Jump to content

Tenzen12

Member
  • Content Count

    1553
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Tenzen12

  1. To be fair she did kill Cornellia. That was quite aggressively aggressive.
  2. Holy Roman Empire and Catholic church is good example. But as powerful pope were he didn't rule HRE. Even if he had actually more power then Church of Seiros in FE3H.
  3. That's nonsense. Moral authority doesn't equal political power, even if it might go hand to hand. Rhea and Church simply doesn't excercise enough of power to considered rulers. It doesn't interfere with inner policies of any nation nor it operate without their consent. They provide support when requested and they get certain privileges in return. Ultimatelly it's give and take and always were. Having means to rule isn't same as actually rulling.
  4. She literally invaded aliance and Kingdom AFTER destroying church and capturing it's supreme leader. Edelgard is strong nationalist and never aknowledged Kingdom and Aliance as legitmate nations. She is pure breed conqueror. Also feudalism served it's purpose until we came with better system. Just because it's inferior to democracy doesn't mean it's terrible system. It's certainly more stable then for example communism. That's lot of pretty strong assumptions here. As far as we could see Rhea doesn't really care how much people follow doctrine, as long as they doesn't start killing other people. And ChoS protect civilians on regular basis, what they do NOT, is strong arming soverign nations to do their bidding because for one, Church simply doesn't have enough influence to do so. Church can't interfere with inner policies of other countries (which is also reason why there is no point destroying it for sake of potential reforms). To be honest I am also getting somohow tired of always making equation between open rebelion/terrorism and voicing discontent. No matter how you slice it, raising army and marching to kill pope (or anyone on that matter is legit reason for authorities defend owneself and everyone else who would get caught in it.
  5. I did say there is bad apple here and there. And if you want talk about paralogues I remember some where nobles fight bandit protect civilians and other where they fight invaders.
  6. Nobility and Crest system is not inherently bad, it was established for reasons and it's reason mostly (or even completely) unrelated to church doctrine. Nobility protect commoners, that's why cast systems exist in first place and lot of nobles of Fodlan did not forget about it. Except empire there is no nation "rotten to core" and yes its because TWSITD corrupted it and took complete control over it. This also serve as "fuel". And it's pretty obvious she's not gonna abolish nobility anyway. She didn't turned Empire into democracy, she handed it to her sucessor eventually, which means it's still autocratic nation, and it's obvious Linhardt and Caspar fathers as well as any other nobles who supported her will stay in power. Fodlan society in general has its flaws and it that would be nice if they got fixed, but it's nothing that would require armed intervention (from nation that has it actually worst.) as again only one who suffer because it are nobles and they have it in their job description.
  7. Yes, there is something rotten in Fodlan it's called Those Who Slither in Darkness. They caused unbalance in Kingdom and are source of all Imperial scheming. As for Crest itself, nobles make only small fragment of population. They are one with privileges and riches (generally speaking) so it also come with some detriment. I don't think there is need change whole society just to make it more friendly place for nobility, especially if prize is paid by commoners. Aliance is more or less fine as it is. Could be better, could be worse. As for propaganda, I don't have any problem with it, actually I approve it even, but it certainly belong among "questionable" methods so it can't be said Eldegard does not do anything questionable on her route.
  8. She is revolutionary indeed. Thing is she wants rebuilt what she think is bad society and she is hardly objective on that matter. She also does plenty questionable thing in own route. Just because Edie lead small strike force personally does not make beasts used by her army main force dissappear. Not to mention she attacked neutral country and used fake news demonise her enemies.
  9. If nothing else he goal of Fodlan conquest is very not good, especially as in 3/4 she could just destroy church, kill Rhea and be done with it without invading her neighbours. And it's miraculous she apparently somehow managed get good end. That said even if she did make Fodlan better place it was in spite of her actions during story rather then because of it. Her methods weren't just wrong morally, they were wrong on practical level which make it actually much worse. In the end both Di and El acted terribly, without good reason (even if Edie believed otherwise), and only one of them got better.
  10. You know that "everything is up to interpretation" is actually not argument, do you? Well whatever.
  11. And isn't that exactly what I was saying? ie that he doesn't dislike Rhea and question his decision leave 20 years ago. That's all I am arguing about.
  12. I think Azure moon is "good side", because Dimitri get his redemption arc and change his ways. Crimson Flower is "bad side" because Eldegard never admit being wrong.
  13. I don't disagree, but it also double as admiting he was too rash when he left imho.
  14. Crimson Flower is Easter egg, Silver Snow is default and internationally makes siding with Eldegard contraintuitive.
  15. He also tell him he "should have return to monastery much sooner." and it's pretty obvious he has no problem to return among ranks of her Knights. Yes he is still wsrry of her for obvious reasons, but that's all to it. Quote you used is also twenty years old and Jeralt wasn't at best place at that time. I assume you are using English audio, right? You might want reconsider that.
  16. Love (respect / admiration) and fear are not mutually exclusive.
  17. Yeah, I think dub made Rhea much more ... I guess more shady sounding In other hand while Jeralt voice is quite on spot, he use bit different rhetoric. Japanese Jeralt sounds much more ok to return to knighthood not like he is on gunpoint, or something.
  18. - As I mentioned multpiple time before neither, removing crests, Church or Rhea is beneficial to her goal create better society, nor is her conquest especially as she might not have lifespam long enough both wage war and enforce reforms afrerwards. Whole war is her lashing out over her childhood trauma instead facing it head on. It's also very possible she is afraid of "Arundel" who rised her and that's why she rather look for something else direct her rage imho. She using calculaing logic for goals she set base on emotions, that's why I can't consider her rational even she is composed calculating and Machiavellian. That's not mutually exlusive - Again definition alone makes Rhea not ruler, she authority , power and duty enforce it but it doesn't change definition. Church of Seiros is not completely diffrent from medieval catholic church when it come to influence, but even if pope could refuse king legitimacy or order war of cross, or he wouldn't be ruler either. In same hypothetical scenario Pope could in theory use his authority same way as Rhea did. Given situation in medieval Europe it wouldn't be good idea, but that option would still be ithere. This also reason why she can keep peace without being actual Ruler as having influence is not equal of having land nor subjects. Nor it means having direct control over sovereign countries. Killing Edelgard is not policially good move as she technically on top of Empire, but nor is letting her allive. Unfortunatelly there is no good third option. - It's true Rhea weren't able deal with TWSitD and that's indeed her greatest failure as pretty much this whole political crissis you mentioned is engineered by them, but again Church doesn't act as final authority. It use it's influence when then things get out hands, but leave handling internal affairs to people who are suppossed to handle it. It's not different then for example NATO stepping in Izrael-palestine conflict although given powerscalling it would be more like NATO stepping between hypothetical US-China conflict instead. - You sort of got me there, I never really considered Black Eagles as part of Edie followers, more like friends who stick with her because Byleth (who is one that should get leadership points here), but yes if Black Eagles decide side with her (which is not something she herself expected) then yes she got some loyal subordinates. Ultimatelly I believe Eldegard is not good leader whatsover due her immaturity and lack of charisma. Church is too rigid to be able adapt to extreme cover terrorist tactics of TWSitD (Basically situation would probably contiune work relatively normally if TWSitD didn't start openly operate after seizing power in Empire, which is where ChoS stopped to be adequate as power balancer) and it's probably better being reformed under Byleth afterward. Claude is most likely best when it come to actuall diplomacy even if he lack power.
  19. Again 1)Being composed and being rational are two different thing. Rhea might be angry but her choice is consistent with her path actions and what she sees as arci-bishop duty and it certainly warranted as everyone involved can testify. In other hand Edelgard might keep being compossed but pretty much all her action are driven by emotion allone without good reasoning behind it. 2)Rhea isn't really ruler in first place. She is leader of massive organisation, but she doesn't have land nor subjects, although she has certain level of authority and power enforce it. 3)Comparing leading ability, I think Rhea once again win regardless as she actually were able keep peace for such long time, she has very loyal and competent followers and even who aren't religious and church in general were able swiftly react to any vissible development. Edelgard followers are mostly opportunists that might turn against her when it's beneficial to them not to mention she would probably never be able consolidate her power in Empire if it wasn't handed to her by TWSitD. In all seriousness, Edie mostly follow rails prepared for her beforehand and I am not even sure how much she is aware of that. There isn't lot of actual leadership involved. You can argue Rhea being uncompromising against direct opposition is wrong (just because it worked for so centuries, doesn't necessary means it's right method, I think I could get convinced about that), but I think when it come to comparing level of leadership, Edie should compete with post-timeskip Dimitri instead.
  20. It would explain why her crest went berserk at least, but hard to say.
  21. Well I certainly agree she is not cold and efficient and I also think she did terrible job from strategic perspective even if she tried achieve something as her actions can't reasonably lead to desired goals from most part That said I don't see how is any that related our current conversation. Rhea might or may not act impulsively when ordered Eldegard death, but I don't think it put Edie into better light as pretty much whole her war is driven by emotions alone.
×
×
  • Create New...