Does Crimson Flower... make sense compared to the rest of Three Houses? SPOILERS, obviously.

[DefyingFates]

I've been mulling over this since Three Houses came out but I've been meaning to talk about it more strongly over the past few months and a topic on the Engage forum prompted me to give this a go.

When you start CF, Edelgard tells you the "true" history of Fodlan, that Rhea is a control freak who's evil to the core and Nemesis and the other Elites were essentially freedom fighters. The rest of the route seems to support this. People have already pointed out that Edelgard is much nicer than in other routes (even if she still lies to her own allies) but Rhea is much more malicious too.

But then you look at the other routes and... none of the above makes sense. Nemesis et al. are clearly painted as power-hungry maniacs, Rhea is shown to be someone who meant well but chose poorly and Edelgard goes full war criminal (RIP Bernie). And to top it all off, these (and other details) remain consistent among all three of the other routes.

There's still some evidence for Edelgard's claims in them: for example, the library in the Abyss shows the Church tried to stop technology progressing too far, Manuela states in Part 1 how odd it is that Garreg Mach is connected to all three regions despite the original Empire splintering after it was built and Rhea flat out admits to faking history (but only in an attempt to prevent another war), but despite these three routes remaining consistent it feels like Crimson Flower pulled a Fates by changing reality to make itself make more sense.

Either that, or Edelgard pulled a Celica and decided the obviously evil people she knew were liars and manipulators were telling the truth over more reliable sources for some reason.

What do you think?

[vanguard333]

Edelgard claims that her knowledge of Fodlan's history: that Rhea's fight against Nemesis was not religious and that the hero's relics were manmade and were not gifts from the goddess, was secretly passed down from emperor to emperor. These two pieces of information are correct, but, as the player learns in Verdant Wind, it's incomplete: the hero's relics were manmade weapons made from dragon bones and Nemesis' conflict with Rhea was Rhea's revenge for Nemesis killing her mother and slaughtering almost all her kin. I think these two pieces of information probably were passed down from emperor to emperor; Rhea considered the first emperor to be a friend, but she definitely never told him the full story, as Rhea was always extremely guarded, causing even close friends like Jeralt to begin to distrust her.

 

30 minutes ago, DefyingFates said:

When you start CF, Edelgard tells you the "true" history of Fodlan, that Rhea is a control freak who's evil to the core and Nemesis and the other Elites were essentially freedom fighters. The rest of the route seems to support this. People have already pointed out that Edelgard is much nicer than in other routes (even if she still lies to her own allies) but Rhea is much more malicious too.

Remember that Rhea completely snaps in the Crimson Flower route as a result of Byleth siding with Edelgard; what Edelgard sees of Rhea, unknown to Edelgard, is essentially confirmation bias for both of them. Rhea sees Byleth side with Edelgard and is convinced that her attempt at creating a vessel for her mother has only created a new Nemesis, and Edelgard is convinced that the Rhea we see after Rhea snaps was always Rhea's true mental state.

I don't remember Edelgard ever thinking Nemesis and the Elites were freedom fighters; all I remember is her assuming that Rhea and Nemesis' conflict was purely political; something it probably would've seemed to be from the perspective of the first emperor.

 

35 minutes ago, DefyingFates said:

But then you look at the other routes and... none of the above makes sense. Nemesis et al. are clearly painted as power-hungry maniacs, Rhea is shown to be someone who meant well but chose poorly and Edelgard goes full war criminal (RIP Bernie). And to top it all off, these (and other details) remain consistent among all three of the other routes.

I think it's worth remembering that Azure Moon and Verdant Wind were built from Silver Snow.

Also, Edelgard never set Bernie on fire in any of my playthroughs of the other routes.

 

38 minutes ago, DefyingFates said:

Either that, or Edelgard pulled a Celica and decided the obviously evil people she knew were liars and manipulators were telling the truth over more reliable sources for some reason.

What do you think?

I don't think Edelgard ever trusted TWSITD, but she did make a mistake in never investigating them further whenever they slipped up and accidentally revealed more than they wanted to: one of the most notable examples of this would be in part 1, when Thales refers to Nemesis as a "thief" in front of Edelgard (who is wearing her Flame Emperor disguise), and Edelgard notices that odd choice of term but doesn't think to look into why TWSITD would refer to Nemesis as a thief.

[lenticular]

I've long thought that Edelgard is basically just a naive dupe who has been gaslit to hell and back by the Agarthans. There are just too many aspects of what she says and does that don't make sense to me otherwise. For instance:

• The general populace of Adrestia has sufficient loyalty to her to follow her to war against the church, but she never considers just declaring independence from the church as an alternative to war.
• She says that she is super into the idea of meritocracy, but then she appoints all her school friends to high offices of state.
• She, as the Flame Emperor, somehow commands Kostas to kill Edelgard without realising that this is a bad idea?
• She credulously accepts anything she is told that backs up her position, from bad information about Rhea's character to bad science about the Blue Sea Star.

I don't think that this is what the writers intended for me to think, but it's how it's pretty much always come across to me. And happily, unlike certain other characters in Fire Emblem history who have had their own idiot ball moments, she does actually feel justified. It's almost impossible to believe that anyone could stand the amount of abuse that she did at the age that she did without being messed up in the head in at least some way. And if her particular psychosis has made her believe everything that the Agarthans are feeding her, then I find that believable.

(My understanding is that this is not a popular opinion, and that is fine. There are always multiple ways to interpret any work; I don't claim that mine is the only valid interpretation.)

[DefyingFates]

1 hour ago, lenticular said:

to bad science about the Blue Sea Star.

Wait, what's this about, if you don't mind explaining?

Otherwise, even though you defended her in the end I have to applaud your bravery in openly criticizing Edelgard of all characters in a public forum. Congrats!

1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

Remember that Rhea completely snaps in the Crimson Flower route as a result of Byleth siding with Edelgard; what Edelgard sees of Rhea, unknown to Edelgard, is essentially confirmation bias for both of them. Rhea sees Byleth side with Edelgard and is convinced that her attempt at creating a vessel for her mother has only created a new Nemesis, and Edelgard is convinced that the Rhea we see after Rhea snaps was always Rhea's true mental state.

This is fair, but burning civilians alive seems out of character for her (and Catherine) all the same.

1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

I don't remember Edelgard ever thinking Nemesis and the Elites were freedom fighters; all I remember is her assuming that Rhea and Nemesis' conflict was purely political; something it probably would've seemed to be from the perspective of the first emperor.

She says the war started because Nemesis didn't want to live under the Rhea's rule or something to that effect. She doesn't explicitly use the term "freedom fighters", but that definitely seems to be how she saw the conflict (especially considering she's essentially doing the same thing).

1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

I think it's worth remembering that Azure Moon and Verdant Wind were built from Silver Snow.

True (I keep losing the source for this...) but even the new content added to these routes defy Edelgard's version of events.

1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

Also, Edelgard never set Bernie on fire in any of my playthroughs of the other routes.

In which case Edelgard bombs a random henchman which is... less sadistic in one way and more in another 😛

1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

I don't think Edelgard ever trusted TWSITD, but she did make a mistake in never investigating them further whenever they slipped up and accidentally revealed more than they wanted to: one of the most notable examples of this would be in part 1, when Thales refers to Nemesis as a "thief" in front of Edelgard (who is wearing her Flame Emperor disguise), and Edelgard notices that odd choice of term but doesn't think to look into why TWSITD would refer to Nemesis as a thief.

Oh yeah, Edelgard was never committed to the TWSITD cause, but as you say it doesn't make sense that she would take what they said at face value without at least applying a grain of salt. The example you gave is a great one, yet she dismisses that slip immediately with a "Regardless..." and getting them back on topic.

1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

Edelgard claims that her knowledge of Fodlan's history: that Rhea's fight against Nemesis was not religious and that the hero's relics were manmade and were not gifts from the goddess, was secretly passed down from emperor to emperor. These two pieces of information are correct, but, as the player learns in Verdant Wind, it's incomplete: the hero's relics were manmade weapons made from dragon bones and Nemesis' conflict with Rhea was Rhea's revenge for Nemesis killing her mother and slaughtering almost all her kin. I think these two pieces of information probably were passed down from emperor to emperor; Rhea considered the first emperor to be a friend, but she definitely never told him the full story, as Rhea was always extremely guarded, causing even close friends like Jeralt to begin to distrust her.

This is another fair point, but it still feels too... "clean" an explanation, if that makes sense? But I think you addressed it later in your comment anyway: for some reason Edelgard never bothered looking further into what she was told.

[lenticular]

22 minutes ago, DefyingFates said:

Wait, what's this about, if you don't mind explaining?

One of her notes in the advice box says:

Quote

People used to believe the goddess once fell here from the Blue Sea Star, but according to astronomical research, the light from that star takes millions of years to reach us.

This absolutely does not make a lick of sense. Stars that are that far away are not bright enough to be visible to the naked eye, let alone to become the stuff of legend. For comparison, the real-life inspiration for the Blue Sea Star is Sirius, which is less than 9 light years away. You could maybe conceivably get something of the right sort of brightness and distance if you had a quasar as a neighbouring galaxy, but this a pretty big stretch to begin with, and for it to make sense, you've got to assume that there are astronomers out there who are capable of correctly calculating the distance, but not capable of realising it wasn't a star at all, which I don't buy for a second.

Furthermore, we know (from the Abyss library) that telescopes were banned by the church, and the best telescopes anyone in Fódlan had managed to come up with used two lenses from glasses. The only people who could possibly be making astronomical readings that sophisticated are the Agarthans. In short, they are feeding her lies about Sothis mythology, and she is eating it up entirely uncritically because it reinforces her existing beliefs.

Is this what I'm supposed to take away from that single throwaway line of text? Almost certainly not. Was it probably just written by a writer with a poor grasp of astronomy who thought that saying millions of years sounded cool? I suspect so. And yet, did it instantly jump out at me, science nerd that I am, as something that didn't make sense at face value but needed to be interpreted? Why yes, yes it did.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

3 hours ago, DefyingFates said:

When you start CF, Edelgard tells you the "true" history of Fodlan, that Rhea is a control freak who's evil to the core and Nemesis and the other Elites were essentially freedom fighters. The rest of the route seems to support this. People have already pointed out that Edelgard is much nicer than in other routes (even if she still lies to her own allies) but Rhea is much more malicious too.

But then you look at the other routes and... none of the above makes sense. Nemesis et al. are clearly painted as power-hungry maniacs, Rhea is shown to be someone who meant well but chose poorly and Edelgard goes full war criminal (RIP Bernie). And to top it all off, these (and other details) remain consistent among all three of the other routes.

Rhea and Edelgard both want Teach on their side. Without them, they become their worst selves. It's much more dramatic in Rhea, given her... investment... in Teach. But Edelgard shows this loss too (even if it really only makes sense in SS).

Anyway, Edelgard's "true history" of Fódlan... isn't. Like, she was totally correct that the Church lied about Nemesis and Sothis, but totally incorrect about what truth they were covering up. CF doesn't challenge Edelgard on her story, but it doesn't affirm her on it, either. It just... doesn't really come up, beyond Edelgard's initial motivations.

26 minutes ago, lenticular said:

This absolutely does not make a lick of sense. Stars that are that far away are not bright enough to be visible to the naked eye, let alone to become the stuff of legend. For comparison, the real-life inspiration for the Blue Sea Star is Sirius, which is less than 9 light years away. You could maybe conceivably get something of the right sort of brightness and distance if you had a quasar as a neighbouring galaxy, but this a pretty big stretch to begin with, and for it to make sense, you've got to assume that there are astronomers out there who are capable of correctly calculating the distance, but not capable of realising it wasn't a star at all, which I don't buy for a second.

New theory: the speed of light is much lower in the universe of Fódlan. So taking nine million years isn't actually all that far.

Anyway, this is a funny point I never noticed, so thanks for bringing it up!

[Etrurian emperor]

I wouldn't say Edelgard goes full war criminal. Even in the routes where she's harsher the Empire noticeable lacks the war crimes committed by the likes of Bern, Nohr or Daein. The Imperial Army slaughtering civilians also isn't really comparable with Edelgards MO.

As for Nemesis and the elites. Nemesis is a scumbag, but the elites are a more murky subject. You can find writing of one elite who claims to be baffled as to why Seiros seems to hate them so much, and Rhea being forced to glorify them probably means that the elites at least had some traits worthy of celebrating. 

Rhea meant well and Edelgard is amusingly prejudiced against her but that's also not entirely relevant. Rhea meaning well doesn't change that her system is flawed and already on its last legs. And while Rhea has a real benevolent side this side of her seems conditional to her being in control. The moment that control is threatened a much darker side shows up. Rhea wants whats best, but only on her own terms, not those of others, certainly not of those she dislikes. 

 

Edited May 26, 2023 by Etrurian emperor

[Armchair General]

4 hours ago, DefyingFates said:

that Rhea is a control freak who's evil to the core

Well, they're both control freaks, just for different reasons. As for Rhea being evil, it's kind of hard to actually call her that. Although, she does go well out of her way to enforce the status quo. While most of the stuff with the Western Church could be constructed as an bit of an civil war started by Team Slither; the one thing that she did entirely outside of their influence is to tell Byleth to never talk about what happened to Miklan when he used the Lance of Ruin. Almost makes you wonder if some random soldier picked up an fallen noble's ancient dragon fossil weapon and started using it for an while.

4 hours ago, DefyingFates said:

Nemesis and the other Elites were essentially freedom fighters

Factoring in with what happened to Maurice, it's kind of obvious that they were disposable pawns and their relics is essentially glorified hush money in the present day.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

Edelgard and siblings were experimented on and murdered. Her procedure only worked because they seeked out probably several noble brats throughout Fodlan and got it right for the first time on Lysithea. Every noble wants a child with a crest, and could be persuaded to give up their child tragically to make them a multicrest political golden goose. Nobody would admit that they gave up their daughter in a bid for more power.

As the sole survivor of her family, her reward was brainwashing. If you told her that her Uncle and his incel buddies perpetrated the Duscur tragedy, she wouldn't believe you. Her theoretical war against him is motivated purely by what they did to Byleth's dad five years ago, and she doesn't see any issue with their methods in other routes where she doesn't ally with Byleth. Growing up, she forgets the people that raised her and her time spent in Faerghus (trauma deleting memories, or deliberate result of brainwashing, who knows). Then gets her history from underground fascists looking to continue a thousand year old genocide for reasons they probably didn't question either. But you can't rally a war on what they teach, you have to take real life grievances (Societal hierarchy based on owning crests is unjust, whether you're a commoner or noble), and frame the people you want to kill as the perpetrators and beneficiaries. That's how you get a holocaust.

Nobody at Garreg Mach disagrees with abolishing crests. Even Lorenz comes around purely on his own. And the endings of those other routes confirm that that's what happens when just people finally take power. TWSITD aren't around to cause things like the Duscur massacre and other unexplained tragedies in order to maintain a weak society with weak leaders (and body-snatched leaders) that could be persuaded into finishing the Nabatean genocide. Edelgard is a fascinating villain from the context of Silver Snow, but the details got muddied and deleted when the writers decided mid-development to make a route that portrays her as a hero, then tweak the other routes in a way that quietly say "maybe she had a point". Crimson Flower could have been you and Edelgard uncovering the grift, using your alliance with Slitherers to quietly bump them off while playing along with the War. Like Conquest but as a real redemption arc story that you help her through. No one is a slave to their past. We can rise above our abusers in the end.

Edited May 26, 2023 by Zapp Branniglenn

[Fire Emblem Fan]

Crimson Flower really does make mush less sense than the other routes, yes. I think it's probably because it originally wasn't even supposed to be a route, and once it was they didn't do too great a job of making everything fit together for it.

[Armchair General]

7 minutes ago, Fire Emblem Fan said:

and once it was they didn't do too great a job of making everything fit together for it.

Honestly, she could have stationed Casper's dad and her former retainers on the Imperial side of that famous bridge and the Alliance would be too busy arguing amongst themselves as the Holy Kingdom burns to the ground

[Dark Holy Elf]

11 hours ago, DefyingFates said:

When you start CF, Edelgard tells you the "true" history of Fodlan, that Rhea is a control freak who's evil to the core and Nemesis and the other Elites were essentially freedom fighters. The rest of the route seems to support this. People have already pointed out that Edelgard is much nicer than in other routes (even if she still lies to her own allies) but Rhea is much more malicious too.

But then you look at the other routes and... none of the above makes sense. Nemesis et al. are clearly painted as power-hungry maniacs, Rhea is shown to be someone who meant well but chose poorly and Edelgard goes full war criminal (RIP Bernie). And to top it all off, these (and other details) remain consistent among all three of the other routes.

It's more nuanced than you're making it sound, on both sides.

While the game is cagey about the details of his time, Nemesis is almost surely a freedom fighter of some sort. He's called the "King of Liberation"... where do you think he got that title? That said, he also murdered a bunch of Nabateans and turned their bones into weapons. A freedom fighter need not be a moral paragon! No shortage of examples of this in our own world. Whether he's a villain or a hero is a matter of perspective. That's the point and I think it's a pretty neat one. “If you think of people as simply enemies or allies, it may be impossible to grasp the truth" is one of my favourite lines in the game.

That said, It's worth noting Edelgard doesn't really seem too concerned about Nemesis himself or his motivations, because Nemesis has been dead for over a millienium (his zombie appearance in VW notwithstanding), while the person who rewrote the history surrounding him and the Elites is still alive and wielding power today.

I don't particularly agree that Edelgard varies in "niceness" much between routes, you just see different sides of her depending on if you're on her side or not. That's natural. Same with Rhea, honestly - nothing she does in CF isn't foreshadowed in WC, and I think what Byleth does is a very reasonable trigger for her descent into grief and anger, whatever your opinion on her previous morality.

11 hours ago, DefyingFates said:

Either that, or Edelgard pulled a Celica and decided the obviously evil people she knew were liars and manipulators were telling the truth over more reliable sources for some reason.

I said this in the other thread and I'll re-iterate it here: at no point did Edelgard believe the Agarthans for much of anything. Her knowledge, both where it is correct and where it is flawed, comes from the imperial line. I'm not sure where this "the Agarthans fed her information" thing comes from.

11 hours ago, DefyingFates said:

Edelgard goes full war criminal (RIP Bernie)

Even if you somehow get Edelgard to light Bernie on fire (and ignore the fact that Bernie's panel is not, in fact, even on fire), you should know that if you're seeing that happen in Gronder, you probably also saw Gilbert and/or Claude do the same thing to their own allies three maps previous. Now I'm all for saying pretty much everyone in this game is a war criminal (because they unequivocably are by modern standards), but if you're concerned about one and not the other you should probably ask yourself why.

10 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

I don't think Edelgard ever trusted TWSITD, but she did make a mistake in never investigating them further whenever they slipped up and accidentally revealed more than they wanted to

I mean, they're pretty hard to investigate, but Edelgard and Hubert do more of it than anyone else ever does in the game. Remember that it is Hubert who locates Shambhala, and is the only character who seems to be explicitly looking into them in general, based on dialog from his paralogue and CF in general.

If you mean the "thief" line, why would she care or need to investigate? Remember that she already knows Wilhelm's version of events. Needless to say she trusts that more than she would trust anything Thales has to say on the subject. So do I. Thales' line is interesting for a couple reasons but his opinion is not remotely trustworthy.

8 hours ago, lenticular said:

This absolutely does not make a lick of sense. Stars that are that far away are not bright enough to be visible to the naked eye, let alone to become the stuff of legend. For comparison, the real-life inspiration for the Blue Sea Star is Sirius, which is less than 9 light years away. You could maybe conceivably get something of the right sort of brightness and distance if you had a quasar as a neighbouring galaxy, but this a pretty big stretch to begin with, and for it to make sense, you've got to assume that there are astronomers out there who are capable of correctly calculating the distance, but not capable of realising it wasn't a star at all, which I don't buy for a second.

Furthermore, we know (from the Abyss library) that telescopes were banned by the church, and the best telescopes anyone in Fódlan had managed to come up with used two lenses from glasses. The only people who could possibly be making astronomical readings that sophisticated are the Agarthans. In short, they are feeding her lies about Sothis mythology, and she is eating it up entirely uncritically because it reinforces her existing beliefs.

It's a bit of a stretch to say that Agarthans, who have lived underground for centuries, have done the astronomical research Edelgard is citing. Far more reasonable to assume it's from Morfis, Dagda, or Almyra (especially given the parallels of Fodlan to medieval Europe; the Arab world was far ahead in astronomy during that period). As for "millions" being incorrect in place of "dozens" or "hundreds", there are plenty of explanations. The Doylist one is the writer fucked up. The Watsonian one is that whoever did the calculations Edelgard cited in-universe made an error (there are plenty of similar examples in human history). The line certainly isn't intended to make her sound stupid, regardless - she is, after all, correct that light from stars does indeed take years to reach us, and that they are not (to our knowledge) home to space-traveling gods.

6 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

she doesn't see any issue with their methods in other routes where she doesn't ally with Byleth

She absolutely does. How much she acts on the issues she sees varies, but she always sees them for what they are.

Hubert: You should know that in her heart, Her Majesty regards that group as enemies of herself and her family. They used her father, the former emperor, as a puppet and murdered her siblings with their vile experimentation. I believe Her Majesty may have told you some of this herself. That is why this was a...very painful decision for her to make.

While this line is from CF, there's no reason to believe he's lying here; Edelgard hates the Agarthans, and their methods, and was reluctant to work with them at all, even dating back to she and Hubert drawing up their plans in the leadup to the game's events. (In Hopes, she pushes to break with them entirely, due to feeling it possible there.) There's no reason to believe she feels differently by route. See also:

Edelgard: I see. So my uncle's defeat is beyond doubt?
Hubert: Yes, Your Majesty. I have confirmed it via countless channels. I advise that we accept this as a drop of joy amid a pool of sorrow.
(Azure Moon Chapter 19, emphasis mine)

Now, is it a fair criticism of her that she chooses to work with them in Three Houses despite her misgivings? Absolutely. But to argue she was brainwashed (well, outside whatever happens in Azure Gleam) doesn't really fly. If the Agarthans brainwashed her, they did an incredibly poor job of it given that she hates them and turns on them in... basically every timeline, either by leaking their base to her other enemies or by taking matters into her own hands directly.

[vanguard333]

11 hours ago, DefyingFates said:

This is fair, but burning civilians alive seems out of character for her (and Catherine) all the same.

She says the war started because Nemesis didn't want to live under the Rhea's rule or something to that effect. She doesn't explicitly use the term "freedom fighters", but that definitely seems to be how she saw the conflict (especially considering she's essentially doing the same thing).

True (I keep losing the source for this...) but even the new content added to these routes defy Edelgard's version of events.

In which case Edelgard bombs a random henchman which is... less sadistic in one way and more in another 😛

Oh yeah, Edelgard was never committed to the TWSITD cause, but as you say it doesn't make sense that she would take what they said at face value without at least applying a grain of salt. The example you gave is a great one, yet she dismisses that slip immediately with a "Regardless..." and getting them back on topic.

This is another fair point, but it still feels too... "clean" an explanation, if that makes sense? But I think you addressed it later in your comment anyway: for some reason Edelgard never bothered looking further into what she was told.

I can understand that opinion. I think it makes sense as Rhea has completely snapped and completely given up on any shred of faith in humanity she had before. As for Catherine, Catherine obeys without question because, if she doesn't, then she has to question her role in Christophe's execution.

I don't remember that, but Crimson Flower was my first playthrough so I might've just forgotten it.

Fair enough.

I meant that, in my playthroughs, Edelgard never set the area on fire until after it was only occupied by my units, so Edelgard doesn't cause any friendly fire, except I guess in the literal sense as the fire is very friendly for her.

Indeed.

 

1 hour ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

While the game is cagey about the details of his time, Nemesis is almost surely a freedom fighter of some sort. He's called the "King of Liberation"... where do you think he got that title?

Given what Maurice, the Wandering Beast says if Byleth fights him, I think it's clear that Nemesis' title of "King of Liberation" refers to the killing that Nemesis did; i.e. he 'liberated' people of their lives.

I would like to show the quote, but I'm having trouble finding it. But I remember Maurice saying something like, "That sword; it is the sword of the king. Are you here to liberate me?" Can someone please provide the actual quote if they can find it?

 

1 hour ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

I mean, they're pretty hard to investigate, but Edelgard and Hubert do more of it than anyone else ever does in the game. Remember that it is Hubert who locates Shambhala, and is the only character who seems to be explicitly looking into them in general, based on dialog from his paralogue and CF in general.

If you mean the "thief" line, why would she care or need to investigate? Remember that she already knows Wilhelm's version of events. Needless to say she trusts that more than she would trust anything Thales has to say on the subject. So do I. Thales' line is interesting for a couple reasons but his opinion is not remotely trustworthy.

That's true.

True, but I never said she should ask Nemesis what he meant by "thief". The fact is that no version of events she's heard would explain why anyone would call Nemesis a thief, so it is a failing on her end that she didn't seem to even try to find out why.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

1 hour ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

She absolutely does. How much she acts on the issues she sees varies, but she always sees them for what they are.

It's one thing to quietly disapprove of another person's motivations, and another thing entirely to agree to their war and kill countless innocents as they command. This goes well beyond the usual 'Camus' archetype. Camus didn't spend a year surrounded by potential allies who could take back his country if he put his heart out there.

Quote

Hubert: You should know that in her heart, Her Majesty regards that group as enemies of herself and her family. They used her father, the former emperor, as a puppet and murdered her siblings with their vile experimentation. I believe Her Majesty may have told you some of this herself. That is why this was a...very painful decision for her to make.

While this line is from CF, there's no reason to believe he's lying here; Edelgard hates the Agarthans, and their methods, and was reluctant to work with them at all, even dating back to she and Hubert drawing up their plans in the leadup to the game's events. (In Hopes, she pushes to break with them entirely, due to feeling it possible there.) There's no reason to believe she feels differently by route. See also:

As I was saying, this is the only route where there's a real hint of remorse and this was the line that I was thinking of. But it's still flimsy because it's coming from Hubert, not Edelgard. Hubert's devotion to her majesty and love of subterfuge is made clear in his supports with her. Is he taking Byleth for a ride here? That's what I'm left wondering anyway. I'm also reminded of that one mid-chapter quote in chapter 12 Where Death Knight appears on your side. Byleth is visibly perturbed. Edelgard responds with "Don't worry. We're allies now...I understand you have many questions but they'll have to wait until after the battle :)" And given what happens at the end of the map she never gets a chance to explain. When they reunite five years later, there's a fade to black and we don't hear what she tells Byleth about the situation. How she might have explained the real situation or kept the conversation tactically focused on the Church. Characterization wise, everyone, up to and including Edelgard, is blindsided by Byleth's betrayal of the church, so it has to be assumed that narratively he's here for his own vendetta against the Church or his trust in Edelgard. Not any sense of justice of "True History of Fodlan".

Right before that Hubert quote you posted he says Arundel has amassed his own army and "it seems to me" his plans differ from our own. His vagueness on the details suggests that Byleth is not up to speed on who they are. And that the plans on betraying Arundel are still in their infancy, and subject to debate on whether there should be plans at all. What changed their mind on the matter was probably Byleth reappearing with his Sword as a substitute source of power and morale. Byleth already fought alongside his father's killers to his (perceived) dying breath, so his loyalty is clearly not in question. If Byleth never rejoins Edelgard, nothing in the non-CF routes supports the notion that Edelgard would ever turn on them, during or after the war. And before you bring up Three Hopes, I haven't played it. This thread is asking specifically about Three Houses, in any case. Retcon talk can wait.

Quote

Edelgard: I see. So my uncle's defeat is beyond doubt?
Hubert: Yes, Your Majesty. I have confirmed it via countless channels. I advise that we accept this as a drop of joy amid a pool of sorrow.
(Azure Moon Chapter 19, emphasis mine)

Now, is it a fair criticism of her that she chooses to work with them in Three Houses despite her misgivings? Absolutely. But to argue she was brainwashed (well, outside whatever happens in Azure Gleam) doesn't really fly. If the Agarthans brainwashed her, they did an incredibly poor job of it given that she hates them and turns on them in... basically every timeline, either by leaking their base to her other enemies or by taking matters into her own hands directly.

Again, Hubert turns on the Slitherers with his letter, not Edelgard. And a lot of people have sudden attacks of conscience when the end becomes inevitable. From Hubert's point of view, maybe that letter is betraying Edelgard since he did not run this idea by her. We don't know his state of mind or motivation beyond "These bastards deserve death as much as the Church". There would be no clearer indication that Edelgard sees them as a true villain than if she had explained everything when given the opportunity after her defeat. But of course that's not what happens. Given the chance to explain the same things that Hubert does in his letter, she whines to Byleth in SS and VW, and reaches for her dagger in AM's respective cutscenes. CF Edelgard is not the same person as the other three.

The Drop of Joy line is...well Edelgard says it best in response: Pretty words, but it doesn't make a difference. She may not like her body-snatched uncle personally, but his death is clearly devastating enough for her to decide on her last option a moment later - foreshadowing that she's about to complete her uncle's experiments and become the giant crest monster. If you had given her a choice to let Arundel die in battle or save his life, I can't imagine her choosing the former, especially in this route when pushed into a corner.

[Armchair General]

3 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

I would like to show the quote, but I'm having trouble finding it. But I remember Maurice saying something like, "That sword; it is the sword of the king. Are you here to liberate me?" Can someone please provide the actual quote if they can find it?

 

Jump to 11:00

[Jotari]

Just reading the OP as I don't want to get waylaid, but those all sounds like issues of tone more than facts. The game is consistent in that Rhea propagandized her victory (but weirdly she also white washed Nemesis calling him the King of Liberation, the Agarthans are the only ones whose view of history have him as anything less than stellar) and Edelgard takes effort with that. It's just tone that alters how the characters are coming across in each route. Even Edelgard, nicer in Crimson Flower, is still doing super shady stuff. She tries to kill her own classmates at the holy tome, uses demonic beasts (with no conversation ever suggesting she chooses to stop, it might very well be that we only don't get to use them entirely for gameplay reasons) and post time skip she invades the Alliance because they were being neutral in the war! Which frankly was a bit of a stupid idea that she was lucky didn't blow in her face, if Claude had been more aggressive in that route she would have been wiped out during the time skip.

[vanguard333]

5 hours ago, Armchair General said:

Jump to 11:00

Thank you.

So I was close; instead of, "Are you here to liberate me?", he actually said, "are you the one who can liberate me?"

In any case, it's a very strong hint that Nemesis' title "King of Liberation" was more of a twisted metaphor for his skill at mass-slaughter.

[Dark Holy Elf]

10 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

If Byleth never rejoins Edelgard, nothing in the non-CF routes supports the notion that Edelgard would ever turn on them, during or after the war. And before you bring up Three Hopes, I haven't played it.

Edelgard outright tells Thales "there will be no salvation for you". I would argue that from that line alone, it's clear she intends to turn on him. And the fact of the matter is, she and Hubert do turn on them by betraying the location of their base. Why do you think they bothered to obtain that information if not to use it against them later?

You should play Three Hopes, both because it's a good game but also because it does clarify some things which might otherwise be considered ambiguous. You can argue that Edelgard never intended to turn against the Agarthans in non-CF. If I understand you correctly, you are primarily arguing this by citing a lack of evidence contradicting you (especially once you dismiss Hubert's lines in CF 13 as a lie to manipulate Byleth)... I think it's a bit of a weak argument, but you can make it, due to the ambiguity of the Houses script. Hopes, however, removes the ambiguity in this particular case. This dialog is taken from Chapter 2, which takes place during the first month of White Clouds, and the only change to the timeline so far is that Edelgard managed to get Jeritza installed as a House Professor (as Houses circumspectly implied was her plan), instead of Byleth.

Edelgard: Well? What do you think? I believe there is a very good chance it will work.
Hubert: Perhaps, Lady Edelgard. But is that chance not outweighed by the danger of matters going awry? We have managed to walk the knife's edge so far, but what you are suggesting is open hostility [to Those Who Slither in the Dark]. If they so much as catch wind of our intentions, things will go sideways very quickly.

10 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

Again, Hubert turns on the Slitherers with his letter, not Edelgard.

Both Hubert in CF13 (unless you think he's lying) and Hopes make it clear that Edelgard takes more issue with the slitherers than Hubert does, if anything. Regardless, for the purpose of tactical planning and decisions, Hubert and Edelgard are essentially one and the same for this discussion - they explicitly plan things out together, though Hubert takes care of some of the small details he considers beneth Edelgard's notice. But even if you think this is one such time, it's clear that Hubert thinks he is representing both of their perspectives with that letter.

Hubert: That said, as the survivors, I must ask you to settle certain affairs in our stead. You must destroy the threat that slithers in the dark.
(emphasis mine)

11 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

Given the chance to explain the same things that Hubert does in his letter, she whines to Byleth in SS and VW, and reaches for her dagger in AM's respective cutscenes.

If you assume Edelgard already knew about the letter (as seems most likely), she has no need to say the same things in person. Edelgard does the things she does in those scenes because, having been defeated, she wants to die.

11 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

Given what Maurice, the Wandering Beast says if Byleth fights him, I think it's clear that Nemesis' title of "King of Liberation" refers to the killing that Nemesis did; i.e. he 'liberated' people of their lives.

Why not both?

I'm not gonna press this point too far because again, the game is so cagey about Nemesis and his time (which honestly is cool; the history of 1000 years ago should be somewhat shrouded!). And since this discussion was about what Edelgard says about Nemesis, it's worth noting Edelgard actually has very little to say about him: just that Seiros and the first Emperor defeated him in a war (correct) and that the conflict was more nuanced than the Church would have us believe (not hard-confirmed, but I would consider it likely, given that the testimony comes from one of Nemesis's own enemies, who if anything would be biased against him!).

[Zapp Branniglenn]

1 hour ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

Edelgard outright tells Thales "there will be no salvation for you". I would argue that from that line alone, it's clear she intends to turn on him. And the fact of the matter is, she and Hubert do turn on them by betraying the location of their base. Why do you think they bothered to obtain that information if not to use it against them later?

It would be a mistake to be in year five of a war alongside an unknown ally and not make an effort to obtain the most basic of information they're not giving you freely. Especially if Hubert isn't lying about them being enemies of their enemies. My country has an entire bureau dedicated to that in peace time. What Hubert does in selling out their state capital is entirely benevolent by comparison to what the CIA has gotten up to. Overthrowing entire regimes to install US friendly leaders. 

And we haven't even broached the reality that the letter was delivered post-humously under the condition of his empire's collapse! What you write in your will is entirely separate from what you do while you're still alive. And whether or not a deathbed confession is admissible in our modern justice system is a subject of constant debate on a case by case basis. 

Quote

You should play Three Hopes, both because it's a good game but also because it does clarify some things which might otherwise be considered ambiguous.

I don't wanna. Certainly not to engage in some online debate. There's six routes to play through. I got through Three Houses' four routes because of the Normal/Casual setting and hitting auto battle so I can skip to story scenes and supports, and even that felt like a waste of my time. In this case I can't just let my switch run the inputs for me, I gotta be there to square square triangle.

And there's no guarantee that events I experience in one playthrough won't contradict the choice quotes you've pulled from Hopes out of context. With Three Houses I at least played through it and can look it up to confirm that's not all that was said in that scene. I saw enough of one stream to know that it's AU fiction. Or a series of ret cons if in fact it's revealed to be a time travel sequel. This thread asked about Three Houses and I gave my perspective on that. 

 

Edited May 27, 2023 by Zapp Branniglenn

[Jotari]

8 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

I don't wanna. Certainly not to engage in some online debate. There's six routes to play through. I got through Three Houses' four routes because of the Normal/Casual setting and hitting auto battle so I can skip to story scenes and supports, and even that felt like a waste of my time. In this case I can't just let my switch run the inputs for me, I gotta be there to square square triangle.

 

I don't want to pressure you to play Hopes, because it really doesn't make a difference to me, but I do want to just give you some context for what six routes actually means. To start with they are mostly split into a Mystery of the Emblem/Binding Blade style good and bad split. Where one option has basically all the content of the other option and then some. In addition, the game actually is designed so you can skip most of it on repeat playthroughs. After you're first clear you have the option to buy and item called the Merc Whistle which let's you skip non story maps (which make up a hefty bulk of the run time) and basically LTC a playthrough.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

3 hours ago, Jotari said:

I don't want to pressure you to play Hopes, because it really doesn't make a difference to me, but I do want to just give you some context for what six routes actually means. To start with they are mostly split into a Mystery of the Emblem/Binding Blade style good and bad split. Where one option has basically all the content of the other option and then some. 

I cannot parse what this means. The only thing these two games have in common is that Book 2 and FE6 both end early if you didn't get all the macguffins.

We call them the "bad" ending, but really nothing in the ending's tone implies you did anything wrong. Someone on a first playthrough would be none the wiser. And every loose end that gets resolved in the true ending either won't happen inexplicably or resolves itself offscreen. Wow. Just like CF. Archanea's Dragon Altar. Elibe's Dragon Temple. Fodlan's Shambala. Definitely feels like a route missing it's "true ending" chapters.

Edited May 28, 2023 by Zapp Branniglenn

[Dark Holy Elf]

20 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

And we haven't even broached the reality that the letter was delivered post-humously under the condition of his empire's collapse! What you write in your will is entirely separate from what you do while you're still alive. And whether or not a deathbed confession is admissible in our modern justice system is a subject of constant debate on a case by case basis. 

"destroy Those Who Slither in the Dark in our stead" implies that's what they intended to do if the chance had presented itself. Of course, you're right to point out they never got around to it, but we came down this path because you claimed that she had no issue with them. If you want to adjust your claim to "she had issues with them, but never big enough to actually do anything about it until the war with the Church was over", I'll certainly accept that.

(You can argue, of course, that Hubert's statement about their intentions is also a lie, but an argument which rests on treating any in-game text which contradicts you as a lie is a very weak one.)

21 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

I don't wanna. Certainly not to engage in some online debate.

Well, I don't feel you should play it just to engage in debate! You should play it because, if you like Fodlan's storytelling enough to participate in this debate, you would probably like a game that continues that storytelling. I'll grant the gameplay is very different, and some people don't vibe with Warriors gameplay. I'm not sure what you've heard about the game but it's written by the same writers and digs further into the same setting, although it still doesn't resolve everything and maintains ambiguities (but that's part of the Fodlan games, for better or worse). You can always try out the demo assuming that's still available. Or watch one of those streams you mentioned a little further.

21 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

And there's no guarantee that events I experience in one playthrough won't contradict the choice quotes you've pulled from Hopes out of context.

The particular quote I've cited is from the first hour into the game, so you could fully see the context by playing the demo. It's only viewable if you choose to join the Black Eagles (actually, it's literally the scene that plays immediately after said choice), but it's implied to occur regardless of route, given that the plan Edelgard puts into motion in that scene (and her resulting conflict with the Agarthans) occurs on the other routes too, again during the run time of the demo.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

4 hours ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

"destroy Those Who Slither in the Dark in our stead" implies that's what they intended to do if the chance had presented itself. Of course, you're right to point out they never got around to it, but we came down this path because you claimed that she had no issue with them. If you want to adjust your claim to "she had issues with them, but never big enough to actually do anything about it until the war with the Church was over", I'll certainly accept that.

I repeat: It's one thing to privately disapprove of someone's actions or motivations, and another thing entirely to wage a war in their name going on five years that has taken the lives of countless people that trusted you to Lead.

And if Edelgard really does see the Slitherers as a comparatively great evil, then it's a case of 'Woman who made her own bed is Outraged she must now lie in it'. Nothing about her motivations and backstory lines up in siding with her abusers, and that's why CF is so odd to read as a Heroic-Route-Actually. You have to ignore so much of what's going on. Like the Javelins of Light at Arianrhod scene. This is a direct attack from Uncle and a huge military setback for both parties. When the events are described to us, the twist about Nukes has a new perspective in this route "what we thought the Goddess was capable of was actually our allies". And instead of turning on them right then and there, or at least acknowledging them as a greater threat than perceived, it's "wow we better take the L and blame the church if anyone asks". 

Maybe Hopes is the second (and third?) chance to Do CF and its characters right. But it doesn't excuse Three Houses. Its not "their intention all along" clarified. It's a revision. I stopped reading about Hopes when I learned of the multiple routes. They didn't learn anything from TH! Yet I didn't want to trash a game I haven't played. I stayed away from news and discussion specifically to avoid being the kill joy up to and after release. Me speed running through the two other routes of Three Houses grants the impression that I was invested in that story. But really I was just desperate to find something I liked about the new, sixty dollar fire emblem. They made these other routes, I guess I'll play them as fast as possible. In retrospect, cutting out the Fire Emblem bits and only being left with the Monastery junk I didn't like was really short sighted on my end. Avoiding Hopes was my "call me when Fire Emblem is Fire Emblem again" redemption arc.

Edited May 28, 2023 by Zapp Branniglenn

[Jotari]

17 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

I cannot parse what this means. The only thing these two games have in common is that Book 2 and FE6 both end early if you didn't get all the macguffins.

We call them the "bad" ending, but really nothing in the ending's tone implies you did anything wrong. Someone on a first playthrough would be none the wiser. And every loose end that gets resolved in the true ending either won't happen inexplicably or resolves itself offscreen. Wow. Just like CF. Archanea's Dragon Altar. Elibe's Dragon Temple. Fodlan's Shambala. Definitely feels like a route missing it's "true ending" chapters.

Yeah, that's more or less how it is. You still play the same final chapter regardless, but without some extra chapters that some how manage to straddle the line between "very significant" and "can be cut with absolutely no issue."

Also on the subject of Hopes, I find "go play Hopes" a poor defense of Houses. A story should be able to stand on its own without requiring supplementary materials to make sense.

[Armchair General]

3 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

Maybe Hopes is the second (and third?) chance to Do CF and its characters right

I never did Scarlet Blaze, but only one of the other two routes unintentionally pits you against Team Slither and the ending to that fight was an collective shrug by everyone who survived and then they went back trying to kill each other.

 

3 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

It's a revision. I stopped reading about Hopes when I learned of the multiple routes. They didn't learn anything from TH! 

They kind of did, in some areas; but it still falls into the "MC can do anything!" pitfall. But at least they've repeatedly pointed out that as an mercenary, you don't get much of an say in where the lords decide to invade.

 

3 hours ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

This is a direct attack from Uncle and a huge military setback for both parties. When the events are described to us, the twist about Nukes has a new perspective in this route "what we thought the Goddess was capable of was actually our allies". And instead of turning on them right then and there, or at least acknowledging them as a greater threat than perceived, it's "wow we better take the L and blame the church if anyone asks". 

Well, the ending to CF implies that Hubert started an unseen war against them.

 

Come to think of it, the story would have made an lot more sense if Edelgard and Hubert dropped some hints that Team Slither is planning to kill off everyone out of spite and that they're both disposable pawns.

 

Of course, Rhea would lose her shit, Adrestria will get nuked as collateral and everyone will fucking die. But still.