LilyRose

But she didn't know any of this. That is clearly stated by both Rhea and Seteth after she is rescued in SS. They knew that murdering Sothis (even a slumbering Sothis) and then returning to murder most of her children in Zanado was beyond the capability of a simple bandit but they didn't know who helped him. There was an investigation at the time that yielded no results. All that they knew was that there were people out there who violently opposed them but that's not a lot to go on when the people in question are "shapeshifters" who literally live under the ground. Sure, Rhea is able to deduce that the technologically advanced freaks who live in Shambhala and hate Sothis are the remnants of the people who Sothis fought in the past but that's after the fact deduction based on Hubert's letter, going to their city and then fighting them face to face. I admit that a lot of the Agarthan backstory makes no sense and is poorly written but the game is pretty clear about the Nabateans being clueless about their longstanding enemies until they receive help from Hubert. Nothing was explained very well and most of what was explained doesn't make sense because it's just bad writing, but that part of the story is clear. I guess long story short, the writing is terrible in vast parts of this game, it’s something that I ignored during the honeymoon phase but after spending the last month & over 200+ hours with a much better written game it has been extremely difficult getting back into 3H to finish my maddening run.

The mental break in CF seemed to be due to the triple whammy of the betrayal, the loss of Sothis and the war. Those are her three big triggers and CF Byleth pushed every single one of them. Can a crest be destroyed in a fire? If not, then she could have still retrieved it from a dead Byleth (that's kind of a gruesome thought) but maybe not, since Jeralt's diary said that she was in a state over the news that the baby was dead. Of course, he disappeared so we don't know what she went through once he was gone or how long it took her to realize that he'd lied and skipped town with the "dead" baby.

It depends on which route you end up on. If you play the Church route then BL should be your second/last playthrough because you will have learned exactly what Byleth is and most of the other lore is covered on that route. If, however, you end up on Edelgard's route you should do Golden Deer. You will get more of the history and an actual satisfying conclusion vs. Blue Lions which is fun but doesn't explain anything Another option if you aren't interested in Dimitri or Claude is to recruit as many of the BL and GD students as you can then save before the big decision and once you finish the first BE route go back to your save and do the second one. It will save you time and you still get the full story.

I love Alois' support since by the end he really feels like Byleth's big brother, only fitting since both were raised by Jeralt. But I will never understand why they chose to make it an S support instead of an A+, it just made things too confusing. Even if they were going to keep it as a S support paired ending then they should have announced from the start that it was a super best friends ending instead of romantic because a lot of gay fans felt baited. While on the subject I wish they would adopt a better system than having every character be avatar-sexual, it feels too gamey. Instead of the avatar being able to romance everyone of the opposite sex, there should be supports that only go to B rank or A rank then a couple that can hit A+ rank and finally a select few available for S rank. I find that kind of a system to be more realistic than the wish fulfillment thing that is going on right now. Also, if there are only a handful of potential lovers for the avatar it would be a lot easier to make them all avatar-sexual regardless of gender to give gay fans more representation in the game.

No, it isn't a direct response to what I quoted. You misinterpreted both the original post and my response but instead of just admitting that you misunderstood the point, you instead decided to double down. The first post and my response was about the persecution and death that would befall the Nabateans, the descendants of the Elites and Seiros' Empire allies if Seiros had never rewrote the history which is why the original post mentioned the Loptyrians. No one is positing that Seiros would be the one killing these people (which is I guess is what you are saying), the entire point of this particular discussion is that if she hadn't censored history her people (including her human allies) and the innocent descendants of the Elites would be persecuted, hunted and killed. Also, you have no problem at all using your head canon to support your claims in debates, in fact you've done it multiple times on this page alone. Should you not do that? Everyone interprets things in the game world and incorporates it as their own personal canon because there is only so much actual canon available to us. Some of the things you've written I agree with while others I disagree with but it was done in a respectful way as opposed to the snotty and condescending tone that you have displayed in multiple responses to multiple posts. I don't have a problem with you disagreeing but the tone that you have chosen to take is completely unnecessary, also it defeats your purpose. If your purpose is to get me to take in what you're saying and challenge my own beliefs that goes completely out the window when you start throwing around words like "dumb and silly" or lampooning as you call it. I don't believe in blocking or muting or ignoring people because I feel like that just serves to stifle the conversation and makes everything an echo chamber but in your case I think I may be forced to do that, not because you disagree with me, but because the unpleasantness is too much. That's why I found parts of her s-support so sad because she's of course internalizing everything and taking responsibility for things she had no part in without being able to say "yeah, but everything is not my fault and I did good things too". I think this is one of the biggest failings of Rhea not being the "4th Lord" on the Church route. She never really gets a chance to speak for herself on what happened and why she did the things that she did and how much of it she really sees as good, bad or just necessary. She's imprisoned for so long that by the time we get her back the war is essentially over so there is no time to build out her character to see just what she thinks about the world of Fodlan and she's just used as a lore dump before the end.

Good point. I guess even if Sothis never awakened in Byleth the most she would have to wait to get the stone back would be a normal human lifespan (50 - 60 years?). I'm still holding out hope for a prequel dlc that focuses on Jeralt's and Byleth's missing twenty years. It feels like their is more to Byleth's past that hasn't been revealed.

What are you talking about? Do you even know what you're talking about? Or in your haste to tell me how wrong I am did you forget to read with understanding the post I was responding to as well as my own. Because what you are saying has nothing to do with the original post or my response. The Nabateans, the descendants of the "Elites" and Seiros' Empire allies would have been hunted down because of their crests by regular old humans doing the regular old human thing of killing to obtain power they didn't have and/or killing what they didn't understand. That is the gist of my post as well as the one that I was responding to. I'm not sure what you were responding to and it doesn't even matter. Head canon has an actual definition which you can read below. You can't just make up your own definition because you don't like something that someone else wrote. It's not a theory it is my interpretation of the fictional world of Fodlan and since it isn't contradicting anything that is canon, who are you to say that it is wrong? Were you a writer on this game? Because if you are not one of the writers for Three Houses, then how do you know it is wrong? I have tried to be mature, decent and respectful to everyone on this board. When I saw that debates were just going around in circles I just dropped it and moved on. We are all just fans here and all of us have our own opinions about this game, the characters, the story and everything else Fire Emblem. I don't have an issue with people disagreeing with my ideas and I welcome any responses to my posts as long as they are just as decent and respectful to me as I'm going to be towards them. Headcanon (or head canon, head-canon) is a fan's personal, idiosyncratic interpretation of canon, such as the backstory of a character, or the nature of relationships between characters.

It would have been an unending war on the descendants of the “Elites”, the Nabateans and their allies. They would have been hunted down and killed either by those envious of their power or those who saw them as abominations. It is extremely unlikely that her people would have survived considering that there were only five of them left. Chaos and war would have destroyed Fodlan which was the exact opposite of what Sothis, and by extension Rhea, wanted. Censoring the history was the best decision at the time that she made it of course she could have never foreseen what humans would turn the crests into a thousand years later. How can head canon be factual? If it was factual it would be canon. And how can you judge the validity of someone else's head canon when the very definition of it is that it's a personal interpretation of a story. But you know what, nevermind, it just saves my time because I don't even have to seriously reply.

Regardless of whether you consider it dumb or not, there is a clear distinction between wars (like the Seiros/Empire vs Nemesis, Loog vs the Empire or the Alliance breaking free from the Kingdom) and the minor skirmishes, bandit attacks and nobles being jerks to one another that you seem to be talking about. Three wars in a 1000 years is a really good record and I would consider that relative peace. It is most definitely not "constant warfare" which is what the person who I was responding to said Fodlan was enduring. I never made a comparison between the characters, Hubert and Rhea, I believe that it was you who made that comparison. I'm talking about due process or the lack thereof and how it doesn't seem to be a factor at all in certain situations, not sure what you were talking about. And finally, since your head canon says that not many people died in Edelgard's war then by all means go with it. My head canon says that a continent wide war that raged for over five years is going to be far more deadly than some random bandit attacks.

Two things along the same line as this that I would really like fleshed out in a dlc side story. I'm very confused that the game just left significant portions of Byleth's backstory blank. Why did Jeralt work in Leonie's village alone? Byleth would have been a little kid only a few years older than Leonie but she wasn't with Jeralt and it's seriously doubtful that Jeralt had any relatives alive to take care of her. And of course when asked Byleth just says that she doesn't remember but that's strange. Also, why can't Byleth remember even the simplest of things from her past. I understand the age thing because Jeralt would want to hide her true age as much as possible but even when people would ask simple questions like how long have you been a mercenary she couldn't answer. I would love for some of that backstory to be filled in. And, Jeralt's and Rhea's relationship is interesting. When Jeralt left the monastery he never changed his name and he was a famous mercenary who traveled all over Fodlan. I find it incomprehensible that Rhea didn't know that he was alive. So why would she just let him roam all around the continent with his kid/her mother's heart but never try to bring him back to Garreg Mach? It really doesn't make sense. She is a big believer in fate so maybe she thought that eventually Byleth would make her way back to the monastery but it seems odd that she never tried to speed fate along a little bit. Her faith in Jeralt was incredibly strong for her to just leave the only tangible thing that she had left of her mother with him and never tried to get it back.

Multiple students also had near breakdowns when they were sent to clear out Kostas' bandit gang and fight Lonato's militia. All that says is that they are children who have not had to actually experience what happens when you have to stop bad people from doing bad things. Also, they were tried (after being apprehended while escaping by the Knights). Shamir read their list of charges, Seteth had already investigated them which is how he knew who they were and the highest person in the Church of Seiros pronounced the verdict and punishment. Are you doubting that they were guilty? I'm not sure what other trial you think needed to take place. And to be really clear about this, the game points you in different directions for all of the major characters. Claude is the schemer and cheat who is not to be trusted only for him to turn out to be the most solid and decent of all the Lords. Dimitri who is noble and upstanding turns into a murderous animal then back again. Edelgard is cold and arrogant but also an abused and damaged kid lashing out at the system she thinks destroyed her family. We are pushed towards a belief that Rhea is evil incarnate. Jeralt doesn't trust her. He tells you to be on your guard at all times. She is completely ruthless. And it's pretty easy to see that she is not telling Byleth (and us as the player) the whole truth. But I've played every route including VW and SS twice (because those are the routes with the most lore) and what we learn about Rhea is that she's not evil, she's not a villain. She's done some stuff (some of it questionable) but her intentions were never bad and she never directly hurt anyone who didn't come for her first. Jeralt was her friend for a century and he only stopped trusting her because she was telling him an obvious lie which led him to believe the worst. But, after being back at the monastery for a while he also said that perhaps there was never any reason to leave the monastery in the first place. I have no idea what creepy smile you are talking about because like I said I've played this game 6 times and I never saw it, perhaps you are imagining it because it reinforces what you already believe.

There is no state of constant warfare in Fodlan that's the whole point. Banditry and nobles preying on people is terrible but it's not a state of constant warfare. Whether you agree with Rhea's methods or not, you can't really argue the results of almost 1000 years of peace. Now of course you can argue about the true cost of all that order and peace but to act as if the peace didn't exist is completely ridiculous. Multiple times in game, people (those who liked Rhea and those who didn't) talked about how long it had been since there was a war. Which is why I don't understand why this is even a debate? There are many things that Rhea did that can be analyzed and debated that are clearly shown in game but whether war was sweeping through the continent of Fodlan before Edelgard is really not one of them. Are we comparing Hubert and Rhea? I thought we were talking about due process. But yes, the difference between Hubert and Rhea is obvious. One of them is a murderer who will do whatever he feels is "justified" to protect Edelgard. The other is a ruthless person who will respond violently when she is attacked but she never actually goes out and pre-emptively starts killing people. She was more than justified in her decision to execute people who tried to kill her, robbed her tomb and assaulted her students. How can one be doubtful that a war that engulfed the entire continent, decimated the armies of the Kingdom and Alliance, and took a chunk out of the Knights of Seiros when Garreg Mach fell resulted in the deaths of fewer people than random bandit attacks? Even at the end Edelgard said that all across this continent people are killing each other, I've got to think she meant more a couple of dozen. TWSITD were able to take on the likeness of humans and therefore were able to actually plant those seeds of doubt and discontent all over the continent. How do you think they were able to take over the Empire? And we are clearly told in game that the Bishop of the Western Church wanted Rhea out of the way because he wanted control and didn't like the religion being ruled by the Central Church from Garreg Mach. Also, in the first (or second) side quest that Seteth gives Byleth, we find out that the Western Church also hates Rhea for being too permissive (which considering how some people in the fandom look at her is kinda funny) because she has foreigners and non-believers in the Monastery/KoS. Rhea made a mistake in dealing with Christophe. He tried to assassinate her so his execution was justified but regardless of what was going on in the Kingdom she should have just told the truth about why he was executed. Sure people would have panicked because first the King is assassinated and then an attempt is made on the Archbishop's life, but still the lie did far more harm than the truth would have. This is an ongoing problem with Rhea's desire for peace and order, most of the time it's a good thing but sometimes a little chaos on the front end saves you from having a lie come back to bite you in the butt years later. The fact that she lied about why she killed Christophe made Lonato more militant in his actions towards her and the Central Church, driving a man who was loyal into the waiting arms of the Western Church bishop. What last couple of centuries of unexplained executions? That never happened. When have the Knights ever kicked down any doors while Rhea just wantonly executed people? That never happened, ever! And if I'm not mistaken in another post you also said that the Eastern Church was purged along with the Western Church. That never happened. The Eastern Church was basically a rubber stamp for Rhea, what reason would she have to purge it?

Jeralt , a man who may not hate Rhea but certainly doesn’t particularly like her, stated that it had been centuries since the last major conflict in Fódlan. Are there foreign countries attempting to invade, yes. Are there minor skirmishes, yes. Are there bandits, yes. I mean this is a Fire Emblem game where violence is a basic part of the gameplay. But there hasn’t been a war in centuries until Edelgard started one which resulted in the deaths of far more people than would be harmed in random bandit attacks. And just as an aside the reason why the Kingdom is in disarray and swept into Duscur killing everyone they could find was because Edelgard’s allies killed their King and framed the people of Duscur for his death to ease her path to victory in her eventual invasion of their country. Also, I just don’t have a problem divorcing my modern world morality from a fantasy game world. We know that Rhea is ruthless when crossed but she doesn’t murder people. The members of the Western Church who were caught trying to carry out both a robbery and an assassination, broke into a tomb and assaulted multiple students were judged guilty by the Archbishop who had every right to as the sovereign of her territory and their sentence was death. What would have been the alternative? There is no system in place that called for a judge, jury, prosecutor and defense attorney in Fodlan (& that is consistent regardless of the route you take). Also, there doesn’t seem to be nearly as much vitriol directed at Hubert for assassinating would be threats to Edelgard as there is for Rhea carrying out justice on proven criminals. Or are we going to head canon that Hubert gives all of his targets due process?

I don't know if I would call it good or bad but it was certainly the more prudent choice on her part. Theoretically, she could have lived another 1000 years or more why would she trust Claude, the master schemer, with all the secrets of her kind. Let's be honest, her race haven't had the greatest track record with people knowing who they are and not using it against them. But when she knew that she was dying she did tell them so it's not like she took all of her secrets to the grave. "Humanity Fuck No" is definitely not what I wrote. It is very easy to dump all of the bad things in Fodlan at the foot of Rhea as if all wayward behavior can be attributable to one person. So, looking at other contemporary countries should give us a glance at what is possible without the influence of Rhea or crests. And when we look at those countries, we find that they are in no better shape than Fodlan but they don't have crests and Rhea holds no sway in those areas, so why are they stumbling and falling? And it has nothing to do with "Rhea's system failed too", that's not the point. The point is that we know of the existence of five countries in the 3H's universe and all those countries have societal issues plaguing them. All five countries with different cultures, different Gods, different languages and the only common denominator is humanity. Does that mean that I think humanity should be wiped out? Of course not! But I do think that Sylvain's statement about how there will be another war eventually because humans thrive on conflict is true and that truth shines a whole different light on what's going on in Fodlan. Also, Byleth is a lot more than just Byleth after she merges with Sothis, of course even before she merged with Sothis she was no ordinary human. Sothis gave Byleth the power of the Progenitor God which allowed her to cut a hole between dimensions (!) to release herself from the realm of darkness (that is a lot more than some "limited time travel"). The fact that she survives a fall that would have killed any regular person, then sleeps for five years at the bottom of a canyon to recover, makes it seriously debatable if Byleth can be considered human at all. When Sothis wakes Byleth from her slumber, she speaks as if she and Byleth are indeed the same entity, so the Goddess didn't disappear she just became one with Byleth (or at least a part of her did considering Rhea's s-support). We know that Indech, Macuil and even Thales consider Byleth as an incarnation or extension of Sothis. While Seteth and Flayn certainly think of her as one of them and if you s -support Seteth there is even more evidence to suggest that they are correct. So Byleth is already an immortal leader, right? I mean it is written in the Byleth/Flayn ending that he is ageless and if the fall off a mountain won't kill her what can?

On my last playthrough (the 6th one, so I desperately needed to change some things up) I did Church route and fell in love with horses. Overall this was not the best idea as I feel like I wasted some of my normal stars. Ferdinand & Caspar - Great Knights: OMG! I think that an actual tank could roll over these two and they would be just fine. Byleth (until Enlightened One change), Sylvain, Felix, Dorothea & my trio of tiny killers Lysithea, Annette & Flayn - Dark Knights: I will never do this again! Dorothea and Flayn hate horses, gremory Lysithea with Thyrsus is much deadlier, Felix was terrible and I ended up benching him (first time ever and I'd used him in 4 of my other runs). My boy Sylvain was awesome but not up to his normal standard. Bernadetta & Petra - Bow Knights: Perfection as usual! Mercedes - Holy Knight: This was a good fit and something that I will probably do again. My only issue with Mercedes is that Marianne is so much better at everything so she never gets picked. I chose to only level up one healer this time and she was good, not Marianne good, but still good. Marianne - Paladin: It took a while to get her str to a respectable level but once she was in the double digits it all started to come together. Only Byleth was a deadlier with a sword. Raphael - Dancer: I did it as a joke but he was surprisingly good. I knew I was going to do it so I recruited him very early and started training his sword up. He ended up being the third best swordsman in that run behind only Byleth and Marianne.