Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

Yeah; I'm late to this specific conversation and don't have all the context for who is arguing what, but I can point out that that's a case of telling rather than showing, and what's being told to the player contradicting what's being shown; something that Shadows of Valentia is quite guilty of in a number of places.

The problem is that the player is shown Alm always being perfect and Celica's actions being in the wrong as she ultimately makes things worse by agreeing to Jedah's deal. The game is supposed to be about balance, working together and bonds overcoming conflicting ideologies but it breaks that lesson by basically having the story favour Alm. That's the problem. 

Which is pretty much the issue.

There would be an actual point if, you know, Alm actually took some kind of lesson that Celica said and applied it. But any time that Celica is even mentioned in the story, it has nothing to do with Alm thinking of anything Celica taught him. Then it can be said that Alm's wisdom is more due to Celica, but anything that Alm does, it has nothing to do with Celica's wisdom or teaching. It's Alm getting by cause he's already perfect. 

 

Share this post


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

Which is pretty much the issue.

There would be an actual point if, you know, Alm actually took some kind of lesson that Celica said and applied it. But any time that Celica is even mentioned in the story, it has nothing to do with Alm thinking of anything Celica taught him. Then it can be said that Alm's wisdom is more due to Celica, but anything that Alm does, it has nothing to do with Celica's wisdom or teaching. It's Alm getting by cause he's already perfect. 

Exactly. Are you adding to my point or trying to disagree with me? I ask because your point is pretty much mine, but you open with, "Which is pretty much the issue". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

Exactly. Are you adding to my point or trying to disagree with me? I ask because your point is pretty much mine, but you open with, "Which is pretty much the issue". 

Adding to your point. 

Share this post


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

What are you talking about Duma went insane and allowed Rudolf to attack her. Depending on how you interpret the god tree she might have never reblessed the land. Yeah she babied them to much. No she didn’t cause Duma to want Celica soul she had absolutely nothing to do with Rigels actions. An if she hadn’t had sealed falchion Duma would have won because Celica might have not even left the church or Mila wouldn’t have been there to help Alm. Mila would have just killed Rudolf. Because it wasn’t his destiny to beat her. Jeddah was already feeding maidens souls to try to cure Dumas degeneration long before the story. Was she a flawed leader yes that’s obvious. But the story clearly blames everything on the degenerated Duma. Milas faith still exists by the end of the game Dumas doesn’t. Know if you want to say the game doesn’t call Mila out enough for causing the famine and being a bad leader sure I agree. But she’s not the war god Duma was. 

I'm a bit at a loss as to what your overall point is. Let's take all of these things one at a time.

9 hours ago, Julian Solo said:

What are you talking about Duma went insane and allowed Rudolf to attack her. 

Yes, this is true.

9 hours ago, Julian Solo said:

Depending on how you interpret the god tree she might have never reblessed the land. Yeah she babied them to much.

I don't really see much evidence of that. Sofia did suffer droughts and stuff the moment she was gone. The whole point of Zofia's flaws would be a little lost if Mila was a conman.

9 hours ago, Julian Solo said:

No she didn’t cause Duma to want Celica soul she had absolutely nothing to do with Rigels actions. 

English is a little iffy here. You're saying Mila had nothing to do with Duma wanting Celica's soul? Yeah, that's true....so what? I never suggested Mila was cooperating with Duma.

9 hours ago, Julian Solo said:

An if she hadn’t had sealed falchion Duma would have won because Celica might have not even left the church or Mila wouldn’t have been there to help Alm.

What makes you think this? Celica left the church because she had a dream of Alm in danger fighting Rudolf. And Mila sealing Falchion didn't give her the ability to hang around as a ghost and save Celica. That's just something Divine (and Earth) dragons can naturally do. At best you can say if Mila didn't seal Falchion then Duma and Jedah would have destroyed Falchion, but that's really pure speculation. It's just as likely they would have stored the useful weapon in the exact same vault Alm ended up getting it in anyway which would have lead to no changes.

9 hours ago, Julian Solo said:

Mila would have just killed Rudolf. Because it wasn’t his destiny to beat her. 

So you think Mila committed suicide on Rudolf? It was her grand plan to get herself killed and seal Falchion and then unseal it later? You're really going to have to provide some kind of evidence to back up a suicidal Mila. Because she certainly looks determined to fight Rudolf.

Mila lookin fine | Fire Emblem Amino

9 hours ago, Julian Solo said:

Jeddah was already feeding maidens souls to try to cure Dumas degeneration long before the story. 

Whether eating people's souls actually does anything to help Duma is a really ambiguous plot point. It's wrapped all up in Celica and Jedah's sacrifice and the return of her soul with consent both being needed and not required. It's basically a mess. But from what we do know of both of them, Mila seems no more mad than Duma and could even be argued to be less crazy.

9 hours ago, Julian Solo said:

Was she a flawed leader yes that’s obvious. But the story clearly blames everything on the degenerated Duma. 

I thought you just said Duma wasn't degenerating because Jedah was feeding him souls?

9 hours ago, Julian Solo said:

Milas faith still exists by the end of the game Dumas doesn’t.

Both of them exist as a combined faith actually.

9 hours ago, Julian Solo said:

 Know if you want to say the game doesn’t call Mila out enough for causing the famine and being a bad leader sure I agree.

Well maybe a bit more directly it could have in the ending, but I don't think they drop the ball all that hard in regards to Mila's poor leadership qualities. What I definitely would have liked to have seen was a playable battle where you control Rudolf and various other bosses in a battle against Mila. That would have been super fun.

9 hours ago, Julian Solo said:

But she’s not the war god Duma was. 

Who is claiming Mila is a war god?

 

So I think aside from addressing your points, I might have shown how monumentally scattered and hard to figure out your posts are. Do you think you could sum up your opinion in a single line?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ottservia said:

I mean it isn’t officially stated but it is heavily implied. I mean Duma’s final words suggest as much where he tells Alm and Celica to learn from their mistakes and to make Valentia a strong nation filled with Mila’s love. The point of the narrative is heavily implied to be about the flaws in Duma and Mila’s ideals. The game isn’t exactly subtle about that message. Alm and Celica are supposed to represent those ideals. The flaws of those ideals as well as their virtues and they both face characters that showcase the logical extremes of those ideals(Berkut for Alm and Jedah for Celica). That’s how the narrative sets itself up. Hell the argument Celica and Alm have at the end of act 2 is supposed to reflect the same argument between Duma and Mila. It’s through their respective character arcs that they’re supposed to learn that those ideals on their own are bad and it’s only through the marriage of those ideals that a kingdom can truly prosper.

Problem is though Alm doesn’t represent Duma’s ideals at all. He’s more representative of Mila than Duma. The only character that truly represents Duma’s ideals is Berkut which yeah is kind of the point. He’s supposed to be Alm’s foil after all. But the problem is that their foil relationship is kind of shit because they’re not similar in the slightest. The conflict between them is just so darn shallow. It’s just kinda Berkut hating on Alm because he needs to validate his insecurities. It’s very one sided. Like if you want me to believe that Berkut is what could’ve been you have to show that. You have show how Alm and Berkut aren’t all that different. The story doesn’t make that effort. Like I have hard time believing that these two are supposed to foil each other because they don’t. The reason this is such a big problem is because again that’s what the story wants to do. It wants to show that if Alm did give into his ambition and insecurities he would end up like Berkut. Berkut is meant to show the logical extremes of Duma’s ideals and foil Alm in that way. It doesn’t work because Alm isn’t representative of Duma’s ideals in the slightest. They don’t really make that a point to emphasize with alm. He’s just kind of a flawless paragon but then they want you to view him as a flawed character at times when he never was. Like which is it?

No? Pretty sure Duma makes it clear NOT to repeat Duma and Mila's mistakes, not Alm and Celica's specific mistakes. Where they refused to agree with each other and allowed man to spiral into a messy state. Alm and Celica were only ever talked about to resemble the two ideals, which they 100% do. The flaws of the ideals are shown more through Berkut and characters like Lima. If Celica represented the flaws, she'd be too passive and never get anything done. She never would've had any successes, yet that contradicts itself. It's way easier to go with Alm and Celica being the peak of Duma and Mila and their ideals. You bring up the Act 2 argument but they immediately make up around Act 4 through Halcyon's magic. Further showcasing how they're the best versions of Duma and Mila. 

Alm represents Duma's ideals, he's said to have strength of heart and he believes in man as a whole, that they don't have to be lost without gods. That's literally Duma's ideals for man to be strong and not hinge themselves on gods. Berkut only represents the problematic flaws, aka being too cold and putting too much value in power. Which lines up with him being a confirmed foil of Alm. Celica is a similar peak where she's extremely loving and passive, but she WILL work and get shit done than whining about Mila's blessings and doing nothing. 

6 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

Yeah; I'm late to this specific conversation and don't have all the context for who is arguing what, but I can point out that that's a case of telling rather than showing, and what's being told to the player contradicting what's being shown; something that Shadows of Valentia is quite guilty of in a number of places.

 

The problem is that the player is shown Alm always being perfect and Celica's actions being in the wrong as she ultimately makes things worse by agreeing to Jedah's deal. The game is supposed to be about balance, working together and bonds overcoming conflicting ideologies but it breaks that lesson by basically having the story favour Alm. That's the problem. 

Alm throughout the entire game does fight what's in front of him. The Tatiana situation was entirely Lukas telling the strategical advantages of going for Nuibaba, not Alm having any passive wisdom in that situation. Hell, the entire solution to the Delthea situation was literally fighting and killing the man controlling her. There was no unique "non fighting" factor. Alm didn't use his words to sway Delthea or have her fight it or some bs. It was his sword being plunged in Tatarrah that freed her. That point was never contradicted and without Celica, it's directly confirmed in game that he dies in the war. Combine that, their personal bond and Celica's numerous successes that confirm her value... There is a "balance" even if Alm saves her in the end just like in Gaiden. It's all about Alm and Celica's bond, that without each other... one would be lost even if they can theortically get some stuff done apart just like Duma and Mila. But they would fail in the end without each other. Which is an objective truth since Alm and Celica save each other from certain death. Duma can't even be reached without both brands to open a door. 

Edited by Seazas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2020 at 12:13 AM, Anathaco said:

After rescuing Delthea, Clive says that he’s “lucky to have so wise a teacher”.

 

Does the game say that if Delthea dies? I know that Luthier doesn't comment on it I think.

21 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

 

 

The problem is that the player is shown Alm always being perfect and Celica's actions being in the wrong as she ultimately makes things worse by agreeing to Jedah's deal. The game is supposed to be about balance, working together and bonds overcoming conflicting ideologies but it breaks that lesson by basically having the story favour Alm. That's the problem. 

I think it's more to the problem that Celica (aside from Valbar and pals/ the whitewing sisters maybe dying.) has to make dumb (and I think they're quite bad honestly) decisions later in the game for the sake of plot. (Though honestly you probably could easily make the same story without her being stupid.) 

While Alm's mistakes are all purely player stuff that the game will comment on, like Mathilda dying or killing Zeke, I think how Alm is handled is actually great for an FE protagonist on his own (Having difficult levels where the player is called out for their failures as opposed to the protagonist screwing up for the sake of plot in a cutscene *COUGH*BYLETH*COUGH*), its just that since Celica has to make plot mistakes after a certain point, it's kinda ruined. 

She really should have just been made to become a witch by force, instead of trusting Jedah, the man who has exactly one point in Charisma. 

Edited by Samz707

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Seazas said:

Alm throughout the entire game does fight what's in front of him.

The problem with this statement is that so does Celica. It’s just a matter of story and gameplay segregation really. Also when is that aspect of Alm ever portrayed as a flaw in his character? The story acts like it’s a character flaw but it’s not really. A character flaw is only really a flaw if it holds the character back in some way and in the case of Alm it doesn’t. At no point in the story does “Attacking whatever is in front of him” hinder him. It doesn’t put him in bad or otherwise tough situations. It doesn’t cause any problems for him. If anything it works out for him more often than not. 

Share this post


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

The problem with this statement is that so does Celica. It’s just a matter of story and gameplay segregation really. Also when is that aspect of Alm ever portrayed as a flaw in his character? The story acts like it’s a character flaw but it’s not really. A character flaw is only really a flaw if it holds the character back in some way and in the case of Alm it doesn’t. At no point in the story does “Attacking whatever is in front of him” hinder him. It doesn’t put him in bad or otherwise tough situations. It doesn’t cause any problems for him. If anything it works out for him more often than not. 

But it is fact that Alm does fight in front of him and he believes that Celica could add something different that he could not. And it is worth considering since Celica had the wisdom to approach the one who caused all this in the first place. Alm being reckless brought him more trouble than necessary, it didn't benefit Alm and directly hindered the army. Him acting rashly made it more difficult on Forsyth and Lukas in Daybreak Skies, him not listening to Lukas when running up on bandits was a hinderance than any actual story benefit and him gunning for Nuibaba's abode just for Celica put his army in a terrible spot. Him and his group working through that troublesome situation doesn't make Alm's reckless tendencies any less of a hinderance, since in many cases Alm not being reckless in those situations would've benefitted him.  It's a flaw, just something that Alm doesn't end up losing the war over since he's competent.

Edited by Seazas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Samz707 said:

I think it's more to the problem that Celica (aside from Valbar and pals/ the whitewing sisters maybe dying.) has to make dumb (and I think they're quite bad honestly) decisions later in the game for the sake of plot. (Though honestly you probably could easily make the same story without her being stupid.) 

While Alm's mistakes are all purely player stuff that the game will comment on, like Mathilda dying or killing Zeke, I think how Alm is handled is actually great for an FE protagonist on his own (Having difficult levels where the player is called out for their failures as opposed to the protagonist screwing up for the sake of plot in a cutscene *COUGH*BYLETH*COUGH*), its just that since Celica has to make plot mistakes after a certain point, it's kinda ruined. 

She really should have just been made to become a witch by force, instead of trusting Jedah, the man who has exactly one point in Charisma. 

I would say that Alm's the main problem. Main characters ideally need to be compelling, and a big part of being compelling is struggle. But I never got the sense that anything was actually hard for Alm. Celica at least was grappling with moral and character dilemma, while I never got the sense that any of the obstacles in Alm's path were that much of obstacles. For just one example, he is handed control of a resistance movement that lost control of Zofia's capital and then immediately retakes it. 

My favourite FE protagonist is Ike, and one thing that is made clear when comparing Ike and Alm is that Ike is very clearly struggling. He starts off as a complete newbie who gets in trouble in the second chapter, his mercenary company spends the first third of the game (after Daein declares war) on the run from Daein, where another day in which the princess is safe with them is another small victory. He loses his father and mentor in chapter 9 and he has to come to grips with stepping into a leadership role far sooner than anyone expected that he would have to (creating a strong parallel with Elincia's journey), and it is all very much a struggle. By the time he comes to grips with leading a small company, he then is immediately thrust into the position of leading an army in a war, he is not ready for it, and the game reflects that. Ike struggles a lot. 

Don't get me wrong, Alm gets a lot thrown at him, but if none of it seems to actually weigh him down, then what's the point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Seazas said:

But it is fact that Alm does fight in front of him and he believes that Celica could add something different that he could not.

As expressed numerous times by me and others the narrative never actually shows any instances of this happening so this point is moot.

19 minutes ago, Seazas said:

Him acting rashly made it more difficult on Forsyth and Lukas in Daybreak Skies, him not listening to Lukas when running up on bandits was a hinderance than any actual story benefit and him gunning for Nuibaba's abode just for Celica put his army in a terrible spot. Him and his group working through that troublesome situation doesn't make Alm's reckless tendencies any less of a hinderance, since in many cases Alm not being reckless in those situations would've benefitted him.  It's a flaw, just something that Alm doesn't end up losing the war over since he's competent.

Okay let’s think of it another way then. If Alm didn’t fall for Nuibaba’s trap he actually gets put in a worse situation than if he had because now he has to fight both Zeke and Jerome’s army. Where as if he had fallen for the trap, then he saves Tatiana. Therefore he doesn’t have to fight Zeke. Which puts him in a better situation inherently so if anything he’s rewarded for doing the more reckless thing. I think even Lukas mentions it might be a good idea to fight Nuibaba anyway so yeah. Again his recklessness is never really punished in any meaningful way. Nothing is taken away from him because of it. If anything it does more good for him than bad.

 

3 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

Main characters ideally need to be compelling, and a big part of being compelling is struggle.

Ehhh not every main character needs to struggle. Flawless paragons can work(heck Ike is one example of such. Well he’s not flawless but close enough anyway). The problem with Alm though is that story acts as if he struggled at any point during his journey when he didn’t. Alm says that without Celica’s “wisdom” he struggled on his path but that isn’t shown anywhere in the story. It’s never once made apparent that he struggled at all. If you want a comparison from me just look at Chrom. He gives into Gangrel’s taunting and helps perpetuate the cycle of hate between Ylisse and Plegia. How is he rewarded for it? His sister is captured and dies a martyr to save him from an impossible choice. Chrom makes a mistake is punished for it by losing someone close to him. It’s only after Emmeryn’s death that he begins to finally understand the ideals his sister stood for. Again he’s punished by the narrative for making a mistake. If you want another example look at Celica. She trusts someone she obviously shouldn’t and well she loses her soul as result and fails to accomplish her goals. She’s not rewarded for being an idiot. The narrative constantly punishes her for it. 

Share this post


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

Ehhh not every main character needs to struggle. Flawless paragons can work(heck Ike is one example of such. Well he’s not flawless but close enough anyway).

Who said anything about flaws? I was just talking about struggle; as in struggling to overcome something (it could be a character flaw, but it doesn't have to be). For the Ike example, I didn't once bring up a character flaw except for his recklessness in chapter 2, and even that I phrased within the wider context of him struggling as a rookie mercenary. 

2 hours ago, Ottservia said:

The problem with Alm though is that story acts as if he struggled at any point during his journey when he didn’t. Alm says that without Celica’s “wisdom” he struggled on his path but that isn’t shown anywhere in the story. It’s never once made apparent that he struggled at all.

This part I agree with, and is pretty much my exact point only worded slightly better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

Who said anything about flaws? I was just talking about struggle; as in struggling to overcome something (it could be a character flaw, but it doesn't have to be). For the Ike example, I didn't once bring up a character flaw except for his recklessness in chapter 2, and even that I phrased within the wider context of him struggling as a rookie mercenary. 

The thing I was trying to get at is that a character doesn't need to "struggle" to be make for a compelling protagonist. The core of any story is conflict and there are plenty of ways to go about creating conflict. A character who doesn't struggle can make for a fine protagonist. It's been done before and it's been done well. It's a matter of if the story is structured with that kind of character in mind. I just kinda correlate flawed with one that struggles cause they are more or less the same to me.

Share this post


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

I just kinda correlate flawed with one that struggles cause they are more or less the same to me.

I see. I honestly don't; I just see "struggle" as the character trying to overcome something. It could be a character flaw, but it doesn't have to be one, and thinking that it has to be a character flaw has actually led to the problem of writers running out of established character flaws for their characters to overcome and having to either reintroduce prior flaws or make up new ones that the characters didn't exhibit before. 

For another example, in The Hobbit, Bilbo's struggle doesn't come from a character flaw, but instead comes from him being way out of his comfort-zone; he's never left The Shire before and he's certainly never burgled before, let alone stolen back a treasure hoard from a dragon, and the journey and loss of the comforts of home weigh on him immensely. 

You are right in that there doesn't necessarily need to be struggle for a protagonist to be compelling, but in writing, unlike in math, counterexamples do not inherently disprove the rule (since writing rules are more akin to guidelines). I was just trying to say that it is one major ingredient for making a compelling character. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2020 at 8:05 PM, Jotari said:

I'm a bit at a loss as to what your overall point is. Let's take all of these things one at a time.

Yes, this is true.

I don't really see much evidence of that. Sofia did suffer droughts and stuff the moment she was gone. The whole point of Zofia's flaws would be a little lost if Mila was a conman.

English is a little iffy here. You're saying Mila had nothing to do with Duma wanting Celica's soul? Yeah, that's true....so what? I never suggested Mila was cooperating with Duma.

What makes you think this? Celica left the church because she had a dream of Alm in danger fighting Rudolf. And Mila sealing Falchion didn't give her the ability to hang around as a ghost and save Celica. That's just something Divine (and Earth) dragons can naturally do. At best you can say if Mila didn't seal Falchion then Duma and Jedah would have destroyed Falchion, but that's really pure speculation. It's just as likely they would have stored the useful weapon in the exact same vault Alm ended up getting it in anyway which would have lead to no changes.

So you think Mila committed suicide on Rudolf? It was her grand plan to get herself killed and seal Falchion and then unseal it later? You're really going to have to provide some kind of evidence to back up a suicidal Mila. Because she certainly looks determined to fight Rudolf.

Mila lookin fine | Fire Emblem Amino

Whether eating people's souls actually does anything to help Duma is a really ambiguous plot point. It's wrapped all up in Celica and Jedah's sacrifice and the return of her soul with consent both being needed and not required. It's basically a mess. But from what we do know of both of them, Mila seems no more mad than Duma and could even be argued to be less crazy.

I thought you just said Duma wasn't degenerating because Jedah was feeding him souls?

Both of them exist as a combined faith actually.

Well maybe a bit more directly it could have in the ending, but I don't think they drop the ball all that hard in regards to Mila's poor leadership qualities. What I definitely would have liked to have seen was a playable battle where you control Rudolf and various other bosses in a battle against Mila. That would have been super fun.

Who is claiming Mila is a war god?

 

So I think aside from addressing your points, I might have shown how monumentally scattered and hard to figure out your posts are. Do you think you could sum up your opinion in a single line?

Holy moly moving the goal post Batman. Your entire argument was based off a head canon Rudolf would have just given Alm the Falchion or Duma would allow him too, to give it to Alm. I said Jeddah was feeding souls to cure Duma. Not that he succeeded anyone who has played fire emblem knows curing degeneration is impossible lmao.

I have repeated my point multiple times if Mila hadn’t sealed falchion and been there to help Alm and Celica would be dead. Then you started a long drawn out debate were you’re only reasoning from what am getting from your posts is “Mila bad Rudolf good.” 

If you think Mila sealed herself because she couldn’t kill Rudolf or something like? I don’t know how you ever came to that conclusion when Rudolf says it himself he can’t. Mila despite letting Jeddah destroy her body was still alive. Duma and Milas literally turn themselves into a tree at the end of the game. So yes they committed suicide. Stop wasting my time filibustering please.  
 

@vanguard333That’s what is so weird about Alm most lords were fully trained raised in environments were they have to be. Alm is made pretty clear to be like Ike a novice. But just steamrolls everything like a veteran. 

Edited by Julian Solo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who has beaten the original Gaiden and the Awakening DLC it does seem like the remake did soften Alm’s character. My guess is IS did this because they were worried that a more head strong,   ruthless and resolute Alm wouldn’t have resonated as well with the players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Julian Solo said:

Holy moly moving the goal post Batman. Your entire argument was based off a head canon Rudolf would have just given Alm the Falchion or Duma would allow him too, to give it to Alm.

Moving the goalposts? But I didn't even have an argument. I've just been responding to your points which have been nigh on incomprehensible. And it's not head canon. It is an outright plot hole in the original Gaiden that Rudolf kills Mila, wants Duma deead and has the means to kill him yet sits on his ass all game waiting for Alm (or someone else strong) to come to the deed for him. That's a pretty unarguable plot hole. You'd need to head canon it to not be a plot hole in Gaiden. Now it's not a plot holw in Three Houses because they've introduced the fact that Rudolf is unable to use Falchion after killing Mila with it. That I believe is why that plot point was introduced.

59 minutes ago, Julian Solo said:

I said Jeddah was feeding souls to cure Duma. Not that he succeeded anyone who has played fire emblem knows curing degeneration is impossible lmao.

 

Becoming a manakete and especially throwing away your dragon stone is a surefire way to stop degeneration. Though granted that's not curing it. 

59 minutes ago, Julian Solo said:

I have repeated my point multiple times if Mila hadn’t sealed falchion and been there to help Alm and Celica would be dead. Then you started a long drawn out debate were you’re only reasoning from what am getting from your posts is “Mila bad Rudolf good.” 

 

That's two separate points. 1, If Mila hadn't sealed Falchion and 2, if she hadn't been there to help Alm and Celica. 2 has absolutely no bearing on 1. She could have not sealed the Falchion and still helped them. Nothing suggests that sealing Falchoin gave her access to any extra ghost powers.

I also haven't said anything that amounts to Rudolf's good. Just that he killed Mila.

59 minutes ago, Julian Solo said:

If you think Mila sealed herself because she couldn’t kill Rudolf or something like? I don’t know how you ever came to that conclusion when Rudolf says it himself he can’t. Mila despite letting Jeddah destroy her body was still alive. Duma and Milas literally turn themselves into a tree at the end of the game. So yes they committed suicide. Stop wasting my time filibustering please.  

So why'd Duma fight Alm then if he just wanted to turn himself into a tree? Mila and Duma were both killed and are dead in as close an approximation to that concept that applies to Earth and Divine Dragons. Just like Marth and Anri  killed Medeus by stabbing him in the face with Falchion yet his essence persisted to be resurrected in the future. If you want to argue semantics you can just replace dead with defeated. It really doesn't make any difference. Rudolf "defeated" Mila just as Alm "defeated" Duma and Marth "defeated" Medeus. All of which were fighting back and clearly did not want to be "defeated".

 

Edited by Jotari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Samz707 said:

think it's more to the problem that Celica (aside from Valbar and pals/ the whitewing sisters maybe dying.) has to make dumb (and I think they're quite bad honestly) decisions later in the game for the sake of plot. (Though honestly you probably could easily make the same story without her being stupid.) 

While Alm's mistakes are all purely player stuff that the game will comment on, like Mathilda dying or killing Zeke, I think how Alm is handled is actually great for an FE protagonist on his own (Having difficult levels where the player is called out for their failures as opposed to the protagonist screwing up for the sake of plot in a cutscene *COUGH*BYLETH*COUGH*), its just that since Celica has to make plot mistakes after a certain point, it's kinda ruined. 

She really should have just been made to become a witch by force, instead of trusting Jedah, the man who has exactly one point in Charisma. 

I absolutely despise this criticism for one reason. THAT'S JUST HOW WRITING WORKS. Like Oh no a character did something that moved the plot forward., how horrible. Obviously this is the greatest sin a writer can make. Actually have characters take actions that perpetuate the ongoing conflict and move the story forward. Absolute blasphemy. Like everything that happens in a story is for plot reasons. That's just how writing works. You can nitpick anything to pieces if you try hard enough watch. It's so contrived that Alm was suddenly made leader of the deliverance for all because he was the son of Mycen. It's so unrealistic. Or, The only reason Alm ran out to go save silque was so that the player would have something to fight to keep the gameplay going. He would've been much better off avoiding them but no the developers need an excuse to have the players play another map so they can level up their units. Y'see what I mean? you can call anything in a story contrived or unrealistic if you try hard enough. This is what I mean when I say storytelling is inherently contrived. Everything in a story happens for the sake of the plot. Name one thing in a story that doesn't do that. Again, it's just how writing. So to criticize something for happening solely for the sake of the plot is just kinda like criticizing water for being wet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

I absolutely despise this criticism for one reason. THAT'S JUST HOW WRITING WORKS. Like Oh no a character did something that moved the plot forward., how horrible. Obviously this is the greatest sin a writer can make. Actually have characters take actions that perpetuate the ongoing conflict and move the story forward. Absolute blasphemy. Like everything that happens in a story is for plot reasons. That's just how writing works. You can nitpick anything to pieces if you try hard enough watch. It's so contrived that Alm was suddenly made leader of the deliverance for all because he was the son of Mycen. It's so unrealistic. Or, The only reason Alm ran out to go save silque was so that the player would have something to fight to keep the gameplay going. He would've been much better off avoiding them but no the developers need an excuse to have the players play another map so they can level up their units. Y'see what I mean? you can call anything in a story contrived or unrealistic if you try hard enough. This is what I mean when I say storytelling is inherently contrived. Everything in a story happens for the sake of the plot. Name one thing in a story that doesn't do that. Again, it's just how writing. So to criticize something for happening solely for the sake of the plot is just kinda like criticizing water for being wet.

I don't mind characters being idiots but they need a reason to be an idiot.

In the case of Jedah, maybe it's just me but "sacrifice soul = Dragon Sanity" seems sketchy anyway and well....Jedah is a evil looking, evil sounding and has been described as evil by the people in the Sage's Hamlet, who ARE trustworthy, Celica literally trusts an incredibly obviously evil man trying to manipulate her at essentially face value and I think the vast majority of people would realize he's trying to turn her into a witch.

She knows he's A: Evil, B: Wants her soul and that witches have their souls ripped out of them and C : his followers have been trying to kill her once she set foot off the island.

 

You can move the plot foward but you need to make it come off natural.

Three houses for instance, does Edelgard suddenly not having her axe in the prologue move the plot foward? yes, is it good writing? **** No, someone's weapon shouldn't just vanish for the sake of plot, same with the "Ashen Demon" apparently losing all combat ability once we're in cutscene mode or that mage who's skull I just cleaved with Edelgard suddenly being completely unharmed once a cutscene starts.

If anything requiring someone to mess up drives the plot fowards, they need a reason to mess up other than "The plot said so.", Celica shouldn't trust a man who's manipulation skill is 1 out of 100, Byleth shouldn't suddenly be nearly killed by a random generic mage I literally just had laying down in the dirt dead and Edelgard's axe shouldn't have vanished into thin air without explanation.

 

Edited by Samz707

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, it just occurred to me, but didn't the Valentian Accordian reveal that Duma was the one that had Falchion, and the only reason Rudolf even got it was because he convinced Duma to give it to him in exchange for using it against Mila?

In which case, it stands to reason that Rudolf had to attack Mila then, as that was the only way to get Falchion in the first place. And then when he did defeat Mila, Mila sealed it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

If anything requiring someone to mess up drives the plot fowards, they need a reason to mess up other than "The plot said so.", Celica shouldn't trust a man who's manipulation skill is 1 out of 100, Byleth shouldn't suddenly be nearly killed by a random generic mage I literally just had laying down in the dirt dead and Edelgard's axe shouldn't have vanished into thin air without explanation.

But what you’re not understanding is there usually is a reason for a character to mess up. You’re just not seeing it. There is a reason for Celica to mess up other than plot reasons. It’s because she is too trusting. It’s an established character flaw of hers and it’s not like the story rewards her for doing so. She trusts someone she shouldn’t trust and what happens as a result? well she gets her soul taken and fails to accomplish anything. There’s a thematic purpose to it. It’s supposed to show the flaws in being too kind and trusting and I’d say it’s effective at doing that. 

 

14 minutes ago, Samz707 said:

Three houses for instance, does Edelgard suddenly not having her axe in the prologue move the plot foward? yes, is it good writing? **** No, someone's weapon shouldn't just vanish for the sake of plot, same with the "Ashen Demon" apparently losing all combat ability once we're in cutscene mode or that mage who's skull I just cleaved with Edelgard suddenly being completely unharmed once a cutscene starts.

That’s just general gameplay and story segregation. It happens all the time in any story driven game. If you wanna an example, if Alm can rewind time in gameplay, then why doesn’t he do so to save his father or Berkut? Y’see what I mean. Again you can nitpick anything to pieces if you try hard enough. Besides that, it’s just such a minor thing to complain about to me. Things like that don’t really effect the message the story wants to tell so whatever. Who cares? Even then that sort of “criticism” is based in suspension of disbelief which is completely subjective and personal. It’s not the story’s fault for breaking your suspension of disbelief because it’s completely personal to you. What breaks your suspension of disbelief will not break mine so any criticism that relies on it is well moot because it’s not the fault of the story. What’s more important is if a story can follow its own rules consistently and even then breaking those rules is possible within a story so long as the story is able to stay true to itself. Verisimilitude is what matters most in storytelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said:

Wait, it just occurred to me, but didn't the Valentian Accordian reveal that Duma was the one that had Falchion, and the only reason Rudolf even got it was because he convinced Duma to give it to him in exchange for using it against Mila?

In which case, it stands to reason that Rudolf had to attack Mila then, as that was the only way to get Falchion in the first place. And then when he did defeat Mila, Mila sealed it. 

We don't even need the Valentine Accordion for that, it's outright said in the game that Rudolf got Falchion from Duma. At least it is in Gaiden. I can't imagine they'd change that line.

Share this post


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

@vanguard333 That’s what is so weird about Alm most lords were fully trained raised in environments were they have to be. Alm is made pretty clear to be like Ike a novice. But just steamrolls everything like a veteran. 

Exactly. To add to that: even then, other lords who were raised up in environments of having to take command could still be argued to struggle: as barebones as the plot of Shadow Dragon is, it does place a fair bit of emphasis on how Marth has to step up to the plate as heir to Altea and the Falchion, and how it is a struggle for him to do so. Alm just steamrolling through everything is not something I've seen much of in Fire Emblem, even in games where it would be a bit more excusable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

Exactly. To add to that: even then, other lords who were raised up in environments of having to take command could still be argued to struggle: as barebones as the plot of Shadow Dragon is, it does place a fair bit of emphasis on how Marth has to step up to the plate as heir to Altea and the Falchion, and how it is a struggle for him to do so. Alm just steamrolling through everything is not something I've seen much of in Fire Emblem, even in games where it would be a bit more excusable. 

The reason for that might actually be Gaiden's world map. They can simply write "And then Marth was forced to run away by seizing this castle" in the other games and feature the next chapter in a new location, but not so much for Alm where you have to move to the next location. This was before varied map objectives too (though putting invincible Hardin on the field for a proto escape map worked well for the whole writing "And then Marth was forced to flee where he seized this castle"). Though they did make it somewhat interesting with this system with the endless Dracozombie volcano (course that's so metal it leans towards bamf territory than natural struggle). Even in Genealogy of the Holy War the chapter set up means the character only struggles through plot based betrayals. In terms of military conquest Sigurd and Seliph steamroll the entire continent with no trouble. Thracia was really the first game to actually show the characters struggling in the military side of things and complimented it with new map objectives which allowed them to turn the concept up to eleven.

Edited by Jotari

Share this post


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

But what you’re not understanding is there usually is a reason for a character to mess up. You’re just not seeing it. There is a reason for Celica to mess up other than plot reasons. It’s because she is too trusting. It’s an established character flaw of hers and it’s not like the story rewards her for doing so. She trusts someone she shouldn’t trust and what happens as a result? well she gets her soul taken and fails to accomplish anything. There’s a thematic purpose to it. It’s supposed to show the flaws in being too kind and trusting and I’d say it’s effective at doing that. 

 

That’s just general gameplay and story segregation. It happens all the time in any story driven game. If you wanna an example, if Alm can rewind time in gameplay, then why doesn’t he do so to save his father or Berkut? Y’see what I mean. Again you can nitpick anything to pieces if you try hard enough. Besides that, it’s just such a minor thing to complain about to me. Things like that don’t really effect the message the story wants to tell so whatever. Who cares? Even then that sort of “criticism” is based in suspension of disbelief which is completely subjective and personal. It’s not the story’s fault for breaking your suspension of disbelief because it’s completely personal to you. What breaks your suspension of disbelief will not break mine so any criticism that relies on it is well moot because it’s not the fault of the story. What’s more important is if a story can follow its own rules consistently and even then breaking those rules is possible within a story so long as the story is able to stay true to itself. Verisimilitude is what matters most in storytelling.

Sorry but I don't buy someone as trusting as Celica believing Jedah at all, Celica's trusting, not mentally disabled, unless she drowned in the swamp and lost IQ from it, I do not believe she'd be that terminally stupid to trust Jedah, again, you literally hear how he's evil from an entire village, Celica needs to have somehow forgotten the entirety of Sage's Hamlet AND Saber telling her how witches were made for it to be logical for her to even consider what he's suggesting, she's got a ton of evidence that trusting him is not a good idea and literally none that it is.

Game play story segregation isn't really an excuse, if anything that shows how bad the story in the game is, good story based games IMO don't feel like the rules changed when a cutscene started rolling (Hell in TH a guy literally uses a shield spell that doesn't even exist in any game in the entire series in the cutscene where Byleth gets the sword of the creator.), I'm also fairly certain that the Turnwheel is just ment to in-universe be showing the future rather than actual time travel and seemingly always shows a worst-cause scenario. (And I'm sure constantly looking at everyone dying isn't something Alm nor Celica want to keep witnessing so they probably only look at the turnwheel occasionally.) 

 

 

Edited by Samz707

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...