Sublime Manic

Dan, feel free to largely disregard the message of Blu's post and the bad grammar it contains. I'm pretty sure most people would say he has a rather warped view of reality, himself.

If it can't hold a candle to Floatzel, why do they have the same score? Also, you praise the Shinx line for having access to Bite against Fantina, but claim she has too much offensive presence against the Zubat line to be of any use, despite the Zubat line being substantially bulkier and faster (and if you have a Crobat by then, it's also hitting harder). How does Luxio have "a solid standing" against Fantina when Golbat is "not enough to stand up to Fantina's party"? Don't want to come off as overly critical: I enjoy reading your posts in this thread. I just wanted to point out those minor nitpicks

His tragedies are known for being tragic. He wrote other things, too. His tragedies don't even come close to being the majority of what he wrote, although they're probably the most frequently taught and most famous.

Use a Rescue Staff on Tiki to move her further up. With people in the right place, you can get her to the highest row of the map. Makes it a LOT easier to cover her with fewer characters.

Just as some examples: In some places, it can be one man and many women. In other places, just one man and one woman. In other places, any two consenting people of sufficient age. That the definition is necessarily malleable at all means it can be changed though. Is legalizing gay marriage changing the definition? Yes. And? It's changed before. It can change all the time throughout history.

'Dem oil and fire tactics. I'd definitely want a less goody-two-shoes than the ones that exist currently, but I don't want a genocidal maniac, either. I would absolutely love a morally ambiguous anti-hero who faces Sophie's Choice type dilemmas that have actual consequences. Maybe some of the people they have to kill are in the right, or innocent but necessary victims of circumstance. Maybe they have to do what's best for their country or whatever entity they owe their allegiance to even if it's not best for everyone (like Trabant). Maybe the protagonist actually has some genuinely dislikable negative characteristic that they have to deal with. They KNOW some of their actions are objectionable and have to not only become okay with that but be totally willing to stick by their actions for whatever greater purpose they're supposed to serve. Maybe for once their land isn't the one being invaded. I'd like to see things like that for the next lord. I want a lord that some people are going to see as a villain in some way. Leaf doesn't have everyone kissing his ass for everything he does with all who follow him worshiping his every decision (unlike his cousin). He's portrayed as making mistakes and having those mistakes actually CALLED mistakes instead of just always being right about everything. His plight is so much more intimate and applaudable for these reasons.

While I normally totally disagree with Olwen's statements in the Serious Discussion forum, I largely agree with what he's been saying here. Bullying doesn't go away, unfortunately. Things can be done to inhibit bullying, but it's not something that can be squashed out. It's something that even if a school does everything in its power to stop it from happening at school, can happen elsewhere. And Asperger's is definitely something can be worked with, much like plenty of other things. And working on how you interact with people is definitely a good way to go about it. I went to a counselor when I was much younger and I don't think that helped me too much at the time, but over the years, I think I've figured out how to get by. Most people I interact with would not call me socially awkward or at least not to the point that it's inhibitive even if they would call me awkward. My ex, who knows me better than damn near anyone else said I was very awkward but exceedingly good at masking it in such a way that others wouldn't pick up on it. Counseling that might help you in this regard is at least worth considering.

You're right. My bad. I apologize. I'd just taken note that any time someone said something that wasn't explicitly sympathetic, you criticized them for it. If everyone just told the OP how sorry they are for them, though, very little would be accomplished. For the most part, people making these critiques are not playing villains. Late, but entirely spot-on.

Ah! The person who complained when Eclipse pointed out the first post featured self pity and equated it with kicking someone in the stomach. Hyperbole much? Eclipse wasn't attacking. She was pointing out something true. I feel like I did the same. Pointing out things that are true does not mean you're attacking someone. I'm talking in the past… and? The original post is one big summary of someone's past. I never said I ceased to have it or turned out not to have it. And when did anyone complain about his difficulty with social interaction? Not once in this thread that I've noticed. It's been pointed out repeatedly that this thread was asking for attention, which it is, despite the OP's claim that it isn't. Frankly, compassion isn't always the best way to help someone. Trying to promote compassion is promoting the coddling that doesn't actually help. They don't need your pity party.

This is the Serious Discussion forum. So… what exactly is it you want to see discussed? Asperger's (you say it has nothing to do with that, but you're the one who mentioned it in the first place, so it can't mean nothing)? Bullying? How much life can suck? Yourself? Telling your story in third person with a title like "The Boy" until the big reveal that YOU are "the boy" isn't exaggerating per se, but definitely isn't the least dramatic way to present a narrative, either. You say you're looking for a certain type of response by specifying what type of response you already get plenty of and don't want to see. You didn't write this in a journal for no one to see. It can certainly be seen as a way of asking for some sort of attention even if it's not a cry for attention. I certainly don't think you should feel bad about it, but if it looks like a bear and acts like a bear, people are going to call it a bear. Making this thread is asking for attention on some level. There's nothing inherently bad about that. Sometimes asking for attention is a very important, occasionally life-saving thing. That said, there DOES appear to be a lot of coddling in the responses and in a way, it's kind of offensive. I almost agree with Dick in a way on that point. Any time someone points out something about your post that is true but not flattering, they're getting criticized for it to some extent because poor boy - his story is heartwrenching. How dare anyone say anything other than how sorry they are for the boy. I was told I had Asperger's growing up too. I know other people with it as well. I think I have a pretty fabulous social life, and I know other people with the syndrome as well who are doing great, socially. It's certainly not an insurmountable road block to anything. High school can really suck. Not to take a page directly out of Dan Savage's book, but things can definitely get a lot better in a few years (bullying doesn't necessarily stop later in life, though - just a heads up). Doesn't mean the present or the next couple of years don't have to capacity to be awful at times. But, uh, find a way to cope and hope for the best? School certainly isn't the only place to meet people or make friendships. As someone already suggested (and someone who said your post contains self pity! How dare they!) you'd likely be best served by someone trained to assist you like a counselor, as well.

Bullshit. A lot of the things you've said are true, but to claim that the 'mystical' connotations religions apply to marriage are what "makes a marriage a marriage" is ridiculous. Those connotations exist for people of particular faiths, but they're hardly the singular feature that give marriage its definition (as opposed to, say, the legal benefits and encumbrances that exist for all marriages). Further, that a connection often (but certainly not always) exists between marriage and religion does not make religion proprietor of the institution. You haven't claimed that it does, but when people end up making the claim that marriage and religion are separated, which as you pointed out isn't quite true (and plenty of same sex marriages involve religious ceremonies, too), it's usually to make the point that religion doesn't own marriage or that religions against same sex marriage ought not be able to disallow their existence just because they aren't in favor of them. You, yourself, pointed out there exist a variety of types of marriage (shotgun, convenience, arranged). Those without any religious connotations whatsoever also exist. Religious or so-called 'mystical' connotations for marriages exist, but they definitely aren't what define it contemporarily.

I consider myself a pretty big Tharja fan. But I can assure you it's not because of her body (I'm gay, so I give zero fucks). It's more because of what makes her such a terrible person in the eyes of those who hate her. Chrom, Lucina, Henry, and Tharja all definitely have a lot of fans.

The wiki is so full of misinformation and bias it can be appalling. The laguz royals mop the floor with everything but so many of them have such poor availability. If you find using laguz enjoyable, it's definitely worth using non-royal laguz, too.

The only person required for 2-E is Elincia. And the CRK people that just show up since you can't control that. You can field everyone available though, so there's no reason not to. They made laguz a lot easier to use in RD, in my opinion. And some of them are really good, so I definitely recommend trying a couple of them out! I'm particularly fond of using Volug and Ulki.

I don't really want weight to return, but I wouldn't particularly mind if it does. Only on the condition that it be subtracted from Strength instead of from Con. It was totally unfair how characters of a smaller frame were basically penalized for using heavier weapons in the GBA games.

Of the three chapters Brom is in before Gatrie shows up, I'm pretty sure Mordecai is in two of them. He's required for one and not required for 2-E, but neither is Brom. Pretty sure everyone can be deployed in that one, though. As for managing funds, all I'll say is it's unfair to judge laguz to the same standard as beorc if you're giving beorc the resources they need to do well and not doing the same for the laguz.

The way I see it, if you buy your beorc units weapons, it shouldn't be a problem to buy Olivi Grass for the laguz if you're using any. Definitely not trying to imply people should be using Mordecai instead of Brom, either. But if someone is just using whatever is most convenient at the time, Mordecai has some pretty big selling points over Brom in the chapters where you're forced to use both, and after that, Gatrie's around who is generally much more convenient to use as well. But if it's fun for you to use Brom as I imagine it is, all the more power to you!

Supposing Mordy is transformed, though, it'll be a good long while before Brom catches up with those base stats he's competing with. Like… Brom has to become a Marshall before he breaks Mordecai's base defense transformed I'm pretty sure. Of course, the lack of 1-2 range and fire weakness hurt, but no unit has everything.

This game throws so much stuff at you to keep Laguz transformed so long as you aren't trying to use them all I've never had a problem with it. But even without transforming, Mordecai has what, 57 HP and 16 Defense? That's a whopping 21 HP lead over Brom's base, in exchange for 5 Defense untransformed (which, transformed, puts Mordecai ahead by 11 points of Defense). If Brom isn't dying, I can't imagine Mordecai would be. Transformed or not.

One of my favorite characters in Tellius is Calill. While she has some unique niches and kicks plenty of ass after giving her sufficient favoritism, most people find Soren a lot easier to use, I imagine, if they're looking for just one Arch Sage. Same with Brom. Sure you can use him, and if you favor him enough he'll probably do better, but Gatrie is arguably a lot more convenient to use. And Gatrie's stat growth distribution is pretty delicious by comparison. Plus, if I just wanted a tank, for some of the chapters Brom is in where Gatrie isn't available yet, Mordecai is insanely tankier. As a character, I'm largely indifferent to him though. Family man characters are pretty rare though, so he's pretty cool on that front I suppose.

Oh, cool. I haven't bothered playing that one yet so I was wondering if the land Ike traveled to was ever going to be specified or not.

It's explicitly stated that the land Ike traveled to (with Soren, of course) is Ylisse? Where does it specify this, precisely?

Precisely. Further, there could be a cathartic element to it. When people blame violence on video games, I'm reminded of this: http://kotaku.com/breaking-down-the-absurd-anatomy-of-a-video-game-scare-487437560 When people blame violence on media in general (be it something like trying to blame Columbine on Marilyn Manson, or killings inspired by movies), I think of this: http://www.digitalvillage.org/dv_jenkins1.html I agree with the OP that video games are influential (all video games, not just "games like that" as they put it), and that everything has the capacity for influence, however minute. But just because there was an influence doesn't mean it's the driving force behind someone's actions, or that it should be seen as the reason someone does something. To directly blame video games or other media is almost (if not always) stupid.

I guess I'll go by game: FE4: Levin, Sigurd, Arthur, Julius, Leaf, Ishtar FE5: Leaf (again, yay!), Homeros, Olwen FE6: Hugh, Echidna, Niime FE7: Serra, Erk, Nils (fucking Nini taking all the supports...), FE8: eh FE9/10: Tanith, Calill, Soren, Reyson, Shinon FE11/12: Merric, Athena, Wolf FE13: Henry, Tharja, Anna, Severa, Gangrel, Brady And any Paul/Jasmine type villains. Tanith, Calill, and Henry are definitely at the top of the list, though.