I somehow thought Metodey and Randolph were the same character for way too long

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

43 minutes ago, Sooks said:

I mean we don’t know if they specifically were trying to kill Edelgard and not just stop her, since dying in this game doesn’t actually kill you.

One interpretation of enemy characters surviving, when they "die" in battle, is that their attacker was going easy on them. An example where this occurs, explicitly, is Shinon in Path of Radiance - if Ike defeats him, after Rolf speaks to Shinon, then Shinon will be spared. In theory, you could argue the same here - that, while willing to kill a random Assassin, the students and teachers of Garreg Mach aren't willimg to kill a classmate (as they know her to be, in BE). Then again, she survives on BL/GD as "the Flame Emperor", so she probably would've outlasted any attempt to kill her in battle, regardless.

40 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

She also states when she fights a Black Eagle Student in the BE route that she wasn't actually serious when she said that. Add in that none of the students actually die, and in Silver Snow, any defeated units are said to have joined her still, it basically means that she kept to what she said, that none of them would die, but she claimed they would in an effort to scare them. 

Then why give it as an order? She could have told her classmates "stand down, or your lives will be forfeit!" on invading the Tomb. While also telling her soldiers, in advance, not to attack except in self-defense - and to avoid killing anyone. Now, it's theoretically possible she gave the first order, but that puts her mooks in the awkward situation where one order contradicts the other. To kill, or not to kill?

And she brings a couple monsters along. Not only do they not contribute to the effort of theft, but they're very unlikely to be able to follow her (possible) "mercy instructions". At the very least, she was acting recklessly and endangering her classmates' lives.

[Jotari]

11 hours ago, RainbowMoon said:

Okay, first of all, Byleth and co don't have any horse in the race. Byleth, and by extension her class, is literally Rhea's blunt killing tool all throughout White Clouds. Every month from chapter 2 onward, Rhea's said "Go chop this guy's head off" and Byleth does. Outside of paralogues, there's never an instance of "What does Byleth/Dorothea/Ingrid/whoever want?" And so there's no reason it should be any different in chapter 11. Byleth and co are protecting the stones simply because Rhea said so. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if half the class didn't even know what the stones are or why they're important.

And second, you're applying gameplay to a discussion about story. Canonically, all the Black Eagles survive chapter 11. If we're talking about story then only story deaths (Jeralt, Rodrigue, etc.) matter. It's not fair to say "Well what if Bernie dies?" when she can literally die at any point on any route and everyone just acts like she never existed.

Already explained why this isn't true. Not doing it again.

What the hell is this even supposed to mean? You're obviously being sarcastic, but doesn't that weaken your argument a smidge since Metodey dying is obviously a good thing (and possibly even intentional on Edelgard's part)?

I have to say, this is absolutely spot-on. Perfectly explains why I (and many others) can sympathize with Edelgard even after what went down in the tomb.

What this really boils down to, @Jotari, is that I see Edelgard's actions in the holy tomb as forgivable and you don't. And that's fine, but you're not gonna change my opinion and I'm not gonna change yours. So let's just put the argument aside and agree to disagree on this.

You are entirely missing my point if that's what you think I'm saying. It's not about wether it's forgivable or not, it's about the massive, sudden and more importantly needless turn around of having Byleth and co fighting for their lives (and they are fighting for their lives, Edelgard tells her soldiers to kill them if they resist and they are resisting) one second and then turning around and joining Edelgard in the next second. You're right that Byleth and co are doing this because Rhea tells them to, if they have qualms with doing so it should be before their friend just had them ordered to be killed and they in return looked a bunch of her soldiers, not afterwards.

And the wife beater comparison is very apt as it's literally the same excuse Edelgard is making for herself. "I'm only hurting you because you're making me do it."

It's just a terrible segment of the game in terms of writing and could so easily have been remedied by just making the Black Eagles split happen one chapter earlier.

Edited December 13, 2020 by Jotari

[Silver-Haired Maiden]

25 minutes ago, Jotari said:

You are entirely missing my point if that's what you think I'm saying. It's not about wether it's forgivable or not, it's about the massive, sudden and more importantly needless turn around of having Byleth and co fighting for their lives (and they are fighting for their lives, Edelgard tells her soldiers to kill them if they resist and they are resisting) one second and then turning around and joining Edelgard in the next second. You're right that Byleth and co are doing this because Rhea tells them to, if they have qualms with doing so it should be before their friend just had them ordered to be killed and they in return looked a bunch of her soldiers, not afterwards.

And the wife beater comparison is very apt as it's literally the same excuse Edelgard is making for herself. "I'm only hurting you because you're making me do it."

It's just a terrible segment of the game in terms of writing and could so easily have been remedied by just making the Black Eagles split happen one chapter earlier.

If it helps, I'm entirely with you on this one. That whole chapter is a really bad look for Edelgard. Someone says they're gonna kill me while they rob a place if I try to stop them I'm pretty much gonna take them at their word no matter if they try to recant later. Sending an army in is a huge threat, they were all armed (though none of this explains why the students were, that's weird). It's just a huge mess of writing and all of it in disservice to her. She's either cold and doesn't care about the (very real) potential of hurting people that are supposed to be her friends or she's so naïve as to not realize that she could be shooting herself in the damn foot. That was not my most eloquent post but meh, I think it's phrased clearly? XD

[omegaxis1]

34 minutes ago, Jotari said:

You are entirely missing my point if that's what you think I'm saying. It's not about wether it's forgivable or not, it's about the massive, sudden and more importantly needless turn around of having Byleth and co fighting for their lives (and they are fighting for their lives, Edelgard tells her soldiers to kill them if they resist and they are resisting) one second and then turning around and joining Edelgard in the next second. You're right that Byleth and co are doing this because Rhea tells them to, if they have qualms with doing so it should be before their friend just had them ordered to be killed and they in return looked a bunch of her soldiers, not afterwards.

And the wife beater comparison is very apt as it's literally the same excuse Edelgard is making for herself. "I'm only hurting you because you're making me do it."

It's just a terrible segment of the game in terms of writing and could so easily have been remedied by just making the Black Eagles split happen one chapter earlier.

 

4 minutes ago, Silver-Haired Maiden said:

If it helps, I'm entirely with you on this one. That whole chapter is a really bad look for Edelgard. Someone says they're gonna kill me while they rob a place if I try to stop them I'm pretty much gonna take them at their word no matter if they try to recant later. Sending an army in is a huge threat, they were all armed (though none of this explains why the students were, that's weird). It's just a huge mess of writing and all of it in disservice to her. She's either cold and doesn't care about the (very real) potential of hurting people that are supposed to be her friends or she's so naïve as to not realize that she could be shooting herself in the damn foot. That was not my most eloquent post but meh, I think it's phrased clearly? XD

Really begs the question about why the BE class and Byleth are all of a suddenly ready to jump into fighting against Edelgard at all when they aren't even sure yet. And they are basically fighting to kill more, given that they kill the soldiers, like Metodey.

Then again, could be that seeing Rhea suddenly go crazy and turn into a huge raging dragon and Edelgard seeming to know make them wanna hear some answers from her.

But yeah, I don't deny that it wasn't exactly handled the best. 

[Dark Holy Elf]

12 hours ago, Jotari said:

You are entirely missing my point if that's what you think I'm saying. It's not about wether it's forgivable or not, it's about the massive, sudden and more importantly needless turn around of having Byleth and co fighting for their lives (and they are fighting for their lives, Edelgard tells her soldiers to kill them if they resist and they are resisting) one second and then turning around and joining Edelgard in the next second.

The phrase "fighting for their lives" means something rather different to me; it's when you're fighting because if you don't fight, your life is in danger anyway. That doesn't describe the situation here, unless you'd also make statements like "Solon was fighting for his life during his attack on Remire Village". Byleth and co. aren't fighting for their lives, they're fighting for the crest stones.

Anyway, as is probably obvious by now, for me, the ludicrous part of the sequence was that a battle was even occurring. I felt that was a shark-jumping moment. So while you were more bothered by the turnaround after, I personally saw that as the plot getting back on the rails. Basically we focus on different things we find narratively unsatisfying. That said, we all agree that this sequence wasn't handled very well. (Obviously both our complaints would be solved by re-writing the entire sequence.)

Edited December 13, 2020 by Dark Holy Elf

[------]

19 hours ago, Jotari said:

You are entirely missing my point if that's what you think I'm saying. It's not about wether it's forgivable or not, it's about the massive, sudden and more importantly needless turn around of having Byleth and co fighting for their lives (and they are fighting for their lives, Edelgard tells her soldiers to kill them if they resist and they are resisting) one second and then turning around and joining Edelgard in the next second. You're right that Byleth and co are doing this because Rhea tells them to, if they have qualms with doing so it should be before their friend just had them ordered to be killed and they in return looked a bunch of her soldiers, not afterwards.

All any of this tells me is that you haven't listened to a word I've said. They're not fighting for their lives. They're fighting by their own choice. The only reason their lives are in danger is because they chose to try and protect something (the holy tomb and the stones) that they have no personal attachment to or reason to protect other than that Rhea told them to. Believe it or not, most sane people don't jump in and risk their lives trying to stop a robbery after the robber says they won't die if they just stay put. Because not dying is something most people value more than saving other people's stuff. Then you throw in the fact that the robber in this case is a close friend and I can't even begin to imagine why Byleth and co don't just step aside and let her take the stones. Once again, I think @Dark Holy Elf hit the nail on the head:

6 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

Anyway, as is probably obvious by now, for me, the ludicrous part of the sequence was that a battle was even occurring. I felt that was a shark-jumping moment. So while you were more bothered by the turnaround after, I personally saw that as the plot getting back on the rails. Basically we focus on different things we find narratively unsatisfying. That said, we all agree that this sequence wasn't handled very well. (Obviously both our complaints would be solved by re-writing the entire sequence.)

I think it's time to just face it. CF chapter 11 is a bad look for everybody involved. Edelgard for robbing the tomb and threatening her friends, and Byleth's class for starting an unneccesary and deadly fight with the person they were about to side with anyway.

19 hours ago, Jotari said:

And the wife beater comparison is very apt as it's literally the same excuse Edelgard is making for herself. "I'm only hurting you because you're making me do it."

First of all, I've already explained multiple times how you've completely misjudged Edelgard's reasoning. And second, do you realize what a tone-deaf comparison that is? I mean, you're more or less equating a robber who genuinely doesn't want to hurt her friends with someone who uses violence, manipulation and emotional/psychological abuse and to deliberately mistreat the person they claim to love for no reason other than their own sick, warped and utterly self-obsessed definition of what love is. That might come across a tad insensitive to real life abuse victims, just saying.

At this point though, I'm just done with this discussion. It's not going anywhere and we just keep arguing the same things over and over. We're clearly never gonna see eye to eye on this so let's just forget about it and move on.

[omegaxis1]

11 minutes ago, RainbowMoon said:

First of all, I've already explained multiple times how you've completely misjudged Edelgard's reasoning. And second, do you realize what a tone-deaf comparison that is? I mean, you're more or less equating a robber who genuinely doesn't want to hurt her friends with someone who uses violence, manipulation and emotional/psychological abuse and to deliberately mistreat the person they claim to love for no reason other than their own sick, warped and utterly self-obsessed definition of what love is. That might come across a tad insensitive to real life abuse victims, just saying.

A better comparison would be in the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie when Will was blocking Jack's exit while Jack held Will at gunpoint. Jack asked Will to move, but Will refused to, making Jack ready to pull the trigger. Will could have just stepped aside and let Jack get away, because his life is on the line, but Will actively chose to stand in Jack's way, by his own choice, pushing Jack to nearly pull the trigger.

[Jotari]

58 minutes ago, RainbowMoon said:

All any of this tells me is that you haven't listened to a word I've said. They're not fighting for their lives. They're fighting by their own choice. The only reason their lives are in danger is because they chose to try and protect something (the holy tomb and the stones) that they have no personal attachment to or reason to protect other than that Rhea told them to. Believe it or not, most sane people don't jump in and risk their lives trying to stop a robbery after the robber says they won't die if they just stay put. Because not dying is something most people value more than saving other people's stuff. Then you throw in the fact that the robber in this case is a close friend and I can't even begin to imagine why Byleth and co don't just step aside and let her take the stones. Once again, I think @Dark Holy Elf hit the nail on the head:

I think it's time to just face it. CF chapter 11 is a bad look for everybody involved. Edelgard for robbing the tomb and threatening her friends, and Byleth's class for starting an unneccesary and deadly fight with the person they were about to side with anyway.

Byleth and co are not random civilians in this analogy. They are the bank security. They are tasked by authority to defend the property. And unlike random civilians, they are armed and have the power to do so. They are the ones who have been trained to jump into battle when their duty demands. Now this doesn't mean they have to, they have a duty of care to their own lives. And as we both agree I'm sure, having the route split choice before the battle would have made far more sense. But choosing to stop someone doing something immoral with the appropriate level of force is not an immoral choice. In this case the perpetrators are clearly willing to use lethal force, so lethal force is not an escalation. If we don't accept that then basically anyone can do anything they want so long as they make it clear they're willing to kill you if you try to stop them. Now that obviously doesn't make a killing spree granted, disabling (using tasers, rubber bullets tranqs etc in the real world) if possible is preferable, and indeed they do manage to disable Edelgard without killing her. So they're obviously not taking it as an opportunity to kill. They're doing the best to accomplish their job that they've been tasked to do by their boss.

Quote

First of all, I've already explained multiple times how you've completely misjudged Edelgard's reasoning. And second, do you realize what a tone-deaf comparison that is? I mean, you're more or less equating a robber who genuinely doesn't want to hurt her friends with someone who uses violence, manipulation and emotional/psychological abuse and to deliberately mistreat the person they claim to love for no reason other than their own sick, warped and utterly self-obsessed definition of what love is. That might come across a tad insensitive to real life abuse victims, just saying.

But that is literally what Edelgard is doing. Like literally. She is attacking her friends and blaming them for it and then asking them to join her. She is completely unrepentant about ordering her friends to be killed. She doesn't expect them to forgive her because she doesn't see anything wrong with ordering her friends to be killed. And they don't seem to care about it at all either. The following scenes are just characters being asked "You sure you want to do this?" "Yes." No one holds it against Edelgard at all that she, at the absolute minimum, put their lives in a precarious situation. Earlier you said the difference is that I find Edelgard unforgivable while you don't, and I said that's not the issue. It really isn't. Sure what Edelgard did could be forgivable, but the game doesn't give any weight to what she does at all in Crimson Flower. Her actions are completely ignored. The Black Eagles are clearly hurt and betrayed by Edelgard and those feelings are completely dismissed after the choice, replaced entirely by "Whoa are we really doing this?" Whatever their reasoning, these two sets of characters were fighting against each other with sharpened weapons, ready to kill if need be, that should mean something in a story. Even if the plot took a route where the Black Eagles were the ones apologizing for standing Edelgard way and asking her for forgiveness, which I suspect you'd prefer, I'd think it silly, but that would be their characters then and it'd make sense (at least in that scenario, don't get me started on how Silver Snow gives the Black Eagles Schrodingers loyalty which is a massive disservice to them) it'd be better than the route they did take which was basically to ignore the events of that chapter entirely. Which is pretty terrible as for the plot it's probably the single most important plot in the entire narrative.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Jotari

[omegaxis1]

16 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Byleth and co are not random civilians in this analogy. They are the bank security. They are tasked by authority to defend the property. And unlike random civilians, they are armed and have the power to do so. They are the ones who have been trained to jump into battle when their duty demands. Now this doesn't mean they have to, they have a duty of care to their own lives. And as we both agree I'm sure, having the route split choice before the battle would have made far more sense. But choosing to stop someone doing something immoral with the appropriate level of force is not an immoral choice. In this case the perpetrators are clearly willing to use lethal force, so lethal force is not an escalation. If we don't accept that then basically anyone can do anything they want so long as they make it clear they're willing to kill you if you try to stop them. Now that obviously doesn't make a killing spree granted, disabling (using tasers, rubber bullets tranqs etc in the real world) if possible is preferable, and indeed they do manage to disable Edelgard without killing her. So they're obviously not taking it as an opportunity to kill. They're doing the best to accomplish their job that they've been tasked to do by their boss.

But that is literally what Edelgard is doing. Like literally. She is attacking her friends and blaming them for it and then asking them to join her. She is completely unrepentant about ordering her friends to be killed. She doesn't expect them to forgive her because she doesn't see anything wrong with ordering her friends to be killed. And they don't seem to care about it at all either. The following scenes are just characters being asked "You sure you want to do this?" "Yes." No one holds it against Edelgard at all that she, at the absolute minimum, put their lives in a precarious situation. Earlier you said the difference is that I find Edelgard unforgivable while you don't, and I said that's not the issue. It really isn't. Sure what Edelgard did could be forgivable, but the game doesn't give any weight to what she does at all in Crimson Flower. Her actions are completely ignored. The Black Eagles are clearly hurt and betrayed by Edelgard and those feelings are completely dismissed after the choice, replaced entirely by "Whoa are we really doing this?" Whatever their reasoning, these two sets of characters were fighting against each other with sharpened weapons, ready to kill if need be, that should mean something in a story. Even if the plot took a route where the Black Eagles were the ones apologising for standing Edelgard way and asking her for forgiveness, which I suspect you'd prefer, I'd think it silly, but it'd be better than the route they did take which was basically to ignore the events of that chapter entirely. Which is pretty terrible as for the plot it's probably the single most important plot in the entire narrative.

... Dude. They literally said it to you several times.

Edelgard told them not to get in the way. 

As I said above, it's basically Jack trying to get out while Will is blocking the door. Jack is asking Will to get out, and if he does, his life is spared.

Edelgard didn't order her friends killed, she said that if they get in the way. Meaning that she's warning her friends not to meddle.

Guess who meddled?

[Dark Holy Elf]

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

Byleth and co are not random civilians in this analogy. They are the bank security. They are tasked by authority to defend the property.

That is absolutely not their job, unless you think "do whatever Rhea commands them to do at any given moment" is their job. (Understandable, since Rhea seems to think so.) Here's the only line I could find detailing their job before it happens:

"Rhea: It is said that when Seiros received the revelation, she had holy warriors by her side, protecting her. Your students, who have followed you and fought alongside you through the darkest of times, are well suited to stand by you for the ceremony."

Like if Edelgard had said "I'm here to kill Byleth" then we agree the students would be justified in attacking her, but that's not what happened.

Also if I was a bank security guard and a good friend of mine showed up and robbed the bank, I sure as hell am not risking both our lives to get in her way. Would you?

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

She is attacking her friends

She's stealing property at a place they happen to be present. To stop her, they attack her. The fact that you don't understand this difference (as made abundantly clear by the fact that you used the phrase "fighting for their lives" earlier) is probably why you also don't understand why the characters would forgive her. (Also the person whose property they were defending just threatened to rip out their teacher's heart and transformed into a giant monster, that probably made everyone view Edelgard's actions of stealing from her in a much more favourable light.)

Edited December 14, 2020 by Dark Holy Elf

[Jotari]

43 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

... Dude. They literally said it to you several times.

Edelgard told them not to get in the way. 

As I said above, it's basically Jack trying to get out while Will is blocking the door. Jack is asking Will to get out, and if he does, his life is spared.

Edelgard didn't order her friends killed, she said that if they get in the way. Meaning that she's warning her friends not to meddle.

Guess who meddled?

Edelgard meddled. She was the one who brought an army uninvited to ransack a place that didn't belong to her.

5 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

That is absolutely not their job, unless you think their job is "do whatever Rhea commands them to do at any given moment" is their job. (Understandable, since Rhea seems to think so.) Here's the only line I could find detailing their job before it happens:

"Rhea: It is said that when Seiros received the revelation, she had holy warriors by her side, protecting her. Your students, who have followed you and fought alongside you through the darkest of times, are well suited to stand by you for the ceremony."

Like if Edelgard had said "I'm here to kill Byleth" then we agree the students would be justified in attacking her, but that's not what happened.

Also if I was a bank security guard and a good friend of mine showed up and robbed the bank, I sure as hell am not risking both our lives to get in her way. Would you?

She's stealing property at a place they happen to be present. To stop her, they attack her. The fact that you don't understand this difference (as made abundantly clear by the fact that you used the phrase "fighting for their lives" earlier) is probably why you also don't understand why the characters would forgive her. (Also the person whose property they were defending just threatened to rip out their teacher's heart and transformed into a giant monster, that probably made everyone view Edelgard's actions of stealing from her in a much more favourable light.)

I agree, that they have reasons not to fight for Rhea there (and reasons to fight for her too). But that's not the actions the character take. What they do is follow the orders of authority figure present. This leads them coming to blows, which is absolutely ignored. Like I said before, if you want to frame it as them being completely in the wrong to question what Edelgard was doing and trying to stop her, then sure, the story could have done that. But it didn't. It just brushed her actions completely under the rug.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Jotari

[omegaxis1]

Just now, Jotari said:

Edelgard meddled. She was the one who brought an army uninvited to ransack a place that didn't belong to her.

I agree, that they have reasons not to fight for Rhea there (and reasons to fight for her too). But that's not the actions the character take. What they do is follow the orders of authority figure present. This leads them coming to blows, which is absolutely ignored.

Edelgard didn't attack them. She even asked her friends not to get in her way. 

Quote

Edelgard: I'm sorry, my teacher. I cut this path, and now I must follow it. My friends, I ask that all of you stay back. It is not my intention to fight you. (to her troops) By order of the Adrestian emperor, Edelgard von Hresvelg, I command you to collect the Crest Stones! If anyone attempts to stop us, kill them!

She didn't order her soldiers to attack and kill them. She ordered them to collect the Crest Stones. And asked her friends to please not get in the way.

What did they do? 

They got in the way. They took a stance and tried to fight her. 

And after that, in CF, they end up seeing Rhea go berserk, declare her intent to kill Byleth, and turn into a vicious monstrous dragon.

By all accounts, they are more inclined to listen to Edelgard because they have reason to understand that Edelgard's opposition against Rhea suddenly makes sense. 

[Jotari]

2 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Edelgard didn't attack them. She even asked her friends not to get in her way. 

She didn't order her soldiers to attack and kill them. She ordered them to collect the Crest Stones. And asked her friends to please not get in the way.

What did they do? 

They got in the way. They took a stance and tried to fight her. 

And after that, in CF, they end up seeing Rhea go berserk, declare her intent to kill Byleth, and turn into a vicious monstrous dragon.

By all accounts, they are more inclined to listen to Edelgard because they have reason to understand that Edelgard's opposition against Rhea suddenly makes sense. 

She asked her friends to ignore her banditry. And they didn't. So she ordered their deaths. Even if you find out afterwards she was stealing from a crazy dragon, ordering people to kill you while you're doing what you think is right is a significant action.

[omegaxis1]

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

She asked her friends to ignore her banditry. And they didn't. So she ordered their deaths. Even if you find out afterwards she was stealing from a crazy dragon, ordering people to kill you while you're doing what you think is right is a significant action.

And guess what? They knew the consequences. Why would they get upset because they decided not to listen to Edelgard when she asked them to not get in the way? She was their friend and emperor, so by all accounts, they oughta listen. They didn't, and the order to kill is them choosing to take their chances, even though she clearly makes it clear that she never wanted to go there. 

You can say that Edelgard is doing banditry all you want.

It does not change that Edelgard told them not to get in the way.

They had a choice, they chose, and then realized why Edelgard was acting that way. 

Cause and effect. 

[Jotari]

1 minute ago, omegaxis1 said:

And guess what? They knew the consequences. Why would they get upset because they decided not to listen to Edelgard when she asked them to not get in the way? She was their friend and emperor, so by all accounts, they oughta listen. They didn't, and the order to kill is them choosing to take their chances, even though she clearly makes it clear that she never wanted to go there. 

You can say that Edelgard is doing banditry all you want.

It does not change that Edelgard told them not to get in the way.

They had a choice, they chose, and then realized why Edelgard was acting that way. 

Cause and effect. 

And as I said

8 minutes ago, Jotari said:

She asked her friends to ignore her banditry. And they didn't. So she ordered their deaths. Even if you find out afterwards she was stealing from a crazy dragon, ordering people to kill you while you're doing what you think is right is a significant action.

 

[omegaxis1]

Which I literally pointed out already. They CHOSE to get in the way. Not that Edelgard gave them no option. She gave them a clear choice, with a clear warning that if they did, it would be a life threatening situation. 

They chose to forgo her warning. Why should Edelgard be, in any way, held accountable for that in CF? If anything, learning the truth in CF makes them realize that they fought Edelgard and put her in danger because they decided to not listen to her.

[Jotari]

7 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Which I literally pointed out already. They CHOSE to get in the way. Not that Edelgard gave them no option. She gave them a clear choice, with a clear warning that if they did, it would be a life threatening situation. 

They chose to forgo her warning. Why should Edelgard be, in any way, held accountable for that in CF? If anything, learning the truth in CF makes them realize that they fought Edelgard and put her in danger because they decided to not listen to her.

Because she was the one who went there with an army to try and steal something.  They were not in any kind of moral wrong for trying to stop her from forcibly taking something that isn't hers. And it's not like she even tried to explain herself. The Black Eagles beg her for an explanation and all she says is try to stop me and you'll die.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Jotari

[omegaxis1]

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

Because she was the one who went there with an army to try and steal something.  They were not in any kind of moral wrong for trying to stop her from forcibly taking something that isn't hers. And it's not like she even tried to explain herself. The Black Eagles beg her for an explanation and all she says is try to stop me and you'll die.

Again, she gave them fair warning. They had a choice to not intervene. They have zero obligation to meddle. If anything, when Edelgard proclaimed herself the emperor, it actually gives them more of an obligation to NOT get in the way, because she is the leader of their nation. Edelgard isn't expressing intent to harm so long as they don't meddle.

Your "moral" argument isn't even an effective factor when morally, you would actually help your friend, not fight against them. They don't know why she's doing it, and instead of actually trying to find out later, they instead fight and ultimately put Edelgard in harm's way at the end, where Rhea ordered Edelgard's death. 

If anything, the moral argument is reversed at the end, where they are the ones in the wrong by putting their friend in danger.

[Jotari]

2 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Again, she gave them fair warning. They had a choice to not intervene. They have zero obligation to meddle. If anything, when Edelgard proclaimed herself the emperor, it actually gives them more of an obligation to NOT get in the way, because she is the leader of their nation. Edelgard isn't expressing intent to harm so long as they don't meddle.

Your "moral" argument isn't even an effective factor when morally, you would actually help your friend, not fight against them. They don't know why she's doing it, and instead of actually trying to find out later, they instead fight and ultimately put Edelgard in harm's way at the end, where Rhea ordered Edelgard's death. 

If anything, the moral argument is reversed at the end, where they are the ones in the wrong by putting their friend in danger.

Okay well that is just simply not true. But let's assume for a second you're correct. Edelgard is completely and 100% in the right and they are in completely in the wrong for raising their weapons at their god emperor. Then they should be seeking Edelgard's forgiveness post battle. Like I said previously, if that's what actually happened I would have as much issue with it since at least that would be the characters and the story we have. But instead the whole issue is completely ignored. Whatever way you slice it, no matter who is in the right or wrong, coming to blows and having two friends legitimately fighting in a situation where either of them could live or die is a massive thing to happen in an individual's life which is not addressed at all.

Now the actual truth is that they are in no way wrong for trying to stop Edelgard from committing banditry. But stepping aside and letting her wouldn't be wrong either. And they have compelling reasons to do either. Which is precisely why the choice to fight or join her should have been before the battle and not afterwards.

[omegaxis1]

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

Okay well that is just simply not true. But let's assume for a second you're correct. Edelgard is completely and 100% in the right and they are in completely in the wrong for raising their weapons at their god emperor. Then they should be seeking Edelgard's forgiveness post battle. Like I said previously, if that's what actually happened I would have as much issue with it since at least that would be the characters and the story we have. But instead the whole issue is completely ignored. Whatever way you slice it, no matter who is in the right or wrong, coming to blows and having two friends legitimately fighting in a situation where either of them could live or die is a massive thing to happen in an individual's life which is not addressed at all.

Now the actual truth is that they are in no way wrong for trying to stop Edelgard from committing banditry. But stepping aside and letting her wouldn't be wrong either. And they have compelling reasons to do either. Which is precisely why the choice to fight or join her should have been before the battle and not afterwards.

And thus, you answered your own question.

Neither were fully right or wrong. Both did something and ultimately, they let that be water under the bridge. 

By no accounts should Edelgard apologize for her actions, nor should they ask for forgiveness for not understanding the situation. 

 

[Slyfox]

Let's say, you threaten your friends' lives and tell them to stay out of your way lest you be forced to kill them. You are their friend and future leader, sure, but aside from that, what reason do they have to listen to you? Your friends literally know nothing of why you are doing this and you have just revealed yourself as the Flame Emperor, linking you to several terrible events (even if Remire isn't exactly your doing, no one believes you, and that's a whole other topic anyway). Right or wrong, you are seen as responsible. How would they feasibly respond? Exactly as it has played out in the game (until the decision for the route split, which isn't handled all that well in my opinion).

Now, the students may not know exactly why Edelgard is stealing crest stones and bones and as far as they know the Empire hasn't declared war on the church or who is supporting her or why. All they know is that she has been linked to multiple heinous acts, will kill her friends if necessary and is planning on doing further harm. Again, the students may not know what crest stones and bones can do but given the Flame Emperors purported track record, it could very likely lead to more vile actions.

The Black Eagles opposing her in this chapter are all decent people, so why would they stand aside and let her have her way and let further tragedy happen? Edelgard offers not one reason why they should do as she says, not until after.

I'd say she absolutely owes them an apology in Crimson Flower.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Slyfox

[Dark Holy Elf]

35 minutes ago, Slyfox said:

Let's say, you threaten your friends' lives and tell them to stay out of your way lest you be forced to kill them. You are their friend and future leader, sure, but aside from that, what reason do they have to listen to you?

• a) You're their friend
• b) You're the leader, for whatever stock you put in that.
• c) If they listen to you, both they and you will live.
• d) They trust you more than Rhea.

The better question is, what reason do they have to NOT listen to you? Because they value someone else's property more than their friend's life, and their own? I normally dislike quoting myself, but hey, I think the question is worth asking again, for emphasis.

2 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

Also if I was a bank security guard and a good friend of mine showed up and robbed the bank, I sure as hell am not risking both our lives to get in her way. Would you?

I'd be honestly surprised if you would... and if you would, you must place far more emphasis than me on the "moral" value of personal property.

For what it's worth I do agree that I would have liked to see this event (if it's gonna be in the game at all) referenced after the fact, too (on both CF and SS), since I agree it would have been traumatic for all involved. That said it's far from unbelievable that the characters would forgive her. As @omegaxis1 already put it, neither side is fully in the right or wrong (as is consistent with the core theme of Three Houses), and it's quite possible both recognize that. I think a big apology from either side would be out of character

[Slyfox]

35 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

• a) You're their friend
• b) You're the leader, for whatever stock you put in that.
• c) If they listen to you, both they and you will live.
• d) They trust you more than Rhea.

The better question is, what reason do they have to NOT listen to you? Because they value someone else's property more than their friend's life, and their own? I normally dislike quoting myself, but hey, I think the question is worth asking again, for emphasis.

My entire post was my explanation as to why, which is still appropriate to your above quote and I feel it directly answers this question. The reasoning extends beyond just the holy tomb, or are we just going to ignore everything the Flame Emperor and TWSITD have done?

Perhaps we simply have different views on the matter.

42 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

• For what it's worth I do agree that I would have liked to see this event (if it's gonna be in the game at all) referenced after the fact, too (on both CF and SS), since I agree it would have been traumatic for all involved. That said it's far from unbelievable that the characters would forgive her. As @omegaxis1 already put it, neither side is fully in the right or wrong (as is consistent with the core theme of Three Houses), and it's quite possible both recognize that. I think a big apology from either side would be out of character

The bolded part we can absolutely agree on. I only think that Edelgard should apologize in CF, not that she would.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

2 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

Which I literally pointed out already. They CHOSE to get in the way. Not that Edelgard gave them no option. She gave them a clear choice, with a clear warning that if they did, it would be a life threatening situation. 

They chose to forgo her warning. Why should Edelgard be, in any way, held accountable for that in CF? If anything, learning the truth in CF makes them realize that they fought Edelgard and put her in danger because they decided to not listen to her.

The choice is a two-way street. It was Edelgard's choice to invade the Tomb that put her classmates in a position. As students of Garreg Mach, do they follow their professor and the Archbishop? Or, as citizens of the Empire, do they follow the Crown Princess (whom they don't yet know to be Emperor)? Or, do they follow their conscience, and act on whether they see Edelgard's actions as right or wrong?

Like, say my friends and I go to the bank. It's supposed to be an ordinary withdrawal, right? Nope, a bunch of my gang in ski masks show up to rob the place, ordering everybody down! Maybe I've got a good reason to rob the bank - say, my son needs an expensive surgery. Regardless, let's say one of my friends decides to intervene (because they think ehat I'm doing is wrong), and gets shot by a member of my gang. I didn't want them to get shot, but it happened. Don't I, as the mastermind of the plot, and creator of a life-endangering situation, bear no small responsibility for my friend's death?

35 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

The better question is, what reason do they have to NOT listen to you? Because they value someone else's property more than their friend's life, and their own? I normally dislike quoting myself, but hey, I think the question is worth asking again, for emphasis.

The property she was stealing (Crest Stones) was being stolen for the purpose of waging war. As Hanneman later surmises, the Crest Stones were targeted for their use in creating Demonic Beasts. By not interfering, Edelgard's classmates would effectively allow more weapons of war to be created - thus facilitating not only the horrid beast creation process, but also endangering their potential victims. Admittedly, they didn't know her purpose at the time - but from her mode of entry, it was fair to imagine her reasons as less than benign.

One more rant, though - Edelgard could've handled things way better, without really even trying (at least, on BE routes). Rather than mysteriously disappearing, she and Hubert simply follow Rhea down to the Holy Tomb. In doing so, they discover the path to the Holy Tomb (this is a golden opportunity). Then the throne disappointment happens, and they all return to the surface. At the next available opportunity, Edelgard (armed with this knowledge) organizes a covert break-in to the Holy Tomb. If all goes as planned, they've escaped with the stones, no battle at hand, and Rhea none the wiser. But that's not as fun as having a battle down there, so... I get it.

Alternatively, while Rhea's back is turned, Edelgard and Hubert each nab a couple Crest stones, replacing them with fakes they brought along. It's not much, but it's a start.

[Dark Holy Elf]

 

36 minutes ago, Slyfox said:

My entire post was my explanation as to why

If I respond to the rest of said post, will you respond to mine? I'm getting a bit tired of both you and Jotari trying to tapdance around the fact that coming to potentially lethal blows with your friend in defence of property is messed up. If you aren't willing to address what I consider the core issue here, I'm also quite fine with just agreeing to disagree.

 

25 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

The property she was stealing (Crest Stones) was being stolen for the purpose of waging war.

Well, as you went on to say yourself, the party has no way of knowing this (which neatly allows us to sidestep debates on the morality of the war itself, thank goodness). You're basically saying the party should have prejudged Edelgard's actions as greater evil than mere theft, to the point that they're willing to risk their own lives (and hers) to stop her. Despite the fact that she's their friend. Despite the fact that several of them would likely feel some degree of loyalty to the emperor and a strong aversion to fighting soldiers of their own country (and one of the two most likely exceptions dislikes the church). Despite the fact that the person ordering them to "destroy this villainous traitor" is someone several of them have previously voiced explicit distrust of. And of course, they do so without even the slightest bit of soul-searching. I don't buy it, myself. It's very clearly lazy writing to let the battle play out as it does on BL/GD.

Also, for what it's worth, Hubert does pointedly call Edelgard as Your Majesty before the fight, identifying her as the emperor.