Children in future games

[nhaer042]

I know there are topics like this floating around but I was curious so I made a poll.

For my money, I have to say I'm mixed on there being children. I do like the mechanic in theory but the lack of a viable story reason makes me hesitate to even bother recruiting them.

As for them being in future games, I won't say no but I will say wait a while. Far as I'm concerned, the mechanic has worn its welcome for the time being.

[Morgan]

The reason I like children is more so as a mechanic. Having a customizable unit that you can build to be whatever you want, and also having lots of them, makes the game have more replay ability and options. Even if it's poorly incorporated story wise, the children mechanic adds a lot to the game's replay ability, whether it be building your own units, filling out the support log, etc.

I know a lot of people will say they won't want kids, but in my opinion they're really fun as a mechanic

[nhaer042]

Oh, I agree. It's a great mechanic. I just think there should be a good story reason for their presence.

[Morgan]

Yeah. Story wise they're not that great, although I can't say I dislike more units, even if it is poorly written. Doing a future mechanic like Genalogy of the Holy War could work, but I'd also miss the old units, which I know is a small nitpick but whatever

The deep realms honestly weren't TOO BAD. I mean it's bad, but I always felt people freaked a bit much in them. Yes it was forced, but still... I'm not sure of another way to make it work besides time skip

[Thane]

Children could just as easily be trainees, squires or apprentices acquired through ways that don't involve bad story excuses and mental gymnastics.

Personally, while I love the children in Awakening, they don't feel needed in Fates and are only there because it was such a popular concept in its predecessor. All that development time could've gone to polishing the main game instead.

I voted no on both, but I did so under the assumption that the mechanic would remain more or less the way it is now; if they pull a Genealogy of the Holy War, then it's another matter entirely. However, I think even that would be unnecessary, and that Intelligent Systems should focus on one single, large cast as opposed to one big and one small, and if they do that, then we can get fewer but more developed support conversations as well. At least in an ideal world.

[Morgan]

Children could just as easily be trainees, squires or apprentices acquired through ways that don't involve bad story excuses and mental gymnastics.

Personally, while I love the children in Awakening, they don't feel needed in Fates and are only there because it was such a popular concept in its predecessor. All that development time could've gone to polishing the main game instead.

I voted no on both, but I did so under the assumption that the mechanic would remain more or less the way it is now; if they pull a Genealogy of the Holy War, then it's another matter entirely. However, I think even that would be unnecessary, and that Intelligent Systems should focus on one single, large cast as opposed to one big and one small, and if they do that, then we can get fewer but more developed support conversations as well. At least in an ideal world.

I didn't consider squires or apprentices. Those are great options! Just curious though, how would the inheritance work?

Like if A marries/A ranks/friendships/whatever in the next game to B, then does the apprentice inherit from that? Children worked because it was a parent, but would the squire just look up to the variable parent and inherit stats from them? I'm looking at this from a mechanic standpoint so that's why I ask

[Mox]

I feel kind of indifferent to the whole mechanic. I feel like it would be ok if it was implemented in the story the same way as Genealogy of the Holy War, but only if it served the actual plot to have children. I didn't like the way that Fates handled the children, I thought that it was sloppy and poorly executed.

Note: Rezzy suggested that recruiting a spouse's family member would be interesting and I agree. They went on to talk about how this could also serve alliances and stuff. I have to agree, I think this would make more sense to have an already trained member of another persons family be recruited than 'suddenly children'.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Mox

[nhaer042]

Note: I saw somebody on here (don't remember your name, sorry), that said recruiting a spouse's family member would be interesting and I agree. They went on to talk about how this could also serve alliances and stuff. I have to agree, I think this would make more sense to have an already trained member of another persons family be recruited than 'suddenly children'.

That does sound more plausible. Skill and Growth rate inheritance would still be tricky to handle though.

[Namarid]

Voted no for the first one ,even though there are some gems like Forrest and Sophie, their inclusion in the game is uncalled for and it makes the first gen look like morons and bad parents. These children should have nothing to do with the war. In awakening the children had more of a reason to be there and the idea of them fighting a war is much more believable considering their circumstances.

Despite that I voted yes for the second one. I like shipping characters and seeing the results of these ships are very rewarding( sometimes heartwarming). I also like the idea of the abilities of the parents being passed down to the child. In some cases having a child better develops the character of the parent, for example Takumi and Leo. I would love children to be in future games,but give them a good reason to be there.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Tactician. D

[Tolvir]

I would be fine with having children back under one of two circumstances.

Option 1: It is involved in the story. Whether it is another time travel plot, alternate timelines, or timeskip I would be fine. I just want it to fit in with the story or have a reason for being there.

Option 2: It is only accessed once you beat the game. I would be fine for it to return if it was accessed once you beat the game, and then its available to all other playthroughs as extra content. That way you already experienced the story as it should be, so now it is giving you some extra content for replay value.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Tolvir

[TheWerdna]

I put my answer as no and maybe. The maybe basically is an "only if it makes sense for the given story of the game (aka FE4 or Awakening) and is not shoehorned in (aka Fates)"

Edited April 20, 2016 by TheWerdna

[Volo]

I'm disappointed about the explanation for them in this game but I would have been even more disappointed if there were no child units at all. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The mechanic is easily one of the most interesting aspects of the game

[Reki]

I always saw them as side characters so I don't really mind them. I wouldn't mind seeing them appear again, but it would be nice if they played a role in the story.

[warchiefwilliams]

Wasn't there already a poll about this? Eh, regardless, No for the first question and Maybe for the second.

The problem lies with weaving the mechanic into the narrative and the quality of the characters that are in the second generation. Awakening's time travel was wonky, but the 2nd gen, in my opinion were all good characters, which kind of mitigates the wonky time travel, so they worked... somewhat... As for Fates, hyperbolic time chambers are even more convoluted than time travel, and combined with the relatively poor characters (especially when compared to their parents and especially certain expys) meant that the child mechanic is gimmicky as hell and their only use is for extra bodies for the army and experience for the 1st gen characters you actually use.

IS has proven they know how to make this system work. They just need a good way to implement it from a narrative sense. Pulling a Genealogy is always a good idea, if a bit uninspired.

[nhaer042]

I think pulling another Genealogy would be easier aid then done. You'd have to be able to come up with a story that can span over a time gap long enough for children to be born and raised old enough to fight. And as IS has proven recently, their storytelling capability is lacking to put it nicely.

[Book of Ereshkigal]

I've said it before, I love the entire concept of a second generation, but I strongly dislike recent story reasons shoehorning it in. (especially in Fates)

[Sartek]

Some children are nice as units, but I hate the story "explanation", and dislike some of the mechanics (The hair color part for example. Some children look so much better with a specific hair color, but it doesn't means I like having to do a specific couple)

Edited April 20, 2016 by Sartek

[Rezzy]

Note: I saw somebody on here (don't remember your name, sorry), that said recruiting a spouse's family member would be interesting and I agree. They went on to talk about how this could also serve alliances and stuff. I have to agree, I think this would make more sense to have an already trained member of another persons family be recruited than 'suddenly children'.

That was me. The original thread is here. http://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=62557&hl=in-laws

[Etrurian emperor]

No I don't like that children are in Fates. I pretty much hate it precisely because I like so many of the kids. That great characters like Shiro, Kiragi, Siegfried, Forrest and Percy have the most dignity if you consider them non canon means something has gone terribly wrong.

But I do like to see children return. I just want it done with competence. I want the children to belong in the game and I want great characters to have the dignity they deserve.

Pairing characters is something that has deserved its place in Fire emblem by now and being a parent does add something to certain characters. Give the children a real place in the story and I'm all for it.

I do think they need to do it through a timeskip. There are only so many excuses you can give to explain young adults having teenage children(or teenage children having young adults) and Fates showed that time travel is the only one that's valid. Another hyperbolic time chamber would just be ridiculous and quite frankly imply skewed priorities.

Having the parents age naturally seems the best option for the story.

[NekoKnight]

I'm going to say no and no. Some of the children characters in Fates are fun but that's not because they are the children of characters.

Apart from fitting into the narrative poorly (Fates parents are all terrible people) what I'd really like the game to get away from is everyone supporting everyone, particularly if it involves romance. Plenty of people have no reason to talk to each other, but it gets worse when they decide to get married despite having no chemistry or having spent much time together. I'd like to abolish pre-epilogue marriages unless it's integral to the plot (ex Chrom getting married).

Even if you could make the children fit in the narrative, I don't want the story to be restricted just to allow a popular mechanic to return. We've had a time skip, we've had time travel, and now painfully we have "easy-bake-oven" children. Let's take the series in a new direction. I think Thane's proposal of apprentices is a fair compromise to keep a similar mechanic while not maiming the story for it

[Nym]

I don't like children in Fates. I remember when the children were announced, I was like : ''Why? WHY?''. I get it that Awakening saved the franchise but you don't have to copy a core mechanic of the game and put it in the next game without any good explanations (the Deeprealms are, hands down, the worst possible excuse). I really liked the children in Awakening because they are a main part of story but they are also the best characters in the game (in both gameplay and character wise but it's only my opinion, Gaius is pretty funny too). On the other hand, the Fates children are not even in the main game. In fact, most of their chapters have promoted units which make it very hard to get them before the end of the game and they are not memorable either. I only like Selkie, Velouria and Kanna and that's it.

Maybe, they can bring back children but PLEASE, give a good excuse, like a timeskip or something (and not time travel, we already have this).

[EricaofRenais]

Honestly I don't care, I rarely use the kids at all because I tend to like the 1st gen units better. I like supports and want that to stay and kids can stay or go I don't really care, but I wish they would do it so that kids make sense because time traveling kids/putting kids in a magical place where they grow up in a few months is getting really old really fast. At least Awakening made sense but Fates was just plain strange and did not work very well.

[Anacybele]

I voted no for both. The only thing I really hate about Fates other than a lot of ridiculous-looking character designs (mainly among the Nohr characters) is that children returned. They were not needed here at all and were just forced. I pretend they don't exist as a result. I don't mind marriage though. I even still married my Corrin to someone (though I didn't do any other pairings).

I just think we should get a break from children right now since IS doesn't seem to know how to do them properly at the moment. And a game without children right now would just generally feel fresher.

[Butterstroke]

I like the idea of children units. Just as long as they flow in the story line, I would be happy.

[saisymbolic]

I don't care about the kids as a whole, though, I do like a select few. As someone said on another response, I would have liked it if they were apprentices/squires; Percy could have easily been Arthur's little sidekick that followed after him due to hero worship and admiration. I also do not particularly care for how they were implemented into the game; they could have used the Bond Unit system and treated the children characters as beings tied to the Astral Realm that takes on characteristics of the "parents" to totally fulfill my same sex pairings and head!canon.

If they do come back, all I ask is for a sensible reason for them being there and implemented with the fact that the player army is at war and does not have time for babies in mind. I don't mind romance; I don't even mind marriage; but having babies while one is in the middle of a conflict makes me squint somewhat.

Edited April 20, 2016 by SaiSymbolic