Jump to content
Killer Kronya

Can we talk about how terrible Those Who Slither in the Dark are as villains? (Spoilers Obviously)

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Landmaster said:

They do say who his target was. "As many nobles as possible". Dimitri and Claude are nobles and literally the only ones at that being chased. It's clear that they're targets. She said him not killing anyone was why she was disappointed.  

She has more reasons to run in the same direction as them than not. Running away by herself would make it pretty obvious she knew this was going to happen and could very easily make her a suspect (not that anyone likely would have come to that conclusion but it would have been a possibility). I'm sure she'd also wants to see Kostas get the job done correctly rather than go somewhere else and just assume he kills them. Speculation aside, since it's not particularly relevant, we know that's why Kostas was hired~

If you choose to think otherwise, then you're free to do that~ 

 

No we know NOT that Kostas was hired to specifically kill Dimitri and Claude. Edelgard also has no reasons to tell him the truth. Why should she tell him "YOu attacked me to and that's why I want to kill you, Kostas"? That would be stupid. We don't know the exact plans she had with Kostas, so can we please stop to claim theories as facts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hauke said:

 

No we know NOT that Kostas was hired to specifically kill Dimitri and Claude. Edelgard also has no reasons to tell him the truth. Why should she tell him "YOu attacked me to and that's why I want to kill you, Kostas"? That would be stupid. We don't know the exact plans she had with Kostas, so can we please stop to claim theories as facts?

Yes we do. She doesn't have to tell them why she wants them dead, just that she wants them dead. He's a bandit, he doesn't care what her reasons are. He's just there to get paid.

They are facts but like I said, you're free to choose to believe otherwise, if you wish~ No one can stop you~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Landmaster said:

Yes we do. She doesn't have to tell them why she wants them dead, just that she wants them dead. He's a bandit, he doesn't care what her reasons are. He's just there to get paid. 

They are facts but like I said, you're free to choose to believe otherwise, if you wish~ No one can stop you~ 

The show me the facts. Show me thew FACT that the game tells you that she wants Dimitri and Claude death., It's NEVER mentioned in the game, that she hired Kostas to kill Dimitri and Claude. Never ever. Why do you act as if this are facts which are mentioned in the game? There are indicators that thos could be the case, but there are no facts. Is it so hard to understand what "fact" means and why this are NOT facts? If she told Kostas "Kill Dimitri and Claude" that would be a fact. We only know she hired him to kill "as much nobles as possible" which not necessary means Dimitri and Claude. She don't even tell him where. She could just have hired him to kill random nobles in Fodlan and he just choose the students on his own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hauke said:

The show me the facts. Show me thew FACT that the game tells you that she wants Dimitri and Claude death., It's NEVER mentioned in the game, that she hired Kostas to kill Dimitri and Claude. Never ever. Why do you act as if this are facts which are mentioned in the game? There are indicators that thos could be the case, but there are no facts. Is it so hard to understand what "fact" means and why this are NOT facts? If she told Kostas "Kill Dimitri and Claude" that would be a fact. We only know she hired him to kill "as much nobles as possible" which not necessary means Dimitri and Claude. She don't even tell him where. She could just have hired him to kill random nobles in Fodlan and he just choose the students on his own.

Here is their conversation~

This is from the game. 

He's obviously not hired to kill random Fodlan nobles because he was chasing Dimitri and Claude.

Kostas complains that the Knights of Seiros interfered and Flame Emperor says "I had hoped you would achieve your goal despite the setback". The Knights interrupted him from killing the House Leaders. Meaning his goal was to kill the House Leaders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ivan Tridelan said:

Basically, this organization exists to ensure Edelgard does not just talk to Claude and Dmitri and ally with them in undoing the whole Crest system (the Church would depend on whether Rhea accepts the explanation that "humanity has abused the gifts of the Goddess and so they should no longer be considered a sign of divine right to rule") by making her too paranoid to trust anyone other than Hubert (and Byleth, especially in CF) and anti-Church/Rhea to consider coming to some compromise/agreement to legitimize the downfall of the nobility.

Not true because Edelgard trusts Byleth (to a point). 
I honestly don't think Edelgard wanted to talk to them.(though again Claude didn't have any issues dissolving the Alliance on any path), but Edelgard wanted unification. Dimitri had no reason to want that or end the crest system. (to which again my biggest question is how they intended to stop this w/o mass experiements on babies/people until it was eliminated completely which is just as wrong as them trying to force crests on people) or end the nobility.

Edited by daisy jane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They just felt like an excuse for part 1 villains before the inevitable war between the three houses. I dislike how they get nowhere with their plans and how I'm still left wondering about what they wanted to achieve at all. Shaft Castlevania says something about sacrificing people for some grand plan, and he's around using mind controlling magic on people and experimenting with crests, but then...... Their plan reaches nowhere.

I also don't really understand their dynamics.

(Part 1 endgame spoilers)

Spoiler

Like why Edelgard even bothered "allying" with them. She didn't benefit from anything and nor did they from their alliance, other than maybe getting more firepower. If anything, they are more like the type of people Edelgard would prefer to fight against. It's like Alvis allying with Manfroy but without any of the benefits that would come from it.

Overall I wish part 1 was all about wrapping up their arc, while part 2 should've entirely been about the war. I know it needed a villain to keep the plot going, and the issues within the church are central to the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Ottservia said:

yeah that's annoying honestly. True moral gray in storytelling is hard to do because it's something that can actively shake up an audience's world view. I'll say again that fictional morality is for the most part relatively simple at least when compared to morality in real life which is way too complex. Because You just really have a hero and a villain. One is good and one is bad that's usually how it goes in stories. The audience already has an idea on who to side with because of the way it's presented. You side with the hero because they're "good" and people like to feel like they're morally in the right. People don't like to feel like they're morally in the wrong which is what true moral gray storytelling does. It actively forces the audience to question their own moral principles without really giving them a definitive answer(kinda like how morality is in real life) and people generally don't like that(I mean just look at all the discourse surrounding Edelgard's character as an example). People like to feel like they're doing the right thing or following a character that is always presented as in the right. This is why IS is so afraid to go all in with the moral ambiguity. They don't want people to feel like they're wrong which is exactly what true moral gray storytelling is supposed to do. 

I will grant 3H is probably the closest IS has gotten to that level of moral ambiguity(at least of the games I've played) but they didn't quite hit the mark. It ain't no death note but it's close if you ask me.

Fire Emblem fanbase can't handle moral gray either. Plenty are blindly calling Rhea and Edelgard evil just because they have bad and flawed aspects to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rapier said:

They just felt like an excuse for part 1 villains before the inevitable war between the three houses. I dislike how they get nowhere with their plans and how I'm still left wondering about what they wanted to achieve at all. Shaft Castlevania says something about sacrificing people for some grand plan, and he's around using mind controlling magic on people and experimenting with crests, but then...... Their plan reaches nowhere.

I also don't really understand their dynamics.

(Part 1 endgame spoilers)

  Hide contents

Like why Edelgard even bothered "allying" with them. She didn't benefit from anything and nor did they from their alliance, other than maybe getting more firepower. If anything, they are more like the type of people Edelgard would prefer to fight against. It's like Alvis allying with Manfroy but without any of the benefits that would come from it.

Overall I wish part 1 was all about wrapping up their arc, while part 2 should've entirely been about the war. I know it needed a villain to keep the plot going, and the issues within the church are central to the story.

Edelgard tells you why she "allied" with them in her Supports.

She didn't have a choice, their entire backstory also reinforces that they had the ground Edelgard did not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Seazas said:

Fire Emblem fanbase can't handle moral gray either. Plenty are blindly calling Rhea and Edelgard evil just because they have bad and flawed aspects to them.

I think it's very hard to argue Edelgard isn't the villain in this scenario. She's right in wanting to extinguish crests and the religious masquerade around them. She isn't right for doing that by conquering the entire continent by war and paving her way to success over everyone's dead bodies. I dislike how she didn't even try to coerce the other Houses into her cause, because Claude agrees with her reasons but not with her methods (as per his route). Dimitri probably wouldn't have agreed, but then again, one less enemy to deal with if she actually cared enough and compromised with Claude.

I'd prefer if the whole They who Slither in the Dark arc was closed in part 1, revealing the church's secrets as well as their own, and then each House leader decides what to do based on what they learned from that experience. In that case, Edelgard would see the crests as evil and that there's no way to be freed from them and of their religious influence if not by war. Dimitri would believe they could still be used for good and argues the religious influence is necessary for harmonizing their society. Claude would still want a change, but through compromise instead of war, and would be seen as a naive idealist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rapier said:

I think it's very hard to argue Edelgard isn't the villain in this scenario. She's right in wanting to extinguish crests and the religious masquerade around them. She isn't right for doing that by conquering the entire continent by war and paving her way to success over everyone's dead bodies. I dislike how she didn't even try to coerce the other Houses into her cause, because Claude agrees with her reasons but not with her methods (as per his route). Dimitri probably wouldn't have agreed, but then again, one less enemy to deal with if she actually cared enough and compromised with Claude.

I'd prefer if the whole They who Slither in the Dark arc was closed in part 1, revealing the church's secrets as well as their own, and then each House leader decides what to do based on what they learned from that experience. In that case, Edelgard would see the crests as evil and that there's no way to be freed from them and of their religious influence if not by war. Dimitri would believe they could still be used for good and argues the religious influence is necessary for harmonizing their society. Claude would still want a change, but through compromise instead of war, and would be seen as a naive idealist.

People are comparing her and/or Rhea to Hitler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, in spite of them having similar goals, she and Claude don't really get along in like everyday conversation. And it's pretty clear she thinks the Alliance and Kingdom are just discount versions of the Empire. And she doesn't trust him at all considering he seemingly appeared out of nowhere.

Not sure why people are still angling for the "she could have just talked to him!" argument when it's clear she doesn't like talking to him lmao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Crysta said:

Honestly, in spite of them having similar goals, she and Claude don't really get along in like everyday conversation. And it's pretty clear she thinks the Alliance and Kingdom are just discount versions of the Empire. And she doesn't trust him at all considering he seemingly appeared out of nowhere.

Not sure why people are still angling for the "she could have just talked to him!" argument when it's clear she doesn't like talking to him lmao

Additionally, she sees him as incompetent doesn't she? She easily gets mad at Claude's jokes. Dimitri sees right through them and controls himself: leading to the two having better relations toward each other.

Edited by Seazas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh I know she called him dumb, but I don't know if she seriously believes that so much as it's really, really easy for him to get under her skin. And he gleefully does so.

"For a fool, you catch on quickly" is kind of contradictory lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, politics go way further than "well I don't like him, might as well not try diplomacy at all!". It's also strange that Edelgard has allies in both the Alliance and the Kingdom, yet she never tries to reach out to their respective leaders. Yes, I know Dimitri wouldn't even listen to her, but she could've tried with Claude and attempted a compromise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Rapier said:

I mean, politics go way further than "well I don't like him, might as well not try diplomacy at all!". It's also strange that Edelgard has allies in both the Alliance and the Kingdom, yet she never tries to reach out to their respective leaders. Yes, I know Dimitri wouldn't even listen to her, but she could've tried with Claude and attempted a compromise.

She has massive trust issues which should be obvious if you've played her path. She doesn't seek Claude's help because she does not trust him, simple as that.

No, she does not behave in the objectively best way. Her inability to trust people and seek out potential allies is absolutely a character flaw and causes her to have more trouble reaching her goals (and in all routes but hers, causes her to fail to reach them entirely). This does not make her evil. People rarely act in the objectively best way possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rapier said:

I think it's very hard to argue Edelgard isn't the villain in this scenario. She's right in wanting to extinguish crests and the religious masquerade around them. She isn't right for doing that by conquering the entire continent by war and paving her way to success over everyone's dead bodies. I dislike how she didn't even try to coerce the other Houses into her cause, because Claude agrees with her reasons but not with her methods (as per his route). Dimitri probably wouldn't have agreed, but then again, one less enemy to deal with if she actually cared enough and compromised with Claude.

I'd prefer if the whole They who Slither in the Dark arc was closed in part 1, revealing the church's secrets as well as their own, and then each House leader decides what to do based on what they learned from that experience. In that case, Edelgard would see the crests as evil and that there's no way to be freed from them and of their religious influence if not by war. Dimitri would believe they could still be used for good and argues the religious influence is necessary for harmonizing their society. Claude would still want a change, but through compromise instead of war, and would be seen as a naive idealist.

 

and why is she right to extinguish it?

again people (Including Edelgard) - are like get rid of it- so is the way to kill everyone who has a crest and hope it doesn't pop up in future generations, killing them too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, daisy jane said:

again people (Including Edelgard) - are like get rid of it- so is the way to kill everyone who has a crest and hope it doesn't pop up in future generations, killing them too?

Seeing as the end of Crimson Flower does not result in the mass murder of all your party's crest-users, this is clearly not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

Seeing as the end of Crimson Flower does not result in the mass murder of all your party's crest-users, this is clearly not the case.

no. because the game ends. but that's I feel a legitimate question. 
Edelgard wants to eliminate crests. 
the crests are something found in the blood. 
we're told that there are a lot of instances that they can skip generations - and appear whenever. 

we also know that people are tortured to have blood transfusions to get crests - but this is painful and leads to death - so there's nothing to say that doing the same technique to remove them would be the same.

so my question again. How is edelgard planning to eliminate the crests?
Why are the crests the thing to be eliminated. Linhardt pointed out that a good chunk ofthem is for war-time benefit but a good chunk of them are for healing and peace time.  note that nugget never even enters Edelgard's mind. like that is a big major question for me. 

 

in regards to those who slither in the dark - I don't think they were actually meant to be villians (in the game) in the sense of  - they are just another cog in a wheel of what was brewing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rapier said:

I think it's very hard to argue Edelgard isn't the villain in this scenario. She's right in wanting to extinguish crests and the religious masquerade around them. She isn't right for doing that by conquering the entire continent by war and paving her way to success over everyone's dead bodies. I dislike how she didn't even try to coerce the other Houses into her cause, because Claude agrees with her reasons but not with her methods (as per his route). Dimitri probably wouldn't have agreed, but then again, one less enemy to deal with if she actually cared enough and compromised with Claude.

I'd prefer if the whole They who Slither in the Dark arc was closed in part 1, revealing the church's secrets as well as their own, and then each House leader decides what to do based on what they learned from that experience. In that case, Edelgard would see the crests as evil and that there's no way to be freed from them and of their religious influence if not by war. Dimitri would believe they could still be used for good and argues the religious influence is necessary for harmonizing their society. Claude would still want a change, but through compromise instead of war, and would be seen as a naive idealist.

That's what I've been saying for a while, 3H's story would just make a lot more sense if it ended up in an alliance instead of war. It goes down that road because they evidently wanted to push "choices" and the strong feels of killing and waging war on your friends and former comrades. But if you remove all that jank, it doesn't really make sense for neither Claude nor Edelgard to not reach out for the other's help, especially since they have high esteem of one another (and while they're not best friends they don't act like enemies either). Hell, I'd argue the story would make even more sense if Dimitri too would join in, making his arc not only be his redemption, but actually him finding the truth and addressing the right people with his revenge. Also it would play into the shared backstory the two have, which was definitely worth more exploration.

So yeah, the game is a conflict because the developers wanted to do a better Fates, and in all fairness it happened, but peace and rainbows would've been more sensible this time around. And there's nothing stopping them from still putting in tragedy and bloodshed, it wouldn't be a smooth alliance anyways.

10 minutes ago, daisy jane said:

...

I mean I see your point, but also don't worry too much about it, it's really just "fantasy science". We see in a fair share of endings (mostly Lysithea's) even outside of CF, that people figure out a way to remove them, which obviously doesn't involve murder (since she goes on to live a happy long life). I don't know, they clean her blood or just use some new magic, who knows.

Also I'd argue that Edelgard's point is not necessarily against crests themselves, but they have to be removed (or at least get rid of their importance) since they're at the very base of the nobility system, which is what she actually wants to overthrow.

Edited by timon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TWSD is easily the weakest part of the story and unfortunately sours an otherwise interesting plot. It's even more frustating that they are necessity for Edelgard's motivation and what ultimately makes her one of the more compelling FE antagonists to date.

imo they should have condensed these characters into one. Kronya and Solon easily could have been 1 character which would help a lot to make the plot flow more smoothly and give them overall more weight.
I would even go so far to merge these two into the Death Knight because that's another throwaway villain who desperately needs a lot more fleshing out (no own motivation) and doesn't do anything besides popping up and teleporting away. Heck, he only gets a single CG scene out of BL and even then it's more about Mercedes than himself.
Thales also needs a lot more presence in the war period because he only does things in the True BE and BL routes. In the latter as Arundel he is treated as an afterthought and that's ridicilous for one of the supposedly major villains.

The most offensive part is easily Nemesis though and further downgrades their relevance in the war period. The guy has absolute no setup at all and basically just exist to add some "difference" between the Church and GD route (which is another major flaw in 3H).
Even the plot seems to ridicule the TWSD at this point as one of them dies to the poisonous swamp that appeared for no reason. I guess they were self-aware after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part 1 itself is the weakest part of the story, actually. Spending time on the monastery was fun, the character interactions were interesting, but it felt like the writers didn't really know where they wanted the story to be and simply added random conflicts while pretending they'd make sense later.

For example, the whole issue with the Western Church dies within the chapter where they try to invade the Holy Tomb - we never see anything from them again, other than in paralogues and other character mentions where it's said they were "taken care of". Then there's the chapter where Flayn is kidnapped and someone says it's because of her crest, but this never becomes relevant again. Then Solon turns an entire village mad for the sake of an experiment that's supposed to achieve.... something, that never comes to fruition later. He also mentions sacrifices for something that never becomes important. Solon ultimately dies without accomplishing anything and Thales spends the rest of the game chilling in his basement until he decides to dubstep nuke a fortress to kill everyone (but also fails).

Arguably, FE12's prologue (or even Awakening) has more plot consistency than 3H part 1. Part 1 knows it has to use a story as an excuse and does that, but the story itself is meaningless.

Edited by Rapier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, daisy jane said:

no. because the game ends. but that's I feel a legitimate question. 
 Edelgard wants to eliminate crests. 
the crests are something found in the blood. 
 we're told that there are a lot of instances that they can skip generations - and appear whenever. 

When Edelgard says she wants to eliminate crests she appears to be more referring to their hold on people and the creation of a class system based around them. It's possible that the resarch of Linhardt et al. might one way find a way to remove them entirely (as happens with Lysithea), but that's less important than the social change she is seeking to affect.

There is never any suggestion of mass murder or forced experiments, and plenty of reason to think that Edelgard, even under the least charitable views of her morality, would be revolted by such things. Again, the fact that the various playable character crest-bearers all have endings which largely do not mention such things is all the evidence you should need.

19 minutes ago, Rapier said:

Part 1 itself is the weakest part of the story, actually. Spending time on the monastery was fun, the character interactions were interesting, but it felt like the writers didn't really know where they wanted the story to be and simply added random conflicts while pretending they'd make sense later.

 

I agree with this. (Not sure what it says that I still think the story is the best in the series.)

I will say that Chapters 3 and 5 (Lonato and Miklan) do stand alone well and set up some things for later in the game. And of course Chapter 11 and 12. But the stuff involving the cult all seems to be setup for plot points that never occur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Creating a complete and perfect Grey vs Grey conflict would be complicated for many reasons.

1.- It's hard to actually a write a story where every character has almost equal moral ground.

2- It would make very hard to actually wanting to see the end of the game because the path you took could be technically "wrong".

3.- It would potentially make the protagonist unlikeable; and wanting for the antagonist to actually win in a game it would be so freaking weird.

Edited by Troykv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Troykv said:

3.- It would potentially make the protagonist unlikeable; and wanting for the antagonist to actually win in a game it would be so freaking weird.

That would be interesting. It'd be like Death Note. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, daisy jane said:

Not true because Edelgard trusts Byleth (to a point). 
I honestly don't think Edelgard wanted to talk to them.(though again Claude didn't have any issues dissolving the Alliance on any path), but Edelgard wanted unification. Dimitri had no reason to want that or end the crest system. (to which again my biggest question is how they intended to stop this w/o mass experiements on babies/people until it was eliminated completely which is just as wrong as them trying to force crests on people) or end the nobility.

1st point I'm good with (she actively wants Byleth on her side and does some irrational things around him/her to the point Hubert IIRC questions her about how close she is getting to Byleth)

2nd point I'm not. Dmitri just wants his Kingdom to stop tearing itself apart. That being said, his long-time friends Sylvain and Ingrid have suffered due to the obsession with the Crests, and Dmitri himself has no particular reason to be against ending the Crests' influence on nobility. And again, as people have said, Edelgard isn't against the Crests themselves, rather she's against how severely they influence society (the fact that Sylvain's brother was disowned simply because he lacked a Crest is compelling evidence of just how severe this issue is). As for the idea of unification, it just makes reforming easier since everyone is under her command. If she felt assured it would happen anyways, she'd likely be OK with it. It's mentioned a number of times she's keenly aware of how much blood is on her hands and she doesn't LIKE that, so if she felt there was a genuinely better option available with no strings (such as TWSITD messing it up) I think she'd take it. Problem is her own distrustful nature, stubbornness and single-minded determination lead her to not attempt such alternatives.

17 hours ago, Crysta said:

Honestly, in spite of them having similar goals, she and Claude don't really get along in like everyday conversation. And it's pretty clear she thinks the Alliance and Kingdom are just discount versions of the Empire. And she doesn't trust him at all considering he seemingly appeared out of nowhere.

Not sure why people are still angling for the "she could have just talked to him!" argument when it's clear she doesn't like talking to him lmao

Claude and Edelgard have almost opposite daily personalities. Clashing is expected. That being said, it's more that Claude himself makes it clear he's a schemer and not particularly trustworthy. That being said, he does have serious moments and any would-be ruler knows better than to let petty things like personality clashes get in the way of diplomacy.

That being said, it's reasonable precisely because he shows little to no respect for the Goddess, Crests or the noble system in general, therefore he is a potential recruit, albeit one that would be approached extremely carefully. Though as someone pointed out, she has allies in the Alliance who could look into that for her as well.

13 hours ago, Shiki said:

TWSD is easily the weakest part of the story and unfortunately sours an otherwise interesting plot. It's even more frustating that they are necessity for Edelgard's motivation and what ultimately makes her one of the more compelling FE antagonists to date.

imo they should have condensed these characters into one. Kronya and Solon easily could have been 1 character which would help a lot to make the plot flow more smoothly and give them overall more weight.
I would even go so far to merge these two into the Death Knight because that's another throwaway villain who desperately needs a lot more fleshing out (no own motivation) and doesn't do anything besides popping up and teleporting away. Heck, he only gets a single CG scene out of BL and even then it's more about Mercedes than himself.
Thales also needs a lot more presence in the war period because he only does things in the True BE and BL routes. In the latter as Arundel he is treated as an afterthought and that's ridicilous for one of the supposedly major villains.

The most offensive part is easily Nemesis though and further downgrades their relevance in the war period. The guy has absolute no setup at all and basically just exist to add some "difference" between the Church and GD route (which is another major flaw in 3H).
Even the plot seems to ridicule the TWSD at this point as one of them dies to the poisonous swamp that appeared for no reason. I guess they were self-aware after all.

Totally agree. TWSITD are the core of Edelgard's background and how she came to be the way she is (particularly her distrustful nature and extreme anti-Church sentiments) and yet they're killed off almost as soon as they appear, except Thales, who does almost nothing the whole game regardless of route, and Cornelia, whose status as a member is only relevant in BE route but in that route she's killed off BEFORE being revealed as a member.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...