Jump to content

Darkmoon6789

Member
  • Content Count

    133
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Darkmoon6789

  • Rank
    Co-ruler of the Adrestian Empire
  • Birthday 01/07/1991

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sweden (Stockholm)

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Fire Emblem Game
    Three Houses

Member Badge

  • Members
    Edelgard

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Maybe so, but this relies on Rhea actually being willing to hear Edelgard out in the first place, and her actually being willing to forgive Edelgard for her past transgressions against the church. Do you think it would be possible to calm Rhea down after the identity of the Flame Emperor is revealed at the holy mausoleum? Do you think she could show mercy to Edelgard and decide to work together with her if she tells her the truth of what is going on and about the Agarthans? If Rhea can't show mercy, then Edelgard has no reason to reach out to her. It is pretty clear to me that the war could have definitely been avoided with better communication, one of the best ways to do that was to somehow force Edelgard and Rhea to sit down in a room and talk to each other for a few hours.But pretty much no being on the planet has enough influence over both of them to force them to do anything against their will. I also think that Dimitri's grudge against Edelgard could be redirected if he was told who was the real culprit behind the tragedy of Duscur. But that is assuming he will be able to accept the truth. Generally, if everyone in this game simply had more knowledge about what was going on. A lot of this conflict could have been avoided, that is why it is a tragedy.
  2. It seems like everyone and their mother has been blamed for the Tragedy of Duscur by one point or another by someone. I don't think I ever seen an incident with this many different scapegoats. To this day I don't understand why Dimitri is under the impression that Edelgard killed her own mother at the age of 12, what exactly is even remotely suggesting that this would have been the case? But maybe that is just another sign of Dimitri being quite irrational about this. The people of Duscur were themselves a scapegoat and Christophe was another. So many people has been falsely accused of being behind this incident that it is basically a tragedy in its own right. So is there really no information on why Loog and his followers were dissatisfied with Imperial rule?
  3. This is basically the reason I consider her such a great character. But I do consider her highly sympathetic because she has a good heart and the reasons she does what she does is often not only understandable, but also relatable. I find it very hard to not feel sympathy for someone who has been through so many awful things such as Edelgard. I am not ashamed to admit that Edelgard is definitely a bit of a waifu of mine. There are more than just Edelgard I like in this manner, but I show the type in that most are either morally great characters, or some kind of sympathetic villain. I have a tendency to easily get attached to characters with a tragic background.
  4. There is also one other thing I found rather interesting, the implication that Loog was assisted by those who slither in the dark. This would mean that the ones behind the division of Fodlan was not the church like Edelgard seem to think, but the Agarthans. (Not that Edelgard has any way of knowing this). Do anyone know the original reason why Loog wanted to separate from the Empire? Is probably covered in the main library somewhere. I wonder if the entire thing could have been a ploy. Unless there is a really good reason. I kind of think that Faerghus would have been better off not splitting from the Empire in the first place. I do generally think that unification is beneficial for everyone, the more splintered people are between smaller nations and cultures, the greater the risk for a conflict is. A coalition of smaller nations is also less effective in defending their territory against outside threats, compared to one united larger nation.
  5. I have managed to get through a significant amount of the abyss library now and I have to say I found the evidence in the encyclopedia of Fodlans insects to be quite damning against Rhea. Especially the part of suppressing medical knowledge so that people would be more reliant on white magic and therefore the church for healing illness. The one thing I find confusing is that the cruel Sothis depicted in this book seem so much at odds with the version of Sothis we have seen through Byleth I also think the Edelgard civil war plan is kind of dumb. She is still starting a war, the chance of major change in the world is reduced compared to the continental war and it could be just as bloody. Not to mention that Edelgard wants to help people in more than just her own nation. However hard this is to imagine Edelgard only pushes her beliefs on the rest of Fodlan to help those she believes suffer under the crest system and that applies to more than just the empire
  6. This is actually the least toxic I have ever seen a debate like this get. Seen some real nightmares. I mainly just reply because I want to and it gives me an excuse to talk about Edelgard which I love doing. Of course I do think that this games story is quite morally grey and therefore I don't believe there is an objective answer about who is in the right
  7. Interesting idea, considering I do plan to write a story taking place during Edelgard's shadow war with the Slitherers. This is a concept I could use
  8. If there is anyone out of the surviving Agarthans with a higher rank than Thales and that is very bad news for crimson flower Edelgard. I would hope she would be able to make it
  9. That does seem consistent with Rhea's behaviour in later ages. The old gods of the Agarthans is another thing I know absolutely nothing about. But it does seem like Thales is some kind of high priest for his people, so he obviously had a lot of faith in whatever their religion is. I also did look up the origin of the name Rhea quite a while back, it is apparently from Greek mythology, Rhea is actually the wife of Kronos and the mother of Zeus. Not sure how that is relevant to this character, but that seems to be where the name comes from. Edelgard is a Germanic name simply meaning "noble protector", so very good connotations with that name. Hresvelg is a reference to Hresvelger, a giant in Norse mythology who had the power to turn into an eagle. Makes sense with the eagle on the imperial regalia
  10. Thanks, will read that once I have time. I have been kind of wondering for a while now which of these two factions technically struck first. Could be either as all sources we have on this are incredibly biased.
  11. The only way she could help Fodlan without starting a war is if she first managed to deal with Thales and his organisation, something I don't think she could do alone at the point in time the war started. Her only real alternative would be to turn to Rhea for help and hope she is more understanding after explaining Thales was behind everything. I don't know how high the chances of this happening actually is after the Flame Emperor reveal. She is otherwise under real pressure from the Slitherers start the war. Byleth in crimson flower actually serves primarily as an emotional support for Edelgard, but that is actually vital as this Edelgard does become a lot less ruthless as a result. I am guessing she refuses to use the Slitherers out of principle in this case . Maybe Hubert's actions do reflect on her reputation, but ultimately she isn't technically culpable. Not any more culpable than she is for the tragedy of Duskur just because Thales claims it was done to her benefit. Edelgard has been loudly condemning that action even to his face. I also really doubt it was beneficial to Edelgard because of what it did to Dimitri. But in the end, maybe we should just agree on that. The circumstances in this game are very complicated and things aren't that black-and-white. Edelgard isn't all innocent or all guilty, the answer is somewhere in between. She is somewhat culpable for the slitherers actions due to the alliance, but not fully responsible, as a lot of these actions isn't something she really wants. I am willing to overlook a lot of Edelgard's less ideal actions because I do know she has good intentions, and that she can be better than she often comes across. In the end. Edelgard's rule isn't all that bad for the people in general, most of the problems exist only during the war. And I do have to give credit for successfully reforming the system and making something better, as well as getting rid of the slitherers, even if the game isn't very clear how exactly that was accomplished.
  12. One thing I have to give Hubert credit for is that his plan does end working and he is instrumental in the destruction of the Slitherers after the war. Edelgard most likely couldn't have done this without him. But it is also good that Edelgard got Byleth as a second advisor, he/she is quite good at balancing out Hubert as he is often times too pragmatic. Byleth helps Edelgard stay in touch with her emotions and Hubert pushes her in a more cold and calculating direction. I don't really approve of Hubert silencing the dissenters without Edelgard's approval, but I can't blame this on Edelgard as she has no knowledge of this. This is entirely on Hubert. unless, some dissenters are slitherers in which case, screw them, they do need to die.
  13. Addressing the whole Hubert thing, he is always suspect. He frequently disobeys direct orders from Edelgard to show mercy if he believes that doing otherwise is in her best interest. Hubert is coldly rational but lacks empathy, he is however frequently right in his assertions. While he can ultimately be blamed for Edelgard's alliance with the Slitherers has Edelgard originally refused until she was convinced to accept by Hubert. What is even worse is that I actually find humorous logic to be flawless, doesn't make sense for Edelgard to go against the Slitherers at this point, doing so after the war is the superior tactical decision. Just another case of Hubert valuing Edelgard's life above any other. He realised the danger she would be in if she went against them, and he is completely correct about that. Hubert also frequently does things in secret without Edelgard's knowledge. I initially assumed him to be evil and a bad influence on Edelgard, but lately I am not so sure, however cold his perspective is it often makes sense. While I am uncertain if I would consider Hubert evil, he's definitely worse than Edelgard. Also, my understanding the Hyrm doesn't happen at all in crimson flower. While the conquest can easily make people in universe believe Edelgard is a tyrant, I do not think that make it so. She is just too good a ruler to possibly be considered tyrannical. She just kind of suffers from some bad PR due to her unfortunate alliance with the Agarthans, which however unfortunate it is does make tactical sense. Still think it reflects well on Edelgard that she hates having to tolerate these people until the war is over, I can tell how much that bothers her in almost every scene they are in.
  14. Thanks, I had been searching for the reason Sophis did that. Currently on my second playthrough (guess what I played first) with the golden deer and I haven't reached the point I can access that library yet. I was thinking that Sophis didn't seem like the type to commit genocide for no reason based on our interactions with her. Many of the reasons I kind of admire Edelgard, she isn't your typical conqueror. This is actually another reason why I find her alliance with the Agarthians so regrettable, a pretty much ruined what would otherwise be a pretty clean war. It Edelgard could get rid of them. She should, but it didn't seem to be a realistic possibility.
  15. And utilitarianism would say maybe... It depends. The debate between Kantian moral philosophy and utilitarian moral philosophy is quite interesting and I can see some valid points in both camps, even if I do know where I stand. I think it is quite telling with the Agarthans that even someone willing to go as far as Edelgard think we are going too far. The wiki on Edelgard actually states that her primary problem with them is their disregard for civilian casualties. They do in a way represent a level of by any means necessary that even Edelgard wouldn't stoop to. So they are a clear line where Edelgard is moral limit is. She might be allied with them, but she is still going to make it clear that she isn't approving of their actions, it is kind of interesting that Edelgard went as far as actually showing up after Remire village to try and clarify things for Byleth and Jeralt. Quite a bit of risk, but apparently it was really important to her for them to know that the Flame Emperor didn't approve of his course of action. The Agarthans to my understanding is all about revenge at any cost, I am not even certain if they have any plans of rebuilding society at all. And I think I've made myself clear what I think about revenge as a motivation, I think it is a destructive principle that leads to a cycle of violence and is pretty much never justified. This game really made me think when it comes to the contrast between motivations and actions when it comes to morality and made me reach some personal conclusions. One of them being that you can't judge a person by their actions alone, motivation is quite important and even a person responsible for terrible atrocities might not be a monster. I think it is ultimately important to recognise that people like Edelgard, Dimitri and Rhea are ultimately flawed human beings with good intentions (mostly), and neither in my opinion really deserves to be crucified for their supposed crimes. Nobody is perfect and nobody really deserves to be defined by their past when they can contribute to a better future. Basically, I don't care what Edelgard did during the war, it is who she becomes afterwards that really matters. To embrace the mentality that people need to suffer because their misdeeds is to embrace sadism and prioritise selfish satisfaction at the cost of even more bloodshed. This is after all what motivates the Agarthans. Vengeance is a satisfying primal instinct, but it is ultimately primal, uncivilized and selfish.
×
×
  • Create New...