Fire Emblem: High or Low Fantasy?

[False Prophet]

As the title said, what is your opinion on the matter of whether Fire Emblem can be categorized as a High or Low Fantasy series?

I came up with this question after seeing the FE: Heroes trailer and Kozaki's artwork (anyone here thinks that he has an unhealthy love for loops?). In my personal opinion, the Fire Emblem games have been moving back and forth between High and Low Fantasy. The first three games follow closely to the general description of a High Fantasy work. Genealogy takes some inspiration from Welsh mythologies, which itself can be categorized as Low Fantasy; however, Genealogy and its follow-up Tharcia can still be called as High Fantasy, as well as 6 to 8. Path of Radiant and Radiant Dawn, and then from 11 to 13 follow the same pattern, with the two Tellius games adding elements of Low Fantasy, and the games after them returned to High Fantasy.

[Integrity]

fire emblem is pure strain classic high fantasy and really doesn't do exceptionally much to differentiate itself from i

 

EDIT: i should probably elaborate a little

the core definition of 'low fantasy' is that the world is either deeply relatable to our own with optional really toned-down fantastic elements, or is presented as a world like our own where the fantastic elements are deeply unnatural. neither of those things apply to any of the fire emblem games.

another definition i've heard and kind of like is that high/low fantasy is split by just idealism/realism in general, i.e. something like game of thrones is less optimistic and more low fantasy, while something like the belgariad is more optimistic and (well, textbook, in this case) high fantasy. fire emblem's games are pretty much all a good vs. evil struggle, even the ones that pretend to be muddier, and would be 100% in high fantasy in all cases.

i can't think of a definition of low fantasy that any single fire emblem fits at more than a glance, let alone a significant part of the series.

Edited January 19, 2017 by Integrity

[ping]

The definitions of high/low fantasy that I'm familiar with are 1) how accessable supernatural powers are for the average inhabitant and 2) how grand the plot is on a scale between 'personal struggle' and 'world-consuming desaster'. And I'm with Integrity in that FE is very clearly on the High Fantasy side of things in both categories.

@1: I'm pretty sure that mages and clerics/priests with magical healing powers are presented as absolutely mundane in every game in the series. It even looks like everyone in FE has at least some elementary magic power. I'm thinking of Roy here because while Cecilia states that he doesn't have a knack for magic, she also implies that he would still be able to learn magic - just not as good as Lilina. And the game often doesn't even bother to explore where and how magic users learned their arts. There's also the Magic stat that most most units in most (non-GBA) games have a non-zero number in, but since that's just gameplay, I won't take it as an actual indicator.

@2: FE is almost always about saving the world from some kind of global desaster. Maybe Thracia776 might be an exception (haven't played it, so it's just what I've read about the plot), but other than that, we tend to have dragons/evil cults/demon kings threatening to take over and/or destroy the entire continent or even world. So yeah, High Fantasy all the way.

[Jotari]

A thing to consider however is that a lot of the standard magical elements are in the story purely for the sake of gameplay. If Genealogy of the Holy War was a series of books instead of a game then there'd be no need to have tomes, staves, pegasi or draco knights in the story at all. It'd be a political intrigue story with the only magical elements being the Holy Weapons. Nothing else is actually critical. Unlike say the Archanea/Elibe games where the existence of dragons and their relationship with humans is a critical element of the story.

Edited January 19, 2017 by Jotari

[Specta]

Whether they were implemented primarily for gameplay purposes or not, they are still present within the world and the story and so contribute to whether the stories are low or high. Elements don't have to be critical to be accounted for.

I am also not sure how it would be low fantasy.

[CappnRob]

Low Fantasy can still have big sweeping grand storylines, they just tend not to be. The concrete deciding factor between them is the prevalence and ease of access of the supernatural, and yes, Fire Emblem tends for magic to be a fairly mundane and easily accessible thing, so its pretty high fantasy. A few games are more personal than others (namely 5 and 7) instead of big huge wars, but the setting and mood is still the same. 

It helps to remember that high fantasy doesn't disqualify darker themes or grimmer stories, mind - we have Thracia and Genealogy to more than confirm that. It helps to not get caught up in the corny "Game of Thrones-esque" descriptor people like to throw around when describing low fantasy. Yes, GoT is lowish fantasy, but its not low because its grim and grimy and full of murder, its low because the setting is relatively mundane and what few supernatural happenings are abound are treated as strange and unnatural. Warhammer Fantasy is pretty violent and grimdark too, but its high fantasy out the yazoo due to how prevalent and ubiquitous supernatural things are in it.

If you want a great low fantasy strategy game, I suggest checking out Banner Saga. It meets the technical requirements without all the grimdark hangup of GoT copycats.

MOD EDIT merging posts:

33 minutes ago, Jotari said:

A thing to consider however is that a lot of the standard magical elements are in the story purely for the sake of gameplay. If Genealogy of the Holy War was a series of books instead of a game then there'd be no need to have tomes, staves, pegasi or draco knights in the story at all. It'd be a political intrigue story with the only magical elements being the Holy Weapons. Nothing else is actually critical. Unlike say the Archanea/Elibe games where the existence of dragons and their relationship with humans is a critical element of the story.

I dunno mate, dragon knights at least are petty damn important to a crucial plot point in Genealogy's storyline :V

Edited January 19, 2017 by Specta

[Jotari]

27 minutes ago, Specta said:

Whether they were implemented primarily for gameplay purposes or not, they are still present within the world and the story and so contribute to whether the stories are low or high. Elements don't have to be critical to be accounted for.

I am also not sure how it would be low fantasy.

See it's for reasons like that I don't like to even categorize things into genre's in the first place. It's a focus on the aesthetic of things more so than the plotting or theming. Which leads people to judge large swaths of media as inherently good or bad based something that is largely pointless. It's still the same story whether you're using cavalry or space ships.

19 minutes ago, CappnRob said:

Low Fantasy can still have big sweeping grand storylines, they just tend not to be. The concrete deciding factor between them is the prevalence and ease of access of the supernatural, and yes, Fire Emblem tends for magic to be a fairly mundane and easily accessible thing, so its pretty high fantasy. A few games are more personal than others (namely 5 and 7) instead of big huge wars, but the setting and mood is still the same. 

It helps to remember that high fantasy doesn't disqualify darker themes or grimmer stories, mind - we have Thracia and Genealogy to more than confirm that. It helps to not get caught up in the corny "Game of Thrones-esque" descriptor people like to throw around when describing low fantasy. Yes, GoT is lowish fantasy, but its not low because its grim and grimy and full of murder, its low because the setting is relatively mundane and what few supernatural happenings are abound are treated as strange and unnatural. Warhammer Fantasy is pretty violent and grimdark too, but its high fantasy out the yazoo due to how prevalent and ubiquitous supernatural things are in it.

If you want a great low fantasy strategy game, I suggest checking out Banner Saga. It meets the technical requirements without all the grimdark hangup of GoT copycats.

MOD EDIT merging posts:

I dunno mate, dragon knights at least are petty damn important to a crucial plot point in Genealogy's storyline :V

I don't believe I've seen that artwork before. Pretty sweet. Regardless though the point is that Quan was ambushed and killed, how or where is a surprisingly irrelvant factor for the narrative in an absolute sense.

[CappnRob]

Given it was Trabant who killed Cuan and Trabant is the king of Thracia and Thracia is known for its dragon knights and the fact they were dragon knights is what gave Trabant's forces the advantage to kill Cuan and Ethyln to begin with, it seems like it'd be a huuuuge oversight to just write it off as an "ambush". Unless you were boiling Genealogy down to the barest bones of its narrative you can't really count that out, and if you were doing that it may as well not even be Genealogy's story anymore. The fantastical elements are what give Fire Emblem it's flair, and Genealogy's flair is this half-political machination story of nations plotting against a fantastical backdrop, and half over-throw-the-evil-empire-ruled-by-literal-dragon-satan.

[Specta]

14 minutes ago, Jotari said:

See it's for reasons like that I don't like to even categorize things into genre's in the first place. It's a focus on the aesthetic of things more so than the plotting or theming. Which leads people to judge large swaths of media as inherently good or bad based something that is largely pointless. It's still the same story whether you're using cavalry or space ships.

I don't see what that has to do with it? The argument for how people judge different genres seems to be another fish to fry entirely. Even so, genre is not just aesthetic. Many genre are more primarily defined by the specific focus of the plot (such as romance) or the general themes and atmospheres (such as gothic) or other elements.

Similarly, the setting shouldn't be dismissed as just being aesthetic, unless you're really reducing stories down to core themes only, but that seems dismissive of a story as a whole.

Edited January 19, 2017 by Specta

[Parrhesia]

Magic is everywhere and taken for granted, and there's never real questions asked about the player's ethics, with a strong defined evil usually in place to be overcome (Conquest might be different in that specific regard). It's high fantasy.

[vanguard333]

I think that Fire Emblem has always had elements of both high and low fantasy, leaning more towards high fantasy but still in the middle. Magic is accessible and there are manaketes and laguz, but, for the most part things in human kingdoms make sense and the struggle is usually kingdom attacks kingdom (more like low fantasy) but then, out of that conflict, the potentially world-ending threat emerges (high fantasy).

[NekoKnight]

6 hours ago, CappnRob said:

It helps to remember that high fantasy doesn't disqualify darker themes or grimmer stories, mind - we have Thracia and Genealogy to more than confirm that. It helps to not get caught up in the corny "Game of Thrones-esque" descriptor people like to throw around when describing low fantasy. Yes, GoT is lowish fantasy, but its not low because its grim and grimy and full of murder, its low because the setting is relatively mundane and what few supernatural happenings are abound are treated as strange and unnatural. Warhammer Fantasy is pretty violent and grimdark too, but its high fantasy out the yazoo due to how prevalent and ubiquitous supernatural things are in it.

I've never heard people say GoT is low fantasy because it's dark fantasy, only that human conflict is the central focus of the story.