Zerosabers Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I guess but...bombard just sounds cool. I guess it could be slightly different in some way. Not trying to rain on your parade but isn't there a bow called Astra with the astra skill? When I think of the word bombard... I think of Michael Bay explosions. So are we talking like fire-elemented attacks with a bow or something haha. Yea there is a bow called Astra, but bombard could instead do the normal physical damage, then do added magical damage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zerosabers Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 There may very will be but I've never run into it. And sure I don't see why not or it could mean that they loose arrows with fire for added damage. I think its under wireless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryo Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Gryphon's skills are useful, so keep the skills and ditch the class :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skynstein Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Awakening did a very faint job of introducing them as a Chon'sin thing. They probably wouldn't be missed if they were scrapped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giratina Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I'd only be okay with them if they weren't as random and maybe went with a certain unit, but otherwise I don't care. Hopefully they'll be replaced with a new Wyvern class instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerene Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Awakening did a very faint job of introducing them as a Chon'sin thing. They probably wouldn't be missed if they were scrapped. Ah, really? Was this in a support conversation? Did a NPC mention it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryo Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I didn't even know that they were a Chon'sin thing either XD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bookofholsety Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 tentatively, yes, but preferably under the proviso that they get spun into their own class family. granted, i'm not totally sure what they could even DO as their own class family - pegasi and wyverns already have the two obvious contrasting builds covered - but then again, fe sure as hell isn't a stranger to redundant classes. i can't say i particularly care for them being presently attached to the wyvern family for no particular reason, but aesthetically speaking, i'm all for griffons. as far as them appearing basically out of nowhere goes, well, that was par for the course for fe13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorin Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Get rid of them. While you're at it, give my Falcon Knight back her swords. If you want a poor Queen knock-off, make it its own class instead of trying to cram so much into the Falcon Knight. I love you for this. All of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderfox Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I liked the class, so I voted yes, but as others have said it felt out of place. When I first saw the class here on SF I was like "HUH!?" With a new world (Theoretically) I feel it could fit better in 14 than it did in Awakening Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 (edited) If the class is expanded upon, given it's own first tier class perhaps, maybe can use swords instead of axes (or bows maybe?), then yes. Also give some backstory or info on them. Edited January 18, 2015 by Knight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentacotus Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Awakening did a very faint job of introducing them as a Chon'sin thing. They probably wouldn't be missed if they were scrapped. What? Where was this mentioned? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire Emblem Fan Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I could go either way. If they're there, then cool. If not, then cool. Eh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty Kamina Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 They are extremely out of place in FE13. As it stands, I vote no, but if they were made their own class tree then my mind may change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trickster Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I think they need their own shtick, something they can call their own. If wyverns are gonna be more axe based, why not give griffons swords so we have an flying weapon triangle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magical CC Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Since this is supposed to be happened in a fantasy Japan. Why not Kirin? That beast can fly too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiddon Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Since this is supposed to be happened in a fantasy Japan. Why not Kirin? That beast can fly too. Uh, no they can't; Kirin are depicted to be heavenly, but aren't capable of flight. The closest they get is that are said to be able to walk on water and even when walking they are incapable of bending a single blade of grass. It's said they walk upon clouds, but whether or not that pertains to flight is debatable. Although it would be interesting to see them as a kind of mount or creature encountered. Actually, with the opening of the Japanese bestiary you can do TONS of stuff. Like maybe expand the Taguel/Manakete to include creatures like Tanuki and Kitsune. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magical Glace Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I think it would work as its own tree, not a part of the dragon riders. Statwise, I'd say: Pegasus Knights - Speed and Resistance Wyvern Knights - Strength and Defense Griffon Knights - Either Skill or a balance between Peggies and Wyverns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerene Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 (edited) Uh, no they can't; Kirin are depicted to be heavenly, but aren't capable of flight. The closest they get is that are said to be able to walk on water and even when walking they are incapable of bending a single blade of grass. It's said they walk upon clouds, but whether or not that pertains to flight is debatable. Although it would be interesting to see them as a kind of mount or creature encountered. Actually, with the opening of the Japanese bestiary you can do TONS of stuff. Like maybe expand the Taguel/Manakete to include creatures like Tanuki and Kitsune. It depends on which definition of flight we are using. If we are using the dictionary definition, then no, because the dictionary definition directly states the use of wings. If we go by the definition of just being "airborne," then a qilin can work because qilins technically have a floating ability. As you stated, they are able to walk on clouds/water. Qilin have such a gentle nature that they do not dare to harm a living being, even if it's a blade of grass. That's why in art and architecture, they are often depicted as walking on inorganic substances like clouds and water, giving a "floating" appearance. Edited January 19, 2015 by ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Stewart Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 TBH I think if Griffons were branched off into their own class tree, and if FE were to have some sort of "flying weapon triangle", then pegs should be given swords, and Griffons be given lances, but I think that's probably just me. honestly I'm not super fond of the Griffon Rider class, so I wouldn't be upset if it disappeared altogether. I'd rather it not be a part of the Wyvern class tree if it did come back, but I doubt that will change. :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saifors Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 funny thing: a while before awakening showed gryphon riders I tried making a GBAFE gryphon rider battle sprite. So yeah I say keep them Gryphons look cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gradivus. Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 (edited) why not, a quicker but less bulky wyvern lord alternative and 11 movement with a thief on it is gr10 so I think they should stay @Glaceon Sage I'd definitely not say skill because lolSkill. a balance would be much better imo, if an unpromoted class. i'm neutral about how they'll be handled on 14, but I think they should stay. Edited January 18, 2015 by Gradivus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X-Naut Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I don't see why they need to go because they were poorly explained in one game, nor do they NEED a first-tier because they replace a mount. Are the wyverns used by Wyvern Knights in FE8 ever explained? And how about all those cavaliers->paladins who have a different horse after promoting? Besides, it's plausible that some mounts require experience to tame; in the wyverns' case it could be temperament, and in the gryphons' they could be too proud to allow inexperienced riders to ride them. In the case of characters who identify with their initial mount it's less the new mount's fault for replacing the old one and more the developers' fault for lack of foresight. That said, like a lot of other people I want to see them be more than just bland/average, lanceless Wyvern Lords. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerene Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I don't see why they need to go because they were poorly explained in one game, nor do they NEED a first-tier because they replace a mount. Are the wyverns used by Wyvern Knights in FE8 ever explained? And how about all those cavaliers->paladins who have a different horse after promoting? Besides, it's plausible that some mounts require experience to tame; in the wyverns' case it could be temperament, and in the gryphons' they could be too proud to allow inexperienced riders to ride them. In the case of characters who identify with their initial mount it's less the new mount's fault for replacing the old one and more the developers' fault for lack of foresight. That said, like a lot of other people I want to see them be more than just bland/average, lanceless Wyvern Lords. Hm, quite an interesting thought with the tame theory. However, the problem of gryphon riders shows itself when people are speculating they're purpose/where they came from/what to do with them when a simple statement in the game could have cleared it all up. I'm still figuring out where in Awakening it states that gryphons are from Chon'sin. While wyverns were never explained in FE8, we have to consider that in general, FE lore has had wyverns since the first game. It's simply become a part of the staple so to most fans, it's not really much of a "surprise." Gryphons are a bigger surprise since Awakening was the first time gryphons were ever introduced. And oh man, were some people so excited (including me) until we realized that it was merely a promoted class. Not to mention, I'm pretty certain that gryphons and wyverns are entirely different species unless gryphons are somehow repitilian. (They don't seem like it.) It's more a more stark contrast than say, going from one horse to oh, a different colored horse. I think in general, people are just kinda confused over where gryphons came from, since it doesn't seem to just follow the "oh yeah they were already part of this world haha" reason. It very well could be, but I am still wondering where this in-game text is concerning gryphons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Book of Ereshkigal Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I like the idea of a Gryphon rider, but I want it to be divorced from the Wyvern riding tree and differentiated or something. 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.