HK Motendra Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 After you choose to marry Robin (your avatar) with any of the future second generation children, has anyone else thought of what would happen with your marriage once their present self is born? Note: Lucina is the only one in the game who is currently born Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airship Canon Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 (edited) Obligatory Image response: Anyways, the timetravelers and their non-timetraveling selves are two totally different people. Robin fell in love with the timetraveler, not the kid. So anything happening wouldn't be a thing. Something like youngerself meeting timetraveler might occur, but that's neither here nor there for Robin, because that might happen anyways. (And will in case of unpaired Noire) Edited July 14, 2013 by Airship Canon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightdasher Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 You mean now that their parents won't die? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danaos Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Ah, yes, two seperate persons of course. But I always thought that some if not most of them wouldn't be born in the playable timeline, even if their older counterparts don't stay. Imagine you were on of the parents meeting your child from a future, would you really want to have a newborn just like them? Not to mention that big shift in regard to the end of the ylisse-pleagian war and Walhards conquest in the other timeline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty Kamina Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 (edited) I think most of the future children would avoid their younger selves aside from an unpaired Noire or Severa. (It is mentioned in Severa's unpaired ending she visits her parents once a year so I'd imagine she would encounter her present timeline counterpart) Edited July 15, 2013 by Virion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HK Motendra Posted July 14, 2013 Author Share Posted July 14, 2013 (edited) Obligatory Image response: Anyways, the timetravelers and their non-timetraveling selves are two totally different people. Robin fell in love with the timetraveler, not the kid. So anything happening wouldn't be a thing. Something like youngerself meeting timetraveler might occur, but that's neither here nor there for Robin, because that might happen anyways. (And will in case of unpaired Noire) Well, that pretty much sums up their marriage but I remember in Chrom's A support with Lucina, saying that she'll always have a place at his side. Now, assuming this applies to all of the children and their respective parents, it makes you wonder what kind of role they would play and they can't just leave with Robin, who is Chrom's Tactician and friend.... right? Edited July 14, 2013 by HeroKingMarth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carter Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 On my first playthrough, I chose a male avatar and then married Lucina. I then thought it was awkward, since at (I think) chapter 21, Lucina said she had to kill me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airship Canon Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 On my first playthrough, I chose a male avatar and then married Lucina. I then thought it was awkward, since at (I think) chapter 21, Lucina said she had to kill me. That scene is pretty important to Lucina's character. Basically, you're the greatest threat to the world, and she wants to kill you for the sake of the world, and to save her father- which is important, because if she fails at that, she -knows- history will repeat itself. However, she cannot actually bring herself to do so- she loves you far more than anything else and despite the risk to her mission, she doesn't have the heart to kill someone that close to her. It really shows a blatant fact that she's more than just "must save the world". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquakat Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 That scene is pretty important to Lucina's character. Basically, you're the greatest threat to the world, and she wants to kill you for the sake of the world, and to save her father- which is important, because if she fails at that, she -knows- history will repeat itself. However, she cannot actually bring herself to do so- she loves you far more than anything else and despite the risk to her mission, she doesn't have the heart to kill someone that close to her. It really shows a blatant fact that she's more than just "must save the world". Also shows that she's inherited Chrom's "must not lose anyone I care about"... let's go with quirk. I'm of the opinion that the "present children" when they're born MIGHT (big might) look the same as the future children, but will end up as totally different people. ...Okay, maybe not totally, but enough. As a result, I believe any pairing with a second generation kid will end up just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airship Canon Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Also shows that she's inherited Chrom's "must not lose anyone I care about"... let's go with quirk. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. Better to aim for no losses and run risks than take losses to eliminate the risks. In other words, Jeigan and Virion are very terrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquakat Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Absolutely nothing wrong with that. Better to aim for no losses and run risks than take losses to eliminate the risks. In other words, Jeigan and Virion are very terrible. ...I maintain that allowing a (small/single) sacrifice for the good of the world is the smarter choice, but I've always been on the pragmatic side of things, sometimes too much so. Also, I'm looking at it from an observer perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airship Canon Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 (edited) ...I maintain that allowing a (small/single) sacrifice for the good of the world is the smarter choice, but I've always been on the pragmatic side of things, sometimes too much so. Also, I'm looking at it from an observer perspective. From an observer PoV, I... can't disagree harder. Being cost effective is always better than not. If you can accomplish something without losses, but risk losing everything to aim for that it's better to take that than to take a loss to assure victory. Edited July 15, 2013 by Airship Canon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT075 Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 fuck dat logic we have dem feels Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquakat Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 From an observer PoV, I... can't disagree harder. Being cost effective is always better than not. If you can accomplish something without losses, but risk losing everything to aim for that it's better to take that than to take a loss to assure victory. Confused as to how losing one person to definitively kill something is less cost effective than saving everyone, but take the HUGE risk of letting that something loose again that could effectively destroy the world. But this is off-topic. If you'd like to discuss it more, pm me so that the topic can stay... well, on topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.