Three Houses does a lot tell and not show

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said:

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.

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.

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.

First paragraph is just Imperial apologetics. You're acting like Edelgard is a force of nature, whom Claude foolishly stood against, when the reality is that Edelgard consciously chose to invade the Alliance. Did she have a motivation, of course. But not a justification. You don't "remove" someone else from the equation because they won't submit to you. That's autocratic thinking.

Second paragraph is just racism. Seriously, replay Verdant Wind. In the Claude arc of Crimson Flower, it's not the Almyrans who are some barbaric invading force. It's the Empire. Claude and the anti-Empire Alliance Lords shouldn't favor rule by Edelgard, over assistance from Almyrans, merely because they're the same race. See also: "Blood Runs Red", Path of Radiance.

Third paragraph - okay, so Edelgard didn't do a bad thing on this route that she did on other routes. Get this girl a fucking medal.

Honestly the Dimitri stuff is ancilliary, so I'll relent on that.

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

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?

...

[omegaxis1]

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

First paragraph is just Imperial apologetics. You're acting like Edelgard is a force of nature, whom Claude foolishly stood against, when the reality is that Edelgard consciously chose to invade the Alliance. Did she have a motivation, of course. But not a justification. You don't "remove" someone else from the equation because they won't submit to you. That's autocratic thinking.

Second paragraph is just racism. Seriously, replay Verdant Wind. In the Claude arc of Crimson Flower, it's not the Almyrans who are some barbaric invading force. It's the Empire. Claude and the anti-Empire Alliance Lords shouldn't favor rule by Edelgard, over assistance from Almyrans, merely because they're the same race. See also: "Blood Runs Red", Path of Radiance.

Third paragraph - okay, so Edelgard didn't do a bad thing on this route that she did on other routes. Get this girl a fucking medal.

Honestly the Dimitri stuff is ancilliary, so I'll relent on that.

...

Alright, first I'll answer your question that you've repeated. First off, Cladue was always intending on trying to unite Fodlan from the getgo. He admitted himself in VW, even. He also coveted and had originally sought the Sword of the Creator, a weapon known to wipe out entire armies, more powerful than any other Relic, and can cleave mountains. Since he learned he couldn't use it himself, he instead wanted to use Byleth overall to try and get his ambitions to work. Simply cause Edelgard beat him to the punch in starting the war does not, in any way, mean that Claude is any different. He just doesn't act first. Remember that Claude does not control a unified nation. He's just a sovereign duke, not some king. 

Had Edelgard not made the attack and invested solely in facing the Kingdom, Claude would make an attack on the Empire and Kingdom himself so that he could rule Fodlan. So And Claude wouldn't be attacking cause Edelgard is trying to unify Fodlan. He's trying to attack cause he wants to rule Fodlan from the getgo.

Now for your argument, once again, I remind you that the Alliance is not some unified nation. The other lords have every right to join to aid the Empire. There's already been proof of the Alliance major lords acting on their own, without the need for consent. But here, Claude is directly meddling into the affairs and preventing any aid from being sent out. In other words, he is restricting what is in their right to do. The narration even points out that it's a feigned neutrality, and Hubert points out that Claude is planning to make his own attack. And the third part, yeah. She could have, but doesn't. Does not change that Edelgard's been letting them settle things diplomatically for years now, but Claude was literally preventing diplomacy from working out. Cause he wants to become the supreme king of Fodlan himself. That's the fact of the matter that you're trying to dance around. In the end, does not matter how much you wanna absolve Claude of his actions to try and condemn Edelgard. Claude was trying to get in Edelgard's way cause he wanted to be on top. Edelgard took him out of the equation because she was aware of his intentions. It's not hard to see that Edelgard and Claude get that they are similar in multiple ways.

 

[NekoKnight]

4 hours ago, Icelerate said:

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? 

Well obviously she's better than Corrin.

Metoedy sure is a nonsensical pick for a subordinate for Edelgard though. All of the other ones we see, like Randolph and Ladislava are professional and honorable types but Metoedy is an unabashed sadist. Sure, maybe he's the right tool for their current job but goodness, no, I don't see that psychopath being a part of Edelgard's "bluff" to not kill students.

 

[Jotari]

8 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

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. 

Not a plot hole, because it is theoretically possible. But just really inane writing. Further exasperated when you play a Paralogue in that level that shows Rhea had access to some random spirit soldiers and golems. If I were to take that scene, it would go down with Edelgard showing up with her soldiers, Rhea activating the tombs protection mechanisms. The golems being able to momentarily subdue Edelgard, then Byleth being given the choice to save or execute her. Regardless what he chooses, Edelgard's demonic beasts appear on the scene to counter the golems and the chapter battle begins, with Byleth and the black eagles joining either Rhea or Edelgard depending on the choice. This would have the added effect of actually acknowledging that Edelgard is using demonic beasts and can lead to a scene before the next chapter where Byleth can express disapproval of them that causes Edelgard to stop their production. Instead of the way it is now where Edelgard just casually pretends her usage of people who underwent the same type of horrific experiments she suffered just never happened (maybe there is some random exploration dialogue that attests to this, but it needs to be an actual present plot point in the story, especially given how the very presence of the demonic beasts is what lets her capture Rhea in all the other routes).

57 minutes ago, NekoKnight said:

Well obviously she's better than Corrin.

Metoedy sure is a nonsensical pick for a subordinate for Edelgard though. All of the other ones we see, like Randolph and Ladislava are professional and honorable types but Metoedy is an unabashed sadist. Sure, maybe he's the right tool for their current job but goodness, no, I don't see that psychopath being a part of Edelgard's "bluff" to not kill students.

 

Metoedy is either the best tool for the current job, as he's a fantastic actor and had no intention of killing anyone (and then dies for his art), or he's the absolute worst tool for the job as Edelgard doesn't want anyone to die and he's clearly murder happy and Edelgard really needs to recheck the CVs.

I actually thought Metoedy and Randolph were the same character for a while and was thrilled when he acted like a jackass to me as an enemy but was then super respectful and polite as an ally. I thought it was brilliant deconstruction of the random asshole general, showing that when you're not fighting to the death, these characters are real people. But then it turns out Metoedy and Randolph aren't the same guy, Randolph does have the same polite characterisation when fought as an enemy and Metoedy is just a random asshole general.

4 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

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.

Aside from being a rather racist way of looking at it, the exact intentions of the Almyrans are rather irrelevant for the purpose of this conversation, as Edelgard and Hubert had no idea that Claude was collaborating with them. If we're talking about whether the attack was justified, we need only examine the actions at the time the attack began. It would be like me committing premeditated murder on my neighbor, and then after my neighbors dead it turns out they're a serial killer. Them being a serial killer in no way makes my murder justified because I had no idea they were at the time.

(for any shady government officials reading this, I will officially state I have absolutely no plans to kill any of my neighbors, and they're probably not serial killers)

Edited January 18, 2020 by Jotari

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

4 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

Alright, first I'll answer your question that you've repeated. First off, Cladue was always intending on trying to unite Fodlan from the getgo. He admitted himself in VW, even. He also coveted and had originally sought the Sword of the Creator, a weapon known to wipe out entire armies, more powerful than any other Relic, and can cleave mountains. Since he learned he couldn't use it himself, he instead wanted to use Byleth overall to try and get his ambitions to work. Simply cause Edelgard beat him to the punch in starting the war does not, in any way, mean that Claude is any different. He just doesn't act first. Remember that Claude does not control a unified nation. He's just a sovereign duke, not some king. 

Had Edelgard not made the attack and invested solely in facing the Kingdom, Claude would make an attack on the Empire and Kingdom himself so that he could rule Fodlan. So And Claude wouldn't be attacking cause Edelgard is trying to unify Fodlan. He's trying to attack cause he wants to rule Fodlan from the getgo.

Now for your argument, once again, I remind you that the Alliance is not some unified nation. The other lords have every right to join to aid the Empire. There's already been proof of the Alliance major lords acting on their own, without the need for consent. But here, Claude is directly meddling into the affairs and preventing any aid from being sent out. In other words, he is restricting what is in their right to do. The narration even points out that it's a feigned neutrality, and Hubert points out that Claude is planning to make his own attack. And the third part, yeah. She could have, but doesn't. Does not change that Edelgard's been letting them settle things diplomatically for years now, but Claude was literally preventing diplomacy from working out. Cause he wants to become the supreme king of Fodlan himself. That's the fact of the matter that you're trying to dance around. In the end, does not matter how much you wanna absolve Claude of his actions to try and condemn Edelgard. Claude was trying to get in Edelgard's way cause he wanted to be on top. Edelgard took him out of the equation because she was aware of his intentions. It's not hard to see that Edelgard and Claude get that they are similar in multiple ways.

 

I appreciate you addressing my question. I would assert, however, that you didn't answer it. You acknowledge that Claude could have invaded the Empire, and that he has his own ambitions - sure. The thing is, I'm not attempting to ascertain whether their beliefs and goals were right or wrong - but, rather, whether their actions were.

Claude intervened within the Alliance to prevent Houses Gloucester and Ordelia from aiding the Empire, sure. It's unclear what degree of latitude is afforded to the "head of the Alliance", but I would assert that the individual Lords aren't completely sovereign - if they were, the Alliance (and, notably, Alliance troops such as what we fight) would be fuctionally non-existent. Moreover, it's not exactly clear what form that intervention took, and whether it was outside Claude's rights.

Even assuming the actions committed were outside Claude's rights, it's Houses Gloucester and Ordelia (as members of the Alliance) who have a legitimate claim against Claude, not the Empire (not a member of the Alliance). The Empire is not "owed" anything by any Alliance house, and it has no right to invade when it was never asked to - not even by those Alliance Houses friendly to the Empire. That (voluntary, non-obligatory) aid was witheld is merely a pretext that Edelgard uses for invading, and ensuring that she will have dominion over the Alliance.

Let's suppose, though, for a moment, that Edelgard is justified. That Claude's intervention was enough to justify an invasion. Let's look at things from Claude's point of view. The Empire is seeking aid from several houses of the Alliance. This request has created bitter division amongst the Alliance Houses, and threatens Claude's own ability to lead them. As such, he decides to invade the Empire, to prevent them from doing harm to the Alliance. If Edelgard was justified, then so too is Claude.

But, this produces a contradiction. If Claude is justified in invading the Empire, then Edelgard, in wishing to unite Fódlan and seeking aid from Alliance Houses, must be in the wrong. And if Edelgard is wrong to launch her invasion, given the previously-stated moral equivocation, then so too is Claude. Therefore, I would assert that neither one of them would be morally justified in carrying out an invasion of the other's country.

Do they both want to? Yes. The difference is, Edelgard actually follows through with it. We do not judge the murderer, and the person who only thinks of committing murder, as morally the same. While Claude may have been wrong in interefering with Alliance Lords, I would assert that Edelgard committed a far greater wrong in invading the Alliance - one that she had no legitimate moral justification for.

Does Edelgard have tactical justifications, absolutely. Could she have been more brutal about it, of course. But at the end of the day, she is the one inflicting war on a nation presently at peace - a tense peace, but peace nonetheless. For, ultimately, the self-serving aim of uniting all of Fódlan under her rule. This particular action, even if part of a well-intentioned goal, I cannot see as morally justified. 

[Geenoble]

I just want to talk about another annoying show not tell moment real quick. 

Holst and Count Bergliez. these characters are constantly brought up depending on route and are said to incredible combatants Andy honourable fighters, he’ll in SS Casper states that he saw his father die protecting some off his men so it shows that he puts his subordinates lives above his own. Honestly even if they just had a little line of dialogue, but they get no screen time whatsoever, same thing with Jeralt, we’re only told about their feats Andre we never get to make an impression of them ourselves and are force to look at them through the eyes of Hilda and Casper.

[omegaxis1]

11 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I appreciate you addressing my question. I would assert, however, that you didn't answer it. You acknowledge that Claude could have invaded the Empire, and that he has his own ambitions - sure. The thing is, I'm not attempting to ascertain whether their beliefs and goals were right or wrong - but, rather, whether their actions were.

The point of what I was saying is to point out that Claude does not care for what the other person's motivations are. He simply wanted to rule Fodlan because he believed in his goal of trying to end the xenophobic nature of both Fodlan and Almyra by tearing the borders down. But in CF, he doesn't trust others, but rather uses them as a means to an end. He's not on the deep end like others, thus holds some level of morality still, but he's always been someone that wanted to unite Fodlan himself so that he can tear down the borders, because he didn't believe in anyone else. That's why he intended to become the supreme king, but gets beaten and thus is forced to put a level of trust onto others. In AM, he has to make a gambit with Dimitri. In CF, he holds enough trust in Edelgard at least to let his on his lineage to her.

11 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Claude intervened within the Alliance to prevent Houses Gloucester and Ordelia from aiding the Empire, sure. It's unclear what degree of latitude is afforded to the "head of the Alliance", but I would assert that the individual Lords aren't completely sovereign - if they were, the Alliance (and, notably, Alliance troops such as what we fight) would be fuctionally non-existent. Moreover, it's not exactly clear what form that intervention took, and whether it was outside Claude's rights.

I mean, the narration itself states that Claude incited internal conflict himself just to prevent the Empire from performing any diplomatic intervention with the Alliance lords.

Quote

Meanwhile, Claude, leader of the Alliance, staves off Imperial intervention by strategically stirring up conflicts between Leicester lords in an effort to feign neutrality. 

And Claude might be the head of the Alliance, he is not someone with full power over the nation as a king or emperor would be. Hence why the lords generally try to act on its own self interests or such. It's not a unified nation that has a stable government. It's even for that that it makes sense as to why the Alliance members don't really have so much of a strong loyalty toward the Alliance. It's because of how the Alliance has such a weak structure that it made it impossible for Claude to really take advantage of his position without getting a strong enough support. 

It's why Claude only ever manages to make much progress in VW, when he uses Byleth as a figurehead for the resistance army.

11 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Even assuming the actions committed were outside Claude's rights, it's Houses Gloucester and Ordelia (as members of the Alliance) who have a legitimate claim against Claude, not the Empire (not a member of the Alliance). The Empire is not "owed" anything by any Alliance house, and it has no right to invade when it was never asked to - not even by those Alliance Houses friendly to the Empire. That (voluntary, non-obligatory) aid was witheld is merely a pretext that Edelgard uses for invading, and ensuring that she will have dominion over the Alliance.

Keep in mind that neither House Ordelia or House Gloucester oppose the Empire when they are entering the Alliance territory. This is because they support the Empire, and therefore, won't intervene or try to fight them when they arrive. In fact, with Lorenz and Lysithea on board, they're basically on board with the idea of opposing Claude for trying to stop the Empire like it is. Even Marianne points out that Claude and Edelgard hold similar ideals, but yet is being irrational about it.

Which is basically the point. The houses support Edelgard, but Claude is meddling in the affairs of aiding the Empire when it needs help. 

11 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Let's suppose, though, for a moment, that Edelgard is justified. That Claude's intervention was enough to justify an invasion. Let's look at things from Claude's point of view. The Empire is seeking aid from several houses of the Alliance. This request has created bitter division amongst the Alliance Houses, and threatens Claude's own ability to lead them. As such, he decides to invade the Empire, to prevent them from doing harm to the Alliance. If Edelgard was justified, then so too is Claude.

But, this produces a contradiction. If Claude is justified in invading the Empire, then Edelgard, in wishing to unite Fódlan and seeking aid from Alliance Houses, must be in the wrong. And if Edelgard is wrong to launch her invasion, given the previously-stated moral equivocation, then so too is Claude. Therefore, I would assert that neither one of them would be morally justified in carrying out an invasion of the other's country.

Do they both want to? Yes. The difference is, Edelgard actually follows through with it. We do not judge the murderer, and the person who only thinks of committing murder, as morally the same. While Claude may have been wrong in interefering with Alliance Lords, I would assert that Edelgard committed a far greater wrong in invading the Alliance - one that she had no legitimate moral justification for.

Does Edelgard have tactical justifications, absolutely. Could she have been more brutal about it, of course. But at the end of the day, she is the one inflicting war on a nation presently at peace - a tense peace, but peace nonetheless. For, ultimately, the self-serving aim of uniting all of Fódlan under her rule. This particular action, even if part of a well-intentioned goal, I cannot see as morally justified. 

In the end, whether it was justified or not, neither of us cannot make a firm statement, cause for all we know, it might or might not be. Not like we have all the laws and understanding of politics to understand which is justified or not in a video game. But in the end, it's made clear in the game that Claude only refused to join with Edelgard in the first place because he wanted to be the ruler of Fodlan instead. Had he been allowed to follow through, the war would have become much bloodier.

[Flere210]

All of this make me realize of Fragile Fodlan position is. 

I already assumed Fodlan to  e in no shape to defend againist a new Dagda invasion after any route(it's also possible that Dagda had a civil war at the same time, it happened in actual history), but whut Claude ambition, as soon as he rules Almyra he can lead a full scale invasion whit the Goneril likely making him pass. Fodlan is fucking screwed.

[omegaxis1]

8 hours ago, Geenoble said:

I just want to talk about another annoying show not tell moment real quick. 

Holst and Count Bergliez. these characters are constantly brought up depending on route and are said to incredible combatants Andy honourable fighters, he’ll in SS Casper states that he saw his father die protecting some off his men so it shows that he puts his subordinates lives above his own. Honestly even if they just had a little line of dialogue, but they get no screen time whatsoever, same thing with Jeralt, we’re only told about their feats Andre we never get to make an impression of them ourselves and are force to look at them through the eyes of Hilda and Casper.

Count Bergliez is also someone that was involved in being responsible for Edelgard's suffering along with her siblings. 

But yeah, it's rather annoying how we never see or hear from several major nobles that are supposed to be so renowned. Hell, apparently if Count Bergliez had been in the fight, we'd apparently lose. 

2 minutes ago, Flere210 said:

All of this make me realize of Fragile Fodlan position is. 

I already assumed Fodlan to  e in no shape to defend againist a new Dagda invasion after any route(it's also possible that Dagda had a civil war at the same time, it happened in actual history), but whut Claude ambition, as soon as he rules Almyra he can lead a full scale invasion whit the Goneril likely making him pass. Fodlan is fucking screwed.

It's unlikely that Holst would let Claude in anymore once he left Fodlan to be Almyra's King. I mean, he's drinking buddies with Nader, but that doesn't mean that Holst was going to let Nader in without a good reason, and that was only cause during the time, Claude was the Alliance leader. But he's not the Alliance leader anymore. 

[Flere210]

I am expecting him to die of mushroom poisoning eventually and getting replaced by Hilda! Hilda! Hilda! If she is not dead. And i am only half joking.

Edited January 18, 2020 by Flere210

[Axel987]

1 minute ago, omegaxis1 said:

Count Bergliez is also someone that was involved in being responsible for Edelgard's suffering along with her siblings. 

But yeah, it's rather annoying how we never see or hear from several major nobles that are supposed to be so renowned. Hell, apparently if Count Bergliez had been in the fight, we'd apparently lose. 

It's unlikely that Holst would let Claude in anymore once he left Fodlan to be Almyra's King. I mean, he's drinking buddies with Nader, but that doesn't mean that Holst was going to let Nader in without a good reason, and that was only cause during the time, Claude was the Alliance leader. But he's not the Alliance leader anymore. 

Speaking of the former; something I've always wondered wrt the experiments inflicted on the Hresvelg family.

The Insurrection of the Seven began as a result of Ionius making a power grab and trying to centralize all of Adrestia's power unto the position of the Emperor. The 6 big houses+House Gerth then conspired against him and pulled a coup d'etat, effectively rendering the Emperor politically impotent.

Then they...allow experiments to be committed on the children of the emperor, to, in Edelgard's words, "Create an peerless Emperor to rule all of Fodlan."

Which doesn't really make any sense. Why would the houses that plotted against the Emperor as a result of him forcefully trying to centralize power, enable TWSITD to do this, when they had just stopped an emperor from gaining complete control.

Especially when timeline wise, it's implied that Arundel only got replaced by Thales close to 1174, which is when Edelgard returned to the Empire, 3 years after the Insurrection in 1171, implying the experimentation began later on.

It's one of those things that I don't feel is properly touched on by the game, with most of it's details being found in the library or through Hubert, despite being extremely imporant for Edelgard.

[omegaxis1]

1 minute ago, Axel987 said:

Speaking of the former; something I've always wondered wrt the experiments inflicted on the Hresvelg family.

The Insurrection of the Seven began as a result of Ionius making a power grab and trying to centralize all of Adrestia's power unto the position of the Emperor. The 6 big houses+House Gerth then conspired against him and pulled a coup d'etat, effectively rendering the Emperor politically impotent.

Then they...allow experiments to be committed on the children of the emperor, to, in Edelgard's words, "Create an peerless Emperor to rule all of Fodlan."

Which doesn't really make any sense. Why would the houses that plotted against the Emperor as a result of him forcefully trying to centralize power, enable TWSITD to do this, when they had just stopped an emperor from gaining complete control.

Especially when timeline wise, it's implied that Arundel only got replaced by Thales close to 1174, which is when Edelgard returned to the Empire, 3 years after the Insurrection in 1171, implying the experimentation began later on.

It's one of those things that I don't feel is properly touched on by the game, with most of it's details being found in the library or through Hubert, despite being extremely imporant for Edelgard.

Yeah, people RELALY tend to forget the entire Insurrection of the Seven, because it's subtle and not actually brought up so often, but it makes the entire case of Edelgard's standing being very much tied. There's absolutely no alternative for Edelgard that was possible. The war was inevitable. Sadly, it's not in your face about it like the Tragedy of Duscur.

Also, likely the plan was that Duke Aegir would make a puppet emperor out of Edelgard as well and have her lead the war for unification while he casually sits back and sips tea. But Edelgard managed to turn the tables on him by getting the help of the other nobles. 

[Jotari]

You know, re:Claude saying he wants to be the supreme leader of Fodlan, he never actually says how he intends to do so. Given his character it seems to me he's much more interested in using diplomacy to achieve his goals rather than overt violence. And when he does have the opportunity to actually  become the supreme leader of Fodlan he doesn't take the opportunity at all and just goes back to Almayria, so it's not like it's a grand ambition, it's a means to an end. I don't think Claude was lying when he said he wanted to be the leader of a united Fodlan, but given the context, I think the comment should be more taken that he wanted a united Fodlan, and he wanted it for the express purpose of opening the borders and integrating more with Almayria and other nations. He doesn't necessarily want the job himself, just so long as the isolationist policy is put to an end. Hence why he convinces Byleth to rule the united Fodlan rather than doing it himself.

TL;DR, I don't think Claude was going to go full Edelgard with his ambitions. It was probably more diplomatic in nature. Maybe arranging a marriage with Edelgard would be on the agenda, though that part is purely speculation on my part (gee it sure would be nice to see the three lords interacting a bit to see how they really feel about each other).

Edited January 18, 2020 by Jotari

[omegaxis1]

Just now, Jotari said:

You know, re Claude saying he wants to be the supreme leader of Fodlan, he never actually says how he intends to do so. Given his character it seems to me he's much more interested in using diplomacy to achieve his goals rather than violence. And when he does have the opportunity to actually  become the supreme leader of Fodlan he doesn't take the opportunity at all and just goes back to Almayria. I don't think Claude was lying when he said he wanted to be the leader of a united Fodlan, but given the context, I think the comment should be more taken that he wanted a united Fodlan, and he wanted it for the express purpose of opening the borders and integrating more with Almayria and other nations. He doesn't necessarily want the job himself, just so long as the isolationist policy is put to an end. Hence why he convinces Byleth to rule the united Fodlan rather than doing it himself.

TL;DR, I don't think Claude was going to go full Edelgard with his ambitions. It was probably more diplomatic in nature. Maybe arranging a marriage with Edelgard would be on the agenda, though that part is purely speculation on my part (gee it sure would be nice to see the three lords interacting a bit to see how they really feel about each other).

I think you got your Claudes mixed up in a bunch. Claude acts more differently in each route than Dimitri, Edelgard, and Rhea do. 

First off, it's kind of a clear strategy in CF. If Edelgard gave her all in the fight against Dimitri and Rhea, and they did the same, they basically left their backs exposed. Well, with Almyrans, Claude basically has two armies, with the Alliance as one, and the Almyrans in the other. He would easily flank both of them at once and take the win, or that's basically what he had been planning on. 

Keep in mind that Claude, even in VW, stated that he had been after the Sword of the Creator, a weapon more powerful than any other Relic, which can wipe out armies and cleave mountains. Wanting that kind of weapon basically make it clear that violence is definitely part of Claude's equations. 

You're thinking that Claude in VW, when he gets his chance to rule, he doesn't take it. But the thing is, in VW, Claude's changed. He's learned to trust others more and let his secrets be out. The point of VW is that Claude's grown to trust Byleth, calling them a sibling in the JP version, and thus entrusts Fodlan to them, knowing that they can work together to break the borders.

That's just it. 

Byleth is meant to be the avatar that helps each character grow and become a better person. Hence why CF Edelgard is MUCH more different than any other routes of Edelgard, which she herself calls out in her B support:

Quote

Edelgard (blushing): I'm afraid this might sound a bit... sentimental. However... I want to thank you. Because of you, I feel I can walk my fated path without losing myself. If I were alone, I might have lost perspective and become a harsh ruler with a heart of ice. But I'm not alone. With you by my side, I'm somehow free to be not only a leader but... simply Edelgard.

And Dimitri only ever regains his sanity and becomes a better person in AM because Byleth was there for him after Rodrigue's words shook him, despite how is redemption was downright silly in my opinion. 

So Claude is a better person in VW than he would be in the other routes.

In AM, Claude has no choice but to give up cause Dimitri destroyed Claude's forces. So he had to make a gambit and then leave. CF, he wanted to rule Fodlan, but he lost and ultimately had to give up.

SS, he just f*cks off. 

As for the Claude/Edelgard marriage, hey, I'd go for it. I mean, the two canonically flirted on the battle conversation.

[Axel987]

11 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Yeah, people RELALY tend to forget the entire Insurrection of the Seven, because it's subtle and not actually brought up so often, but it makes the entire case of Edelgard's standing being very much tied. There's absolutely no alternative for Edelgard that was possible. The war was inevitable. Sadly, it's not in your face about it like the Tragedy of Duscur.

Also, likely the plan was that Duke Aegir would make a puppet emperor out of Edelgard as well and have her lead the war for unification while he casually sits back and sips tea. But Edelgard managed to turn the tables on him by getting the help of the other nobles. 

I mean it was an internal conflict that was inherently kept hush-hush, whereas the other was an international freak accident that ended in genocide. It's only natural that the latter is a lot more spoken about imo.

And having just rewatched the crowning ceremony, that seems a likely conclusion to make. Interestingly, Ionius himself mentions leaving the "Fate of Fodlan" in Edelgard's hands, implying there was great demand for re-unification within the empire's higher ranks already.

That being said, I do find it odd that even having already gained the allegiance of Count Bergliez(and presumably Hevring) by that point, Edelgard could just, sack Aegir immediantly upon getting the crown, when it's stated that the emperor is politically impotent at that point. Neither of the counts appear to back her up either so like?

[Jotari]

21 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

I think you got your Claudes mixed up in a bunch. Claude acts more differently in each route than Dimitri, Edelgard, and Rhea do. 

First off, it's kind of a clear strategy in CF. If Edelgard gave her all in the fight against Dimitri and Rhea, and they did the same, they basically left their backs exposed. Well, with Almyrans, Claude basically has two armies, with the Alliance as one, and the Almyrans in the other. He would easily flank both of them at once and take the win, or that's basically what he had been planning on. 

Keep in mind that Claude, even in VW, stated that he had been after the Sword of the Creator, a weapon more powerful than any other Relic, which can wipe out armies and cleave mountains. Wanting that kind of weapon basically make it clear that violence is definitely part of Claude's equations. 

You're thinking that Claude in VW, when he gets his chance to rule, he doesn't take it. But the thing is, in VW, Claude's changed. He's learned to trust others more and let his secrets be out. The point of VW is that Claude's grown to trust Byleth, calling them a sibling in the JP version, and thus entrusts Fodlan to them, knowing that they can work together to break the borders.

That's just it. 

Byleth is meant to be the avatar that helps each character grow and become a better person. Hence why CF Edelgard is MUCH more different than any other routes of Edelgard, which she herself calls out in her B support:

And Dimitri only ever regains his sanity and becomes a better person in AM because Byleth was there for him after Rodrigue's words shook him, despite how is redemption was downright silly in my opinion. 

So Claude is a better person in VW than he would be in the other routes.

In AM, Claude has no choice but to give up cause Dimitri destroyed Claude's forces. So he had to make a gambit and then leave. CF, he wanted to rule Fodlan, but he lost and ultimately had to give up.

SS, he just f*cks off. 

As for the Claude/Edelgard marriage, hey, I'd go for it. I mean, the two canonically flirted on the battle conversation.

Wanting a powerful weapon isn't the same as wanting to use a powerful weapon. That would be deterrence theory. The fact that even in Crimson Flower Claude ultimately does arrange it so Fodlan is united is showing that he is always thinking diplomatically about how he can achieve that goal (though obviously he'd prefer himself ruling over Edelgard because he has no idea how Edelgard would act in regards to the Almayrians, turns out it is unreasonably positive but he has no way of knowing that). He uses his own death as a playing card to achieve his goals. That's a man whose thinking diplomatically, not militarily. In all cases Claude's strategy is always to sit back and try to manipulate the situation to best suit his interests. The only time he ever seems to go on the offensive is in Verdant Wind after gaining Byleth (and like all routes that story begins with an attack on the monastery where he's playing the defensive role). I just don't see anything about Claude's character that would suggest if Edelgard had sat back and done nothing, he would have responded by launching an unprovoked attack on the entire continent. For one that's an irrationally stupid way to try and unite the continent (especially if it's coming from the Alliance which even 100% united probably isn't as martially strong as the empire), it's no coincidence Edelgard utterly fails in 3/4 routes. Deciding randomly to attack the entire world doesn't really have a massive chance of success. Claude the conqueror seems unlikely to me and is based on about two lines of dialogue that could be interpreted in a very different way.

21 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

 

As for the Claude/Edelgard marriage, hey, I'd go for it. I mean, the two canonically flirted on the battle conversation.

That confirms it. Claude's master plan in Part 1 being to bang Edelgard is now my headcanon.

Edited January 18, 2020 by Jotari

[omegaxis1]

13 minutes ago, Axel987 said:

I mean it was an internal conflict that was inherently kept hush-hush, whereas the other was an international freak accident that ended in genocide. It's only natural that the latter is a lot more spoken about imo.

And having just rewatched the crowning ceremony, that seems a likely conclusion to make. Interestingly, Ionius himself mentions leaving the "Fate of Fodlan" in Edelgard's hands, implying there was great demand for re-unification within the empire's higher ranks already.

That being said, I do find it odd that even having already gained the allegiance of Count Bergliez(and presumably Hevring) by that point, Edelgard could just, sack Aegir immediantly upon getting the crown, when it's stated that the emperor is politically impotent at that point. Neither of the counts appear to back her up either so like?

Keep in mind that the Church has records of it, so it's legit clear that the Church knew about it. 

Ionius already knew what Edelgard was planning, no doubt. 

Linhardt is the one that stated that Bergliez and Hevring are backing her. There's also Arundel, so the Agarthans are also helping. And in Chapter 7, after the events, Caspar noted that Edelgard spoke with Count Bergliez afterward, which he felt was odd, cause he thought that there was animosity between the two.

12 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Wanting a powerful weapon isn't the same as wanting to use a powerful weapon. That would be deterrence theory.

I mean, even if he wanted to use it as a threat to make everyone listen to his demands, cause he's got a nuke basically, that's not gonna stop a war. Hell, if anything, Rhea would have been pissed and would have tried to kill Claude. He wanted the weapon, but he wasn't dumb enough to think that there wouldn't be problems that would stir up and violence as a result.

14 minutes ago, Jotari said:

The fact that even in Crimson Flower Claude ultimately does arrange it so Fodlan is united is showing that he is always thinking diplomatically about how he can achieve that goal (though obviously he'd prefer himself ruling over Edelgard because he has no idea how Edelgard would act in regards to the Almayrians, turns out it is unreasonably positive but he has no way of knowing that). He uses his own death as a playing card to achieve his goals. That's a man whose thinking diplomatically, not militarily.

I mean, that's just it. Because he refused to trust in Edelgard from the getgo, he tried to meddle into the affairs and prevent anyone from helping Edelgard. He wanted to rule himself. 

The fact is, even the thought of unifying Fodlan is absurd and not possible for him to achieve without violence. Faerghus being chivalry and the Empire being the original nation, neither nation would be willing to give up their history and pride as a nation by any means. So regardless of how you claim that Claude wanted a united Fodlan, diplomacy was never gonna be possible in uniting the nations. 

Claude even admits that his ideals couldn't have been met had it not been for Edelgard and her war. 

Claude overall took advantage of Edelgard being the first to strike and capitalized on it. This is realistic as there are plenty of people that take advantage of war for personal gain. 

17 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I just don't see anything about Claude's character that would suggest if Edelgard had sat back and done nothing, he would have responded by launching an unprovoked attack on the entire continent. For one that's an irrationally stupid way to try and unite the continent (especially if it's coming from the Alliance which even 100% united probably isn't as martially strong as the empire), it's no coincidence Edelgard utterly fails in 3/4 routes.

The dude runs the weakest nation of the continent and doesn't even have full control over it. There's 100% no doubt that Claude would have acted much more differently had he been a prince and became the next king of the nation like Faerghus. But being a sovereign duke doesn't give him as much perks as he needed.

I dunno why you think that Edelgard utterly fails. She didn't get the results she wanted, but she certainly did what no one else did. She caused things to change. Not as good as it would be if she were in charge, but definitely better than what Fodlan's been going through for countless years. Also, in every route, Edelgard only fails cause "god" opposes her, in the form of Byleth, who fights against Edelgard. 

21 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Deciding randomly to attack the entire world doesn't really have a massive chance of success. Claude the conqueror seems unlikely to me and is based on about two lines of dialogue that could be interpreted in a very different way.

Edelgard never attacked the entire world, though. She declared war against the Church, not Faerghus or Leicester. 

[Jotari]

17 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Keep in mind that the Church has records of it, so it's legit clear that the Church knew about it. 

Ionius already knew what Edelgard was planning, no doubt. 

Linhardt is the one that stated that Bergliez and Hevring are backing her. There's also Arundel, so the Agarthans are also helping. And in Chapter 7, after the events, Caspar noted that Edelgard spoke with Count Bergliez afterward, which he felt was odd, cause he thought that there was animosity between the two.

I mean, even if he wanted to use it as a threat to make everyone listen to his demands, cause he's got a nuke basically, that's not gonna stop a war. Hell, if anything, Rhea would have been pissed and would have tried to kill Claude. He wanted the weapon, but he wasn't dumb enough to think that there wouldn't be problems that would stir up and violence as a result.

I mean, that's just it. Because he refused to trust in Edelgard from the getgo, he tried to meddle into the affairs and prevent anyone from helping Edelgard. He wanted to rule himself. 

The fact is, even the thought of unifying Fodlan is absurd and not possible for him to achieve without violence. Faerghus being chivalry and the Empire being the original nation, neither nation would be willing to give up their history and pride as a nation by any means. So regardless of how you claim that Claude wanted a united Fodlan, diplomacy was never gonna be possible in uniting the nations. 

Claude even admits that his ideals couldn't have been met had it not been for Edelgard and her war. 

Claude overall took advantage of Edelgard being the first to strike and capitalized on it. This is realistic as there are plenty of people that take advantage of war for personal gain. 

The dude runs the weakest nation of the continent and doesn't even have full control over it. There's 100% no doubt that Claude would have acted much more differently had he been a prince and became the next king of the nation like Faerghus. But being a sovereign duke doesn't give him as much perks as he needed.

I dunno why you think that Edelgard utterly fails. She didn't get the results she wanted, but she certainly did what no one else did. She caused things to change. Not as good as it would be if she were in charge, but definitely better than what Fodlan's been going through for countless years. Also, in every route, Edelgard only fails cause "god" opposes her, in the form of Byleth, who fights against Edelgard. 

Edelgard never attacked the entire world, though. She declared war against the Church, not Faerghus or Leicester. 

The Sword of the Creator (and Byleth) is a tool. Once put into play, he obviously is going to seek to have control over it over anyone else having control over it. That doesn't mean his plan is to go Nuclear Ghandi with the thing. As for the realism of uniting Fodlan without using violence, that's up in the air. Telling people of 1945 that uniting Europe without a war is possible in a single life time would have been possibly the most ridiculous prediction ever, yet here we are today with a Europe that is more unified than ever (well, until Brexit comes to fuck it up). Marrying Edelgard, while only speculation based on a single line of flirtatious dialogue, would have been an incredibly effective way of uniting much of Fodlan without resorting to war. And with the Alliance and the Empire merged in a marital union, implementing the Kingdom under some kind of Confederate Treaty seems plausible. Violence and war is not the only way to change the world.

As for why Edelgard failed, well I guess I think that because she loses the war and dies. The world does become a marginally better place after the war, but like, so did the world after World War II. I don't think that means Hitler particularly succeeded in his goals (yep, I've just Godwinded). None of the other endings achieve her actual goal of explicitly overthrowing the crest system as far as I can recall. Closest might be Dimitri's ending which is vague as hell. Hell Silver Snow actively keeps the Church as the central power of the continent.

[omegaxis1]

2 minutes ago, Jotari said:

The Sword of the Creator (and Byleth) is a tool. Once put into play, he obviously is going to seek to have control over it over anyone else having control over it. That doesn't mean his plan is to go Nuclear Ghandi with the thing. As for the realism of uniting Fodlan without using violence, that's up in the air. Telling people of 1945 that uniting Europe without a war is possible in a single life time would have been possibly the most ridiculous prediction ever, yet here we are today with a Europe that is more unified than ever (well, until Brexit comes to fuck it up). Marrying Edelgard, while only speculation based on a single line of flirtatious dialogue, would have been an incredibly effective way of uniting much of Fodlan without resorting to war. And with the Alliance and the Empire merged in a marital union, implementing the Kingdom under some kind of Confederate Treaty seems plausible. Violence and war is not the only way to change the world.

As for why Edelgard failed, well I guess I think that because she loses the war and dies. The world does become a marginally better place after the war, but like, so did the world after World War II. I don't think that means Hitler particularly succeeded in his goals (yep, I've just Godwinded). None of the other endings achieve her actual goal of explicitly overthrowing the crest system as far as I can recall. Closest might be Dimitri's ending which is vague as hell. Hell Silver Snow actively keeps the Church as the central power of the continent.

But Fodlan isn't the same place as Europe. We have an Empire that has been a thing for over 1100 years, and a Kingdom that prides itself in chivalry and is more violent and xenophobic than others. Ferdinand states that many Empire nobles dream of reunifying Fodlan, but under the Empire's rule, so Claude was not gonna be able to convince them to give him the power. And Faerghus would generally have issues with the Alliance given that the Alliance separated from Faerghus as well, so why would they join and give power to Claude either? It's simply a case of there being people that would not give Claude power. Him having a nuke only provokes more anger from others. And Rhea herself would be pissed as well that her mother was being used as a tool like that. 

Edelgard's goal was very much for Rhea at the very least to be removed from power and the world to change. Her ideals went higher than what the others did, but she did overall accomplish is removing Rhea from power in VW/AM ultimately, and SS if S support is not reached. That's cause it's Rhea's doctrine that's been keeping Fodlan in stasis. Hell, even Claude literally states that Rhea being around is why so many problems are happening. 

And it's because of her war that the Agarthans could even be damaged in the first place. Otherwise, you can be sure that even Claude's plan would have been sabotaged by them. 

[Jotari]

9 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

But Fodlan isn't the same place as Europe. We have an Empire that has been a thing for over 1100 years, and a Kingdom that prides itself in chivalry and is more violent and xenophobic than others. Ferdinand states that many Empire nobles dream of reunifying Fodlan, but under the Empire's rule, so Claude was not gonna be able to convince them to give him the power. And Faerghus would generally have issues with the Alliance given that the Alliance separated from Faerghus as well, so why would they join and give power to Claude either? It's simply a case of there being people that would not give Claude power. Him having a nuke only provokes more anger from others. And Rhea herself would be pissed as well that her mother was being used as a tool like that. 

Edelgard's goal was very much for Rhea at the very least to be removed from power and the world to change. Her ideals went higher than what the others did, but she did overall accomplish is removing Rhea from power in VW/AM ultimately, and SS if S support is not reached. That's cause it's Rhea's doctrine that's been keeping Fodlan in stasis. Hell, even Claude literally states that Rhea being around is why so many problems are happening. 

And it's because of her war that the Agarthans could even be damaged in the first place. Otherwise, you can be sure that even Claude's plan would have been sabotaged by them. 

No, Fodlan isn't Europe. But that's not my point. My point is that a union of countries can be achieved through means other than conquest. And based on Claude's character, I think these means would have been higher on his list of methods than outright murdering everyone who disagrees with him.

Edited January 18, 2020 by Jotari

[omegaxis1]

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

No, Fodlan isn't Europe. But that's not my point. My point is that a union of countries can be achieved through means other than conquest. And based on Claude's character, I think these means would have been higher on his list of methods than outright murdering everyone who disagrees with him.

No, I'd definitely bet money that you would not get the Empire or Kingdom to give the reigns to Claude. Claude isn't someone that invokes the type of charisma that Edelgard and Dimitri are more noted for. Claude is the schemer and keeps secrets. Hell, Claude wasn't even the leader in the VW route. He made Byleth because he knows that the others would follow him. Claude wasn't gonna be able to diplomatically get the Empire and Kingdom to cede their nation to him.

Given the history and beliefs they hold, the odds are that war was gonna happen if Claude even tried.

[Jotari]

7 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

No, I'd definitely bet money that you would not get the Empire or Kingdom to give the reigns to Claude. Claude isn't someone that invokes the type of charisma that Edelgard and Dimitri are more noted for. Claude is the schemer and keeps secrets. Hell, Claude wasn't even the leader in the VW route. He made Byleth because he knows that the others would follow him. Claude wasn't gonna be able to diplomatically get the Empire and Kingdom to cede their nation to him.

Given the history and beliefs they hold, the odds are that war was gonna happen if Claude even tried.

We're not talking about what's plausible here, we're talking about what the characters intend. Edelgard's method of forcing Fodlan to unite via war is no more realistic, she fails to make any headway despite having some massive advantages, namely demonic beasts and a TWSTD member sabotaging the entire Kingdom. Only Byleth allying with her ever makes her method work. And I didn't say cede nations, I was suggesting a confederation of nations. But that's beside the point. How do you think Claude would have acted if Edelgard had done nothing? And we're not talking about some hypothetical Adrestrian prince Claude, we're talking about the actual interracial man raised in Mongolia that suddenly became the heir to precivil war era United States. His goal is to unite Fodlan so as to open trade with other nations, what steps do you think he would have taken to achieve that goal unimpeded by Edelgard's war? Because invading anywhere other than possibly his own alliance territories seems highly out of character for him in my mind.

Edited January 18, 2020 by Jotari

[omegaxis1]

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

We're not talking about what's plausible here, we're talking about what the characters intend. Edelgard's method of forcing Fodlan to unite via war is no more realistic, she fails to make any headway despite having some massive advantages, namely demonic beasts and a TWSTD member sabotaging the entire Kingdom. Only Byleth allying with her ever makes her method work. And I didn't say cede nations, I was suggesting a confederation of nations. But that's beside the point. How do you think Claude would have acted if Edelgard had done nothing? And we're not talking about some hypothetical Adrestrian prince Claude, we're talking about the actual interracial man raised in Mongolia that suddenly became the heir to precivil war era United States. His goal is to unite Fodlan so as to open trade with other nations, what steps do you think he would have taken to achieve that goal unimpeded by Edelgard's war? Because invading anywhere other than possibly his own alliance territories seems highly out of character for him in my mind.

Edelgard was definitely gonna screw up more outside her own route. She caused too much chaos and violence by giving the Agarthans too much power and freedom to let loose terror. But in CF, she definitely was more on the right track, using both a combination of diplomacy and battles to win people over, given how there were many nobles in the game that were stated to have chosen to join Edelgard throughout the campaign, along with how she had manifestos sent out.

The problem with what you're asking is that Claude's plan is NEVER made clear. But he clearly has been investigating the Relics and sought the Sword of the Creator. We don't know what this grand plan he had in mind, but if he was not going to start a war, then basically, he's stuck. Simple as that. If he wasn't able to get enough power to oppose the other nations or was unwilling to go to war, then he'd have done nothing and gotten nothing. Simple as that. 

Claude literally was able to capitalize on Edelgard's war and take advantage of it for his own purpose. As I recall, he even admitted that it's because of Edelgard's war that his goals could be accomplished.

[Icelerate]

On 1/17/2020 at 10:00 PM, NekoKnight said:

Metoedy sure is a nonsensical pick for a subordinate for Edelgard though. All of the other ones we see, like Randolph and Ladislava are professional and honorable types but Metoedy is an unabashed sadist. Sure, maybe he's the right tool for their current job but goodness, no, I don't see that psychopath being a part of Edelgard's "bluff" to not kill students.

 

But I thought Edelgard is good at choosing her subordinates and tasks that fit. Also, isn't her sparing her former allies going against her character. For example, she won't hesitate to cut Byleth down after the time-skip or the rest of the BE in Silver Snow. 

[Jotari]

6 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

Edelgard was definitely gonna screw up more outside her own route. She caused too much chaos and violence by giving the Agarthans too much power and freedom to let loose terror. But in CF, she definitely was more on the right track, using both a combination of diplomacy and battles to win people over, given how there were many nobles in the game that were stated to have chosen to join Edelgard throughout the campaign, along with how she had manifestos sent out.

The problem with what you're asking is that Claude's plan is NEVER made clear. But he clearly has been investigating the Relics and sought the Sword of the Creator. We don't know what this grand plan he had in mind, but if he was not going to start a war, then basically, he's stuck. Simple as that. If he wasn't able to get enough power to oppose the other nations or was unwilling to go to war, then he'd have done nothing and gotten nothing. Simple as that. 

Claude literally was able to capitalize on Edelgard's war and take advantage of it for his own purpose. As I recall, he even admitted that it's because of Edelgard's war that his goals could be accomplished.

Precisely. Claude's plan never is made clear. So assuming if Edelgard did nothing he would basically do the exact same thing as her (and thus she's justified in invading him) is faulty. And I've already outlined one way in which he could have used diplomatic marriage to united the country. Another way could have been secret attacks on the economy of the other two countries to force closer trade deals. Hell he was investigating the immaculate one as well, perhaps he intended to take down Rhea by making her dragon form public knowledge. There's dozens of inventive ways one can come up that someone could try to unite a continent. And success isn't even part of the question. It's about what Claude would try to do to succeed. Claude is a different beast to Edelgard. He's a schemer. So simply saying "He says he wants to be king, therefore he is Whalahart" is disingenuous.