Why do people think Winterfell crypts is the safest place for women, children and old people?Which last name should the children of Robert and Cersei pass to their childrenWhy do Varys and Illyrio support both of these people?What's the big deal with the Tyrells controlling Westeros?How many statues are there in the Crypts of Winterfell? And in what order are they stored?Do Children of the Forest exist in Westeros in the time which is current for the series and the books?Why did Cersei ask for Ser Balman's help?Why did the Boltons burn Winterfell?Is Samwell Tarly a deserter of the Night's Watch?Do we ever find out who sent the catspaw after Bran in the show?Was Daenerys Targaryen based on Cleopatra?
If a planet has 3 moons, is it possible to have triple Full/New Moons at once?
How do I deal with a coworker that keeps asking to make small superficial changes to a report, and it is seriously triggering my anxiety?
How exactly does Hawking radiation decrease the mass of black holes?
Multiple options vs single option UI
Could the terminal length of components like resistors be reduced?
Is Diceware more secure than a long passphrase?
How to denote matrix elements succinctly?
Elements other than carbon that can form many different compounds by bonding to themselves?
"Whatever a Russian does, they end up making the Kalashnikov gun"? Are there any similar proverbs in English?
Apply MapThread to all but one variable
How to fry ground beef so it is well-browned
Alignment of various blocks in tikz
Can someone publish a story that happened to you?
Which big number is bigger?
a sore throat vs a strep throat vs strep throat
Why didn't the Space Shuttle bounce back into space as many times as possible so as to lose a lot of kinetic energy up there?
Is it idiomatic to construct against `this`
How to stop co-workers from teasing me because I know Russian?
How much cash can I safely carry into the USA and avoid civil forfeiture?
Mistake in years of experience in resume?
Get consecutive integer number ranges from list of int
"You've called the wrong number" or "You called the wrong number"
Relationship between strut and baselineskip
Map of water taps to fill bottles
Why do people think Winterfell crypts is the safest place for women, children and old people?
Which last name should the children of Robert and Cersei pass to their childrenWhy do Varys and Illyrio support both of these people?What's the big deal with the Tyrells controlling Westeros?How many statues are there in the Crypts of Winterfell? And in what order are they stored?Do Children of the Forest exist in Westeros in the time which is current for the series and the books?Why did Cersei ask for Ser Balman's help?Why did the Boltons burn Winterfell?Is Samwell Tarly a deserter of the Night's Watch?Do we ever find out who sent the catspaw after Bran in the show?Was Daenerys Targaryen based on Cleopatra?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
In Game of Thrones S08E02 "A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms", it is repeatedly mentioned by multiple characters (I counted six) that when the Night King and the Army of the Dead attack, the Winterfell crypts are the safest place to be for women, children and old people.
But why is that? As far as I can see, it's got a single way down with lots of steps and poorly lit. If the dead win, the people there will be slaughtered with no way out. In any other place, they would have a chance to run at least.
Why would this be the safest place?
game-of-thrones a-song-of-ice-and-fire
|
show 2 more comments
In Game of Thrones S08E02 "A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms", it is repeatedly mentioned by multiple characters (I counted six) that when the Night King and the Army of the Dead attack, the Winterfell crypts are the safest place to be for women, children and old people.
But why is that? As far as I can see, it's got a single way down with lots of steps and poorly lit. If the dead win, the people there will be slaughtered with no way out. In any other place, they would have a chance to run at least.
Why would this be the safest place?
game-of-thrones a-song-of-ice-and-fire
22
The crypts are huge, so you can protect a lot of people in one place. One way in means only one entrance to defend.
– svenvo7
Apr 22 at 17:36
6
Also there are no windows so they will not see the end coming from miles away.
– mckenzm
Apr 23 at 4:06
2
I'm pretty sure they're setting things up for the dead in the crypts to be raise by the Night King. Hence all the commentary about defending folks down there and so on as well as what you pointed out. A kind of Chekov's Zombie, if you will.
– Paul
Apr 23 at 21:41
The crypts are magically protected like the 3-Eyed Raven's cave.
– J Doe
2 days ago
2
@Paul I just read a theory that Bran refused to stay in the crypts because that will break the magic if any because of Night King mark.
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
|
show 2 more comments
In Game of Thrones S08E02 "A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms", it is repeatedly mentioned by multiple characters (I counted six) that when the Night King and the Army of the Dead attack, the Winterfell crypts are the safest place to be for women, children and old people.
But why is that? As far as I can see, it's got a single way down with lots of steps and poorly lit. If the dead win, the people there will be slaughtered with no way out. In any other place, they would have a chance to run at least.
Why would this be the safest place?
game-of-thrones a-song-of-ice-and-fire
In Game of Thrones S08E02 "A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms", it is repeatedly mentioned by multiple characters (I counted six) that when the Night King and the Army of the Dead attack, the Winterfell crypts are the safest place to be for women, children and old people.
But why is that? As far as I can see, it's got a single way down with lots of steps and poorly lit. If the dead win, the people there will be slaughtered with no way out. In any other place, they would have a chance to run at least.
Why would this be the safest place?
game-of-thrones a-song-of-ice-and-fire
game-of-thrones a-song-of-ice-and-fire
edited 2 days ago
Loong
96021431
96021431
asked Apr 22 at 17:31
KharoBangdoKharoBangdo
6,93694078
6,93694078
22
The crypts are huge, so you can protect a lot of people in one place. One way in means only one entrance to defend.
– svenvo7
Apr 22 at 17:36
6
Also there are no windows so they will not see the end coming from miles away.
– mckenzm
Apr 23 at 4:06
2
I'm pretty sure they're setting things up for the dead in the crypts to be raise by the Night King. Hence all the commentary about defending folks down there and so on as well as what you pointed out. A kind of Chekov's Zombie, if you will.
– Paul
Apr 23 at 21:41
The crypts are magically protected like the 3-Eyed Raven's cave.
– J Doe
2 days ago
2
@Paul I just read a theory that Bran refused to stay in the crypts because that will break the magic if any because of Night King mark.
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
|
show 2 more comments
22
The crypts are huge, so you can protect a lot of people in one place. One way in means only one entrance to defend.
– svenvo7
Apr 22 at 17:36
6
Also there are no windows so they will not see the end coming from miles away.
– mckenzm
Apr 23 at 4:06
2
I'm pretty sure they're setting things up for the dead in the crypts to be raise by the Night King. Hence all the commentary about defending folks down there and so on as well as what you pointed out. A kind of Chekov's Zombie, if you will.
– Paul
Apr 23 at 21:41
The crypts are magically protected like the 3-Eyed Raven's cave.
– J Doe
2 days ago
2
@Paul I just read a theory that Bran refused to stay in the crypts because that will break the magic if any because of Night King mark.
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
22
22
The crypts are huge, so you can protect a lot of people in one place. One way in means only one entrance to defend.
– svenvo7
Apr 22 at 17:36
The crypts are huge, so you can protect a lot of people in one place. One way in means only one entrance to defend.
– svenvo7
Apr 22 at 17:36
6
6
Also there are no windows so they will not see the end coming from miles away.
– mckenzm
Apr 23 at 4:06
Also there are no windows so they will not see the end coming from miles away.
– mckenzm
Apr 23 at 4:06
2
2
I'm pretty sure they're setting things up for the dead in the crypts to be raise by the Night King. Hence all the commentary about defending folks down there and so on as well as what you pointed out. A kind of Chekov's Zombie, if you will.
– Paul
Apr 23 at 21:41
I'm pretty sure they're setting things up for the dead in the crypts to be raise by the Night King. Hence all the commentary about defending folks down there and so on as well as what you pointed out. A kind of Chekov's Zombie, if you will.
– Paul
Apr 23 at 21:41
The crypts are magically protected like the 3-Eyed Raven's cave.
– J Doe
2 days ago
The crypts are magically protected like the 3-Eyed Raven's cave.
– J Doe
2 days ago
2
2
@Paul I just read a theory that Bran refused to stay in the crypts because that will break the magic if any because of Night King mark.
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
@Paul I just read a theory that Bran refused to stay in the crypts because that will break the magic if any because of Night King mark.
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
|
show 2 more comments
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
It is the safest place while the battle rages on, similar to the Battle of Helm's Deep in LOTR: while in the crypt/cave, the non-combatant are out of harms way, and in no risk of being hit by a stray projectile or shrapnel. Plus, if the defenses are breached, then there is no risk of any number of civilians falling in the hands of the enemy to be slaughtered and join the Army of the Dead.
Of course, if they lose the battle, then everyone dies, but that's why they are fighting in the first place: to avoid being wiped out.
If they win, then the civilians, used in the modern sense opposed to military people, are safe and sound and can tend to the wounded combatants who survived the battle and start rebuilding and such.
As for running, it's highly unlikely that the women, children and old people would go very far before being caught by the Army of the Dead and slaughtered in the open fields. Especially since winter has finally come. There is no running from the Army of the Dead. Besides, from a strategic standpoint, any way out is also a potential way in.
44
Though there may be some concern about hiding the people least able to defend themselves in sealed, dark caverns filled with corpses when their attackers can raise the dead to fight for them.
– Upper_Case
Apr 22 at 18:33
14
I think it's a perfect example of the idiot plot, ie characters doing stupid things in order to advance the plot, eg hiding in the cemetery when your enemy is a necromancer...
– Rebel-Scum
Apr 22 at 18:38
28
@Upper_Case: I would expect that the crypts of Winterfell have, over and over, been used to shelter the non-combattants. At this point, it's probably a reflex: battle coming => non-combattants in the crypt. And so it suffers from the same problem as any reflex: people have stopped thinking about it, especially when their mind is already preoccupied with attempting to win against such a huge army.
– Matthieu M.
Apr 22 at 19:31
5
Any corpses down there are surely dust and grime by this point, and even if they weren't there'd be stupidly heavy stone slabs over them. Not a great example of the "idiot plot" as claimed above.
– Sarah Z.
Apr 22 at 20:16
4
We've nowhere near enough evidence to imagine that we definitively know how the Walkers' powers work and, more relevantly, the show's characters have even less (though the books give some decent clues that the crypts are probably a reasonable risk to take, with the lack of good alternatives). It's not clearly the case that the crypts are a problem, but saying they're definitely safe is too strong. The big leap is that they can raise the dead at all, not that they could raise them in case B as well as case A. The characters should be ready for problems in the crypt, but don't seem to be.
– Upper_Case
Apr 23 at 13:57
|
show 3 more comments
Sava's answer is correct, but I wanted to respond to part of your question.
But why is that? As far as I can see, it's got a single way down...
You see it as "only one way out". However, someone who is defending sees it as "only one way in", which means that when you are able to defend this chokepoint, you can keep everyone safe.
This is exactly why castles have a wall and a handful of gates (or often just one): the less gates into the castle, the more resources/manpower you can dedicate towards defending these gates.
To paraphrase The Man In The Iron Mask, when the commander explains to the king why they cannot beat the four musketeers who are entreched in a hallway: "The chokepoint of the corridor negates our superior numbers".
with lots of steps
The civilians won't be moving much when they're in there, why would the steps matter?
& poorly lit.
Again, there's little reason for the civilians to need good lighting while they're hiding. They're not doing anything. I also don't see why they couldn't just light the crypts better if they really needed to.
Additionally, for a human enemy, should the enemy enter the crypts, it makes you more likely not get spotted when you hide. Or even when you do fight back, your eyes are used to the dark and the enemy's are not yet, which again gives the defender the advantage.
Why would this be the safest place?
Because statistically it has been. Consider that White Walkers haven't been seen for a thousand years, but human wars have happened pretty much every generation. This is a centuries' old habit: hide the civilians in the crypts, because it's the best place to keep them safe from the battle that rages on outside.
There is a strong consensus on the tactical benefit of hiding the non-combatants and to keep them safe. This is for two reasons: the soldiers don't need to worry about the safety of they family and can instead focus on the battle, and keeping the civilians safe means they can assist with the post-battle fallout (tend to the wounded, clear rubble, restore things).
They did it in King's Landing with the Battle of Blackwater Bay (it's the scene where Cersei talks to Sansa about having instructed the guard to kill her and her children should the safe place be breached, so that she is not taken by the enemy). Jumping to another franchise, one of the best known use cases of this tactic is in Lord of the Rings, in the Battle for Helm's Deep.
You should consider this safe place as a "keep within the keep". They are the second walls, when the first wall is taken by the enemy.
add a comment |
This is the best way to assure their safety and have the most probable outcome for winning. If the non-combatants were to be hidden away in a different town farther inland, there is still the chance that a part of the undead force could break off and attack (or even the golden company). This would mean that the troops at Winterfell would need to detach a size-able group to accompany them to protect them "just in case". They are considerably outnumbered now and need every fighter they can get, so splitting the forces wouldn't really be a feasible option.
With the non-combatants staying IN Winterfell, not only are all of the troops together in one place to provide the best offense they can, they are also assured and not as worried about their loved-ones well being. They know where the non-combatants are, underground (out of the reach of the enemy), and the only way they will be come endangered is if all the fighters at Winterfell are defeated, in which case, they would be doomed no matter where they were.
With their loved ones near and depending on them, the average person is also probably willing to fight harder to make sure they stay protected. This is the last stand, they're putting all of their chips into one basket because to split them up against a force as large as the undead would be result in decimation.
add a comment |
There is a slightly more morbid reason to have the non-fighters corralled in a single place. It's so that, if the defenders can see they're losing the fight, they can themselves kill and torch them humanely before killing themselves, so prevent them from being captured and turned. It's reasonable to expect the people hiding to panic and try to run in such a situation, but from humanity's point of view it's more important that the enemy's army doesn't grow more than it has to.
New contributor
3
This seems incredibly unlikely to be the reason.
– TheLethalCarrot
Apr 23 at 14:09
1
I can understand them not wanting their friends and family to turn, but not adding to the NK's army doesn't really matter if they lose their last stand.
– Ivo van der Veeken
Apr 23 at 14:11
7
I deem it quite unlikely that the defenders of Winterfell would do that. They're more likely to fight to the last warrior and die on the steps of the crypt trying to defend the civilians than kill them themselves. Burning civilians is something that Cersei would do with no remorse, not Jon Snow and party.
– Sava
Apr 23 at 14:16
add a comment |
Those stone tombs are too heavy for the dead to open. So even if the Night's King raises e.g. Ned and Lyanna, they wouldn't be able to get out of their crypts to attack the living people.
1
I never implied in my question that dead Starks will wake up. Neither does any character that mentions crypts. Maybe only Bran has some idea. I asked from a strategic pov
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "186"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f209561%2fwhy-do-people-think-winterfell-crypts-is-the-safest-place-for-women-children-an%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It is the safest place while the battle rages on, similar to the Battle of Helm's Deep in LOTR: while in the crypt/cave, the non-combatant are out of harms way, and in no risk of being hit by a stray projectile or shrapnel. Plus, if the defenses are breached, then there is no risk of any number of civilians falling in the hands of the enemy to be slaughtered and join the Army of the Dead.
Of course, if they lose the battle, then everyone dies, but that's why they are fighting in the first place: to avoid being wiped out.
If they win, then the civilians, used in the modern sense opposed to military people, are safe and sound and can tend to the wounded combatants who survived the battle and start rebuilding and such.
As for running, it's highly unlikely that the women, children and old people would go very far before being caught by the Army of the Dead and slaughtered in the open fields. Especially since winter has finally come. There is no running from the Army of the Dead. Besides, from a strategic standpoint, any way out is also a potential way in.
44
Though there may be some concern about hiding the people least able to defend themselves in sealed, dark caverns filled with corpses when their attackers can raise the dead to fight for them.
– Upper_Case
Apr 22 at 18:33
14
I think it's a perfect example of the idiot plot, ie characters doing stupid things in order to advance the plot, eg hiding in the cemetery when your enemy is a necromancer...
– Rebel-Scum
Apr 22 at 18:38
28
@Upper_Case: I would expect that the crypts of Winterfell have, over and over, been used to shelter the non-combattants. At this point, it's probably a reflex: battle coming => non-combattants in the crypt. And so it suffers from the same problem as any reflex: people have stopped thinking about it, especially when their mind is already preoccupied with attempting to win against such a huge army.
– Matthieu M.
Apr 22 at 19:31
5
Any corpses down there are surely dust and grime by this point, and even if they weren't there'd be stupidly heavy stone slabs over them. Not a great example of the "idiot plot" as claimed above.
– Sarah Z.
Apr 22 at 20:16
4
We've nowhere near enough evidence to imagine that we definitively know how the Walkers' powers work and, more relevantly, the show's characters have even less (though the books give some decent clues that the crypts are probably a reasonable risk to take, with the lack of good alternatives). It's not clearly the case that the crypts are a problem, but saying they're definitely safe is too strong. The big leap is that they can raise the dead at all, not that they could raise them in case B as well as case A. The characters should be ready for problems in the crypt, but don't seem to be.
– Upper_Case
Apr 23 at 13:57
|
show 3 more comments
It is the safest place while the battle rages on, similar to the Battle of Helm's Deep in LOTR: while in the crypt/cave, the non-combatant are out of harms way, and in no risk of being hit by a stray projectile or shrapnel. Plus, if the defenses are breached, then there is no risk of any number of civilians falling in the hands of the enemy to be slaughtered and join the Army of the Dead.
Of course, if they lose the battle, then everyone dies, but that's why they are fighting in the first place: to avoid being wiped out.
If they win, then the civilians, used in the modern sense opposed to military people, are safe and sound and can tend to the wounded combatants who survived the battle and start rebuilding and such.
As for running, it's highly unlikely that the women, children and old people would go very far before being caught by the Army of the Dead and slaughtered in the open fields. Especially since winter has finally come. There is no running from the Army of the Dead. Besides, from a strategic standpoint, any way out is also a potential way in.
44
Though there may be some concern about hiding the people least able to defend themselves in sealed, dark caverns filled with corpses when their attackers can raise the dead to fight for them.
– Upper_Case
Apr 22 at 18:33
14
I think it's a perfect example of the idiot plot, ie characters doing stupid things in order to advance the plot, eg hiding in the cemetery when your enemy is a necromancer...
– Rebel-Scum
Apr 22 at 18:38
28
@Upper_Case: I would expect that the crypts of Winterfell have, over and over, been used to shelter the non-combattants. At this point, it's probably a reflex: battle coming => non-combattants in the crypt. And so it suffers from the same problem as any reflex: people have stopped thinking about it, especially when their mind is already preoccupied with attempting to win against such a huge army.
– Matthieu M.
Apr 22 at 19:31
5
Any corpses down there are surely dust and grime by this point, and even if they weren't there'd be stupidly heavy stone slabs over them. Not a great example of the "idiot plot" as claimed above.
– Sarah Z.
Apr 22 at 20:16
4
We've nowhere near enough evidence to imagine that we definitively know how the Walkers' powers work and, more relevantly, the show's characters have even less (though the books give some decent clues that the crypts are probably a reasonable risk to take, with the lack of good alternatives). It's not clearly the case that the crypts are a problem, but saying they're definitely safe is too strong. The big leap is that they can raise the dead at all, not that they could raise them in case B as well as case A. The characters should be ready for problems in the crypt, but don't seem to be.
– Upper_Case
Apr 23 at 13:57
|
show 3 more comments
It is the safest place while the battle rages on, similar to the Battle of Helm's Deep in LOTR: while in the crypt/cave, the non-combatant are out of harms way, and in no risk of being hit by a stray projectile or shrapnel. Plus, if the defenses are breached, then there is no risk of any number of civilians falling in the hands of the enemy to be slaughtered and join the Army of the Dead.
Of course, if they lose the battle, then everyone dies, but that's why they are fighting in the first place: to avoid being wiped out.
If they win, then the civilians, used in the modern sense opposed to military people, are safe and sound and can tend to the wounded combatants who survived the battle and start rebuilding and such.
As for running, it's highly unlikely that the women, children and old people would go very far before being caught by the Army of the Dead and slaughtered in the open fields. Especially since winter has finally come. There is no running from the Army of the Dead. Besides, from a strategic standpoint, any way out is also a potential way in.
It is the safest place while the battle rages on, similar to the Battle of Helm's Deep in LOTR: while in the crypt/cave, the non-combatant are out of harms way, and in no risk of being hit by a stray projectile or shrapnel. Plus, if the defenses are breached, then there is no risk of any number of civilians falling in the hands of the enemy to be slaughtered and join the Army of the Dead.
Of course, if they lose the battle, then everyone dies, but that's why they are fighting in the first place: to avoid being wiped out.
If they win, then the civilians, used in the modern sense opposed to military people, are safe and sound and can tend to the wounded combatants who survived the battle and start rebuilding and such.
As for running, it's highly unlikely that the women, children and old people would go very far before being caught by the Army of the Dead and slaughtered in the open fields. Especially since winter has finally come. There is no running from the Army of the Dead. Besides, from a strategic standpoint, any way out is also a potential way in.
answered Apr 22 at 17:39
SavaSava
4,69711760
4,69711760
44
Though there may be some concern about hiding the people least able to defend themselves in sealed, dark caverns filled with corpses when their attackers can raise the dead to fight for them.
– Upper_Case
Apr 22 at 18:33
14
I think it's a perfect example of the idiot plot, ie characters doing stupid things in order to advance the plot, eg hiding in the cemetery when your enemy is a necromancer...
– Rebel-Scum
Apr 22 at 18:38
28
@Upper_Case: I would expect that the crypts of Winterfell have, over and over, been used to shelter the non-combattants. At this point, it's probably a reflex: battle coming => non-combattants in the crypt. And so it suffers from the same problem as any reflex: people have stopped thinking about it, especially when their mind is already preoccupied with attempting to win against such a huge army.
– Matthieu M.
Apr 22 at 19:31
5
Any corpses down there are surely dust and grime by this point, and even if they weren't there'd be stupidly heavy stone slabs over them. Not a great example of the "idiot plot" as claimed above.
– Sarah Z.
Apr 22 at 20:16
4
We've nowhere near enough evidence to imagine that we definitively know how the Walkers' powers work and, more relevantly, the show's characters have even less (though the books give some decent clues that the crypts are probably a reasonable risk to take, with the lack of good alternatives). It's not clearly the case that the crypts are a problem, but saying they're definitely safe is too strong. The big leap is that they can raise the dead at all, not that they could raise them in case B as well as case A. The characters should be ready for problems in the crypt, but don't seem to be.
– Upper_Case
Apr 23 at 13:57
|
show 3 more comments
44
Though there may be some concern about hiding the people least able to defend themselves in sealed, dark caverns filled with corpses when their attackers can raise the dead to fight for them.
– Upper_Case
Apr 22 at 18:33
14
I think it's a perfect example of the idiot plot, ie characters doing stupid things in order to advance the plot, eg hiding in the cemetery when your enemy is a necromancer...
– Rebel-Scum
Apr 22 at 18:38
28
@Upper_Case: I would expect that the crypts of Winterfell have, over and over, been used to shelter the non-combattants. At this point, it's probably a reflex: battle coming => non-combattants in the crypt. And so it suffers from the same problem as any reflex: people have stopped thinking about it, especially when their mind is already preoccupied with attempting to win against such a huge army.
– Matthieu M.
Apr 22 at 19:31
5
Any corpses down there are surely dust and grime by this point, and even if they weren't there'd be stupidly heavy stone slabs over them. Not a great example of the "idiot plot" as claimed above.
– Sarah Z.
Apr 22 at 20:16
4
We've nowhere near enough evidence to imagine that we definitively know how the Walkers' powers work and, more relevantly, the show's characters have even less (though the books give some decent clues that the crypts are probably a reasonable risk to take, with the lack of good alternatives). It's not clearly the case that the crypts are a problem, but saying they're definitely safe is too strong. The big leap is that they can raise the dead at all, not that they could raise them in case B as well as case A. The characters should be ready for problems in the crypt, but don't seem to be.
– Upper_Case
Apr 23 at 13:57
44
44
Though there may be some concern about hiding the people least able to defend themselves in sealed, dark caverns filled with corpses when their attackers can raise the dead to fight for them.
– Upper_Case
Apr 22 at 18:33
Though there may be some concern about hiding the people least able to defend themselves in sealed, dark caverns filled with corpses when their attackers can raise the dead to fight for them.
– Upper_Case
Apr 22 at 18:33
14
14
I think it's a perfect example of the idiot plot, ie characters doing stupid things in order to advance the plot, eg hiding in the cemetery when your enemy is a necromancer...
– Rebel-Scum
Apr 22 at 18:38
I think it's a perfect example of the idiot plot, ie characters doing stupid things in order to advance the plot, eg hiding in the cemetery when your enemy is a necromancer...
– Rebel-Scum
Apr 22 at 18:38
28
28
@Upper_Case: I would expect that the crypts of Winterfell have, over and over, been used to shelter the non-combattants. At this point, it's probably a reflex: battle coming => non-combattants in the crypt. And so it suffers from the same problem as any reflex: people have stopped thinking about it, especially when their mind is already preoccupied with attempting to win against such a huge army.
– Matthieu M.
Apr 22 at 19:31
@Upper_Case: I would expect that the crypts of Winterfell have, over and over, been used to shelter the non-combattants. At this point, it's probably a reflex: battle coming => non-combattants in the crypt. And so it suffers from the same problem as any reflex: people have stopped thinking about it, especially when their mind is already preoccupied with attempting to win against such a huge army.
– Matthieu M.
Apr 22 at 19:31
5
5
Any corpses down there are surely dust and grime by this point, and even if they weren't there'd be stupidly heavy stone slabs over them. Not a great example of the "idiot plot" as claimed above.
– Sarah Z.
Apr 22 at 20:16
Any corpses down there are surely dust and grime by this point, and even if they weren't there'd be stupidly heavy stone slabs over them. Not a great example of the "idiot plot" as claimed above.
– Sarah Z.
Apr 22 at 20:16
4
4
We've nowhere near enough evidence to imagine that we definitively know how the Walkers' powers work and, more relevantly, the show's characters have even less (though the books give some decent clues that the crypts are probably a reasonable risk to take, with the lack of good alternatives). It's not clearly the case that the crypts are a problem, but saying they're definitely safe is too strong. The big leap is that they can raise the dead at all, not that they could raise them in case B as well as case A. The characters should be ready for problems in the crypt, but don't seem to be.
– Upper_Case
Apr 23 at 13:57
We've nowhere near enough evidence to imagine that we definitively know how the Walkers' powers work and, more relevantly, the show's characters have even less (though the books give some decent clues that the crypts are probably a reasonable risk to take, with the lack of good alternatives). It's not clearly the case that the crypts are a problem, but saying they're definitely safe is too strong. The big leap is that they can raise the dead at all, not that they could raise them in case B as well as case A. The characters should be ready for problems in the crypt, but don't seem to be.
– Upper_Case
Apr 23 at 13:57
|
show 3 more comments
Sava's answer is correct, but I wanted to respond to part of your question.
But why is that? As far as I can see, it's got a single way down...
You see it as "only one way out". However, someone who is defending sees it as "only one way in", which means that when you are able to defend this chokepoint, you can keep everyone safe.
This is exactly why castles have a wall and a handful of gates (or often just one): the less gates into the castle, the more resources/manpower you can dedicate towards defending these gates.
To paraphrase The Man In The Iron Mask, when the commander explains to the king why they cannot beat the four musketeers who are entreched in a hallway: "The chokepoint of the corridor negates our superior numbers".
with lots of steps
The civilians won't be moving much when they're in there, why would the steps matter?
& poorly lit.
Again, there's little reason for the civilians to need good lighting while they're hiding. They're not doing anything. I also don't see why they couldn't just light the crypts better if they really needed to.
Additionally, for a human enemy, should the enemy enter the crypts, it makes you more likely not get spotted when you hide. Or even when you do fight back, your eyes are used to the dark and the enemy's are not yet, which again gives the defender the advantage.
Why would this be the safest place?
Because statistically it has been. Consider that White Walkers haven't been seen for a thousand years, but human wars have happened pretty much every generation. This is a centuries' old habit: hide the civilians in the crypts, because it's the best place to keep them safe from the battle that rages on outside.
There is a strong consensus on the tactical benefit of hiding the non-combatants and to keep them safe. This is for two reasons: the soldiers don't need to worry about the safety of they family and can instead focus on the battle, and keeping the civilians safe means they can assist with the post-battle fallout (tend to the wounded, clear rubble, restore things).
They did it in King's Landing with the Battle of Blackwater Bay (it's the scene where Cersei talks to Sansa about having instructed the guard to kill her and her children should the safe place be breached, so that she is not taken by the enemy). Jumping to another franchise, one of the best known use cases of this tactic is in Lord of the Rings, in the Battle for Helm's Deep.
You should consider this safe place as a "keep within the keep". They are the second walls, when the first wall is taken by the enemy.
add a comment |
Sava's answer is correct, but I wanted to respond to part of your question.
But why is that? As far as I can see, it's got a single way down...
You see it as "only one way out". However, someone who is defending sees it as "only one way in", which means that when you are able to defend this chokepoint, you can keep everyone safe.
This is exactly why castles have a wall and a handful of gates (or often just one): the less gates into the castle, the more resources/manpower you can dedicate towards defending these gates.
To paraphrase The Man In The Iron Mask, when the commander explains to the king why they cannot beat the four musketeers who are entreched in a hallway: "The chokepoint of the corridor negates our superior numbers".
with lots of steps
The civilians won't be moving much when they're in there, why would the steps matter?
& poorly lit.
Again, there's little reason for the civilians to need good lighting while they're hiding. They're not doing anything. I also don't see why they couldn't just light the crypts better if they really needed to.
Additionally, for a human enemy, should the enemy enter the crypts, it makes you more likely not get spotted when you hide. Or even when you do fight back, your eyes are used to the dark and the enemy's are not yet, which again gives the defender the advantage.
Why would this be the safest place?
Because statistically it has been. Consider that White Walkers haven't been seen for a thousand years, but human wars have happened pretty much every generation. This is a centuries' old habit: hide the civilians in the crypts, because it's the best place to keep them safe from the battle that rages on outside.
There is a strong consensus on the tactical benefit of hiding the non-combatants and to keep them safe. This is for two reasons: the soldiers don't need to worry about the safety of they family and can instead focus on the battle, and keeping the civilians safe means they can assist with the post-battle fallout (tend to the wounded, clear rubble, restore things).
They did it in King's Landing with the Battle of Blackwater Bay (it's the scene where Cersei talks to Sansa about having instructed the guard to kill her and her children should the safe place be breached, so that she is not taken by the enemy). Jumping to another franchise, one of the best known use cases of this tactic is in Lord of the Rings, in the Battle for Helm's Deep.
You should consider this safe place as a "keep within the keep". They are the second walls, when the first wall is taken by the enemy.
add a comment |
Sava's answer is correct, but I wanted to respond to part of your question.
But why is that? As far as I can see, it's got a single way down...
You see it as "only one way out". However, someone who is defending sees it as "only one way in", which means that when you are able to defend this chokepoint, you can keep everyone safe.
This is exactly why castles have a wall and a handful of gates (or often just one): the less gates into the castle, the more resources/manpower you can dedicate towards defending these gates.
To paraphrase The Man In The Iron Mask, when the commander explains to the king why they cannot beat the four musketeers who are entreched in a hallway: "The chokepoint of the corridor negates our superior numbers".
with lots of steps
The civilians won't be moving much when they're in there, why would the steps matter?
& poorly lit.
Again, there's little reason for the civilians to need good lighting while they're hiding. They're not doing anything. I also don't see why they couldn't just light the crypts better if they really needed to.
Additionally, for a human enemy, should the enemy enter the crypts, it makes you more likely not get spotted when you hide. Or even when you do fight back, your eyes are used to the dark and the enemy's are not yet, which again gives the defender the advantage.
Why would this be the safest place?
Because statistically it has been. Consider that White Walkers haven't been seen for a thousand years, but human wars have happened pretty much every generation. This is a centuries' old habit: hide the civilians in the crypts, because it's the best place to keep them safe from the battle that rages on outside.
There is a strong consensus on the tactical benefit of hiding the non-combatants and to keep them safe. This is for two reasons: the soldiers don't need to worry about the safety of they family and can instead focus on the battle, and keeping the civilians safe means they can assist with the post-battle fallout (tend to the wounded, clear rubble, restore things).
They did it in King's Landing with the Battle of Blackwater Bay (it's the scene where Cersei talks to Sansa about having instructed the guard to kill her and her children should the safe place be breached, so that she is not taken by the enemy). Jumping to another franchise, one of the best known use cases of this tactic is in Lord of the Rings, in the Battle for Helm's Deep.
You should consider this safe place as a "keep within the keep". They are the second walls, when the first wall is taken by the enemy.
Sava's answer is correct, but I wanted to respond to part of your question.
But why is that? As far as I can see, it's got a single way down...
You see it as "only one way out". However, someone who is defending sees it as "only one way in", which means that when you are able to defend this chokepoint, you can keep everyone safe.
This is exactly why castles have a wall and a handful of gates (or often just one): the less gates into the castle, the more resources/manpower you can dedicate towards defending these gates.
To paraphrase The Man In The Iron Mask, when the commander explains to the king why they cannot beat the four musketeers who are entreched in a hallway: "The chokepoint of the corridor negates our superior numbers".
with lots of steps
The civilians won't be moving much when they're in there, why would the steps matter?
& poorly lit.
Again, there's little reason for the civilians to need good lighting while they're hiding. They're not doing anything. I also don't see why they couldn't just light the crypts better if they really needed to.
Additionally, for a human enemy, should the enemy enter the crypts, it makes you more likely not get spotted when you hide. Or even when you do fight back, your eyes are used to the dark and the enemy's are not yet, which again gives the defender the advantage.
Why would this be the safest place?
Because statistically it has been. Consider that White Walkers haven't been seen for a thousand years, but human wars have happened pretty much every generation. This is a centuries' old habit: hide the civilians in the crypts, because it's the best place to keep them safe from the battle that rages on outside.
There is a strong consensus on the tactical benefit of hiding the non-combatants and to keep them safe. This is for two reasons: the soldiers don't need to worry about the safety of they family and can instead focus on the battle, and keeping the civilians safe means they can assist with the post-battle fallout (tend to the wounded, clear rubble, restore things).
They did it in King's Landing with the Battle of Blackwater Bay (it's the scene where Cersei talks to Sansa about having instructed the guard to kill her and her children should the safe place be breached, so that she is not taken by the enemy). Jumping to another franchise, one of the best known use cases of this tactic is in Lord of the Rings, in the Battle for Helm's Deep.
You should consider this safe place as a "keep within the keep". They are the second walls, when the first wall is taken by the enemy.
edited Apr 23 at 11:28
answered Apr 23 at 9:04
FlaterFlater
7,18612130
7,18612130
add a comment |
add a comment |
This is the best way to assure their safety and have the most probable outcome for winning. If the non-combatants were to be hidden away in a different town farther inland, there is still the chance that a part of the undead force could break off and attack (or even the golden company). This would mean that the troops at Winterfell would need to detach a size-able group to accompany them to protect them "just in case". They are considerably outnumbered now and need every fighter they can get, so splitting the forces wouldn't really be a feasible option.
With the non-combatants staying IN Winterfell, not only are all of the troops together in one place to provide the best offense they can, they are also assured and not as worried about their loved-ones well being. They know where the non-combatants are, underground (out of the reach of the enemy), and the only way they will be come endangered is if all the fighters at Winterfell are defeated, in which case, they would be doomed no matter where they were.
With their loved ones near and depending on them, the average person is also probably willing to fight harder to make sure they stay protected. This is the last stand, they're putting all of their chips into one basket because to split them up against a force as large as the undead would be result in decimation.
add a comment |
This is the best way to assure their safety and have the most probable outcome for winning. If the non-combatants were to be hidden away in a different town farther inland, there is still the chance that a part of the undead force could break off and attack (or even the golden company). This would mean that the troops at Winterfell would need to detach a size-able group to accompany them to protect them "just in case". They are considerably outnumbered now and need every fighter they can get, so splitting the forces wouldn't really be a feasible option.
With the non-combatants staying IN Winterfell, not only are all of the troops together in one place to provide the best offense they can, they are also assured and not as worried about their loved-ones well being. They know where the non-combatants are, underground (out of the reach of the enemy), and the only way they will be come endangered is if all the fighters at Winterfell are defeated, in which case, they would be doomed no matter where they were.
With their loved ones near and depending on them, the average person is also probably willing to fight harder to make sure they stay protected. This is the last stand, they're putting all of their chips into one basket because to split them up against a force as large as the undead would be result in decimation.
add a comment |
This is the best way to assure their safety and have the most probable outcome for winning. If the non-combatants were to be hidden away in a different town farther inland, there is still the chance that a part of the undead force could break off and attack (or even the golden company). This would mean that the troops at Winterfell would need to detach a size-able group to accompany them to protect them "just in case". They are considerably outnumbered now and need every fighter they can get, so splitting the forces wouldn't really be a feasible option.
With the non-combatants staying IN Winterfell, not only are all of the troops together in one place to provide the best offense they can, they are also assured and not as worried about their loved-ones well being. They know where the non-combatants are, underground (out of the reach of the enemy), and the only way they will be come endangered is if all the fighters at Winterfell are defeated, in which case, they would be doomed no matter where they were.
With their loved ones near and depending on them, the average person is also probably willing to fight harder to make sure they stay protected. This is the last stand, they're putting all of their chips into one basket because to split them up against a force as large as the undead would be result in decimation.
This is the best way to assure their safety and have the most probable outcome for winning. If the non-combatants were to be hidden away in a different town farther inland, there is still the chance that a part of the undead force could break off and attack (or even the golden company). This would mean that the troops at Winterfell would need to detach a size-able group to accompany them to protect them "just in case". They are considerably outnumbered now and need every fighter they can get, so splitting the forces wouldn't really be a feasible option.
With the non-combatants staying IN Winterfell, not only are all of the troops together in one place to provide the best offense they can, they are also assured and not as worried about their loved-ones well being. They know where the non-combatants are, underground (out of the reach of the enemy), and the only way they will be come endangered is if all the fighters at Winterfell are defeated, in which case, they would be doomed no matter where they were.
With their loved ones near and depending on them, the average person is also probably willing to fight harder to make sure they stay protected. This is the last stand, they're putting all of their chips into one basket because to split them up against a force as large as the undead would be result in decimation.
answered Apr 23 at 18:29
SensoraySensoray
1,049517
1,049517
add a comment |
add a comment |
There is a slightly more morbid reason to have the non-fighters corralled in a single place. It's so that, if the defenders can see they're losing the fight, they can themselves kill and torch them humanely before killing themselves, so prevent them from being captured and turned. It's reasonable to expect the people hiding to panic and try to run in such a situation, but from humanity's point of view it's more important that the enemy's army doesn't grow more than it has to.
New contributor
3
This seems incredibly unlikely to be the reason.
– TheLethalCarrot
Apr 23 at 14:09
1
I can understand them not wanting their friends and family to turn, but not adding to the NK's army doesn't really matter if they lose their last stand.
– Ivo van der Veeken
Apr 23 at 14:11
7
I deem it quite unlikely that the defenders of Winterfell would do that. They're more likely to fight to the last warrior and die on the steps of the crypt trying to defend the civilians than kill them themselves. Burning civilians is something that Cersei would do with no remorse, not Jon Snow and party.
– Sava
Apr 23 at 14:16
add a comment |
There is a slightly more morbid reason to have the non-fighters corralled in a single place. It's so that, if the defenders can see they're losing the fight, they can themselves kill and torch them humanely before killing themselves, so prevent them from being captured and turned. It's reasonable to expect the people hiding to panic and try to run in such a situation, but from humanity's point of view it's more important that the enemy's army doesn't grow more than it has to.
New contributor
3
This seems incredibly unlikely to be the reason.
– TheLethalCarrot
Apr 23 at 14:09
1
I can understand them not wanting their friends and family to turn, but not adding to the NK's army doesn't really matter if they lose their last stand.
– Ivo van der Veeken
Apr 23 at 14:11
7
I deem it quite unlikely that the defenders of Winterfell would do that. They're more likely to fight to the last warrior and die on the steps of the crypt trying to defend the civilians than kill them themselves. Burning civilians is something that Cersei would do with no remorse, not Jon Snow and party.
– Sava
Apr 23 at 14:16
add a comment |
There is a slightly more morbid reason to have the non-fighters corralled in a single place. It's so that, if the defenders can see they're losing the fight, they can themselves kill and torch them humanely before killing themselves, so prevent them from being captured and turned. It's reasonable to expect the people hiding to panic and try to run in such a situation, but from humanity's point of view it's more important that the enemy's army doesn't grow more than it has to.
New contributor
There is a slightly more morbid reason to have the non-fighters corralled in a single place. It's so that, if the defenders can see they're losing the fight, they can themselves kill and torch them humanely before killing themselves, so prevent them from being captured and turned. It's reasonable to expect the people hiding to panic and try to run in such a situation, but from humanity's point of view it's more important that the enemy's army doesn't grow more than it has to.
New contributor
New contributor
answered Apr 23 at 14:03
regularfryregularfry
1111
1111
New contributor
New contributor
3
This seems incredibly unlikely to be the reason.
– TheLethalCarrot
Apr 23 at 14:09
1
I can understand them not wanting their friends and family to turn, but not adding to the NK's army doesn't really matter if they lose their last stand.
– Ivo van der Veeken
Apr 23 at 14:11
7
I deem it quite unlikely that the defenders of Winterfell would do that. They're more likely to fight to the last warrior and die on the steps of the crypt trying to defend the civilians than kill them themselves. Burning civilians is something that Cersei would do with no remorse, not Jon Snow and party.
– Sava
Apr 23 at 14:16
add a comment |
3
This seems incredibly unlikely to be the reason.
– TheLethalCarrot
Apr 23 at 14:09
1
I can understand them not wanting their friends and family to turn, but not adding to the NK's army doesn't really matter if they lose their last stand.
– Ivo van der Veeken
Apr 23 at 14:11
7
I deem it quite unlikely that the defenders of Winterfell would do that. They're more likely to fight to the last warrior and die on the steps of the crypt trying to defend the civilians than kill them themselves. Burning civilians is something that Cersei would do with no remorse, not Jon Snow and party.
– Sava
Apr 23 at 14:16
3
3
This seems incredibly unlikely to be the reason.
– TheLethalCarrot
Apr 23 at 14:09
This seems incredibly unlikely to be the reason.
– TheLethalCarrot
Apr 23 at 14:09
1
1
I can understand them not wanting their friends and family to turn, but not adding to the NK's army doesn't really matter if they lose their last stand.
– Ivo van der Veeken
Apr 23 at 14:11
I can understand them not wanting their friends and family to turn, but not adding to the NK's army doesn't really matter if they lose their last stand.
– Ivo van der Veeken
Apr 23 at 14:11
7
7
I deem it quite unlikely that the defenders of Winterfell would do that. They're more likely to fight to the last warrior and die on the steps of the crypt trying to defend the civilians than kill them themselves. Burning civilians is something that Cersei would do with no remorse, not Jon Snow and party.
– Sava
Apr 23 at 14:16
I deem it quite unlikely that the defenders of Winterfell would do that. They're more likely to fight to the last warrior and die on the steps of the crypt trying to defend the civilians than kill them themselves. Burning civilians is something that Cersei would do with no remorse, not Jon Snow and party.
– Sava
Apr 23 at 14:16
add a comment |
Those stone tombs are too heavy for the dead to open. So even if the Night's King raises e.g. Ned and Lyanna, they wouldn't be able to get out of their crypts to attack the living people.
1
I never implied in my question that dead Starks will wake up. Neither does any character that mentions crypts. Maybe only Bran has some idea. I asked from a strategic pov
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
add a comment |
Those stone tombs are too heavy for the dead to open. So even if the Night's King raises e.g. Ned and Lyanna, they wouldn't be able to get out of their crypts to attack the living people.
1
I never implied in my question that dead Starks will wake up. Neither does any character that mentions crypts. Maybe only Bran has some idea. I asked from a strategic pov
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
add a comment |
Those stone tombs are too heavy for the dead to open. So even if the Night's King raises e.g. Ned and Lyanna, they wouldn't be able to get out of their crypts to attack the living people.
Those stone tombs are too heavy for the dead to open. So even if the Night's King raises e.g. Ned and Lyanna, they wouldn't be able to get out of their crypts to attack the living people.
answered 2 days ago
Joe CJoe C
2,97722342
2,97722342
1
I never implied in my question that dead Starks will wake up. Neither does any character that mentions crypts. Maybe only Bran has some idea. I asked from a strategic pov
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
add a comment |
1
I never implied in my question that dead Starks will wake up. Neither does any character that mentions crypts. Maybe only Bran has some idea. I asked from a strategic pov
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
1
1
I never implied in my question that dead Starks will wake up. Neither does any character that mentions crypts. Maybe only Bran has some idea. I asked from a strategic pov
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
I never implied in my question that dead Starks will wake up. Neither does any character that mentions crypts. Maybe only Bran has some idea. I asked from a strategic pov
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f209561%2fwhy-do-people-think-winterfell-crypts-is-the-safest-place-for-women-children-an%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
22
The crypts are huge, so you can protect a lot of people in one place. One way in means only one entrance to defend.
– svenvo7
Apr 22 at 17:36
6
Also there are no windows so they will not see the end coming from miles away.
– mckenzm
Apr 23 at 4:06
2
I'm pretty sure they're setting things up for the dead in the crypts to be raise by the Night King. Hence all the commentary about defending folks down there and so on as well as what you pointed out. A kind of Chekov's Zombie, if you will.
– Paul
Apr 23 at 21:41
The crypts are magically protected like the 3-Eyed Raven's cave.
– J Doe
2 days ago
2
@Paul I just read a theory that Bran refused to stay in the crypts because that will break the magic if any because of Night King mark.
– KharoBangdo
2 days ago