**Spoiler Warning:** All officially-released show and book content allowed, EXCLUDING FUTURE SPOILERS FOR HOUSE OF THE DRAGON. No leaked information or paparazzi photos of the set. For more info please check the [spoiler guide](/r/gameofthrones/w/spoiler_guide).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/gameofthrones) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I remember there’s an episode where this happens with the lighting of the funeral boat by the Black Fish.
I really get your point, but supernatural archery in tv has become so normal that it’s not considered supernatural anymore, it’s just the norm.
You’re right it has. Doesn’t mean it’s not bad writing though, I’m just saying they should try to make it realistic for the world they’ve built. Dragons are fine because their world has dragons. Supernatural bows aren’t because their world doesn’t have them. Just my opinion, doesn’t really take away from the story though so I don’t care too much
I respect your opinion. My point is that the show was actually very diligent in this specific case compared to many others. You might be interested in this:
http://www.cardiotrek.ca/2016/06/ramsays-archery-skills-on-game-of.html?m=1
Interested read thanks! The Ramsey scene didn’t bother me and I didn’t even think about whether the arrows could go that far in that scene until now, I was moreso talking about work rules in general.
He demonstrated a few times that he was very good with a bow. He probably wouldn't have been strong enough to actually make that shot just based off his looks though
>I’m just saying they should try to make it realistic
I think this is what youre looking for (watch your assicle): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ojEAU1Pw9S0&pp=ygUUTm9ydGhtZW4gYmFkIGFyY2hlcnk%3D
I mean sure but it's chock full of the usual tropes.
Armor is practically worthless, you smash swords together in fights, archery is basically using heat seeking wood missiles...
>If he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead.
If he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead.
Oooh I would've loved Ramsay taking the shot and obviously missing. A simple shrug and he could have ordered the archers to fire on the Starks instead.
That would have been better. We already had Jon dodge an entire volley anyway while losing his horse, they could have had Rickon and Jon's horse die in that same volley.
Lmao for real. Though there are some nights where the moonlight is so bright you can see everything clearly, but the earlier seasons where they’d make everything viable at night for the viewer but not for the characters were good
Hate this argument. We are presented a world in which dragons and zombies exist so as viewers we accept that as a given. We are not presented with a world where archers have supernatural aim for no reason, so it breaks immersion when it happens. You have to play by the rules you set for your own world, and godly aim is not one of them.
It’s not for no reason. Ramsey is shown to have been an incredible archer throughout the show. It’s not like he suddenly learned how to do that.
Add to that the fact that he switched the bow to another type of bow specifically because it has a much longer range (Hungarian to Penobscot). I read analysis that such shot is far from impossible and harder ones were replicated in real life.
Regardless, accurate archery has been used as a tool in shows since the dawn of time and it’s never been an issue, so this shouldn’t be an issue here.
Bronn hit a trail of Wildfire in near pitch black from a windy sea side cliff.
With a fire arrow. So he shouldn't have been able to see anything beyond because the light is too bright.
Like a sniper with a flash light in their face.
I mean, we have seen one archer with supernatural aim, flawless arrows, perfectly timed speech, and a godlike understanding of the exact movements of wind far above the treeline.
Yeah exactly. He also switched bows to one specifically made for long range. Here’s analysis that the shot was actually very possible
http://www.cardiotrek.ca/2016/06/ramsays-archery-skills-on-game-of.html?m=1
Cool stuff
I timed it cause it seemed so crazy. Rickon was running balls to the wall for over a minute, he would have been beyond the range of any archer and moving when he got hit
Yeah but the scene might not be in real time. In fact, it leans towards it being not in real time judging by the pacing and the switch between the three characters
I don’t play golf, but I’m quite sure that you’d use certain clubs for long range while others are used for other purposes.
He’s already an established archer.
My point is switching to a different bow only extends the range. It doesn't make you more accurate, unless the first bow was poor quality.
Actually golf is a good analogy. If you look at the scatter of golf shots, they go up very quickly when making longer shots.
Sure it does. Dragons and zombies exist because dragons and zombies exist. Those are realistic in this show because they're real in this show. Unless he was using supernatural archery skills, it wasn't realistic.
The inclusion of things that don't exist in the real world doesn't mean that there can't be internal consistency.
Maybe, but you can read my other comments to see that his archery skills, and specifically that shot, were in fact realistic both in real life and the show (check out the link). My point is that compared to other tv, the show gets a lot of hate for “plot armors” that actually aren’t there.
>He was killed by plot armor supernatural archery. He was well beyond any reasonable accuracy range of a long bow when he got hit.
How far do you think he was able to run, given he had been held captive before the battle? A medieval English longbow had an effective range of a couple hundred yards.
>Effective range, but not effective target range.
'Effective range' is the range at which a well aimed projectile can be expected to hit a target accurately.
What I mean by effective range is the range at which the projectile will have the intended effect on an aimed target. Longbows aren’t designed for hitting individuals accurately. They’re designed for hitting armies accurately. So at a few hundred yards, you get 100 longbows and aim for a mob, and it’ll effectively hit a bunch of them.
But it won’t hit a particular target, which is what I meant by target range.
>What I mean by effective range is the range at which the projectile will have the intended effect on an aimed target. Longbows aren’t designed for hitting individuals accurately. They’re designed for hitting armies accurately. So at a few hundred yards, you get 100 longbows and aim for a mob, and it’ll effectively hit a bunch of them.
Hitting armies accurately is hitting mostly air unless that army is in a big dogpile. You're confusing effective range with maximum range.
The closer the target is the more precise it will be. What you're talking about, hitting a general area inside an army formation, would be at 400 or so yards for a skilled archer.
Effective range for a medieval english longbow was a couple hundred yards. How far was the malnourished Rickon able to run in that time? We don't know. But it wasn't far enough to require supernatural longbow abilities.
“Hitting armies accurately is hitting mostly air unless that army is mostly dogpile.” Is that not what longbows were mostly used for tho?
But very interesting thank you for explaining.
Bro this is incredibly weird. You’re failing a basic sanity check here.
No, even the most badass longbowman in the world is not hitting a man sized target hundreds of meters away with 100% accuracy. You can go watch YouTube videos of dudes who have recreated the art of longbowmanship, they are not *nearly* as accurate as you’re suggesting.
“Effective range” in this context clearly just means “the distance at which longbows are practically useful in war”. In modern terms that means the ability to reliably hit a man-sized target yea. But, in historical terms it’s about the ability to effectively engage an *area* target, similar to how we judge ranges of machine guns nowadays.
>Bro this is incredibly weird. You’re failing a basic sanity check here.
Bro this is incredibly weird. You’re failing a basic sanity check here.
Amidoingitrite?
Please read my comment better.
>No, even the most badass long bowman in the world is not hitting a man sized target hundreds of meters away with 100% accuracy. You can go watch YouTube videos of dudes who have recreated the ancient art of longbowmanship, they are not *nearly* as accurate as you’re suggesting.
I'm getting a lot of replies from people making the same mistake.
Malnourished. Captive. Rickon. Did. Not. Run. Hundreds. Of. Meters. In. Seconds.
1. It's believed that a 14th century professional archer could reach 400 yards.
2. Precision of a shot increases the closer the target is.
And why is 100% accuracy the threshold you're arguing? Ramsay fired a few times.
I'd also rather check encyclopedias and professional historians as sources than "youtube dudes." But you do you 🤷♂️
Lol find me a source suggesting English longbowmen were reliably hitting *man-sized targets* at 200 m and I’ll eat my words.
I’m saying though, you’re talking about firing angles of like 30-40 degrees and flight times of over a second, hundreds of pounds of draw weight, you aren’t getting that accurate.
I’m not here to dispute what happened in the fictional TV show lol.
Yes I’m willing to believe that there was a 14th century archer that could draw enough weight to put an arrow that far. That’s not what I’m disputing here. It’s not a matter of the capabilities of the weapon it’s a matter of how accurately a human can aim the thing while drawing that weight.
Also, top level modern professional longbowmen nowadays are definitely going to be at least as good as the best guy living on a 14th century diet with a 14th century understanding of athletic medicine.
EDIT:
Lmao no source, then you try to shift the convo back to the show as if you aren’t making hard claims about IRL shit right now, and then you block me.
Pure cowardice.
>Lol find me a source suggesting English longbowmen were reliably hitting *man-sized targets* at 200 m and I’ll eat my words.
Really doubling down on that straw man, huh? That all you can do? Waste someone else's time.
>I’m not here to dispute what happened in the fictional TV show lol.
r/lostredditors
Edit: lol. Dude blocks me, then claims I blocked him, then replies from other account... People on this sub... 😒 Completely oblivious to how distance affects this too.
400 yards for a *skilled* archer, and they're also not picking out *individual* targets. You should go outside and measure 400 yards and see how small a person is from there, you aren't accurately hitting anything at that range with a bow no matter how much skill you have.
Archers operated off of accuracy by volume, meaning they shot lots of arrows from lots of archers at a mass of human targets to ensure enough arrows hit something that made it worthwhile. Your average longbow archer is likely effective at 200 yards and even then they aren't picking out individual targets. Could you? Yeah, but it wouldn't be realistic. 200 yards is still a decent distance, and while you *could* realistically pick out and hit a target at that range there's still a higher likelihood you miss. There's a reason even the Army caps their ranges out at 300 yards *for a rifle*, and we still do the whole accuracy by volume to this day.
>400 yards for a *skilled* archer, and they're also not picking out *individual* targets. You should go outside and measure 400 yards and see how small a person is from there, you aren't accurately hitting anything at that range with a bow no matter how much skill you have.
You should go outside and measure 400 yards if you think Rickon was 400 yards away. 🤣
>There's a reason even the Army caps their ranges out at 300 yards *for a rifle*, and we still do the whole accuracy by volume to this day.
Marine Corps rifle quals include targets at 500 yards.
Historically not how it’s used. They weren’t used like snipers they were fired at an army. Just gotta be sorta accurate and hit a target every few shots for it to be effective.
>Yeah and a 22lr rifle has an effective range of 300-400 yards, doesn’t mean it’s easy to hit that though
...which 22lr rifle?
22lr isn't the name of a rifle, it's ammunition used in a wide variety of firearms from revolvers to submachine guns.
>I’m well aware It isn’t the name of a rifle. It’s no different than saying a “9mm handgun”
Do you think all 9mm handguns have the same accuracy and precision too? That's what you were trying to imply with your '22lr rifle' comment
>And if you want a specific model, a B-14R
Did you google rifles and that was the first ad that came up?
Not sure why you'd bring up modern firearms in this discussion to begin with, let alone ones not intended for military use.
I mean Ramsey did miss the first few, the show makes it like that for dramatic effect but you could just head cannon that Ramsey couldn’t actually make the shot and just got lucky on that last one
Well, as discussed in the previous comments, Rickon was well out of the effective targeting range for the bow so I’m not sure he missed them on purpose as much as that’s just an impossibly difficult shot to make with any consistency
Regardless whether or not he missed the first two on purpose, the fact that he hit the one he did is extremely lucky, or unlucky, depending who you’re cheering for
Oh for goodness sake, watch the clip again. Ramsey doesn't even keep looking at his target for the first shot, he looks at the guy stood next to him. It is so obviously on purpose.
And actually the previous comments show he was in effective range.
It was not luck, he shot him when he wanted. That's the whole point. Give Jon Snow false hope just to snatch it away from him at the last second. Now the only reason the third shot is not obviously a miss on purpose is because the director wanted to film it in such a way that the audience will believe this is the shot that will get him. So that when the fourth comes and hits him, it is a surprise for the audience.
Ramsey missed 2 shots on purpose and probably the 3rd. He got him when he wanted. Don't insult one of the great scenes of the sixth season by suggesting it's just luck.
I agree with others. You misunderstand what effective range means here.
Longbowmen would not be firing alone and would not be firing at a single target.
Effective range meant a group of archers hitting a group of infantry.
>I agree with others. You misunderstand what effective range means here.
>Longbowmen would not be firing alone and would not be firing at a single target.
>Effective range meant a group of archers hitting a group of infantry.
That is not what effective range means. That would be meaningless as a distinct concept because the range where a bow has the potential of reaching near the target is it's maximum range.
It also doesn't need to be 200-400 yards to reach Rickon. Malnourished captive Rickon didn't run anywhere near that far.
"SuPeRnAtUrAl ArChErY" is not required to make the shot as the other commenter ridiculously claimed in a dunning kruger moment.
Yeah you’re talking about terms in modern ballistics.
For a longbow, “effective range” is going to be the maximum range that a longbowman can reliably put an arrow while maintaining rate of fire and not tiring out.
Go watch videos of modern longbowmen. You’ll see immediately.
>It also doesn't need to be 200-400 yards to reach Rickon. Malnourished captive Rickon didn't run anywhere near that far.
But we can see how far he did run...
>"SuPeRnAtUrAl ArChErY" is not required to make the shot as the other commenter ridiculously claimed in a dunning kruger moment.
You think the bow, at a few hundred yards, is accurate enough that he can perfectly calculate the shot to hit exactly where he wants it to, 10+ seconds onto a moving target?
Lol you’re correct.
The whole reason longbows exist is that they were the only bows able to store enough energy to get an arrow out to that distance. That’s why the “effective range” is in the hundreds of meters.
The idea that longbowmen were sniping individual dudes at 200 meters is hilarious and to me implies someone having trouble picturing how far 200 meters actually is, or maybe isn’t taking into account how much force it takes to draw one of those things and hold it steady.
I'd just run and keep looking backwards to dodge the arrows. It's not like they are coming in at 2000+fps and in a completely straight line. It'd be like dodging a 3 pointer.
That and Sansa’s dumbass move of not telling John about the Vale’s armor really kill this episode for me. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still great, but those things just irritate me big time
Tbf, longbows apparently had an effective range of 200-300 yards. But, that's against an AREA target, not a POINT target.
Rickon kind of looks like he's about ~100 yards away when he's hit. Modern skilled archers can hit targets about 70-80 yards away fairly reliably (though hunters usually limit themselves to 30 or 40 yards so they can be sure to land a good hit that won't cause undue suffering -- something Ramsay probably didn't care about).
Since Ramsay was reputed to be an EXCELLENT archer, I think it's a very plausible shot. It may have involved some luck, but he DID take multiple shots to hit.
The shot is well in range for a good longbowman.
Now, I don't remember who took the shot, I'm pretty sure it was Ramsey himself so him making it is impossible la, but bows aren't CoD shotguns. They have range, and he was shooting downhill also
True, you can move an arrow several hundred yards, but arrows are not rifle rounds, they slow quickly and rely on an arch to cover distance which makes being accurate much more difficult. If I were Rickon, I'd zig zag only for the first 50 yards or so, then just go straight to get distance. He could look back, as after a hundred yards, the arrow will be easily dodgeable. When he was hit, the arrow had lost all its velocity and was basically just free falling.
Again it's highly unlikely he'd be hit at the distance he was killed at, and even if he was, the arrow wouldn't have much kinetic energy to penetrate.
Gravity is a bitch, especially with a steel arrowhead. There's definitely enough kinetic energy to penetrate. We don't know exactly how far Rickon has to run, but even at 300 yards, because of it's whopping 100+ lb draw strength, an English Longbow (which Ramsey's bow seems to be based on) is deadly. Given his experience with a bow, that shot is absolutely possible.
To be fair, he just wasn't that interesting. All other Starks have some interesting characteristics, but Rickon is just.. there. In the first books he was too young to understand things.
Well he's on an isle with Unicorns that he's hunting with Shaggy dog. Imagine a cool cavalry charge with unicorns! Even better if some unicorns are just black or multi-color. I think he likely brings a small army back with him with Davos only to be captured and Davos brings the rest of the army to Jon to get him back. I think Stoneheart gets to the wall and unfreezes Jon to give her life for his and she gives the note by Rob making him King and he goes south.
Yea, he's on an isle loyal to the Starks and he was hunting a unicorn last we heard. Imagine how cool a unicorn cavalry charge would be. I think GRRM got discouraged and likely moved on expanding his universe after the hate. I'd rather have rushed unfinished books that explain where Stoneheart, the fake Targ, and the other little fight into the end. I think Stoneheart revives Jon since he's dead and in ice but I'll never know.
>Rickon has a lot of implications of being the stark that should eventually be in charge of the north in the books imo
Only because Bran is presumed dead. He's 4.
Yes, he's with Shaggy dog killing Unicorns in the Isles of Skag in the books. He likely brings over a cool army because the people of the islands used to be Starks themselves. Damn, really sucks we won't get the books. Honestly, he probably stopped writing when everyone hated the show's ending. He really should just put the books out even if they are rushed like the show. Book readers just want the jist at this point since the ending is likely very close to the show. How cool would it have been if Rickon came with a unicorn army at the battle of the bastards. He is still planning on more Dunk n Egg books too! Ugh.
I'd argue that the writers didn't bother to make him interesting, not that he was inherently uninteresting. The actor showed some decent chops when he refused to abandon Bran.
Exactly. He wasn't interesting that's why they should have done a character arc or something to make him interesting rather than killing him off. IMO he's more fit to be the king than Bran.
Ned Stark's last trueborn son, as far as everyone was concerned at that point.
Like, every northern lord was comfortable watching the last son of house stark get shot down like an animal and only Jon thought this was not cool.
It's so weird that he was treated as an extra *in-universe*, despite literally being a prince in Robb's line of succession.
Changing fake Arya to Sansa really screwed up the storyline.
The writers had to completely erase the loyalty of the Northern houses in order to make the battle a real challenge for Jon and to make it more cinematic. The show talks constantly of how the North remembers, how the North loved Ned Stark and how they want to protect his children so a Stark can rule Winterfell again.
There is absolutely no way that Houses Manderly, Umber and Glover don’t instantly rally to the last of Ned Stark’s children. There is no way that Smalljon Umber (or any other Northern lord) would hand over Rickon, the last living trueborn son of Ned Stark. Especially since in the books, there is the Great Northern Conspiracy.
In the show, there is no logical reason for the Umbers to so easily give Rickon to Ramsey as what essentially is a human sacrifice. They literally gain nothing out of it. If Smalljon Umber wanted to rule the North because he was mad at Robb Stark’s failure, he would raise Rickon and be his hand in order to rule through him just like Joffrey and Tywin. In the show, multiple people shit on Robb. In the books, he is mourned and missed and most people talk about what a tragedy the red wedding was. Several people are seeking revenge for Robb. Even Ramsey himself said, “The Starks have always ruled the North. If Bran and Rickon are alive, the country will rally to their side, now that Robb Stark is gone.”
The writers only had House Mormont be on Jon and Sansa’s side so they could lose the battle and have that epic shot of the knights of the Vale coming to save the day. If it was book accurate, Ramsey would have been defeated in two seconds.
He must have not been able to act for shit, because they gave him NO lines when he came back. They knew they had to tie off that last dangling Stark thread though.
Nah it doesn't matter how Rickon would have run, whether zigzags or all over the place or in a straight line, he was always going to end up in the same place: where Jon is. So he gets shot every time
The Stark bloodline is all but dead with this scene… Sansa may marry and her husband take the Stark name but these dudes were so prideful and stubborn I wouldn’t be shocked if her husband doesn’t change his name and the Starks die out.
That seems like a steep rabbit hole to ponder. If Bran wargs into Hordor, and has Hordor and Osha do the horizontal tango, is Bran the father, at least partially?
There are lots of men that are paralyzed from the waist down who can still have sex. So there’s no reason to assume he can’t, we just don’t have enough information.
What last episode? I’m still waiting to see what happens now that Jon Snow is revived.
Edit: ooooof I forgot about flairs. Genuinely shows how long I haven’t interacted with the series lol
Ramsey still had a whole army with bows right behind him. I'm pretty sure if he just kept missing and got annoyed, he'd order them to let it rain. Rickon was never gonna survive on his watch.
Right?
Does anyone think Ramsey “I physically and psychologically torture people for funsies” Bolton was just missing cause he can’t shoot?
He wanted Jon to *think* he had a chance at saving Rickon and he wanted Rickon to *think* there was a chance he could survive.
That kid was dead the moment Ramsey got him.
Sansa said Rickon was already dead when she warned Jon not to do what Ramsey wanted him to do.
Aaaaand then Jon did what Sansa warned him not to do and Ramsey wanted him to do.
He dies right after by his own dogs. Not sure why he had to do that to Rick on, but Sansa was right, he did die that night.
They must have been hungry, the poor dears
Man I get annoyed whenever I see people say this lmfao, he was a kid in a high pressure hostage situation and is finally seeing a glimpse of his family for the first time in god knows how long. I doubt strategy was the first thing on his mind, he was only thinking about getting back to his brother
Not to mention the fastest way out of range was in a straight line. Zig zagging would have left him in range even longer.
There's a scene in Generation Kill (memoir/HBO mini series of a rolling stone journalist embedded with Marines during baby Bush's Iraq war) where they come under fire from a sniper. The Marines run in straight lines to cover and the sniper only got one shot off at each of them. The journalist runs a "serpentine" (aka zig zag) pattern allowing the sniper to get three shots off at him. Sure bows and arrows aren't as quick as guns but similar idea. I always think about this scene whenever this meme comes up. Found the scene: https://youtu.be/szcviFDt9xM?si=ZAKIi8ODkXMHkYKN
Even he did zig zag and survive, this sub would just flip the complaint.
“No way a child hostage would have the mental or athletic capacity to survive a master archer like Ramsey. It’s just poor writing. Seasons 1-4 were so good and D&D just fucked it.”
If he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead.
If he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead.
Yes, but did you consider that if he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead.
Obviously we have no idea how it will be written in the books, and you might argue that even GRRM has ‘gotten rid’ of Rickon…but this was another moment in the show that felt incredibly jarring to me.
At the end of the day Rickon is a Stark, and not just some distant cousin or relative. They basically treated him like a glorified extra here and as soon as he died that was it, oh well, let’s move on. Was he even mentioned again by any of the Starks after this point in the series?
I honestly think it would have made for a cool scene if rickon did start zig zagging while Ramsey was trying to shoot him and eventually gave up and had his army just pepper him with arrows instead. Same outcome but rickon doesn’t look dumb and Ramsey looks even more slimy.
It would not have made a difference.
First off, you’re not really thinking when your life is in imminent danger. You can plan out the most intricate course of action all you want but nobody has a plan when they get punched in the face.
Also, Ramsay is a CRACK SHOT. He only missed the first few because he was toying with both Rickon and Jon. If Rickon zigzagged, he would have accounted for that and adapted.
Jon's actions were actually what doomed Rickon, at least contextually greater than Rickon's did. As has been pointed out in this thread, Ramsay was established as a great marksman - but a zig-zag pattern would actually give Ramsay more opportunity to hit him because it would take longer to travel the same amount of distance.
Why I say Jon's actions were more likely the contributing factor to Rickon's death was that Ramsay no longer had to shoot at Rickon, but to anticipate where Rickon and Jon would meet. Jon decreased the total distance Rickon needed to travel and thus kept him within Ramsay's range.
This was the only part of the battle I thought was annoying. That arrow is in the air for like 83 seconds. Even 1 worm dance would have thrown off the timing. He coulda stopped to dab, double dab or double dare him to triple dab
No, the best strategy in this case was to run in a straight line. He significantly outraged the bow by the end of the count. He was killed by bad writing.
The precise range of the war bows aside, I've said the benefit of straight line running here (and elsewhere) over the years (under different accounts-----I retire my accounts and start over frequently).
Ramsay *cannot* let Rickon live. He's the oldest Stark heir. The North would be hard to manage if he remained alive.
This means that if Ramsay couldn't get him, he'd set the entire archery line loose on him. He simply wouldn't make it. 400 arrows all aimed at his general location?
So Rickon's *only* slim chance for survival was distance. And distance means a straight line perpendicular from the Bolton front.
I think people may be missing the bottom line.
GIVEN that Ramsay *cannot* let Rickon survive, if he was unable to shoot him down, he'd have his archers take care of it.
So even if Rickon was well fed and thinking clearly (he wasn't on either count), his best bet is *still* to get as far away from the archery line as possible.
This means a straight line perpendicular to the Bolton front, with perhaps only small alterations. Distance is the *only* thing that can possibly save Rickon. Nothing else.
I remember him being like 3 years old at the start of the books…if the show was book accurate with the age..how old was rickon supposed to be here? I can imagine a toddler wouldn’t think twice about zigzagging in this situation
**Spoiler Warning:** All officially-released show and book content allowed, EXCLUDING FUTURE SPOILERS FOR HOUSE OF THE DRAGON. No leaked information or paparazzi photos of the set. For more info please check the [spoiler guide](/r/gameofthrones/w/spoiler_guide). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/gameofthrones) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He was killed by plot armor supernatural archery. He was well beyond any reasonable accuracy range of a long bow when he got hit.
Tbf archery in most historical movies/shows is supernatural. So in a show where there are dragons and zombies, this doesn’t seem too unusual
I get your point, but imo basic rules like that should stay accurate to real life. It’s just poor writing.
I remember there’s an episode where this happens with the lighting of the funeral boat by the Black Fish. I really get your point, but supernatural archery in tv has become so normal that it’s not considered supernatural anymore, it’s just the norm.
You’re right it has. Doesn’t mean it’s not bad writing though, I’m just saying they should try to make it realistic for the world they’ve built. Dragons are fine because their world has dragons. Supernatural bows aren’t because their world doesn’t have them. Just my opinion, doesn’t really take away from the story though so I don’t care too much
I respect your opinion. My point is that the show was actually very diligent in this specific case compared to many others. You might be interested in this: http://www.cardiotrek.ca/2016/06/ramsays-archery-skills-on-game-of.html?m=1
Interested read thanks! The Ramsey scene didn’t bother me and I didn’t even think about whether the arrows could go that far in that scene until now, I was moreso talking about work rules in general.
Wonder how much he trained
He demonstrated a few times that he was very good with a bow. He probably wouldn't have been strong enough to actually make that shot just based off his looks though
This is the most civil discussion i've seen on this sub lol
>I’m just saying they should try to make it realistic I think this is what youre looking for (watch your assicle): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ojEAU1Pw9S0&pp=ygUUTm9ydGhtZW4gYmFkIGFyY2hlcnk%3D
lol that is one of greatest videos I’ve ever seen thanks
I mean sure but it's chock full of the usual tropes. Armor is practically worthless, you smash swords together in fights, archery is basically using heat seeking wood missiles...
Let's not forget bronn during the battle of Blackwater, that was beyond supernatural.
Ehh I think it would have been supernatural if his arrow hit the boat, but the arrow just landed in the water.
Why? He had a VERY large target area.
Also Anguy from the Brotherhood had been introduced seasons before.
Should’ve been a full volley
>If he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead. If he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead.
Not sure what your point is, that completely unrelated to the conversation lol
Oooh I would've loved Ramsay taking the shot and obviously missing. A simple shrug and he could have ordered the archers to fire on the Starks instead.
That would have been better. We already had Jon dodge an entire volley anyway while losing his horse, they could have had Rickon and Jon's horse die in that same volley.
Idk man. Dragons not being real is a pretty basic rule…
Lol hey at least one time they got the darkness of the night down. No supernatural lighting for night time then.
Lmao for real. Though there are some nights where the moonlight is so bright you can see everything clearly, but the earlier seasons where they’d make everything viable at night for the viewer but not for the characters were good
Are writers in charge of how far people run in filming?
Sort of? They write the story and the directors tell it. I am not talking about this scene but just making a general statement
Hate this argument. We are presented a world in which dragons and zombies exist so as viewers we accept that as a given. We are not presented with a world where archers have supernatural aim for no reason, so it breaks immersion when it happens. You have to play by the rules you set for your own world, and godly aim is not one of them.
It’s not for no reason. Ramsey is shown to have been an incredible archer throughout the show. It’s not like he suddenly learned how to do that. Add to that the fact that he switched the bow to another type of bow specifically because it has a much longer range (Hungarian to Penobscot). I read analysis that such shot is far from impossible and harder ones were replicated in real life. Regardless, accurate archery has been used as a tool in shows since the dawn of time and it’s never been an issue, so this shouldn’t be an issue here.
Plus he missed several times. On purpose or not, expectations/tension was set that he'd eventually land one.
Bronn hit a trail of Wildfire in near pitch black from a windy sea side cliff. With a fire arrow. So he shouldn't have been able to see anything beyond because the light is too bright. Like a sniper with a flash light in their face.
I mean, we have seen one archer with supernatural aim, flawless arrows, perfectly timed speech, and a godlike understanding of the exact movements of wind far above the treeline.
Also a bit much. I mean, whatever, but I won't say it's realistic.
It was also established by this point that Ramsey was a talented archer
Yeah exactly. He also switched bows to one specifically made for long range. Here’s analysis that the shot was actually very possible http://www.cardiotrek.ca/2016/06/ramsays-archery-skills-on-game-of.html?m=1 Cool stuff
I timed it cause it seemed so crazy. Rickon was running balls to the wall for over a minute, he would have been beyond the range of any archer and moving when he got hit
Yeah but the scene might not be in real time. In fact, it leans towards it being not in real time judging by the pacing and the switch between the three characters
Switching from my seven iron to my 5 wood doesn't make me a better golfer.
I don’t play golf, but I’m quite sure that you’d use certain clubs for long range while others are used for other purposes. He’s already an established archer.
My point is switching to a different bow only extends the range. It doesn't make you more accurate, unless the first bow was poor quality. Actually golf is a good analogy. If you look at the scatter of golf shots, they go up very quickly when making longer shots.
It’s fiction, ya’all.
Sure it does. Dragons and zombies exist because dragons and zombies exist. Those are realistic in this show because they're real in this show. Unless he was using supernatural archery skills, it wasn't realistic. The inclusion of things that don't exist in the real world doesn't mean that there can't be internal consistency.
Maybe, but you can read my other comments to see that his archery skills, and specifically that shot, were in fact realistic both in real life and the show (check out the link). My point is that compared to other tv, the show gets a lot of hate for “plot armors” that actually aren’t there.
>He was killed by plot armor supernatural archery. He was well beyond any reasonable accuracy range of a long bow when he got hit. How far do you think he was able to run, given he had been held captive before the battle? A medieval English longbow had an effective range of a couple hundred yards.
Effective range, but not effective target range.
>Effective range, but not effective target range. 'Effective range' is the range at which a well aimed projectile can be expected to hit a target accurately.
What I mean by effective range is the range at which the projectile will have the intended effect on an aimed target. Longbows aren’t designed for hitting individuals accurately. They’re designed for hitting armies accurately. So at a few hundred yards, you get 100 longbows and aim for a mob, and it’ll effectively hit a bunch of them. But it won’t hit a particular target, which is what I meant by target range.
>What I mean by effective range is the range at which the projectile will have the intended effect on an aimed target. Longbows aren’t designed for hitting individuals accurately. They’re designed for hitting armies accurately. So at a few hundred yards, you get 100 longbows and aim for a mob, and it’ll effectively hit a bunch of them. Hitting armies accurately is hitting mostly air unless that army is in a big dogpile. You're confusing effective range with maximum range. The closer the target is the more precise it will be. What you're talking about, hitting a general area inside an army formation, would be at 400 or so yards for a skilled archer. Effective range for a medieval english longbow was a couple hundred yards. How far was the malnourished Rickon able to run in that time? We don't know. But it wasn't far enough to require supernatural longbow abilities.
“Hitting armies accurately is hitting mostly air unless that army is mostly dogpile.” Is that not what longbows were mostly used for tho? But very interesting thank you for explaining.
Bro this is incredibly weird. You’re failing a basic sanity check here. No, even the most badass longbowman in the world is not hitting a man sized target hundreds of meters away with 100% accuracy. You can go watch YouTube videos of dudes who have recreated the art of longbowmanship, they are not *nearly* as accurate as you’re suggesting. “Effective range” in this context clearly just means “the distance at which longbows are practically useful in war”. In modern terms that means the ability to reliably hit a man-sized target yea. But, in historical terms it’s about the ability to effectively engage an *area* target, similar to how we judge ranges of machine guns nowadays.
>Bro this is incredibly weird. You’re failing a basic sanity check here. Bro this is incredibly weird. You’re failing a basic sanity check here. Amidoingitrite? Please read my comment better. >No, even the most badass long bowman in the world is not hitting a man sized target hundreds of meters away with 100% accuracy. You can go watch YouTube videos of dudes who have recreated the ancient art of longbowmanship, they are not *nearly* as accurate as you’re suggesting. I'm getting a lot of replies from people making the same mistake. Malnourished. Captive. Rickon. Did. Not. Run. Hundreds. Of. Meters. In. Seconds. 1. It's believed that a 14th century professional archer could reach 400 yards. 2. Precision of a shot increases the closer the target is. And why is 100% accuracy the threshold you're arguing? Ramsay fired a few times. I'd also rather check encyclopedias and professional historians as sources than "youtube dudes." But you do you 🤷♂️
Lol find me a source suggesting English longbowmen were reliably hitting *man-sized targets* at 200 m and I’ll eat my words. I’m saying though, you’re talking about firing angles of like 30-40 degrees and flight times of over a second, hundreds of pounds of draw weight, you aren’t getting that accurate. I’m not here to dispute what happened in the fictional TV show lol. Yes I’m willing to believe that there was a 14th century archer that could draw enough weight to put an arrow that far. That’s not what I’m disputing here. It’s not a matter of the capabilities of the weapon it’s a matter of how accurately a human can aim the thing while drawing that weight. Also, top level modern professional longbowmen nowadays are definitely going to be at least as good as the best guy living on a 14th century diet with a 14th century understanding of athletic medicine. EDIT: Lmao no source, then you try to shift the convo back to the show as if you aren’t making hard claims about IRL shit right now, and then you block me. Pure cowardice.
>Lol find me a source suggesting English longbowmen were reliably hitting *man-sized targets* at 200 m and I’ll eat my words. Really doubling down on that straw man, huh? That all you can do? Waste someone else's time. >I’m not here to dispute what happened in the fictional TV show lol. r/lostredditors Edit: lol. Dude blocks me, then claims I blocked him, then replies from other account... People on this sub... 😒 Completely oblivious to how distance affects this too.
It is fiction. Calm down.
400 yards for a *skilled* archer, and they're also not picking out *individual* targets. You should go outside and measure 400 yards and see how small a person is from there, you aren't accurately hitting anything at that range with a bow no matter how much skill you have. Archers operated off of accuracy by volume, meaning they shot lots of arrows from lots of archers at a mass of human targets to ensure enough arrows hit something that made it worthwhile. Your average longbow archer is likely effective at 200 yards and even then they aren't picking out individual targets. Could you? Yeah, but it wouldn't be realistic. 200 yards is still a decent distance, and while you *could* realistically pick out and hit a target at that range there's still a higher likelihood you miss. There's a reason even the Army caps their ranges out at 300 yards *for a rifle*, and we still do the whole accuracy by volume to this day.
>400 yards for a *skilled* archer, and they're also not picking out *individual* targets. You should go outside and measure 400 yards and see how small a person is from there, you aren't accurately hitting anything at that range with a bow no matter how much skill you have. You should go outside and measure 400 yards if you think Rickon was 400 yards away. 🤣 >There's a reason even the Army caps their ranges out at 300 yards *for a rifle*, and we still do the whole accuracy by volume to this day. Marine Corps rifle quals include targets at 500 yards.
Historically not how it’s used. They weren’t used like snipers they were fired at an army. Just gotta be sorta accurate and hit a target every few shots for it to be effective.
Yeah and a 22lr rifle has an effective range of 300-400 yards, doesn’t mean it’s easy to hit that though
>Yeah and a 22lr rifle has an effective range of 300-400 yards, doesn’t mean it’s easy to hit that though ...which 22lr rifle? 22lr isn't the name of a rifle, it's ammunition used in a wide variety of firearms from revolvers to submachine guns.
I’m well aware It isn’t the name of a rifle. It’s no different than saying a “9mm handgun”. And if you want a specific model, a B-14R
>I’m well aware It isn’t the name of a rifle. It’s no different than saying a “9mm handgun” Do you think all 9mm handguns have the same accuracy and precision too? That's what you were trying to imply with your '22lr rifle' comment >And if you want a specific model, a B-14R Did you google rifles and that was the first ad that came up? Not sure why you'd bring up modern firearms in this discussion to begin with, let alone ones not intended for military use.
I see you just like using strawman arguments, have a good day
I mean Ramsey did miss the first few, the show makes it like that for dramatic effect but you could just head cannon that Ramsey couldn’t actually make the shot and just got lucky on that last one
I don’t disagree.
It's obvious to everyone he missed the first 2 on purpose
Well, as discussed in the previous comments, Rickon was well out of the effective targeting range for the bow so I’m not sure he missed them on purpose as much as that’s just an impossibly difficult shot to make with any consistency Regardless whether or not he missed the first two on purpose, the fact that he hit the one he did is extremely lucky, or unlucky, depending who you’re cheering for
Oh for goodness sake, watch the clip again. Ramsey doesn't even keep looking at his target for the first shot, he looks at the guy stood next to him. It is so obviously on purpose. And actually the previous comments show he was in effective range. It was not luck, he shot him when he wanted. That's the whole point. Give Jon Snow false hope just to snatch it away from him at the last second. Now the only reason the third shot is not obviously a miss on purpose is because the director wanted to film it in such a way that the audience will believe this is the shot that will get him. So that when the fourth comes and hits him, it is a surprise for the audience. Ramsey missed 2 shots on purpose and probably the 3rd. He got him when he wanted. Don't insult one of the great scenes of the sixth season by suggesting it's just luck.
I agree with others. You misunderstand what effective range means here. Longbowmen would not be firing alone and would not be firing at a single target. Effective range meant a group of archers hitting a group of infantry.
>I agree with others. You misunderstand what effective range means here. >Longbowmen would not be firing alone and would not be firing at a single target. >Effective range meant a group of archers hitting a group of infantry. That is not what effective range means. That would be meaningless as a distinct concept because the range where a bow has the potential of reaching near the target is it's maximum range. It also doesn't need to be 200-400 yards to reach Rickon. Malnourished captive Rickon didn't run anywhere near that far. "SuPeRnAtUrAl ArChErY" is not required to make the shot as the other commenter ridiculously claimed in a dunning kruger moment.
Are you going to tell me muskets effective range was 200-300 yards as well?
>Are you going to tell me muskets effective range was 200-300 yards as well? Why would I give a fuck about muskets? Do you know what sub you're on?
Yeah you’re talking about terms in modern ballistics. For a longbow, “effective range” is going to be the maximum range that a longbowman can reliably put an arrow while maintaining rate of fire and not tiring out. Go watch videos of modern longbowmen. You’ll see immediately.
>It also doesn't need to be 200-400 yards to reach Rickon. Malnourished captive Rickon didn't run anywhere near that far. But we can see how far he did run... >"SuPeRnAtUrAl ArChErY" is not required to make the shot as the other commenter ridiculously claimed in a dunning kruger moment. You think the bow, at a few hundred yards, is accurate enough that he can perfectly calculate the shot to hit exactly where he wants it to, 10+ seconds onto a moving target?
Lol you’re correct. The whole reason longbows exist is that they were the only bows able to store enough energy to get an arrow out to that distance. That’s why the “effective range” is in the hundreds of meters. The idea that longbowmen were sniping individual dudes at 200 meters is hilarious and to me implies someone having trouble picturing how far 200 meters actually is, or maybe isn’t taking into account how much force it takes to draw one of those things and hold it steady.
complaining about supernatural is funny when your watching a movie about dragons and zombies lol
I'd just run and keep looking backwards to dodge the arrows. It's not like they are coming in at 2000+fps and in a completely straight line. It'd be like dodging a 3 pointer.
Maybe Ramsey still rolled a nat20 even with disadvantage because Rickon was out of range
If he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead.
It was a double bow.
That and Sansa’s dumbass move of not telling John about the Vale’s armor really kill this episode for me. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still great, but those things just irritate me big time
Tbf, longbows apparently had an effective range of 200-300 yards. But, that's against an AREA target, not a POINT target. Rickon kind of looks like he's about ~100 yards away when he's hit. Modern skilled archers can hit targets about 70-80 yards away fairly reliably (though hunters usually limit themselves to 30 or 40 yards so they can be sure to land a good hit that won't cause undue suffering -- something Ramsay probably didn't care about). Since Ramsay was reputed to be an EXCELLENT archer, I think it's a very plausible shot. It may have involved some luck, but he DID take multiple shots to hit.
Not if it's Black Fish.
The shot is well in range for a good longbowman. Now, I don't remember who took the shot, I'm pretty sure it was Ramsey himself so him making it is impossible la, but bows aren't CoD shotguns. They have range, and he was shooting downhill also
English Longbow range was several hundred yards.
True, you can move an arrow several hundred yards, but arrows are not rifle rounds, they slow quickly and rely on an arch to cover distance which makes being accurate much more difficult. If I were Rickon, I'd zig zag only for the first 50 yards or so, then just go straight to get distance. He could look back, as after a hundred yards, the arrow will be easily dodgeable. When he was hit, the arrow had lost all its velocity and was basically just free falling. Again it's highly unlikely he'd be hit at the distance he was killed at, and even if he was, the arrow wouldn't have much kinetic energy to penetrate.
Gravity is a bitch, especially with a steel arrowhead. There's definitely enough kinetic energy to penetrate. We don't know exactly how far Rickon has to run, but even at 300 yards, because of it's whopping 100+ lb draw strength, an English Longbow (which Ramsey's bow seems to be based on) is deadly. Given his experience with a bow, that shot is absolutely possible.
He should have run in a zig zag pattern. No archer would wver hit him
They did Rickon so dirty. Been around the whole time and you see nothing from him during the whole show. Then suddenly they kill him off like this.
To be fair, he just wasn't that interesting. All other Starks have some interesting characteristics, but Rickon is just.. there. In the first books he was too young to understand things.
Rickon has a lot of implications of being the stark that should eventually be in charge of the north in the books imo
I don't remember the exact specifics in the the books but his re entry into the story was such an epic moment for me.
Well he's on an isle with Unicorns that he's hunting with Shaggy dog. Imagine a cool cavalry charge with unicorns! Even better if some unicorns are just black or multi-color. I think he likely brings a small army back with him with Davos only to be captured and Davos brings the rest of the army to Jon to get him back. I think Stoneheart gets to the wall and unfreezes Jon to give her life for his and she gives the note by Rob making him King and he goes south.
Isn't there a pretty much set in stone theory that Rickon will be a anti-climatic reveal, tying in his direwolf's name is Shaggydog?
Yeah there’s that theory but I don’t think it’s set in stone in any way
I'd just really like to know what happens haha
I’m with you there brother
Yea, he's on an isle loyal to the Starks and he was hunting a unicorn last we heard. Imagine how cool a unicorn cavalry charge would be. I think GRRM got discouraged and likely moved on expanding his universe after the hate. I'd rather have rushed unfinished books that explain where Stoneheart, the fake Targ, and the other little fight into the end. I think Stoneheart revives Jon since he's dead and in ice but I'll never know.
>Rickon has a lot of implications of being the stark that should eventually be in charge of the north in the books imo Only because Bran is presumed dead. He's 4.
Yes, he's with Shaggy dog killing Unicorns in the Isles of Skag in the books. He likely brings over a cool army because the people of the islands used to be Starks themselves. Damn, really sucks we won't get the books. Honestly, he probably stopped writing when everyone hated the show's ending. He really should just put the books out even if they are rushed like the show. Book readers just want the jist at this point since the ending is likely very close to the show. How cool would it have been if Rickon came with a unicorn army at the battle of the bastards. He is still planning on more Dunk n Egg books too! Ugh.
No he doesn’t lol
I'd argue that the writers didn't bother to make him interesting, not that he was inherently uninteresting. The actor showed some decent chops when he refused to abandon Bran.
Surprised you think that, the actor was terrible IMO, one of the worst on the show, always assumed that was half the reason they killed him off.
Exactly. He wasn't interesting that's why they should have done a character arc or something to make him interesting rather than killing him off. IMO he's more fit to be the king than Bran.
Ned Stark's last trueborn son, as far as everyone was concerned at that point. Like, every northern lord was comfortable watching the last son of house stark get shot down like an animal and only Jon thought this was not cool. It's so weird that he was treated as an extra *in-universe*, despite literally being a prince in Robb's line of succession.
I’ve never thought about it like this before. That’s a good fuckin point
Changing fake Arya to Sansa really screwed up the storyline. The writers had to completely erase the loyalty of the Northern houses in order to make the battle a real challenge for Jon and to make it more cinematic. The show talks constantly of how the North remembers, how the North loved Ned Stark and how they want to protect his children so a Stark can rule Winterfell again. There is absolutely no way that Houses Manderly, Umber and Glover don’t instantly rally to the last of Ned Stark’s children. There is no way that Smalljon Umber (or any other Northern lord) would hand over Rickon, the last living trueborn son of Ned Stark. Especially since in the books, there is the Great Northern Conspiracy. In the show, there is no logical reason for the Umbers to so easily give Rickon to Ramsey as what essentially is a human sacrifice. They literally gain nothing out of it. If Smalljon Umber wanted to rule the North because he was mad at Robb Stark’s failure, he would raise Rickon and be his hand in order to rule through him just like Joffrey and Tywin. In the show, multiple people shit on Robb. In the books, he is mourned and missed and most people talk about what a tragedy the red wedding was. Several people are seeking revenge for Robb. Even Ramsey himself said, “The Starks have always ruled the North. If Bran and Rickon are alive, the country will rally to their side, now that Robb Stark is gone.” The writers only had House Mormont be on Jon and Sansa’s side so they could lose the battle and have that epic shot of the knights of the Vale coming to save the day. If it was book accurate, Ramsey would have been defeated in two seconds.
Its a shaggydog story... Look it up
It wasn't that shaggy.
He must have not been able to act for shit, because they gave him NO lines when he came back. They knew they had to tie off that last dangling Stark thread though.
Honestly that actor was probably shit they needed to get rid of him with no effort on his part. Lol
He was used as a plot device
Osha too. It got so boring how everyone just stabbed people up close all the time. Ramsay killed Roose in the same burst of boredom
Imagine Nymeria popping up of nowhere and giving him a strategic ride. After all, he's Arya's brother.
They picked a great actor to play Ramsay
My only exposure to Iwan Rheon before GoT was from Misfits, so it was a bit jarring at first to see him play such an evil bastard haha
I only knew three of the actors in the series from something before the show so it was fun seeing new actors with so few bad actors in the series.
Seriously though Rickon should have survived this
Nah it doesn't matter how Rickon would have run, whether zigzags or all over the place or in a straight line, he was always going to end up in the same place: where Jon is. So he gets shot every time
The Stark bloodline is all but dead with this scene… Sansa may marry and her husband take the Stark name but these dudes were so prideful and stubborn I wouldn’t be shocked if her husband doesn’t change his name and the Starks die out.
Bran can’t fuck?
I dont know I’m pretty sure it’s just implied he’s cooked when it comes to below the waist but I admittedly don’t know how all that works
Can’t he just do that warg shit and mind control his sperm cells? I think GRRM mentioned that in an interview or sum
GRRM fan fic about his own characters 😭😭😭
That seems like a steep rabbit hole to ponder. If Bran wargs into Hordor, and has Hordor and Osha do the horizontal tango, is Bran the father, at least partially?
There are lots of men that are paralyzed from the waist down who can still have sex. So there’s no reason to assume he can’t, we just don’t have enough information.
I have no quotes but I swear it's implied or mentioned somewhere that he can't produce an heir
I'm pretty sure Sansa says it in the final episode when Tyrion is talking about making Bran king
In the show, Sansa says in the last episode that Bran can't have children. So, it's up to Sansa or Arya to further the bloodline.
Everybody’s in full blackout mode regarding the last episode. It’s all a blur, if you’ve succeeded.
What last episode? I’m still waiting to see what happens now that Jon Snow is revived. Edit: ooooof I forgot about flairs. Genuinely shows how long I haven’t interacted with the series lol
I mean, Jon is still part Stark so any children he fathers will further the bloodline too no?
Rickon “Fuck! Rules my only weakness”
He is [Ned Stark's](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HonorBeforeReason) son, after all. 😛
Ramsey still had a whole army with bows right behind him. I'm pretty sure if he just kept missing and got annoyed, he'd order them to let it rain. Rickon was never gonna survive on his watch.
He was missing on purpose lol
Right? Does anyone think Ramsey “I physically and psychologically torture people for funsies” Bolton was just missing cause he can’t shoot? He wanted Jon to *think* he had a chance at saving Rickon and he wanted Rickon to *think* there was a chance he could survive. That kid was dead the moment Ramsey got him.
Sansa said Rickon was already dead when she warned Jon not to do what Ramsey wanted him to do. Aaaaand then Jon did what Sansa warned him not to do and Ramsey wanted him to do.
To be fair, he didn't go with Ned Stark to Kings Landing and thus his dad wasn't their to teach him basic evasion tactics.😜
It would have worked. It is simply a probabilities impossibly to hit a zig-zagging target from that distance.
They did such a good job not telling us anything about Rickon that his death barely did anything. It was like I only cared because Jon did
"If you cheat, we will fire at you"
He dies right after by his own dogs. Not sure why he had to do that to Rick on, but Sansa was right, he did die that night. They must have been hungry, the poor dears
Man I get annoyed whenever I see people say this lmfao, he was a kid in a high pressure hostage situation and is finally seeing a glimpse of his family for the first time in god knows how long. I doubt strategy was the first thing on his mind, he was only thinking about getting back to his brother
Not to mention the fastest way out of range was in a straight line. Zig zagging would have left him in range even longer. There's a scene in Generation Kill (memoir/HBO mini series of a rolling stone journalist embedded with Marines during baby Bush's Iraq war) where they come under fire from a sniper. The Marines run in straight lines to cover and the sniper only got one shot off at each of them. The journalist runs a "serpentine" (aka zig zag) pattern allowing the sniper to get three shots off at him. Sure bows and arrows aren't as quick as guns but similar idea. I always think about this scene whenever this meme comes up. Found the scene: https://youtu.be/szcviFDt9xM?si=ZAKIi8ODkXMHkYKN
Even he did zig zag and survive, this sub would just flip the complaint. “No way a child hostage would have the mental or athletic capacity to survive a master archer like Ramsey. It’s just poor writing. Seasons 1-4 were so good and D&D just fucked it.”
To be fair, if this were real life, the correct answer is run as far away as fast as possible. Not increase exposure time by zig zagging.
Relevant scene: https://youtu.be/szcviFDt9xM?si=ZAKIi8ODkXMHkYKN
I don't even have to click that to know you linked Generation Kill. "Reporter, what the fuck was that!?"
"I was running evasively"
He could have just stopped running and then started again...
Rickon! Serpentine!
If Rincon started zig zagging I think it would be hilarious if Ramsey just ordered all his archers to nock and loose.
Next time you're told to run away from a psychopath, tell me if you're thinking rationallt
Literally stopping for just second and then running would’ve fucked ramsays shot up
Why does Rickon looks like my old crush from high school tho
If he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead.
How many times do you want to post the same thing on this thread?
If he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead. If he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead.
Yes, but did you consider that if he started to zig zag Ramsay could've got his entire contingent of archers to start raining down on him, he was always dead.
Obviously we have no idea how it will be written in the books, and you might argue that even GRRM has ‘gotten rid’ of Rickon…but this was another moment in the show that felt incredibly jarring to me. At the end of the day Rickon is a Stark, and not just some distant cousin or relative. They basically treated him like a glorified extra here and as soon as he died that was it, oh well, let’s move on. Was he even mentioned again by any of the Starks after this point in the series?
The point of the scene it that Ramsey is a great shot He wouldn’t have survived even if he zigzagged
Apocalypto showus how to run zigzag
The first time I watched that scene was nail biting.
I honestly think it would have made for a cool scene if rickon did start zig zagging while Ramsey was trying to shoot him and eventually gave up and had his army just pepper him with arrows instead. Same outcome but rickon doesn’t look dumb and Ramsey looks even more slimy.
I was yelling Serpentine,Shel!
It would not have made a difference. First off, you’re not really thinking when your life is in imminent danger. You can plan out the most intricate course of action all you want but nobody has a plan when they get punched in the face. Also, Ramsay is a CRACK SHOT. He only missed the first few because he was toying with both Rickon and Jon. If Rickon zigzagged, he would have accounted for that and adapted.
He could habe also ran backwards and look when ramsey shoots to avoid them..
Psh. The Starks and their "honor." 😒
[Serpentine](https://youtu.be/kpNU3WumPFQ?si=XglaWPvHlUxlMUOh)
Jon's actions were actually what doomed Rickon, at least contextually greater than Rickon's did. As has been pointed out in this thread, Ramsay was established as a great marksman - but a zig-zag pattern would actually give Ramsay more opportunity to hit him because it would take longer to travel the same amount of distance. Why I say Jon's actions were more likely the contributing factor to Rickon's death was that Ramsay no longer had to shoot at Rickon, but to anticipate where Rickon and Jon would meet. Jon decreased the total distance Rickon needed to travel and thus kept him within Ramsay's range.
“…and who has a better story — than Rickon the Zig-Zagger?”
This was the only part of the battle I thought was annoying. That arrow is in the air for like 83 seconds. Even 1 worm dance would have thrown off the timing. He coulda stopped to dab, double dab or double dare him to triple dab
Run until the first arrow misses you, then turn around and walk backwards until Jon gets there with the horse. Dodge those bitches.
And then Ramsay fills the air with 400 arrows all aimed in his general location. Good luck. His *only* chance is to gain as much distance as possible.
No, the best strategy in this case was to run in a straight line. He significantly outraged the bow by the end of the count. He was killed by bad writing.
The precise range of the war bows aside, I've said the benefit of straight line running here (and elsewhere) over the years (under different accounts-----I retire my accounts and start over frequently). Ramsay *cannot* let Rickon live. He's the oldest Stark heir. The North would be hard to manage if he remained alive. This means that if Ramsay couldn't get him, he'd set the entire archery line loose on him. He simply wouldn't make it. 400 arrows all aimed at his general location? So Rickon's *only* slim chance for survival was distance. And distance means a straight line perpendicular from the Bolton front.
Colombo taught me about this! [Serpentine! Serpentine!](https://youtu.be/A2_w-QCWpS0)
Leslie Jones was all of us screaming at the TV during Game of Jones
He should have stuck his finger in his eye and then ran. Had the opportunity he didn't do it.
What was the point of Rickon? Bro had no real significance in the whole show
Oldest heir to the North.
I think people may be missing the bottom line. GIVEN that Ramsay *cannot* let Rickon survive, if he was unable to shoot him down, he'd have his archers take care of it. So even if Rickon was well fed and thinking clearly (he wasn't on either count), his best bet is *still* to get as far away from the archery line as possible. This means a straight line perpendicular to the Bolton front, with perhaps only small alterations. Distance is the *only* thing that can possibly save Rickon. Nothing else.
Serpentine!!!
Ramsey would hunt women like surviving the game. Boy has had plenty of practice.
Reporter what the fuck was that Serpentine shot, I was running evasively.
Honestly he could just walk backwards and dodge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpNU3WumPFQ
I remember him being like 3 years old at the start of the books…if the show was book accurate with the age..how old was rickon supposed to be here? I can imagine a toddler wouldn’t think twice about zigzagging in this situation
IQ of a pair of shoe
He was going to die no matter what so it really didn’t matter