How does Lewyn survive?

[Acacia Sgt]

22 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

Proof of this statement? 

No writing/no explanation is devoid of merit. Because something can't have merit when it isn't explained. Unless you want to argue 0 =/= 0 which is absurd. 

Just about any fiction with some kind of mystery will not reveal everything right away. Well, some might, if the story is more about how the protagonist reaches the answer, instead of going along deducing things with the protagonist; but the fact there's a distinction means there's deliberate information witholding.

How Lewyn survived is not important in the grand scheme of things. You don't question also how Edain, Sylvia, Tailtiu, Lachesis, Erynis, also survied, do you? Since that's not an important detail. Just what happened to them afterwards for some of them is, so that gets explained.

Even if it was, consider that the whole "possessed by Holsety" is a detail meant to not be revealed until game's end. So of course you won't be told that at any point before it. For an in-game explantion, Lewyn is never asked; and mostly interacts with people he'd have already explained things to off-screen, so he's not going to explain again for the player's benefit. Heck, perhaps Holsety himself never bothered to come up with an explanation. After all, who would know Lewyn was even killed in the first place? We don't have the context of Manfroy's attack on Lewyn only that it happened. We never even know if Manfroy ever realized that "Lewyn" was still alive.

Or really, perhaps even in-universe the characters don't consider it a big deal. Just knowing he survived would be enough for some so they don't ask for details.

By the way, yes, things can have merit even if you don't know 100%.

Edited July 22, 2019 by Acacia Sgt

[Icelerate]

16 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Just about any fiction with some kind of mystery will not reveal everything right away. Well, some might, if the story is more about how the protagonist reaches the answer, instead of going along deducing things with the protagonist; but the fact there's a distinction means there's deliberate information witholding.

How Lewyn survived is not important in the grand scheme of things. You don't question also how Edain, Sylvia, Tailtiu, Lachesis, Erynis, also survied, do you? Since that's not an important detail. Just what happened to them afterwards for some of them is, so that gets explained.

Even if it was, consider that the whole "possessed by Holsety" is a detail meant to not be revealed until game's end. So of course you won't be told that at any point before it. For an in-game explantion, Lewyn is never asked; and mostly interacts with people he'd have already explained things to off-screen, so he's not going to explain again for the player's benefit. Heck, perhaps Holsety himself never bothered to come up with an explanation. After all, who would know Lewyn was even killed in the first place? We don't have the context of Manfroy's attack on Lewyn only that it happened. We never even know if Manfroy ever realized that "Lewyn" was still alive.

 Or really, perhaps even in-universe the characters don't consider it a big deal. Just knowing he survived would be enough for some so they don't ask for details.

By the way, yes, things can have merit even if you don't know 100%.

Never said it has to be revealed right away but the whole point of a mystery is that it will eventually be solved. 

Where was it stated they survived? I want proof from the script. Of course I need to know how they survived because everyone in Sigurd's army was shown to be obliterated by the meteors. 

A competent script is going to tell its readers details of important conversations. 

Are you claiming we don't need to know why Ephidel didn't teleport away from the blast instead of scream for Nergal's help? Anything that doesn't make logical sense or contradicts what has been shown should be addressed. 

In universe characters not caring doesn't mean the audience doesn't care. I mean no one in the script wondered why Ephidel didn't teleport away but this doesn't justify him not teleporting. I would think a character getting crushed by a meteor but other characters witnessing this event and then not wondering how that person survived to be bad writing. 

So does that mean the blood pact has merit even if it wasn't explained 100% properly? 

Edited July 22, 2019 by Icelerate

[Acacia Sgt]

3 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

Never said it has to be revealed right away but the whole point of a mystery is that it will eventually be solved. 

Where was it stated they survived? I want proof from the script. Of course I need to know how they survived because everyone in Sigurd's army was shown to be obliterated by the meteors. 

A competent script is going to tell its readers details of important conversations. 

Are you claiming we don't need to know why Ephidel didn't teleport away from the blast instead of scream for Nergal's help? Anything that doesn't make logical sense or contradicts what has been shown should be addressed. 

In universe characters not caring doesn't mean the audience doesn't care. I mean no one in the script wondered why Ephidel didn't teleport away but this doesn't justify him not teleporting. 

So does that mean the blood pact has merit even if it wasn't explained 100% properly? 

Which means information will be witheld until it's time for it to be revealed. If you want an example about not revealing it at all... well, it's mostly used in horror stories. I remember (though I don't remember where I read it to link to it) reading a statement about how someone never thought up about how the monster of their story looks, because the author deliberately wanted the readers to think up descriptions of their own; and then, whatever official answer the author may give in the future, it might not live up to reader's expectations. So said monster will forever remain... vague. At least, I think it was a monster. I read that long ago. I'm currently trying to find it. If I do, I'll PM it to you.

For Edain, a talk convo in Ch6:

Spoiler

Lester:
“I bet you were. But you be careful out here. Mother would be a wreck if anything happened you.”

Rana:
“Yes, but do you know what she told me? She said that we are greatly indebted to the people of Isaac and we should do whatever we can to help them.”

Lester:
“Yeah, we wouldn’t be here now if it weren’t for them. …So where is mother now?”

Rana:
“She’s working at the convent in Tilnanogue.”

Lester:
“I see. Rana, we need to do our best out here for mother and our missing father. Someday we’ll be able to return with mother to her hometown of Jungby.”

For Tailtiu, there's lots of evidence; but the very first one is in Ch6 during a story segment. This also applies to Ethnia, btw:

Spoiler

Fee:
“Why do you need to go to Alster anyway?”

Arthur:
“I think my sister is there. We were separated a long time ago. She and my mom were taken from me when I was young. I grew up on my own in Silesia’s backwoods. Once I heard my sister was seen in Alster, that’s all it took.”

Lachesis, Ch7 talk convo:

Spoiler

Delmud:
“Here, let me explain everything Levin told me. During the last war all us kids fled to Isaac. But then our mother, Lachesis, brought you here to Lenster just after you were born.”

Nanna:
“If you’re my brother, then where is she now?”

Delmud:
“You mean our mother?”

Nanna:
“She left me when I was around 3 to meet up with you in Isaac, but she never came back. I’ve waited for her to come home ever since…”

For Silvia, just Corple's age should tell you she has to survive (as well as her husband), otherwise, this talk convo in Ch9 explains:

Spoiler

Leen:
“So you’re an orphan, too, huh… Do you remember any of your childhood?”

Corple:
“No, none of it. I guess I was just a baby when my father found me in Darna.”

Leen:
“You were also in Darna!?”

Corple:
“You know Darna?”

Leen:
“Yeah, I grew up at the convent in Darna. I must’ve been about two when a young lady, a dancer I think, left me at the convent. And that sort of explains why I became a dancer. I thought I might be able to find my mother someday if I did. I’m not all that good yet, but I’m completely self-taught.”

Here's the thing. How they all survived the battle is never stated. Is it important? Not in particular.

However, there might be an answer. If you subscribe to Gameplay and Story Segregation. The Phinora lover talk convos of Ch5. Here's an example, with Tailtiu's:

Spoiler

Tiltyu with Azel

Tiltyu:
“Azel, don’t go!”

Azel:
“Tiltyu, you promised me you’d head for Silesia. I told you, I’ll come as soon as I can!”

Tiltyu:
“But…”

Azel:
“You can’t fight Freege’s army! What, are you going to kill your own father?”

Tiltyu:
“Well, no, but…”

Azel:
“Good. I’d have second thoughts about someone who’d kill their own dad. You take care of the kids, okay?”

Tiltyu:
“…Azel!”

Tiltyu with Claude

Tiltyu:
“Claude, what should I do?”

Claude:
“Well, you certainly can’t fight your father’s army. Go to Silesia. You’ll be safe there.”

Tiltyu:
“But what are you going to do?”

Claude:
“Well, it’s my duty to see this war out.”

Tiltyu:
“How could you! Just how am I to raise our children without you!?”

Claude:
“I know it is difficult, but please understand.”

Tiltyu:
“…Claude!”

Tiltyu with Lex

Tiltyu:
“Lex, you just have t’fight, don’t ya.”

Lex:
“Hey! You get to Silesia where you’ll be safe.”

Tiltyu:
“You’re so cruel! You want me t’go all alone.”

Lex:
“Hey, everyone in the Freege family is breakin’ their back lookin’ for you, girl. And I don’t want my kids goin’ with them or the Dozels. You understand me!?”

Tiltyu:
“Yeah, but…”

Lex:
“Look, we’ve both been dealt a crappy hand. I wish we could’ve been together longer. I will cherish every single moment we had.”

Tiltyu:
“Oh, Lex…”

Notice how all three have Tailtiu being told to flee to Silessia right away instead of continuing into Grannvale? Just because in the gameplay you can still bring Tailtiu along, who says she really did so instead of obeying her husband and return to Silessia instead? From the previous convo, we know she did flee to Silessia. So what makes more sense? That she did turned back to Silessia with the kids at Phinora hoping her husband would come back for her? Or pressing onwards to Grannvale and somehow survive that and make her way to Silessia with the kids? I'd say it's the former, hence, Gameplay-Story Segregation. The other lover convos should follow the same logic.

A competent script will do that, yes; but it also would know when to do so, if it's really important to know.

Do we?

Well, everyone left first, so they wouldn't know Ephidel didn't teleported away, anyway. Well, how many people have actually wondered that? Honestly, you're probably the first one I've ever seen questioning it. Then again, it's hard to remember 10+ years of this site's content.

It has. Bad merit, perhaps; but merit nonetheless. Do remember that with the Blood Pact it was always a "need to know" basis. We're witheld stuff deliberately, so, say, we won't find out Pelleas's death will be in vain the first time we're seeing it.

[Icelerate]

8 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Which means information will be witheld until it's time for it to be revealed. If you want an example about not revealing it at all... well, it's mostly used in horror stories. I remember (though I don't remember where I read it to link to it) reading a statement about how someone never thought up about how the monster of their story looks, because the author deliberately wanted the readers to think up descriptions of their own; and then, whatever official answer the author may give in the future, it might not live up to reader's expectations. So said monster will forever remain... vague. At least, I think it was a monster. I read that long ago. I'm currently trying to find it. If I do, I'll PM it to you.

 

This example is completely different from revealing how the impossible happened. The impossible in this case means survive a meteor shower from an army while unprepared. What exactly the monster looks like is irrelevant but imagine if the monster ate a guy and then that guy somehow survived but this isn't explained, this would be bad writing. 

Quote

 Notice how all three have Tailtiu being told to flee to Silessia right away instead of continuing into Grannvale? Just because in the gameplay you can still bring Tailtiu along, who says she really did so instead of obeying her husband and return to Silessia instead? From the previous convo, we know she did flee to Silessia. So what makes more sense? That she did turned back to Silessia with the kids at Phinora hoping her husband would come back for her? Or pressing onwards to Grannvale and somehow survive that and make her way to Silessia with the kids? I'd say it's the former, hence, Gameplay-Story Segregation. The other lover convos should follow the same logic.

Thanks for all those conversations. I missed a few but the ones I read I didn't remember in clear detail so I didn't make the implication. 

Quote

 A competent script will do that, yes; but it also would know when to do so, if it's really important to know.

 Do we?

 Well, everyone left first, so they wouldn't know Ephidel didn't teleported away, anyway. Well, how many people have actually wondered that? Honestly, you're probably the first one I've ever seen questioning it. Then again, it's hard to remember 10+ years of this site's content.

You keep on saying it's not important yet you haven't explained why it's not important to know how a character survived. It is questionable writing when people survive when they are supposed to die because it goes against the basic premise that when you encounter a certain death situation, you die. 

Ephidel not teleporting is a huge plot hole in FE7 that's often discussed. I'm not the only one who has said this (28:40). 

Quote

 It has. Bad merit, perhaps; but merit nonetheless. Do remember that with the Blood Pact it was always a "need to know" basis. We're witheld stuff deliberately, so, say, we won't find out Pelleas's death will be in vain the first time we're seeing it.

 

[Icelerate]

29 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

It has. Bad merit, perhaps; but merit nonetheless. Do remember that with the Blood Pact it was always a "need to know" basis. We're witheld stuff deliberately, so, say, we won't find out Pelleas's death will be in vain the first time we're seeing it.

I'm clearly talking about positive merit. We eventually get more information on the blood pact and how it works. More so than the survivors of the Belhella massacre. Why the double standards though?

Sorry for the double post but for some reason the above post got posted suddenly and I can't edit it for some reason. 

Edited July 22, 2019 by Icelerate

[Acacia Sgt]

4 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

This example is completely different from revealing how the impossible happened. The impossible in this case means survive a meteor shower from an army while unprepared. What exactly the monster looks like is irrelevant but imagine if the monster ate a guy and then that guy somehow survived but this isn't explained, this would be bad writing. 

Thanks for all those conversations. I missed a few but the ones I read I didn't remember in clear detail so I didn't make the implication. 

You keep on saying it's not important yet you haven't explained why it's not important to know how a character survived. It is questionable writing when people survive when they are supposed to die because it goes against the basic premise that when you encounter a certain death situation, you die. 

Ephidel not teleporting is a huge plot hole in FE7 that's often discussed. I'm not the only one who has said this (28:40). 

 

You know, I'm not the writers of the game; but perhaps they felt that in a setting where Warp/Rescue/Return Staves and Rings exist... why even bring up which of the six different "I can escape from here" items got used, as if it mattered other than at least one of them got used?

Because that's not a detail that's really needed to know outside of just wanting to know absolutely everything. If some story has a moment where a character prepares a sandwhich for them to eat, but doesn't bring up what the sandwhich contains, is it bad writing that we're not told? Unless what the sandwhich contained was relevant, why bring up what the sandwhich is made of? After all, if the important detail is only that the character ate, then even bothering to say it was a sandwhich was already more than needed details for the scene.

It's the same reason why we know what happened to most of the women post-BallhalaMassacre; but not what happened to them during it. The former is important for the setting, the latter not so much. Just knowing they survived is enough.

It's not really huge. Ephidel is stunned Nergal left without sparing him much thought. Looks to me the action left him too shocked to think of teleporting on his own. It doesn't help his previous statement:

Ephidel:
“Desist, Nils! The power… It runs wild!!”

Already shows he was loosing his composure. Maybe Nergal didn't gave him a self-preservation instinct, or it got disrupted to how emotional he got. As shown with how Limstella could be powered up further, perhaps Ephidel had ran out of power himself. Sometimes, it's not that we're not told, we're just not told directly. Sometimes, instead of being spoon-fed, we must do it ourselves.

11 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

I'm clearly talking about positive merit. We eventually get more information on the blood pact and how it works. More so than the survivors of the Belhella massacre. 

Sorry for the double post but for some reason the above post got posted suddenly and I can't edit it for some reason. 

Because in the context of RD's story, knowing how the Blood Pact works is important. For the Belhalla Massacre, what happened during it is not important, outside that it happened; and that Sigurd and most of his group died in it. It has the same contextual importance as what the Scouring was for the Elibe games. We're only told enough details that matter for what we currently face now.

[Icelerate]

11 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

You know, I'm not the writers of the game; but perhaps they felt that in a setting where Warp/Rescue/Return Staves and Rings exist... why even bring up which of the six different "I can escape from here" items got used, as if it mattered other than at least one of them got used?

 

Because we are shown on the screen that the army gets hit by the meteors. But I suppose the characters might be durable enough to survive a hit or dodge for that to occur. 

Though I was under the impression the script initially said these following heroes died but after reviewing a video on what happens after chapter 5, the only characters confirmed dead are Sigurd, Quan and Ethlyn so the writers left what happened to the others open in which case there is no contradiction. 

Quote

 Because that's not a detail that's really needed to know outside of just wanting to know absolutely everything. If some story has a moment where a character prepares a sandwhich for them to eat, but doesn't bring up what the sandwhich contains, is it bad writing that we're not told? Unless what the sandwhich contained was relevant, why bring up what the sandwhich is made of? After all, if the important detail is only that the character ate, then even bothering to say it was a sandwhich was already more than needed details for the scene.

The sandwich analogy makes no sense in this context lol. It'd make sense if the sandwich was poisoned but somehow the poison had no effect for no reason given. 

Quote

 It's not really huge. Ephidel is stunned Nergal left without sparing him much thought. Looks to me the action left him too shocked to think of teleporting on his own. It doesn't help his previous statement:

 Ephidel:
“Desist, Nils! The power… It runs wild!!”

 Already shows he was loosing his composure. Maybe Nergal didn't gave him a self-preservation instinct, or it got disrupted to how emotional he got. As shown with how Limstella could be powered up further, perhaps Ephidel had ran out of power himself. Sometimes, it's not that we're not told, we're just not told directly. Sometimes, instead of being spoon-fed, we must do it ourselves.

 

That's not a good explanation. It's a natural reaction to escape when you're about to die. No thinking is required. LEH escaped by running yet they were in a more tense situation than Ephidel. 

Quote

Because in the context of RD's story, knowing how the Blood Pact works is important. For the Belhalla Massacre, what happened during it is not important, outside that it happened; and that Sigurd and most of his group died in it. It has the same contextual importance as what the Scouring was for the Elibe games. We're only told enough details that matter for what we currently face now.

How is the Scouring important in this discussion? What about how Micaiah was transported to Daein even though she was supposed to have been assassinated? I was always bummed out we don't get details on how she ended up in Daein. 

[Acacia Sgt]

5 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

Because we are shown on the screen that the army gets hit by the meteors. But I suppose the characters might be durable enough to survive a hit or dodge for that to occur. 

Though I was under the impression the script initially said these following heroes died but after reviewing a video on what happens after chapter 5, the only characters confirmed dead are Sigurd, Quan and Ethlyn so the writers left what happened to the others open in which case there is no contradiction. 

The sandwich analogy makes no sense in this context lol. It'd make sense if the sandwich was poisoned but somehow the poison had no effect for no reason given. 

That's not a good explanation. It's a natural reaction to escape when you're about to die. No thinking is required. LEH escaped by running yet they were in a more tense situation than Ephidel. 

How is the Scouring important in this discussion? What about how Micaiah was transported to Daein even though she was supposed to have been assassinated? I was always bummed out we don't get details on how she ended up in Daein. 

As I showed you with the Phinora talk convos, it's possible that might not even be what happened. Just like how the scene with Holsety using the Valkyrie Staff is not meant to be interpreted literally since we know the "revival" happened in a different context.

It does. It's how some things are just not necesarily important to be brought up.

If it was, then "caught like a deer in the headlights" wouldn't be a phrase. Sometimes, even if you have the instinct to flee, your body doesn't respond or something like that. I should also mention that they only got away since Nils shouted they had to get away. Even Nergal only warped away after Nils shouted that. Would they have all done it if Nils hadn't? Who knows.

Both work from an "past event relative to what is relevant". Well, that's another case of not being explained if it's not important. What's important is that Micaiah grew up in Daein, not how she got there. Like I said, perhaps it's meant for us to speculate about, not to get told us an answer.

 

[Icelerate]

9 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

As I showed you with the Phinora talk convos, it's possible that might not even be what happened. Just like how the scene with Holsety using the Valkyrie Staff is not meant to be interpreted literally since we know the "revival" happened in a different context.

 

Is the nature of dragons saving humans explored further in Thracia with Eyvel/Briggid?

Quote

 It does. It's how some things are just not necesarily important to be brought up.

How one survives is far more important than what someone ate for lunch so that's an odd example.

Quote

 If it was, then "caught like a deer in the headlights" wouldn't be a phrase. Sometimes, even if you have the instinct to flee, your body doesn't respond or something like that. I should also mention that they only got away since Nils shouted they had to get away. Even Nergal only warped away after Nils shouted that. Would they have all done it if Nils hadn't? Who knows.

No reason why Ephidel wasn't willing to teleport while Nergal did. He should have just followed Nergal since that's what he was created to do. 

Quote

 Both work from an "past event relative to what is relevant". Well, that's another case of not being explained if it's not important. What's important is that Micaiah grew up in Daein, not how she got there. Like I said, perhaps it's meant for us to speculate about, not to get told us an answer.

The Scouring was a war situation not a literal execution scene. Someone surviving a war is more plausible than someone surviving an execution. 

[Interdimensional Observer]

2 hours ago, Icelerate said:

I know but wouldn't this have been nice to have in the actual game? If FE4 supposedly has the best writing in the series, questions such as why a character survived should be stated in the actual script. Imagine we needed to look at developer notes to find out how the Black Knight survived in RD. 

Ideally, yes, I'll agree with that. Nothing of importance, unless the developer wants it to be intentionally left ambiguous, should be left out of a game. Having to place information in supplementary material, is better than nowhere at all, but not as good as having it in the game itself. Since the majority of players will not likely read the supplementary material.

Although Genealogy comes from an era, where fitting in all desired information, while I would not say was impossible, was harder than subsequent ones. A remake of Genealogy should be held to higher standards with far greater storytelling experience and resources available for IS.

 

Kaga was willing to give definite answers for many things when asked, but he did also leave some room open for fan imagination. For instance, from this interview:

"Heuga: By the way, Lewyn was referred to as ‘Forseti of the Wind’ and had a strange air to him; so is he related to the dragons?

Kaga’s comment: This is actually one of my favourite themes, and I won’t give a definite answer. You can put the pieces you learn together in different ways depending on how you play the game. It might be that, in Seliph’s chapter, the dragonkind borrowed Lewyn’s consciousness for the moment; or, if Lewyn was killed in Sigurd’s chapter, the Lewyn that appears in Seliph’s chapter could be an actual dragon acting as his substitute."

 

3 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

Is the nature of dragons saving humans explored further in Thracia with Eyvel/Briggid?

Unfortunately, it is not. It is only brought up in her character ending. Only there is the pact she made named, but when and how she made it is left unexplained. It did take her memories, from whenever she lost them, to seven years after Thracia 776, and it concealed her Brand.

It raises more questions than it does answers or interesting details. To the point that its worth asking why Eyvel was made to be Brigid. Although the interview I just linked states Kaga had a fondness for Brigid at the time of Genealogy, so it could be favoritism.

[JSND Alter Dragon Boner]

3 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

 

It raises more questions than it does answers or interesting details. To the point that its worth asking why Eyvel was made to be Brigid. Although the interview I just linked states Kaga had a fondness for Brigid at the time of Genealogy, so it could be favoritism.

Honestly speaking while its never confirmed, Eyvel survival is one of those things that coincidentally "work" when directed into the game's mechanics, somehin

 

Favoritism is definitely something Kaga is very big of yeah. The Peg sisters probably get more prominence post FE1 this way, and in Archanea saga its very apparent that he's particularly fond of Hardin, Camus, and Michalis. The former went and become the center stage of FE3, the second being potrayed strongly and later went to inspire Tactical stars, and Michalis ended up receiving a redemption story out of nowhere on a previously villainous character

 

In FE4 itself.... yeah lets not kid ourselves here Kaga have a hard on for Leif and it took you like 5 seconds to realize that.

 

11 hours ago, Icelerate said:

So FE4 was too ambitious for its own good like FE10? 

Honestly? Yes. But i don't think Lewyn stuff is a good sign of this - the thing about Lewyn stuff is it being tied to the Dragon mythos, the Dragon mythos of Fire Emblem have always been presented as such - mythos. You don't exactly ask why a figure in mythology is as magical as they are

 

But its very clear from interviews that Kaga clearly had way way more in store for FE4 that he didn't quite manage to fit in FE4 itself

A moment in Gen 2 that particularly illustrates this well is how Julius, despite being the central villain of the game alongside the Lopt Sect have an extremely small screentime and pressence in the course of the FE4 gen 2. The appearance of Julius, which is meant to be a direct reference to the appearance of the first appearance of Gharnef as a mid game event meant to be used as a wake up call to Marth, happened in chapter 10 out of 11, 2 castles in roughly midway through the entire chapter.

The highly anticipated "Holy War" that is supposed to be the game's main point of conflict is essentially crammed at the very end

It says a lot that the only thing that manage to get a full coverage in FE4 was the Thracia arc, covering 3 out of 6 chapters of the game where 1 of those chapter is the gen 2 prologue, and Kaga still feel the need to expand the story arc even more as a full game.

[B.Leu]

On 7/23/2019 at 2:08 AM, Interdimensional Observer said:

Unfortunately, it is not. It is only brought up in her character ending. Only there is the pact she made named, but when and how she made it is left unexplained. It did take her memories, from whenever she lost them, to seven years after Thracia 776, and it concealed her Brand.

It raises more questions than it does answers or interesting details. To the point that its worth asking why Eyvel was made to be Brigid. Although the interview I just linked states Kaga had a fondness for Brigid at the time of Genealogy, so it could be favoritism.

Maybe it was her Yewfelle/Ichibal that saved her. Eyvelle/Yewfelle sounds both close.
...I mean yeah, it's probably just Kaga, but... I'm trying too you know. >_>

 

[JSND Alter Dragon Boner]

15 hours ago, B.Leu said:

Maybe it was her Yewfelle/Ichibal that saved her. Eyvelle/Yewfelle sounds both close.
...I mean yeah, it's probably just Kaga, but... I'm trying too you know. >_>

 

One way you can justify it is actually from looking back at the gameplay front. Ulir Blood is the Luck booster in the gameplay of FE4 itself, and it just so happen that every important Ulir character survived through the end of the Genealogy.

 

This won't be the only case of such either, Finn isn't an Ulir, but his Miracle in game skill seems to work in lore - theres several moments in Jugdral saga where Finn could/should have died, but doesn't

[oblivionoath]

On 7/22/2019 at 7:31 PM, Icelerate said:

Though I was under the impression the script initially said these following heroes died but after reviewing a video on what happens after chapter 5, the only characters confirmed dead are Sigurd, Quan and Ethlyn so the writers left what happened to the others open in which case there is no contradiction. 

Thank you for this!  I had the same exact impression at first, with the way all the faces flowed together I thought it had said "and these are the other heroes who have been lost to history" aka dead, something to that effect, but it says "whose fates remain unknown", other than Sigurd, Quan and Ethlyn who it says definitely "lost their lives".  That's the answer right there.

You're not crazy btw despite these others trying to gaslight you, lol.  It def would be bad writing if they were explicitly stated or shown to be dead on screen, but then magically show up later.  I'd say it's still confusing/a bit clumsy presentation as it stands, but at least technically it said their fates remain unknown so fair enough that's how they show up later.