omegaxis1 Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said: As I mentioned before, it can't just have been Azelle who sensed the Loptyr blood. If that is a source of different treatment towards him, if only for a while, then that's something. Even if Arvis wouldn't know at first, it would still be there. Kaga doesn't exactly claim he suffered the exact same way (unless I'm interpreting it wrong), just that there was some form of persecution. But it's something Arvis would fear would happen to him, if it became known. 7 hours ago, Jotari said: I do understand what your saying. Your saying Alvis got treated well because of his noble heritage. No dispute there. If you're saying Alvis got treated well because if his noble heritage, therefore it's out of character for him. To want to build a world of equality, then yes, I do dispute that because Alvis has suffered because of his blood and the actions of his parents. 1 Except nothing really indicates that other people could "feel" that suffocating feeling. Honestly, the thing about Azelle's case is that Kaga mentions that this is mixed with how Arvis is someone very far off reach despite loving him. The Loptous blood effect would if anything be a minor case. If anything, his discrimination was not because he was Loptous, but simply because of the circumstances of his mother's affair with Kurth, as he would kill anyone that spoke ill of her. Kaga really stated it right here: Quote He became the ruler of the Velthomer family in his youth and his influence frightened the nobles. Often he would quarrel with them after they disrespected his mother (even though they spoke the truth) and in extreme cases, he even killed people. But this doesn't tie in to what he says in the roundtable interview. Quote Although the world might seem at peace on the surface, there are people being oppressed solely because they are descended from a ruler who brought about the dark ages in the past. Arvis was similarly discriminated against even though he had done no wrong, and he later learnt from Manfroy that there were many others out there who face the same oppression as him. 1 It is one thing if he faced something like being treated differently because of his circumstances, but the Lopto Sect were hunted down and burned at the stake that they had to live underground for a century. This is not in any way similar to any form of discrimination that Arvis would face. 7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said: Manfroy does say: Manfroy:“Well, how about the Loputian blood link? Have you located Cigyun’s daughter yet?” He wouldn't ask Sandima this if they didn't knew she was somewhere in Verdane, where Sandima is stationed. And if a random man could tell Sigurd about the village... well, it was really only a matter of time. Doesn't matter if Sandima died. Manfroy would just send someone else or himself. And maybe he did, all things considered, but Dierdre was gone. Also, apparently, he didn't thought to keep tabs on Sigurd. Because when he shows up to capture her: But with Sandima dead, there's no longer any way of conduct a search because he was no longer of Verdane. And if Manfroy tries to send more people to conduct a search in Verdane, it would arouse suspicion from Arvis. 8 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said: Manfroy:“At last… the daughter of Cigyun.” This sounds he only just learned where she was, and warped in. If he could just warp in and take her, then why wait? Really, his only lead was Verdane. Once Dierdre left, practically a little over a year happened before Dierdre got captured. There had to have been plenty of opportunities to kidnap her, yet it only happen during Chapter 3. Her leaving Verdane foiled his plans, if only momentarily. 7 hours ago, Jotari said: I agree with this. Manfroy has absolutely no need to wait to capture Deirdre. Finding her is the top priority for him as getting Alvis and Deirdre to procreate is the most vital and most difficult step in his plan. Manfroy either didn't know Sigurd had her, or he was unable to capture her until then thanks to Sigurd's protection. Actually, no. Because right after that, Manfroy says this: Quote Manfroy: “Heh heh heh… Prepare for your rebirth. Once we erase all your memories, we shall introduce you to your new husband. There’s no use fighting it. This is destined to be.” Meaning that he knew that Deirdre was married to Sigurd. And think of the circumstances that led to this. It was when Sigurd left Deirdre alone and she was going off to Sigurd. Basically, it was to wait for Deirdre to be along and defenseless. But Spirit Forest is where Deirdre is protected by the Maerists and there was no longer any form of conducting a search without arousing suspicion. Deirdre leaving the protection of the Spirit Forest and being in Sigurd's custody basically exposed her and easily tracked, and all Manfroy needed to do was wait patiently for Sigurd to go fight and leave Deirdre defenseless. Sigurd ultimately leaving Deirdre by herself is precisely what allowed Manfroy to capture her. 7 hours ago, Jotari said: Sigurd actions, through the first three chapters he learns that -Theres an evil church that wants to ressurect the lopt empire. -Theres a girl related to the empire of old. -Prince Kurth was assassinated by someone. -Agustria is posed to invade Grandbell. 4 Ends up taking the girl out of the protection of her home despite being warned the danger her blood carries. Leaves the girl behind when Augustria attacks because their son needed to be looked after, which is precisely what led her to get captured. Unable to realize that this war is possibly a ruse to capture Deirdre despite learning about the cult and Deirdre. Like, the pieces were all there, but Sigurd wasn't able to in any way paint a bigger picture. Because he doesn't look at the bigger picture and is stuck just reacting. 7 hours ago, Jotari said: Things he does not know. -How the sect intends to re-establish the empire. -What role Deirdre plays in it. -Who killed Prince Kurth Should already able to understand that much when Deirdre literally told him in one scene about her cursed blood. Does he not know how Holy Blood works? Or read a history book? Nobles are supposed to be educated and learn about the history of their nation and other nations. They're supposed to know these things because they must understand the people. 7 hours ago, Jotari said: Things he can do. -Try to protect Grandvale from Agustria while the bulk of its army is out east. Which is precisely what he does. If Sigurd has any flaw it's that he's just too damn good at war. There is no action that Sigurd can take to avoid the way things turned out without it being insane. He's involved in a separate conflict that he has direct orders to involve himself in (and people in danger there that he wants to protect) while all the action happens in a different country. And he does try to gather information from Grandbell (it's how he discovers the Alvis parents thing) but it's not like he has a preestablished spy network under his control. Sigurd was in every way in the position to piece together the conspiracy and figure everything out. Sandima and Deirdre are basically all that one would need. Hence why Kaga makes a good point that if Sigurd had been more competent, he could have avoided the tragedy. He reckless charges into battle, thinking that's the best course and not thinking of the political dangers behind it. I'm not gonna go behind all the politics behind it, but there would have been other ways of handling the situation Sigurd was in without immediately jumping the gun into battle even in the very beginning with Verdane. Even if you say that it was justified because they attacked first, attacking back like that is literally asking for war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotari Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said: Except nothing really indicates that other people could "feel" that suffocating feeling. Honestly, the thing about Azelle's case is that Kaga mentions that this is mixed with how Arvis is someone very far off reach despite loving him. The Loptous blood effect would if anything be a minor case. If anything, his discrimination was not because he was Loptous, but simply because of the circumstances of his mother's affair with Kurth, as he would kill anyone that spoke ill of her. Kaga really stated it right here: But this doesn't tie in to what he says in the roundtable interview. It is one thing if he faced something like being treated differently because of his circumstances, but the Lopto Sect were hunted down and burned at the stake that they had to live underground for a century. This is not in any way similar to any form of discrimination that Arvis would face. Kaga says Alvis was similarly discriminated against. IE, he knows what it's like to have people treat you differently for something that's beyond your control. Agree or disagree with that statement. Nobody has claimed Alvis suffered from active hatred. You're arguing against something that nobody is claiming. Yes, the lopt sect had it way worse. That's irrelevant, Alvis had is bad enough to feel sympathy for them. 1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said: But with Sandima dead, there's no longer any way of conduct a search because he was no longer of Verdane. And if Manfroy tries to send more people to conduct a search in Verdane, it would arouse suspicion from Arvis. They already infiltrated Verdane once, I doubt it would be expressly harder after it's been decimated by Sigurd. You can say otherwise but that's not exactly something that can be proven one way or the other. It's not like they'd even need that many mages to storm a village. And it's not like Deirdre was even staying put in there anyway, as has been pointed out, Sigurd meets her in a different village and she'd wandered far enough to meet Adean when she was imprisoned (some how). And even accepting that the lopt sect is too weak at that point in the story to find the spirit forest, that doesn't matter because Sigurd, like ourselves, has absolutely no knowledge about how widespread and powerful they are. Assuming that they can't find one secluded village when he's only just found out about their existence would be a massively irresponsible of Sigurd. 1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said: Actually, no. Because right after that, Manfroy says this: Come on dude, Manfroy obviously knew where Deirdre was when he captured her. We're saying that for the year and a half of intervening time he didn't (or if he did know he was unable to capture her in that time because of Sigurd's protection). I can't tell if you're honestly just trying to be pedantic or somehow misinterpreted that. 1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said: Meaning that he knew that Deirdre was married to Sigurd. And think of the circumstances that led to this. It was when Sigurd left Deirdre alone and she was going off to Sigurd. Basically, it was to wait for Deirdre to be along and defenseless. But Spirit Forest is where Deirdre is protected by the Maerists and there was no longer any form of conducting a search without arousing suspicion. Deirdre leaving the protection of the Spirit Forest and being in Sigurd's custody basically exposed her and easily tracked, and all Manfroy needed to do was wait patiently for Sigurd to go fight and leave Deirdre defenseless. Sigurd ultimately leaving Deirdre by herself is precisely what allowed Manfroy to capture her. Sigurd didn't leave Deirdre alone. He left her in a heavily fortified castle. It was her decision to go and meet Sigurd against both his knowledge and will. 1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said: Ends up taking the girl out of the protection of her home despite being warned the danger her blood carries. Leaves the girl behind when Augustria attacks because their son needed to be looked after, which is precisely what led her to get captured. Unable to realize that this war is possibly a ruse to capture Deirdre despite learning about the cult and Deirdre. Like, the pieces were all there, but Sigurd wasn't able to in any way paint a bigger picture. Because he doesn't look at the bigger picture and is stuck just reacting. Yes, that all tells him that this girl is important. When you discover this your options are either A) Ignore her and hope no one else finds her (like you did by accident) B) Kill her on the spot without full knowledge of how she's related to everything. C) Take her under your protection to stop who ever would seek to misuse her from doing so. I think option A is by far the most unreliable one. 1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said: Hence why Kaga makes a good point that if Sigurd had been more competent, he could have avoided the tragedy. He reckless charges into battle, thinking that's the best course and not thinking of the political dangers behind it. I'm not gonna go behind all the politics behind it, but there would have been other ways of handling the situation Sigurd was in without immediately jumping the gun into battle even in the very beginning with Verdane. Tell me exactly how you would have handled the situation if you were Sigurd without relying on psychic powers to know what will happen in the future while maintaining a moral character by not murdering Deirdre or letting Adean get raped. Edited February 20, 2019 by Jotari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omegaxis1 Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 7 minutes ago, Jotari said: Kaga says Alvis was similarly discriminated against. IE, he knows what it's like to have people treat you differently for something that's beyond your control. Agree or disagree with that statement. Nobody has claimed Alvis suffered from active hatred. You're arguing against something that nobody is claiming. Yes, the lopt sect had it way worse. That's irrelevant, Alvis had is bad enough to feel sympathy for them. 1 Kaga also says that Manfroy told Arvis that the others had faced the same thing, which is clearly not even true. And not only that, but the case of Arvis being burned at the stake was mentioned by Manfroy as well. All of these don't line up together. 15 minutes ago, Jotari said: They already infiltrated Verdane once, I doubt it would be expressly harder after it's been decimated by Sigurd. You can say otherwise but that's not exactly something that can be proven one way or the other. It's not like they'd even need that many mages to storm a village. And it's not like Deirdre was even staying put in there anyway, as has been pointed out, Sigurd meets her in a different village and she'd wandered far enough to meet Adean when she was imprisoned (some how). And even accepting that the lopt sect is too weak at that point in the story to find the spirit forest, that doesn't matter because Sigurd, like ourselves, has absolutely no knowledge about how widespread and powerful they are. Assuming that they can't find one secluded village when he's only just found out about their existence would be a massively irresponsible of Sigurd. Come on dude, Manfroy obviously knew where Deirdre was when he captured her. We're saying that for the year and a half of intervening time he didn't (or if he did know he was unable to capture her in that time because of Sigurd's protection). I can't tell if you're honestly just trying to be pedantic or somehow misinterpreted that. Sigurd didn't leave Deirdre alone. He left her in a heavily fortified castle. It was her decision to go and meet Sigurd against both his knowledge and will. Yes, that all tells him that this girl is important. When you discover this your options are either A) Ignore her and hope no one else finds her (like you did by accident) B) Kill her on the spot without full knowledge of how she's related to everything. C) Take her under your protection to stop who ever would seek to misuse her from doing so. I think option A is by far the most unreliable one. 4 Except Sigurd was not in any way thinking about the circumstances of Deirdre's situation, only that he's so in love with her that he wanted to be with her. He wasn't truly thinking about her situation. Just cause he says words don't mean he properly put them into action in the end. Manfroy didn't need to perform anything extravagant to get Deirdre. Because Sigurd messed up on his own. By attacking Verdane, he basically instigated a situation where Chagall had every excuse to attack back. By taking Augustria with Chagall escaping thanks to Eldigan, Sigurd was still ultimately being an invader and was open to retaliation from others. He was basically creating a situation where his own forces were going to be forced into a war. And Sigurd left Deirdre at a fortified castle? Guarded by whom? His most powerful knights? No. He took his forces, his best knights, everyone, to fight off against Augustria's forces and the pirates. And all that was left was whatever measly guards and Shannan. Yes, it is definitely a fortified castle that is well protected. He wasn't thinking in any way about Deirdre's situation or the danger she carried. He loved her and she was his wife and they had a son. Nothing about her carrying Loptous blood. Especially since he never once mentions it again. So no, Option C is not even done properly because Sigurd was literally THROWING himself into the danger zone that would just get Deirdre dragged into the situation no matter what. Basically painted a big target sign. 21 minutes ago, Jotari said: Tell me exactly how you would have handled the situation if you were Sigurd without relying on psychic powers to know what will happen in the future while maintaining a moral character by not murdering Deirdre or letting Adean get raped. Funny how you say "you were Sigurd" when you should be asking what Sigurd should have done. If he were a proper noble that understood the bigger picture, he would not have recklessly attacked. Yes, Verdane attacked first, but retaliation like that is ultimately how wars start. Adean is also of noble blood, therefore, would not be harmed in any way. Players know what the bad guys intend to do with her, but Sigurd doesn't know. Nobles or the royal court would issue an envoy or demand to have Adean released, or else there will be consequences. By marching into Verdane territory to take back Adean, you basically made an informal declaration of war and invaded, which ultimately provokes other nations, such as Augustria. --- Now here's the thing. You are assuming this is me shitting on Sigurd. And maybe it can be viewed as such. However, this is actually more just going that Sigurd did act recklessly in his pursuit to do what he thought was good, but was something that endangers others in the long run. Because as Kaga said, it's human nature. Sigurd is by all accounts, a reckless fool that has his heart in the right place. But he doesn't see the bigger picture. It's why Seliph succeeds where his father failed. Seliph IS able to see the bigger picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotari Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 7 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Kaga also says that Manfroy told Arvis that the others had faced the same thing, which is clearly not even true. And not only that, but the case of Arvis being burned at the stake was mentioned by Manfroy as well. All of these don't line up together. Yes, they did face the same thing. They all face prejudiced and persecution. That doesn't mean they faced the same effects of it. 9 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Except Sigurd was not in any way thinking about the circumstances of Deirdre's situation, only that he's so in love with her that he wanted to be with her. He wasn't truly thinking about her situation. Just cause he says words don't mean he properly put them into action in the end. Manfroy didn't need to perform anything extravagant to get Deirdre. Because Sigurd messed up on his own. Manfroy had to wait until Deirdre left the castle on her own violation without Sigurd's consent. 10 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: And Sigurd left Deirdre at a fortified castle? Guarded by whom? His most powerful knights? No. He took his forces, his best knights, everyone, to fight off against Augustria's forces and the pirates. And all that was left was whatever measly guards and Shannan. Yes, it is definitely a fortified castle that is well protected. He wasn't thinking in any way about Deirdre's situation or the danger she carried. He loved her and she was his wife and they had a son. Nothing about her carrying Loptous blood. Speak for yourself, I left my entire army there during my Sigurd solo of the game. In canon the castles are fortified. If the game wanted to suggest otherwise then it would have had Manfroy kidnap Deirdre while she was in the castle. If the game wanted to say Sigurd was mistaken for leaving his wife in an inexplicably undefended castle, then she would have been kidnapped in an inexplicably undefended castle, but she was instead kidnapped while outside of the castle (which again she did without his consent or knowledge). 14 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: So no, Option C is not even done properly because Sigurd was literally THROWING himself into the danger zone that would just get Deirdre dragged into the situation no matter what. Basically painted a big target sign. Sigurd never throws himself into danger. He is always unwilling to launch an offensive and does so because his only alternative is to let a bunch of innocent people die. Sigurd is obviously not the type of person to willfully put his wife in danger. His devotion to Deirdre is like the central tenant of his character. 17 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Funny how you say "you were Sigurd" when you should be asking what Sigurd should have done. If he were a proper noble that understood the bigger picture, he would not have recklessly attacked. Yes, Verdane attacked first, but retaliation like that is ultimately how wars start. Adean is also of noble blood, therefore, would not be harmed in any way. Players know what the bad guys intend to do with her, but Sigurd doesn't know. Nobles or the royal court would issue an envoy or demand to have Adean released, or else there will be consequences. By marching into Verdane territory to take back Adean, you basically made an informal declaration of war and invaded, which ultimately provokes other nations, such as Augustria. Every noble still in the kingdom also road to Adean's aid when she got kidnapped. Even Alvis, though he didn't stick around long as someone had to run the capital. He had the consent of the entire kingdom to rescue his friend. Even the king approved it by having Alvis give Sigurd a sword. They call the Verdanians savages and barbarians, it's pretty clear they knew exactly what would happen to Adean. But sure, I agree, leaving Adean to get raped by barbarians or delegating the task to someone else would have been a sensible decision. But let's consider what would have happened had Sigurd done that? The conspiracy was still in place. The lopt sect definitely would have found Deirdre, Kurth still would have been killed, his father still would have been branded a traitor (as he was Reptor's main political rival). By that point Sigurd might have been spurred into action, but he likely would have been killed as he didn't have all the allies he picked up along the way (most noteably Lewyn and Briggid) backing him up and wouldn't have had access to Tyrfing. If Sigurd took his father's murder lying down then he would have ended up as a pawn for the Empire used as a walking holy weapon user like Brian and Febail (Shannon would also probably survive and have ended up in the same situation). There would have been no resistance movement and the empire would have ruled until Tiki or someone noticed and put a stop to it. By abandoning all morals and acting like a coward Sigurd could have survived, but he wouldn't have avoided tragedy. 33 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Now here's the thing. You are assuming this is me shitting on Sigurd. And maybe it can be viewed as such. However, this is actually more just going that Sigurd did act recklessly in his pursuit to do what he thought was good, but was something that endangers others in the long run. Because as Kaga said, it's human nature. Sigurd is by all accounts, a reckless fool that has his heart in the right place. But he doesn't see the bigger picture. It's why Seliph succeeds where his father failed. Seliph IS able to see the bigger picture. I never said you were shitting on Sigurd. A flawed character who suffers tragedy due to their inadequacies is a perfectly fine story to tell. And maybe that's even the story Kaga wanted to tell. I just don't think it's the story that was told, as the events that changed the continent were things well beyond Sigurd's scope and power to change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotari Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 (edited) 39 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Kaga also says that Manfroy told Arvis that the others had faced the same thing, which is clearly not even true. And not only that, but the case of Arvis being burned at the stake was mentioned by Manfroy as well. All of these don't line up together. Yes, they did face the same thing. They all face prejudiced and persecution. That doesn't mean they faced the same effects of it. 39 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Except Sigurd was not in any way thinking about the circumstances of Deirdre's situation, only that he's so in love with her that he wanted to be with her. He wasn't truly thinking about her situation. Just cause he says words don't mean he properly put them into action in the end. Manfroy didn't need to perform anything extravagant to get Deirdre. Because Sigurd messed up on his own. Manfroy had to wait until Deirdre left the castle on her own violation without Sigurd's consent. 39 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: And Sigurd left Deirdre at a fortified castle? Guarded by whom? His most powerful knights? No. He took his forces, his best knights, everyone, to fight off against Augustria's forces and the pirates. And all that was left was whatever measly guards and Shannan. Yes, it is definitely a fortified castle that is well protected. He wasn't thinking in any way about Deirdre's situation or the danger she carried. He loved her and she was his wife and they had a son. Nothing about her carrying Loptous blood. Speak for yourself, I left my entire army there during my Sigurd solo of the game. In canon the castles are fortified. If the game wanted to suggest otherwise then it would have had Manfroy kidnap Deirdre while she was in the castle. If the game wanted to say Sigurd was mistaken for leaving his wife in an inexplicably undefended castle, then she would have been kidnapped in an inexplicably undefended castle, but she was instead kidnapped while outside of the castle (which again she did without his consent or knowledge). 39 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: So no, Option C is not even done properly because Sigurd was literally THROWING himself into the danger zone that would just get Deirdre dragged into the situation no matter what. Basically painted a big target sign. Sigurd never throws himself into danger. He is always unwilling to launch an offensive and does so because his only alternative is to let a bunch of innocent people die. Sigurd is obviously not the type of person to willfully put his wife in danger. His devotion to Deirdre is like the central tenant of his character. 39 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Funny how you say "you were Sigurd" when you should be asking what Sigurd should have done. If he were a proper noble that understood the bigger picture, he would not have recklessly attacked. Yes, Verdane attacked first, but retaliation like that is ultimately how wars start. Adean is also of noble blood, therefore, would not be harmed in any way. Players know what the bad guys intend to do with her, but Sigurd doesn't know. Nobles or the royal court would issue an envoy or demand to have Adean released, or else there will be consequences. By marching into Verdane territory to take back Adean, you basically made an informal declaration of war and invaded, which ultimately provokes other nations, such as Augustria. Every noble still in the kingdom except the bedridden king also rode to Adean's aid when she got kidnapped. Even Alvis, though he didn't stick around long as someone had to run the capital. He had the consent of the entire kingdom to rescue his friend. Even the king approved it by having Alvis give Sigurd a sword. They call the Verdanians savages and barbarians, it's pretty clear they knew exactly what would happen to Adean. But sure, I agree, leaving Adean to get raped by barbarians or delegating the task to someone else would have been a sensible decision. But let's consider what would have happened had Sigurd done that? The conspiracy was still in place. The lopt sect definitely would have found Deirdre, Kurth still would have been killed, his father still would have been branded a traitor (as he was Reptor's main political rival). By that point Sigurd might have been spurred into action, but he likely would have been killed as he didn't have all the allies he picked up along the way (most noteably Lewyn and Briggid) backing him up and wouldn't have had access to Tyrfing. If Sigurd took his father's murder lying down then he would have ended up as a pawn for the Empire used as a walking holy weapon user like Brian and Febail (Shannon would also probably survive and have ended up in the same situation). There would have been no resistance movement and the empire would have ruled until Tiki or someone noticed and put a stop to it. By abandoning all morals and acting like a coward Sigurd could have survived, but he wouldn't have avoided tragedy (even if he killed Deirdre in cold blood for his lopt blood he still probably would have been killed by Alvis in his gambit to unite the continent). 39 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Now here's the thing. You are assuming this is me shitting on Sigurd. And maybe it can be viewed as such. However, this is actually more just going that Sigurd did act recklessly in his pursuit to do what he thought was good, but was something that endangers others in the long run. Because as Kaga said, it's human nature. Sigurd is by all accounts, a reckless fool that has his heart in the right place. But he doesn't see the bigger picture. It's why Seliph succeeds where his father failed. Seliph IS able to see the bigger picture. I never said you were shitting on Sigurd. A flawed character who suffers tragedy due to their inadequacies is a perfectly fine story to tell. And maybe that's even the story Kaga wanted to tell. I just don't think it's the story that was told, as the events that changed the continent were things well beyond Sigurd's scope and power to change. Edited February 20, 2019 by Jotari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omegaxis1 Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 1 minute ago, Jotari said: Yes, they did face the same thing. They all face prejudiced and persecution. That doesn't mean they faced the same effects of it. Except that doesn't honestly work when the narrative paints persecution to have been in the most incredibly vile way of burning people at the stake. Being treated a little different doesn't even count as being "oppressed" when Arvis was in no way oppressed. In fact, the fact that he was supported by Kurth in secret meant he was far from being oppressed. 3 minutes ago, Jotari said: Manfroy had to wait until Deirdre left the castle on her own violation without Sigurd's consent. Even if she hadn't left, who would stop him? Manfroy is a powerful mage in his own right. Hell, the manga even exploited this by showing him go in and taking her. Who could stop him? Also, even in regards to that, shouldn't Sigurd have been bright enough to know that Deirdre might do this? She already left the protection of Spirit Forest for him, so would she not try to go and rush off to him in this situation? Yes, Deirdre is reckless, but Sigurd oughta have known that. It would have been infinitely safer to bring her with him where he can keep an eye on her than leave her in a castle. 4 minutes ago, Jotari said: Speak for yourself, I left my entire army there during my Sigurd solo of the game. In canon the castles are fortified. If the game wanted to suggest otherwise then it would have had Manfroy kidnap Deirdre while she was in the castle. If the game wanted to say Sigurd was mistaken for leaving his wife in an inexplicably undefended castle, then she would have been kidnapped in an inexplicably undefended castle, but she was instead kidnapped while outside of the castle (which again she did without his consent or knowledge). 1 So... basically, the other knights were incompetent idiots that LET Sigurd's wife go out onto the field without any form of protection? 6 minutes ago, Jotari said: Sigurd never throws himself into danger. He is always unwilling to launch an offensive and does so because his only alternative is to let a bunch of innocent people die. Sigurd is obviously not the type of person to willfully put his wife in danger. His devotion to Deirdre is like the central tenant of his character. He threw himself into the danger the moment he basically began an invasion of Verdane, followed by Augustria. The inability to think of the consequences of his actions is precisely what led Sigurd to end up being separated from Deirdre. 11 minutes ago, Jotari said: Every noble still in the kingdom also road to Adean's aid when she got kidnapped. Even Alvis, though he didn't stick around long as someone had to run the capital. He had the consent of the entire kingdom to rescue his friend. Even the king approved it by having Alvis give Sigurd a sword. They call the Verdanians savages and barbarians, it's pretty clear they knew exactly what would happen to Adean. But sure, I agree, leaving Adean to get raped by barbarians or delegating the task to someone else would have been a sensible decision. But let's consider what would have happened had Sigurd done that? The conspiracy was still in place. The lopt sect definitely would have found Deirdre, Kurth still would have been killed, his father still would have been branded a traitor (as he was Reptor's main political rival). By that point Sigurd might have been spurred into action, but he likely would have been killed as he didn't have all the allies he picked up along the way (most noteably Lewyn and Briggid) backing him up and wouldn't have had access to Tyrfing. If Sigurd took his father's murder lying down then he would have ended up as a pawn for the Empire used as a walking holy weapon user like Brian and Febail (Shannon would also probably survive and have ended up in the same situation). There would have been no resistance movement and the empire would have ruled until Tiki or someone noticed and put a stop to it. By abandoning all morals and acting like a coward Sigurd could have survived, but he wouldn't have avoided tragedy. 4 Except that it wasn't. Nothing said that Sigurd had any permission to go into Verdane territory even to save Adean. In fact, Eldigan asked Sigurd what he was doing, and if they were invading Verdane. Though Eldigan didn't try to stop him, that was already a warning about how going to save Adean would result in consequences. Do we know for certain that she would get raped? Or about the conspiracy? Sigurd ultimately going around attacking without permission or consent, ultimately leading to him having Prince Shannan, and just going there, it basically made the situation worse for Sigurd's case. Yes, you can say that befriending Shannan is the best decision, but had Sigurd kept close with the king, not acted so reckless, and waited properly as a noble would during emergency times of war, he would have maintained a strong tie with the king that would prevent his house from being blamed and casted doubt about his father being the one to assassinate Kurth. Now, you are saying that this would have resulted in others being harmed or endangered, and sacrifices would have been made. But all these sacrifices are being placed under heavy scrutiny because you know the characters. But had they been faceless mooks, the kind that are killed off screen most of the time, would we even care? Not really. A lot of the things are claims and player perspectives, but not entirely factual. If Sigurd had maintained a form of competency, he would have realized the conspiracy ahead of time and avoided the situation entirely. You claim Sigurd being a proper noble is the act of a coward, but Sigurd ultimately became a warmonger that resulted in the deaths of many people. But the blame isn't cast onto Sigurd because he died a tragic death and there are worse people to blame than him. But Sigurd is just as much to blame for many events. 27 minutes ago, Jotari said: I never said you were shitting on Sigurd. A flawed character who suffers tragedy due to their inadequacies is a perfectly fine story to tell. And maybe that's even the story Kaga wanted to tell. I just don't think it's the story that was told, as the events that changed the continent were things well beyond Sigurd's scope and power to change. Except it isn't. You're claiming that is, but if Sigurd had paid more attention, not get blinded by love and actually thought things through more, he may have prevented the chaos that ensued. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotari Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 (edited) 34 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Except that doesn't honestly work when the narrative paints persecution to have been in the most incredibly vile way of burning people at the stake. Being treated a little different doesn't even count as being "oppressed" when Arvis was in no way oppressed. In fact, the fact that he was supported by Kurth in secret meant he was far from being oppressed. I'm just not going to discuss the Alvis point with you any further because I've already been repeating myself for like half a dozen posts now. You fundamentally can't or don't want to understand what I'm saying and I'm not even sure you know what you're asserting about Alvis's character yourself. 34 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Even if she hadn't left, who would stop him? Manfroy is a powerful mage in his own right. Hell, the manga even exploited this by showing him go in and taking her. Who could stop him? Okay, then if by that plot point they were meant to be displaying Sigurd's inadequecy instead of Deridre, why did the game have Manfroy attack her on route to the castle instead of having him attack it directly? Narrativly speaking it just doesn't work to have Sigurd make a mistake of leaving his wife undefended if she doesn't get attack while she's supposedly undefended. It'd be like establishing a plot point where Ike keeps stealing Greil's axe, and then Greil goes and gets killed on a night when Ike doesn't go anywhere near his axe and then pinning the blame on Ike. Plot points only work if they're actually executed. 34 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: So... basically, the other knights were incompetent idiots that LET Sigurd's wife go out onto the field without any form of protection? Yes, and this is expressly shown in the form of a conversation between Shannon and Deirdre (and before you raise it as a point, no, I don't think Shannon was literally the only one protecting Deirdre just like I don't think these wars are being fought with roughly a dozen soldiers on each side). 34 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: He threw himself into the danger the moment he basically began an invasion of Verdane, followed by Augustria. The inability to think of the consequences of his actions is precisely what led Sigurd to end up being separated from Deirdre. Except that it wasn't. Nothing said that Sigurd had any permission to go into Verdane territory even to save Adean. In fact, Eldigan asked Sigurd what he was doing, and if they were invading Verdane. Though Eldigan didn't try to stop him, that was already a warning about how going to save Adean would result in consequences. Do we know for certain that she would get raped? Or about the conspiracy? Sigurd ultimately going around attacking without permission or consent, ultimately leading to him having Prince Shannan, and just going there, it basically made the situation worse for Sigurd's case. Yes, you can say that befriending Shannan is the best decision, but had Sigurd kept close with the king, not acted so reckless, and waited properly as a noble would during emergency times of war, he would have maintained a strong tie with the king that would prevent his house from being blamed and casted doubt about his father being the one to assassinate Kurth. Now, you are saying that this would have resulted in others being harmed or endangered, and sacrifices would have been made. But all these sacrifices are being placed under heavy scrutiny because you know the characters. But had they been faceless mooks, the kind that are killed off screen most of the time, would we even care? Not really. A lot of the things are claims and player perspectives, but not entirely factual. If Sigurd had maintained a form of competency, he would have realized the conspiracy ahead of time and avoided the situation entirely. You claim Sigurd being a proper noble is the act of a coward, but Sigurd ultimately became a warmonger that resulted in the deaths of many people. But the blame isn't cast onto Sigurd because he died a tragic death and there are worse people to blame than him. But Sigurd is just as much to blame for many events. Sigurd was acting like a proper noble. He was defending his land against a hostile invasion. Verdane attacked first, they had taken several castles and were burning the towns in his kingdom. He got a sword from the King after Alvis traveled to assess the conflict. Why do you think the King did that? Because he had a spare sword lying around and he forgot to give Sigurd a Christmas present, or because he actively supported Sigurd's retaliating against an unprovoked attack on his lands? There's also the fact that after conquering Evans Azmur declared Sigurd a Holy Knight as a reward (remember, the prologue is called Birth of the Holy Knight). The game really couldn't have gone more out of it's way to say Sigurd and full approval from the Grannvale government for his actions. He was richly rewarded and honored for his actions. 34 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Except it isn't. You're claiming that is, but if Sigurd had paid more attention, not get blinded by love and actually thought things through more, he may have prevented the chaos that ensued. You still haven't told me what logical course of action Sigurd could have taken to have prevented anything. As I've already pointed out, even if he had left Adean to Verdane, really bad shit would have still happened. Edited February 20, 2019 by Jotari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acacia Sgt Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said: Except that doesn't honestly work when the narrative paints persecution to have been in the most incredibly vile way of burning people at the stake. Being treated a little different doesn't even count as being "oppressed" when Arvis was in no way oppressed. In fact, the fact that he was supported by Kurth in secret meant he was far from being oppressed. Not quite. Burned at stake is treated as the highest level. Arvis went through the lower levels, and fears to go through the upper levels of persecution. Just because he only went through the lower levels doesn't mean it shouldn't matter. It's like saying "There are people worse than you, so stop complaining," as if it didn't mattered or count their suffering because it's not as high as others. Ultimately, this falls under "Show, don't Tell". We're only told because the game itself never focuses on Grannvale itself, only from Sigurd's POV almost all of the time, who is never at Grannvale for 95% of Gen1. Actually, that's very telling. Despite being the Crown Prince of the Kingdom with authority over the nobles, he still had to support Arvis in secret. In secret. That means helping Arvis publicly would've been seen bad on Kurth. That should speak volumes, then. 1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said: Even if she hadn't left, who would stop him? Manfroy is a powerful mage in his own right. Hell, the manga even exploited this by showing him go in and taking her. Who could stop him? Also, even in regards to that, shouldn't Sigurd have been bright enough to know that Deirdre might do this? She already left the protection of Spirit Forest for him, so would she not try to go and rush off to him in this situation? Yes, Deirdre is reckless, but Sigurd oughta have known that. It would have been infinitely safer to bring her with him where he can keep an eye on her than leave her in a castle. Then it wouldn't matter where Dierdre was, then. That includes the Spirit Forest, if she had stayed there. The only protection the village had is just being secluded, but people still know about it, just not how to find it. Even if Dierdre doesn't leave the forest, she only needs to leave the village to be found. Just like how it happened for her to be imprisoned at Marpha Castle in the first place. Those two events are separated by a year and a half, at the most. Would Sigurd remember? Besides, the situations are quite different. Back in Verdane, she didn't leave the forest to be on her own. At Agustria, she was leaving on her own. Can Sigurd really be faulted if Dierdre not only decided to leave, but leave on her own without at least some escort. Heck, if he remembered the whole "leave the forest for him", then he'd expect Dierdre would again leave a place of security with at least someone to protect her. Doesn't matter if it wouldn't have worked since Manfroy has omniscient warping, we have to take in consideration only what Sigurd knows. 1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said: So... basically, the other knights were incompetent idiots that LET Sigurd's wife go out onto the field without any form of protection? And ultimately, that'd be on them; not on Sigurd. --- Was going to answer further on the latter points, but got beaten to it. I'll only add that you can't use Eldigan on this because he's not even from Grannvale. If Grannvale ever bothered to tell Agustria, it'd be to Shagall. It'd be on him to tell his own people about it. Clearly he didn't, or else Elliot wouldn't have tried to make a beeline to Grannvale either. Edited February 20, 2019 by Acacia Sgt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omegaxis1 Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 6 minutes ago, Jotari said: I'm just not going to discuss the Alvis point with you any further because I've already been repeating myself for like half a dozen posts now. You fundamentally can't or don't want to understand what I'm saying and I'm not even sure you know what you're asserting about Alvis's character yourself. 8 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said: Not quite. Burned at stake is treated as the highest level. Arvis went through the lower levels, and fears to go through the upper levels of persecution. Just because he only went through the lower levels doesn't mean it shouldn't matter. It's like saying "There are people worse than you, so stop complaining," as if it didn't mattered their suffering because it's not as high as others. Ultimately, this falls under "Show, don't Tell". We're only told because the game itself never focuses on Grannvale itself, only from Sigurd's POV, who is never at Grannvale for 95% of Gen1. Actually, that's very telling. Despite being the Crown Prince of the Kingdom with authority over the nobles, he still had to support Arvis in secret. In secret. That means helping Arvis publicly would've been seen bad on Kurth. That should speak volumes, then. 2 More like I feel it's a very bad way of comparison. That to call their oppression the same simply because it's a result of the ancestor thing is really bad. So the case of Arvis being compared to the Lopto Sect as a result is just really bad. Also, Kurth supporting Arvis in secret doesn't say that it would look bad on Kurth, but may actually tell more about Kurth himself, in that he loves Cigyun, but feels guilty about making Arvis suffer, where openly supporting him may actually make Arvis suffer more. There are various ways of interpreting that. However, the topic of persecution ultimately has been an issue in Genealogy for me because it's always been a tell rather than show. So I'll drop this from there. 6 minutes ago, Jotari said: Okay, then if by that plot point they were meant to be displaying Sigurd's inadequecy instead of Deridre, why did the game have Manfroy attack her on route to the castle instead of having him attack it directly? Narrativly speaking it just doesn't work to have Sigurd make a mistake of leaving his wife undefended if she doesn't get attack while she's supposedly undefended. Yes, and this is expressly shown in the form of a conversation between Shannon and Deirdre (and before you raise it as a point, no, I don't think Shannon was literally the only one protecting Deirdre just like I don't think these wars are being fought with roughly a dozen soldiers on each side). 3 3 2 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said: And ultimately, that'd be on them; not on Sigurd. But the fact that only Shannan is the one left there and Shannan being the one to tell him, that basically indicates that canonically, Shannan was the one left in charge of defending. No mooks or ordinary soldiers said it. Yes, there could have been mooks, but since no characters tell Sigurd this, it means canonically, those characters went to fight alongside Sigurd. The narrative is ultimately structured in a way where it gives an indication the rest of the army are ultimately with Sigurd, fighting alongside him. So Sigurd DID leave his wife with faceless knights and a little kid. Also, the scene of Manfroy intercepting her is basically an indication of Deirdre's recklessness, something Sigurd should have realized when they met in regards to Sandima, where she left to find Sigurd. Despite knowing the circumstances around Deirdre, Sigurd should have known to kept her close at all time, ESPECIALLY knowing that an evil cult is after her. Keeping her close by would have been safer, but he wasn't again thinking about her situation. He was thinking about the child. Because he doesn't think of the bigger picture. He thinks on the little things. 12 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said: Then it wouldn't matter where Dierdre was, then. That includes the Spirit Forest, if she had stayed there. The only protection the village had is just being secluded, but people still know about it, just not how to find it. Even if Dierdre doesn't leave the forest, she only needs to leave the village to be found. Just like how it happened for her to be imprisoned at Marpha Castle in the first place. Those two events are separated by a year and a half, at the most. Would Sigurd remember? Besides, the situations are quite different. Back in Verdane, she didn't leave the forest to be on her own. At Agustria, she was leaving on her own. Can Sigurd really be faulted if Dierdre not only decided to leave, but leave on her own without at least some escort. Heck, if he remembered the whole "leave the forest for him", then he'd expect Dierdre would again leave a place of security with at least someone to protect her. Doesn't matter if it wouldn't have worked since Manfroy has omniscient warping, we have to take in consideration only what Sigurd knows. Except Sigurd ISN'T thinking about Deirdre's situation. And no, saying that this info came a year ago means he forgot is a BS excuse. The very fact that Sigurd was warned about the danger Deirdre's blood carries is a big danger sign that Sigurd would have remembered if he actually gave it though. But he doesn't. He is a reckless fool that fell in love with Deirdre at fight sight. He doesn't care about the danger her circumstances bring, he just wanted her. Furthermore, the case of how Deirdre left Spirit Forest to be with Sigurd, but Sigurd was by no means thinking about her situation, again. He could have rejected her, which could have forced her back to the forest. Or could have done something else. But Sigurd ultimately wasn't thinking about that. 22 minutes ago, Jotari said: Sigurd was acting like a proper noble. He was defending his land against a hostile invasion. Verdane attacked first, they had taken several castles and were burning the towns in his kingdom. He got a sword from the King after Alvis traveled to assess the conflict. Why do you think the King did that? Because he had a spare sword lying around and he forgot to give Sigurd a Christmas present, or because he actively supported Sigurd's retaliating against an unprovoked attack on his lands? There's also the fact that after conquering Evans Azmur declared Sigurd a Holy Knight as a reward (remember, the prologue is called Birth of the Holy Knight). The game really couldn't have gone more out of it's way to say Sigurd and full approval from the Grannvale government for his actions. He was richly rewarded and honored for his actions. 1 Stop right there. You are 100% incorrect. Sigurd was by no means acting like a proper noble or defending any land. He went in to attack. He wasn't defending. He was attacking. And what does giving him a Silver Sword mean in giving permission to go into Verdane and attack? Is this a culture thing? ANd yes, Verdane attacked first. They acted hostile. But retaliation equals an all out war. Sigurd getting a new sword doesn't mean go deep into Verdane territory and conquer it. Arvis being sent there to assess the situation basically means no formal declaration was made. Hence why when Eldigan asked if Granvalle is formally invading Verdane, Sigurd doesn't say yes but simply explains why he is doing what he is doing. Also, being declared Holy Knight is followed up by Sigurd being told to defend the castles. Once again, nothing suggests the king giving orders to go invade Verdane. That was an act that Sigurd did on his own because he couldn't find Adean in Evans Castle. Especially since after conquering Verdane, Augustria was very much anti-Granvalle. And there was supposed to even be an "Anti-War" policy from Granvalle. But conquering Verdane and later Augustria is a violation of that. If Sigurd was strictly defending and remained in Granvalle territory, then he was acting like a noble and a knight. But if he went in to attack and conquer? Then no, he violated various laws. 33 minutes ago, Jotari said: You still haven't told me what logical course of action Sigurd could have taken to have prevented anything. As I've already pointed out, even if he had left Adean to Verdane, really bad shit would have still happened. I actually have given things he could have done. First off, he didn't make any indication to have told the king, the messenger, or Arvis that he was going to march into Verdane territory to take back Adean. He did not send any envoys or message to Verdane warning that if Adean is not returned, they will march into Verdane and take her back by force. Adean is a noble and would not be harmed in any way. Ensuring that she was not harmed would also be mentioned in the warning. Refusal to acknowledge or reply would result in Sigurd having every excuse to march into there and not be seen as invaders. By doing this, Sigurd is acting as a noble and upright knight of Granvalle that would leave Granvalle blameless for their actions, which would prevent Augustria from having their lords become anti-Granvalle as a result. Not only that, it would no doubt make the king doubtful about Sigurd being a traitor even more and would be willing to hear Sigurd out. Sigurd going out and conquering nations and ultimately harbor Shannan made him look bad as a result. Also, if Sigurd had thought more about Deridre's curse, and even kept the case that he loved her, say that he still did take her in. He would have ensured she remained by his side or well protected by his trusted knights at all times. The narrative indicates that he ended up leaving Deirdre under the care of Shannan only. No one else. Thus, this led Deirdre to act recklessly and able to convince said kid to let her go, which is a stupid move by all accounts. Sigurd should have had his personal knights stay by, which would ensure she didn't leave their protection. Also, the king of Verdane gave Sigurd his dying message: Quote Batou: “No, I’m already done for. But before I die, I have one last thing I must tell you. The evil that’s rearing its head across the continent is all the work of the Dark Sect. They’re out to destroy all that’s good and hasten the revival of the Dark Lord Loputousu. Sandima incited our attack on Grandbell solely to further their cause. They have infested the world, Sigurd. You must stay sharp and not be led astray! Please absolve my failure to keep my citizens from harm’s way. S… Sigurd, I beg of you…” Knowing that Deirdre is being targetted by the dark cult, knowing that the dark cult is causing all the issues, this, by all means, means that Sigurd should have realized that all the war is a result of the dark cult. He could have pulled back and tried to inform the king of the danger and even tried to take Deirdre to the royal court to protect her. Doing this would have actually made Deirdre be discovered to be Kurth's daughter, and that would have entirely destroyed Manfroy's plan, along with Arvis, as Sigurd and Deirdre would be rightfully married. Or even if he didn't do that, he would have still continued to keep Deirdre by his side, not leave her by the castle with a kid being her watcher. Taken her with him where he could again keep an eye on her and safe. Better to keep them where you can keep them close, than keep them somewhere far where he couldn't be there to protect her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotari Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 7 hours ago, omegaxis1 said: But the fact that only Shannan is the one left there and Shannan being the one to tell him, that basically indicates that canonically, Shannan was the one left in charge of defending. No mooks or ordinary soldiers said it. Yes, there could have been mooks, but since no characters tell Sigurd this, it means canonically, those characters went to fight alongside Sigurd. The narrative is ultimately structured in a way where it gives an indication the rest of the army are ultimately with Sigurd, fighting alongside him. So Sigurd DID leave his wife with faceless knights and a little kid. Also, the scene of Manfroy intercepting her is basically an indication of Deirdre's recklessness, something Sigurd should have realized when they met in regards to Sandima, where she left to find Sigurd. I already preaddressed this issue and gave a narrative reasoning as to why it makes absolutely no sense to make it Sigurd's flaw yet not have that flaw mean anything. If we're to argue this you're going to actually have to raise some points to challenge mine. 7 hours ago, omegaxis1 said: Despite knowing the circumstances around Deirdre, Sigurd should have known to kept her close at all time, ESPECIALLY knowing that an evil cult is after her. Keeping her close by would have been safer, but he wasn't again thinking about her situation. He was thinking about the child. Because he doesn't think of the bigger picture. He thinks on the little things. Except Sigurd ISN'T thinking about Deirdre's situation. And no, saying that this info came a year ago means he forgot is a BS excuse. The very fact that Sigurd was warned about the danger Deirdre's blood carries is a big danger sign that Sigurd would have remembered if he actually gave it though. But he doesn't. He is a reckless fool that fell in love with Deirdre at fight sight. He doesn't care about the danger her circumstances bring, he just wanted her. Furthermore, the case of how Deirdre left Spirit Forest to be with Sigurd, but Sigurd was by no means thinking about her situation, again. He could have rejected her, which could have forced her back to the forest. Or could have done something else. But Sigurd ultimately wasn't thinking about that. You still haven't solved the issue of what Sigurd would do. Leaving her in the forest for anyone else to find would have been stupidly reckless. 7 hours ago, omegaxis1 said: Stop right there. You are 100% incorrect. Sigurd was by no means acting like a proper noble or defending any land. He went in to attack. He wasn't defending. He was attacking. And what does giving him a Silver Sword mean in giving permission to go into Verdane and attack? Is this a culture thing? ANd yes, Verdane attacked first. They acted hostile. But retaliation equals an all out war. Sigurd getting a new sword doesn't mean go deep into Verdane territory and conquer it. Arvis being sent there to assess the situation basically means no formal declaration was made. Hence why when Eldigan asked if Granvalle is formally invading Verdane, Sigurd doesn't say yes but simply explains why he is doing what he is doing. Also, being declared Holy Knight is followed up by Sigurd being told to defend the castles. Once again, nothing suggests the king giving orders to go invade Verdane. That was an act that Sigurd did on his own because he couldn't find Adean in Evans Castle. Especially since after conquering Verdane, Augustria was very much anti-Granvalle. And there was supposed to even be an "Anti-War" policy from Granvalle. But conquering Verdane and later Augustria is a violation of that. If Sigurd was strictly defending and remained in Granvalle territory, then he was acting like a noble and a knight. But if he went in to attack and conquer? Then no, he violated various laws. recklessly and able to convince said kid to let her go, which is a stupid move by all accounts. Sigurd should have had his personal knights stay by, which would ensure she didn't leave their protection. Do you honestly think Grannvale was angry at Sigurd for his actions? You think that's the narrative the game was trying to push? Because there's not a single line indicating that. This goes back to how you tried to argue on the Ashera's a god case by claiming "Nothing confirms that person did that thing in the very precise way I define it because the script didn't go into minute detail." Sigurd is in communication with Grannvale when performing his actions. He is being rewarded for his actions, instead of being reprimanded. He gains more responsibilities and consistently has messengers from Valhalla reporting to him. There is no reason to believe anyone in Grannvale objected to him defending their lands and launching a counter offensive on a nation that violated their non aggression pact. Your claim is as baseless as a claim saying Lex is a transsexual, because hey, the game never expressly said he isn't. That's the logic your working under. 8 hours ago, omegaxis1 said: First off, he didn't make any indication to have told the king, the messenger, or Arvis that he was going to march into Verdane territory to take back Adean. He did not send any envoys or message to Verdane warning that if Adean is not returned, they will march into Verdane and take her back by force. Adean is a noble and would not be harmed in any way. Ensuring that she was not harmed would also be mentioned in the warning. Refusal to acknowledge or reply would result in Sigurd having every excuse to march into there and not be seen as invaders. Show me proof. Every noble in Grannvale knew Adean had been captured and even Cuan as far away as Leinster knew it. They all arrived specifically to assist Sigurd. Once again you're trying to argue "Nothing confirms that person did that thing in the very precise way I define it because the script didn't go into minute detail." We don't see Sigurd sending any messages, we also don't see him not sending any messages. It's ambiguous. If you want to say it's not ambiguous, you have to prove it. I have laid my proof saying he did report the situation by saying that other people obviously know of Adean's actions and Sigurd intentions. 8 hours ago, omegaxis1 said: By doing this, Sigurd is acting as a noble and upright knight of Granvalle that would leave Granvalle blameless for their actions, which would prevent Augustria from having their lords become anti-Granvalle as a result. Not only that, it would no doubt make the king doubtful about Sigurd being a traitor even more and would be willing to hear Sigurd out. Sigurd going out and conquering nations and ultimately harbor Shannan made him look bad as a result. Fact: We know the King was pleased with Sigurd's actions in the prologue. Conjecture: Azmur was not pleased with Sigurd's follow up actions. Conjecture: Azmur was very pleased with Sigurd's follow up actions. You're conjecture is as good as mine. I think the fact that there's no scene showing anyone displeased with Sigurd invading Verdane is proof enough that nobody in Grannvale was displeased with it. Once again, if the narrative of the game wanted to depict Sigurd as being reckless and at fault, then they would have actually shown consequences for his actions. This is going back to saying the castle is undefended yet having Deirdre kidnapped outside of it. Plot points only having meaning when they're executed. What the game does suggest is that Sigurd going out and conquering all the nations made him look good. Azmur is incredulous about Sigurd's supposed traitor status and the game suggests very heavily that is Sigurd and the king simply managed to meet each other, then the tragedy would have been avoided. Yes, Sigurd sheltering Shannan gave Reptor more ammo to accuse him of being a traitor, but his primary reason for doing that was to remove Lord Byron and Lord Ring as a political rival. Merely an opinion, but I think if he was brazen enough to outright murder his Prince, then he would have accused Byron and Ring of being traitors regardless. Maybe Sigurd would have been spared if he started to act like Adorey, but the kingdom still would have fallen, the child hunts still would have happened, only instead it would have been Sigurd going around committing them. 8 hours ago, omegaxis1 said: Also, if Sigurd had thought more about Deridre's curse, and even kept the case that he loved her, say that he still did take her in. He would have ensured she remained by his side or well protected by his trusted knights at all times. The narrative indicates that he ended up leaving Deirdre under the care of Shannan only. No one else. Thus, this led Deirdre to act recklessly and able to convince said kid to let her go, which is a stupid move by all accounts. Sigurd should have had his personal knights stay by, which would ensure she didn't leave their protection. This has already been addressed above. Shannon was not the only person in the castle with Deirdre. There was at least he messenger to delivered the news to them. And the armourer, trader, fortunate teller etc that you can make use of. Not to mention that the game does specifically tell you to leave units in the castle in the first chapter of the game. To believe Shannon was the only one defending Deirdre is to believe that Sigurd had only two dozen people in his service the entire time (something Kaga has indicated is not the case in this very interview). 8 hours ago, omegaxis1 said: Knowing that Deirdre is being targetted by the dark cult, knowing that the dark cult is causing all the issues, this, by all means, means that Sigurd should have realized that all the war is a result of the dark cult. He could have pulled back and tried to inform the king of the danger and even tried to take Deirdre to the royal court to protect her. Doing this would have actually made Deirdre be discovered to be Kurth's daughter, and that would have entirely destroyed Manfroy's plan, along with Arvis, as Sigurd and Deirdre would be rightfully married. Sigurd had no idea Deirdre was Kurth's daughter. That would have required him to have prophetic powers. Given the policy, Sigurd is more likely to assume Deirdre would be burned alive if he brought her to court and revealed that there was a possibility she had lopt blood. 8 hours ago, omegaxis1 said: Or even if he didn't do that, he would have still continued to keep Deirdre by his side, not leave her by the castle with a kid being her watcher. Taken her with him where he could again keep an eye on her and safe. Better to keep them where you can keep them close, than keep them somewhere far where he couldn't be there to protect her. There is no reason to assume a battlefield would be safer than a fortified castle for a baby and young mother (something Ethlyn really should have realized). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eryon Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 In regards to the persecution point, I'll note that while it might work for Deirdre and Arvis as an element to make them sympathetic it doesn't really work for the Loptyrians overall since they're toadies of a dragon who specializes in tormenting humanity. Manfroy in particular has way too much fun terrorizing the world for him to work as someone we're supposed to see as having once had persecution happen to him in his past and so he's pushed to wage war on the world out of revenge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotari Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 2 hours ago, Eryon said: In regards to the persecution point, I'll note that while it might work for Deirdre and Arvis as an element to make them sympathetic it doesn't really work for the Loptyrians overall since they're toadies of a dragon who specializes in tormenting humanity. Manfroy in particular has way too much fun terrorizing the world for him to work as someone we're supposed to see as having once had persecution happen to him in his past and so he's pushed to wage war on the world out of revenge. I think they do a decent enough job of making them sympathetic with the conversation that happens after you capture Darna. But yeah, other then that they're irredeemable scum. It's funny, I think Genealogy manages to simultaneously have both the most morally grey and the most black and white conflict in the series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omegaxis1 Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 14 hours ago, Jotari said: I already preaddressed this issue and gave a narrative reasoning as to why it makes absolutely no sense to make it Sigurd's flaw yet not have that flaw mean anything. If we're to argue this you're going to actually have to raise some points to challenge mine. 2 14 hours ago, Jotari said: This has already been addressed above. Shannon was not the only person in the castle with Deirdre. There was at least he messenger to delivered the news to them. And the armourer, trader, fortunate teller etc that you can make use of. Not to mention that the game does specifically tell you to leave units in the castle in the first chapter of the game. To believe Shannon was the only one defending Deirdre is to believe that Sigurd had only two dozen people in his service the entire time (something Kaga has indicated is not the case in this very interview). 3 Except I HAVE challenged it, and you are simply waving it off. The ONLY character to indicate the case about Deirdre was Shannan. No other character. But even if the game leaves you with another character there, guess what? Either Sigurd is dumb enough to not tell any of his own knights to keep watch, instead leaving it to only a little kid, or said unit is stupid enough to allow Sigurd's wife to tread across the field unprotected. But since Sigurd is the leader, the incompetence of the knight is his responsibility. No matter how you dish it out, the fact is that the story is structured to declare that Sigurd left his wife to be watched after by a little kid. And structured that Deirdre was ALLOWED to leave the castle completely unsupervised. That is, by all means, a mark of incompetence from Sigurd. 14 hours ago, Jotari said: You still haven't solved the issue of what Sigurd would do. Leaving her in the forest for anyone else to find would have been stupidly reckless. Except this one goes by the case of conjecture on both sides. Neither knows whether Deirdre would have been found if Sigurd left her alone and just took care of Sandima on his own. You say that she would still have been found, I say that she wouldn't. Just because someone is looking doesn't mean they'll be found. 14 hours ago, Jotari said: Do you honestly think Grannvale was angry at Sigurd for his actions? You think that's the narrative the game was trying to push? Because there's not a single line indicating that. This goes back to how you tried to argue on the Ashera's a god case by claiming "Nothing confirms that person did that thing in the very precise way I define it because the script didn't go into minute detail." Sigurd is in communication with Grannvale when performing his actions. He is being rewarded for his actions, instead of being reprimanded. He gains more responsibilities and consistently has messengers from Valhalla reporting to him. There is no reason to believe anyone in Grannvale objected to him defending their lands and launching a counter offensive on a nation that violated their non aggression pact. Your claim is as baseless as a claim saying Lex is a transsexual, because hey, the game never expressly said he isn't. That's the logic your working under. 4 Yes, because Sigurd going there, attacking nations without any declarations, rather than just defending and waiting for orders, especially since it was expressively mentioned that Sigurd's actions in invading Verdane is what resulted in all the lords in Augustria to be even more hostile toward Granvalle, something that Sigurd couldn't even explain why that happened. As if he couldn't comprehend that his own actions in attacking Verdane were what triggered Augustria to go against Granvalle that all it took was Manfroy to give Chagall a little persuasion for the full attack to be launched. 14 hours ago, Jotari said: Show me proof. Every noble in Grannvale knew Adean had been captured and even Cuan as far away as Leinster knew it. They all arrived specifically to assist Sigurd. Once again you're trying to argue "Nothing confirms that person did that thing in the very precise way I define it because the script didn't go into minute detail." We don't see Sigurd sending any messages, we also don't see him not sending any messages. It's ambiguous. If you want to say it's not ambiguous, you have to prove it. I have laid my proof saying he did report the situation by saying that other people obviously know of Adean's actions and Sigurd intentions. What noble supported him? Quan? The man that is helping Sigurd because he is 1) his brother-in-law, and 2) a friend from school that made a pact with him. Quan's reasons for helping Sigurd are for personal reasons. And every other noble known would be against Sigurd. Also, Eldigan did not personally help Sigurd by any means. He only assisted Sigurd in preventing the lords of his own nation from intervening. 14 hours ago, Jotari said: You're conjecture is as good as mine. I think the fact that there's no scene showing anyone displeased with Sigurd invading Verdane is proof enough that nobody in Grannvale was displeased with it. Once again, if the narrative of the game wanted to depict Sigurd as being reckless and at fault, then they would have actually shown consequences for his actions. This is going back to saying the castle is undefended yet having Deirdre kidnapped outside of it. Plot points only having meaning when they're executed. What the game does suggest is that Sigurd going out and conquering all the nations made him look good. Azmur is incredulous about Sigurd's supposed traitor status and the game suggests very heavily that is Sigurd and the king simply managed to meet each other, then the tragedy would have been avoided. Yes, Sigurd sheltering Shannan gave Reptor more ammo to accuse him of being a traitor, but his primary reason for doing that was to remove Lord Byron and Lord Ring as a political rival. Merely an opinion, but I think if he was brazen enough to outright murder his Prince, then he would have accused Byron and Ring of being traitors regardless. Maybe Sigurd would have been spared if he started to act like Adorey, but the kingdom still would have fallen, the child hunts still would have happened, only instead it would have been Sigurd going around committing them. 3 Except they were indicating it. Quote Eltshan: “How’ve you been, Sigurd… So what prompted you to take Evans Castle? You’re not formally attacking Verdane, are you?” Quote Grandbell’s subjugation of Verdane caused quite a stir in neighbouring Agustria. The lords of Agustria expressed strong anti-Grandbell sentiment. Also, Sigurd's orders were to maintain a hold of Evans Castle. Meaning that even if others attacked it, Sigurd has to defend it, not attack back. But Sigurd meets the enemies and keeps going till he conquered the enemy. Now, you mention how he is rewarded for defending the castle. That's keeping to the orders. But by attacking back and conquering the enemy, he's basically conquering the nation that only makes the situation even worse because it only incited further conflict. Sigurd doesn't realize the consequences of his actions. One of the rare cases where winning battles is actually making things worse for him. 14 hours ago, Jotari said: Sigurd had no idea Deirdre was Kurth's daughter. That would have required him to have prophetic powers. Given the policy, Sigurd is more likely to assume Deirdre would be burned alive if he brought her to court and revealed that there was a possibility she had lopt blood. 1 Really funny, don't you think? That Sigurd, despite having been with her for a long time (well over a year no doubt), was never able to realize that she was Kurth's daughter or of the royal family. Despite how the Brand of Naga was ON HER FOREHEAD. 14 hours ago, Jotari said: There is no reason to assume a battlefield would be safer than a fortified castle for a baby and young mother (something Ethlyn really should have realized). The baby? Sure. Leave behind at the castle. But the wife? Better to keep her by their side, since she has actually been proven to be a capable magic user. And say that he still wanted her at the castle. Knowing her circumstance, he should have stationed his more trusted knights, other characters that he knew, and ensured that Deirdre did not leave the castle until he returned. 4 hours ago, Eryon said: In regards to the persecution point, I'll note that while it might work for Deirdre and Arvis as an element to make them sympathetic it doesn't really work for the Loptyrians overall since they're toadies of a dragon who specializes in tormenting humanity. Manfroy in particular has way too much fun terrorizing the world for him to work as someone we're supposed to see as having once had persecution happen to him in his past and so he's pushed to wage war on the world out of revenge. 2 hours ago, Jotari said: I think they do a decent enough job of making them sympathetic with the conversation that happens after you capture Darna. But yeah, other then that they're irredeemable scum. It's funny, I think Genealogy manages to simultaneously have both the most morally grey and the most black and white conflict in the series. This was one of my biggest gripes with Kaga. The essence of trying to convey a narrative of making the player question the persecution one suffered falls very short. Giving only two or so cases of the suffering the Lopto Sect, TELLING us, rather than showing us, really falls short. Kaga did nothing but show how irredeemable and completely unsympathetic scum the Loptous people were. And these were supposed to be people that didn't participate in child hunts or such back then when Loptous was in power since it's been a century since then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotari Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 (edited) 8 hours ago, omegaxis1 said: [snip] This quoting of overly long comments is getting out of hand. Here are your assertions as I understand them. 1. Sigurd did not have the consent of Grandbell for his actions. 2. Sigurd should have left Deirdre alone in the Spirit Forest. 3. Sigurd shouldn't have left Deirdre alone in Agustria Castle. Those are things you need to prove to me with direct evidence from the game which you've provided none of. Here are my assertions 1. Sigurd did have the consent of Grandbell and in fact Grandbell was very pleased with Sigurd's actions. **Proof: Sigurd gets promoted for his actions. Gets a sword. Gets money. Azmur is doubtful of Sigurd's betrayal in Chapter 5 due to how admirably he has performed. Every noble still in the country (that's Lex, Azel and Alvis) as well as nobles outside the kingdom (Cuan and Ethlyn) come rushing to his aid (actually I suppose Adroney was probably still in the kingdom and didn't come to Sigurd's aid...even though it was his sister that had been kidnapped before. Never noticed that until now. Man that guy's such a dick. They should have given him some sort of presence in that opening chapter, he's not even mentioned once. Claude and Tailtyu are also around and don't get a mention I suppose, so I'll amend my statement to say that half of the nobility come rushing to Sigurd's aid). I believe that's overwhelming proof in favor of my assertion. I predict what your response will be, you will nitpick and get pedantic about my statements without actually invalidating them. That won't work. You have to show me counter proof. Give me even a single line of dialogue suggesting Sigurd's country was disappointed with his actions or that his actions weren't the thing that was expressly expected of him (I'll add that it's even a Grannvale policy to respond to unprovoked attacks with retaliation given what is publicly known to have happened in Isaac, so not only is there no evidence to the contrary, there is in fact precedence for Sigurd's actions). 2. Sigurd shouldn't have left Deirdre alone in the Spirit Forest. **Proof: You're right. This is my conjecture vs your conjecture. But the thing is, it's also Sigurd's conjecture. He has no idea how hard or easy it his to find the spirit forest. What he does know is that he wants to protect this girl and the best way to do that is to keep her near. We also need to consider that Deirdre isn't Sigurd's slave, she chooses to go with him of her own volition. I think (and you're just plain allowed to disagree with me on this one) that Sigurd choosing to leave Deirdre in the spirit forest against his own desire to be with her, against her desire to be with him and with absolutely be effective (remember, she's already been seemingly captured once and when he first finds her she's already getting into trouble with a pair of harassers). And this is all assuming he even knows about her holy blood which he only gets canon confirmation of if Sandima dies first, otherwise it's the vaguest of vague "She's cursed and great calamity will befall us if her hyman doesn't remain in tact" which we know he thinks is "superstitious nonsense" (for the sake of their relationship, I'll assume Deirdre did give him the full rundown of what her deal is). 3. Sigurd should have left Deirdre alone in Agustria Castle. **Proof: A castle is a safe place for a young mother and her baby. Sigurd is not a mind reader, this is the first time he's ever been separated from Deirdre for so long. He had no idea she'd leave to try and see him without a proper guard. In fact, asserting that Deirdre would inevitable go searching for Sigurd completely invalidates anything you might have on point 2, because even if Sigurd decided to leave her in the Spirit Forest, her libido is just that damn strong that she would have left to go find him anyway. This fuck up is on Deirdre, not Sigurd. Despite how passive a character she is, she does have agency and should take responsibility for her decisions. Saying he should have known is once again giving him psychic powers which he presumably lacks. Now don't just go over my statements with a fine tooth comb. Give me some evidence to back up your statements. Evidence, not opinion (like saying Sigurd should have had more than just Shannan guarding her. That's an opinion and one that ignores the representational nature of the story). Edited February 22, 2019 by Jotari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omegaxis1 Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 7 minutes ago, Jotari said: snip It is getting a lot. Now, for you assertations: 7 minutes ago, Jotari said: 1. Sigurd did have the consent of Grandbell and in fact Grandbell was very pleased with Sigurd's actions. 1 You say the proof is that Sigurd was promoted for his actions, but his orders were only to remain and hold Evans Castle. Nothing more. He was not ordered to go and start conquering the incoming enemies. Defense means that you must hold your position and just not lose the castle. Just maintain a defense and that's it. Sigurd being rewarded for defending the castle is him following that order. But he has not stopped himself from going out and conquering Verdane completely and then Augustria. This ultimately forced Belhalla to occupy the two nations and thus caused a major ruckus. It is literally stated in the narration right here: Quote Grandbell’s subjugation of Verdane caused quite a stir in neighbouring Agustria. The lords of Agustria expressed strong anti-Grandbell sentiment. 1 Also, you say it's nitpicking, but many of your arguments in the half the nobles can hardly even hold ground. Azelle was ordered NOT to go, but he ran away from Arvis. Lex just followed Azelle. Andorey... this is the same man that murdered his and Adean's father, yes? And though you can say about Claude, Tailtiu was there for Claude, not Sigurd. She even admitted she doesn't understand the political issues. How can you even consider that to be overwhelming proof? And again, what does giving Sigurd a sword mean in giving permission to go invade other nations? Is this a custom or something? 12 minutes ago, Jotari said: 2. Sigurd shouldn't have left Deirdre alone in the Spirit Forest. First off, nothing indicates that Deirdre was captured. Deirdre makes a note of meeting Adean, but nothing about being captured. She's being harassed, but no one was trying to track her and capture her. So what you said makes absolutely no sense in her capture there. And based on what Sandima says, despite their best efforts, they had not made any progress in finding her. Sigurd and Deirdre's meeting was a chance encounter, but that was it. A chance encounter. Also, if Spirit Forest has those protected by Maerists, and say that Sigurd told Deirdre to stay, he basically rejected her feelings, and she would be forced to stay. He brought her with him because he says he loves her as well. Also, can you give me any proof on why Sigurd was this incompetent in not figuring out Deirdre's identity: 8 hours ago, omegaxis1 said: Really funny, don't you think? That Sigurd, despite having been with her for a long time (well over a year no doubt), was never able to realize that she was Kurth's daughter or of the royal family. Despite how the Brand of Naga was ON HER FOREHEAD. And this is knowing that Cigyun had a daughter about Deirdre's age that Sigurd did learn about, that was born from an affair with Kurth. Yet Sigurd was incapable of putting things together? Not only that, but if Sigurd did realize that she was Kurth's daughter from this, he had every reason and justification to return to the castle, and being wed to Deirdre would have cleared his name completely, despite the other nobles trying to pin the blame on Sigurd. And this would also destroy Manfroy and Arvis's plans completely as Sigurd would become the King Regent. 22 minutes ago, Jotari said: 3. Sigurd should have left Deirdre alone in Agustria Castle. But this is a case of Sigurd completely ignoring that Deirdre is being targetted. He didn't indicate to station any of his personal guards or knights to keep an eye on her. And even if there are hundreds of other faceless mooks there in said castle, they basically allowed Deirdre to walk out of their protection. This canonically makes absolutely no sense at all, because that's not something a knight would not allow. But because the dialogue indicates that Shannan let her go, it's purely on Sigurd for letting a kid try and protect his wife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tetragrammaton Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 22 minutes ago, Jotari said: actually I suppose Adroney was probably still in the kingdom and didn't come to Sigurd's aid...even though it was his sister that had been kidnapped before. Never noticed that until now. Man that guy's such a dick. They should have given him some sort of presence in that opening chapter, he's not even mentioned once. Claude and Tailtyu are also around and don't get a mention I suppose, so I'll amend my statement to say that half of the nobility come rushing to Sigurd's aid). André stays with his father in Isaac at the time and later kills his own father. Claude and Tailtyu are simply not playing the prince charming rescue the hot princess game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotari Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 (edited) 47 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: It is getting a lot. Now, for you assertations: You say the proof is that Sigurd was promoted for his actions, but his orders were only to remain and hold Evans Castle. Nothing more. He was not ordered to go and start conquering the incoming enemies. Defense means that you must hold your position and just not lose the castle. Just maintain a defense and that's it. Sigurd being rewarded for defending the castle is him following that order. But he has not stopped himself from going out and conquering Verdane completely and then Augustria. This ultimately forced Belhalla to occupy the two nations and thus caused a major ruckus. Prove it It is literally stated in the narration right here: Yes, it caused a stir in Agustria. I don't dispute that. What we're arguing is what Grannvale's opinion of Sigurd's actions were. I'll also add that the problems in Agustria were exasperated by the recent assassination of their king, another thing had Sigurd no knowledge of. Before Shagall came into power Grannvale and Agustria had very friendly relations. Also, you say it's nitpicking, but many of your arguments in the half the nobles can hardly even hold ground. Azelle was ordered NOT to go, but he ran away from Arvis. Lex just followed Azelle. Andorey... this is the same man that murdered his and Adean's father, yes? And though you can say about Claude, Tailtiu was there for Claude, not Sigurd. She even admitted she doesn't understand the political issues. How can you even consider that to be overwhelming proof? And again, what does giving Sigurd a sword mean in giving permission to go invade other nations? Is this a custom or something? Because they are there. The biggest one is Alvis who is representing the king. Additionally I never claimed Claude or Tailtyu were assisting Alvis. In fact I explicitly said they weren't. First off, nothing indicates that Deirdre was captured. Deirdre makes a note of meeting Adean, but nothing about being captured. She's being harassed, but no one was trying to track her and capture her. So what you said makes absolutely no sense in her capture there. And based on what Sandima says, despite their best efforts, they had not made any progress in finding her. Sigurd and Deirdre's meeting was a chance encounter, but that was it. A chance encounter. Also, if Spirit Forest has those protected by Maerists, and say that Sigurd told Deirdre to stay, he basically rejected her feelings, and she would be forced to stay. He brought her with him because he says he loves her as well. If Deirdre wasn't captured then it means she was already wandering out of the Spirit Forest on her own for no reason which is even more of a reason to dismiss the Spirit Forest as any means of protection. Also, can you give me any proof on why Sigurd was this incompetent in not figuring out Deirdre's identity: You mean as the daughter of Kurth or as a decedent of Maria? Because I've already said I assume she revealed her lopt heritage to him. As for the Naga one, no one recognized the fact that Julius's mark was clearly not of Fala. These things just aren't common knowledge it seems. And this is knowing that Cigyun had a daughter about Deirdre's age that Sigurd did learn about, that was born from an affair with Kurth. Yet Sigurd was incapable of putting things together? Nope. He had no way of knowing Cigyun had a daughter with Kurth. He was just informed they had an affair and that she abandoned her family afterwards. Without a photo of Cigyn there is absolutely no way to link this story to Deirdre. No one says she's from the spirit forest or had lopt blood or anything. Cigyun is just a woman who had an affair and nothing more. Not only that, but if Sigurd did realize that she was Kurth's daughter from this, he had every reason and justification to return to the castle, and being wed to Deirdre would have cleared his name completely, despite the other nobles trying to pin the blame on Sigurd. And this would also destroy Manfroy and Arvis's plans completely as Sigurd would become the King Regent. Yes, if he had psychic powers to deduce that she was Kurth's daughter, which unfortunately for him, he lacks. But this is a case of Sigurd completely ignoring that Deirdre is being targetted. He didn't indicate to station any of his personal guards or knights to keep an eye on her. And even if there are hundreds of other faceless mooks there in said castle, they basically allowed Deirdre to walk out of their protection. This canonically makes absolutely no sense at all, because that's not something a knight would not allow. But because the dialogue indicates that Shannan let her go, it's purely on Sigurd for letting a kid try and protect his wife. Deirdre is their lord's wife. Any soldiers there, plus Shannan, have to obey her. Saying it's all Sigurd's fault is completely taking away the responsibility from Deirdre for her own actions. Should Sigurd have put more safeguards in place to ensure Deirdre didn't leave safe haven? Well yes, he should have, we know that from hindsight. Was there any reason for Sigurd to believe his wife would abandon safety on her own volition and get herself captured? No, because people in relationship do things their partners don't expect all the time. You still haven't given me any proof for your assertion. You've just tried to discredit mine, as absence of proof is not proof of absence without context. Even if you somehow argue my assertions down to zero, that doesn't rise your assertions above 0. So I ask restrain your desire to nitpick my words for a second and give me these three things. 1. Proof that Grannvale was not supportive of the invasion of Verdane. And then lay out a situation in which Sigurd not doing so wouldn't have lead to tragedy (because his father dying and Alvis X Deirdre still would have happened as far as I see). 2. Proof that it would have been an obviously wiser decision for Sigurd to abandon Deirdre against her will, his desires and with no certainty the Spirit Forest provided any guaranteed safety. And then lay out a situation which wouldn't have lead to tragedy (because his father still would have been killed and he still would have been labelled a traitor. Alvis still probably would have even become ruler in lieu of any opposition, though probably not with the title of emperor). 3. Proof that Sigurd would think taking his wife to a battlefield and separating her from her new born son would have been preferable to leaving her in a fortified castle (and remember, saying he should have known she'd leave is an opinion, not proof). And then lay out a situation in which not doing so wouldn't have lead to tragedy (because his father still would have died and he still would have been labelled a traitor. Alvis still probably would have even become ruler in lieu of any opposition, though probably not with the title of emperor). Just going to bold response. 45 minutes ago, hanhnn said: André stays with his father in Isaac at the time and later kills his own father. Claude and Tailtyu are simply not playing the prince charming rescue the hot princess game Hmm. I think zeroth generation returns from Isaac before Ring and Kurth get murdered. Still, I suppose there's no reason to assume Andorey didn't go to Isaac given Adean was around to look after Jungby and there's no mention of him in the prologue. I'm also an assuming that Bloom was in Isaac (despite my fanfic assuming otherwise) because Tailtyu (and that other sister who seemingly only exists if Tailtyu doesn't marry) was around. The only memeber of Sigurd's generation that we know for sure went to Isaac is Danann, it's eventual ruler. You know what I question though? Why was Aedean lugging Yewfelle around the continent with her when Ring should have brought it to Isaach? And did the Verdanians really let her keep it after they kidnapped her? Or did she go back to Jungby and take it with her on the off chance she comes across her long lost sister where it can be used as an inexplicable aid to recover he lost memories. Any why did she even go with Sigurd when there was no one (that we know of) managing Jungby? Worse than that, why did Jamka go with Sigurd when his country had just been torn apart and he stands as the only royal left alive? Contrivances for gameplay at its finest. Edited February 22, 2019 by Jotari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acacia Sgt Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Jotari said: You know what I question though? Why was Aedean lugging Yewfelle around the continent with her when Ring should have brought it to Isaach? And did the Verdanians really let her keep it after they kidnapped her? Or did she go back to Jungby and take it with her on the off chance she comes across her long lost sister where it can be used as an inexplicable aid to recover he lost memories. Any why did she even go with Sigurd when there was no one (that we know of) managing Jungby? Worse than that, why did Jamka go with Sigurd when his country had just been torn apart and he stands as the only royal left alive? Contrivances for gameplay at its finest. Regarding Edain and the Yewfelle: Sigurd: “Adean… Didn’t you leave the knighthood to become a nun? I think it suits you perfectly. I’d do well to learn a thing or two from you myself.” Adean: “Actually, the sole reason I joined the nunnery is… Well, it’s to aid the chances of finding my sister.” Sigurd: “You must mean Briggid. She’s been missing since your childhood, hasn’t she… You still believe you can find her, do you?” Adean: “That’s correct. And when I do, I must give the Holy Bow Ichival to her!” Since she didn't plan on getting kidnapped, it's likely the bow avoided being stolen and she simply picked it up between Chapters 1 and 2, when she had the chance. Even if it was stolen as well, it's likely it was simply taken back during Chapter 1. It's likely she simply took the chance, since Sigurd ended up hoping all over the western side of the continent. She lucked out then that's where Briggid was, and not on the other side, then. As for who took care of Jungby... well, Sigurd also left Chalphy alone, didn't he? Dozel likewise, since Dannan was with his father. Perhaps each duchy has regents for this kind of situations. I can agree with you there on Jamke. Edited February 22, 2019 by Acacia Sgt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omegaxis1 Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Jotari said: Prove it Narration: Quote Upon gaining control of the Verdane Kingdom, Sigurd received orders from Barhara to preside over Evans Castle along the border. Quote Under orders to hold Evans Castle, Sigurd once again found himself in the midst of conflict. His orders were clear. Hold Evans Castle. He did hold it, but he ended up charging toward the enemy and conquering them. 1 hour ago, Jotari said: Yes, it caused a stir in Agustria. I don't dispute that. What we're arguing is what Grannvale's opinion of Sigurd's actions were. I'll also add that the problems in Agustria were exasperated by the recent assassination of their king, another thing had Sigurd no knowledge of. Before Shagall came into power Grannvale and Agustria had very friendly relations. 2 Except the narration explicitly mentions that the lords grew more hostile because of Sigurd conquering Verdane. The assassination is another thing. But ultimately, Sigurd's actions is still something that caused this mess, even in part. 1 hour ago, Jotari said: Because they are there. The biggest one is Alvis who is representing the king. Additionally I never claimed Claude or Tailtyu were assisting Alvis. In fact I explicitly said they weren't. 2 Which again, all Arvis did was survey the situation. What does survey the situation mean to you? Does it mean automatic granting of orders to attack? Or that gifting a sword means attack? Again, you haven't answered that question. What does gifting a sword mean in expressing permission to attack? And as I showed above, Sigurd's orders were made to hold Evans Castle, not to make any extra moves in attacking. 1 hour ago, Jotari said: If Deirdre wasn't captured then it means she was already wandering out of the Spirit Forest on her own for no reason which is even more of a reason to dismiss the Spirit Forest as any means of protection. Yes, a single chance encounter and incident completely dismiss all notions of protection, yes? Nothing about Deirdre's situation where she was makes any sense in how she met Sigurd. What she was doing there or anything. It happens because Sigurd and Deirdre have to meet. But it was stated that the Maerists resided in Spirit Forest and have been protecting Maera's descendants. 1 hour ago, Jotari said: You mean as the daughter of Kurth or as a decedent of Maria? Because I've already said I assume she revealed her lopt heritage to him. As for the Naga one, no one recognized the fact that Julius's mark was clearly not of Fala. These things just aren't common knowledge it seems. 2 Minor Bloods do not bear a mark. Major Bloods do. Deirdre bears the brand of Naga on her forehead that Sigurd must have seen given the time he spent with her (and had sex with her if Seliph means anything). And not common knowledge? Are you kidding me? What kind of ridiculous logic is that? The mark of Naga is the mark of the ROYAL FAMILY. A freaking noble of all things SHOULD know. It SHOULD be common knowledge for EVERYONE. So the fact that Sigurd DIDN'T know means he's really that incompetent to know be able to recognize the brand despite how he has a brand as well. But the royal family's brand should be far more recognizable because it is the one held in the highest regard. 1 hour ago, Jotari said: Nope. He had no way of knowing Cigyun had a daughter with Kurth. He was just informed they had an affair and that she abandoned her family afterwards. Without a photo of Cigyn there is absolutely no way to link this story to Deirdre. No one says she's from the spirit forest or had lopt blood or anything. Cigyun is just a woman who had an affair and nothing more. 4 1 hour ago, Jotari said: Yes, if he had psychic powers to deduce that she was Kurth's daughter, which unfortunately for him, he lacks. It is called common sense. The brand of Naga is proof that Deirdre has relations to the royal family. Sigurd learned that Kurth had an affair with Arvis's mother, and Arvis's mother ran away and left the place. Like, put two and two together, and all the answers are right there. Rather than throw the psychic card, how about realizing that anyone competent would be able to put the pieces of information together. 1 hour ago, Jotari said: Deirdre is their lord's wife. Any soldiers there, plus Shannan, have to obey her. Saying it's all Sigurd's fault is completely taking away the responsibility from Deirdre for her own actions. Should Sigurd have put more safeguards in place to ensure Deirdre didn't leave safe haven? Well yes, he should have, we know that from hindsight. Was there any reason for Sigurd to believe his wife would abandon safety on her own volition and get herself captured? No, because people in relationship do things their partners don't expect all the time. 1 Tell me, who is the one in charge and giving orders? Deirdre, the lord's wife? Or Sigurd, the lord himself? Who are the knights obligated to obey? Sigurd. And his orders were for Deirdre to remain there. And even if you make an argument that they did obey and let her go, they let her go unsupervised? Either Sigurd, a single guy, is incompetent enough to leave a kid to watch over his wife. Or hundreds of knights are incompetent enough to actually let their lord's wife run through the area completely unsupervised? By all logic, the only one incompetent enough is Sigurd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acacia Sgt Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 11 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: Yes, a single chance encounter and incident completely dismiss all notions of protection, yes? Nothing about Deirdre's situation where she was makes any sense in how she met Sigurd. What she was doing there or anything. It happens because Sigurd and Deirdre have to meet. But it was stated that the Maerists resided in Spirit Forest and have been protecting Maera's descendants. Honeslty, I'd question how good is their protetion. If Dierdre left the forest once, she could leave again. The man that tells Sigurd about the forest was able to tell him Dierdre's own name. In fact: Quote Man: “That might be a tad difficult. You see, the villagers of the Spirit Forest do not involve themselves with the outside world. Moreover, that girl you’re so fond of is strictly forbidden from associating with men. The villagers believe a great catastrophe will befall us if that were ever violated. I’ll get right to the point, Sigurd. Resign yourself of that girl.” If someone from outside the forest can know she can't "associate with men", then... honestly, I don't know who is more incompetent. The Maerans "protecting" her for allowing so much about her be known outside the forest. Or Sandima for failing to figure out what random men of Verdane so casually know. After all, all they need to find out is that Dierdre is hiding in the Spirit Forest, and you can bet Manfroy would warp in with lots of Sect Members. In the end, it's only our speculation how that kidnapping attempt would go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omegaxis1 Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 2 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said: Honeslty, I'd question how good is their protetion. If Dierdre left the forest once, she could leave again. The man that tells Sigurd about the forest was able to tell him Dierdre's own name. In fact: If someone from outside the forest can know she can't "associate with men", then... honestly, I don't know who is more incompetent. The Maerans "protecting" her for allowing so much about her be known outside the forest. Or Sandima for failing to figure out what random men of Verdane so casually know. After all, all they need to find out is that Dierdre is hiding in the Spirit Forest, and you can bet Manfroy would warp in with lots of Sect Members. In the end, it's only our speculation how that kidnapping attempt would go. 4 That is an issue. Yet at the same time, the Maerists also have the case of making a policy of having the Loptous descendant bear only a single child. And Cigyun was the one that broke that creed by bearing two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acacia Sgt Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 (edited) You know, considering Cigyun was able to leave not only the forest but also from Verdane completely, for almost ten years even... yeah, I have to think maybe the forest guys are the more incompetent ones. Then again, I'd question why allow the line to continue at all. They had a few generations to go "You know, just in case, avoid having children and let the bloodline die. Adopt if you really want to raise a child" on Maira's descendants. Then again, perhaps they thought that was too much, and thought they could just control the bloodline from expanding. Anyway, on the topic of Sigurd's actions and Grannvale's opinion on them... let's be fair here. Grannvale did the same thing to Isaach what Sigurd did to Verdane and Agustria. Sigurd was never told "Hey, dial it down, we didn't told you to do this" since half the Dukes had their "Take over Jugdral" ambitions. Do remember one of them, Reptor, is the head of the Council. Sigurd was doing their work for them, so why tell him to stop? Once he secured the western half of the continent, his use was up. Hence the whole "Sigurd is part of the conspiracy!" and the whole being labeled a traitor thing. Edited February 22, 2019 by Acacia Sgt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotari Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Acacia Sgt said: Regarding Edain and the Yewfelle: Sigurd: “Adean… Didn’t you leave the knighthood to become a nun? I think it suits you perfectly. I’d do well to learn a thing or two from you myself.” Adean: “Actually, the sole reason I joined the nunnery is… Well, it’s to aid the chances of finding my sister.” Sigurd: “You must mean Briggid. She’s been missing since your childhood, hasn’t she… You still believe you can find her, do you?” Adean: “That’s correct. And when I do, I must give the Holy Bow Ichival to her!” Since she didn't plan on getting kidnapped, it's likely the bow avoided being stolen and she simply picked it up between Chapters 1 and 2, when she had the chance. Even if it was stolen as well, it's likely it was simply taken back during Chapter 1. It's likely she simply took the chance, since Sigurd ended up hoping all over the eastern side of the continent. She lucked out then that's where Briggid was, and not on the other side, then. As for who took care of Jungby... well, Sigurd also left Chalphy alone, didn't he? Dozel likewise, since Dannan was with his father. Perhaps each duchy has regents for this kind of situations. I can agree with you there on Jamke. That explains why Aedean had it, but not why Ring didn't when he was heading into war (maybe he couldn't use it due to an injury or something? That could make for an interesting set up in a culture like Jugdral). 46 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: [snip] -Look you're just not reading what I'm saying. I never once argued that Sigurd conquering Verdane caused didn't a stir in Agustria. Not once. Yet you've brought it up like six times now. What I've asked repeatedly is for you to prove that Granvale was against the action, which the narration doesn't prove. Give me a scene which suggests Grannvale was against the invasion of Verdane. -I know Julius has minor Flala blood and I know the mark on his forehead is not that. What I am saying is that nobody noticed that the mark on his forehead was NOT the mark of Fala and NOT the mark of Naga. People should have been able to say "Hey, wait a second, why does our imperial prince have the mark of the dark empire we over threw instead of the mark of one of the two crusaders that overthrew it." But since no one was able to come to that conclusion, we can only deduce that what the marks look like are not common knowledge. -How do you know the mark of Naga is the same as the emblem of the royal family? -Noble women had power in these times. Just look at Hilda, or even Ishtar who holds enough authority to give counter orders to imperial orders, and she's barely more than a child. Deirdre left of her own choice. You can either believe she did that through an inexplicably empty castle, or she did that with people who were unable to stop her. That doesn't change the fact that it was her choice to leave and not Sigurd's. -You still haven't actually provided any evidence to affirm your assertions. I ask again for, 1. Proof that Grannvale was not supportive of the invasion of Verdane. And then lay out a situation in which Sigurd not doing so wouldn't have lead to tragedy (because his father dying and Alvis X Deirdre still would have happened as far as I see). 2. Proof that it would have been an obviously wiser decision for Sigurd to abandon Deirdre against her will, his desires and with no certainty the Spirit Forest provided any guaranteed safety. And then lay out a situation which wouldn't have lead to tragedy (because his father still would have been killed and he still would have been labelled a traitor. Alvis still probably would have even become ruler in lieu of any opposition, though probably not with the title of emperor). 3. Proof that Sigurd would think taking his wife to a battlefield and separating her from her new born son would have been preferable to leaving her in a fortified castle (and remember, saying he should have known she'd leave is an opinion, not proof). And then lay out a situation in which not doing so wouldn't have lead to tragedy (because his father still would have died and he still would have been labelled a traitor. Alvis still probably would have even become ruler in lieu of any opposition, though probably not with the title of emperor). Edited February 22, 2019 by Jotari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omegaxis1 Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 2 minutes ago, Jotari said: -Look you're just not reading what I'm saying. I never once argued that Sigurd conquering Verdane caused didn't a stir in Agustria. Not once. Yet you've brought it up like six times now. What I've asked repeatedly is for you to prove that Granvale was against the action, which the narration doesn't prove. Give me a scene which suggests Grannvale was against the invasion of Verdane. 1 I DID. Sigurd's orders were to HOLD Evans Castle. THAT'S it. Meaning Sigurd was only meant to HOLD. DEFEND. NOT ATTACK. DO you get it? Instead of focusing on just defending, Sigurd just mounts an attack, recklessly charging in, and ultimately causing even more problems in the long run. 3 minutes ago, Jotari said: -I know Julius has minor Flala blood and I know the mark on his forehead is not that. What I am saying is that nobody noticed that the mark on his forehead was NOT the mark of Fala and NOT the mark of Naga. People should have been able to say "Hey, wait a second, why does our imperial prince have the mark of the dark empire we over threw instead of the mark of one of the two crusaders that overthrew it." But since no one was able to come to that conclusion, we can only deduce that what the marks look like are not common knowledge. -How do you know the mark of Naga is the same as the emblem of the royal family? 2 I absolutely love how you try to throw off a HOLY MARK of the Crusader, the ultimate Crusader, who slew Galle XVII and thus freed them from Loptous's tyranny, would have that mark be not common knowledge. That's absolutely hysterical. Loptous's marking being less recognized makes MORE sense because it's been a century and people are more likely to burn any markings of Loptous. I cannot believe that you would actually make such a ridiculous claim that NAGA'S mark is the one that wouldn't be common knowledge or wouldn't be recognizable, ESPECIALLY for nobles of all people. 8 minutes ago, Jotari said: -Noble women had power in these times. Just look at Hilda. Deirdre left of her own choice. You can either believe she did that through an inexplicably empty castle, or she did that with people who were unable to stop her. That doesn't change the fact that it was her choice to leave and not Sigurd's. Nothing says that she was escorted by any knights. Meaning she went unsupervised. Therefore, Sigurd didn't station any guards to protect or supervise her. ALl the info is right there in the dialogue. No indication of other shenanigans happened. 10 minutes ago, Jotari said: -You still haven't actually provided any evidence to affirm your assertions. I ask again for, I love how you keep asking for proof, which I deliver, but you not only ignore several things, you wave them off and give an excuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotari Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 (edited) 29 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said: I DID. Sigurd's orders were to HOLD Evans Castle. THAT'S it. Meaning Sigurd was only meant to HOLD. DEFEND. NOT ATTACK. DO you get it? Instead of focusing on just defending, Sigurd just mounts an attack, recklessly charging in, and ultimately causing even more problems in the long run. I absolutely love how you try to throw off a HOLY MARK of the Crusader, the ultimate Crusader, who slew Galle XVII and thus freed them from Loptous's tyranny, would have that mark be not common knowledge. That's absolutely hysterical. Loptous's marking being less recognized makes MORE sense because it's been a century and people are more likely to burn any markings of Loptous. I cannot believe that you would actually make such a ridiculous claim that NAGA'S mark is the one that wouldn't be common knowledge or wouldn't be recognizable, ESPECIALLY for nobles of all people. Nothing says that she was escorted by any knights. Meaning she went unsupervised. Therefore, Sigurd didn't station any guards to protect or supervise her. ALl the info is right there in the dialogue. No indication of other shenanigans happened. I love how you keep asking for proof, which I deliver, but you not only ignore several things, you wave them off and give an excuse. You're referring to this. Filat: “Sir Sigurd, your efforts in this conflict have been quite impressive! His Majesty is exceedingly pleased and has ordained you a Holy Knight of the Kingdom.” Sigurd: “I hardly deserve such a great honour! I pledge my allegiance to His Majesty.” Filat: “We gravely need your help in protecting these castles. You will be duly compensated. Of course the sum will go down if the castles incur any damages. Please continue to be vigilant in the ensuing battle.” That is not an order to hold Evans and do nothing else. That's just a congratulations for his efforts thus far and an explanation of the gameplay mechanic for getting gold. What you need Filat to say would be something like this. Filat: “We gravely need your help in protecting these castles. You will be duly compensated. Of course the sum will go down if the castles incur any damages. We don't want you to cross into Verdane however. There's no need to provoke further conflict with Verdane. Or the opening narration saying something like this Where had Adean been swept off to?And what incited King Batou to invade Grandbell without warning?Sprawling before Sigurd lay the daunting Great Verdane Forest. Although he had only been ordered to defend Evans, he decided to launch an invasion into Verdane.He was about to set foot into the forest of spirits… Someone saying well done for defending our lands, please keep that up you're doing a great job, is not an express order to sit tight and do nothing but defend. And as I and another user have already pointed out, this reaction was Grannvale policy given how they reacted to an (alleged) unprovoked attack on Darna. So why did no one question the mark on Julius's forehead then? Yeah, sure they might not recognize it, but shouldn't people have been highly dubious about an unknown mark on the prince nonetheless instead of a mark of something they know really well. And as you point out, if the mark of loptyr is unknown then Sigurd would be likely to just assume that mark on her head is that very thing. Heim could have had an emblem of his own from before defeating loptyr that is the emblem of the royal family. There's no reason the holy mark need be famous or publicly known. I don't know if it is, maybe. The game never shows us what the mark looks like even. Maybe if we get a 3D remake we'll get to see what these marks look like, but consider how Alm and Celica's mark is just a cross, they could be incredibly basic. Regardless all this would show is that Sigurd is not book learned (or hell, we don't know what they got up to in bed, maybe Deirdre literally never took the circlet off) which is not the same as the supposed faults of naivety or rashness. What is certain is that Sigurd, for one reason or another, didn't recognize that Deirdre was Kurth's daughter. So violating his direct orders to handle Agustria to bring her to court would be an extremely out of character thing for him to do. Still Deirdre's choice, not Sigurd's. No, you haven't provided me any proof yet, you've just tried to discredit my responses. I'm the one that had to drag up the incredibly flimsy quote you're trying to use to say Sigurd had no sanction to invade Verdane (which the quote doesn't actually say). And I'm not just asking for proof, I'm asking you to lay out a scenario in which Sigurd could have avoided his tragic fate by doing so, because the things you're suggesting would not have prevented Alvis and the lopt sect seizing the empire, the death of Sigurd's father and or his own branding as a traitor. Lay it out to me in three bullet points, the evidence that Sigurd's invasion into Verdane wasn't approved, that keeping Deirdre in the forest would have been a wiser decision, and, well there's nothing you can say for the third issue except invalidate Deirdre's agency as a character as it was obviously her decision made independently of Sigurd. You might as well blame Sigurd for the fact that Blaggi didn't warn Claude about Alvis for all the sense that makes. Edited February 22, 2019 by Jotari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.