Darkmoon6789
-
Posts
747 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Darkmoon6789
-
-
1 hour ago, JubileePhoenix said:
I don't like dictators.
Edelgard is no more a dictator than Dimitri, Rhea or any other monarch.
-
2 hours ago, XRay said:
Looks good.
If you mean healer as in staff units, then no. Staff and dragons are mutually exclusive Weapon types.
If you mean healer as in the role, then yes. Any dragon can be a healer using Reciprocal Aid and Renewal. The best unit for that role would Y!Tiki and A!Tiki since they got Breath of Fog.
Healing and Anti-Dragon:
+HP
Breath of Fog
(Atk Refinement)
Reciprocal Aid
HP/Atk
Renewal
Panic Ploy — Threaten Atk/Res
HP/AtkPure Healing:
+HP
Breath of Fog
(Any Refinement except special Refinement)
Reciprocal Aid
HP+5
Renewal
Panic Ploy
HP+5 — RenewalThanks, would Dragon Scion Tiki or Naga's voice Tiki be better for this purpose? My Dragon Scion has a flaw in speed and a bonus in resistance. And the other one, a bonus in speed and a flaw in HP
-
https://www.dropbox.com/s/krjwnd7n94d9ifo/Screenshot_20200518-145906.png?dl=0
I have to say that Idunn has rather high defence for having a flaw in it. How does this look?
I also have one more question, is there such a thing as a healer with the Dragon type?
-
34 minutes ago, XRay said:
36 Def is not ideal, but that is still over 80 bulk with just BST alone and 90 total physical bulk with her base kit. I would not worry about not getting a merge on her since you will eventually get another copy if you play long enough.
Enemy Phase:
+Def/Res
Demonic Breath
Swap
Ignis — Bonfire (if she is facing enemies who cannot double her)
Distant Counter
Vengeful Fighter
(Any C) — Ward Armor — Atk Smoke — Pulse Smoke — Panic Smoke
Mirror Stance — Sturdy StanceEnemy Phase:
+Def/Res
Demonic Breath
Swap
Ignis — Aether
Distant Counter
Special Fighter
(Any C) — Ward Armor — Atk Smoke — Pulse Smoke — Panic Smoke
Quick RiposteHis base kit is fine. You want to use the neutral as the base since it will have higher Spd once merged than the +Atk copy.
HP Flaws are very good if you want to use him as a Player Phase unit since it makes getting into Desperation range easier.
Thanks, but sadly I have already merged Ike with the attack one. Good to know in the future, I thought that the older one would have superior starts when merged as the other one didn't have a bonus to any stat. But I guess I don't truly know how merging really works.
I am actually uncertain what the stat increases are for different amount of merges.
The highest I can get is with Celica, Queen of Valantia. Of which I have three copies. She just have a bonus to attack currently with a single merge. I might want a good skill set for her.
I am also considering building a dragon team. I do have access to Naga Dragon Divinity, Idunn Dark Priestess, Robin Fell Vessel, Tiki, Dragon Scion and Beachside Scion, Ninian Oracle of Destiny and Nagi Dragon Avatar. All at five stars.
Edit: Would Ward Dragons be sufficient on Idunn instead of Ward armour. If I plan to run her in a dragon team?
-
So is there any use for a dark priestess Idunn with a flaw in defense and a bonus to attack? Any suggestions for a set up to make that work? Can't really get a merge on her as I got her randomly outside of the banner focus
I decided to use my free 5 star summon to get a second copy of Ike Zeal Unleashed is my first copy had a flaw in speed and a bonus to attack. From what I understand him having a flaw in speed would be really bad because of how much you rely on it. According to his skills. I am assuming his base kit is fine.
I also had a fallen Corrin with a flaw in HP. but I did think that I this wasn't as big a deal as Ike's flaw in speed
-
4 hours ago, Jugdral Defender said:
I saw some discussion about Alvis and unless prompted I'm not going to get into it deeply right at this time, but Alvis is absolutely nothing like Edelgard. Their stories are also completely different as people. The only similarities are the whole Flame Emperor and evil dark cult things going on. I've written about it before and I'll grab that text if prompted, but their character arcs are completely opposite of each other. Their behavior, attitudes, general characters, stories, arcs and relationships are also nothing alike.
As one super big example, Alvis recognized his mistakes and made a last effort to see peace restored through Celice. He accepted his death if Celice was strong enough to kill him, even hiding Tyrfing for years to give to him. As soon as Celice's army was nearby, he gave Palmark the Tyrfing to give to Celice. Alvis was willing to die for the world he envisioned. He entrusted his ideals to someone else.
On the other hand, Edelgard would never, ever entrust her ideals to the other lords of her game. Even when it was completely clear that Dimitri's intentions were good and that he wanted change in the world as well in Azure Moon (and Dimitri had similar thoughts as Edelgard with the whole Crest system and yadda yadda), Edelgard refused to yield. She was never willing to die for the sake of her new world and didn't feel she could entrust her vision of a new world to anyone else. Instead, she was trying to crush all opposition (even including neutral territories). Her belief seemed to be that it had to be her, specifically, who brought about this change.
In contrast, Alvis sided specifically with the opposition because the opposition felt the same way he did. He gave his supposed enemy the means to defeat him. In all routes of Three Houses, Edelgard never does this - she remains consistently opposed to all other territories across each route (meaning there are no gaps in her character that would make her comparable to Alvis in even one route because she, as a character as well as throughout her arc, remain consistent). Basically, Alvis saw a future in Celice's reign and entrusted the future he hoped for to Celice. Edelgard could have done the same thing but never did, and nor did she ever want to.
Both of them wanted one nation, sure - but Alvis wanted to unify the continent and destroy all prejudice of bloodlines so that even people with Lopt blood could live in his new world (he even stated in gen 1 that he had no problem with the Lopt Sect existing, but he wasn't going to allow them to do harm. In other words, he wasn't going to allow the Sect to be destroyed just for simply existing because that would be hypocritical to his ideals for a new world lacking prejudiced). Edelgard wanted to conquer the continent and have the Children of the Goddess fully removed from power, and also is against dragons having power over humanity (which is a very stark contrast to Jugdral, who view the dragons as gods and see the weapons given to them by those dragons as holy and blessed). Edelgard expresses not wanting the Crest system in place and wants to change it, whereas Alvis is content with the holy bloodlines remaining as they are. Simply put, the holy bloodlines aren't viewed as problematic like Crests are - rather, they're respected and the inheritors are royalty/nobility, which is accepted in Jugdral. In Fodlan, the Crest systems becomes more and more questionable throughout the game (and most presently expressed in CF and AM, which are meant to be two sides of the same coin imo through Edelgard and Dimitri).
When Edelgard conquered Fodlan, there was opposition and war going on for five straight years and many, many characters hated her rule. Alvis' rule was considered peaceful for over a decade until the Lopt Sect took over and let the blame fall to Alvis instead while running around him and making it seem like he was okay with it. Right from the start, Edelgard allied with TWSITD but planned to destroy them in the end, whereas Alvis never actually allied with the Lopt Sect - he just wasn't going to destroy the Sect initially because they hadn't done anything wrong yet at the time. Granted, they both have the whole Sect thing going on, but even those situations are vastly different.
YEAH I SAID I WASN'T GOING TO GET TOO DEEPLY INTO IT but oh well. I mean, this is like a small portion of what I've written before about them, but basically Alvis and Edelgard are on two completely opposite ends of the new world spectrum. Their situations also differ far too much (ex. Crests and holy bloodlines).
Never said they were identical. But there are certainly similarities, especially in both having good intentions but said good intentions also putting them on a darker path.
You do also involuntarily bring up another similarity with Arvis and Edelgard. Edelgard also accepted her death after her defeat, in fact, it is very difficult to convince her otherwise. If not impossible. What she says to Byleth after she is defeated in silver snow and verdant wind also sounds to me like she is passing the torch over to them.
"Your path lies across my grave, it is time for you to find the courage to walk it"
_ EdelgardEven in Azure Moon. If you remember the true meaning of that dagger, and how it is connected to Dimitri's original message of "carving your own path". Edelgard returning the dagger in the manner in which it does can be interpreted as a passing of the torch and indirectly telling Dimitri that it is now up to him to carve his own path into the future as she can no longer do it.
Of course Edelgard only entrusts the future to others after she has no hope of victory and she always insists that she must die with her cause. That in order for someone else to park their path into the future, she must die. So while she would prefer to spearhead the changes to society herself, it sounds to me that she eventually did entrusts the future to another in insisting that Byleth's path lied across her grave. It makes sense that if Edelgard would entrust the future to anyone, it would be Byleth.
-
58 minutes ago, Azz said:
Honestly Azure Moon is the happiest for me. 3 of the 4 MCs all live, it's the only route where Dimitri can begin recovering from his torment (or at least have it not affect him to point of being unable to live normally), it is possible to have every student and faculty member survive sans Edelgard, Hubert and Jeritza if you choose to recruit them and, while not completely wiped out, TWSITD are basically a non-threat to the world now that Thales is dead and they are without a leader. Overall, I felt like AM can end on the happiest note (unless you're an Edelgard, Hubert and Jeritza stan of course...).
For me it is just that I think that the people who died in the war died for nothing while the nobility and crest system still stands at the end of it. It is just a waste really. While with a victory for Edelgard, all of those deaths were in the service of accomplishing something that would greatly help the continent. You are right about Azure Moon having the least casualties among main characters. It is just too bad that Edelgard insists on dying, the girl is as much ruled by her past trauma as Rhea and Dimitri.
If Edelgard would have taken Dimitri's hand and we came to some sort of compromise. I think I wouldn't hesitate to call Azure Moon , the happiest ending. Even if the beginning part after the time skip is definitely the darkest in the entire game.
Of course it is also possible to believe that the changes Dimitri do make to Fodlan is enough to justify the cost of the war. I just don't think it is. It is unclear if even Edelgard's proposed changes will be enough to make up for the casualties in the war, Dimitri's society, even less so as it is less of a change.
I also really don't like seeing Edelgard die, even if she would probably be okay with dying if that means a better Fodlan. I would also save Dimitri in Crimson Flower, if this was possible. I think both of them deserve a happy ending. But only one can get it due to circumstances.
I think that Dimitri is possibly the one who needs Byleth the most as he goes to most of the rails without them. Edelgard needs Byleth as emotional support to rediscover her humanity in face of all the bloodshed she has to do to bring about her new world. Claude doesn't seem to need them at all other than as a means to actually accomplish his vision. Claude is always fine, even if Byleth doesn't join them. Well, Dimitri needs Byleth the most emotionally, I do still favour Edelgard because I think Fodlan needs her vision for the future the most.
-
28 minutes ago, eclipse said:
We're reading the same topic, right?
I think so, I guess you are referring to someone randomly bringing up Alm and the tangent with socialism?
The socialism thing was originally connected to pointing out that Edelgard wasn't a communist or a socialist.
Anyway, I love Edelgard.
-
11 minutes ago, eclipse said:
. . .what the fuck did this topic devolve into.
Edelgard and why some people hate her? Confusion over why some people hate Micaiah?
-
22 minutes ago, Res said:
It’s ok for people to be weak. Some people are going to be physically or mentally weak no matter how much help they have. Weak people still have as much to contribute to society as strong people. Many of the best people I know are ‘weak’ by society’s standards.
I reject the idea that weak people need protecting, too. Weak people don’t need to pandered to. I would consider myself weak. I certainly couldn’t join an army. I’d hate to be considered inferior merely because I couldn’t fight.
There’s a world of difference between socialist and communist. I’m absolutely a socialist and having come to the US from a *slightly* more socialist country (nationalized healthcare, etc.) - I miss it. So yeah, Edelgard isn’t what I would consider terribly left.
Re. Narcissism, I was careful not to call her a narcissist. I don’t think she’s a narcissist, and all leaders do have to have narcissistic traits to a degree anyway in order to lead. But I do find some of her dialogue to be very similar to dialogue a narcissist would use, too similar to ignore.
Ultimately she’s a fictional character, and I, the player, am not Byleth. And I wouldn’t claim that Edelgard gaslit Byleth.
Someone doesn’t have to have wronged you for you to dislike them. Personalities clash; not everyone is going to get along. And that’s why I’m not going to be persuaded to like Edelgard.
If someone really strongly reminds me of another person in multiple ways I’m going to assume that they’re somewhat like that person. Maybe if she actually existed and I could learn more about her I might grow to like her, but as she’s fictional all we have to go on is what we get in the game.
Do what you wish, just don't get into the mindset of believing that Edelgard has wronged you, personally, just because she reminds you of someone else, because she hasn't.
By the way, I think pandering to the weak is more Dimitri than Edelgard, he is the one who keep referring to commoners as inferior to the people protecting them. Edelgard has more faith people than that and thinks that if everyone is given a chance they should be able to contribute to society. She isn't for lording over people like would be the case with the feudal system. She never said she will let the strong trample on the weak, Dimitri made that accusation and she denied it. Edelgard wouldn't consider you inferior and look down on you because of it, she would fight so your position in society would be secure.
28 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:Well, I would not call her narcissistic, but she does admit that she is someone that is viewed as arrogant by others, with even Sothis remarking that about her. Being arrogant might actually make one see the person as narcissistic from a certain perspective.
Some level of haughtiness is to be expected from nobillity. But Edelgard can also be surprisingly humble, she very seldom looks down on someone because they are a commoner or of lower rank. She is also willing to perform manual labour around the monastery, even as Emperor.
Despite her own claims, I don't think Edelgard is anymore arrogant than the likes of Ferdinand or Lorenz.
-
14 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:
The Jedi should never have been part of the Republic to begin with. It's why Palpatine played them like a fiddle, not only turning them into generals of an army, but also making them overall help him conquer planets and expand his reach, and doing it all under their very nose.
Honestly, given how Edelgard has no issues with Nabateans personally, but wants to wipe out the Agarthans, Edelgard would allow Jedis to remain, but wipe out the Sith herself.
But that's Star Wars, but the point is, religion and politics together is BAD.
Well, I don't like religion mixing with politics either, which is a huge reason for why I support Edelgard and dislike Rhea.
-
51 minutes ago, Blackstarskywalker said:
Edelgard has been called a nazi, fascist, ethnocentric, military dictator, egocentric, and now narcissistic. Take off Emperor Palpatine, you've got competition. 😂😂😂
None of them actually true.
I think we all know that if Edelgard was the Sith Emperor, the Galaxy would have been a much better place. The primary difference between Edelgard and Palpatine is that Edelgard has good intentions and is quite agreeable. The rebellion would lose their will to fight as soon as they met her.
Sure, she still might want to separate the Jedi from galactic politics as she doesn't like religion wielding political power. But I very much doubt that she will build a Death Star. I also think a lot of her policies would be rather popular with the people.
If Edelgard is the Emperor, I guess Byleth would be Darth Vader
-
2 hours ago, Res said:
She’s also pretty authoritative. I know Fodlan’s politics can’t really be compared to modern politics (plus I find the world is not that fully-fleshed out, with a fair few contradictions), but yeah, meritocracies generally don’t jive with left-wing politics.
~
One thing I haven’t seen mentioned yet: I personally dislike Edelgard because I find her pattern of speech and turns of phrase narcissistic. I actually find her self-centered in that she believes she knows best and has the answer for everyone. Being willing to sacrifice others’ lives for your own goals (even if you’re also prepared to lay down your own life) is not something I admire. And as someone who’s had to deal with narcissistic abuse in their life I actually find Edelgard very, very hard to listen to. I’ve come across a few other people with similar backgrounds to me who dislike her for the same reason.
I also disagree with meritocracy on a fundamental level and don’t believe they work - and the ending of CF doesn’t help in this respect because all of Edelgard’s close friends end up being in positions of power (and yes, I agree it would have improved a lot to see Dorothea or another commoner placed in a position of power). And some people are weak - physically or mentally or weak in terms of influence - and that’s okay! They still deserve as much of a chance at life as anyone else.
You should still recognize that just because Edelgard reminds you of someone who wronged you in yhe past, it doesn't mean she is anything like that person.
I have encountered a person who hates Edelgard because she reminds them of their ex gaslighted them in the past. But the truth is that Edelgard never gaslighted Byleth. Edelgard is not the person who wronged you. Is it really fair to judge her based on something she has never done?
-
20 hours ago, Kiran_ said:
I definitely agree that Blue Lions is the saddest route for me. Though it's mostly because I have to kill Edelgard. Haha. I vividly remember my first playthrough (Blue Lions), and as much as I loved the characters I had such a soft spot for Edelgard and her ideals after seeing how much the world negatively affected my poor BL babies. And I was super sad when negotiations broke down, and then the end when Edelgard does that to herself, made me really sad for her. Also because I feel like Blue Lions is the most realistic in the fact ... nothing *really* changes by the end. Even after all that war and death, things get a little better, but it's so incomplete and really society doesn't really grow or change that much. Which makes me kinda sad.
I think Golden Deer had the potential to be sad, but idk. It was too detached.
Dimitri's death didn't really hit me at all. He was too much a crazed person in that one. At least in Crimson Flower he was like a focused villain. But in Golden Deer he was just crazy, and honestly needed to be put down, imho, so I wasn't really sad about. This comes from someone who is still upset we couldn't marry Dimitri in Blue Lions, so I do LOVE him, I just didn't really have any sympathy for him in that route.
Crimson Flower was I think the happiest route. There was nothing really sad about it to me (except killing former students/teachers (well Leonie/Catherine I happily murdered)), because it felt like the entire route I was on the right path. With Blue Lions and Golden Deer it just felt ... like I had made the wrong choice. Those were the routes I played first and idk. Golden Deer felt more 'right' then Blue Lions, but Crimson Flower really was the only route where I was invested in the actual outcome because I knew it to be better. So there was a feeling of true ... happiness at the end. Because through all the darkness came hope and light.
I am glad someone share my view that Crimson Flower is the most hopeful. It is actually the only time in the game, I felt absolutely right about what I was doing. This is definitely not helped on the other paths when Edelgard says that she wished that she and Byleth could walk this path together. That just makes me feel that things are not the way they are supposed to be.
It is ironic, but because of how many of the students have suffered under the crest system. I feel that they are fighting on the wrong side of the war without ever realising it. Maybe because they really never realised what Edelgard is really fighting for. So it is kind of tragic that someone like Ashe would fight for the people who killed his stepfather, against the very ideals that Lonato was fighting for. Or that Sylvain would fight in order to preserve the crest system, which have brought him so much misery.
-
3 hours ago, Sir Wolfram of Vallora said:
Alright I'll throw in my hat in the ring. I dislike Edlgard simply because I agree more with Rhea. I sympathise with her cause more than I can agree with Edlgard's. For me, Edlgard is a sypathetic take on a Walhart character, but I feel what made Walhart so good is you couldn't sympathize with him. He demands your respect, not your sympathy.
I do have some sympathy for Rhea, but I prefer Edelgard and I still believe that Rhea needs to be removed from power. It should be noted that Edelgard doesn't kill Rhea in most timelines, and that her death in Crimson Flower is her own doing. Edelgard would have spared her life if she surrendered and didn't burn down the capital.
SpoilerI also like Flayn, which is why I spare her every time.
-
6 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:
Like I said earlier, people don't want to believe that someone that starts the war and works with evil people will get anything good out of it. They think that politics and pure ideals work flawlessly, or that change in a society where people don't think about change is easily accepted.
Ionius and Lambert both tried to change, but nobles opposed their efforts, resulting in them working with the Agarthans, which caused catastrophic consequences.
Peaceful changes weren't an option.
I think I already said my piece why politics and pure ideals doesn't match. It simply ignores reality.
I guess she could join in with the charge against the Agarthans, but doing that would mean losing the Empire completely and from her point of view, it is exactly the same as siding with the Agarthans, joining up with people she hates the fight a common enemy. Mark my words, the Agarthans still controls the Empire, this choice would not prevent the war. And how much does it bird really even contribute to the cause without control of the Empire? She has a lot more control over events doing the exact opposite, going with the Agarthans against the shirts, maintaining control of the Empire and use said control of the Empire in the end to destroy the Agarthans. She simply wouldn't have the power to destroy the church after the war against the Agarthans was over going with the other option.
29 minutes ago, Ottservia said:yeah that too also people saying the new system she'll put in place is flawed and won't last. And I'm just like yeah that's true but that's also true of any governmental system. No government system is perfect so yeah it's gonna fall eventually so what exactly is the point being made here? The point of the narrative isn't if Edelgard's system will last it's that it's better than the system Foldlan has currently.
That is a point I am trying to make for a long time, the new system doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to be better. I think it will be even if it will have ups and downs.
I also think literally any ending to the game have its detriments to its government system. It is not unique for Crimson Flower. I personally think that doing this entire war and not removing the nobility or the crest system is honestly a complete waste. At least with Edelgard winning the war has more of a point.
56 minutes ago, Ottservia said:I honestly don't get the hate then again it's hard for me to understand the hate towards any fictional character in general. Like I get people have tastes and will therefore dislike anything for whatever reason but what I don't understand is why people hate her this much. It doesn't make a lot of sense especially because a lot of the reasons people say they dislike her isn't even true y'know like saying she caused the tragedy of duscur. Like no she didn't. I thought that was obvious. Also she killed Geralt. She didn't do that either. This community confuses me sometimes.
Still, these are misconceptions at least one character in the game actually has about Edelgard. Still, I sometimes wonder if some other haters has even played the game at all considering some of the things they are saying. Many I know haven't played Crimson flower, which makes me wonder if they are even qualified to have an opinion on her as they clearly haven't even tried to get to know her.
Not to mention the whole "she burned Bernadetta" thing. It is the King of nonsense accusations
-
20 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:
Radiant Dawn, actually. Micaiah is not a character in Path of Radiance. But I would not say that Edelgard and Micaiah are that similar, honestly.
Arvis is not controversial, because he was overall portrayed as an antagonist and overall objectively wrong. Because he did bad things, bad things resulted. Even if at first they were good, the story made everything go to hell for him, so people take that as "do only good things and things will be good" and "if you do bad things for a good cause, you will fail". This is why Edelgard's ending is generally nitpicked by others that are against her, as they don't want to believe that the aggressor of a war should have succeeded into making good things.
Except the thing is that Edelgard isn't an idiot like Arvis. Where Arvis thinks that after grabbing power, that's it, he didn't bother to deal with the clearly evil cult. Edelgard, on the other hand, knows that the clearly evil mole people should be eradicated.
Of course I would say that the entire concept of "if you do bad things for a good cause, you will fail" is moralistic bullcrap. When you are in a position of leadership, the effectiveness of your leadership is far more important than the purity of of your actions. The job basically requires the willingness to make sacrifices for the greater good to be an effective leader. Anyone who actually believes that leaders have the luxury to remain morally pure. I suggest should go and read The Prince by Machiavelli for a real understanding about the nature of politics.
One example I heard brought up recently was that in game of thrones, when the Faith Militant took over King's Landing. Many people wished that Joffrey was still king rather than the mild-mannered Tomen. Of course, both of those kings are rather crappy in their own right for different reasons. But it shows you that ruthlessness does have a value when it comes to leadership and that if you are too nice. People will just walk all over you.
I think Edelgard strikes a good balance between being merciful and doing what must be done.
I could also pick apart literally every ending in the game, the truth is that will always be more problems in the future, that is just unavoidable because that is what reality is like. But I do think that things will be better in the future than how things were before. After the ending of Crimson Flower. It just won't be flawless.
If anyone is doubting that war can lead to good things, I would say that abolishing slavery after the American Civil War was a good thing.
45 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:She certainly is likable. Very selfless, benevolent and kind with some bits of stubbornness and a surprising amount of sass to prevent her from being boring. I'd say she's definitely not similar to Edelgard though. Michy is rather fragile which Edelgard very much isn't.
So far as I can tell Arvis has never been controversial and has always been considered a very effective villain. However barely anyone knows of Arvis so he might have been controversial if Fire Emblem fans could actually play his game. Its also somewhat different to be a clear antagonist from the get go then it is to first be a protagonist who then turns into an antagonist. The later category has a chance to have fans reject the character due to feeling betrayed or holding a protagonist to higher moral standards.
Selfless, benevolent and stubborn does actually sound very much like Edelgard.
Think one reason I never felt betrayed by Edelgard is that I never held any real loyalty to the church in the first place. I had been sceptical of them since Lonato. If you go Crimson Flower, I would describe Edelgard as a protagonist, simultaneously playing the role as antagonist, but later goes over to being the protagonist full-time after you join her. Thing is that being the antagonist, it is just a designation of going against the protagonist, if the protagonist joins the antagonist, they are no longer the antagonist.
35 minutes ago, haarhaarhaar said:(Spoilers for RD lol)
I hadn't really thought of the parallels between Micaiah and Edelgard, but they're definitely there. It's true that she doesn't have an especially clear vision for society at large (which makes sense because she never wanted power) and was happy accomplishing relatively small feats of good. Edelgard never got that opportunity (although some of her dialogue indicates she would have preferred a smaller life than fate gave her). But the life experiences of both and their compassion for the downtrodden directly motivate their desires for the world (no racism/no Crest-based class system respectively) and their unwilling shouldering of responsibility. Micaiah refuses to fight in Part I after Izuka attempts to turn Muarim feral, and shuts down any possibility of that, (unlike Edelgard with crest beasts) but the power dynamics are also more in her favour at that point than Edelgard's are with TWSITD.
Her relative incompetence as a general in Part 3 of RD is slightly excused by her trust in and sympathy for Pelleas, and she is similar to Edelgard in that both publicly support their regime even though they privately dislike aspects of it. Her calculations are also fairly utilitarian - she attempts to kill Sanaki as soon as she can because the only other apparent alternative is the blood pact murder of her entire country, and gets foiled because she lets her emotions get in the way. Edelgard probably would have sacrificed a loved one in order to save her country though (idk? Byleth in CF is the only person she's close enough to for that, but Byleth never gets put in Sothe's position). After that chapter in RD, Micaiah is just getting shat on, but that's simply the logical move for the Gallian Alliance against someone they have to treat as a genuine enemy. Basically, Micaiah's half-resolve saves Sothe but as a result kills Pelleas needlessly (on your first playthrough) and inevitably loses a lot of Daein lives anyway. I doubt it was more lives lost than would have been lost if Micaiah let the blood pact activate, but there's also the race factor going on, so I don't really know how to weigh that decision morally. Long story short, their situations and characters have some similarities, but Edelgard is more resolved (and thus more divisive) than Micaiah.
And yeah I agree Micaiah was never a Mary Sue character either
I can certainly see some similarities.
I have heard of these blood pacts and they sound absolutely horrifying. To my understanding if someone breach a contract signed as a blood act, it will lead to every single citizen in their country dying. Because we are talking about casualties on such a massive scale, I would say that it is clearly the moral thing to do to sacrifice the life of one in order to save countless others. It is so destructive that nearly anything is better than to allow a blood pact to trigger. But this is assuming that a blood pact actually ends with the death of the person who signed it.
Edelgard is very lucky that blood pacts doesn't exist in her world, otherwise I'd bet that Thales would have forced her to sign one. As for the hypothetical if she would sacrifice Byleth to save that the rest of her people in this situation,. Yes, I think she would, but she would feel horrible about it.
-
7 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:
Well she does clearly fight for the wrong side and while she regrets the situation she constantly defends her actions that become increasingly less moral. She's very clearly in the wrong which can make her behavior somewhat frustrating.
At the time many people also insisted she was a ''marry sue'' which I never really agreed with.
I should really play path of radiance, the game seems to have many fascinating characters. My primary exposure to Micaiah was because she was my starting 5 star in heroes and the girl seems very likeable. I have also had a friend of mine compare her to Edelgard, though I am not sure how similar they really are.
The character I probably would compare Edelgard to would-be Arvis, the whole of at that Emperor which makes me think that Edelgard's title is the direct reference to him. Once again, I haven't played the game he is from, but based on his dialogue in heroes, he also seems to be a character willing to go to extreme lengths to achieve his vision for the greater good. I think that Arvis and Edelgard would probably get along if we were to meet.
Was Arvis ever a source of controversy?
There is also the comparison between Edelgard and Ashnard, but other than having the meritocracy angle in common, Ashnard doubles down the very hard on might makes right in a way that Edelgard just doesn't and he also seems to be completely insane.
-
1 hour ago, Silver-Haired Maiden said:
Frankly, she isn't. Divisive doesn't equal hated, she even won CYL her first year being out.
You want to see hated female characters? I point you to Micaiah after Radiant Dawn came out. Or Eirika. While the hate for these two has calmed down significantly the past several years (with Heroes playing a large part in Micaiah's) those two had so much vitriol spat at them that it makes Edelgard discourse look downright tame by comparison.
Why on earth would Micaiah be hated? From what I know about her that doesn't even make sense to me.
-
2 hours ago, Hong Nhi said:
Edelgard is your best girl ? XD
Pretty much, Edelgard is in my opinion extremely likeable and well-intentioned, especially for a conquering Emperor. I have not encountered many characters like her
-
15 minutes ago, Lapis said:
Leonie, Hapi, Yuri (if they count bc DLC) and ig Ignatz. Leonie becomes a mercenary either way and Ignatz just an artist as always, Yuri does his underground business and helps orphans and Hapi basically goes into hiding and occasionally helps out the empire agains Those who slither her being the only one with an explicit CF ending out of the 4.
Yes i am thinking that too. It just would have been nice to actually See it you know? Like maybe the game introducing the character in part 2 and showing them slowly working the ranks up and growing from that into a good candidate for the role.
Tbh the thing with the writing and world building was just out of my personal problems bc while i find the premise of CF and Edelgard really interesting and facinating i think the execution leaves for me at least a lot to be desired. Maybe its bc i played AM and VW first and now am biased but a lot of especially the last third of CF felt rushed and undeveloped. I think part of that is because of how the developers said in an interview that originally SS was suppose to be the Black Eagles route and they later changes it bc they wanted the player to be able to side with Edel too so they made CF a secret route, but then also changed that again and decided it's so easy to get that it is kinda the main route for BE now. Like if it was nothing but an extra route it would have been fine that it's a bit shorter than the other routes and had less cinematics and all. But like this i think they really should have added some chapters and wrapped some things up. I don't hate Edelgard, but she isnt my favouriote either just due to the writing i simply prefer her in the antagonistic role she plays in SS/AM/VW.
To come back to the original topic tho my theory is a lot of people seem to hate her due to her being presented a lot more 'prominent' than Claude and Dimitri for example from a marketing point. That in it self isnt a bad thing but it is not rocket science to conclude that when someone doesnt like or is just midly against a character but whenever they interact with the media the character is 'more' front and center than other characters that might be equal, people easily can drift off into extremes. This is about FEH but also about the pre-release marketing of Three houses and things like the theme song of the whole game being solely in her perspective. I really hope it doesn't come over as me trying to justify some of the extreme haters or saying that i am one. This is simply my theory on the topic.
It seem to me that Edelgard ended up as a far more likeable character than was originally intended when the developers first started working on the game, they later realise this fact and that the player might actually want to join her and so made the Crimson Flower route. Maybe it could have been more expanded if we came up with it later in development, but I am glad it exists at all. It is actually my either favourite or second favourite route in the game, Azure Moon is the main competitor. I just feel that these two routs have the strongest emotional cores. I am not sure what the point of silver snow is at all honestly, it actually feels a lot more redundant than crimson flower due to being so similar to verdant wind. It would actually be pretty bad if it was the only route available for Black Eagles.
I do actually think Edelgard's prominence in marketing makes sense as she is a major character, regardless of route. Major antagonist is still a very important role and I think her being more prominent than Dimitri and Claude is justified. I read that she was originally envisioned as Byleth's... well… Nemesis. Granted, with changes later in development, she ended up being much more than that, as she is now a major antagonist and a possible protagonist in her own right. Granted, I do think that Dimitri should have been developed for has an antagonist in crimson flower, as it is you essentially need to have played Azure Moon truly understand the how dangerous Dimitri actually was when he was obsessed with vengeance.
Let me tell you, as a massive fan of Edelgard. It is actually amazing that she gets so much focus in heroes. Granted, I would also really love to have timeskip Dimitri as a playable hero.
To rank the three lords in order, my favourite is Edelgard, followed by Dimitri, followed by Claude. Claude is a good character in his own right, but Edelgard and Dimitri are both god tier characters, the personal conflict between the two of them is unmatched when it comes to drama, in comparison, I feel like Claude barely have anything to do with the plot. It is also a case of him not being flawed enough in comparison to the other two. Believe it or not, it is the floors of Edelgard and Dimitri that makes them compelling to me. I wouldn't like Dimitri,nearly as much as I do as a character if he didn't have such a strong dark side.
As for Edelgard, she is something that I don't very often see in any form of media, a well-intentioned conqueror who wants to conquer the continent not to further her own personal power, but because she genuinely thinks that she is liberating people from a tyrant that has brainwashed people into obedience for generations. She is basically a subversion of the evil Emperor archetype like Dimitri is a subversion of the heroic Prince archetype. I understand why the developers are so proud of Edelgard. It does seem that she has a character actually exceeded their original expectations as well.
I could be wrong, but my original estimation for why some people hated her is simply that they couldn't comprehend the concept of a conquering empire being anything other than evil. Of course, my extreme devotion to Edelgard is in a way a response to feeling that Edelgard doesn't deserve the hatred she gets. So I might be overcompensating for it
-
35 minutes ago, Lapis said:
Hm yeah... this makes sense but if that's the case it kinda feels then that they only tell us that Edelgard wants to change up the class system but don't show us like an commoner who does get into a position of power. They even could have just added an NPC to fill that role while not great it would have been better than nothing. As of now the thing that basically everyone of the BEs get the positions they always were intended to get no matter the system change (except Casper ig) can be seen as best just a bit of lazy writing and at worst nepotism. Though i don't think Edelgard based on her in-game values and goals would do nepotism.
i honestly think, that if aspects like that in CF and the route in general had gotten a bit more world building and bit of an overworked storyline between Intsys decision to not make it a secret route anymore and the games' release it would have given way less complaints about Edelgard as a character.
Given Edelgard's position on her own children, that being that they shouldn't inherit her position as Emperor, I would actually expect her to make laws against her officials choosing their own offspring as their successors. When it comes to nepotism, I don't know why this is always ignored, but the previous number. This system is pretty much the height of nepotism in that the children of the last ruler always inherit their position, regardless of competency.
I actually had to look up what happened to be other commoners in Crimson Flower, it seems that Raphael and Ashe both become knights, even if Raphael later quits his position to inherit his father's inn. It is the same solo ending they get in every route. But I guess that counts as being promoted into nobility. I actually kind of have a feeling that Edelgard will probably choose a former commoner as the next Emperor, it would be the ultimate symbolic gesture that social class doesn't matter under this new system. Am I forgetting any commoner character? There really don't seem to be that many in the game.
I actually do agree that more effort should have been spent on Crimson Flower, for once 9t should have been considered the main route of the Black Eagles. I know not everyone could get behind Edelgard and her methods. But you don't get a choice in siding with Dimitri and I straight up wouldn't do that in Byleth's shoes. If I didn't know that he was going to have a redemption arc. I am really not in favour of boar Dimitri's methods or the fact that he seems to enjoy torture and murder. But despite its flaws, what is still there in Crimson flower still quite good. I just wish there was an additional arc where you fought against Thales. Few have suffered more at the hands of Thales and Edelgard, she deserves to be able to take him down. Still, I am glad this rout exists at all. If I chose a house leader at the beginning of the game, I would expect following them and their story. If I had to fight against Edelgard with the house she is supposed to be the leader of, I would feel seriously ripped off. It also has some of the best emotional weight of the entire game with its interactions between Edelgard and Byleth and the others.
-
16 minutes ago, Lapis said:
One thing that always bothered me about the writing of Edelgard or CF in general tbh is how the one person who got no title or anything out of all of this was the one commoner in her group, Dorothea. Casper gets the position of his father as stated in game as recognition of his efforts in the war. Ferdinand gets his lands back. But Dorothea? Nope Dorothea stays a commoner and only can marry to make her situation better, despite being in the main team, even her solo-ending insist on her getting married.
It just seems kinda weird and not fitting of Edel given her goals
It is probably due to Dorothea not wanting a political position as she rather wanted to get back to the opera. Edelgard wouldn,t have any issue giving her a position of power if that is what Dorothea really wanted. But she is rather successful and wealthy due to her opera about Edelgard even the Emperor loved.
-
2 minutes ago, FrostyFireMage said:
People who brand Edelgard as a liberal or any political leaning confuse me, she wants a meritocracy not a communist/socialist government or anything like that.
She is technically not left wing or right-wing the way we understand it, as she lives in a world completely different from ours. People usually think too much in terms of right and left when it isn't always appropriate.
But she does have several policies that could be associated with liberalism. Ultimately, her goal is freedom for the people by the disbandment of the nobility and inherited power, she is for enlightenment and the progress of technology and supports secularism, all things that some people associate with liberalism (something she also has in common with the participants of the French Revolution, she has serious Napoleon parallels). But it isn't like she is a socialist or anything as Edelgard doesn't even have a concept of the term. Same reason she is not a fascist, as that is also a political philosophy that is too new for Edelgard to even have a notion of the concept. But her and Ferdinand's plan to create free education is very much a socialist policy. But meritocracy as a whole could also be interpreted that she might be in favour of free market capitalism if she had a notion of the concept, which she probably doesn't due to it also being too new. But under the modern political umbrella. This might qualify as right-wing.
As you can see, Edelgard's policies are all over the place on the political spectrum, but she legitimately had some belifs shared by of the modern right and left. But overall, why some people might associate her with liberalism is that Edelgard famously dislikes tradition and therefore definitely isn't conservative. She is all about progress and changing the old order. It is just that her world's status quo is different from ours.
I usually compare policies with other people in the world when deciding who to support. Don't exactly expect her to introduce a modern democracy as she wouldn't have a concept of the idea because it doesn't really have a history in Fodlan. Theoretically, both Edelgard government and Dimitri's could possibly lead to a democracy in future generations.
Why Edelgard von Hresvelg is the most hated girl?
in Fire Emblem: Three Houses
Posted
Of course, fixed my post.