Thorough discussion of the entire story and characters

[MessengerIris]

59 minutes ago, Holder of the Heel said:

Also agreed.

For some of these reasons, I hypocritically enjoy Hubert more than her, even though he co-signs everything she does and has a much shorter threshold for wanting to kill people for goals. He is openly disinterested in right or wrong, and his motivation is very clear. Do everything to protect Edelgard and make sure she succeeds in whatever it is she wants. This I can respect and appreciate the aesthetic of.

Comparatively, the necessity of Edelgard's actions for her goals isn't as simple, and just as you say, if you find that hard to accept, that causes a huge hiccup when it comes to getting along with her character. I suppose it is similar to how whether the player buys Dimitri's mental state and how, if they don't, that sends their feelings about him and his route down a sinkhole, and really that is pretty understandable even as someone who fell for him.

For me, it is more the narrative vs the character motivations. 

In their respective routes:

Dimitri is painted as very wrong by the game. The game and his interactions with the supporting cast all make him out to be wrong. The supporting cast mainly goes along with it because of the mutual goal (freeing the Kingdom). Heck, even Dimitri (during his speech to Randolph) admits that he is nothing more than a monster who is just awaiting his just desserts (him refusing to move during the attack by Fleche). Even when insane, the game doesn’t try to justify anything Dimitri does (eg, every time Felix bashes on Dimitri for letting his murderous emotions get the best of him). His insanity and downfall is only there to makes you sympathetic, but his end goal and means were ultimately still selfish, and the game does not try to paint it otherwise. 

Whereas I can’t say the same for Edelgard. Yes, her primary supporting cast also has doubts over her actions but they still go along with it, and not all of them have as strong of a reason to support Edelgard’s aggressive position during the war. Heck, at the time Byleth sided with Edelgard, there wasn’t much going for her either! She goes off justifying the casualties as “necessary sacrifices” ... but this is NOT her decision to make. These sacrifices are not hers to offer - they require the blood of the people caught in the cross-fire to her end goal. 

And then on the other routes, when given a chance to surrender and negotiate (especially Claude’s), Edelgard refuses because despite their mutual goals, she does not think Claude has the “capacity” that she has to save Fodlan (which in my opinion, is very arrogant and just reinforces her savior complex). 

I think from a moral perspective, having a tragic past does not give either of them the justification to do the atrocities they did. 

At the end of their respective routes, with all the additional awareness/insight they learned, if you asked me if the characters had regrets and would have done things differently, I would say:

Dimitri - he would not have pursued Edelgard out of revenge and focused on liberating his Kingdom.

Edelgard - she would’ve regret not doing things BETTER (better assassin to eliminate Dimitri/Claude, more decisive actions to eliminate the resistance quicker). She regrets not anticipating the push-back/chaos of the war, but ultimately thinks the war is still the right way to achieve HER goal. 

I think for me, that in lies the difference in my acceptance of these characters. None of their actions were “right.” They were all driven by personal motives to a degree, but whether they recognize it and would have changed it in retrospect, is different. (As shown in your opinion of Hubert. He is who he is, and doesn’t try to make himself sound right OR wrong. He is aware that at the end of the day, he has a goal to reach, which I actually appreciate.) 

Edited August 18, 2019 by MessengerIris