Jump to content

omegaxis1

Member
  • Content Count

    3,901
  • Joined

  • Last visited

5 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Fire Emblem Game
    Awakening

Allegiance

  • I fight for...
    Ylisse

Recent Profile Visitors

3,384 profile views
  1. Pretty much this. I absolutely cannot stand when that happens in a Fog of War map. It ends up ruining everything. Combine that with a desert map, and you get Chapter 14 of Binding Blade, ie. arguably the most horrible and terrible map in the entire FE franchise.
  2. Yeah. So to any hypothetical scenario where Edelgard manages to do away with the Agarthans and just never tried to start a war? Well, Rhea would intervene in political affairs, using the Church's influence and authority to protect the nobles and Crests overall. Thing about political interferences is that they tend to take a LOT of time to sort over. And Rhea? She's got literally ALL the time. Edelgard doesn't. So, in the end, it is absolutely impossible for society to change and progress with Rhea running the Church.
  3. Exactly so. Rhea would have continued to try and come up with ways to revive Sothis. She has been obsessed with this for over a thousand years. Also, cardinal or advisor, it doesn't matter, because Rhea is the one that gets the final say. Regardless of how Byleth is, Rhea is unwilling to tolerate anyone that defies her will. The moment Byleth tries to protect Edelgard, Rhea loses it and calls him a failure, wanting nothing more than to kill him. She also gets very angry when Byleth refuses to hand over the Lance of Ruin. Rhea does not see Byleth as a person. He's just a jar, a container to hold Sothis's soul. It's only when she had five years to contemplate her mistakes that she finally accepted that her mother was gone. Without chaos, Rhea would have STILL believed that she can bring back her mother, and likely would have tried again. Had the attack not happened, Rhea would have simply kept Byleth close to her at all times. Simple as that. Whatever power Byleth gets, it isn't something that would match Rhea's. Rhea gets the final say. And Rhea is unwilling to accept any kinds of changes if it may very well undermine the power and authority of the Church. That's why she barred the printing press, the telescope, and the autopsies, because those technological advances would very well undermine the power the Church holds. Rhea defended House Gautier, who disowned Miklan that resulted in the Relic being stolen, by wanting to keep the incident of the Black Beast a secret, stating that they cannot have the nobles lost the trust of the commoners. And Rhea is obviously well aware that disowning kids in Faerghus for not bearing a Crest is common practice, as stated by Seteth. If there's any form of trying to make changes that would undermine or endanger the authority of the Church, Rhea would stop it. It's precisely because of that that Rhea WOULD have prevented Edelgard from making her changes. Edelgard wants to abolish nobility and remove the belief of divine right to rule. If Adrestia, the very nation founded by Seiros and Wilhelm, where there's the entire sacre where the archbishop must bear witness to the new Emperor, to do away with all that, it's something that would completely undermine the Church, the archbishop, and everything with them, and Rhea would have intervened politically with Edelgard had that been the case.
  4. Claude's story to deal with racism WOULD have been better had the Almyrans been an active helper in the war, rather than show up literally one chapter and leave immediately after. Would have given the players a chance for NPCs and such to comment about how maybe Almyrans aren't so bad or such. But nope. No NPC even mentions the Almyrans in VW after chapter 18.
  5. Keep in mind of context. This is a case where Rhea is only putting you in charge strictly because something could very well happen to her. And then, this decision is still only because Rhea still believed Byleth was Sothis and would become Sothis: In the end, she STILL thought that Byleth was going to turn into Sothis. That's the problem. Rhea believes that the only one that is fit to rule over Fodlan is Sothis. There would be no successor but Sothis for Rhea. Rhea was someone that was unable and unwilling to change until she's forced to. It takes five years of being removed from power and imprisoned before she finally got it in her head that she messed up and was wrong.
  6. That requires Rhea to CHANGE, which she ONLY does as a result of being imprisoned for 5 years. You missed the original point I made where Rhea is an IMMORTAL dragon. Someone that's actively inhibited humanity's ability to progress, much like how Nabateans inhibited humans after the Agarthan war. The thing that Fodlan brings about with Rhea is something that isn't possible in real life, ie. someone that has serious longevity. Rhea has been in control of the Church for over 1,100 years. There's a thing called stagnant leadership, because the longer you rule, the more unlikely you are willing to change how you rule over others. So with Rhea in charge, the Church would never change in a peaceful method. The other routes are hypocritically riding on the coattails of Edelgard's war.
  7. You're ignoring multiple factors. First, this is medieval times. Not modern society. And in medieval times, religion is VERY influential. You can see it in history books. Second, the three nations are all under the influence in politics by the Church. Third, Fodlan is xenobphobic as a result of the Seiros tenants, so outsiders won't really get to say anything. Anything in regards to how modern times have peaceful resolutions, it's ignoring the many factors that come to play and how Fodlan is not like your example.
  8. Well there you go. Has GLOBAL situations that benefitted it. But you're forgetting that Fodlan is a continent that is isolated from the rest of the world. Just like that, you're in two completely different scenarios. Fodlan can't be changed peacefully, especially when you remember that society is also being controlled by an immortal dragon, something real life lacks. And keep in mind that many revolutions were not purely peaceful. More often than not, war still came from it. Hell, even peaceful changes was STILL built from the blood and sacrifice of many people. THANK YOU! This is why I cannot truly side with the other lords. Dimitri's talk with Edelgard in Blue Lions is him saying that "surely" there was a way, but never once was this "way" ever expressed or explained. No one made any comments about what Edelgard COULD do, but throw this moral card about and acting like she's at fault for choosing to go through with it, but never once bother to bring about an actual alternative of how to change things peacefully.
  9. Agreed. This is Fire Emblem, not Avatar. In 3H's case, Rhea was someone that does NOT compromise when it comes to the Church or her beliefs. Just as this video tries to act like Edelgard had other options, they honestly try and ignore or overlook the many complex structure of the issues. Rhea was someone that kept Fodlan in stasis for over a thousand years. She impeded and inhibited humans from progressing, both on a technological and societal level. The recent Dream interview only confirms more about how dragons, after the Agarthan war, ruled over humanity and kept them from progressing, acting on their beliefs that this was the best way to prevent war. Thing is, suppressing something only makes something become worse later. This video immediately ignores context and tries to act out on meta knowledge, not realistic knowledge in the context of the story, cause it overlooks how Rhea only changed in non-CF routes because she had been imprisoned for five years, and had time to think about how badly she screwed up. It's not surprising for someone to be taken out of power and imprisoned to finally learn humility. And the fact that it tries to refer to the "Rhea did (Mostly) Nothing Wrong" vid that once more, people just try to insist Edelgard is objectively wrong, and ignores many forms of context. I'd love if someone could make debunk videos about that.
  10. Roku, being the Avatar, actually going around the world, learning the culture and befriending his masters, where he learns the other bending arts and understanding the culture, became a stronger person. But he was stubborn. He should have actually considered it. Had he done that, he could have gotten Sozin and worked with him to try and bring about PEACEFUL cultural exchange. Actually promote trade between nations, and learning what the others nations had. And you have to realize that doing nothing or being too stubborn to accept change is an evil that people love to overlook. "I did nothing, so I am innocent." If a kid is abandoned, left alone, and you do nothing to help, and let it be someone else's problem, and as a result, that kid grows up to be a serial killer. Had you chosen to act and help him, he'd have become a great person. But by choosing to do nothing, he became a killer. Hence why I bring up Einstein's quote. Roku had the power and ability, the choice even, to help bring Sozin's vision and beliefs to fruition through peaceful means. But because Roku chose to be stubborn and reject the possibility of change, it made Sozin walk a darker and more evil path.
  11. In the end, no one was willing to open up to one another. Everyone was closed off, consumed in their own beliefs and stubbornness. In fact, given how Fodlan acts, it seems almost like there's very little forms of actual communication between nations. Very little trust. Things needed to change.
  12. Dude, are you for real? Sozin proposed an idea to Roku. Roku adamantly rejected it. Sozin wanted Roku to at the very least consider the possibilities, and still Roku was being stubborn about it. And you are quick to ignore how even as a spirit, Roku was STILL stubborn that he would insist that Aang had to kill Zuko and separate the four nations, to the point that Aang severed his connection to Roku as a result at realizing how wrong Roku's thinking was. Roku refused to believe that the peace could exist if the four nations connected with one another. He believed they HAD to remain apart. But this is a VERY wrong way of thinking. By keeping the nations separate, you promote isolation, make people closed off on seeing opportunities to learn. The Avatar has to learn the four elements, and therefore has to explore the world and learn the culture of the world so that he can keep balance. This is literally why cultural exchange should have been considered. Sozin's original ideals WERE right, but Roku stubbornly and adamantly refused to believe in it, but Roku was WRONG to believe that. And yeah, I can never forgive Sozin for committing genocide, much like how I can never forgive Faerghus for committing genocide on Duscur, but guess what? Roku is very much part of the reason why Sozin decided to resort to war for the sake of his ideals.
  13. You are talking about the Church of Seiros, which is what the majority of the nations and people as a whole support due to it being the religion of the continent. Religion + Medieval times = A BIG DEAL! Yeah, everyone is stubborn. It isn't just Edelgard and Rhea. Dimitri is consumed by revenge and refuses to listen to anything until he has his redemption in AM. Claude is unwilling to trust others because of xenophobia in Fodlan until he learns to trust Byleth.
  14. Did... did you literally miss what I said? I feel you purposefully ignored what I said and took everything out of context. I literally stated that what they did was wrong and they had to be stopped. What I also stated was that Roku should not have rejected what Sozin said, but instead took that as an opportunity to make peaceful cultural exchange. Suddenly, had that been the case, no war, no genocide, but peaceful change. But Roku was adamant about keeping the four nations divided, which caused Sozin to try to force change. There is a cause and effect to everything. Every action you make has consequences. Hence why it's utterly stupid to act like doing nothing is a righteous act when it's very much evil. Read Einstein's quote: Doing nothing, allowing things to stay as they are, it's what causes others to act. Roku choosing to do nothing and instead rejecting Sozin's noble beliefs that they should try to spread their culture around made is what caused Sozin to harbor hatred and anger, making him grow resentful, prideful, and arrogant, believing that he should do it. Roku COULD have actually accepted what Sozin did, and allowed it to be a peaceful cultural exchange. Could have opened up things. Next time, pay attention to the context of what I said before you start making up bullshit, okay?
  15. Here's the book of Seiros page: Hanneman and Edelgard's support: The entire Imperial bloodline is based on how Seiros bestowed her Crest onto Wilhelm, who became the first emperor. Then we get about how Chapter 5 with Miklan: Then after the event: Apply some logic overall. Rhea's been in charge of the Church of Seiros for over a thousand years. She is the one that placed the doctrines that people follow and abide by, and is the one that distributed the Relics to nobles in the first place. Like, how much evidence do you need?
×
×
  • Create New...