Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Darkmoon6789

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

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Sweden (Stockholm)

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Fire Emblem Game
    Three Houses

Member Badge

  • Members

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I agree with that Edelgard isn't entirely clean, no lord in this game really is with the possible exception of Claude, which honestly makes him less interesting than the other two. I always get is shut that down my spine whenever someone debates in terms of "getting away scotch free" or "getting away with it". I think that mindset is the first step on a very dark path. Edelgard is more than just the sum of her crimes and to reduce it down to just requiring punishment and judgement for misdeeds. Is ignoring someones inherent humanity, ignoring who she is as a person and what she really feels just to define her solely by her worst actions. This is more than just about Edelgard, it is about my views on justice and rehabilitation in general. I can never understand or approve of that mindset which is why I also have trouble truly supporting Dimitri. I am not saying you have that mindset, but it is just something that I got reminded of.
  2. I think that the strangest thing about it is that if Rhea assumes that Edelgard will come to the rescue of the civilians. That relies on Edelgard being a good person. She is, but why does Rhea think that? I at least give her the benefit of doubt that she legitimately believes that Edelgard's side is evil. Her entire rationale in this entire war doesn't make any sense, unless she is working from the assumption that her enemies are evil. But if Edelgard was the evil tyrant Rhea believed her to be, she wouldn't have come to the rescue of the civilians and Rhea would have essentially defeated herself by burning down her own stronghold. Essentially, this entire plan would never have worked if Rhea's claim of Edelgard being wicked was actually true. Edelgard and Dimitri are very similar in that regard, they both doesn't want people to get hurt but feel like it is unavoidable. They both live for a memory of those who are dead and is doing what they are doing allegedly to fulfil their wishes. The primary difference is that there is a part of Dimitri that does take pleasure in killing and causing suffering to those he deem evil. But there is also a side of Dimitri that does not. I think Dimitri have a legit split personality. Edelgard, by contrast, doesn't enjoy killing anyone, but is willing to accept innocent people dying for the sake of a better future as she knows that when it comes to war, it is unavoidable. It also seems like Edelgard is more tolerant of morally dubious people than Dimitri. Boar Dimitri after his reunion with Byleth get angry at the very insistence of not straight up murdering the bandits that have come to loot Garreg Mach, citing that, but allowing one to live is implying that Byleth things that their lifestyle of looting and pillaging is justified. In the eyes of Dimitri their actions makes these bandits unfit to live and any mercy towards them, contributing to them hurting more innocent people. Edelgard, on the other hand, frequently associates with bandits and people like Jeritza. Presumably because she understands that sometimes circumstances can drive you to do things you don't really want to do. Some of them are just desperate to survive, and whatever they have done it doesn't stop them from still being human. Despite all the people he had killed, Edelgard takes pity on Jeritza and gives him a sanctuary, trying to make use of his bloodlust for a more productive purpose. Edelgard is herself in a situation where she feels like she hasn't much of a choice but to do some of morally unscrupulous things. Maybe that is what makes our heavy less absolute stance on morality and therefore she is more merciful to supposedly evil people than Dimitri. Dimitri's sense of justice leads to part of him thinking that killing some people is morally justified because they are evil. I don't think Edelgard ever had any such delusions, she makes no pretense that those deaths she is responsible for in the war didn't necessarily deserve to die. She always understood the ramifications of her actions but deemed it necessary
  3. Still, why the army of Faerghus would be in favour of burning down their own capital with the civilians in it is beyond me. It seems quite counter-productive to protecting their people. It also makes no sense from a military standpoint, as you say, Edelgard could have just waited them out and they would have essentially have destroyed their last stronghold. So why does Edelgard act? I think the answer is to save the citizens of Fhirdiad from the fire as she doesn't want any more innocents to die than is absolutely necessary. Did Rhea know she would react this way? If so, that seems like a pretty weird assumption to make for someone who presumably believes that Edelgard is evil. It isn't that they are fighting without a king that I find odd. It is that they are following someone who just told them to burn down their own capital. The knights of Faerghus abandoned any code of chivalry by supporting this move, as knights, they are sworn to protect their, citizena, not to participate in their slaughter. Logically speaking, this should lose Rhea the support of Faerghus as a nation because of such obvious disregard for the lives of their citizens and the oaths of its knights. They would probably still oppose Edelgard, but they shouldn't obey Rhea.
  4. So you dislike the Lords, including Edelgard because you think they are too good? I will take that as a compliment. Granted out of the three I don't actually think that Claude has enough blood on his hands to be as interesting as the other two, I wish that the developers would have focused more on his underhanded tactics. Dimitri's and Edelgard's differing versions of justice has resulted in the both of them having quite a bit of blood on their hands. Despite their good intentions. It is complexity like this that makes them interesting. But lying to the Black Eagles, you might just hit the nail on the head. Edelgard has trust issues and therefore has trouble showing weakness to people other than Byleth. It isn't really about Edelgard being a terrible person, it is about her having some issues based on her past. One of Edelgard's primary weaknesses is her inability to trust people, despite regarding them as friends. It is only Byleth trusts enough to know that they wouldn't cause any trouble if they knew the truth. Which all stands back from Edelgard's trust issues and how her position distances her from people. As the previous commentator pointed out, Byleth is the only one who doesn't let her position as the Emperor get in the way of regarding them simply as Edelgard.
  5. That just means you are biased against everyone, not neutral. Also, did you even read what I wrote about why it is a really stupid idea to tell the Empire as a whole who was really responsible for the destruction of Arianrhod? The short summary is this, the Agarthans will take an official declaration of their existence as an act of war and destroyed more cities in retaliation. She lies because she cannot officially admit that the true culprit even exists without risking her own people.
  6. While I can't answer for him, I can answer for me. In my case, because I like her. Edelgard might be a conqueror and a warrior, but she is also a human being. Underneath her tough exterior she is a traumatised young girl who want nothing more than to make the world a better place so that the horrible thing that happened to her and her siblings wouldn't happen to anyone else ever again. Edelgard isn't a typical villain who enjoys bloodshed and death, she mourns the fallen, her decisions do weigh on her conscience. She is stubborn to a fault, but she is a very sweet girl on the inside as evidenced by her love of sweets and armoured stuffies (Teddie Bears). She is also very easily embarrassed, which is adorable. Given everything that she is, I don't think it is fair to paint Edelgard as some kind of monster, she is very sympathetic and human proving that even those who starts wars and conquers nations are very much still a person who can have quite a few redeemable qualities. She is the living embodiment of why judging a person solely by their actions can be misleading. Edelgard is so much more than just a conqueror.
  7. Are you certain about that as you are hardly neutral yourself as your anti-Edelgard bias is obvious. You do have a certain track record. But it is okay as long as you try to keep to the facts, after all, true objectivity is impossible. Even with the same information we are going to interpret it differently. I think you failed to consider the far more plausible option. Edelgard doesn't know the full truth of everything and is just speculating about a lot of things and sometimes she is mistaken. I am assuming you are referring to the church being behind purposefully splitting the Empire into several pieces to weaken it? If you pay attention to some of the books in the shadow library. There is actually an insinuation that it is correct that someone did it deliberately worked behind the scenes to split the Empire into pieces to propagate war and conflict. Edelgard is only wrong about the perpetrator, as it was in reality the Agarthans. So, she is technically right about someone deliberately supporting Loog in order to weaken the Empire, but wrong about the culprit as Agarthans to try to blame the church for the incident. She just happens to fall for their trick. Yet it cannot be argued that the church didn't benefit from the deal with Faerghus, it is just that the church took the bait that would later be used against them in motivating the Empire to fight. Even if some of the stuff she says about the church is made up, Edelgard still obviously believe it and wasn't the one who made it up. Also, literally everything in this game is from an unreliable narrator as everything is someone's perspective. One you know about the world history but isn't in the hidden library is literally church propaganda. And hidden library has an anti-church bias , so it isn't fully reliable either. There is also no guarantee that Rhea is actually telling the truth at the end of verdant wind. It is always the truth according to someone, even if they do believe it. There might still be all kinds of misconceptions. This isn't unique to Edelgard. And yes, I believe that Rhea likely believe her version of events that she tells Claude. But she is still horribly biased and there is some signs she might have be underestimating the benevolence of her mother as there are some signs that Sothis might have committed genocide on the Agarthans. Something that Rhea probably believes is justified because she could never comprehend that her mother would ever do anything wrong. Furthermore, the reason she lied about destroyed Arianrhod is blatantly obvious, how is it especially terrible? It is obviously because provoking the Agarthans at this point would be incredibly stupid after making such a demonstration of power. The Agarthans would likely take Edelgard revealing their existence to the rest of the Empire as another act of defiance and nuke Enbarr if she told her troops the truth about what really happened at Arianrhod. You have to remember that they are a shadow action that very few people know exist, so if Edelgard can't reveal their existence to the Empire as a whole, blaming the church is the only logical option. It also helps that the church already have taken credit for the valley of torment in the past in an attempt to hide the existence of the Agarthans, which makes this lie quite believable. My point here is that there are strong incentives to not want people to know about the existence of those who slither in the dark and the lie is entirely in service of not angering them further as long as they still have the church to fight. So it is entirely possible that by making this decision, Edelgard could have saved quite a number of lives. Is it better to blame an atrocity on it action not responsible for it or risk another city being destroyed?
  8. But the Flame Emperor directly denies being responsible for the Remire incident. Granted, maybe only Byleth knows that. Still, you would think that this will would a fact worth mentioning to the rest of them. The number one error everyone makes is assuming the Flame Emperor is the mastermind when they weren't. But most I guess wouldn't understand that there is a separation between Flame Emperor followers and the Agarthans. Also, the dialogue you use as an example, does seem to be from exactly before the final battle. That is the way into the war, Ferdinand is just essentially saying that they have to finish what we started, it is way too late to turn back now. Which is absolutely logical given the situation. Silver snow is only one out of four routes, it is the outlier as Ferdinand is very loyal in the other 3. But considering Dorothea seemed to be reluctant to fight Edie even in silver snow, so I guess I do have to give her the gold medal for loyalty to Edelgard over Ferdinand. Maybe she wouldn't usually choose to fight, but I always got the impression she had a very strong friendship with Edelgard, so I believe she would at least be supportive of her in most cases.
  9. I can't think of a single person who should remain after Rhea sets Fhirdiad on fire. With the possible exception of Cyril. Even Catherine seems to be bothered by this, it is by this point, they should realise that Rhea has lost it. I do think that Seteth and Flayn would also of yet to the burning of Fhirdiad if they were still around at that point. But this is right at the end of the war, so maybe it doesn't matter. Everyone's allegiance would have been the same up to this point
  10. I kind of think that back-and-forth arguments is exactly what you are supposed to do in an discussion. how else are you going to be exposed to different viewpoints. If you are not allowed to express them? If you have 10 paragraphs to say about what I have said about Dimitri, I invite you tell me what you think. It is possible I could gain more knowledge in the exchange and that is ultimately my goal here. To gain a greater understanding. Would you believe me if I say that Dimitri is actually my second favourite character in the entire game? And it certainly isn't because I think he is in the right or that I agree with him. He actually reminds me quite a bit of Arthas Menethil from Warcraft , who is also one of my favourite fictional characters of all time. Both started out with ultimately good intentions and let an obsession with vengeance, twist them into becoming monsters. The difference is that Dimitri did manage to catch himself and managed to become a better person. Arthas lost his humanity completely and became one of the most evil villains in the history of his world. Dimitri is very interesting to me because he is the character that somehow managed to make his unwillingness to accept the idea that sometimes innocents needs to be sacrificed for the greater good and his hatred for the strong trampling the weak into reaching a conclusion that led him to become the very thing that he hated. Ultimately, his desire to punish those who he sees as guilty leads him to becoming incredibly sadistic, and he projects that sadism onto the people he punishes , whenever that is true or not, as he assumes every Imperial general takes pleasure in the killing of innocents. Which is in the case of Randolph is not true, him and soldiers like him are just fighting for their country. They are not the monsters Dimitri think they are, this even applies to Edelgard herself as Dimitri during this time, has a very distorted vision of what she is really like. Even after his recovery, Dimitri ultimately wants to end the bloodshed by any means necessary, but he is blind to the fact that he helps perpetuate the cycle of violence as much as Edelgard. The very act of fighting against her perpetuates more casualties. Dimitri is a multifaceted character who I find quite interesting because he isn't the typical goody two shoes hero. He is in my opinion the most fascinating at height of his insanity Also keep in mind that if I do talk about crimson flower a lot. It is because I love that route. Azure moon is a close second. Neither exist in a vacuum and what you learn on one route informs the other. Why the fact that Dimitri and Edelgard weren't able to get along is such a tragedy is specifically because neither of them are really bad people at heart. Sorry if I can be a bit long winded, I just love talking about this game and often I don't mean for my posts to be as long as they are. I just think of one thing I want to say and then think of thousand more when I am in the process of writing a comment. I guess what you mean with talking about crimson flower is that I was mainly talking about who would join Edelgard rather than the other way around? I just don't have as much of an idea why any of the Black Eagles would fight for the other side. I also find it a bit suspicious that some of those charts have a most people on the Imperial side fight for it supposedly unwillingly. It just screams of bias to me and it is like some people can't accept that some people would follow Edelgard willingly. Not everyone would be against her because not everyone thinks her methods are unjustifiable. Ultimately, I am not trying to say that her actions are okay because she is well-meaning, I am saying that they might be necessary and that some of her actions. Being sketchy doesn't preclude her from possibly being in the right.
  11. Yes, I consider all the crests of the 10 elites in the dark magic as well as all the relics as they were all created by the Agarthans. All crest beasts are is a corrupted form of the Nabateans own transformations after all. The only crests that aren't dark magic are crests of the Saints. That being the crests of the Seiros, Cichol, Cethleann, Indech and Macuil. They were all either willingly passed to humans or the humans with those crests are their direct descendants, not sure which. There are also sacred weapons like the sword and shield of Seiros which are in a completely different category from the relics. Who are unholy in nature. Also, but does provide a good explanation for why Ferdinand doesn't see Edelgard's new system as an issue, if he is right and it wouldn't make a single bit of difference for people like him as he considers himself qualified to rule. If all the nobles actually were the most competent and most well-equipped members of society and most qualified to rule Edelgard's meritocracy wouldn't do a single bit of difference. Because the game have so many routes. A lot of characters are very flexible in what they are willing to support. I just object to the idea that Ferdinand isn't loyal to the Empire. He is actually one of the last people I would ever argue would betray Edelgard. There is also another question I have been thinking about, would it be possible for any Agarthan to betray their faction? I would assume that most would be brainwashed into unquestioned loyalty by Thales and more than willing to die for their cause. Yet again Kronya didn't seem to be a willing sacrifice. Even if they are evil people, maybe not everyone would be up for being treated as completely disposable. There we have another possibility would response to crest beasts, while I don't think it is the case, given some of the earlier examples in the game. Is it possible that some of them might have previously been Agarthans? They have certainly shown themselves to be willing to sacrifice their own in the past for various dark rituals.
  12. Sorry, I did mean Maurice, it is quite similar names so I just mixed it up. I would say that the crest of flames is of the dark nature, because Nemesis stole that power. Byleth inherited this power directly from Sothis, but Edelgard was given it through dark experimentation. It is an unnatural crest with its powers arising from the murder of a deity. I have never by any point said that Edelgard is entirely innocent. That is an interpretation you yourself have made. I am saying that there is usually a reason for her doing scummy shit. She is not one to do bad for the sake of doing bad. Most of the scummy things she has ever done is more or less linked to her decision to ally with the Agarthans. She obviously have some responsibility for this decision, but it is at least second-hand and should not be treated as if their actions are always 100% fully supported by her, they are mostly not, just barely tolerated for the sake of the war effort. It is just irritating that some people can't seem to comprehend that there is a middle ground between absolute innocence and absolute guilt. Even if the crest beasts were volunteers. It is not a completely morally good act as it is still a horrific sacrifice and somewhat equivalent to someone deciding to become a suicide bomber for a cause they believe in. But Edelgard isn't moustache twirling villain , despite what some people may think. The truth of the matter is pretty undeniably. But Edelgard is a good and well-intentioned person who is willing to go to extreme lengths to make her vision of the greater good a reality. If she does evil. It is because she believes that her end goal makes it worth it. The Agarthans will be allowed to commit atrocities for a time, but Edelgard ultimate goal is to destroy them as well as the church. She is just willing to do what is necessary to make sure both will be defeated. It doesn't make her entirely innocent, but it is a mitigating factor and shows what she really thinks of their methods. It is a lot like how Edelgard plans to use wars to end future wars I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't think Edelgard would willingly take part in the creation of crest beasts from innocents. But she could potentially turn a blind eye to the Agarthans doing that and use the result of their work. It is not that unusual in the war for a country to ally with someone reprehensible if they have a common enemy. Great Britain and the United States, as well as the rest of the allies did cooperate with the Soviet Union in World War II. Does that make them partially responsible for all the atrocities committed by Joseph Stalin? I guess that could be argued if they had the power to stop it. But I think we can all agree that deciding to fight the Soviet Union at this time. In addition to Nazi Germany, Italy and Japan would be a pretty nonsensical decision. So they tolerated the obvious abuse of human rights in order to cooperate in defeating their common enemy. I think that situation is roughly analogous of Edelgard making an alliance with the Agarthans. It doesn't necessarily mean she has to approve of everything they are doing. It is just the tactically smarter decision Also, have you even been reading my post? I specifically told you that azure moon and verdant wind also clearly supports the idea that most of the Black Eagles will join Edelgard on default. In fact, most of the time, I do think that people would stay with their respective house, with a few exceptions. This is pretty much what is the default fact in the game, regardless of if a character's interests would be better served joining another side. Which happens quite frequently, as multiple characters are fighting on a side that is ultimately against their own best interest. Of course, there are scenarios where it would make sense for various characters to go with various sides. Most have at least one reason to be at either side of the war. But once committed to one side or another, most cannot be so easily convinced to join the other. I do interpret a character not being sparable as a willingness to fight to the death for their respective sides. Which showcases quite a bit of dedication. It means that nothing I left could say could convince them to betray their country by the point. There is a reason most need to be convinced before the war begins as after they have already made their decision. Generally speaking, any character who values keeping a noble title could be argued to be fighting against their own best interests siding with Edelgard. Any character wronged by the crest system for is a commoner is ultimately fighting against their best interest siding against Edelgard. This would be the primary reason Ferdinand have an incentive to go against Edelgard, but it does seem that for the most part, his loyalty to his nation is strong enough to fight for Edelgard anyway. Just like how despite being wronged by the crest system, or are kept under the boot of the nobility. Loyalty to their original nations is still the reason these people fight against what would actually benefit them. The problem is that there is a chance that almost every character can and up at almost any side depending on the circumstances. But they are still more likely to pick one side or another. For the record, I don't think Felix would betray Faerghus most of the time, but he could be convinced to do so under the right circumstances. Like Ferdinand could be convinced to go against Edelgard, even if most of the time he would not.
  13. I think that Edelgard is able to transform as her transformation is different in nature from the rest. It is implied that she actually transforms as a response to unlocking the true power of the crest of flames I think that is a sign of the true dark nature of that crest. In the case of Macuil, is crest was known as being cursed, so it wouldn't surprise me if different rules apply to him than normal. This is not a normal transformation If you remember I also stated a second option, I said that they would wither be volunteers or created by the Agarthans independently of the main Imperial army and lended to them to help in the war effort. Little evidence we do have as you say seem to suggest Myson is one of the primary people behind the creation of crest beasts. He also happens to be present during the siege of the Imperial Palace in Azure Moon. Suggesting he might also have had a hand in hers transformation as well, he probably devised the method. Obviously the Agarthans wouldn't bother to just use volunteers. Yet, I don't think it is entirely impossible, but some people would volunteer for this if the Imperial army practised this. Some people are willing to die for the nation and for a cause they believe in, why wouldn't this extend to transforming into a monster as well? Maybe then people should stop pretending people like Ferdinand doesn't fight for Edelgard in every single rout with the exception of silver snow. And that is only due to influence from Byleth. Regardless of his views on nobility, Ferdinand is nonetheless loyal to Edelgard most of the time. Same with Petra, she is in verdant wind. The only member of the Black Eagles to stand directly outside Edelgard's throne room. This suggests to me that she is trusted above all others, which implies quite a bit of loyalty. I think this is because Edelgard has promised her the independence of the nation in return for her service. A promise I know she keeps if she wins the war. I find it pretty silly that Petra would fight against Edelgard for the independence of the nation when Edelgard has already promised to make her nation independent, she has no reason to be interested in Brigid as a vassal state. The default state of all Black Eagles members is to join Edelgard without interference from Byleth. So even if Byleth didn't exist, they would pretty much all be part of the imperial army in Azure Moon, Verdant Wind and Crimson Flower. If we want a way to measure loyalty, I guess we can see it like this, the ones that can be spared and recruited the even once the war phase has started has comparatively less dedication to their faction. I think that Ashe in the verdant wind is recruitable after his defeat, same with Lorenz in both that route and azure moon. We also have Lysithea in crimson flower. Do anyone have a complete list of characters that is sparable and recruitable in each route after the war has already started? I would think that the fact that both Ferdinand and Petra fight to the death and can not be spared, and convinced to join your side shows that they are both very loyal to the Empire.
  14. I have assumed that either the crest beasts in the Imperial army was either volunteers or made by the Agarthans independently from Edelgard and later lended to her to help with the war effort. Edelgard accepts their presence because they provide a military advantage as she considers achieving victory and reshaping the society in Fodlan to be more important in the long run. I don't actually view the use of monsters in your army as inherently evil, if for example the people who transformed were volunteers. It would be a lot better, morally speaking. It also seems from the dialogue following the holy tomb incident in the crimson flower that Edelgard will allow those who are not willing to fight for her to leave, and that the people who stay do so willingly. For this reason, I can say with confidence. She doesn't have a tendency to force people to fight for her. People are willing to do a lot for ideals they believe in, I could definitely see some being willing to make this sort of sacrifice as in most cases, it doesn't seem like the transformation is permanent. But the game never fully explains how exactly these demonic beasts were created , so this is just speculation. But I think we shouldn't jump to conclusions that they were all kidnapped civilians or something. A lot of people in the universe jumped to conclusions when it came to Edelgard and a lot of those conclusions have turned out to be wrong. Once you examine the situation further. When it comes to Edelgard and Dragons. I think the problem isn't necessarily that Rhea is a dragon, but that she is an immortal despot who has ruled Fodlan for over a millennia, deciding that she knows better than humanity, makes decisions for them and tells everyone who oppose are without mercy. Rhea has also limited technological progress in Fodlan for reasons she never disclosed to her subjects and has been lying to them the entire time. Even if she thinks it is for their own good. Edelgard is someone who embraces humanity and mortality, and I get the impression she finds the idea of the ruler living forever to be abhorrent. Especially another species, deciding what is best for another because they consider themselves above them. This applies not only to dragons, but the very concept of gods as Edelgard doesn't believe anyone has an inherent right to rule because of circumstances of birth. So, she rejects the very concept of divine authority, the same as she rejects the right of the nobility and the monarchy to stand above the commoners. Edelgard always intended to be the final emperor who inherited their position through her bloodline. Her war is very much about liberation for humanity from the tyranny of dragons who considers themselves above them, as well as the liberation of commoners from the nobility, whose attitude towards the commoners is very much similar as what the Dragons have towards humanity. That they are inherently superior and it is their role to protect those beneath them. You're right in that some people would actually appreciate being protected by such a powerful beings such as the immaculate one, this is where the primary conflict between the two factions takes shape. As some people want to be protected by something stronger than them and they want these beings, whenever dragons, gods, or the nobility, to make decisions on their behalf as they do think they have that right. While I haven't played awakening, I did read a little bit about Naga. To my understanding, while she is worshipped as the goddess by humanity. Naga is the complete opposite of Rhea as she has never claimed to be a god and the worship of her did arise independently of any design by her instead of the deliberately created church, like was created by Seiros with the expressed purpose of making her mother a goddess. Naga deliberately doesn't interfere in the affairs of humanity because she doesn't think it is her right to rule over them. Rhea is the complete opposite in this regard, as she thinks she needs to rule over and guide humanity for their own good. I guess I am trying to say but Edelgard probably wouldn't have the same problem with Naga as with Rhea as she doesn't rule over humanity with an iron fist
  15. That is a very intelligent comment, one of the reasons I would say that Edelgard becomes such a great leader in crimson flower is because she listens to the advice of her companions and takes what they say in their supports to heart. People like Ferdinand, Byleth, Manuella and Dorothea helps Edelgard be a better leader than she would have ever been on her own. Even in an absolute monarchy. Leadership is still a team effort as the advisors to the emperor are also just as important as the Emperor herself. The thing is, the reason why Edelgard in non-crimson flower routes shuts down her capacity for empathy and becomes, in her own words, an Ice Queen is because she basically needs to in order to be able to carry the burden of all the death and bloodshed she has to bear the responsibility for during the war. Edelgard is normally a very empathetic person, so her primary defence mechanism to be able to bare what she feels must be done is to shut down that side of her entirely. This side of her is reawakened by Byleth, which leads to a less ruthless Edelgard during crimson flower, but it also has the side-effect of Edelgard feeling a lot more of the weight of all of those who perished in the war. But because Byleth is with her, she is able to bare it without shutting down her emotional side entirely. I do believe Edelgard is very likely to be suffering from some pretty heavy guilt later in life from all that death and destruction. Even if she still likely believed she did was to must be done. But Byleth will be there for her to help her deal with that. One of the reasons I find Boar Dimitri so frustrating is because he flat out refuses to listen to anyone. As soon as they contradict his delusions in any way. Fortunately, he eventually snaps out of it with the help of Byleth. As you say, he will be a good thing because of his support group. My primary worry would be for him to fall into insanity again at some point in the future, it is mentioned, even at the very end, but he still hears the voices. But maybe with Byleth and the rest he will have the strength to ignore them. Without Byleth, he would be an absolutely awful King. In fact, I would rather have insane Azula as Firelord than insane Dimitri as King. This is because Azula for the most part, still sticks to banishment, regardless of how bad her mental state while Dimitri at his worst kills and tortures with impunity and enjoys every second of it. It is a very good thing that this isn't the person he is anymore at the end of Azure Moon. One reason I do prefer Edelgard to Dimitri, even at their best, is that Edelgard was never as bad as Dimitri at her worst. Edelgard might be cold at her worst, but she was never sadistic
  • Create New...