As stated in this answer about Game of Thrones fire can burn any Targaryen.

If that is the case, why doesn't fire hurt Daenerys?

In one of the episodes of season 1 or season 2, Daenerys says Viserys is not a true heir to the throne as he got burnt. Why did she say that?

  • 4
    The answer you linked is based on the books, but this is one of many times where the show clearly deviates from the books. Daenerys gets burned in the books and GRRM said outright that she isn't fire-proof. In the show, she holds the hot dragon egg that burns her handmaiden and her plot against the Khals revolves around her fire resistance. This ability is limited to her, however, as her brother and Jon both are affected normally by heat.
    – DKu
    Apr 21, 2019 at 20:27
  • 1
    Please limit your question to one question rather than multiple all scrambled together.
    – Daeron
    Apr 24, 2019 at 13:18

4 Answers 4


The answer to your first question is that we simply do not know. No explanation has been given for her apparent resistance to fire. We do know that this is not an ability imparted on all Targaryens, as both Jon and Viserys are affected by heat.

As for the line "fire cannot kill a dragon," this is misinterpreted to mean "fire cannot kill a Targaryen," adding to the confusion about Daenerys' fire resistance. This is not commentary on her own ability. Instead, she is refuting Viserys' previous claims to be "the dragon" -

No! You cannot touch me! I am the dragon! I am the dragon! I want my crown! Ahh!

Viserys also previously used the phrase "wake the dragon" when threatening Daenerys. At first she is frightened of him, but comes to recognize his weakness over time. When she says he wasn't a dragon, she is accepting that her brother was never what she thought he was.


Targaryens aren't fire-proof.

According to GRRM, Daenarys is special.

Granny: Do Targaryens become immune to fire once they "bond" to their dragons?

George_RR_Martin: Granny, thanks for asking that. It gives me a chance to clear up a common misconception. TARGARYENS ARE NOT IMMUNE TO FIRE! The birth of Dany's dragons was unique, magical, wonderous, a miracle. She is called The Unburnt because she walked into the flames and lived. But her brother sure as hell wasn't immune to that molten gold.

Revanshe: So she won't be able to do it again?

George_RR_Martin: Probably not.

As to whether Dany is completely fire-proof there is some further, very detailed reading over on Reddit.

  • 7
    But didn't she do it again with the old Dothraki wives? Apr 21, 2019 at 23:50
  • 1
    Daenerys' statement Viserys is not a true heir to the throne as he got burnt is conflict with GRRM's TARGARYENS ARE NOT IMMUNE TO FIRE! Apr 22, 2019 at 6:41
  • @NullPointerException That's what happens with POV chapters. GRRM routinely uses a little trick called "unreliable narrator". Dany might in fact honestly believe that Viserys wasn't a true Targaryen because he burnt, but that simply isn't true. It's not just Viserys, there's a long list of Targs burnt to death. In any case, IDK what she said in the show, But in the books she thought to herself He was no dragon, Dany thought, curiously calm. Fire cannot kill a dragon. So Viserys might have been her brother but he wasn't "worthy" or a Dragon according to her.
    – Aegon
    Apr 22, 2019 at 8:31
  • 4
    @DavidGrinberg, that never happened in GRRM's books, and probably won't happen at all when books would be finished.
    – user28434
    Apr 22, 2019 at 9:18
  • 1
    @DavidGrinberg - Being able to withstand enough heat to kill normal people might not necessarily mean being completely immune. Might be a sweet spot between when they die and when she starts taking damage when it's time to get out of Dodge. Apr 29, 2019 at 20:58

Martin has made a point to emphasize that Targaryens, including Daenerys, are not immune to fire. Khal Drogo's pyre was more than just a cremation — Daenerys was burning the witch Mirri Maz Duur. This blood sacrifice, along with the magic of her dragon's eggs, created a perfect storm of sorcery that left her unburnt.

And that's why she was the mother of dragons and fire can't burn her.


The question was answered, but one part of your question hasn't really been addressed yet:

In one of the episodes of season 1 or season 2, Daenerys says Viserys is not a true heir to the throne as he got burnt. Why did she say that?

Keep in mind who Danaerys is at that point in time. She is barely a teenager, pretty much raised by Vyserys' arrogance about their dragon heritage and symbolism, and Illyrio's brownnosing (which effectively reinforces Vyserys' boasting).

Vyserys very much uses the "Targaryens are dragons, Targaryens are fire personified" rhetoric, and then ends up getting burnt. The logical conclusion to seeing Vyserys burnt is that his claims were never correct to begin with, but Dany instead concludes that Vyserys' claims were true but did not apply to Vyserys himself.

It makes sense from Dany's perspective, as she never burns herself. This is shown in the pilot episode where Dany enters the hot bath which should burn her but doesn't.

Vyserys' rhetoric was just that, and unbeknowst to Vyserys Dany actually has the powers which Vyserys claims Targaryens have. It makes sense that Dany grows up believing in Vyserys' rhetoric.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .