Jump to content
StormyAngel

Rhea is an excellent foil for Edelgard *SPOILERS*

Recommended Posts

I haven't yet finished all four routes, so if the gamed directly contradicts me anywhere please let me know!

Why Edelgard's War was More Justified than Seiros' War

Both Seiros/Rhea and Edelgard suffered through the loss of their families to tragic deaths at the hands of mad men seeking power (Nemesis, Duke Aegir). In both cases, they were innocent and good people who suffered through no fault of their own. In each case, TWSitD were ultimately behind their suffering. Both of them were shaped by their suffering, and ultimately launched a war to "unite fodlan" as a consequence. Seiros War was later termed the "War of Heroes", whereas Edelgard's War is the main plot of the game Fire Emblem: Three Houses.

So why, you ask, was Edelgard's War more justified? The answer lies, in the differences between the two women: their desires and their ultimate actions. Let's start with Seiros.

Seiros

Why did Seiros start her war? We don't have every detail, but it is not difficult to guess. She wanted revenge on Nemesis. It took her over 98 years to make it happen, but she did eventually meet him in battle and slay him.

But what then? Obviously she desired revenge, but what else did she want? She appears to have wanted two things: to bring back Sothis (and most likely, subsequently her entire race), and to prevent a second Red Canyon. While her people weren't around to be massacred again just yet, Seiros had been badly burnt by the experience and wasn't going to take any chances. She falsified the history of Nemesis and his Ten Elites, established the crest/nobility system, and centralized power in her hands in the church. From her position of power, she guided the empire, and later the kingdom and alliance, with the ultimate goal of preventing the humans from becoming a threat to her or her soon to be (she hoped) resurrected mother and race.

Compare this to Edelgard:

Edelgard

Why did Edelgard start her war? To destroy the crest/nobility system, so that nobody ever suffered again as she had. She wanted revenge, yes, but in the service of her greater goal was willing to work even with those she knew to be responsible for her suffering (Count Bergliez, Arundel/Thales/TWSitD, etc.), which serves to demonstrate the depth of her commitment to her cause.

In the Crimson Flower Route, Edelgard succeeds. While that's probably at least in part because this is a video game, it reveals that she was sincere in her desires and followed through. She successfully destroyed the crest/nobility system before handing her throne over to a worthy successor and stepping down. She never wanted power or personal benefit, she wanted change (albeit, no matter the cost).

The question then becomes: was Edelgard's war necessary? Couldn't she have found a better path?  And here the answers are less certain, but it is worth noting that Seiros/Rhea was a direct obstacle to change. The woman/dragon had ruled for over 1000 years and had not changed anything despite the suffering inherent in the system. She also casually ordered the execution of people with personal grievances (Lonato) or doctrinal disagreements (the western church), because they threatened her power. The one thing that is certain is that Edelgard could never have succeeded at her ultimate goal without coming into conflict with Rhea/Seiros. If she had not launched her war unprovoked, the archbishop likely would have started a crusade shortly after any attempts she made to reform the system in the empire became known. The assault on Garreg Mach was, in a way, a preemptive strike upon a destined foe.

But Starting A War is Always Evil

Both Seiros and Edelgard had their own personal reasons for launching their wars. They both caused a great deal of deaths in the process. I am personally of the opinion that evil never justifies evil, and they were both wrong to launch their wars. Yes Nemesis needed to die, and Edelgard's desire to destroy the crest/nobility system imposed by the church was not wrong, but both women undoubtedly caused a number of tragedies themselves by launching their wars. It is a sad irony that in their desire to prevent second occurrences, they caused such things themselves.

But I do believe that we can see in the results of the wars, and the personal motivations of Edelgard and Seiros, a level of morality worth judging. Seiros desire for revenge is, to my mind, less worthy than Edelgard's desire to protect the innocent. Likewise, the manner in which Seiros and Edelgard wielded the power their wars brought to them demonstrate an inherent difference to the nature of the conflicts themselves. Both wars were fought in error, but Edelgard's war at least actually served an ultimate purpose beyond self aggrandizement.

So What's the Point?

Well, isn't it interesting that Rhea/Seiros' history makes her such an excellent foil for Edelgard? And both of these tales unfold along the Black Eagles Routes of the game. I think that juxtaposition was not an accident. Edelgard is often praised by those who like her character, but decried by those who focus in on her actions. But I wonder if those who dislike her have considered the ways in which Seiros/Rhea is actually worse than Edelgard. Whether you choose to fight with Edelgard or with Rhea, you will ultimately be siding with someone who bears some responsibility for the tragedy at hand. There is no "correct" side, only differing shades of gray.

As for me, I think that while they both suffered through similar traumas, the way that Edelgard responded to hers is ultimately superior to the way Seiros responded. Likewise, the outcome and purpose of Edelgard's war, while not strictly justifying it, does make it less evil than Seiros' war. What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there's no "less evil" or "more evil" when you kill people, regardless of your intentions

in this case, there's only "i like edelgard/rhea more, so i agree with her"

Edited by Yexin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting to me because I find myself quite liking both. Not just as characters, but more specifically that I find myself having no problem backing each of them in their actions. I can think of very few conflicts where I can genuinely think that both parties are genuinely in the right, but bearing in mind I've played neither Edelgard's nor Rhea's routes, I believe I would be fully comfortable being involved in what each sets out to accomplish. I offer an unconditional well done for whoever set up that conflict.

I have no problem with Edelgard working with the enemy-of-an-enemy, if that is the realistic path to victory. I have no problem with her reclaiming all of Fodlan as Empire territory, because there is every argument that it is theirs by right. I have no problem with her seeking personal retribution on those who have wronged her, for I would not blame anyone for doing the same. I have no problem with her war.

I have no problem with Rhea summarily executing rebels, because I believe that is what any ruler of that era would have done. Indeed they would likely do so to mere dissidents and not have the restraint to merely punish actual armed forces actively rebelling. I have no problem with her subterfuge, for it appears to be the only path to the salvation of her kind. And perhaps most controversially, I have no problem with how a dragon may treat humans, just as a human may treat any species it believes lesser. She does not carry the same obligation to humans as humans do to each other. I have no problem with her war.

 

If there is one thing I might have a problem with, it's that Fodlan is ultimately a homogeneous culture, with the majority population in each of its realms being ethnically identical, all speaking the same language perfectly with the same intonation, and none showing any meaningful separate identity. That, unfortunately, prevents any real nuance beyond the core religious conflict. It does, I suppose, provide some degree of vindication of Edelgard's position of there being one rightful realm split apart by external intervention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion the actions of Edelgard and Rhea are so similiar that if put into the position of each other they probably would do exactly the same as their counterpart.

 

32 minutes ago, StormyAngel said:

In the Crimson Flower Route, Edelgard succeeds. While that's probably at least in part because this is a video game, it reveals that she was sincere in her desires and followed through. She successfully destroyed the crest/nobility system before handing her throne over to a worthy successor and stepping down. She never wanted power or personal benefit, she wanted change (albeit, no matter the cost).

I dont know if you have already played Golden Deer Route, but that is exactly what Seiros/Rhea also tried to do. Destroy the current system (Agarthians/Nemesis), bring back order and hand it then over to a worthy sucessor. She just took 1000 years to find one (which is Byleth). Thats seems to be quite a lot of time, but not from a perspective of a dragon which is for all we know immortal (when not killed).

 

32 minutes ago, StormyAngel said:

The question then becomes: was Edelgard's war necessary? Couldn't she have found a better path?  

 

That depends what her real motive is: Demolishing the crest system in favor of something better: Absolutely not necessary. Considering that all other major powers (Dimitri, the church upper members, to a degree also Claude, many of the students who become soon leaders of their noble houses) were sick of the system, change could have been brought with a bit of diplomacy. Sure, it would certainly not be easy, and some violence would probably be necessary to bring all the nobles in line. But i dont think it would be as bad as a full bloody war.

 

If her true motive was however to rule over a united fodlan as the absolute authority - which is hinted by the game but never outright confirmed. Then yes her war was necessary.

 

32 minutes ago, StormyAngel said:

She also casually ordered the execution of people with personal grievances (Lonato) or doctrinal disagreements (the western church), because they threatened her power.

That is a lie and you know that. Lonato and the Western Church members were executed because they tried to kill Rhea and the Middle Church leadership not because of "disagreement" or "they denied their authority". They had a "disagreement" and "denied Rheas authority" for years, and the Middle Church did nothing against it. Sure once you walk the path of violence you will be experiencing the full force of her wrath with no mercy given, but for all we know you could stand at the plaza of Garreg Mach monastery shouting "Rhea is a corrupted leader who only cares for her own good, oh btw the western church is much cooler" and nothing will happen to you.

 

32 minutes ago, StormyAngel said:

But Starting A War is Always Evil

Both Seiros and Edelgard had their own personal reasons for launching their wars. They both caused a great deal of deaths in the process. I am personally of the opinion that evil never justifies evil, and they were both wrong to launch their wars. Yes Nemesis needed to die, and Edelgard's desire to destroy the crest/nobility system imposed by the church was not wrong, but both women undoubtedly caused a number of tragedies themselves by launching their wars. It is a sad irony that in their desire to prevent second occurrences, they caused such things themselves.

 

Well does Rhea truly start the war? You could argue that with the attack on Zanado, TWSITD throwed the first punch.

 

32 minutes ago, StormyAngel said:

As for me, I think that while they both suffered through similar traumas, the way that Edelgard responded to hers is ultimately superior to the way Seiros responded. Likewise, the outcome and purpose of Edelgard's war, while not strictly justifying it, does make it less evil than Seiros' war. What do you think?

Ah we dont know much about the outcome of Edelgards war. Outside that it becomes a "golden age" whatever that means in details. You could also claim that after Rheas war their was a golden age because then there was peace (for a few hundred years).

When jugding their actions I would like to view the consequences if they were deciding against war.

In Edelgards case nothing would happen and she could try to change the system by reforms. Which is not easy - but winning the war also isnt easy.

In Rheas case inaction would mean total annihilation if her and her entire race.

 

Considering that I would never say that Edelgards war is more justified than Rheas.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, how is Rhea starting the ancient war when Agrian started the nuclear war, sent Nemesis to assassinated Sothis, massacred both human and dragons in Zanado, then attempt to conquered the world with relics and crests?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Nihilem said:



That depends what her real motive is: Demolishing the crest system in favor of something better: Absolutely not necessary. Considering that all other major powers (Dimitri, the church upper members, to a degree also Claude, many of the students who become soon leaders of their noble houses) were sick of the system, change could have been brought with a bit of diplomacy. Sure, it would certainly not be easy, and some violence would probably be necessary to bring all the nobles in line. But i dont think it would be as bad as a full bloody war.

 

I see people keeping saying that, and I can't help thinking each time: And the Agarthans will stay put like drooling morons while that happen, just like the corrupt nobility still in place by the time she and the others comes to power too and they begin to work on these reforms? Oh and the fact in the scenario where 'Reforms' was the selected path, there is no Byleth awakening Sothis and then fusing with her, at the very least not 'in time' or 'in sync' for these reforms to happen (and to the people telling me 'it would happen sooner or later'... Didn't happen for 20 years, there is no telling how long it will take and how long before Rhea see the blips on the radar. And they are a bloody merc, you really want me to believe they never have been in a dangerous situation which could have prompted Sothis' awakening before that? Looks like it is a bit of a dice roll, and you never know what will roll unless the dice is loaded).

 

Before that, it is all Rhea at the head of the Church, who repeatedly showed ruthlessness in dealing with the opposition and who clearly tolerates no actual direct challenge to her will (Southern Church did existe. Past tense important). And given taking the axe to the Crest system is taking the axe to something which has been by now one of the Church's pillars for one thousand years despite the initial intentions of safekeeping what little was left of fellow Children of the Goddess, nothing of what I saw from Rhea sans Byleth tells me she would take changes of that scope, which by their very nature attack the Church's overall legitimacy by denying one of its core elements, with a smile. (Yes I know it wasn't the intention, but do you truly think you can develop a religion where Crests are painted as 'GIfts of the Goddess' and have as a central myth with your Messiah, Four Saints and Ten Elites, all Crests Bearers, and not have a sacralization by association of the Crests happen, despite the presence of Nemesis as a foil?)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not fighting Kingdom/Church/Alliance doesn't stop her from fighting TWSitD. She did exactly that after unifying Fodlan. 

Plus TWSitD didn't forced her to do so, they only indoctrinated her so she think it's her own idea. She came to them for help, don't forget that. 

Edited by Tenzen12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edelgard is a Luciferean villain ala Lex Luthor.

Rhea is her greater being ala Superman.

Edelgard opposes Rhea since she reminds the former that there are bigger works than her petty concerns. A wound on her pride. Tells her she can not control as she pleases.

To see what I'm talking about:

 

 

Edited by Eryon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was Nemesis that started the ancient war. Seiros faults was... not surrendering and letting hin do whatever he please?

Also we are judging Seiros war because 1000 years after the systems was corrupted. Do you really believe that Edelgard's golden age would last 100 years, let alone 1000? In 50 years top her "worthy successor" will die, and who know whi the successor will be. Roman emeperor had a fairly good streak whit the adoption system, but eventually Marcus Aurelius chosed Commodus. Edelgard united Adretia would follow a similar path imo. If Dagda doesn't conquer it first.

Edited by Flere210

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Timlugia said:

Ah, how is Rhea starting the ancient war when Agrian started the nuclear war, sent Nemesis to assassinated Sothis, massacred both human and dragons in Zanado, then attempt to conquered the world with relics and crests? 

Not only that, the Agarthians likely nuked themselves on purpose to force Sothis to use up all her power to restore the land, which would cause her to go into a deep sleep, and thus, allow them to easily kill Sothis.

Edited by MrPerson0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Eryon said:

Edelgard is a Luciferean villain ala Lex Luthor.

Rhea is her greater being ala Superman.

Edelgard opposes Rhea since she reminds the former that there are bigger works than her petty concerns. A wound on her pride. Tells her she can not control as she pleases.

To see what I'm talking about:

 

 

I kind of see your point but also not really. You're drawing conclusions from assumptions, you're basically guessing Edelgard's plan. The thing is, in the game her motivations are mostly political and very "human". She doesn't really have a big problem against the religion nor the goddess, she has a problem with the church and the society. Her war is against a system, and yes, at the top of that system there's something that isn't human, but that's not the reason she goes to war. That's the reason TWSITD go to war.

TWSITD =/= Edelgard. They have a common enemy, but not common motivations. What you're describing is what TWSITD are trying to achieve (eg. "manking domination" and obliteration of the goddess), Edelgard wants to tear down a faulty system, that's it. She's the literal meaning of revolution, nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Yexin said:

there's no "less evil" or "more evil" when you kill people, regardless of your intentions

in this case, there's only "i like edelgard/rhea more, so i agree with her"

Well that's simply not true. Killing in self defense is clearly not evil, for a clear example. And Seiros killing Nemesis wasn't something I would term evil either, and she clearly didn't do that in self defense.

But launching a war is pretty evil, yeah. I'm not arguing against that. My point is more that it's an evil Seiros is also guilty of, and that Edelgard's differences with her make her slightly more justified than she was to launch her war. Relative evils, basically.

7 hours ago, Nihilem said:

In my opinion the actions of Edelgard and Rhea are so similiar that if put into the position of each other they probably would do exactly the same as their counterpart.

Well, I obviously disagree, because my whole point is that they respond to very similar tragedies in very different ways, but I'm probably over simplifying things.

7 hours ago, Nihilem said:

That depends what her real motive is: Demolishing the crest system in favor of something better: Absolutely not necessary. Considering that all other major powers (Dimitri, the church upper members, to a degree also Claude, many of the students who become soon leaders of their noble houses) were sick of the system, change could have been brought with a bit of diplomacy. Sure, it would certainly not be easy, and some violence would probably be necessary to bring all the nobles in line. But i dont think it would be as bad as a full bloody war.

If her true motive was however to rule over a united fodlan as the absolute authority - which is hinted by the game but never outright confirmed. Then yes her war was necessary.

 

You're ignoring the fact that the ultimate major power (Rhea) would absolutely fight tooth and nail against changing the crest/nobility system. There's a reason it's still around after 1000 years, and she is it. Diplomacy might have worked with everyone else, but definitely not Rhea. It's part of how she maintains her power, and she zealously guards her power.

7 hours ago, Nihilem said:

That is a lie and you know that. Lonato and the Western Church members were executed because they tried to kill Rhea and the Middle Church leadership not because of "disagreement" or "they denied their authority". They had a "disagreement" and "denied Rheas authority" for years, and the Middle Church did nothing against it. Sure once you walk the path of violence you will be experiencing the full force of her wrath with no mercy given, but for all we know you could stand at the plaza of Garreg Mach monastery shouting "Rhea is a corrupted leader who only cares for her own good, oh btw the western church is much cooler" and nothing will happen to you.

Well the western church interactions were very weird to me, so maybe my interpretation is wrong. That being said, I didn't lie, I was just skipping over my logic/supporting evidence straight to a conclusion in the interest of getting to the point. Allow me to spell out my reasoning here:

1.The Western Church and Rhea vocally disagree on doctrine, and she does nothing.

That only serves to strengthen my point that the church was created as a tool to maintain power. Rhea doesn't actually care what the humans believe about the goddess, so she does nothing when they differ like this. Until...

2.The western church enters a "publicly open" tomb in order to do a little grave robbing. When some students attempt to make a citizen's arrest, they resist.

This is where Rhea goes off the rails. She has no evidence the western church was behind the "assassination plot", other than Byleth and Co's reasoning that it was intended as a distraction in order to open Seiros tomb. But more important to Rhea here is that they're acting against her wishes. So, off with their heads. With (as shown) basically no questioning whatsoever. This is then followed by sending the Knights of Seiros on a mission to purge the entire western church...doesn't that seem a bit much?

The point here is that this is a clear example of what would happen to Edelgard if she tried to peacefully oppose Rhea. She'd be fine so long as all she did was talk, but if she made any attempts to actually change anything that's when the swords would come out for 'rebelling'.

 

7 hours ago, Nihilem said:

Well does Rhea truly start the war? You could argue that with the attack on Zanado, TWSITD throwed the first punch.

She was personally provoked, sure, but the war of heroes started in Imperial Year 32, more than 32 years after the red canyon. There wasn't ongoing large scale conflict before that, so she clearly did start a war where there hadn't been one before. Besides which, she launched the war on the entire continent, and not just TWSitD.

7 hours ago, Nihilem said:

Ah we dont know much about the outcome of Edelgards war. Outside that it becomes a "golden age" whatever that means in details. You could also claim that after Rheas war their was a golden age because then there was peace (for a few hundred years).

When jugding their actions I would like to view the consequences if they were deciding against war.

In Edelgards case nothing would happen and she could try to change the system by reforms. Which is not easy - but winning the war also isnt easy.

In Rheas case inaction would mean total annihilation if her and her entire race.

 

Considering that I would never say that Edelgards war is more justified than Rheas.

 

 

 

7 hours ago, Nihilem said:

Ah we dont know much about the outcome of Edelgards war. Outside that it becomes a "golden age" whatever that means in details. You could also claim that after Rheas war their was a golden age because then there was peace (for a few hundred years).

When jugding their actions I would like to view the consequences if they were deciding against war.

In Edelgards case nothing would happen and she could try to change the system by reforms. Which is not easy - but winning the war also isnt easy.

In Rheas case inaction would mean total annihilation if her and her entire race.

 

Considering that I would never say that Edelgards war is more justified than Rheas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, StormyAngel said:

Well that's simply not true. Killing in self defense is clearly not evil, for a clear example.

don't agree at all, but ok, that's your opinion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, StormyAngel said:

You're ignoring the fact that the ultimate major power (Rhea) would absolutely fight tooth and nail against changing the crest/nobility system. There's a reason it's still around after 1000 years, and she is it.

No, she isn't. Even the literal books she wrote shows her thoughts on the crest system:

"The descendants of the heroes sought to use their ancestors power. In time they amassed land, titles, crests, and wealth, and used it all to set the land aflame. The goddess' power, intended to stem the flow of evil, became a tool of destruction, and all because of the greed of humanity. And the goddess, heartbroken, hid herself from the world."

She simply allowed man to do whatever they wanted, and in turn, they chose to hold power over others.

21 minutes ago, StormyAngel said:

She was personally provoked, sure, but the war of heroes started in Imperial Year 32, more than 32 years after the red canyon. There wasn't ongoing large scale conflict before that, so she clearly did start a war where there hadn't been one before. Besides which, she launched the war on the entire continent, and not just TWSitD.

This is part of the history she changed. She didn't want anyone to know the truth about the Agarthians having missiles that could destroy the land and whatnot, which would in turn reveal that dragons existed.

Edited by MrPerson0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's really in question that Rhea and Edelgard are meant to be quite similar to each other, but I don't think these two wars are comparable.

Rhea's entire family was butchered, with all of their remains stolen and made into weapons. It's not like she was sitting there unprovoked and attacked Nemesis for no reason, whether the war itself was right or not~

Meanwhile Edelgard, while wanting to reform the system of nobility, also still of her own free volition invades the Kingdom and Alliance because she more so wants a Fodlan ruled under the Empire to get what she wants. The Kingdom and Alliance did nothing to her to warrant being attacked and brought into a war~

This is why I cannot get behind Edelgard's actions being justified at all. I'm not arguing one way or the other for Rhea. She just very plain and simple wanted revenge. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Yexin said:

don't agree at all, but ok, that's your opinion

What is the alternative? Just letting the guy kill you?

 

48 minutes ago, StormyAngel said:

You're ignoring the fact that the ultimate major power (Rhea) would absolutely fight tooth and nail against changing the crest/nobility system. There's a reason it's still around after 1000 years, and she is it. Diplomacy might have worked with everyone else, but definitely not Rhea. It's part of how she maintains her power, and she zealously guards her power.

Do you have any evidence supporting your claim? Support - Talks, Ingame-Scences,  anything?

We know from Support Talks with Shamir and Cyril that Rhea is remarkeble tolerant regarding different opinions (in comparision to real life medieval religious leaders). Even allowing non believers to serve in higher position in the knights, who openly admit beeing atheistic (or having another religion).

We also know from various Sidequest (the first one Seteth gives you) and the pre and after cutscenes from chapter 3-4 that both the western church and Lonato challenged her authority without any kind of repercussion. Only when they were building up armies/ trying to assasinate Rhea, they were mawed down mercilessly.

From the books in the Library and Seteths supports we know that the crest system in its current form is not really supported by the church upper levels. Sure, we dont know exactly Rheas thoughts on it but assuming that the "seiros - bible" was written with her consent, she is no fan of it. That one is a assumption, but in my opionion a justified one. It also makes sense given the circumstances how the system was created and how is behind it.

 

So which support, Cutscenes or other texts in any kind of form succest that she will actually stop Edelgard from reforming the empire when she not calls for the head of Rhea? Because all arguments I heard until now were "maybe", "surely" and "probably"....

 

 

 

Quote

1.The Western Church and Rhea vocally disagree on doctrine, and she does nothing.

That only serves to strengthen my point that the church was created as a tool to maintain power. Rhea doesn't actually care what the humans believe about the goddess, so she does nothing when they differ like this. Until...

2.The western church enters a "publicly open" tomb in order to do a little grave robbing. When some students attempt to make a citizen's arrest, they resist.

This is where Rhea goes off the rails. She has no evidence the western church was behind the "assassination plot", other than Byleth and Co's reasoning that it was intended as a distraction in order to open Seiros tomb. But more important to Rhea here is that they're acting against her wishes. So, off with their heads. With (as shown) basically no questioning whatsoever. This is then followed by sending the Knights of Seiros on a mission to purge the entire western church...doesn't that seem a bit much?

The point here is that this is a clear example of what would happen to Edelgard if she tried to peacefully oppose Rhea. She'd be fine so long as all she did was talk, but if she made any attempts to actually change anything that's when the swords would come out for 'rebelling'.

 

And that they tried to kill said students while they were "grave robbing" you are going to ignore? But point taken, defiling the holy tomb/seiros grave - which are the most holy places the church of seiros knows - will also get you on Rheas kill list. Therefore i will modify my argument to "Edelgard could make reforms for the crest system as long as she didnt try to kill Rhea or steal the crest stones from the holy tomb." Funnily enough Edelgard tried both. I still disagree with the argument "Rhea kills everyone who challenges her authority" and will continue to do so until i can see some evidence for it.

Edited by Nihilem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, PrincessAlyson said:

Killing in self-defense is sometimes necessary, though. Are you just going to let let someone kill you? No.

 

19 minutes ago, Nihilem said:

 What is the alternative? Just letting the guy kill you?

if there's an alternative that allows both me and my aggressor to be saved, i'd go for that: no one has the right to take another person's life, no matter the circumstance, and if there's no such alternative, i'd rather die than being guilty of destroying someone else's family

i don't know where you two grew up, but that's what i've been taught, and i strongly believe in it

and no, i am not christian nor anything, i'm just very close to people whose job also has to do with handling these situations, so probably this made me less selfish and more thoughtful about these things

 

back on topic, i think neither rhea or edelgard are 100% right or 100% wrong

i just happen to like rhea's character more, for both design and attitude

i also generally love motherly figures in videogames, so yeah, easy win for me

still, as i said, i don't justify her for what she does

Edited by Yexin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I'd say this is why TWSITD exist. So that Edelgard's revolution can't be solved by diplomacy. We've already established that Claude and Dmitri are likely to agree, as are numerous members of both of their houses. Rhea could be handled via the argument that the Crests might be gifts from the Goddess, but they've been severely misused, enough that they should no longer be considered evidence of "divine right" or whatever. Without TWSITD, Edelgard wouldn't be so jaded, anti-Church or distrustful of others (assuming someone still experimented on her to make her want to do away with the system so others don't suffer like her) and would therefore be open to talking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Landmaster said:

Rhea's entire family was butchered

Err... so was Edelgard's, or at least her siblings were. Not to mention she herself was experimented on as well.

17 minutes ago, Landmaster said:

She just very plain and simple wanted revenge. 

And one could make the argument that Edelgard is also motivated by revenge; revenge against the crest-centered "chosen one" social hierarchy that took her siblings from her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hunter Nightblood said:

Err... so was Edelgard's, or at least her siblings were. Not to mention she herself was experimented on as well.

And one could make the argument that Edelgard is also motivated by revenge; revenge against the crest-centered "chosen one" social hierarchy that took her siblings from her.

They weren't butchered, they died in experimentation~ Not saying it's any less tragic but being butchered and turned into weapons is a little different than what happened to Edelgard.

I don't doubt she in part wants revenge. The difference is Edelgard's anger is executed at the wrong people. She is working with the people she should be fighting because she is being fed misinformation by Arundel about the Church. Not only that, she brings the Alliance and Kingdom into it because she does not only want to change the system, she has always wanted Adrestia to return to it's former glory and rule all of Fodlan.

Rhea, at the least, takes her anger out on the people who killed her family and are carrying around their remains as weapons~

Share this post


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

 Not only that, she brings the Alliance and Kingdom into it because she does not only want to change the system, she has always wanted Adrestia to return to it's former glory and rule all of Fodlan.

I'm going to disagree with the "bringing the Kingdom into the war" part of this, as Rhea took refuge in the Kingdom. While there's a decent debate to be had on whether invading the Alliance was necessary, invading the Kingdom was inevitable the second they allied with Rhea.

To put into simpler terms, if Group A and B are allies and Group C attacks Group A, Group B will come to Group A's aid. Group C did not bring Group B into their war, rather Group B came to the aid of Group A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hunter Nightblood said:

I'm going to disagree with the "bringing the Kingdom into the war" part of this, as Rhea took refuge in the Kingdom. While there's a decent debate to be had on whether invading the Alliance was necessary, invading the Kingdom was inevitable the second they allied with Rhea.

To put into simpler terms, if Group A and B are allies and Group C attacks Group A, Group B will come to Group A's aid. Group C did not bring Group B into their war, rather Group B came to the aid of Group A.

I could agree to that if not for the fact that Edelgard always planned to invade both the Kingdom and the Alliance. We know within 10 seconds of our first conversation that she thinks Adrestia is superior to the Kingdom and the Alliance and wants to return to the time when Adrestia ruled all of Fodlan. She would have eventually invaded the Kingdom regardless of The Church taking refuge there because her end goal always required it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't get it. TWSITD screw up her family and world view, and she blames it on their sworn enemy. Sounds like brainwashing to me. Not the Anankos-level mind control we're used to in this series, but a more subtle kind that allowed her to finally see them as an enemy when they started dropping nukes at the end of her story. But Hubert is the only one that saw them as a threat before the offscreen nukes, and even then he relegated them to a post-war concern once the other nations are dealt with.

I don't doubt the nobility system of Fodlan sucks and ruins people's lives. But look at our real world, we don't have those things anymore and our lives still suck depending on where and how we were born. Life has no obligation to be fair and this game is full of kids with screwed up backgrounds that made the best of their situations despite there being a war on that they are obligated to fight. Rhea may be an immovable object when it comes to matters of her mother - hey families are complicated and icky, but she's far from a tyrant that would start a war with opposing ideals. There's also that nasty benefit of hindsight, Fodlan has had completely new governmental systems come into existence in spite of the Church. That's progression. The Monastery takes in refugees without ever asking them to say a prayer. How generous. We know Rhea's Fodlan worked out because we're still here. Countries don't typically last a millenium without a war or twelve. But a lot of those that objected to the Empire's war at first blush aren't still here post time skip. Bummer. 

Edited by Glennstavos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Landmaster said:

They weren't butchered, they died in experimentation~ Not saying it's any less tragic but being butchered and turned into weapons is a little different than what happened to Edelgard.

I don't doubt she in part wants revenge. The difference is Edelgard's anger is executed at the wrong people. She is working with the people she should be fighting because she is being fed misinformation by Arundel about the Church. Not only that, she brings the Alliance and Kingdom into it because she does not only want to change the system, she has always wanted Adrestia to return to it's former glory and rule all of Fodlan.

Rhea, at the least, takes her anger out on the people who killed her family and are carrying around their remains as weapons~

Except she doesn't want to rule all of Fodlan, and even steps down afterwards. She IS fed misinformation and isn't considering diplomacy as an option.

As for the Kingdom and the Alliance, to be fair they only exist in the first place because the Church legitimized their rebellions. The Kingdom in particular would pretty much inevitably side with the Church in order to prevent the Empire from becoming dominant and she already has at least a third of the Alliance on her side so she might as well take them too. Both nations also embrace the Crest fascination, perhaps even more than the Empire.

Edelgard's main issue is being too certain she is right, too certain her methods are necessary to defeat both the "evil" Church and TWSITD, and too paranoid to even try to reach out to Dmitri and Claude.

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...