What defines a 'Lord' character?

[Florete]

Now let's try to define main character. I'll take Red Fox's criteria:

Characters like Hector, Lyn, Avatar etc. fit into this definition nicely. I think it works but consider the following situation:

The main character of FE14 is a character called Estelle. Estelle is not the army leader (she's just a troop); she's just a soldier class and she's not force deployed in the final chapter because she has to take on the main villain in a movie cutscene rather than a player-controlled fight. But the game ends if she dies because the entire story is from her perspective and she's actively involved in it. Going by the definition you guys have provided to me, Estelle is not the main character of FE14, but it's clear that she is due to the story being from her perspective.

And Estelle is not a Lord. She's just a soldier! How can she be a Lord? Obviously Lord means something different than main character.

It's impossible to define what a main character is. It's like trying to define what a chair is. Oxford dictionary defines a chair as a "separate seat for one person, typically with a back and four legs." But we can imagine a possible community where objects with a back and four legs exist, and people only sit on those objects in groups of two. It would be a strange community, but it's possible. There's no reason to believe that chairs are only separate seats for one person. See Paul Elbourne's book for a more elaborate argument on how difficult it is to define these kinds of concepts.

What we can do, at most, is try to find some characteristics to point us in the right direction. The characteristics Red Fox lists are a good way to indicate which x is a main character, but they're not essential.

You make a good point. Should this theoretical situation actually happen (leaving aside the probability of it), I wonder if the fandom would consider her an FE Lord, despite being the main character. Micaiah, at least, shares a lot of traits with other Lords, so considering her one is easy.

However, I do think that Estelle would need to be force deployed on every map, final included, unless there was some other main character who was force deployed instead, in which that character would probably be more important and the primary protagonist anyway. While I can see the main character of a Fire Emblem game being a common soldier and possibly not even having a unique class, I can't see the character not being forced, because if you're going to be the main character, you should be around for the events of the story. So I would probably change my criteria to something like this:

1. Game over for death always

2. Force deployed whenever focus of the story is on them

[Florete]

Now let's try to define main character. I'll take Red Fox's criteria:

Characters like Hector, Lyn, Avatar etc. fit into this definition nicely. I think it works but consider the following situation:

The main character of FE14 is a character called Estelle. Estelle is not the army leader (she's just a troop); she's just a soldier class and she's not force deployed in the final chapter because she has to take on the main villain in a movie cutscene rather than a player-controlled fight. But the game ends if she dies because the entire story is from her perspective and she's actively involved in it. Going by the definition you guys have provided to me, Estelle is not the main character of FE14, but it's clear that she is due to the story being from her perspective.

And Estelle is not a Lord. She's just a soldier! How can she be a Lord? Obviously Lord means something different than main character.

It's impossible to define what a main character is. It's like trying to define what a chair is. Oxford dictionary defines a chair as a "separate seat for one person, typically with a back and four legs." But we can imagine a possible community where objects with a back and four legs exist, and people only sit on those objects in groups of two. It would be a strange community, but it's possible. There's no reason to believe that chairs are only separate seats for one person. See Paul Elbourne's book for a more elaborate argument on how difficult it is to define these kinds of concepts.

What we can do, at most, is try to find some characteristics to point us in the right direction. The characteristics Red Fox lists are a good way to indicate which x is a main character, but they're not essential.

You make a good point. Should this theoretical situation actually happen (leaving aside the probability of it), I wonder if the fandom would consider her an FE Lord, despite being the main character. Micaiah, at least, shares a lot of traits with other Lords, so considering her one is easy.

However, I do think that Estelle would need to be force deployed on every map, final included, unless there was some other main character who was force deployed instead, in which that character would probably be more important and the primary protagonist anyway. While I can see the main character of a Fire Emblem game being a common soldier and possibly not even having a unique class, I can't see the character not being forced, because if you're going to be the main character, you should be around for the events of the story. So I would probably change my criteria to something like this:

1. Game over for death always.

2. Force deployed whenever focus of the story is on them and in the final chapter.

3. Story must focus on them for a significant portion of the game. ("significant" being a variable that depends on the game and story in question)

Other things, like unique class, army leader, and special Prf weapon may be there for many/all of the current Lords, but I wouldn't count them as necessary.

EDIT: I don't know what happened but the first time I posted (about 5 minutes before this one) was accidental and was unfinished.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Red Fox of Fire

[Chiki]

It doesn't seem to be necessary for them to be deployed in the final chapter. We'd still call Leaf a Lord if he got force-fatigued during the final chapter.

It might not even be necessary for there to be a game over when they die. Imagine Leaf got injured permanently in the halfway through the game but the game still revolved around him and his ages. Would he be a Lord or not? I'd say yes.

The only necessary one seems to be that they need to be significant to the story and maybe that they're playable for a certain amount of time. It would be strange to call Leaf a Lord if he became unplayable after losing his arm in Prologue, at least for me.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Chiki

[Florete]

He doesn't lose his arm in Prologue, though, and that's just the thing: Fire Emblem games will always feature a main character on the field. There wouldn't be a situation where we only have a bunch of side characters on the field with the protagonist sitting off to the side.

If we had a "main character" in a Fire Emblem game that didn't give a game over on "death" and was never force deployed, I, at least, would not consider them a Lord regardless of their status as protagonist.

[Chiki]

He could have lost his arm. But that won't change our idea of a Lord. If I see a chair without a back, that's not going to change my idea of a chair. If Leaf lost an arm halfway through the game, I still think he'd be a Lord. But there could have been faceless characters like in FE11 who you deployed instead of Fin, Othin etc. in FE5. In that case, only Leaf could have been considered the main character since the story would revolve around him and his decisions.

[dondon151]

He could have lost his arm. But that won't change our idea of a Lord. If I see a chair without a back, that's not going to change my idea of a chair.

that, my friend, is what we call a stool. not the poopy kind, mind you.

Edited February 19, 2014 by dondon151

[Chiki]

that, my friend, is what we call a stool. not the poopy kind, mind you.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/chair?q=chair

Funnily enough, Oxford Dictionary says all stools are chairs.

[Baldrick]

Historically, a lord is the leader of the army; the character who can seize. Most of the games are straightforward because the leader is forced in every chapter; 7/8 have different modes that focus on different lords. RD is the only game where this gets muddled; I would consider it Ike and Micaiah, for having the longest stint as leaders by far and leading for the majority of the chapters they are in.

Edit: It says a stool is a seat. So stools and chairs are subsets of seats.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Baldrick

[Florete]

He could have lost his arm. But that won't change our idea of a Lord. If I see a chair without a back, that's not going to change my idea of a chair. If Leaf lost an arm halfway through the game, I still think he'd be a Lord. But there could have been faceless characters like in FE11 who you deployed instead of Fin, Othin etc. in FE5. In that case, only Leaf could have been considered the main character since the story would revolve around him and his decisions.

Lots of stuff can happen, but is there really a need to go so far out of the realm of reality just to question something? The next Fire Emblem could feature a protagonist who is never seen on the field, is not a leader in any way, and dies halfway through (the rest of the story is I don't know what the hell), and that would throw everything for a loop, but unless it actually happens, I don't care enough to go that far in my consideration. Estelle was one thing; I don't see it ever happening like that in the main series, but if I'm to extend this to hacks, I could see it there, as she's not too far-fetched of an idea, and we can still define "Lord" characters in ROM hacks.

If Leaf lost his arm in the prologue and was not deployable for the remainder of the game, I would not consider him a Lord in the way we use the term for FE characters. Would the rest of the fandom? Maybe. I don't really care. If he was halted halfway, I would probably consider him one as at that point he'd meet my criteria minus deployment in the final.

[Loki Laufeyson]

If it seizes, its a Lord. The End, good bye.

Unless its name is Geoffrey, then its just a matter of convenience.

[Jotari]

How about we say this. A Lord is a tag or a way of classifying something. Someone who is a Lord must be deployed, causes a gameover when killed and can seize or control troops if applicable. Despite this characters don't always have to be a Lord. We know Leaf is a Lord in Fe5 but not in Fe4, if that extends to chapters within games then we can define it pretty easily. Geoffrey is a Lord for one chapter in Radiant Dawn. For that one chapter he has all the aspects and traits of a Lord but after that chapter his tenure as a Lord is over. Similarly Hector is not a Lord in Eliwood mode of Fe7 but is a Lord in his own mode.

[BrightBow]

I'm on the team of Lord simply being a term used for the Main character.

Stuff like Ike's promotion in PoR or Lucina's class are merely playing with the tradition of them having Lord as a class name but are not the reason that they are "the" Lord.

So my list is:

FE7: Eliwood, Hector, Lyn due to each of them being the main character depending on the mode.

FE8: Eirika, Eprahim, ditto

FE9: Ike

FE10: Ike, Micaiah, Elincia, since the three of them are main characters of their own story arcs. Others like Nephenee or Tibarn in part 4 are merely temporal the leader of their army but are never the main character of an arc.

FE12: Kinda difficult. I'm just gonna assume that Chris is merely the viewpoint character of the game and that the Lord is still Marth.

FE13: Probably Chrom since he is supposed to be a traditional Lord, down to the point where he is the unit representing the team on the world map. So it feels odd to deny him that title.

Besides, technically, Avatar plays the role of the amnesiac maiden who plays a vital role in the plans of the villain like Julia, Ninian or even Isabella/Catleia over in Advance Wars. But definitely not Lucina. For her, Lord is nothing but a class name.

Edited February 19, 2014 by BrightBow

[Florete]

If it seizes, its a Lord. The End, good bye.

Chrom never seizes, yet is undeniably a Lord.

[Refa]

Neither does Alm, actually.

[Baldrick]

Does anybody else seize in those games? If not, those two would probably qualify based on being your avatar on the world map.

[Florete]

Does anybody else seize in those games? If not, those two would probably qualify based on being your avatar on the world map.

Dunno about Gaiden, but every chapter objective in Awakening is kill boss or kill everyone.

[Psych]

Pretty sure every Gaiden chapter is route save maybe the final or a few with significant bosses. I'd consider Celica a lord too though.

And Lucina's definitely a lord even if she's not that focal. She has the class and unique weapon and everything.

[bottlegnomes]

Skimmed the topic, so not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but I'm going to go with:

1) Always causes a game over when the character reaches 0 HP

2) Capable of using one or more unique or semi-unique weapons

So doing this you'd get:

FE1 - Marth. Only other characters with unique weapons are Merric and Linde, who can die.

FE2 - not a bloody clue

FE3 - Marth (see FE1)

FE4 - Sigurd & Celice definitely. Holy weapons would be considered semi-unique. Diedre while capable of wielding Naga in lore, isn't in gameplay as it's never available to her so she doesn't fit 2. Only thing I'm not sure about here is Julia. Can she retreat or do you need to start over?

FE5 - Leaf. Plenty of characters have unique weapons but can die.

FE6 - Roy

FE7 - Lyn, Eliwood, Hector

FE8 - Ephraim & Eirika

FE9 - Ike. I don't think Elincia causes a restart.

FE10 - Micaiah & Ike. I believe Elincia/Tibarn can retreat in endgame instead of causing a game over.

FE11 - Marth. See FE1, but add Caeda.

FE12 - Marth. See FE11.

FE13 - Chrom. Avatar doesn't have any unique or semi-unique weapons and I'm not sure if Lucina causes a game over.

Aside from a few cases I'm not sure about, this seems pretty accurate for the characters I consider lords.

Edited February 20, 2014 by bottlegnomes

[Tamanoir]

Skimmed the topic, so not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but I'm going to go with:

1) Always causes a game over when the character reaches 0 HP

2) Capable of using one or more unique or semi-unique weapons

So doing this you'd get:

FE1 - Marth. Only other characters with unique weapons are Merric and Linde, who can die.

FE2 - not a bloody clue

FE3 - Marth (see FE1)

FE4 - Sigurd & Celice definitely. Holy weapons would be considered semi-unique. Diedre while capable of wielding Naga in lore, isn't in gameplay as it's never available to her so she doesn't fit 2. Only thing I'm not sure about here is Julia. Can she retreat or do you need to start over?

FE5 - Leaf. Plenty of characters have unique weapons but can die.

FE6 - Roy

FE7 - Lyn, Eliwood, Hector

FE8 - Ephraim & Eirika

FE9 - Ike. I don't think Elincia causes a restart.

FE10 - Micaiah & Ike. I believe Elincia/Tibarn can retreat in endgame instead of causing a game over.

FE11 - Marth. See FE1, but add Caeda.

FE12 - Marth. See FE11.

FE13 - Chrom. Avatar doesn't have any unique or semi-unique weapons and I'm not sure if Lucina causes a game over.

Aside from a few cases I'm not sure about, this seems pretty accurate for the characters I consider lords.

FE2 : Both Alm and Cellica causes Game Over upon death.

Alm have two unique weapons (Falchion and Royal Sword).

Cellica doesn't have any unique weapons, but she is one of the only unit able to learn Ragnarok (the other being Dute).

[RJWalker]

FE4 - Sigurd & Celice definitely. Holy weapons would be considered semi-unique. Diedre while capable of wielding Naga in lore, isn't in gameplay as it's never available to her so she doesn't fit 2. Only thing I'm not sure about here is Julia. Can she retreat or do you need to start over?

Deirdre doesn't get killed. She gets captured by the enemy. You get her back when you conquer the final castle of any chapter.

[Jotari]

Deirdre doesn't get killed. She gets captured by the enemy. You get her back when you conquer the final castle of any chapter.

They said she doesn't fit because she doesn't use any kind of unique weapon, not because she can't be killed.

And I'm quite sure Julia can be killed. At least in the last chapter. It wouldn't do much good having her retreat when she's an enemy.

Edited February 20, 2014 by Jotari

[bottlegnomes]

Cellica doesn't have any unique weapons, but she is one of the only unit able to learn Ragnarok (the other being Dute).

That might constitute semi-unique. But I'm gonna hold off on a decision until I play the game or a remake.

Deirdre doesn't get killed. She gets captured by the enemy. You get her back when you conquer the final castle of any chapter.

Did you mean Julia?

Edited February 20, 2014 by bottlegnomes

[BrightBow]

Well, she and her daughter are the only ones who can ever use Aura.

Anyway, weapons are not a got criteria. There are tons of people who can use unique weapons in FE5 for example. It doesn't prove anything. It's a nice tradition but I don't see why it has to be obligatory just because Celicia is the only exception so far.

That might constitute semi-unique. But I'm gonna hold off on a decision until I play the game or a remake.

Did you mean Julia?

It applies to both anyway.

Edited February 20, 2014 by BrightBow

[bottlegnomes]

Well, she and her daughter are the only ones who can ever use Aura.

Yeah, FE4's a little screwy. I guess the best way to define semi-unique in that game would be requiring major holy blood.

Anyway, weapons are not a got criteria. There are tons of people who can use unique weapons in FE5 for example. It doesn't prove anything. It's a nice tradition but I don't see why it has to be obligatory just because Celicia is the only exception so far.

And all those FE5 characters, except Lief, don't cause a game over when they reach 0 hp. Like I said, Celica might have semi-unique based on what Totally Radical Judge said. But, like RFoF said, I'm not talking about hypotheticals, I'm talking about what's established in the series so far. Unique or semi-unique class probably works just as well, though that's not exactly set in stone either.

It applies to both anyway.

Then neither would be lords as they don't fit 1.

Edited February 20, 2014 by bottlegnomes

[Chiki]

Lots of stuff can happen, but is there really a need to go so far out of the realm of reality just to question something? The next Fire Emblem could feature a protagonist who is never seen on the field, is not a leader in any way, and dies halfway through (the rest of the story is I don't know what the hell), and that would throw everything for a loop, but unless it actually happens, I don't care enough to go that far in my consideration. Estelle was one thing; I don't see it ever happening like that in the main series, but if I'm to extend this to hacks, I could see it there, as she's not too far-fetched of an idea, and we can still define "Lord" characters in ROM hacks.

If Leaf lost his arm in the prologue and was not deployable for the remainder of the game, I would not consider him a Lord in the way we use the term for FE characters. Would the rest of the fandom? Maybe. I don't really care. If he was halted halfway, I would probably consider him one as at that point he'd meet my criteria minus deployment in the final.

Yes, because otherwise we wouldn't be able to test our established concepts and see what they actually mean. Thought experiments are used in science and philosophy all the time.