Later FEs have made me appreciate this game's narrative. (SPOILERS FOR RD, AWAKENING, AND FATES)

[bottlegnomes]

I kind of went the opposite way. The more I think about RD's plot, the dumber I think it is. There's a topic on here somewhere where I go into great lengths about how nonsensical the logistics of the blood pact are. Short version:

1. It takes like a year for the casualties to equal one moderate battle. The entire Mad King's War took like a year.

2. How does it know who to kill? Geography? Census? Professed nationality? Heartfelt loyalty?

3. How do you realistically get people to sign?

3.1 If it's as easy as it appears, why isn't literally everyone under a blood pact?

3.2 If it's not, how the hell does it fit on one page, and why was Pelleas too lazy to read it? Is he illiterate?

I also came to the conclusion that I would've forgiven all faults in this game if they'd had a scene of Pelleas reading several hundred pages of the blood pact, getting progressively more frustrated, and the giving up and signing it.

The senators weren't poorly written as a whole. Most were, but Hetzel was a very good job of what he was: a well intentioned person who was cowed into collusion because he was weak-willed.

I don't actually think Validar was any worse written than Lekain. Lekain is in it all for greed. Validar is a religious zealot; he's not supposed to be rational. They're both cartoonishly evil and both have the most minimal motivation possible.

LR, I think it's kind of insulting to compare Lekain to the Joker. The Joker at his best is a commentary on psychology, both in-and-of himself and in his effects on Batman, and a Hobbesian take on society, i.e. without government people are just the worst. Lekain is a Saturday morning villain.

Edited October 6, 2015 by bottlegnomes

[Alazen]

I think it does say that(probably in more confusing legal language), but Izuka convinced Pelleas to sign it. The Begnions don't have that kind of insider in the Crimean court.

They might not have an insider in Crimea's court, but they did have a time where Elincia was hanging around in Begnion. I would call that a golden opportunity to get what would look like a desperate mark to sign a Blood Pact.

I guess you could point out that she was sheltered away for most of her life up until PoR started, Daein invaded Crimea with Ashnard laying around the capital, and she wasn't crowned queen in the proper ceremony yet. But if so, couldn't it have kicked in when she was crowned queen?

Edited October 6, 2015 by Alazen

[Alazen]

double post

Edited October 6, 2015 by Alazen

[Lord Raven]

LR, I think it's kind of insulting to compare Lekain to the Joker. The Joker at his best is a commentary on psychology, both in-and-of himself and in his effects on Batman, and a Hobbesian take on society, i.e. without government people are just the worst. Lekain is a Saturday morning villain.

I guess that's adaptation dependent. I definitely wasn't referring to the Chris Nolan Jokers or any of the modern adaptations, but it was the only example I could think of.

It kind of works for people who believe he's a flat Saturday Morning cartoon villain though but you are indeed correct that he is definitely much much deeper than what I believe the public perceives him as. I think a more apt comparison is like the Ginyu Force probably but for some reason I didn't think of it.

Now as to the senators' motivations- do they really need to be 'nuanced'? They don't like how Daein and Crimea aren't under Begnion rule anymore, they don't like how laguz aren't slaves anymore(and more specifically how laguz are coming into Begnion and killing them currently). Sanaki doesn't see these things as problems and so they remove her from power. Their motivations are simple, but it's not like they're evil just because.

Then they're just one-dimensionally power hungry and only care for themselves and would rather let the world rot. They're generic villains. The audience has no degree of sympathy with their actions throughout the game.

They were also the ones behind the Serenes Massacre (I believe?) and Micaiah's faked assassination, if you don't recall. They're merely power hungry. They have no ideology either. It's the fact that you can only understand their motives as evil is what makes them poor villains especially since they were manipulating things behind the scenes.

I think the only villain that came close to this level of comic villainry is Julius and even he was just a boy who was cursed with the blood of Loptuouso (or whatever his name was). The Lopt clan were definitely pretty much driven by their religion though but at least you could sympathize with many people fighting for Valhalla (ie, Alvis, the girl with the major Tordo blood whose name I cannot remember for the life of me). You only really had Hetzel in the senate's faction and even he was basically just a coward.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Lord Raven

[DarkDestr0yer61]

Oh goodness. Radiant Dawn's plot. Where to begin

Blood Pact:

1. Does Pelleas not read? Don't get me wrong, I like him but he is quite naive. I get that he is the only person that trust Izuka, but he didn't atleast skim over the contract a little?

2. I believe one reason people don't like it is because Pelleas would NEVER agree to help Lekain. For multiple reasons too. Reason 1, Begnion was the one that was giving Daein problems throughout the beginning of the game. Reason 2, Daein just got lifted off the ground after the Mad King's War. The idea of Daein rushing into war, a war they are not involved in, would be madness. Which brings me to issue number 2.

3. Doesn't the Blood Pact mean that Daein is in debt to Begnion? Well, Sanaki, the empress, joins sides with the Laguz Alliance. So wouldn't technically Daein go against Begnion either way at that point? If anything, I would think the Empress would overrule the Senate as far as trying to control Daein. So I would think at that point Daein would have to switch sides.

4. Part 4. This is where I get confused. Why does the Blood Pact not kill anyone from Daein when they join Ike's group and storm Ashera's tower?

Micaiah and Pelleas:

1. Why would she agree to help him? and why would he put her through this? Pelleas is trying to help his country, sure. But at what cost? Sending an army to fight against the laguz alliance would just cause unnecessary blood shed for both sides. If I were Pelleas, I would have banished anyone I loved from my kingdom in order to save them from getting caught up in this mess.

2. Why did Pelleas wait so long to tell the real reason they are siding with Lekain? I'm not sure how it would have helped in the long run, but they might could have tried doing something different.

3. Why would Micaiah do this? She does what he says. She even thinks this is messed up, but she agrees to go with it. Even when she does find out, she says she wants to avoid blood shed. how? By setting the Empress's army on fire.

4. What would be worse? Dying from a disease because you refuse to give in to being a puppet? or dying from war because you throw away your honor and fight for people you hate?

And now my least favorite thing about all of this.

Lehran:

All of this. All of this is caused by him. He wanted the war to happen. He wanted Ashera to wake up and kill everyone. But why?

The reason.... he doesn't like the laguz (and branded) to be treated badly by the beorc...................................................................................................

I'm sorry what?

So he wants to prevent laguz to be treated badly by beorc. And he does that by provoking a war between the laguz (which had beorc on that side who treated them with respect) and the beorc who treats the laguz like scum. The war that not only causes bloodshed for both sides, but also will end up awakening Ashera which will kill everyone anyway.

I think they could have been a more peaceful way to do this. I absolutely hate the whole "I'm going to perfect the world by killing everyone" trope. If the Senators were the big problem with beorc treating laguz badly, why not take out the Senators? Lehran is more than capable of it. Hell, use the "black knight" as a scapegoat. If Zelgius can somehow become the Black Knight and join Daein just because, then Lehran could very well ask Zelgius to wear an entirely different disguise and just murder the douchebag senators.

*Begnion Daily News* Senators from Begnion were murdered by a mysterious Beorc assassin. The location or nationality of the assassin is a mystery.

Edited October 6, 2015 by DarkDestr0yer61

[Radiant head]

Lehran isn't that confusing. He basically became a full blown nihilist in despair after the massacre.

But the game also hints that he was lying about how much he was responsible for so that Ike would cut him down with no regrets.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Radiant head

[bottlegnomes]

@LR, Ginyus sounds about right, and I do agree that the Joker's less thought out incarnations can approach that.

@Radiant Head, where'd you get the exaggerating part from? It's been a while since I paid attention to the story.

@DarkDestroyer, while you might hate it, it's a fairly accepted trope, so I wouldn't say that aspect of him is poorly written. It's not even that he thinks things will be perfect; it's that he thinks things can't possibly get worse and universal death would be preferable to letting things continue as they have. To put it lightly, he's kinda bitter. He might have issues elsewhere, but I wouldn't say his core motivation is one.

[Radiant head]

That's how I interpret his battle convo with Tibarn.

Sephiran: Hello, King Tibarn. I thought I might see you. Only the strongest reach the top. It's only natural that you would be among them.
Tibarn: You know what? I don't believe you're the big, bad, evil guy you want us to think you are.
Sephiran: What could you be talking about?
Tibarn: Ah, I was right! I see it in your eyes. I've been around for a while, and learned a bit about spotting fakes. So now that your secret's out, maybe you'd like to open up to me: Who are you really?
Sephiran: ...

[-Cynthia-]

Then they're just one-dimensionally power hungry and only care for themselves and would rather let the world rot. They're generic villains. The audience has no degree of sympathy with their actions throughout the game.

They were also the ones behind the Serenes Massacre (I believe?) and Micaiah's faked assassination, if you don't recall. They're merely power hungry. They have no ideology either. It's the fact that you can only understand their motives as evil is what makes them poor villains especially since they were manipulating things behind the scenes.

I think the only villain that came close to this level of comic villainry is Julius and even he was just a boy who was cursed with the blood of Loptuouso (or whatever his name was). The Lopt clan were definitely pretty much driven by their religion though but at least you could sympathize with many people fighting for Valhalla (ie, Alvis, the girl with the major Tordo blood whose name I cannot remember for the life of me). You only really had Hetzel in the senate's faction and even he was basically just a coward.

The people of Begnion committed the Serenes Massacre, but the senators set it up by implicating the herons in assassinating Misaha (the people of Begnion are pretty stupid I guess).

This boils down to whether villains actually 'need' to be sympathetic or not. There are people in the real world who are power hungry and will do anything to keep themselves in power and resist change. I found the senators effective enough in representing this. Note that Zelgius, Levail, Degh, Lehran, and arguably Ashera herself are still antagonists who are more nuanced and sympathetic(probably).

[Irysa]

Path of Radiance is pretty long already, I'm not sure squeezing more big plot points in it would be a good idea.

That doesn't make sense within the context of Radiant Dawn's Part 1(if Daein needs Begnion's donated resources that badly, they wouldn't fight for independence to begin with). I suppose you could just axe Part 1, but then it becomes difficult to care much of anything about Micaiah and co. since they're introduced as the enemy. You'd also be substantially altering gameplay at this point.

Not neccessarily. If people are being oppressed, they will rise up. Remember that Sanaki didn't know about what was going on in Part 1 anyway, and near the end pretty much disowns the people behind it. Begnion is a huge nation and will likely have food surplus, so it makes sense from a humanitarian perspective for them to aid Daein, and Sanaki isn't the type to allow thousands to starve. It's a good leverage point too.

This boils down to whether villains actually 'need' to be sympathetic or not.

I don't think anybody said villains have to be, because there is merit to simplistic stories. But stories where conflicts are more nuanced and the audience is compelled to consider their own values in relation to the story creates a deeper connection to that story, and I'd argue that's a key element to cultivating the most powerful and memorable scenes possible. There's also the element of tragedy and hopelessness that can be realised when you could be supporting multiple parties. I think that fundamentally, the closer media gets to touching the heart of an individual, the more it succeeds at art's primary role of invoking thought/emotion from it's audience, so it's more valuable in that sense.

As a quick afterthought, simplistic stories are perfectly capable of achieving high emotional potency, but the fact is that this approach has been well tried and tested and it's easier to work with, which ups the average merit. More complex situations demand more complex and thoughtful writing, which tends to lead to greater pitfalls.

[-Cynthia-]

Not neccessarily. If people are being oppressed, they will rise up. Remember that Sanaki didn't know about what was going on in Part 1 anyway, and near the end pretty much disowns the people behind it. Begnion is a huge nation and will likely have food surplus, so it makes sense from a humanitarian perspective for them to aid Daein, and Sanaki isn't the type to allow thousands to starve. It's a good leverage point too.

Daein could just pillage Begnion or Crimea for food in Part 3 or make a deal with Crimea for food in exchange for safe passage. All of those solutions sound better than fighting a losing battle against the laguz in the hopes that the senators might honor Sanaki's deal (Sanaki being with the Laguz Alliance rather than in Begnion by 3-11 complicates things). It just doesn't really work within Radiant Dawn's plot, you'd have to rewrite the whole thing.

I don't think anybody said villains have to be, because there is merit to simplistic stories. But stories where conflicts are more nuanced and the audience is compelled to consider their own values in relation to the story creates a deeper connection to that story, and I'd argue that's a key element to cultivating the most powerful and memorable scenes possible. There's also the element of tragedy and hopelessness that can be realised when you could be supporting multiple parties. I think that fundamentally, the closer media gets to touching the heart of an individual, the more it succeeds at art's primary role of invoking thought/emotion from it's audience, so it's more valuable in that sense.

As a quick afterthought, simplistic stories are perfectly capable of achieving high emotional potency, but the fact is that this approach has been well tried and tested and it's easier to work with, which ups the average merit. More complex situations demand more complex and thoughtful writing, which tends to lead to greater pitfalls.

We already have so many 'sympathetic' villains in the Tower though already- every FE game has its share of power hungry assholes and I don't think they all need some higher ideal or sad backstory or whatever to justify their existence in the plot.

[Irysa]

I can't really be bothered to continue to talk about alterations to the plot of this game at any great length but I'll grant you one last reply.

Daein could just pillage Begnion or Crimea for food in Part 3 or make a deal with Crimea for food in exchange for safe passage. All of those solutions sound better than fighting a losing battle against the laguz in the hopes that the senators might honor Sanaki's deal (Sanaki being with the Laguz Alliance rather than in Begnion by 3-11 complicates things). It just doesn't really work within Radiant Dawn's plot, you'd have to rewrite the whole thing.

Crimea has almost no reason to back Daein given recent history and is currently rebuilding in a post war era. Crimea is also a small state and is less likely to have food surplus. Gallia still hates Daein so that isn't happening either. Begnion still claims a degree of sovreignity over the entire continent so it makes far more sense for them to try to use Daein as a satellite state.

Daein pillaging for food sounds fine by me but would be a large plot alteration.

Sanaki was essentially removed from power somewhere in the mess of events that lead up to the Laguz War in FE10, so given the Senators are in charge of systems at home they can easily keep extortion going.

I mean honestly, this is really not a drastic change at all; Mic is still being coercively forced to do things she doesn't really want to do for the good of her people, it just avoids the awkward magical walking plague contract plot contrivance out of nowhere problem. It doesn't actually solve the core issue that there's no real reason for Daein to be fighting with the Laguz Alliance.

We already have so many 'sympathetic' villains in the Tower though already- every FE game has its share of power hungry assholes and I don't think they all need some higher ideal or sad backstory or whatever to justify their existence in the plot.

I didn't say they needed to either, I'm simply speaking as an advocate for stories that forgo that entirely and rather than just having "sympathetic villains", merely have characters who are justifiable and understandable throughout, rather than neccessarily having to set up distinguished antagonists.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Irysa

[-Cynthia-]

I mean honestly, this is really not a drastic change at all; Mic is still being coercively forced to do things she doesn't really want to do for the good of her people, it just avoids the awkward magical walking plague contract plot contrivance out of nowhere problem. It doesn't actually solve the core issue that there's no real reason for Daein to be fighting with the Laguz Alliance.

The main difference is that Mic and co. really have no reason not to tell the Laguz Alliance what's going on and at that point Elincia and/or Sanaki would likely promise to give them food if Daein stays out of the way- thus invalidating the past 3 chapters or so of Part 3.

[Irysa]

I said last but I'm terrible at taking my own advice. I really don't think this is worth the effort required given I don't even particularly think this is a good plot alteration.

We're allowing for the fact that Crimea doesn't have a food surplus and already has its own internal tensions. I don't think the majority of the country would be that happy to have to start rationing in order to feed the people who subjugated them a year or two back.

As for Sanaki's word, it means little when she has to win back Sienne in order to fufill that promise given she's been the victim of a coup d'etat. A siege on the capital could last months given that a large portion of the Begnion Army is still under the Senator's command.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Irysa

[Loki Laufeyson]

The Blood Pact honestly never bothered me much. What REALLY bothered me was:

- How every character that wasn't turned into stone were all the playable characters, the NPCs that ran the stores, and every other character with plot armor. How convenient.

- Ranulf ruining one of the game's biggest reveals. ("Yo, Ike, Zelgius is the Black Knight k thx bai")

But man, Zelda cycle is truly blending into the FE fandom. I stand by my prediction that by 2017 when everyone is through playing Fates multiple times, we'll start seeing the "You know, Awakening wasn't that bad a game after all."

Blood Pact was stupid as shit, but youre right. The plot armor and how the reveals are handled are the biggest beefs i have with that game's plot. The Blood Pact could have been cool if it had a more nuanced implementation.

[The Geek]

Really when Awakening and Fates came out it had the opposite effect on me. I started thinking "you know, the stories of the old games weren't that great after all were they?"

I guess I suffered from a case of Hype Backlash Backlash.

[bottlegnomes]

How about this: Begnion's standing army is massive. It's big enough to take on the armies of combined other nations. Instead of them needing Daein's help, make it that the senators would rather useless Daein citizens die than important Begnion citizens. Miccy and part 1 happen, but Daein doesn't have a standing army; they just have a bunch of conscripts. In fact, cut any scenes of a standing army out of part 1 as well. Daein was an aggressor nation that lost a war. WWII is a pretty strong parallel to PoR, and, IIRC, Germany, Japan, and Italy didn't get to have standing armies for a long time afterwards. The choice becomes you risk your lives or we use a fraction of our army to make the occupation force look like pleasant company. Doesn't change anything in the grand scheme of things (threat of annihilation, Miccy being conflicted about helping the people she fought against, Pelleas and Miccy being naive) and gets rid of Pelleas being so incompetent that he can't read a single page.

You could even still make it that Begnion needs the help, but the senators are good enough at bullshitting that Miccy and Pelleas are still coerced into helping by the threat even if rebelling again would be the better option. Wouldn't be the first time in history a threat that can't really be followed through on was effective.

As for simple villains, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with them, but to make them any good, you have to tell the story in an interesting or memorable way. Look at most Disney villains or Voldemort. They're pretty clear cut evil, like the senators, but they have a panache about them that makes people like them or at least remember them. Valtome is about the only senator that has something like that going for him.

The other road is make the villain clearly evil, but make him or her work to undermine the heroes ideals. Since he's been mentioned, the Joker is a good example of this. He's unabashedly evil and will never stop, and he constantly tempts and taunts Batman to kill him.

Those are the more "literary" ways to handle cartoonish villains, but if you want to go the simple route, it has to be about the development of the main characters with the villains being a roadblock. Goku is probably one of the most simplistic heroes there is, but even he grows by training to get stronger. That's his whole schtick. He wants to be the greatest fighter ever. Ike doesn't grow as a character—he's Badass McGee from start to finish. Micaiah has some stuff what with growing into a leader in part 1 and justifying her actions in part 3, but those are pretty shoddily done IMO. They did more in less than half the time with Elincia. She went from a very idealistic girl willing to give up anything for her friends to realizing that personal sacrifices have to be made for her country if she wants to rule effectively.

Edited October 7, 2015 by bottlegnomes

[-Cynthia-]

How about this: Begnion's standing army is massive. It's big enough to take on the armies of combined other nations. Instead of them needing Daein's help, make it that the senators would rather useless Daein citizens die than important Begnion citizens. Miccy and part 1 happen, but Daein doesn't have a standing army; they just have a bunch of conscripts. In fact, cut any scenes of a standing army out of part 1 as well. Daein was an aggressor nation that lost a war. WWII is a pretty strong parallel to PoR, and, IIRC, Germany, Japan, and Italy didn't get to have standing armies for a long time afterwards. The choice becomes you risk your lives or we use a fraction of our army to make the occupation force look like pleasant company. Doesn't change anything in the grand scheme of things (threat of annihilation, Miccy being conflicted about helping the people she fought against, Pelleas and Miccy being naive) and gets rid of Pelleas being so incompetent that he can't read a single page.

You could even still make it that Begnion needs the help, but the senators are good enough at bullshitting that Miccy and Pelleas are still coerced into helping by the threat even if rebelling again would be the better option. Wouldn't be the first time in history a threat that can't really be followed through on was effective.

Hmm, this could work maybe and there are some scenes that allude to a situation similar to this anyway (the end of 3-11). I suppose the issue would be that it may be difficult to frame to the player how big and dangeous Begnion's army actually is when we've been beating their army in Parts 1 and 3(empty threat).

Edited October 7, 2015 by -Cynthia-

[Alazen]

If it's such an issue to figure how to get Daein to fight against the Laguz Alliance, then couldn't you have Daein NOT fight against them? Instead, you could for example have Daein try to take advantage of Begnion's war to get one over on the empire out of revenge for the nation's defeat in the Mad King's War and the abuse from Jarod's army. That way, you'd still have Daein helping to spread the chaos that leads to the coming of the gods without resorting to something like the Blood Pact.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Alazen

[-Cynthia-]

If it's such an issue to figure how to get Daein to fight against the Laguz Alliance, then couldn't you have Daein NOT fight against them? Instead, you could for example have Daein try to take advantage of Begnion's war to get one over on the empire out of revenge for the nation's defeat in the Mad King's War and the abuse from Jarod's army. That way, you'd still have Daein helping to spread the chaos that leads to the coming of the gods without resorting to something like the Blood Pact.

It's a possibility, but then Micaiah doesn't have to make any tough decisions and you don't have player units fighting against each other- it's just like most FE games and would be kinda dull I guess.

[Alazen]

It's not like RD as it is now really did the idea of having two player armies fight each-other justice from a dramatic standpoint. If the fights between Ike and Micaiah's armies were supposed to show the tragedy of war (friend fights friend, family member fights family member, etc.), then they dropped the ball on that count since the player units survive their fights even if they reach 0HP as an enemy. All considered, having Ike and Micaiah's armies fight really comes off as the developers trying to show off RD's separate armies gimmick without really putting it under the proper weight.

As for Micaiah making ''tough decisions'', well think of this way: Daein lost a war with Begnion as the apparent key to its defeat, then went under occupation by Jarod's army. Daein has sore citizens itching to get back at Begnion. An anti-Begnion movement spreads across the nation that gets the attention of Micaiah and Co. Micaiah sees doing so as iffy, Pelleas wants to be the king his citizens cheer for, and Izuka does as he does. Izuka convinces Pelleas to declare war on Begnion while it's focused on the Laguz Alliance. Micaiah contests going to war, Pelleas approves war, and so Micaiah goes along with the invasion. You could play up how it looks like Daein by large hasn't learned from the Mad King's War and so its repeating past mistakes. Point out that Daein is the aggressor and the Begnion troops are defending their empire.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Alazen

[bottlegnomes]

Hmm, this could work maybe and there are some scenes that allude to a situation similar to this anyway (the end of 3-11). I suppose the issue would be that it may be difficult to frame to the player how big and dangeous Begnion's army actually is when we've been beating their army in Parts 1 and 3(empty threat).

For part 1, my thinking was that's a barebones occupation force, and history has shown that rebellious populations can cause hell for superior forces pretty reliably. Even if the corrupt senators are largely in charge, it's going to look suspicious sending a significant amount of troops to Daein all of a sudden.

For part 3, IIRC, Begnion hadn't mobilized its forces in the beginning which is how the LA got so far. When they did, that's when Skrimir lost to Zelgius, and they had to retreat.

There's some precedent, but yeah, they'd have to play it up more. From what I remember, there are allusions to how impressive Begnion's army is, but they're pretty minor.

I was actually thinking something like Alazen's suggestion, but at the time wanted to keep it in the general narrative framework of RD's story. But for major changes, the player units fighting each other could come in Micaiah and Ike running into each other and being suspicious of the other's intentions or something like mistaking them for Begnion forces. You could do that in part 3 or even part 4.

Edited October 9, 2015 by bottlegnomes

[Alazen]

I'm thinking that if you're serious about keeping the warring player armies gimmick without resorting to the Blood Pact or some other method that has one side coerced by the Senators, then you could do it like this:

1. The Crimea Civil War doesn't happen while Ludveck is still around for internal conflict.

2. News reaches Crimea of the defeat of Jarod's army and crowning of Ashnard's son Pelleas. This gets a backlash among the citizenry who remember Daein's invasion and occupation.

3. Seeing an opportunity to seek glory, Ludveck proposes an invasion of Daein. This is contested by others in Crimean government until it's pointed out how loud the calls for revenge are in Crimea. Elincia relents and orders to prepare for war.

4. It's agreed to hire the Greil Mercenaries for their performance in the Mad King's War.

5. The invasion is noticed in Daein, making Micaiah's army go on the defense.

5. The Laguz Alliance's war on Begnion proceeds without the Greil Mercenaries with Skrimir as the Lord.

Edited October 9, 2015 by Alazen

[Paper Jam]

- Ranulf ruining one of the game's biggest reveals. ("Yo, Ike, Zelgius is the Black Knight k thx bai")

How else could it have been revealed? Ranulf was the only one who knew, and Ike wouldn't have cared if Ranulf hadn't told him.

[Baldrick]

Clearly, it needed a dramatic reveal a la Scooby Doo.

Ike: Now, Black Knight, let's see who you really are!
Ike removes the Black Knight's helmet
Ike: Old Man Zelgius!?
OMZ: And I would've gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling mercenaries!