Regarding Ike

[Florete]

Fair enough. Though it still seems like a weak excuse that there's no indication other than signing in blood. In an actual contract something major not being mentioned would be grounds to void the whole thing. But real world =/= Tellius.

I'll agree with that.

I'd say being good helps, but the character has to be likable in his or her own right. Haar's not as good as Seth but he's much more popular because of his personality. Miccy probably wouldn't be hated, but she probably wouldn't be popular.

I think that's more because Seth is a Jeigan. Some people still perceive Jeigans as terrible units, thus Seth loses some popularity. And Haar doesn't exactly have much personality; he just likes to sleep. I can relate to him, though, because I also like to sleep.

[bottlegnomes]

True about Seth. I sometimes forget people still don't like Jagens. I think 99% of people can relate to Haar, which is part of why I think people like him so much. Looks also make difference. I don't just mean attractiveness, but overall. Like Stefan probably wouldn't have been nearly as popular as he was when PoR came out if he'd been dressed like Zihark. Or if Haar didn't have his eyepatch.

Edited August 12, 2012 by bottlegnomes

[Sol Hiryu]

I think all the discussion about the Blood Pacts really show how contrived they are as a plot device. We're given the impression that it's some sort of magically powerful signed pact, but we're never given insight on how it actually works. We have the information on how to stop it, and how it can even be weakened (although the localization omits this and doesn't even explain why the mark starts fading), but nothing on its specific workings. How does it give the senators such unparalleled control at their will? You can chalk part of that up to both Pelleas and the previous King Kilvas being really dumb, but it only underscores the fact that we do not have an inkling of how that part actually functions.

Edit: Reading through the extended script again, it seems like if one person doesn't follow the wording of the pact specifically, the other party can invoke the curse at their leisure. More explanation, but then it brings up the question of how Ashnard was able to get the old wise man to activate the curse. Still seems subject to too many plot-holes though, especially considering that the localization doesn't even bother explaining further than "lol we tricked youuuu".

As I see it, the blood pact just serves as a convenient way to bring Daein back into the war and to gloss over the whole Kilvas thing. Outside of Part 2 and early Part 3, RD is written really horribly, which is where all these characterization issues pop up. Maybe if they didn't try so hard to make Daein look sympathetic and not completely ignore the atrocities they committed in PoR, Micaiah probably could have come off a lot better.

Edited August 12, 2012 by Sol Hiryu

[CT075]

i never took the "i'm taking orders from over your head" comment literally

i thought naesala was using micaiah's justification of "well the pact doesn't affect a statue" and was just being cheeky with lekain

[HeroMystic]

I also think that if she didn't share spotlight with Ike she'd be more accepted ^^', her team is so weak compared to his. So everyone wants to avoid her altogether to start playing with the cool guys. Her "Mary Sue" traits don't even make her the center of attention they only serve to make Ike look even better than everyone else. She has foresight the ability that gave her advantage in some of the battles of Part 1 but she starts failing as soon as she's matched against Ike. Yune accompanying her only helped so she can bless Ike in the end and make him even stronger. At the end of the game even Yune compliments Ike over Micaiah, despite being Micaiah her chosen one.

I actually think it's the opposite. If Micaiah had more attention in the game she'd be more liked. I do agree Ike and the GMs act as a "spotlight stealing squad", though I generally dislike this term because it gives an arbitrary negative to a character, that should instead be blamed on the writers.

As for gameplay, I'd be lying if I said being good/bad in a game doesn't factor into it, but RD is pretty much one of the worst games to base that off of. Due to Tier 3 caps, it's pretty damn easy to cap all stats. As for Micaiah, she was my absolute worst unit on my first playthrough. Every other playthrough however she's been very good because of her absurd growth rates in her offensive MAG, Luck, and RES, which allows me to BEXP abuse to raise everything else. With this in mind I don't hold gameplay against her.

EDIT: I actually complain about Ike more than Micaiah in terms of gameplay because of his retarded RES growth. Can have a pure water, and stand on a +10 RES tile, and -still- be put to sleep. ><

Edited August 12, 2012 by HeroMystic

[NTNP]

A page or so back we were asked to construct a good reason for Daien to become involved with Part 3 without any major changes to the narrative or gameplay. I think that after reading everyone's responses that a simplest one would be to have other events that are a little more realistic take the place of the blood pack plot device while still retaining the key parts of the story such as Begnion's Senators (especially Lekain) manipulating everyone and Daien eventually choosing to join Begnion to fight the Laguz Alliance.

Going back to Ashnard in PoR, perhaps the easiest option would have just been to say that Ashnard was a rather impressive villain in his own right and capable of manipulating others to gain his way. Just stating that he was the illegitimate son of the King and a concubine would help to have explained why he had to kill so many people. Before becoming king all of his legitimate brothers would need to die, along with his uncle(s) and his father. Having him remember exactly how many (say 15) would be a reasonable number. Then they have him explain how he gained the loyalty of his soldiers (like Petrine), allies within Begnion who were willing to aid him (Izuka) and how he used his blood games to get the best, most deadly people in Daien onto his side… perhaps with the likes of Volke and the BK joining there. Then just explain how he systematically killed his 'half' siblings through poison, trickery, defeats in battle (sometimes by their own soldiers) and accidents allowed him to ascend the ranks. Then with it cumulating with Ashnard killing his own father last and say laying the blame on the recently fled Gawain (Greil) saying that he had been the one to do it to add some fuel to the fire. That makes it where it sounds like Ashnard is brutal, ruthless, logical and risk taking (much like he was with the invasion of Crimea) instead of some sort of magical overlord which doesn't really fit his persona in game.

Now moving onto RD… Starting with Pelleas and Lekain's conversation, using the theory of Lekain trying to convince Pelleas to join their side (without magical powers) might have been the best option. He could have claimed that the Laguz Alliance wasn't just coming after Begnion but after Daien too for what they had done in PoR. He could have also said that Pelleas "owed" them for the loans to help rebuild Daien, about how the Aspostle had been so kind as to allow him to keep his throne, even though she could have sent the Central Army to crush them if she had wanted. He could also mention how weak that Pelleas's position really was right now. He could have talked about all the hatred that the Crimeans still had for him and his father (which would be true based on what the peasants were saying in Part 2) and how there were those in Begnion that didn't trust him yet, but if Pelleas would aid them that they would. Finally that if Daien did act that Begnion would further help their nation by paying them (as they do with the raven tribe) along with a fairly substantial gain for Pelleas himself. All four of these arguments are pretty valid and might give Pelleas and the player pause to consider what they might do, especially if this was done relatively early on in the conflict.

Moving on to the Naesala betrayal, someone mentioned that it would be very interesting seeing him choosing to betray his allies for another reason this time. Lets have it where the various "background" events happen in a slightly different order. Perhaps when leaving Crimea after Part 2 that Leanne mysteriously vanished, right about at the same time that the Laguz Alliance began gearing up for war (and perhaps when Zelgius, in BK form, was last seen after leaving Daien) and have it be hinted that Begnion had taken Leanne during the conversations between the Senators. Then show Naesala's rather conflicted self throughout his events, as they do previously, and it would also help explain WHY Leanne is willing to protect him so much later on. Then the betrayal happens and everything plays out as it did from there. Then say near the end of Part 3 that Ike and co defeat a boss (say at the end of P3) and then Leanne pops out, scared and worried since she could sense all the chaos outside. Reyson, Tibarn and co likely would have assumed she was dead and then had her explain WHAT had happened to her with being abducted, again, by the Zelgius except this time it wasn't in the guise of another. She could read his thoughts and KNEW it was the same man that had taken her before... the Black Knight. This would have also been a much better way to reveal who the Black Knight really was rather than having Ranulf do it. Then IS could have had Leanne looking desperately trying to find Naesala. She could say that she could feel his thoughts, how worried that he had been for her only to find out what Naesala had done… then have her put it all together and let her beg Tibarn and co to forgive him, because Naesala had betrayed them for her.

Now looking toward the reason for Daien to get involved with the war, this was already brought up… why not make it where instead of the Laguz Alliance escaping into the lava fields lets have them be forced to escape into Daien. With a massive laguz army, likely forced to ravage towns to feed itself, so Pelleas and Michiah would have been placed into a similar position as what Elinicia was put into during her and Geoffrey's random chapter. With that, they would have to choose if they wanted to fight the Laguz Alliance, not necessarily on behalf of Begnion, but merely because they were invading them first. Then if you really needed to solidify things, having that potential assassination attempt on Pelleas or Michiah happen might have been a good option, especially if the Crimeans had been shown to support Laguz Alliance by that point and made it feel like the ONLY ally left was Begnion. Or they could have had Izuka appear with his Feral Ones to brutally slaughter a town (ideally the one where Fiona had been ruling) near where the Laguz Alliance had been and let the common people make the connection that the "subhumans" had killed them and they'll kill everyone in Daien too if the King and their Maiden don't do something about it. Both of these events would have echoed that while Lekain came off as an ass, he was probably right about what was going to happen giving further reasons for Pelleas to join them. With those two changes, the plot could have really set it up where Daien wasn't so much choosing to work WITH Begnion, but were choosing to OPPOSE the Laguz Alliance instead. Then just have a single chapter (say everyone's favorite swamp) and then have the Central Army show up with Zelgius at its head. And we can finally remove the cartoon villain that was Valtome who should have just been never even introduced outright. Then just to play up the fact that neither side is being "forced" into this, have Zelgius offer to aid Daien in THEIR battle with the Laguz Alliance along with still being willing to offer the bargain that Lekain had made about giving them more gold and that after this Daien and Begnion would be closer than ever. This would also fit pretty well with Zelgius's actions in PoR as well, showing up just a little late and offering to become the backbone so someone else like Michiah (in RD) or Ike (in PoR) could remain in charge while Begnion gains more control. This would have allowed for us to still had the same basic set up, along with making it where once the Laguz Alliance was forced to flee all the way back into Crimea that the plot could have started from exactly the same spot, with very little deviation and then have it where the combined Crimea, Apostle x Laguz Alliance went to war with the Senators of Begnion and Daien, especially since the first battle ground would have been Daien again.

Thus the only change remaining would have been to have it be both the Begnion and Daien armies make up the defensive for the last two chapters of Part 3. Then just put some of the rather impressive characters like Zelgius and Levail there alongside of the laguz royals to really show off how powerful some of the enemies are to foreshadow the growing that will happen in Part 4. Both sides are still fighting, the maps can still play out just about the same and then part 4 could have happened (which is an entirely different beast) without having the rather irksome and somewhat confusing use of the blood packs. Thus the packs created a great deal of controversies are removed along with giving the party a much better reason for Naesala to rejoin the player factions and perhaps giving a more dramatic set up for Part 4.

Edited August 12, 2012 by NTNP

[CrashGordon94]

True about Seth. I sometimes forget people still don't like Jagens. I think 99% of people can relate to Haar, which is part of why I think people like him so much. Looks also make difference. I don't just mean attractiveness, but overall. Like Stefan probably wouldn't have been nearly as popular as he was when PoR came out if he'd been dressed like Zihark. Or if Haar didn't have his eyepatch.

Yeah, looks do seem to be a big thing, especially with female characters too.

On a sidenote some people tolerate Micaiah just because they find her hot.

Also, whether it effects her popularity or not, she should've been better as a unit.

[Loki Laufeyson]

I honestly doubt tiers have much to do with it. I can't speak for everyone else, but I genuinely dislike Micaiah's personality for non-gameplay reasons and I genuinely feel that Ike avoids being a Gary Stu for non-gameplay reasons.

When I look at Ike, I look at his PoR self and not just his RD self. I agree completely that RD Ike alone is a Gary Stu. No arguments. But I see Ike as both PoR Ike and RD Ike put together. PoR Ike was believable to me and I liked his character a lot. So PoR Ike is what keeps me from thinking that Ike as a whole is a Gary Stu.

Micaiah, on the other hand, had nothing but RD. If you don't like what you see of her in RD, you're not going to like her much. Unlike Ike, she doesn't have that additional "game" to fall back on.

I agree with both these points. In fact, i consider Micaiah a fair to decent unit because she has Thanibombs and staff utility. Ive had many a blessed Miccy as well where she can destroy junk. Ive had not-so-blessed Miccys too but she does well with the staves. So i dont consider her a bad unit. Of course, Ike is better but yeah. Gameplay wise, i dont really have an issue with Micaiah.

FE8: Ephraim is better and, as far as I've seen, more well-liked.

But i prefer Eirika!

As for the other lords, I cant really speak for the lords that came before Roy because...well...i really havent played those games.

Roy: His character was not all that fantastic and hes mediocre as a unit at best. I have really no real opinion on him. Im pretty ambivalent.

Eliwood: i like him as a unit most of the time. His character isnt bad either but not fantastic.

Lyn: I hate her as a unit but i really like her character.

Hector: I like him a lot both as a character and as a unit.

Eirika: I like her a lot. Both as a unit and a character.

Ephraim: I find his character exceedingly boring. But as a unit, hes great.

Ike: FE9, he was a great character and a solid unit.

Micaiah: I already said my opinion here. I find her to be an ok unit and sometimes even good. Character wise...bleah.

Ike: FE10, yeahhh he suffers from a lack of more character development. If FE9 didnt exist, id find him really flat and boring. Unit wise, hes amazing.

Marth: (FE11) ive only played a little bit of this and his character is flat and his gameplay is...well i guess its passable.

I think in my case, a lot of biases against characters arent exactly the same as everyone elses. Like, i really dont like Mia at all as a character. She sucks and very one dimensional. But in FE10, shes a pretty great unit. Calill in FE9 bugs the shit out of me, but she makes a decent unit. Farina in FE7 is a harpy but as a unit, shes gr9. I love Louise as a character, but as a unit, not so much. :/

Edited August 12, 2012 by Jon Snow

[Anouleth]

This means that if Micaiah and the Daein Army confessed to Sanaki during Part 3 and joined with her, the blood pact would actually not activate since Lekain is overruled. Of course, Micaiah never found out about this, so I'm not gonna hold it against her, but it only makes the blood pact even more confusing and extremely disorganized.

Actually, it's a bit more complicated. Naesala's blood pact was written so that it conferred loyalty to Begnion, and since Sanaki outranks the Senate, Naesala can choose to serve her instead of them. Pelleas' blood pact confers loyalty more specifically to the Begnion Senate, so Sanaki can't be used.

I honestly doubt tiers have much to do with it. I can't speak for everyone else, but I genuinely dislike Micaiah's personality for non-gameplay reasons and I genuinely feel that Ike avoids being a Gary Stu for non-gameplay reasons.

It's funny, because in general, people do seem to prefer lords that fight well. Just look at Sigurd and Ike.

Going back to Ashnard in PoR, perhaps the easiest option would have just been to say that Ashnard was a rather impressive villain in his own right and capable of manipulating others to gain his way. Just stating that he was the illegitimate son of the King and a concubine would help to have explained why he had to kill so many people. Before becoming king all of his legitimate brothers would need to die, along with his uncle(s) and his father. Having him remember exactly how many (say 15) would be a reasonable number. Then they have him explain how he gained the loyalty of his soldiers (like Petrine), allies within Begnion who were willing to aid him (Izuka) and how he used his blood games to get the best, most deadly people in Daien onto his side… perhaps with the likes of Volke and the BK joining there. Then just explain how he systematically killed his 'half' siblings through poison, trickery, defeats in battle (sometimes by their own soldiers) and accidents allowed him to ascend the ranks. Then with it cumulating with Ashnard killing his own father last and say laying the blame on the recently fled Gawain (Greil) saying that he had been the one to do it to add some fuel to the fire. That makes it where it sounds like Ashnard is brutal, ruthless, logical and risk taking (much like he was with the invasion of Crimea) instead of some sort of magical overlord which doesn't really fit his persona in game.

Why does this need to be explained? You already get that impression from the game as is, and without any giant infodumps or "explanations".

Now moving onto RD… Starting with Pelleas and Lekain's conversation, using the theory of Lekain trying to convince Pelleas to join their side (without magical powers) might have been the best option. He could have claimed that the Laguz Alliance wasn't just coming after Begnion but after Daien too for what they had done in PoR. He could have also said that Pelleas "owed" them for the loans to help rebuild Daien, about how the Aspostle had been so kind as to allow him to keep his throne, even though she could have sent the Central Army to crush them if she had wanted. He could also mention how weak that Pelleas's position really was right now. He could have talked about all the hatred that the Crimeans still had for him and his father (which would be true based on what the peasants were saying in Part 2) and how there were those in Begnion that didn't trust him yet, but if Pelleas would aid them that they would. Finally that if Daien did act that Begnion would further help their nation by paying them (as they do with the raven tribe) along with a fairly substantial gain for Pelleas himself. All four of these arguments are pretty valid and might give Pelleas and the player pause to consider what they might do, especially if this was done relatively early on in the conflict.

But none of these are a convincing reason to go to war. Daein is still in the middle of reconstruction. What good does it do them to launch a war of aggression? Better to just try and defend themselves if the Crimeans and Laguz want a war. And if Begnion is so powerful and mighty and could crush Daein at any point, why would they need the assistance

Moving on to the Naesala betrayal, someone mentioned that it would be very interesting seeing him choosing to betray his allies for another reason this time. Lets have it where the various "background" events happen in a slightly different order. Perhaps when leaving Crimea after Part 2 that Leanne mysteriously vanished, right about at the same time that the Laguz Alliance began gearing up for war (and perhaps when Zelgius, in BK form, was last seen after leaving Daien) and have it be hinted that Begnion had taken Leanne during the conversations between the Senators. Then show Naesala's rather conflicted self throughout his events, as they do previously, and it would also help explain WHY Leanne is willing to protect him so much later on. Then the betrayal happens and everything plays out as it did from there. Then say near the end of Part 3 that Ike and co defeat a boss (say at the end of P3) and then Leanne pops out, scared and worried since she could sense all the chaos outside. Reyson, Tibarn and co likely would have assumed she was dead and then had her explain WHAT had happened to her with being abducted, again, by the Zelgius except this time it wasn't in the guise of another. She could read his thoughts and KNEW it was the same man that had taken her before... the Black Knight. This would have also been a much better way to reveal who the Black Knight really was rather than having Ranulf do it. Then IS could have had Leanne looking desperately trying to find Naesala. She could say that she could feel his thoughts, how worried that he had been for her only to find out what Naesala had done… then have her put it all together and let her beg Tibarn and co to forgive him, because Naesala had betrayed them for her.

Why is it better that Naesala betrays the Alliance for Leanne, than it is to do it for his country? I think that's actually rather selfish, to commit mass murder just to protect your girlfriend. Better, perhaps, to keep his motives murky and mysterious.

Now looking toward the reason for Daien to get involved with the war, this was already brought up… why not make it where instead of the Laguz Alliance escaping into the lava fields lets have them be forced to escape into Daien. With a massive laguz army, likely forced to ravage towns to feed itself, so Pelleas and Michiah would have been placed into a similar position as what Elinicia was put into during her and Geoffrey's random chapter. With that, they would have to choose if they wanted to fight the Laguz Alliance, not necessarily on behalf of Begnion, but merely because they were invading them first. Then if you really needed to solidify things, having that potential assassination attempt on Pelleas or Michiah happen might have been a good option, especially if the Crimeans had been shown to support Laguz Alliance by that point and made it feel like the ONLY ally left was Begnion. Or they could have had Izuka appear with his Feral Ones to brutally slaughter a town (ideally the one where Fiona had been ruling) near where the Laguz Alliance had been and let the common people make the connection that the "subhumans" had killed them and they'll kill everyone in Daien too if the King and their Maiden don't do something about it. Both of these events would have echoed that while Lekain came off as an ass, he was probably right about what was going to happen giving further reasons for Pelleas to join them. With those two changes, the plot could have really set it up where Daien wasn't so much choosing to work WITH Begnion, but were choosing to OPPOSE the Laguz Alliance instead. Then just have a single chapter (say everyone's favorite swamp) and then have the Central Army show up with Zelgius at its head. And we can finally remove the cartoon villain that was Valtome who should have just been never even introduced outright. Then just to play up the fact that neither side is being "forced" into this, have Zelgius offer to aid Daien in THEIR battle with the Laguz Alliance along with still being willing to offer the bargain that Lekain had made about giving them more gold and that after this Daien and Begnion would be closer than ever. This would also fit pretty well with Zelgius's actions in PoR as well, showing up just a little late and offering to become the backbone so someone else like Michiah (in RD) or Ike (in PoR) could remain in charge while Begnion gains more control. This would have allowed for us to still had the same basic set up, along with making it where once the Laguz Alliance was forced to flee all the way back into Crimea that the plot could have started from exactly the same spot, with very little deviation and then have it where the combined Crimea, Apostle x Laguz Alliance went to war with the Senators of Begnion and Daien, especially since the first battle ground would have been Daien again.

To be honest, this sounds like kind of an idiot plot. Why would the Laguz Alliance retreat into Daein without clearing it with Pelleas? Wouldn't they realise that might start a war, especially if Daein still attacks them in 3-6? Doesn't that remove the opportunity for 3-8, 3-9, and 3-10? Moreover, once the laguz alliance are gone and are in Crimea, there's no motive for Daein to continue the war.

Edited August 12, 2012 by Anouleth

[Florete]

But i prefer Eirika!

You are not the entire fandom.

[Sunwoo]

It's funny, because in general, people do seem to prefer lords that fight well. Just look at Sigurd and Ike.

Well, I did say that I can't speak for everyone else. Also, there may be a separation between people who like a character for stats and for character.

[Anouleth]

Well, I did say that I can't speak for everyone else. Also, there may be a separation between people who like a character for stats and for character.

Obviously nobody goes through the game saying "I like character X because he's good at combat", but people are influenced and biased by such things without necessarily being aware.

[Sunwoo]

Obviously nobody goes through the game saying "I like character X because he's good at combat", but people are influenced and biased by such things without necessarily being aware.

Point taken. I guess I'm mostly speaking for myself. :P

[Loki Laufeyson]

You are not the entire fandom.

Yeah. Im actually not crazy.

I guess I'm mostly speaking for myself. :P

Half the time i wonder if you and i are the same person.

[Sunwoo]

Half the time i wonder if you and i are the same person.

We have a lot of similar thoughts, huh? XD

[tenkiforecast]

Eh, I tend to separate ability in-game and story/characterization.

I really, really like Sigurd because he is an extremely well-written character. He is a genuinely kind man who is thrown into terrible situations and his personality starts to break as more trauma is forced upon him. I still consider Gen 1 of FE4 to be the best writing in the Fire Emblem series, with FE9 close behind. Then I would say FE7 or FE5, dunno about 13 because I'm keeping myself in the dark.

Gen 2, I feel like IS put all their effort into Gen 1. The protagonists are just kind of boring. They don't have much characterization, it all goes into the villains in this part of the story. Yes, some of the villains are written *extremely* well (Ishtar, Trabant, Alvis) but the writers did not put much effort into the Issacian Liberation Army. As a result, Celice is kind of boring. More work needs to be done to help give him more of an arc.

Leaf is actually pretty well-written. He consistently suffers from self-doubt in the game, questioning his own moves, and makes many mistakes. Each time he has to pay for them, and by the end of the game he has grown to be a skilled military leader.

Roy has a harem. That is pretty much it, Roy at the end of the game is the same as the beginning. FE6 did not have as much ambition, I think. Maybe most of the writers were working on FE5, and after that faltered (because it was released 3 years after the N64 came out, not because of quality) they probably assumed it was the story. So they simplified it, and again the main villain is the most interesting character. Zephiel is actually interesting. Roy is not.

FE7 works because it is smaller in scope, and it knows it is smaller in scope. This is the same situation with FE5. The issues the various Lords go through are all based on smaller, personal problems. Many times, these small stories are the most interesting parts of a story. Casablanca is a small-scope story, as is Cowboy Bebop, Citizen Kane, Watchmen (at least the personal situations which makes this memorable), the Odyssey, etc... Lyn's story is intriguing. Eliwood's issues are very relate-able except the killing your girlfriend thing, and Hector's story hits very close to home if you have lost close relatives. They work because they are small in scale.

Eirika and Ephraim never did anything for me. Eirika does develop away from the ingenue type innocence, and does become very competent as time goes on. Ephraim, I do not really notice much of his growth. Probably need to read through the story again for that.

Ike's writing is great. He starts out as this very untested, unsure mercenary who is forced into extreme roles. He is given a lot of time to grow into his position as a military leader, and rises to the challenge without losing core aspects to his character. He is still pretty compassionate, attentive to the mercenary company, and I like the trust that develops between him and Elincia as the game progresses. FE10 is just not his story. He shows up and does not get much development because it is not his story. He does not need to be in this story, it is supposed to be about Micaiah. She's the one on the box cover. So why is she ignored after Part 1? Eh...

Part of what bugs me about FE10 is how Miccy is just dropped after part 1 in terms of importance to the plot. Part 3 has the Blood Pact plot device, which I just do not like for many of the reasons in this thread, but also Miccy stops developing. And then Part 4, they replace Miccy with God, so she's out. Her growth is pretty similar to Roy's, meaning not a whole lot. I just find her boring.

As for Marth, well...FE1 was made by 4 people who were not that attentive to world-building or a complex story. Marth has about as much development as Roy. Not much to say here.

My issues with FE10 are that Intelligent Systems tried to do too much with their story. They tried to do too much with their story without enough time to work out all the details, or were forced by the map and situation designers. Part 1 feels rushed. Part 2 is the most solid, and I wish was expanded on more because it is the best part of the game in my eyes. Part 3 feels fine until Daein is brought in by plot convenience and then it becomes a mess. Part 4 is...wow, they completely ran out of time here. That's as much as I can summarize it without detail. So much detail and better ideas than I could think of have been proposed in this topic already.

[Noktra]

Actually, it's a bit more complicated. Naesala's blood pact was written so that it conferred loyalty to Begnion, and since Sanaki outranks the Senate, Naesala can choose to serve her instead of them. Pelleas' blood pact confers loyalty more specifically to the Begnion Senate, so Sanaki can't be used.

-----

It's funny, because in general, people do seem to prefer lords that fight well. Just look at Sigurd and Ike.

Bloodpact: If that's the case with Naesala's pact, I'm willing to accept the whole "Sanaki overrules" thing...

It's still meh in my opinion, but at least plausible enough.

But when is this expicitily told? We only get to know that Kilvas was under a Bloodpact too... (at least as far as I can remember).

The only pact halfway depicted is the one Pelleas had. From gamescript alone I had no reason to assume the Kilvas' one would work differently...

(Though I found this timeline thingie on the mainsite, with Kilvas capitulating to Begnion in a War somewhat 200 years prior to PoR... would be reason enough to sign such a "nice" paper huh)

But that's my main problem with RD ... the story itself is not actually that bad... it just have needed 1-3 sentences more here and there to make it plausible... that's wasted potential imho.

----------------

Strong Lords are more liked:

That may be the case... But in a way that's to be expected from a game that rather punishes you for using weak characters...

(remembers me of my 1st playthrough of FE7 ... I used my favorites.... and was close to despair at the final chapter with getting raped all over *lol*)

And as far as I am concerned... I can't stand Ike... (neither Micaiah, but well...)

Can't say for sure about Sigurd (just played prologue - and managed to get Sigurd killed once, oopsies XD ...but so far I like Sigurd, though not as much as Cuan)

Roy and Marth are both as deep as a sheet of paper... no character whatsoever... but gameplaywise I found Marth pretty good (can't say about Roy for now) and storywise I don't care for any of them both... *shrugs*

I love the Lord trio of FE7, all three of them (though favorite is Hector because of comical amusement.... "Mages! *panics*" XD)

Eirika and Ephraim, I love them both... but what can I say? I'm a girl and I just plainly adore Ephraim hehehe (Ephraim = favorite Lord for me)

Ike may be a solid unit, and I have to admit in FE9 he was ....ok characterwise.... nothing more... Didn't hate him, didn't like him, he was just there...

But since RD I hate Ike with a passion... just overshadowed by Micaiah whom is unbearable...

In my opinion Micaiah is not even a character... She doesn't flow with the story, she doesn't evolve with the story.... heck she's not even consistent in her very characterization...

She's a ptachwork of whatever-charactertraits-were-needed-this-moment and just serve as a cheap plotdevice for the storytellers... ugh... horrible.

Edit:

My issues with FE10 are that Intelligent Systems tried to do too much with their story. They tried to do too much with their story without enough time to work out all the details, or were forced by the map and situation designers. Part 1 feels rushed. Part 2 is the most solid, and I wish was expanded on more because it is the best part of the game in my eyes. Part 3 feels fine until Daein is brought in by plot convenience and then it becomes a mess. Part 4 is...wow, they completely ran out of time here. That's as much as I can summarize it without detail.

*fails using the quote function properly...*

exactly my thoughts too

Edited August 13, 2012 by Noktra

[Anacybele]

I don't think Ike is a stu. Obviously, since I love him so much. :P

But anyway, I think he got pretty decent character development and has plenty of flaws. I just think people tend to overlook some of them because IS has somewhat failed to exploit them properly.

First flaw: Ike puts himself down a lot. He doesn't seem to have much confidence in the beginning. He gets over this one though, as any hero needs to overcome SOME weakness to succeed.

Next: Ike's a glutton. He loves food. This can be exploited as a weakness because if Ike isn't careful, he can make himself ill. Or, the enemy can target him with poison if they figure out his love of spicy meat. This is one of the flaws that IS failed so miserably to properly show us.

Next: Ike's recklessness. Mist points this out, but there are few instances at all where Ike is truly reckless.

Next: An obvious one, Ike is too blunt sometimes. I love his bluntness, though lol. IS actually did good with this one, as we all know.

Next: There are people who hate/dislike Ike. Shinon, Micaiah, and to an extent, Nailah. All of Daein seem to blame Ike for their problems as well. And let's not forget Gatrie deserting him along with Shinon in PoR.

Next: Ike doesn't think before he acts or talks at times, like the scene where he defends Elincia after Sanaki basically makes fun of her.

Next: Ike lacks manners and etiquette. Ike himself actually mentions this one. This is another flaw that IS failed to exploit properly, though. That was the only time where Ike seemed to really have this flaw in PoR.

As for his development, he changed a lot in RD since PoR and in PoR he already went from inexperienced mercenary to a powerful general and famous war hero. In RD, he's a lot more experienced, he's more of a man and more mature, and he's much stronger (in more ways than one). Basically, he went from boy to man. Ike is still shown to lack some manners though, like when he told Rafiel he should be more like Reyson and then Nailah scolded him for it.

And that's really all I have to say on this matter.

[FionordeQuester]

Next: Ike's a glutton. He loves food. This can be exploited as a weakness because if Ike isn't careful, he can make himself ill. Or, the enemy can target him with poison if they figure out his love of spicy meat. This is one of the flaws that IS failed so miserably to properly show us.

Is that really a result of a character flaw though, or is it just the result of how much he puts his body through in training and on the battlefield? I mean, according to this article...

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7407688n&tag=contentMain;contentBody

Michael Phelps has to eat 8000-10,000 calories worth of food almost every day just to withstand his training regimen. So Ike's appetite may not be as unwarranted as it seems.

[bottlegnomes]

Putting yourself down is actually a sue trait if despite it you're still the best. For PoR Ike it dos make sense, as he's nervous about his new responsibilities. In RD Ike doesn't put himself down; he's actually kind of arrogant.

Also, he's not a glutton. He just has a big appetite and likes food. Gluttony is overeating just for the sake of eating.

Edited August 13, 2012 by bottlegnomes

[Baldrick]

In my opinion, Ike falls into all seven of the Deadly Sins.

Gluttony: He's a big eater.

Pride: As bottlegnomes said, he's pretty arrogant.

Wrath: He's trying to get revenge on the Black Knight.

Sloth: He's reluctant to help Sanaki until she forces him to. And he lazes around, not rescuing Lucia until the last possible moment.

Greed: He leads a mercenary troop, killing hundreds of enemies and potentially his own allies too, all for the sparkle of filthy lucre.

Envy: He's clearly jealous that Micaiah saved her country quicker than he did, that she has cooler powers, that people love her, that she has a cooler backstory, etc.

Lust: Unlike other lords that settle down with their childhood friend/dragon girl/twin sister, Ike never married, because he didn't want to restrict himself to one person. He's not fussy; girl, boy, Laguz, it's all the same to him.

[Florete]

Okay, enough fooling around in here.

[Anouleth]

Bloodpact: If that's the case with Naesala's pact, I'm willing to accept the whole "Sanaki overrules" thing...

It's still meh in my opinion, but at least plausible enough.

But when is this expicitily told? We only get to know that Kilvas was under a Bloodpact too... (at least as far as I can remember).

The only pact halfway depicted is the one Pelleas had. From gamescript alone I had no reason to assume the Kilvas' one would work differently...

(Though I found this timeline thingie on the mainsite, with Kilvas capitulating to Begnion in a War somewhat 200 years prior to PoR... would be reason enough to sign such a "nice" paper huh)

Well, I don't remember exactly where I heard this, and it might be in the extended script somewhere, and I may have just hallucinated it or something, but it's a decent enough explanation.

But that's my main problem with RD ... the story itself is not actually that bad... it just have needed 1-3 sentences more here and there to make it plausible... that's wasted potential imho.

It is plausible. What precisely, isn't mentioned that makes it implausible?

[CrashGordon94]

What do you mean, RFOF?

[Anouleth]

What do you mean, RFOF?

The posts about Micaiah and the blood pact are kind of off-topic. This is supposed to be a topic about Ike, not a general plot topic.

I don't think Ike is a stu. Obviously, since I love him so much. :P

But anyway, I think he got pretty decent character development and has plenty of flaws. I just think people tend to overlook some of them because IS has somewhat failed to exploit them properly.

First flaw: Ike puts himself down a lot. He doesn't seem to have much confidence in the beginning. He gets over this one though, as any hero needs to overcome SOME weakness to succeed.

Modesty is not a flaw.

Next: Ike's a glutton. He loves food. This can be exploited as a weakness because if Ike isn't careful, he can make himself ill. Or, the enemy can target him with poison if they figure out his love of spicy meat. This is one of the flaws that IS failed so miserably to properly show us.

Not really a flaw.

Next: Ike's recklessness. Mist points this out, but there are few instances at all where Ike is truly reckless.

And there's never a point where it backfires upon him or even makes him look bad. In fact, there's precious little evidence to show he even really counts as reckless. Chapter 2 can be explained by him caring about Mist and Rolf. Is caring about Mist and Rolf a flaw?

Next: An obvious one, Ike is too blunt sometimes. I love his bluntness, though lol. IS actually did good with this one, as we all know.

And there's never a point where it backfires upon him or even makes him look bad. Whenever he talks back, it's always in defense of a Good Guy and always to a person who deserves it, and he even gets praised for it.

Next: There are people who hate/dislike Ike. Shinon, Micaiah, and to an extent, Nailah. All of Daein seem to blame Ike for their problems as well. And let's not forget Gatrie deserting him along with Shinon in PoR.

Micaiah has never met him. After she meets the real deal, she melts in the face of his impossible charisma. Shinon also develops a grudging respect for Ike after she gives him a chance. That's the operative point. People do dislike Ike, but when they give him a chance to earn their respect, NOBODY dislikes him.

Next: Ike doesn't think before he acts or talks at times, like the scene where he defends Elincia after Sanaki basically makes fun of her.

And there's never a point where it backfires upon him or even makes him look bad. Whenever he talks back, it's always in defense of a Good Guy and always to a person who deserves it, and he even gets praised for it.

Next: Ike lacks manners and etiquette. Ike himself actually mentions this one. This is another flaw that IS failed to exploit properly, though. That was the only time where Ike seemed to really have this flaw in PoR.

How the fuck is that a flaw?