<<Spoilers>>  I'm on my third full-series read-through and currently in Chapter 29: The Festival of Birds.  I am 45 years old, read this book for the first time when I was in my 20's, and read it a couple of times in my 30's.  The one thing I've concluded is this book feels a bit more rapey than I remember.  Yeah, I think we can all agree Mat was straight-up raped by Tylin, but what never caught my attention is I think Shaidar Haran raped Moghedien.  It doesn't come right out and say that, but I think RJ was trying to convey that SH, like lesser Myyrdraal, do their worst to their victims, and I don't think it was merely a beating.  That's my interpretation anyway.  

As for the ending, a competent writer does know how their story is going to begin/end roughly.  While there can be some pivots, you tend to stick to the structure.  When you know how things will end, you get wonderful things like WoT, Mistborn, and Breaking Bad (major pivots were made, but the overall arch remained.)  When you don't know how you will end it, you get Lost, The Dark Tower, The new trilogy...  ...Hell...  ...anything JJ Abrams touches, The Dragging Dead, X-Files, and the poster child of bad endings-- Game of Thrones.  Which is very interesting to me.  Has GRRM committed that cardinal sin of not having the ending to ASoIaF already constructed?  Or did he just want the TV show to move on its own, and reserve his book ending for the readers? Or is he feverishly looking for a new ending seeing how poorly the show's was received?  Sorry, I am responding to a decade-old post and digressing, but man-- bad endings to good stories are the worst.  You just wasted my time.

I was a member of this forum a billion years ago, long forgot my log-in, and quite frankly, I have kept the WoT on the shelf since I finished two read-throughs for AMoL at release.  With the TV show becoming closer to a thing, I got curious and dipped back in.  I'm in the first third of the The Dragon Reborn, and decided to check out the old forums, and this thread interested me.  I think a lot of the contributions sound interesting (save the one suggestion that Moraine come back early.  Love the character, but no way.  Deeply screws with Rand's arc, and it was such a triumphant event when she strode into that tent.  Such a goose bump moment.  It was worth the decade-plus long wait.  So good.)

As for what I would like to see in the tv show: don't skimp on the Maidens.  They will translate to TV well.  They are badasses.  They are funny.  They are self-aware (how can you not love a crew who actively cheer on those who burn them the best with insults.)   Rand's terrible handling of them was good storytelling.  So please, give them their full due.

As for what needs to be tempered, is well...  ...Nynaeve's temper.  If she is chewing rocks in almost every scene, it will get old quick in 1-hour episodes.  God help her if they mention her beating disagreeable people with her stick, or 'dosing them with sheep's tongue root' when she is off camera.  They don't need to gut her personality, but crank it back some, or she will be a roundly despised character.  The braid tugging is prone to get old super quick if over done.  I don't think RJ handled her character all that great to begin with, and while she did eventually develop, to me it was a loooooong static line before a sudden spike in her arc.  She didn't have an arc.  She had a hockey stick.  While it won't be Joffrey level, I'm afraid the hate will be real.  She is too important of a character for people to groan when she is on screen.

Lastly, slight OT, but let me get the casting thing off my chest.  I do think some people are getting a bit overly virtue-signally about the whole thing.  From the books, and the interview played at the end of the first few books, I was convinced The Two Rivers was rural England.  Caemlyn is Camelot/London.  So of course, fair complexions was in my mind's eye.  I think the same goes for a lot of people.  With every book adaptation comes that jarring moment when the screen does not portray what has been the brain's portrayal. Now consider the brain has had 30 years to cement that, yeah some people are going to think this is off.   Regardless of what the difference is, some book readers always get rabid about how it's different on the screen. I'd just request others not be so quick to scream 'bigotry!'  That's probably not it.  Besides, if the product bears out that the casting was done well, none of it will matter to anyone sane anyway.