I watched yesterday the last episode of game of thrones The Laws of Gods and Men, and honestly for me that was the tiny spec that was needed to say that I had enough. I wonder why the are so many changes from the books to the series, to make matters worst pointless changes that some times even mess characters up like Stannis (in my opinion). I was okay with Khaleesi to have her dragons stolen as I thought that was made for increasing the viewers' suspense. But

  • Why did they have to make up Locke for cutting of Jaime's hand and then sent him to the wall in order to get information about Bran? and then kill him
  • Why the whole scene with Theon and Yara? (What's wrong with the name Asha ?)
  • Why to even show Stannis at Braavos, who not only never been there, but at the time being (third book, blood and gold) he was at DragonStone (If I remember correctly, it's been a while since I've read it), doing nothing until Davos told him about the wall
  • Finally why the whole thing with Jon and Bran at Craster's house
  • 10
    Also, it's not like they had a squadron of Elf archers show up at the Wall and toss some dwarves, eh? Commented May 13, 2014 at 10:14
  • 6
    I havn't read the book but read up discussions about why Bran's/Theon's story was added simply becoz the reader doesnt know their fates until later books. If a certain character disappears from the show & reappears after 3 seasons, no body's gonna connect with him anymore. There is a reason much more people watch TV than read books. Its the low attention span & patience. So u gotta cater to my needs. Commented May 13, 2014 at 10:23
  • 11
    This question appears to be off-topic because it looks like a rant disguised as a question.
    – user8719
    Commented May 13, 2014 at 10:25
  • 12
    You do realize that what works on paper doesn't work on television right? Like, that's really what every one of these questions boils down to. Different mediums don't cross over the way you expect them to.
    – Monty129
    Commented May 13, 2014 at 10:38
  • 5
    George RR Martin has scripted several episodes and had a lot of input elsewhere as an executive producer. If you have a problem, perhaps you should take it up with him. Commented May 13, 2014 at 11:17

1 Answer 1


Unless you just plop the book in front of the camera and slowly turn pages for ten hours, any adaptation from a novel to a TV show is going to make changes both big and small.

They are taking a lot of subplots out, and creating a few of them.

Since Locke is now dead, there are no loose ends to this artificial subplot. He was simply created to avoid a bigger plot and then killed off.

As for Asha's name, the reasoning was that she would have been too easy to confuse with Osha. We're still waiting to see where her plot is going, though.

Since they took

Coldhands out of the show, and the whole magic door beneath the Wall, Sam was not sworn to secrecy anymore, so Jon was now aware of Bran being beyond the Wall.

The 'whole thing with Jon and Bran at Craster's house' was a device used to avoid unnecessary, non existing subplots that would bulk up the show.

As far as Stannis goes, I'm still waiting to see what happens.

  • 1
    Your second spoiler is incorrect. He arrives himself looking for Stannis and has to travel to their encampment outside Winterfell to find him. So yes, him travelling to Braavos is quite out of hand.
    – ediblecode
    Commented May 13, 2014 at 12:31
  • 13
    I thought the scene at the Iron Bank was brilliant. Having Stannis sit on an ordinary bench (and calling him Lord Stannis) easily summed up how little the Iron Bank thought of him, and how much power they wield over kings and men. Commented May 13, 2014 at 16:27

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.