Fire Emblem Three Houses

[MyBoyHector]

36 minutes ago, nyainou said:

The only thing that needs to stay in a Fire Emblem game is strategy. That's it.

Which is why I also hope they remove the mass change classing that was fates and go back to the more olden style of Fire Emblem, where you had a set number of classes and skills at your disposal and have to make do, compared to fates which was farm skills, have 12 people with all the uber skills and face palm roll into the enemy.

Quote

Unisex classes, diversified casts, multiple same-sex supports, battle arts, troops, etc. 

1. They have plenty of Unisex classes, however not every class has to be, have the odd class be unique actually helps diverse a cast
2. Multiple same-sex supports, I agree with but lets face it, for Game Creators the subject is always very "Touchy" subject because in the end, they have to cater to an audience, an audience that will never have the same views, sadly. As such its impossible to please everyone, because such a thing is literally impossible to do, unless we all become hive minded together.

3. Which is why they adding formations is going to make this interesting, as I assume it will work like a stance, where it will have an advantage and a negative... (Eg, more damage, but take more damage, take less damage, but deal less, etc)

Edited June 30, 2018 by MyBoyHector

[jake72002]

The real reason why Pegasi favor females as riders..... 

Edited June 30, 2018 by jake72002
Grammar

[Etrurian emperor]

On 29-6-2018 at 6:24 AM, Sunsurge said:

I'm sorry, a game IS worse without diversity. That's exactly why we have people wanting these things. The "social agenda" is to correct a WRONG. A wrong where fantasy is just all white people, and elves and magic can exist but "omg a black character makes no sense" or "a male on a winged horse that I've gendered as feminine is wrong!"It doesn't make sense.

I never found that a very convincing argument. Despite not being real magic, elves and dragons are all staples of the typical medieval European setting. Black characters are not. Using established staples to justify the inclusion of things that lots of people find out of place is a weird leap of logic to me, and its not going to convince a lot of people. 

The inclusion of colored people on historical or historically inspired settings all depends on how its done and why. The people who bizarrely enough expected that Kingdom Come would depict a multi cultural medieval Bohemia that never existed were just acting like bafoons about it. On the other end of the spectrum people who might hypothetically complain about black characters running around in a historical trading hub like Alexandria would be equally silly. 

When it comes to Fantasy settings there is already a pretty good template to use. Games like Skyrim or Dragon age have clearly established regions where people of color live. If black Redguards are found in nordic Skyrim or if the Black Rivanians are found in British Ferelden then its usually stated or implied that this is because they migrated there. This is a much better and more realistic way than just pretending that medieval European-ish societies just naturally have a very diverse array of people in their borders. 
The Witcher on the other hand is incredibly devoted to portraying the Slavic people who have an abysmal amount of representation in video games. As such I found the people complaining the game's diversity rather offensive. They already went above and beyond to depict marginalized people so the criticism was self defeating and undeserved. 

Fire emblem is slowly but surely showing more diversity too. Two of Awakenings more prominent characters where Black, Fates had the colored Niles and the male pegasus rider Subaki and Echoes might have had black people in Boey and Gray.

I wasn't really a fan of Subaki as the first male Pegasus rider. He looked too much like a normal guy for it. It would have been much more fun if they used the Lucius archtype and have a character so feminine that even the Pegasus which only allow females to ride them get confused and think its a chick. Then in his ending its said that this male pegasus rider went down in history as the genius who managed to breed Pegasus that accepted males. This would give a proper explanation for the change and give a canon explanation why Pegasus would suddenly allow men to ride them. 

Edited June 30, 2018 by Etrurian emperor

[MyBoyHector]

1 hour ago, jake72002 said:

The real reason why Pegasi favor females as riders..... 

You cant deny this.....

[Tryhard]

48 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I never found that a very convincing argument. Despite not being real magic, elves and dragons are all staples of the typical medieval European setting. Black characters are not. Using established staples to justify the inclusion of things that lots of people find out of place is a weird leap of logic to me, and its not going to convince a lot of people. 

The inclusion of colored people on historical or historically inspired settings all depends on how its done and why. The people who bizarrely enough expected that Kingdom Come would depict a multi cultural medieval Bohemia that never existed were just acting like bafoons about it. On the other end of the spectrum people who might hypothetically complain about black characters running around in a historical trading hub like Alexandria would be equally silly. 

I don't find the former argument very convincing either. You are throwing around magic in FE lest we forget. And I don't really find fantasy races particularly suited to an era considering there are things like elves and trolls present in future settings like Shadowrun. If we're going to go into believing Fire Emblem being a medieval european setting and that somehow historical accuracy is important, then you should be wanting the persecution of homosexuals to be a theme as was in medieval ages.

But this is why historical accuracy has always been on the backburner as a priority. I actually don't find games that strictly devote themselves to historical accuracy interesting. As someone who plays and enjoys the Total War series for example, they always took "creative liberties" with it.

On 6/29/2018 at 5:24 AM, Sunsurge said:

I'm sorry, a game IS worse without diversity. That's exactly why we have people wanting these things. The "social agenda" is to correct a WRONG. A wrong where fantasy is just all white people, and elves and magic can exist but "omg a black character makes no sense" or "a male on a winged horse that I've gendered as feminine is wrong!"It doesn't make sense.

Pushing for diversity, even in its most simplistic form of having males ride pegasi (which hello, Hercules), is not wrong and won't ruin a game. What ruins a game is confirming to sexist "traditions" for the sake of keeping the status quo. A game with nothing but white, straight characters IS a worse game, by simple factor of it doesn't represent the world and diversity around it. So no, it IS fixing what's broken. 

I don't really mind either way but I will say that Japanese developers mostly are not concerned with this. While there may be some inching towards this, they mostly do not care about a social agenda. It's not because of conscious tradition per se but because of omission.

Edited June 30, 2018 by Edgelord

[jake72002]

Further proof that FE steeds have sexual preferences..... 

[Pegasus Knight]

5 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

 

I wasn't really a fan of Subaki as the first male Pegasus rider. He looked too much like a normal guy for it. It would have been much more fun if they used the Lucius archtype and have a character so feminine that even the Pegasus which only allow females to ride them get confused and think its a chick. Then in his ending its said that this male pegasus rider went down in history as the genius who managed to breed Pegasus that accepted males. This would give a proper explanation for the change and give a canon explanation why Pegasus would suddenly allow men to ride them. 

NO JUST NO!

 

Edited June 30, 2018 by Pegasus Knight

[Sunsurge]

On 6/30/2018 at 7:38 AM, Etrurian emperor said:

I never found that a very convincing argument. Despite not being real magic, elves and dragons are all staples of the typical medieval European setting. Black characters are not. Using established staples to justify the inclusion of things that lots of people find out of place is a weird leap of logic to me, and its not going to convince a lot of people. 

The inclusion of colored people on historical or historically inspired settings all depends on how its done and why. The people who bizarrely enough expected that Kingdom Come would depict a multi cultural medieval Bohemia that never existed were just acting like bafoons about it. On the other end of the spectrum people who might hypothetically complain about black characters running around in a historical trading hub like Alexandria would be equally silly. 

When it comes to Fantasy settings there is already a pretty good template to use. Games like Skyrim or Dragon age have clearly established regions where people of color live. If black Redguards are found in nordic Skyrim or if the Black Rivanians are found in British Ferelden then its usually stated or implied that this is because they migrated there. This is a much better and more realistic way than just pretending that medieval European-ish societies just naturally have a very diverse array of people in their borders. 
The Witcher on the other hand is incredibly devoted to portraying the Slavic people who have an abysmal amount of representation in video games. As such I found the people complaining the game's diversity rather offensive. They already went above and beyond to depict marginalized people so the criticism was self defeating and undeserved. 

Fire emblem is slowly but surely showing more diversity too. Two of Awakenings more prominent characters where Black, Fates had the colored Niles and the male pegasus rider Subaki and Echoes might have had black people in Boey and Gray.

I wasn't really a fan of Subaki as the first male Pegasus rider. He looked too much like a normal guy for it. It would have been much more fun if they used the Lucius archtype and have a character so feminine that even the Pegasus which only allow females to ride them get confused and think its a chick. Then in his ending its said that this male pegasus rider went down in history as the genius who managed to breed Pegasus that accepted males. This would give a proper explanation for the change and give a canon explanation why Pegasus would suddenly allow men to ride them. 

Wow. That is the most casually ignorant sentence I have read in a while. So ... things that LITERALLY don't exist (elves and dragon) are staples of a traditionally exclusive (and sorry to use the word—racist) genre, and therefore because fantasy has always been exclusionary it's okay to CONTINUE doing it? Established staples come from a time when diversity didn't exist in fantasy because it was dominated by (surprise) white men. So no, don't start telling me that dragons are a classic staple but the inclusion of ANY people of color can't be included because they're not a "staple". Try again

In these fantasy worlds, literally anything can happen. Time travel. Space travel. Anything, except diversity. The blatant erasure of people of color (not a focus on black, because there are so MANY minorities)  in these genres masquerades under the false and racist guise of “historical accuracy.” Fantasy and sci-fi often draw inspiration from ancient Celtic, Norse, Greek and medieval European culture. Therefore, disgruntled white people try to use this to perpetuate the white nonsense that people of color should not exist in these universes.

People like you would complain about Idris Elba in Thor because it's based on Norse mythology, so Heimdall can’t be "black." Your imagination can stretch for alien attacks, a man with a magic hammer and interdimensional travel, yet could not possibly encompass a black man or hispanic women playing a make-believe character in a fantasy WORLD. 

Writing white people into fantasy is no challenge because "historical accuracy". Whiteness in fantasy or sci-fi or games just "is". But you know. WE (minorities) have to BEG for a case to exist in fantasy. People call it "social" reasons that we ask to simply be included or exist in something that's a literal made-up world.

That's insulting (and surprise, actually racist).

So to recap, most historical settings ARE not intended to be historical (I.E. dragons, elves, magic and trolls). It's an aesthetic thing. Medieval European settings are rarely historically accurate, so much as they draw from the aesthetics of swords, armies, kingdoms and general design of homes. We look to the past to create these fantastical worlds, but let's be honest for a second. They DON'T take place on Earth. Fire Emblem doesn't take place on a "lost continent" of the Earth. It doesn't take place anywhere because it's a made up, fantasy world, which can have ANY rules it wants. So sorry, but your argument is so clearly and painfully exclusionary based on someone who doesn't want the status quo to change.

If we're talking about classic historical fiction (with added minimal  fantasy elements), then SURE, adding diversity for the sake of diversity isn't correct. Because it's trying to show a specific time and place. But most fantasy isn't like that. Have you ever even written a fantasy novel? Or seen why there's a huge push towards diversity? Because when I write a fantasy novel, I draw from an aesthetic of a place. I look at the history. The information. The design. But the world I create is just that. A brand new world. With new customs, new religions. Hell, my worlds have dragons and magic in them, so why am I going to be limited by what old, white people who originally created fantasy did? Why would I ever be limited to creating a non-diverse world simply because it's a "staple" of the Genre? 

So no. Your argument is actual trash. And not your fault that it's trash, it's just typical racial superiority that's been propagated to make sure diversity can't exist. To make sure that when people ask it's easy to say, "No, you're kind aren't a staple of fantasy. Dragons are. But YOU, with the dark skin? No. You can't be part of this." It's to make sure when we ask to be included it's okay to calm us down by saying, "Japanese people aren't considered with social issues, so it's okay". So educate yourself on the casual racism of fantasy. It might help. Honestly.

[Etrurian emperor]

1 hour ago, Sunsurge said:

Wow. That is the most casually ignorant sentence I have read in a while. So ... things that LITERALLY don't exist (elves and dragon) are staples of a traditionally exclusive (and sorry to use the word—racist) genre, and therefore because fantasy has always been exclusionary it's okay to CONTINUE doing it? Established staples come from a time when diversity didn't exist in fantasy because it was dominated by (surprise) white men. So no, don't start telling me that dragons are a classic staple but the inclusion of ANY people of color can't be included because they're not a "staple". Try again

In these fantasy worlds, literally anything can happen. Time travel. Space travel. Anything, except diversity. The blatant erasure of people of color (not a focus on black, because there are so MANY minorities)  in these genres masquerades under the false and racist guise of “historical accuracy.” Fantasy and sci-fi often draw inspiration from ancient Celtic, Norse, Greek and medieval European culture. Therefore, disgruntled white people try to use this to perpetuate the white nonsense that people of color should not exist in these universes.

People like you would complain about Idris Elba in Thor because it's based on Norse mythology, so Heimdall can’t be "black." Your imagination can stretch for alien attacks, a man with a magic hammer and interdimensional travel, yet could not possibly encompass a black man or hispanic women playing a make-believe character in a fantasy WORLD. 

Writing white people into fantasy is no challenge because "historical accuracy". Whiteness in fantasy or sci-fi or games just "is". But you know. WE (minorities) have to BEG for a case to exist in fantasy. People call it "social" reasons that we ask to simply be included or exist in something that's a literal made-up world.

That's insulting (and surprise, actually racist).

So to recap, most historical settings ARE not intended to be historical (I.E. dragons, elves, magic and trolls). It's an aesthetic thing. Medieval European settings are rarely historically accurate, so much as they draw from the aesthetics of swords, armies, kingdoms and general design of homes. We look to the past to create these fantastical worlds, but let's be honest for a second. They DON'T take place on Earth. Fire Emblem doesn't take place on a "lost continent" of the Earth. It doesn't take place anywhere because it's a made up, fantasy world, which can have ANY rules it wants. So sorry, but your argument is so clearly and painfully exclusionary based on someone who doesn't want the status quo to change.

If we're talking about classic historical fiction (with added minimal  fantasy elements), then SURE, adding diversity for the sake of diversity isn't correct. Because it's trying to show a specific time and place. But most fantasy isn't like that. Have you ever even written a fantasy novel? Or seen why there's a huge push towards diversity? Because when I write a fantasy novel, I draw from an aesthetic of a place. I look at the history. The information. The design. But the world I create is just that. A brand new world. With new customs, new religions. Hell, my worlds have dragons and magic in them, so why am I going to be limited by what old, white people who originally created fantasy did? Why would I ever be limited to creating a non-diverse world simply because it's a "staple" of the Genre? 

So no. Your argument is actual trash. And not your fault that it's trash, it's just typical racial superiority that's been propagated to make sure diversity can't exist. To make sure that when people ask it's easy to say, "No, you're kind aren't a staple of fantasy. Dragons are. But YOU, with the dark skin? No. You can't be part of this." It's to make sure when we ask to be included it's okay to calm us down by saying, "Japanese people aren't considered with social issues, so it's okay". So educate yourself on the casual racism of fantasy. It might help. Honestly.

Well those certainly are some assumptions. I don't know where you reached the conclusion that I meant to say that  ''that dragons are a classic staple but the inclusion of ANY people of color can't be included because they're not a "staple" when I added several instances where the inclusion of colored people were done pretty well. The point I was making about Hammerfall and Rivain was clearly going in the direction that you just had to incorporate it in the lore rather than make it rest on a faulty assumption that the audience is just going to suspense their disbelief.

Have you considered that its the argument itself and not the inclusion of  colored people I have a problem with? Because I stand by that. If someone is absolutely firm on the belief that a black shopkeeper running around in a fantasy medieval village is out of place then pointing at a DRAGON, a being who's presence in that setting is almost universal then its not going to change that persons mind. Why would it? You might think its a clever argument but to lots of people its going to fall flat. 

You mentioned that diversity didn't exist in old work of Fantasy which is true. Lets take lord of the Rings as an example. Its a very white setting, not unusual because its author lived in a colonial age. Now lets imagine that the next Shadow of Mordor sequel opts to go with a black main character. Just making it a black Gondorian and insisting the audience to suspense their disbelief is something guaranteed not to go over very well. So why not create a Black main character and point any nay sayer to the lore which says Black people DO exist in middle earth. The southern country of Haradrin and the lands beyond are supposed to be inhabited by people inspired by Africans. Let the new black main character hail from Haradrin and fight to free his people from Sauron. BAM! You got your black main character, fully integrated in the lore, reinforcing the lore by showing a society we've seen little of  and with no controversy attached to it. Isn't that so much more sensible then just saying black Gondorians have always existed and tell everyone who disagrees to shut up because Dragons already exist?

Going ''but dragons already exist!'' is an argument of weakness and infinitely less interesting then the alternative. You said it yourself, anything can happen in Fantasy. So why NOT show thriving nations based on African societies like the Mali empire, the never colonized Ethiopians or the Zulu? Have those countries stand as equals to the usual expies of France and England, have these nations be the origins of colored people rather than insisting the fantasy expy of England is just amazingly diverse out of itself. Its not even particularly hard to come up with interesting places and scenarios that could gracefully incorporate colored people in Fantasy so why would you want less interesting scenarios that are going to convince a lot less people? A black gondorian or rohiram is just asking for LOTR fans to throw tantrums. A Haradrin main character is probably going to get praised by that exact same people for furthering the lore. Telling us about Hammerfall and the Redguards is so much more interesting than insisting some Nords are just naturally black.

I would be more careful with accusations of racism and ignorance. A fellow not so mellow as myself might easily take offense and then things could turn ugly. Likewise, the person you might deem racist might in fact merely be advocating for better reasoning and more interesting scenarios.

Edited July 1, 2018 by Etrurian emperor

[NekoKnight]

8 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Just making it a black Gondorian and insisting the audience to suspense their disbelief is something guaranteed not to go over very well. So why not create a Black main character and point any nay sayer to the lore which says Black people DO exist in middle earth. The southern country of Haradrin and the lands beyond are supposed to be inhabited by people inspired by Africans. Let the new black main character hail from Haradrin and fight to free his people from Sauron. BAM! You got your black main character, fully integrated in the lore, reinforcing the lore by showing a society we've seen little of  and with no controversy attached to it. Isn't that so much more sensible then just saying black Gondorians have always existed and tell everyone who disagrees to shut up because Dragons already exist?

The whole post is well spoken but I'll just quote this part. Honestly, this is something that mildly bothered me about Radiant Dawn and Awakening's black characters. They existed but...where did they come from? There were perhaps two characters from each game who had this darker skin unlike any other character in the game. It's not an issue of wanting to see more or less diversity, it's establishing that people didn't just fall from the sky into this "fantasy European" setting (even Plegia is a bit suspect when it comes to who looks ethnically distinct, but at least they have several characters from there).

You mention Lord of the Rings, and I'll add A Song of Ice and Fire to the discussion. Many of the events in that world take place in "fantasy Europe" but there are other nations and peoples who are not white, who are encountered by various characters. It would be very strange for a black Summer Islander to find himself hanging out with the Wildlings (probably inspired by the Picts) beyond the Wall, but very reasonable to find them in trading ports or in areas closer to their homeland. The point is these people came from somewhere, and it's effectively established in the lore. A story isn't stronger for simply being diverse, it's strong for having solid world-building.

 

 

Edited July 2, 2018 by NekoKnight

[Pegasus Knight]

I am sorry but do u really want an an explanation as to how a black dude appeared in a world like FE ?

well there are some black people in the continent but since they are few u didnt see many of them in the story before... what more of an explanation u need... lets say they are rare or at least were rare...

 

I get the point of world building... but if a story doenst have that is it so bizarre to have some black characters? without mentioning where they came from? (and FE doesntt have a concrete and complete world building, especially ih u take into account all the different timelines and universes)

 

Do we also need a reason on how gay people suddenly appeared in  the FE continent ....?

 

I am sorry but some posts here are kind problematic... the posters might not be racist or homophobes but their posts comes as such...

 

 

Edited July 1, 2018 by Pegasus Knight

[ElectiveToast]

3 hours ago, Pegasus Knight said:

I am sorry but do u really want an an explanation as to how a black dude appeared in a world like FE ?

well there are some black people in the continent but since they are few u didnt see many of them in the story before... what more of an explanation u need... lets say they are rare or at least were rare...

 

I get the point of world building... but if a story doenst have that is it so bizarre to have some black characters? without mentioning where they came from? (and FE doesntt have a concrete and complete world building, especially ih u take into account all the different timelines and universes)

 

Do we also need a reason on how gay people suddenly appeared in  the FE continent ....?

 

I am sorry but some posts here are kind problematic... the posters might not be racist or homophobes but their posts comes as such...

 

 

The story will appear to have world building as judging from the lore explanations in the trailer. I’m fine with a Black character in the game as long as Lancester is known for having a large amount of Ebonic citizens. Otherwise, a Black dude being the King of an otherwise all-White kingdom would just look weird and out of place. A kingdom based in Moorish-Hispanic culture would be nice actually. 

 

However, what peaks my curiosity more is why is a dude with a Russian name the leader of a Kingdom based in Scottish-Celtic culture. 

[nyainou]

I find it very strange that there are people who feel like there needs to be a justification for the existence of PoC and LGBT people in any given fantasy setting. I think I understand where everybody's coming from, but I'm not sure. So please, correct me if I've misunderstood. 

I just can't imagine getting so fussed up this particular part of worldbuilding. As others have stated, you can do anything in fantasy. Does it really ruin your suspension of disbelief so much to see a PoC/LGBT character in a place they "shouldn't" be? I think there are way more important parts of worldbuilding to be focused on. The socio-economic situation of a country, their religious system if any, how their government works, the class divide, etc. Hell, even their cuisine and arts feel infinitely more 1) important and 2) interesting than ""justifying"" the existence of "minorities". 

The fantasy genre should adapt to match the times. Maybe we should stop basing everything off of Celtic, Norse, Greek and medieval European culture. If not for their "lack" of diversity, but also for the fact that they're so fucking overdone I didn't even bother reading any of the new Lords' full names because its just boring stuff I've heard before. Yawn. The fact that I may be able to let my eyes glaze over and still be able to fill in the blanks in 3H's worldbuilding makes me feel very bored. Fantasy writers need new material. 

The new God of War (which I know is a pre-existing franchise) was really good, but I didn't pay fuck-all attention to any of the worldbuilding because I knew it already since its all been used before. Maybe that's good for something more character-driven, I suppose. But in the contexts of an actual war, which 3H is setting itself up to be, I think I'd like to know more about the state of the countries, with those countries being fresh materials. There's 0 reason to pay attention to something I've already seen so much of, so why not draw inspiration from something different for once?

[thecrimsonflash]

4 hours ago, NekoKnight said:

The whole post is well spoken but I'll just quote this part. Honestly, this is something that mildly bothered me about Radiant Dawn and Awakening's black characters. They existed but...where did they come from? There were perhaps two characters from each game who had this darker skin unlike any other characters in the game. It's not an issue of wanting to see more or less diversity, it's establishing that people didn't just fall from the sky into this "fantasy European" setting (even Plegia is a bit suspect when it comes to who looks ethically distinct, but at least they have several characters from there).

You mention Lord of the Rings, and I'll add A Song of Ice and Fire to the discussion. Many of the events in that world take place in "fantasy Europe" but there are other nations and peoples who are not white, who are encountered by various characters. It would be very strange for a black Summer Islander to find himself hanging out with the Wildlings (probably inspired by the Picts) beyond the Wall, but very reasonable to find them in trading ports or in areas closer to their homeland. The point is these people came from somewhere, and it's effectively established in the lore. A story isn't stronger for simply being diverse, it's strong for having solid world-building.

This does bring up a good point and can be pushed into fire emblem's general usage of not just characters who have different skin colors, but this also brings in the generally poor usage of characters who are different in general to the bulk of the cast, Manaketes, Taguels, Wolfskin, and Kitsune, all feel kind of poorly integrated into the world and almost seem to exist in a vacuum, Manaketes to a lesser degree but their presence is still somewhat easy to ignore in their games, Taguel are panned for barely existing in awakening, and both kitsune and wolfskin both have no real impact in their games. The problem I think, is us never seeing them in the world, a single chapter which features them in a less violent environment (not a battlefield) would help us see them as something more believable, I don't think they need to be forced into every scene of the game (lets not throw a random manakete in the background where they are out of place), but to show a more peaceful side of them could do much more for helping us feel them truly integrated into the world than just making one playable and throwing a few into the background.

In contrast, the Laguz are very well integrated into the tellius games, this is because they are well established both in lands in which they live and how their societies work, laguz exist and have real stakes in the world, I don't even think one would need to make a whole country of manaketes or beast of the week to have them feel real, just having a small village would be enough to give us the idea.

I personally think that creating countries of origin for characters who are ethnically different from the main characters would be a good course of action for helping them not feel strange or out of place or forced, if we are going for a medieval context, most people lived their entire lives either as nomads walking in the same circle til they drop dead or they lived in the same village their entire lives, only the merchant and noble classes would be capable of traveling and even then doing so was far more dangerous than would be worth any experiences, you would only travel when necessary, So given that, places of origin would help and would make the lore way better.

[Pegasus Knight]

15 minutes ago, nyainou said:

I find it very strange that there are people who feel like there needs to be a justification for the existence of PoC and LGBT people in any given fantasy setting. I think I understand where everybody's coming from, but I'm not sure. So please, correct me if I've misunderstood. 

I just can't imagine getting so fussed up this particular part of worldbuilding. As others have stated, you can do anything in fantasy. Does it really ruin your suspension of disbelief so much to see a PoC/LGBT character in a place they "shouldn't" be? I think there are way more important parts of worldbuilding to be focused on. The socio-economic situation of a country, their religious system if any, how their government works, the class divide, etc. Hell, even their cuisine and arts feel infinitely more 1) important and 2) interesting than ""justifying"" the existence of "minorities". 

The fantasy genre should adapt to match the times. Maybe we should stop basing everything off of Celtic, Norse, Greek and medieval European culture. If not for their "lack" of diversity, but also for the fact that they're so fucking overdone I didn't even bother reading any of the new Lords' full names because its just boring stuff I've heard before. Yawn. The fact that I may be able to let my eyes glaze over and still be able to fill in the blanks in 3H's worldbuilding makes me feel very bored. Fantasy writers need new material. 

The new God of War (which I know is a pre-existing franchise) was really good, but I didn't pay fuck-all attention to any of the worldbuilding because I knew it already since its all been used before. Maybe that's good for something more character-driven, I suppose. But in the contexts of an actual war, which 3H is setting itself up to be, I think I'd like to know more about the state of the countries, with those countries being fresh materials. There's 0 reason to pay attention to something I've already seen so much of, so why not draw inspiration from something different for once?

Judging from the answers here the problem isnt the origins of inspiration but the actual mindset that people have built over the years... Its really baffling to me how they can accept dragons, magic, woldskins, kitsune and any other crazy thing (that didn't exist in that country's history or even mythology!!) but show them a male pegasus rider and they freak their minds.... RIP i mean RIP the irony is that the only actual pegasus rider in mythology was a  male.... RIP i cant take these arguments seriously when they flip flop all over the place... (see also the Pegasus efficiency argument RIP)

 

I am sorry i dont want to sound rude but if the opposite side tries to put themselves on the other sides shoes they might actually understand instead of trying to find unreasonable excuses to fit their agendas...

[IfIHadToPickADude]

47 minutes ago, nyainou said:

The fantasy genre should adapt to match the times. Maybe we should stop basing everything off of Celtic, Norse, Greek and medieval European culture. If not for their "lack" of diversity, but also for the fact that they're so fucking overdone I didn't even bother reading any of the new Lords' full names because its just boring stuff I've heard before. Yawn. The fact that I may be able to let my eyes glaze over and still be able to fill in the blanks in 3H's worldbuilding makes me feel very bored. Fantasy writers need new material. 

I'll add on to this by saying that we don't even need to base things off of things from Medieval times. You can create an entire fantasy setting by basing it on something like the Lawrence of Arabia's Campaign during WWI or The Franco-Prussian War for example. Just because a war or event happened in an era with more advanced technology doesn't mean you have to stick with it. Imagine a Fire Emblem game that goes through a Napoleon Bonaparte like figure's reign as they conquer the continent, or one with you fighting for an army that resembles Soviet Russia's and you fight off an army that is like Nazi Germany's! Of course you don't have to base fantasy stories on real life events, there's also Indian, Chinese, Sumerian, and Arabic cultures you could use for inspiration. But the point is that there is a lot, and I mean a lot of material, that fantasy writers can get inspiration from.

5 hours ago, Pegasus Knight said:

Do we also need a reason on how gay people suddenly appeared in  the FE continent ....?

If a writer does this, I don't think that they should be a writer anymore. LGBT people have existed for as long as humanity as been around, so to give an explanation as to why they exist is extremely weird. 

[May]

1 hour ago, nyainou said:

I just can't imagine getting so fussed up this particular part of worldbuilding. As others have stated, you can do anything in fantasy. Does it really ruin your suspension of disbelief so much to see a PoC/LGBT character in a place they "shouldn't" be? I think there are way more important parts of worldbuilding to be focused on. The socio-economic situation of a country, their religious system if any, how their government works, the class divide, etc. Hell, even their cuisine and arts feel infinitely more 1) important and 2) interesting than ""justifying"" the existence of "minorities". 

PoC/LGBT characters require world-building whereas the heterosexual/cisgender white character simply exists. As you said, the problem is rooted in using European people and culture as the standard. 

Anyways, Fire Emblem: Terrace House.

Edited July 1, 2018 by Aera

[MyBoyHector]

15 minutes ago, Aera said:

PoC/LGBT characters require world-building whereas the heterosexual/cisgender white character simply exists. As you said, the problem is rooted in using European people and culture as the standard. 

Anyways, Fire Emblem: Terrace House.

Lol'd.

Now to put this topic back on track and move away from a debate that really needs its own section, hopefully with how they've shown off Lady Swordaxe, Mr Spears and Mr Bows, Im hoping for 3 separate playthroughs, each with their own corresponding lords. 

[nyainou]

3 minutes ago, MyBoyHector said:

Now to put this topic back on track and move away from a debate that really needs its own section, hopefully with how they've shown off Lady Swordaxe, Mr Spears and Mr Bows, Im hoping for 3 separate playthroughs, each with their own corresponding lords. 

They handled it so poorly in Fates, I'm not sure I'd get excited if they did something similar. Do you just mean like a singular game with the same starting and (similar) ending points with a variable middle? Because I'd prefer something like that instead of something Fates-style. I found semi-enjoyment in how the army swaps were handled in SoV, though it did leave me feeling disconnected with the cast. Maybe a blend of those styles would be nice. 

[May]

6 minutes ago, MyBoyHector said:

Lol'd.

Now to put this topic back on track and move away from a debate that really needs its own section, hopefully with how they've shown off Lady Swordaxe, Mr Spears and Mr Bows, Im hoping for 3 separate playthroughs, each with their own corresponding lords. 

I was actually hoping each lord get their own trailer if the three of them are of equal importance. 

[MyBoyHector]

Personally I hope its all separate from each other. While not the best example, like sacred stones, while the end game might of been the same, the paths they took were rather different. SoV wasn't bad but could of been done better.  Perhaps if there are 3 factions the focus could be each one has a major enemy, while the other faction shows up rarely in each play through much like a weapons triangle    Axe lady vs Spear,  spear vs Bow,   bow vs axe lady, type deal.

[SimplyUnknown]

27 minutes ago, MyBoyHector said:

Personally I hope its all separate from each other. While not the best example, like sacred stones, while the end game might of been the same, the paths they took were rather different. SoV wasn't bad but could of been done better.  Perhaps if there are 3 factions the focus could be each one has a major enemy, while the other faction shows up rarely in each play through much like a weapons triangle    Axe lady vs Spear,  spear vs Bow,   bow vs axe lady, type deal.

I wouldn't mind playing a game with separate paths. I feel they did it rather well in both Sacred Stones and Echoes, so it's clearly possible. As for the enemy thing, it reminds of the game Seiken Densetsu 3. You could choose three of six characters to play as, with 3 pairs of two as partners. And each partner set had a main villain of sorts that was the focus of their specific quest though the regular big bad was the same throughout. It was an interesting game and I think it could work similarly here, with the player character acting as the viewpoint and link between them. Which path you would be on depended on who you chose to travel with.

[MyBoyHector]

Ahhhhh Seiken Densetsu 3, Aka Secret of Mana.

[NekoKnight]

Split routes, if done probably would be amazing but after Fates, I think they should just play it safe with a linear story. Even in the case of the better written split route games (SoV and Sacred Stones), more routes just means less content per play through.

2 hours ago, nyainou said:

I find it very strange that there are people who feel like there needs to be a justification for the existence of PoC and LGBT people in any given fantasy setting. I think I understand where everybody's coming from, but I'm not sure. So please, correct me if I've misunderstood. 

I just can't imagine getting so fussed up this particular part of worldbuilding. As others have stated, you can do anything in fantasy. Does it really ruin your suspension of disbelief so much to see a PoC/LGBT character in a place they "shouldn't" be? I think there are way more important parts of worldbuilding to be focused on. The socio-economic situation of a country, their religious system if any, how their government works, the class divide, etc. Hell, even their cuisine and arts feel infinitely more 1) important and 2) interesting than ""justifying"" the existence of "minorities". 

World building isn't a zero-sum game. You can and should talk about all those things. Justifying smaller subsets of the population is a matter of better writing, and it doesn't just apply to Caucasians and non-Caucasians. As Thecrimsonflash mentions after you, Awakening had the character Panne who is apparently the last of her kind and no one really knows anything about Taguel or where they come from. She just exists and it's weird.  If you plopped a white guy into an East Asian fantasy counterpart country, with no explanation for why he's the only one like that, I'd be raising an eyebrow too.

Wait, are you saying LGBT people don't come from a specific country...?

 

[Maimishou]

Personally, I would love it if they went the way Fates did but had all three routes on one cart similar to Fates's limited edition, rather than three games on three separate carts. Let us pick a house to side with and play a different campaign depending on which house we chose. It would certainly add more replay value than the games already have.