Central Theme in the Next Fire Emblem

[thetiger39]

What should the Central Theme in next Fire Emblem be about? What should the player learn and get out of the Theme FE15 wants to portray?

1. My simple rewrite of Revelations has Hoshido and Nohr on various shades of gray while his/her own faction is morally white. Corrin, when confronting both sides will have no problem spouting the phrase "If there was a right side, I would've found it by now" would be the central theme and lesson if Revelations was a one and done FE Fates. As a person not into that pick between the lesser of two evils type, this theme resonates with me the most.

2. The Importance Friendship and Trust and Bonds. Over the course of the story, our emo protaganist learns to trust his/her comrades and believe in the power of friendship and that by being alone and trying to do all all by ones self, it will take him nowhere.

Edited July 12, 2016 by thetiger39

[Sunwoo]

Growing the fuck up and learning that as future king/queen/ruler of their country they can't be selfish and care only about the named people immediately surrounding them or their friends and family; that as a ruler, sometimes you need to make sacrifices for the greater good otherwise you are unfit to be ruler.

[Loki Laufeyson]

Consequences and reaping what you sow. We need an FE about this i think.

[Captain Karnage]

we'll see in the fall when FE mobile comes out.

I think we've all forgotten about it

[NoNameAtAll]

Growing the fuck up and learning that as future king/queen/ruler of their country they can't be selfish and care only about the named people immediately surrounding them or their friends and family; that as a ruler, sometimes you need to make sacrifices for the greater good otherwise you are unfit to be ruler.

So basically, Thracia 776?

Because that's pretty much what Leif went through and learned from August.

[DrewHak]

A plot based of civil war where the protagonist is original a member of the faction supporting the original government or whatever, but over the course of the story learns of the truth, that his govt. is committing horrible atrocities and that he has been blindly led by them. He is disillusioned I guess, with the second half of the story it should be him working the the revolutionary side, and the endgame being the revolutionaries winning and protagonist being instated as new leader of new govt. Pretty odd.

[NekoKnight]

The idea that morality is merely a point of view. It wouldn't go as far as nihilism, more like "Everyone is the hero of their own story". Everyone has dreams and ambitions. Everyone has people they love and values that they would fight for.

[Sunwoo]

So basically, Thracia 776?

Because that's pretty much what Leif went through and learned from August.

In a way, almost every FE game up to FE12 was about growing the fuck up and learning to be a better ruler. FE6 Roy wasn't going to be ruler of Pherae anytime soon, as Eliwood is still alive at the end of the game, but this is a clear theme in the other games.

In FE7, Hector considers himself a loud who's better off not being in court but when Uther dies he realizes that he has to grow up and take responsibility as the ruler of Ostia now.

In FE8, Ephraim was running around playing soldier and in flashbacks talked about dumping responsibility on Eirika so he can be a mercenary, but realizes that he needs to stop being irresponsible and take up the mantle of responsibility as future king.

In FE9 and FE10, Elincia learns about the people of Crimea and what it is to be ruler, and then she has to learn to compromise her idealism with harsh reality and become a good ruler who's somewhere in the middle ground. Her growing into a strong ruler is in contrast to Pelleas, who wants to do the best for his country, but is weak willed and taken advantage of by schemers around him and has to depend on Micaiah, in contrast to Elincia who learned to move on without Ike.

In FE11, Marth states that he is a prince before he is a brother or son. He knows that since he is the king now, he has to do what is best for the people, not for him personally.

But FE13 and FE14, in comparison, have a more "self-centered" morality. It's not that a theme of bonds and friendship and family (although I call bull in this one, a real theme of family wouldn't let you marry people who call you sibling and wouldn't make you unrelated to your "blood" family so you can marry them) bothers me. But rather, this theme of bonds and friendship is told in a very self-centered way. It's all about you. You're the most important thing. You're the only one who can decide the fate of the world. You are worth putting the world at risk. You, you, you. It's in an extremely sharp contrast to the previous FE games, where rulers gave a shit about their country, even the generics with no names, rather than just the people immediately around them.

I have a hard time believing that characters like Chrom, Marx, Hinoka, and Kamui care about their people the way Elincia, Pelleas, Sanaki, or Marth do. I have a hard time believing that they learn to be better rulers the way Hector and Ephraim and Elincia and Marth do. Heck, Awakening outright praises Emmeryn as a saint for doing things that pre-character development Elincia and Eirika would do, and then avoiding any character development by committing suicide and being a martyr.

tl;dr What I'd really like to see in the next game is a central theme of princes and princesses becoming better rulers, rather than everyone fawning over the self-insert via some shitty theme of BONDS and FRIENDSHIP.

[NekoKnight]

I have a hard time believing that characters like Chrom, Marx, Hinoka, and Kamui care about their people the way Elincia, Pelleas, Sanaki, or Marth do. I have a hard time believing that they learn to be better rulers the way Hector and Ephraim and Elincia and Marth do. Heck, Awakening outright praises Emmeryn as a saint for doing things that pre-character development Elincia and Eirika would do, and then avoiding any character development by committing suicide and being a martyr.

I don't really get the Emmeryn hate. The story does a well enough job of explaining why she rules as she does. Her father's war with Plegia nearly ruined both countries and she had a lot of damage control to do. To add on to this, Plegia's king was a spiteful dickwad that was trying to goad Ylisse into another war so it was difficult for her to retain the peace. Finally, she only kills herself after it's made clear that Chrom won't be able to rescue her and that her death would be more meaningful if she chose it herself. You don't have to like the saint/martyr tropes but it doesn't make her a bad character.

[Sunwoo]

I don't really get the Emmeryn hate. The story does a well enough job of explaining why she rules as she does. Her father's war with Plegia nearly ruined both countries and she had a lot of damage control to do. To add on to this, Plegia's king was a spiteful dickwad that was trying to goad Ylisse into another war so it was difficult for her to retain the peace. Finally, she only kills herself after it's made clear that Chrom won't be able to rescue her and that her death would be more meaningful if she chose it herself. You don't have to like the saint/martyr tropes but it doesn't make her a bad character.

My problem with Emmeryn is less her and more the story's portrayal of her. I think she would've been amazing if she received the Pelleas treatment as a well-intentioned ruler who was just too soft and misguided to be in charge, but rather the game wants us to believe she did absolutely no wrong.

Elincia hired the Greil Mercenaries to take back Crimea and kick Ashnard out. She was born after her uncle was named heir to the throne, was raised in secret, and never supposed to actually be queen. We can understand why her pre-character development self was too idealistic and soft to put her foot down. The nobles conspiring against her are made out as assholes and opportunists, and if they ever had any valid points against Elincia it's overshadowed by their greed for power. Kind of like how Gangrel is made out to be an asshole who repeatedly goads Emmeryn despite her wanting nothing but peace.

And yet, the narrative doesn't treat Elincia as completely in the right. She realizes that as the queen she does have to harden herself and make difficult decisions. This is in sharp contrast to how Emmeryn is portrayed as being very similar to pre-character development Elincia, and yet it's suddenly a good thing? Emmeryn didn't even have to die in the first place. The only reason she was in that situation is because she refused to do what almost every other FE lord whose country was invaded has done in their games. When Awakening wants me to believe things that are in such contrast to previous FE games, and not necessary for the better, I can't understand what the deal is.

tl;dr I'm not saying Emmeryn is a bad character. I'm saying the narrative of the game that tries to have me believe that she was a good ruler who made wise decisions and her martyrdom was inevitable is stupid, especially when previous games have had no issue portraying rulers like her as being weak.

[blah the Prussian]

I definitely agree that the theme of growing up and accepting responsibilities as a ruler should make a return. I actually have the story for an FE game planned out in my head, but here's another thing I want to see: there's the cliche Evil Emperor and Gharnef Archetype, and the player assumes that the Gharnef will end up manipulating the evil Emperor. Instead, though, the Evil Emperor is strong enough to handle the power of whatever dark God the Gharnef worships. In effect, the Gharnef gets played for a fool.

It would be kind of like what happens with Bowser and Antasma in Mario and Luigi: Dream Team.

I'd also want the villain to be fighting for something. I've said this before, but the strongest part of Tellius's story is that Ashnard, while being pure evil, is fighting for an ideology. Make the main villain here fight for something; for example, that the world is running out of resources, and that the world's population needs reduction. Then he can just use the powers of the Dark God as a super weapon when the war begins to turn against him.

Edited July 14, 2016 by blah the Prussian

[Dinar87]

I definitely agree that the theme of growing up and accepting responsibilities as a ruler should make a return. I actually have the story for an FE game planned out in my head, but here's another thing I want to see: there's the cliche Evil Emperor and Gharnef Archetype, and the player assumes that the Gharnef will end up manipulating the evil Emperor. Instead, though, the Evil Emperor is strong enough to handle the power of whatever dark God the Gharnef worships. In effect, the Gharnef gets played for a fool.

It would be kind of like what happens with Bowser and Antasma in Mario and Luigi: Dream Team.

I'd also want the villain to be fighting for something. I've said this before, but the strongest part of Tellius's story is that Ashnard, while being pure evil, is fighting for an ideology. Make the main villain here fight for something; for example, that the world is running out of resources, and that the world's population needs reduction. Then he can just use the powers of the Dark God as a super weapon when the war begins to turn against him.

It'd be a good idea to finally have a fire emblem game where you don't defeat some dragon as the final boss. Maybe this is a bit of a stretch but I liked Ashera simply because you're fighting an actual god (I think) rather than some dragon who everyone(for some reason) deems as a god.

As for "growing up"...what sort of ideas do you have in mind? What about a protagonist who thinks there's 'good people' and 'bad people' in the world but, after being tricked by several 'good guys' finally realizes that all humans have both good and bad in them. Maybe he/she helps a revolution succeed but the person put in power (who was initially good) succumbs to greed and turns out of be an even worse ruler than before?

Edited July 14, 2016 by Dinar87

[blah the Prussian]

It'd be a good idea to finally have a fire emblem game where you don't defeat some dragon as the final boss. Maybe this is a bit of a stretch but I liked Ashera simply because you're fighting an actual god (I think) rather than some dragon who everyone(for some reason) deems as a god.

As for "growing up"...what sort of ideas do you have in mind? What about a protagonist who thinks there's 'good people' and 'bad people' in the world but, after being tricked by several 'good guys' finally realizes that all humans have both good and bad in them. Maybe he/she helps a revolution succeed but the person put in power (who was initially good) succumbs to greed and turns out of be an even worse ruler than before?

Yeah actually both of the Tellius games didn't have a dragon as the final boss. Huh. Niether did Sacred Stones.

I was thinking that growing up would be shown as more making hard decisions than realizing there's good and evil in the world. I don't want my protagonist to be naive, I want them to not be a good leader at the start of the story. I also want a protagonist where a big part of their character is their tactical genius. We haven't had a lord like that since Ephraim (I don't consider Robin a Lord) and Corrin is an outright moron. But yeah, I'll probably post the pitch soon.

[Dinar87]

Yeah actually both of the Tellius games didn't have a dragon as the final boss. Huh. Niether did Sacred Stones.

I was thinking that growing up would be shown as more making hard decisions than realizing there's good and evil in the world. I don't want my protagonist to be naive, I want them to not be a good leader at the start of the story. I also want a protagonist where a big part of their character is their tactical genius. We haven't had a lord like that since Ephraim (I don't consider Robin a Lord) and Corrin is an outright moron. But yeah, I'll probably post the pitch soon.

I was mainly referring to awakening and fates when I made that statement about too many dragons.

What sort of "hard decisions" would they make?

[blah the Prussian]

I was mainly referring to awakening and fates when I made that statement about too many dragons.

What sort of "hard decisions" would they make?

For example, not saving a contingent of their army because it would badly weaken the main army.

[NekoKnight]

Concerning what some of the other posters are saying about "growing the fuck up" as a theme, I don't think that should be the only theme. Don't get be wrong, getting one's shit together and maturing as a person is about as relatable as it gets, but considering how frequently it has been done in Fire Emblem, I think we could use some more philosophical themes as well.

My problem with Emmeryn is less her and more the story's portrayal of her. I think she would've been amazing if she received the Pelleas treatment as a well-intentioned ruler who was just too soft and misguided to be in charge, but rather the game wants us to believe she did absolutely no wrong.

Elincia hired the Greil Mercenaries to take back Crimea and kick Ashnard out. She was born after her uncle was named heir to the throne, was raised in secret, and never supposed to actually be queen. We can understand why her pre-character development self was too idealistic and soft to put her foot down. The nobles conspiring against her are made out as assholes and opportunists, and if they ever had any valid points against Elincia it's overshadowed by their greed for power. Kind of like how Gangrel is made out to be an asshole who repeatedly goads Emmeryn despite her wanting nothing but peace.

And yet, the narrative doesn't treat Elincia as completely in the right. She realizes that as the queen she does have to harden herself and make difficult decisions. This is in sharp contrast to how Emmeryn is portrayed as being very similar to pre-character development Elincia, and yet it's suddenly a good thing? Emmeryn didn't even have to die in the first place. The only reason she was in that situation is because she refused to do what almost every other FE lord whose country was invaded has done in their games. When Awakening wants me to believe things that are in such contrast to previous FE games, and not necessary for the better, I can't understand what the deal is.

I think the key difference here is that Elincia was a main character whereas Emmeryn was more of a supporting character/plot device. Elincia gets a full character arc (ie character focus) because she's a central driver of the plot. Who are the main characters of Awakening? Chrom, Robin and Lucina. Emmeryn serves her role as the saint/martyr and her death triggers some character development for Chrom. It's a bit role but it serves its purpose. Not everyone is going to be fleshed out or given critical attention.

Elincia and Emmeryn are in different positions, anyway. Elincia is a princess on the run so her dependency on others is a negative aspect that she needs to overcome. Emmeryn is in charge of a country, and preventing another full fledged war from breaking out IS something she can do (ie not give into Gangrel's provocations). There isn't really a winning move for Emmeryn. She can either be an ineffectual pacifist or she can invade Plegia AGAIN, and throw away all the progress she made towards restoring her country. For what it's worth, she was fighting Plegia/defending Yllise in a Cold War type situation, using Chrom as her proxy against Plegian "bandits".

Bolded: Think about what Micaiah did after kicking out the Begnion occupation forces. She immediately pushed for Daein to remain neutral in the coming war because she didn't want Daein to suffer destruction again. This is a similar situation to Emmeryn wanting to deescalate the Plegia/Yllise conflict (Emmeryn is captured in an attempt to parley with Gangrel). She can't do "what every other FE lord" did because that defeats her own purposes. Most FE games don't have the recent history of a devastating war to discourage further large scale conflicts.

tl;dr Emmeryn has different circumstances to other Fire Emblem characters (pre-character-development!Elincia, Pelleas) so her more favorable treatment by the story is appropriate.

[HF Makalov Fanboy Kai]

I definitely think we should have something focused on a romance of the three kingdoms era where trust and bonds are made and broken like one night stands, it'd be interesting to having to jump around and having to ally with your former enemy to attack your former ally, only for the reverse to happen later down the line.

heck that could also work for a "we gotta be like pokemon and sells several versions of the game"

[Moblin Major General]

I want to see a Fire Emblem game that explores corruption in the enemy ranks and "Sins of the Father" in the protagonist's country of origin. "Evil Empire" is actually held in high regard and moral standing, until a seemingly innocent nation is attacked. It is then that the protagonist rises up against his occupiers in a mix of opportunism/calling out hypocrisy. In this, the Camus has his own route to muckrake inside of the Empire when he finds out the invasion was economically motivated. Once the conspirators are sniffed out, the Camus addresses the rebellion, giving the choice to fight him (this gives the player 2 powerful secret bosses, one being the Camus, the other being on par with if not more powerful than most final bosses), or to end the game with a peace treaty (a la Paris,1783). The Camus is shown to be fighting for something good underscored by corruption, and when you do fight him, it's because it's your choice. The caveat with the last two fights is that if you lose, it defaults to the "bad" ending, and that any character that is defeated isn't considered dead or retired in the game's endings after the last required chapter.

[Sunwoo]

tl;dr Emmeryn has different circumstances to other Fire Emblem characters (pre-character-development!Elincia, Pelleas) so her more favorable treatment by the story is appropriate.

That's fine if you think that way, but I still have to disagree. Regardless of the circumstances, she still comes off as weak ruler who, unlike other weak rulers in past games, is praised by the narrative as being too pure for this world not because she's actually special but because of Awakening's narrative had protagonist-centered morality.

[Jedi]

We need a central theme that doesn't get mired by the games own mechanics, or way people act towards each other.