Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Morswo said:

As someone who likes Arvis is Edelgard at first a very interesting character, but she has one disturbing flaw in my opinion, she lies too much. In CF is this shown, where she is lying to all of her allies, except Hubert and Byleth. She seems to try to manipulate them and to not care about telling the truth. All of them have proven their loyalty and still she is not honest. This for me pretty bad and a heavy drawback, if she wouldn't be such a liar, she could one of my favorite characters.

  Hide contents

I am talking about the destruction of Arianrhod, Edelgard tells her allies that this was done by the church. She lies to motivate the Black Eagle Strike Force and to prevent a loss of moral, considering it was done by those who slithers in the dark.

 

I always only really saw that as a way for Edelgard to prevent pissing of the Agarthans now that she knows what will happen if she steps out of line. If she told the truth, many of soldiers would make a move against Agarthans and she cannot afford that. What if they decided to blow up the Imperial capital? Also, Byleth was never lied to in this incident

According to what I am noticed Edelgard doesn't actually lie all that often, and when she does she is mostly bad at it (she can't help but hinting to Byleth that they are the Flame Emperor). Hubert actually lies more to Edelgard than vice versa, you know, as he actually does eliminate targets Edelgard doesn't approve of being eliminated

Edited by Darkmoon6789

Share this post


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

I always only really saw that as a way for Edelgard to prevent pissing of farmer now that she knows what will happen if she steps out of line. If she told the truth, many of soldiers would make a move against Agarthans and she cannot afford that. What if they decided to blow up the Imperial capital? Also, Byleth was never like to in this incident

 

I already got this, but my problem is that she shows even her commanders no trust and it feels extremely wrong to lie to the ones who may saved your, just to go the easy way. In this way it is also indicated, that she lacks trust into her commanders, so that she believes  that her former classmates aren't able to not see the priority in wiping of the kingdom.
I am convinced she could persuade them, so that this incident wouldn't be necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Morswo said:

I already got this, but my problem is that she shows even her commanders no trust and it feels extremely wrong to lie to the ones who may saved your, just to go the easy way. In this way it is also indicated, that she lacks trust into her commanders, so that she believes  that her former classmates aren't able to not see the priority in wiping of the kingdom.
I am convinced she could persuade them, so that this incident wouldn't be necessary.

Maybe she could persuade them, but Edelgard has major trust issues because of what happened to her, it is one of her major character flaws. Byleth is actually one of very few people she trusts completely. But I would also be very reluctant to trust people if I spent so much time around the leaders of the Agarthans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like her design especially post time skip but that’s kinda it, I don’t agree with some of her actions in game but they’re not enough to make me hate her. Also I don’t think she has that many haters, from what I’ve seen in Gamefaqs and Reddit a lot of people just have problems with a portion of her fanbase (like those that blindly defend Edelgard or the creeps that fetishize F!Byleth x Edelgard ship) so they create multiple Edelgard hate threads just to troll and piss them off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Ari Chan said:

I like her design especially post time skip but that’s kinda it, I don’t agree with some of her actions in game but they’re not enough to make me hate her. Also I don’t think she has that many haters, from what I’ve seen in Gamefaqs and Reddit a lot of people just have problems with a portion of her fanbase (like those that blindly defend Edelgard or the creeps that fetishize F!Byleth x Edelgard ship) so they create multiple Edelgard hate threads just to troll and piss them off.

That would at least explain a few things, I actually did engaged with the gamefaqs community shortly after finishing Crimson flower and it did give me more than a few misconceptions, I am quite sure some people are downright lying about events in the game. Possibly for trolling purposes. Now that I have actually played through the entire game. I'm starting to think that a lot of the people participating in those discussions haven't even played the bloody game and just repeat what they say heard elsewhere. My old argument used to be that it makes no sense to blame the Edelgard in Crimson Flower for things she did in Azure Moon, as they are completely separate timelines, but with time I have realised that this distinction isn't necessarily necessary these two versions of Edelgard aren't as far apart as I was originally led to believe. As desperation moves go , the Hegemon thing is still a heck of a lot better than burning down your own capital city. While it is full of civilians. It isn't really a evil move to willingly transform yourself into a crest beast as much as it is a stupid one. I will not pretend like Edelgard always have perfect judgement. But she usually doesn't let innocents die if she can avoid it. It makes sense to her to resort to extreme self-sacrifice in a desperate situation. 

While I defend Edelgard, I hope it doesn't come across like I do so blindly, I like to think I have a strong ideological basis for my beliefs. I also do find female Byleth and Edelgard very cute as a couple, don't necessarily see what is so creepy about liking that ship. Sure it is a bit overrepresented in comparison to shipping Edelgard with male Byleth. But I think some people just really like the idea of a girl on girl relationship being central to a games plot, it is not nearly as common as straight relationships are in media. Plus Edelgard and Byleth, regardless of gender is one of the cutest things in the entire game. The truth of the matter is that I have very seldom seen people defend Edelgard without good reasons for doing so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I'm going to be analytical about Edelgard and no be as passionate as I'm usually, I will give my full thoughts on her as a character:

design: to me she is okay, noting that blows me away but nothing offensive either, she is 6 out of 10

writing: she has the best writing out of the 4 house leaders, despite being my least favorite of all of them, 10 out of 10

gameplay: she is the worst lord due to her being the one stuck in armor in her canon classes and not having her magic on disposition, but can be better with recalssing, 5.5 out 10

motivation: her motivation are understandable, but the way she dealt with it was far from the ideal, but i can see where she was coming form:, 8 out of 10

actions: here is were my problem with her lies: she mostly never questioning if what the Aghatians told her is a lie, she pulnging her continent into a 5-years old war, she telling her step-brother that it was all worthy, her ambition is installing a meritocracy, something that hits to close to home to comfort, her hypocrisy on committing everything she hate Rhea for, her alliance with the Aghatians. but she does have a single saving grace: she does seem to at least care about the black eagles. 2 out 10

 

so I hope this helps to explain why me and other people aren't found on Edelgard, and wash some of the misconceptions about the people who don't like her, since most of the people who don't like who I know fall into the same camp, including the Australian Youtuber Big Klinggy, so I hope this help putting things in perspective

Edited by darkblade2814

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, darkblade2814 said:

If I'm going to be analytical about Edelgard and no be as passionate as I'm usually, I will give my full thoughts on her as a character:

design: to me she is okay, noting that blows me away but nothing offensive either, she is 6 out of 10

writing: she has the best writing out of the 4 house leaders, despite being my least favorite of all of them, 10 out of 10

gameplay: she is the worst lord due to her being the one stuck in armor in her canon classes and not having her magic on disposition, but can be better with recalssing, 5.5 out 10

motivation: her motivation are understandable, but the way she dealt with it was far from the ideal, but i can see where she was coming form:, 8 out of 10

actions: here is were my problem with her lies: she never questioning if what the Aghatians told her, she pulging her continent into a 5-years old war, she telling her step-brother that it was all worthy, her ambition is installing a meritocracy, something that hits to close to home to comfort, her hypocrisy on committing everything she hate Rhea for, her alliance with the Aghatians. but she does have a single saving grace: she does seem to at least care about the black eagles. 2 out 10

 

so I hope this helps to explain why me and other people aren't found on Edelgard, and wash some of the misconceptions about the people who don't like her, since most of the people who don't like who I know fall into the same camp, including the Australian Youtuber Big Klinggy, so I hope this help putting things in perspective

If some people's problem with her is their alliance with the Aghatians, I remind you that sometimes there are inevitable alliances. In World War II, the allies (USA, France, UK) have to join forces with the Soviets to defeat the nazis. In the URSS a communist regime was established, which committed atrocities like the holomodor and caused famines in its population. So we had liberal countries that had to join forces with a regime with values totally opposite to theirs, because the most important thing was to defeat the Nazis.

Edelgard's alliance with the Aghatians was momentary, we already know that on the crimson flower route she eliminates them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edelgard is my favorite lord in 3H. That being said, I personally disagree with Her Majesty in not pursuing TWSITD openly and publicly. 

I wish she had been strong(er) or, in a stronger position as to declare her enemy in the open. I think playing shadow games with TWSITD really did not pay off. 

That completely aside, I feel she has a great personality. Were this Garreg Mach, I'd be her groupie - free. I adore her. Haha. 😄

Edited by DragonSnackies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like her in all routes but CF.

She is an absolutely amazing villain but her writing in CF as a protagonist is Fates-tier.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, darkblade2814 said:

actions: here is were my problem with her lies: she never questioning if what the Aghatians told her,

I've always found this argument quite odd since in Chapter 4 the game provides evidence for the opposite by having Arundel/Thales unintentionally slip up Nemesis was just a glorified thief to her face, which makes Edelgard go like "I'll pretend I didn't hear that. ANYWAY..."

33 minutes ago, Enryx25 said:

I like her in all routes but CF.

She is an absolutely amazing villain but her writing in CF as a protagonist is Fates-tier.

Edelgard works best as a bad guy only in AM where she is Dimitri's antithesis IMO. In both Verdant Wind and Silver Snow she's far too absent to be effective, which works against her once the death cutscene kicks in for different reasons.

In CF I don't think she's bad since it makes sense she's that way in-context, but I do think they could've done more with her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Moltz23 said:

I've always found this argument quite odd since in Chapter 4 the game provides evidence for the opposite by having Arundel/Thales unintentionally slip up Nemesis was just a glorified thief to her face, which makes Edelgard go like "I'll pretend I didn't hear that. ANYWAY..."

Edelgard works best as a bad guy only in AM where she is Dimitri's antithesis IMO. In both Verdant Wind and Silver Snow she's far too absent to be effective, which works against her once the death cutscene kicks in for different reasons.

In CF I don't think she's bad since it makes sense she's that way in-context, but I do think they could've done more with her.

I will rephrase my comment above that part slipped trough my mind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Moltz23 said:

Edelgard works best as a bad guy only in AM where she is Dimitri's antithesis IMO. In both Verdant Wind and Silver Snow she's far too absent to be effective, which works against her once the death cutscene kicks in for different reasons.

Sadly being absent a bit of a common theme for enemy rulers in Fire Emblem. Its a theme only Ashnard and Lekain really manage to overcome. 

The way it usually goes is that the villain perhaps shows up once mid way through the story and then sits in his castle the entire game without saying or doing anything. Everyone from Medeus to Zephiel to Edelgard just sits on their throne all day. Edelgard shows up at Grondor but otherwise she's a good girl who patiently waits in her castle. Zephiel shows up to chat with Hector and beat up Cecilia but otherwise he's a good boy who patiently waits in his castle while Roy dismantles his dreams. Medeus doesn't even bother to say or do anything until the boss battle. I suppose Garon does show himself plenty, but he's Garon so we probably all wish that he wouldn't. 

Ashnard got around this by often having scenes in his throne room where he talked with the Daien generals about what was happening. Lekain has this to a lesser extend and also copies Nergal in occasionally coming towards the heroes to gloat at them. We really needed this with Edelgard, getting scenes where she plots with Hubert and Thales or mocks the captured Rhea. 

Edited by Etrurian emperor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably because she's an ethnocentric autocrat engaged in a war of aggression using child soldiers and victims of human experimentation. It's ok though because she wants to lock herself in a room and eat sweets all day, it's gap moe!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll agree with those who say Edelgard isn't the "most hated", but she is a character whom people have strong feelings on. I think this "divisiveness" is actually a sign that IS succeeded in creating a true morally-gray character. In fact, I quite like her as a character, both in her own route and in those where she plays the antagonist. 

At the same time, though, I don't really agree with Edelgard on a personal level. While she was right to find fault with the Church, I still see choosing to work with Those Who Slither as something of a devil's bargain, that only paid off in her favor because the postscript tells us Thales choked to death on the idiot ball. Had she confided the truth behind Twistid in the Church, and the other house leaders, it might have been possible to eliminate a group that literally tortures people to death. Then Edelgard could take the throne and make internal reforms, without imposing her system on other nations.

For what it's worth, I understand why Edelgard didn't go such a route, and why she believed that fixing the world through a war was her duty. Strangely enough, I really enjoy the Crimson Flower route - not because I support Edelgard, but because I love how every battle has weight, how much it differs from other routes, and how it shows the magnitude of effort and sacrifice that must be made, when one wishes to change the world through war. It feels like the "blood-stained path" Edelgard speaks of, brought to life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I'll agree with those who say Edelgard isn't the "most hated", but she is a character whom people have strong feelings on. I think this "divisiveness" is actually a sign that IS succeeded in creating a true morally-gray character. In fact, I quite like her as a character, both in her own route and in those where she plays the antagonist. 

At the same time, though, I don't really agree with Edelgard on a personal level. While she was right to find fault with the Church, I still see choosing to work with Those Who Slither as something of a devil's bargain, that only paid off in her favor because the postscript tells us Thales choked to death on the idiot ball. Had she confided the truth behind Twistid in the Church, and the other house leaders, it might have been possible to eliminate a group that literally tortures people to death. Then Edelgard could take the throne and make internal reforms, without imposing her system on other nations.

For what it's worth, I understand why Edelgard didn't go such a route, and why she believed that fixing the world through a war was her duty. Strangely enough, I really enjoy the Crimson Flower route - not because I support Edelgard, but because I love how every battle has weight, how much it differs from other routes, and how it shows the magnitude of effort and sacrifice that must be made, when one wishes to change the world through war. It feels like the "blood-stained path" Edelgard speaks of, brought to life.

Pretty much, the fact that people are so divided about her does pretty much prove that Edelgard is morally ambiguous. Even if people always will feel that their interpretation is right, ultimately the only truth we can reach is the consensus.

Working with Agarthans is a devil's bargain, but one I am not sure how much choice she has in making.

The main thing that bothers me is that I at least wish that people could dislike Edelgard for things she actually does, instead of absurd personal interpretations like her being racist. It always kind of angers me when I read something like that because Edelgard actually isn't that far removed from Claude when it comes to her opinion on foreigners. I do think it's rather silly to act as if she tried to enforce some kind of Holocaust on the Dragons as well, the only dragon you have to kill in Crimson flower is Rhea and she was offered a chance to surrender, and Edelgard doesn't kill her anywhere else in the game, instead choosing to imprison her. It isn't about her being a dragon, it is Rhea wielding power like a tyrant that Edelgard has a problem with. It just seems to me that a lot of Edelgard haters just don't understand her as a character.

If I were judging the souls of the characters of this game, I would actually show mercy on Edelgard because I don't think her general nature is bad, and I would show the same mercy to Rhea and Dimitri. They are all guilty of inflicting quite a bit of harm on the world, but neither of the three are beyond redemption. For me it isn't about their acts, it is about the nature of their character

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the top of my head:

  • Early on, she confesses to you that she would have no issues sacrificing her own citizens, because a sacrifice for the greater good is not one in vain. This is technically true, but in the end she starts a war, which would obviously bring a lot of sacrifice and death. Though she is seen honoring the fallen on all routes.
  • She is the least sympathetic after you lose your father, I saw this as too cold, I was like whoa girl. But considering she saw the deaths of her whole family, this is likely how she learned to cope.
  • In all other routes, the war is negatively affecting everyone. Dimitri lost his home, was framed for murder, and spent 5 years in isolation. Claude has to deal with the Alliance on the verge of collapse, with attacks likely from imperial loyalists. Not to mention the merchants, monks, and citizens who come to the monastery to get food and have a place to stay. The war destabilizes the whole continent.

However, there are counter points, she starts the war because she wishes to eradicate the church as she sees them as the ones to blame, and they partially are with their outdated system of nobility in which titles are inherited and not earned. However it was TWSITD who set the way for the insurrection of the seven, caused the tragedy of duscur, and tortured Lysithea's family. The church is bad and stunts creative growth, so she has a point, but I feel like she should have dealt with the agarthans first?

And also, Dimitri is also a pretty polarizing character.

Share this post


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

At the top of my head:

  • Early on, she confesses to you that she would have no issues sacrificing her own citizens, because a sacrifice for the greater good is not one in vain. This is technically true, but in the end she starts a war, which would obviously bring a lot of sacrifice and death. Though she is seen honoring the fallen on all routes.
  • She is the least sympathetic after you lose your father, I saw this as too cold, I was like whoa girl. But considering she saw the deaths of her whole family, this is likely how she learned to cope.
  • In all other routes, the war is negatively affecting everyone. Dimitri lost his home, was framed for murder, and spent 5 years in isolation. Claude has to deal with the Alliance on the verge of collapse, with attacks likely from imperial loyalists. Not to mention the merchants, monks, and citizens who come to the monastery to get food and have a place to stay. The war destabilizes the whole continent.

However, there are counter points, she starts the war because she wishes to eradicate the church as she sees them as the ones to blame, and they partially are with their outdated system of nobility in which titles are inherited and not earned. However it was TWSITD who set the way for the insurrection of the seven, caused the tragedy of duscur, and tortured Lysithea's family. The church is bad and stunts creative growth, so she has a point, but I feel like she should have dealt with the agarthans first?

And also, Dimitri is also a pretty polarizing character.

The truth of the matter is that polarising characters are usually the most interesting, probably why Edelgard and Dimitri are my two favourite characters from this game. While I do believe that Edelgard is at heart a good person, it is her playing a role usually reserved for villains that makes her interesting. She might have been a bit harsh when it came to the death of Byleth's father, but I think ultimately what she said rings true. Plus, it is implied that she leaked to the location of the killer, if you talk to her in the monastery during this time she says that she will do anything to make sure Byleth gets their revenge, and I don't think she is lying. Edelgard likes Byleth and is probably feeling guilty about her involvement in their father's death. Her helping dealing with Kronya is her way to make up for it, not with just pretty words, but with action and her advice is actually something that is useful when it comes to coping. It is essentially: "sitting in here for all eternity moping will solve nothing, in order to honour your father's memory you need to take action. Eventually you have no choice but to move on "

When it comes to Lonato. I interpreted this as what she is saying is that the militia that died for their lord fought for him willingly and therefore their choice and their sacrifice should be respected. I do not think Lonato forced them to fight for him, they took up arms willingly, like many would do for Edelgard at a later date. The sacrifices she is talking about isn't people she forces to fight for her, but the ones who do so willingly. Edelgard greatly respects those who die fighting for what they believe in, it is yet another reason she prefers to go out the same way. 

As you can see most detractions when it comes to her can also be interpreted as a positive if you look at it in another light

As for the Agarthans, she probably would have taken them out first. If she wasn't convinced by Hubert to join up with them instead. Still Hubert was the one who eliminated the Agarthans in the end (even in verdant wind), he knew what he was doing from the beginning. Their alliance was a bid for them to buy some time and find out more about their enemy, while simultaneously furthering another goal of theirs. This tactic has its drawbacks, especially in the PR department, but I am not entirely certain that Edelgard could have taken on the Agarthans before the war as she and Hubert needed some time to consolidate their own power within the Empire and locate the base of the Agarthans. It is pretty hard to fight an enemy, you have no idea where they are at. Plus Edelgard pretty much always had their strings attached to her since her father was reduced to a puppet ruler, she is probably the Lord with the least ability to make a move against them. But Hubert knew what he was doing and he even planned for the eventuality of him and Edelgard being defeated and setting up a reserve plan to screw over the Agarthans if this was to happen. I guess what I am trying to say is. While Edelgard could have made a move against them earlier, I don't think she could have won. Which makes her alliance, the more pragmatic decision, and it should never be mistaken for her ever supporting the Agarthans or approving of what they have been doing

Edelgard is neither a typical hero nor a typical villain, she is a truly unique specimen I have seen nowhere else, she does ultimately strive for the greater good, and in her own route. She does achieve her goals. But always at a great cost. What makes her morally grey is debating whenever or not the price was worth the result. I can't tell you the answer to that, because I don't think there is an objective answer. I just know that Edelgard did what she thought was right, and in so doing, she caused some damage along the way.

By the way, I do find your comments quite insightful as you do seem to see both sides of the argument

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

The main thing that bothers me is that I at least wish that people could dislike Edelgard for things she actually does, instead of absurd personal interpretations like her being racist. It always kind of angers me when I read something like that because Edelgard actually isn't that far removed from Claude when it comes to her opinion on foreigners. I do think it's rather silly to act as if she tried to enforce some kind of Holocaust on the Dragons as well, the only dragon you have to kill in Crimson flower is Rhea and she was offered a chance to surrender, and Edelgard doesn't kill her anywhere else in the game, instead choosing to imprison her. It isn't about her being a dragon, it is Rhea wielding power like a tyrant that Edelgard has a problem with. It just seems to me that a lot of Edelgard haters just don't understand her as a character.

The question of "is Edelgard species-ist?" is, I think, an interesting one that the game doesn't really answer either way. How much should be read into the music for CF's ending cutscene being called "A World for Humanity", or the fact that she and Hubert can't be fielded on the Indech paralogue? If she knew Flayn and Seteth's true identities, would she treat them any differently? It's hard to tell, when all the Nabateans she interacts with are her foes for political reasons. Edelgard almost certainly isn't racist (considering her bond with Petra, and the mutual respect they share on either side of battle), and she probably isn't species-ist (but even if she is, you could make the case that it's justified by her sample size of one Nabatean). Either way, though, I agree that it's not a strong case to make against her.

18 hours ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

If I were judging the souls of the characters of this game, I would actually show mercy on Edelgard because I don't think her general nature is bad, and I would show the same mercy to Rhea and Dimitri. They are all guilty of inflicting quite a bit of harm on the world, but neither of the three are beyond redemption. For me it isn't about their acts, it is about the nature of their character

It's an interesting way of framing things. I don't believe Edelgard (nor Rhea, Dimitri, and Claude) are "bad at heart", and certainly wouldn't "wholly condemn" any of them. At the same time, though, I tend to judge people more by their actions, than by what I perceive their character to be. For example, while both Claude and Edelgard express a desire to rule a united Fodlan, I have harsher feelings on Edelgard choosing to invade the Alliance, than I do on Claude's actions before or after the invasion. Granted, it's a move that pays off for her in the end, and gives us a couple really cool maps, so I'll let it slide, haha.

15 hours ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

When it comes to Lonato. I interpreted this as what she is saying is that the militia that died for their lord fought for him willingly and therefore their choice and their sacrifice should be respected. I do not think Lonato forced them to fight for him, they took up arms willingly, like many would do for Edelgard at a later date. The sacrifices she is talking about isn't people she forces to fight for her, but the ones who do so willingly. Edelgard greatly respects those who die fighting for what they believe in, it is yet another reason she prefers to go out the same way. 

Agreed on this one! Part of what I really like in Edelgard as a character is her respect for the beliefs of others, including her opponents. She doesn't try to force others to change their beliefs - had she the hypothetical opportunity to save lives by "brainwashing" her enemies into no longer opposing her, she almost certainly would not do so. She values the will of the individual highly, which I think plays into her "people aren't as strong as you think" conversation with Dimitri on Azure Moon. He sees more value in people sharing beliefs, relying on one another, and partipating in institutions such as the Church, than in being totally independent and self-assured. At least, that's how I read their dichotomy, if that makes any sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

If she knew Flayn and Seteth's true identities

I'm pretty sure she does since she has boss conversations with Seteth and Flayn to that effect in Verdant Wind/Silver Snow. At least, if Solon/the Agarthans knew then it's not unreasonable to assume their allies would also know. For the record, I do think she's prejudiced against Nabateans, given that she's very quick to claim that they're "monsters who have controlled Fodlan in secret" when not only is that demonstrably not the case (everone else besides Rhea has either been sleeping or selcuding themselves from society), she keeps mentioning it as if it's one of her main arguments against the status quo. 

 

Anyways, I don't think Edelgard is massively hated. Characters like FE4!Hilda and Makalov are probably more widely disliked by the fanbase, though admittedly for different reasons. At worst, you probably think she's a villain whose played for much more pathos than other ones in the series and one who, even if her methods are abhorrent, has a point that feudalism and fantasy eugenics are Very Bad Things that need to be curbed or done away with. That's a more of a defend-able position than, say, Anankos, whose just a crazy dragon because Mystery of the Emblem reference dragons go insane for some reason. And while I'm sure other people have brought these up, she did win a popularity poll and was pretty consistent in online usage rankings, at least to the beginning of the game.  

 

One things that does interest me is how she contrasts with other emperor figures in the series. She like Arvis, for example, in that she really wants to make things equitable for the common folk, but has to ally with dark figures who are manipulating her for their own ends. Like Ashnard, she also wants to use war to remake the socio-political system of her continent from one ruled by landed gentry to more meritocratic systems; unlike him, however, she's nowhere near as batshit as he is and doesn't seem to revel in war for its own sake. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

The question of "is Edelgard species-ist?" is, I think, an interesting one that the game doesn't really answer either way. How much should be read into the music for CF's ending cutscene being called "A World for Humanity", or the fact that she and Hubert can't be fielded on the Indech paralogue? If she knew Flayn and Seteth's true identities, would she treat them any differently? It's hard to tell, when all the Nabateans she interacts with are her foes for political reasons. Edelgard almost certainly isn't racist (considering her bond with Petra, and the mutual respect they share on either side of battle), and she probably isn't species-ist (but even if she is, you could make the case that it's justified by her sample size of one Nabatean). Either way, though, I agree that it's not a strong case to make against her.

It's an interesting way of framing things. I don't believe Edelgard (nor Rhea, Dimitri, and Claude) are "bad at heart", and certainly wouldn't "wholly condemn" any of them. At the same time, though, I tend to judge people more by their actions, than by what I perceive their character to be. For example, while both Claude and Edelgard express a desire to rule a united Fodlan, I have harsher feelings on Edelgard choosing to invade the Alliance, than I do on Claude's actions before or after the invasion. Granted, it's a move that pays off for her in the end, and gives us a couple really cool maps, so I'll let it slide, haha.

Agreed on this one! Part of what I really like in Edelgard as a character is her respect for the beliefs of others, including her opponents. She doesn't try to force others to change their beliefs - had she the hypothetical opportunity to save lives by "brainwashing" her enemies into no longer opposing her, she almost certainly would not do so. She values the will of the individual highly, which I think plays into her "people aren't as strong as you think" conversation with Dimitri on Azure Moon. He sees more value in people sharing beliefs, relying on one another, and partipating in institutions such as the Church, than in being totally independent and self-assured. At least, that's how I read their dichotomy, if that makes any sense.

I didn't even know that you could access the Indech paralogue on Crimson Flower, doesn't it require Dimitri?

I just think that Edelgard really doesn't have a that much exposure to Nabateans other than Rhea, and she doesn't know their full history. Her view of them could very much in the different if she knew the full story and I think it would be. Seteth and Flayn would primarily be guilty by association with Rhea. But Edelgard would probably not be so harsh on Flayn if she knew her better. Still, she is merciful towards even Rhea as Edelgard spares her life in the other routes, which is certainly more mercy than Rhea would give her if the situation was reversed. You have to remember that Edelgard don't actually know the true history of Fodlan and what actually happened with the Red Canyon and Nemesis.

I don't actually think that Edelgard is that hated at all, she has plenty of very loyal supporters and people who love her character. It is just that her detractors are also very vocal. But I am uncertain if they are really all that many, even the ones who doesn't agree with her usually at least think she is a well written character

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

I didn't even know that you could access the Indech paralogue on Crimson Flower, doesn't it require Dimitri?

Indech's paralouge requires Lindhardt and Leonie in Part II. I think in Crimson Flower it's available after the conquest of Deirdru, and neither Hubert nor Edelgard can be deployed there (because Lindhardt doesn't want them finding out about Indech). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Alistair said:

Indech's paralouge requires Lindhardt and Leonie in Part II. I think in Crimson Flower it's available after the conquest of Deirdru, and neither Hubert nor Edelgard can be deployed there (because Lindhardt doesn't want them finding out about Indech). 

Not to mention that there is no telling what Indech would do if they were present, he might be more hostile towards them than the rest if he knew about Edelgard's personal war with Rhea. Granted, I don't know if Indech actually does approve of Rhea, he might have left for a reason. I was kind of thinking that Indech does have quite a bit of knowledge about the true history of Fodlan, it Edelgard could be convinced to talk to him. She might gain a more nuanced understanding of what is going on. Still, I maintain her issues is primarily with Rhea, even if she might be under the misconception that the rest have something more to do with controlling Fodlan than is the actual truth, thanks to Rhea's propaganda and the role the Saints serve in it.

If Edelgard has any hatred towards Dragonkind as a whole, it is only because of misinformation. It is about their involvement in controlling things from behind-the-scenes rather than any kind of racial hatred.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Alistair said:

I'm pretty sure she does since she has boss conversations with Seteth and Flayn to that effect in Verdant Wind/Silver Snow. At least, if Solon/the Agarthans knew then it's not unreasonable to assume their allies would also know. For the record, I do think she's prejudiced against Nabateans, given that she's very quick to claim that they're "monsters who have controlled Fodlan in secret" when not only is that demonstrably not the case (everone else besides Rhea has either been sleeping or selcuding themselves from society), she keeps mentioning it as if it's one of her main arguments against the status quo. 

Good catch. Here's her convo with Seteth, in VW20 and SS19:

Spoiler

Seteth: Edelgard! Return Rhea! Release your grip on Fódlan!
Edelgard: If you strike me down, they will return. I cannot permit what you desire. You are a child of the goddess. You must not be allowed power over the people!

So it does appear that she's of the mind that the "children of the Goddess" will, by their very nature, exploit humanity. Which I certainly disagree with, but it's understandable in the light of Rhea's past deeds, and the relationshipbetween Nabateans and the Church. It is possible for Byleth to spare Seteth and Flayn in CF15, but we are told they go into hiding.

52 minutes ago, Alistair said:

Indech's paralouge requires Lindhardt and Leonie in Part II. I think in Crimson Flower it's available after the conquest of Deirdru, and neither Hubert nor Edelgard can be deployed there (because Lindhardt doesn't want them finding out about Indech). 

Yep. Ironically, it's on Dimitri's route that the paralogue is trickiest to activate, requiring two out-of-house recruits rather than one. The rationale for excluding Edelgard and Hubert isn't made explicit - does Linhardt think that they would try to kill Indech? Or conversely, that Indech would refuse to cooperate with the leader of an anti-Church movement? His precaution does pay off, but I love the idea of giving The Inexhaustible to a weirdly-built Edelgard or Hubert, and them having no clue where this weapon came from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Good catch. Here's her convo with Seteth, in VW20 and SS19:

  Hide contents

Seteth: Edelgard! Return Rhea! Release your grip on Fódlan!
Edelgard: If you strike me down, they will return. I cannot permit what you desire. You are a child of the goddess. You must not be allowed power over the people!

So it does appear that she's of the mind that the "children of the Goddess" will, by their very nature, exploit humanity. Which I certainly disagree with, but it's understandable in the light of Rhea's past deeds, and the relationshipbetween Nabateans and the Church. It is possible for Byleth to spare Seteth and Flayn in CF15, but we are told they go into hiding.

Yep. Ironically, it's on Dimitri's route that the paralogue is trickiest to activate, requiring two out-of-house recruits rather than one. The rationale for excluding Edelgard and Hubert isn't made explicit - does Linhardt think that they would try to kill Indech? Or conversely, that Indech would refuse to cooperate with the leader of an anti-Church movement? His precaution does pay off, but I love the idea of giving The Inexhaustible to a weirdly-built Edelgard or Hubert, and them having no clue where this weapon came from.

I think it is mostly due to the fact that they are immortal, any human tyrant would eventually die and be replaced, once a tyranical Nabatean gets into power, it would be very hard to get them out of there. I think Edelgard would tolerate their people within her empire, she just wouldn't be willing to give them any positions of power because of what happened in the past. Seteth at least is partwise culpable for Rhea's regime, but I don't think Flayn as much to do with it. So I think she is an innocent party. Does the same thing happen if you spare Flayn and not Seteth?

I also think Edelgard has this idea that humans should rule over humans, which I think isn't entirely unreasonable, given how easily a dragon could dominate a species that are so much weaker than them. Just another case of Edelgard using her power to protect the weak from being exploited by the strong really, is she really that much different from Dimitri when it comes down to it?

At the very least, I don't think that Edelgard's hatred of Nabateans is extreme enough to justify ethnic cleansing or anything like that. Therefore I think the Hitler comparisons are rather stupid. There is a huge difference between killing one dragon and killing over 6 million people, and it might be even larger than this.

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...