NekoKnight

Their claim is that a second gen doesn't fit TH's story so it wasn't included, which I think is a fair guess. EDIT: Maybe they're just talking about the gameplay element, in which case, ignore this.

Agreed. While I think we could use some variety in how non-human characters are portrayed (Manakete aging is so vague. Why are some of them adults but others are children for thousands of years? Did Dheginsea spend 3000 years as a little dragon shota?) there is nothing wrong with a character appearing young if they're dressed like a child. No more Nowi's, please and thank you. Agreed with everything here. I think there are a lot of problems with avatars, including how TH uses them, but there IS a character arc. My disappointment with the arc is that it sorta just fizzles out in the part 2 of the story and Byleth is just along for the ride. ------- Some TH interface stuff It's bothers me that: -You can't see the rank of your equipped battalion -Duplicate battalions aren't listed next to each other in your list -You can't see the unit's class experience unless you try to reclass them -You can't see how many of an item you're already holding when buying things And probably more.

That about sums it up, I think. What a bar to leap! lol Soleil tho, talk about Yikes: the character.

As others have said, if you want to include dragons, evil or otherwise, give them deeper characters than "I must eradicate all humanity because rawr". So, y'know, make them characters. I'm totally on board with dragons as final bosses or major threats but there should be more to the story than just their physical threat.

This is a really positive example of what I'm advocating for (more or less, I'm proposing an element of randomness so players won't easier quarantine a doomed character and stopped caring about them because they know they will die). I don't think anyone has ever said "I dropped FF7 because the devs screwed me over by killing a character I liked using". I suppose if gameplay inconvenience is the main gripe people have with this idea, they could implement a system where you get a replacement soldier with more or less the same abilities. That said, with the number of characters one gets, I don't think it would be impossible to keep playing with the death of one character.

Seems like the consensus is that people don't want to pay the price in gameplay for a narrative pay off. Fair enough.

I see, thanks for the lore! Was I just imagining that thing about why Tiki had to go to sleep?

Thanks for your elaboration on my recap of history. I just wanted to point out that there have been times in history where people have willingly discarded their higher class birthright. I could definitely see that being written into the story, considering Edelgard is a big advocate of the underprivileged, she could get support from strong lords that don't have much political sway (including those who were forced into lower positions for their lack of crests). These could have been imperial loyalists who were ejected after the Insurrection of the Nine. From what I understand, besides Ferdinand and Hubert's fathers, Edelgard was largely working with the people already in power. I suppose it just boils down to people finding humans more relatable so they'd rather write a story where humans came out on top rather than some weirdo dragons. I was under the impression that it was an age/power thing considering Duma/Mila, powerful dragons starting going crazy around the same time after long lives and Tiki was said to need to be magically put to sleep specifically because she was so powerful, to avoid degeneration. But I could be mis-remembering things. Archanea isn't a world I was that engaged with. At any rate, for whatever the reason, dragon degeneration is one of Fire Emblem's most iconic and intriguing lore things.

Agreed 100% I love dragons and the common lore threads that characterize many of them in Fire Emblem (immortal creatures that eventually go crazy with age/their own power that seal their power in special stones, and can take on human forms) is really cool. What we need less of, in my opinion, is "humans in the ancient past go to war with dragonkind and wipe out most of them" and "I'm going to wipe out all humanity because I'm craaaaazy" dragon antagonists. I'd rather see them thriving and exploring how dragon societies function, including their relations with the humans in the story. We get a bit of this from Tellius but as they're isolationists, we don't learn a lot.

Speaking of historical examples of similar movements, I often think about the imperial restoration of Japan and the abolition of the caste system. Japan had an interesting revolution in that it was lead by the social elites (samurai) rather than the lower classes. Japan's case was special, however, because they were a feudal agrarian society now realizing how hopelessly outclassed they were by their hungry, imperialist neighbors. It was in their best interest to discard their previous birthrights in order to build a stronger nation. I don't really see why anyone serving Edelgard would share her interest in a meritocracy. What do they have to gain?

While Edelgard's accomplishments are grander, I think they're completely unbelievable. Abolishing the church and the value of crests in society was already a tall order but to get rid of the nobility in such a short time across several countries would be borderline impossible. Why should all the people who are elevated by their birthright want to support Edelgard? Look at what happened to Lambert after trying to enact some societal changes that the nobility didn't like. I'm sure it was less radical than stripping the social elite of their power like Edelgard did. Dimitri's leadership might be seen as less ambitious but it's a lot more realistic.

Fire Emblem has always been a series that draws players in by their lovable cast of characters, often more than even the story itself. One of the most heart-wrenching things to experience while enjoying media is seeing a beloved character die...but only if it's done well. So how has Fire Emblem handled scripted (or story mandated) deaths? Generally it's NPCs, which can certainly have an impact but is it possible to make a impactful death with player controlled characters? Let's look at examples of where this has been done before. Spoilers for scripted character deaths for SD, SoV, Genealogy, Fates, and TH I'd argue that most of these attempts fail to really capitalize on making the player care. If you can choose who dies, you just throw your least liked character under the bus. But if you don't get to choose, then the character gets shafted which sucks for their fans. How could we implement this to make people actually care about a character dying? I have an idea. What if a character was scripted to die (let's say in chapter 18 of a 25 chapter game) but that character would be selected via a hidden game mechanic. To ensure this is a character people have actually been using/getting personally invested it, they could make it so that the character with the most support points with the lord character will die in some battle, affecting the protagonist in a profound way. The character could get a CG image depicting their death and multiple script changes could be made to accommodate what that person's death meant to the lord. What was their shared past? What dreams did they have? How will the protagonist choose to honor their memory? Things like that. This death would technically be under the player's control to force, but you could make it difficult if the support points were a hidden value rather than the listed CBA support rank (in the same way that paired endings in Three Houses are determined by invisible support points if multiple pairs have an A ranking). The death could happen to anyone and would probably be someone that the player was close to. What do you think? Do you never want scripted player character deaths? If they are scripted, should you be able to choose who dies or should an element of randomness be added to keep people on their toes?

While I understand the sentiment, I still think the problem is with other people being purposely obtuse. People will be like "Achtually, Mary Sue refers to a self insert in fanfiction that is flawless and becomes the center of the story so clearly my favorite character is not a Mary Sue." No you dumdum, you know that's not what anyone means when they use the word! Stop being dumb! Personally, I find the term a convenient shorthand and I'd rather fight people over their misunderstanding than give up on a word because people are stupid. "I won't back down!" as Chrom once said. There are many hills to die on, but this one is mine. I believe the word Dorothea uses is "glare", which is a more contemptuous way of staring at someone. I think it's kind of the point that Ferdinand is being unfairly maligned for something that wasn't that serious. As I said before, Dorothea has a lot of baggage. It says in her bio that among her dislikes is herself. The way people treated her in her childhood (and even in her adult life sometimes) cut her deep and she'll see even innocuous things like a boy staring at a girl as more sinister than they even are. I don't think their CB supports can be regarded as icy or openly hostile. The way she reads her lines makes it seem she doesn't really hate Ferdinand for his behavior. If she really despised (and I'd call that a disproportionate reaction) Ferdinand, she wouldn't give him a nickname or give him a quiz about why she dislikes him. Their interactions could even be called playful. But subconsciously she can't disassociate him from what he reminds her of. The 'boy staring at a girl' incident is less the inciting factor in her feud with Ferdinand, it was everything before and after in her life that gave her a distaste for him. Her long standing grudge is with society rise up singers! not Ferdinand specifically. I do like you second idea, however. It's an event that could more understandably be misinterpreted as contempt rather than benevolence.

It can be a pretty difficult thing to convey all the nuances of what makes a character a Mary Sue. One common trait that people list when giving the definition is that the character never fails or suffers and people will use that to dismiss an accusation against a character. "Corrin and Alm can't be Mary Sues! They both lose loved ones and are powerless in certain cases to prevent a tragedy!" to which I would counter "the tragedies are never their fault" or worse "the tragedy IS their fault but no one blames them". Or perhaps people would say "Eliwood doesn't have any flaws, isn't he a Mary Sue?" to which I'd say no because while he doesn't have any flaws to criticize, he's never unbelievable or valued more highly than one would expect. Discussing Mary Sue traits is another, perhaps less controversial, way to approach the discussion of characters. For example, I think Micaiah has a large number of traits (special ability/hair color/heritage/well liked) that would fit a Mary Sue but when you consider how they fit into the narrative, they don't make her a Mary Sue character. She isn't universally loved, her powers help but don't define her character and her heritage is only important for the epilogue, and I'd say she earned it. In regards to Daenerys, I considered her a Mary Sue for a good chunk of the story. Many of her early victories were just good fortune falling in her lap and while she does suffer hardship, her successes had more to do with luck and her enemies being dumb than her own abilities. My opinion changed after she got to Mereen and her limitations as a ruler were explored more thoroughly. I still have more issues with her character but she became more rounded, as most GoT characters do. I really hope that scene lives on in infamy as one of the lowest points in the series; where a protagonist is acknowledged to have a flaw but the story says that their purity mustn't be sacrificed for the sake of personal growth.

It seems this is an unpopular opinion so I'll say it. "Mary Sue" shouldn't be maligned as a invalid point of criticism. I understand some of the criticisms; the term has meant different things to different people and some misuse the term to slam characters they don't like whether or not the accusation has any merit. I view it as a short-hand for characters who are overly loved, skilled or centralize a plot on them without good reason. Corrin is a Mary Sue because they are adored or hated by the entire cast for no reason other than to be the most important person in the narrative. Alm is a Mary Sue because he is promoted to the position of the leader for dubious reasons and always succeeds, no matter how reckless or inexperienced he is. He always makes the right decisions, which is bad for a story where he's supposed to mirror Celica instead of being better than her in every way. It's fine if you want to disagree with this take on the characters but to disregard the argument entirely because of the term "Mary Sue" is to be the real killer of a discussion. I think you should check out the Dorothea x Ferdinand support again. Dorothea hates him because she thinks he's like every other noble who abused or ignored her when she was a street urchin but switched over to adoration when she was the hot thing in society. She remembers Ferdinand as another person who showed her scorn when she was down on her luck but was all smiles after she made something of herself. Dorothea has a lot of baggage concerning other nobles that she pinned on Ferdinand and she tells him that in the support. Staring at a girl in a fountain isn't the bee analogy, she's saying she thought he was someone who only gravitates to what's currently beautiful. She thought he was fake but the A support resolves that conflict when Ferdinand said he's always thought she was beautiful.

Even from that game, Ike and Mist would be the first sibling pair that don't support each other. Rolf and his brothers don't have supports with each other either.

Three Houses is definitely the best magic system to date. With magic uses restored after battle you don't need to have that hoarder instinct when it comes to using the stronger/rarer stuff. Running out of magic uses is also a non-issue when it comes to basic attack spells and it's just some of the specialty spells like Thoron and Meteor that you have to put any thought into conservation. There is early game issues but that's just a problem with the noble/commoner class. I really like all magic users having access to any spell they have the skill rank for. I also like characters having their own spell lists to give them more flavor. I could see there being special items that permanently teach a spell to a character, but they should be exceptions rather than a rule.

I think it's kind of a mixed bag. On one hand, recruiting other students feels like it cheapens the experience. You don't have as many opportunities to experience the sadness of facing beloved characters as enemies on the battlefield. On the other hand, you can field up to 12 units on some maps so you probably want 3 more students unless you use the unaffiliated characters. There are also other entertaining inter-house supports and paralogues that are only available with students recruited from other houses.

There hasn't been so much fuss over a chair since Game of Thrones.

Maybe. I'm just trying to think of what would be the specific intention for such a power. "Return people to their true body" Would that be a something that fixes wounds and cures illnesses? "True mind" Is that the ability to restore sanity...cure Alzheimer's... dispel magic curses...? Situational and useful things but they really need to elaborate on the history of the chair and the specific utility/reason why it was given if they want to make it feel like a significant part of the narrative.

Still seems pretty contrived to me. Despite it being a gift from Valla, no one in Hoshido is aware that Valla exists which (apart from not making any sense) kind of eliminates the gift giving as important for anything other than it being used as a plot device for the story. A throne with the power to apparently restore memories and reveal slime monsters is awfully specific for the problem they have in Conquest. Is that a utility this Vallite king thought would be useful?

My opinion concerning the lords, having played through Crimson Flower and Azure Moon (stop reading here if you've not played those)