Game of Thrones/Headscratchers

Changing Asha's name to Yara to avoid confusion with Osha....
What the heck? Those two don't even have a scene together, and it's not like Osha's a major character. Besides, we have Robb/Robert/Robin, Jon Snow/Jon Arryn, Tyrion/Tywin and all the Targaryens have similar sounding names - why bother to change this one?
 * Maybe Osha's role is expanded in the television show? There's some speculation that she will take the place of the Reeds from the books.
 * That could be even more problematic in the long run.
 * What I'd like to know is why they couldn't have just gave Osha a different or variant name (Oshanna or some other random Spearwife's name) to begin with if they foresaw the trouble with Asha, unless they thought they would only be given one season. Still, Osha's such a minor character in the books and her name is barely ever mentioned on-screen (if at all) that I'd doubt the "casual viewers" who the producers are so ostensibly worried about would be any wiser if her name was changed between seasons anyway.
 * Because for one thing then this entry would be complaining about why they changed Osha's name.
 * Because, as seen in the second season, Osha has been getting a lot more screentime than she got in the books, and she's received more screen time than Yara thus far.
 * My guess is because both characters interact directly with Theon on the show. But yeah, it reeks of Viewers are Morons. Robert Arryn's name was changed to Robin, even though in-universe he's named after Robert Baratheon, but it's not a major change since his nickname is Sweetrobin.
 * Wildlings are going to have their own accent, that's the best way to emphasise the difference. Robin can be assumed to be a pet name since he's clearly being babied all the time.

Why didn't Tyrion use the rings he was clearly wearing to bribe Mord?
Rings are not coins. They have to be appraised and sold and you never get fair value, not least if the jeweler couldn't do much with them but have them melted down for gold because they're pretty clearly designed for a member of House Lannister. As well ask why he didn't offer the very fine clothes off his back: money is portable, instantly negotiable, and universally (well, almost) valued. Tyron has his hands up to ward off Mord's blows while offering him gold, then in absolute exasperation states that he doesn't have any gold on him now. However, his fingers are clearly adorned by several gold rings. Why he doesn't use the rings as a bribe is never addressed. Two episodes later, he does use one of his rings to bribe Shagga, stating that it's worth more than everything the mountain clans own combined. One can attempt any number of justifications, but the most obvious explanation is that it's simply the show-runners' error. They probably didn't think of it before they filmed the scene, and didn't have the time or budget to rewrite or reshoot anything.
 * That, and maybe Tyrion simply has a fondness for his jewellery, and would rather pay Mord in cash if he can. Tyrion didn't know that Mord would take a few goes to come round to the idea.
 * A bigger question is why Mord didn't simply swipe Tyrion's rings while he was at it. He seemed inclined to rob him rather than trade with him, anyway.
 * Exactly. Mord might've just taken the rings when offered and not done his part of the bargain. "Send this message and I will give you the gold AFTER" works a lot better since it ensures that Mord has to go through with it before he can get his gold.
 * I think we can chalk this up to the creators just not thinking of removing Tyrion's jewelry in the scene.
 * It's debatable whether a smart man like Mord would even know to think of things other than coins as being worthy of value or exchangeable for wealth.
 * He uses one in The Pointy End to bribe Shagga.
 * The scene where he offers the ring to Shagga with the explanation that "it's worth more than you've ever owned" is probably more symbolic of House Lannister's influence (it's not just ANY solid gold ring but a Lannister signet) in matters other than wealth. He is the queen's brother after all.
 * Or the gold is literally worth more than the entire tribe owns. Remember, in the next episode Tyrion describes a single silver stag as unusually high payment for a whore. Gold is worth a lot in Westeros.
 * I always thought the "commanding a high price" thing was down to the fact that it was a silver stag for each of the guards...
 * The ring itself is worth literally more than all the tribe owns, but it does show how much wealth and power the Lannisters have at their disposal. If just one of their little trinkets is worth that much, imagine how much they could do for the hill tribes.
 * It could be that his rings (aside from the tiny little pinkey ring on his left hand), being a silver colour in appearance and offered to Shagga with the mention of high-quality steel, were in fact made of high-quality Lannister steel rather than gold.
 * No one wears steel jewellery, much less a Lannister.

How, exactly, did Ned not anticipate Littlefinger's betrayal?

 * Littlefinger said, again and again, that he was untrustworthy. Then, when he offers great advice to Ned (seize the throne for yourself), Ned scoffs at his advice and basically tells him to fuck off before implementing his own plan. And just earlier, Ned was offered aid from the (much more) honorably Renly and refused. There's Honor Before Reason and then there's carrying an Idiot Ball.
 * That's sort of the point. While Ned is largely a pretty likeable guy who cares for his family and friends, his rigid adherence to honor regardless of the circumstances is his Fatal Flaw. He assumes that if he's straight with someone, they'll be straight with him in return, and it bites him in the ass.
 * Littlefinger reiterated his untrustworthiness precisely to make himself seem harmless. It defused Ned's fears of him.
 * Littlefinger explains it in the whore-porn scene: "Slowly. You’re not fooling them, they just paid you. They know what you are. They know it’s all just an act. Your job is to make them forget what they know. And that takes time. You need to … ease into it"
 * Correct - Littlefinger is actually a master at this game of manipulation and deceit, as the rest of the story will show. He got Honor-driven Ned to trust him by telling him *not* to trust him... which made him sound like an honest man, compared to all the other court suck-ups.
 * From the books:  Not that that excuses Ned's ignoring Littlefinger's Obviously Evil attributes, but it makes a bit more sense in retrospect.
 * Actually, Littlefinger
 * Hang on, where'd you get that from?
 * It's in A Clash of Kings (the 2nd Book) and will probably be touched on in the second season.
 * Where in Clash of Kings (or more details, please)? Honestly curious (there is the from Varys to Tyrion, which is highly suggestive but not really conclusive. Later edit: in fact, after both rereading that chapter and seeing the scene on the TV series, it seems to allude to circumstances in general, moreso than a specific individual).
 * With what we know from the books now, it's entirely likely that the "another" was Varys himself, in an attempt to help topple Westeros into chaos so that his chosen Targaryen could claim the throne.
 * Littlefinger is also a childhood friend of Catelyn, and she assures Ned that he's loyal to her. This helps sell himself as a lying schemer who is nevertheless their schemer.
 * This is sort of a case of viewer myopia. To us, watching everything from outside with an objective eye and knowing it's fiction, Littlefinger fits the "villainous advisor only out for his own betterment" archetype to a T. But Ned's not a viewer watching a bit of fiction... he's just living in his world, he's not going to look at Littlefinger and go "Hey, this guy has a Goatee of Evil, I bet he's gonna turn on me."

How did Ned figure out who the father was?

 * Okay, so Ned looks through the book and sees the Baratheon-Lannister unions all produce children who look like Baratheons, fine. He reaches the conclusion thanks to Sansa that the children are not, in fact Robert's. Fine, makes sense especially considering how Cersei and Robert very openly feel about each other. Then here is the one thing that makes me scratch my head: he jumps to the conclusion either as or before he meets with Cersei in the godswood that the father is, in fact, Jaime Lannister. Now, maybe he was just making a fortunate guess based on his dislike that Cersei freely admitted right after being accused, but I at least can't quite follow the logic. This was also my only real headscratcher from the books so far. By no means a deal-breaker, but still a bit odd.
 * It's a little more expanded upon in the books, but basically the book Ned was reading also contained the history of the Lannisters, not just the Baratheons. They're large and old families and the book goes back centuries, and every time Baratheon wed Lannister, whether male to female respectively or vice-versa, every single time the child had black hair. In addition, while we only met one, the book also makes clear that there are other bastards of Robert's out there, one of which Ned saw (who had her father's hair) and one of whom he's heard description of (and is the spitting image of his father at that age). Finally, there is a pretty short pool of blond people who could have fathered Cersei's children: the Targaryens are dead, Loras Tyrell is too young (as well as super gay, though Ned probably doesn't know that)... that pretty much only leaves someone from Cersei's own family. Of which Jaime is by far the likeliest candidate. On top of that, Ned figures out at the same moment that's probably the reason why someone tried to kill Bran. It's circumstantial, but it supports his theory, and there isn't exactly a magna carta to hold him back.
 * Sansa gives him the clue in "A Golden Crown" - she whines that Joffrey is a lion, like his mother; he's nothing like a Baratheon. Ned gets a certain "A-ha" look...
 * It's also mentioned more than once in the books how much Joffrey looks like Jaime.
 * But Jaime's twin sister is Joffrey's mother. The fact that Joffrey looks like Jaime doesn't really mean anything.
 * Actually it does. Given that Cersei and Jaime are supposed to look at a lot a like (more so the books than the show) and the kid winds comes out in the very same, it gives Ned some more circumstantial proof.
 * I thought when Ned asked Cersei: "Your brother... or your lover?" he was sort of testing the ice, not being certain about Jaime being the father yet. Cersei's response confirmed it.
 * The books suggest, though not outright state, that Cersei and Jaime were far less subtle and discrete than they should have been or thought they were. Tyrion, Littlefinger, Varys, and their uncle all knew without them knowing they knew. Its likely Ned picked up on some signs that they were fucking that he wrote off because they were siblings, and once he discovered that Robert couldn't be the father, he thought back to that.
 * Also remember that both Jon Arryn and Bran were both attacked to protect this secret, which very strongly suggests that the affair is ongoing. That further narrows the list of suspects, not the least of which because Jaime was probably the only blonde in Winterfell when Bran fell.
 * I took that whole thing not as an admission of incest (like a previous troper said, I figured Ned was just "testing the ice" with the incest thing), but merely an indicator that Joffrey wasn't Baratheon. It doesn't matter WHO Cersei's sleeping with, as long as it isn't Robert, Joffrey's in trouble, and Ned had just come to the conclusion that Baratheons have a dominant dark hair gene. The rest everyone else pieces together just because they all hate the Lannisters and want to believe it.
 * I always thought it was pretty obvious how he figured it out. When Ned found out that Robert wasn't the father, he likely remembered what Catelyn told him: Bran's fall and subsequent assassination attempt on the day almost every man in the royal entourage was out hunting - everybody except Jaime Lannister, that is. From there it's an obvious connection from the secret of Cerseis children to what Bran saw that day that made the Lannisters try to kill two people who came too close to their secret.

Is Joffrey an idiot or something?

 * His  AND mother are at war with one of the most powerful houses in the land, and he goes and !? Even CERSEI was screaming "WTF ARE YOU DOING!?" at him while his girlfriend was pleading at his side...and now his   has been captured by the Starks. Way to go, Joffrey, !
 * He's a spoiled brat who's always gotten his way and is prone to act very sociopathic. Of course he's a complete idiot when it comes to actually ruling.
 * He's 14 years old. (So, yes. Most 14-year-old's are). Also as far as he knows, Ned Stark just tried to usurp his throne for no reason and his Mom's never actually explained to him why it's important to let Ned live, just ordered him to do so.
 * He was raised with Cersei's values and Robert's bloodlust. He considers Robert his father and wants to be a tough guy to make him proud.
 * Joffrey is Stupid Evil to the core and everyone knows it after he pulled that little stunt. Unfortunately, he's the king, so no one can really tell him to stop.
 * So, short answer, yes, he is.
 * Joffrey seems to be smart enough to understand that everybody is making him into a puppet ruler, and decides to show that he won't be held in anybody's leash in the most spectacular manner possible. He lacks any understanding of the bigger picture and the realities of being a king however, thus only managing a demonstration of why he needs that leash in the first place.
 * Think about the amount of parental guidance Joffrey got in his life. There wasn't much from Robert, who was too busy hunting whores and fucking boars. There was almost none from his father; in a later book, Cersei warns Jaime from even standing near his children for fear that someone will make the connection just by seeing them side-by-side. And his mother, Cersei, who gave him most of his training? Not always on top of things. In other words: no father figures, and a Small Name, Big Ego for a mother. It's no wonder Joffrey's a raging incompetent. Who would have taught him not to be?
 * ...YES! He's stupid, he's arrogant and he's a sociopath, and now he's king he's drunk with power. And bear in mind that he's certainly dumb enough to believe in all honesty that Ned was behind his father's death, considering that's what everyone's been telling him and the guy just confessed, so that puts the execution in a slightly different light. What's much harder to understand is why his Chessmaster advisors didn't foresee it, and take extra-special pains to convince him just how very stupid it would be.
 * Reading in between the lines, it's entirely possible that one or more of his Chessmasters didn't engineer the situation.
 * Add that this is the new king's first real act of power, and he has probably been hearing all over that his mother is the real power behind the throne. Her telling him what to do drove him to do the opposite, to prove he was no-one's puppet.
 * He's an inbred cowardly little bastard (literally) and in universe inbreeding is implied to lead to madness ("The Mad King" was thought to be "Mad" for just that reason). He's not so much an idiot as an insane, sadistic little twit who sees Ned as the embodiment of everything he is not (Couragous, Honorable, Strong, etc.) and the man who tried to dethrone him on his coronation day. Given the way he's acted up until this point I'd be scraching my head if he didn't have Ned executed.
 * Remember that scene were Joffrey bullies the butcher's boy? That scene wasn't just there to show us that Joffrey is an evil sadist. It was also there to show us that when Joffrey is an evil sadist, everybody will rush to support Joffrey and persecute his victims. Joffrey has learned all his life that he can Kick the Dog and Rape The Dog whenever he gets bored, and if the dog tries to bite back, it will soon be a dead dog. The boy does not know the meaning of the word "consequences." Who would have taught it to him?
 * Joffrey's uncle and grandfather, each in their turn as Hand of the King, have openly said to Joffrey's face that they don't think he has the brains to tie his own shoes.
 * Short answer: yes. He really isn't the sharpest spoon in the drawer. More the point he likely decided on the spur of the moment that sentencing Ned to the Night's Watch was weak and that the crowd needed a better show. They got one.
 * Doubt it was spur of the moment. Likely, as in the books, Littlefinger planted the seed of the idea, knowing it would sprout in Joffrey's psychopathic little head when the time came.

The Birds and the Spiders

 * OK, so this is a pretty trivial Just Bugs Me, but if Varys is a 'spider', and his spies are his 'little birds', shouldn't they be eating him? Or at the very least, not sharing their flies with him...
 * More likely than not, Varys originated the 'little birds' part himself when he started out (perhaps even before he became Master of Whisperers), but everyone else (i.e. everyone who disliked/distrusted him) thought that invoking the imagery of a venomous creepy-crawler that traps its prey by spinning webs had a more appropriate ring to it than 'Varys the Birdkeeper'. The dissonance you mentioned may even have been intentional on the part of his detractors, in the hopes that one of the 'birds' would 'eat' the spider.
 * I got the impression, in part due to Baelish and Varys' dialogue in the season finale, that Varys inspires fear in even the most powerful of men. That, despite being an otherwise powerless, weak, foreign eunuch, the Spider still commands the Birds. (Which acts as a stark contrast to the series' status quo of "might equals right.")
 * It seemed simple to me. People call him 'The Spider' because he sits at the middle of his 'Web' of informants/spies/assassins who he calls his 'little birds' in reference to the saying 'a little bird told me'.
 * Yes, but those two metaphors clash with each other pretty badly. Hey, I said it was trivial...
 * Based on the book series, Varys has been trading in information for a goodly portion of his life, and established the phrase "his little birds" in his early life as a thief of knowledge. The "spider" bit came afterwards, in King's Landing, working for the Targaryens. The two are completely unrelated.
 * To be more precise, in his early life they were called his "little mice". Whatever he calls them, it really makes no difference; they're small, harmless looking and get around everywhere without people noticing them or paying attention to them. And he's called the spider because he sits in the middle of a web of information.
 * To make it explicitly clear; Varys came up with the "little birds/mice" metaphor on his own. Other people began referring to him as "the Spider" later on, and Varys himself has never claimed or used that moniker. It's the difference between how Varys views himself(as a very well informed individual) and how other people view him(as a damn spider).
 * Alternately, he is one of these types of spiders http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goliath_birdeater

What exacatly is Syrio Forel's job?

 * He is a short Braavosi man who has his own generously sized chamber in the middle of the Red Keep. He does not have any official job, even the Lannisters' soldiers call him the "dancing master," and not a single soldier in King's Landing is trained by him--not only do they not use even remotely the same style, but they don't treat him with any respect, either. Why did he live in the city, let alone the castle, at all? Where did he get money?
 * Presumably he's a fencing master and is being paid by Eddard Stark. I think that "dancing master" is used because it wouldn't be considered appropriate for a girl to be taught fighting, so Syrio is officially giving Arya dancing lessons. That being said, it is possible that Syrio does actually teach dance and/or that fencing would be referred to as dancing- since everyone in Westeros fights with broadswords or jousts, maybe fencing is considered just for show, not combat.
 * If he was just the resident fencing instructor, then even if fencing was looked down on as a girlish style or a kind of dance, everyone would be aware that he at least knows his way around weapons - however, the guards initially expect him to be entirely harmless. Either he's a professional dancing master who Eddard happened to know was an expert fencer as well, or he was brought in specifically by Ned to train his daughter under that cover story. I'd guess the latter.
 * Person who read the books here to help! Syrio is from Braavos, a town across the narrow sea akin to Venice. The blade Needle is a blade made in the style of the "Water Dancers", the prefered way to fight over in Braavos. So when Ned found out about the sword he looked into finding an instructor skilled in the blade over in Braavos. Syrio was/is the "First Sword of Braavos" which meant that he was a high skilled fighter for the main lord over there. The Seven know why he decided to go to the Red Keep and teach Arya, but he did. Also, yes, "Dancing Master" is a cover story for the sword training and also clear because Arya's learning the "Water Dancing" style of swordplay.
 * he could have been there as a mercenary, maybe run into trouble back home so he fled to westeros, making his way as a sellsword until Ned find him and offer him a better job
 * He used to be the "First Sword of Braavos", basically a personal bodyguard to the leader of one of the Free Cities across the Narrow Sea. Why he's in King's Landing isn't fully explained but presumably his old job gave him enough coin to travel as he wished. When Ned found Needle and decided that Arya needed formal training he hired Syrio. As stated above, his being her "dancing master" was just a cover story.
 * Thing is, during the mediaeval and renaissance periods in real life, it was quite common for fencing masters to give dancing lessons as well, because the basic skills and footwork transferred over. Assuming that aspect of historical culture got carried over into Westeros, they really should have been aware of at least the possibility that he was an able swordsman, even if his main source of coin was as a dancing master. Hell, the fact that he was the former First Sword of Braavos (which would be something they would most likely have heard even if he hadn't declared that fact to them, tavern rumours being what they are) should have told them that he had skill, and if he was in truth working as a dancing instructor they should have known he'd definitely still be in shape. Essentially, I think if "dancing master" is a cover story, it is at best going to be the sort of blatantly obvious polite fiction to placate the worst gossips. Especially considering the only person who seems in the least bit taken in by it is Sansa. I think the majority of their arrogance in that scene comes from a combination of racism, belief in the superiority of their style of swordsmanship (and the design on their swords), and a firm belief that no-one could seriously hurt a man in full armour using only a stick (at least, not before he or his equally armoured mates shoved 28 inches of steel down the throat of whoever tried).
 * His own chamber? In the books, they practice in one of the dining halls in the Tower of the Hand with all the tables pushed to the side. I don't think Syrio actually lives in the castle...
 * Syrio is either just hanging around and being paid by the lesson, or he's employed by the crown in whatever capacity. In the book (and I can't remember if it's echoed in the show at the moment but I think it was), when Ned is telling the girls to pack up and Arya asks what about her lessons, Ned says that Syrio can come with them "if he will agree to enter my service", thus implying he's not currently outright employed as a member of House Stark.
 * 'Entering my service', in this context, would mean swearing loyalty to Ned Stark as his liege lord. It doesn't just mean 'being employed'. Syrio's current status is, as mentioned above, almost certainly that of a fencing master being paid by the lesson, which is a very common arrangement for wandering arms tutors in that kind of milieu. And he's not necessarily employed by the Crown - Ned might be no Lannister but he's still Hand of the King and one of the seven greatest nobles of the realm in his own right, and could thus easily afford Syrio's fees out of pocket.

Why didn't pick up a sword?

 * Fighting off four armed soldiers with only  is awesome, I think we can all agree, but they all had swords just lying on the ground afterwards.
 * If you listen to the audio as Arya flees, there is much metal clanging and screaming. Since Syrio already had his training sword cut in half, one wonders if he did not indeed pick up a sword to continue the melee. There is an awful lot of fighting noise as she runs, so we can imagine the fight was far from over, and he must have extended the combat somehow.
 * In the books, it's made pretty clear that is very different from Westerosi fighting, as it uses rapier-type swords and quick, light-footed movement above all, as opposed to the longswords of the Seven Kingdoms. It could be that  just wouldn't be effective with one of the  swords.
 * I figure that it was an effort to show mercy to Aria. Get her to run away before he starts killing the guards, in an attempt to preserve as much of Aria's innocence as he can. Seeing her dancing instructor kill people in front of her may not be something that he wants Aria to see and remember. Especially since the majority of his instruction has seemed to be along the lines of teaching Aria how to stay alive in a sword fight, rather than how to kill her opponent.
 * With sharp weapons, those amount to the same thing - as indeed Arya shows a moment later when she kills the stableboy. The guards on the ground, incidentally, were dead or dying - never mind the absence of gore.
 * Getting knocked on the helmet with a wooden sword may cause a concussion, but it's quite unlikely to kill you, at least unless repeated several times over. Those helmets do have padding, after all. The fact that there are several screams after Arya flees does indicate that more than one person dies painfully afterwards, so the chances are that Syrio does pick up the sword. The knight of the Kingsguard can be seen in a later episode unharmed however, so unfortunately it's likely that he killed Syrio, unless he jumped out of the window or something.
 * Actuall the screaming and metal clanging was not from Syrio but from a different room where the Lannisters were killing the Stark servants and guards, indicating to Arya she could not go that way.
 * In the book, Syrio kills the non-Kingsguard guards using just his wooden sword, all while Arya is watching. He exploits gaps in their armor and leaves them all dead, illustrating the effectiveness of quickness and footwork against non-armored/partially-armored opponents. However, Arya leaves before Syrio fights the fully-armored Kingsguard, and the reader is left to assume that Syrio falls to the armored opponent.
 * Defeated =/= killed. As above, it's rather difficult to kill someone with a wooden sword by striking them in the head. Knock them out? Perhaps. But outright killing them? Unlikely.
 * I feel that it should be noted that it's very hard to "knock someone out" (as in induce total unconsciousness) for an extended period of time through blunt trauma without killing them, or at least without causing permanent brain damage. The guards on the floor are most likely either awake or dead.
 * His wooden sword is pretty effective in the book. He whacks one guy in the throat, jabs another in the eye, and breaks a third's wrist. Not to mention the one who got used as a human shield.
 * Indeed, it's actually mentioned, I think, as being a wooden sword cored with lead. It's also probably a particularly hard, dense wood, not like the soft, cheap stuff that toy swords are made out of. It's probably quite capable of crushing tracheas and cracking skulls.

Why did Jaime give Tyrion's dagger to Bran's would-be assassin?

 * Catelyn is no Miss Marple so I get that she needed a pretty obvious clue the Lannisters were involved, but there doesn't seem to be a reason for Jaime to do something that so obviously implicates his house.
 * Well it hasn't been mentioned exactly who sent the assassin, so there's no point in headscratching ove this until we have all the facts.
 * The most common suspect is Joffrey, who is the only one with reason to have the assassin use an extremely rare dagger that would be linked back to the Lannisters, as revenge on Tyrion for slapping him and forcing him to pay sympathy to the Starks, knowing Tyrion would be blamed for the murder.
 * That's actually an interesting point. Joffrey is vengeful enough to do it and short-sighted enough not to see the disastrous effect it would have on his house if one of his family were accused of murder.
 * There's no reason to think that Joffrey would be able to think far enough ahead to presume that Tyrion would be blamed for it, or that he knew the dagger was Tyrion's. The books make it clear, in fact, that
 * It seems that the original poster here is not necessarily asking who sent the assassin after Bran, but why Catelyn comes to the conclusion that she does. Am I correct? In both the show or the book, her evidence is too weak and she pays for it.
 * Catelyn came to the conclusion she did because Littlefinger told her that it was Tyrion's dagger, and she trusts him implicitly because he is her childhood friend who was and is in love with her. Now, it's fairly obvious to us that Cat should not trust Littlefinger, but I think we're supposed to assume that she was blinded by her childhood relationship to see the person he had grown into.
 * I think we are meant to assume that the Lannisters didn't send the assassin because of this. It's pretty clear that Tyrion was being set up, and the Lannisters would have no reason to implicate one of their own. Cersei might want to get Tyrion out of the way, but she wouldn't want to sacrifice the integrity of her house, and Jaime seems to actually care about Tyrion. I think we are led to surmise that someone is purposely trying to implicate the Lannisters in the hopes that the Starks and Lannisters will go to war with each other. We don't actually even know if the dagger belonged to Tyrion. We only have Littlefinger's word, and Littlefinger is a lying schemer. Wouldn't Tyrion have noticed if his dagger had been stolen? Especially a nice dagger like that one? Littlefinger tells us Tyrion won it from him when he bet against Jaime, but why would Tyrion bet against his brother the Kingslayer? There's a lot to the story that doesn't add up, which means there's more going on here than what we were told.
 * Good points. I had just assumed the twins were trying to finish the job they had started and kill the boy, but there could be other things going on. It would probably behoove me to read the books.

Why are there no Baratheon guards with Robert?

 * At King's Landing, Lannister guards cover the court like flies on jam but soldiers of Robert's own house are nowhere to be seen. Renly is likely have had a few among his entourage when it fled the city, but you'd expect Robert who is so obsessed with his past glory days to have his knights and soldiers around to remind him of those days, instead of bumping into Lannisters everywhere.
 * Some minor book spoilers here, but more or less (it's explained a bit in A Clash Of Kings), the Baratheon brothers don't have any other family and their guards/supporters tend to be those affiliated with their in-laws. Renly is supported by the Tyrells and their bannermen (because he's arranged to marry Loras' sister); Stannis' wife is from a house called the Florents, so his guards are generally Florents and their bannermen; Robert is stuck with the Lannisters.
 * To clarify the point a little further with info that the show didn't spell out directly: Robert is not the Lord of Storm's End, Renly is, and Stannis is the Lord of Dragonstone (the hereditary Targaryen seat). So most of the men at arms and knights that pay featly to House Baratheon do so to Renly. The Kingsguard, the royal men at arms, and some Baratheon men (largely unnamed in the show) are theoretically Robert's but a lot of them have compromised loyalties. In the aftermath of Robert's Rebellion, Baratheon's strength was weakened by the war and then Robert had to split them to fill the royal household, provide Stannis forces to hold Dragonstone against restive Targaryen vassals, and cover Storm's End. Tywin took advantage of that to put Lannisters (various cousins and such) and former Lannister men into lots of positions in the royal household. Hence why men like Sandor "the Hound", Ilyn Payne, and others are nominally Robert's people but in reality have no loyalty to him what so ever. (Plus, Robert being the warrior he is just don't surround himself with guards to the extent a wiser man like Ned or Jon Arryn would)
 * There are a handful of Baratheon guards seen when the royal entourage enters Winterfell and sporadic sightings while traveling south toward King's Landing. They're the ones wearing the light brown armor, though they're never seen again once they reach the capitol. It makes more sense in the books, when Lord Renly actually made the journey to Winterfell with the King, rather than being left behind. Presumably, Renly took them all with him when he left King's Landing in the wake of Robert's death.
 * Tywin Lannister presumably provides many Lannister guards and the like as a condition for lending the throne obscene amounts of money. In the manner of, "Sure, you can have a loan, but would you take my nephew as your squire in return? I can give you the money, but I'd like a contingent of my own guards posted in the Red Keep to watch over Cersei. For her safety, you understand. Of course I'll lend you the funds, but I'd like my own sworn bannerman to have the honor of being your heir's personal bodyguard." And so on and so forth. Lending over three million gold dragons to the Iron Throne is worth a lot of favors, to the point where it's no surprise that the palace is overflowing with Lannister guards and Lannister relations holding many important offices.
 * It's precisely because he's "obsessed with his past glory days" that he thinks he doesn't need guards. I get the impression that Robert is a firm believer in Asskicking Equals Authority (it is after all how he got the throne) and he thinks that only a man who can't defend himself needs guarding (and of course he's blind to the fact that he himself has grown fat, lazy and careless).

Why does anyone trust Littlefinger?

 * All he does is smile evilly all the time and make veiled threats.
 * Part of his brilliance is his ability to present himself openly as untrustworthy as a way of drawing people into his trust. Works for Ned, anyway!
 * He (and Varys likewise) never pretends to be trustworthy; he just pretends that you are the one person in the world who can trust him, because, for whatever reason, helping you happens to be in his interests. It's easier to believe someone like that than it is to believe someone who claims to be "good", especially in the Crapsack World that is Westeros.
 * Everyone knows that Littlefinger is a self-serving conniver, but he's also very useful, and everyone thinks that they can use him to gain some sort of advantage. As Ned finds out, Robert used him to back his excessive spending for years.
 * There's also the fact that people underestimate just how good a manipulator Littlefinger is. As the books show, even those who truly don't trust him in the slightest end up getting played anyway, because they think that, having seen through him, they can beat him. Essentially, Littlefinger's strength is convincing people that he's a Smug Snake, when he is in fact a full-fledged Magnificent Bastard.
 * Littlefinger is basically Go T's answer to the Cigarette Smoking Man from the X Files. As in, yes, everyone knows he's evil and nobody trusts him, but he's also sufficiently awesome at gathering information, that he always has too much useful information for anyone to want to kill him. He would make sure that if someone wanted to kill him, he would always be able to give them something else that was more attractive to them, (money, information, one of his women perhaps) than his death.
 * Almost no one trusts Littlefinger. But he is extremely useful. And that is why he's kept around, not because anyone likes or trusts him.

Why do Sansa, Bran and Arya have posh Southern English Accents when all of the rest of Ned's offspring have rugged Northern English accents?

 * Cat doesn't because she's more of a Southernner (though if Westeros is directly relatable to England she should talk like a Brummie :P) but this inconsistency annoys me. Sansa may be using a 'phone voice' to fit in at court but Arya wouldn't! Girls and small people can talk Northern too...
 * I would think it may be because those three tended to be under the care of Cat or the Septa rather than their father.
 * Because they didn't place the actor's accents very high on the list when casting? Don't get me wrong, I thought it was weird how many different accents the Stark family has, too, but really that shouldn't be top priority.
 * I concede that this is probably the case; Samwell Tarly's accent does not exactly scream "highborn lad," either.
 * In the antebellum south, men and women often had distinctly different accents due to differences in their customary upbringings. There's no reason why the same cannot be true here.
 * Except that in that case Bran would have the same accent as the other guys, not the girls. And if you listen to the bonus features, Isaac Hampstead-Wright isn't using his normal accent; for starters he swallows his final "t"s a lot more when out of character.
 * Bran's still young enough that he's spent slightly more of his time with his mother and female caretakers, most likely. (Also the favorite thing, below.) If the sky hadn't fallen, after a few more years of hunting trips and touring the land with his father and brothers, his accent probably would have changed some.
 * Actually, it seems that Bran is Cat's favorite child and she seems to dote on him. So it is conceivable that Cat had more of a hand in his upbringing than she might have with Robb.
 * Or even that all the boys had accents like Bran's when they were his age but were moved to shed it when they became adolescents and spent more time in training with Rodrik Cassel and generally becoming men of the North.
 * Because most people don't notice, including myself.

Does snow ever melt north of The Wall?
And if it doesn't, how can trees grow there?
 * A Wizard Did It.
 * Joking aside, the books heavily imply that there are a lot of supernatural forces subtly influencing the world. That, or maybe it's just in the world's arctic circle.
 * Yes, "supernatural forces" Did It. By magic. Nothing to do with wizards. *Serious face*.
 * Valid response. The way A Wizard Did It is used is "There is no actual explanation, the writer didn't bother with one and didn't care". It has nothing whatsoever to do with actual magic, Little Mister Sarky.
 * I suppose the snow does melt north of the Wall, up to some point. The Westeros map ends with the "Lands of Always Winter" (which is completely unexplored, and where the White Walkers come from), so it stands to reason that the lands below that, but still above the Wall, are not stuck in a "permanent Winter".
 * The wall is described as 'sweating' sometimes, so temperatures are not always below freezing. Also, the wildlings' territory must be at least nominally arable to support their population, which means the permafrost line is therefore almost certainly much farther north.
 * Original questioner here. Jeor Mormont answered this a few episodes back, when he told that Qhorin Halfhand had to live a full winter north of the Wall because he couldn't cross the Frostfangs "before the thaw". So yeah, snow does melt there - up to a point at least.
 * Simplest way to explain it: It's always winter north of the Wall, but it's not always deepest, freezingest, blizzardiest winter. Trees can grow in our own always-cold climates, clearly they could grow there.

How powerful is the one sitting on the Iron Throne?
I haven't read the books and have seen five episodes, so perhaps I'm missing the point, but is there a reason everyone wants the Iron Throne? What does the person ruling at Kings Landing rule over, besides that area? And how do The Wall, Winterfell, and Kings Landing relate to eachother and who, if not the King, controls them? Also, in the first episode and a few episodes later there was mention of some barbaric group of people (I don't think it was the Dothraki or White Walkers)on the other side of some area; who are they, where are they and how do they fit into all of this? And where are Dany and her brother from (was it on the map at the beginning of the show?)Basically, I need someone to explain the role of the King, and the current power rankings in the GoT universe in general. You guys have been extremely helpful, thank you. So generally speaking the King rules most of the continent, but the series itself makes it a point that 1)every King rules differently, and some use their position more effectively than others to a varied degree of success and 2)being King doesn't necessarily mean you have any authority whatsoever? Awesome. I have a better idea of what the series is about (the show, at least) since I finished season 1 today (episode 9: I lost faith in humanity). "Game of Thrones" is essentially "Everyone wants the Iron Throne for various reasons."
 * That's... a lot of questions. Have you considered reading the books? They've got maps and family trees, they help a lot. As for the power rankings, I suggest you read up on the Feudal system; Winterfell and all the other castles in Westeros are held by lords (like Ned Stark and Tywin Lannister), each of whom has sworn to obey the King on the Iron Throne (so he effectively rules the whole continent). In turn the lords have "bannermen", or barons, who are loyal to them, and they rule over a smaller parcel of land. Knights are right at the bottom of the pile, and run small estates. The peasants don't own any land, they're just allowed to use it to farm on by whichever noble owns it. The Wall marks the edge of the kingdom, and all the "wildlings" on the other side of it are considered uncivilised savages.
 * Well that is the question that the entire series is asking as well. Varys has a great riddle about this in the Second Book - the rich man, the king and the priest. One of the main themes of the book is who actually holds power and why. In theory, we're talking about a feudal society where the king and his lords have mutual obligations to each other. However, that is not how it is in practice. A rich and powerful lord (Tywin Lannister) could gain power while the king still nominally rules and a royal family could gain an advantage (i.e. dragons) which allows them more absolute and centralized power than a normal feudal relationship.
 * Cersei points this fact out quite well to Joffrey early on when he says he'll create a royal army loyal to him and use them to crush the uppity Starks. She points out that any troops he draws from the North into the Royal Army would be loyal not to Joffrey, but to the Northern bannermen and the Starks. Joffrey doesn't seem to immediately get that just because he's king, everyone would not automatically obey him, and that the king only possesses power when everyone else acknowledges it. There's a reason why Tywin is the puppetmaster of this entire conflict, and Joffrey is pretty much just a puppet.
 * Feudalism was a scenario where you had the lord of a particular township or castle, who had serfs working his land. The serfs subsisted from said land themselves, and gave the lord a cut of what they produced, and he in turn gave a cut of that to the king. There were a few different types of serfs, and whether or not they could be kicked off the land, depended on which type they were. The king, in turn, held authority over the collective group of said lords, in a central location, the capital. Before the Magna Carta at least, the monarch had absolute power in theory, but it primarily came down to what the lords were willing to tolerate in practice. Henry VIII was a good example of a post-Magna Carta king, who still threw his weight around a lot, and generally had people killed when he felt like it. People were generally willing to take a lot less crap from a monarch, than what we tolerate from our leaders today.
 * Not to turn this into a discussion on English history, but Henry VIII is actually a pretty bad example of a post Magna Carta monarch; that venerable document was pretty much comatose during his reign and there's a really good argument that he was the most absolutely powerful British head of state ever(that is to say, before or after Magna Carta). Getting back on subject, it seems like what goes on in Westeros isn't entirely what we would call feudalism. It helps to remember that the Great Houses were originally royals of their own kingdoms before the Targaryens came along The realm is still called "The Seven Kingdoms of Westeros", strongly implying that this past isn't totally discarded. In summary, I'd say that the likes of Tywin Lannister or Ned Stark are something of a mix between dukes and minor kings, and the whole Westerosi system is more of a mix between medieval European feudalism and the American federal system.
 * The most powerful person is the one with the most soldiers who will fight and die for them, but more importantly kill a lot of other people before they die. And the one with that can take the Iron Throne. That's your answer.

Why does Tyrion make Shae Sansa's maid?
While he does do this in the books, it happens later on in the story and though it makes sense if he wants a spy in Sansa's rooms, again in the books it was partly because he wanted her to be closer to him without arousing suspicion and it was her cover story. In A Clash of Kings Shae's living in a nice house on the outskirts of the city to keep her under cover and free from Tywin's wrath, and Tyrion has to negotiate a sort of truce with Varys in order to be able to slip out to see her. In the show, she already seems to be established in the castle and no one seems to mind too much. Shae basically appears to have gotten bored with lazing around in the lap of luxury all the time and wanted something to do - like serving a bratty teenage highborn?
 * Only Varys and Bronn know of her because Tyrion keeps her stuck in the room all day. That's what she is complaining about in the beginning of Episode 3. I gather that jumping ahead to having him assign her to Sansa is a practical change - it prevents them from needing more sets and characters. It also keeps her more connected to the others and gives her actress more to do.
 * She hasn't got any human contact besides Tyrion and Varys. Sansa is surrounded by Lannisters. Tyrion may have shrewdly realised that they'd be likely to make friends, and he'd have a lot of influence over Cersei's pawn. What is unlikely about the change from the book's version is that Cersei would allow Tyrion to appoint Sansa's handmaid - she'd probably quite like a spy there herself.
 * Cersei is savvy but I don't think she's savvy enough to think of putting a spy in among Sansa's personal entourage. Either that or she might not have thought it necessary, considering Sansa can't go anywhere without being surrounded by Lannister eyes and ears.
 * The fact that she's surrounded by Lannisters makes it all the more likely that she'd want to spill the beans in private -- and it works both ways, she'd also be suggestible to people she thought were her confidantes. In the books, IIRC, it's strongly implied she has spies among Sansa's servants.
 * At this point, Cersei probably doesn't have a spy with Sansa because there isn't any reason to. Sansa is completely cut off from everyone and clearly brown-pants terrified. It's not like Cersei even needs to get an actual confession from Sansa to accuse her of treason, and she's no threat to Joffrey or Cersei's position.
 * S2Ep7 shows that Cersei does have spies within the ranks of Sansa's handmaidens. Shae is simply Tyrion's spy, but she's a bit more active than the passive spies Cersei planted.

Where does the show exist in terms of continuity?
Given the details that have been changed, does it exist within its own, or does it supersede that of the novels, or is it just non-canon in the ASOIF mythology?
 * ...it's an adaptation. It has its own continuity.
 * The extras on the Season 1 boxed set spell out a backstory and a world heavily continuous with that of the novels (with a few minor tweaks to dates and the like). The past is basically the same, but the future is likely to be written in different ways.
 * This is definitely correct, since as of season four the show is departing pretty heavily from the books. If George Martin is the setting's parent, then the show has now moved out of his house and gotten its own apartment.

Where are any of Catelyn's guards?
Catelyn appears to arrive at Renly's camp with precisely no guards or entourage at all, and leaves with no guards as well, save for Brienne. So the mother of the self proclaimed King in the North is prancing around Westeros with no protection on the road whatsoever?
 * There are two guards with her when she arrived. You can tell they're Northmen by their plain style of armour in contrast to the soldiers gathered at Storm's End. Presumably there were more guards waiting on the outskirts of the camp just Catelyn Stark got seperated during the chaos that occurred.

Is there a specific reason why Arya doesn't ask Jaqen kill Tywin Lannister and Gregor Clegane?
I've only read the first book, so I'm somewhat confused. Those two are high up on her shit list, and she has a master killer at her beck and call. Kill those two in the right moment, and there should be plenty of time for her and Gendry to escape in the ensuing chaos, and their deaths would spell doom for the Lannisters in the long term, inevitably resulting in painful deaths for Joffrey and Cersei. Arya is a clever girl and should know well enough how important Tywin is for her enemies.
 * She is a child, and more tempted to silence the violent bullies around her than the big targets. She comes to regret her choices.
 * I believe she also specifies the Tickler first to see if Jaqen really will follow through with it or if he's just screwing around with her.
 * Tywin is not in Arya's list. In fact, he was the one that put an end to the tortures and executions at Harrenhal, if he dies they'll likely return and Arya knows this. As for why she didn't say The Mountain... well, we shall see I guess.
 * In ep 7, we see what happens when Tywin suspects a plot to kill him - he hangs and tortures half the garrison. If Tywin died under suspicious circumstances, she has every reason to believe she'd be tortured to death.
 * This does seem like a bit of a Plot Hole. The situation doesn't come up in the book, as Tywin didn't show up until after she'd used up her "wishes". However, because I generally prefer to give these things the benefit of the doubt; Tywin is Affably Evil in a castle full of bullies, torturers, rapists and Complete Monsters. Arya may be aware in the back of her mind that Tywin is an important target, but be distracted by seeking revenge for crimes committed in her own sight. Or, she might be saving him for last, and similarly to the book, some contrivance will force her to use her last death on something else.
 * Not being faithful to the book doesn't a Plot Hole make. As pointed before, there is little reason for Arya to choose Tywin to begin with, let alone as her first kill. Besides, she is just a child.
 * In addition, in the book Tywin was at Harrenhal while she still had her "wishes", they just never interacted; she does consider going to him and revealing who she is but considers it unlikely she'd even be allowed near him, and when he leaves to return to war she realises too late that, hey, he's the one she should have named. Again, she's just a child getting back at those who've wronged her, she doesn't think of the bigger picture.
 * Gendry calls Arya out on this when he finds out about her having had Jaqen in her debt. She basically says she just didn't think about it. Again, that's understandable... she's small and she's scared, she's focused on what's right in front of her and surviving day to day rather than the bigger picture. She does want revenge against the higher-ups and to end the war, but she's more immediately concerned with saving her own skin.

Dany pronounces Qarth as "Quarth" without ever seeing the word written down.

 * When Dany's bloodrider returns to announce that he's found Qarth, he pronounces it "Karth." Dany has never heard of the city. When she arrives at the gates, she mispronounces it "Quarth," even though she's never seen the name written down and would have no idea that it starts with a Q.
 * Who's to say she never saw it written -- maybe there was a road sign outside the Garden of Bones? "50 Miles to Qarth"? Or maybe Jorah spelled it out for her at some point. Or perhaps more likely, her mistaken pronunciation just happened parallel the spelling.
 * Qarth seems to be in the big leagues of far-eastern cities, like Ghis and Asshai. It's possible she'd read about it as a child.
 * When her bloodrider tells her he found it, she's never heard of it. She asks Jorah if he knows anything about it.
 * The bloodrider was speaking Dothraki when he told her. Maybe she though that 'Qarth' should be pronounced differently in Common Tongue for some reason.
 * People don't always pronounce something exactly the way they've heard someone else pronounce it, even if they're trying to. That's one of the things that happens with accents.

Why are Bronn and The Hound not wearing their uniforms?
One is head of the Goldcloaks and the other a Kingsguard, but they keep wearing the same blackish worn armor they did before they were promoted...
 * The Hound does wear his armor during the end of the first season, but afterward he wears his regular armor, likly because he either doesn't care or wants to appear distinctive among the nancy-boy knights of the Kingsguard (its important to note that he hates knights and never takes the honorific of "ser" at any point). Bronn, meanwhile, is characterized by the collossal, epic, sun-blocking pile of fucks that he doesn't give. He's the head of the Goldcloaks, he'll wear whatever damn uniform he wants.
 * With the large cast, they generally limit the number of costume changes to keep the budget down and to help viewers keep all the characters straight. In the story's world, the uniform of the Kingsguard is really just a white cloak and shield. The Hound is wearing the white cloak when Joffrey has Sansa stripped in the throne room. He pulls it off and covers her with it. I don't know if we've seen him with it since then.
 * The part about the uniform of the Kingsguard being only a white cloak is not true. On the books, they also wear white armour (except for Jaime, who prefers using a golden one most of the time) and white shields. On the TV series, the armour seems to have been substituted by those matching golden armours they all wear. As for Sandor not wearing it, he doesn't want to even look like a knight.
 * Not sure if that's true even in the books. They are mentioned as wearing white armor, but it appears that each member of the Kingsguard buys and wears his own armor. (Loras is mentioned as having a much more expensive and elaborate white rose themed set of it than the other brothers of the guard.) So it's probably less that white armor is considered part of the Kingsguard uniform and more that most of them choose to wear some variant of white armor out of tradition or style. Jaime does mention that he had some white armor when he served under Aerys and changed into his preferred golden armor but kept the white cloak on, but that implies that he was still buying and wearing the golden stuff during his time as a Kingsguard, and thus they're perfectly allowed to wear other armor but still need to wear the white cloak all the time (and that he'd donned his out of habit).
 * Finally explained in a conversation between Tyrion and Bronn in the Prince of Winterfell. Tyrion protests that Bronn looks like a common sellsword without a uniform despite being City Watch Commander, Bronn replies that he doesn't want to wear one because as he claims: "The cloak slows you down in a fight, makes you hard to move quietly and the gold catches the light so you're nice and easy to spot at night."

Jon's lack of headgear.
OK, so Jon Snow is beyond the wall, on icy tundra, where he acknowledges that spending the night without fire could be fatal...and he doesn't cover his head or his ears? Does he enjoy the idea of living the rest of his life without earlobes, assuming that he survives to do so? This baffles me even more considering that the scenes were shot in Iceland, where poor Kit Harington must have really suffered for his art, not wearing a hat of any kind during the shoots -- only to make the scenes appear less realistic.
 * This seems to be related to Helmets Are Hardly Heroic. Actually, almost no one in the Night Watch in the show ever wears a hat, except for Qorin Halfhand- which might explain why Halfhand is considered the savviest Watch member in-universe.
 * According to the costume designer, they tried it with hats. It was impossible to tell who was who unless you had the camera right in their faces, so they removed the hats despite the costume crew's vocal objections.
 * Honestly, this makes perfect sense. You've just got to make some adherence to the medium, and only a particularly nitpicky subset of viewers would rather see weather-accurate costuming than be able to tell who was who during a scene. Besides, hats are only rarely mentioned as being worn in the books, either... it usually either leaves it to your imagination or they just pull up the hoods of their cloaks.

Why does Sandor carry a longsword strapped to his back, over the chest?
This may sound nitpicky, but Game of Thrones aims to give a realistic picture of a feudal society with a few supernatural trappings. As a bodyguard the Hound must have quick access to his weapon at all times. It's physically impossible for anyone to draw a longsword from a scabbard positioned like that. What is worse is that there is an extremely simple way to achieve the same effect without sacrificing realism: just make the strap shorter, and have it go over his shoulder, rather than across his chest, and he could draw the weapon in the fraction of a second without problem. That sort of thing belogs to Conan the Barbarian, not Game of Thrones.
 * The primary weapon Sandor uses is sheathed at his hip. You can clearly see it when he's escorting Joffery on S2 Ep6. He carries a big heavy blade on his back, but when he needs to draw his weapon quickly he uses the arming sword at his hip. You can clearly see him draw it from the hip when the riots start. The weapon on his back is just a backup, not likely to be used unless he knows of a threat coming beforehand, in which case he can loosen the strap, drop the weapon, and pull it from the sheath. But a longsword isn't exactly going to be the weapon a bodyguard quick-draws; the arming sword at his hip is.
 * That sword is reserved for the battlefield and monsters. I'm guessing the Cleganes have a tradition of wielding anti-cavalry swords.
 * Demonstrated nicely in Blackwater, where he wields it in pitched battle against Stannis' forces.
 * Exactly. Sandor carries two swords. The small arming sword at his hip is his everyday weapon, used for bodyguarding. It's most useful vs. lightly-armored opponents in close terrain such as indoors or in cities - i.e., exactly the sort of situation that Sandor, as a royal bodyguard in King's Landing, would be expecting most of the time. The big sword on his back is his anti-armor weapon, intended for beating down and cracking open large hard targets. (It's also highly intimidating just by being worn, which is a handy thing for a bodyguard). But since he generally runs into those sorts of targets only during pitched battles, where he'll have ample time to draw his sword beforehand, he doesn't need it in a quick-draw rig and so carries it in one that flops around less.
 * Plus, can you imagine trying to swing that big sword in a narrow hallway?

Why exactly does Jaime think it's necessary to kill his cousin to escape?
The reason he killed him was to lure the jailer with the keys close enough to strangle, but couldn't the same result have been attained by telling his cousin to pretend to be dead/dying, thus luring the jailer close, and then have both of them attack the jailer and escape? Surely it would increase Jaime's likelihood of survival and escape to have an accomplice, and they could always split up once they'd gotten away from the camp if necessary. It doesn't even seem like he was killed for plot purposes, as it would not cause any unsolvable problems for the storyline for it to happen this way. Just a Plot Hole?
 * Desperation. The guard might be smart enough to recognize someone pretending to be dead, but a body twitching and gasping in clear death throes is a lot more likely to draw the guard in. Also, its questionable if Jaime's cousin would cooperate with him, considering how he's cooperated with the Starks so far. Remember that he'd likely be killed for trying to escape; Jaime is important enough to keep alive, but a relatively unimportant Lannister might get killed by accident while escaping, and attempting to escape would leave Robb disinclined to favor the guy if recaptured. He might also earn clemency by reporting the escape. Jaime can't be sure if he'd agree to help, and not rat him out if he revealed his escape attempt. So from a brutal, utilitarian standpoint, the most reliable use for his cellmate is as a twitching corpse to draw the guard in. Jaime has made it clear that he is very selfish already.
 * There's also the point that they needed to give Jaime another Kick the Dog moment to remind everyone that "hey, he's still a bad guy." Sure, he's sympathetic, but he's still the same guy who pushed a ten year old out a window.
 * Because "Kinslayer" rhymes well with "Kingslayer".
 * I'd also dispute how useful Alton would have been in any escape attempt. Another person doubles your chance of getting caught. Jaime probably reasoned that Alton would have only slowed him down.

Why is Robert called a fool?
Okay, his public spending was out of control (though, in truth, given the myriad political favours he doled out to him, I doubt Tywin would have cared had Robert simply decided not to pay). But people were not starving under him and generally enjoyed a much, much better standard of living as compared to well, the insane monarch who killed babies 'cause of the voices in his head. Add to that him freeing the country from the aforementioned crazy man and you've got quite the formula for a man who, at the very least, should be praised to the high heavens by the common folk. The only criterion for calling him an idiot was because he was boisterous. Otherwise things were at least stable given his administration, and he wasn't harming that.
 * You speak like it's a common opinion held by the smallfolk. Only people in power who know him think that he's a fool, mostly because of his spending habits, and the drinking and the whoring and all that. It's not quite as simple as that, of course. Robert had no talent as an administrator, and his policies left the realm deep in debt (not just to the Lannisters!) and he died before the consequences of that debt effected the realm... but he was still an amazing diplomat and general, and he managed to weld together a realm rent by rebellion via force of charisma and diplomatic concessions. The common folk, well, they likely mostly liked him during his rule, but there were always Targaryen loyalists, and there are always men who think the current ruler is a fool, and not everyone was happy with what he did during the Rebellion. Also, after he died, a five way civil war broke out, which might have soured opinions on him a bit.
 * But it is generally accepted however, that the majority of that debt is to the Lannisters. Honestly, how many kings do take a center role in governing their country? Robert may not have instituted sweeping reforms but his spending policies, while idiotic, should not draw him into the level of mudslinging he's often subjugated to in universe.
 * But that's just it, isn't it? In-universe, he catches a lot of flak, because, well, that's what happens to the man on top. Everyone hates tthe man on top. Add to this the fact that Robert is regarded as a fool by the Lannisters, they-who-shit-gold and who are one of the most powerful houses in Wseteros, and you'll get a lot of people who agree who really disagree but the Lannisters have already supplied them with their opinion. Hell, even Robert himself was a bit derisive of his own rule. Just look at the scene where he asks Ned to be his Hand; in his own words, he wants Ned to run the kingdom while he whores and drinks himself into an early grave. Sure, Robert isn't really a fool, but he seems that way to a lot of people, and some of the most powerful ones in the Seven Kingdoms want to see him go down.
 * Robert's rule was only succesful because he hand an excellent Hand serving him for the most of it, while he personally did as little ruling as humanly possible. He was a masterful general and a charismatic leader, but in day to day governing he was rubbish, and he let power seep through his fingers like a sieve. Hence, he was a fool to anyone who seeks the throne with that power in mind.
 * To be fair, the ability to consistently find talented subordinates and persuade them to hire on, and the wisdom to know which parts of your job are better off delegated than not, are very desirable characteristics in a senior executive. In fact, they're generally considered to be the two hardest parts of the job. Robert definitely had his flaws as a king, but he was nowhere near as hopeless as generally believed. I'd put him solidly into the top 25% of Westerosi kings.
 * You don't understand Tywin very well. Lannisters don't just pay their debts, they expect debts to be paid back. He doesn't even cancel the debt when Joffrey takes the Throne in the books. And it's not just debt to him, it's to the Faith of the Seven and to the Iron Bank of Braavos. So debts to a religious institution and another country. These become relevant later in the books. Vast debts, it said Littlefinger managed to improve taxation by tenfold over King Aerys' reign, even if this is exaggeration Robert managed to squander vast coffers left to him and constantly outspend an even larger income. Which he spent frivolously, on feasts, tournaments, etc. Not on any positive public works, reforms or improvement. That by itself makes a crappy ruler. But then there's all the other stuff people have mentioned.

Why can't Jaqen kill Tywin?
As far as I remember, Arya didn't ask him to do this in the books (though I could be wrong), but why doesn't he kill him here? He has the skills to kill a man seconds before he reaches his destination in broad daylight without anyone noticing him, so it can't be 'cause he's not good enough.
 * He can. It'll just take too long. Jaqen can't teleport, he'd have to catch up with a
 * Arya's problem with Jaqen seemed more of an issue with time than Jaqen not being able to kill Tywin at all. Arya was impatient and wanted Tywin dead "now" as she thought he was marching against Robb. Since it worked the last time with Amory Lorch she figured Jaqen could deliver on it again, but those emergency wolfsbane darts don't come cheap.

Why didn't Sansa go with Sandor?
In the books she's got an escape plan set up with. And Sandor tries to rape her before offering to take her to safety. Here...Sandor's a bit creepy. That's about it. Really...I'm scratching my head more as to why they didn't take one scene in any of the previous seven or eight episodes to show Sansa and  conspiring. Would have been simple, would have taken five minutes of screen time.
 * I think she thought Stannis was winning, and in that case she would be in relative safety as his prisoner, rather than on the road in the middle of a warzone with only one guard.
 * I think it falls under Adaptation Explanation Extrication. They could've added something with, or at least maintained some of the creepiness between her and The Hound, which would have been a lot more in keeping with his character.
 * In the show The Hound has done nothing but being a pawn of Joffrey and Cersei. He reported Sansa's bleeding and he refused Sansa's attempt to thank him for saving her in their last episode together, saying that he did it only because he likes killing, remember. Now, this same creepy guy shows up one night as the city is under siege by enemy forces and says that he is going to take her home in an awkward way. Can you really blame her for believing that the escape offer was a setup from Joffrey or Cersei to make her look like a traitor?
 * As far as Sansa knows, Stennis is about to conquer the city, and she knows that he has a reputation for honour and integrity, and will most likely use her to broker a peace with Robb. Meanwhile, Sandor has done nothing but play up his own repulsiveness to her, even while saving her from danger, gloating how awesome killing people is, and so on. She really has no pressing reason to believe that he won't just rape her and leave her to the wayside somewhere down the line if he gets bored.

Why is Tyrion in Valar Morghulis?
I understand that he is no longer Hand of the King, but he hasn't done a bad job and didn't do anything to disgrace himself. I don't see why returning suddenly. Wouldn't take issues with that?
 * A simple answer: probably wouldn't have a problem with it, for the simple reason that he doesn't like Tyrion. Nor does Cersei; she tried to have him killed. Tyrion may have a lot of allies in King's Landing now, but very few of them are in the Red Keep. Perhaps they were secretly hoping he'd die from his wound.
 * It's easy to forget that hates Tyrion.
 * While that's true, he obviously recognises his usefulness, as evidenced by him making Tyrion Hand in the first place (which is a huge responsibility), although he may have done this just to provide a scapegoat on whom to pin Joffrey and Cersei's failures in Tywin's absence. Either way, he's not the type to kill off someone useful just because he doesn't currently have a use for them -- that reeks of Cersei. She's been looking for an opportunity to destroy Tyrion for ages.
 * Tywin does recognize his usefulness, that's why Tyrion is still alive. This does not change the fact that Tywin despises him, and will reward him as little as possible -- even in situations where he'd reward other men far more generously for accomplishing the same things. Tyrion is doomed to be The Unfavorite because he's a dwarf, that's the entire point of his character arc.
 * Also, Tywin is arrogant enough to be secure in the belief that Tyrion will remain loyal to House Lannister even if he's been getting screwed over. Its not an entirely irrational belief -- what prestige and lifestyle Tyrion does enjoy is dependent on the family fortunes, and due to his physical and social challenges Tyrion is vastly unlikely to raise an independent power base elsewhere -- but Tywin forgets that if you push a man to where he has nothing he feels worth living for, he'll stop caring about where his next paycheck comes from. Ultimately this leads to Tywin's death.
 * While Tyrion was unconscious, others took the credit for his successes.
 * Well, let's see what Tyrion did loose. 1) The Hand position already belonged to Tywin, Tyrion was merely acting on his behalf; 2) The Tower of the Hand is to be occupied by Tywin for the same reason - Tywin most likely doesn't care where Tyrion is going to sleep now, and since he is unconscious the only people left to decide where to put him (Cersei, Joffrey, Pycelle, etc) hate him for some reason or another and are petty enough to put him in a servant chamber; 3) Bronn being City Watch commander only benefits Bronn and Tyrion, naming someone more trusted and loyal seems a first step for anyone who takes the Hand spot (and it was in fact what Tyrion himself did when he arrived at KL and got rid of Janos Slynt); 4) the Hill tribes are hard to control and are only loyal to Tyrion too, paying them to leave before they cause trouble is also reasonable; 5) Finally, getting recognition to Tyrion for holding down the fort during the battle a) depends of Joffrey, who is a prick and hates Tyrion; b) implies a recognition that it was Tyrion, and not Joffrey, who was in charge of the city during the battle, and he is not going to do that.

So who burned Winterfell?
So Theon makes his speech, So far, so good. And then...we cut to Bran and the others emerging to a Winterfell that's been burned to the ground, with everyone dead. So who did it? Did the Ironborn torch the place out of spite? Or was it the Northern army who managed to get in? And if so, why would they burn it? And why does no one seem the least bit curious?
 * Presumably it's left as a cliffhanger to be answered in the third season. I assumed that the Ironborn had razed the place down to cover their escape, but apparently I was wrong. Either way, the creators seem to want a lot of questions to be dealt with in the following season to keep the audience interested.
 * I thought it was fairly obvious that it was the Bastard of Bolton who did it, because, I mean, come on. He's Roose Bolton's bastard.
 * It's only obvious to people who've read the books. The series has only hinted at Roose Bolton's cruelty, and hasn't shown any sign of his disloyalty.
 * Incidentally, what confuses me about the matter the most is just why didn't the Boltons occupy Winterfell? It's the most important fortress in the North. Leaving it standing alone with gates open is like an invitation for some bandits to squat in, and make themselves an enormous pain to remove.
 * Because then it would be flagrantly obvious they'd switched sides?
 * No it wouldn't. They were sent to occupy Winterfell. That was their purpose of returning to North: restoring the most important fortress into region back to Stark control. Being Stark bannermen, it would be their duty to occupy and secure the place for their liege lord.
 * But if they were betraying the Starks (as they clearly were), occupying it means they would have to give it back to Robb when he returned. As it stands now, the most important fort in the north is the Dreadfort. The Starks' power is severely hampered and they get to blame the Ironborn for the whole thing.
 * Up until anyone else decides to waltz in to Winterfell and set up a garrison there. It's the most important fortress in the North. It's hard to imagine that anyone would leave it empty for long, and if they did, someone else would claim it.
 * It's burnt. The smallfolk are gone or dead, the fields have already been harvested and the food stolen or destroyed. Any random person that tried to claim it would be starved out because ... wait for it... winter is coming.
 * It's one thing to not explain why the castle is burned to create a cliffhanger. But it gets ridiculous if you consider it from Maester Luwin's perspective. If he knows that Ramsay betrayed the Starks, shouldn't he maybe tell at least Osha? Otherwise Bran and the others will just assume that Dreadfort men are their allies (they had been up to this point, and there was no reason to assume different), and maybe reveal themselves if they encounter them. And if Luwin didn't know, why did he tell them to head north? Shouldn't he tell them to just look for the army his brother sent to take back Winterfell?
 * Maybe he didn't know. He had a spear put through him. He might have just been unconscious through the sack and levered himself to the godswood afterwards.
 * Or he went straight to the Godswood to die after taking a spear to the gut, rather than pointlessly standing in the castle to watch who put the torch on it.
 * From Luwin's perspective it just looks like Theon's Ironborn have betrayed him. One of Theon's men clunks him on the head, Luwin marches out to demand to know WTF is going on, one of Theon's men stabbed him. He probably desperately crawled away once Bolton's men set Winterfell alight, both to get himself to safety and that in hopes he might find Bran and Rickon, since he knew they were alive. He probably does think the Ironborn torched Winterfell, he just thinks they did it without Theon's approval.
 * It isn't made explicit in the show, but in the books it is made clear that even if they're allied together, the Starks do not trust the Boltons as far as they can throw them, and Ramsay is well known for his...evilness in the north. They should have done a better job explaining it, but even if Luwin didn't know the Boltons burned Winterfell, he has plenty of reason to advise the boys from going into Bolton hands.

Couldn't Joffrey ?

 * I remember watching the 1st season Blue-ray extras about Aegon the Conqueror, the King who conquer the Seven Kingdoms, married both his sisters. So i found it strange that Joffrey didn't
 * The fact that Rhaegar felt the need to abduct Lyanna implies that practice has been discontinued for a while. Plus, marrying multiple daughters of great houses would devalue the political strength of the union, and create a Succcession Crisis over whose children are senior (the children of the first wife? the oldest child?) -- in fact, it would probably be easier if they were both your sisters. The Lannisters want the Tyrells' absolute backing, they can't afford to offend them.
 * Marrying more than one woman is a foreign custom that the Targaryens brought to Westeros from Valyria. It wasn't something that was considered normal in the Seven Kingdoms, and since Joffrey's presumed father overthrew the Targaryen dynasty, it would be very bad form of him to start following their traditions. It would make him seem like a poser, a would-be Targaryen, and turn everybody who hated them against him. It's unlikely that even Joffrey has any good opinions of the Targaryens, in any case.
 * All these good reasons, plus Joffrey sort of has reasons to downplay his similarity to the Targaryens, not reinforce them.