[Why all the hate for SS?]

That's not true. Many of the choices have their own advantages. Swordmaster's higher strength versus Assassin's higher EXP gain. Bishop's staff rank against Sage's superior combat. I don't think there are any choices in the game that are clearly overwhelmingly in favour of one side or another before you take into account the reliance on movement and staff access in efficient play.

I was being a little facetious with that description, but it is true that a good many (probably the majority) of branching class choices are no-brainers. In fact, why not make a comprehensive list, just to know for sure?

Recruit -> Knight / Cavalier ; A sword and extra movement versus, uh, nothing.

Knight -> General / Great Knight ; Both have complete weapon dominance, and GK has extra movement compared to the General's low-activation, low-use skill.

Cavalier -> Great Knight / Paladin ; Axes are nice, but unnecessary, and two movement is just too sweet to pass up.

Journeyman -> Fighter / Pirate ; Alright, this one's pretty equal, but it's a trainee example, so take it worth its grain of salt.

Fighter -> Hero / Warrior ; In a battle between swords and bows, the winner is obvious (especially when the Hero's promotion gains are so much better).

Pirate -> Warrior / Berserker ; An additional weapon type is always more practical than a meager crit. bonus, particularly when that weapon is effective against fliers.

Archer -> Sniper / Ranger ; Do I need to explain this one?

Mercenary -> Ranger / Hero ; Again, pretty equal. Being able to rush through things with +1 movement is great, but so are axes. Pass.

Myrmidon -> Swordmaster / Assassin ; Again, pretty equal. How much of an impact the experience increase will make depends upon how liberal one's KE use is, and the retained lockpick ability of assassins is nice.

Thief -> Assassin / Rogue ; Lockpicks aren't exactly hard to come by, which is the only advantage Rogues have going for them.

Pegasus Knight -> Falcon Knight / Wyvern Knight ; Swords versus a completely useless (and sometimes game-freezing) skill.

Wyvern Rider -> Wyvern Knight / Wyvern Lord ; See above. It's worth noting that, as far as promotion gains go, this one's close, with the +1 STR/HP and +2 DEF of the WL versus the +3 SP of the WK.

Pupil -> Mage / Shaman ; Dark magic is heavy and basically unusable.

Mage -> Mage Knight / Sage ; An unnecessary magic type (are dark magic users ever a threat in FE8?) versus a higher movement stat.

Shaman -> Druid / Summoner ; I personally feel that Summoners are an underrated class, but there's no denying that anima is better than Phantoms.

Monk/Priest -> Bishop / Sage ; In a game dominated by monster units, Slayer is simply too good to pass up.

Cleric -> Valkyrie / Bishop ; Another even choice, as it depends upon the make-up of your team.

Troubadour -> Mage Knight / Valkyrie ; It's a choice between one magic type and a clearly inferior alternative.

By my count, that's four fairly equal choices (one of which is a trainee choice) out of the 18 total. That doesn't exactly scream "balance," and- except in a rare number of situations- it means that the choice is all but made for the efficiency-savvy tactician.

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

Well, I'm not sure what just happened, but if we're all happy now, I'm not too concerned.

You are painfully boring.

I think you've missed the point here, or my post wasn't as clear as I intended it to be. My assertion in my original statement was that someone who believed the original post could be a dissertation shouldn't be taken seriously about anything. Ever. Which obviously (at least to me, but I made the post so I guess it would be obvious to me) was just as much an exaggeration as your poking fun of the length of the original post. Which is why I directed you back to your own link, so that you could understand I also was exaggerating in my original statement.

Yeah, I'm gonna go with "obvious to you." But no hard feelings.

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

Doomguy, you say you've read through this thread. In doing so, you may have noticed the unbalanced numbers of people arguing for the two sides. Banzai and I can't respond to everything here, not for as long as anyone might wish to keep pressing the point. After a few exchanges, we must figure out if we think there is any merit in continuing to argue a particular point. If it's not going anywhere, we must leave it be; we have no choice.

Some arguments we've had have lead to results and greater understanding. Banzai and I have conceded multiple points when the opposing argument has been sufficiently supported. We have no aversion to conceding points; we simply will not do it when it is not warranted. This argument will not lead to greater understanding of anything. It is not going anywhere; you have noted yourself that both sides have just been repeating the same arguments over and over. We disagree about why the argument has stagnated, but no attempt to convince the other about it is going to go anywhere, either.

As such, there is nothing left to argue here, no reason for us to continue responding to your posts. You seem to be the only one who thinks there's any point in continuing this back-and-forth, and that's just not enough. I will not respond to any more of your posts in this thread, and I believe I've convinced Banzai to not do so, either. I realize this is not what you wish, but it is not something you will be able to change by continuing to post requesting responses. Here, although we will never agree about why it will be necessary, we must agree to disagree.

You've got the attitude of a real winner.

First, you two absolutely do "have a choice" about responding to people. If you had the time to think up and finish this colossal, fire-starting OP, then surely it's not too much trouble to take the time and respond to those who engage your thread. Second- and this is now the third time I've said this- I do not believe the argument is going in circles. I believe it is moving in a clear direction (my direction, naturally), and that a consensus is inevitable if given the proper commitment on both sides. That's how debating tends to work.

But hey, feel free to do whatever you like. This isn't a sanctioned debate or anything, so you've got the luxury of choosing to ignore posts at your pleasure. Just don't pretend that this is a matter of "having no choice"; it's a matter of giving up, which is exactly the kind of move I'd expect a couple of losers to take.

Thanks a lot for playing, and better luck next time.

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

So whoever gets the last word wins? As I said before, you put forward no new points or evidence in your last post that you haven't already said before. You said yourself in an earlier post that we were simply going around in circles. When I explained this to you a couple posts back, you responded by insulting me, claiming I hadn't the reading comprehension skills of a middle-schooler.

This is the second time you've claimed I said this, and this is the second time I'm telling you I didn't. The argument isn't going in circles. You're being obtuse, certainly, but we're slowly making progress bit by bit. Or we were, at least, until you decided to throw in the towel.

It has nothing to do with "the last word wins"; in a debate, one person makes a point, the other person responds, and the process continues. Simple. Currently, you're up next, and if I were to post again before you did, I would be repeating myself. Nothing I can do until you decide to step up to the plate.

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

It's not that I'm offended, it's just that I'd rather this topic not get locked because it devolved into a flame war.

At this point, it might as well get locked. You have nothing to say that hasn't already been thoroughly debunked, as evidenced by your continued refusal to put forth a rebuttal.

[Looking for a FE7 save]

I could use one of these too, actually. Anyone?

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

Re-read the article you linked me to, then re-read my statement. If you can't understand "the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device" used in my previous statement, I doubt a doctorate (or a masters, or even a bachelor's at an academically rigorous university) is in your future.

So I didn't realize you were, ah, dense. Sorry; I didn't mean to be rude to someone with your shortcomings. Here's a simplified explanation: see that original post? It's long as shit. Obscenely long, in fact, by forum standards. I called it a "dissertation" as a way to mock its excessive length, a form of something we call hyperbole. Since you didn't seem to understand what that term meant, I posted a convenient link for you to peruse at your leisure.

Yes, I understand that you were trying to be coy. And bless your heart, keep trying!

Ha ha, nice try. Unless you can indicate to me that you're willing to do this politely, then I see no reason to continue. Amazingly, this thread went 28 pages of mostly respectful discussion before a mod had to step in and post a warning.

I'm not gonna fall for your bait. Honestly, if you want a response to your last post, look to the response I made to the post before that. Both of us have simply recycled the same exact points for our last three posts.

Typical, and I should've seen it coming. It takes a very special kind of poster to spend hours typing up a mega-essay on a Fire Emblem critique, only to drop out of a debate after a few posts because poor wittle baby's feelings got hurt.

News flash. Respectful discussion doesn't translate into good discussion. As I said before, this entire topic has been an exercise in redundancy, something that I was hoping to shake up a bit. Trouble is, you appear to lack the reading comprehension skills of a middle-schooler, much less an alleged UCLA English major. If you really believe I've "recycled the same exact points," then you're hopeless.

And seriously, grow a pair. Are you really that offended by a forum debate about the plot of a GBA game? Apparently so, which makes me seriously question your priorities.

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

Calm. Down. There's a heated argument and then there's practically flaming. This is for both of you. I see anymore signs of flaming in here and a warn will be given. Anymore after that and it'll be suspensions. Play nice or leave.

Yawn.

And a slap on the wrist is no reason not to bother responding, Bonzai. Unless you'd like to concede, which is probably in your best interest at this point.

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

I think anyone who is under the impression that a dissertation is only 12,000 words can't possibly be taken seriously about anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole

Try to keep up if you're just jumping in. As a fun fact, I'm actually seriously considering pursing a Ph.D.

See, the reason I didn't respond to your post in quotation format is because, as you pointed out yourself, the argument was going in circles. You said absolutely nothing in this post that you haven't said in posts previously; my response to you this time would be no different than it has been the last few times.

As a matter of fact, I said plenty of new things, and clarified many more. You're just looking for an excuse to be lazy and obtuse.

I say that most of your statements involve you making assumptions and posing hypothetical explanations to what happened. Then what do you do in response? Make assumptions and pose hypothetical explanations as to what happened.

The silver lining here is that, count-for-count, my explanation holds up a hell of a lot better than yours does. Whether you realize it or not, you're making the same types of assumptions, little man.

Saying that "In text Nils says that Nergal needs quintessence to control dragons" neither refutes Nils's other statement that he requires tremendous amounts of quintessence to call dragons through the gate nor does it explain how Nergal managed to call dragons through the gate at the end of the game despite Athos and Limstella both explaining that Nergal has run low on quintessence.

This is why I probably won't have kids for a while: I hate repeating myself over and over again.

Proposition 1: After being fatally wounded, Nergal is low on quintessence.

Proposition 2: After being fatally wounded, Nergal summons dragons.

---

Conclusion: Nergal does not require a peak amount of quintessence to call dragons.

Notice that word peak. At any given time, Nergal is in the process of absorbing and incorporating the quintessence of dozens, if not hundreds, of people into his being. When Nils says that calling dragons requires a tremendous amount of quintessence, he doesn't appear to mean "tremendous for Nergal," but rather "tremendous in general." This is confirmed by the fact that Nergal does indeed summon dragons when his energy is all but depleted, as well as the fact that Nils makes clear Nergal seeks ultimately to control the dragons.

Where is your evidence that all of that energy is for merely opening the gate? Hm? Love to hear it.

"Your idea that the massive amounts of every he was collecting was for calling the dragons alone is just wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong." How so? As I posted earlier, in New Resolve Nils specifically explains that Nergal requires tremendous amounts of quintessence to call dragons. If he is out of quintessence by endgame, then I fail to see how he calls the dragons.

See above. And really now, just think about it. What takes more energy: issuing a simple call, or harnessing the awesome powers of dozens of legendary beasts who nearly wiped out humanity? And given the fact that, at the end of the game, Nergal summons dragons from the open gate with virtually no energy, there's no rational way to conceive of it otherwise.

What are also the facts? That Nergal opens the gate later in the game without this ritual. So obviously it isn't an essential step to opening the Dragon's Gate.

I already covered this: it was an essential part during the initial stage. Are you so dense and uncreative that you can't fill in this small step yourself? There's also the very real problem that, well, we're dealing with magic; what kind of explanation do you want?

Bottom line, this doesn't constitute a "plot hole," but rather a partially ambiguous magical process, where the player is not entirely privy to the complex thoughts of a millennia-old master archsage.

Here's another fact: That Nergal can take quintessence off of dead men and store it for later use. So if he chose Elbert for his quintessence, there's absolutely no reason why Elbert has to be alive for the ritual.

Bolded for effect: we don't know the complete details of how the Ritual works. Clearly, it was an exceptional case.

Anyways, the conclusions you draw, as I stated in my previous post, rely on assuming that the game is infallible; that because Nergal is a super genius everything he does is done right. You come up with a lot of hypothetical explanations for things that are not mentioned in the game whatsoever.

Wrong. My explanations rely on the safe assumption that, as a master magician, super-genius, and scholar, Nergal knew what he was doing, and the Ritual was necessary.

Kishuna sheds light on the character of Nergal? How so?

The creation of Kishuna...

-further affirms Nergal's cruelty

-demonstrates that Nergal is willing to toy not just with life, but with emotions

-reflects how Nergal's desire for revenge cost him his own emotions, symbolized by the throwing out of his emotionally-capable creation

And where does Tolkein do it? And where does Lewis do it? I'm not familiar with Lewis but examples would be nice.

Pick up any Sci-Fi book in the world. Chances are, it will deal with some kind of extraterrestrial life form. Sometimes, these life forms are given human qualities, their motivations explored and explained in a relatable fashion; many times- especially if they're side characters, like Kishuna- their aims will be chalked up to nothing more than "they're just not like us." It's left ambiguous. You should know this, if you are in fact an English major at UCLA.

And to recap, here's what we know about Kishuna:

-as a morph, he is sub-human

-he has been given the capabilities for experiencing emotions

-he has been thrown away, left to wander the world

-when around the player, the aura he gives off is one of "sadness"

He might not have a motivation in the first place- after all, do animals have "motivation"?- but if he does, it almost certainly involves emotions on some level.

Anyways I won't respond to your insults this time since doing so is pointless and merely goads you to post more insults.

Hate to say this, but I'll be insulting you whether you respond to them or not. You were asking for this kind of treatment with that asinine OP.

I assume next post you'll say a lot of the same things you've been saying, and I'll say a lot of things I've been saying in response, and nothing will change, and nothing will happen, and you'll wind up thinking you're right, and I'll wind up thinking I'm right, and nobody else watching this discussion will care.

What a goddamn hypocrite. So is this how you think a debate works? Is this all you believe people are capable of? One person says one thing, another person says another, they bicker for a bit, and then go their separate ways, unconvinced? That's complete tripe: reasonable people can enter a debate, impassioned or not, and come out with a totally new perspective. So long as the other person's been the least bit persuasive, naturally.

But hey, let's say you're right. Let's say that people aren't going to change their minds, and are only going to yell at each other until they run out of energy. Then why did you post this essay in the first place?

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

I

I'm exactly one word into this response, and I already know exactly what it's going to say. As my eyes glaze down, the structure of the post is not in quotation format- as you'd usually expect from a proper response- but rather in paragraph format. This indicates to me that you're going to utterly derail the topic, choose not to try and counter my points directly, and instead go on a tangent about how you know writing, how I'm a jerk-off, that I'm somehow "ignoring" your brilliance, or some other irrelevancy. It's going to be a nonsensical tirade instead of a proper rebuttal. Let's see...

love this. I don't even know where to begin here. For starters, you completely ignore textual evidence, instead choosing to make up your own explanations for events. "I guess Nergal was doing this." "I think Nergal was doing this." Everything you say is purely hypothetical. In regards to the ritual, since there is no logical explanation in-game why Elbert has to be kept alive for the ritual, you simply assume a logical explanation exists, only we have no way of knowing about it. You even ignore textual evidence which would imply that Elbert doesn't have to be alive for Nergal to use his quintessence to open the gate.

Yep, nailed it.

I don't ignore textual evidence; in my previous post, I told you that Nils explains to Eliwood and company how Nergal plans to control the dragons. That's one fact. There's also the fact that, at the end of the game, Nergal manages to summon dragons from the (then-opened) gate with his dying breath. Your idea that the massive amounts of every he was collecting was for calling the dragons alone is just wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Sorry.

Now let's talk about the Ritual. Here's what we know about it: Nergal considers it an essential step to opening the Dragon's Gate; he chooses Elbert because of his tremendous individual level of quintessence; the Ritual is so essential to the process that he sends his best man, the Angel of Death, to watch over the sacrifice; and, as far as we can tell, the Ritual was only used during the initial opening. These are the facts. From here, there are two possible interpretations:

1) Nergal, being a megalomaniacal super-genius and master of magic, knew what he was doing, especially when it comes to magical rites. No in-game evidence or text later contradicts the necessity of the Ritual during the initial opening, so although the player might not know the specifics, it's a safe bet that something pretty damn important was going on. Perhaps it involves getting inside Ninian's head; perhaps it involves something else entirely. Either way, Nergal's title of Dark Druid and comparable status to Athos aren't bestowed upon him for nothing.

2) LOL PLOT HOLE, ALSO I'M A DUMBASS

I went with the first option. Guess which one you went with?

Having someone do something and never explaining why is bad writing. Sure, it's good at times to keep a character's motivations or the reason why they exists secret from the reader for a time, but not permanently. You can claim that "bad writing" is simply a matter of opinion, but there are clear indicators of when something is good writing and when something is bad writing. Otherwise, why would some books be well-liked and others not? Why would some stories be considered classics and others not? What would be the purpose of classes teaching writing? How would a professor be able to grade an essay? How would Strunk and White get away with writing the Elements of Style? So disregarding "bad writing" as me simply bawling is you simply disregarding my points.

I love how you just *completely* ignored what I typed, so you know what? Much as your original dissertation was a colossal waste of time, typing up yet another response where I simply repeat myself is a waste of time. So here's a nice little copy-paste for you, complete with new additions and bolded parts for your pleasure:

"[Kishuna's] purpose in FE7 is to shed light on the character of Nergal (and maybe Renault), as well as serve as a neat gameplay mechanic. What was his motivation? Well, he's a being created for the sole purpose of carrying emotion, so I'd assume Kishuna is driven by emotional instability.

[...]

It's better left ambiguous because Kishuna is a minor, minor symbolic character... He's an emotionally distressed puppet.

And this technique is usually done in fantasy and science fiction. Tolkein does it, Lewis does it, and plenty of others do it."

If it's still not getting through, I can also add underlining and maybe increase the font size for you.

Anyways, to top it off, you simply continue to insult me. I can do that too. I mean, if I'm such a dweeb for writing the analysis, you're a dweeb for responding to it, and writing multi-paragraph essays explaining just why I am wrong (unsuccessfully, I may add, since simply saying someone is arguing unsuccessfully is a foolproof debate technique amirite?). I mean, it's not like you have any tenable arguments on your side, so I guess I win anyway. As usual.

Are you really comparing me to you in this case? You took the initiative to write a dissertation-length hate-paper about Fire Emblem 7's plot, for seemingly no reason other than to generate controversy. Furthermore, you followed up this paper with 28 forum-pages worth of responses, trying to hit home your ridiculous "essay" as if you'd experienced gaming enlightenment, when you're really just an insufferable loudmouth. How many hours upon hours did you spend playing, researching, writing, proofreading (oh wait, probably none LOL), and responding?

Compare that to myself: I read the paper (~20 minutes), posted a response on GameFAQs (~20 minutes), copy-pasted it over here (~5 minutes), and have indulged myself in a discussion with you (~30 minutes total). Hell, I've barely broken the one-hour mark! And on top of that, I actually enjoy Fire Emblem 7's plot, so defending it is actually a *good* use of my time. What do YOU get out of needlessly attacking it?

I mean Jesus F. Christ, if you're going to waste your time, at least be a tad bit persuasive.

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

Limstella and Athos both say that Nergal doesn't have much quintessence left by endgame. So I don't see how your explanation, which is not only completely unsupported by anything in the script, even explains anything. In fact, I'm not sure what you're even trying to say.

I'm getting tired of this back-and-forth. brb, gonna go look up the game text

EDIT: So the text is basically impossible to find past what this site has, but suffice to say that Nils talks about how Nergal seeks to "control the dragons' power" for his own purposes. Towards the end of the game, when his power is waning, he doesn't seek to call the dragons then and there; rather, he hopes to defeat Eliwood and company once and for all. I'm guessing he planned to build back his quintessence later on. When that all went to hell? Call up 'dem dragons.

You're saying here that since Elbert was kept alive, there must have been a good reason for it, even if we don't know that reason.

In fact, we do know the reason: to carry out the Ritual.

No. Something happening without any textual explanation as for why it happened--in this case, textual evidence seems to contradict there being any reason for it happening--is a lapse on the part of the writer. I guess you could explain every plothole in existence with the statement "We don't know why that happened, but since it happened, there must be some good unknown reason for it." That doesn't explain anything. You don't even try to give some hypothetical explanation for why Elbert would be kept alive. You just assume that the writing is infallible and thus every problem in the story has some hidden explanation beyond our comprehension.

You're confused again. We know what the motivation is- it's spelled out quite clearly- but we don't know the specifics. There's a big difference between "Nergal did this for some reason" and "Nergal did this to carry out the Ritual, the specifics of which are partially unknown to the player."

Well, I'm going to go out and say that YOU'RE wrong, only it's a waste of my time to explain to you why. Yeah. So ha, two can play it that way.

Yep. Except that, you know, you wasted your time typing up a goddamn dissertation about a simple sRPG plot for... no real reason. Something tells me that, no, your time actually isn't that valuable after all.

Anyways, Ephidel's actions are not the most efficient way to do things according to other evidence in the text, which I pointed in the original analysis. In fact, he could have caused more chaos had he listened to what Hector had to say, or what Pent had to say, or what Uther had to say. And even if we decide to accept that Ephidel is incompetent, that certainly strikes against him being a creepy and fearsome villain, as many (both ingame and outside of the game) are wont to say.

This is more of the same. Ephidel had a plan of action, which worked, but not quite as well as he would have liked. He also didn't account for the unexpected variable in Eliwood and company. You can nitpick all you want and try to "improve" his plan in hindsight, but it's unbelievably petty.

Since Eliwood and friends eventually do manage to escape with Elbert, I'm gonna assume that Jaffar's purpose wasn't fulfilled at all.

I take it you missed the part where the dragon literally collapsed.

Anyways, Jaffar is in Nergal's pocket, as people at several points in the story claim; so I fail to see what Jaffar could do that is more important than making sure Nergal's ceremony goes off without issue. If Jaffar's most important mission before leaving is to guard Elbert, an old man tied up in the middle of the Black Fang headquarters, under personal supervision by Nergal, then I don't see how some random unknown assignment could possibly be more important that stopping the army of people who just charged into the Dragon's Gate to stop Nergal's ceremony.

Elbert was absolutely essential to enacting the Ritual; protecting him should have been, and rightfully was, a top priority. Bottom line.

So we're already assuming that the collapsing Dragon's Gate has some kind of energy vortex which suppresses magical power, and Nergal but not Ephidel has just the amount of power to escape from the Gate. Mmkay.

No need to assume, bro. Ephidel uses magic to warp all over the place; when the gate collapsed, Nergal- an infinitely powerful shaman- was able to escape its radius, while Ephidel- a mere puppet- was not. "Induction."

And I fail to see how three chapters of Kishuna showing up for random, unexplained reasons and fighting you is something better left ambiguous.

It's better left ambiguous because Kishuna is a minor, minor symbolic character. He's not even human; why should we judge him according to human motivations? He's an emotionally distressed puppet.

And this technique is usually done in fantasy and science fiction. Tolkein does it, Lewis does it, and plenty of others do it.

If that's your explanation for his character, then it certainly doesn't make a very good character out of him.

Awesome, bro! Glad to know your opinion! Now please, explain to me where there's a "plot hole," exactly?

And if fate is on his side, then how do Eliwood and friends beat him anyways? If fate can be inaccurate, or changed, then that isn't an explanation for why Nergal would be so cocky, why he pretty much stands aside and lets Eliwood get Durandal and Armads, ye ancient weapons of lore that defeated dragonkind eons ago.

"The power of hope/courage/convenience." It's a tried-and-true RPG plot cliche, perhaps seen most prominently in Final Fantasy VI. I'm sure you'll chime in with something about how "the writing is bad" (which is really just a translation for "I don't like it waaaah"), but no plot hole to be found here either. Too bad.

Insults insults, defamation defamation

Yeah, that's what happens when you embarrass yourself publicly: you get called out for it by people who know better.

I could say the exact same to you and it wouldn't be any more relevant. I mean let me just punctuate my response here by saying I win, you lose, hahahahahaha there's nothing you can do about it. That will make it true, right?

You typed up a 12,000 word essay about a plot in a GBA game; you've officially "lost," no matter how the argument goes. Thankfully, you don't have any tenable arguments on your side, so I guess I win anyway. As usual.

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

Good job ignoring textual evidence.

Let's see... Your first actual argument against me is when you state that Nergal needs quintessence to control dragons, but not to call them. Wrong. Here's the quote in New Resolve which clearly refutes that.

Nils:

...I think it's because we can open the Dragon's Gate. Just calling them? Nergal can do that on his own.

Hector:

Are you serious?

Nils:

Yes, but it requires a tremendous amount of quintessence.

Nothing here contradicts what I said. Nergal can't open the gate, so he needs Ninian/Nils to help. Calling dragons requires a "tremendous amount of quintessence," according to Nils, but we also see Nergal do just that with his dying breath. How to we resolve this apparent inconsistency? Simple: by accepting that Nergal deals with quintessence in *huge* quantities. Even after dozens of skirmishes, battles, and even quasi-wars, Nergal still doesn't feel confident enough to control the dragons he plans to summon.

Then, since at every other point in the story Nergal (and Limstella) can harvest the quintessence of someone whenever they die and use it later, there's absolutely no justification for Nergal keeping Elbert specifically alive for the time when he plans to open the Dragon's Gate. He could have killed Elbert earlier and taken his quintessence then; in fact, in New Resolve Nils stats that Nergal got a lot of his quintessence from Elbert's knights, who had died earlier. So keeping Elbert alive had no bearing on the quintessence Nergal could have extracted from him.

Wrong. He was needed for the Ritual. Do we know the specifics of how this process works? Nope, but clearly, keeping him alive was necessary. That's the bottom line.

Oh boy, comparisons to RedLetterMedia.

Admitting you've heard of him only confirms my suspicions.

Anyways, Ephidel's actions don't make sense, since as I pointed out at numerous points in the original post, Ephidel often acts in ways which allow his plans to be foiled, or else ignores excellent opportunities to cause the chaos Nergal desires. A few examples: He apathy towards Eliwood speaking with Ostia, his invasion of Caelin instead of Ostia, and his orders that Darin flee with over half his army instead of crush Eliwood with numbers. Conveniently, you ignore all my points in which I explain why Ephidel's actions make no sense, and simply say "they make sense because he was causing chaos." I know that's what he's SUPPOSED to do, but as I explained before, he does a terrible job of it.

I really didn't want to waste my time getting into the specifics, but you're wrong. Even if you *were* right, your accusations are wrong: it's not that Ephidel's actions "don't make sense," but rather that they're not the most efficient way to do things according to, well, you. Maybe I'll dive into the specifics later, but this is a minor point either way. You just need to accept that "Ephidel's an incompetent moron because he caused chaos, but could've caused even MORE chaos if only he'd listened to MY advice!" is a nonsensical complaint to levy against him.

I don't understand why Jaffar had to guard Elbert and not, say, Nergal himself, who is at least twice as powerful as Jaffar. Not to mention that as soon as Eliwood and friends actually get to the Dragon's Gate to stop Nergal's plan, Ephidel has Jaffar leave for seemingly no reason.

Ephidel had Jaffar leave because his purpose there- to stop Eliwood and company from escaping with Elbert- was fulfilled. What was the other thing Jaffar had planned? We don't know, but presumably it was another assignment. The Four Fangs are rather busy, you understand. It's not a "plot hole" or "bad writing" that everything isn't needlessly and obnoxiously spelled out.

And Ephidel's warp spell would prove ineffective? I guess that explains why Nergal can warp away from the collapsing gate seconds before it obliterates Ephidel. They were also the exact same distance from the gate, so proximity had nothing to do with the disparity between them.

Equal distance, highly unequal power. Nergal is Nergal, and Ephidel is an expendable creation of Nergal. Worlds apart.

Also, enigmatic characters in fiction never remain enigmatic the whole game. There is some sort of resolution to every loose thread. Kishuna has no explanation, no resolution, adds absolutely nothing to the story.

That's actually not true at all. Plenty of great works of fiction keep minor sub-plots shrouded in mystery. And really now, let's be clear about what Kishuna is: a minor, minor sub-plot. His purpose in FE7 is to shed light on the character of Nergal (and maybe Renault), as well as serve as a neat gameplay mechanic. What was his motivation? Well, he's a being created for the sole purpose of carrying emotion, so I'd assume Kishuna is driven by emotional instability. But it's better kept ambiguous.

Nergal is crazy, and thus everything he does that doesn't make sense is explained? That's just poor writing.

You've misunderstood. Nergal wants to envelop the world in chaos. By keeping Eliwood and company alive, he believes that he will bring them into immense suffering when they realize all of their work will be for nothing. Beyond that, Nergal is simply arrogant, because he has fate on his side. Remember what Athos says in Nabata: the "wheels of fate" have all but foretold that Nergal will succeed. Why bother killing small worms when you could watch them squirm? It's consistent with Nergal's insane, megalomaniacal character. Shout "bad writing" all you want; it won't change this.

Anyways, nice try, but you haven't said a single thing which somebody hasn't brought up before, only to be refuted. In fact, a lot of the things you brought up were never brought up before because there was such an obvious in-textual evidence which disproved them. Then you only looked at maybe, ten of my points and dismissed all the rest because apparently it wasn't worth your time. So great. You sure proved me wrong.

This entire topic (which, for whatever reason, I was compelled to read) has been an exercise in redundancy. People indulge you as if you have something new or insightful to say, when your incompetence and inability to see past your own childish biases leads you to hold this game to a ludicrous double-standard. Speaking of cherry-picking points, I'm glad your hypocrisy carries over into this response as well.

Keep on trying though, kiddo. Every misguided word you post only makes your own position less credible.

[Let's Play FE7]

It hurts me to learn that you don't appreciate the masterful FE7 plot, Paperblade. For shame.

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

There have been a lot of accusations throughout that this rant is not, in fact, worth taking seriously. Just an fyi.

Sure, but then you get stuff like this...

Normally I just lurk the ROM hacking section to see if Serenes Emblem has come out yet,

but someone showed this to me in AIM chat. I always thought something was wrong with

the story after the all the times I've played FE7, but now, all I can say is...

General Banzai, you are the MAN.

...as late as page 28. I suppose I'm just surprised that the response is so mixed, when it should clearly be tipped in one direction.

[Cancelling Forced Events]

A more likely explanation is that it's just a left-over debug feature that wasn't fully removed. Just like the data-erase feature in Advance Wars, and a bunch of other features found in games all over. It was probably a handy way to break out of an event that wasn't functioning properly.

Or that it's an intentional button combination, and not a side-effect of some unexpected button presses.

This actually seems less likely, to be honest.

[QUINTESSENCE? DONT UNDERSTAND]

This rant was re-posted over at GameFAQs. I read half of it, skimmed the rest, and had a good laugh. Then I learned people were taking it seriously, which was baffling, so I typed up a response.

Now, I come to SerenesForest, and what do I find? People taking it seriously. Look, I understand the temptation to be impressed by BIG TEXT DUMP OHWOW, but it doesn't take too much effort to realize that this guy doesn't have a clue. So I'm just going to re-post my response from GameFAQs over here in the hopes that the 28 pages of discussion this empty rant has generated doesn't go unredeemed:

{{{

I'm very surprised people are taking this seriously, so here's my attempt to respond to as much of this as I can stomach.

Couple of things to start off. First, let's start out with this quote from mid-way in the rant:

Too bad this game is so rife with holes that there are still so many more it takes all this time to explain them all.

Now, "rife with holes" implies that there are a great many plot holes that should be obvious. I'm going to wager that he can't even identify one. Second, although this is called a "critical analysis," it's nothing of the kind. It's teeming with petty gripes and self-proclaimed "improvements" to the story that would be out-of-place in any genuine critical analysis. So let's refer to this as what it really is: a pretentious piece of nerdrage.

His problems with Lyn's mode are largely overblown and not worth looking at except from a distance. There are a couple instances where we're not entirely clear about Lundgren's motivation, but this is to be expected: it happens in just about every story, and not only in video games. There's room to leave things up to the imagination, and for the most part, it's not hard to connect the dots. Which is good, because a plot hole is a much greater offense to good writing than ambiguous motivations or a minor lack of clarity.

Then we get to the main plot, and I begin to wonder whether or not he's serious.

First, he needs either Ninian or Nils to open the Dragon's Gate for him. Then, he needs a large amount of quintessence in order to call the dragons, which he can do himself.

This is factually incorrect. He needs a lot of quintessence to control the dragons, not call them; as we see at the end of the game, Nergal can simply call dragons even with his dying breath.

This simply correction fixes a good many of his supposed "plot holes," which should demonstrate how poorly thought-out and pathetic this rant is.

But if Elbert truly supported the rebellion why did Nergal imprison him? Hell, why did Nergal imprison him either way? If Nergal wanted his quintessence why not just take it and be done with Elbert? Keeping Elbert alive certainly doesn't work well for Nergal as Elbert releases Ninian and Nils later on, so… why?

Once again, explicitly stated in-game: Elbert has a tremendous amount of quintessence for a single human being (likely owing to his bravery and stalwart resolve), making him an excellent choice of sacrifice for the gate-opening ritual.

Ephidel's actions are mysterious when you first play the game but make no sense in hindsight. And that is what this game does. It has plot holes all over the place and covers them up with tarp, makes you look the other way so you never learn that anything was wrong in the first place. It dazzles you with flashy effects in order to cover up egregious plot errors. I'll explain all of these later, and you'll be hitting yourself wondering how you never noticed such problems. They aren't minor, nit-picky errors either; some of them deal with the entire plot of the game.

You know what I just realized? This guy's trying to be like RedLetterMedia- but is doing a horrendous job. Ephidel's actions make perfect sense: he was commissioned by Nergal to create conflict and strife throughout Lycia, generating quintessence for Nergal to collect.

Let me ask you one question. Why does Darin invade Caelin? I can't find a single thing in the plot that even tries to explain this. It makes sense for gameplay reasons, of course—brings Lyn back in the story. But can anyone explain to me what justification Darin—or Ephidel—have for invading Crimea? To get quintessence?

Nergal wants quintessence. Darin wants to become the ruler of Lycia. It's not rocket science.

Jaffar is even just lounging around at the Dragon's Gate, doing nothing but killing Leila. Why not send him?

Because he was protecting the most important asset of all: Elbert.

Darin has already revealed himself to be an incompetent leader, why would you entrust defense of the Dragon's Gate to him? Especially with Jaffar prowling around? Why not send Jaffar to kill Eliwood? He's right there, in the Dragon's Gate, he even kills Leila, and yet Nergal does not order him to do anything else? That makes no sense.

This guy needs to keep in mind that for Nergal, having dozens of Black Fang members die off is no problem at all. It generates conflict, which in turn generates quintessence. The entire point of the Dragon's Gate skirmish was to keep Eliwood and company at bay long enough to perform the ritual, and Nergal believed that Darin was up for the job. He was mistaken, but this isn't a plot hole. As I explained before, keeping Jaffar on Elbert was much, much safer than throwing him into a large-scale battle and risking him being killed.

[And as another poster pointed out, Darin was practically on his hands and knees for the position, so Nergal accepted. Remember to distinguish between gameplay and story.]

So yeah, if anyone can give me an explanation here [for Kishuna] I'd love to hear it.

Kishuna is an enigma, his motivations largely kept mysterious. This type of character is done all the time in fiction.

Legault then appears and apparently he's second in skill only to the Four Fangs, which is funny because he's a Level 12 Thief.

A quick note here, because he makes this mistake at least a couple dozen times: in any RPG, you can't equate story logic with gameplay logic. This is basic stuff here.

Anyways Ephidel finally dies because even though he has the power to warp anytime he wants he just stands at the gate when it explodes.

I'm assuming this guy doesn't have eyes, then, because the summoned dragon was literally collapsing into the gate. A warp spell would prove ineffective in the face of that kind of energy.

Elbert dies and Nergal takes his quintessence, which I suppose he couldn't have done earlier for whatever reason.

Saving him for the sacrifice.

Meanwhile we're introduced to Pent, who is searching for a macguffin artifact in the desert which is never explained or revealed to the player.

It's strongly implied to be one of the three Heavel's seals.

Oh, god, and now we've moved on to Chapter 26. Believe it or not, the story only begins to make less sense from here on out. I didn't think it was possible. But it's true. This is where the plot truly begins to unravel at the seams.

Yep, this guy is definitely trying to be RedLetterMedia. How quaint.

Also, Nergal makes Vaida ridiculously overpowered with magical power. Yet he does this for no other enemy besides Limstella. Why not? Who knows.

Presumably, he does- it just doesn't manifest itself in the gameplay. Remember, there's a sharp contrast between story logic and gameplay logic in RPGs.

But if chaos is what they want, why not simply assassinate Zephiel? Do they want Bern to be peaceful instead of chaotic? What's the point of a scapegoat?

Without a scapegoat, the King of Bern is the clear suspect for the assassination. Having Nino be a scapegoat remedies this glaring problem.

Why doesn't Nergal want to kill them? What's the good for him in keeping them alive? To harvest their quintessence? Why doesn't he just kill them then harvest their quintessence, the same way Limstella harvests the quintessence of Ursula after she dies?

Nergal, having been corrupted by dark magic and the conquest of power, is no longer completely sane. Think about it: why summon the dragons in the first place? Because Nergal values chaos and control. Keeping Eliwood and company alive to witness and suffer the hellfire he plans to unleash goes along with this mentality. You could argue that the "crazy villain" thing is a pretty common trope, I guess, but it's not bad writing, and certainly not a plot hole.

Athos tries to fight Nergal and does five damage. Nergal claims he could kill all of them right now… but decides to leave. Yeah. Just like that. He doesn't even try to take Nils with him, even though Nils is right there and Eliwood is immobilized and helpless when he realizes he killed Ninian.

This is specifically explained: Nergal needs greater quintessence to recover from his wounds. [And as a previous poster pointed out, the blast itself consumes a great deal of energy. Nice catch.]

This game is a plot of cloth and stilts. It puts on a front face, gives the impression of depth, but underneath is nothing but sticks.

Actually no, it doesn't. The plot to Fire Emblem 7 is pretty standard RPG fare, and serves as a framework for the excellent character development and fantastic gameplay. It's not complicated.

The rest of this rant isn't worth my time, or anybody's time for that matter.

And I find it funny how he accuses this game of adhering to "middle-school logic" when his writing, proofreading, and grammar skills barely reach a sixth grade level.

}}}

Bottom line: I'm an asshole, this guy doesn't know what he's talking about and is trying way too hard.

[Lucius, Erk, or Canas?]

Canas... LUNA and being tanky for magic-user standards scores plus points. I do not care about the pros and cons of Dark Magic, period!

lolLucius and that lolDEF and lolLCK.

Luck, man. The most important stat in the game, word.

[HHM playlog by the new guy.]

Bartre.

Enjoy.

Man, this dude is an asshole.

[Lucius, Erk, or Canas?]

How in the love of god is Erk beating Canas? I can understand Lucius being on top- though it's probably inaccurate for ranked runs, at least- but Erk's got better availability, a superior magic type, better supports, and better stats. (Canas is the most fun to use, however!)

[Kishuna]

Yes; you interpreted what I said about Renault's change in personality as him going "out of his mind." I never once said anything about Renault going crazy.

I was more referring to the implied meaning behind your claim that Renault was "under Nergal's influence." But I see what you mean regardless.

[Kishuna]

I would like to point out that you were the one who characterized Renault as "out of his mind," not me. I interpreted that to mean having lost all moral consideration.

Hm? Here's what I typed, copied verbatim:

"There's nothing to suggest that Renault was out of his mind when he murdered Lucius' parents. On the contrary, it ties in both with his mercenary profession and with the guilt that he later develops, so deep that he seeks to become a bishop."

Bit of miscommunication, but no worries.

[Kishuna]

OK, so how does that discount that morph from being Kishuna? We've confirmed that Kishuna was not the absolute first morph that Nergal created based on the fact that Nergal broke his tradition of numbering morphs for Kishuna. If we take your interpretation to be correct (that first doesn't mean the absolute first), then it supports the hypothesis that Renault's friend is Kishuna.

In case I'm not being clear, let's go ahead and re-name all human-like entities Nergal shaped in Arcadia "Pre-Morphs" so we don't get confused. Here's what I'm getting at:

Pre-Morphs -> Morphs (Renault's friend was the first one) -> Morphs with emotions (Kishuna was the first one)

This outline ties more seamlessly into the backstory we hear about through Renault's supports. He's charged with hunting down others for quintessence, and the energy from others and himself is used to further Nergal's morph-making ambitions. After he's gained enough energy, Nergal creates his first full morph, more complete than the Pre-Morphs of Arcadia: Renault's friend, who was likely his "#1." Sometime later on, he makes Kishuna, who is given a name to contrast this creation from the others. That's my take on it, anyway.

"...He is asleep... ............ Forgive me, son. In those days... I only thought of myself... I trespassed against many in my singular drive to regain the friend I lost...and to satiate my own...monstrous greed. I even sacrificed... the lives of others... Forgive me... Please...forgive...me......"

No doubt Renault was obsessed with saving his friend and filling the void in his heart, but that doesn't strike me as "crazy." More just narrowly determined to the point of becoming blind to other (particularly moral) considerations.

Because he lacks faith? But yes, I suppose that's a reasonable assumption, too.

I was just makin' a joke.

[FE7 HHM 0% growths (with commentary) CANCELLED]

For fun, dondon, I'm tempted to upload a commentary video myself, because I'm convinced you and I have exact opposite speaking styles (though yours is perhaps better suited to a rational, strategic subject like Fire Emblem, I confess!). Haven't posted here in a while, but just wanted to say that I love these vids and am eager for more!

Also...

Because I'm not 21.

Aw, he's so kayuute!

[FE7 HHM 0% growths (with commentary) CANCELLED]

[lol double post]

[Kishuna]

The first morph was created centuries before the time of FE7, though.

Assuming Wallace's support to be true, Renault was a mercenary with positive ideals when Wallace was a youth, but was underneath Nergal's influence when Lucius was very young. It's a reasonable assumption that he lost his friend within this time period.

From Isadora's support, it is implied that Renault is not a very good bishop, which means that he hasn't been a bishop for very long.

I disagree with most of these assumptions. While the first ever "morph" was created during Nergal's stay in Arcadia (and it was so primitive I'm not sure it would've even counted), Renault's friend was the first morph created after Nergal had put his new plan into motion. There's nothing to suggest that Renault was out of his mind when he murdered Lucius' parents. On the contrary, it ties in both with his mercenary profession and with the guilt that he later develops, so deep that he seeks to become a bishop. And clearly Renault hasn't been a bishop for very long; why else would his magic stat be so low?