Jump to content
Red Lilies

Criticizing Ryoma - What is acceptable in War or perhaps not

Recommended Posts

I know this has been touched on in more than one thread - usually one not just about the topic - and seeing it again might annoy some people. If you don’t want to rehash your side of the argument, that’s fine. Skip this thread. But I feel that what I consider my side, the side of wanting to criticize Ryoma for his actions is often not well argued or fails to touch on the parts that really bother me about his actions here.

I’ve always felt there is a real lack of clarity to why Ryoma comes across badly here. I mean, I remember reading discussions surrounding dislike of Robin’s actions in Awakening when the enemy fleet is burned and the lack of remorse/discussion among the characters about the act. But for some reason whenever someone says “Ryoma was kinda a jerk in Chapter 12” he gets defended a lot. But while Nohr is presented as a “morally ambiguous place” that often does questionable things, the story presents Hoshido as good and honorable. Which is why it is so easy to have a kneejerk disgusted reaction of Ryoma’s choices in Chapter 12. Because it’s a guy claiming he’s on the high ground while doing questionable things.

Skip to the end for the Tl;dr version.

We can look at it this way – people were so bothered by the treatment in war of prisoners and the wounded, we got the Geneva Conventions (back in 1860s) which defines the basic rights of wartime prisoners (civilians and military personnel); established protections for the wounded and sick; and established protections for the civilians in and around a war-zone. Specifically it states that persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat (aka taken out of combat) by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely. To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture, taking of hostages, outrages upon dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, executions. Plus a second part which states after combat the wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

But the Geneva Conventions weren’t the first historical event where people came out and considered just what was considered ‘acceptable’ during times of war – there is much literature on basically the treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked that date quite a ways back. Back in the day, that could include the injured giving their parole (a promise not to fight) and retaining their weapons, or giving up all their weapons in order to pass. But, more problematically, what if you have a cultural tradition of killing the enemy’s badly wounded, or not giving aid? – people turned around and returned the ‘favor’. Many cultures therefor went out of their way to do both.

Saladin sending his physicians to a sick Richard the Lionheart – talk about an early example of helping an enemy who was not all that well liked by his enemies because it was honorable and the right thing to do in Saladin’s eyes.

A similar debate was engendered when Edward I took the female relatives of Robert the Bruce captive, then hung them in cages outside the castle walls for years at a time as bait to get Robert to surrender. Edward claimed he was justified because Robert the Bruce had been excommunicated, and bringing him to heel was more important than other moral imperatives. There was, however, a lot of criticism, both straight up moral outrage and worry about what might happen if English noble noncombatants were captured. – though this is a much more extreme example.

I’m outlining this not as an argument that Fate’s had this sort of laws in place, but that humans have long had a knee jerk reaction to certain acts they define as inhumane. Ryoma’s act in the chapter where he not only refuses to allow Elise to seek aid but then uses her as a bargaining chip to get what he wants can easily fall under what people classify as lacking morals. Some of my personal problems with his acts here are thus:

- He uses Elise’s condition to further a person vendetta – not to help the war effort: He wants Nohrrin, not a surrender of the Nohrian army. (If you’re going to do something questionable, at least make it useful. As it stood, he didn’t do anything to actually help end the war here and still went down a path that put a non-combatant (as outlined by hocs de combat) in danger. I struggle to even tell myself that Ryoma “was trying to capture an enemy general” since at this point Nohrrin has actually not held any campaigns on Hoshido soil, unlike other divisions of the Nohr army, nor was Nohrrin currently heading to fight on Hoshido soil. Nohrrin is running around dealing with uprising in Nohr. Which mean Ryoma had to ignore all those segments of the army actually fighting Hoshido along the border to enter Nohr and track down Nohrrin. I can’t see it as anything other than personal)

- He puts his own men at risk to literally stop Nohrrin from saving Elise – he was not holding the castle because it was strategic, but because he knew Nohrrin would be there and wanted Nohrin back. “I’ve been waiting for you!”(This makes me irked as his ability to lead and his lack of care for the men under him. He shows he’d rather put his own men in danger to take a location in the first place just to confront Nohrrin. Then when Nohrrin proposes they don’t have to fight, that Nohrrin only wants the medicine Ryoma pushes the fight. He engages even though other options are on the table – and Nohrrin is willing to negotiate - and does so because he wants Nohrrin. This kinda ties back with my first point of personal vendetta, but has to do with endangering your men for something personal)

- He is aware of Elise’s condition and doesn’t offer aid: When presented with the reason why Nohrian was there, he didn’t care (this goes against the previously presented ‘kind’ and ‘honorable’ character Ryoma. Would you consider it inhumane if an enemy commander refused to let a sick and dying person past to receive aid? He could have let just Elise past. Or let a doctor leave. But he refused both options – well, ok, they’re not presented, but there is hardly any discussion about his options. Once Nohrian refuses to surrender but wants to talk it out, Ryoma literally attacks instead, saying it’s surrender or fight, no in between. You could easily argue that Nohrian wasn’t even given a chance to request a doctor or turn Elise over to the enemy to be treated. Neither action reflects particularly well on Ryoma imho. He chose to let Elise suffer to further his agenda that wasn’t even a strategic or military one. This is a hard thing to feel good about, especially since the game has set up Ryoma as a “good” and “honorable” man. It’s the same thing with Xander being a “good” and “honorable” man who is tortured by his actions which he commits in the name of “duty”. At least the game acknowledges his actions are wrong, yet Ryoma doesn’t even see the moral problems with his.).

Now, that all being said, it is clear from the game that Hoshido regularly employs practices that would be against today’s morality standards about war. Jacob and Oboro have a conversation about battlefield ‘clean-up’ aka, killing the wounded. This is also directly against today’s standards. But the reason I’m outlining this is I often see people saying we shouldn’t hold Ryoma’s actions in Chapter 12 against him. But that’s ignoring the understanding of war and rules we hold today. (I’ll note here that Japan subscribes to the Geneva Conventions. So it’s likely that their current society does take umbrage with poor treatment of wounded and sick. So this might actually be a purposeful enacting of trying to create disgust with a “good” man). By the morals and rules of warfare we uphold today, his actions are something that results in kneejerk disgust . Even more so because he’s been present as an honorable and good man who claims to be better than Nohr. But that isn’t shown through his actions. I think leaders should lead, not extort. Which was what Ryoma was doing in Chapter 12, and worse, he was doing it for personal reasons, not combative ones. So I think it is fair for people to hold these actions against him.

Tl;dr

In the end, I am bothered by the claim that Ryoma’s actions were logical – he marched across enemy territory to confront his missing sibling and get them to come back with him. Not logical, emotional. Once he’s there, even though the option is on the table to discuss things, he demands surrender or fight – putting the lives of his men in danger in favor of a personal need to have a sibling “come home” with him. Still emotional, not logical. Further, a poor sign of leadership as he’s literally prioritizing his personal need over his men. His refusal to give Elise medicine or let her have access to doctors? I’ve seen it argued that it’s pragmatic, but it’s not. He loses nothing by allowing her treatment. However, considering she is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. He loses any goodwill they might otherwise have.

One might argue that the goodwill was never there, but to Ryoma there is no evidence of this. While Nohr has treated its prisoners of low birth poorly (see Kaze and Rinka), it currently has a history of treating prisoners of high birth well. After all, his last sibling to be taken by Nohr wasn’t killed....and was raised as a royal. Letting Elise die is almost guaranteed to change this. Saving her, however, builds goodwill towards how himself or his family might be treated during the war. Definitely not logical or smart, especially since Nohrrin was willing to negotiate, so it was not like he didn’t have any other choice. Ryoma was the one who made the choice that it was surrender or fight.

So this is my argument that we should be able to hold Ryoma’s actions against him as they feel moral questionable, that he did not act logically nor pragmatically, and that he failed to behave in manner befitting a leader and general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never knew this picture would become so handy:

8bYpntO.png



Since I talked about this yesterday, I will simply copy that response here:

"Ryouma didn't hold a hostage. A princess of the enemy nation got sick, and he didn't see the need to help her out because, frankly, why would he? His nation was just attacked out of the blue by a power-hungry king and his lackeys who lack the spines to stand up to him. His mother died protecting the main character, just as his father did, yet the protagonist willingly goes back to a nation that doesn't give a shit about its own people. Not only that, but he took the Yatogami with him.

Neither Elise nor Corrin are two innocent little puppies being bullied by the big bad Ryouma; Corrin is an enemy general while Elise is an active participant in the war. Ryouma has everything to lose on letting them continue the way they have, so why on earth would he help her? I'm honestly starting to wonder if people get so worked up about this is because Elise is cute; would people have cared this much if it was any other Nohrian sibling who got sick?

As I mentioned earlier, Ryouma is also proven to be completely justified in his actions considering Corrin - and Elise - completely fuck Hoshido over in Conquest. I don't care how happy that ending tries to be, it's one of the most insulting, poorly written excuses for the end of a plot I have ever seen. A fuckton of Hoshidans died either directly or indirectly as a result of Corrin's actions, the two princes were killed and Nohr effectively conquered all of it, and now you celebrate Xander - who also willingly took part in the invasion - becoming the king. If Corrin had returned to Hoshido and maybe taken two seconds to think over their actions, then maybe they could've worked together and reached some sort of agreement or plan or anything.

Speaking of which, that makes me think: why don't people lash out against Corrin for risking Elise's life? Even though he stands to lose on the princess recovering, Ryouma offers them free passage provided Corrin goes with him, so why doesn't the goody two-shoes comply? Isn't this the person who is supposed to be far too good for, well, their own good? Why the sudden stubbornness?

And finally, can someone just give me a single reason for why Ryouma should help the enemy here? Do you think it would make Garon chill out? Would Elise retire from the war? Would Corrin make his murder spree a little less murderous? What would the point be in trying to help her here?"

Edited by Thane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a tricky subject. If you want to talk about the Geneva Convention, then it's a war crime to attack combat medics with a clear insignia (Elise probably has one, but idk). POWs are also entitled to certain rights, and I don't think Ryoma would've allowed Corrin to be granted certain ones (namely, allowed to communicate regularly with relatives and receive care packages as well as being quickly released after conflict ends).

However, Elise could be a Strategist and using personal weapons offensively results in combat medics no longer being protected by the Geneva Conventions, so if Elise used a tome for anything other than self-defence or defence of a patient (i.e. only attacking on the enemies turn), then she's fair game. It's also worth pointing out that applying real life rules of warfare to video games (especially fantasy/medieval ones) is ridiculous, since it's a completely different world with (most likely) completely different international protocols (if any) and if we're going to apply our real life rules, than Nohr has already broken those rules by deliberately attacking a civilian population (as far as Hoshido knows anyway, but there's no reason to suspect otherwise). Not to mention all the shit they pull while suppressing rebellions (all of which Nohrrin had a role in, so...).

Edited by Phillius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

totally acceptable

basic combat strategy 101 is to kill the healer first!

I mean she happily murders people in my game; I have a feeling if she looked large and beastly people would have an entirely different viewpoint on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's war. Everything is fair game to guarantee the survival of your country and people. Lose, and your country will be pillaged and razed and the enemy will have their way with the people.

That's why I like what Micaiah tried in Radiant Dawn against the Begnion army that was gonna conquer them again, an army five times or more of Daein's size and people freaked out and called her a war criminal. Haha. Seriously.

Ryoma doesn't have any reason (except the goodwill of his heart) to help her. In fact, his main reason to be there should be capture her (not that Garon would care) to have some leverage, not to bring back Corn.

In fact, one would expect much more pragmatism from the Nohrian royals in certain chapters. It is even more non-sense when you have Leo saying that Zola or Iago are dishonorable when his personal skill is "Pragmatic".

Edited by Lanko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

totally acceptable

basic combat strategy 101 is to kill the healer first!

I mean she happily murders people in my game; I have a feeling if she looked large and beastly people would have an entirely different viewpoint on this.

It's also illegal in real life. In video game land though, anything goes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It hurts every time I read his name.

The true unsung hero of this game. The man with the most solid plans for the least amount of bloodshed, the villain with the most character development and most impressive sense of fashion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, not this shit again.

1. Geneva Convention: this exists in the real world, but does FE even have an equivalent of the Geneva Convention? Not Nohr and Hoshido, but FE in general. Because as far as I remember, killing enemy medics has been acceptable for both the player and the enemy. No one gives a fuck. The only FE game that I've played (7-11, 13-14) that actually made a point about not killing noncombatants was that one chapter in FE9, and those guys were priests who were literally being held hostage. Not medics who were openly aligned with a side.

Most fans have never given a fuck about killing enemy healers up until Elise, and let's be honest: she's not special at all. So unless someone can prove that Geneva Convention equivalent exists in Nohr/Hoshido and all of FE, and we have reason to believe this, the point is moot.

2. Ryouma is only aware of Elise's condition because Kamui was an idiot and told him that Elise was sick. As Thane had already mentioned, Elise is an enemy princess who willingly chose to take part in the war. She's not some innocent little girl anymore. He has no obligation to give a fuck about her health. "He could've let Elise past or a doctor leave"? Except, again, Elise is not some uninvolved innocent. She's an enemy healer, and if she's promoted she's an outright combatant. Elise living means that she'll live to fight again, or she'll live to heal an enemy who will live to fight again. And it's not like helping Elise is going to do anything good for Hoshido. Is Garon going to call off the war because Ryouma let Elise have medicine, or at least spare Ryouma and his family because he's now in their "debt"? NO. If Ryouma lets Elise live, Nohr's not going to return that favor. Literally nothing to gain for Hoshido, everything to lose.

3. You keep on using Ryouma's men as an excuse for why he's so "emotional" and showing of poor leadership. Now, I'll ask you this, what are Ryouma's men going to think when he lets Nohrrin walk all over him and just hand over that medicine? Remember, as far as Hoshido knows, Nohr just killed their queen and leveled their capital. I'm sure there are some people in Hoshido who are just itching for a piece of Kamui. Or Nohr. Now, in the face of the traitor, your future king decides to just … I dunno, go home and give the enemy princess the medicine she needs to get better? Are you kidding me? THAT is going to lose the respect of his soldiers more than anything else. THAT is a sign of poor leadership. In FE10, Crimean nobles lambasted Elincia for ceding control of Crimea to Begnion. Ryouma giving the medicine to Elise and letting Kamui just do Kamui things without a fight is just outright stupid and he would've deserved to be lambasted if he'd done that.

tl;dr

What is right isn't always the "nice" thing and "morality" isn't always as clear-cut as you'd think it'd be.

Edited by Sunwoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like many others, I'm sick of explaining this all the time.

Here's a better and more interesting question:

What if victim wasn't Elise?

What if the sick person was Camilla? Or Xander? Better yet, what if it was Garon?

I think the major reason people critcize Ryoma in Chapter 12 is because the victim is Elise, the "cute, innocent little sister".

Who the game expects you to feel sorry for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the main point here isn't that Ryoma would have let Elise die, but that he was unwilling to negotiate. Both from a practical and moral standpoint, he had plenty to gain from negotiating. Especially since negotiations take time, which is something that the side offering to negotiate has precious little of. Ryoma has nothing to lose by attempting to negotiate but still refuses to his own detriment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the main point here isn't that Ryoma would have let Elise die, but that he was unwilling to negotiate. Both from a practical and moral standpoint, he had plenty to gain from negotiating. Especially since negotiations take time, which is something that the side offering to negotiate has precious little of. Ryoma has nothing to lose by attempting to negotiate but still refuses to his own detriment.

He did. He said if Corrin came back with him, he would grant free passage to the Nohrians. Corn refused.

Even then they were bad terms. He should have said he would grant Elise treatment, but as a prisoner of war. Corn should have known Ryoma would hold up his end of the bargain. Instead, he decided to fight, killing Hoshidans he didn't want to kill, risking killing the brother he didn't want to fight, putting in risk his own troops and also risking losing the battle and getting Elise killed as a consequence.

EDIT: They were actually amazing terms. Ryoma was welcoming Corn back without any consequence for his past choice to side with Nohr, would leave the rest of the Nohrians alive and Elise wouldn't even be captured as a royal prisoner of war.

Edited by Lanko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, having some internet issues so got a lot more responses faster than I had time to reply. Sorry!

Also, again if youre sick of the subject, feel free not to respond.

Never knew this picture would become so handy:



Since I talked about this yesterday, I will simply copy that response here:

"Ryouma didn't hold a hostage. A princess of the enemy nation got sick, and he didn't see the need to help her out because, frankly, why would he? His nation was just attacked out of the blue by a power-hungry king and his lackeys who lack the spines to stand up to him. His mother died protecting the main character, just as his father did, yet the protagonist willingly goes back to a nation that doesn't give a shit about its own people. Not only that, but he took the Yatogami with him.

Neither Elise nor Corrin are two innocent little puppies being bullied by the big bad Ryouma; Corrin is an enemy general while Elise is an active participant in the war. Ryouma has everything to lose on letting them continue the way they have, so why on earth would he help her? I'm honestly starting to wonder if people get so worked up about this is because Elise is cute; would people have cared this much if it was any other Nohrian sibling who got sick?


-- I never said it had anything to do with Elise being a innocent little puppy. Actually I believe I pointed out that at the time Elise was Hocs de combat also known as non-combative because she was too sick. I don’t care whether Elise is cute or if it was another sibiling – I am arguing that as a non-combative she no longer was a threat.

That said, Ryoma has plenty of reasons to be mad at Corrin and Nohr. But that doesn’t make his decision logical, in fact it only highlights that he was coming from an emotional place.

As I mentioned earlier, Ryouma is also proven to be completely justified in his actions considering Corrin - and Elise - completely fuck Hoshido over in Conquest. I don't care how happy that ending tries to be, it's one of the most insulting, poorly written excuses for the end of a plot I have ever seen. A fuckton of Hoshidans died either directly or indirectly as a result of Corrin's actions, the two princes were killed and Nohr effectively conquered all of it, and now you celebrate Xander - who also willingly took part in the invasion - becoming the king. If Corrin had returned to Hoshido and maybe taken two seconds to think over their actions, then maybe they could've worked together and reached some sort of agreement or plan or anything.

Never argued that the ending was well written or happy. What I argued was his actions in the moment were not from an honorable and good place. You can’t say that what happened later meant that it justified Ryoma’s actions earlier. Ryoma didn’t know any of that was going to happen. He refused to talk or parley even though his opponent asked for it (another big no-no of war throughout history) and then attacked. You say if Corrin had returned to Hoshido to talk it out it might have worked – maybe if Ryoma had taken two seconds to think over his actions – aka crossing miles of enemy territory after a ‘general’ who had so far not set foot on Hoshido soil or been involved in any skirmishes on Hoshido land, then threatening to fight instead of listening even though his opponent wished to talk rather than fight – then maybe they could’ve worked together and reached some sort of agreement or plan or anything.

Speaking of which, that makes me think: why don't people lash out against Corrin for risking Elise's life? Even though he stands to lose on the princess recovering, Ryouma offers them free passage provided Corrin goes with him, so why doesn't the goody two-shoes comply? Isn't this the person who is supposed to be far too good for, well, their own good? Why the sudden stubbornness?And finally, can someone just give me a single reason for why Ryouma should help the enemy here? Do you think it would make Garon chill out? Would Elise retire from the war? Would Corrin make his murder spree a little less murderous? What would the point be in trying to help her here?"

I do think Corrin should have surrendered. But surrendering or not has no reflection on Ryoma’s actions. He picked the fight, he pressed the fight, he tried to use emotional blackmail on Corrin.

And finally, can someone just give me a single reason for why Ryouma should help the enemy here? Do you think it would make Garon chill out? Would Elise retire from the war? Would Corrin make his murder spree a little less murderous? What would the point be in trying to help her here?

Yes. Stated as before since we’re into copying and pasting atm: Ryoma’s refusal to give Elise medicine or let her have access to doctors? I’ve seen it argued that it’s pragmatic, but it’s not. He loses nothing by allowing her treatment. However, considering she is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. He loses any goodwill they might otherwise have.

One might argue that the goodwill was never there, but to Ryoma there is no evidence of this. At the time of the incident, Ryoma has no reason to believe Nohr will treat any imprisoned family members poorly. While Nohr has treated its prisoners of low birth poorly (see Kaze and Rinka), it currently has a history of treating prisoners of high birth well. After all, his last sibling to be taken by Nohr wasn’t killed....and was raised as a royal. Letting Elise die is almost guaranteed to change this. Saving her, however, builds goodwill towards how himself or his family might be treated during the war. Definitely not logical or smart, especially since Nohrrin was willing to negotiate, so it was not like he didn’t have any other choice. Ryoma was the one who made the choice that it was surrender or fight.

History shows there is very little actual killing of prisoners of noble birth because the cost is usually so high. You want to treat your prisoners how you hope your enemy will treat them.

It's a tricky subject. If you want to talk about the Geneva Convention, then it's a war crime to attack combat medics with a clear insignia (Elise probably has one, but idk). POWs are also entitled to certain rights, and I don't think Ryoma would've allowed Corrin to be granted certain ones (namely, allowed to communicate regularly with relatives and receive care packages as well as being quickly released after conflict ends).

However, Elise could be a Strategist and using personal weapons offensively results in combat medics no longer being protected by the Geneva Conventions, so if Elise used a tome for anything other than self-defence or defence of a patient (i.e. only attacking on the enemies turn), then she's fair game. It's also worth pointing out that applying real life rules of warfare to video games (especially fantasy/medieval ones) is ridiculous, since it's a completely different world with (most likely) completely different international protocols (if any) and if we're going to apply our real life rules, than Nohr has already broken those rules by deliberately attacking a civilian population (as far as Hoshido knows anyway, but there's no reason to suspect otherwise). Not to mention all the shit they pull while suppressing rebellions (all of which Nohrrin had a role in, so...).

Geneva Convention (GC) doesn’t only cover combat medics. In this case I was refuring to the part of the Convention that state that sick combatants are no longer considered enemy combatants and thus are protected under that. But I mostly brought up GC to illustrate the long standing history we have in beliefs of rules of war. We are 150 years (6 generations) into the Geneva conventions, and we humans keep adding to them. So I think they do speak to a very human conviction that might doesn't make right. And several centuries of military practice suggest that the universal belief that we should hold certain humanitarian standards in war support the likelihood that there were standards in Nohr and Hoshido as well

Elise would not be considered an enemy combative under GC due to her sickness. So not fair game. And as stated above, history shows that people have always held humanitarian standards and beliefs about war and leaders who broke these where unpopular and usually didn’t have long term success. So not exactly reflecting well on Ryoma. And yes I get it’s a game – but that doesn’t mean I can’t be annoyed at Ryoma’s lack of ability to assess a situation well. Even looking at just the Elise part, she is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. At this time he has no reason to think that if his family is taken prisoner they’ll be treated poorly (his one example of a live situation is Corrin, who was treated well). So antagonizing Nohr and giving them reason to kill his family is not in his favor.

And if we’re looking at it from a “Nohr did worse already!” stand point, then it becomes a question of whether or not Ryoma should sink to their level. And I think it is fair to criticizes him for doing so.

This is my only response to this topic:

https://giphy.com/gifs/6DrYAtQYRWpWg

Also, again, I reiterate:

He was just treating her like the adult she technically is.

Never said it had anything with her being adult or not. It has everything to do with me judging him poorly for picking a fight in a situation where the enemy actively asking to talk instead, and refusing to allow aid to a dying person, and using that person as emotional black mail.

It's war. Everything is fair game to guarantee the survival of your country and people. Lose, and your country will be pillaged and razed and the enemy will have their way with the people.

That's why I like what Micaiah tried in Radiant Dawn against the Begnion army that was gonna conquer them again, an army five times or more of Daein's size and people freaked out and called her a war criminal. Haha. Seriously.

Ryoma doesn't have any reason (except the goodwill of his heart) to help her. In fact, his main reason to be there should be capture her (not that Garon would care) to have some leverage, not to bring back Corn.

In fact, one would expect much more pragmatism from the Nohrian royals in certain chapters. It is even more non-sense when you have Leo saying that Zola or Iago are dishonorable when his personal skill is "Pragmatic".

History actually shows us this is not the case in the majority of the situations.

Ryoma has reason to want to make sure that there is goodwill if the case that his family gets taken prisoner. Historically nobles were very well treated when captured for this very reason – they wanted to make sure their families would be well treated if taken by the other side.

I actually agree with your Pragmatic first part, but I don’t think Ryoma’s actions were pragmatic at all. He march across miles of enemy territories, after his missing sibling so he could “bring Corrin home”. Even though it put his men in danger and wouldn’t win them any strategic advantage. When faced with Corrin he pressed a fight, even though there were other options. All of this suggests it’s emotional for him, not logical

Wow, not this shit again.

1. Geneva Convention: this exists in the real world, but does FE even have an equivalent of the Geneva Convention? Not Nohr and Hoshido, but FE in general. Because as far as I remember, killing enemy medics has been acceptable for both the player and the enemy. No one gives a fuck. The only FE game that I've played (7-11, 13-14) that actually made a point about not killing noncombatants was that one chapter in FE9, and those guys were priests who were literally being held hostage. Not medics who were openly aligned with a side.

Most fans have never given a fuck about killing enemy healers up until Elise, and let's be honest: she's not special at all. So unless someone can prove that Geneva Convention equivalent exists in Nohr/Hoshido and all of FE, and we have reason to believe this, the point is moot.

2. Ryouma is only aware of Elise's condition because Kamui was an idiot and told him that Elise was sick. As Thane had already mentioned, Elise is an enemy princess who willingly chose to take part in the war. She's not some innocent little girl anymore. He has no obligation to give a fuck about her health. "He could've let Elise past or a doctor leave"? Except, again, Elise is not some uninvolved innocent. She's an enemy healer, and if she's promoted she's an outright combatant. Elise living means that she'll live to fight again, or she'll live to heal an enemy who will live to fight again. And it's not like helping Elise is going to do anything good for Hoshido. Is Garon going to call off the war because Ryouma let Elise have medicine, or at least spare Ryouma and his family because he's now in their "debt"? NO. If Ryouma lets Elise live, Nohr's not going to return that favor. Literally nothing to gain for Hoshido, everything to lose.

3. You keep on using Ryouma's men as an excuse for why he's so "emotional" and showing of poor leadership. Now, I'll ask you this, what are Ryouma's men going to think when he lets Nohrrin walk all over him and just hand over that medicine? Remember, as far as Hoshido knows, Nohr just killed their queen and leveled their capital. I'm sure there are some people in Hoshido who are just itching for a piece of Kamui. Or Nohr. Now, in the face of the traitor, your future king decides to just … I dunno, go home and give the enemy princess the medicine she needs to get better? Are you kidding me? THAT is going to lose the respect of his soldiers more than anything else. THAT is a sign of poor leadership. In FE10, Crimean nobles lambasted Elincia for ceding control of Crimea to Begnion. Ryouma giving the medicine to Elise and letting Kamui just do Kamui things without a fight is just outright stupid and he would've deserved to be lambasted if he'd done that.

tl;dr

What is right isn't always the "nice" thing and "morality" isn't always as clear-cut as you'd think it'd be.

1:No but that doesn’t mean we should be allowed to judge a supposed good and honorable man for acting in a way that appears inhuman. And a supposed general acting like an emotional invested child. We blame Corrin for the lack of actual stratigy, what was Ryoma doing marching so far into enemy territory after one person and picking a fight when the other side didn’t want one and oftered to have negotiation? Not acting like a military commander . I never said it has anything with Elise being a healer. It has everything to do with what is morally ok. We don’t attack civilians (which Hoshido did suggest they follow that rule), and we generally don't kill people who can't fight back. If Elise was active, this wouldn't be an issue. But she wasn't.

2:Ok, I didn’t make this clear enough, clearly. Elise, sick and out of commission is not what is generally considered an “enemy” combatant. In our universe, which yes I know is not FE, that is not a combatant. This, as is usually understood by rules of what is considered humane, is therefore people feeling like it was not moral is totally valid. Further, which I also realize I failed to make clear, when I said “let her pass” I meant surrender Elise so she could receive treatment. This would have meant she was a prisoner of Hoshido, but got to live. Historically (in our world) this was an actual practice. And yes, once again I get FE is not real and is made up. But if the characters are to be believable they should act in a manner that is believable as humans. And history shows that humans are very particular about having rules of war.

Also Ryoma has reason to want to make sure that there is goodwill if the case that his family gets taken prisoner. Historically nobles were very well treated when captured for this very reason – they wanted to make sure their families would be well treated if taken by the other side. Elise is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. At this time he has no reason to think that if his family is taken prisoner they’ll be treated poorly (his one example of a live situation is Corrin, who was treated well). So antagonizing Nohr and giving them reason to kill his family is not in his favor. At this time he has no reason to believe Nohr might not treat his family well – history in Nohr has shown Nohr does treat them well. SO he does have a lot to lose by actively preventing her from seeking aid and dying.

3:Actually I used Ryome endangering his men as an example of how he’s acting emotional over logical. He is literally only at the castle because he’s looking for Corrin. He is ignoring the actual fighting going on at the border to be there, after Corrin who so far has done no actual fighting against Hoshido. That means it is not strategic.

As for what his men might be thinking, which I never actually addressed, letting the enemy, who is sick and unable to fight die because you’re upset your brother has chosen the other side doesn’t reflect well on a commander. People don’t like following assholes. Further, people often don’t like fighting when then don’t have too

What is right isn’t always the “nice” thing. However, what is right is usually the morally correct one. Letting someone die to further your personal vendetta is something that someone can and should be judged for.

Like many others, I'm sick of explaining this all the time.

Here's a better and more interesting question:
What if victim wasn't Elise?
What if the sick person was Camilla? Or Xander? Better yet, what if it was Garon?

I think the major reason people critcize Ryoma in Chapter 12 is because the victim is Elise, the "cute, innocent little sister".
Who the game expects you to feel sorry for.

As I stated before, feel free not to post if you’re tired or sick of discussing this

None of my argument had anything to do with it being Elise. I understand you're tired of explaining your view point, but don't ignore everything I said in favor of a completely unstated, irrelevant point. If it was Camilla or Xander I would still think Ryoma behaved badly. He was not acting either morally nor strategically.

Garon is another matter entirely. He would be strategic to let die (actually maybe Xander as well, but considering there are 3 other heirs to the throne, not really), though perhaps not morally.

I think the main point here isn't that Ryoma would have let Elise die, but that he was unwilling to negotiate. Both from a practical and moral standpoint, he had plenty to gain from negotiating. Especially since negotiations take time, which is something that the side offering to negotiate has precious little of. Ryoma has nothing to lose by attempting to negotiate but still refuses to his own detriment.

THIS^

Telling Corrin its "come back with me or fight" and not allowing any other options although Corrin was will to negotiate does not reflect well on Ryoma and is something to be criticized. He then followed it up by attacking Corrin while Corrin was still trying to talk - Corrin didn't even get a chance to agree to the fight. Not exactly honorable either.

Edited by Red Lilies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, one would expect much more pragmatism from the Nohrian royals in certain chapters. It is even more non-sense when you have Leo saying that Zola or Iago are dishonorable when his personal skill is "Pragmatic".

That's because the Nohr royals are, quite frankly, raging hypocrites and complete morons. Prolonging a bloody a pointless war for the sake of "honor" is a-ok, but ending the war with much less bloodshed in a "dishonorable" way is bad because what's logic.

I think the main point here isn't that Ryoma would have let Elise die, but that he was unwilling to negotiate. Both from a practical and moral standpoint, he had plenty to gain from negotiating. Especially since negotiations take time, which is something that the side offering to negotiate has precious little of. Ryoma has nothing to lose by attempting to negotiate but still refuses to his own detriment.

I'm curious, what do you think Ryoma stands to gain from negotiating with Corrin? It's not like Corrin has the authority to end the war or call a ceasefire, and the likelihood of Garon being open to negotiation, even with Elise's life on the line, is a flat 0%.

Also Ryoma has reason to want to make sure that there is goodwill if the case that his family gets taken prisoner. Historically nobles were very well treated when captured for this very reason – they wanted to make sure their families would be well treated if taken by the other side. Elise is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. At this time he has no reason to think that if his family is taken prisoner they’ll be treated poorly (his one example of a live situation is Corrin, who was treated well). So antagonizing Nohr and giving them reason to kill his family is not in his favor. At this time he has no reason to believe Nohr might not treat his family well – history in Nohr has shown Nohr does treat them well. SO he does have a lot to lose by actively preventing her from seeking aid and dying.

History has nothing to do with it. Garon only spared Corrin because he wanted to use Corrin as a Trojan horse to kill Mikoto, as Corrin's bloodline allowed him to pass through the barrier surrounding Hoshido without being affected. He even admits to this in Birthright. Kaze and Rinkah were both nobles or equivalent, and he was fully prepared to kill both of them. Bloodline doesn't matter; Garon would kill them all without a second thought.

I'll respond to the rest in a seperate post.

EDIT: Actually, one more thing.

Telling Corrin its "come back with me or fight" and not allowing any other options although Corrin was will to negotiate does not reflect well on Ryoma and is something to be criticized. He then followed it up by attacking Corrin while Corrin was still trying to talk - Corrin didn't even get a chance to agree to the fight. Not exactly honorable either.

Ryoma had no obligation to negotiate with Corrin, nor did he have any obligation to wait for Corrin to agree to the fight.

Edited by AzureSen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He did. He said if Corrin came back with him, he would grant free passage to the Nohrians. Corn refused.

Even then they were bad terms. He should have said he would grant Elise treatment, but as a prisoner of war. Corn should have known Ryoma would hold up his end of the bargain. Instead, he decided to fight, killing Hoshidans he didn't want to kill, risking killing the brother he didn't want to fight, putting in risk his own troops and also risking losing the battle and getting Elise killed as a consequence.

EDIT: They were actually amazing terms. Ryoma was welcoming Corn back without any consequence for his past choice to side with Nohr, would leave the rest of the Nohrians alive and Elise wouldn't even be captured as a royal prisoner of war.

I don't call an ultimatum a negotiation. This all still goes back to trying to get a personal benefit from a political situation. He could have charged an absurd amount of money that would have done wonders for his army funds, he could have offered to allow Elise through as a PoW in order to get her treated and then proceeded with further negotiations later. Whether or not Corrin would have accepted any of these is one thing, but a lack of trying is another. I wouldn't consider: "Come home with me! No? Ok let's settle it with our blades!" a negotiation on any level at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History has nothing to do with it. Garon only spared Corrin because he wanted to use Corrin as a Trojan horse to kill Mikoto, as Corrin's bloodline allowed him to pass through the barrier surrounding Hoshido without being affected. He even admits to this in Birthright. Kaze and Rinkah were both nobles or equivalent, and he was fully prepared to kill both of them. Bloodline doesn't matter; Garon would kill them all without a second thought.

I'll respond to the rest in a seperate post.

History has a lot to do with it. We can only judge people on how they will act based on what we've seen. So far, Ryoma has seen Nohr not kill his siblings when they were taken as hostages. So he has no reason to believe any other case will be different unless he does something to change that - such as treating a non-combative poorly.

I got the impression that neither Rinkah nor Kaze were seen as nobles by Nohr. So that might be me mis-remembering. But royals were certainly viewed as royals and had a history of being treated well as prisoners.

So it doesn't exactly feel like a good reflection on Hoshido being 'better' people or a logical choice for Ryoma to actively start a fight and prevent Elise from getting help. So I think it's fair to call him on it.

Edited by Red Lilies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1:No but that doesn’t mean we should be allowed to judge a supposed good and honorable man for acting in a way that appears inhuman. And a supposed general acting like an emotional invested child. We blame Corrin for the lack of actual stratigy, what was Ryoma doing marching so far into enemy territory after one person and picking a fight when the other side didn’t want one and oftered to have negotiation? Not acting like a military commander . I never said it has anything with Elise being a healer. It has everything to do with what is morally ok. We don’t attack civilians (which Hoshido did suggest they follow that rule), and we generally don't kill people who can't fight back. If Elise was active, this wouldn't be an issue. But she wasn't.

One, Ryouma isn't acting inhumanely. People who keep on crying about what a besmirch on his moral character this is have so far not presented any better and equally intelligent alternatives for what he could have done instead. Second, Iago is the one who tipped off Ryouma to Kamui's whereabouts. Emotional attachment to Kamui or not, Kamui is at this point an enemy general who needs to be taken out. If you know where an enemy general is going to be and you're certain you can take them out, then why the hell would you not go stop that enemy general? This isn't just about Ryouma having an emotional investment to Kamui. THIS IS WAR. If Ryouma feels he can take out Kamui and his army, then going after them is the SMART thing to do since Kamui is a war general leading around troops.

Active or not, Elise is still with the enemy. People get sick all the time, even soldiers. Even in real life. Do you expect the enemy to just take a time out because one soldier on their opposing side is sick? And if this whole "Elise wasn't on the battlefield so this isn't an issue" thing applies, how come no one gives a fuck about Takumi being sick in chapter 16 and Iago being an asshole? Is it because Iago is an asshole already and Kamui wasn't stupid enough to tell HIM that Takumi was sick? Or is it because Takumi isn't "cute widdle Elise"? Because I wonder.

2:Ok, I didn’t make this clear enough, clearly. Elise, sick and out of commission is not what is generally considered an “enemy” combatant. In our universe, which yes I know is not FE, that is not a combatant. This, as is usually understood by rules of what is considered humane, is therefore people feeling like it was not moral is totally valid. Further, which I also realize I failed to make clear, when I said “let her pass” I meant surrender Elise so she could receive treatment. This would have meant she was a prisoner of Hoshido, but got to live. Historically (in our world) this was an actual practice. And yes, once again I get FE is not real and is made up. But if the characters are to be believable they should act in a manner that is believable as humans. And history shows that humans are very particular about having rules of war.

Well, THAT one is on Kamui and not Ryouma. Because Kamui's the one who said "no". Ryouma gave Kamui more of a negotiation attempt than Kamui honestly deserved. Kamui refused. Therefore, even if Elise could've been treated as a prisoner of war of Hoshido, Kamui's the one who said no and therefore if this is even anyone's responsibility it's on Kamui. Not Ryouma.

Also Ryoma has reason to want to make sure that there is goodwill if the case that his family gets taken prisoner. Historically nobles were very well treated when captured for this very reason – they wanted to make sure their families would be well treated if taken by the other side. Elise is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. At this time he has no reason to think that if his family is taken prisoner they’ll be treated poorly (his one example of a live situation is Corrin, who was treated well). So antagonizing Nohr and giving them reason to kill his family is not in his favor. At this time he has no reason to believe Nohr might not treat his family well – history in Nohr has shown Nohr does treat them well. SO he does have a lot to lose by actively preventing her from seeking aid and dying.

Except no matter what Ryouma does it's NOT going to affect how Nohr treats them at all? With villains as comically evil and 1-dimensional as Garon, Iago, and Ganz, they're not going to care that a Hoshidan did them this one favor where they helped out the princess. What Nohr wants to do with the Hoshidan royals if they did capture them is war is going to be done to them WITHOUT reflecting on anything the Hoshidans did to help them or not.

Besides, I wouldn't call how Garon treated Kamui "well".

3:Actually I used Ryome endangering his men as an example of how he’s acting emotional over logical. He is literally only at the castle because he’s looking for Corrin. He is ignoring the actual fighting going on at the border to be there, after Corrin who so far has done no actual fighting against Hoshido. That means it is not strategic.

As for what his men might be thinking, which I never actually addressed, letting the enemy, who is sick and unable to fight die because you’re upset your brother has chosen the other side doesn’t reflect well on a commander. People don’t like following assholes. Further, people often don’t like fighting when then don’t have too

What is right isn’t always the “nice” thing. However, what is right is usually the morally correct one. Letting someone die to further your personal vendetta is something that someone can and should be judged for.

I already responded to most of this in point one. But a few more points to make. One, Kamui DID fight against Hoshido at this point. Against both Takumi and Hinoka and their armies in chapters 10 and 11. It may not be IN Hoshido, but Kamui did fight the Hoshidan army. Ryouma going after Kamui is not a personal agenda. Taking out Kamui, A WAR GENERAL, if he feels capable of doing so is a strategic move. You're so hung up on "oh Ryouma MUST be chasing after Kamui because of EMOTIONAL STUFF" that you don't even look like you're trying to see how it could make sense in a practical way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History has a lot to do with it. We can only judge people on how they will act based on what we've seen. So far, Ryoma has seen Nohr not kill his siblings when they were taken as hostages. So he has no reason to believe any other case will be different unless he does something to change that - such as treating a non-combative poorly.

I got the impression that neither Rinkah nor Kaze were seen as nobles by Nohr. So that might be me remembering. But royals were certainly viewed as royals and had a history of being treated well as prisoners.

Ryoma's also seen a Nohrian assassin try to kill his brother and him, an exploding sword almost kill his brother and kill his stepmother and untold Hoshidan civilians, Faceless sent by Nohr to attack innocents, is well-aware that Garon was responsible for his father's death and for the exploding sword, and on top of everything else declare unprovoked war against his nation. There is no reason for Ryoma to think any of his siblings will be spared, given all of the horrible things Nohr has done, just because Garon spared his sibling once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geneva Convention (GC) doesn’t only cover combat medics. In this case I was refuring to the part of the Convention that state that sick combatants are no longer considered enemy combatants and thus are protected under that. But I mostly brought up GC to illustrate the long standing history we have in beliefs of rules of war. We are 150 years (6 generations) into the Geneva conventions, and we humans keep adding to them. So I think they do speak to a very human conviction that might doesn't make right. And several centuries of military practice suggest that the universal belief that we should hold certain humanitarian standards in war support the likelihood that there were standards in Nohr and Hoshido as well

Elise would not be considered an enemy combative under GC due to her sickness. So not fair game. And as stated above, history shows that people have always held humanitarian standards and beliefs about war and leaders who broke these where unpopular and usually didn’t have long term success. So not exactly reflecting well on Ryoma. And yes I get it’s a game – but that doesn’t mean I can’t be annoyed at Ryoma’s lack of ability to assess a situation well. Even looking at just the Elise part, she is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. At this time he has no reason to think that if his family is taken prisoner they’ll be treated poorly (his one example of a live situation is Corrin, who was treated well). So antagonizing Nohr and giving them reason to kill his family is not in his favor.

And if we’re looking at it from a “Nohr did worse already!” stand point, then it becomes a question of whether or not Ryoma should sink to their level. And I think it is fair to criticizes him for doing so.

Being sick puts Elise under Hors de Combat, which only means that she can't be attacked. In regards to actually being sick, here's what the GC has to say;

“Cared for by the Party to the conflict in whose power they may be … They shall not willfully be left without medical assistance and care, nor shall conditions exposing them to contagion or infection be created”

You may notice that it specifies 'whose power they may be'. Ryoma wouldn't be allowed to attack her, but he has no responsibility to care for her. That duty belongs to Kamui and Co. Ryoma asking Kamui to surrender before Elise can be treated is actually reasonable, since surrendering would place the Nohrian party under his power and thus, he would be responsible for taking care of Elise.

Besides, why do people complain about the conflict being so black and white and wish that the conflict would be more morally ambiguous, but also complain when Ryoma also does something morally ambiguous (even though what he does is only illegal by the standards of the real world). It's called having your cake and eating it to.

History has a lot to do with it. We can only judge people on how they will act based on what we've seen. So far, Ryoma has seen Nohr not kill his siblings when they were taken as hostages. So he has no reason to believe any other case will be different unless he does something to change that - such as treating a non-combative poorly.

I got the impression that neither Rinkah nor Kaze were seen as nobles by Nohr. So that might be me mis-remembering. But royals were certainly viewed as royals and had a history of being treated well as prisoners.

So it doesn't exactly feel like a good reflection on Hoshido being 'better' people or a logical choice for Ryoma to actively start a fight and prevent Elise from getting help. So I think it's fair to call him on it.

You're right, they didn't kill him. They merely brainwashed him into believing he was Nohrian, attempted to have him kill POWs (which is also against the GC) and only keep him alive so that he could use him as a Trojan Horse to kill Mikoto, which resulted in massive damage to a civilian area, the loss of many civilian lives and fully intended for Kamui to also die in the explosion. That doesn't sound like being 'treated well' to me.

Edited by Phillius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point here is that the writing for this is laughably bad. They tried to make a character that is, in almost every other situation an honorable man, be seen by the conquest player as someone who is unwilling to compromise so that the players themselves don't have to feel as guilty as Nohrrin himself is about choosing a path that ultimately forces you to fight against good people (before even fully understanding the circumstances of the choice in many players' cases).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Stated as before since we’re into copying and pasting atm:

Ryoma’s refusal to give Elise medicine or let her have access to doctors? I’ve seen it argued that it’s pragmatic, but it’s not. He loses nothing by allowing her treatment. However, considering she is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. He loses any goodwill they might otherwise have.

One might argue that the goodwill was never there, but to Ryoma there is no evidence of this. At the time of the incident, Ryoma has no reason to believe Nohr will treat any imprisoned family members poorly.

While Nohr has treated its prisoners of low birth poorly (see Kaze and Rinka), it currently has a history of treating prisoners of high birth well. After all, his last sibling to be taken by Nohr wasn’t killed....and was raised as a royal. Letting Elise die is almost guaranteed to change this. Saving her, however, builds goodwill towards how himself or his family might be treated during the war. Definitely not logical or smart, especially since Nohrrin was willing to negotiate, so it was not like he didn’t have any other choice. Ryoma was the one who made the choice that it was surrender or fight.

History shows there is very little actual killing of prisoners of noble birth because the cost is usually so high. You want to treat your prisoners how you hope your enemy will treat them.

What? Look at how Garon murdered Sumeragi. An ambush in a peace meeting. Then the explosion that killed Mikoto and thousands of civilians.

Historically, why would any leader that saw these actions have any reason to believe said country (Nohr) will have (or has) any "goodwill" during the actual war for his population (they didn't), his siblings and himself? No one would trust anyone from said country.

Ryoma was defeated and could be imprisoned in chapter 25, but Garon ordered him killed anyway.

Also, both countries are pretty much isolated from each other, how does Ryoma know if Nohr is treating prisoners of high birth well? From which countries? Rinka is the daughter of the Fire Tribe chieftain and Garon didn't care. Are you talking about Felicia and Flora? Ryoma has no way of knowing that two random maids are daughters of a chieftain.

When Kaze and Rinka returned, they must have reported that they were gonna be executed (and that others were). The precedent simply isn't there for Ryoma.

Considering all this, Ryoma treated his potential prisoners far better than the enemy treated his. So this is a moot point.

Corn was negotiating what? What else could he offer Ryoma? I want to see what this could possibly be.

Ryoma offered an amazing deal for him: come back to your birth family, we will disregard your past choice, your soldiers will live and we won't even imprison Elise. Corn refused, so then they were simply two enemy armies that met each other. This was not an ultimatum, it was the only two decisions that could've been made.

Ryoma treating Elise first and then offering Corn a deal is non-sense. They were in enemy territory. How long would Elise take to recover? Why risk getting surrounded by the enemy? Specially since Iago was the one that tipped Ryoma off? If Corn wouldn't suffer by fighting Ryoma, then Iago would simply attack him.

About Ryoma acting emotionally, as if that is a problem and never happened to other leaders during History. Sometimes it bore fruits, sometimes it didn't. If he got Corn back that would have been a massive blow on Nohr.

And his move wasn't that illogical. In the previous chapter Corn spared Hinoka, which proved to Ryoma that Corn could still be saved. He also had the Yato. Getting the sword back is a practical and logical motive, getting Corn back an emotional one.

Edited by Lanko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What? Look at how Garon murdered Sumeragi. An ambush in a peace meeting. Then the explosion that killed Mikoto and thousands of civilians.

Historically, why would any leader that saw these actions have any reason to believe said country (Nohr) will have (or has) any "goodwill" during the actual war for his population (they didn't), his siblings and himself? No one would trust anyone from said country.

Ryoma was defeated and could be imprisoned in chapter 25, but Garon ordered him killed anyway.

Also, both countries are pretty much isolated from each other, how does Ryoma know if Nohr is treating prisoners of high birth well? From which countries? Rinka is the daughter of the Fire Tribe chieftain and Garon didn't care. Are you talking about Felicia and Flora? Ryoma has no way of knowing that two random maids are daughters of a chieftain.

When Kaze and Rinka returned, they must have reported that they were gonna be executed (and that others were). The precedent simply isn't there for Ryoma.

Considering all this, Ryoma treated his potential prisoners far better than the enemy treated his. So this is a moot point.

Corn was negotiating what? What else could he offer Ryoma? I want to see what this could possibly be.

Ryoma offered an amazing deal for him: come back to your birth family, we will disregard your past choice, your soldiers will live and we won't even imprison Elise. Corn refused, so then they were simply two enemy armies that met each other. This was not an ultimatum, it was the only two decisions that could've been made.

Ryoma treating Elise first and then offering Corn a deal is non-sense. They were in enemy territory. How long would Elise take to recover? Why risk getting surrounded by the enemy? Specially since Iago was the one that tipped Ryoma off? If Corn wouldn't suffer by fighting Ryoma, then Iago would simply attack him.

About Ryoma acting emotionally, as if that is a problem and never happened to other leaders during History. And it wasn't that illogical. In the previous chapter Corn spared Hinoka, which proved to Ryoma that Corn could still be saved. He also had the Yato. Getting the sword back is a practical and logical motive, getting Corn back an emotional one.

Well considering that Corn is the only one who can use it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well considering that Corn is the only one who can use it...

Even if Kamui is the only one who can use it, why would you want them using it in the first place? One less weapon pointing at your countrymen is one less weapon pointing at your countrymen. Plus, isn't it considered to be a Hoshidan sacred sword as well because they'd certainly want it back in that case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well considering that Corn is the only one who can use it...

No problem either. You will simply have an enemy not wielding a powerful weapon against you.

EDIT: Hah, ninja'd

Edited by Lanko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...