Jump to content
omegaxis1

The True Tragedy of Three Houses

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Suspension of disbelief will be different for everyone, but I, and I'm sure many, have to do some mental gymnastics to justify blaming someone else for your torture and allying with the people who actually tortured you to carry that out. Aside from that I agree with what you're saying. Edelgard's torture backstory manages to obviously be very important to her and inform her actions...while simultaneously being somewhat superfluous. I could more easily buy Edelgard's entire actions without the torture, if her view of Rhea and the crest system was simply her own way of looking at the world (possibly with some of being raised by Ionus). I'm quite sure the real reason for the backstory is a meta one to derive sympathy for Edelgard from the player.

I do actually completely understand why Edelgard is working with them, it isn't that she doesn't blame the Agarthans for what happened to her, she does, which is why she hates working with them and plans to wipe out after the war.  

They just aren't the only ones responsible for suffering across Fodlan, Edelgard has a lot of experience with corrupt nobles abusing their power, it isn't just that the Agarthans experimented on her and her siblings, it was that the nobility of the Empire allowed them to do that, not to mention the insurrection. There is also the factor that Edelgard was told by your father about the true nature of the Archbishop, this part doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the trauma, she is under the impression that the Dragons has been trying to control the world through religion for a millennia, which isn't even entirely inaccurate. I think it is clear that Edelgard is an enlightened woman of science and reason, to falsify history and alter the progress of technology would be straight up offensive to someone like her.

Of course, if I was there I would rather have not allied with the Agarthans, but it is clear Edelgard feels the same way, it is simply a necessity due to circumstances. But in her shoes. I would also be constantly leaking info about the Agarthans, their plans and the location of their bases to Rhea. It is better for the church to expand troops to take care of them, weakening both our enemies in the process without losing any of our troops. The Agarthans were completely defeated before the war was over by the church, but would allow Edelgard complete freedom to pursue this war on her own terms without having to worry about the threat of her puppet masters hanging above her head. Hopefully by that point the Agarthans would have weakened the church enough to make an imperial victory plausible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Suspension of disbelief will be different for everyone, but I, and I'm sure many, have to do some mental gymnastics to justify blaming someone else for your torture and allying with the people who actually tortured you to carry that out.

Doubt she thinks Rhea is personally responsible for her torture. She is responsible for plenty else, though. And just maybe she considers resolving those issues more important instead of being caught up in her own personal trauma?

34 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Aside from that I agree with what you're saying. Edelgard's torture backstory manages to obviously be very important to her and inform her actions...while simultaneously being somewhat superfluous. I could more easily buy Edelgard's entire actions without the torture, if her view of Rhea and the crest system was simply her own way of looking at the world (possibly with some of being raised by Ionus). I'm quite sure the real reason for the backstory is a meta one to derive sympathy for Edelgard from the player.

Are you okay with AM being 100% about Dimitri and his trauma, nearly to the exclusion of everything else? What amount of traumatic backstory is too "superfluous" for you that it sullies the same justifications she would use even if it wasn't there? 

Edited by Crysta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Crysta said:

Doubt she thinks Rhea is personally responsible for her torture. She is responsible for plenty else, though. And just maybe she considers resolving those issues instead of being caught up in her own personal trauma?

Are you okay with AM being 100% about Dimitri and his trauma, nearly to the exclusion of everything else? What amount of traumatic backstory is too "superfluous" for you that it sullies the same justifications she would use even if it wasn't there? 

Am I okay with Azure Moon being 100% about Dimitri to the exclusion of everything else? Almost the opposite really. I feel like in the first half of Azure Moon everyone kind of ignores Dimitri and that Gilbert is more like the lord. But that's neither here nor there. You don't seem to be getting what I'm saying. The trauma aspect to Edelgard's character complicates things and not I think in a way that improves her character as it makes all of her opinions and actions suspect and adds a tonne of personal enmity between her and a faction that is basically ignored. Edelgard's tolerance of the Agarthans is much more in line with "shady ass people I don't like and will dispose of as soon as I'm doing using them" rather than who they actually are to her, which are the people who literally tortured her and murdered like 90% of her family. Basically the way she acts in the game is as if the torture doesn't exist rather than it being a monumental part of her life. And I don't just mean she represses it, I mean if you take that C support out all of her actions in the game will still make exactly as much sense  if not more sense (though her turning into a monster in Azure Moon would require some more justification).

Edited by Jotari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Am I okay with Azure Moon being 100% about Dimitri to the exclusion of everything else? Almost the opposite really. I feel like in the first half of Azure Moon everyone kind of ignores Dimitri and that Gilbert is more like the lord. But that's neither here nor there. You don't seem to be getting what I'm saying. The trauma aspect to Edelgard's character complicates things and not I think in a way that improves her character as it makes all of her opinions and actions suspect and adds a tonne of personal enmity between her and a faction that is basically ignored. Edelgard's tolerance of the Agarthans is much more in line with "shady ass people I don't like and will dispose of as soon as I'm doing using them" rather than who they actually are to her, which are the people who literally tortured her and murdered like 90% of her family. Basically the way she acts in the game is as if the torture doesn't exist rather than it being a monumental part of her life. And I don't just mean she represses it, I mean if you take that C support out all of her actions in the game will still make exactly as much sense  if not more sense (though her turning into a monster in Azure Moon would require some more justification).

Cause Edelgard is looking at the bigger picture. She buries away her real emotions and desire to destroy them because she's focusing on the larger things. 

This is why CF needed an extension, since had we gotten more chapters to deal with the Agarthans, it'd be Edelgard finally beginning to release all the pent up emotions that she's been holding back against them the entire time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Am I okay with Azure Moon being 100% about Dimitri to the exclusion of everything else? Almost the opposite really. I feel like in the first half of Azure Moon everyone kind of ignores Dimitri and that Gilbert is more like the lord. But that's neither here nor there. You don't seem to be getting what I'm saying. The trauma aspect to Edelgard's character complicates things and not I think in a way that improves her character as it makes all of her opinions and actions suspect and adds a tonne of personal enmity between her and a faction that is basically ignored. Edelgard's tolerance of the Agarthans is much more in line with "shady ass people I don't like and will dispose of as soon as I'm doing using them" rather than who they actually are to her, which are the people who literally tortured her and murdered like 90% of her family. Basically the way she acts in the game is as if the torture doesn't exist rather than it being a monumental part of her life. And I don't just mean she represses it, I mean if you take that C support out all of her actions in the game will still make exactly as much sense  if not more sense (though her turning into a monster in Azure Moon would require some more justification).

I will admit one thing, given what the Agarthans did to Edelgard, it is really strange that you don't deal with them directly in the game itself, Edelgard given her background has more reason to want Thales dead than anyone else. So it is a bit unsatisfying to see them dealt with in the epilogue rather than in an actual mission given this personal connection. 

Edelgard turning into a monster is actually perfectly justified in the sense that her soldiers has done this for her so she sees it as nothing more than right that she is willing to do the same thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um question totally unrelated to this but what is Rhea's real name because on the Fewiki on Fandom says that Rhea was her name I thought it was Seiros?

Also it says that the four saints were descendants of Sothis although it says that the Nabateans were children of the goddess?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, PeonyofLeosa Dreamworld said:

Um question totally unrelated to this but what is Rhea's real name because on the Fewiki on Fandom says that Rhea was her name I thought it was Seiros?

Also it says that the four saints were descendants of Sothis although it says that the Nabateans were children of the goddess?

To my understanding her name is Seiros, Rhea is basically a fake identity, but they are sometimes used interchangeably, it is referring to the same person.

Isn't being the descendants of Sothis and being the children of the goddess the same thing? I could be wrong, but doesn't do this imply that the four Saints were in fact Nabateans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

To my understanding her name is Seiros, Rhea is basically a fake identity, but they are sometimes used interchangeably, it is referring to the same person.

Isn't being the descendants of Sothis and being the children of the goddess the same thing? I could be wrong, but doesn't do this imply that the four Saints were in fact Nabateans?

Correct. Seiros is her actual name, and Nabateans is the proper name of their race. I'm annoyed by the name "children of the goddess" because we don't get much lore on them, so people might interpret that name literally.

Spoiler

I mean Cethleann can't literally be Sothis' child, unless Cichol...yuck...although that would explain why Rhea is so weird about Byleth/Sothis...BRB I'm gonna go throw up...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Sid Starkiller said:

Correct. Seiros is her actual name, and Nabateans is the proper name of their race. I'm annoyed by the name "children of the goddess" because we don't get much lore on them, so people might interpret that name literally.

  Hide contents

I mean Cethleann can't literally be Sothis' child, unless Cichol...yuck...although that would explain why Rhea is so weird about Byleth/Sothis...BRB I'm gonna go throw up...

 

It is also possible that children of the goddess is just another name for Nabateans and that it isn't necessarily her literal children. 

Spoiler

Granted, with Rhea you can never know, she does sometimes give of signs of having an Oeidipus complex. There is hardly ever a time. She doesn't talk about her mother in some fashion, which makes it weird when she is in a relationship with Byleth

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was just watching a YouTube vid that was talking about how great the Aquaman was in regards to how the character motivations and actions are very consistent, and this line he says got me thinking about how 3H is played:

Quote

"Make the character's motivations strong enough that the main characters HAVE to fight, regardless whether the writers want them to or not."

While I used the philosophical talk with Itachi in my initial post, from a writer's standpoint, everything about why Edelgard, Dimitri, Claude, and Rhea do what they do, why they can't do what they might have been able to do, it all makes sense, and why conflict is simply inevitable. 

Even if there is some part of them that want everyone to just get along, the character's motivations are just too strong that mutual existence of everyone is just impossible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

So I was just watching a YouTube vid that was talking about how great the Aquaman was in regards to how the character motivations and actions are very consistent, and this line he says got me thinking about how 3H is played:

While I used the philosophical talk with Itachi in my initial post, from a writer's standpoint, everything about why Edelgard, Dimitri, Claude, and Rhea do what they do, why they can't do what they might have been able to do, it all makes sense, and why conflict is simply inevitable. 

Even if there is some part of them that want everyone to just get along, the character's motivations are just too strong that mutual existence of everyone is just impossible. 

Well, there wouldn't be a game without this conflict, so force the writers need to make sure it happens, for one reason or another, and to make it work in universe. It needs to come from the characters motivations.

By the way, I didn't mention it before, but Itachi is my favourite Naruto character

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

Well, there wouldn't be a game without this conflict, so force the writers need to make sure it happens, for one reason or another, and to make it work in universe. It needs to come from the characters motivations.

By the way, I didn't mention it before, but Itachi is my favourite Naruto character

Yup, hence why it makes sense why everyone has good reason why they can't just talk. What they know, what they don't know, what they can't just say, everything is just so complicated that it's hard to open up. They are all isolated people without way of truly communicating. 

And yeah, Itachi is a great character, though I have issues with some of the stuff he did, namely with Sasuke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it's difficult to have in depth discussion about Three Houses is because of  now much variance there is. With characters being highly malleable to Blyeth goals. Take Perta for instance she can either range from declaring absolute loyalty from Edelgard to rebelling against the empire from years of servitude. It becomes difficult to say which of the most "definitive"  The applies to a good amount of characters. In addition is it tricky to have conversations while all posters fully played all the routes including the dlc. That's over a 100 hours to go through. There can't be a guideline saying that "you have to play this and this" unfortunately. Made even worse by more than 6 months later and there is not a complete script online. The small changes in translations also makes things confusing. Reminds me in the early 2000s of manga fan translations where characterization changed depending on version. 

Regarding Naruto I do like how majority of the major villains are products of the ninja system. Starting out with well intentions, that turned jaded after years of violence and suffering. The Ten Tails arc was all kinds of screwy with the concept by being fulled with evil brain chakra, talk no jutsus^2, deus ex machina, and Naruto being ninja jesus. Still I love the show.

 

Edited by Jingle Jangle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Crysta said:

 

That's a strange way of putting it. She wants Rhea out of her position, at the very least, so humanity can reclaim their right to govern themselves and she can uproot the nobility and class system at the heart of a significant amount of Fodlan's problems. Rhea thinks she's upholding peace, but in reality it's just that the multitude of problems her system is responsible for really don't bother her that much; it's better than humanity getting too advanced once again.

The church does suck. With how hard the game hits you over the head with what's wrong with it, it's impressive that this is YMMV.

Claude is new to Fodlan. It makes sense for him to be more cautious. But even so, he's pretty adamantly convinced that Rhea's his primary obstacle.

I wonder why.

.....That wasn't what I meant, we all know that the church is corrupted and Rhea is a walking mess. Edelgard and Claude are valid in being highly suspicious of the church. Fire Emblem follows the old "church is bad", JRPG trope, but at the same time it gives good reasons as to why that it is.

The difference is that Claude was in the right for waiting and holding his cards till the perfect opportunity was brought to him, than just declaring war and bringing forth bloodshed. Edel did not know all the information and only knew half-facts, and half-truths and lead everybody into war anyways.

Claude and Edelgard are interesting because they are almost on the same wavelength, but Edelgard chooses war, and Claude would rather not. Claude would rather wait instead, which was the wiser path to take.

If Claude is on the "wrong" route, then he either dies or just leaves, but that was better than just bringing everybody into a bloody war with 1/2 truths. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Eurydice said:

.....That wasn't what I meant, we all know that the church is corrupted and Rhea is a walking mess. Edelgard and Claude are valid in being highly suspicious of the church. Fire Emblem follows the old "church is bad", JRPG trope, but at the same time it gives good reasons as to why that it is.

The difference is that Claude was in the right for waiting and holding his cards till the perfect opportunity was brought to him, than just declaring war and bringing forth bloodshed. Edel did not know all the information and only knew half-facts, and half-truths and lead everybody into war anyways.

Claude and Edelgard are interesting because they are almost on the same wavelength, but Edelgard chooses war, and Claude would rather not. Claude would rather wait instead, which was the wiser path to take.

If Claude is on the "wrong" route, then he either dies or just leaves, but that was better than just bringing everybody into a bloody war with 1/2 truths. 

 

The difference is Claude wasn't given, or didn't take, the opportunity to act. But just sitting around and waiting for the perfect opportunity to arise is not a proactive, or even effective, way to bring forth systematic change. And sometimes just talking doesn't work, either, particularly when numerous factions are pursuing their own self interests. Edelgard's interests are in direct conflict with Rhea, obviously, but after the Flame Emperor reveal any possible inroads with Dimitri and the kingdom are out the window, too.

I think I'm just about done with explaining why attacking the Agarthans first is impractical for her ultimate goal. She's driven by her backstory and emotions, but she is not easily consumed by the latter. All taking them out first would do is make her feel better while lessening her own forces versus the Church.

You're right that Edelgard didn't have all the information that we, the player, have access to. It is very easy to judge her by that standard, but that's not fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Crysta said:

The difference is Claude wasn't given, or didn't take, the opportunity to act. But just sitting around and waiting for the perfect opportunity to arise is not a proactive, or even effective, way to bring forth systematic change. And sometimes just talking doesn't work, either, particularly when numerous factions are pursuing their own self interests. Edelgard's interests are in direct conflict with Rhea, obviously, but after the Flame Emperor reveal any possible inroads with Dimitri and the kingdom are out the window, too.

I think I'm just about done with explaining why attacking the Agarthans first is impractical for her ultimate goal. She's driven by her backstory and emotions, but she is not easily consumed by the latter. All taking them out first would do is make her feel better while lessening her own forces versus the Church.

You're right that Edelgard didn't have all the information that we, the player, have access to. It is very easy to judge her by that standard, but that's not fair.

Claude had to step on eggshells basically, so to speak, he knew that he had to be careful and know what he was doing, before doing anything, and realistically, he knew that his dream was basically a impossible one.

Claude's path was just taking the long path, instead of the short one, like Edelgard. If you believe that Edelgard took the correct path, that's fine, just, I have to really disagree, she didn't know what she was doing and had lack of control over the Slithers. We know why she worked with them, because she felt like she had to. Edelgard's plan was just messy, and did more hurt than saving, and only leading everybody on those 1/2 truths she has comes off as highly manipulative. Not saying that Claude was innocent of being manipulative either.

Disagree ? Byleth/ player doesn't know the whole truth until Rhea confesses it at the end of only some of the routes. SS and VW, I believe.

Maybe I'm being too harsh on Edelgard as she takes this path out of frustration and the desire to change the world for the better, but it just comes off as ....bad. Claude and Sylvain don't help either.

Edited by Eurydice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sid Starkiller said:

Correct. Seiros is her actual name, and Nabateans is the proper name of their race. I'm annoyed by the name "children of the goddess" because we don't get much lore on them, so people might interpret that name literally.

  Reveal hidden contents

I mean Cethleann can't literally be Sothis' child, unless Cichol...yuck...although that would explain why Rhea is so weird about Byleth/Sothis...BRB I'm gonna go throw up...

 

If I recall correctly when she talks about her backstory she says she "used the name Seiros", so that's probably not her real name too. She's probably in the category of too old to have a "real" name and just gets a new name every century.

9 hours ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

I will admit one thing, given what the Agarthans did to Edelgard, it is really strange that you don't deal with them directly in the game itself, Edelgard given her background has more reason to want Thales dead than anyone else. So it is a bit unsatisfying to see them dealt with in the epilogue rather than in an actual mission given this personal connection. 

Edelgard turning into a monster is actually perfectly justified in the sense that her soldiers has done this for her so she sees it as nothing more than right that she is willing to do the same thing

I meant form a lore perspective as she takes that form because she has two crests which would need to be altered somewhat if the torture backstory didn't exist (although just "she used science to turn a crest bearer into a demonic beast" would probably suffice. That is what's basically happening, the two crests business serves as mostly as power hype).

Edited by Jotari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Eurydice said:

Claude had to step on eggshells basically, so to speak, he knew that he had to be careful and know what he was doing, before doing anything, and realistically, he knew that his dream was basically a impossible one.

No, he didn't really get to the point where he had do political eggshell walking. He was a kid in class when Edelgard declared her war, not truly in any position of power to do anything. And when he finally did ascend, he had to deal with that aftermath before he could realistically pursue anything else. He does want to avoid war more than likely, so he wouldn't be going down that path if he had another open to him, but it's because he also knows the world couldn't "get behind" something like that... and his vision is far more contingent on people getting along than hers is.

tl;dr you're giving him too much credit for a hypothetical long term plan that never actually takes place because Edelgard's war gives him the opportunity to forge the world how he likes it without looking like a terrible warmongering tyrant. There's a reason I don't consider VW's ending the best.

7 minutes ago, Eurydice said:

Edelgard's plan was just messy, and did more hurt than saving, and only leading everybody on those 1/2 truths she has comes off as highly manipulative. Not saying that Claude was innocent of being manipulative either.

CF's ending is the best ending. I'm not even sure I'd call it messy: it's pretty straightforward and narrow in scope. It's not like we go razing towns or go out of our way to target civilians. Everyone you kill is a combatant.

10 minutes ago, Eurydice said:

Disagree ? Byleth/ player doesn't know the whole truth until Rhea confesses it at the end of only some of the routes. SS and VW, I believe.

Maybe, I'm being too harsh on Edelgard as she takes this path out of frustration and the desire to change the world for the better, but it just comes off as ....bad. Claude and Sylvain don't help either.

You don't realize she's operating on incomplete information until you've played those routes, yes.

There's nothing suggesting Claude's hypothetical plan to bring peace to Fodlan would have worked. Not sure where Sylvain comes in? He's an asshole because of his Crest and he doesn't really seem to change in the story lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Eurydice said:

Claude had to step on eggshells basically, so to speak, he knew that he had to be careful and know what he was doing, before doing anything, and realistically, he knew that his dream was basically a impossible one.

Claude's path was just taking the long path, instead of the short one, like Edelgard. If you believe that Edelgard took the correct path, that's fine, just, I have to really disagree, she didn't know what she was doing and had lack of control over the Slithers. We know why she worked with them, because she felt like she had to. Edelgard's plan was just messy, and did more hurt than saving, and only leading everybody on those 1/2 truths she has comes off as highly manipulative. Not saying that Claude was innocent of being manipulative either.

Disagree ? Byleth/ player doesn't know the whole truth until Rhea confesses it at the end of only some of the routes. SS and VW, I believe.

Maybe I'm being too harsh on Edelgard as she takes this path out of frustration and the desire to change the world for the better, but it just comes off as ....bad. Claude and Sylvain don't help either.

The problem with this is Rhea. Rhea's not like modern leaders. She's immortal. She's been alive all this time without anyone knowing. The reason why nowadays, most leaders don't stay in charge forever is to prevent stagnant leadership. Rhea's overall become someone that was unwilling to step down. Claude can try and try and try, but his dream won't be attained if Rhea is unwilling to change, and she's been like this for the course of over 1,200 years.

Trying to assume that change would surely have happened without war cause the current gen are good people is overall utilizing meta knowledge as headcanons. Because it's overall an assumption.

War changes people and beliefs, makes them see things in a different light.

Take Ferdinand as an example. He had to  learn what it was like being a noble that's had his title, land, and wealth all stripped away. He changed and had to learn to see things in a new perspective.

Take Ingrid as another. If she's in AM, she's sticking to her knightly beliefs all the way. But recruit her in other routes, and she's no longer able to consider herself a knight of Faerghus anymore, so she steps back and reanalyzes her life, which makes her choose to generally return to House Galatea after the war and work hard to transform the land from a frigid wasteland to a bountiful one. 

This is why Edelgard is considered a "Chaotic Good" in being a good person that uses chaos as a means to bring about the change needed. Even if she didn't WANT to, she knew that she NEEDED to.

Want =/= Need

She suffered a horrific tragedy, so she's unwilling to sit back and just wait for change that just wasn't happening. 

2 minutes ago, Crysta said:

CF's ending is the best ending. I'm not even sure I'd call it messy: it's pretty straightforward and narrow in scope. It's not like we go razing towns or go out of our way to target civilians. Everyone you kill is a combatant.

One thing that makes me love about Edelgard's route the most is that I KNOW what I'm fighting for. It's why I had such struggle with AM because... Dimitri really didn't make a future clear. Because Dimtiri doesn't think of the long term goals or a future, but focuses on the present overall, which is reflected by his last line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

One thing that makes me love about Edelgard's route the most is that I KNOW what I'm fighting for. It's why I had such struggle with AM because... Dimitri really didn't make a future clear. Because Dimtiri doesn't think of the long term goals or a future, but focuses on the present overall, which is reflected by his last line. 

I can't say I would have gone about it the same way she did, but it was my third route so I knew going in that there was going to be incomplete/imperfect logic behind some of her actions. I'm not sure everyone is keen on making peace with that if it's not their first route, and particularly if AM was their first choice. I have no scientific data or research to back this up, mind you, but it generally feels that way.

I will say that the rest of the BE students felt like they were just there because they liked me, rather than passionately behind the cause or considering the implications behind what Edelgard may be doing. It's less noteworthy than the fretting the BL does in regard to feral Dimitri, but like... some fretting may have been alright? None of them strike me as particularly religious but jfc we're upending some pretty foundational stuff in the near future. It's not like it seems like Edelgard couldn't hold her own in a debate.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Crysta said:

I can't say I would have gone about it the same way she did, but it was my third route so I knew going in that there was going to be incomplete/imperfect logic behind some of her actions. I'm not sure everyone is keen on making peace with that if it's not their first route, and particularly if AM was their first choice. I have no scientific data or research to back this up, mind you, but it generally feels that way.

I will say that the rest of the BE students felt like they were just there because they liked me, rather than passionately behind the cause or considering the implications behind what Edelgard may be doing. It's less noteworthy than the fretting the BL does in regard to feral Dimitri, but like... some fretting may have been alright? None of them strike me as particularly religious but jfc we're upending some pretty foundational stuff in the near future. It's not like it seems like Edelgard couldn't hold her own in a debate.

It's incredibly rare for someone to like El if they played Blue Lion first. Hell, play Golden Deer and still be hard pressed to like her. 

Honestly, I dunno. Thing is, Edelgard's route is all about making a choice for yourself. You join the cause because you believe in it. It's actually why I like how the final lines in the last chapter before the battle began is of the students expressing their own personal desires. Its also what makes me like most of the recruits of CF since the characters express their own personal beliefs.

The JP lines kind of indicate how the students look up to both Byleth and Edelgard together, which is reflected by the S support of the two where Edelgard expresses that the two of them will be the lights that will guide Fodlan to its new dawn. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

It's incredibly rare for someone to like El if they played Blue Lion first. Hell, play Golden Deer and still be hard pressed to like her. 

Honestly, I dunno. Thing is, Edelgard's route is all about making a choice for yourself. You join the cause because you believe in it. It's actually why I like how the final lines in the last chapter before the battle began is of the students expressing their own personal desires. Its also what makes me like most of the recruits of CF since the characters express their own personal beliefs.

The JP lines kind of indicate how the students look up to both Byleth and Edelgard together, which is reflected by the S support of the two where Edelgard expresses that the two of them will be the lights that will guide Fodlan to its new dawn. 

I think the existence of Silver Snow weakens the Black Eagle students a bit in this regard (excluding Hubert of course). As we have a route where they expressly don't join the cause just because Byleth doesn't. That does make it seem like their allegiances are less based on beliefs and more based on just personal loyalty. You know they had the balls to outright take away your main lord in that route (who for me held my movement ring T.T) I kind of wish they'd been willing to go one step further and remove the entirety of the black eagles (with maybe some exceptions) and just include prepromoted Church members as your main army (maybe with a slightly expanded cast there). This probably would annoy some people who on their first run have been training a bunch of units they like, but it would make the characters seem a bit more solid in their beliefs and would force the player to use some church members that I expect mostly get ignored due to later recruitment times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

 

One thing that makes me love about Edelgard's route the most is that I KNOW what I'm fighting for. It's why I had such struggle with AM because... Dimitri really didn't make a future clear. Because Dimtiri doesn't think of the long term goals or a future, but focuses on the present overall, which is reflected by his last line. 

Dimitri does not need a plan for the future, they attacked his country unprovoked and he is going to end the war. There is nothing more and nothing more is needed. Is the normal Villain act, Hero react story. Edelgard had to be stopped because that version of Edelgard sure as hell was not going to lead to CF ending. Wich ino would not work anyway, but at this point i am a broken record about that issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, Dimitri needs a plan if I want to be confident of his ability to lead after exhibiting clear, invasive mental health issues. And plenty of advisors.

But I can't assume that reassurance is necessary for everyone.

Edited by Crysta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Flere210 said:

Dimitri does not need a plan for the future, they attacked his country unprovoked and he is going to end the war. There is nothing more and nothing more is needed. Is the normal Villain act, Hero react story. Edelgard had to be stopped because that version of Edelgard sure as hell was not going to lead to CF ending. Wich ino would not work anyway, but at this point i am a broken record about that issue.

Honestly, that's even worse, really. Cause 3H is all about how things currently needed to change. And that if you want things to change, you need some plan for the future. Dimitri talks this once, but never really in depth. It's this lack of reason that makes it hard to know what the point of fighting is. 

We can easily argue that any ending will not work out and another war can break out as a result. It's not that hard. Like, at all. Like saying one route is not gonna work out is silly, really. You can move one generation and say something will go wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...