Jump to content
omegaxis1

The True Tragedy of Three Houses

Recommended Posts

Just now, Darkmoon6789 said:

So either makeshift funeral pyre or absolutely nothing? Don't seem evil at at to me if this is true. Why is this always a major argument? Seems desperate to me

It's a dumb argument, esp when Gilbert and Alois, in AM and CF respectively set Garreg Mach's front yard on fire with everyone still on it.

Share this post


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

Every time somebody brings up Bernadetta being set on fire, they're expressing annoyance at how often it's brought up against Edelgard's character, which I personally have never encountered. The only people who seem to make a big deal of it are the ones trying hard to defend it and just end up drawing attention to it anyway. I certainly never thought of it as malicious until I was being told not to make a big deal out of it. 

Eh people were actually bringing it up in the original Edelgard is bad thread, to emphasize her cruelty, and there was actually a fair amount of people going "WTF really that happens?"

It doesn't. But not setting Bernie on fire doesn't really mean she's not perfectly fine with setting everyone else on fire lol

Share this post


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

Eh people were actually bringing it up in the original Edelgard is bad thread, to emphasize her cruelty, and there was actually a fair amount of people going "WTF really that happens?"

It doesn't. But not setting Bernie on fire doesn't really mean she's not perfectly fine with setting everyone else on fire lol

B-but she set my side on fire!  Never mind the fact that EO doesn't take terrain damage (and neither does Holy Knight).

Out of all Edel has done, this is one of the least offensive things.  Though how the heck did she find the time to stuff that platform full of combustibles, and how did my guys NOT accidentally torch it first?

Share this post


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

Yes, I'm aware that you're fine with Dimitri being cruel and dumb because he's irrationally hellbent on revenge, and you're apt to overlook his previous mistakes and shortcomings - which actually strike me as far more self-destructive and potentially dangerous to his own people than anything Edelgard has done until that point - because he gets better. I'm less thrilled about how easily everyone but Dimitri himself forgives himself for it.

This thread, like the billion before it, is fixated on Edelgard and how she's wrong. I'm bringing up how Dimitri is wrong, since apparently we're having difficulty arguing about something else somehow.

 

I'm not fine with it like how I'm not fine with him taunting Randolph though jerkass had a point and should have just killed him to be done and over with it instead of torturing him which is what Byleth proceeds to do. I pointed out why it led him the way it did in the Gronder fight and why it wasn't a narrative OOC moment as opposed to Claude there in that battle. Last I check everyone agrees that Dimitri is off the deep end in AM and VW including his fans, no one is defending his actions just simply makes sense. I don't get why you can't come to terms with that.

Edited by AbsoluteZer0Nova

Share this post


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

Eh people were actually bringing it up in the original Edelgard is bad thread, to emphasize her cruelty, and there was actually a fair amount of people going "WTF really that happens?"

It doesn't. But not setting Bernie on fire doesn't really mean she's not perfectly fine with setting everyone else on fire lol

If I wanted to put Edelgard on blast for murdering her allies, I would sooner point out her turning on the Slitherers at the end of her route. At least, I assume she kills them all? It all happens off screen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Axel987 said:

It's a dumb argument, esp when Gilbert and Alois, in AM and CF respectively set Garreg Mach's front yard on fire with everyone still on it.

And  how Rhea set the entire Kingdom Capital on fire, with civilians still in it.

But this only applies to one route, other versions of Rhea never does this

Share this post


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

Every time somebody brings up Bernadetta being set on fire, they're expressing annoyance at how often it's brought up against Edelgard's character, which I personally have never encountered. The only people who seem to make a big deal of it are the ones trying hard to defend it and just end up drawing attention to it anyway. I certainly never thought of it as malicious until I was being told not to make a big deal out of it. 

At this point, I'm just tired of that argument. Honestly, I shouldn't have to feel the need to defend every bit of action, but seems that stans of all sides HAVE to take a shot at every negative of opposing lords. 

4 minutes ago, Crysta said:

Yes, I'm aware that you're fine with Dimitri being cruel and dumb because he's irrationally hellbent on revenge, and you're apt to overlook his previous mistakes and shortcomings - which actually strike me as far more self-destructive and potentially dangerous to his own people than anything Edelgard has done until that point - because he gets better. I'm less thrilled about how easily everyone but Dimitri himself forgives himself for it.

This thread, like the billion before it, is fixated on Edelgard and how she's wrong. I'm bringing up how Dimitri is wrong, since apparently we're having difficulty arguing about something else somehow.

Dimitri also confesses to having killed children, but BL stans have always tried to argue the context and instead insist that Dimitri is justified. 

Also, one cruel thing is how there's a domino effect in 3H, where one mistake sets forth a chain of events. 

Dimitri wanted to torture Randolph to death led to Byleth being forced to kill him as a mercy, and that made Fleche seek revenge, which led to Rodrigue's death.

Edelgard allowing Thales to take the Death Knight resulted in Flayn's kidnapping, which resulted in the experiment in Remire. Edelgard tried to correct her mistake when Flayn had been kidnapped, but it doesn't change that her mistake led to tragedy, and the later one where Monica got inserted and Jeralt was killed. 

Share this post


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

If I wanted to put Edelgard on blast for murdering her allies, I would sooner point out her turning on the Slitherers at the end of her route. At least, I assume she kills them all? It all happens off screen.

Spoiler

Unpaired Byleth's ending proves this wrong, sadly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not even going to try and defend the "killing childrens thing" beyond simply thinking it's hella jarring, given the game calls out that even early-part 2 Dimitri has a soft spot for children. Probably meant to be.

I think people over-focus on the fire thing because it isn't being done by the allied party so they feel like they're meant to take it as "Oh no, they're ruthlessly burning their own soldiers alive!!!!" or something lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, eclipse said:
  Hide contents

Unpaired Byleth's ending proves this wrong, sadly.

 

Jeritza ending reveals that it's 100% true and they are utterly wiped out.

Hooray for genocide, am I right? 

Only genocide Edelgard is guilty of. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

If I wanted to put Edelgard on blast for murdering her allies, I would sooner point out her turning on the Slitherers at the end of her route. At least, I assume she kills them all? It all happens off screen.

Edelgard is not an egregious villain by FE standards. Her moves are more calculated and cold than atrocious and cruel. There's no evil laughter or overextended monologues.

I think the worst thing she probably does beyond being responsible for the casualties of war (again not something OMG TERRIBLE or unusual by FE villain standards) is give Thales the reigns on anything full knowing he's evil af. She prevents the citizens of the capital from evacuating but doesn't actually... do anything with them? It feels like she just rolls over and dies at that point in VW lol.

Edited by Crysta

Share this post


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

At this point, I'm just tired of that argument. Honestly, I shouldn't have to feel the need to defend every bit of action, but seems that stans of all sides HAVE to take a shot at every negative of opposing lords. 

Dimitri also confesses to having killed children, but BL stans have always tried to argue the context and instead insist that Dimitri is justified. 

Also, one cruel thing is how there's a domino effect in 3H, where one mistake sets forth a chain of events. 

Dimitri wanted to torture Randolph to death led to Byleth being forced to kill him as a mercy, and that made Fleche seek revenge, which led to Rodrigue's death.

Edelgard allowing Thales to take the Death Knight resulted in Flayn's kidnapping, which resulted in the experiment in Remire. Edelgard tried to correct her mistake when Flayn had been kidnapped, but it doesn't change that her mistake led to tragedy, and the later one where Monica got inserted and Jeralt was killed. 

Well you know Dimitri and Edelgard have the right to defend themselves or any person for that matter if their life is in jeopardy especially when it's the battlefield or attempted assassination kids included sad as it is. Reason why I ultimately get her killing Dimitri in Crimson Flower, what I didn't approve of was her taunting Dimitri when that was the information he had the time and her not explaining to him fully there as he was a king that was defending his country from the person who raged war in being the invader though that why in itself I don't for the like of me understand that line from Edelgard afterward with her saying that Dimitri lost sight of his path as king like.. what? When Crimson Flower is literally him having not gone insane in losing his path as king in being so obsessive with revenge that it makes him lose his responsibilities to the crown like the other routes just that him killing Edelgard and defending his kingdom coincide here which he was in his right to do so as any king should for their kingdom. Though hey another comparison between the two of them in being foils with Edelgard to Dimitri in CF and Dimitri to Randolph in AM.

Edited by AbsoluteZer0Nova

Share this post


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

If I wanted to put Edelgard on blast for murdering her allies, I would sooner point out her turning on the Slitherers at the end of her route. At least, I assume she kills them all? It all happens off screen.

I wouldn't shed tears for the slitherers, this needs to be done for the safety of everyone. They were never true allies, Edelgard was strongarmed into working with them based on circumstances. 

They have ruined the lifes if Edelgard and countless others, torturing her and Lysithea, killing Edelgard's siblings in a cruel and torturous manner. Don't get how killing them would be a bad thing

Share this post


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

Jeritza ending reveals that it's 100% true and they are utterly wiped out.

Hooray for genocide, am I right? 

Only genocide Edelgard is guilty of. 

Yeah that's, another jarring thing about TWSITD.

Are they the only Agarthans left? If so are we basically committing genocide? Did Sothis basically commit genocide? The implications are there and it's kinda uncomfortable if you actually think about it lol.

4 minutes ago, Crysta said:

Edelgard is not an egregious villain by FE standards. Her moves are more calculated and cold than atrocious and cruel. There's no evil laughter or overextended monologues.

I think the worst thing she probably does beyond being responsible for the casualties of war (again not something OMG TERRIBLE or unusual by FE villain standards) is give Thales the reigns on anything full knowing he's evil af. She prevents the citizens of the capital from evacuating but does actually... do anything with them? It feels like she just rolls over and dies at that point in VW lol.

She doesn't really do anything with that, it's more of her baiting Claude than anything, thinking he wouldn't endanger the people there by attacking full force or something, I guess. Then again Hubert blatantly uses ballistas, magic orbs and onagers that could hit any of the houses possibly, along with Demonic Beasts out on the streets so...??

Edited by Axel987

Share this post


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

Jeritza ending reveals that it's 100% true and they are utterly wiped out.

Hooray for genocide, am I right? 

Only genocide Edelgard is guilty of. 

"We, uh, completely forgot what the hell we wrote about Byleth, and now there's a huge conflict.  What do?"

The only way I can reconcile this is if it's a huge localization error.  Otherwise, the two can't co-exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She wasn't strong armed: Hubert convinced her that they were worth using against the Church. One of the points of disagreement I have with Edelgard stans is their willingness to insist she has no agency. I always got the distinct impression she was well aware of what she was doing but mistakenly believes she has the upperhand in that arrangement, and that's why it comes as a shock when the Slitherers release the magic nukes.

Share this post


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

Edelgard is not an egregious villain by FE standards. Her moves are more calculated and cold than atrocious and cruel. There's no evil laughter or overextended monologues.

I think the worst thing she probably does beyond being responsible for the casualties of war (again not something OMG TERRIBLE or unusual by FE villain standards) is give Thales the reigns on anything full knowing he's evil af. She prevents the citizens of the capital from evacuating but doesn't actually... do anything with them? It feels like she just rolls over and dies at that point in VW lol.

Actually, to my understanding she didn't give Thales the reigns, he already had them. He had full control of Edelgard's father, if anything she was given the reigns by him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

Actually, to my understanding she didn't give Thales the reigns, he already had them. He had full control of Edelgard's father, if anything she was given the reigns by him

I thought Aegir was removed and replaced by Thales when she formally took the throne? I don't think Thales was regent during her father's reign... but I could have missed it.

Share this post


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

I thought Aegir was removed and replaced by Thales when she formally took the throne? I don't think Thales was regent during her father's reign... but I could have missed it.

Aegir to my underdtanding was always a puppet of Thales, even before he killed and replaced the real Lord Arundel

Share this post


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

Edelgard is not an egregious villain by FE standards. Her moves are more calculated and cold than atrocious and cruel. There's no evil laughter or overextended monologues.

I would argue the closest to that from Edelgard is her about to kill Dimitri in her telling him "Farewell King of Delusion" which was a unnecessary quip the same applying to Dimitri calling Randolph a monster when both should have just killed them and be done with it. Though actually with that said I'm aware Crimson Flower has some mistranslations though the Edelgard pretty much no you response still wasn't any better from what I saw in the actual translation in Japanese where as Azure Moon's Edelgard telling Dimitri he has no idea how the poor feels of what motivates them being nobility when she herself is too in being baffling was better explained in the actual translation.

Share this post


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

I thought Aegir was removed and replaced by Thales when she formally took the throne? I don't think Thales was regent during her father's reign... but I could have missed it.

Thales/Arundel only replaces him outside of CF since there Edelgard strips away everything from him and his family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, AbsoluteZer0Nova said:

Well you know Dimitri and Edelgard have the right to defend themselves or any person for that matter if their life is in jeopardy especially when it's the battlefield or attempted assassination kids included sad as it is. Reason why I ultimately get her killing Dimitri in Crimson Flower, what I didn't approve of was her taunting Dimitri when that was the information he had the time and her not explaining to him fully there as he was a king that defending his country from the person who raged war in being the invader though that why in itself I don't for the like of me understand that line from Edelgard afterward with her saying that Dimitri lost sight of his path as king like.. what? When Crimson Flower is literally him having not gone insane in losing his path as king in being so obsessive with revenge that it makes him lose his responsibilities to the crown like the other routes just that him killing Edelgard and defending his kingdom coincide here which he was in his right to do so as any king should for their kingdom. Though hey another comparison between the two of them in being foils with Edelgard to Dimitri in CF and Dimitri to Randolph in AM.

Explain for... what? 

To shatter his beliefs? That he literally dragged his nation to a war, killed countless people, and caused his own soldiers to turn themselves into monsters, all for a misguided belief? If Dimitri was able to listen to reason, then Edelgard did something far crueler. She made him realize that he did all this for nothing. That his beliefs amounted to naught.

Remember what Edelgard said about Lonato? That pitying him and labeling him as merely a victim, when he died for his beliefs, is truly the most disrespectful thing. 

Edelgard would rather Dimitri die believing he was right than to die knowing how much he screwed up. Even though the act of what she did afterward was gutting at her heart. 

That's the thing. Dimitri and Edelgard both fought for their beliefs. 

Edelgard doesn't know the full truth about Rhea, and thus sees has as a monster that manipulated humanity for her own selfish purpose. Dimitri didn't know that Edelgard was innocent of the Tragedy of Duscur. 

They are bound by their own form of reality. And that reality is their beliefs, and that they staked everything on. They piled so many corpses on it, and would stake their lives into that belief. 

7 minutes ago, eclipse said:

"We, uh, completely forgot what the hell we wrote about Byleth, and now there's a huge conflict.  What do?"

The only way I can reconcile this is if it's a huge localization error.  Otherwise, the two can't co-exist.

More endings generally indicate that they were already beaten since they always refer to the struggle in past tense. But I got a friend that knows translations, so I can check up on them.

7 minutes ago, Crysta said:

She wasn't strong armed: Hubert convinced her that they were worth using against the Church. One of the points of disagreement I have with Edelgard stans is their willingness to insist she has no agency. I always got the distinct impression she was well aware of what she was doing but mistakenly believes she has the upperhand in that arrangement, and that's why it comes as a shock when the Slitherers release the magic nukes.

More like she doesn't now enough about them and thus needs to investigate them as much as she could, hence why she and Hubert investigate them. It's how they were able to figure out that the Agarthans were the ones behind the Aillel. Know the saying, "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer." 

But doing so meant that Edelgard had to comply with quite a few of their atrocious actions. 

6 minutes ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

Actually, to my understanding she didn't give Thales the reigns, he already had them. He had full control of Edelgard's father, if anything she was given the reigns by him

I meant how she gave Thales the Death Knight, and then in Chapter 12, she had to comply with Thales's strategy in non-CF routes. It's why CF route has the war change extensively.

 

4 minutes ago, Crysta said:

I thought Aegir was removed and replaced by Thales when she formally took the throne? I don't think Thales was regent during her father's reign... but I could have missed it.

 

1 minute ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

Aegir to my underdtanding was always a puppet of Thales, even before he killed and replaced the real Lord Arundel

You're thinking Arundel. Aegir is Ferdinand's father, who dies in Ferdinand/Lysithea paralogue in non-CF routes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Axel987 said:

The actual weird thing is that Claude attacks you regardless of if you actually go after him.

The problem is they say that Gronder Field is incredibly foggy during the cutscene beforehand, but it's not actually a fog of war map. It would've been nice if there was some way to disguise who the third army was, and not reveal Dimitri/Claude's presence until you actually get near them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the weird Ferdinand x Lysithea paralogue it's implied that Aegir was terrible but things got even worse when Thales was put in charge and Thales managed to shove all the blame onto Aegir.

Still, at the very least, she replaces one cruel slug with an even crueler slug.

Share this post


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

More endings generally indicate that they were already beaten since they always refer to the struggle in past tense. But I got a friend that knows translations, so I can check up on them.

For unpaired Byleth:

Spoiler

He/she stands ready to defend against the Slithers every time they rise up.  Which implies that someone or something keeps resurrecting them.

 

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...