What would have happened if the Flame Emperor never went on the offensive?

[Jotari]

8 minutes ago, Hardric62 said:

 

'No power'. Yup. That's why the fact the archbishop is supposed to serve as witness for each new emperor crowning is a big deal, and even more when Edelgard ditches this for her own crowning.  

Well it demonstratably isn't a big deal as Edelgard gets away with it just fine.

Edited March 1, 2020 by Jotari

[Nihilem]

52 minutes ago, Hardric62 said:

 

'No power'. Yup. That's why the fact the archbishop is supposed to serve as witness for each new emperor crowning is a big deal, and even more when Edelgard ditches this for her own crowning.  Clearly there is absolutely no influence of the pope of the religion and her military order within half the continent just because of one incident more than one century ago. Absolutely nobody would believe or could imagine that things could have evolved past that low point, or that the Central Church could ever try to renew these relationships themselves.

 

It was the relationships between the two groups knowing a rise in tension at that moment, there was 120 years for the crisis to cool off. And it did so enough her father was attending Garreg Mach. Also, by that logic, once the Western Church is purged, there should be no relationship between Faerghus and the Church.

 

Having the archbishop at your own crowing is also something is also nice publicity for the newly crowned emperor. Like politicans from conservative parties across europe are eager to meet the pope and letting themselves taken pictures with him. That does not mean that the pope has anything to say in the countries of those politicans.

On the other side, the existence of the Ministry of Religion which has replaced the southern bishop is hard evidence that the influence of the church on empire politics is minimal at best. This event alone is basically there version of Bismarcks "Kulturkampf" (a struggle between the (nothern) german empire and the catholic church, where the politican Bismarck basically stripped the church from most of there important wordly "rights" like perfoming marriages and (religious) education and putting them under control of the state) which diminished the influence of the catholic church in germany quite drastically and cemeted the "Split between church and state" (dont know the correct english word for it).

 

With all the references between Adrestia and the various german states, i dont think that this is a accident ....

 

 

But by all this discussions we should probably keep in mind that only we as the outside observant know this. Edelgard on the other side were fetched information from a group which had all the intention to make the church look as bad as possible whereever they can. So maybe they conviced Edelgard that the Ministry of Religion was secretly controlled by the church or that even the whole Coup détat was somehow their doing .... wouldnt be the first time they blamed the church for things they themselves were responsible for ....

 

Quote

And for 'No change can be sudden'... French Revolution. Within two, three years, the nobility had lost its privileges, many had emigrated to search for support from foreign monarchies, and the social order had taken a pretty serious hit, which led to reactions from other Europeans kingdoms not keen on the idea that their peasants could ever take notes about what happened, and a Church which didn't like the ditching of kings she's supposed to sacre.

But wasnt his point that creating a functioning and just system took time? Because the system in the aftermath of the french revolution was certainly not just and I would also say not really functioning.... that you can overthrow a system in a few years I think no one questioned. But then you normally have chaos.

Edited March 1, 2020 by Nihilem

[Hardric62]

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

Well it demonstratably isn't a big deal as Edelgard gets away with it just fine.

 

Which is why it is a trigger for Crimson FLower, only happens on the very month Edelgard launch her war, and is described as a coup in every other road.

 

I can't say if that's bad faith or trolling.

 

39 minutes ago, Nihilem said:

With all the references between Adrestia and the various german states, i dont think that this is a accident ....

 

I find this statement very ironic, because my reasoning is very ùuch grounded in parallels to be drawn with the medieval German States: Namely, the Holy Roman Empire. Where one of the emperor's big defining features was the fact he was crowned by the pope, the only ruler of Europe to have that. Which of course meant for the popes that they very much had a say to have in imperial policies (See Fredric Barbarossa, Henry IV and Canossa, Fredric II Hohenstauffen, for starters). Conflict between papal and imperial authority is a defining feature of the HRE's history, until the Reformation bit both the very catholic pope and the very catholic emperor in the butt. And even then in 1526, Charles Quint, which would be the emperor to see the end of his morale superiority through papal crowning in the empire, and the Reformation beginning to gain ground at the time, still took the time of entering a war with the pope to demonstrate he had the pants in the relationship, which ended with the sack of Rome.

 

41 minutes ago, Nihilem said:

On the other side, the existence of the Ministry of Religion which has replaced the southern bishop is hard evidence that the influence of the church on empire politics is minimal at best. This event alone is basically there version of Bismarcks "Kulturkampf" (a struggle between the (nothern) german empire and the catholic church, where the politican Bismarck basically stripped the church from most of there important wordly "rights" like perfoming marriages and (religious) education and putting them under control of the state) which diminished the influence of the catholic church in germany quite drastically and cemeted the "Split between church and state" (dont know the correct english word for it).

 

Thing is, by that point, Bismarck (lutherian), and the bulk of Germany (lutherian/calvinists), are protestants. And even there, the catholics within Germany won many actual wins before Bismarck was forced to negotiate with the Church. And relations remained strained until the end of the Second Reich. That would rather point at the persistance of some serious influence in my opinion.

 

40 minutes ago, Nihilem said:

 

But by all this discussions we should probably keep in mind that only we as the outside observant know this. Edelgard on the other side were fetched information from a group which had all the intention to make the church look as bad as possible whereever they can. So maybe they conviced Edelgard that the Ministry of Religion was secretly controlled by the church or that even the whole Coup détat was somehow their doing .... wouldnt be the first time they blamed the church for things they themselves were responsible for ....

 

Facepalm. Facepalm so hard.

First, because I'm ducking tired of people saying 'LOLZ, Edelgadr is sooo much of a cretin for swallowing Mole Men Bullshit'. At what exact moment of their relationship of intense mutual hatred is it suggested she would be so monumentally stupid to believe anything they would say to her face? My guess, using basic logic? They probably nudged her in that direction, yes, but they most likely did so indirectly, since you know, she had literaly zero reasons of trusting them, by doing things like Solon/Thomas and its frobidden texts of Verdant Winds. Signs of dissimulation of truth by the Church, shady behaviors... Basic deduction is then generally enough to draw not-so friendly conclusions about whoever is tied to these things.

Second, The shitshow of the Southern Church happened 120 years ago, that's a lot of tiume for the Central Church to get their heads out of their butts to rebuild their relationship with Adrestia, the bloody half of the continent, which is literaly next door. It seems like basic logic some diplomacy happened during the years, but who knows? Maybe this possibility is really too far removed from common sense to be considered.

Third, a part of the problem with the Church is the moral order it upholds, with the nobility with a divine mandate to rule, that they let go to their heads after centuries of Kool-Aid drinking, leading to duckshows like Duscur and the Seven. Edelgard's anger stems from the fact that the Church created a system which allows this sort of blatant, brutal and bloody abuse to happen, and 'forgot' about its own commandments about how Crests isn't enough to be beyond everyone, and do that sort of shit.

 

40 minutes ago, Nihilem said:

But wasnt his point that creating a functioning and just system took time? Because the system in the aftermath of the french revolution was certainly not just and I would also say not really functioning.... that you can overthrow a system in a few years I think no one questioned. But then you normally have chaos.

 

Call it cynism, but I don't see Edelgard establishing this order even within Adrestia peacefully. Because the Mole Men and the Seven control the country, not her. Yes, she got Bergliez and Hevring in her corner, but the only way she could have outbidden Aegir with them is likely that very war to unify Fodlan, and the possibilities it offered. Without that, no change of camps, especially to support an order aimed at getting them off power. And the Mole Men won't like their Nemesis 2.0 giving the middle finger to their plans. So intense, bloody nasty civil war is likely to happen. Which will probably lead to the sort of changes the French Revolution happened.

[Jotari]

24 minutes ago, Hardric62 said:

 

Which is why it is a trigger for Crimson FLower, only happens on the very month Edelgard launch her war, and is described as a coup in every other road.

 

I can't say if that's bad faith or trolling.

 

 

I find this statement very ironic, because my reasoning is very ùuch grounded in parallels to be drawn with the medieval German States: Namely, the Holy Roman Empire. Where one of the emperor's big defining features was the fact he was crowned by the pope, the only ruler of Europe to have that. Which of course meant for the popes that they very much had a say to have in imperial policies (See Fredric Barbarossa, Henry IV and Canossa, Fredric II Hohenstauffen, for starters). Conflict between papal and imperial authority is a defining feature of the HRE's history, until the Reformation bit both the very catholic pope and the very catholic emperor in the butt. And even then in 1526, Charles Quint, which would be the emperor to see the end of his morale superiority through papal crowning in the empire, and the Reformation beginning to gain ground at the time, still took the time of entering a war with the pope to demonstrate he had the pants in the relationship, which ended with the sack of Rome.

 

 

Thing is, by that point, Bismarck (lutherian), and the bulk of Germany (lutherian/calvinists), are protestants. And even there, the catholics within Germany won many actual wins before Bismarck was forced to negotiate with the Church. And relations remained strained until the end of the Second Reich. That would rather point at the persistance of some serious influence in my opinion.

 

 

Facepalm. Facepalm so hard.

First, because I'm ducking tired of people saying 'LOLZ, Edelgadr is sooo much of a cretin for swallowing Mole Men Bullshit'. At what exact moment of their relationship of intense mutual hatred is it suggested she would be so monumentally stupid to believe anything they would say to her face? My guess, using basic logic? They probably nudged her in that direction, yes, but they most likely did so indirectly, since you know, she had literaly zero reasons of trusting them, by doing things like Solon/Thomas and its frobidden texts of Verdant Winds. Signs of dissimulation of truth by the Church, shady behaviors... Basic deduction is then generally enough to draw not-so friendly conclusions about whoever is tied to these things.

Second, The shitshow of the Southern Church happened 120 years ago, that's a lot of tiume for the Central Church to get their heads out of their butts to rebuild their relationship with Adrestia, the bloody half of the continent, which is literaly next door. It seems like basic logic some diplomacy happened during the years, but who knows? Maybe this possibility is really too far removed from common sense to be considered.

Third, a part of the problem with the Church is the moral order it upholds, with the nobility with a divine mandate to rule, that they let go to their heads after centuries of Kool-Aid drinking, leading to duckshows like Duscur and the Seven. Edelgard's anger stems from the fact that the Church created a system which allows this sort of blatant, brutal and bloody abuse to happen, and 'forgot' about its own commandments about how Crests isn't enough to be beyond everyone, and do that sort of shit.

 

 

Call it cynism, but I don't see Edelgard establishing this order even within Adrestia peacefully. Because the Mole Men and the Seven control the country, not her. Yes, she got Bergliez and Hevring in her corner, but the only way she could have outbidden Aegir with them is likely that very war to unify Fodlan, and the possibilities it offered. Without that, no change of camps, especially to support an order aimed at getting them off power. And the Mole Men won't like their Nemesis 2.0 giving the middle finger to their plans. So intense, bloody nasty civil war is likely to happen. Which will probably lead to the sort of changes the French Revolution happened.

I really don't think Seteth and Rhea etc appreciate the symbolism of Edelgard inviting Byleth along to the ceremony. The fact that it's never called a coup (if that's even true) is because we're on Edelgard's side in that route. I'm not sure Rhea and co even know Byleth was present for the crowning (they likely think it happened after the holy tomb incident by when Byleth would not be considered a church member).

[Nihilem]

1 hour ago, Hardric62 said:

I find this statement very ironic, because my reasoning is very ùuch grounded in parallels to be drawn with the medieval German States: Namely, the Holy Roman Empire. Where one of the emperor's big defining features was the fact he was crowned by the pope, the only ruler of Europe to have that. Which of course meant for the popes that they very much had a say to have in imperial policies (See Fredric Barbarossa, Henry IV and Canossa, Fredric II Hohenstauffen, for starters). Conflict between papal and imperial authority is a defining feature of the HRE's history, until the Reformation bit both the very catholic pope and the very catholic emperor in the butt. And even then in 1526, Charles Quint, which would be the emperor to see the end of his morale superiority through papal crowning in the empire, and the Reformation beginning to gain ground at the time, still took the time of entering a war with the pope to demonstrate he had the pants in the relationship, which ended with the sack of Rome.

If you dig deeper you also see references to other periods of the german history. The cutscene were she decleared war on the church was most likely inspired by the nuremberg Rally, which itself is connected to the beginning of the third reich. The whole part about "race of religious lizards who in secret control the fate of the world from the shadows" also feels uncomfortly close to how the nazis viewed the jews (I am not saying that Edelgard is a facist. Only that this is anther reference to german history not related to HRE).

The Creation of the "Ministry of Religion" to control the church is in my opinion definetly more connected to Bismarck (which were active in the north german empire and not HRE) because it actually represents the result of the "Kulturkampf" (replacing church structures by state structures) then the "Investiturstreits" (which was about the right to appoint bishops). The southern bishop was exiled and his function replaced by a minister after all, he was not replaced by another bishop appointed from the emperor.

Next the current situation of the empire wields some interesting parallels to the "Weimar Republic". The whole argument that the church aided the rebels in their war for independence is quite close - while not perfectly - resembling the "Dolchstoßlegende" were the military leaders of the old german empire claimed that the loss of world war 1 was not because they were defeated by a supreme military army but because the socialdemocrats (there political concurrents) had aided the enemy forces in secret. Also the story of crimson flower is literally a retelling of hitlers rise to power, where a secret gathering of old nobles aided the charismatic new leader to battle a greater foe (the communists) in the hope to controll him later. But they got removed from power silently once that person rose to power quite quickly. Again not saying Edelgard is a Nazi. Just that I find it interesting how many connections to all of german history can be found in the game.

 

But the connections to real world history is in itself of course no argument if the church has power in the empire. The Ministry of Religion on the other side is a really good argument that they dont have. Unless of course the church has secret controll over it - which I dont believe because in the whole game there is no evidence for it.

 

 

 

Quote

 

Thing is, by that point, Bismarck (lutherian), and the bulk of Germany (lutherian/calvinists), are protestants. And even there, the catholics within Germany won many actual wins before Bismarck was forced to negotiate with the Church. And relations remained strained until the end of the Second Reich. That would rather point at the persistance of some serious influence in my opinion.

 

Just because of historical interest: What victories do you mean? The catholic church -to my knowledge- never could retake the privileges it lost during the Kulturkampf. And the power shifted to the state, not the protestants. Well most prussians statesmen were ofc protestants but the laws were enacted that the state would control it and no church of whichever confession.

 

Quote

 

Facepalm. Facepalm so hard.

First, because I'm ducking tired of people saying 'LOLZ, Edelgadr is sooo much of a cretin for swallowing Mole Men Bullshit'. At what exact moment of their relationship of intense mutual hatred is it suggested she would be so monumentally stupid to believe anything they would say to her face? My guess, using basic logic? They probably nudged her in that direction, yes, but they most likely did so indirectly, since you know, she had literaly zero reasons of trusting them, by doing things like Solon/Thomas and its frobidden texts of Verdant Winds. Signs of dissimulation of truth by the Church, shady behaviors... Basic deduction is then generally enough to draw not-so friendly conclusions about whoever is tied to these things.

I would appreciate if we could have a serious discussion based on facts not emotions. Because people do not follow your logic does not make them stupid.

My reasoning for believing that Edelgard may buy the lies the Agarthans tell her is because we actually see her buying other lies the Agarthans tell her ingame. Like the great hero Nemesis who only had a struggle with the Nabateans and is not the agressor. Were even the Agarthans mock her for. Or that the Church somehow diveded the empire when in the DLC it is hinted that it was some familiar underground people. It may be that she does not believe them and only told them to their forces that they follow her, but unfortunately we can not look into her head to see what she is really thinking ....

She certainly would not believe everything they say, but if it is enough to influence her actions .....

Quote

Second, The shitshow of the Southern Church happened 120 years ago, that's a lot of tiume for the Central Church to get their heads out of their butts to rebuild their relationship with Adrestia, the bloody half of the continent, which is literaly next door. It seems like basic logic some diplomacy happened during the years, but who knows? Maybe this possibility is really too far removed from common sense to be considered.

Third, a part of the problem with the Church is the moral order it upholds, with the nobility with a divine mandate to rule, that they let go to their heads after centuries of Kool-Aid drinking, leading to duckshows like Duscur and the Seven. Edelgard's anger stems from the fact that the Church created a system which allows this sort of blatant, brutal and bloody abuse to happen, and 'forgot' about its own commandments about how Crests isn't enough to be beyond everyone, and do that sort of shit.

 

Having diplomatic relations is not the same thing as controlling foreign countries in secret. I see no evidence that relations between the central church and the empire have improved after the insurrection. Or that they somehow can control things inside the empire.

For your second argument i am a little bit confused, the tragedy of Duscur and Insurrection of the seven is even more evidence that the central church has no influence over the three realms of fodlan (or alternatively do not care what is happening there). Either way they do not seem to control things happening in the realms from the shadows, because they are either unable or unwilling to do it. Or do you mean that they should have build up enough power in e.g. Faerghus to prevent such things? Wouldnt they then not actually becoming the shadowy mastermind Edelgard is criticising them?

 

Quote

 

Call it cynism, but I don't see Edelgard establishing this order even within Adrestia peacefully. Because the Mole Men and the Seven control the country, not her. Yes, she got Bergliez and Hevring in her corner, but the only way she could have outbidden Aegir with them is likely that very war to unify Fodlan, and the possibilities it offered. Without that, no change of camps, especially to support an order aimed at getting them off power. And the Mole Men won't like their Nemesis 2.0 giving the middle finger to their plans. So intense, bloody nasty civil war is likely to happen. Which will probably lead to the sort of changes the French Revolution happened.

The French Revolution did not change much. Most of it was reverted by the rise of Napoleon and the Wiener Kongress. Just with other people in power. The processes that brought us modern democracies were much much slower.

Edited March 1, 2020 by Nihilem

[Crysta]

1 hour ago, Nihilem said:

But the connections to real world history is in itself of course no argument if the church has power in the empire. The Ministry of Religion on the other side is a really good argument that they dont have. Unless of course the church has secret controll over it - which I dont believe because in the whole game there is no evidence for it.

There's NPCs, presumably clergy, who flee the Empire to the monastery because they feel it isn't safe to worship there. I'm not sure why the existence of the ministry means they have no reach there, so much as they may just have greater oversight over religious practices because of what happened with the Southern Church. In game, this theory isn't supported.

I know the Church being gutted and not being a threat would suit the argument that Edelgard is just a power hungry and bloodthristy conqueror, but it really, really goes against what the game itself is constantly implying about how they operate and the influence they have.

1 hour ago, Nihilem said:

My reasoning for believing that Edelgard may buy the lies the Agarthans tell her is because we actually see her buying other lies the Agarthans tell her ingame. Like the great hero Nemesis who only had a struggle with the Nabateans and is not the agressor. Were even the Agarthans mock her for. Or that the Church somehow diveded the empire when in the DLC it is hinted that it was some familiar underground people. It may be that she does not believe them and only told them to their forces that they follow her, but unfortunately we can not look into her head to see what she is really thinking ....

She certainly would not believe everything they say, but if it is enough to influence her actions .....

Which lies do they tell her in game?

Thales calls Nemesis a thief in front of her and it sounds like she disagrees.

You say we cannot look into her head and see what she's really thinking but it seems like that's what you're doing.

[Quillmonger]

Edelgard probably would have hard a much harder time coming to power since her father was just a figure head. It's only because she gets backing from a few lords and TWSITD that she's able to wrestle power back after the Insurrection of the Seven. People kind of ignore that this is said in the game, but it makes sense that the insurrection was a set up to probably force the emperor into a corner which allowed TWSITD the kind of free reign they had. It's not even clear how much she knew about them upon becoming the Flame Emperor and it looks like she and Hubert have been gathering information them and their possible allies so that they could destroy them when the opportunity came. 

But the idea of there not being a flame emperor reveal is kind of what I am writing about (it's got more different than that), but basically Dimitri and Edelgard get together and she just kind of stops what she's doing. It leads to TWSITD to start trying to find a way to replace her or force her back into helping them and basically Rhea rallies an army against them because she finds out they have a kid and thinks the child is an abomination, although she might trying to stop them from uniting the Empire and Kingdom. 

[Hardric62]

5 hours ago, Nihilem said:

If you dig deeper you also see references to other periods of the german history. The cutscene were she decleared war on the church was most likely inspired by the nuremberg Rally, which itself is connected to the beginning of the third reich. The whole part about "race of religious lizards who in secret control the fate of the world from the shadows" also feels uncomfortly close to how the nazis viewed the jews (I am not saying that Edelgard is a facist. Only that this is anther reference to german history not related to HRE).

The Creation of the "Ministry of Religion" to control the church is in my opinion definetly more connected to Bismarck (which were active in the north german empire and not HRE) because it actually represents the result of the "Kulturkampf" (replacing church structures by state structures) then the "Investiturstreits" (which was about the right to appoint bishops). The southern bishop was exiled and his function replaced by a minister after all, he was not replaced by another bishop appointed from the emperor.

Next the current situation of the empire wields some interesting parallels to the "Weimar Republic". The whole argument that the church aided the rebels in their war for independence is quite close - while not perfectly - resembling the "Dolchstoßlegende" were the military leaders of the old german empire claimed that the loss of world war 1 was not because they were defeated by a supreme military army but because the socialdemocrats (there political concurrents) had aided the enemy forces in secret. Also the story of crimson flower is literally a retelling of hitlers rise to power, where a secret gathering of old nobles aided the charismatic new leader to battle a greater foe (the communists) in the hope to controll him later. But they got removed from power silently once that person rose to power quite quickly. Again not saying Edelgard is a Nazi. Just that I find it interesting how many connections to all of german history can be found in the game.

 

And yet, you draw these parallels here, where other people less 'charitable than you can make them in their head for you because, welp, you just compared Edelgard and the Nazis for them. I'm not saying anything too.

I'll also point that appointing bishops is the medieval equivalents of what you are talking about with the Kulturkampf and state control of the church. Which is, again an interesting thing to know, but I think it is more pertinent to compare the medieval fantasy empire to the medieval historical empire. The further I am comfortable about drawing historical parallels pertinent for medieval entities is the French Revolution at best, and when it is pertinent. Like whoen someone wants to overthrow the social order their continent is built on.

 

To conclude on that, I'll point out France which did manage to reign in Church Influence because they won the battle of bishop appointment the empire lost. Tighter control never meant the Church everyone went to each Sunday and was at heart of their daily life magically lost all influence on society. There still was quite the support for it if the Wars of Religion, or things like the Vendean Insurrection are anything to go by.

 

5 hours ago, Nihilem said:

 

Just because of historical interest: What victories do you mean? The catholic church -to my knowledge- never could retake the privileges it lost during the Kulturkampf. And the power shifted to the state, not the protestants. Well most prussians statesmen were ofc protestants but the laws were enacted that the state would control it and no church of whichever confession.

 

I meant that it is easier to defy the catholic Church when it means nothing to you. And the catholic Ländern, like Bade-Wurtemberg for instance, were... fairly slow to enact any of these laws, when they even voted them. And Bismarck had to backpedal the most... controversial laws by 1878, and after that, negociate with the pope, which is not a sign of a complete victory for him. This shift wasn't a smooth ride for him.

 

6 hours ago, Nihilem said:

I would appreciate if we could have a serious discussion based on facts not emotions. Because people do not follow your logic does not make them stupid.

My reasoning for believing that Edelgard may buy the lies the Agarthans tell her is because we actually see her buying other lies the Agarthans tell her ingame. Like the great hero Nemesis who only had a struggle with the Nabateans and is not the agressor. Were even the Agarthans mock her for. Or that the Church somehow diveded the empire when in the DLC it is hinted that it was some familiar underground people. It may be that she does not believe them and only told them to their forces that they follow her, but unfortunately we can not look into her head to see what she is really thinking ....

She certainly would not believe everything they say, but if it is enough to influence her actions .....

 

I'm not expecting characters to follow logic constantly, but for people to use it while analyzing characters. Like, 'WHY people think Edelgard would automatically believe everything the people who carved her up like raw burger to plant a second Crest in her body after butchering all of her siblings trying to do so to them?'. If anything, I'd say Edelgard has vested emotional reasons for not trusting them in these circumstances.

And no, they didn't tell her shit about Nemesis, in case the fact she is all 'What?' when Tharundel calls him a thief because how much of a two-bit thug he was before the Mole Men used him. This is Imperial secret history, Emperors-only, about how the Church version of the war with Nemesis is bullshit. Edelgard only draws logical conclusions from there, because you usually write history with a scalpel to make yourself look better and the opposition worst, not the complex stunt Rhea pulled.

Church division? 1) It is a propaganda speech to her army, odds are facts in it will be fudged too. 2) You can achieve that by letting someone 'find' old forbidden texts bitching about how the Church is siding so one-sidedly with Faerghus on negociations at the end of the War of the Eagle and Lion, and reports about 'assistance' to Loog or other dicey events while editing out anything which could lead to think of the Mole Men in these scenarios. Biais would lead to draw the connections without going 'Trust us, we totally butchered you and your family because of the Church and how evil they are.'

 

6 hours ago, Nihilem said:

 

For your second argument i am a little bit confused, the tragedy of Duscur and Insurrection of the seven is even more evidence that the central church has no influence over the three realms of fodlan (or alternatively do not care what is happening there). Either way they do not seem to control things happening in the realms from the shadows, because they are either unable or unwilling to do it. Or do you mean that they should have build up enough power in e.g. Faerghus to prevent such things? Wouldnt they then not actually becoming the shadowy mastermind Edelgard is criticising them?

 

My second argument is 'the Church backed with its continent-wide influence the very system the nobles abuse to pull all their shit'. She set up the game, and can't be assed regulating it, despite her precious book saying she should do so (Commandments, plus the precedent the war with Nemesis create. Church went to war against bad Crest-bearers, so it creates the expectation they should do so now. If they don't, then these Crest-bearers/nobles have their approbation.)

And why, yes I am holding against Rhea the fact she couldn't contain disasters like Duscur. She built that whole edifice in the name of enforcing peace and order on Fodlan (her words in tea time, S-Support), I am going to hold her accountable for the failures of this rule, even if it is a far more hands off one than Edelgard imagine. Because when you let a ducking genocide happen without even a condamnation, you are doing something seriously wrong. My bone against Rhea isn't that she took upon herself to shape Fodlan's society, leading to an informal rule of the continent, it is that her attempt is breaking down something fierce since centuries, and that she is unable to fix the problem, and unwilling to let someone else take the driving wheel. Except Mama Sothis, and I am not considering morphing 'Resurrect Mama so I can see her again' to ''Resurrect Mama so I can see her again and she can fix everything' as a remotely pertinent plan for handling Fodlan's troubles. And no, it didn't work, it was just a series of insane odds she literaly had no control over that led to the outcome of the games.

 

6 hours ago, Nihilem said:

The French Revolution did not change much. Most of it was reverted by the rise of Napoleon and the Wiener Kongress. Just with other people in power. The processes that brought us modern democracies were much much slower.

 

I know. I can read history books/whatever mediums. I am just pointing out that with a violent war to enforce new standards, odds of something more similar to what the French Revolution set up will happen. Complete with counter-revolutionary wars to bury any change.

 

 

 

 

7 hours ago, Jotari said:

I really don't think Seteth and Rhea etc appreciate the symbolism of Edelgard inviting Byleth along to the ceremony. The fact that it's never called a coup (if that's even true) is because we're on Edelgard's side in that route. I'm not sure Rhea and co even know Byleth was present for the crowning (they likely think it happened after the holy tomb incident by when Byleth would not be considered a church member).

 

They don't risk to 'appreciate it', Edelgard explicitely asks of Byleth of keep quiet about it, leading to exactly what you say about 'not knowing'. Because it would take a braindead potato to 'not get' the symbolism of an emperor ditching the archbishop for their crowning.

And it is very much qualified as a coup in AM, VW, SS... aka all non-CF roads, when Seteth describe how Edelgard snatched away power in the introduction of Chapter 12, when you know she actually got her father's full cooperation on the subject.