Paper Jam Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 If Jill gets an A support with Haar, her ending says that she moved to Talrega with her husband, and if she doesn't have an A support with Haar, it says nothing about Jill having a husband. That means that Haar and Jill got married, doesn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bros Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 Probably. The fact that it changes from having an A support with Haar likely means that's what happened. It's not always the case since Ike having an A with Soren changes Soren's ending but Ike and Soren don't get married. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Laufeyson Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 I know its not really related but is Mist's ending change only with an A support with Boyd? Cuz i had an A support with Rolf and her ending was the same as always. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Jam Posted June 26, 2009 Author Share Posted June 26, 2009 Probably. The fact that it changes from having an A support with Haar likely means that's what happened. It's not always the case since Ike having an A with Soren changes Soren's ending but Ike and Soren don't get married. Of course, the ending never implies that they do, unlike Jill. I know its not really related but is Mist's ending change only with an A support with Boyd? Cuz i had an A support with Rolf and her ending was the same as always. Yup. Mist only marries Boyd, and only if they have an A Support with each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bros Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 (edited) Of course, the ending never implies that they do, unlike Jill.Yup. Mist only marries Boyd, and only if they have an A Support with each other. The fact that it mentions that she got married only with an A support with Haar means she marries Haar. What's wierd is why Boyd and not Rolf? Rolf is much closer to her own age. Edited June 27, 2009 by luigi bros Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellioning Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 That's what we all want to know. Maybe Boyd's a lolicon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaybee Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Rofl is younger than Mist, and she always seemed to like Boyd more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bros Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 I've only supported them in FE10 to see the ending, but it didn't look like they had any feelings for eachother. I didn't see the FE9 ones where personality is shown though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Jam Posted June 28, 2009 Author Share Posted June 28, 2009 Maybe Boyd's a lolicon? Jill and Mist are roughly the same age, so if Boyd is a lolicon, that probably makes Haar one too. Haar was old enough to serve in Begnion's army when Shiharam deserted, and that was 21 years before Radiant Dawn. That means that Haar is in his mid-to-late thirties or even his forties in Radiant Dawn, whereas Jill is still in her late teens... On the other hand, Naesala is quite a bit older than Leanne, and Almedha is old enough to be Ashnard's great-great-great-grandmother, so maybe it isn't so weird after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Laufeyson Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 I thought in FE9 Mist was 14 and Jill was 16. but yeah i guess so. Haar seems to be about 35 or so in PoR. *shrugs* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bros Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 Almedha is old enough to be Ashnard's great-great-great-grandmother, so maybe it isn't so weird after all. That's differant. The Dragon Tribe age much, much, much, much slower than the Beorc. Almedha looks like she's around Ashnard's age. When Ike meets Ena and Nasir Ena says it's only been three years. That's probably the same as like I don't know a month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireman Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 It was generally accepted in the "olden days" for men to marry women much, much younger than them. Not so much in our generation...XD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Jam Posted June 28, 2009 Author Share Posted June 28, 2009 It was generally accepted in the "olden days" for men to marry women much, much younger than them. Not so much in our generation...XD I'm not sure about that. Two of my uncles are married to women quite a bit younger than them. (10 to 15 years younger, if I remember correctly; not as big an age difference as Jill and Haar, but still a pretty big age difference.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.