thedman975

Yes, I'm very sorry about that! I will not do it again! I had not properly read the rules

In this video, I make the claim that Three Houses balanced mages better than a lot other Fire Emblem games. Do you agree with that statement? Which games do you think did mages or the magic system better than Three Houses?

Hey so I think on the final chapter of the first act the sleep druid is bugged. He freezes the game when he targets my units with sleep. It has happened 2/3 of the times I tested it.

Hey guys I just posted this video about the Three Houses Class System. Please consider giving it a watch and telling me your thoughts on it.

Does anyone know how hack Sacred Stones so that it calculates the hit rate with different numbers? For example, multiplying skill by 3 instead of 2.

Hey dont you hate on my man Owain. And just because its not the end of the word donest mean that the new title could he seriously disappointing

This artstyle scares me. It's too slender an unappealing

Ok wow This direct was so disappointing... Fire Emblem Three Houses seriously scares me. The designs are way too anime (I like anime but I'm afraid the slender style especially will alienate potential players). I really didn't want an avatar again but it looks like thats what we're going to get. The graphics look good but I have really big fears. I feel like this plot is shaping up to be basic. Maybe I'm just butt-heart because Nintendo had like 3 big games that I hadn't seen footage for. .

Does anyone know of any Roy Great Lord Animations? He has his durandal animation but nothing like a real promoted Lord animation like the other Lords do. I've been looking but I haven't found any.

You make it sound like Ike's character traits and talents are exclusive to him and absolutely no one else. That's why i don't agree with you when you say that Roy is bad for doing things anyone else could've done. They aren't exclusive purely to Ike but they are definitely rare. The fuck? That's basic literature terminology. How is it a buzz word? My point is that your using it like its a buzz word. Saying that something is just dramatic irony doesn't actually address the criticisms that I was making. I have been defending Roy this entire time but clearly nothing's getting through you and if you're gonna insult me, then i'm just not gonna take you seriously anymore. Admittedly I could have worded this better and my tone wasn't very polite so i apologize but what I was trying to say here is that maybe I could see what you were saying better if you gave me something to like about Roy.

You do realize that, by using this statement, you're implying that all Lords are the same, right? If Roy is boring, so is every Lord in the series. No, I do not realize that because it is not true. If I say "there is nothing about this fps that differentiates it from others in this genre." I am not implying that all first person shooters are the same, I am saying that there was nothing unique about the one particular first person shooter. So you're saying that Ike is the most unique character ever written? ....What? No, I did not say that. Here "they" means "literally anyone" because that was a response to you saying that by my logic literally anyone could have done what Ike did. Its funny how instead of actually bothering to defend Roy you have to play this game of putting words in my mouth and crying "Subjective." Do you know what dramatic irony is? It's when the audience knows something that the characters don't. Yes, to the players, that Lycian was obviously evil but to Roy, he wasn't. That does not make Roy a bad character. Celica gets a lot of criticism for something similar when she trusts Jedah. Jedah looks like a Scooby-Doo villain but to the characters, Jedah looks normal (i guess blue skin is just common in Valentia). So dramatic irony is the new buzz word now? Yes I do know what that is thanks for asking. What that has to do with my criticism I don't see, however. You use Celica and Jedah as an example, but Jedah CLEARLY demonstrated that he was not trustworthy. He lead a cult of evil, Duma-worshiping priests, turned people into witches, and literally tried to kill Celica's entire party. Even Celica denoted that she had no reason to trust him at first so that kind of destroys your point right there. Celica's stupidity, (thinly veiled through excellent voice acting) is obvious both to the reader and the other characters who also don't trust Jedah so I fail to see your point. Roy should have been able to deduce that guy was evil instead of just being a little bit supsicious because of the overwhelming evidence the game gave (This is the most common fan translation): Merlinus: “Well, finally we can get a good night’s rest, Master Roy!” Roy: “I wonder. The man who said he was Lord Orun’s advisor…” Merlinus: “Wagner? Did he bother you in any way?” Roy: “He seemed to be in control of everything, as if he owned the place. And we can’t see Lord Orun because he’s ill? Something’s not right…” Merlinus: “Hmm… You do have a point, Master Roy.” (Saul and Dorothy appear) Saul: “Excuse me, Master Roy. There seem to be an awful lot of soldiers patrolling the area.” Dorothy: “I think we’re being spied on.” Roy: “What? No…” Cath: “You noticed? Impressive.” Roy: “!? Show yourself, intruder!” (Saul and Dorothy leave. Cath appears) Cath: “Hi!” Roy: “And…who might you be?” Cath: “Aw, we can talk about me later. You know, I overheard that Wagner guy talking in the main hall, and he said he’s going to ambush you guys.” Roy: “Lord Orun would never do that!” Cath: “Oh yeah, that person’s dead. That dark magician assassinated him or something.” Roy: “What!?” Cath: “And he’s going to capture you guys and turn you into Bern so he can join up with them.” Merlinus: “Hold it, Master Roy! Don’t trust people like this so easily!” Cath: “You can believe me or not, it’s up to you. But don’t come crying to me when you find yourselves in trouble!” (Guinevere appears) Guinevere: “Roy…if what she says is true…” Roy: “Let’s set a trap. We’ll pretend we’re leaving. If Wagner is after us, he’ll do something to persuade us to stay.” Cath: “If you’re gonna go outside, use the room in the north! That room leads to the courtyard, so you’ll be out of here in no time. Good luck!” From this we can make the conclusion that: Roy only managed to deduce that something wasn't right based off of the simple contradiction that Wagner was totally in charge despite Orun supposedly being sick, not dead, and that Wagner wasn't letting them see Orun. Again. Incredibly simple deduction that most ppl would have been able to make. A priest and his bodyguard noticed the oddly large amount of soldiers that Roy, a trained army commander and Merlinus, his personal advisor were oblivious to. Roy failed to deduce that he was being spied on when a young probably uneducated bodyguard managed to. While Roy was suspicious, he still believed Lord Orun was in charge despite the overwhelming evidence that even he commented on. When Cath told Roy that Wagner was planning to ambush them, he still trusted that "Lord Orun would never do that." Roy's plan, giving his sources and information, was not a "tactical feat" in any sense of the word. And furthermore the plan still got Roy attacked by Wagner's forces which outnumbered his. All it accomplished was to confirm what Cath said which could have been verified at a later time. Escape should have been Roy's main priority after walking into a trap. All of this is literally dramatic irony, especially that bolded part. Yes this is obviously dramatic irony but that doesn't mean that it doesn't characterize Roy. It still happened within the story. Roy still failed to make simple deductions that the majority of ppl in that position (not just observing it through a screen) would have been able to do. For example, other characters clearly see that Lilina loves Roy. I understand that poorly using buzz words is easier than actually trying to defend Roy's character but you can also just admit that Roy isn't a good character.

Subjective Ok so u can't dismiss criticisms with "subjective." While "interesting" certainly is subjective, "unique" is not. Roy has no characteristics that differentiate him from the other Lords in this series. You can literally apply this to every hero in fiction. Let's take a look at Ike. By your logic, anyone with Ike's training could've also done what he did in the story, therefore making Ike a bad character. No, they could not have done what Ike did because they would not have had his character traits, talents, and possibly his determination. There's a difference between me saying "anyone who took four years of high school could figure out 2+5" and "anyone who went took Political Science courses in college could become President of the United States." The point I'm trying to make hear is that the evidence people use to say Roy is clever, his "feats" of tactical ability, were so basic that literally anyone who studied this could have done it. If he had developed some strategy so genius that no one saw it coming and it decimated the enemy forces than I wouldn't be saying that. But his plan to deceive the obviously evil Lycian that imprisoned Sue was to just play dumb. Literally common sense, not to mention Cath already gave him all of his information and he couldn't figure things out on his own. ??????????????? If the story says he's smart, then he's smart. Unless there is a very, very clear contradiction (for example, saying Roy can fly when he actually can't). There are clear contradictions. How was Roy not able to determine that the obviously evil Lycian vassal was evil without the knowledge being spoonfed by Cath. How is Roy not able to figure out when any of the women in the army are in love with him when literally everyone, including the reader, can. A story can say whatever it wants about a character but if it doesn't demonstrate it than what impact does it have? If I write that character x is smart but he rarely figures things out than he isn't that smart. That's more of an issue with the presentation than Roy himself. You can apply this to FE1-5 as well. No the issue is both. And Fe 4's Sigurd was way more interesting and Fe 6 has better written characters with actual personalities so "other games did it as well" is not an excuse. Once again, that's subjective. WHAT? OPINIONS ARE SUBJECTIVE? SHOCKER. What's the point of discussion or debate if we're just going to say things like "that's subjective" or "that's ur opinion" Again, subjective. You're really riding this Roy hate train aren't you? Most of your argument is either heavily biased or just straight-up flawed. Saying "x has a personality" is not subjective. Saying "x has an opinion" is not subjective. Subjective does not equal completely useless or biased. Honestly I thought I was in the minority hating Roy because of how well he did in the first CYL poll. But if there is a "hate train" it is clearly justified. Also u have to actually demonstrate that my argument is flawed, constantly saying "subjective" does not do that.

The point is that there's nothing unique or interesting about Roy. If practically everyone can do something than it is not a "feat." Figuring out things that are blatantly obvious doesn't make you cunning. When I briefly mentioned his training with Cecilia my point wasn't that Roy is a bad character because anyone with the right training could have done what he did in the story, my point was that anyone with HIS training could have done what he did in the story. Roy isn't smart, the story just says he is. He has virtually no personality or development throughout the campaign and honestly that's almost as bad if not as bad as Corrin. Roy is one of the worst Lords in the franchise and no where near the best character in his game. Clarine, Dieck, Rutger, Melady, Perceval (I could go on for a while) all outclass Roy as characters (almost as much as they outclass him as units). Also yes personality is subjective but that doesn't mean a good character doesn't need to have one. I'm not saying Roy has a bad personality I'm saying he has no personality he literally justs reacts to everything in the same standard way everysingle time. So no, invalidating Roys "feats" because "anyone cand do them" is not invalidating the feats of every Lord in the series and pretty much any character in fiction because almost all good characters in fictions and good lords in this series have personalities, opinions/beliefs, and actual "feats" or interesting choices, of which Roy has none.

I wasn't defending Eirika I actually criticized her. I think the only thing positive I said about her and Ephraim were that they were charming. So yes, i suppose I did rate FE 8 to high, although I feel as though while many of the cast is forgettable at first glance, they become more interesting when you read the support chain. And while their were definitely a few quality villains overall your criticism of them is accurate. However, to say that its cast is weaker than The Binding Blade, whose non-generic charachters i can count on my hands, and fates which was filled with anime cliches, is ridiculous.

Ok I read alot of the thread and concede that my statement was incorrect. He is cunning and that's it. And to be honest all of is tactical moves are things that anyone of average intelligence (especially someone schooled in battle tactics by a premier general) would have been able to deduce. What Efflin is more than a bard? No way? He tricked that obviously evil guy into revealing himself after Cath gave him all of his information? Amazing! He's not that smart because he still can't see the obvious signs that several female characters in the army like him for some reason. Some of his feats of kindness are also just things that literally any good person would do avoiding bloodshed when possible and helping people in need aren't exactly revolutionary. He's a good guy, he's a little cunning, and that's as far as his personality and talents go. He's bland at best with no interesting traits or opinions. He just reacts to everything that happens in the same calm monotone manner. Also while yes opinions are subjective there are objective facts behind them so while no opinion or stance is factually correct there is value in seeing which stance is better supported by the evidence.