Why do you talk to enemies in battle to recruit them?

[Nozomi Kasaki]

I know it makes sense that you could talk to an allied unit to recruit them, but why exactly do you talk to enemies in the battlefield to recruit them?

Wouldn't it be a little bit more realistic if you just capture them first as prisoners of war before having them defect at your side and use them in the next chapter or something? I know that some playable characters are probably related to those enemy units or some of those enemy units have probably been thrown in the battlefield against their own will, but they still need to lock them up, at least temporarily, just in case they are actually planning to kill the playable Lord or something.

I don't know I just don't understand this. Can you guys tell me why?

[Polinym]

The ability to capture units to recruit them probably would have been a fun way to shake up recruitments, but it's not the easiest thing in the world to implement design-wise. That would work better in the post-Kaga games.

It does still make sense to talk to someone on the battlefield to recruit them in most cases. Consider the Sheeda - Navarre example: How exactly is a lightly-armed young lady supposed to capture a trained swordfighter? Plus, Navarre and other units have the chance to prove their loyalty by turning to fight their comrades instead.

[joevar]

6 hours ago, Nozomi Kasaki said:

Wouldn't it be a little bit more realistic if you just capture them first as prisoners of war before having them defect at your side and use them in the next chapter or something?

thats realistic except FE dont have a working prisons in their base afaik. maybe, if FE works more like Suikoden or equivalent, which is yes they do recruit people after they become prisoner for the enemies like you said. Except avatar, we only move character(s) on the field anyway in FE. the "base" is always that lovely place where you chitchat or flirting away with comrade. not place for bargaining with opposing faction or coercing Prisoner of War

closest thing to realistic that i can think of : you knock them or at least overwhelm them in fight, then you can start talking and they in turn willling to listen since they cant win atm. not running head on and start yelling "heyyy you! talk to me first before you start swinging (your weapon)" then they die from low HP in enemy phase

tldr; thats the game own limitation i guess, they could be more realistic but too late i guess.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

8 hours ago, Polinym said:

Consider the Sheeda - Navarre example: How exactly is a lightly-armed young lady supposed to capture a trained swordfighter?

Pretty easily. She just needs to run her lance through his shirt collar, then carry him back to Marth through the skies.

8 hours ago, Polinym said:

Plus, Navarre and other units have the chance to prove their loyalty by turning to fight their comrades instead.

That's pretty messed-up, if you think about it. Especially when they're killing their former subordinates. I appreciate when games have them turn into green units instead (i.e. Klein and Thea in FE6).

9 hours ago, Nozomi Kasaki said:

Wouldn't it be a little bit more realistic if you just capture them first as prisoners of war before having them defect at your side and use them in the next chapter or something?

That's basically what Fates does, with the Capture mechanic. But it only happens to enemy generics, plus a select few bosses.

Anyway, it's more effort to capture someone and keep them prisoner, than it is to either A) kill them, or B) persuade them right away. Plus, if they're imprisoned, it raises the specter of "hang on, do they actually agree with my cause? or are they just fighting to avoid jail time?". Most Lords are too noble and idealistic tobe content with the latter. 

[Nozomi Kasaki]

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

Plus, if they're imprisoned, it raises the specter of "hang on, do they actually agree with my cause? or are they just fighting to avoid jail time?". Most Lords are too noble and idealistic tobe content with the latter. 

I mean the latter is kind of realistic. I mean let's face it, not everyone fights for someone's noble ideals. Everyone has an interest and if the Lord's goals benefit them, they'll join him/her, but not necessarily because they agree or believe in their cause, but because it could benefit their own interests. No one is a pure Samaritan. And those are the facts that Fire Emblem Lords need to face. Besides, new allies who are only fighting to avoid punishment or for money is at least much better than nothing at all.

Anyway, sorry for my terrible English.

[Original Alear]

Well, I will point out there are a couple examples of this happening...if you capture the Navarre archetype in Thracia 776 and release him, he'll still show up a few chapters later and can be recruited by that green haired cleric (Sapphy?). And in Path of Radiance, you actually have to beat Shinon (with Ike? I can't remember if that's needed) after having him talk with the right person (Rolf, IIRC).

Quote

thats realistic except FE dont have a working prisons in their base afaik.

I don't think the lack of a holding area in prior games is enough to rule out adding it in future games. Especially after 3 Houses, where there is probably a prison in Garreg Mach (were the rhea assassins held there before their beheading?). Fates and 3 Houses have already broken away from some of the common archetypes and stereotypes that were in a lot of past games, I don't think a room with a locked door is really that revolutionary.

It's not like the games are all starry eyed idealism with recruitment conversations, the Tellius saga had the thing where Shiharam could recruit Jill out from under you, Nino conversing with the surviving Reed brother causes them to become more aggressive (in terms of moving around the map to attack at will, or so I've heard), and Reinhardt will give Olwen a weapon and then proceed to continue trying to kill your party.

Edited October 16, 2022 by Original Johan Liebert

[joevar]

2 hours ago, Original Johan Liebert said:

I don't think the lack of a holding area in prior games is enough to rule out adding it in future games. Especially after 3 Houses, where there is probably a prison in Garreg Mach (were the rhea assassins held there before their beheading?). Fates and 3 Houses have already broken away from some of the common archetypes and stereotypes that were in a lot of past games, I don't think a room with a locked door is really that revolutionary.

hey thats not a fair argument at all. almost literally every feature imaginable can be added in future games. even more so when its a series with pretty long history of release thats not going to stop anytime soon. Also pretty sure OP mostly talk about how it was so far in past FE games, not what they could not do in future games.

im well aware that explorable base function only go as far as Fates and 3House so its not enough a representative when compared to how many FE already released, not to mention 3House Garreg mach is a base in the form of monastery slash academy on the surface. im just pointing out that could happen the very first time "base" become actual thing integrated into gameplay, not how its not present now, so it wont be later too.

the only thing im ruling out to be changed is about the very title of this thread: talking to enemies in battle to recruit them. i dont see it removed entirely as long as theres traditional FE recruitment, not limited to whatever 3H did.

the fact you think its not revolutionary even more a question why they havent added it yet. not an excuse why they not added that function

Edited October 16, 2022 by joevar

[henrymidfields]

I've never thought about this, but I fully agree, now that you mentioned. At least I'd like to see some capture mechanic as an alternative and a post-game conversation where if a certain unit is alive and present, then they'll speak to the former enemy and either make amends or otherwise negotiate. Otherwise the enemies get sent elsewhere and you lose the chance to recruit them. There's no reason why a makeshift cell or holding area with guards cannot be a thing for POWs to be temporarily held while they await being sent to a more permanent location.

Edited October 16, 2022 by henrymidfields

[Original Alear]

Quote

the fact you think its not revolutionary even more a question why they havent added it yet. not an excuse why they not added that function

You know they have a prison in FE Fates, right? That even functions with capturing bosses you don't converse with in battle and then recruiting them to your party.

Edited October 16, 2022 by Original Johan Liebert

[Acacia Sgt]

I would think it wasn't a feature since most of the time the FE armies are constantly on the march, where it'd be something of a hassle to manage POW's, at least for long-term prospects. Hence why Thracia did the "capture and recruit by chapter's end". Fates was the first to have an actual Home Base the player army would inhabit for the entire campaign (instead of temporary like the Genealogy Home Castles), hence the jail function now being sensical to have.

Edited October 16, 2022 by Acacia Sgt