Robin (M) is a terrible character

[Bloo]

People are always commenting on how supports with the male avatar always have a huge leap from A to S and the marriage aspect seems forced, but I feel that there is a much deeper problem with Robin's supports.

In pretty much all of Robin's romantic supports, the focus is predominantly on the other character in the support. For example, Robin and Olivia discuss Olivia's money saving, Robin and Cherche discuss handling Minerva, Robin and Cordelia discuss Cordelia feelings towards the Pegasus Knights.

I feel like this means that IS really struggled to come up with additional character traits about Robin, outside of 'tactical genius' and 'amnesiac'. They really did not bother to round out the character more, and instead went for the repetitive personalities of the other characters.

There are a few exceptions to the rule, Robin x Flavia is one wherein Flavia comments on how Robin and Chro work better together and Robin in the S support pretty much gives Chrom the finger.

If there are other exceptions to this rule, and if Female Robin is the same then feel free to enlighten me.

This is only my opinion.

Thoughts?

[Alertcircuit]

I think they don't specify Robin's personality too much because he's supposed to represent you. They try to give him the flattest most generic personality out there so as little of it as possible contradicts yours.

[Bloo]

I think they don't specify Robin's personality too much because he's supposed to represent you. They try to give him the flattest most generic personality out there so as little of it as possible contradicts yours.

Then perhaps they should give you choices as to what to say at points. And no not the inconsequential ones like 'Sacrifice Emmeryn?'

[Sunwoo]

Then perhaps they should give you choices as to what to say at points. And no not the inconsequential ones like 'Sacrifice Emmeryn?'

This part isn't exclusive to just the male MU, you know. Both avatars come off as a bit generic.

[Bloo]

This part isn't exclusive to just the male MU, you know. Both avatars come off as a bit generic.

I'd assumed that, but I haven't completed enough FeMU supports to know fully.

[Naughx]

Well "Robin" is supposed to be a placeholder character to represent the player...

[Sunwoo]

I'd assumed that, but I haven't completed enough FeMU supports to know fully.

I suggest doing that then, because if you think the male MU is a terrible character then the female MU isn't much different because they share the same story dialogue and several supports. Even in the supports where they're different, if maMU is the generic nice guy, then feMU is the generic catty girl.

[Superfan959]

Ah, yet another reason I despise this game. It felt like IS couldn't decide between making Robin a blank slate and giving him a predetermined character. They clearly weren't up for making an SMT style MC where the player picks every piece of dialogue, but they didn't want to flesh Robin out either. I especially thought the part where he crashes the ships was stupid, because IIRC, despite the fact that it's HIS/YOUR plan, the game hides it from you until it happens.

[Refa]

I like the character creation system. Now if only it had a few more hairstyle options...

[Beelzebub]

I especially thought the part where he crashes the ships was stupid, because IIRC, despite the fact that it's HIS/YOUR plan, the game hides it from you until it happens.

Not to mention your master plan involving Basilio that you've been diligently working on for half dozen chapters to the player's ignorance.

Edited August 24, 2014 by Beelzebub

[Czar_Yoshi]

Avatar-M is a much better character than Avatar-F on the basis of their Chrom supports (C-A) alone.

[Roflolxp54]

Ahem. Self-insert character (and a Gary Stu/Mary Sue at that). Dating sim style supports. What can you expect?

[That Person's Name]

they struck a nice balance between generic enough to be the player but with traits necessary of a tactician, were the player to be a brilliant tactician. Were I a brilliant tactician I could see myself being quite like him

[Interceptor]

It's a good thing that Robin-M isn't an actual self-insert; I'm not quite sure how tomes work and I can't stand on water.

Edited August 25, 2014 by Interceptor

[Baldrick]

If you had once torched a battalion of ships I don't think we could be friends any more.

[Hoshino Sora]

I'm not really fond of Robin. If I had to relate them to something, it would probably be water. Their personality can literally fit into any sort of container, actually, to be more specific, they have very little personality. They're not completely a self-insert, nor are they their own person. They scare me more than Tharja, most of the time.

[Kreekakon]

After thinking a bit about what the OP has pointed out, I'd say that I have to agree somewhat. Robin is a rather blank character who doesn't really have too many traits as a character.

There is this interesting activity I saw on a Youtube video before which tells you how to identify a well-rounded character from a bad one:

Describe a character the best you can WITHOUT having any of the mentioned points be related to their profession, or their appearence. The easier you can think of general ways to describe a character while constrained under these rules, the better the character was presented.

----------------------------------------------------

However even with all the above being said, I still don't dislike Robin. His sort of "character" just isn't a pet peeve of mine that I would care too much about in my games. He's fine in my books.

[Topazd]

Describe a character the best you can WITHOUT having any of the mentioned points be related to their profession, or their appearence. The easier you can think of general ways to describe a character while constrained under these rules, the better the character was presented.

RedLetterMedia?

But yeah, The character of the MU's in both FE12 and 13 is outright repulsive. I essentially just make my own headcanon, in which the MU's just flat out don't exist.

[Kreekakon]

RedLetterMedia?

Yep, that's where it came from. They practiced that activity on several people to show how the characters from Star Wars Episode 1 were overall more boring, and lifeless compared to the ones from the original trilogy.

The participants easily described characters from the original like Han Solo, but struggled to figure out what was a notable character trait in Qui-Gon Jinn.

[Alertcircuit]

Oh, I've seen those Plinket reviews. Interesting analysis on those films.

So Robin is intelligent, um... likes books... ordinary?

This is actually a really good idea. You movie/tv/game makers should put this one next to the Bechdel test!

[RJWalker]

Yep, that's where it came from. They practiced that activity on several people to show how the characters from Star Wars Episode 1 were overall more boring, and lifeless compared to the ones from the original trilogy.

The participants easily described characters from the original like Han Solo, but struggled to figure out what was a notable character trait in Qui-Gon Jinn.

Those attempts were so sad and biased, it was funny. It is quite easy to describe Episode 1 characters in the way described. The whole review was biased and generally pretty bad.

Qui-Gon Jinn for example, rejects authority and would rather do things his own way like when he insists on training Anakin in defiance of the council. He'll even manipulate the force to get his own way like when he cheats at dice to get Anakin free. I could go on but it is very easy to follow the contraints and still describe the characters.

The RLM review was really bad. The complete inability of the test audience to describe anything makes me think that either the test audiecne was selected in a way that they hadn't watched the film in a long time (or hadn't watched it all) or the more likely scenario being that the whole 'test' and their reactions were scripted to beging with it.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Ranger Jack Walker

[Kreekakon]

Those attempts were so sad and biased, it was funny. It is quite easy to describe Episode 1 characters in the way described. The whole review was biased and generally pretty bad.

Qui-Gon Jinn for example, rejects authority and would rather do things his own way like when he insists on training Anakin in defiance of the council. He'll even manipulate the force to get his own way like when he cheats at dice to get Anakin free. I could go on but it is very easy to follow the contraints and still describe the characters.

The RLM review was really bad. The complete inability of the test audience to describe anything makes me think that either the test audiecne was selected in a way that they hadn't watched the film in a long time (or hadn't watched it all) or the more likely scenario being that the whole 'test' and their reactions were scripted to beging with it.

I think one of the main points of that character rule is not only if you're ABLE to describe a character. It's also how easily the traits come to mind.

You could describe Qui-Gon Jinn that way true, but for me at least I find it very hard to find that description come to me faster than the Han Solo one. When I think of Han Solo, his character traits just pop up right in front of me while with Qui-Gon Jinn my brain requires a bit more searching.

I think this is also due to how a character was presented, because it shows how strong of an impression they left on the viewer.

[thecrimsonflash]

my favorite of the supports was with nowi I just took one of your most prized possesions and made it into a ring marry me I find it halarious that c-a was the exact same for both same with tharja

[Topazd]

The Plinkett reviews are, at times, annoying and almost always biased in regards to basically everything, but I think in practice the method served in proving his point well. Yes, Qui-Gon certainly had his distinct character traits, but they aren't always prominent due to how the movie itself presents him.

[RJWalker]

IT's not surprising that character traits of the OT characters are easier to remember. Putting aside the fact that they've been ingrained in society, there's also incredibly, well, for lack of a better word, tropey, even when the movies first came out. 'Tropey' is unrelated to actual quality.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Ranger Jack Walker