Alastor plays and ranks the whole series! Mission Complete! ...For now.

[Sunwoo]

48 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Hearing this argument on racism in games reminds me I've been reading some reviews of The Great Ace Attorney Chronicles. The game is made by Japanese developers, so it is modern Japanese willingly portraying fictional versions of themselves. And it is historically accurate that the Victorian era in Britain was very racist- they had to justify the colonial mission somehow.

Nonetheless, critics of the game have expressed a dislike for the amounts of racism in the game. Critics might have a point when they say "A bunch of aspects of this game are unrealistic and silly, so why keep to realism with the racism?" and "The Japanese characters don't fight back against the racism hurled their way enough". I wouldn't know, as I haven't played the game myself and have no interest in doing so. 

My point being, maybe portraying "hard" racism, is bound to turn some people off from a game, and hence developers would shy away from including it in playable/"hero" characters.

Perhaps, but maybe 3H shouldn't have tried to make "stopping racism" a part of Claude's arc if they were going to be wishy-washy about it. It's hard to be lenient towards IS when Tellius was much less of a train wreck about portraying racism in the world than pretty much every other game following it.

[ZeManaphy]

59 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Discrimination against other species, with the indirect exception of environmentalism (or veganism) I suppose, which JRPGs also tend to feature in some magical fantasy form, is not relevant IRL. JRPGs and the ilk want for whatever reasons to speak of relevant issues. But, the writers, for a multitude of reasons I can speculate on, keep the treatment mild and not hit too close to reality. If you want slaves, make them shapeshifting beasts -without brown skin- because you'll land in a lot of hot water if you mess the portrayal of brown-skinned slavery up. If you want to portray anti-Semitism in Europe, as Valkyria Chronicles does, use dark blue hair instead of religion as the divider between Semite and gentile, because nobody IRL has dark blue hair, so nobody will criticize you.

I'm not saying that there are 0 examples of discrimination in the game, rather, I'm saying that its not really racism when the two groups are clearly different species with objectively different traits, in this case one of the groups can take the form of animals. Racism by defintion is these two things: "The belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another." or "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized." In the former's case, there's clearly distinct barrier between the two groups as established above, and the latter only applies to members of the same species. 

That's the issue  I have with Disney's Zootopia: Judy learns that she should have not have judged Nick Wilde, a fox for being a fox. The problem here, however, is that makes perfect sense from a biological standpoint for a bunny to be scared of a fox, especially since the history states that prey was once hunted by predators in the film, hence potentially providing a justification for prejudice against the predators in the film. In this case, its more like justified speciesism. 

The same issues I have with Zootopia also apply to POR/RD. There is a physical distinction between Laguz and Beorc, with one race being capable of transforming into another animal like a Dragon, Lion, Wolf, or a Bird, two of which can kill people in real life. Its probably common sense to say that these beings posess much greater physical strength compared to a non-transformer, at least when transformed. It would make sense to be afraid of people who could change into a giant animal and has the potential to kill you easily. If you had a brought a pet Lion and told me it was tame, I still would not go near it because its wild animal that has been not been sucessfully been domesticated by people and has attacked and eaten people in the past and still retains it wild traits. And we know for fact that Beorc and Laguz are not same species for the aforementioned above. I won’t go too much more into POR/RD because I never played the games. The issue feels more like speciesism, especially considering the different kind of Laguz. 

In the end, I find Three Houses handling of racism more relatable than Zootopia even if its not the main focus simply because it focuses on humans being discriminated, which makes it a lot easier to sympathize with members of the same species, who we know for the fact do not have drastic biological differences. 

In the case of Zootopia, I would make it instead of different mammals living in a society, I would make it a different breeds of animals, because breeds of animals are the same species, jsut different charcteristics. A pitbull would make a perfect "Aggressive" breed that is misunderstood, while a toy poodle would make a perfect " cute " breed due to its small size.

Edited August 5, 2021 by ZeManaphy

[Interdimensional Observer]

4 minutes ago, ZeManaphy said:

I'm not saying that there are 0 examples of discrimination in the game, rather, I'm saying that its not really racism when the two groups are clearly different species with objectively different traits, in this case one of the groups can take the form of animals.

You see oaks, cedars, and willows, I see a forest. I think it's as simple as that, a difference in perspectives. And that's perfectly acceptable in something as unimportant as popular entertainment. 🙂

[ZeManaphy]

13 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

You see oaks, cedars, and willows, I see a forest. I think it's as simple as that, a difference in perspectives. And that's perfectly acceptable in something as unimportant as popular entertainment. 🙂

Sorry if I sounded too passionate. This is something I picked from Pokémon forums and Youtubers like Tamashii Hiroka. When we criticize or praise a game, we give long paragraphs backed up by evidence. If your interested in seeing how detailed these posts are, I can post a link to one of my friend’s post on Smogon why he think HGSS are the worst game in the franchise. 

[lenticular]

2 hours ago, ZeManaphy said:

In previous games, the player could just bench a character if they did not want to use them. But that’s not the case in Three Houses the player is actively encouraged to use all their units by making their students in blank slates. You are given the free ability to tailor your students in any way you like, encouraging you to give each student a unique role in your army.

You absolutely can bench any character you aren't using, though. In fact, generally, it's more efficient to do so. There's an upper limit on how many characters can ever be deployed at once (12 on the field plus 3 adjutants) and unless you're grinding, there's also an upper limit on how much experience you can get, so it generally makes sense to divide that experience only between the characters you're actually going to be deploying. In this sense, Three Houses isn't any different from other Fire Emblem games.

Yes, there is flexibility in how you train and class your units, meaning you never fall into situations of "welp, I like both Gatrie and Tauroneo but I only want one general so I guess one of them is getting benched" but that hasn't really been an issue in Fire Emblem since reclassing was introduced. I also think that you're overselling thigns a bit by referring to characters as blank slates. They all have distinct bases, growths, skill strengths and weaknesses, budding talents, learned spells, learned combat arts, personal ability, etc. which shapes who they are and makes everyone suited to some classes and not to others. Personally, I like this mainly because it keeps characters distinct but also because I am a masochist who enjoys making deliberately bad choices and running with them.

2 hours ago, ZeManaphy said:

The the big reason why I love Tea Parties. By paying close attention to supports, reactions to favorite gifts, and  the kind of items you return to students shows their personalities, and Tea Parties are the ultimate test. By executing a perfect tea party, you are rewarded charm for both you and the participant.

In theory, I see where you're coming from here, but in practice, I don't think they really work out like that. A lot of answers make sense, but there are also a good number that just seem entirely too arbitrary. Yes, of course Catherine is going to want to talk about "Someone you look up to" or "Mighty weapons", but why is she interested in "Gardening mishaps" or "Classes you might enjoy"? I have no idea. And if, at the end of the tea time, she says "We should train together" then the correct responses are either to laugh or sip tea? But if you nod or chat instead, then that's wrong? I have no earthly clue how that even begins to make sense.

2 hours ago, ZeManaphy said:

All this points to the main themes of this game, which is: How beautiful and cherished life is, only for those cherished moments to go away so quickly and romance, but not in good way. The poem's first part refers to how wonderful and tranquil the academy days were, only for war to come out of the blue and change everything. The first part of the game does not vary because it does not need to. Fodlan is land at peace with no war going on, only for war to be declared later on. To think that we were once all friends- now we are enemies, fighting for what we believe is right- this happened so fast- I miss the academy days so much.

This theme is definitely present, but I have to say it's not one that particularly worked for me. I think that this is because the main characters are also the main actors who are driving the war. If anyone has the ability to end the war peacefully, then it is our people. Edelgard especially is the single primary instigator of the war, so it is particularly jarring to have a song from her point of view about how terrible war is when it is literally all her fault.

2 hours ago, ZeManaphy said:

TLDR: If People are trying play Three Houses like previous titles where you just take a short break to repack on items or fix weapons and want to go from battle to battle with little breaks are not obviously not going to enjoy Three Houses because its a game that rewards you for putting time for knowing students, doing activities, and being invested and taking as much time as possible to learn about the world of Fodlan and its history and current political issues. 

I think that the real question here is to what extent monastery activities should be mechanically tied to battle performance. Personally, I enjoy (most of) the monastery as an end in itself. I like walking around, interacting with the characters and learning more about the world. For me, that is an end unto itself. I find it fun, so I don't need the extra little carrot of making my people fight a little bit better. What I want, ideally, is to be able to engage in as much monastery content as I want without having to worry that I'm going to trivialise the battle content, or as little monastery content as I want without having to worry that I'm setting myself up to fail.

With that said, though, I'm sure that for some people, the integration of the two systems is entirely the point. For some people, the monastery is all about the rewards that it grants and being able to see the fruits of one's labour, so to speak. And I'm not going to tell those people that they are wrong. And then there are still others who have no interest in the monastery at all and who would rather just skip the whole thing if they could, and I won't tell them that they're wrong either. And the challenge in the game's development was how to keep all these different types of people happy? How can you make it rewarding for people who want to be rewarded, skippable for those who want to skip, and a goal in and of itself for people who just want to take a break from their tactical combat game to play a walking sim for a while? It's a difficult challenge, but I think that IS mostly did a decent job of it, though with a few exceptions.

(As an aside: Can you please try to use more paragraph breaks? It's difficult to read single unbroken paragraphs like the one I'm quoting from. Thank you.)

2 hours ago, Alastor15243 said:

A species is defined as a group of living organisms capable of producing fertile offspring together. Branded are not sterile, they can still have children of their own. Therefore beorc and laguz are both the same species, just as mutants are still human in X-Men.

That is a definition of "species", but not the only one. (For other definitions, see, for instance, the Wikipedia article for "species".) Even in the real world, the definition can break down in several cases, such as ring species or asexually reproducing species. As ever, nature remains more complicated than our ability to fit it to neat boxes and definitions, and we live in a world which isn't further complicated by Weird Magic Stuff. I don't think it's particularly meaningful to ask whether laguz and beorc are the same species and whether they suffer from racism or speciesism, when we can just say that they face bigotry and discrimination and leave it at that.

[Jotari]

5 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Hearing this argument on racism in games reminds me I've been reading some reviews of The Great Ace Attorney Chronicles. The game is made by Japanese developers, so it is modern Japanese willingly portraying fictional versions of themselves. And it is historically accurate that the Victorian era in Britain was very racist- they had to justify the colonial mission somehow.

Nonetheless, critics of the game have expressed a dislike for the amounts of racism in the game. Critics might have a point when they say "A bunch of aspects of this game are unrealistic and silly, so why keep to realism with the racism?" and "The Japanese characters don't fight back against the racism hurled their way enough". I wouldn't know, as I haven't played the game myself and have no interest in doing so. 

My point being, maybe portraying "hard" racism, is bound to turn some

I've only played the first case, so I've only encountered one British character so far, but the casual racism has been one of my favorite aspects of the game. It levels the British Empire which also gets praised as the leading culture in science and law etc, so showing their arrogance through the very real racism they had helps in giving it a lens of reality where otherwise it might come across as excessive anglophileism. Likewise the actual acknowledgement of Meji era values and the supreme authority of the military is another realistic aspect of it I like from the Japanese side. All in all it depicts the era as a mixed bag and I find that pretty appealing. Course that's just my opinion, if people don't want to be reminded racism exists when playing their wacky lawyer game that's fair enough. For something like that you're just not going to please everyone.

4 hours ago, ZeManaphy said:

I'm not saying that there are 0 examples of discrimination in the game, rather, I'm saying that its not really racism when the two groups are clearly different species with objectively different traits, in this case one of the groups can take the form of animals. Racism by defintion is these two things: "The belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another." or "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized." In the former's case, there's clearly distinct barrier between the two groups as established above, and the latter only applies to members of the same species. 

That's the issue  I have with Disney's Zootopia: Judy learns that she should have not have judged Nick Wilde, a fox for being a fox. The problem here, however, is that makes perfect sense from a biological standpoint for a bunny to be scared of a fox, especially since the history states that prey was once hunted by predators in the film, hence potentially providing a justification for prejudice against the predators in the film. In this case, its more like justified speciesism. 

The same issues I have with Zootopia also apply to POR/RD. There is a physical distinction between Laguz and Beorc, with one race being capable of transforming into another animal like a Dragon, Lion, Wolf, or a Bird, two of which can kill people in real life. Its probably common sense to say that these beings posess much greater physical strength compared to a non-transformer, at least when transformed. It would make sense to be afraid of people who could change into a giant animal and has the potential to kill you easily. If you had a brought a pet Lion and told me it was tame, I still would not go near it because its wild animal that has been not been sucessfully been domesticated by people and has attacked and eaten people in the past and still retains it wild traits. And we know for fact that Beorc and Laguz are not same species for the aforementioned above. I won’t go too much more into POR/RD because I never played the games. The issue feels more like speciesism, especially considering the different kind of Laguz. 

In the end, I find Three Houses handling of racism more relatable than Zootopia even if its not the main focus simply because it focuses on humans being discriminated, which makes it a lot easier to sympathize with members of the same species, who we know for the fact do not have drastic biological differences. 

In the case of Zootopia, I would make it instead of different mammals living in a society, I would make it a different breeds of animals, because breeds of animals are the same species, jsut different charcteristics. A pitbull would make a perfect "Aggressive" breed that is misunderstood, while a toy poodle would make a perfect " cute " breed due to its small size.

It doesn't massively matter whether beorc and laguz can be scientifically classed as of the same species. Because the racism in the game is clearly being treated as an analogy. It's working off the same ideas of prejudice and how it affects both societies and individuals that exists in our world (mutant registry people do have legitimate concerns). One can argue that analogies that give super powers to one or both sides inherently break down because they get so radically different to the real world, but to throw the baby out with the bath water. Because at the end of the day it's still expressing the same themes and ideas in the narrative that would be there if you did replace all the characters with humans of a different race (well except the dragon laguz because their long life and immense power are hard aspects of the plot, course they suffer the least racism, probably because of the aforementioned long life and immense power).

Edited August 5, 2021 by Jotari

[Samz707]

4 hours ago, lenticular said:

 

In theory, I see where you're coming from here, but in practice, I don't think they really work out like that. A lot of answers make sense, but there are also a good number that just seem entirely too arbitrary. Yes, of course Catherine is going to want to talk about "Someone you look up to" or "Mighty weapons", but why is she interested in "Gardening mishaps" or "Classes you might enjoy"? I have no idea. And if, at the end of the tea time, she says "We should train together" then the correct responses are either to laugh or sip tea? But if you nod or chat instead, then that's wrong? I have no earthly clue how that even begins to make sense.

 

Doesn't help it feels very hollow since the other person doesn't even properly talk back to you, it honestly feels like a feature still in Alpha.

Edited August 5, 2021 by Samz707

[AnonymousSpeed]

On 8/4/2021 at 11:45 AM, Acacia Sgt said:

Eh, if we truly are to thrive as a society, I don't think promoting tribalism is the way to go. That just encourages the whole "They're different, therefore I hate them" mindset that is still so prevalent over here in this planet to this day and age.

I disagree that self-determination promotes tribalism, but I don't to completely take over Alastor's thread with weird political theory.

On 8/4/2021 at 12:31 PM, Acacia Sgt said:

Ironically then, as someone who is not really part of the three powers, Byleth can work best as an impartial mediator as head of state of the united Fodlan but also not as entrenched with the Church as someone like say Seteth. Garreg Mach's location in the center of the continent was also chosen for the same reason all those centuries ago.

Perhaps, but Byleth (and successors) cannot be impartial to themselves, and so their own interests will become entrenched over time.

18 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

The funny thing is that his argument means support to the dissolution of such an entity as the "United" States. After all, why foment a united body of government when all 50 states can just be their own nation-states? Why foment a single American identity when New Englanders, Californians, Dixies, Cascadians, Midwesterns, Hawaians, Appalachians, etc. can instead promote their own?

17 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Yeah, I was just bringing up the way his statement could be taken as. And that's exactly why it's not really the way to go or expect it will work. In any case, if the US would ever split up, yeah, it wouldn't be as 50 individual countries. The number would be much lower. Various states who do have some things in common with each other joining up.

Or at least some more 10th amendment rights, which I would be in favor of. It's funny you mention this, because it was assumed in the nascent days of the United States that the prospective size of the country was too much for a single government and that it eventually would break up into smaller (though still closely allied) republics.

17 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Agreed, though, that no one in Three Houses is as big a jerkass as Shinon. Who, for the record, gets along pretty well with Gatrie, too.

Cowardly authors. What's the point of writing a large cast of characters without dysfunctional racists and alcoholics?

14 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

In my opinion, racism allegories fail when one side is clearly more different than just the superficial level. So at least TH did it more right by having Almyrans be just about the same as Fodlanians, unlike Laguz being a whole class of their own thanks to their shapeshifting abilities, longer lifespans, and other actual differences.

I mean, I agree and disagree. While most differences between races are merely cultural, there are still cultural differences between them. I disdain the French on the grounds of their deplorable character, but not every Frank is a sex-addict and many cultural practices are not so objectionable.

13 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Japanese video games commonly want to say racism is bad, but few of them ever want to be so serious and controversial as to make a serious tackling of the issues of race and ethnicity. Thus, fantasy species become a wafer-thin cover for an unserious, unrealistic, and inoffensive way of featuring racism and saying it's bad and the world should stop having it.

If you're afraid to throw hands, don't start a fight.

13 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

To back to the old quip "If men were angels, no government would be necessary". And if men were angels, any government could work, because angels are sinless, faultless creatures ignore Lucifer who would never engage in evil. From autocracy to anarchy, angels could make it all function flawlessly.

Nonsense, because if angels really were sinless (which they of course are not), they would not engage in forms of government which are inherently sinful.

***

What was that about not taking over the thread again?

[Samz707]

20 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

 

Cowardly authors. What's the point of writing a large cast of characters without dysfunctional racists and alcoholics?

 

 Manuela is a highly dysfunctional Alcoholic isn't she?

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

17 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

Cowardly authors. What's the point of writing a large cast of characters without dysfunctional racists and alcoholics?

Well, Manuela is a dysfunctional alcoholic, so... halfway there.

17 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

What was that about not taking over the thread again?

It would be a pretty dark joke to get this two-years-in-the-making thread shut down on literally the very last game Alastor has to review.

19 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

I mean, I agree and disagree. While most differences between races are merely cultural, there are still cultural differences between them. I disdain the French on the grounds of their deplorable character, but not every Frank is a sex-addict and many cultural practices are not so objectionable.

There are two things I can't stand: people who are intolerant of other people's cultures, and the Dutch.

[Acacia Sgt]

24 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

I disagree that self-determination promotes tribalism, but I don't to completely take over Alastor's thread with weird political theory.

Not my point. Besides, self-determination and unification are not incompatible. Just like how Malta had a significant support in wanting to remain under British rule, simply asking for more representation and integration, but the British considered keeping the island as no longer cost-effective, and thus let them go despite protests of wanting to remain. Even a referendum made shortly after independence resulted in the Maltese still wanting Queen Elizabeth II as their Queen and Head of State. Which remained in effect at least before the country shifted to a republic.

Edited August 5, 2021 by Acacia Sgt

[AnonymousSpeed]

9 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

 Manuela is a highly dysfunctional Alcoholic isn't she?

9 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Well, Manuela is a dysfunctional alcoholic, so... halfway there.

Unless they vomit over themselves on camera, it doesn't count.

8 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Not my point.

Ah, my mistake.

8 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Even a referendum made shortly after independence resulted in the Maltese still wanting Queen Elizabeth II as their Queen and Head of State. Which remained in effect at least before the country shifted to a republic.

I would need to know more about the practical role of Britain in the administration of Malta before I can comment on that.

[Acacia Sgt]

5 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

I would need to know more about the practical role of Britain in the administration of Malta before I can comment on that.

Going on a tangent, I just realized I could've used my own country instead or as well as an example. 11 years of an Independence War against Spain... only to then ask if the King of Spain could still be our King. Or if not him, then another member of the royal family.

We humans are a complicated lot. Though to be fair, our Independence War are more against the Napoleonic Regime imposed on Spain rather than at Spain itself. At least, at the beginning and not entirely the reason for it.

Edited August 5, 2021 by Acacia Sgt

[AnonymousSpeed]

7 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Going on a tangent, I just realized I could've used my own country instead or as well as an example.

Yeah, moments like those stink. I hate them, but at least you get to be smarter than your past self.

Very interesting tidbit, but at least looking at the American revolution, there was an antebellum idea that "the king" was separate from "the government", with most grievances being directed towards parliament specifically. I have no idea whether anything like that could have also been in play with Spain though, I'll differ to you there. Regardless, I wouldn't support succession, let alone revolution, unless you were actually going to do something differently, so I assume we're agreed there.

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

I disagree that self-determination promotes tribalism, but I don't to completely take over Alastor's thread with weird political theory.

Hey, if you can form that into a title, I'd comment on it in Serious Discussion.

 

1 hour ago, Samz707 said:

 Manuela is a highly dysfunctional Alcoholic isn't she?

 

1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Well, Manuela is a dysfunctional alcoholic, so... halfway there.

Hey, I take personal offense at that....Manuela is a very high functioning alcoholic!

1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

 

There are two things I can't stand: people who are intolerant of other people's cultures, and the Dutch.

"Why  didn't you stop Nohr from kidnapping Corrin."

"I would have, but they share a border with the Dutch"

1 hour ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Going on a tangent, I just realized I could've used my own country instead or as well as an example. 11 years of an Independence War against Spain... only to then ask if the King of Spain could still be our King. Or if not him, then another member of the royal family.

We humans are a complicated lot. Though to be fair, our Independence War are more against the Napoleonic Regime imposed on Spain rather than at Spain itself. At least, at the beginning and not entirely the reason for it.

Okay, time to play the game of where is Acacia from? Independence from Spain, hmm. That narrows it down to...like a quarter of countries that exist today XD

In the case of my country we wanted to have nothing to do with Britain at all, but they force us to keep the monarchy while giving up the ruling government. At least until we could do some legally trickery to slowly start ignoring the role of the monarch.

[AnonymousSpeed]

7 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Okay, time to play the game of where is Acacia from? Independence from Spain, hmm. That narrows it down to...like a quarter of countries that exist today XD

In the case of my country we wanted to have nothing to do with Britain at all, but they force us to keep the monarchy while giving up the ruling government. At least until we could do some legally trickery to slowly start ignoring the role of the monarch.

Mexico.

Yeah man, it's like Ghandi said- "Be the change you want to see in the world".

[Jotari]

2 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

Mexico.

Explains why they accepted having an Emperor....twice.

[Acacia Sgt]

It's all fun and games until the American Puppet Liberal Republican wants to get rid of the French Puppet Liberal Monarchist. This is why we can't have nice things.

Anyway, I agree that this is now better to be its own thread than clutter in Alastor's. Fodlan's politics are enough as it is, heh.

[AnonymousSpeed]

You know what really jips my chain? Why do Shove and Smite take up a combat art slot?

Edited August 6, 2021 by AnonymousSpeed

[Alastor15243]

23 hours ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

You know what really jips my chain? Why do Shove and Smite take up a combat art slot?

I think because there just aren't any activated skills anymore. Every skill is passive now unless I'm experiencing a major brain fart, so every "command" skill has been turned into a combat art for simplicity.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

40 minutes ago, Alastor15243 said:

I think because there just aren't any activated skills anymore. Every skill is passive now unless I'm experiencing a major brain fart, so every "command" skill has been turned into a combat art for simplicity.

"Steal" and "Dance" are commands derived from skills. Dance is strictly class-linked, but Steal exists in class-linked and equippable forms. Perhaps these could've been reworked as free-slot combat arts?

Also "Rally" is its own command, usable only by units with a (personal or equippable) rally skill.

[lenticular]

2 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

"Steal" and "Dance" are commands derived from skills. Dance is strictly class-linked, but Steal exists in class-linked and equippable forms. Perhaps these could've been reworked as free-slot combat arts?

Also "Rally" is its own command, usable only by units with a (personal or equippable) rally skill.

There's also Locktouch.

Regardless, I would guess that Shove and its cousins are combat arts because a combat art slot is less valuable than a skill slot. I don't know about anyone else, but I find that I often have more than five skills that I'd like to bring if I could, but rarely feel the desire for more than three combat arts.

[Alastor15243]

Hey, so, for the first time ever I'm going to have to play the game for a bit "off camera". I suspended the game at the end of last part, which was all well and good at the time, but now there's a switch game I want to play and (shout-out to my friend Ephraim225 for taking the time to confirm this for me on short notice) the game didn't prompt me to save after finishing free exploration. So I'm gonna do the first lesson off-camera, save, and discuss what I did on Monday.

Edited August 6, 2021 by Alastor15243

[AnonymousSpeed]

On 8/5/2021 at 5:15 PM, AnonymousSpeed said:

[picture]

Pick between three epic armies: The Pink Panthers, the Green Drunkards, and the Brown Papists. If you choose to join that last house, you get a second split at the end of part 1 depending on whether you want to be ruled by the King of Spain again.

On 8/6/2021 at 4:42 PM, Alastor15243 said:

I think because there just aren't any activated skills anymore. Every skill is passive now unless I'm experiencing a major brain fart, so every "command" skill has been turned into a combat art for simplicity.

On 8/6/2021 at 5:24 PM, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

"Steal" and "Dance" are commands derived from skills. Dance is strictly class-linked, but Steal exists in class-linked and equippable forms. Perhaps these could've been reworked as free-slot combat arts?

Also "Rally" is its own command, usable only by units with a (personal or equippable) rally skill.

On 8/6/2021 at 7:37 PM, lenticular said:

Regardless, I would guess that Shove and its cousins are combat arts because a combat art slot is less valuable than a skill slot. I don't know about anyone else, but I find that I often have more than five skills that I'd like to bring if I could, but rarely feel the desire for more than three combat arts.

Regardless, I like map commands such as shove and swap and I also like Combat Arts, since those let you actively change what you're doing. I'm very upset my interesting decision making is even more limited than normal by these competing slots. The best option would obviously have been to have a single skill category with eight slots which could be filled with as many passive or combat arts as you wanted.

[Shadow Mir]

On 8/6/2021 at 6:52 PM, Alastor15243 said:

Hey, so, for the first time ever I'm going to have to play the game for a bit "off camera". I suspended the game at the end of last part, which was all well and good at the time, but now there's a switch game I want to play and (shout-out to my friend Ephraim225 for taking the time to confirm this for me on short notice) the game didn't prompt me to save after finishing free exploration. So I'm gonna do the first lesson off-camera, save, and discuss what I did on Monday.

That's okay. What is the game, btw?