Micaiah character analysis

[Alputone]

23 minutes ago, eclipse said:

It's a modified trolley problem.  Instead of one person over several, it's a group of strangers versus an equal number of your friends and family.  Where's the trolley going to go in that situation?

The point of the trolley problem is to question whether it is okay to commit a lesser evil to prevent a greater evil. I was assuming you were substituting the lesser evil with attacking the Laguz to the greater evil of activating the blood pact.

23 minutes ago, eclipse said:

Counterexample: The governments around the world and all the messy political issues that make RD look damn appealing.  We humans apparently like abusive parents or something.  IMO it's closer to employer/employee, except there's only one place hiring.

Yeah in theory the state/citizenry is SUPPOSED to being like parent/child but in practice it comes out more like employer/employee or worse master/slave. I was going for what the state is ideally supposed to function as.

23 minutes ago, eclipse said:

This says so much about your stance, to the point where I seriously doubt that you'll be able to entertain another view besides your own.

Yeah I'm pretty committed to not committing murder on innocents to save innocents even if they are my own. Totally crazy right.

23 minutes ago, eclipse said:

That's great, if you decided to completely forget Daein's history of mistreatment of laguz.  Just because the leaders don't believe in discrimination doesn't mean that the general populace will follow.  Given the blood pact (which I will complain about another day) and the general sentiment of Daein WRT laguz, declaring war on the laguz won't be questioned as much as if they sprung some sort of alliance.  If you want to see just what a pain it is to get rid of discrimination, look no further than the current events in this world.

I don't get what you're saying here? So what? Daein has acted horribly towards the Laguz so that makes it okay to go ahead and continue it? What's realistic and unrealistic is a whole separate issue between what's right and what's wrong. Just because forming an alliance with the Laguz may have been met with resistance doesn't make the alternative of waging war on them any less wrong.

Edited May 25, 2021 by Alputone

[Florete]

5 minutes ago, Alputone said:

Yeah I'm pretty committed to not committing murder on innocents to save innocents even if they are my own. Totally crazy right.

It's not about what you would do. It's about the fact that you can't seem to understand why someone else would do something different. You lack empathy.

[Alputone]

1 minute ago, Florete said:

It's not about what you would do. It's about the fact that you can't seem to understand why someone else would do something different. You lack empathy.

I never said I didn't understand why a person would do something different or in Micaiah's case why she did what she did. I understand it perfectly, I would even sympathize with her. It's just that I don't believe certain circumstances justify certain actions.

[Ottservia]

You see this is why I prefer not to judge/analyze characters by real world moral standards. I find it to be extremely biased and often times misses the point of the work or character in question. It just leads to arguments that don’t really go anywhere. To me it doesn’t matter what my personal moral standing is on what the character says or does. I’m more concerned with what the story itself has to say about those things. I can’t talk much about Miciah because I haven’t played RD but those are just my two cents after skimming through the thread. 

[eclipse]

18 minutes ago, Alputone said:

The point of the trolley problem is to question whether it is okay to commit a lesser evil to prevent a greater evil. I was assuming you were substituting the lesser evil with attacking the Laguz to the greater evil of activating the blood pact.

Which is exactly it.  An unknown number of laguz/Daein soldiers die versus an unknown number of Daein citizens.  Since we don't have a quantity, we'll have to go with what is known.

20 minutes ago, Alputone said:

Yeah in theory the state/citizenry is SUPPOSED to being like parent/child but in practice it comes out more like employer/employee or worse master/slave. I was going for what the state is ideally supposed to function as.

RD doesn't have an ideal government (Begnion has rampant corruption and Crimea/Daein have inexperienced leaders), so forcing an ideal in that situation makes no sense.  We know that people can cross borders somewhat freely (Aimee and her group being an example), but I'm not sure how easy it would be to resettle in another country.  Maybe if there's a village that'll welcome you?  I don't think people can move countries permanently easily, but it sounds theoretically possible.

23 minutes ago, Alputone said:

Yeah I'm pretty committed to not committing murder on innocents to save innocents even if they are my own. Totally crazy right.

You're assuming there's a way NOT to do that.  In Micaiah's mind, there wasn't.  Once again, you'll have to go with what she knew at the time, instead of inserting your own morality and knowledge on top of her.

24 minutes ago, Alputone said:

I don't get what you're saying here? So what? Daein has acted horribly towards the Laguz so that makes it okay to go ahead and continue it? What's realistic and unrealistic is a whole separate issue between what's right and what's wrong. Just because forming an alliance with the Laguz may have been met with resistance doesn't make the alternative of waging war on them any less wrong.

Do you think the populace of Daein, which was already stressed out over a regime change would suddenly be overjoyed with allying with "sub-humans"?  Pelleas doesn't have Ashnard's iron grip.  Would sparking a potential civil war be worth that alliance, especially once news of the blood pact came to light?

10 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

You see this is why I prefer not to judge/analyze characters by real world moral standards. I find it to be extremely biased and often times misses the point of the work or character in question. It just leads to arguments that don’t really go anywhere. To me it doesn’t matter what my personal moral standing is on what the character says or does. I’m more concerned with what the story itself has to say about those things. I can’t talk much about Miciah because I haven’t played RD but those are just my two cents after skimming through the thread. 

Part of a good character is that there's some sort of underlying logic behind their actions, one that's human.  Which is impossible if you put your hands in your ears and pretend that story trumps everything.  Sometimes, a story's writing is shit, and needs to be called out as such - and part of that is ignoring that people are human and will do human things.

[Alputone]

1 minute ago, eclipse said:

Which is exactly it.  An unknown number of laguz/Daein soldiers die versus an unknown number of Daein citizens.  Since we don't have a quantity, we'll have to go with what is known.

Kill a few to save many is wrong in my eyes. I admit it's not wrong in the eyes of others but from my own point of view it is and why I disagreed with Micaiah.

5 minutes ago, eclipse said:

You're assuming there's a way NOT to do that.  In Micaiah's mind, there wasn't.  Once again, you'll have to go with what she knew at the time, instead of inserting your own morality and knowledge on top of her.

There was a way namely NOT killing a group of people that have done no wrong to you. If the blood pact was activated then that's not Micaiah's fault that is Begnions. We are only held accountable for what we do not others. Again I'm not saying she should do nothing and I understand Micaiah doesn't want anyone to die but you don't try to save your people by killing others that don't deserve it.

 

10 minutes ago, eclipse said:

Do you think the populace of Daein, which was already stressed out over a regime change would suddenly be overjoyed with allying with "sub-humans"?  Pelleas doesn't have Ashnard's iron grip.  Would sparking a potential civil war be worth that alliance, especially once news of the blood pact came to light?

Again I agree with you that's it's unrealistic but unrealistic as it may be it still doesn't justify waging war on the Laguz because the population would be more down with that.

 

When it comes to means vs ends in a moral conflict I lean more towards the means as being more important than the ends.

[Ottservia]

13 minutes ago, eclipse said:

Part of a good character is that there's some sort of underlying logic behind their actions, one that's human.  Which is impossible if you put your hands in your ears and pretend that story trumps everything.  Sometimes, a story's writing is shit, and needs to be called out as such - and part of that is ignoring that people are human and will do human things.

You missed my point because I agree with everything you said here. My point was more so that if you judge a character’s actions based on what you personally agree or disagree with then I feel like that misses the point. Whether or not you agree or disagree with a character is more or less irrelevant to analysis/criticism. Now whether or not you can understand the character is the important part. 

[eclipse]

7 hours ago, Alputone said:

Kill a few to save many is wrong in my eyes. I admit it's not wrong in the eyes of others but from my own point of view it is and why I disagreed with Micaiah.

So you're okay with killing many?

7 hours ago, Alputone said:

There was a way namely NOT killing a group of people that have done no wrong to you. If the blood pact was activated then that's not Micaiah's fault that is Begnions. We are only held accountable for what we do not others. Again I'm not saying she should do nothing and I understand Micaiah doesn't want anyone to die but you don't try to save your people by killing others that don't deserve it.

Once again, we're going to have to look at this from the eyes of someone in the game.  There's no way Begnion's gonna go "yup we're killin' your people!" to everyone in Daein.  While some might believe her, many will think that it's the king's fault that their families are dropping dead.  This will cause more inner turmoil, and as Daein just got through a period of civil unrest, it's the last thing they need.

7 hours ago, Alputone said:

Again I agree with you that's it's unrealistic but unrealistic as it may be it still doesn't justify waging war on the Laguz because the population would be more down with that.

When it comes to means vs ends in a moral conflict I lean more towards the means as being more important than the ends.

It also has to be feasible within the confines of the story and character.  Micaiah doesn't just fly by the seat of her pants.  She takes the time to think things through.  With her priority being the people of Daein, she's not going to offer them up to the meat grinder to appease some outside force, one which the people aren't too fond of to begin with.

When it comes to moral conflict, I look at the context, instead of just judging everything based on the knowledge I have.

[Alputone]

1 minute ago, eclipse said:

So you're okay with killing many?

No I'm not okay with killing anyone. I just don't believe killing a few to save many is right. And in Micaiah's case if worse comes to worse and the blood pact is activated she wouldn't be responsible Lekain would.

 

4 minutes ago, eclipse said:

Once again, we're going to have to look at this from the eyes of someone in the game.  There's no way Begnion's gonna go "yup we're killin' your people!" to everyone in Daein.  While some might believe her, many will think that it's the king's fault that their families are dropping dead.  This will cause more inner turmoil, and as Daein just got through a period of civil unrest, it's the last thing they need.

Yeah but you're are giving the consequences of an action greater precedence than the action itself. It's the principle that is more important to me.

 

6 minutes ago, eclipse said:

With her priority being the people of Daein, she's not going to offer them up to the meat grinder to appease some outside force, one which the people aren't too fond of to begin with.

She wouldn't be sacrificing the people of Daein instead it would be Lekain killing the people of Daein they are two separate things. Having a gun pointed at your head or being blackmailed does not give you license to do whatever it takes to get out of it.

[eclipse]

10 minutes ago, Alputone said:

No I'm not okay with killing anyone. I just don't believe killing a few to save many is right. And in Micaiah's case if worse comes to worse and the blood pact is activated she wouldn't be responsible Lekain would.

This is like blaming guns for violence, and you're also okay with Daein citizens dying.  Micaiah wouldn't stand for that.  Nor would she use this logic to justify it.

11 minutes ago, Alputone said:

Yeah but you're are giving the consequences of an action greater precedence than the action itself. It's the principle that is more important to me.

Well, yes, because this one is literally life or death.  It's a lot easier to judge when it's not the life of someone you're close to on the line.

12 minutes ago, Alputone said:

She wouldn't be sacrificing the people of Daein instead it would be Lekain killing the people of Daein they are two separate things. Having a gun pointed at your head or being blackmailed does not give you license to do whatever it takes to get out of it.

Do you think the citizens of Daein will make that distinction?  Do people IRL?  Again, Micaiah is built on the premise of being human, which includes dealing with human logic (in this case, from the citizens).

[Alputone]

48 minutes ago, eclipse said:

This is like blaming guns for violence, and you're also okay with Daein citizens dying.  Micaiah wouldn't stand for that.  Nor would she use this logic to justify it.

No it's not. Micaiah didn't write the blood pact or sign it. It's not her fault if Lekain activates it. It's Lekain's fault. That's like blaming the victim for not giving in to the oppressors demands.

Daein has been screwed twice in the games and both times are it's leaders fault. Falling under Begnion occupation was Ashnard's for invading Crimea and the Blood pact was Pelleas's fault for being too stupid not to read the terms of the treaty that was written by the very country you just won your freedom from. So because Pelleas screwed Daein by signing the blood pact now the Laguz Alliance has to perish because better them than us?

Edited May 26, 2021 by Alputone

[eclipse]

28 minutes ago, Alputone said:

No it's not. Micaiah didn't write the blood pact or sign it. It's not her fault if Lekain activates it. It's Lekain's fault. That's like blaming the victim for not giving in to the oppressors demands.

Daein has been screwed twice in the games and both times are it's leaders fault. Falling under Begnion occupation was Ashnard's for invading Crimea and the Blood pact was Pelleas's fault for being too stupid not to read the terms of the treaty that was written by the very country you just won your freedom from. So because Pelleas screwed Daein by signing the blood pact now the Laguz Alliance has to perish because better them than us?

Do you pay attention to how things work in this world, or are you seriously so wrapped up in your morality that you aren't willing to take a look around?  What do you think happened in various conflicts in this world?  Why did it happen?  Now why would it be any different in a fictional world?

[Alputone]

15 hours ago, eclipse said:

Do you pay attention to how things work in this world, or are you seriously so wrapped up in your morality that you aren't willing to take a look around?  What do you think happened in various conflicts in this world?  Why did it happen?  Now why would it be any different in a fictional world?

So because I have a different view point than you I must be oblivious to the world around me? Look if you're a consequentialist then you could make the case that Micaiah did the right thing by making the decision she believed that would save the most amount of lives or at least the most amount of her nation's lives. The thing is I'm not a consequentialist. I don't believe that the means justify the ends. That's about as clear cut as I can make it. You don't have to agree with me we can just agree to disagree and leave it at that.

Edited May 26, 2021 by Alputone

[eclipse]

5 minutes ago, Alputone said:

So I because I have a different view point than you I must be oblivious to the world around me? Look if you're a consequentialist then you could make the case that Micaiah did the right thing by making the decision she believed that would save the most amount of lives or at least the most amount of her nation's lives. The thing is I'm not a consequentialist. I don't believe that the means justify the ends. That's about as clear cut as I can make it. You don't agree with me we can just agree to disagree and leave it at that.

It's not that your opinion is different.  It's that it's completely unrealistic, given how humans and politics works.  And if you can't be honest about how humans and politics works, then I don't think the rest of your argument is in good faith.

[Alputone]

20 minutes ago, eclipse said:

It's not that your opinion is different.  It's that it's completely unrealistic, given how humans and politics works.  And if you can't be honest about how humans and politics works, then I don't think the rest of your argument is in good faith.

Not doing the right thing because it's too hard or unrealistic is not an excuse. Humans are weak and fallible no one is debating that. But in a moral conflict human weakness doesn't really factor in to determining the right thing to do. Morality is not supposed to walk in step with human nature it's actually supposed to curb it.

Edited May 26, 2021 by Alputone

[Florete]

1 hour ago, Alputone said:

And in Micaiah's case if worse comes to worse and the blood pact is activated she wouldn't be responsible Lekain would.

But where really does responsibility lie when the one who can prevent a tragedy chooses not to do so? Yes, Lekain is ultimately the primary villain, but if Micaiah let the Blood Pact kill Daein and Daein were to somehow know about it, they wouldn't put all the blame on Lekain, they'd also blame Micaiah for not doing what she could to prevent it from her position of power. Yeah, I know what you're thinking, "they're wrong, Lekain is the only one at fault," but the people of Daein don't care what you think. They see that a leader they loved and trusted let them all die. Maybe if you were Micaiah you'd find that acceptable, but you're not Micaiah.

I'm beginning to wonder why you made this topic at all. If you wouldn't do what Micaiah does, fine. But this discussion has been going nowhere because you seem unable to accept that people see the world differently than you do. What you say is right isn't right to everyone else. What were you expecting people to say?

[Alputone]

20 minutes ago, Florete said:

I'm beginning to wonder why you made this topic at all. If you wouldn't do what Micaiah does, fine. But this discussion has been going nowhere because you seem unable to accept that people see the world differently than you do. What you say is right isn't right to everyone else. What were you expecting people to say?

I have said multiple times this is all my opinion not some objective fact. I brought it up because I found things about her character I disagreed with and wondered what everyone else thought. When asked why I felt the way I did I gave explanations as to why. Also because the situation Micaiah was in was interesting.

Edited May 26, 2021 by Alputone

[vanguard333]

My thoughts on Micaiah: she's an interesting character with a lot of potential, and I think the story managed to utilize somewhere around seven tenths (7/10) of that potential before overshadowing her in favour of other characters.

Right away, one thing I really like is her dynamic with Sothe. She's the one that Sothe spent all of Path of Radiance looking for, and right away, it shows. I think that their tension whenever Sothe brings up Ike is great and makes a lot of sense: Sothe was there fighting alongside Ike and being inspired by him; he's seen firsthand that the Conquest of Daein and the Begnion Occupation were not Ike's fault, whereas Micaiah hasn't had that experience to learn who Ike really is and she doesn't have that perspective, so to her, Sothe fanboying about Ike is him fanboying about the guy that led an invasion of their homeland (a counter-invasion after Daein invaded Crimea, but an invasion nonetheless). I also like how, when she does finally meet Ike in part 4, she sees why Sothe is so inspired by Ike. Plus, her thoughts on Ike in part 1 led to what is possibly the funniest bit of banter in all of Fire Emblem:

Sothe:
“Entering Gallia by yourselves would be nearly impossible. The man you need to get you into Gallia actually resides in Crimea. That man, Ike, is in contact with King Caineghis and his advisors. There’s no doubt in my mind that he’s the man you need.”

Micaiah:
“Right. Lord Ike, hero of the Crimean Liberation, leader of the Greil Mercenaries, and father of Sothe’s children…”

I also like how there's a mystery behind the origin of her special (inevitably-royal) chosen one powers; a mystery that the story answers with the reveal that she was Sanaki's branded older sister, and I like how she's unique among FE lords in being a light mage and a healer.

 

In terms of how much I felt she got overshadowed, I'll just quote myself from another topic:

Quote

Micaiah certainly starts off strong. She's definitely well-utilized in part 1. In part 3, …I'm torn. I do think that the Dawn Brigade could've used a few more chapters. I like that there is a fair amount of attention put on her and the Dawn Brigade in the latter half, and it makes sense that they're not present in the first half, but I really don't like how the Dawn Brigade in part 3 is basically a better-written prototype of Conquest: protagonist is having to work for bad guy until they find a way to undermine the bad guy. I think Radiant Dawn, even with blood pacts being the reason Micaiah's having to help Begnion, is handled better than Conquest, but it doesn't even get the "undermine the villains" until part 4, and I feel like there needed to be more for Micaiah in these chapters. 

As for part 4, there she really needed more. It's possible to make a host character still relevant to a story, but it requires for them to still be making a lot of decisions and doing things. Micaiah gets some dialogue with Ike and Sothe, and I honestly can't remember anything else she does. If she had some important conversations with Yune (such conversations would obviously have to be in their shared head due when Micaiah is being Yune's host), if there was more reason for Yune and Micaiah to swap between who's in control, etc. One of the biggest issues is that there's really no conflict left that's Micaiah's battle to fight outside of Numida; there's no antagonist that makes things personal or really has any dynamic with Micaiah that actually gets explored: Lekain is Sanaki's foe, the Black Knight is Ike's, Degihnsea is Kurthnaga's, Sephiran is Sanaki's again, and Ashera doesn't have any dynamic with anyone outside of Sephiran if you recruit him.

It's almost as if they wrote Micaiah, and then tried to write how she'd be relevant in later chapters, and the rest of the Dawn Brigade have this problem to.

 

[Icelerate]

On 5/24/2021 at 8:52 PM, Jotari said:

And by far the best ammo for attacking the worth of her as a character is the blood contract and how contrived it makes the scenario.

No it is not. You'd have to make a link between the blood pact being contrived to Micaiah's writing in the scenario being contrived first. 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Icelerate

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, Icelerate said:

No it is not. You'd have to make a link between the blood pact being contrived to Micaiah's writing in the scenario being contrived first. 

Micaiah's actions and choices are going to be somewhat contrived if the reason she's in the whole scenario to begin with is contrived. Because the choices don't exist in a vacuum. They exist in the larger context of the story. If all other options for a character have been removed, then there should be a pretty good reason why they're removed, no matter how consistent the character might act within those confines. The confines themself are still influencing the engagement of the story. And I say this as someone who isn't nearly as negative about the blood pact as most (really my biggest issue with it and this whole arc in general is how abruptly it swerves into irrelevancy as soon as the story decides it wants to begin it's final act).

[Icelerate]

9 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Micaiah's actions and choices are going to be somewhat contrived if the reason she's in the whole scenario to begin with is contrived. Because the choices don't exist in a vacuum. They exist in the larger context of the story. If all other options for a character have been removed, then there should be a pretty good reason why they're removed, no matter how consistent the character might act within those confines. The confines themself are still influencing the engagement of the story. And I say this as someone who isn't nearly as negative about the blood pact as most (really my biggest issue with it and this whole arc in general is how abruptly it swerves into irrelevancy as soon as the story decides it wants to begin it's final act).

Yes but in order to do that, you'd have to be able to argue that the choices Micaiah makes are contrived or that the only choices she makes are those associated with the constraints of the blood pact. None of the two arguments are true hence not an effective way of arguing against the worth of her character. 

[Dark Holy Elf]

Even if you consider the blood pact to be contrived, it doesn't mean we can't examine the choices and morality of the characters who are constrained by it.

I generally find the contrivance of the blood pact to be overstated in the first place. If Lekain revealed that the Begnion occupation force had planted a fantasy nuclear bomb under the Daein capital and that they would detonate it if Pelleas didn't cooperate, I suspect fewer people would have a problem with it, and the choices of Pelleas and Micaiah et al. would be functionally the same.

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

Even if you consider the blood pact to be contrived, it doesn't mean we can't examine the choices and morality of the characters who are constrained by it.

I never said you couldn't. In fact I was here arguing in favor of Miaciah as a character. I just said that if one wants to argue against Micaiah's performance as a character then the blood pact is by far a better source of criticism for the writing than just personally disagreeing with her morals. On the whole I am pretty positive about Micaiah and Radiant Dawn's plot as a whole. I'm an incorrigible devil's advocate though.

1 hour ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

I generally find the contrivance of the blood pact to be overstated in the first place. If Lekain revealed that the Begnion occupation force had planted a fantasy nuclear bomb under the Daein capital and that they would detonate it if Pelleas didn't cooperate, I suspect fewer people would have a problem with it, and the choices of Pelleas and Micaiah et al. would be functionally the same.

I suspect people probably would be more positive about it, but a magic nuke would come with its fair share or problems, namely why wouldn't Begnion use it in any other scenario where it'd be really useful? You'd need to put some kind of limeter on it that forces them to only be able to use it on Daein which is again heading into pretty contrived territory. Overall they wrote themselves into a corner when they decided they wanted Micaiah and Ike to fight in Radiant Dawn as there's not many great reasons to justify it given their personalities. And that's probably why I've seen far fewer "fixes" for Radiant Dawn's plot than the likes of Fates or Three Houses. There's no real simple easy solution to get the same results. If I were to come up with an alternative idea I'd probably try and work in the Feral Drug somehow. Maybe the feral drug has already been leaked into the Daein water supply while Begnion were in control, and now Benion just needs to activate some kind of trigger to turn Daein into 28 Days Later. That at least would use a preestablished method and one that couldn't be used elsewhere

Edited May 29, 2021 by Jotari

[kradeelav]

I find the black/white ethics nature far less interesting than how she handles things inter-personally, actually.

I've written up my own analysis post on her here, but I would absolutely first read this strip I made of a theoretical confrontation between her and Zihark once when she has to order everyone to attack the laguz*. Zihark's my all-time favorite character and for a long time I really disliked Micaiah; however, in drawing the strip I gained a real sympathy for how incredibly screwed she was, and how she was reacting in the only ways she ever knew to react  - part of my goal in drawing the strip was to make her *more* likeable than Zihark (who i assume the audience would side with at first, given his straightforward "attacking the laguz is not right" stance.

Those two links above should answer it.

*still shake-fisting at IS/Nintendo for not adding in what should've been a super fun/gutwrenching base conversation.

[rory swann]

i agree micaiah been an absolute bitch through out the entire game except the time when she saved nico, even that leads to jarod killing a shit ton of civilians. which she should have for seen, but hey, kid's life matters. and talk shit about ike during the mad king's war just make her worse. as daein literally: invaded another country with no formal declaration of war; committing countless atrocities across crimea, war crimes against crimea civilian that is on par with what begnion did in daein; conducting immoral experiment against laguz on a massive scale. and i see people say ike "invaded" daein unnecessarily since ashnard is in crimea at the moment, but ike only realised that after he conquered daein's capital. and daein have every single right to be punished due to what they did. and what did she do? she literally said nothing regarding what ashnard did. which basically indicated she have little regard to non daein people as a whole. also she took pelleas's order without blinking and continue to do so even after realising the entrie thing is a begnion set up. what is even more irritating is that she try to justify her evil actions in whatever way she could find with absurd reasons. normally my view on a character divided in 2 parts, their in game performance and their personality. micaiah could potentially be the only character i truly dislike, in all of the fire emblem games. with horrible in game performance and horrible personality. and make her an protagonist in RD is such a bad thing, hell even laura or aran is a better choice to lead DB than this massive genocide freak