I'm not a massive fan of Avatars, but I still really want one in a Genealogy of the Holy War remake

[Jotari]

13 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Personally, I don't think this is a good idea, for reasons others have already stated. But I do think it's a fun idea. So, how would I go about it?

- Highly aesthetically customizable. Think Awakening levels - multiple builds, hairstyles, and hair colors. Maybe voices, but with full voice acting, that may be impractical. 

- Choose one Minor Holy Blood type (of the 13). Or, none at all. This affects their growths (which are, otherwise, fixed).

- Choose two skills. These can be anything that aren't game-breaking.

- There is an option to randomly generate your Avatar, based on the customizations available. 

- Their starting class, Tactician, is infantry with 6 move, and C in all weapon types (before applying Holy Blood). Generally balanced bases and growths, only impacted by choice of Holy Blood.

- At level 20, they can promote into Grandmaster, jumping up to 7 move and B in all weapon types.

- They join at level 1, from Turn 1 of the Prologue, with a "Steel" Weapon, "El" Tome, Lightning, Jormungandr, or Mend, based on their choice of Holy Blood. If no Holy Blood is chosen, they join with no weapon, but the "Charisma Band" instead.

- They die at Belhalla. If paired up, they have a single child of the opposite gender, whose name can be decided in a lover conversation. If Avatar is female, her son inherits her inventory, while the father's inventory is treated as though he died. If Avatar is male, the mother's canon son (or Patty) no longer inherits from their father - the Avatar's new daughter supercedes them in inheriting inventory.

- Avatar cannot interfere with canon couples (Sigurd/Dierdre, Quan/Ethlyn).

- If Avatar is not paired up, they will have no child. Instead, you will get a randomly-generated substitute Avatar-child. This one gets a weapon the same way as the original Avatar. Either way, the Avatar-child is playable from the start of chapter 6, as a level 1 Tactician.

Well making them infantry would be a surefire way to guarantee they won't dominate the battlefield in Genealogy of the Holy War.

[Book Bro]

I just don't trust IS to add an avatar that doesn't usurp the plot and/or makes it significantly worse because of player worship. I wouldn't hate it if they did it solely for gameplay, I guess, but considering SoV didn't have one I hope they continue to leave them out of a potential Echoes subseries.

[Lightcosmo]

I agree with no avatars in FE4. They just dont need one, so why would they add them in? It's not like they need anymore characters to field. 

And the story, god would that be terrible. I dont trust them to not muck it up either. Sorry.

[Use the Falchion]

I'm pretty neutral about Avatars, but I wouldn't mind having one, although I admit I'd prefer it to be a character that already exists and is changed to fit the two sexes rather than being someone new. 

[Jotari]

14 hours ago, Use the Falchion said:

I'm pretty neutral about Avatars, but I wouldn't mind having one, although I admit I'd prefer it to be a character that already exists and is changed to fit the two sexes rather than being someone new. 

I'd accept female Oifey, just so long as she keeps the mustache.

[Acacia Sgt]

Yeah... no... no no no...

In my opinion, it's much better to just create a new character than to start altering an existing one. More so when it's to like fill an agenda, or tick a checkbox. Or whatever.

Edited December 28, 2020 by Acacia Sgt

[Use the Falchion]

4 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Yeah... no... no no no...

In my opinion, it's much better to just create a new character than to start altering an existing one. More so when it's to like fill an agenda, or tick a checkbox. Or whatever.

I don't think there's anything wrong with giving an existing yet possibly (now perceived as) shallow character a secondary purpose that doesn't in any way conflict with their original/primary one, or help flesh them out.

[Acacia Sgt]

1 minute ago, Use the Falchion said:

I don't think there's anything wrong with giving an existing yet possibly (now perceived as) shallow character a secondary purpose that doesn't in any way conflict with their original/primary one, or help flesh them out.

I don't mind it either. However, there is a difference between fleshing out a character and then doing something like that. Like, why create a counterpart out of them? If we're creating a new character anyway, let it be their own character, instead of "X but with Y different", specially when also making them interchangeable.

So no, not turning an existing character into an avatar role. I think it's better to make that role out of scratch instead.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

On 12/27/2020 at 4:03 AM, Florete said:

If you get to decide their name, why can't you decide their gender? And why does it always end up being opposite gender, anyway? Especially in this case considering the child is more-or-less going to become the new avatar character, and most people will probably want to continue playing as their preferred chosen gender.

Why be able to choose their name? It's a simple rationale, but - parents get to choose their child's name. So, if I'm controlling an Avatar, it makes sense that I would be able to input their preferred name for a child. In my vision, the child is born between chapters 3 and 4, between the Avatar and whichever potential partner they have the highest support (or love points) with. If all potential parents are dead or taken, you get an adoptive "substitute Avatar-child".

Of course, parents can't pick the gender or sex of their child. I was envisioning the child not as a "Gen II Avatar", but rather as a "successor to the Avatar" - one who wants to continue their father/mother's legacy. So their customization options would be limited, outside of the existing inheritance system (like a Morgan you can name). I'd rather the gender be deterministic than random (to allow for easier planning), but whether it should be "the same" or "the opposite", I could see a case either way.

On 12/26/2020 at 10:40 PM, AnonymousSpeed said:

This idea is actually really good.

I'm going to pocket this.

By all means!

On 12/27/2020 at 6:12 AM, Metal Flash said:

If I`m not mistaken, New Mystery had even more customization options than Awakening did.

I love all of these ideas, particularly the last four.

Re: New Mystery, there were fewer hair colors and general body types than Awakening. But you could impact their stats and lore more, as well as starting class. And thanks!

[Use the Falchion]

9 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

I don't mind it either. However, there is a difference between fleshing out a character and then doing something like that. Like, why create a counterpart out of them? If we're creating a new character anyway, let it be their own character, instead of "X but with Y different", specially when also making them interchangeable.

So no, not turning an existing character into an avatar role. I think it's better to make that role out of scratch instead.

Again, if the character's role doesn't change and you're already adding the part, then it's not a giant problem IMO. Like Oifey. Making Oifey the avatar works in my head because: 

1. Oifey's role doesn't change. In Part 1 they'd still be the tactician and in Part 2 they'd still be the parent figure. They would simply be more paternal or maternal depending on the desired choice. 

2. Oifey works now as a playable character in Part 1 if the developers desire to make it so; or they could give us a reason to not make him playable, stating their role as a tactician is too great a risk. 

3. Oifey is in both generations, meaning that we don't have to worry about newcomers feeling completely distraught about losing their avatar in Belhalla. (...they'd only feel mostly distraught.)

4. Oifey's role in the game is set, meaning that we don't have to worry about an avatar becoming a sort of character shill or stealing all of the spotlight. 

 

[Florete]

4 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Why be able to choose their name? It's a simple rationale, but - parents get to choose their child's name. So, if I'm controlling an Avatar, it makes sense that I would be able to input their preferred name for a child. In my vision, the child is born between chapters 3 and 4, between the Avatar and whichever potential partner they have the highest support (or love points) with. If all potential parents are dead or taken, you get an adoptive "substitute Avatar-child".

Of course, parents can't pick the gender or sex of their child. I was envisioning the child not as a "Gen II Avatar", but rather as a "successor to the Avatar" - one who wants to continue their father/mother's legacy. So their customization options would be limited, outside of the existing inheritance system (like a Morgan you can name). I'd rather the gender be deterministic than random (to allow for easier planning), but whether it should be "the same" or "the opposite", I could see a case either way.

Envisioned or not, with how you have it set up that's definitely how it would come off. The original avatar dies and is replaced by their child, a nameable character who presumably has similar perks and story involvement as the original. If the original avatar doesn't die then it's easier to get away with having more aspects of the child set in stone, but having an avatar for only half the game is pretty weird and is probably a lot of why SoV doesn't have an avatar character.

[Metal Flash]

20 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Re: New Mystery, there were fewer hair colors and general body types than Awakening. But you could impact their stats and lore more, as well as starting class. And thanks!

I see, so appearnce could be customized less despite the larger variety of portraits. No problem. 

[Gordin]

An avatar would be cool but only if they get murdered in Belhalla. I don't want the avatar to survive that ruins the entire massacre. I don't give a crap about new players being disthrought. MURDER THE AVATAR IN BELHALLA.

Edited December 31, 2020 by Gordin

[Jotari]

2 hours ago, Gordin said:

An avatar would be cool but only if they get murdered in Belhalla. I don't want the avatar to survive that ruins the entire massacre. I don't give a crap about new players being disthrought. MURDER THE AVATAR IN BELHALLA.

I agree. The Belhalla Barbeque was a really ballsy move to pull, killing an avatar would be the best way of maintaining that.

[Florete]

But let's be real: if a Genealogy remake gets an avatar, they're not gonna die.

[Acacia Sgt]

The best compromise I can see if they pull a Lewyn and have them become an NPC. Being playable in both generations is something I feel should remain exclusive to Finn.

That said, chances are they might have them remain playable, sadly.

Still, I'd prefer it if they did died at Belhalla as well. Granted, there were enough survivors, factoring the need to have every single child unit be born, so in some cases the avatar has to survive for at least a few years after the fact, but still...

[The Moon Mage]

I mean considering what happened with Kris I don't think they would ever try that again. All that I would want is just for genealogy's problems to be fixed. Some new character's would be nice but an avatar would just be unnecessary.

[Florete]

5 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

The best compromise I can see if they pull a Lewyn and have them become an NPC. Being playable in both generations is something I feel should remain exclusive to Finn.

That said, chances are they might have them remain playable, sadly.

The only actual issue will be that your avatar is (presumably) leveled while everyone else on the team starts low, but I'm sure they can work around that somehow. Maybe they'll temporarily be an NPC or something. I just don't see them leaving an avatar completely unplayable until the end of the game.

They'd probably also pull a Byleth and keep them frozen in time during the generation skip so that the avatar can look the same for the whole game. And, if they want to go all the way...that would make it so the avatar can marry 2nd gen units.

For the record, I'm not saying any of this because I want it to happen. Just saying what I would think would happen.

5 hours ago, The Moon Mage said:

I mean considering what happened with Kris I don't think they would ever try that again.

But consider what happened with Robin, Corrin, and Byleth.

[Acacia Sgt]

9 minutes ago, Florete said:

The only actual issue will be that your avatar is (presumably) leveled while everyone else on the team starts low, but I'm sure they can work around that somehow. Maybe they'll temporarily be an NPC or something. I just don't see them leaving an avatar completely unplayable until the end of the game.

They'd probably also pull a Byleth and keep them frozen in time during the generation skip so that the avatar can look the same for the whole game. And, if they want to go all the way...that would make it so the avatar can marry 2nd gen units.

For the record, I'm not saying any of this because I want it to happen. Just saying what I would think would happen.

Pulling a Thracia in that they got turned to stone and housed at Yied Shrine, where at some point after Ch8 (let's say Sarah went to Yied and used the Kia Staff... barring the Liberation Army hauling the statue with them) rejoins the group... as a concept that would actually be quite interesting.

Though if it had to be any character, not sure on any potential Avatar. Ah well...

[SSbardock84]

I'm all for avatars if they're minor characters and don't largely influence the story. I just hate how major they've been and would prefer something more like Blazing Sword but make the avatar playable and have a character portrait.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

On 1/1/2021 at 5:24 PM, Acacia Sgt said:

The best compromise I can see if they pull a Lewyn and have them become an NPC. Being playable in both generations is something I feel should remain exclusive to Finn.

That said, chances are they might have them remain playable, sadly.

Still, I'd prefer it if they did died at Belhalla as well. Granted, there were enough survivors, factoring the need to have every single child unit be born, so in some cases the avatar has to survive for at least a few years after the fact, but still...

That sounds like a "make nobody happy" kind of compromise. People who wanted the Avatar to die now have to deal with "oh they're so special they survived a big ol' assassination attempt, now they're gonna instruct Seliph because they're so smart and perfect." Whereas, people who wanted to keep using the Avatar get them back... unplayable. Showing up only in cutscenes. Taunting them.

Anyway, I'm already not a fan of Gen II Lewyn, so adding a second one (or overwriting him with aged-Avatar), I don't think sounds very good.

On 1/1/2021 at 10:43 PM, Florete said:

They'd probably also pull a Byleth and keep them frozen in time during the generation skip so that the avatar can look the same for the whole game. And, if they want to go all the way...that would make it so the avatar can marry 2nd gen units.

It genuinely frightens me how plausible this sounds.

[Jotari]

On ‎1‎/‎2‎/‎2021 at 12:43 PM, Florete said:

 

They'd probably also pull a Byleth and keep them frozen in time during the generation skip so that the avatar can look the same for the whole game. And, if they want to go all the way...that would make it so the avatar can marry 2nd gen units.

 

Hannibal needs to S support someone! (and make that same sex S support, dude is already adoping kids)

Though realistically, approaching this in terms of gameplay, in lieu of retconning some time travel into the story (or worse introducing that deep realms cop out again), this would exclude the avatar being able to reproduce with a child of their own at all. Unless they want to lock a child unit of the avatar:s to only first gen units thus making marrying second gen units sort of objectively an inferior choice.

[Florete]

19 hours ago, Jotari said:

Though realistically, approaching this in terms of gameplay, in lieu of retconning some time travel into the story (or worse introducing that deep realms cop out again), this would exclude the avatar being able to reproduce with a child of their own at all. Unless they want to lock a child unit of the avatar:s to only first gen units thus making marrying second gen units sort of objectively an inferior choice.

Though it's minor, they have already made avatar marriage options that don't produce children in a game with a second generation: Rhajat and Niles when married by the same sex. I think they wouldn't mind the lack of an avatar child if it needed to be that way, especially when it allows for straight marriage.

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa]

E

 

Edited February 13, 2021 by Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

[Florete]

On 1/12/2021 at 6:01 PM, Deirdre an Bhróin said:

Those are all from 100% original FE titles, while Kris was implemented into a remake of a remake + sequel. Kirs was made a thing 9though very poorly) because FE3 Book II and FE12 were intended to be two different experiences, unlike with Gaiden/Echoes for a lot of western or newer players. 

If IS really wanted avatars again in a remake, it would've been done in Echoes. 

The logistics of getting an avatar into Gaiden are a lot tougher than almost any other FE game. You either:

1. Force an avatar to one side (likely Alm's), preventing an avatar in a full half of the game but allowing them to participate in the story.
2. Let the player choose a side, most likely preventing them from participating in the story.
3. Have the avatar magically be on both teams or have two avatars.

I know some fans here would be totally fine with 2, but from a developer's perspective of wanting to please the most amount of people, none of these work well. Genealogy doesn't have any of these issues since it doesn't have parallel stories.

For the record, they've said in interviews that they actually did consider putting an avatar into Echoes, citing wanting to focus on Celica on Alm for the reason why it didn't happen, though I believe there was more to it. I mentioned Robin, Corrin, and Byleth because it's clear that their avatar characters have become wildly popular since Kris, so remake or not, it should be expected that they'll continue to do it. New Mystery also had its own plethora of issues unrelated to the avatar that resulted in lower popularity for the whole thing, but both Kris's were still ranking relatively well in CYL, suggesting enough people wanted to see them in FEH for one reason or another.

On 1/12/2021 at 6:01 PM, Deirdre an Bhróin said:

IDK what the last line means, but what I can understand is that you're saying IS won't care if there are any non-child-making supports, correct?

Yes, that's correct. They'll prioritize allowing any potential opposite-sex marriage, regardless of if it can produce a playable child.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Florete