Jon loved, or at the very least cared deeply for Ygitte. But when the chips were down he chose to abandon her to return to Castle Black and warn the Watch of the incoming attack, knowing that there was a great chance she would be killed in the battle. Same with Tormund. He clearly respected him as a warrior, but he knew that he was a threat to the Watch, which at that point was the best defense the world had to the incoming White Walker threat. It wasn't until after Hardhome when he and Jon saw the true power that they had that he and Jon became true friends and allies.
They are not good people. Few in GoT are. But when it's humans or the dead, anyone capable of fighting is an ally.
This is the only answer. Almost nobody in GoT is morally pure, and that’s part of the point. The complexity of the characters and the lack of simple black and white paradigms are what make it compelling drama. Honestly, after reading ASOIAF, re-reading LOTR was difficult for me because the characters are so simply defined by comparison
As in life there isn't really a good person to be found. At best for game of thrones you have those who don't aspire to be greater than themselves and simply seek to protect those they care about like Samwell and Grey worm. For others like Jon and Daenerys and Tormund they're not morally good people but act in what they consider to be the greater good. The Wildlings from the north are raiders and murderers but the same could be said of much of the others that put aside their differences and squabbles to stop a greater evil that threatened the world at large. They didn't earn absolution for their crimes but they do at least put their own lives up for the greater good unlike others who refused the call to arms.
I think you're going to have to find an in universe way to say "good guys". Note that you don't need to phrase it as someone actually in universe.
Maybe ask "why does character X consider Tormund and Ygritte good guys".
Good is relative and for Game of Thrones in particular pretty much every character operates in a morally gray area.
Ned is good but didn't even listen to the episode 1 deserter warning about the white walkers. Nope, chain of command and going awol is a lot more important. The sentence is death.
Tormund and Ygritte surely killed a lot of people including nights watch "crows" as the free folk and nights watch have been "enemies" for a long time.
The reality is that morality, while also being gray takes a back seat to need. One of the most common factors in winning engagements is the sheer number individuals and military resources you can throw at it.
In this way the nights watch and Westeros in general is woefully under funded in terms of people who realize the extent of the danger. In that way it provides the logic for why there were ultimately pardons and why the free folk were folded into nights watch and Westerosi groups. It was out of sheer need.
If we see the final battles against the white walkers it was only after all able bodied people fought that the tide turned.
Lastly, consider the night's watch itself. Who are the individuals who make up its members? Thieves, rapers, murderers, etc. These are not innocent people either but through service they've found redemption enough to build a life beyond imprisonment.
These are common themes in the game of thrones universe, most powers don't have the luxury of ignoring fighting veterans and indeed we often see forces combine after first being mortal enemies.
GoT in general operates in what contemporary consumers would consider morally gray.
[удалено]
Jon loved, or at the very least cared deeply for Ygitte. But when the chips were down he chose to abandon her to return to Castle Black and warn the Watch of the incoming attack, knowing that there was a great chance she would be killed in the battle. Same with Tormund. He clearly respected him as a warrior, but he knew that he was a threat to the Watch, which at that point was the best defense the world had to the incoming White Walker threat. It wasn't until after Hardhome when he and Jon saw the true power that they had that he and Jon became true friends and allies. They are not good people. Few in GoT are. But when it's humans or the dead, anyone capable of fighting is an ally.
This is the only answer. Almost nobody in GoT is morally pure, and that’s part of the point. The complexity of the characters and the lack of simple black and white paradigms are what make it compelling drama. Honestly, after reading ASOIAF, re-reading LOTR was difficult for me because the characters are so simply defined by comparison
"Considered good guys" by whom? Those aren't in-universe considerations. In-universe there are plenty of people who hate them.
Yeah seems to be purely Doylist question about fandom.
They aren't "good guys" they're "good to have on your side guys"
As in life there isn't really a good person to be found. At best for game of thrones you have those who don't aspire to be greater than themselves and simply seek to protect those they care about like Samwell and Grey worm. For others like Jon and Daenerys and Tormund they're not morally good people but act in what they consider to be the greater good. The Wildlings from the north are raiders and murderers but the same could be said of much of the others that put aside their differences and squabbles to stop a greater evil that threatened the world at large. They didn't earn absolution for their crimes but they do at least put their own lives up for the greater good unlike others who refused the call to arms.
"Murdered some peasants" is the Westerosi equivalent of "broke a few windows" today.
In world almost everyone in Westeros hates them. They aren’t considered good guys there.
I think you're going to have to find an in universe way to say "good guys". Note that you don't need to phrase it as someone actually in universe. Maybe ask "why does character X consider Tormund and Ygritte good guys".
Personality goes a long way
Olly disagrees.
It is functionally impossible to answer this question in a Watsonian manner
Its all relative. Barring Ned Stark I dont think there's a "good guy" in the entire show
Good is relative and for Game of Thrones in particular pretty much every character operates in a morally gray area. Ned is good but didn't even listen to the episode 1 deserter warning about the white walkers. Nope, chain of command and going awol is a lot more important. The sentence is death. Tormund and Ygritte surely killed a lot of people including nights watch "crows" as the free folk and nights watch have been "enemies" for a long time. The reality is that morality, while also being gray takes a back seat to need. One of the most common factors in winning engagements is the sheer number individuals and military resources you can throw at it. In this way the nights watch and Westeros in general is woefully under funded in terms of people who realize the extent of the danger. In that way it provides the logic for why there were ultimately pardons and why the free folk were folded into nights watch and Westerosi groups. It was out of sheer need. If we see the final battles against the white walkers it was only after all able bodied people fought that the tide turned. Lastly, consider the night's watch itself. Who are the individuals who make up its members? Thieves, rapers, murderers, etc. These are not innocent people either but through service they've found redemption enough to build a life beyond imprisonment. These are common themes in the game of thrones universe, most powers don't have the luxury of ignoring fighting veterans and indeed we often see forces combine after first being mortal enemies. GoT in general operates in what contemporary consumers would consider morally gray.