GOT: That Sansa scene (spoilers)

[BloatedGuppy]

EDIT: In the scene where Jaime and Brann walk into the garden unopposed I had a total Plinket moment.

That and the fact they arrived at the same exact moment as the (inexplicably) murderous Sand Snakes just made for high comedy. I expected Benny Hill to start blaring.

 

[OhNoYouDidnt]

It isn't a change from the books. In the books, it's the character of Jeyne Poole [http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Jeyne_Poole] (masquerading as Arya Stark) that is wed to Ramsay.

...Umm, do you realise that you contradicted yourself there? It is a change from the books because they use one of the main characters - one of the Stark survivors, no less - instead of a relatively insignificant side-character. If that isn't a change, I don't know what would be.

And as BloatedGuppy explained far better than I could, there is absolutely ZERO reason for Sansa to be there. None whatsoever. It is a ridiculously contrived change from the source material that does not appear to serve any purpose beyond providing shock value.

You know what makes this particularly awful? Jeyne did show up in the HBO show - there's a screenshot of her in your Wiki link. But they didn't do anything with her. The whole "issue" of having to introduce yet another character could've been solved all the way back in Season One by keeping Jeyne instead of making her a background character during the first few episodes. But I guess that required way too much foresight.

 

[Silvanus]

Stannis has <5000 men. Stannis is trying to defend the realm against the long night. He's not going to "take King's Landing" with a force less than fraction of the size of the one he already failed to take it with.

That's true, but he has a number of other options. Taking out the Boltons (with Clan, Mormont, and Umber help) could realistically earn him pledges from a number of other Northern houses, first of all-- and even potentially some of the Riverlanders later on, if his campaign continued straight down, though I doubt it will.

He may also have a force of Sellswords sailing to support him in the future, as paid for by the Iron Bank.

 

[chikusho]

He takes risks to reap rewards, I guess? He acts with a goal in mind, and for him to be able to achieve that goal risks are necessary.

Well, yes. As long as we're guessing, I imagine he could be doing just about anything. Maybe he's a secret Targaryen, or The Night's King! Based on what you've seen actually take place, what are his motives? What does he stand to gain?

Don't be silly, my response was rhetorical. Littlefinger has an end goal in mind. Exactly what that is has only been hinted at (the Iron Throne), so whatever actions he takes we have to assume that it's towards achieving that goal. He's taken plenty of risks so far, and secretly giving Sansa to Roose is far less crazy than what has come before.

He knows Stannis is coming to take the north and then King's landing.

Stannis has <5000 men. Stannis is trying to defend the realm against the long night. He's not going to "take King's Landing" with a force less than fraction of the size of the one he already failed to take it with.

Stannis is trying to defend the realm against the long night by become the king of Westeros. If there's any character with clear motivations, it's Stannis. What of it?

By giving Sansa to Roose he gains an ally in Roose

An ally that the show establishes has no army to speak of and no power outside of that granted them by the Throne, with which the Sansa deal severs their relationship.

An ally is better than no ally. If everything goes according to Littlefingers plan, the Lannisters won't hold the throne for much longer, and by that time the severed relationship is meaningless.

Also, there's nothing public about Littlefinger handing her over to Roose. Rembember, she isn't Sansa, she's Alayne, his niece, until handed over to Roose. There's noone to say how she got there.

He was walking around openly. Varys employed spies in every court in the Seven Kingdoms, that Qyburn would've inherited upon becoming spymaster. Even if there wasn't someone there in a professional capacity, the smallfolk talk. He was seen escorting her through the Riverlands as well.

Varys isn't in Kings landing anymore. Also, how do you "inherit" a secret network? Only Varys knew the identities of his spies, and his spies are probably still working for him.

Yes, he was seen escorting his niece Aleyne through the Riverlands.

Finally, it's better to maybe have a friend in the Boltons than not.

Why is that better? What is the benefit of having a politically toxic friend with depleted/non-existant military strength? Particularly when you're trading the preeminent power in the realm for it?

Probably a hell of a lot of benefits, or just enough benefit for it to be worthwhile. There are plenty of resources in the north, and you need the north in order to maintain the seven kingdoms. Him giving Sansa to Roose can grant him control and influence in the area no matter which way the fight with Stannis goes. If Littlefinger wants to be King, he's going to need a warden in the North, and letting Roose work on getting the Northerners to bend the knee is a hell of a lot more convenient than conquering it later on.

His authority in the north stems from the crown, and the crown is in shambles.

How is the crown in shambles? At the end of the war the Lannisters still have some 20-30K fighting men available, the Tyrells over 50K. Which is to say nothing of the Riverlands and Stormlands, all of which are under the control of Kings Landing. So the Crown is "in shambles", and somehow Roose Bolton makes an appealing alternative? How?

The crown is in shambles because they have just gone through two kings, a couple wars and lost the only person who was capable enough to steer the ship. That is, Tywin, who was also responsible for creating and maintaining the alliances after the war of the five kings. Tommen is just a boy controlled by Cersey. Cersei is in power now, and she's using all of her focus on petty vengeance. Also, the crowns main ally is conspiring against them. It doesn't matter how many soldiers they have if they aren't utilized correctly. I think Davos put it best:
https://youtu.be/fJihLGtcHwA?t=298
I mean, if way over in Braavos everyone knows that Tywin is really in charge, it's safe to assume that everyone in Westeros knows it as well.

So to put it short, his authority is dwindling. Especially if he's privy to the fact that the Tyrells are also working against the crown, even though that's not explicitly stated.

The Tyrells ARE the crown.

And the Tyrells don't care about Sansa.

And even if he doesn't gain an army, he needs proper authority and respect to not face resistance from the north in those preparations. Hell, possibly even more so. It's a lot easier to gather supplies and prepare for winter when people are working for you rather than when you have to force them to do so by the tip of a sword. With a Stark commanding them, he will probably face less resistance.

So he gets proper authority and respect from the smallfolk (something he has never failed to accomplish on his own) and in turn becomes a rebel faction in open defiance of the governing body of the Seven Kingdoms. And this is a good political move for him?

Roose wants to rule the north. Getting a legitimate claim on the north is a very good political move for him. Northerners don't respect the crown, but they do respect the Stark name. Since he knows that Kings Landing is in shambles, knows that Tyrion has been convicted for the murder, and probably knows that the Lannisters will not be in power much longer, whomever takes control after Cersei will probably want stability in the North when winter comes. And thus they will not go to war over a Stark girl wich the Warden of the North has under control.

Quite the contrary. When every act, statement and motivation is explicitly spelled out, the show quickly becomes a bore.

Sorry, are those the two choices? Either everything is explicitly spelled out and detailed, or you have to make wild guesses about why anything is happening?

Or you make educated guesses based on the information that the show provides you with, which I'm doing right know. Your reaction to Sansa going to Bolton was that it was crazy and shitty writing (which really sounds quite frustrating). My reaction was that it was really clever; another feather in the hat of our devious friend Petyr Baelish.

 

[Frankster]

We should have more GoT topics in this forum, I enjoy reading other people's views even if I don't agree with them (it's what I do with my friends pretty much).

3. It makes no sense for Sansa to agree to it. What does she hope to accomplish?

*nods vigorously* This is my single biggest gripe with the storylines this season (there's a few but this one takes the cake) and is a big factor as to why I'm not really sympathetic with Samsa this season despite the rape and everything.

She signed up for this. Even if she didn't know how sadistic Ramsay was, she knows what the Boltons did to her family and the sordid history of that house. She knew she was going to marry a Bolton and that would presumably imply laying in bed with him, probably in a not very tender way given the Bolton's rep.

And she went along with it anyway... Because she is Dark Samsa and she will destroy the Boltons from within! >:O
Yeah seriously, fuck the samsa storyline this season.

That and the fact they arrived at the same exact moment as the (inexplicably) murderous Sand Snakes just made for high comedy. I expected Benny Hill to start blaring.

That scene just needed a scooby doo chase montage as the 2 groups run around the watergardens with princess Myrcella in tow. Also that epic fight choreography, there was a few GIFS floating around the internet showing just how horribad it was, of which this is only one I could find on short notice: https://static.fjcdn.com/gifs/Sandsnakes+more+like+cringe+snakes_12324b_5550470.gif

 

[Terminal Blue]

Or you make educated guesses based on the information that the show provides you with, which I'm doing right know. Your reaction to Sansa going to Bolton was that it was crazy and shitty writing (which really sounds quite frustrating). My reaction was that it was really clever; another feather in the hat of our devious friend Petyr Baelish.

I agree. I think based on what we've been told in the show there is no reason to suspect its a bad idea at all.

Furthermore, Littlefinger in the series is a much more gothic character. His ambition is much more extreme and obsessive, to the point that there doesn't seem to be an actual endpoint to it.. Series Littlefinger clearly isn't going to be satisfied by having a nice title and spending the rest of his life brofisting his powerful allies and finding money for them when they need it, he seems to be playing a much more dangerous game and one to which there is conceivably no end.

In a way, this is quite clever and well observed and as someone who likes gothic fiction conventions I think it's pretty cool. There is no place for Littlefinger in the social order. Strengthening the Tyrells or the Lannisters isn't actually going to help him. He can only keep winning providing everyone else keeps losing.

 

[chikusho]

Or you make educated guesses based on the information that the show provides you with, which I'm doing right know. Your reaction to Sansa going to Bolton was that it was crazy and shitty writing (which really sounds quite frustrating). My reaction was that it was really clever; another feather in the hat of our devious friend Petyr Baelish.

I agree. I think based on what we've been told in the show there is no reason to suspect its a bad idea at all.

Furthermore, Littlefinger in the series is a much more gothic character. His ambition is much more extreme and obsessive, to the point that there doesn't seem to be an actual endpoint to it.. Series Littlefinger clearly isn't going to be satisfied by having a nice title and spending the rest of his life brofisting his powerful allies and finding money for them when they need it, he seems to be playing a much more dangerous game and one to which there is conceivably no end.

In a way, this is quite clever and well observed and as someone who likes gothic fiction conventions I think it's pretty cool. There is no place for Littlefinger in the social order. Strengthening the Tyrells or the Lannisters isn't actually going to help him, because he can only keep winning providing everyone else keeps losing.

I agree. That makes him all the more intriguing. If he really is gunning for the Iron Throne, what series of events would need to take place for him to actually gain it? Littlefinger has no claim whatsoever, so why would he ever be accepted as a ruler? Like, does he just want to put himself in a position that allows him to rule behind the scenes? Or is he planning to get the kingship by marrying into it? Or, is he planning to change the entire social order and get elected "President of the Seven Kingdoms"? Haha.
I mean, he's basically the reason behind the destabilization of Westeros; the true instigator of the war of the five kings. It's not that he would cause something like that without a clear goal in mind.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

It isn't a change from the books. In the books, it's the character of Jeyne Poole [http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Jeyne_Poole] (masquerading as Arya Stark) that is wed to Ramsay.

...Umm, do you realise that you contradicted yourself there? It is a change from the books because they use one of the main characters - one of the Stark survivors, no less - instead of a relatively insignificant side-character. If that isn't a change, I don't know what would be.

No, as I said the character from the book was incorporated into show with Sansa's role, thus the storyline is the same.

As an FYI, both the showrunners and GRRM have said many times that the two are different beasts. Game of Thrones has and will continue to deviate frequently from A Song of Ice and Fire. It is an adaptation, not a direct page to screen translation.

And as BloatedGuppy explained far better than I could, there is absolutely ZERO reason for Sansa to be there. None whatsoever. It is a ridiculously contrived change from the source material that does not appear to serve any purpose beyond providing shock value.

In the show, Sansa is there. It really is that simple. Brienne isn't where she is in the books. So too with Bromm. Lady Stoneheart is omitted entirely, Mance Raider is *actually* dead instead of pretend-dead. It is not ridiculously contrived...in the context of the show everything that happened did so more or less believably....except for Cersei who is so stupid it beggars belief that she hasn't had a twist in her fate sooner. But my understanding is that this isn't too different from the books either.

You know what makes this particularly awful? Jeyne did show up in the HBO show - there's a screenshot of her in your Wiki link. But they didn't do anything with her. The whole "issue" of having to introduce yet another character could've been solved all the way back in Season One by keeping Jeyne instead of making her a background character during the first few episodes. But I guess that required way too much foresight.

I can't tell what you are saying here. Are you suggesting that it would've been better if they had introduced Jeyne and had her rape scene with Ramsay instead of with Sansa filling the role? Because that wouldn't make sense...you don't mind that Jeyne is raped but Sansa is crossing the line?

 

[OhNoYouDidnt]

No, as I said the character from the book was incorporated into show with Sansa's role, thus the storyline is the same.

As an FYI, both the showrunners and GRRM have said many times that the two are different beasts. Game of Thrones has and will continue to deviate frequently from A Song of Ice and Fire. It is an adaptation, not a direct page to screen translation.

The storyline became different because they put Sansa Stark, one of the main characters, into a position she shouldn't have been in. Instead of marrying "Arya" (doesn't matter that it's not really Arya), the last surviving Stark child who isn't suspected of some heinous crime, Ramsay ends up marrying the woman who's under suspicion of regicide. Maybe she actually is a regicide in the show, I don't know.

The point is, this completely changes Sansa's storyline, it makes the Boltons look like fools and it has potential repercussions that wouldn't have been there if Ramsay had married Jeyne Poole instead.[footnote] i.e, Cersei finds out and takes Roose's Warden title away.[/footnote]

And I understand that the show is a different beast; that's why I don't watch it any more. The changes and deviations made by the showrunners have consistently been of an appalling quality, and this latest choice involving Sansa just further solidified my belief that they don't know how to properly write for these characters and this world. I'll continue waiting for The Winds of Winter. Hopefully it'll be out before the new decade.

In the show, Sansa is there. It really is that simple. Brienne isn't where she is in the books. So too with Bromm. Lady Stoneheart is omitted entirely, Mance Raider is *actually* dead instead of pretend-dead. It is not ridiculously contrived...in the context of the show everything that happened did so more or less believably....except for Cersei who is so stupid it beggars belief that she hasn't had a twist in her fate sooner. But my understanding is that this isn't too different from the books either.

Right, if you ask me, those are yet more examples of the showrunners' incompetence. Bronn's antics in Dorne in particular stand out as highly questionable creative decisions.

As for Cersei... Well, yes. She thinks she's incredibly smart, smarter than she actually is. You'd expect that there will be consequences for that at some point.

I can't tell what you are saying here. Are you suggesting that it would've been better if they had introduced Jeyne and had her rape scene with Ramsay instead of with Sansa filling the role? Because that wouldn't make sense...you don't mind that Jeyne is raped but Sansa is crossing the line?

My problem with the scene isn't that it involves rape. That's what Ramsay would do, because Ramsay is a monstrous, brutally sadistic man. It'd be ridiculous if they suddenly shied away from his monstrous nature after showing all those gratuitous Theon torture scenes. My problem is that it's Sansa who's the victim. It makes no sense for Sansa to be in this situation. Sansa shouldn't be there. The Boltons shouldn't want to marry off Ramsay to Sansa. Sansa's "I'm going to stop being a victim and I'm actually going to do stuff now" arc is ruined by relegating her to the victim role yet again. What makes me think so? If Sansa's story is going to follow Jeyne's from now on, as you seem to suggest, she's really not going to be doing anything pro-active at all.

If there was a sensible, logical explanation for Sansa to be there, I probably wouldn't have so much issues with this. But as it is, it really comes across to me as though the showrunners want to keep Sansa in the brutalised victim role for no real reason other than to give Sophie Turner more screentime than she normally would've received.

tl;dr: Sansa being raped isn't the problem, the problem is Sansa being there in the first place.

 

[Scarim Coral]

I suppose it is rape per say since Sansa wasn't really consent to it?
I don't really remember it other than Ramsey saying he doesn't want to say it twice thus implying he was somewhat forceful to her (in saying so she could of said no but I suppose at this point she is intimidated by him).

Now I think about it more, yeah it is rape. I mean lets look back to Sansa first "marriage" to Tyrion. Tyrion respected her wish to not go through with it but in saying so Tyrion didn't wanted to marry her in the first place while Ramsey wanted to marry her for the most part.

 

[WhiteNachos]

I was kinda hoping someone else would open this can of worms but anyway here goes.

I briefly glanced at a click bait article about how game of thrones played off the rape scene just for the lolz and what scum bags the producers were for having a rape scene "lightly" added for pure entertainment value which raised a few questions.

For starters was it rape? And I instantly feel like shit for asking that question because I think we all know she wasn't exactly thrilled with the circumstances but when you start talking about these kinds of royal arranged marriages based on convenience there starts to be a kinda grey area between rape and just having a disgusting forced husband that you reluctantly sleep with because it's your duty.

The next question is about rape as entertainment.

You're on a forum for video games, most video games derive their entertainment from violence. So trying to act like rape is questionable seems a bit hypocritical.

That aside, I don't see the big deal. We've had schadenfreude in entertainment for eons, violence for centuries and we're worried rape crosses the line? We've already had torture and mutilation (sexual and not) in game of thrones and these people kept watching.

The only difference now that I can see is that

A. It's happening to a woman that's a main character
and
B. The perpetrator is a character no one likes.

I found the scene fairly uncomfortable especially since Sansa is one of my favourite characters

Honest question: why?

 

[WhiteNachos]

TL;DR: They didn't DO anything with it. They basically went "Sansa got raped and that's bad because Ramsay is evil" Yeah, because I was struggling to get that with all the ways it's been crammed down our fucking throats.

Would you rather they cook up some bullshit probably-out-of-character reason for why he wouldn't rape her? I mean that scene seemed like the natural progression of the scenes thusfar.

 

[Erttheking]

TL;DR: They didn't DO anything with it. They basically went "Sansa got raped and that's bad because Ramsay is evil" Yeah, because I was struggling to get that with all the ways it's been crammed down our fucking throats.

Would you rather they cook up some bullshit probably-out-of-character reason for why he wouldn't rape her? I mean that scene seemed like the natural progression of the scenes thusfar.

I would've preferred that they never wrote this stupid scene in the first place. It's completely and utterly contrived and doesn't mesh with the plot. Just like half the scenes in the show so far. Really the series has just gone down the drain, completely ignoring entire sub plots from the books despite being desperate for content and trying to cram two books, 2,000 pages worth of material, into one season. While constantly adding their own made up stuff.

Really, this season is just a god damn trainwreck.

 

[Azure23]

I find it really strange that people are bent out of shape about a rape scene in a series where good, innocent people are murdered and flayed left and right.

If you can stomach people being brutalized for your entertainment, I don't see why rape is any different.

It probably has to do with the fact that her even being in winterfell, married to a Bolton makes no sense for her character, Littlefinger's character, or in universe logic. She is a suspected regicide, she's the most wanted person in westeros after Tyrion. The Boltons owe their power entirely to the Lannisters and wouldn't risk their relationship with them by marrying Ramsay to Sansa. As for Sansa's character, she wouldn't go through with it either, in the books she's contemplating suicide so she won't have to marry Joffrey, and hell, he only killed one member of her family. Likewise. Little finger is a smart man, basically the #2 spymaster in westeros. He knows about the. Boltons, they have a very widely known rep, Ramsay especially. He legitimately cares about Sansa (after all she is the spitting image of a woman he never got over) and despises the Boltons for killing Catelyn. At this point they've simply replaced Sansa for another character entirely for no reason other than that the writers "loved the Jeyne Poole plot line" which imo is creepy as fuck considering it's pretty inconsequential to the plot and overall pretty disgusting.

See most people angry about the scene are angry not because it's a rape scene, but because it makes no sense in universe, the fact that the show regularly uses rape for cheap shock or even background elements (crasters keep) just adds fuel to the fire.

 

[Terminal Blue]

But the Boltons wouldn't want to marry Sansa, she's a suspected regicide!

Do the Boltons know?

Okay.. ravens, but seriously.. First of all, and this is a broader peeve so let's deal with it first, the ravens make absolutely no sense. You may as well go through the entire book series and replace all mention of "raven" with the word "cellphone" because that's what they are. They're a magical way for people to communicate over long distances when they shouldn't be able to.

Carrier pigeons work because some breeds of pigeons have an innate instinct to return to the same nest in order to breed. Precisely how they do it is still not completely known, but regardless they can and its pretty amazing and was very useful at one point. Ravens are likewise pretty amazing animals which can perform many feats of intelligence, but they a) do not have a homing instinct and b) even if they were some magical breed of homing ravens, would not be able to understand where they were supposed to go. Unless a maester has a raven trained to fly to every location in Westeros, they're not going to be able to use them to communicate in the fashion they are shown to.

Secondly, suspending disbelief on the magical corvids, has everyone been told that Sansa is a suspected regicide? To my memory (which may be wrong) it doesn't seem to have come up in any conversation that this is public knowledge, furthermore, even assuming it is public knowledge down in King'd Landing, why would the Boltons (or anyone in the North) be told? What's the message going to be? "hey, you know that girl who is technically the rightful heir to your stupid "king in the north" title and who we'd effectively been keeping hostage.. well, we lost her. I guess we're dumb like that!"

If you're going purely by rational logic, it makes no sense to tell anyone. Tyrion took the fall, and his assumed responsibility at least makes the Lannisters look semi-competent as well as getting rid of a family member noone liked. Even Cersei doesn't actually seem interested in the idea of bringing Sansa to justice so much as just having her tortured and killed, and generally you don't need to tell anyone you're doing that.

Sure, this is speculation here.. but let's consider one thing. The Boltons don't seem to know that Sansa is already married, which means they presumably don't know that Tyrion is alive.

Maybe something in the books contradicts this, but then.. cellphone ravens. Books can be pretty dumb too.

Also in "things in the books that totally don't make sense", Dorne. Just.. Dorne. A fiercely independent country whose own succession system basically ensures it would, in reality, almost certainly cease to be independent within a few generations, because inheritence =/= lineality.

 

[Silvanus]

Carrier pigeons work because some breeds of pigeons have an innate instinct to return to the same nest in order to breed. Precisely how they do it is still not completely known, but regardless they can and its pretty amazing and was very useful at one point. Crows are likewise pretty amazing animals which can perform many feats of intelligence, but they a) do not have a homing instinct and b) even if they were some magical breed of homing crows, would not be able to understand where they were supposed to go. Unless a maester has a crow trained to fly to every location in Westeros, they're not going to be able to use them to communicate in the fashion they are shown to.

Spoiler: The Winds of Winter Spoilers

There are significant limitations for individual Ravens, which are only gone into in depth in the Theon preview chapter we have for The Winds of Winter. Essentially, individual Ravens cannot go wherever their masters want: they are usually trained for single locations (or two). When a Lord is said to "send a Raven", it doesn't mean "send any Raven to X"; it means, "use the Raven trained to go to X".

 

[Terminal Blue]

Spoiler: The Winds of Winter Spoilers

There are significant limitations for individual Ravens, which are only gone into in depth in the Theon preview chapter we have for The Winds of Winter. Essentially, individual Ravens cannot go wherever their masters want: they are usually trained for single locations (or two). When a Lord is said to "send a Raven", it doesn't mean "send any Raven to X"; it means, "use the Raven trained to go to X".

Thanks, that's actually been bugging me for a while.. You can probably tell.

 

[Loonyyy]

snip

Having been a while since I've read the books, the specifics are a bit hazy, but instead of Sansa, Ramsay is meant to be marrying:

Spoiler

Arya. Specifically, as Arya is still missing, they pretend that Jeyne Poole, a minor side character, is Arya instead, to take control of the remaining Stark lands and holdings. Which neatly sums up any problem with Sansa's supposed responsibility for Joffrey's death, and doesn't involve Sansa making the hike to Winterfell for yet another detour from the books.

Basically, this is just another detour from the books, that's kinda pointless, quite stupid, and not particularly conducive to the plot, and will require yet more rewrites and deviations in future. And it involves having a major POV character being raped, when they're ostensibly on an arc where they learn to be authoritative and stand up for themselves, though in the mould of Littlefinger.

It's rather like the Jaime/Cersei scene in the thematic inconsistency. Jaime is meant to be on an arc where he learns a sort of honour and nobility, leading to his greater interest in the Kingsguard, and largely influenced by his interactions with Brienne, before he sends her to continue trying to save the Stark girls, though they're on the side of his family's enemies. And then he rapes his sister beside the corpse of their incest son. Completely pointless change.

 

[Azure23]

But the Boltons wouldn't want to marry Sansa, she's a suspected regicide!

Do the Boltons know?

If you're going purely by rational logic, it makes no sense to tell anyone. Tyrion took the fall, and his assumed responsibility at least makes the Lannisters look semi-competent as well as getting rid of a family member noone liked. Even Cersei doesn't actually seem interested in the idea of bringing Sansa to justice so much as just having her tortured and killed, and generally you don't need to tell anyone you're doing that.

Sure, this is speculation here.. but let's consider one thing. The Boltons don't seem to know that Sansa is already married, which means they presumably don't know that Tyrion is alive.

Maybe something in the books contradicts this, but then.. cellphone ravens. Books can be pretty dumb too.

Also in "things in the books that totally don't make sense", Dorne. Just.. Dorne. A fiercely independent country whose own succession system basically ensures it would, in reality, almost certainly cease to be independent within a few generations, because inheritence =/= lineality.

The Boltons know, it's been months since Sansa's escape and every major lord in westeros has spies in Kings Landing. The death of Joffrey and the disappearance of Tyrion and Sansa was widely publicized with massive rewards offered for both of them. Likewise they know Sansa is married, as it has been even longer since that occurred. Cersei is incredibly paranoid and spends most of her arc during this time seeing the influence of Tyrion and Sansa everywhere, she sees them as equal partners in the murder of her son and goes so far as to assume every misfortune that befalls her as the machinations of them. As for Dorne, it's not independent, it's a constituent kingdom of the Iron Throne, one of "the seven kingdoms." the rulers only style themselves as "prince" or "princess" because that's the Rhoyner way and it's their tradition. They still pay taxes to the iron throne. I don't really know what you mean by their succession system, the eldest child of the current ruler inherits the kingdom. Man or woman eldest child inherits, if the ruler has no children the next eldest sibling inherits, if there are no siblings then they can appoint a successor. This is simply the latest really dumb move on the show runners part, I'm kinda surprised to see so many people defend it. Though the people doing the defending don't really have much to compare the show to so I can understand it I guess.

 

[Laughing Man]

The whole Boltons marrying Sansa to Ramsay despite her being wanted for regicide is actually explained and while it isn't as clean and straight forward as the books solution it does make sense.

Firstly the Boltons like everyone else just want power, they don't care how they get it, marrying the rightful heir to the North pretty much gives them the North. How the other Lords sees it is up to them but I suspect they will go with the ones that don;t agree will side with Stannis, the Karstarks for example and will no doubt be smashed when they try to attack Winterfell during Winter leaving only those that while they may not like the Boltons aren't willing to rise up against someone who by marriage has the legit claim.

Second Baelish actually says in one of the episodes that the last time the North was raised for war behind one leader and one cause they over threw one of the most powerful houses of the time (The Targareans.) The Boltons believe that by being legitimately attached to the heir to the North they could raise the North and over throw the Iron Throne.

Third why do they care. Again it's explained quite a few times that with Winter just round the corner, the death of Tywin and the distance involved that the Iron Throne just doesn't have the power or resource to march on Winterfell. Why would they fear the wroth of a potential enemy who doesn't have the power to do anything. They actually gain far far more by being married to the legit air to the North than they do by supporting some rapidly decaying house in the South.

Let's remember that Sansa running to Cersei and telling her about her father's plans to depart Kings Landing no doubt played a massive roll in the events that have gone on.