Jump to content
omegaxis1

Why I cannot fully sympathize with Rhea

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

So, you want to ignore what the game states and insist that it has to be something akin to an ultimatum? Where is your logic behind it? In fact, it's very much tantamount that Edelgard would actually NOT make it be an ultimatum, given how Edelgard is always someone that respects choices. Out of all the cahracters in the game, Edelgard's always been the one that ever actually asks Byleth what THEY want, and if they are sure of their path, always giving them a choice, even in her own route, asking that they can walk away from this fight at any point, and Byleth always assures her that they are certain of their choice.

To say that she lied about the manifesto is sounds like what Seteth and Dimtiri think, where they insinuate that she wants to become a false deity even though that is blatantly wrong

Like I said there's a reason we don't know what the manifest is if you want to believe edelgard and they leave it blank for you intentionally. Do you not see that you're spinning it in circles. I don't hear about the manifest in any route but in crimson flower That's why I said it could have been an ultimatum we don't know what it is edelgard has been proven to lie and this is the only route that we hear about it. 

The manifest is a key Lynch pen of making her either a aggressor or someone who is willing for diplomacy. The only way to believe the manifest is to completely believe in edelgard. we have been shown that she's willing to lie to us she lies to all of her other comrades too. Which put doubt in the manifest in that the entire point. 

 

You believe that the manifest is what edelgard just telling us what it is. Me or anyone with suspicion would put doubt into it. We have an example of her forcing another house to help her in Golden deer. But it could be that what she says can be completely true. This is why it's a blank story event if we were actually shown that the manifest was what she said or a lie it would either make her a aggressor or a diplomat.

 

This is why you're able to put complete headcanon about what her character is into the event. do you not see your comment and understand that you have put edelguard character in to the manifest. you even mention her character in the comment about the manifest because that's all you actually have to work with. 

 

I previously said in the comment that the game makes you have an emotional attachment to the characters. so you can sympathize with them to create a more fluid story for the blank events. 

 

For either one of us we could be wrong about the manifest you believe edelgard I do not. All we know edelgard could have given them a picture of a monkey and were both wrong That's why it's left blank.

 

The developers in the dream interview said they intentionally left in doubts for the crimson flower route. Completely showing the fact that they know that by doing this people will end up in situation like this for debate It was all intentional.

 

Once again showing that I'm not trying to disagree with you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, it just occurs to me that myself and many others have gone WAY off topic and this has, YET AGAIN, to another Edelgard discussion and who's right and who's wrong.

This topic is just me stating why I cannot hold the most sympathy toward Rhea as other do. So I would like to request everyone to also remember that this topic is about Rhea and her issues PRIMARILY. 

So please, let's get back on topic. 

Share this post


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

Okay, it just occurs to me that myself and many others have gone WAY off topic and this has, YET AGAIN, to another Edelgard discussion and who's right and who's wrong.

This topic is just me stating why I cannot hold the most sympathy toward Rhea as other do. So I would like to request everyone to also remember that this topic is about Rhea and her issues PRIMARILY. 

So please, let's get back on topic. 

It's' quite funny how unless a topic it's completed gameplay related will at some point create a Edelgard discussion, hahahah xD.

Rhea is thick BTW (?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rhea is human and that is her greatest fault. a lot of people say that she had hundreds of years to get over it but honestly that truly really isn't enough. she's going through a selective genocide as a black man I can tell you that the scars of slavery still hit deep today in the community as if it was yesterday. 

for someone to say that she has issues is a vast understatement she didn't have a psychologist to help her through this problem now did she. it's like telling someone's best friend after their mother died to get over it after just two years.

 

Rhea is human and that's the problem if anything she's the most human person in the entire cast of the Lord's. She is completely emotional and stuck on as a child because in that very moment she watched her entire race die. You can compare her to other characters all we want but put yourself in the situation and you'll most likely end up being worse. That's the entire point of her character. it's easy to hate her because she has a character fault that's easy for a regular person to understand but she never gets over it because as a fictional character she supposed to be better than us. Human beings don't like to be told that were flawed in nature. 

 

Do I sympathize her no do I understand her completely. And she's got thighs that make the world just seem so perfect.

 

Share this post


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

Okay, it just occurs to me that myself and many others have gone WAY off topic and this has, YET AGAIN, to another Edelgard discussion and who's right and who's wrong.

h o w   u n e x p e c t e d

2 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

This topic is just me stating why I cannot hold the most sympathy toward Rhea as other do. So I would like to request everyone to also remember that this topic is about Rhea and her issues PRIMARILY. 

So please, let's get back on topic. 

doesn't really mean much, when you're the first to derail a thread's topic (your own thread, in this case) just to once again state your opinions, which, i assure you, we all have already memorized by a long time

i mean no offense, really, but sometimes you really can come off as thick-headed and obnoxious, and please consider that the "many people misunderstand her character" justification might be valid for you, @Darkmoon6789 and some others, but not everyone is actually willing to put so much thought into argumenting a fictional character's actions

i feel like i might get warned for what i just said, but i felt i had to express these opinions of mine: anyway, no hard feelings

 

back on topic

i don't think anyone actually believes Rhea did nothing wrong or blatantly ignores what she did

for me, at least, it's just a matter of attitude: Rhea can be kind, strict, loving or ruthless depending on what the situation requires, but in the end, she's just a broken woman who had an incredibly long period of time to let her negative feelings and her internal corruption partially take control of her

and quite ironically, extremely long lifespan and dragon powers aside, this proves how she's not that different from regular humans

for us humans, even the smallest of things can have a huge impact, and for Rhea it took only 5 years (basically nothing for her) of imprisonment during which she had no power or influence whatsoever (something she took for granted) to radically change her mind

and, as @jawaunw says, the fact that she's so human is the exact cause of her demise

these are some of the reasons i love her so much yes her body and "ara ara" charm are as well

Edited by Yexin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A person who cannot deal with their trauma, and cannot control their emotions, is not qualified to lead an institution or a nation. She only considers her mother as the only one who can rule, so I think she considers inferior humans.

In fiction stories, I like characters that evolve and overcome their shortcomings and trauma. It is a pity that on the SS route, Rhea was very absent. It is true that in the end she reconsiders, but that doesn't tell me much either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Yexin said:

h o w   u n e x p e c t e d

doesn't really mean much, when you're the first to derail a thread's topic (your own thread, in this case) just to once again state your opinions, which, i assure you, we all have already memorized by a long time

i mean no offense, really, but sometimes you really can come off as thick-headed and obnoxious, and please consider that the "many people misunderstand her character" justification might be valid for you, @Darkmoon6789 and some others, but not everyone is actually willing to put so much thought into argumenting a fictional character's actions

i feel like i might get warned for what i just said, but it's something i felt i had to express these opinions if mine: anyway, no hard feelings

 

back on topic

i don't think anyone actually believes Rhea did nothing wrong or blatantly ignores what she did

for me, at least, it's just a matter of attitude: Rhea can be kind, strict, loving or ruthless depending on what the situation requires, but in the end, she's just a broken woman who had an incredibly long period of time to let her negative feelings and her internal corruption partially take control of her

and quite ironically, extremely long lifespan and dragon powers aside, this proves how she's not that different from regular humans

for us humans, even the smallest of things can have a huge impact, and for Rhea it took only 5 years (basically nothing for her) of imprisonment during which she had no power or influence whatsoever (something she took for granted) to radically change her mind

and, as @jawaunw says, the fact that she's so human is the exact cause of her demise

these are some of the reasons i love her so much yes her body and "ara ara" charm are as well

Is the first part, referring to Rhea or Edelgard? Because the one I was referring to many people misunderstanding was Edelgard. It is just that it is like some people just can't accept that the aggressor and a conqueror can be justified, or even a good person. 

And yes, Rhea is ironically a very human character, I also think that Edelgard would be more sympathetic towards her. If she actually knew the entire truth, but she has mostly just seen Rhea's worst sides, Rhea also do not truly seem to understand Edelgard. Yet the ideological divide would still remain even if both were informed of the truth. Regardless of their actions. I don't think either of the two are that bad as people. I would actually say that Rhea was in the right initially back 1000 years ago, it is only recently,she has started to slip.

Also ,Rhea in her Seiros outfit is freaking gorgeous.

49 minutes ago, Blackstarskywalker said:

A person who cannot deal with their trauma, and cannot control their emotions, is not qualified to lead an institution or a nation. She only considers her mother as the only one who can rule, so I think she considers inferior humans.

In fiction stories, I like characters that evolve and overcome their shortcomings and trauma. It is a pity that on the SS route, Rhea was very absent. It is true that in the end she reconsiders, but that doesn't tell me much either.

Rhea isn't really fit for leadership in her current state, as Azula is not fit to be Firelord while she is literally hallucinating and wrongly believe that everyone is out to get her because of the paranoia induced by her mental breakdown. Granted, maybe Dimitri is the closer comparison as he also suffers from hallucinations. But both Rhea and Azula do seem to have a thing that they both kind of venerate their mother/father. The primary difference that I am uncertain about Sothis true nature and Azula's father is most definitely evil.

Share this post


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

Is the first part, referring to Rhea or Edelgard? Because the one I was referring to many people misunderstanding was Edelgard. It is just that it is like some people just can't accept that the aggressor and a conqueror can be justified, or even a good person. 

in the first part i was referring to Edelgard: i thought it would've been clear from the context, i'm sorry i haven't made it clearer myself

Share this post


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

A person who cannot deal with their trauma, and cannot control their emotions, is not qualified to lead an institution or a nation. She only considers her mother as the only one who can rule, so I think she considers inferior humans.

In fiction stories, I like characters that evolve and overcome their shortcomings and trauma. It is a pity that on the SS route, Rhea was very absent. It is true that in the end she reconsiders, but that doesn't tell me much either.

Ironically, this is exactly how Ferdinand describes Dimitri in CF:

Quote

Ferdinand: Dimitri, the King of Faerghus. He despises Edelgard and everything she stands for. I am of the opinion that a man seized by such strong feelings is not fit to be king. It is a sad situation, really.

> Byleth: Kings are people too. 

Ferdinand: If he cannot suppress his emotions to make reasoned decisions, he should abdicate. 

> Byleth: Kings can't be emotional?

Ferdinand: (Support point up) No, they cannot. Kingly judgment has to be wholly separate from the emotions of the individual. 

 

Share this post


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

Also ,Rhea in her Seiros outfit is freaking gorgeous

Finally someone agrees with me that she looks amazing as a saint. People actually like her archbishop outfit it's complete garbage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, jawaunw said:

Finally someone agrees with me that she looks amazing as a saint. People actually like her archbishop outfit it's complete garbage. 

 

1 hour ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

Finally someone agrees with me that she looks amazing as a saint. People actually like her archbishop outfit it's complete garbage. 

This is another reason why I like CF, actually. XD

Seeing Rhea be Seiros is just epic.

Seiros should have been playable in Silver Snow. It would have made the story so much more interesting. And I would have had fun having her punch people to death.

Share this post


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

 

 

This is another reason why I like CF, actually. XD

Seeing Rhea be Seiros is just epic.

Seiros should have been playable in Silver Snow. It would have made the story so much more interesting. And I would have had fun having her punch people to death.

Agreed, Rhea should have been treated like the Lord in silver snow. Why else would you side with the church, if not to get to know Rhea better?

Seiros is the original badass conqueror of Fodlan. She makes for a good archenemy to Edelgard. 

While this argument is usually used to make Edelgard look bad, I do think there is legitimate reasons to compare her with Seiros. They are both conquerors who was motivated by the death of their immediate family. It just shows to me that Edelgard really is the descendant of Seiros, their crests alone invite the point of comparison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/5/2020 at 11:41 AM, omegaxis1 said:

There's a reason why in CF, it's noted by an NPC that to the Empire, Faerghus and Leicester are basically traitors. 

Trying to say that the Empire should just "get over it" because it's been a long time is not the case. Because the Empire was wronged countless times, and had power taken from them

But isn't that part of your explanation in the OP, that Rhea should have gotten over her trauma despite not everyone involved are found and still secretly plotting against her. I mean for Rhea it's genocide; for the Empire it's, what, lose out on territories and extra taxes? What if Brigid or Almyra shows proof that Empire was separated from them by force not long ago? Do they have the right to reclaim it like you said?

Why can't the same explanation be applied to Empire, or Edelgard herself, why can't they just get over their trauma. This isn't a question because I am sure you will have some glorified justification for why it's different cases. And you would think that those are actually perfectly reasonable justification with lots of philosophy or something like that.

Both Rhea and Edelgard are on brink of losing it. In all routes, Rhe loses her pretended sanity as soon as Edelgard revealed herself. Anyone who opposed her or tried to tell her she was wrong, she's in power to eliminate them. Same goes to Edelgard, she has Hubert and position as heir to the throne, made her thinking that she has the power (and indeed she has) to eliminate what she "believes" is wrong. 

Finally, I agreed that Rhea should be made playable. Cutscene fight between her (in Seiros form) and Edelgard would be epic. 

Share this post


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

But isn't that part of your explanation in the OP, that Rhea should have gotten over her trauma despite not everyone involved are found and still secretly plotting against her. I mean for Rhea it's genocide; for the Empire it's, what, lose out on territories and extra taxes? What if Brigid or Almyra shows proof that Empire was separated from them by force not long ago? Do they have the right to reclaim it like you said?

Why can't the same explanation be applied to Empire, or Edelgard herself, why can't they just get over their trauma. This isn't a question because I am sure you will have some glorified justification for why it's different cases. And you would think that those are actually perfectly reasonable justification with lots of philosophy or something like that.

Both Rhea and Edelgard are on brink of losing it. In all routes, Rhe loses her pretended sanity as soon as Edelgard revealed herself. Anyone who opposed her or tried to tell her she was wrong, she's in power to eliminate them. Same goes to Edelgard, she has Hubert and position as heir to the throne, made her thinking that she has the power (and indeed she has) to eliminate what she "believes" is wrong. 

Finally, I agreed that Rhea should be made playable. Cutscene fight between her (in Seiros form) and Edelgard would be epic. 

There's a difference between Rhea and humans. Rhea is immortal who knows and carries on the same knowledge she has seen. Humans aren't immortal, but passes on legacies. Legacies that get inherited are always interpreted by the successor differently at times. Just as Edelgard doesn't have the complete information interprets the information that was given to her by her father differently than how it actually is. 

To give a lighter comparison, Lucina always thought that Marth was a powerful warrior that struck fear into the hearts of friends and foes, but in reality, he's a kind and sensitive man that is critical of himself and wants to save everyone he could. Lucina doesn't know the full story of Marth, because history presented him as someone fearsome and powerful. 

Or how Gangrel uses the war that Emmeryn and Chrom's father waged on Plegia years back as reason for waging the new war on Ylisse. 

Or in IRL situations, how there's still plenty of forms of racism persisting, or hatred for past events that are still existing, but for now isn't expressed. 

Also... it REALLY does not help that Garreg Mach literally CELEBRATES the Battle of the Eagle and Lion literally every year, having the Houses compete. I always felt this was a seriously bad take on the Church. The Empire is CONSTANTLY reminded every year that they suffered a defeat from Loog and the Church threw them under the bus by backing Loog's claim for independence. While Faerghus and the Blue Lions house would hold the event with pride, for Adrestia, it's rubbing salt in their wounds. 

Also, Edelgard isn't about the past. But rather, her past is toward how the future has to be prevented. She sees the current situation that was created as a result of Rhea's influence over society as a problem and humans will commit the exactly same atrocities if something isn't done. But the nobles of Adrestia, in their own pride, sees the Empire to have been wronged and that Fodlan should never have been divided in the first place. 

Share this post


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

Okay, it just occurs to me that myself and many others have gone WAY off topic and this has, YET AGAIN, to another Edelgard discussion and who's right and who's wrong.

This topic is just me stating why I cannot hold the most sympathy toward Rhea as other do. So I would like to request everyone to also remember that this topic is about Rhea and her issues PRIMARILY. 

So please, let's get back on topic. 

That's what happens when you go too hard into Protect Edelgard mode.  Might want to back off a bit, even if she is your favorite out of the main cast of 3H.

9 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

There's a difference between Rhea and humans. Rhea is immortal who knows and carries on the same knowledge she has seen. Humans aren't immortal, but passes on legacies. Legacies that get inherited are always interpreted by the successor differently at times. Just as Edelgard doesn't have the complete information interprets the information that was given to her by her father differently than how it actually is.

. . .wait, she is?  I thought she just had a super-long life span, a la every other manakete we've been introduced to.

Share this post


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

That's what happens when you go too hard into Protect Edelgard mode.  Might want to back off a bit, even if she is your favorite out of the main cast of 3H.

. . .wait, she is?  I thought she just had a super-long life span, a la every other manakete we've been introduced to.

So do we know how long she actually does live? I always just assumed she was more or less immortal like most dragons in fictional media

Edited by Darkmoon6789

Share this post


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

. . .wait, she is?  I thought she just had a super-long life span, a la every other manakete we've been introduced to.

I mean, she still looks the exact same age after a thousand years. To normal humans, that's basically being immortal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, MagicCanonBalls said:

Why can't the same explanation be applied to Empire, or Edelgard herself, why can't they just get over their trauma. This isn't a question because I am sure you will have some glorified justification for why it's different cases. And you would think that those are actually perfectly reasonable justification with lots of philosophy or something like that.

Sure there is a big difference. Edelgard does not let hatred control her, or the trauma she had affect her reason. And she focuses on changing Fodlan society for the better, and eliminating the agarthans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am absolutely happy to let the Edelgard stuff go, I've spent way too long writing about her lol.

 

I don't think a Fodlan with humans in charge inherently means better outcomes than Rhea's Fodlan. I only think humans have a right to be in charge of areas where humans make up the vast majority of the population - the fact that Rhea's Fodlan also fossilised some negative customs and stereotypes helps the case of humanity, rather than simply being the case for humanity (for me, at least). With that being said, I think if we could choose leaders that had a thousand years worth of experience leading, we probably would.

I do think there is still something attractive about an existence more powerful than humanity's own being in charge, looking out for them. The fact that she is ridiculously resistant to change, lied to humanity about like everything, and made a surprising number of mistakes for someone who has been (intermittently at least) in charge of a continent-wide religion for a millenium, screams that she's bad at her job, but you can still read her motivations being good, even if her course got twisted. 

Share this post


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

I don't think a Fodlan with humans in charge inherently means better outcomes than Rhea's Fodlan. I only think humans have a right to be in charge of areas where humans make up the vast majority of the population - the fact that Rhea's Fodlan also fossilised some negative customs and stereotypes helps the case of humanity, rather than simply being the case for humanity (for me, at least). With that being said, I think if we could choose leaders that had a thousand years worth of experience leading, we probably would.

I do think there is still something attractive about an existence more powerful than humanity's own being in charge, looking out for them. The fact that she is ridiculously resistant to change, lied to humanity about like everything, and made a surprising number of mistakes for someone who has been (intermittently at least) in charge of a continent-wide religion for a millenium, screams that she's bad at her job, but you can still read her motivations being good, even if her course got twisted. 

I agree that humans aren't always the best leaders. But the series has shown that different species and races ruling over humanity isn't good either, because that will also stoke hatred, especially when the person does a bad job or morally questionable or wrong things. 

Ironically, Awakening shows how a better form of dragons being with humans are, in the form of Tiki, and even Naga. Tiki is a religious figure. Naga is worshipped like a god. But neither directly intervene or meddle into humanity, hold political power, or enforce their beliefs onto people via military. The religion remains as a form of faith for the people, and not a political tool within society. 

Naga even insists that she is no god, yet Nah is shown to be able to pray to her and give offerings, and Naga speaks back to them.

So there is a form of communication between Naga and Tiki with the people, but they only seek to help as a guide at best. 

And Tiki's definitely been through her own trauma as well, and she had the help of her friends and companions, all of whom died as time went by.

Share this post


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

I mean, she still looks the exact same age after a thousand years. To normal humans, that's basically being immortal. 

If we're looking at Rhea's mental state, her life span (or lack thereof, as an immortal) is important to the conversation.  So hand-waving it as immortal isn't a good idea.

Though if nothing in-game said that she's immortal, I'll assume she's your garden-variety manakete, with a very long life span (see: Tiki).

Share this post


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

If we're looking at Rhea's mental state, her life span (or lack thereof, as an immortal) is important to the conversation.  So hand-waving it as immortal isn't a good idea.

Though if nothing in-game said that she's immortal, I'll assume she's your garden-variety manakete, with a very long life span (see: Tiki).

This is sort of why it's difficult, if not dangerous, for beings of immense longevity to lead mankind, those that don't have that. It's hard to understand the perspective and really comprehend the things they endure. Tiki makes it clear that her longevity made her suffer immensely, because the people she loved died and she remains alive because of her life-span. 

Similarly, it becomes hard for a dragon to effectively lead mankind because they can't always understand the humans' perspective of the kind of suffering that is happening. 

Share this post


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

If we're looking at Rhea's mental state, her life span (or lack thereof, as an immortal) is important to the conversation.  So hand-waving it as immortal isn't a good idea.

Though if nothing in-game said that she's immortal, I'll assume she's your garden-variety manakete, with a very long life span (see: Tiki).

Like elves really, we don't actually know what their the Nabatean maximum lifespan is, but it is definitely over 1000 years. But even sure if Rhea is considered all that old for her species. Granted, I would classify her as an ancient dragon going by Dungeons & Dragons terms. 

I also have no idea what effect living for thousands of years really has on the grieving process, maybe it is actually harder to process loss. If you are not used to your people dying around you. Maybe the death of a Nabatean is a bigger deal to them than for humanity as the limb so much longer and don't need to deal with death all that often. 

But I do have a concern with leaders being immortal, we have issues with politicians that are to all the being out of touch with today's technology and culture. Now just imagine the same issue with people capable of living for thousands of years. It is inevitable that they would live in the past and have trouble adapting to change. It is actually a blessing that leaders die and get replaced with new ones. Rhea used to be a good leader, but I think her inability to move on from the past made her incapable of handling a changing world. Her goal was always to restore how things was and bring back her mother. The opposite of Edelgard, who is all about bringing something new that the world has never seen. That is frightening to people like Rhea.

I do believe that if Edelgard was capable of living for thousands of years, she would also inevitably be unable to adapt to a changing world. As the world would eventually become rather different from the one she grew up in, not to mention what her guilt over the casualties inflicted in the war could do to her mental state over the centuries. It is actually a good thing that Edelgard isn't immortal and that she will die, leaving room for a new generation to take over. I don't believe she would want it any other way.

I guess I am trying to say that it isn't necessarily Rhea's fault, it is just to be inevitable consequence of living for us long as she did, especially with such trauma. Leadership does eventually need to be replaced. Otherwise it gets stale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're free to your own opinion and I'm not here to sway you on it, but I agree with the general consensus here. "Get over it" isn't really a good defense here. For you, 1000 years may be a long time to hold onto trauma. For Manaketes, how long is 1000 years really? A quarter of her lifespan? Considering the absolute terror that was inflicted upon her siblings and family, I can't really get too mad at Rhea, of all people, for not moving on.

But that's just me~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually got to thinking how much does Rhea interact with the students of the officers academy? I am not talking about the house leaders here but regular students like Sylvain, Lysthiea, Marieanne, Ferdninand, Ashe,  Bernedetta, Hapi, ect. Or in previous generations people like Holst, Younger Yuri, Younger Balthus ect. I know in the advice box Rhea has some things saying she should interact more with the students but I wonder just how much she does do that.

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...