-
Posts
747 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Darkmoon6789
-
-
1 hour ago, Silver-Haired Maiden said:
Since we're discussing Dimitri, who I love as much as y'all love Edelgard, I shall jump back into this discussion.
When talking about Dimitri, it is vital to remember that he was suffering a literal break in reality, induced by severe trauma and untreated PTSD and survivor's guilt. He was literally suffering from psychosis, so badly that he was talking to dead people who he genuinely believed to be there. So bad that he believed Byleth to be another angry dead person coming back to haunt him for failing them.
When talking about psychopathy, approximately 30-40% of combat veterans report auditory or visual hallucinations/delusions. That is a significant chunk. The guy can hardly be blamed for his actions if he's not even in touch with reality at the time. More than anything, he needs genuine medical care. I'm not saying that what he did was okay, people still got hurt, but allow me for a moment to turn your own defense of Edelgard back at you.
Dimitri felt remorse for doing what he did. He considered himself a monster for doing it but felt it was necessary to do so in defense of innocent people who couldn't defend themselves any longer. He hated himself for doing it but considered it a necessary sacrifice in order to help other people and make the world a better place by ridding it of monsters like himself. He just went about it on a far more personal level than Edelgard did, instead of starting a war to do it he decided to do it with his own two hands.
Also you guys talk about obsession with vengeance as though Dimitri was a completely sane and rational person at his worst. He wasn't. In White Clouds, before he started losing himself to a PTSD related break entirely, he absolutely wanted revenge but he hadn't let it consume him. It took the betrayal of someone he once cared about incredibly deeply to drive him off that edge.
Since war was also brought up, of all of the 3 lords, Dimitri would be the one to understand the true horrors of war more than any of the others. It was Dimitri present at the assassination of his father and the resulting deaths of everyone around him, it was Dimitri who was sent to quell the rebellion. You can claim that Edelgard understood the horror of war all you want but the fact is she didn't. None of you do either. You think of it as something necessary for change and sometimes it is, but if you truly understood you might be a little less quick to defend Edelgard. Just like Edelgard might have been more hesitant to declare war. War is a monster. It's very nature is tragedy and suffering, it is a fire whose fuel is living human beings. No soldier wants to be maimed or die on the battlefield and for every one that is hurt or killed there are many more people who are also hurt - their loved ones, friends and family. That's not even touching on the human rights violations that tend to take place during war. Don't do this unless you can handle it, but go and look up actual war time accounts. Look at actual images of battlefields. Not the Hollywood crap but actual footage. It is horrific, it is awful, it is a fate that you shouldn't wish upon even your worst enemy. I don't want to get into too much detail because this is a public forum but I cannot impress upon you enough just how horrid war actually is.
As I have been saying before, I don't hate Dimitri or think he is evil. Your defence of him. It makes perfect sense. I would not hold his actions against him. He is definitely emotionally compromised by his trauma for most of the story, which could explain his often times irrational conclusions. For example, it makes a mention later on in the story after he recovered some of his sanity that he suspected that Arundel was responsible for the tragedy of Duscur, as he had been suspicious of his sudden stop of donations to the church. But if he suspected Arundel, why did he spend so long blaming Edelgard for said tragedy? I guess the answer might lie in the fact that he just wasn't thinking rationally at the time due to his issues. He needed a scapegoat to deal with his trauma and Edelgard was convenient for that role due to her actions as the Flame Emperor.
You might also have a point in that Dimitri had experienced the horrors of war firsthand, the tragedy of Duscur was beyond horrific and it is pretty much a slaughter as the death of Lambert caused the knights of Faerghus to essentially committed genocide on an innocent party. But Edelgard has been through trauma of her own, even if it is of a different nature. She is no stranger to suffering. I am uncertain of how much experience Edelgard has had with war, I am uncertain if he ever fought a real battle before the start of her revolution.
She might have more emotional distance from it, but at the very least, she does understand that innocents will die because of her decision and she did hesitate as a consequence. But to her, the more immediate suffering is the one caused by the crest system and the church as this is the kind of suffering she has experienced. So, the suffering caused by the nobility and the church by the attitude towards crests and the importance of the society of Fodlan places on them is what feels the most real to her for the same reasons as Dimitri's personal experiences with war means that he is more intuned to the suffering caused by war. Essentially Edelgard's experiences with the systematic suffering caused by the brutal, unfair and unjust society of Fodlan makes her unable to accept the existence of this system for another minute, and is why she is willing to move heaven and earth to create a new system.
Edelgard's actions are as much motivated by her trauma as Dimitri's actions are motivated by his. So if you extend sympathy to Dimitri regardless of his actions for these reasons, you should also show the same courtesy to Edelgard. Just because someone likes one of them doesn't mean we have to consider the other a monster. Dimitri is actually my second favourite character in this game and if Edelgard didn't exist, he would have been my favourite. I am a bit bothered by that. I don't get why liking one of these characters always has to come at the expense of the other, I can even fall into that trap myself, I guess because my protective instincts kick in whenever someone wants to harm Edelgard.
I have been exposed to a lot of the awfulness of humanity, I am well aware of the horrors of war. But I am more well researched on the details of the horrors of systematic human rights violations such as what was done during the Holocaust, what was committed by the Soviet government during the reign of Joseph Stalin, as well as the torture methods used by the Catholic church and the Protestant churches during the mediaeval era, including the witchhunts and the inqusition. War is horrific, yes, but so is living under a theocracy or a oppressive government. Nowadays I try to avoid looking at such material because my mental state can't handle it as well as I used to.
The worst part about living under a oppressive system is that often times, it brainwashes you into thinking that oppression is okay. I can only imagine how horrible it must be to live as a woman in a Third World country that considers you a second-class citizen, the culture, even possibly having brainwashed you into thinking this is the natural way of things. Places that practices genital mutilation and stoning rape victims to death. And because of the brainwashing the governments of these places engages in the people might never break free from this of their own accord. I have trouble accepting a reality such as this and however horrific war is, there will be suffering for a time when trying to overthrow this type of system. But in the long run. Such actions might prevent quite a bit of suffering and give the people living in these regions a higher standard of living. Like Edelgard, if I had the power to stop these types of things I would not sit idly by and let these abuses of human rights continue. It is from this context, I view Edelgard's actions. I can sympathise with her desire to use any means to change the world for the better because she is sick of the world, being such a crappy place. Peace is all well and good, but the unwillingness to act that often times comes with too much of an aversion to war can sometimes perpetuate suffering and make people doormats for those who aren't adverse to violence.
"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good to do nothing"
Sorry for the long post, but I have a lot to say on the subject. I guess I am trying to say that while I sympathise with both Edelgard and Dimitri, I do understand Edelgard's way of thinking a bit more. Even if she is in the wrong that will not change the fact that I will still love Edelgard. But I don't think that whenever she is in the right or wrong is all that obvious.
-
8 minutes ago, Vitezen said:
While Edelgard is more acutely aware of the consequences of her actions, remember that Dimitri is somewhat out of touch with reality. He regularly hallucinates post-timeskip, and while he's clearly worse at that point than he was in the past, we don't actually know exactly how unstable he was at all times during White Clouds. It's unfair to say that Dimitri is absolutely evil for his actions when he isn't fully aware of reality.
It's good for Edelgard to always have the greater scope in mind as she leads, but in Dimitri's warrior culture where people must work within their role, that isn't always useful. Carefully weighing the risks of fighting when you're on the battlefield, unable to escape, and facing an enemy that will do everything in their power to kill you in order to avoid being killed themselves, isn't practical. I think the game does a great job here in situating legitimate insanity next to the voluntary fervor of a soldier, and asking the viewer to decide if there's a distinction between the two. Ultimately, the tragedy of Azure Moon isn't that Dimitri is evil, it's that he's a mentally unstable person put in the wrong position at the worst possible time, and others have to suffer the consequences for actions that he can't be fully blamed for taking due to his insanity. He would be perfect as a soldier, where his love of violence could be let loose as necessary and held back by a superior who knows when it's time to stop fighting. At that moment, he would be an amazing soldier, but a poor king, yet a king is what he is.
True, I also never said that Dimitri is absolutely evil. But I see him as a cautionary tale of what an obsession with vengeance can do to an otherwise good person.
As you say, Dimitri would be a great soldier if he had a superior to tell him what to do, but as king he doesn't have a superior. But being a terrible king doesn't make him a bad person. Being a monarch is very demanding and I just don't think that someone with severe mental issues would have an easy time in that role. It is even possible to be too good a person for that role as a level of ruthlessness is sometimes required to make difficult decisions and this needs to be counterbalanced by empathy to avoid becoming a tyrant. Even after overcoming his mental issues, I think that Dimitri's inability to handle the deaths of innocents makes him less ideal as a monarch.
I have thought that Dimitri had a certain similarity to Jeritza. Who also have a need for violence due to severe mental issues. But Edelgard gave him and his need for bloodshed a place within the Imperial hierarchy as a soldier. So his mentality was put to use for the sake of the war effort. The greatest problem he faces is what he would do once the war is over, would Edelgard's peaceful utopia still have room for a person like him? Maybe if Dimitri wasn't born as king, he might have been better off in a similar position as Jeritza, channelling his bloodlust into his role as a soldier. In another life he could easily have had the same role as the Death Knight.
-
15 minutes ago, Vitezen said:
That depends on what you mean by a genuine desire. Dimitri has been suffering from some form of mental illness his entire life. Can you say that he's fully responsible for his thoughts and feelings? But beside that point, this also relates to a bigger theme of Azure Moon, which is the ramifications of living in a military culture.
While Edelgard's ideal country strives toward an enlightened and educated population that can decide things for themselves, Dimitri's culture is one of duty, vocation, and stratification. Not everyone will be expected to improve themselves in this society, but society will have a place for them. Someone who has a predilection toward violence will become a soldier, and their excesses of violence may be kept in check by a superior who is more capable of controlling them. Azure Moon and the game in general work to break down the idealization of war, but that doesn't mean a country where soldiers are honored is bad. Of course, Dimitri has his own mental problems that both help and hurt him in his culture, but just saying he's morally wrong ignores most of the commentary the game makes.
I am primarily talking about Dimitri in between the holy tomb mission and the death Rodrigue. The person he becomes at the end of the route is a different story entirely. But the darkness within him, is best expressed during his interactions with Randolph, where it is very clear that Dimitri views his enemies as monsters worthy of death, even if they are just soldiers fighting to protect their families. It is Dimitri at his worst, as Dimitri when he is trying to negotiate and later is willing to spare Edelgard is Dimitri at his best.
I don't know if you're implying that Edelgard idealise war. But I don't think this is accurate. Edelgard is more than aware of the horrific nature of war, as implied by her interactions with Byleth after the holy tomb mission in Crimson Flower. She knows that innocents and civilians will be caught up in the chaos and that she will be responsible for their deaths by giving the order to start the war. A decision that is weighing on her all the way through.
So why does she do it? Well, because she believes that by overthrowing the church. She will be able to put an end to the bloodstained history of Fodlan. She legitimately believes that while the war will be terrible, it will lead to fewer lives lost in the long run, as by victory. She believes that she will be able to usher in a golden age of peace and prosperity. The tragedy is that both Dimitri and Edelgard wants to achieve the same thing, to put a stop to the cycle of the strong oppressing the weak. Dimitri doesn't believe that Edelgard's methods will work due to her methods being leveraging strength in order to change society.
I don't actually think the game takes a stance on whenever Edelgard's war was right or wrong. It is much smarter than that, it presents a complicated scenario and lets everyone make their own conclusion based on the information presented. We know that the war is costly, but we do not know if the brighter future ushered in by Edelgard whenever she wins or loses is worth that price. There is a possibility that it is. The message I get is that war is terrible, but sometimes it might be necessary. Which I think is a far more nuanced message than any simple lesson that war is bad.
You're right in that of Edelgard and Dimitri are very complex characters, which is why I find them so amazing.
-
7 hours ago, Vitezen said:
@Darkmoon6789 Dimitri's struggle with sadism conflicting with his morals isn't due to multiple personalities. He's just struggling to reconcile conflicting aspects of himself. He wants to follow his own moral code, but he also has desires that conflict with his code, and to make it worse, those desires are partly being sated by doing the things his code requires him to do. He commits egregious violence because he's trying to satisfy both of his desires. He satisfies his moral desires by punishing those he considers guilty, evil, or unjust, but also satisfies his sadistic, violent side by exacting revenge that exceeds what is deserved.
If that is true, then his darkness is genuine and his mental issues cannot be used as an excuse for it. I wouldn't pursue judgement against Dimitri because he is later repentant for a lot of his worst deeds. But I do think he is actually morally worse than Edelgard who doesn't have any sadistic impulse or takes any enjoyment from slaughter, even if her casualty rate is probably higher due to starting the war.
It just comes to show why I prefer Edelgard, she has no illusions that any of the innocents that dies in her war deserves it. Nor that those who fight for the church are bad people. Everything is down to necessity for changing the society in Fodlan. It is a lot more honest than fooling yourself into thinking your enemies are literal. Demons and deserves to die. She is even willing to spare Rhea if she surrenders. And she does in many routs when Rhea is captured. Comes to show that the number of casualties isn't everything
1 hour ago, Slyfox said:Claude wasn't done nearly as well as he could have been, sadly. That said, he's still a fairly well written character who gives off the impression that he could have done more damage if events had been different. It just so happens that he'd rather be an opportunist than an instigator, given the option. One thing they did really well is that I couldn't always tell when he was being serious or joking, lying or telling the truth. Maybe it's a bit of all at once? If he had time to set up all his plots, what could he have managed to pull off? However, Edelgard sees to that he doesn't when she declares war against the church.
Questions for ya. Do you believe everyone in Three Houses deserves a second chance? If Edelgard does, then does Dimitri? Does Rhea? Not even naming others, those three are victims of circumstance and have all handled their trauma in both terrible and great ways. They all have the best of intentions and do terrible things to achieve them. If you'll forgive the worst in one person, then it stands to reason you'd forgive the worst in someone else you aren't as close to.
Now, let's say your government destroyed your country and killed it's own citizens, but had the best of intentions (which differ from person to person). What about another country ruining yours? Would you simply forgive them and let them be? Or would you remove them? People's ideas of justice, right and wrong are different. If everyone was given a second chance, and a third, and a fourth, we'd have anarchy. That's why we have rules, punishment, justice. Rules may be unfortunate, but many people aren't kind enough to show that we can do without them. History has proven that time and time again, as well as our present day lives. Can we release serial killers into the wild, because maybe some of them didn't want to kill but couldn't help themselves?
While I think it's possible to forgive everyone I mentioned, it would be foolish to let them "get away scot-free". Forgiveness does not exclude taking measures to make sure others aren't harmed. You can forgive their "inherent humanity", but still not hand them another knife because they say they are really sorry. It seems like you think that punishment and justice means someone has to take perverse pleasure out of it, invariably. That's a very black and white view on the matter, and dangerous in it's own way.
Responsibility goes hand in hand with accountability. That's part of the job description. Edelgard knows this. Her opponents want to hold her accountable, and she accepts this, though she won't let it happen because she still has a goal to achieve. If Edelgard herself has come to terms with all this, who are we to tell people not to judge her? She certainly has done her own fair share of judging.
Anyway, I'm kinda of rambling on without a clear goal in mind, but keep this in mind: Idealism is a very admirable trait and though we'd be lost without it, take care that it doesn't go to such extremes that less well-intentioned people will take advantage of it. Because they will. And if they hurt you or others, what will you do about? How will you stop it from happening again?
Short answer, yes, I do think both Edelgard, Rhea and Dimitri have the potential to be good enough people to deserve a second chance. But this isn't exactly feasible given the situation, practicality is also important, and if I have to issues between them, I would choose Edelgard. They still have sympathy for Rhea, but her actions at Fhirdiad hurt a lot of innocent people. Killing her wouldn't be acceptable because her actions make her deserve death, but because it might be the only way to make sure she won't hurt further innocents.
Even the same action can carry a lot of different meanings depending on the motivation behind said action. I would argue that the Joker from Batman should probably be killed, not because of any ideas of Indus Irving to pay for these crimes or any such nonsense. But simply because his track record of escape attempts, and ever increasing kill count makes this a matter of it being necessary for saving other people. As well as it being nearly impossible to rehabilitate someone like him. When making a decision like this you need to take into consideration the likelihood of someone changing their ways and becoming a benefit to society instead of a detriment as well as the risk they pose. If they are ever let out again. . Ultimately we lock criminals in prison not because they deserve to suffer, but because we have to protect further innocents from being harmed by their actions as well as a closed off environment being the best circumstance to try to rehabilitate these people.
But even if necessary, we should never take pleasure in the suffering of another or in the taking of lives. This is ultimately what I accuse people in favour of punitive justice for doing.
I am also not exactly in favour of my country's leadership right now. I would be in favour of another country, taking it over. If I am confident they will run things better. Ultimately, well-being of our citizens is more important than nationality. If a male general Empire invaded Earth and managed to make this craphead of the planet into a utopia that was better for everyone. I would be firmly in favour of our alien saviours.
I think it is the fact that neither Edelgard, Rhea or Dimitri aren't ultimately bad people that makes the story into the tragedy. Ideally I would like to save all of them, but I know that is impossible. So I have to focus on the one who is my favourite. Even in real life. I do wish I could save everyone, but that won't be possible, so necessity will take priority over ideals. Protecting people will be the number one priority and we will deal with rehabilitation and second chances when we can afford it. But I do hope that if their world truly does have an afterlife that Sothis will take mercy on all three of them, regardless of route. They all deserve a better than to suffer for eternity for their actions. I do take ideas of an afterlife in consideration as well when dealing with this topic. Even if I don't believe in it myself.
I have had discussions elsewhere with fanatics who believe that actions like what Edelgard did needs to be paid for eternally in the afterlife. It is a belief also shared by Rhea . According to her own statements. I just don't see the point, there is no magical need to make anyone suffer regardless of what they have done. That is injustice, it is sadism. We must do what we must in this life, but if there is another I will never sanction any action to carry over into the next one. It is remarkable how little empathy, some people have one dealing with condemning the dead.
The annoying thing with Edelgard is while I do think she would deserve a second chance. Even if she loses. She do seem insistent to die in this circumstance, so my insistence on helping her would go against her wishes. We see this very same scenario with Dimitri in Azure Moon. Ultimately her death is her own decision, I can't blame Dimitri in Azure Moon or Byleth in Verdant Wind and Silver Snow for it. They simply respected her wish. Do I truly have a right to force are to live on when she clearly doesn't want to? I don't know the questions that. But it being her decision makes her death easier for me to handle. I would just want Edelgard to be remembered as the person she really was, rather than a caricature. I would prefer history to remember the real reasons behind her actions rather than being painted as a villain. Her willingness to die is just another sign of her self-sacrificing nature and I do find it admirable in a way.
Not that I expect a world based on medeval Europe to have such an advanced understanding of justice and rehabilitation. Edelgard knows from experience that in her world death is probably better than any prison sentence as by this era humanity didn't yet have a concept of rehabilitative justice. People still wrongly believed in. eye for an eye.
-
14 minutes ago, SnowFire said:
Rhea's overriding goal is to resurrect Sothis and protect the Children of the Goddess, and in the CF route she has entirely failed at both, as Byleth betrayed her and Seteth/Flayn are either dead or in hiding. This is the "anagnorisis" moment in a tragedy where somebody realizes that everything they worked for has been worthless or counterproductive. It's reasonable to assume that her mental state would not be the best and she would be lashing out at unconnected humans in general. The main way it'd be out of character is that it doesn't seem to militarily make any sense for an ancient veteran of wars - but as stated already, the game acts like firing Fhirdiad does make sense and this is a reasonable thing to do, so in-setting she isn't making a terrible mistake tactically.
Not to sidetrack the conversation too much, but nah, all of the routes except for maybe Silver Snow show multiple sides of the lord, and they aren't "clean." Edelgard still does some questionable things in the CF route if this is what you're referring to, so I disagree it's letting her off scot clean. Also, to the extent this is a valid complaint, I feel that a certain other recent Fire Emblem is an infinitely worse offender - that being FE Fates. No need to go into detail, but Fates takes pains to ensure that nothing bad that ever happens is Corrin's "fault", even on Conquest, even when it plainly is their fault. Nothing in Three Houses comes close to doing that, i.e. you win the battle while miraculously sparing all enemy troops, then evil allies roll in and execute the boss anyway, or the boss commits suicide rather than die by the Lord's hand after getting beat up which somehow makes it okay.
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.
-
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.
34 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:I think it's less the route and more the people.
I mean, many Dimitri fans defend or justify many of Dimtiri's actions, even some that are unjustifiably bad. I mean, geez, they say that Dimtiri doesn't WANT to hurt others, but feels he has to, why are these people saying that, but condemning Edelgard, who starts a war, not because she wants to, but because she feels she has to?
It's also sad that the writers really sucked at making Claude. They admitted to wanting Claude to be worse than he was presented, and admitted he became more of a good guy.
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
-
22 minutes ago, SnowFire said:
Belated: Very few characters, honestly. I agree with the earlier point in this thread about defection from your country to the point of joining the other side to be rare. It does happen, but only because of A) An existing rebel faction that already dislikes / wants to overthrow the government for other reasons, and aiding another country is just a means to an end; B) the other country has already conquered a region and is recruiting; or C) Zealots willing to abandon their families to fight for what they believe in. Now, for Fire Emblem named characters and aristocrats with the power to control their own destiny, sure, they can be a special case; plenty of the French ancien regime DID run off to Austria or England rather than serve the First Republic or Napoleon. But those were not large numbers of people. It's a lot to ask people to abandon their families, friends, and property.
For characters, I agree that Ashe / Ferdinand / Lorenz / Hanneman strike me as the most likely to go rogue. Ashe is a rare character with basically nothing holding him down to any one loyalty, no family, no money, no obligations; he's also a driven, moral character that could potentially be convinced that Byleth is Just That Awesome. Ferdinand gets dispossessed and his father arrested. Lorenz is category B above - the Glouster domain is allied to the Empire so it's not weird for him to be recruited, even if his ideological alignment isn't great with CF, and his distaste for Claude makes him a plausible Lions pickup as well. Hanneman's plot is just deeply anti-old-Empire that he left behind and compatible with what Edelgard's new Empire plan is.
While I don't peg them as likely traitors, I could at least sorta buy Marianne, Petra, Raphael, & Leonie switching sides, as their ties are somewhat weaker to their factions. (Manuela->CF too for similar reasons to Hanneman.) Everyone else is a lot sketchier; I tend to feel actively bad if recruiting them.
People talked about the final mission in CF, and I kinda disagree it makes sense for Ashe and Annette to switch sides there - at least the way the game presents the scenario. No, setting the city on fire doesn't make tons of sense (why doesn't Edelgard just stand back and do nothing?), but the game acts like Rhea's setting Fhirdiad on fire is a useful-if-desperate military tactic; the bulk of the forces you fight there are Kingdom troops. It doesn't seem to act like Rhea is actually destroying the city herself, oddly enough. So to the extent that this mission is treated just as Edelgard invading Fhirdiad with a dramatic backdrop, it's fine. More generally, it's important for establishing that Faerghus, while maybe once unified to Adrestria, is its own separate place now that is not going to quietly submit to an army unifying it. Edelgard has one of her most tone-deaf lines there, something along the lines of "a Kingdom without a King? Why are you still fighting?" (Yeah, and why didn't Iraq cool off after we killed Saddam Hussein? Sigh.) Well, the people of Faerghus are the kingdom, not the king, and if Ashe wasn't already recruited he's not going to go along now with a conquering force just because they're strong. Annette has a tie to the Royal College of Sorcery here and is also presumably fighting from local pride. I thought it made sense.
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.
-
5 minutes ago, jawaunw said:
Typically I'd call it inconsistent writing but there's actually good reasons behind that. Lorenz flat out says he still has to convince his father not to help the empire because they might get attacked. Ashe I don't know much about because he spent most of his time on the bench.
What does this have to do with the comment I made? Like I'm serious like this has no reason being here I'm talking about the lie and not the church.
This seems to be the biggest point here man. I'd like to put down that yes as a human being I have the right to question the concept of friendship between people. I mean look at the Black eagle supports all of them have coming together moments except with Edelgard. there was a giant wall between them that no one ever is able to get past except the main character with his magic superpower.
I mean I'm only realistically like that for the Lords they're all just too happy-go-lucky for me. no one is truly a villain except those who slither it's just another good guy versus Good guys scenario.
and I'm saying the LIE is bad more in the way of the Black eagle students rather than the people this is a perfect chance for her to show weakness towards them and try to have comfort with them and rally together to come out stronger.
I mean the Black eagle house just skips the reunions entirely. they're either completely different camp they literally only follow the teacher. the only reason they stayed with the empire outside of the Black eagle route is because it's their home and well special enemies. I mean they really should have had a reunions battle for the crimson flower route blue lions are the ones who should never have stuck together.
And the keep with the thread I still think the black eagles Ashe and Lorenz are the only people who would literally leave their house because of circumstance.
I still don't understand why anyone would think Lysithea what willingly join the empire if it wasn't for the teacher.
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.
-
16 minutes ago, jawaunw said:
well you're not wrong I hate all of the Lord so technically I'm only neutral in the fact that I dislike them all.
Okay the two characters you just mentioned were forced to fight on the empire side. ashe because his family. Lorenz Is without a doubt the most force character to be on the empire side. Literally admitting he doesn't want to be there.
Yes a very much terrible lie used as an excuse just to make people hate the church more.
also the same developers who told us that they left a bunch of hints inside of edelgard's route so we wouldn't trust her because she might be lying to us. It sounds like a deliberate ploy to create tension.
Also she never told anyone about those who slittered in the dark until way at the end. she blatant was lying about them. That's two lies with the price of one.
none of them are friends they aren't friends by truth or by love or anything. The only house that has true friends throughout the whole game is the blue lion house. And they're the most dysfunctional group of them all but you can argue that none of them would ever leave their king.
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.
-
45 minutes ago, haarhaarhaar said:
Yep I don't disagree with this. Your comment I've quoted here doesn't contradict what I said earlier either, and both can be true at the same time.
Out of interest is there any particular reason you defend Edelgard so intensely?
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.
-
25 minutes ago, jawaunw said:
I never said that she sees them as tools I said that their relationship is that of being tools to her there's a big difference.
They still leave just to follow their teacher if anything that helps the point that I'm trying to make.
The one lie that you're trying to use as a defense of her truthfulness is very massively terrible. The entire first part of white clouds is misdirection and lies. Some of the stuff she says about the church is flat up made up. She said she sent all the manifest that we never see anything about. Edelgard in the entirety of her character is an unreliable narrator. We are told from edelgard what she does we are never actually shown. You can either chalk it up to terrible storytelling or an intentional design choice.
The game itself gives you hints about it. there are NPCs that fly out tell us not to trust everything about edelgard.
I get it you like edelgard but you should look at this from a neutral side. I'm not trying to insult the character.
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?
-
6 minutes ago, paladin21 said:
And yet he's the one who sais that she should die in SS.
Ferdinand: We have already killed Hubert. Now is no time to hesitate.
Caspar: She has it coming! After all, she started this war!
Bernadetta: Someone has to stop her, and that someone is us!
Linhardt: As her former classmates, I feel we owe it to her to try talking it out.
Petra: This battle will be a deciding one. I am believing that it is her wish to be facing us.
Dorothea: Poor Edie... Professor, wherever you lead, I'll follow.
Ferdinand and Caspar are adamant in finishing her off, Petra and Bernardetta want to stop her themselves and Dorothea and Linhardt hoped that there was a more peaceful way.
And yet Edelgard was the first one deploying beasts in the battlefield, at least two of them, a couple of hours before. Everybody knew that the Flame Emperor was responsible for the massacre at Remire, and no one would have restrained themselves from taking its life. However, when they see that the big baddie is their Valedictorian, it's all weird and all.
Everyone knew that Rhea had high hopes for Byleth and holded him in great steem. They probably had seen her fighting in her human form (during Ashe's paralogue), constraining her power. To anyone who has been betrayed by someone who was very close, snapping at that moment may be something regretable, but understandable. When you're betrayed, you don't want to see that person as a human, so that your resolve doesn't weaver, and it takes time to come over it. There would be a shocking reaction to her being a dragon, but just because they way she shows herself.
The students side with Byleth, not with Edelgard and that's because of her concealment of her plans. If they aren't recruited by Byleth, they would likely be tagged as Slytherins, and be seen as spies or traitors, so they are left little choice, but to hide or stay with the ones that trusted them. Being in Byleth's inner circle in non-CF routes was a safe card. Even Linhardt aknowledges being looked upon as a traitor in one of his exploration conversations. And the fact that Edelgard started the war actually forces her friends to fight. If she, after being crowned Empress, had made a proclamation of her views instead of launching a sneak attack, the other BE would have been able to choose freely to fight or not. She didn't give them that option. She had chosen that they had to fight, they just had to choose the side, and the only key player to level that was Byleth.
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.
-
1 hour ago, Etrurian emperor said:
In general it doesn't seem out of character for Annette to join the church. However it does become out of character when she's still on that side after Rhea decides to set Fhirdiad on fire.
Annette doesn't seem the type to abandon her family indeed. However in most routes her family is aligned with the empire. Baron Dominic may not like it but he's an Imperial stooge in most routes, though admitingly not in Crimson Flower. In fact her scrapped betrayal in Azure Moon may have stemmed from that fact.
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
-
39 minutes ago, Silver-Haired Maiden said:
What you're saying would have merit if it weren't for the same people taking every conversation and turning it into CF/Edelgard every time. I point you to basically every discussion not explicitly about gameplay that's on the 3H forum. Go read them and see if the same people talking about the same points don't keep popping up. That's the part that's annoying. CF has just as much merit as any other route... not more.
To be fair, I was mostly referring to Darkmoon, not you. You're just one of the hardest on the "Defend Edelgard" stance so you came to mind, but that's why I didn't tag you. Also you very much do refer to Edelgard being in the right in most threads though I will give credit where it's due, you've calmed down on that a lot. My apologies for the misinterpretation.
If that's not how you want to come across, then maybe don't go out of your way to write 12 paragraphs in response to every criticism that people give Edelgard.
I don't think Edelgard is evil, I never have. I dislike her choices, I dislike her actions, and frankly I dislike her attitude, but I don't think she's evil. Let alone a bad character. She's actually one of the best written characters in the game and I appreciate her character a good deal. But that doesn't mean I'd support her and I think it does her a massive disservice to see you go around and try to reason away some of her more morally gray acts with "But she has good intentions!" So do a lot of video game antagonists, that doesn't make them any less of a villain just like it doesn't make Edelgard a worse character. Sometimes though you have to accept that people won't agree with her and that it's okay. You obviously don't agree with Dimitri. I highly disagree with a lot of your assertions about him but I don't sit there and call you out with a 10 paragraph response every time you say something bad about him. Comparing Edelgard to WW2 is something I also never did. However there are those that do find the allies culpable in what Soviet Russia did and there were those even in those days that wanted us to take out the Soviets afterward. I don't think allying with evil is ever really a good thing, including in real life.
Also I think it's you that didn't fully read my post. Here's what I said.
So yes I acknowledged that you started talking about the other routes... once I brought it up. Before that you'd mostly been using CF as the character justifications and I still think that's a wrong tactic. Frankly I don't care who anyone would think would switch sides, I just don't think anyone should use any one route as justification for it. Especially the Black Eagles as they technically have two routes that they could go in. As far as my own personal opinion, I don't think Ferdinand would switch sides out of pure loyalty to his country and wanting what's best for Adrestia, but I can see the argument either way. Same for Lorenz who canonically is concerned for his people if they oppose Edelgard because he knows war could be very bad for them and that's on all the routes. So we do agree on that point. Lysithea I'm a touch more iffy on...
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.
-
12 minutes ago, haarhaarhaar said:
Hmm I take your point, but by that logic the rest of the descendants of the Ten Elites also have 'dark' crests - it just seems like a pretty arbitrary distinction that doesn't have a basis in the game itself. Take for example the Ten Elites in VW endgame - their relic weapons are dark presumably because they are created with dark magic (hence the Greek letters after their name) but their crests are exactly the same in nature as the crests of your party. I'm actually thinking about making a different thread on dark magic in 3H so watch this space anyway.
It should also be said that not many of the students would actually oppose Edelgard on the basis of her views about nobility. The most pro-nobility characters (Ferdinand, Lorenz, Constance) all believe that nobles are nobles only in as far as they are the most competent and well-equipped members of society. In other words, they already believe they are in a system close to meritocracy. Obviously the old system being near a meritocracy isn't actually true, but Ferdinand and Lorenz both truly believe that they have privilege because they are (or will be) exceptional enough people to have earnt it, and they put in effort in order to justify that position. And Constance's support with Edelgard explicitly states that she is happy and willing to rise to the equivalent position in Edelgard's government to what the Nuvelles once had through her own merit in magic research, rather than her bloodline. The rest of the students have little attachment to the nobility system - if anything the character I see as being most opposed to Edelgard's position on nobility (apart from Dimitri) is Hilda, who'd probably hate the idea of losing the life of luxury nobility affords her.
If Ferdinand were to betray Edelgard, it would probably be because of her imprisoning his father, which he could interpret as snubbing the work and advice that House Aegir has provided for generations. In that scenario, he could believe that the only way to get through to Edelgard and make her see why her road is mistaken would be to oppose her on the battlefield - his patriotism would still be motivating him in this scenario, but he would be taking extremely drastic measures to do what he thinks is right for the country and the continent. Normally (without Byleth's interference) his loyalty to the Empire wins out despite these reservations about Edelgard's path in non-CF routes, and that's why you always fight him.
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.
-
7 minutes ago, haarhaarhaar said:
That seems strange - why would the goddess' blood be innately darker than the blood of any other Nabatean? If you're referring to her ability to act twice etc., that's a product of her Twin Crests skill - the fact that she has two crests explains why her monster transformation is that powerful, but it doesn't explain how she was able to transform in the first place.
If you mean Macuil, then I can't think of a single instance where anyone claims the Crest of Macuil is cursed. If anything, we know less about the Crest of Macuil than most Crests. If you mean Maurice, then you've got the order of events wrong. Maurice's Crest is only considered cursed after Maurice transforms into the Wandering Beast and starts killing people - if we are to believe the legend (which is currently the best explanation we have) then the reason he transformed was overuse of his Crest and his Hero's Relic. His crest is no more cursed than anyone else's, it's a myth that got aggrandised over several centuries.
Completely artificial Demonic Beasts (i.e. without a human base) seem the least likely, because we have no positive evidence that these exist at all. Demonic Beasts are different in nature from the giant animals etc that you fight in auxiliary battles, and Part I provides us plenty of evidence that these Demonic Beasts are formed from humans. It would be far more efficient for the Agarthans to not bother with human experimentation - the fact that they do suggests a human core is a necessary part of the beast creation process. Now we definitely don't know enough about Myson to assume that he is the mad scientist behind Demonic Beasts, but it really doesn't fit with the Agarthan profile to ask for consent and look for willing sacrifices for their experiments. Ask Kronya, or Remire Village. It's theoretically possible that there were volunteers, but it's just unlikely because we see the Agarthans skip the consent-asking process multiple times, it's unlikely that anyone but the most diehard of martyrs would volunteer for this, and even those diehard martyrs would have to know that the Agarthans are behind this and the process requires humans - it's hardly as if they're advertising for recruits. So yeah, I can't claim it's impossible. But I think the reasonable position is to assume that people getting turned into Demonic Beasts are either unaware, unwilling or both.
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.
28 minutes ago, Silver-Haired Maiden said:They only do this because you and Omegaxis are so fucking staunch on your "Edelgard did nothing wrong and no one in the BE could ever betray them!" stance. Sometimes you just have to accept that she did some scummy shit. The crest beasts are not something you can justify, even Edelgard allying with the Agarthans makes her culpable in the crest beast creation because she did nothing to stop it in the other routes even though in CF it's pretty obvious that she could have, you know since none were used there. The game makes it very clear that the crest beasts are a bad thing, that they're in pain, that they're turned against their will in every case that we see them except two and even then it's portrayed as horrific. Your head canons don't dismiss those facts, turning into a crest beast is meant to be a very very bad thing.
On top of that, other people aren't the problem here. The problem is that you refuse to see any viewpoint that doesn't agree with yours as valid and you will argue until you're blue in the face about it because other people couldn't possibly have other, equally valid opinions. Even if that isn't your intention that is how you're coming across.
Now if you want to use other routes to justify what you think then please, by all means do so. But sitting there and claiming that the other routes and the character's behaviors in them don't matter because they're not CF, or acting like CF has the only legitimate character interactions is not only dishonest, it's infuriating and biased as hell. I don't agree that Felix would betray Dimitri and Faerghus but you don't see me sitting there and arguing with everyone about it because I can see where they're coming from in having different interpretations of what his character would do. You can afford other people the same courtesy with the BE students.
As for your last point, that would be a more nonbiased way of looking at it. Of course that way also means that only 3 characters in the entire game can be recruited over in any form of defecting. Lorenz, Ashe, and Lysithea. They are the only post-time skip recruits that are possible and I think Ashe can only be recruited over if you recruited him before the time skip? But I could be wrong about that. Also Lysithea is less of a betrayal and more of a "Claude told me to join with you if something happened to him".
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.
-
6 hours ago, haarhaarhaar said:
Yeah these are really good questions about the beasts - as well as Gloucester with giant wolves, Almyra is somehow able to control giant birds (in Edelgard's paralogue and Hilda's IIRC). Maurice doesn't transform back to human form, but the other humans who went beast mode do (Miklan, Edelgard, the students in Ch. 9). How come crest-bearing Edelgard managed to turn at all?
How come Macuil can remain transformed in the middle of nowhere for a thousand years, but short transformation exhausts Rhea and transformation is impossible for Seteth and Flayn? The BESF never fight directly alongside monsters, even when it would make sense to, and Chapter 11 should see you fight alongside Rhea's Golems against Edelgard, because they're supposed to be a security system for the Holy Tomb. What exactly are Rhea's Golems anyway, and how do they operate? They're presumably some kind of automaton, but unlike how Titanus are explained, it's never said what or who is supplying them energy, or how they were built a thousand years before Cornelia managed something similar.
Demonic Beasts have masks, which get broken off when you barrier break them, but normal beasts do not. I take the masks as being symbolic of some kind of forced magical control, which gets destabilised at the moment of barrier break, but recovers after (there's normally a bit of the mask left). It explains why their barriers start at complete as opposed to normal giant wolves and birds, but giant beasts also have full barriers, and barrier breaks work the same way regardless of whether a beast is under TWSITD control so I may just be over-reading into game mechanics.
It's also true that demonic beasts (those under the effect of the Agarthans' artificial Crest Stones) seem to be the only ones that use magic attacks (fire breath, wind strikes etc), which makes sense if they've been refined using magic. Indech, Macuil and Rhea can do it too, but I take that as being Nabatean so more in control of their powers. Maurice, Miklan, Dedue and naturally appearing beasts use physical attacks, and what I guess is naturally produced poison.
EDIT: I forgot about Aelfric, whose Umbral Beast form is capable of magic and physical attacks. If anything it seems to confirm that the type of item used to transform inevitably affects the type of beast produced.
If we're counting the DLC, then Yuri's paralogue demonstrates unwilling soldiers/mercenaries turning into Demonic Beasts. Myson then calls this "experiment" successful. We can't declare that no one ever volunteered for this, but it really doesn't seem likely.
It's still true that we aren't made to judge Demonic Beasts in Part II nearly as forcefully as in Ch. 9, maybe because they are already well-established in-universe by Part II even though the player doesn't see their usage in the time skip. It probably ought to be a warning sign for the player though, even if the game makes little comment.
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?
1 hour ago, Silver-Haired Maiden said:That's on ONE route and not the other 3. Stop treating CF as though it's the only option when 3 other, equally viable options exist. I've said it before, I will say it again: In a game like 3H you HAVE TO look at the characters through the lens of all of the routes, not just your preferred one. This isn't a if you want to because anything else is a disservice to the majority of other paths and acts as though they don't exist in favor of your baby route.
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.
-
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.
17 minutes ago, Timlugia said:This I actually want to discuss further: You are assuming everyone considers the dragon as a monster, but is that really so?
Immaculate One is the center of Church of Seiros's worship, they called her the emissary of the goddess, and heavily featured on church arts and worships, such as on the flag and murals.
We also have Jeralt narrating the world building for us:
It seems that for many, especially those who followed Serios's faith, not only Immaculate One wasn't considered as a monster, but a guardian sent by the goddess. While some might be dread of her transforming such as Edelgard considering her an enemy to human race, Church believers might actually be encouraged by the sight of Immaculate One, viewing it as some kind prophecy fulfilled.
Furthermore, wyvern seems to be quite common animals in Fodlan and Almyra, making a true dragon less alien to their people than to us.
In the analogue the real world religion, many religions feature deities or powerful beings able to transform to non-humans, or are non-human taking human forms. For example, how Naga was based on south Asian religion. Had a snake god really appear, she might actually attract quite some followers while others grew weary of her in the same time.
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
-
2 hours ago, SimplyUnknown said:
I think this is an interesting comment for a couple of reasons. For one, I'm curious about what your definition of a 'true leader' is in this situation. But my main reason is that I don't see why Dimitri not being a 'true leader' would get in the way of him being a great king. For me at least, there really isn't a problem and I think it's because of how the game portrays both Dimitri and Edelgard on their chosen paths.
Dimitri and Edelgard are not like Byleth or Claude. They are both broken people in a lot of ways and that is part of what makes them compelling. But the thing I find the most interesting is that fact that the only times either one comes into power and becomes a great leader is when Byleth chooses their route. When they are both guaranteed a support system that Byleth provides along with the students they bring to their side. Edelgard has the Black Eagle Strike Force on her route and Dimitri has the Blue Lions on his, even if you don't bother recruiting anyone else on those paths.
On the paths where one or both of them fall, they usually end up with one guaranteed subordinate in the forms of Dedue and Hubert. The two people who would follow their leaders to the ends of the earth and who Byleth cannot poach to another house. On their own paths, however, they have other forms of support who do question them, in the forms of Ferdinand and Felix for certain, and potentially other members like Ingrid or Dorothea. Not to mention their trust in Byleth who can stand up to them, though moreso on the Blue Lion's path imo. A leader is not an island, and a true leader, in my opinion, knows how to listen to others and take their feedback. To listen to another perspective and find a better solution. Dimitri is only able to do that in the Blue Lions path where he's not so fixated on revenge and Edelgard is only able to hang onto her empathy on the Crimson Flower path.
I guess what Three Houses proves to me is that it's not a single person who rules a country, but many people. Because if you take away that support system and leave one person standing at the top, who is to keep them from falling?
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
-
11 minutes ago, zuibangde said:
You're simplifying defection way too much. Nobody defects simply because another country's interests align with theirs. If that happens, the world would be in a constant state of chaos. Millions of Americans were against the war in the Middle East but they didn't just decide to pack and leave the US or defect to another country. Soldiers were sent to war against their wishes and died doing so. The point is, the game's portrayal of 'defection' is utterly ridiculous and unrealistic. I don't see any of them defecting. At most, probably not volunteer to fight in the war or maybe attempt to start a civil war/uprising within their own country during a period of chaos.
Also, they're not fighting for Dimitri?? The students in AM are fighting for their country. Their leader just happens to be insane. You're telling me that if your country is being invaded but your leader/president is insane, you'll go 'Eh. I guess I'll join the country that's invading us'.
I'd also argue that Edelgard is far from being mentally stable. It's pretty clear that she suffers from mental issues too, they're just not as apparent.
I was talking about what I would do if I somehow ended up in Fodlan during this period of time. I would agree that the recruitment system is pretty silly for the most part , with a few exceptions, and it can result in pretty ridiculous scenarios.
Granted, I do keep forgetting that Lysithea isn't technically part of the Black Eagles, she really does feel like a part of the Black Eagles to me.
Edelgard does suffer from her own trauma, but she is remarkably stable. Given what happened, logically speaking, she probably should be just as unstable as Dimitri, but she kind of isn't for whatever reason. The primary difference being Dimitri is obviously of his rocker and it is very easy to notice. Edelgard does suffer from a lot of different phobias due to her imprisonment and experimentation, but she doesn't share this with most people, as she is a very closed off person.
Granted, there are also certain members of the Black Eagles who doesn't have a strong reason to fight for one side or another, and is probably only siding with the Empire because that happens to be the nation they are from. Primarily Lindhardt and Bernadetta. Even if in the case of Bernadetta , it is possible she is loyal to Edelgard because Edelgard imprisoned Bernadetta's father for what he did to Bernadetta and she is now free of his abuse.
The thing with Dorothea is that while she doesn't necessarily want to fight it really comes across in her supports she is very close to Edelgard and appreciate the increased influence she wants to give commoners.
About Ferdinand, I think he sticks around because he knows that if he proves himself useful to Edelgard, he is likely to keep his old position in the Imperial hierarchy. It seems like he wants to be a sort of advisor to Edelgard.
-
7 hours ago, Slyfox said:
I very much look forward to doing so. While I have major grievances with Three Houses, it still is my favorite game of the series. I've never been against Crimson Flower, my only issue was characters joining/not joining Edelgard's side.
The main reason I've taken so long to do play Crimson Flower is because of the burnout I've mentioned. I always go into my games mostly blind, I had no idea about anything regarding the characters when I first played. I played Silver Snow first which was... kind of empty. But I enjoyed it. Then I went into Verdant Wind, still blind. That was a mistake. Nearly identical. That's when the burnout happened. And then spoiled myself on many things from the other routes because I just couldn't bring myself to continue.
If White Clouds was a communal route before you chose to split off into a dedicated path, Three Houses would have been so much more enjoyable for repeat plays.
I do know what you mean. Considering I played the game three times in a row, crimson flower, verdant wind and azure moon in the listed order.
Let's say that I am very sick of playing white clouds by this point. But at the very least the different house leaders have different common terrace on the events. I did also read, but it is really not recommended to play Verdant Wind after Silver Snow, or vice versa. Silver Snow being so similar to a route I have already played is another reason why I saved it for last.
9 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:Honestly, I feel one key thing people tend to forget in CF (particularly those that thing that it makes no sense why anyone would join Edelgard) is that it's the route where everyone sees Rhea having a meltdown and see her turn into a giant monster right before their eyes. Not exactly something that people can just unsee once they see it.
It's quite the reality breaker there. It's why they are willing to hear Edelgard out, and why she can actually explain why she's fighting the Church. You can't exactly explain why you are opposing the archbishop because no one would believe that the archbishop is secretly a dragon that's been disguising herself as a human for over a thousand years.
Taking into account how long Rhea's been alive, it makes people wonder just what Rhea had or could have done. It's easy to make your own deductions and think that she could have fabricated much history, and even manipulated many events. And given how many students are fearful of Rhea because of how they have seen how she acts in situations with such ruthlessness, it makes them more unlikely to trust in the Church.
And knowing what Edelgard is fighting for, wishing to remove the Crests, allow a meritocratic government, and so on, many characters would be on to fight for such a cause. Cause a lot of the students hate the Crest system, and commoner kids want to have social mobility.
Honestly, I feel that CF is the better route when it comes to realism. Since it's the one route where you can't recruit everyone.
The other routes make terribly little sense.
Honestly, many students don't even work in the other routes. Hilda in AM for one thing. Why would she be willing to fight under the army of Dimitri when he's being a literal lunatic?
Makes perfect sense as Rhea's behaviours surrounding the holy tomb incident is also what solidified my loyalty to Edelgard's cause. Makes sense that it would do the same for certain characters.
I already had my suspicions regarding the church because of some statements Rhea made about the Lonato rebellion about making an example of those who stand against the church. There has been signs of her being extremely cruel and ruthless throughout the game and her dialogue after the holy tomb mission solidified this.
There is also all be fact that the leading figures of those posting Edelgard is Rhea and Dimitri, both who are completely insane. Truth be told, if I was actually there in Fodlan . I would never choose to fight for Dimitri because it is obvious he is mentally unstable, the attitude of him and Rhea combined would easily make me defect to the Empire.
I don't find it that unbelievable that some of the students might have similar thought patterns.
-
36 minutes ago, Slyfox said:
Not much else I can say regarding your first point, we simply have different views on those supports, and that's fair. I just think that there's a large disconnect from White Clouds Black Eagles vs. Pro Edelgard Black Eagles.
We are talking about only six people (plus Ferdinand's retainers) that have jumped ship. While they are not of any importance within Three Houses, how many other students remained loyal to Edelgard? How many didn't? The classes are much bigger than we get to see. It's easy to forget that the cast in Three Houses may have other close relationships than just our playable units and important NPCs. Maybe some Empire-related non-students rebelled against Edelgard too? There's no way of knowing, but the only fact that we have is that at least six people defected. It's an insignificant number.
As far as the promise goes, it wasn't handled with much grace in Silver Snow. That route should have focused more on the Church crew, and possibly picking up the Black Eagles as you go along. Regardless, Edelgard betraying her classmates in the holy tomb and trying to kill them if they stand in her way is a very strong motivation to defect.
If you'd like to go into individual characters, please do so by all means! These forums are for sharing opinions (respectfully - as some people like to forget), not withholding them!
And I'll be perfectly honest with anyone I've debated with, I am STILL working my way through Blue Lions and have yet to play Crimson Flower! So my information is not complete and possibly biased. That said, I try to argue as objectively as I can and I've been doing constant reading on Three Houses ever since it released, even though I was burned out from the game partway into Verdant Wind (that lasted some months). I'd also like to add that I've previously addressed characters joining Edelgard as Crimson Flower followers and whatnot, but since I haven't had a first hand experience with that route yet, I'll instead call them Pro Edelgard's something or other (tbd). There, full disclosure done!
If anything, I think it is silver snow that is the odd one out. As in both azure moon and verdant wind. All of the black eagle members join Edelgard, including a few other people like Lorenz and apparently Hanneman. So I assume this is the default position without any intervention from Byleth. They fight with my left against Edelgard for the same reason many non-black eagle members join them in crimson flower, because they trust Byleth. Granted, no black eagle member was present at the holy tomb in those routes.
I personally think that you should have been given the opportunity to join Edelgard before the holy tomb mission, not after. I had already made up my mind by that point, and I found it frustrating that I basically had to fight her against my will. I also have no idea why Edelgard reveals herself before the fight even starts in this route. If you have to fight anyway. Maybe they should have saved the reveal for after that fight like every other route. If she is going to reveal herself, at least grant the player the option to sign of her before the mission. I think that would make a lot more sense in terms of believability.
By the way, I do strongly recommend playing crimson flower, it has its flaws, but it is a really good route regardless and the most different in the entire game. The supports with Edelgard really humanises her as a character and explains why many of these people would join with her.
The only route in the game I haven't played is silver snow, I will do it one day. But I did do it last as for me as someone was started with crimson flower, the members of the black eagle house going against Edelgard just feels wrong to me. Many of these people I originally knew as close friends of hers, so it is heartbreaking to see them like that.
-
11 minutes ago, Slyfox said:
All these are decent points.
However, take Silver Snow, which shows the Black Eagles as all horrified by Edelgard's actions, or at least worried. None of them wanted war. It's a huge disconnect from them being on the Crimson Flower side of things.
Petra is looking out for her own people, she's kind of in the same position Lorenz is in. So it's not necessarily sharing a vision and more about self preservation.
Again, Lonato was explicitly incited by the Western Church to go through with his rebellion (you could even argue manipulated). His people rallied behind him because they loved him, but no matter how noble the cause, his rebellion was futile. If he had known of Edelgard's plans, it would have been smarter to join her then. Instead he gets a bunch of his own people killed. Ashe is wise for his age and thinks before he acts, he never considered revenge in any of the routes (unless you recruit him to CF). He has good reason for joining the Empire, but I don't think that's what his character would have done without player input, based on how he handles the Lonato/Church stuff in White Clouds.
Felix is miserable in Crimson Flower. No matter how much the end result lines up with his ideals, it's certainly not the way he would have chosen.
While I don't think Lysithea is the one to want war, her reasons for joining Edelgard have a bit more weight to them than most other characters, I'll give her that.
Ferdinand is more about being noble of spirit, and less of being noble of station. I can't see him condoning warfare either.
Lorenz would join, though not by choice. Whether or not because it's simply what his father wanted, Gloucester territory is ill placed should they suffer the Empire's wrath.
Some characters would have to be rewritten to justify their inclusion, or better yet, we could have focused on some other characters instead of just the students and faculty/church. People like Ladislava or Randolph would have been prime candidates. It kinda of boils down to the fact that most people that can join CF are different versions of Claude. They want change and have similar ideals, but aren't willing to go about it to the extent that Edelgard does.
Long story short, while Edelgard is one of my favorite characters in the game, I just can't see most other playable characters joining her as natural.
I'm not saying you are wrong, I just think the developers did not do enough work fleshing out their characters enough to join Crimson Flower. Regardless, it's all a moot point because we can do whatever we want and believe whatever we want. They allow for that in the game. I just think it could have been done better.
Is mainly due to the fact that you can recruit almost every character, regardless of route, regardless of how little sense that makes. For that reason they needed to make each character quite flexible in their goals to justify siding with basically anyone.
I would also agree that telling Lonato to wait with announcing his rebellion until Edelgard declares war would have been the smarter decision. That way, his life wouldn't have been wasted. I don't know what the heck they were thinking with having him rebelling so early. He either was impatient, and did that of his own accord, or it had some kind of connection to the Western Church, which all signs point to having some kind of connection with Cornelia because the base of the Western Church is Arianrhod.
There is something I think is rather odd with the idea of the choosing to fight against Edelgard because you don't believe the war is the right thing to do. By that point there will be war whenever they want it or not, if there is going to be fighting anyway, doesn't it make more sense to actually fight for the side that more closely aligns with your ideals whenever you agree with the war itself or not? The act of resisting itself perpetuates more bloodshed, which kind of makes the idea of fighting against someone in a war because you are not in the favour of war pretty ridiculous. If any of them were truly against the very idea of having a war. The logical decision would be to not fight for either side. Like with Dimitri towards the end of the azure moon, if he is really that keen on stopping Edelgard's war, with quickest way to accomplish that would be to surrender as bloodshed would only continue as long as he continues to resist. The war could end with the death of Edelgard, but it could also end with her achieving victory. There is more than one way to put an end to her war. Maybe someone came to the conclusion that the best way to minimise casualties is to assure Imperial victory.
But hey, I don't know why I am expecting humans to be logical, they almost never are. Humans are sometimes capable of making bizarre decisions for bizarre reasons, it is actually somewhat realistic.
-
32 minutes ago, Slyfox said:
I'd argue that Ashe is an equally valid option for routes other than CF, if not more so.
Yes, Christophe was killed under a false pretense. Yes, Lonato was put down. Ashe absolutely loves his family. So joining CF because the Church can't be trusted and because they took away his family can make sense.
On the other hand, Christophe did participate in an assassination plot. Lonato brought civilians/militia into his hopeless rebellion (everyone says it's hopeless), and that's something Ashe is not okay with. The Church takes care of his two siblings after the rebellion is over. The Western Church (and by unknown extension, TWSITD), are the ones who instigated the events involving Christophe and Lonato, and the Central Church promptly deals with the corrupt members.
I don't know enough about the Ashen Wolves to know if they'd join or not (still slowly working through their supports). I think that their DLC was competent at best, though the resources spent on it could have been used to flesh out other parts of Fodlan and better characters.
Which brings me to another point. One of the worst parts for me in Three Houses is that any of the playable characters joining Edelgard and Hubert for the Empire offensive simply isn't believable. While decent points can be made as to why, it's just not what I got out of their dialogue, supports and story presence. No one struck me as willing to plunge the entire continent into war, besides the aforementioned two.
That said, who joins who (or Byleth, specifically) in Part Two is poorly done anyway. It just further confirms what the developers said in that recent interview, they originally didn't have plans for CF. I think most of the characters must of had their personalities and whatnot set in stone at that point. I truly think CF got shafted hard in the writing and plausibility department, and that's a huge shame.
To those of you who love CF, I mean no offence. I'm not bothered by it's existence, I'm bothered that it could have been so much more... which is also an argument you can direct at the other routes. We really needed another year of development for this game.
I would respecfully disagree, as I think more than a few individuals have been significantly wronged by the crest system enough for them to support Edelgard's actions once they are clear about why she is doing what she's doing. In fact, for some people, I see very little reason not to.
Most students of the Black Eagle house are loyal to the Empire. First and foremost, and therefore they follow its Emperor. Dorothea has a legitimate personal investment in Edelgard's cause being a commoner, Caspar's focus on justice could just as easily apply to getting justice against the church. Most of the rest are there because they are bound to be Empire in one way or another. Petra especially has been shown to be extremely loyal to Edelgard to the point that she frequently is the last person standing in the Imperial Palace guarding her throne room. I think this is because despite Brigid being a vassal state of the Empire, she is loyal to Edelgard because she has promised to make her nation independent in return for her service.
The reason most of the students would side with their respective house leaders is mostly out of loyalty to their country. But there are some cases where siding with Edelgard would actually better serve their interest in the main reason they don't is that they don't know what she is fighting for. Ultimately, I believe that Ashe would be misguided in fighting against her as it is against his own best interest and the wishes of his stepfather. No one forced Lonato to do anything and he rebelled of his own free will and those who followed him did so often their free will. Edelgard says as much during the Lonato mission and we should know she has more insider information than anyone. There are reasons why Ashe wouldn't, but there are also reasons why he would.
Felix chose downright in disdain towards the knightly code of Faerghus as he thinks it is hypocritical due to the death of his brother. I can definitely see him create a new and different society. Plus his hatred of Dimitri makes joining Edelgard even more likely, especially once Dimitri goes off the deep end.
Lysithea shares a lot of Edelgard's experiences as she went through similar experiments. And if she knew her goal was to end such things once and for all. I believe she would be all for it. Her primary reason for opposing Edelgard is because of the Empire's connection to the people who experimented on her. She's usually unaware Edelgard is also one of their victims.
Mercedes is one of very few people I legitimately wonder what the heck she is doing on the side of the Empire in crimson flower. The only legitimate reason I can think of is Jeritza. Faith means a lot to Mercedes, which makes her usually more likely to side with the church, I guess it depends how strong her ties is to her family.
It is also kind of funny that the two most classic nobles in the entire game, Ferdinand and Lorenz also side with Edelgard on default. Count Gloucester sides with the Empire in a power play against house Riegan. his son coming with him due to his loyalty to his family. Ferdinand actually seemed to be one of the most loyal to Edelgard in my opinion, I guess he sees himself as a natural counterweight to Edelgard and considers his presence invaluable (which it is).
Who should have betrayed their faction?
in Fire Emblem: Three Houses
Posted
You know I am starting to understand your perspective now. Just know that I don't really debate to change people's minds, I participate in these debates because I find it entertaining and because it helps me further my understanding of the game, its themes and through it explore philosophy and increase my understanding of the world in general. To do so, you must be exposed to opposing points of view. People are usually set in their ways, which means that trying to change their minds is pointless.
Edelgard likely did underestimate the horrors of war when she started it, but during over five years of war, I think she slowly started to realise just how horrific it really was, which put quite a burden on her. But it isn't like she could take back the declaration of war by that point. She was already committed to her path and she had to see it through and hope that her future would be worth it in the end. I think this is the reason she shuts down emotionally over the course of the war, her empathetic side can't handle all the bloodshed and being responsible for it, so she has to shut down that side of herself in order to carry on. Only Byleth could break down that icy shell and help Edelgard embrace her humanity once again.
For this reason, I think that Edelgard after her victory in the war in Crimson Flower will likely never want to start a war ever again, because after having experienced war in person. She would understand its horror better than anyone. She wouldn't want more blood and her already heavy conscience. I think that all the death she has been responsible for would bother her specifically because Edelgard is a good person at heart. The concept of the person as good as Edelgard being responsible for so much death and having to deal with the consequences to her psychological well-being is exactly why I think Edelgard is such a compelling character.
You do have a point in that a lot of media glorify war, it is just that the military and therefore the government has an incentive to do that as otherwise people would never sign up to be soldiers, not if they understood that in real war, often times it is not a battle of good versus evil, in most cases were consists of battles between two evils. It is only really a question of degrees. I have found after researching World War II that every single nation involved in this war has been responsible for the mass slaughter of civilians. The allies might have been the lesser of two evils, but they are not the heroes they are often portrayed to be. It is highly unlikely that any participant in a war is innocent of war crimes. It is just that it is usually only the loser that gets convicted.
So if I have to ask you. Considering what you said about Dimitri and mental issues. Are you familiar with Azula from Avatar the Last Airbender? I have used similar arguments in defence of her in the past with the argument that she isn't truly responsible for her actions due to the immense level of psychological abuse she suffered from her father and her suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, to the point that she does have hallucinations.