Tenzen12
-
Posts
1,553 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Tenzen12
-
-
26 minutes ago, Ivan Tridelan said:
@Tenzen12: Claude says to Byleth if you talk to him in prologue "I didn't know there would be mercenaries in this village. I guess Lady Luck is smiling on me"
Edelgard knowing about the mercenary company is an interesting idea since it would drastically reduce the risk of her getting killed OR causing needless deaths and if her primary goal was getting rid of the unknown professor-to-be then it works out well.
Doesn't change Claude was first one to take off and Edie with Di after him. It could be true he was lucky enough to ennact Edies plan without even noticing or... it could be scheme.
-
1 hour ago, LegendOfLoog said:
Right, but they attained that wealth through the Caste System to begin with. There wouldn’t be as dramatic a wealth gap between commoners and nobles without the system Rhea sanctioned and continues to perpetuate through the Church of Seiros. The first step to reducing that gap is abolishing nobility, and after that, establishing a meritocratic system is the best path to leveling the playing field. I personally don’t think that allowing a corrupt system to continue is ok because “well, they’ll still have money.” Eliminating noble status is the first step of many, but it is a necessary one.
Regarding the Church of Seiros, even if they allowed revolutions to occur before, none of those revolutions fundamentally changed anything with the relationship between commoners and nobility. And as long as Rhea is focused on reviving her mother, I don’t think she’s particularly interested in making any reforms on her own. This is supported by the game itself. She had literally 1000 years to try and change the system, but she only allows reform to occur after a bloody war and the failed resurrection of Sothis. I also think you’re misinterpreting how much power Edelgard actually has here. Despite her saying to TWSITD’s faces that she wants to kill them basically, they do nothing. Why? Because she isn’t actually a threat in Part 1. She has no real control over them, so saying that she “let” them do something is inaccurate. Her claims that she would have stopped them in her Flame Emperor persona are false and, in my opinion, stem from her dislike of losing control. She’s marching to their drum in Part 1, not the other way around.
Your last sentence is more or less my point. None of us know what would have happened if everyone held hands and walked into the sunset together. That includes the characters in this story as well. Edelgard doesn’t even know if anyone would agree with her in the first place. She has no reason to believe that Rhea will be totally cool with giving up all her power and abolishing the Church she established. Similarly, she has no reason to believe that most of the currently entrenched nobility would just give up their privileged status, something deeply ingrained to their identity. This applies to Dimitri and Claude as well since she plans to basically take control of the entire continent. Regardless of her reasons, it wouldn’t make much sense for the two heirs of said countries to just hand away their position on words alone. As a result, she relies on military strength. This is fairly rational imo, and I can’t see why she would go about it any other way.
Honestly, I’m still not even sure killing them was the intention of hiring Kostas. I’m assuming Thales would be down with killing them as it would make his life a lot easier in the long run, but instead of TWISTD, she relies on some random bandits? There are some interesting nuggets hidden here and there that may support this. For example, there’s an odd line at the Monastery where Ferdinand wonders if one of the Lords knew that there were mercenaries in Remire. And when Edelgard with her mask confronts Kostas, she doesn’t appear particularly angry that he failed to kill them. She seems frustrated that Rhea made Byleth a professor. There was an interesting theory on Reddit that said it was all a plot to replace the unnamed professor that was originally supposed to teach. Caspar makes a comment where he expected Jeritza to replace the missing professor, and the idea here is that was Edelgard’s plan. After all, having your underling (the Death Knight) as your Professor would be convenient. Of course, this is all a theory, but it seems fairly plausible to me. Unfortunately, the game doesn’t say anything explicit about it, so we’ll never know.
I don’t think that’s true. What I’m saying here is that her motivations are consistent across the routes. As a result, it makes sense that in a similar position, she would make a similar decision. Let’s assume for a second that she does take Dimitri’s hand. Do you think she’ll ever have power again to accomplish her goals? Assuming she doesn’t die from her monster transformation or experimented Crests, I can’t imagine that even Dimitri would just let her roam freely after throwing the entire continent into war. In that case, she’d be imprisoned like she was in her childhood, but this time, there’s no way out. So either way, her losing is essentially death. Her staying alive would also embolden any remaining Empire and TWISTD forces, so her dying is actually beneficial to ending the war.
I consider her a great character not because of her moral goodness though. I just think calling her a “vile woman” oversimplifies her character massively. Actions do not exist in a vacuum, so regardless of the moral uncleanliness of some of her choices, I don’t think it’s so simple. You’re right that doesn’t really make your interpretation “bad” though. I just strongly disagree with it.
-Real world shows that gap between nobility na commoners is unrelated to magical crests. Even in Fodlan majority nobles don't have crests in first place.
-Rulers of Fodlan are ones who should make reforms and Rhea isn't one. Why should somoene who hold no territory and have no right to collect taxes, make reforms on territories of people who do?
-Well yeah stuff like abolishing church or nobility in countries she has no buisiness to interfere with wouldn't exactly be most warmly accepted ideas, but getting support for own reform on own territory is something that can be talked through. If talks fail there is always room for violence, but honestly doing stuff through war is least productive and most costy way to make change. Any sane person would go for it as last option, not first.
- She literally hired him to kill "as much noble brats as possible" and it's pretty obvious it was Claude who knew about Jeralt mercenary band. He was one who decided run away toward village, Dimitri and Edie followed after him. He is also one fairly used attempts to his life irc so it make sense he would do homeworks.
-
1 hour ago, Crysta said:
Really? Because that epilogue paints Gloucester in a more positive light than what the Ignatz/Raphael paralogue would suggest. He eventually accepts the marriage and even compliments his son for his choice.
Seconded. I get morally gray, strident traditionalist vibes from what little is revealed about him... and his interactions with Claude and Lorenz would be interesting.
Alliance politics really should have been explored more.
In regards to re: Edelgard stepping down, I'm legitimately surprised she was comfortable with handing rulership to someone other than Byleth, due to her obvious trust issues. But it is what it is, I guess.
Well, he certainly have good points, though I think those merchant wouldn't feel any better about it. Point was if he was left in charge, who else was?
-
No, except one ending when she decide that sensei is more important then Fodlan she rule for years and years and doesn't retire until... it's time to retire. And yes she is completely and unlimitelly on top. Who she chose to do her job afterward is unrelated whether she is authoritarian, (but it should be noted all her friends get position after their parents. Including letting whole territory to be mannaged by Bernardetta for some reason)
Also I only said free market is only way to have non meritocracy without nepotism. It doesn't mean I think capitalism can be just implemented in Fodlan or that unhinged capitalim without regulations is good idea, just that there is no point of doing meritocracy in any other way, because that means certain failure.
-
Her system is lacking because it's meritocracy enforced by authoritarian system. Which basically means instant nepotism and whole system can go hell once emperor became corrupt. Even feudalism is better then that as monarch is limited by nobility while here he/she can just decide who will be in which positions. without any regard to anyone. Only way to reliably achieve meritocracy is free market as it's self-regulating (real free market still can end take adventage of poor and uneducated as any other kind of meritocracy , but it's less prone to nepotism at least).
49 minutes ago, CyberNinja said:You know, you could at least quote or mention me if you're going to respond so I can get the alert.
I sincerely doubt you take anyone who's disagreed with you in good faith, so why should I place any value in that? Other than the fact I was trying to steer the thread on to topic by reiterating some positions. However you seem to be unwilling to offer even the courtesy to back up any of your claims so how about this:
you start posting screenshots backing anything of what you've said and I'll get off your case? Let's start with:
who are the corrupt nobles she has placed in power, what evidence do you have to support this?
is it caspars father, who dies to save the lives of his soldiers
or are you going to make the argument about Ferdinand, who gains his position in all his endings in all routes because he is actually just that good at governing? Does Dimitri undermine his nonexistent democracy in doing so? How about Byleth, I suppose Claude is pretty terrible about creating an equal society if he entrusted ruling Fodlan to his teacher who only put his students in positions of power.
lindhart is able to cause an industrial revolution in Brigid in one of his endings, leonie and Felix can become so successful that they make themselves jobless as mercenaries. The end state of Fodlan is so determinate on who was recruited that you'd have to set some sort of parameters for us to judge it. What remains constant is that your students are the most competent, most deserving of merit, around.
I get that in the wonderful world of the modern western enforced peace we have this great love for democratic values but are you just going to work under the expectation that anything leading to democracy is an ultimate good thing? Do you really want to bow down to the popular opinion of the very isolationist, fanatically religious, and racist Fodlan? This is a medieval society, any democracy would be run by the wealthiest merchants, the landowners in the old nobility, and the religious demagogues who control the masses. It would at best be a secret oligarchy, a tyranny without a figurehead to throw down, the blame shifted to the people who voted the party into power. It would be ridiculously corrupt there just wouldn't be the possibility of it ever being revealed as such.
When it come corrupt nobles Count Gloucester come to mind. He was responsible for death of many merchants, he supported Empire during war in CE and retained his position. You can find it in Ignatz and Raphael paralogue and in Lorentz CF ending with Mercedes.
And no I don't think anything leading to democracy would be good thing, but peacful route it have no flaws. Dimitri itself actually focus on elimination of racism and in every route but CE where it's optional Claude survive and move to Almyra, which means there is no reason assume relationships between both countries wouldn't improve. Dimitri also explicitly give common people means partake in ruling, not merchants or nobles specifially. Well if merchant can afford bribe commoners to get what they want, that's perfectly fine though. It's commoner free will vote however they want and whatever reason.
And yes by very definition of word Rhea doesn't rule anything. To be able say that you would have to change meaning of that word. In arguments so far it's used as embelishment to make another points. So yes it's used dishonestly.
-
Again there is no evidence "terrible system" you speak of is result of Rhea decisions she made millennium ago. And to be honest I really have trouble see anyone mentioning "Rhea ruling Fodlan" having good faith.
Edelgard fault is her huge confirmation bias, once she hears anything that suit her, she instantly accept it and that isn't great combination with her strong nationalistic views and ambitions. Given she blame Church even for splitting Kingdom from Empire, it's very likely she would get easily manipulated into war regardless how much of actual truth she knows.
And what Edelgard fixed in the end? Fodlan is still full of local conflicts during her reign, corrupted nobles are in power by "merit" they showed during war and she established power structure most prone to corruption imaginable (well, after communism that is) on top of that she stopped Fodlan progress toward democracy for her generation.
Given how lacking her reforms are previous system was better in long run. Best way we can hope is that her "worthy successor" is really worthy and rebuilt Adrestia Empire power structure from scratch.
-
Key word here is "her interests" which in this case means protecting Fodlan on Sothis behalf and while some of her decisions might (or may not) have undesirable consequences through some butterfly effect or something, direct positive outcomes are fully tangible.
She later used her position somehow to attempt revive progenitor God, but even if that was selfish desire she believed it's not against Fodlan best interests (quite opposite actually).
Rhea herself believe her lies could be possibly reason for " this war" , which is enough for her take responsibility and step down , but even if she can't refute accusations that's not same as admitting she is responsible for everything she is attributed with either
-
For example Sylvain, he get everything he wants and girls fight over him! How did he deserve such terrible fate?! (jk)
-
58 minutes ago, Crysta said:
Yes they are. They literally infiltrate the upper reaches of society and control powerful parts of it. How do you think they got ahold of Edelgard in the first place? They manipulate it well because at one point they were the society that created/coveted the Crests for their power.
But Seiros/the Church revised history to make the Elites the good guys, which led to the noble houses venerating them and as a consequence... that's why the world state is the way it is. Both her and the Slithers share the blame for that.
That's also wrong, they created 3/4 crests, but Crest system is simply result of post war settlement. How much of that can be attribute directly to ChoS scripture is matter of anyone headcanon.
Point is there is no society that doesn't broke when enough people is replaced, removed or coerced. As long as Agarthians are allowed slither in the dark there is no good defense (because you don't even know you are under attack until it's too late) Decentralization of power can make it somehow more difficult and Dimitri is pretty much first sign that Fodlan society naturally head in that direction and it's certainly not Rhea who using her "manipulation from shadow" thingy who hinder these efforts.
-
20 minutes ago, Crysta said:
Why not? You don't need to be a part of the system to expose how flawed it is. And why would you remove them? They're apart of the world just as much as the Nabateans were or are.
Also don't need a cult of evil mole people to create evil in the world. They exploit the weaknesses already there.
It doesn't matter if they are part of world, they are not product of society. It wasn't result Aztecs flawed system (their society was terrible, but that's different matter) that they basically annihilated by Spanish soldiers. TWSitD are just more sneaky, but their abilies cannot be coped by normal means.
And yes, you don't nerd evil cult create evil in the world, but it's certainly easier to do good when evil cult doesn't assassinate people trying sign peace treaty with their long time enemies.
-
Remove TWSitD from equation and only bad things you get are Miklan and Aliance being Aliance. (though without Empire backing Acheron wouldn't be able cause trouble). You cannot use actions of terrorists, that were never part of system to claim system is flawed.
-
1 hour ago, Dark Holy Elf said:
If you are going to play this card, then there is no problem with Edelgard starting a war because Fodlan is not a modern Earth society, but one steeped in constant warfare anyway. Don't play this card.
Rhea's behaviour as a leader is not okay behaviour, and isn't supposed to be read as such. In fact it's extreme enough that a reasonable person might just do something drastic to get rid of her.
Not really Fodlan doesn't have concept of "right of conquest" and it's thanks teaching of Seiros this continent has fairly modern view of morality. Everyone(Eldegard included) knows war is bad.
Rhea executing terrorists without court in other hand is not matter of morality, but legality. Judgement was passed according to system that was in established to do exactly that. We currently have better system, but that doesn't mean previous forms were wrong.
-
1 hour ago, timon said:
Yes burning Fhirdiad is obviously the worst part, but even before that, the whole chapter 17 is Rhea manipulating the complete Kingdom army (+ the king himself) as bait for her attack, and when that fails she uses them as meat shields for her retreat (instead of turning dragon and attempting to save them).
Now I'm not saying she's a monster everytime, because it's pretty obvious that CF!Rhea is a lot more lost than her other iterations (that goes for Edelgard as well), but I still find it difficult to see her as anything more than a villain, if only a minor one. She does have her redemption in other routes, but I still don't feel like it's enough to delete everything she did. Same deal with Dimitri btw.
I might be wrong, but I am pretty sure, she didn't use Kingdom army as bait. Irc it was supposed be pincher attack, but bad weather make coordination difficult.
But yeah, she did use remains of Kingdom army as shield to retreat when Dimitri fall.
-
Did she killed Nemesis for revenge? Hell yes! Was that war about vengeance? That certainly doesn't seem to be case. We saw what kind of person is Nemesis, he ravaged Zanado to obtain power for conquest with Wilhelm trying oppose him. Rhea and the saints gave him and his allies crests joined war. That includes Seteth and Flayn v you know Seteth wouldn't endanger Flayn just for revenge. Given both Seteth and Wilhelm (who she hold in high esteem even almost thousand years later) were involved there is plenty of reasons why could negotiation take place instead continuing bloody war against elites). It was never one-woman show
Second there are no implications Rhea using military to threaten anyone and so far when it come soft power it was used only when things went out of control (like when Loog defeated Imperial forces, which is also only known event Church got involved. )
-
In whole game there is even single showcase of Rhea caring for crests or bloodlines (actually I am 70% sure she never even said word crest in whole game) . It's not that uncommon for nobles to marry commoners and she not just never shown problem with it, but schools rules actually encourage interactions between people of different status.
Even Eldegard claims of Rhea setting up Crest system is actually based on bigger cover up of real creators. If Rhea needed blood she would clone All Children of Goddess, but she was fine with protecting their creststones much more crest stones then there is crests. Remember she isn't trying revive her kins. She completely depend on Sothis who is much more powerful then her to do so.
And your argument in other hand is nothing but wild assumption based solely on cinematic of Rhea being pissed on guy who killed her family
-
Dorothea suffering has nothing to do with crests though. Slums are always thing.
I mean yes, she probably could either kill or castrate 10 elites and crested allies from Adrestia Empire so they can't pass on crests to next generation but it would be pretty dick move imho ( pun not intended) .
-
That's actually both wrong.
1.Only one who suffer are nobles, well few of them. Masses are innact by Crest system.
2.Rhea did not created it. She hidden origin of crests and everything else related to TWSITD, rest was just work of humans. In matter of fact often even completely unrelated to church or its teaching (Gautier and other border noble families).
-
Literally every enemy call you for your Sxxt as they dies protecting their country and families you trampling over. Non of Black Eagles join because they trully believe in her ideal, Caspar completely stop talk about justice and only want fight, Petra is only in because she don't want Brigit get screwed again, Dorothea feel pretty despodent. And ultimately Eldegard can't properly even get moral high ground even against crazed dragon who just burned whole city making whole Final Boss showdown feel like bullying instead.
-
Well, I don't know you or what games you play, so cannot comment on that.
-
It doesn't really ask if revolution is justified though, quite opposite actually. Crimson Flower keep hammering you made mistake and ended on wrong side of history.
-
Basic assumption is:
Seiros-> Crests are gift from Goddess, using them selfishly is bad.
Humans - > Crest are good, Curch said so. Let's make toxic Crest system.
Eldegard - >toxic Crest system exist because church says Crest are good, only by destroying church they can realize they are wrong and Crests are to blame.
-
Rhea never met Aghartian or their tech in person before. She knows they exist but they were doing stuff behind scene only.
-
She and Hubert came to them to offer cooperation. She wasn't forced to do anything, she just did what she though is her mission and she never regreted taking that part.
-
I doubt it's the case. At least not intentionally. I think they just fired so many magical nukes they got caught in it. Not that I don't think they wouldn't able, but evil I just don't think they would be able put in faith in Sothis (or anyone on that matter) goodness.
What are your thoughts on Edelgard? *SPOILERS*
in Fire Emblem: Three Houses
Posted · Edited by Tenzen12
-That wasn't your point. You said"Without crests there would be no dramatic wealth gap", which is false. Having crest only decide who is privileged not existence of privilege itself. Anyway feudal system of inheritence is still better then communism/autocratic meritocracy, even if it gives massive lead to people who may not deserve it at times.
- You yourself called her Arcibishop of Church. That's what I would call her. You can't be ruler without territory with people tied to it. Only people Rhea can boss around are ones paid to be ordered around, which means by very definition of that word she can't be ruler.
-Yes she could, she were able do it after war, through assassination and she had fair share of inside knowledge from get to go. There is no reason assume she couldn't do same instead of war. Linhardt and Caspar fathers might be responsible for Insurection of seven, but they seems to be decent guys who would support Edie against Arundel and with Church and Kingdom backing, there is no reason it wouldn't work. And sure she believes Church is corrupted and whatever, but she had never problem to work with corrupted people in first place lot of them stayed in power after war too. In first place why would you NOT focus on evil in your own country? Adrestian Empire is WORST of three, if Edie fail she will make everyone equally misrable. She should first prove she knows what she is doing before export "justice" by force, but she tries force system she can't even know will work allongside with TWSitD influence.