Three Houses does a lot tell and not show

[Jotari]

2 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

No, they don't. Read her quote:

And fact of the matter is, you can't die in the chapter. In fact, in Silver Snow, if any BE students were beaten in Part 1, Edelgard has a line saying that friends from back then have joined her, even though you don't fight them in SS.

So yeah, in the end, no one actually dies, nor does she actually try to murder you. In the end, it was 100% a bluff, even though she did come to launch an attack.

Edelgard would prefer to spare anyone if she's able to. It's why she's able to spare Claude, is okay with Byleth letting Flayn and Seteth live, and even tries to get Rhea to surrender. 

Keep in mind that Edelgard admits that she's fully aware and prepared for the deaths that will inevitably come from the war. But she doesn't want to kill if she's able to help it in following through with her goal. 

Yeah, she's prepared to spare people, if they submit to her will and do exactly what she says. Otherwise she'll kill them. I can provide quotes from Ashnard attesting to the very same thing.

[omegaxis1]

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

Yeah, she's prepared to spare people, if they submit to her will and do exactly what she says. Otherwise she'll kill them. I can provide quotes from Ashnard attesting to the very same thing.

It's war, dude. During that time, you're basically all standing at ultimatums. But even those that do stand in her war, she doesn't kill, just removes them from being a threat. It's literally what she did to Duke Aegir and the other nobles that opposed her. Only one that died was Hubert's father, and that was cause Hubert despised him for his betrayal of House Hresvelg. Hell, she even states that if Rhea surrenders, what would they do, and she prefers to strip her of all political power. 

So I call BS to you trying to call her an Ashnard. She's not asking people to submit to her will. Hell, she even tells Ferdinand that she wants people like him, people that would challenge her and make her consider other perspectives. 

[Jotari]

2 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

It's war, dude. During that time, you're basically all standing at ultimatums. But even those that do stand in her war, she doesn't kill, just removes them from being a threat. It's literally what she did to Duke Aegir and the other nobles that opposed her. Only one that died was Hubert's father, and that was cause Hubert despised him for his betrayal of House Hresvelg. Hell, she even states that if Rhea surrenders, what would they do, and she prefers to strip her of all political power. 

So I call BS to you trying to call her an Ashnard. She's not asking people to submit to her will. Hell, she even tells Ferdinand that she wants people like him, people that would challenge her and make her consider other perspectives. 

At this point it's not a war. It's her attacking her classmates unprovoked and without warning. And using literal monsters to do so.

[omegaxis1]

Just now, Jotari said:

At this point it's not a war. It's her attacking her classmates unprovoked and without warning. And using literal monsters to do so.

And once again, not actually killing any of them, given that no one can die, and despite this, can still choose to join her.

Thing about Edelgard is that she always respects the choices people make and is the ONLY one that ever gives you a choice. Unlike Dimitri, Claude, Gilbert, or Seteth, she presents you with choices and a chance to back out or join her. She doesn't force or coerce you. Hence why in CF, when you side with her and she asks if you're sure you want to fight with her, you always assure her that you are prepared to do so and chose this of your own will.

The others basically make it impossible to have a choice in the matter.

[Midnox]

Indeed. This game is rich in backstory and background, but showing so little makes me less invested in then. Good thing the rest of it is so well written it’s not an abysmal flaw. I mean, compare it to the not bad by not up to standard Awakening, and, for what I read, actually abysmal Fates

[Jotari]

5 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

And once again, not actually killing any of them, given that no one can die, and despite this, can still choose to join her.

Thing about Edelgard is that she always respects the choices people make and is the ONLY one that ever gives you a choice. Unlike Dimitri, Claude, Gilbert, or Seteth, she presents you with choices and a chance to back out or join her. She doesn't force or coerce you. Hence why in CF, when you side with her and she asks if you're sure you want to fight with her, you always assure her that you are prepared to do so and chose this of your own will.

The others basically make it impossible to have a choice in the matter.

I didn't know that no one can die in that chapter, and if it is the case then I call bullshit (on the game, not you, because the game probably does do it and that makes me respect it less). Because Edelgard clearly tells her soldiers to kill anyone who resists. That would necessitate a secret meeting before hand where she goes "I'm going to tell you to kill anyone who resists, but I'm not being serious okay. Don't really kill them. I know they're armed and they're definitely going to be killing you because they think their lives are at stake because I've clearly vocally told you to kill them, but hold back. I'll be really disappointed if any of them actually die. In fact no matter how many of us die, you are absolutely forbidden from killing them. Everyone understand? Even you too crazy demonic beasts that I've managed to smuggle into a school?"

Edited January 17, 2020 by Jotari

[omegaxis1]

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

I didn't know that no one can die in that chapter, and if it is the case then I call bullshit (on the game, not you, because the game probably does do it and that makes me respect it less). Because Edelgard clearly tells her soldiers to kill anyone who resists. That would necessitate a secret meeting before hand where she goes "I'm going to tell you to kill anyone who resists, but I'm not being serious okay. Don't really kill them. I know they're armed and they're definitely going to be killing you because they think their lives are at stake because I've clearly vocally told you to kill them, but hold back. I'll be really disappointed if any of them actually die. In fact no matter how many of us die, you are absolutely forbidden from killing them. Everyone understand? Even you too crazy demonic beasts that I've managed to smuggle into the school?"

And she tells any BE student that faces her that she had no intention on actually killing you. Did you not read the dialogue there? The kill threat was a bluff. Given that she arrives with her soldiers, it's kind of clear that she did make commands earlier not to kill anyone. The Demonic Beasts are also under Edelgard's control, since Agarthans made them to follow orders. 

In the end, Edelgard stuck true to her words. None of them would kill anyone, even if they resist. Edelgard proved to have never actually intended to have any of them die. 

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

3 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

It really isn't an overreaction. Edelgard is at a standstill at the war against the Kingdom and Church, and has a shortage of troops. At best they are just maintaining a standstill which can change within a moment's notice if Dimitri and Rhea raise a strong enough army to launch their own invasion. Claude refusing to lend the Empire aid means he's still attributing to its destruction by actively preventing anyone that has a right to send help. Once again, I remind you that Gloucester and Ordelia have every right to send aid to the Empire.

Yes, but Claude is "attributing to the Empire's destruction" in a manner that is within his rights. Yes, Gloucester and Ordelia have the right to aid the Empire, but they still choose not to. If this is because of Claude's actions, then it's those houses, not the Empire, that have a legitimate gripe with Claude. And if the Empire's survival depends on receiving external aid, then that reflects Edelgard's own failure in managing a nation.

3 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

No, if he really wanted to protect civilians, he could have done what he did in Azure Moon, which was evacuate Derdriu on ships. But in CF, he shut Derdriu down and endangered the civilians. When Edelgard defeated the enemies on the Derdriu city, a villager pleads with Edelgard not to hurt the city, and Edelgard assures him that she will not harm anyone in the city, and the target is Claude. So Claude literally endangered people's lives to likely keep the fact that he brought in Almyran reinforcements a secret. 

Because he views it as a military necessity for defending the Alliance. If Edelgard is so concerned for those civilian lives, then she is welcome to not invade or attack Derdrieu. Nothing compels her to invade beyond her own ideals and ambitions.

3 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

You think Almyrans, people that like to invade for FUN, would settle for merely defense? 

Let's be real, if Edelgard literally turned her back, Claude and the Almyrans would have stabbed her, Dimitri, and Rhea in the back.

Racism. Great. Yes, in a parallel universe, Claude and the Almyrans may have launched a first strike against the Empire. If that happened, we'd be having a different discussion. But that's not what happened - instead, the Empire launched the first strike. Edelgard is the aggressor, and Claude is justified in fighting back against her with any means at his disposal.

[Water Mage]

26 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

And she tells any BE student that faces her that she had no intention on actually killing you. Did you not read the dialogue there? The kill threat was a bluff. Given that she arrives with her soldiers, it's kind of clear that she did make commands earlier not to kill anyone. The Demonic Beasts are also under Edelgard's control, since Agarthans made them to follow orders. 

In the end, Edelgard stuck true to her words. None of them would kill anyone, even if they resist. Edelgard proved to have never actually intended to have any of them die. 

That arguably makes Edelgard look worse. It means Edelgard placed more value on the lives of people not loyal to her cause than the lives of the soldiers who actually follow her voluntarily. Yes those soldiers were prepared to die when they joined her, but would really follow a leader who puts more value in the lives of the people trying to kill than your own?

[omegaxis1]

2 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Yes, but Claude is "attributing to the Empire's destruction" in a manner that is within his rights. Yes, Gloucester and Ordelia have the right to aid the Empire, but they still choose not to. If this is because of Claude's actions, then it's those houses, not the Empire, that have a legitimate gripe with Claude. And if the Empire's survival depends on receiving external aid, then that reflects Edelgard's own failure in managing a nation.

Then it's within the Empire's rights to launch an attack toward someone that is overall helping the Church and Kingdom that they are warring against in that regard. The Houses are within rights to help the Empire, and they want to, but they cannot because Claude is preventing it, having incited internal conflicts himself.

Hence why taking the Great Bridge helped it so that Count Gloucester can aid the Empire, like the reverse of VW in taking the Great Bridge.

4 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Because he views it as a military necessity for defending the Alliance. If Edelgard is so concerned for those civilian lives, then she is welcome to not invade or attack Derdrieu. Nothing compels her to invade beyond her own ideals and ambitions.

Making it no different from Edelgard using the citizens as meat shields to slow down Claude in VW. Claude is basically endangering civilian lives. Edelgard will push through, same as Claude. Does not change that Claude still endangered their lives.

6 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Racism. Great. Yes, in a parallel universe, Claude and the Almyrans may have launched a first strike against the Empire. If that happened, we'd be having a different discussion. But that's not what happened - instead, the Empire launched the first strike. Edelgard is the aggressor, and Claude is justified in fighting back against her with any means at his disposal.

Once again, you seem to be ignoring how Claude literally admitted that he intended to be Fodlan's supreme ruler himself. That's not some joke. Edelgard did attack, but Claude was already taking a stance against the Empire. Only difference is that Claude is willing to leave Fodlan and no longer interfere with Edelgard and be in her debt, hence why she doesn't need to kill him. 

4 minutes ago, Water Mage said:

That arguably makes Edelgard look worse. It means Edelgard placed more value on the lives of people not loyal to her cause than the lives of the soldiers who actually follow her voluntarily. Yes those soldiers were prepared to die when they joined her, but would really follow a leader who puts more value in the lives of the people trying to kill than your own?

Not really. Her soldiers are already prepared to fight the cause of their own will. They chose to fight for her in the end and are prepared to lay down their lives. Trying to nitpick and saying that she's a horrible person because she let the men die is rather silly, given how you're trying to condemn Edelgard for this.

[Water Mage]

13 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

 

Not really. Her soldiers are already prepared to fight the cause of their own will. They chose to fight for her in the end and are prepared to lay down their lives. Trying to nitpick and saying that she's a horrible person because she let the men die is rather silly, given how you're trying to condemn Edelgard for this.

I never said she’s a horrible person, only that she’s not a very good leader. But fact is that Edelgard is still placing more value on the lives of the students. Students who are armed, that killed before, are ready to kill again, are defending the church and that are training to become soldiers. They’re not innocent lambs. They’re soldiers. The fact that Edelgard is willing to recruit them to her cause shows she considers them soldiers. Edelgard would have been completely justified in killing them. But she places more value in the lives of people not loyal to her than her own loyal soldiers. That’s poor leadership.

And the fact that the students don’t die in the chapter battle in the Holy Tomb mean nothing, because no one dies in Part 1 even on Classic. When students fall in classic mode during the Holy Tomb do they retreat and can be used again or just retreat and can’t be used again? 

Edited January 17, 2020 by Water Mage

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

6 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Then it's within the Empire's rights to launch an attack toward someone that is overall helping the Church and Kingdom that they are warring against in that regard. The Houses are within rights to help the Empire, and they want to, but they cannot because Claude is preventing it, having incited internal conflicts himself.

That a civil conflict exists between Houses of the Alliance, does not entitle Edelgard to invade. It's up to Houses Gloucester and Ordelia to handle their own policy - if the only way they can aid the Empire is by fighting Claude, then it's in their hands to declare war, not Edelgard's. They're part of the Alliance, she's an external aggressor.

11 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Once again, you seem to be ignoring how Claude literally admitted that he intended to be Fodlan's supreme ruler himself. That's not some joke. Edelgard did attack, but Claude was already taking a stance against the Empire. Only difference is that Claude is willing to leave Fodlan and no longer interfere with Edelgard and be in her debt, hence why she doesn't need to kill him. 

I never denied this - again, stating a desire to rule a whole continent is not an act of war. "Takin a stance against the Empire" is not war, real-world countries do that all the time. If Claude acted on those intentions, by invading the Empire, then Edelgard would be justified in retaliating against them. But then again, by your logic, Claude would be justified in such an invasion, because Edelgard has already expressed her own desire to rule all of Fódlan. I honestly feel like you're employing different moral standards to different characters, and that is no bueno.

15 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Making it no different from Edelgard using the citizens as meat shields to slow down Claude in VW. Claude is basically endangering civilian lives. Edelgard will push through, same as Claude. Does not change that Claude still endangered their lives.

I'll concede that these actions are morally equivalent. Claude probably should have let the civilians of Derdrieu leave. None of that justifies Edelgard's own actions, though.

[NekoKnight]

58 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I didn't know that no one can die in that chapter, and if it is the case then I call bullshit (on the game, not you, because the game probably does do it and that makes me respect it less). Because Edelgard clearly tells her soldiers to kill anyone who resists. That would necessitate a secret meeting before hand where she goes "I'm going to tell you to kill anyone who resists, but I'm not being serious okay. Don't really kill them. I know they're armed and they're definitely going to be killing you because they think their lives are at stake because I've clearly vocally told you to kill them, but hold back. I'll be really disappointed if any of them actually die. In fact no matter how many of us die, you are absolutely forbidden from killing them. Everyone understand? Even you too crazy demonic beasts that I've managed to smuggle into a school?"

Yep. This "Edelgard told her soldiers not to kill anyone" narrative is nonsense. It's Corrin's stun sword levels of silly. I'm sure Metodey and all of her men present there were happy to be slaughtered, knowing that it meant Edelgard's favorite classmates were spared.

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said:

And she tells any BE student that faces her that she had no intention on actually killing you. Did you not read the dialogue there? The kill threat was a bluff. Given that she arrives with her soldiers, it's kind of clear that she did make commands earlier not to kill anyone. The Demonic Beasts are also under Edelgard's control, since Agarthans made them to follow orders. 

In the end, Edelgard stuck true to her words. None of them would kill anyone, even if they resist. Edelgard proved to have never actually intended to have any of them die. 

You're the one that doesn't seem to be listening to me (because I have already referenced her combat dialogue that you've referred to twice now). Perhaps I should frame my opinion in another way. This might be hard for you to understand because you have such a black and white view of this game, but my problem here isn't with the nature of Edelgard's character. It's the fact that fighting her before making the choice to go down that route on not afterwards is fragrantly ridiculous as it leads to that exchange I made above. That Edelgard would allow her friends to walk into a trap she intends to spring. That she would make a declaration to kill them. That she would have her armed soldiers not in fact do that. That her soldiers would literally continue to follow that order while they themselves are being slaughtered. That Edelgard herself would openly admit that it is not true, and then immediately attack. That mindless demonic beasts that can even attack units its allied with would also follow through on this order. All of it is monstrously contrived and bending over backwards to accomplish something that is way more easily done and way more sensible by merely putting the decision to join Edelgard before the chapter starts, rather than after she has launched an unprovoked attack and made death threats. Edelgard is a person who will avoid killing if possible, but will not hesitate to kill if she deems it necessary (it's when and where she deems necessity people have a problem with), so putting both her and Byleth in this position leads to overwhelming level of stupidity from the narrative. It all makes the stance that Edelgard's massive respect for human life ring hollow when it takes place on a battlefield of her making that's strewn with an unnecessary amount of corpses.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Jotari

[Axel987]

Just now, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

That a civil conflict exists between Houses of the Alliance, does not entitle Edelgard to invade. It's up to Houses Gloucester and Ordelia to handle their own policy - if the only way they can aid the Empire is by fighting Claude, then it's in their hands to declare war, not Edelgard's. They're part of the Alliance, she's an external aggressor.

I never denied this - again, stating a desire to rule a whole continent is not an act of war. "Takin a stance against the Empire" is not war, real-world countries do that all the time. If Claude acted on those intentions, by invading the Empire, then Edelgard would be justified in retaliating against them. But then again, by your logic, Claude would be justified in such an invasion, because Edelgard has already expressed her own desire to rule all of Fódlan. I honestly feel like you're employing different moral standards to different characters, and that is no bueno.

I'll concede that these actions are morally equivalent. Claude probably should have let the civilians of Derdrieu leave. None of that justifies Edelgard's own actions, though.

Probably a good thing to note that Claude actively blockades the links between the naval port and the city, preventing people from getting into or leaving the city from that direction. In Azure Moon, the imperial army and their reinforcements come in -through- the city into the naval port, implying they attacked from a completely different direction in that route, hence why Claude evacuated the citizens into the ships in the naval port.

Also worth noting that at no point in CF is it mentioned that there were any civilians in the vicinity of the area of combat. If there were, they would be mentioned considering they are -literally- every time it's relevant.

[omegaxis1]

1 hour ago, Water Mage said:

And the fact that the students don’t die in the chapter battle in the Holy Tomb mean nothing, because no one dies in Part 1 even on Classic. When students fall in classic mode during the Holy Tomb do they retreat and can be used again or just retreat and can’t be used again? 

You seem to also be ignoring something. That despite what happens in the Holy Tomb, any BE student that falls in part 1 is stated to have joined Edelgard in part 2, as I mentioned the Edelgard quote. Though you don't fight them in the story, it still means that the others do join her.

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

You're the one that doesn't seem to be listening to me (because I have already referenced her combat dialogue that you've referred to twice now). Perhaps I should frame my opinion in another way. This might be hard for you to understand because you have such a black and white view of this game, but my problem here isn't with the nature of Edelgard's character. It's the fact that fighting her before making the choice to go down that route on not afterwards is fragrantly ridiculous as it leads to that exchange I made above. That Edelgard would allow her friends to walk into a trap she intends to spring. That she would make a declaration to kill them. That she would have her armed soldiers not in fact do that. That her soldiers would literally continue to follow that order while they themselves are being slaughtered. That Edelgard herself would openly admit that it is not true, and then immediately attack. That mindless demonic beasts that can even attack units its allied with would also follow through on this order. All of it is monstrously contrived and bending over backwards to accomplish something that is way more easily done and way more sensible by merely putting the decision to join Edelgard before the chapter starts, rather than after she has launched an unprovoked attack and made death threats. Edelgard is a person who will avoid killing if possible, but will not hesitate to kill if she deems it necessary (it's when and where she deems necessity people have a problem with), so putting both her and Byleth in this position leads to overwhelming level of stupidity from the narrative. It all makes the stance that Edelgard's massive respect for human life ring hollow when it takes place on a battlefield of her making that's strewn with an unnecessary amount of corpses.

Basically, you dislike how the game frames and presents it, as it feels like a plot hole, overall. Yes? 

I'm not gonna argue in regards to that, as 3H has PLENTY of plot holes and issues that are problematic and should have had things done better. 

1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

That a civil conflict exists between Houses of the Alliance, does not entitle Edelgard to invade. It's up to Houses Gloucester and Ordelia to handle their own policy - if the only way they can aid the Empire is by fighting Claude, then it's in their hands to declare war, not Edelgard's. They're part of the Alliance, she's an external aggressor.

And Edelgard is out of time. If she doesn't make a move and has to wait for Claude to attack, knowing the type of guy he is, Edelgard isn't dumb enough to let him get the better of her. He took a stance against her and was preventing aid from being sent, and ultimately, he was intending on his own invasion. which Hubert and Edelgard suspected as much. They clearly know that Claude is feigning neutrality.

1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I never denied this - again, stating a desire to rule a whole continent is not an act of war. "Takin a stance against the Empire" is not war, real-world countries do that all the time. If Claude acted on those intentions, by invading the Empire, then Edelgard would be justified in retaliating against them. But then again, by your logic, Claude would be justified in such an invasion, because Edelgard has already expressed her own desire to rule all of Fódlan. I honestly feel like you're employing different moral standards to different characters, and that is no bueno.

Dude, stating that he intended to rule himself is very much proving that he was going to launch his own invasion. In the end, Edelgard launching an attack to remove Claude from power and prevent him from meddling, with the case of her even stating that the Empire won't be occupying Alliance, it's not exactly the type of invasion that you are going by any more. Claude's already made a stance and is going against the Empire, so Edelgard has every reason to launch an attack against him. 

This ain't about moral standards so much as it's the case of how if Edelgard didn't act, Claude's own attack that has been proven would mean that Edelgard prevented the war from getting even worse. 

1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I'll concede that these actions are morally equivalent. Claude probably should have let the civilians of Derdrieu leave. None of that justifies Edelgard's own actions, though.

Well if Edelgard did nothing, and Claude tried to flank, I can tell you that the war would definitely have become much bloodier, that's for sure. Edelgard ultimately made a move to make a quick, surgical strike to prevent the bodies from piling up even further.

58 minutes ago, Axel987 said:

Also worth noting that at no point in CF is it mentioned that there were any civilians in the vicinity of the area of combat. If there were, they would be mentioned considering they are -literally- every time it's relevant.

A villager literally pleads to Edelgard not to harm the city. And literally mentioned that people aren't able to leave the city by Hubert. Meaning that yes, there are civilians in Derdriu and are in danger. 

Edited January 17, 2020 by omegaxis1

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

32 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Dude, stating that he intended to rule himself is very much proving that he was going to launch his own invasion. In the end, Edelgard launching an attack to remove Claude from power and prevent him from meddling, with the case of her even stating that the Empire won't be occupying Alliance, it's not exactly the type of invasion that you are going by any more. Claude's already made a stance and is going against the Empire, so Edelgard has every reason to launch an attack against him. 

This ain't about moral standards so much as it's the case of how if Edelgard didn't act, Claude's own attack that has been proven would mean that Edelgard prevented the war from getting even worse. 

Edelgard has no evidence that Claude was planning an attack against the Empire. Claude's "crucial line" about wanting to unite all of Fódlan himself, was delivered after Edelgard had already beaten him. Therefore, it cannot serve as a precursor to invasion. "Claude's own attack" has not been proven, it is speculation on your part. The only attack that is proven is Edelgard's. So, to ask it bluntly - would Claude have been justified in invading the Empire, on the basis that Edelgard's plan to unite Fódlan meant that she would eventually invade the Alliance?

Also the Empire is in control of the Alliance after Claude flees. Arundel himself, the second-strongest person in the Empire, goes there to "collect" their Hero's Relics - presumably, with other members of Those Who Slither. Edelgard may not have installed a traditional occupying force, but she expects the allegiance of everyone there. It was a conquest, through and through.

[omegaxis1]

26 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Edelgard has no evidence that Claude was planning an attack against the Empire. Claude's "crucial line" about wanting to unite all of Fódlan himself, was delivered after Edelgard had already beaten him. Therefore, it cannot serve as a precursor to invasion. "Claude's own attack" has not been proven, it is speculation on your part. The only attack that is proven is Edelgard's. So, to ask it bluntly - would Claude have been justified in invading the Empire, on the basis that Edelgard's plan to unite Fódlan meant that she would eventually invade the Alliance?

Also the Empire is in control of the Alliance after Claude flees. Arundel himself, the second-strongest person in the Empire, goes there to "collect" their Hero's Relics - presumably, with other members of Those Who Slither. Edelgard may not have installed a traditional occupying force, but she expects the allegiance of everyone there. It was a conquest, through and through.

Um, Claude bringing in Almyran reinforcements is PROOF. Given the literal history of Almrya with Fodlan, that's basically testament enough. Not to mention Hubert's statement that the shutdown of Derdriu is proof that Claude is planning on launching his own attack as well. Also, it's even more pronounced on the JP version where had he won, he would have continued on.

I think you're trying to exempt Claude from everything simply by pointing out that Edelgard made an attack and overall circling around the point. Cause keep in mind that Edelgard had not touched the Alliance at all during the five year period. She's only fighting the Kingdom because Dimitri dragged the nation to the war in his goal for vengeance. Would Edelgard have attacked had Claude not been interfering? Nope. She's attacking because Claude's been interfering in matters between the Empire and the other lords. 

And yes, the Alliance did merge with the Empire after, since Claude literally did set things up that the Alliance is to join the Empire should something happen to him, whether he be dead or exiled. Edelgard also deduced that that might have been what Claude had also in mind should he be killed.

And though Arundel goes in, keep in mind that in CF, Edelgard destroys any Agarthan bases covertly, proven by the Jeritza auxiliary mission. The one that has been there and maintaining order in the Alliance is actually Count Bergliez, not Arundel. 

[SigurdVII]

9 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Um, Claude bringing in Almyran reinforcements is PROOF. Given the literal history of Almrya with Fodlan, that's basically testament enough. Not to mention Hubert's statement that the shutdown of Derdriu is proof that Claude is planning on launching his own attack as well. Also, it's even more pronounced on the JP version where had he won, he would have continued on.

I think you're trying to exempt Claude from everything simply by pointing out that Edelgard made an attack and overall circling around the point. Cause keep in mind that Edelgard had not touched the Alliance at all during the five year period. She's only fighting the Kingdom because Dimitri dragged the nation to the war in his goal for vengeance. Would Edelgard have attacked had Claude not been interfering? Nope. She's attacking because Claude's been interfering in matters between the Empire and the other lords. 

And yes, the Alliance did merge with the Empire after, since Claude literally did set things up that the Alliance is to join the Empire should something happen to him, whether he be dead or exiled. Edelgard also deduced that that might have been what Claude had also in mind should he be killed.

And though Arundel goes in, keep in mind that in CF, Edelgard destroys any Agarthan bases covertly, proven by the Jeritza auxiliary mission. The one that has been there and maintaining order in the Alliance is actually Count Bergliez, not Arundel. 

I don't know how it would be a debate. Claude already proved he's not a neutral party by doing his best to orchestrate conflicts between the Alliance lords in order to keep his grip on power. The very fact he shut down Derdriu and brought in Almyrans to back him up despite the history between them and the Alliance is proof enough. The game even describes him at several points as maintaining a "facade of neutrality" and being the leader of the anti-Imperial faction of the Alliance alongside Holst and Judith. 

Either way, had Claude not already done everything he could to interfere with Edelgard, there wouldn't have been a fight between them. But he had his own goals that required him to defeat her, hence why he admits that he wanted to become Fodlan's supreme king if he hadn't lost. I don't know how people forget that in Fodlan Claude is not royalty, he's just a sovereign duke. To become a ruler of Fodlan would mean he's taking for himself, which means he was going to take on Edelgard eventually.

And as far as the Alliance, Claude gives it free and clear. All Edelgard originally wanted was for the three houses that pledged themselves to her (Cordelia, Gloucester, Edmund) to join her cause. Claude is dead set on uniting Fodlan in every route, hence his handing it over free and clear to whoever the winner is if he thinks he can work with them. 

[SpiceMan]

17 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Um, Claude bringing in Almyran reinforcements is PROOF. Given the literal history of Almrya with Fodlan, that's basically testament enough.

How is that proof? Do you have anyway to prove that Almyran reinforcements were not just for defense against the eventual attack from the empire Claude feared. The alliance alone is no match for the empires strength and Claude realizes this and brings in reinforcements to defend. All you are doing is speculating that Claude might is planning an attack. All Hubert is doing is speculating that Claude might be planning an attack. None of that is proof. You know who did attack though? Edelgard. No matter what Claude might have done, he didn't. 

And I assume by the history of Almyra with Fodlan you mean Almyra constantly attack the Alliance right. And that is somehow proof that Claude is conspiring with them to attack the Empire. I think you're grasping. Also a major point here, Edelgard and Hubert didn't know he had summoned Almyran reinforcements, so you saying that was obviously a sign of the alliances approaching attack doesn't mean anything towards justifying Edelgard's invasion because she invaded even without that knowledge. 

[omegaxis1]

Just now, SpiceMan said:

How is that proof? Do you have anyway to prove that Almyran reinforcements were not just for defense against the eventual attack from the empire Claude feared. The alliance alone is no match for the empires strength and Claude realizes this and brings in reinforcements to defend. All you are doing is speculating that Claude might is planning an attack. All Hubert is doing is speculating that Claude might be planning an attack. None of that is proof. You know who did attack though? Edelgard. No matter what Claude might have done, he didn't. 

And I assume by the history of Almyra with Fodlan you mean Almyra constantly attack the Alliance right. And that is somehow proof that Claude is conspiring with them to attack the Empire. I think you're grasping. Also a major point here, Edelgard and Hubert didn't know he had summoned Almyran reinforcements, so you saying that was obviously a sign of the alliances approaching attack doesn't mean anything towards justifying Edelgard's invasion because she invaded even without that knowledge. 

You do recall how Almyrans have a history of actively invading Fodlan, right? And it's done for the joy of combat itself, so they invade for fun. 

And no, it's not just the Alliance's problem. Keep in mind that the Empire helped the Alliance during the first Almyran invasion, and ALL THREE nations of Fodlan contributed to creating Fodlan's Locket.

Here's are the textbooks:

Quote

- Imperial Year 961: The Almyran Invasion -
The great eastern nation of Almyra crossed Fódlan's Throat and invaded Alliance territory. The Empire dispatched troops in order to help conquer this threat, and the attackers were just barely driven off.

 - Imperial Year 1101: The Construction of Fódlan's Locket -
To defend against future Almyran invasions, the Alliance, the Kingdom, and the Empire joined their efforts and resources to construct the indomitable fort known as Fódlan's Locket.

So if Almyra is there as reinforcements, that ain't just gonna fly and be accepted under normal circumstances, as Fodlan is still a xenophobic continent. So yes, Almyrans being in there is already proof enough.

[Hardric62]

1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said:

You do recall how Almyrans have a history of actively invading Fodlan, right? And it's done for the joy of combat itself, so they invade for fun. 

And no, it's not just the Alliance's problem. Keep in mind that the Empire helped the Alliance during the first Almyran invasion, and ALL THREE nations of Fodlan contributed to creating Fodlan's Locket.

Here's are the textbooks:

So if Almyra is there as reinforcements, that ain't just gonna fly and be accepted under normal circumstances, as Fodlan is still a xenophobic continent. So yes, Almyrans being in there is already proof enough.

 

And... they were not there until Chapter 14, before... So no proof. And it is actually an instance of 'tell not show' here. The narrative of the switch to the War Phase speaks of feigned neutrality for Claude and his faction of the Alliance, but some other elements would have been nice. Reports from spies saying that Claude looks like he is discussing opening his borders to a Church army to flank the Empire, for instance... Or say that the pro-Empire called on the Empire to topple Claude and his faction for a casus belli so they can pledge their full support behind Edelgard to break the stalemate with the Kingdom and the Church.

[Icelerate]

4 hours ago, NekoKnight said:

Yep. This "Edelgard told her soldiers not to kill anyone" narrative is nonsense. It's Corrin's stun sword levels of silly. I'm sure Metodey and all of her men present there were happy to be slaughtered, knowing that it meant Edelgard's favorite classmates were spared.

Metodey seemed like he was there for the purposes of killing so I'd like to know how Edelgard managed to reign in him as well as all those beasts from killing anyone. But Edelgard>>>Corrin as a character, would you agree? 

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

1 hour ago, SigurdVII said:

2 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

Um, Claude bringing in Almyran reinforcements is PROOF. Given the literal history of Almrya with Fodlan, that's basically testament enough. Not to mention Hubert's statement that the shutdown of Derdriu is proof that Claude is planning on launching his own attack as well. Also, it's even more pronounced on the JP version where had he won, he would have continued on.

I think you're trying to exempt Claude from everything simply by pointing out that Edelgard made an attack and overall circling around the point. Cause keep in mind that Edelgard had not touched the Alliance at all during the five year period. She's only fighting the Kingdom because Dimitri dragged the nation to the war in his goal for vengeance. Would Edelgard have attacked had Claude not been interfering? Nope. She's attacking because Claude's been interfering in matters between the Empire and the other lords. 

And yes, the Alliance did merge with the Empire after, since Claude literally did set things up that the Alliance is to join the Empire should something happen to him, whether he be dead or exiled. Edelgard also deduced that that might have been what Claude had also in mind should he be killed.

And though Arundel goes in, keep in mind that in CF, Edelgard destroys any Agarthan bases covertly, proven by the Jeritza auxiliary mission. The one that has been there and maintaining order in the Alliance is actually Count Bergliez, not Arundel. 

I don't know how it would be a debate. Claude already proved he's not a neutral party by doing his best to orchestrate conflicts between the Alliance lords in order to keep his grip on power. The very fact he shut down Derdriu and brought in Almyrans to back him up despite the history between them and the Alliance is proof enough. The game even describes him at several points as maintaining a "facade of neutrality" and being the leader of the anti-Imperial faction of the Alliance alongside Holst and Judith. 

Okay, Claude is not neutral. He is anti-Empire. Fair? That doesn't mean that the Empire is justified in invading the Alliance. Neighboring sovereign nations don't need to be "best friends", or inherently supportive of each other. They just need to be non-belligerent. Claude did not make a military move against the Empire, nor did anyone in the Alliance. The Empire made the first move against the Alliance.

2 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

Um, Claude bringing in Almyran reinforcements is PROOF. Given the literal history of Almrya with Fodlan, that's basically testament enough. Not to mention Hubert's statement that the shutdown of Derdriu is proof that Claude is planning on launching his own attack as well. Also, it's even more pronounced on the JP version where had he won, he would have continued on.

Claude's attack is literally against an invading nation at the doors of his capital. It's a defensive move, intended to drive the invading Empire out (the Almyrans are there with Claude's blessing, and unlike the Empire, they have no intent of taking over the Alliance). It's his duty to defend the Alliance, and the domain of House Riegan, against those who would seek to conquer it. This is the equivalent of blaming a man who is getting mugged for punching his attacker. I don't get how you can see Claude as in the wrong here.

And you didn't answer my key question - would it have been justified for Claude to invade the Empire, on the basis that Edelgard expressed a desire to unite all of Fódlan?

2 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

I think you're trying to exempt Claude from everything simply by pointing out that Edelgard made an attack and overall circling around the point. Cause keep in mind that Edelgard had not touched the Alliance at all during the five year period. She's only fighting the Kingdom because Dimitri dragged the nation to the war in his goal for vengeance. Would Edelgard have attacked had Claude not been interfering? Nope. She's attacking because Claude's been interfering in matters between the Empire and the other lords. 

Edelgard "not fighting the Alliance for five years" isn't out of the goodness of her heart, it's because she doesn't believe she can handle a two-front war - at least, not until the Professor returns. Moreover, Claude, as the leader of the Alliance, has a decisive role in determining the foreign policy of the Alliance, including that of its Lords. If Claude literally ordered a hit against an Empire negotiator that went to speak with Lord Gloucester, you may have a point. But we have no reason to believe that this happened. Frankly, I'm more convinced that Lords Gloucester and Ordelia made a show of saying "we want to support the Empire, but Claude won't let us - that way, they remain in the Empire's good graces, without having to actually give up any funds or resources. But that last bit is speculation on my part.

Don't redice the Kingdom's participation in the War merely to a pursuit of vengeance. Dimitri, and most in the Kingdom, support the Church and believe its presence is a good thing. So it's natural that he would come to Rhea's aid against an aggressor.

[omegaxis1]

1 minute ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Okay, Claude is not neutral. He is anti-Empire. Fair? That doesn't mean that the Empire is justified in invading the Alliance. Neighboring sovereign nations don't need to be "best friends", or inherently supportive of each other. They just need to be non-belligerent. Claude did not make a military move against the Empire, nor did anyone in the Alliance. The Empire made the first move against the Alliance.

Taking a stance in the war, and the Alliance not being a truly unified nation, means that Edelgard is able to launch an attack against Claude himself. Because once again, the Alliance is not some unified nation. Every lord have their rights, but Claude is interfering in the rights of the other lords. So Edelgard is removing Claude from the equation. Had he allied with her in the first place, or not meddled into the affairs, the attack wouldn't have come. But Claude wanted to rule Fodlan himself.

3 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Claude's attack is literally against an invading nation at the doors of his capital. It's a defensive move, intended to drive the invading Empire out (the Almyrans are there with Claude's blessing, and unlike the Empire, they have no intent of taking over the Alliance). It's his duty to defend the Alliance, and the domain of House Riegan, against those who would seek to conquer it. This is the equivalent of blaming a man who is getting mugged for punching his attacker. I don't get how you can see Claude as in the wrong here.

And you didn't answer my key question - would it have been justified for Claude to invade the Empire, on the basis that Edelgard expressed a desire to unite all of Fódlan?

Almyrans are not known to be friendlies in Fodlan. They literally invade Fodlan for FUN. The entire continent literally worked to create Fodlan's Locket to keep them out for a reason. The Almyran reinforcements and Claude's admission make it ABUNDANTLY clear that he intended to launch his own invasion. It's not something you can say, "Oh, the Almyrans were purely for defense." Yeah, that's not how it works. Not with Almyrans, whom I repeat, invades Fodlan for shits and giggles.

6 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Edelgard "not fighting the Alliance for five years" isn't out of the goodness of her heart, it's because she doesn't believe she can handle a two-front war - at least, not until the Professor returns. Moreover, Claude, as the leader of the Alliance, has a decisive role in determining the foreign policy of the Alliance, including that of its Lords. If Claude literally ordered a hit against an Empire negotiator that went to speak with Lord Gloucester, you may have a point. But we have no reason to believe that this happened. Frankly, I'm more convinced that Lords Gloucester and Ordelia made a show of saying "we want to support the Empire, but Claude won't let us - that way, they remain in the Empire's good graces, without having to actually give up any funds or resources. But that last bit is speculation on my part.

Don't redice the Kingdom's participation in the War merely to a pursuit of vengeance. Dimitri, and most in the Kingdom, support the Church and believe its presence is a good thing. So it's natural that he would come to Rhea's aid against an aggressor.

The Empire could literally strongarm Count Gloucester like it did in the other routes, threatening invasion if they do not work with them, which is mentioned in the other routes. But Edelgard doesn't do anything of the sort in Crimson Flower, despite how she is capable of doing just that. 

As for the Kingdom, Dimitri literally admits it. Several times. He literally tells Rhea that there's only one person he wants to kill. He fights against Edelgard to kill her for Duscur that is pointed out even by Sylvain if recruited, or mentioned by Sylvain if unrecruited in the battle. Or how Dimitri's last words to Dedue or Edelgard are, again, about revenge. 

Not to mention, Dimitri literally tried to deceive Rhea into making her think that she was the flank, when he intended on making her and the Empire fight first so that he could flank. This was ruined before it happened cause the rain messed up his plans. 

So yeah, nothing about honoring the Church or being their allies. He dragged his nation to war for the sole purpose of revenge. No different from Rhea creating the Church of Seiros and helping in the creation of the Empire, so that she can get revenge on Nemesis.