Jump to content

What are your thoughts on Edelgard? *SPOILERS*


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, wissenschaft said:

"This conversation is especially really bad on the morality spectrum for Edelgard because here Dimitri is more sane than he was in BL until he gets his redemption scene (here he has his friends with him and didn't endure the loneliness that he did in his path) and she's basically trying to find fault with him DEFENDING HIS COUNTRY his moral obligation like what the heck Edelgard?"

His kingdom is merely a renegade province of the empire. Their "kings" have no legitimate claim to the land.

Its the type of real world reasoning that countless wars have be started over IRL.
 

What do you mean? I don't think either Edelguard or Demitiri are in the right here. If anyone is the good Lord in this game its Claude but hes powerless without Byleth's support. 



 

I think I'm having some insecurities about me liking Edelgard... But I'm feeling a little better after thinking some things in my own; sorry for bothering you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 928
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 minutes ago, Troykv said:

I think I'm having some insecurities about me liking Edelgard... But I'm feeling a little better after thinking some things in my own; sorry for bothering you.

Hey man, I love Edelgard. No shame in that. I love the fact this game makes you fall in love with one of the antagonists. Thats an awesome move by the writers. Makes siding against Edelgard all the more tragic for Byleth.

And if you just don't care about having the moral high ground, they give you a route to side with her and you get a happy ending anyway. Best Waifu status achieved. 😉

Edited by wissenschaft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the huge turn-off about Edel is the fact that she lies to everyone (except Hubert and you) to gain their support.

After the nuking of Arianrhod, when Edel says that it's the church instead of TWSITD to the students (and probably all of her troops) that was the last straw. If the students/troops knew that they were working with TWSITD and that they were also that big of a threat (and that the church didn't do those horrible things she's talking about), they wouldn't keep fighting for her.

With the talk of manifesto by Hubert/Edel, you can see that they are employing propaganda/disinformation to control everyone. Is this really a good leader (or even human being) ?

To be honest every time I was alone with her during her route I wanted to see a prompt saying : "Cut off her head."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She is somewhat machiuvelical in the literal sense, this doesn’t mean she is evil but it rights her off as at least grey never good. To achieve her ends she employs the help of TWSITD and tolerates and supports to some extent their actions she also starts a war five years long that will claim the life of many, she is in complete contradiction with Claud in her philosophy although their “end” is similar; a United Fódland. Claud’s path also shows us the good way to unite  Fódland, on without bloodshed and one at peace with the rest of the world. Once you have played GD you can’t agree with her actions because you have seen the same goals achieved peacefully. She feels somewhat like Arvis. Actually quite a lot, from the treason, to allying with questionable individuals all in the goal to impose her world view onto the continent, also “flame emperor”, dual holy blood, one of which belonging to the biggest evil in history, don’t tell me that’s coincidental, but at the same time neither is completely evil, both are nuanced individuals with bloody ambitions. (My this is really the Genealogy remake /s). Also I hate that you only end Nemesis with the GD that means that in both Edelgard’s and Dimitri’s path Nemesis could awaken (Thales clearly was done with the preparations for is revival so what stops it) at any time and wreck havoc with his ten generals, compromising Fódland’s future. I probably feel more enclined to side with her if she truly went through with making sure peace would last, which again only Claud does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, wissenschaft said:

Hey man, I love Edelgard. No shame in that. I love the fact this game makes you fall in love with one of the antagonists. Thats an awesome move by the writers. Makes siding against Edelgard all the more tragic for Byleth.

And if you just don't care about having the moral high ground, they give you a route to side with her and you get a happy ending anyway. Best Waifu status achieved. 😉

 

22 minutes ago, Tharne said:

One of the huge turn-off about Edel is the fact that she lies to everyone (except Hubert and you) to gain their support.

After the nuking of Arianrhod, when Edel says that it's the church instead of TWSITD to the students (and probably all of her troops) that was the last straw. If the students/troops knew that they were working with TWSITD and that they were also that big of a threat (and that the church didn't do those horrible things she's talking about), they wouldn't keep fighting for her.

With the talk of manifesto by Hubert/Edel, you can see that they are employing propaganda/disinformation to control everyone. Is this really a good leader (or even human being) ?

To be honest every time I was alone with her during her route I wanted to see a prompt saying : "Cut off her head."

I suppose that puts me in the lower moral ground for wanting to share her path; I'm okay if you hate me.

23 minutes ago, Vaieti said:

She is somewhat machiuvelical in the literal sense, this doesn’t mean she is evil but it rights her off as at least grey never good. To achieve her ends she employs the help of TWSITD and tolerates and supports to some extent their actions she also starts a war five years long that will claim the life of many, she is in complete contradiction with Claud in her philosophy although their “end” is similar; a United Fódland. Claud’s path also shows us the good way to unite  Fódland, on without bloodshed and one at peace with the rest of the world. Once you have played GD you can’t agree with her actions because you have seen the same goals achieved peacefully. She feels somewhat like Arvis. Actually quite a lot, from the treason, to allying with questionable individuals all in the goal to impose her world view onto the continent, also “flame emperor”, dual holy blood, one of which belonging to the biggest evil in history, don’t tell me that’s coincidental, but at the same time neither is completely evil, both are nuanced individuals with bloody ambitions. (My this is really the Genealogy remake /s). Also I hate that you only end Nemesis with the GD that means that in both Edelgard’s and Dimitri’s path Nemesis could awaken (Thales clearly was done with the preparations for is revival so what stops it) at any time and wreck havoc with his ten generals, compromising Fódland’s future. I probably feel more enclined to side with her if she truly went through with making sure peace would last, which again only Claud does.

Several endings talk about dealing with TWSITD in some way, but the details aren't very clear. I need this expansion to give to Edelgard the whole truth after being deceived for so long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

@genagi Attacking the church (which is actually a better church compared to the reality), killing the 'saint', blaspheming the Holy Tomb, starting a war against other 'non-heretic' states, cooperating with people who hold the demonic cult, would be considered as evil by the standards of most common medieval people. Actually it is modern ethical standard (from yourself and many others) found her redeemable and willing to take a more flexibale and utilitarianism perspective on her. 

You brought up a good point and I mostly agree with your evaluation. My argument was a specific response to the critique of her using the demonic beast being "crime against humanity". I argue that this interpretation requires the characters to understand ethical concepts beyond what their society environment could support.

As for heretic or blasphemous nature of her action, a careful reading of the script would reveal a more nuanced interpretation. Let me explain. In the support conversation between Claude and Leonie, Claude talked about faith being separated from the church's view on nature, that nature is independent from one's faith. They also joked about their conversation being heretic. This shows that the Church of Seiros can be viewed as a political institution that exercise sovereignty, instead of the only source of spirituality or faith in Fodlan. In fact, in GD route Claude has expressed several times that the church's rule might be reason of Fodlan's closedmindness and stagnation. NPC conversation with Mercedes also mentioned as similar point in BE route, that true faith does not mean one should agree to the church's rule (think about protestant vs catholic).

According to how the game portraits the church, Reah's authoritarian rule is far from benign. It is pretty clear that the church cracks down opposing fractions within the church. By extension, it is plausible to assume there is no freedom of religion in Fodlan. By medieval standard, oppositions or other foreign religions may well view the church as the worshiping the false god, or viewing the church's canon as apocryphal. Since the church heavily censors books (shown by various supports) and garbles Fodlan's history, there is no reliable third party account of how well the church actually rules Fodlan (Byleth is perspective is heavily biased because he/she is most privileged). Given Hubert's conversation just before the naming the black eagle strike group, Hubert explicit mentioned that there are noble houses that supports downing the church and they are joining their causes. Hence there is evidence indicating the church may not be the one and only true faith representing the people of Fodlan.

Also the fact that the Goddess and her descendants (manaketes) actually exist defeats of the nature of faith being transcendental. If God is an actual being and can be killed, then it loses its transcendental status as the one and the absolute. This has profound implications as the manaketes will eventually be seen as merely another species that tries to subjugate mankind. In fact, El's conquest has additional justification because of this. In her rousing speech, she frames Rhea as just a monster that imposes its tyranny on mankind with lies. By this logic, the church (along with saints and holy tombs) may well lose its legitimacy once their true nature are exposed.

I am not saying that the church of Seiros is evil or benevolent. It's probably benevolent but that's irrelevant. What's relevant is once the true nature of the church is exposed, it will face a political crisis which is exactly what El is taking advantage of.

I hate to do this but you can also compare communist countries (say North Korea) with the church and it might surprise you how many parallels you can draw: censorship and ministry of truth, no freedom of religion or speech, deification/absolute power of the leader, myriad of moral paragons (saints), isolated from the outside world, ruling class enjoying much higher degree of freedom etc. I am not saying the church secretly does evil things, I don't know. But the game intentionally sets up the church in a way that is open to a much sinister interpretation. And we know for a fact that the church is built on lies.

Quote

...at the beginning of the story, what happened if byleth did not save her? She died because of the bandits she hired herself? What a talent plan with political wisdom... Even her mental stability seems not suitable for a future ruler, although she is not the worst. She is willingly to make herself a monster at the end of BL route and she seems lost the last bit of sanity at that point. 

Every faction leader show its worse/dark side when he/she is desperate in the opposite route. I don't think reading El as crazy or stupid leads anywhere (unless you really hate her then sure). The hire-bandit-to-kill-self thing may be bad writing (since it is so idiotic it jeopardizes character) or a red herring for the reveal. The monster thing is a little extreme but also show her resolve. I agree that some details are lacking or rather cliche but if you look at 90% of the character building she is definitely more cool and stable than any other leader, scheming, hiding in plain sight, and being an undercover TWSITD member. Also a great conqueror does not necessarily make a great ruler. Judging by the endgame narration, which is the only in-game evidence on how she rules, she is pretty alright.

Edited by matchalatte
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Troykv said:

 

I suppose that puts me in the lower moral ground for wanting to share her path; I'm okay if you hate me.

Several endings talk about dealing with TWSITD in some way, but the details aren't very clear. I need this expansion to give to Edelgard the whole truth after being deceived for so long.

Hey, I love that we have the option to side with Edelgard. For the Empress! lol And yes, I dream of an expansion that lets Edelgard, Demitri, and Claude all live.

Edited by wissenschaft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

@Tharne

One of the huge turn-off about Edel is the fact that she lies to everyone (except Hubert and you) to gain their support.

After the nuking of Arianrhod, when Edel says that it's the church instead of TWSITD to the students (and probably all of her troops) that was the last straw. If the students/troops knew that they were working with TWSITD and that they were also that big of a threat (and that the church didn't do those horrible things she's talking about), they wouldn't keep fighting for her.

With the talk of manifesto by Hubert/Edel, you can see that they are employing propaganda/disinformation to control everyone. Is this really a good leader (or even human being) ?

You brought up a good point and I agree such action is Machiavellian in nature, which adds to her character.

However, good propaganda is necessary to win war. You can't ignore the fact the church is biggest propagandist of them all, controlling knowledge and thought via rewriting history and censoring books, which are the only source of information in Fodlan. It's a war of disinformation. Also I am not defending propaganda, but sadly mankind has not move past it. It's still literally everywhere (old school and new forms alike) and it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, matchalatte said:

According to how the game portraits the church, Reah's authoritarian rule is far from benign. It is pretty clear that the church cracks down opposing fractions within the church. By extension, it is plausible to assume there is no freedom of religion in Fodlan. By medieval standard, oppositions or other foreign religions may well view the church as the worshiping the false god, or viewing the church's canon as apocryphal. Since the church heavily censors books (shown by various supports) and garbles Fodlan's history, there is no reliable third party account of how well the church actually rules Fodlan (Byleth is perspective is heavily biased because he/she is most privileged). Given Hubert's conversation just before the naming the black eagle strike group, Hubert explicit mentioned that there are noble houses that supports downing the church and they are joining their causes. Hence there is evidence indicating the church may not be the one and only true faith representing the people of Fodlan.

Also the fact that the Goddess and her descendants (manaketes) actually exist defeats of the nature of faith being transcendental. If God is an actual being and can be killed, then it loses its transcendental status as the one and the absolute. This has profound implications as the manaketes will eventually be seen as merely another species that tries to subjugate mankind. In fact, El's conquest has additional justification because of this. In her rousing speech, she frames Rhea as just a monster that imposes its tyranny on mankind with lies. By this logic, the church (along with saints and holy tombs) may well lose its legitimacy once their true nature are exposed.

I am not saying that the church of Seiros is evil or benevolent. It's probably benevolent but that's irrelevant. What's relevant is once the true nature of the church is exposed, it will face a political crisis which is exactly what El is taking advantage of.

I hate to do this but you can also compare communist countries (say North Korea) with the church and it might surprise you how many parallels you can draw: censorship and ministry of truth, no freedom of religion or speech, deification/absolute power of the leader, myriad of moral paragons (saints), isolated from the outside world, ruling class enjoying much higher degree of freedom etc. I am not saying the church secretly does evil things, I don't know. But the game intentionally sets up the church in a way that is open to a much sinister interpretation. And we know for a fact that the church is built on lies.

Every faction leader show its worse/dark side when he/she is desperate in the opposite route. I don't think reading El as crazy or stupid leads anywhere (unless you really hate her then sure). The hire-bandit-to-kill-self thing may be bad writing (since it is so idiotic it jeopardizes character) or a red herring for the reveal. The monster thing is a little extreme but also show her resolve. I agree that some details are lacking or rather cliche but if you look at 90% of the character building she is definitely more cool and stable than any other leader, scheming, hiding in plain sight, and being an undercover TWSITD member. Also a great conqueror does not necessarily make a great ruler. Judging by the endgame narration, which is the only in-game evidence on how she rules, she is pretty alright.

Again there is lot of mental gymnastics here. Rhea does not suppress opposition Western church was doing own things for years and she did nothing until they tried assassinate her. 

As for Eddie's supporters they were most likely all nobles wanting expand their influence, that doesn't say anything about what common folks think. But you can tell what they do id you go around monastery and talk some. 

 

And lastly there are no indication Church rule Fodlan outside of conspiracy theory spread by terroristic group. 

Edited by Tenzen12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, matchalatte said:

You brought up a good point and I agree such action is Machiavellian in nature, which adds to her character.

However, good propaganda is necessary to win war. You can't ignore the fact the church is biggest propagandist of them all, controlling knowledge and thought via rewriting history and censoring books, which are the only source of information in Fodlan. It's a war of disinformation. Also I am not defending propaganda, but sadly mankind has not move past it. It's still literally everywhere (old school and new forms alike) and it works.

It was a lost cause a war were true wins because Edelgard it's the disadvantage anyway; a very Machiavellian decision; but one that I wouldn't see happening any other way; even removing the propaganda side of this.

If she revealed the true nature of the attack... she would be killed (by her Uncle or Rhea); and everything she did would be in vain.

It would be a true betray to the TWSITD; and Rhea would see this as a threat to her stale civilization.

Edited by Troykv
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, matchalatte said:

You can't ignore the fact the church is biggest propagandist of them all, controlling knowledge and thought via rewriting history and censoring books, which are the only source of information in Fodlan. It's a war of disinformation.

For Rhea it's not really a war. Rhea and other Manaketes in this world seems to be immortal (I think ?) so their perception of time isn't the same at all. The brutal death of her Mother and almost all of her race is still fresh and will probably never go away (you can see that with the way  Flayn talked about her past like it happened not so long ago while it happened, in fact, a very, very long time ago.). It could be even fresher in her mind than what Edelgard suffered at the hand of TWSITD.

Her whole establishment of the church has in my opinion three purposes :
-Protect the remaining Manaketes. (You could say "They can just go live somewhere else." But Fodlan is also their homeland since Sothis made them here and TWSITD is still around.)
-A way for humanity (the Crest bearer's descendants especially) to repent for what they did to her people. (A little fucked up but since, like I said, she probably view Time in a different way than us, it is reasonable in her mind.)
-Avoid another Nemesis. (That goes a little with point 1, but this one is more about protecting the Humans from themselves I think. Of course because of TWSITD we got another Nemesis, in fact two : Edelgard and well...Nemesis the Return.)

Edited by Tharne
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Again there is lot of mental gymnastics here. Rhea does not suppress opposition Western church was doing own things for years and she did nothing until they tried assassinate her. 

I agree with the mental gymnastics. After all, I am providing a reading of a character.

But you have ignored why Western church tries to assassinate Rhea in the first place. One thing we can be sure from the game is that there is no opposition within the church that can realistically challenge Rhea but dissidents are there. Hell, even Seteth and Jeralt expresses doubts in private conversations.

I concede that you could read the overarching plot as a multilayered TWSITD conspiracy against the church and mankind. But the more interesting approach is to look at every faction in Fodlan as rational agents with their own political agendas. From this view, it's clear to me Rhea is the only authoritative figure (or dictator) and such authoritarianism cannot internally digest different political ideals which the game clearly hints at. El is the force that disrupts the balance of power which enables social/political change for Fodlan and the revelation of truth (by weakening Rhea's position). Notice how Rhea only explains what's going on (the truth) when she is severely weakened (or before death).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Nihilem said:

Oh yeah, a Revelations type story dlc is also what I wish for.... is in good because I heard actual Revelations wasnt written that well ... And no GD Route doesnt count because Edel is still brainwashed there. And dies probably.

But to be fair that 5 Route also must somehow adress the problem with mad seiros which seems to be a victim of "beeing a dragon corrupts you after time".

 

And I dont think that would devaluate the other stories as it would be dlc and everyone who does not like a "happy ending story" can just ignore it. And keep the bittersweet endings ...

They could bring a plot device with somekind mcguffin like a potion that cures madness or bring in dragon stones like in the Arcanaia games. Marth, Chrome and alm games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

For Rhea it's not really a war. Rhea and other Manaketes in this world seems to be immortal (I think ?)

First of all thanks for laying out the three purposes of the establishment. I will think on that.

According to the BE route

Spoiler

Rhea, Seteth, Flayn can all be killed. There is not evidence I know of in the game that they continue to exists.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, matchalatte said:

First of all thanks for laying out the three purposes of the establishment. I will think on that.

According to the BE route

  Hide contents

Rhea, Seteth, Flayn can all be killed. There is not evidence I know of in the game that they continue to exists.

 

The purposes I talked about are just my interpretation of what I think are the reasons behind the creation of the Church (it's not stated in game, from what I know.) based on some of Rhea's dialogue.
And I'm not saying that they can't be killed, just that they don't die because of aging making them see Time not in the same way as us.

Edited by Tharne
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seem like most people opioion of her are she evil or bias to BL since it the most 'FE' story out of FE Three Houses. I guess it true most people wants to be the hero of the stories instead of the morally grey characters. I guess that why most people sided with Hoshido over Nohr. People say they want grey character but not really. Most folk want black or white stories. Myself personally like grey stories and happy ends but eh cant please everybody.

Edited by Mikethemaster2018
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, matchalatte said:

I agree with the mental gymnastics. After all, I am providing a reading of a character.

But you have ignored why Western church tries to assassinate Rhea in the first place. One thing we can be sure from the game is that there is no opposition within the church that can realistically challenge Rhea but dissidents are there. Hell, even Seteth and Jeralt expresses doubts in private conversations.

I concede that you could read the overarching plot as a multilayered TWSITD conspiracy against the church and mankind. But the more interesting approach is to look at every faction in Fodlan as rational agents with their own political agendas. From this view, it's clear to me Rhea is the only authoritative figure (or dictator) and such authoritarianism cannot internally digest different political ideals which the game clearly hints at. El is the force that disrupts the balance of power which enables social/political change for Fodlan and the revelation of truth (by weakening Rhea's position). Notice how Rhea only explains what's going on (the truth) when she is severely weakened (or before death).

 

The game is not just TWSITD conspiracy, but we cannot deny that they deceived and manipulated every single faction that is opposing the church, and Edelgard herself has her own brand of disinformation that paint the church as far worse than it is. 

Also, we people has to constantly portray Rhea as the God Empress of Makind when she is 100% willing to step down in favor of Byleth in any route but BE. There is no guarantee that Byleth would be the same as Rhea when it comes to punish dissident. And is not like Rhea is a crazed Torquemada in the first place.

48 minutes ago, Mikethemaster2018 said:

Seem like most people opioion of her are she evil or bias to BL since it the most 'FE' story out of FE Three Houses. I guess it true most people wants to be the hero of the stories instead of the morally grey characters. I guess that why most people sided with Hoshido over Nohr. People say they want grey character but not really. Most folk want black or white stories. Myself personally like grey stories and happy ends but eh cant please everybody.

For a story to be morally grey, every faction involved has to do questionable things and be at least partially at fault for the conflict. This does not happen in 3H, were the church, Edelgard and TWSITD are entirely responsible for the war and at the very least the GD don't do anything questionable(Dimitri is very arguable). This does not happen in other morally grey stories. In FO New Vegas for example, while the Legion is as evil as can gets, every other faction has pro, cons, and people you have to murder just to side with them. In FFT, both sides of the war of the lions are equally corrupt, And even "good" characters like Ramza or Wiegraf fall from grace or gets manipulated into supporting bad people. In FE3H this does not happen, there is a perfectly viable way to solve the conflict whitout moral compromises in the GD route. Intsys always chicken out when it comes to give a dark side to ny faction, even if this game is an improvement over RD and Fates.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Mikethemaster2018 said:

Seem like most people opioion of her are she evil or bias to BL since it the most 'FE' story out of FE Three Houses. I guess it true most people wants to be the hero of the stories instead of the morally grey characters. I guess that why most people sided with Hoshido over Nohr. People say they want grey character but not really. Most folk want black or white stories. Myself personally like grey stories and happy ends but eh cant please everybody.

BE is still most played route in game. It's true that Eldegard is more on black then gray, but people love her regardless. So I don't think your words were warranted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, matchalatte said:

You brought up a good point and I mostly agree with your evaluation. My argument was a specific response to the critique of her using the demonic beast being "crime against humanity". I argue that this interpretation requires the characters to understand ethical concepts beyond what their society environment could support.

As for heretic or blasphemous nature of her action, a careful reading of the script would reveal a more nuanced interpretation. Let me explain. In the support conversation between Claude and Leonie, Claude talked about faith being separated from the church's view on nature, that nature is independent from one's faith. They also joked about their conversation being heretic. This shows that the Church of Seiros can be viewed as a political institution that exercise sovereignty, instead of the only source of spirituality or faith in Fodlan. In fact, in GD route Claude has expressed several times that the church's rule might be reason of Fodlan's closedmindness and stagnation. NPC conversation with Mercedes also mentioned as similar point in BE route, that true faith does not mean one should agree to the church's rule (think about protestant vs catholic).

According to how the game portraits the church, Reah's authoritarian rule is far from benign. It is pretty clear that the church cracks down opposing fractions within the church. By extension, it is plausible to assume there is no freedom of religion in Fodlan. By medieval standard, oppositions or other foreign religions may well view the church as the worshiping the false god, or viewing the church's canon as apocryphal. Since the church heavily censors books (shown by various supports) and garbles Fodlan's history, there is no reliable third party account of how well the church actually rules Fodlan (Byleth is perspective is heavily biased because he/she is most privileged). Given Hubert's conversation just before the naming the black eagle strike group, Hubert explicit mentioned that there are noble houses that supports downing the church and they are joining their causes. Hence there is evidence indicating the church may not be the one and only true faith representing the people of Fodlan.

Also the fact that the Goddess and her descendants (manaketes) actually exist defeats of the nature of faith being transcendental. If God is an actual being and can be killed, then it loses its transcendental status as the one and the absolute. This has profound implications as the manaketes will eventually be seen as merely another species that tries to subjugate mankind. In fact, El's conquest has additional justification because of this. In her rousing speech, she frames Rhea as just a monster that imposes its tyranny on mankind with lies. By this logic, the church (along with saints and holy tombs) may well lose its legitimacy once their true nature are exposed.

I am not saying that the church of Seiros is evil or benevolent. It's probably benevolent but that's irrelevant. What's relevant is once the true nature of the church is exposed, it will face a political crisis which is exactly what El is taking advantage of.

I hate to do this but you can also compare communist countries (say North Korea) with the church and it might surprise you how many parallels you can draw: censorship and ministry of truth, no freedom of religion or speech, deification/absolute power of the leader, myriad of moral paragons (saints), isolated from the outside world, ruling class enjoying much higher degree of freedom etc. I am not saying the church secretly does evil things, I don't know. But the game intentionally sets up the church in a way that is open to a much sinister interpretation. And we know for a fact that the church is built on lies.

Every faction leader show its worse/dark side when he/she is desperate in the opposite route. I don't think reading El as crazy or stupid leads anywhere (unless you really hate her then sure). The hire-bandit-to-kill-self thing may be bad writing (since it is so idiotic it jeopardizes character) or a red herring for the reveal. The monster thing is a little extreme but also show her resolve. I agree that some details are lacking or rather cliche but if you look at 90% of the character building she is definitely more cool and stable than any other leader, scheming, hiding in plain sight, and being an undercover TWSITD member. Also a great conqueror does not necessarily make a great ruler. Judging by the endgame narration, which is the only in-game evidence on how she rules, she is pretty alright.

 

I understand you dislike for the church of seiros, but I think you really exaggerate its bad aspect here. The church of seiros was probably doing better than the real church in history- less wealth, far less political influence( especially in the empire), acting more as the meditator rather than positively pursue to expand its influence. The church literally has very little influence in the domestic affair of the empire after the south church staff, and they never care about who would be the next emperor as long as it is not someone who wants to distinguish the whole church with a war. And, Rhea in some endings is very willing to step down and hand over the power to someone else. Church of seiros, after all, has limited power, while the empire under Edelgard's rule really is too powerful to be good. 

Besides, many unbelievers and foreigners works in the church as well- Shamir as an example. Church of seiros even welcome scholar like Hanneman to work here and study the nature of Crest as well (who, ironically, is escaping from 

And I think you are argue against yourself here. If, exposing the true nature of the church, can effectively reduce church's influence in a far more peaceful way, Edelgard's war seems less justified and stupid. 

Many things you said about the church can be applied to the empire as well. Might be even better if it is applied to the empire. How come a centrist authorative empire which has a ruler like Edelgard( I have listed all my reasons above why she lacks quality of being a good ruler above) is better than a authoritative religious institution? From what I see in the game, the empire is more dangerous simply because its ruler has more power centralized on herself. Yes, she has supports from some noble house, but what about those who are opposing her? Is there anyone in the empire could stop Edelgard making some policies if they think it is a bad idea? Seems like she really has the power on literally everything and can do literally everything if she wants at the end of the game.( The only obstacle is... TWSITD) (Well she can listen to others advice but that's it. I highly doubt that Ferdinand can really be an obstacle to her if he disagree with her sometimes)

And, in the s support,  the last word she says to Byleth is something like ”let us become the new light shine upon the land of Fodlan”. For me it just confirms the belief that she is an authorative secular leader who is no better than religous one.

Also, Edelagrd's rule is based on misinformation and propaganda as well, making her no better than the church. She believes the 'Nemesis is hero' kind of history and misinformation and probably would spread it as the 'correct' version of history. And can Edelgard still gain support from common people if the public know everything she did? (Cooperating with TWISTD which nuked the whole city but then say it is the church who are doing that is one of the worst. If the public know the truth they probably would lost the faith in her completely.)

(Judging by the endgame narration, everyone is pretty alright, even Rhea. I really think it is a bad writing and not convincing at all but I see no point to argue anymore.)

Edited by genagi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dislike Edelgard a lot after playing the four routes because she just seems to me a person looking for revenge. She is really biased against the church and Rhea (because of the people she collaborates with), and while some of the things she points out are true, in the end she doesn't seem to care that much about them.  Also the fact that the is repeating Fódlan's history in her end doesn't help. The "ends justify the means" doesn't bother me as much, in fact, I think we need more female characters like her.  

Edited by Jena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I think I have mentioned the potential persecution Edelgard might have on Seiros believer. So it is zero religious tolerance and freedom under her rule as well. She seems no better than the church in this matter. 

I highly doubt that Edelgard will allow Seiros believer to work in her government, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really wonder what would have happened if somehow the truth about Seiros, Nemesis, Agartha etc would be show to Edelgard. Like they find some ancient ruins where the real history is saved in .. computers? Did they had those? ... but whatever somehow the truth is revealed with solid proofs.

 

Do you think Edelgard would still insist on her rebellion and conquest of fodlan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, genagi said:

And I think you are argue against yourself here. If, exposing the true nature of the church, can effectively reduce church's influence in a far more peaceful way, Edelgard's war seems less justified and stupid. 

Sadly no establishment or status quo will simply give up power and just leave. Peaceful transition is only viable if there is opposition within the establishment.

Quote

The church of seiros was probably doing better than the real church in history- less wealth, far less political influence( especially in the empire), acting more as the meditator rather than positively pursue to expand its influence.

You seem to confuse political influence/power with moral judgement. A powerful church doesn't make it bad. For the church to be an effective mediator, the kingdom, the empire, and the alliance must surrender a part of their absolute sovereignty power to the church. 700 years of peace make it more plausible to assume that the power structure in Fodlan is highly centralized and the church is the final arbiter of foreign affairs. It is also clear that the church has its own big army (not guard) and controls the knowledge of Fodlan, which makes it arguably more powerful than the catholic church during medieval time.

Quote

Many things you said about the church can be applied to the empire as well. Might be even better if it is applied to the empire. How come a centrist authorative empire which has a ruler like Edelgard( I have listed all my reasons above why she lacks quality of being a good ruler above) is better than a authoritative religious institution?

I am not saying that the empire is better than the church, it is left to player's own imagination and evaluation. I am simply pointing out what players could be missing because church is the status quo. The empire's design has a noticable facist (roman) undertone and is controlled by TWSITD proxies so there is no value being captain obvious.

Quote

 Yes, she has supports from some noble house, but what about those who are opposing her? Is there anyone in the empire could stop Edelgard making some policies if they think it is a bad idea? From what I see in the game, the empire is more dangerous simply because its ruler has more power centralized on herself. Yes, she has supports from some noble house, but what about those who are opposing her? Is there anyone in the empire could stop Edelgard making some policies if they think it is a bad idea? Seems like she really has the power on literally everything and can do literally everything if she wants at the end of the game.

Of course the opposing sides are all purged during the war, which is precisely the reason why I argue that war is a great way to consolidate her power within the empire. But after the war is won, all is left to players' imaginations. Could be good or bad. It is not impossible to imagine El introducing a constitution to fill the vacuum left by the theocracy, in order to establish the legitimacy of the newfound sovereignty. A well functioned constitution can rein in her power with no problem (she stepped down anyway). This is indeed the model of how revolution led to modernization/democratization/nation founding/independence.

Rhea only steps down after her position was significantly weakened, which is ultimately caused by the disruption from El.

Quote

And, in the s support,  the last word she says to Byleth is something like ”let us become the new light shine upon the land of Fodlan”. For me it just confirms the belief that she is an authorative secular leader who is no better than religous one.

Well authoritarianism has various shades of grey. While in its most absolute form is widely regarded as a bad way of governing, the so-called neo-authoritarianism (theory) can act as a crucial step for democratization. Two successful cases of neo-authoritarianism are Taiwan and Singapore, both of which have peacefully transitioned into free open societies from authoritarianism.

Quote

 I really think it is a bad writing and not convincing at all but I see no point to argue anymore.

I respect your decision. Thank you for the discussion and have a good day.

Edited by matchalatte
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end we can agree that Byleth is the reason why the winning side ends improve the world instead of ending in ****hole state; the plans to destroy the whole continent failed because of them.

Without Byleth; Edelgard probably became more vulnerable to eventually turn into Nemesis 2 completely; Dimitri remains as a mad king and Rhea either dies or falls into complete madness.

Edited by Troykv
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite taking visual cue's from emperor Hardin is seems that Arvis was the emperor that inspired Edelgard's role in the story As such I view Edelgard similar to how I view Arvis. 

The two are somewhat unique among well intended extremists found in jrpg's. Most of those villains are really obviously in the wrong with ideals that are benevolent only in their own warped minds or with sacrifices far too big to justify those ideals. That's not really the case with Edelgard and Arvis. They just want a very conventional ideal of a just world without persecution. They aren't wrong in their desire for this and if left to their own devices they do follow up on their desire to create a better world. Arvis wasn't wrong but he was sabotaged by the Lopt cult. Edelgard's ideal isn't wrong either and she seems intent not to let Those that Slither sabotage her reign.

Even if their goals are undeniably good their means of getting their is.....bad. Arvis was said to be a great ruler who led Jugdral into a golden age but he still held that barbecue and manipulated everyone to get that. Edelgard strives to be a just ruler, abolish an oppressive class system and lead a unified Fodlan to a golden age. But she still starts a war that probably kills thousands to get there. I suppose it boils down to whether the ends justify the means. 

 

Edited by Etrurian emperor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...