scigeek101

There is no easy option to delete an account. Another issue with this site.

I've just gotten a moderator warning for making a report. This is clearly an abusive president and will be ending my good faith relationship with this sight immediately deleting my account permanently. I request all others to do the same.

So far Fire Emblem 1 2 and 3 have been remade. It stands to reason that 4 will be next.

We have that. It's called He-man universe because of Evillyn.

Thing is if magic exists the way it is depicted in game. Meaning that it works a certain way and always works that way. It's really a natural phenomena of some sort. As opposed to a supernatural phenomenon. Now a supernatural phenomenon may indeed be a natural phenomenon that we simply do not understand. But if a phenomenon is repeatable and measurable by any objective metrics it is basically a natural phenomenon even if we have no clue how it works. Like gravity is a good example. We know how it works. We really don't have a good idea of why it works. Just that it does. Ancient people had even less idea. Stuff like alchemy was seriously considered as a science, and in a way, it is, as far as chemistry is a thing. You just can't make a good model of chemical reactions without a microscope to understand the underlying structure of matter, so it's basically trial and error. If you think about it to any primative person a gun is essentially a form of magic. It kills at a distance by some unseen force. You might be wearing a suit of armor designed to fight against swords and the like, but some random guy with a gun can still kill you. So fire emblem mages are basically musketeers.

I'd like to see them make it into some kind of a roguelike campaign. Doesn't have to be the main focus but something like a 10 chapter randomly generated campaign focused around permadeath might be fun. Don't know what kind of units maps or weapons you'll get. Just do super Mario or something for the story. Princess is captured at castle whatever by some dragon qyou gotta fight your way there.

Marth's situation basically was Hardin had either wrecked every other country or Marth had killed whomever Hardin had set as the ruler, basically leaving the whole continent leaderless and putting Marth in a very adventageous position to become the Holy God Emperor. Now, I've never much liked the plot of book 2, something felt off to me. I go for a , revisionist history version of it. Marth having won the war, and history being written by the victors, wrote the story of history to make him seem to be in the best possible light and Hardin in the worst. Hardin likely worried (rightly) about Marth's ambitions set off to weaken Marth's ability to control by sending him off to another land to govern where he lacked the same political advantage as he had in his homeland. Marth being unhappy with this situation used the opportunity to get his friend Lorenz to instigate a rebellion, then Marth brutally murdered him and claimed it to be "suicide" to hide the truth. Marth then began a bloody a brutal campaign of subjugation across the continent. Later historians re-wrote the campaign as book 2 to legitimize the tyrant Marth's rule. We see quite a few hints to this. One is the creation of Lundgren as a character who is totally absent from book 1. Lundgren is simply "Marth" as he ruled the land, and was spun off into an alternative character to distance his reign of terror from Marth's new messianic image. We also see the part where Marth visits some random village and the King of Orleans is there for no reason to give Marth his crown and the star sphere. What probably actually happened is Marth was pushed out of Grust by Hardin after he tried to instigate a bloody rebellion, Marth then found the remains of the fell dragon at thebes while out in the desert and used that to brutally subjugate the continent. Later fabricating the "Anri's way story" to add legitamacy to his reign. As well as completely fabricating the last couple chapters where he saves the world from a resurrected garnef and all that. It's just lazy writing all around.

I think it depends on how we define wealth. If we define it purely as value of items owned, it's hard to to say who is the richest, I'd say Ike is in the running there what with the collection of newly made legendary unbreakable weapons, but that said, that only counts if we consider Ike the owner of his entire armies goods. In terms of power as an expression of wealth. Byleth wins easily I think in the "I've become the pope emperor of the entire continent" If we count my playthrough it's probably Eliwood due to substantial arena abuse as a child.

Yes it definitely isn't a foreign concept. Though it likely differs substantially from European serfdom. All I know specifically is that peasants were taxed in rice, which following the relative period of peace in the Edo era leading to an abundance of rice and a decline in it's value, left the samurai class fairly poor in comparison. Also peasants weren't allowed to travel freely and had to get "passports" which were in the form of wooden tokens with writing on them and enforced via a bunch of checkpoints along the major roadways. I'm also aware of a couple of peasant rebellions happening in the late Edo period that were put down very violently with the Bakufu essentially finding the ring leader and sticking his head on a pike outside the town gate as an example of what happens when you decide not to pay your rice tax.

Not really a myth. The concept is called "kirisute gomen" and it referred to the samurai right to summarily execute people of lower classes, sort of, actually it is similar to being able to start a duel. But they couldn't just kill whomever they wanted for whatever reason. They'd be required to justify their decision to other samurai or face ritual suicide themselves for dishonor. It could only be done immediately after someone had attacked the samurai's honor, and the person getting cut down also had the right to self defense. Afterwards the samurai would have to report the incident to the local authorities who would decide post ex facto whether or not it was justified, and if they decided it wasn't the samurai would be dishonored and face ritual suicide or the death penalty. Testing swords on criminals was something else they did. They'd rate blades based on how many criminals they could cut through at once. But they weren't going around killing peasants willy nilly. At least they weren't supposed to.

While for something like Fire Emblem, gameplay is more or less the most important factor, having a strong plot to carry the gameplay is also important I think. Lots of people are probably going to drop this one before the endgame just because the story just isn't that engaging. Granted, this is a problem that Fire Emblem often has, but I question that, if we're going to do this level of story but not have it be very good, maybe making a far simpler story with less text is better? Or even one that is basic but allows for more player choice and multiple routes? The very basic outline for the story here works alright, but it might be better if there's about 80% less of it. And if they let you make more meaningful story choices. Even if that means something like first going to Elusia by way of Solm rather than Brodia or something like that.

I liked how Tellius handled the Dragons. They were very powerful, extremely long lived, essentially demigods of a type. They didn't seem to be particularly interested with the affairs of the other races, and just kind of sat in their own kingdom and didn't do much. Engage the dragons just don't make sense. You're the divine dragon and that means you can, do nothing dragon related except take extra damage from wymslayers. All right then. Then what's her face does get a dragon form but we don't even get to fight it when she "spoilers" what gives? Evil Cobra Dragon is a cool design though. I kinda liked how FE7 had just a normal fire dragon as the final boss. Playing up dragons the whole game as super scary and deadly enemies gets a bit iffy when there are mobs of them. But a singular dragon that your whole team needs to take down, that's cool lore wise.

I'd say that the general idea of an iron man run would be to play the game as if the save feature doesn't exist That is that saving at all goes against the spirit of the run. Of course, for a game as long as this, that is unreasonable to play it all in one sitting. So saving and reloading from that save doesn't really break the idea, but it's supposed to be one continuous playthrough and if you reload a save to do something different, like scumming for rings, I do think that isn't really in line with a strict iron man run. Same as how getting your lord killed and getting a game over should be a restart from the beginning in a "true iron man". Run. Though granted I would likely save scum the rings and continue after lord death anyway cause why not? I wouldn't say the clear would "count" but it's not like anyone is taking score and it's not like anyone is enforcing the "rules". Personally I'd say the gatcha random elements add some spice to the run. Though it's pretty lame how few of the S rank rings actually give skills.

,I think there is some fun to be had with the online multiplayer aspects. Potentially. I've not messed with it much. Frankly I'm in the same boat where the post game isn't that interesting to me. Don't see much benefit in upgrading engage weapons. If we had direct PVP I might be more interested.

Sword of Seals sounds better. It fits well with the sequel, Fire Emblem: Wrath of the Walrus.