Who are some of the most overrated characters development/character wise.

[Crysta]

1 minute ago, Eurydice said:

 Claude knows that fighting the church and Rhea is just going to trigger bloodshed and he's not about that, while Edelgard is willing to go all the way. 

 

He's willing to go all the way if he has to. He just really hopes he doesn't have to.

Edelgard making the move to become the Supreme Ruler herself certainly throws a wrench in his plans, whatever form those plans were ultimately going to take. But he turns it to his advantage and speeds his dreams up considerably. She got bloody when he didn't have to.

[AvatarofDiscord]

1 minute ago, Crysta said:

So do you think Rhea is just going to change the way she does things over crumpets and tea, given how well she handles criticism and dissent?

He anticipates having to fight as an inevitability. Because it probably is. But he's a cad in a strange land who just recently got a hint of political power, whereas Edelgard was born an Imperial princess and had been plotting for years. He wasn't "already on his way" - he was just starting on a very, very long road.

Dude the only time she is mad at people for disagreeing with them is with them trying to kill her

Such as the western church, Edlegard, TWSITD, Etc.

Also Claude is the schemer, he knows he could talk people out of fighting him such as Lorenz in his route or even getting people to help him like Dimitri in the BL route, saying “because it probably is” is horrible for your argument since probably doesn’t count for shit as that is arguing from things we don’t know

 

[Eurydice]

7 minutes ago, AvatarofDiscord said:

Dude the only time she is mad at people for disagreeing with them is with them trying to kill her

Such as the western church, Edlegard, TWSITD, Etc.

Also Claude is the schemer, he knows he could talk people out of fighting him such as Lorenz in his route or even getting people to help him like Dimitri in the BL route, saying “because it probably is” is horrible for your argument since probably doesn’t count for shit as that is arguing from things we don’t know

 

If Claude wants to challenge the church and Rhea, then she would completely snap and try and take him down. Rhea wouldn't take too nicely to this, and Claude knows this. Rhea is nice towards you, unless you challenge her and I don't think she would ever listen to Claude or his schemes... in fact trying to trick Rhea would just make her even more furious, I feel

Rhea is like a ticking bomb, you don't want to accidentally push the wrong trigger with her.

Yes, he managed to talk out Lorenz, but Rhea is so very different. 

 

Claude could TRY, but he fancies his head too much, I feel. 

Edited February 14, 2020 by Eurydice

[Crysta]

13 minutes ago, AvatarofDiscord said:

Dude the only time she is mad at people for disagreeing with them is with them trying to kill her

No, she makes it very clear how poorly she thinks of those who defy her when you return from putting down Lonato. You know, the dialogue about teaching the students what happens to those foolish enough to turn against the heavens? She kills and... actually probably doesn't think to ask questions ever. I know she appears saintly but her selfish ulterior motives are pretty obvious.

I'm going to leave it at that, though. Not gonna spend my time detailing how the dragon church and Rhea are bad versus Edelgard haters. I think Rhea is also a great character.

Claude is a schemer but he's not charisma incarnate as much as he wants to be. If you think he's opposed to military conflict, you're not paying attention: even in his own route he's deliberately causing infighting to try to dissuade the Empire from immediately invading.

I do think his hypothical war would look notably different than Edelgard's, but the end result would likely be similar.

 

Edited February 14, 2020 by Crysta

[AvatarofDiscord]

7 minutes ago, Crysta said:

No, she makes it very clear how poorly she thinks of those who defy her when you return from putting down Lonato. You know, the dialogue about teaching the students what happens to those foolish enough to turn against the heavens? She kills and... actually probably doesn't think to ask questions ever. I know she appears saintly but her selfish ulterior motives are pretty obvious.

I'm going to leave it at that, though. Not gonna spend my time detailing how the dragon church and Rhea are bad versus Edelgard haters. I think Rhea is also a great character.

Claude is a schemer but he's not charisma incarnate as much as he wants to be. If you think he's opposed to military conflict, you're not paying attention: even in his own route he's deliberately causing infighting to try to dissuade the Empire from immediately invading.

I do think his hypothical war would look notably different than Edelgard's, but the end result would likely be similar.

 

For fucks sake if you are going to say something say the full quote

She isn’t against people turning against the church, she is against people turning their blades against it though

And about that infighting part, that would be a good point if it applies when war isn’t happening such as during the first part where he could help influence the churches of Fódlan to argue against the central church, but he had to use the infighting to save his people from dying of invasions

And if you’re going to argue that it would likely be similar, that is arguing from ignorance

Seriously I expected better

[Crysta]

Nah I'm not going to take wiki screen caps. If you've read all of Rhea's dialogue and came to the conclusion that she's alright with people opposing her, it'll take a lot more to sway you than I'm willing to put into this argument.

"He had to start fights in order to save people" is quite the take, though.

I can't say I'm terribly impressed with your argumentation, either, but I can at least say I avoided using MLK Jr. or Hitler. I deserve kudos.

Edited February 14, 2020 by Crysta

[AvatarofDiscord]

1 minute ago, Crysta said:

Nah I'm not going to take wiki screen caps. If you've read all of Rhea's dialogue and came to the conclusion that she's alright with people opposing her, it'll take a lot more to sway you than I'm willing to put into this argument.

"He had to fight in order to save people" is quite the take, though.

I can't say I'm terribly impressed with your argumentation, either, but I can at least say I avoided using MLK Jr. or Hitler. I deserve kudos.

Opposing someone is different than disagreeing with them

Opposing them is basically ready to fight them for difference of reasons, while disagreeing with them could go into discussions about what they disagree with

I didn’t say he had to fight to save his people, I said he had to use the infighting to save his people or prevent casualties on his side during the war

The only thing someone should give you kudos for is horrible argumentation and the reading skill of a 7 year old, with the attention span of one to boot, at least with my example of MLK jr. I didn’t say if it was wrong or not, I provided it as an example of a peaceful way to change things but obviously you couldn’t read that like that and assume I wanted to bring in real world politics

[Hardric62]

4 hours ago, AvatarofDiscord said:

You do realize that the “nobles” that treat everyone like shit are all from the empire right?

Duke Argir, Count Varley, Count Bartels being three examples

Euuuuuuh... What about the nobles who helped killed Lambert during Duscur, because they wanted to halt his reforms? Or Lord Gautier? I mean, Miklan deserves his fate for chosing banditry and the likes, but the toxic attitude of Dearest Daddy was definitely a lead cause here.

And in Leicester? Oh look, power-hungry Daddy Gloucester, He who murders merchants for following trade routes because that means they are not giving him ALL THE MONEY, and that has been going for years (Raphael's parents), or Acheron, clearly set-up for being a recidivist backstabber, willing to go to petty wars for the smallest patch of land.

I tihnk the rot is slightly more system-wide than you think.

[Crysta]

You could make that point without putting an actual civil rights leader in it: if you feel you somehow can't, then it's probably a poor point to be making in the first place. It's not even a good example: MLK Jr. is also a great example of taking action versus oppression instead of just waiting for the powers that be to be alright with it via nice conversation. Sure he preached non-violence, but he ignored pleas for him to stand down and just wait for the times to change, and he was considered a radical in his time because of it. He got killed for it.

I'm really just against using real life political figures in internet debates because most of the time it's done with a poor understanding of actual history and/or they're being used in bad faith. 

[Eurydice]

....I'm not a mod or admin or anything, but isn't this getting a bit heated guys ?  Anyways, I don't agree with Edelgard or her motives, and believe that Claude had familiar wishes to Edelgard, but didn't want to start bloodshed and therefore he makes Edel look a bit foolish and overrated etc etc etc  going to fly out of here. 

[Crysta]

1 minute ago, Eurydice said:

....I'm not a mod or admin or anything, but isn't this getting a bit heated guys ?  Anyways, I don't agree with Edelgard or her motives, and believe that Claude had familiar wishes to Edelgard, but didn't want to start bloodshed and therefore he makes Edel look a bit foolish and overrated etc etc etc  going to fly out of here. 

NO YOU MUST STAY AND DEBATE ME

Don't worry, the argument is done. I don't really care if he insults me lol.

Still think people are letting Claude off the hook because the narrative never needed to explore his underhandedness and the lengths he'd be willing to go to without a Byleth or Edelgard, but whatever.

[AvatarofDiscord]

4 minutes ago, Hardric62 said:

Euuuuuuh... What about the nobles who helped killed Lambert during Duscur, because they wanted to halt his reforms? Or Lord Gautier? I mean, Miklan deserves his fate for chosing banditry and the likes, but the toxic attitude of Dearest Daddy was definitely a lead cause here.

And in Leicester? Oh look, power-hungry Daddy Gloucester, He who murders merchants for following trade routes because that means they are not giving him ALL THE MONEY, and that has been going for years (Raphael's parents), or Acheron, clearly set-up for being a recidivist backstabber, willing to go to petty wars for the smallest patch of land.

I tihnk the rot is slightly more system-wide than you think.

And almost all of them allied with the empire during the war (or its allies TWSITD with the Tragedy of Duscur since TWSITD was the ones who started the whole thing, Patricia even helped and she was from the empire as well)

Lord Gautier is the only one I would concede but one could argue the toxic attitude truly began after the MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS AT SYLVAINS LIFE which caused Miklan to get disowned

7 minutes ago, Crysta said:

You could make that point without putting an actual civil rights leader in it: if you feel you somehow can't, then it's probably a poor point to be making in the first place. It's not even a good example: MLK Jr. is also a great example of taking action versus oppression instead of just waiting for the powers that be to be alright with it via nice conversation. Sure he preached non-violence, but he ignored pleas for him to stand down and just wait for the times to change, and he was considered a radical in his time because of it. He got killed for it.

I'm really just against using real life political figures in internet debates because most of the time it's done with a poor understanding of actual history and/or they're being used in bad faith. 

I made that point to reinforce my point, because then someone couldn’t say (What’s a good example of that happening). And those pleas for him to stand down we’re from boycotting the bus and other things of the sort, not from punching people left and right.

[Etrurian emperor]

11 minutes ago, AvatarofDiscord said:

And almost all of them allied with the empire during the war (or its allies TWSITD with the Tragedy of Duscur since TWSITD was the ones who started the whole thing, Patricia even helped and she was from the empire as well)

I think that reflects more poorly on the Kingdom nobles then the imperial ones. Count Varley and Aegir are scum but they are also very much destroyed when Edelgards take the throne. At that point the imperial nobles are fighting for a cause or at the very least accept Edelgard's cause to some extend. 

Meanwhile the Kingdom nobles seem to operate solely out of self interest. They don't like their king so they butcher him and plot a genocide on Duscur, and later when the Kingdom is invaded they roll out the red carpet for Edelgard. Though this probably goes more for the western Kingdom lords rather than the eastern ones. Fraldarious and Gauthier stay loyal while Rowe, Kleiman and Dominic become Edelgard toadies. Kleiman seems the most evil of these western lords since he apparently was the lord who orchestrated the Duscur massacre. I can respect someone like Berglies who fights the cause even if its against his own interest a lot more than the western Kingdom lords who are all a bunch of spineless opportunists at best and plotters of genocide at worst. 

The alliance doesn't come off entirely well either. Gloucester is pretty evil and the only reason he's not a Fodlandian Laus is because you don't have to fight him. Meanwhile Acheron is pretty evil too. 

Edited February 14, 2020 by Etrurian emperor

[Hardric62]

2 minutes ago, AvatarofDiscord said:

 

Lord Gautier is the only one I would concede but one could argue the toxic attitude truly began after the MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS AT SYLVAINS LIFE which caused Miklan to get disowned

 

Pretty sure the favoring and disowning sparked the multiple life attempts, not the reverse. I mean, for things to reach that point, much toxicity had to happen beforehand.

5 minutes ago, AvatarofDiscord said:

I made that point to reinforce my point, because then someone couldn’t say (What’s a good example of that happening). And those pleas for him to stand down we’re from boycotting the bus and other things of the sort, not from punching people left and right.

You know, there is another Martin Luther you could have used: the one who sparked Reformation. It all started as a criticism for indulgences, aka Catholic Church selling pardons for money. From there, he developed a wider critic of the Catholic Church. The pope reacted poorly, excommunicating him, and asking the emperor to squash the grubby little monk and his partisans... Who sold out to the German Princes over the revolting peasants believing in his message to get the military firepower to ensure protestantism's survival.

 

PS:

3 minutes ago, AvatarofDiscord said:

And almost all of them allied with the empire during the war (or its allies TWSITD with the Tragedy of Duscur since TWSITD was the ones who started the whole thing, Patricia even helped and she was from the empire as well)

 

Opportunistic weasels jump the better looking ship, or the one opposed to their political opponents, how unexpected. Thing is, nothing say thy are keeping their power and position once Edelgard wins and their importance begins to drop (I think the Mole Men's presence is a sign that there is a shortage of more palatable allies here).

[AvatarofDiscord]

10 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I think that reflects more poorly on the Kingdom nobles then the imperial ones. Count Varley and Aegir are scum but they are also very much destroyed when Edelgards take the throne. At that point the imperial nobles are fighting for a cause or at the very least accept Edelgard's cause to some extend. 

Meanwhile the Kingdom nobles seem to operate solely out of self interest. They don't like their king so they butcher him and plot a genocide on Duscur, and later when the Kingdom is invaded they roll out the red carpet for Edelgard. Though this probably goes more for the western Kingdom lords rather than the eastern ones. Fraldarious and Gauthier stay loyal while Rowe, Kleiman and Dominic become Edelgard toadies. Kleiman seems the most evil of these western lords since he apparently was the lord who orchestrated the Duscur massacre. I can respect someone like Berglies who fights the cause even if its against his own interest a lot more than the western Kingdom lords who are all a bunch of spineless opportunists at best and plotters of genocide at worst. 

The alliance doesn't come off entirely well either. Gloucester is pretty evil and the only reason he's not a Fodlandian Laus is because you don't have to fight him. Meanwhile Acheron is pretty evil too. 

Duke Aegir and Varley weren’t destroyed because of their heinous actions, but more because they chose not to side with Edlegard.

She does the same to Ferdinand when he doesn’t side with Edlegard.

It’s more of the western Kingdom lords who are spineless, Rowe was the kindest of the three as he just wanted revenge on Rhea for his sons death.

Father Gloucester is evil, but son Gloucester is good natured Narcian (And I did mention Acheron as evil)

14 minutes ago, Hardric62 said:

 

Pretty sure the favoring and disowning sparked the multiple life attempts, not the reverse. I mean, for things to reach that point, much toxicity had to happen beforehand.

You know, there is another Martin Luther you could have used: the one who sparked Reformation. It all started as a criticism for indulgences, aka Catholic Church selling pardons for money. From there, he developed a wider critic of the Catholic Church. The pope reacted poorly, excommunicating him, and asking the emperor to squash the grubby little monk and his partisans... Who sold out to the German Princes over the revolting peasants believing in his message to get the military firepower to ensure protestantism's survival.

 

PS:

 

Opportunistic weasels jump the better looking ship, or the one opposed to their political opponents, how unexpected. Thing is, nothing say thy are keeping their power and position once Edelgard wins and their importance begins to drop (I think the Mole Men's presence is a sign that there is a shortage of more palatable allies here).

Sylvain did get special treatment, but Miklan trying to kill Sylvain caused him to get disowned

I wasn’t mentioning MLK jr since he was the first example that popped into my head when it came to peaceful ways to cause change

Given how Edlegard took away power from those who didn’t side with her and gave it to others who side with her (Ferdinand if he wasn’t recruited and Bernadetta mom when Count Varley was arrested) it would be safe to argue that she more than likely would have given them a place in her government if she won the war considering she did this after the war started

[Sid Starkiller]

4 minutes ago, AvatarofDiscord said:

Sylvain did get special treatment, but Miklan trying to kill Sylvain caused him to get disowned

No, Miklan was disowned for not having a Crest. He was disowned the MINUTE Sylvain was revealed to have a Crest. That's why he turned to banditry in the first place: he had nowhere else to go.

It's clear to me now that you just flat-out have no idea what you're talking about. I'm done wasting time on you.

[Etrurian emperor]

16 minutes ago, AvatarofDiscord said:

Rowe was the kindest of the three as he just wanted revenge on Rhea for his sons death.

Actually that's Lonato who's the lord of Gaspard. Rowe is the family that controls the fortress city on the border between the Kingdom and Empire. We never actually get to see them but apparently betraying their nation is the particular gimmick of house Rowe. In the Library it says they got their position in the Kingdom because they defected from the empire and gave control of Arianrhod to the Kingdom. A couple of centuries later and they switch back from Kingdom to the Empire. 

[AvatarofDiscord]

8 minutes ago, Sid Starkiller said:

No, Miklan was disowned for not having a Crest. He was disowned the MINUTE Sylvain was revealed to have a Crest. That's why he turned to banditry in the first place: he had nowhere else to go.

It's clear to me now that you just flat-out have no idea what you're talking about. I'm done wasting time on you.

Disinherited and Disowned are two different things

Miklan still got to live in the house with Sylvain, but the multiple times Miklan tried to kill Sylvain got Miklan disowned

Sylvains supports even say this if you read the bloody things, but then again what do I know I’m a person who apparently doesn’t know what I’m talking about despite multiple playthroughs and reading the supports alot