Geriba

There's a difference between "not being afraid" and "being at peace." The latter implies an overcoming of fear of death, which is what I'm addressing. The former is technically possible, I guess, but I would question how far you've thought through the problem of nonexistence if you aren't afraid of it. If you're are unafraid of death, you should be unafraid of everything.

1) If "states of being" are defined by ending at some point, then all activities are states of being. Nonsensical. My previous analogy holds. 2) How can you not fear what you don't understand? How do you know that death is like sleep?

Let me try again. Since you all seem to be of a scientific breed, maybe numbers will help. Person A values Activity X with 100 Love Points; Person B values that same Activity X with 1000 Love points. Both Person A and Person B are forced to give up Activity X sometime down the road. Who will it be harder for? Clearly Person B, as he or she values Activity X more than Person A. Now imagine Activity X is "life." The less you value life, the easier it should be to come to terms with losing it. If you're a slave or indentured servant who toils everyday without rest, you'll likely have an easier time coming to terms with death than if you are a rich king; similarly, if you have a life-affirming, appreciative character, regardless of your situation, you'll find it harder to accept death than if you're of an apathetic character. The one exception to this rule seems to be religion. Bringing everything back, if petty bullshit like biological fatalism or eternal rest is enough to let you "come to terms" with ceasing to be, then there's a very strong inductive case to be made that you don't particularly value life compared to someone who wrestles with the question as the most important one. "Epic generalization" turns out to be not-so-epic. One last question I pose to you all: what is a more fundamental, essential question than how to come to terms with dying? And how can you be satisfied with "well other people had to die first a hurr durr"?

You're all very funny. We in the philosophy world would call you all "reductionists," aka people who try to understand complicated moral/existential issues by atomizing everything down to the lowest common denominator. If your pseudo-philosophy about "death being a price to pay" and "I can comprehend nothingness as complete peace" satisfies you, then don't let me get in the way. [Note to self: stay out of Serious Discussion board, as people don't take it seriously.]

Geitz/Eliwood sounds fine, but you implied a desire to do a straight-up Lyn/Eliwood earlier. I'd probably prefer the latter, but am down with either.

Wow. "Benefitted from death"? "Price we all must pay"? You do realize that, as an atheist, the world is nothing but a cluster of random forces without care or concern, right? The universe doesn't owe you anything, and you don't owe anything to the universe. More importantly, you cease to be. No amount of evolutionary retrospection or reductionist apologetics is going to change that.

Phoenix is right. None of us can even begin to comprehend non-existence. The best we have are empty metaphors like "sleep" and "being at peace."

So there's some arbitrary threshold where the pain gets to a point where life is no longer worth living? You can see why I'm skeptical of people like you appreciating life.

Needlessly pessimistic. I do care about being right, but I care more about framing a tier list that best corresponds to the objective quality of each character. There's certainly a case to be made that any kind of debate is going to have bias seep in from each opponent, but that's why we have (relatively) impartial observers on the outside come in and point out flaws in reasoning or missed evidence. It's not a perfect system, but we have nothing better; let's just roll with it. I'll take Red's word for impartiality if she'll take mine!

So what's scary for you isn't ceasing to be, but rather the pain involved with death? Hypothetical question: would you rather live a painful life, or die a painless death?

This is true, but there's no better way to do it. If someone wishes to move a character up and down, they need to make a case for that character, and others respond. It ultimately comes down to which side can make their case better, no doubt about it (although unlike a straight-up debate, multiple people can get involved in either side at any time).

I love how nonchalantly everyone here (other than the OP, of course) is taking the issue of death. If it's not your greatest fear without question, then you're not appreciating life enough. Death is nothingness personified: you cease to be. Even more baffling is that none of you appear to be religious, which is at least a source of quiet comfort and spiritual purpose; subscribing to scientific reductionism should only make death all the more startling. Don't talk about what happened if you're not comfortable, but can you explain (if not prove) why what you believe could be true? How can "peace" exist in a place of utter absence?

I'd still be inclined to put Farina above Renault. She's still a bottom-five unit because of the hit to Funds, but the loss isn't too sorely missed. At a minimum, she's a boon for the Experience rank, as her solid bases and low level make her a perfect candidate to hit 20 and possibly be promoted. It's not enough to get her out of Bottom Tier (which is where she belongs), but I'd argue she should be above Renault's possible-chapter-and-a-half staff utility. Go ahead and pick which unit you'd like Eliwood to go up against, Red!

How about we do things the normal way, i.e. make marginal changes instead of radical ones? If you're so sure Lyn and Eliwood deserve to be closer together, it should be easy enough to, say, debate Harken over Eliwood. I'm completely down with doing a Dorcas debate with Life Admiral and an Eliwood debate with Red, so long as you two are. Haven't had a good debate in a while.

Dorcas comes at Ch.12, meaning he's got a 16-chapter availability lead over Geitz. That's huge. All the while, because of his excellent base stats (which put him miles above Bartre), he's dealing heavy damage and reliably one-shotting a good deal of enemies, especially with specialized weapons like the halberd. Once Geitz comes along, he'll replace Dorcas, no question; that doesn't change the immense contribution Dorcas makes to the early game.

Christ man, you are the most sarcastic user on this board. Good thing Gaiden is your favorite FE. I can outline the basic argument behind Dorcas > Geitz, but it essentially boils down to early-game versus late-game, and they're about equal in both.

Aye, that it is. I believe the top of Upper Mid is a good place for Eliwood to be, at least to start things off. We can debate Eliwood/Harken, and see where things go from there. On another note, isn't Dorcas supposed to be just above Geitz? That's where he was in the most recent GameFAQs list, at least.

Red, I'm going to have to take up arms against this Lyn > Eliwood notion. I was perfectly willing to concede it over in the Efficiency List, but we've had this discussion to death over at the GameFAQs boards, and Eliwood always comes up comfortably on top. Perhaps you can make a more compelling case than usual, but I feel like we'll need a proper debate first. Just some things to think about: -Because experience matters, and because he's got a cavalier- and knight-effective weapon, Eliwood will be seeing a lot of combat early on -Eliwood has a good five chapter lead over Lyn, and despite your implications to the contrary, he'll be doing plenty in each -Lyn may have a slight advantage for a few chapters with the Mani Katti; we should crunch numbers, but I doubt it'll turn out that significant -The second promotion hits and/or the Mani Katti breaks, Eliwood > Lyn is a lock for the remainder of the game

I'm quite familiar with the human anatomy, but I specialize in a few key areas, and the back isn't one of them.

I can definitely help out in this topic. Sorry buddy, but unless there's some key information you're not sharing, "maybe another night" translates into "maybe another lifetime." She's just not into you, and it's best to move on.

I'm not sure how many Serenes Forest members are jazz connoisseurs, but the genre needs some love- it's supremely under-appreciated! Feel free to post links to favorite jams or tunes, as well as discuss everything from the classics and legends to the up-and-coming stars. Here are a couple to start things off: John Coltrane: Wise One This song is off of his Impulse-era Crescent album. The quartet does a fantastic job as usual, delivering some impressive solos while preserving the song's delicate emotional tone. Flying Lotus: Massage Situation A newer tune, this song captures Lotus's characteristic fusion of jazz and electronica. Some trivia: one man composes and layers the synthetic sounds of Flying Lotus, and he's got an impressive jazz pedigree, being directly related to Miles Davis.

Just took the test again, and here were my results: ENFP 45 - 67 - 61 - 53 So I guess I've become more feeling-oriented in the past few months!

I see. Either way, your 7-turn could have been made into a guaranteed 6-turn by burning two RNs after Matthew opens the door, which is my point.

I'm going to try and verify this (as well as future possible discrepancies) by running a growth playthrough alongside your 0% playthrough, using your strategies as a base and seeing if there are more possibilities with a few key stat gains. I've already got one example: if it's true that the RNs are aligned in a set way at the beginning of a new game (in regards to the supposed "guaranteed six-turn Ch.11 completion" via the southern route), then in taking the west route, you can burn two RNs after Matthew opens the door, dodge the archer and the soldier's attack, and retain enough HP to survive Wire's attacks; that means a six-turn completion is possible both ways. And for what it's worth, you get a wonderful level-up to boot! EDIT: Just tested this twice more with two separate files and, yes, it's guaranteed. I might post a video of it later.