Jump to content

Edelgard would have been better without her backstory


Jotari
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Crysta said:

A character's history usually instructs their actions in a story - or at least it should if it hopes to feel compelling or organic - and I think if they didn't try to show it in the story then we'd get even more people misunderstanding the general thrust of Edelgard's character and thinking she's just Stalin in a red armored dress.

I have not gotten deep into Crimson Flower, though, and admittedly a small part of me is dreading how they're going to show blushy, vulnerable Edelgard considering how poorly I think they did edgelord Dimitri. But from what I know so far, I think those bits are needed in the narrative.

I mean... she kinda is Stalin in a red armored dress.  She sends her soldiers to fight and die for her without remorse (unless they're her former classmates, in which case she'll still send them to die, but she'll also be sad about it), she locked up a political prisoner in a horrible place, she has a crummy ideology that simply wouldn't work (not the way she'd want it to, anyway; meritocracy will just ensure the most fortunate continue to lead successful lives), and she seeks to basically turn the entire continent she inhabits into one nation under her rule.  She's just more sympathetic than Stalin.

 

If I were to say something to the topic, it'd be that Those Who Slither In The Dark just make her story worse.  She could keep her sob story of being experimented on, but instead of the onus of that being placed upon a shadowy organization she works alongside, it could've been placed upon the nobility that sought to remove as much power from her family as possible through any means necessary (making her fight against the status quo of nobility and personal vendetta against those such as Duke Aegir all the more justified).  Since Rhea was similarly doing experiments with crests, it's not too far-fetched to assume the Imperial nobility would be capable of doing the same.

They could keep the Agarthans, but have them die out a long time prior to the game's events instead of becoming TWSITD and not be Mr. Sci-Fi Dubstep City.  This way too their story could serve as a more interesting mirror to Edelgard's story, rather than a reason for why Edelgard shouldn't fight the Church of Seiros.

Oh, and change Edelgard's awful ideology into something that at least has some chance of working out for the better.  Because anyone who'd actually put the idea of a meritocracy under a microscope would be able to tell fairly easily that it'd only just further perpetuate the divide between rich and poor, what with the rich being the only ones who could afford the best education and training out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I think Edelgard's backstory is mostly there to give her a drive to succeed in her goals. Because her siblings were all tortured to death she's very desperate ensure they didn't die a pointless death. She knows the Slitherers were involved but feels she's left with a choice. Either she ignores or destroys the slitherers, missing her chance to reform a flawed world and making her siblings death meaningless or she uses the power she was given, use and then discard the slitherers to reforge the word and ensure their deaths aren't in vain. 

If Edelgard uses the powers gained from their experiments and the ties with the Slitherers to reforge the world then she can see their deaths as a step towards a new golden age. If she keeps the status quo they will forever have died for nothing. Revenge can always be achieved when she's done reforging the world and her whipping out the Slitherers when their use ran out suggest she's neither forgotten nor forgiven what they did to her family. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ertrick36 said:

I mean... she kinda is Stalin in a red armored dress.  She sends her soldiers to fight and die for her without remorse (unless they're her former classmates, in which case she'll still send them to die, but she'll also be sad about it), she locked up a political prisoner in a horrible place, she has a crummy ideology that simply wouldn't work (not the way she'd want it to, anyway; meritocracy will just ensure the most fortunate continue to lead successful lives), and she seeks to basically turn the entire continent she inhabits into one nation under her rule.  She's just more sympathetic than Stalin.

Do you... know what Stalin was?

She sends her soldiers off to fight just as any general does. I guess you think she should agonize over it repeatedly, even though it's clear she's committed to her plan and the inevitable consequences? Locking up political prisoners is hardly uncommon, and still an massive upgrade from outright executing them (which, mind you, she's still perfectly willing to do - and I'm actually surprised that she doesn't do that to all of her corrupt ministers who inevitably did not enjoy being ousted from power), her ideology isn't that crummy considering the whole of Fodlan has been operating under the pretense of a false, ultimately harmful mythology, and she's willing to relinquish her position as empress once she finds a worthy successor - and one not bred from the system of governance she clearly hates.

So no, she really is not Stalin in a dress.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Landmaster said:

Not necessarily. She would have been better if she was just more educated on the history of Fodlan and the reality of the fact that she is working with the people she should have prioritized taking down over Rhea, who she had little to no reason to target if she knew the truth~ 

Why? If we're basing it off her established character, its clear that she and Hubert are human supremacists thus having Seteth, Rhea, and Flayn in any position of power would be unacceptable for them. Furthermore if you read Edelgard's character sheet, you realize that she hates losing control. She is an autocrat and one who doesn't recognize the independence of the kingdom and Alliance. If you remove the Agarthans and Nabateans, then this is simply the story of an Emperor working to reclaim the old borders of the empire, she is embracing the Adrestian dream of reconquest. So it doesn't matter the ideology of the three lords, Edelgard would attempt to kill them regardless to reclaim the empire because 1) her need for control would not trust independent actors to create the society she desires 2) Her #1 goal is unification, attacking the church is just part of pretext. With this in mind, allying the Agarthans makes sense because she intends to fight the other two kingdoms in a state of total war. Her actions make sense when you look at her how she is rather than how you think she should be. She's the main villain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, CyberNinja said:

Her actions make sense when you look at her how she is rather than how you think she should be. She's the main villain.

Can I just say how much I fucking agree with this statement!!!! Cause holy shit FINALLY someone else gets it!! You should criticize a story for what IT WANTS TO BE not what you think it should be. Like why can’t more people understand this?!?!?! 

You don’t go into McDonald’s and criticize it for it not being a fine dining experience cause that’s not why you go to McDonald’s! Sorry for the little tangent there. It’s just something that’s been on my mind

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

I don't think Edelgard knows nearly as much about the crests, the relics, or Rhea's original form + the purpose of her church as she thinks she does. 

I don't think she knows that the crests weren't invented by the church.

I don't think she knows that the crests and the relics were created by the Agarthans, during their war against Sothis.

And I certainly don't think she knows that they were made from the blood and bones of the children of the goddess. (the biggest church secret she seemed to know was that Rhea's true form was 'an inhuman beast' I don't even think she fully understood that Rhea was Sothis's daughter or that her true form was that of the Brood of Sothis) 

______

I think Edelgard listened to ALOT of Agarthan propaganda about The Church. Without even realizing she was listening to Agarthan propaganda. And formed opinions + ideas about The Church based on the half-truths and misinformation they were feeding her.

Thinking (again--this is her arrogance) that she must have formed the greatest of all opinions because she was special; she was learning secrets about The Church that normal people didn't know.


And it never even occurred to her to think Who is telling me this and why?  Do they know something I don't know? Am I being used? 

See I have no problem with that at all. I get that and I get Edelgard's reason for warring with he church. My problem is that those reasons seem to have absolutely nothing to do with her backstory. 

 

3 hours ago, JubileePhoenix said:

I wonder when the game gets older if people will stop questioning Edelgard actions and start asking if Edelgard is a poorly written character. The game is too young to start asking that question tho. 

Also it could be that the Agarthans are the worst thing about this game, because there the most "im evil" group in a very morally grey game And Edelgard being tied to them. That in my opinion ruins her character a lot. 

That's another issue I kind of have and was considering making it the topic of this thread. I think they could have been very nuanced villains if you just took out there horrible experiments and Kronya's bloodlust. Making them less overtly evil and suddenly you have a group of terrorists whose ideology is championing humanity over dragons.

 

3 hours ago, JubileePhoenix said:

I wonder when the game gets older if people will stop questioning Edelgard actions and start asking if Edelgard is a poorly written character. The game is too young to start asking that question tho. 

Also it could be that the Agarthans are the worst thing about this game, because there the most "im evil" group in a very morally grey game And Edelgard being tied to them. That in my opinion ruins her character a lot. 

I don't think something can be too young once it's released as a single product. It won't become old unless we ask these questions.

2 hours ago, Rezzy said:

I'm on the last two chapters of Edelgard's route and was wondering how it was going to resolve that plot.  Her route being the shortest also makes it a bit glaring that this never gets addressed.

I think they really just wanted Rhea to be the final boss (hope you don't find that to be a spoiler, if you're two chapters from the end you've probably figured that's going to be the case already) despite the fact that you fight her in another route anyway. So they shoved all the Arathan conflict onto just one battle with Cornelia and left it as a "and then stuff happened." Having Rhea be defeated as Seiros, then fighting the Arathians like in the other routes and have Thales transformed into a monster or something become the final boss would have made it standard length and feel more conclusive.

2 hours ago, Ertrick36 said:

If I were to say something to the topic, it'd be that Those Who Slither In The Dark just make her story worse.  She could keep her sob story of being experimented on, but instead of the onus of that being placed upon a shadowy organization she works alongside, it could've been placed upon the nobility that sought to remove as much power from her family as possible through any means necessary (making her fight against the status quo of nobility and personal vendetta against those such as Duke Aegir all the more justified).  Since Rhea was similarly doing experiments with crests, it's not too far-fetched to assume the Imperial nobility would be capable of doing the same.

The obviously best choice would be to put the blame on the actual church itself. Although that would prefer probably sour the church too much in other routes. Then again they do have that break away Western (or was it Eastern) faction that could be related but not too related.

Edited by Jotari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, CyberNinja said:

Why? If we're basing it off her established character, its clear that she and Hubert are human supremacists thus having Seteth, Rhea, and Flayn in any position of power would be unacceptable for them. Furthermore if you read Edelgard's character sheet, you realize that she hates losing control. She is an autocrat and one who doesn't recognize the independence of the kingdom and Alliance. If you remove the Agarthans and Nabateans, then this is simply the story of an Emperor working to reclaim the old borders of the empire, she is embracing the Adrestian dream of reconquest. So it doesn't matter the ideology of the three lords, Edelgard would attempt to kill them regardless to reclaim the empire because 1) her need for control would not trust independent actors to create the society she desires 2) Her #1 goal is unification, attacking the church is just part of pretext. With this in mind, allying the Agarthans makes sense because she intends to fight the other two kingdoms in a state of total war. Her actions make sense when you look at her how she is rather than how you think she should be. She's the main villain.

This. Exactly. She's a Knight Templar. She "knows" she's right, and that - in her mind - makes everything she does right.

Her meritocracy is the only right way for a society to be; therefore, the other nations of Fódlan must be forced to adopt it. Thus, her war is justified.

Rhea is an "inhuman beast"; therefore, she has to be destroyed.

It's okay to lie to her allies for convenience when the Agarthans destroy Arianrhod, but it wasn't okay for Seiros to lie for convenience as part of the end of the war against Nemesis and the Elites.

The Agarthans are minor villains by comparison. I think that's why Crimson Flower is complete without fighting them. The climax is when Edelgard and Rhea, the main characters of the conflict, face each other. Forcing the game to carry on past that point would just drag the story out past its welcome.

Plus, her allying with the people she hates shows her priorities: conquest first, then revenge. It also illustrates her arrogance, which is her principal flaw: she sees the Agarthans as a non-threat. Even after she's surprised by their show of force, three seconds later she's convinced herself that the knowledge of what they can do is an advantage. That's why I think she's better with her backstory: it illustrates her character flaw.

EDIT: It also ties in to her need for control. She frames it as having to choose which enemy to fight first: church or Agarthans. She chooses the Agarthans as an ally against the church because that gives her some measure of influence over them, which is something that she wouldn't get over the church if she chose the other way around.

Edelgard's a great character, but people really need to stop believing that the fact that you can join her makes her not a villain.

Edited by Seafarer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll give my 2 cents. I think the backstory is fine the way it is. It is ok for villains to have flaws like arrogance and ignorance, even if it sounds nonsensical from the other perspective - ultimately these flaws make her a relatable and flawed human. To her, what she does makes sense and allows her to justify the actions she does. I just think it gets ridiculous when people start arguing that she is some sort of savior because “well what she does makes sense from her mind and as a result, all her opponents are therefore wrong and should just roll over to allow her actions and conquest.” As if there isn’t an other side to her conquest. And then those same individuals will bend themselves backwards to make every other opponent (whether it be Claude/Dimitri/Rhea/etc) out looking like some sort of “bigger villain” who Edelgard had to put down/conquer/some nonsense like that. I think the game was a good reflection of how multifaceted war is because ultimately everyone thinks their cause is just and worthy of sacrifice. She is ruthless and Machiavellian in her actions, but not sadistic. Besides, nothing wrong with liking an aggressor. 

I do think it is unfortunate that her character is diminished because she is too closely associated with the clearly irredeemable villains with insufficient story presence to make them as scary/powerful as she frames them to be, and those villains barely have any context to make their actions understandable (beyond death to dragons and evil for the sake of evil). If anything, I think I would rather write out the entire TWSITD plotline and have her motivation stem more directly from the nobility (ie the nobility tortured and experimented on her siblings etc). That way, there is a more direct correlation to her end goal, and CF would stop being "I am helpless against TWSITD's control and as a result must partner with them" and make her seem more like a conquerer with accountability and the agency to make morally questionable decisions for what she believes is a better society. I just often find people who defend Edelgard's actions as heroic and necessary often build TWSITD's threat and storytelling to be better than it actually is, which is quite barebone and open to interpretation. 

Edited by MessengerIris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I think they really just wanted Rhea to be the final boss (hope you don't find that to be a spoiler, if you're two chapters from the end you've probably figured that's going to be the case already) despite the fact that you fight her in another route anyway. So they shoved all the Arathan conflict onto just one battle with Cornelia and left it as a "and then stuff happened." Having Rhea be defeated as Seiros, then fighting the Arathians like in the other routes and have Thales transformed into a monster or something become the final boss would have made it standard length and feel more conclusive.

Yeah, I don't know all the details for the routes I haven't done, but I've been pretty thoroughly spoiled by this point.  I've spent the entire half of the game thinking to myself.  How is what we're doing justified?  We freakin' attack the Alliance first, because they might attack us?  That's Soviet Union attacking Finland in WW2 level logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh, the Slitherers aren't only relevant to her backstory. They're relevant to Dimitri because they were what triggered Tragedy of Duscur and they've been manipulating his kingdom behind the scenes just as readily as they were manipulating the Empire. They're relevant to Rhea because they backed and aided Nemesis, and what they and Nemesis did instructs what Rhea's plans because they're responsible for the death of her people and mother. They're not complex villains, but they are important to several important narratives.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rezzy said:

Yeah, I don't know all the details for the routes I haven't done, but I've been pretty thoroughly spoiled by this point.  I've spent the entire half of the game thinking to myself.  How is what we're doing justified?  We freakin' attack the Alliance first, because they might attack us?  That's Soviet Union attacking Finland in WW2 level logic.

Her scruples were correct and Claude was ferrying over the Almyran navy, so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Crysta said:

Eh, the Slitherers aren't only relevant to her backstory. They're relevant to Dimitri because they were what triggered Tragedy of Duscur and they've been manipulating his kingdom behind the scenes just as readily as they were manipulating the Empire. They're relevant to Rhea because they backed and aided Nemesis, and what they and Nemesis did instructs what Rhea's plans because they're responsible for the death of her people and mother. They're not complex villains, but they are important to several important narratives.

 

Eh, how important is questionable. 

Tragedy of Duscur/Kingdom -> It was orchestrated by the Kingdom nobility with a little shove from TWSITD. If we wrote TWSITD them out, the nobility can commit that tragedy all by themselves. It would reinforce the narrative that the nobility system is corrupt and needs to be removed. 

Rhea -> Write out TWSITD and just leave Nemesis. What does that leave us? A guy, who like Edelgard, thinks that we don't need Gods and that humans should reign supreme. Not that farfetched of an idea. It would reinforce the idea that humanity's greed for power and control can lead them to do terrible things like genocide. Rhea could still make those concessions to keep the false peace between humans vs Nabateans, out of respect for her mother. Rhea's fanaticism with her mother and maintaining this false peace doesn't really need TWSITD - it would just highlight the idea that people with the best of intentions can be led astray. 

Empire -> Feudalism is already a corrupt system. You can have the Empire's nobility pulling the strings with pushing for Crests and the Insurrection of the Seven, solely for the sake of power/prestige/money/influence (because it's not like it hasn't happened before in history), without Arundel shoving his way into Empire politics. It would also put into perspective the idea of centralized power vs being led by a group of corrupt nobles. 

I feel like without TWSITD, the game itself would benefit from a more introspective examination at what can go wrong in feudalistic societies and the result of people's selfishness/arrogance. Maybe it is just me, but right now, it feels like "oh yeah a lot of bad things happen because some big bad is in the shadow pulling the strings, but jokes on you, they're taken care of in 2 chapters in VW and in the epilogue of CF." 

Edited by MessengerIris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Crysta said:

Eh, the Slitherers aren't only relevant to her backstory. They're relevant to Dimitri because they were what triggered Tragedy of Duscur and they've been manipulating his kingdom behind the scenes just as readily as they were manipulating the Empire. They're relevant to Rhea because they backed and aided Nemesis, and what they and Nemesis did instructs what Rhea's plans because they're responsible for the death of her people and mother. They're not complex villains, but they are important to several important narratives.

 

I don't know how it works for Dimitri's route, but Nemesis simply could have been working independently if those who slither in the dark were written out.

28 minutes ago, MessengerIris said:

I’ll give my 2 cents. I think the backstory is fine the way it is. It is ok for villains to have flaws like arrogance and ignorance, even if it sounds nonsensical from the other perspective - ultimately these flaws make her a relatable and flawed human. To her, what she does makes sense and allows her to justify the actions she does. I just think it gets ridiculous when people start arguing that she is some sort of savior because “well what she does makes sense from her mind and as a result, all her opponents are therefore wrong and should just roll over to allow her actions and conquest.” As if there isn’t an other side to her conquest. And then those same individuals will bend themselves backwards to make every other opponent (whether it be Claude/Dimitri/Rhea/etc) out looking like some sort of “bigger villain” who Edelgard had to put down/conquer/some nonsense like that. I think the game was a good reflection of how multifaceted war is because ultimately everyone thinks their cause is just and worthy of sacrifice. She is ruthless and Machiavellian in her actions, but not sadistic. Besides, nothing wrong with liking an aggressor. 

I do think it is unfortunate that her character is diminished because she is too closely associated with the clearly irredeemable villains with insufficient story presence to make them as scary/powerful as she frames them to be, and those villains barely have any context to make their actions understandable (beyond death to dragons and evil for the sake of evil). If anything, I think I would rather write out the entire TWSITD plotline and have her motivation stem more directly from the nobility (ie the nobility tortured and experimented on her siblings etc). That way, there is a more direct correlation to her end goal, and CF would stop being "I am helpless against TWSITD's control and as a result must partner with them" and make her seem more like a conquerer with accountability and the agency to make morally questionable decisions for what she believes is a better society. I just often find people who defend Edelgard's actions as heroic and necessary often build TWSITD's threat and storytelling to be better than it actually is, which is quite barebone and open to interpretation. 

This is the bones of what I'm getting at. I actually think her character is strong enough that her actions could stand on there own without the backstory. I don't need her backstory to believe she'd do all these things. And what the backstory does do is bring about a massive contradiction in her motives that one has to do some mental gymnastics to get around. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MessengerIris said:

I feel like without TWSITD, the game itself would benefit from a more introspective examination at what can go wrong in feudalistic societies and the result of people's selfishness/arrogance. Maybe it is just me, but right now, it feels like "oh yeah a lot of bad things happen because some big bad is in the shadow pulling the strings, but jokes on you, they're taken care of in 2 chapters in VW and in the epilogue of CF." 

And apparently accidentally in the Blue Lions route

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all for more political intrigue over the generic evil cult, but I prefer the evil society with actual world building relevance than "but one day the humans turned on the dragons and slaughtered them all... somehow." A technologically advanced society that gradually becomes corrupt and turns on their allies out of a desire for more power definitely shares the same traits as the current predatory nobility, in itself.

Nemesis alone is Batta the Beast. I'm actually not sure why they needed him lmao

Edited by Crysta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Crysta said:

I'm all for more political intrigue over the generic evil cult, but I prefer the evil society with actual world building relevance than "but one day the humans turned on the dragons and slaughtered them all... somehow."

Nemesis alone is Batta the Beast.

I think Nemesis's motivation and backstory could have benefit a little bit from combining with TWSITD's backstory. Like maybe he too was a human who wants to push the limits of humanity and innovation to extend beyond the reliance of God's control. A lot of people in our own history started questioning religion once science and innovative thought was on the rise. It didn't have to be "one day humans wanted to rebel." Rhea could still be for Sothis because she saw what happens when innovation leads to genocide, and as result, clings onto the hope that religion is salvation. That setup seems like an idea that stems a lot from the debate between about humanity's willpower vs relying on holy intervention. But seriously, you don’t need some “hidden bad guy” to be responsible for literally all the bad stuff that happens in feudalistic society when a lot of that stuff can be pinned moreso on humanity’s and the social system’s inherent flaws. People can all make crappy and selfish decisions, all on their own accord, and removing TWSITD would allow ALL the protagonists to do that, instead of “TWSITD’s controlling and watching everything I do so let’s just go along with it.” TWSITD just felt like IS got cold feet on Edelgard and realized many people wouldn’t like a ruthless waifu. Maybe I am one of the few, but I wish she was less of a contraindication and stuck to her guns like she does in BL (where she admittedly continues her bloody path despite Arundel being out of the picture because she was so driven on unifying and creating a “better” Church-less world). 

Edited by MessengerIris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CyberNinja said:

Why? If we're basing it off her established character, its clear that she and Hubert are human supremacists thus having Seteth, Rhea, and Flayn in any position of power would be unacceptable for them. Furthermore if you read Edelgard's character sheet, you realize that she hates losing control. She is an autocrat and one who doesn't recognize the independence of the kingdom and Alliance. If you remove the Agarthans and Nabateans, then this is simply the story of an Emperor working to reclaim the old borders of the empire, she is embracing the Adrestian dream of reconquest. So it doesn't matter the ideology of the three lords, Edelgard would attempt to kill them regardless to reclaim the empire because 1) her need for control would not trust independent actors to create the society she desires 2) Her #1 goal is unification, attacking the church is just part of pretext. With this in mind, allying the Agarthans makes sense because she intends to fight the other two kingdoms in a state of total war. Her actions make sense when you look at her how she is rather than how you think she should be. She's the main villain.

I never said her actions didn't make sense. All of what she does is fine for a villain. But CF tries to make her a protagonist and allying with the evil mole men on the basis of misinformation does make that particular route feel questionable because it doesn't feel like anything we're doing is justified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rezzy said:

And apparently accidentally in the Blue Lions route

If they had the power to take the kingdoms head on, they'd have done so, that is so obvious I don't even know why we're discussing it. They act in shadow because being revealed means defeat. Their logic in story makes sense, they want to kill the Dragons, they also want the three kingdoms locked in a state of perpetual conflict, Edelgard works to end the war while Cornelia works to exhaust the resources of both the kingdom she controls and the rebels. Agartha doesn't start seriously supporting Edelgard until she risks losing and will cut ties once it becomes clear she's lost or they'll lose too much (Myson's death) if they remain. Both the Empire and Agartha work to complete their genocide of the Nabateans and both work to hunt down the KOS. In 3/4 routes they can kill of Rhea whenever they wish but use her to supply cheap demonic beast units. to the empire. Ideally the empire will emerge victorious but be too worn down to be a threat, Arundel will engage a massive civil war utilizing the unrest he's been spreading throughout the empire and they'll use this to headcap Edelgard and subvert the entirety of Fodlan. They'd then begin their pogroms against the human population of Fodlan as they see them as "mere beasts" since both nobility and commoners carry the blood of Nabatea (crests) and they view the humanity above as irrevocably tainted by Sothis and her ilk. If Solon is to be believed, they do view themselves in a messianic sense (Saviour of all) for those they view as true Ary-humanity. So I've joked about this before but Three houses is the most faithful Fallout 2 adaptation I've seen and Agartha are the Enclave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On her own with Byleth, without having played Three Houses once herself or reading a guide, Edelgard would act like she does in CF. If it's not your first route, I'm pretty sure you're not going into it just to feel justified yourself so much as you're trying out a different perspective.

If it turns out to be a perspective someone happens to empathize with, so be it. That means the writing is compelling, not that they're down with tyranny themselves. 

17 minutes ago, MessengerIris said:

I think Nemesis's motivation and backstory could have benefit a little bit from combining with TWSITD's backstory. Like maybe he too was a human who wants to push the limits of humanity and innovation to extend beyond the reliance of God's control. A lot of people in our own history started questioning religion once science and innovative thought was on the rise. It didn't have to be "one day humans wanted to rebel." Rhea could still be for Sothis because she saw what happens when innovation leads to genocide, and as result, clings onto the hope that religion is salvation. That setup seems like an idea that stems a lot from the debate between about humanity's willpower vs relying on holy intervention.

Nemesis alone can't be responsible for that. He could be the figurehead, and it seemed like he was, but the masses behind him (and he would need help) would more or less be what the Agarthians were but with... a different means of acquiring the needed power to take on dragons? Idk. And who knows, I wouldn't be surprised if some of them genuinely did feel this way instead of just doing it for the evulz and glowy weapons: history written by the victors is not proven to be accurate even in game.

I think Rhea just yearning for her mom, and purposely stunting the technological growth of society so the past doesn't repeat itself, is fine. The religion she erects is a means of control already, and one that's pretty believable. I don't think she wants Sothis to return just to save everyone and I prefer it that way.

Edited by Crysta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the notion I've heard expressed here of Edelgard being exposed to propaganda, and in some regard brainwashed by her torturers. Truthfully, when I started the game, I had hoped that Hubert (who, I thinks it's fair to say, is the most TWSITD-like character we get to play as) was doing such a thing - acting as a servant to the Emperor-to-be, while bending her heart and mind against the Church. As for the game we got, though, I think her trauma does provide value in why she stands against the Church. It makes her position (feeling the need to ally with her tormentors) more pitiable, which makes her personal resolve more impressive, in my opinion. Regardless, Those Who Slither were underbaked and too blatantly evil/incompetent (Solon probably could've gotten so much more dirt against the church, if he didn't totally monologue his identity and plan) to feel like they fit tonally in this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ertrick36 said:

Oh, and change Edelgard's awful ideology into something that at least has some chance of working out for the better.  Because anyone who'd actually put the idea of a meritocracy under a microscope would be able to tell fairly easily that it'd only just further perpetuate the divide between rich and poor, what with the rich being the only ones who could afford the best education and training out there.

I'm trying to understand Edelgard's meritocracy but it comes up short for me. My biggest issues are: 1 What does she know about the common people? The only person that doesn't come from a noble/ background is Dorothea or Manuela . Not much of a window there. 2. Regardless of route majority of the the commoners endings are less ambitious than their noble counterparts. Even in the Crimson Flower route there are few examples of commoners rising above their stations. 3:  Most of the BE students are nobles that to inherited their respective positions as they've been raised towards. That feels more like handpicking people to fill in the empty seats rather than the meritocracy she supports.

Might be missing something here. 

Edited by Jingle Jangle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh wow, I shouldn't be surprised this conversation ended this way.

I personally Edelgard's backstory works nicely because it creates a motive for driving her motivation. It's hard for someone to see the evil of the world, specially if they're "privileged ones" unless the evil comes after you, and that happened when Aegir, Thales and co. did her horrible deeds. 

Edelgard noticed because of this that the world needs to change, and the death of her family and even more people that had died and will die for similar reasons (basically Crest and Nobility related) drived her to create a future where these actions are never done again, and world without the Church at the center... And of course, a quite crazy dream needs an even crazier plan. She managed to make it work pretty well, despite how dangerous it would look in paper (She managed to defeat the Church and with managed to complete one of her main objectives: remove Rhea's influence from the world, and she can actually won the whole conflict if Byleth doesn't go against her, though, maybe she would have needed Byleth to deal with Thales, to be fair the only character that always wins is Byleth 😛 ).

Edited by Troykv
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, just out of curiosity, what would the rest of you put in place after removing the caste system?

Because if it's "I'd establish a democratic republic!", I have some bad news for you...

Edited by Crysta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Troykv said:

Oh wow, I shouldn't be surprised this conversation ended this way.

I personally Edelgard's backstory works nicely because it creates a motive for driving her motivation. It's hard for someone to see the evil of the world, specially if they're "privileged ones" unless the evil comes after you, and that happened when Aegir, Thales and co. did her horrible deeds. 

Edelgard noticed because of this that the world needs to change, and the death of her family and even more people that had died and will die for similar reasons (basically Crest and Nobility related) drived her to create a future where this actions are never done again... And of course, a quite crazy dream needs an even crazier plan. She managed to make it work pretty well, despite how dangerous it would look in paper (She managed to defeat the Church and with managed to complete one of her main objectives: remove Rhea's influence from the world, and she can actually won the whole conflict if Byleth doesn't go against her, though, maybe he would have needed Byleth to deal with Thales).

From my understanding, OP and my qualm is more to do with TWSITD's involvement in Edelgard's backstory, moreso than her actual backstory. I think her backstory of torture is actually quite well done and puts her actions in a lot of context. But because TWSITD is such a badly written ultimate villain, it makes a lot of Edelgard's action seem misdirected against the church (since most people will end up falling on the argument that the church upholds some the crest/nobility system, which again, is open to interpretation. I personally don't think the church is great but some of Edelgard's blame is overexaggerated.). If Edelgard's backstory was more closely tied to her end goal (removal of the nobility/Crests), then it wouldn't seem so contradicatory and confusing.

Like I mentioned before, write out TWSITD completely. Now it becomes: Imperial nobility wants a unified Fodlan -> Insurrection of the Seven -> abducts Edelgard and siblings to create superpowered Emperor to achieve that goal -> Edelgard hates Crests and nobility. Now, rather than TWSITD is watching my every move so I must go remove the church?? logic, it would just be "lemme appease the Imperial nobles with conquest but use their resources to unify Fodlan screw them over by removing their power." Also, a lot of the CF endings should reflect more of a meritocratic society (yes, societies don't change overnight but seriously felt a lot of things didn't even change at the end of CF when people like Bernadetta/Caspar inherent their respective titles and positions). 

Edited by MessengerIris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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