NekoKnight

I don't really get the Emmeryn hate. The story does a well enough job of explaining why she rules as she does. Her father's war with Plegia nearly ruined both countries and she had a lot of damage control to do. To add on to this, Plegia's king was a spiteful dickwad that was trying to goad Ylisse into another war so it was difficult for her to retain the peace. Finally, she only kills herself after it's made clear that Chrom won't be able to rescue her and that her death would be more meaningful if she chose it herself. You don't have to like the saint/martyr tropes but it doesn't make her a bad character.

I choose you, Arceus!

You aren't going to get the higher level forges unless you grind/abuse DLC so if it breaks the game, that was on you. The highest forge I ever got was a +3 and that was with Smithy Skill Midori raining Iron weapons on me. If I had to say anything is "wrong" with forging, it's that forged Iron weapons are often superior to Steel and Silver.

I'm aware, I'm just commenting on what Fates gave Swordmasters because it's the most recent game.

I like the +20 modifier Fates has for single weapon classes (Swordmaster has +10 crit and +10 avoid). Considering how many weapon choices you have in Fates within a single weapon type, you could stock your entire inventory without even getting a second weapon type. Rather than increase Swordmaster's base crit bonus any further, they should give them unique swords with higher crit chance (or maybe just an improved Killing Edge that lacks the avoid penalty).

I like the flavor they add to characters and think they fit a niche as a nice situational boost. If it comes back in future games, I hope they put more thought into the balance of those skills. Some are so situational that you are likely to never see them in action (Selena's personal). We need more skills like Beruka's or Kana's. Ones that give the character a slight edge in a certain play style.

There is a difference between a flawed character and a bad character. A flawed character will make mistakes but ultimately prove to be competent in their decision making. A bad character will continue to make bad decisions (Kamui continuing to support Garon) or be hypocritical in their actions (Xander going on about peace after conquering a nation). I don't know what peoples' reactions were at the time of Radiant Dawn's release but in a somewhat recent thread on SF asking who people preferred, Micaiah or Kamui, people preferred Micaiah on a scale of like 4 to 1. Bolded: Kamui is also supported by his Hinoka and Sakura despite being directly responsible for Gooron's mission to make you cry, shattering crystal balls, the curse, the magical throne and non-lethal-warfare-Kamui make the Blood Pact sound like Shakespeare by comparison.

The idea that morality is merely a point of view. It wouldn't go as far as nihilism, more like "Everyone is the hero of their own story". Everyone has dreams and ambitions. Everyone has people they love and values that they would fight for.

Citation needed? What Fire Emblem game uses "history written by the victors" as a framing device? If he could have stopped, why didn't he? If he knew Garon was the true enemy, why not go after him directly? Because rebelling directly wasn't an option (at least, we're supposed to believe this). Everyone makes choices and those choices are affected by circumstances. Micaiah could have let the blood pact run its coarse but she chose to submit. Kamui's "choice" was to follow orders, only deviating from them to spare an insignificant number of enemy soldiers. The difference between Micaiah and Kamui is that Micaiah made the best choice (open to interpretation) out of two terrible options whereas Kamui made the worst choice out of a myriad of options. Both characters are forced to act against their morals, and both ultimately decide to support a villainous faction for selfish reasons (Micaiah to protect her country and Kamui to protect his siblings). Micaiah has decency to admit that her choice made her a bad person. Kamui seems to think himself a hero, despite supporting the villains. Can you see how alike they are and yet Micaiah is way more likable and human for how she handles it? I'll take a character forced into villainy over a character who allows evil to happen through their inaction and ineptitude. Kamui is "refreshing" in the same way a rotten apple is "refreshing" after a lifetime of fresh fruit.

I love Tellius for their world building but there are a number of game mechanics I wouldn't want to see back. 1. Biorhythm: Stats shouldn't fluctuate as turns pass. Granted, it doesn't affect too much but it's still a negative feature. 2. 3rd tiers: I know some really like these but I don't think they add much value. There just isn't much to give 3rd tiers besides skills to make them ridiculous. Radiant Dawn, with the exception of the Dawn Brigade, effectively had 2 tiers anyway. 3. Laguz transformation: Admittedly, Radiant Dawn did some things to improve on the system (no automatic transform) but having characters occasionally be reduced to an extremely vulnerable form isn't very fun. Things I do like: Full canto, shove, ledges, custom character outfits.

I had been thinking about this just recently, actually. Had they made a moderately entertaining but flawed narrative, I would have given them the "At least you tried" gold star, but they did everything so poorly that I can't even praise them for that. Besides, I wouldn't even call it "something different" considering Micaiah's story arc was a much more competent telling of what they were trying to do in Conquest.

I wouldn't mind if they did away with the S ranked weapons and just gave the single weapon users unique weapons they could use at earlier ranks.

"Fuck up" is putting it lightly. It's more like they do a lot of immoral and nonsensical things and the game treats you like a tragic hero instead of being a selfish coward. That's a good summary of their mixed priorities that resulted in a disaster. Point 2 and 3 can coexist easily, if time is put into making both factions nuanced, but that puts the premise in opposition with Point 1. You can't be a purely good protagonist working for purely evil people.

3D seems to be the future of Fire Emblem so I don't see why they would go back to sprites now. That said, I'd definitely play the game.

I try to use the characters with the best looks and personality but I'm still going to trade them out if they under-perform too badly. Basically, if they are viable, I will accept sub-optical units. Incidentally, I rarely use pre-promotes even if they are objectively better than some of their counterparts. Laslow doesn't deserve a strike-through. Now if you said Odin...

I agree with most of your post except for the bolded. Even after doing all the paralogues, my core group was only hitting level 15 by the last few levels, with some getting to level 15 on the very last level. I think the highest level skill should be 12, not 15. Level 15 skills basically translate to "endgame + PVP". I'm still salty about the Warp Scroll requiring you be at level 15

How well would this set up work? Front: Nohrian Trust, Hoshidan Unity, Renewal, Wary Fighter, Quixotic Back: Dual Guardsman, Luna, Rend Heaven, Aegis, Astra Would Sol be better than Luna or would Renewal be adequate healing?

I think a mix of simplified names and historical "class" titles is appropriate. The idea of a name is that it should instantly bring to your attention what the unit is. I know a Bow Knight is a guy who probably rides a horse and uses a bow. Until "Turcopole" becomes common gamer terminology, it's going to take a while to recognize what they do. If you think a new name is more indicative of what that class is, then change it. I'd avoid overdoing the historical name drops, however.

I'm not sure why you are insistent on this line of thinking. Skills or equipment being retired after better alternatives are unlocked is a stable of many game series and doesn't necessarily reflect bad game design. "Useless" isn't even a good way to describe lesser skills. "Sub-optimal" maybe, but not useless. Aggressor might be better than Quick Draw but that didn't make Quick Draw a useless skill. It just means that if you made it all the way to level 35 and used your class seals, you earned a skill upgrade. You need to think about strength progression, not just what the finished character will have equipped. Even with your proposed system, inevitably there are going to be superior skill combinations. Vantage + Wrath will probably always be better than any combination of weaker skills so no system will avoid certain skills being objectively worse than others. True. I have no doubt that with considerable care and attention, a capacity system could work quite well. But that goes for the 5 skill system as well; with proper skill balancing, it can work just as well.

No shame in that. Time spent doing something you love isn't wasted. I usually clock between 30 minutes to and hour, depending on the difficulty of the map. Of course, that doesn't count numerous resets... (lol)

Outside of paralogues, I think you would have trouble writing a singular story line. Dragon Age Origins has a simple premise, so you can go recruiting allies/doing subplots in the order you please. It wouldn't be impossible for Fire Emblem to fit this mold, but it would be very atypical of the series. I'd prefer the game take a linear coarse so characters can grow and change as the plot goes on. With "free order of play" you sacrifice character development and story progress. Mind you, I love Dragon Age Origins to death, but it's a very different sort of story telling than Fire Emblem.

Is it rare for Fire Emblem though? Most protagonists are benevolent royalty so Fire Emblem as a whole is pretty monarchist. I don't know the specifics of Begnion's senate but considering it's members all have the title of "Duke", it's likely that they're lords themselves. Elibe had plenty of local lords who were corrupt and undermining the central authority, so I wouldn't call it new.

So, for the people who like pair-up (in Fates), do you think it needs to be tweaked at all? Personally I like the implementation a lot, but I've heard a nūmber of people insist that it's still too strong, or that Guard Stance is always better than Attack Stance. Any thoughts on what should be improved? "Bad" skills aren't really an issue in Fates. A lot of skills acquired early on still have application even in later game, and even for the not so great skills, they are a boost appropriate for lower level characters. It's the nature of RPGs to upgrade and replace your abilities as time goes on so it's not a game flaw that Camaraderie is worse than Renewal. You get Camaraderie 15 levels earlier. There are definitely skills I'd improve or replace but I don't think everything needs to be end-game viable. I didn't really like Capacity because it limited what skills could go together on a single character. In Tellius you typically had a max of 2-3 skills on a character and there was often leftover wasted capacity. With predetermined slots, you don't have any leftovers.

Discussion of/solutions to mounted unit balance is going to need to take a lot of factors into consideration. Personally, I'd rather a fun mechanic (like Canto) be tweaked rather than removed or have such poor distribution that few can make use of it (like Shove in Fates). I don't recall Canto ever being game breaking or dissuading me to use anything but mounted units. If they were to limit Canto to a class skill, I'd want it to be full Canto (ie it works even after attacking).

No Lance Fighter or Tactician.... I guess mage would be the next best choice. I'd probably want to avoid direct fighting so a weapon with range or reach would suit me. I wanted to say Wyvern Rider (because FUCK YEAH DRAGONS), but I get motion sickness so I'd be total rubbish at it in real life, lol