[022]
cherrychels
Current Version
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
Yet, while I agree Jon\'s overall impact based on his actions in this battle is definitely debatable, I’d hesitate in calling his role passive because wouldn’t that mean he didn’t make any decisions or active effort while in combat? However much many of these decisions/efforts failed (ie. charging but not reaching the Night King), Jon made intentional choices for a specified purpose and fought (though failed in his objective). But again, I’d certainly agree his role was sidelined.
to:
Yet, while I agree Jon\\\'s overall impact based on his actions in this battle is definitely debatable, I’d hesitate in calling his role passive because wouldn’t that mean he didn’t make any decisions or active effort toward a specific goal while in combat? However much many of these decisions/efforts failed (ie. charging but not reaching the Night King), Jon made intentional choices for a defined purpose and fought (though failed in his objective). But again, I’d certainly agree his role was sidelined.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I would agree his role in the battle was sidelined, which is disappointing. Nonetheless, I’d argue he doesn’t fulfill the ActionSurvivor trope as written or as a bystander because Jon\'s participation in battle was intentional and his purpose for fighting was to defeat the AOTD via killing Night King rather than ActionSurvivor\'s goal of just fighting to get out of the action alive.
to:
I would agree his role in the battle was sidelined, which is disappointing. Nonetheless, I’d argue he doesn’t fulfill the ActionSurvivor trope as written or as a bystander because Jon\\\'s participation in battle was intentional and his efforts/actions were to defeat the AOTD via killing Night King rather than ActionSurvivor\\\'s goal of just fighting to get out of the action alive.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I would agree his role in the battle was sidelined, which is disappointing. Nonetheless, I’d argue he doesn’t fulfill the ActionSurvivor trope as written or as a bystander because Jon did participate and intentionally fought toward a specific objective (destroy Night King) in the battle.
to:
I would agree his role in the battle was sidelined, which is disappointing. Nonetheless, I’d argue he doesn’t fulfill the ActionSurvivor trope as written or as a bystander because Jon\\\'s participation in battle was intentional and his purpose for fighting was to defeat the AOTD via killing Night King rather than ActionSurvivor\\\'s goal of just fighting to get out of the action alive.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
As for why Jon apparently had to be on Rhaegal and what advantage this had, yeah, I\'d agree this is up for debate because the impact riders have on a dragon\'s effectiveness isn\'t quite explored in this show. I may be incorrect but I had thought a dragon with a rider could be better directed to perform a specific action — such as when Jon spots the Night King and makes the decision to pursue him on Rhaegal/attack mid-air or when he chose to follow Dany in strafing wights on Rhaegal. I could be wrong on that.
to:
As for Jon\\\'s impact on Rhaegal in battle and what advantage this had, yeah, I\\\'d agree this is up for debate because the impact riders have on a dragon\\\'s effectiveness isn\\\'t quite explored in this show. I may be incorrect but I had thought a dragon with a rider could be better directed to perform a specific action — such as when Jon spots the Night King and makes the decision to pursue him on Rhaegal/attack mid-air or when he chose to follow Dany in strafing wights on Rhaegal. I could be wrong on that though.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
However, yes, he did fail in all of his efforts to reach and destroy the Night King, which mitigates his overall impact and means he failed the one objective he pursued in this battle.
to:
However, yes, he did fail in all of his efforts to reach and destroy the Night King, which mitigates his overall impact and means he failed the primary objective he pursued in this battle.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
As for why Jon apparently had to be on Rhaegal and what advantage this had, yeah, I\'d agree this is up for debate because the impact riders have on a rider\'s effectiveness isn\'t quite explored in this show. I may be incorrect but I had thought a dragon with a rider could be better directed to perform a specific action — such as when Jon spots the Night King and makes the decision to pursue him on Rhaegal/attack mid-air or when he chose to follow Dany in strafing wights on Rhaegal. I could be wrong on that.
to:
As for why Jon apparently had to be on Rhaegal and what advantage this had, yeah, I\\\'d agree this is up for debate because the impact riders have on a dragon\\\'s effectiveness isn\\\'t quite explored in this show. I may be incorrect but I had thought a dragon with a rider could be better directed to perform a specific action — such as when Jon spots the Night King and makes the decision to pursue him on Rhaegal/attack mid-air or when he chose to follow Dany in strafing wights on Rhaegal. I could be wrong on that.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I would agree his role in the battle was sidelined, which is disappointing. Nonetheless, I’d argue he doesn’t fulfill the ActionSurvivor trope as written or as a bystander because Jon did participate and fought in the battle.
to:
I would agree his role in the battle was sidelined, which is disappointing. Nonetheless, I’d argue he doesn’t fulfill the ActionSurvivor trope as written or as a bystander because Jon did participate and intentionally fought toward a specific objective (destroy Night King) in the battle.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
That said, I think the overall relative impact he made in this battle is up for debate, yes — particularly in consideration that he failed to reach and destroy the Night King, his entire mission.
to:
However, yes, he did fail in all of his efforts to reach and destroy the Night King, which mitigates his overall impact and means he failed the one objective he pursued in this battle.
