So I FINALLY did Silver Snow...Wow...

[omegaxis1]

13 hours ago, Lunarly said:

This will be my last post but, idk why you're trying to strawman. It's hard to debate on a topic when someone else is trying to strawman and use a bunch of extreme conclusions on a topic the game barely touches on as some sort of argument. I've already made it clear that I'm well aware Rhea's involvement in the war was personal (aka revenge against Nemesis) yet you still insist that I keep arguing against this fact and brought it up repeatedly for whatever reason. I literally never mentioned that WIlhelm made the mode in the history books or even wrote them in the library, yet you mention that is something I did when all I pointed out was the primary source of information we have on what happened in the past was through the library. Game mentions Rhea and Wilhelm worked together but we literally no 0 on their relationship dynamic, yet you still insist you know all the answers and that Wilhelm was subservient to Rhea because Rhea said Wilhelm was dedicated to her cause (which can be interpreted multiple different ways, and not just in the way you find to be right). Literally didn't mention anything about how Rhea did 0 manipulation, when I mentioned multiple times that Rhea manipulated history and pointed out her S-Support confession where she admits to deceiving her followers but, you still chose to ignore that. 

Overall, you're basically just constantly jumping to the strawman argument. Do you even know what the point of your own argument was about? Or anything about what you're trying to refute? 

Hence why I said earlier. You're dancing around the subject.

2 hours ago, Sid Starkiller said:

Edelgard has some subtle moments where she discusses it with Byleth, but the fact that so many people were shocked by the reveal says it was either too subtle or just not enough.

I think so as well. It seems like people would prefer if the Church is bad argument was more obvious and not subtle at all. People prefer not to have subtlety. 

[Moltz23]

1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

The Crimson Flower route seems to get the short end of the stick for a lot of important things. For another example: where's my cinematic three-way-fight in part 2? I'm going to guess that Silver Snow doesn't have that cutscene or battle either. Please correct me if I'm wrong. 

I haven't seen the Holy Tomb cinematic (as I have yet to play the other routes), so I wonder if it (and Edelgard giving an actual reason for the raid) would've helped. 

The scene I'm talking about happens before the routesplit actually, so it counts for both CF and SS. And nope, SS doesn't get that battle either because the game skips that month outright.

Edelgard providing a reason would've helped a lot I think. Heck, the game could've done something interesting for the Holy Tomb buildup scene depending on whether you went to Edel's coronation or not, which is why I find so weird that moment never happens in that route yet it does in the others.

Edited January 19, 2020 by Moltz23

[Sid Starkiller]

1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

I think you and I are in complete agreement; the game did not lay enough foundation for the decision moment. I had no idea that people accidentally picked "join Edelgard"; thinking it was, "Can we at least discuss this?" For me, noticing that that there was no, "Can we discuss this?" option or prior discussion-for-the-foundation/buildup killed my immersion.

While poorly executed, you could make it work. Rhea, in the state of mind she was in at that point, would not have been fine with you disobeying her order to kill for any reason, and likely accuse you of betrayal, at which point she would reveal herself as a dragon (just like the actual version in the game), at which point you'd probably be a lot more comfortable joining Edelgard, if nothing else than out of fear for your own life.

Too bad the writers didn't think of that, though.

Edited January 19, 2020 by Sid Starkiller

[eclipse]

On 1/18/2020 at 1:00 AM, SpiceMan said:

That's true. I never really thought about it that way, that the elites were already in charge and Rhea just continued with it. This why the new dlc should have been set in the past so we can finally have concrete proof of what the hell happened. But there is still the chance we will learn more about it anyway so I'm hopeful.

I kind of like having those questions around.  Much like RL history, a lot has probably been lost due to the powers-that-be/time/circumstance.  Even if we never get the full story, is it really that important to vilify one side?

3 hours ago, Jotari said:

It;s actually rather impressive how little Dimitri and Edelgard manage to actually say in their meet up before the climactic battle in Azure Moon. It's basically "I want to change the world" "Yes, but your methods!" No discussion on what changes exactly, what regime she plans to replace it with, how the current world is flawed. There aren't even any offers of concessions, nor even threats or ultimatums. For a diplomatic meeting there is a shocking lack of actual diplomacy. Neither of them actually state what they want from this conflict beyond vague platitudes. Really makes me wonder why Edelgard bothered to even show up. Sure she says it's a whim, but like, didn't she want to gain something from the conversation. There isn't even a call for an unconditional surrender.

Perhaps the actual diplomatic discussion was off-screen (say, led by Hubert and someone equally competent on Dimitri's side).

1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said:

Overall, you're basically just constantly jumping to the strawman argument. Do you even know what the point of your own argument was about? Or anything about what you're trying to refute? 

Hence why I said earlier. You're dancing around the subject.

Calm down.

[omegaxis1]

3 hours ago, Jotari said:

It;s actually rather impressive how little Dimitri and Edelgard manage to actually say in their meet up before the climactic battle in Azure Moon. It's basically "I want to change the world" "Yes, but your methods!" No discussion on what changes exactly, what regime she plans to replace it with, how the current world is flawed. There aren't even any offers of concessions, nor even threats or ultimatums. For a diplomatic meeting there is a shocking lack of actual diplomacy. Neither of them actually state what they want from this conflict beyond vague platitudes. Really makes me wonder why Edelgard bothered to even show up. Sure she says it's a whim, but like, didn't she want to gain something from the conversation. There isn't even a call for an unconditional surrender.

I think it's to establish two things. 

1) That they can never understand each other. There's a huge mistranslation. Edelgard never says in the JP version that Dimitri cannot understand the poor. It's acutally more along the lines of, "Someone who has those things can never understand those that do not." This is because it's in response to Dimitri saying that he learned the lessons he did from his friends. Edelgard is basically saying in a form of lamentation that she has no friends.

2) Dimitri basically getting a chance to have a way of expressing the morality and just establish he does not believe that change with violence works. Which is a bit hypocritical because he does just that.

Honestly, it's more annoying how he learns of the possibility that Patricia might be alive, but never tells Edelgard this.

[Dark Holy Elf]

While I do have some problems with Black Eagles Chapter 11, I personally don't think a wishy-washy "can we discuss this?" option would be especially plausible, and I can't imagine what narrative purpose it would serve even if it worked. Two people are on the point of killing each other, you take the side of one and aren't going to stop just because Byleth says "can't we all just get along". Rhea, in general, has never shown much interest in discussions of any sort; Edelgard has just committed to a war against the church and isn't going to back down in this moment either. Not all decisions in life can be made with careful deliberation and access to all available evidence; I don't mind the game forcing a quick choice here.

(Plus, even if Byleth succeeded and they were able to talk things out, that doesn't leave much of a game.)

I'm surprised to see negative comments about the Dimitri/Edelgard Enbarr scene in Azure Moon on the other hand, I thought that was one of my favourites in the game. I certainly had a clear picture of what Edelgard was trying to accomplish and why Dimitri sympathised but disagreed with the methods.

[omegaxis1]

4 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

While I do have some problems with Black Eagles Chapter 11, I personally don't think a wishy-washy "can we discuss this?" option would be especially plausible, and I can't imagine what narrative purpose it would serve even if it worked. Two people are on the point of killing each other, you take the side of one and aren't going to stop just because Byleth says "can't we all just get along". Rhea, in general, has never shown much interest in discussions of any sort; Edelgard has just committed to a war against the church and isn't going to back down in this moment either. Not all decisions in life can be made with careful deliberation and access to all available evidence; I don't mind the game forcing a quick choice here.

(Plus, even if Byleth succeeded and they were able to talk things out, that doesn't leave much of a game.)

I'm surprised to see negative comments about the Dimitri/Edelgard Enbarr scene in Azure Moon on the other hand, I thought that was one of my favourites in the game. I certainly had a clear picture of what Edelgard was trying to accomplish and why Dimitri sympathised but disagreed with the methods.

Rhea makes it clear. If you go against the Church, you die. Either complain in the background to be ignored, or do something that would give the Church the excuse to punish you. 

There's really nothing diplomatic that El could say.

Also, a neat thing is that Edelgard's given up in trying to recruit Byleth to her side, because he was blessed by the goddess. Keep in mind that Edelgard USED to be a devout believer of the goddess. In fact, her talk with Dimitri hints that she prayed for Sothis to save her from the torment. But she didn't get saved. And the goddess is someone that is preached to save and protect all that is beautiful. So to Edelgard, that means that the goddess views Edelgard as something disgusting. Or hell, maybe Hegemon Edelgard is how Edelgard views herself, as some disgusting abomination that should never have existed. 

But now, she witnesses that the goddess made a literal intervention to save Byleth. That's basically like the goddess just spat in Edelgard's face. And now, Edelgard feels that just as it is her destiny to face the Church of Seiros, now she feels that it's Byleth's destiny to oppose her. 

Hence why Crimson Flower is the route where you oppose destiny.

 

[SpiceMan]

28 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

There's a huge mistranslation. Edelgard never says in the JP version that Dimitri cannot understand the poor. It's acutally more along the lines of, "Someone who has those things can never understand those that do not." This is because it's in response to Dimitri saying that he learned the lessons he did from his friends. Edelgard is basically saying in a form of lamentation that she has no friends.

Damn, why do these mistakes have to happen? That line makes so much more sense than the one in English. Edelgard calling Dimitri out on being rich when she herself is the f**king emperor was such a stupid line. I like the meaning behind the original though, kinda sad.

[omegaxis1]

2 minutes ago, SpiceMan said:

Damn, why do these mistakes have to happen? That line makes so much more sense than the one in English. Edelgard calling Dimitri out on being rich when she herself is the f**king emperor was such a stupid line. I like the meaning behind the original though, kinda sad.

"Nintendo believes that Tree House is blessed with good localization and is necessary to give players great dialogue for cheaper price. But Nintendo is wrong. Tree House is to blame for this brutal, irrational translations the players have to see and hear."

[vanguard333]

3 hours ago, Moltz23 said:

The scene I'm talking about happens before the routesplit actually, so it counts for both CF and SS. And nope, SS doesn't get that battle either because the game skips that month outright.

Edelgard providing a reason would've helped a lot I think. Heck, the game could've done something interesting for the Holy Tomb buildup scene depending on whether you went to Edel's coronation or not, which is why I find so weird that moment never happens in that route yet it does in the others.

Yeah; I knew that you were talking about an event that happens before the route-split; I'm just saying that Crimson Flower seems to get the short end of the stick a lot (Silver Snow as well, given what I've read here, but at least it only has one missing chapter rather than four). 

 

2 hours ago, Sid Starkiller said:

While poorly executed, you could make it work. Rhea, in the state of mind she was in at that point, would not have been fine with you disobeying her order to kill for any reason, and likely accuse you of betrayal, at which point she would reveal herself as a dragon (just like the actual version in the game), at which point you'd probably be a lot more comfortable joining Edelgard, if nothing else than out of fear for your own life.

Too bad the writers didn't think of that, though.

I suppose that would've worked. In that happened though, I would probably also want at least one rant from Edelgard before the choice: either a Motive Rant or a The Reason You Suck Speech directed at Rhea; maybe even something that manages to do both at once through clever dialogue. 

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MotiveRant

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheReasonYouSuckSpeech

To be clear, I'm not saying that it would be necessary if they had chosen to do that; just that it would improve it (and it probably would've also improved how they actually handled it). 

 

2 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

While I do have some problems with Black Eagles Chapter 11, I personally don't think a wishy-washy "can we discuss this?" option would be especially plausible, and I can't imagine what narrative purpose it would serve even if it worked. Two people are on the point of killing each other, you take the side of one and aren't going to stop just because Byleth says "can't we all just get along". Rhea, in general, has never shown much interest in discussions of any sort; Edelgard has just committed to a war against the church and isn't going to back down in this moment either. Not all decisions in life can be made with careful deliberation and access to all available evidence; I don't mind the game forcing a quick choice here.

(Plus, even if Byleth succeeded and they were able to talk things out, that doesn't leave much of a game.)

I don't think anyone is necessarily asking for the question to be answered "yes, we can discuss this"; just the chance to ask.

Plus, I only suggested it as one possible solution; another possible solution being maintaining the snap decision, but having more buildup towards it. 

[Jotari]

12 hours ago, eclipse said:

I kind of like having those questions around.  Much like RL history, a lot has probably been lost due to the powers-that-be/time/circumstance.  Even if we never get the full story, is it really that important to vilify one side?

Perhaps the actual diplomatic discussion was off-screen (say, led by Hubert and someone equally competent on Dimitri's side).

Calm down.

Maybe all the good writing is just off screen hanging out with Hilda's brother...okay that's a bit too harsh on the game. It just frustrates because it has so much more potential than the all the other games we've been been getting from Fire Emblem last decade yet still messes up in some baffling ways. Most of it is likely down to budget and over ambition than poor writing though.

12 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

I think it's to establish two things. 

1) That they can never understand each other. There's a huge mistranslation. Edelgard never says in the JP version that Dimitri cannot understand the poor. It's acutally more along the lines of, "Someone who has those things can never understand those that do not." This is because it's in response to Dimitri saying that he learned the lessons he did from his friends. Edelgard is basically saying in a form of lamentation that she has no friends.

2) Dimitri basically getting a chance to have a way of expressing the morality and just establish he does not believe that change with violence works. Which is a bit hypocritical because he does just that.

Honestly, it's more annoying how he learns of the possibility that Patricia might be alive, but never tells Edelgard this.

It establishes those things on the most basic of levels. Like I said before the scene basically goes "I want change" "But your methods!" It's no wonder they don't understand each other, because neither of them actually explains anything about their viewpoints. Like I said, vague philosophical platitudes and no actual down to earth discussion about the situation they're in and what can be done to remedy it.

12 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

While I do have some problems with Black Eagles Chapter 11, I personally don't think a wishy-washy "can we discuss this?" option would be especially plausible, and I can't imagine what narrative purpose it would serve even if it worked. Two people are on the point of killing each other, you take the side of one and aren't going to stop just because Byleth says "can't we all just get along". Rhea, in general, has never shown much interest in discussions of any sort; Edelgard has just committed to a war against the church and isn't going to back down in this moment either. Not all decisions in life can be made with careful deliberation and access to all available evidence; I don't mind the game forcing a quick choice here.

(Plus, even if Byleth succeeded and they were able to talk things out, that doesn't leave much of a game.)

I'm surprised to see negative comments about the Dimitri/Edelgard Enbarr scene in Azure Moon on the other hand, I thought that was one of my favourites in the game. I certainly had a clear picture of what Edelgard was trying to accomplish and why Dimitri sympathised but disagreed with the methods.

It's not the what (which o have some issues with too in terms of establishment) but the how. Edelgard's stance is "I will use violence to enact change!" And Dimitri is "No, we can change without violence." Neither of them say "This is the change I want and I want you to do this for me to achieve it. If you don't then I will have no choice but to do this." That is to say neither of them actually make any attempt to put an end to the conflict diplomatically, it's just "No u."

12 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

Rhea makes it clear. If you go against the Church, you die. Either complain in the background to be ignored, or do something that would give the Church the excuse to punish you. 

There's really nothing diplomatic that El could say.

Also, a neat thing is that Edelgard's given up in trying to recruit Byleth to her side, because he was blessed by the goddess. Keep in mind that Edelgard USED to be a devout believer of the goddess. In fact, her talk with Dimitri hints that she prayed for Sothis to save her from the torment. But she didn't get saved. And the goddess is someone that is preached to save and protect all that is beautiful. So to Edelgard, that means that the goddess views Edelgard as something disgusting. Or hell, maybe Hegemon Edelgard is how Edelgard views herself, as some disgusting abomination that should never have existed. 

But now, she witnesses that the goddess made a literal intervention to save Byleth. That's basically like the goddess just spat in Edelgard's face. And now, Edelgard feels that just as it is her destiny to face the Church of Seiros, now she feels that it's Byleth's destiny to oppose her. 

Hence why Crimson Flower is the route where you oppose destiny.

 

It's not about convincing Rhea, it's about convincing the Black Eagles. They are heart broken that Edelgard betrays them and beg her to tell them why and she responds by saying surrender or die. She doesn't even say "trust me, I have good reason for this." Just "sorry we have to be in this decision where I'm forcing you to fight me without context. I'd prefer if you'd just surrender without context and just let me do whatever I want though."

Edited January 20, 2020 by Jotari

[omegaxis1]

8 hours ago, Jotari said:

It establishes those things on the most basic of levels. Like I said before the scene basically goes "I want change" "But your methods!" It's no wonder they don't understand each other, because neither of them actually explains anything about their viewpoints. Like I said, vague philosophical platitudes and no actual down to earth discussion about the situation they're in and what can be done to remedy it.

No denial that the talk was poorly written. If anything, it was just to give Dimitri some moral high ground, while getting little out of El.

8 hours ago, Jotari said:

It's not about convincing Rhea, it's about convincing the Black Eagles. They are heart broken that Edelgard betrays them and beg her to tell them why and she responds by saying surrender or die. She doesn't even say "trust me, I have good reason for this." Just "sorry we have to be in this decision where I'm forcing you to fight me without context. I'd prefer if you'd just surrender without context and just let me do whatever I want though."

Yeah, because how exactly do you expect someone to sit down and listen to you try and explain that Rhea is an ancient dragon disguising herself as a human and has been manipulating Fodlan for over a millennia exactly? 

[Jotari]

11 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

No denial that the talk was poorly written. If anything, it was just to give Dimitri some moral high ground, while getting little out of El.

Yeah, because how exactly do you expect someone to sit down and listen to you try and explain that Rhea is an ancient dragon disguising herself as a human and has been manipulating Fodlan for over a millennia exactly? 

Even a "trust me, I have my reasons" or an "I'll explain later" would be nice. Of course as I said earlier she probably could have manipulated the situation so they weren't even there to begin with. Just like the Azure Moon convo, it's not that an explanation is possible, it's that zero attempt is given to try.

Edited January 20, 2020 by Jotari

[omegaxis1]

Just now, Jotari said:

Even a "trust me, I have my reasons" or an "I'll explain later" would be nice. Of course as I said earlier she probably could have manipulated the situation so they weren't even there to begin with.

Why? They were all told to go there by Rhea and Byleth. They were supposed to be the new "holy warriors" and all that. Not exactly something that El can tell them not to go, especially since Rhea was asking Byleth to take them as well. 

[Jotari]

Just now, omegaxis1 said:

Why? They were all told to go there by Rhea and Byleth. They were supposed to be the new "holy warriors" and all that. Not exactly something that El can tell them not to go, especially since Rhea was asking Byleth to take them as well. 

Asking, not telling. There's no demand for the students to be there. And considering these characters are willing to put their life on the line and go to war for Edelgard, I think they trust her enough where if she really asked them they would have held back.

[omegaxis1]

3 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Asking, not telling. There's no demand for the students to be there. And considering these characters are willing to put their life on the line and go to war for Edelgard, I think they trust her enough where if she really asked them they would have held back.

The point of the matter is that Byleth is under the impression that some important ceremony, so he asked the students to go with him. El can't exactly say to them, "Don't go there."

Why? 

How is she gonna explain that? 

Answer, she can't. 

There's no logical explanation. Things have gone to the point of no return already.