Brides. . . really?

[Anouleth]

Semantics. She's wearing it to battle, it's a battle gown.

So what you're saying is that you're happy that a woman is wearing a dress, that is a dress that is worn to battle, to battle? You seem easily pleased, then.

We already have a Dancer, you don't think Olivia knows her way around a pole?

Pole dancing is quite different, you know. And I don't see any lance rank on Olivia, so clearly she does not know her way around a pole.

[ISRMMBV]

Pole dancing is quite different, you know. And I don't see any lance rank on Olivia, so clearly she does not know her way around a pole.

Ah but your forgetting Anoleth. She can have kids

*bud dum bum kssh*

Edited June 1, 2012 by ISRMMBV

[StrategistPockystix]

Being a Lord doesn't always make you a capable fighter either, but nobody complained about that. I admit it's a tad silly, but no less so (if you think about it), than a 'Prince', 'Lord' or 'Villager' class. These are titles, or statuses, and don't encompass the whole of the person.

The dress is just impractical though. Then again, so is what half of what everyones wearing in this game.

again, by comparison most lords start out terrible to mediocre, getting better (with some obvious exceptions). While wearing your typical anime-fantasy things (or man skirts, if your Marth), or over sized armors for the Knights they at least seemed like something you'd at least see on the battlefield. Need I remind you that actual knights fought in armor and clothing that was made for defense, but was ugly and often cumbersome, while high ranking officers; usually those who never saw much action, dressed with appearance in mind. now, in a game that'd be boring as all hell. So while FE13 has "upped the ante" in terms of outlandish, the series did take some liberties. . . but. . . they weren't ever riding into battle in $20,000 gowns that were meant to be worn for a single day, that somehow have even less maneuverability than a suit of General armor lol

And yes, people complained about the older designs too, it's just that those were more of a design choice. . . this is just because the bride needs to be in the white dress fitting of the term bride. . . if we were using logic that stated she would be a battle-bride (stretching this here) she'd look more stylized. . . and not just a dress

[Anouleth]

Being a Lord doesn't always make you a capable fighter either, but nobody complained about that. I admit it's a tad silly, but no less so (if you think about it), than a 'Prince', 'Lord' or 'Villager' class. These are titles, or statuses, and don't encompass the whole of the person.

Bride is not a title, or a status. I believe the issue is that a woman being a bride is an extremely small and minor part of who she is. Being a Prince, or a Lord, or a Villager, or even a Nomad or a Pirate is a better reflection of title or status. Eirika is a princess or a queen before she is a bride. And that's true for every woman, that being a bride is going to be an extremely small part of who they are.

[Striped Shirt]

Likes Ponies = must be willing to see a woman fight in a dress that most women can barely walk in, let alone fight in

I just think it's a little ironic is all.

So what you're saying is that you're happy that a woman is wearing a dress, that is a dress that is worn to battle, to battle? You seem easily pleased, then.

I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make with that, but what's wrong with being easily pleased? If I was forced to choose between being someone who enjoys things and a sourpuss who gets mad at video games I'll take the former every time.

Though preferably I'd like to be both.

Pole dancing is quite different, you know. And I don't see any lance rank on Olivia, so clearly she does not know her way around a pole.

Pole dancing, belly dancing, it's all the same. You really don't think the Dancers have dabbled?

Edited June 1, 2012 by Striped Shirt

[Onestep]

again, by comparison most lords start out terrible to mediocre, getting better (with some obvious exceptions). While wearing your typical anime-fantasy things (or man skirts, if your Marth), or over sized armors for the Knights they at least seemed like something you'd at least see on the battlefield. Need I remind you that actual knights fought in armor and clothing that was made for defense, but was ugly and often cumbersome, while high ranking officers; usually those who never saw much action, dressed with appearance in mind. now, in a game that'd be boring as all hell. So while FE13 has "upped the ante" in terms of outlandish, the series did take some liberties. . . but. . . they weren't ever riding into battle in $20,000 gowns that were meant to be worn for a single day, that somehow have even less maneuverability than a suit of General armor lol

And yes, people complained about the older designs too, it's just that those were more of a design choice. . . this is just because the bride needs to be in the white dress fitting of the term bride. . . if we were using logic that stated she would be a battle-bride (stretching this here) she'd look more stylized. . . and not just a dress

Actually, yes, you would need to remind me about that armour. Knight's armour was generally well tended to, and fitted so as to encumber the wearer very little. Only the full, Gothic plate armour required the wearer to be riding a horse for full effectivity. Do remember that essentially ALL knights had a title of some kind and generally either wealth or expensive family heirlooms at their disposal.

And all these suits of armour were generally quite attractive to look at. From the 15th century onward in particular, Maximillian armour (considered the succesor to Gothic plate) was incredibly ornate and quite common among the nobility.

As for the white dress... It's iconic, I suppose. For Swordmasters or Demon Hunters or any other class, most people will have their own, wildly different, ideas on what they should be wearing. But if you asked someone what they imagined a bride would wear, the answer would invariably be a white dress. At least in the West.

As for what someone would say if you asked them what a bride would wear in battle, the answer would probably be another question. That is: 'What's a bride doing in a battle to begin with?'

[StrategistPockystix]

Actually, yes, you would need to remind me about that armour. Knight's armour was generally well tended to, and fitted so as to encumber the wearer very little. Only the full, Gothic plate armour required the wearer to be riding a horse for full effectivity. Do remember that essentially ALL knights had a title of some kind and generally either wealth or expensive family heirlooms at their disposal.

And all these suits of armour were generally quite attractive to look at. From the 15th century onward in particular, Maximillian armour (considered the succesor to Gothic plate) was incredibly ornate and quite common among the nobility.

As for the white dress... It's iconic, I suppose. For Swordmasters or Demon Hunters or any other class, most people will have their own, wildly different, ideas on what they should be wearing. But if you asked someone what they imagined a bride would wear, the answer would invariably be a white dress. At least in the West.

As for what someone would say if you asked them what a bride would wear in battle, the answer would probably be another question. That is: 'What's a bride doing in a battle to begin with?'

knights (usually sir) had the fancy armor, if you were a low ranking, low class soldier (i.e. most of fire emblem) you wore what little the blacksmith could turn out in times of war. it was serviceable, but it wasn't the high grade, well made sets of armor. but yes, there was better armor made for the knights that came from noble families that could afford the fancy stuff to die in. Now yes, they managed to streamline some armor, but it was just that, streamlined. ever look at the usual nameless schmucks in fire emblem, that's what a normal soldier would have. you'd be lucky to die in something that was more expensive than your lord's horse.

and again, stylistic choice of samurai-like clothes, which is breathable and loose enough to move in, in comparison to a heavy, highly decorative dress that would wear it's user down. I will concede that I have no idea what the previous swordmaster DLC character was wearing then. . . probably killed a peacock.

and I think you answered why people dislike the entire idea of the class at the end. I mean, why Bride? Why not have her own class, y'know one that's actually something you'd see on the battlefield. . .

Bride is not a title, or a status. I believe the issue is that a woman being a bride is an extremely small and minor part of who she is. Being a Prince, or a Lord, or a Villager, or even a Nomad or a Pirate is a better reflection of title or status. Eirika is a princess or a queen before she is a bride. And that's true for every woman, that being a bride is going to be an extremely small part of who they are.

this

Edited June 1, 2012 by StrategistPockystix

[Samias]

My complaint with the class wasn't ao much with the concept moreso than the choice of Eirika to represent the class initially. But honestly, I am just curious about the scenario that leads to Eirika's particular predicament of fighting in a frilly, cumbersome wedding gown. The actual concept of a bride class actually isn't so bad considering this is Waifu Emblem, though I hope males get a corresponding groom class, since you can make any of them husbands, too. And then we could get yet another custom female class, and I would be perfectly happy with that. I just don't want girls to be exclusively saddled with support classes while guys get badass fighters.

[Anouleth]

My complaint with the class wasn't ao much with the concept moreso than the choice of Eirika to represent the class initially. But honestly, I am just curious about the scenario that leads to Eirika's particular predicament of fighting in a frilly, cumbersome wedding gown. The actual concept of a bride class actually isn't so bad considering this is Waifu Emblem, though I hope males get a corresponding groom class, since you can make any of them husbands, too.

The difference is that women are defined by loyalty and subservience to their man.

And then we could get yet another custom female class, and I would be perfectly happy with that. I just don't want girls to be exclusively saddled with support classes while guys get badass fighters.

She's lucky even to get bows and staves. The initial design was her to wield Pre-Nuptial Agreements and Bouquets.

[Airship Canon]

I'm sure I could scrape some subhumans off the floors of TvTropes' basement who think they're interesting too.

There's Laguz on TvTropes?

Anyways: What's that saying? Oh yeah, "Don't Knock it until you try it". I think that's the one.

... WHY THE HELL ARE PEOPLE WHINING ABOUT A CLASS THAT WE KNOW NOTHING (outside of "Female Only", "Bows + Staves") ABOUT?

It's kinda silly and stupid, don't ya think?

By the way, my guess at Skills:

L5 Imbue

L15 Nihil

[Anouleth]

There's Laguz on TvTropes?

Anyways: What's that saying? Oh yeah, "Don't Knock it until you try it". I think that's the one.

... WHY THE HELL ARE PEOPLE WHINING ABOUT A CLASS THAT WE KNOW NOTHING (outside of "Female Only", "Bows + Staves") ABOUT?

It's kinda silly and stupid, don't ya think?

We know what it looks like and the name, so I feel pretty justified in saying that it doesn't look good and the name is a bad one. I'm not saying that this class is going to be useless or not fun to use or whatever, just that I hate the concept.

[uguu]

There's Laguz on TvTropes?

Anyways: What's that saying? Oh yeah, "Don't Knock it until you try it". I think that's the one.

... WHY THE HELL ARE PEOPLE WHINING ABOUT A CLASS THAT WE KNOW NOTHING (outside of "Female Only", "Bows + Staves") ABOUT?

It's kinda silly and stupid, don't ya think?

By the way, my guess at Skills:

L5 Imbue

L15 Nihil

their problem isn't what the class can do, but what the class is

are you illiterate?

[Saria]

I think the very obvious problem with Eirika's DLC is just the name choice. I haven't seen many people actually say her dress was horrid, but most of what I've seen people complain about is the practicality (you can't tell me that's not an impractical thing to wear). If Eirika truly is in the middle of her wedding when she's teleported into the scenario, then it's understandable for her to be wearing it then, but she seems the type to want to change out of it afterwards? Anyways, not my point.

It really is fairly sexist to use the term 'Bride' for the brand new female-specific class when Demon Fighter was made as a male-only class. It seems like it was shafted, and is reaffirming of what a lot of people feel a woman's place is; Though I suppose Eirika doesn't seem all that odd of a choice for it given their naming. I feel Princess or Queen would be most fitting, but given that barely any of the other female units you recruit are actual royalty, I can see how that wouldn't work in a logical sense. However, a different word maybe could have been chosen that would have settled better for her class name?

Such as Maiden, if they wanted a female oriented name after all. I don't know... It really is the choice of the word Bride that tips this into a problem area for a lot of people, me included. And while the dress is impractical, at least Eirika's artwork was treated a lot nicer than Micaiah's or Elincia's.

[Anouleth]

I think the very obvious problem with Eirika's DLC is just the name choice. I haven't seen many people actually say her dress was horrid, but most of what I've seen people complain about is the practicality (you can't tell me that's not an impractical thing to wear). If Eirika truly is in the middle of her wedding when she's teleported into the scenario, then it's understandable for her to be wearing it then, but she seems the type to want to change out of it afterwards? Anyways, not my point.

It really is fairly sexist to use the term 'Bride' for the brand new female-specific class when Demon Fighter was made as a male-only class. It seems like it was shafted, and is reaffirming of what a lot of people feel a woman's place is; Though I suppose Eirika doesn't seem all that odd of a choice for it given their naming. I feel Princess or Queen would be most fitting, but given that barely any of the other female units you recruit are actual royalty, I can see how that wouldn't work in a logical sense. However, a different word maybe could have been chosen that would have settled better for her class name?

Such as Maiden, if they wanted a female oriented name after all. I don't know... It really is the choice of the word Bride that tips this into a problem area for a lot of people, me included. And while the dress is impractical, at least Eirika's artwork was treated a lot nicer than Micaiah's or Elincia's.

Maiden would be fine; but it's important to note that reclassing hasn't stopping other characters from hopping over class boundaries. You can turn noblemen into mercenaries, commoners into knights, and professional soldiers into rugged barbarians.

And I don't really have any problems with the artwork.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Anouleth

[Striped Shirt]

Such as Maiden, if they wanted a female oriented name after all. I don't know... It really is the choice of the word Bride that tips this into a problem area for a lot of people, me included. And while the dress is impractical, at least Eirika's artwork was treated a lot nicer than Micaiah's or Elincia's.

I'll agree with this. I would probably be a lot more up-in-arms about the class if it didn't debut with an absolutely beautiful and respectful representation of one of my favorite lords.

It put me in the right mindset to appreciate the class I suppose, as I see it more as a celebration of femininity than sexist commentary on a woman's "role". Frankly, I think the the people so cynical to see it that way are giving off some pretty unfortunate implications.

[Sunwoo]

We know what it looks like and the name, so I feel pretty justified in saying that it doesn't look good and the name is a bad one. I'm not saying that this class is going to be useless or not fun to use or whatever, just that I hate the concept.

This. I've said it numerous times before, I like the artwork itself, as a stand alone. It looks really nice, and the dress is pretty. My problem is that the class is called a "Bride" and that it's a female exclusive class. If you're gonna give us a Bride, then why can't you give us a Groom that's a male exclusive class. Why did Alm get an awesome male exclusive class while women got ... Bride? Why is this even a class?

If they had called it something else reasonable, then I wouldn't be complaining. If it didn't look like they were trying to turn Eirika into a staff chick (when in her original game, she was on the front lines), I wouldn't complain. But ... guess what? They did.

Edit:

It put me in the right mindset to appreciate the class I suppose, as I see it more as a celebration of femininity than sexist commentary on a woman's "role". Frankly, I think the the people so cynical to see it that way are giving off some pretty unfortunate implications.

A bride is a celebration of femininity? Why do we need a class that is a "celebration of femininity?" FE is a game about WAR. Just give me something that looks practical to fight in. Also, Alm's class ... while it's a male-exclusive class, there's nothing about its naming that would limit female characters. Whereas Bride is pretty much exclusively a term applied to women.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Folgore Yellow

[Onestep]

I think the problem a lot of people have is that they're taking the class a character has to be more important than it actually is, with regards to the characters. When Eliwood is a Paladin, he's still the Lord of Pherae. Same goes for Hector. Shiida's a Pegasus Knight, even though she's a princess. Pretty much the entire cast of Jugdral have titles to their name, but a wide variety of classes.

A class is just a collection of skills, and the Bride class is no different. Note that there's no actual obligation for a female unit using the class to have a groom. It's a class, not a description.

I do question why they called it 'Bride', but it's not a big enough issue for me to be concerned about. I don't see any kind of inherent sexism in it and I highly doubt any was intended. IS was probably just struggling for a name, saw the concept art for Eirikia, thought it looked like a wedding dress and BAM! New class.

[Saria]

Maiden would be fine; but it's important to note that reclassing hasn't stopping other characters from hopping over class boundaries. You can turn noblemen into mercenaries, commoners into knights, and professional soldiers into rugged barbarians.

And I don't really have any problems with the artwork.

It doesn't work reverse though is what I meant by Queen and Princess not being fitting for the others, such as turning a myrmidon into a Lord or anyone else. Especially since Lord is specific to only two characters in the game, and Star Lord if you count Marth in as well.

[Saria]

I'll agree with this. I would probably be a lot more up-in-arms about the class if it didn't debut with an absolutely beautiful and respectful representation of one of my favorite lords.

It put me in the right mindset to appreciate the class I suppose, as I see it more as a celebration of femininity than sexist commentary on a woman's "role". Frankly, I think the the people so cynical to see it that way are giving off some pretty unfortunate implications.

Eirika's DLC doesn't red flag me as sexist nearly as much as Micaiah's redesigning did, but it's still there for quite a few people.

My point is this: Alm's specific class got a name fitting for a fighter. Eirika's specific class was given a name fitting for... well a Bride, not so much a fighter.

Barring everything else, I'm at least pleased that they seem to be giving her a wide range of weapon's, her class definitely looks like it will be useful to have around. It's just the naming of it that's a problem.

[Mysterique Sign]

Although I do I agree calling the class Bride is a little...eyebrow raising (should've been Magical Girl!), but can we at least agree that it's kind of neat that they're taking a traditional symbol of femininity and showcasing it as a symbol of power and strength?

Edited June 1, 2012 by Mysterique Sign

[ISRMMBV]

Although I do I agree calling the class Bride is a little...eyebrow raising (should've been Magical Girl!), but can we at least agree that it's kind of neat that they're taking a traditional symbol of femininity and showcasing it as a symbol of power and strength?

Okay, so you make a contract with a prophet and get a "soul token" from a Magical Girl.....

Where've I heard that before?

[Mysterique Sign]

They'll be fine as long as they get enough grief seeds

[Loki Laufeyson]

This. If Eirika really was summoned from her wedding, then most of my complaints would be for naught. If she's a Bride just because ... well, just because, then I'll be a little annoyed.

Yeah. But even if she was summoned right from her wedding, why would her entire battle arsenal change so radically? Just because shes in a dress? But the issue here isnt just Eirika. Obviously the game has a reclassing system and you can unlock classes with the DLC. Cool beans. But like, this particular one is...umm..female only and...just...wut? Also staves and bows is a weird combination to say the least.

Her class is called bride and she's in a wedding dress, I don't think it's a stretch to say that's the point of the class.

Thats what i find irksome.

We know what it looks like and the name, so I feel pretty justified in saying that it doesn't look good and the name is a bad one. I'm not saying that this class is going to be useless or not fun to use or whatever, just that I hate the concept.

Indeed. Skill sets for this class could be kinda gr9mazing for all we know. Growths could be good too. Its the concept behind it thats a little Like Anouleth said earlier, this wouldnt attract much ire at all if it were called something like "Maiden" or "Noble Lady" or some junk like that. Bride is just...eeehhh and kinda well..it just feels wrong.

Eirika's DLC doesn't red flag me as sexist nearly as much as Micaiah's redesigning did, but it's still there for quite a few people.

Oh im not as pissed as i was about the Micaiah thing. No where near. But yeah.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Florina

[Original Alear]

Even though it is dumb I still kinda thing it's awesome. I would totally join Eirika on the battlefield wearing my own wedding dress.

[Karasz]

I honestly don't think there's anything wrong with the semantics of the Bride class. Yes, it sounds almost irksome. Yes, it's Eirika in a wedding dress. Yes, it has Bows & Staves. But honestly, who cares? So long as females get a new class with good utility, I don't care one bit. I can't be arsed to be irked by the fact that the name of the class is "Bride," and quite frankly, I don't care, either. They needed to come up with a good Female class sooner or later, seeing as Demon Fighter is Male only. Although to counter the fact that Demon Fighter's skills are RIDICULOUS, Bride should probably have female-only skills that will help them out...but god only knows if they'll give Bride Defense +10, that's a bit OP.

But yeah, I'm interested in further seeing how the Bride class plays out when we get it on June 7th. So everyone should just quit their bitching about a class that hasn't been released yet? You want to judge it? Judge it when Eirika's DLC comes out, not beforehand when we know nothing about it.