Alternatives to Conquest Chapter 15? [obvious spoilers inside]

[Sunwoo]

*Hides Rifle*

Oh no! Sunwoo's dead! Who could've done such a thing?

Except you failed to realize that I am the town tree stump! Everyone vote for Phillius, they outed themselves as scum! ##Vote: Phillius

Okay I'll stop derailing this topic and go away now. Or be on topic again.

Regardless of how we personally feel about Kamui and the Nohr path and the storyline of Fates in general, I think we can all agree that it had a lot of potential. Wonder what went wrong.

Edited January 15, 2016 by Sunwoo

[ghast]

tfw everyone ignores your post ;-;

[Sunwoo]

I'm sorry ghast, I couldn't figure out anything to say in response to your post because I agreed with it.

[NekoKnight]

Speaking of that, let's do what most of these topics do at one point or another and complain about Garon. The problem with Kamui and the other Nohrian siblings is that they keep getting hamstrung by Garon's 'If you disobey me even slightly, I'll kill you' attitude. Let's recap:

-If Kamui questions Garon, he'll probably be executed

-If Kamui tries to subvert Garon's orders, he'll get executed

-If Kamui opposes Iago/Ganz, they'll tell Garon and he'll be executed

-If any of the Nohrian Siblings disobey Garon or oppose Iago/Ganz, they'll be executed

*snip for length*

Those are some interesting ideas for story and game play integration.I like the idea of Garon sending you on a suicide mission AFTER you disobey him, as opposed to right after Kamui displays his loyalty by returning from Hoshido, as it is in the actual game. Talk about mustache twirlingly evil.

As for the story, I think it was a poor choice to constantly show the protagonist's helplessness in defying his orders. I don't care if you want to call that realistic, I want to play as someone with real agency! Imagine if an RPG made your character incredibly weak with no fighting talent because "realistically" that orphan abandoned on a farm won't grow up to be a powerful warrior. Great, you nailed realism and ruined game design!

tfw everyone ignores your post ;-;

I read it and agreed with everything you said but didn't have anything to add. Sorry.

I will say that I wish the Hoshidans would eventually give up on you. When they care more about their traitor brother than they do about each other, we have a problem.

[Namarid]

-If the writers were feeling particularly brutal, repeated failure to follow orders could have him execute one of the servants or Silas, excusing it with them being a 'bad influence'.

*screams at the sky* WHY DIDN'T YOU THINK OF THIS IS. Seriously more ideas like this would of made the story a lot more darker and would of made it have more emotional impact. I could see this idea being apart of a few special missions where disobeying results in a death of one the characters you just said. This could of then put more weight on future special missions because you could be weighing one life which you care about against thousands of lives that you have no connection to. Neither choice is wrong and is down to your morals.

[Time the Crestfallen]

As for the story, I thXink it was a poor choice to constantly show the protagonist's helplessness in defying his orders. I don't care if you want to call that realistic, I want to play as someone with real agency! Imagine if an RPG made your character incredibly weak with no fighting talent because "realistically" that orphan abandoned on a farm won't grow up to be a powerful warrior. Great, you nailed realism and ruined game design!

You underestimate the power of Indie games. If they can make a game about driving a bus, than they can make a game about a useless orphan abandoned on a farm. Probably with SNES graphics for maximum nostalgia appeal.

That's another problem though; Kamui has no agency compared to other lords in the franchise. Quite a few of them are Royals and the ones that aren't are still the leaders of their group and are generally free to make their own decisions. Kamui however, is constantly hamstrung by the fact that Garon is willing to kill him at the drop of a hat, Iago and Ganz will report him to Garon and get him killed for disobeying orders and even Xander, the protective older brother threatens to kill Kamui for saying that the man who constantly commits war crimes is anything less than a saint. I'm all for characters being held accountable for their actions by others, but Kamui needs more freedom to act, so that their own personality and flaws can have more of an impact on the story.

[ghast]

You underestimate the power of Indie games. If they can make a game about driving a bus, than they can make a game about a useless orphan abandoned on a farm. Probably with SNES graphics for maximum nostalgia appeal.

That's another problem though; Kamui has no agency compared to other lords in the franchise. Quite a few of them are Royals and the ones that aren't are still the leaders of their group and are generally free to make their own decisions. Kamui however, is constantly hamstrung by the fact that Garon is willing to kill him at the drop of a hat, Iago and Ganz will report him to Garon and get him killed for disobeying orders and even Xander, the protective older brother threatens to kill Kamui for saying that the man who constantly commits war crimes is anything less than a saint. I'm all for characters being held accountable for their actions by others, but Kamui needs more freedom to act, so that their own personality and flaws can have more of an impact on the story.

the threaten to kill thing is a mistranslation as I've been told. its supposed to say that he won't be able to protect him or something along those lines instead.

If Kamui could just push himself a biiit further I feel like he'd stand up to ganz/lago. That would have been great to see

[blinkingbrave]

the threaten to kill thing is a mistranslation as I've been told. its supposed to say that he won't be able to protect him or something along those lines instead.

Yeah, that's essentially right. I already paraphrased it earlier in the thread when it first came up, so I'm not gonna do it again, haha.

If the translation/summary you follow (because I guess you were keeping up with a incorrect one? Sorry, I don't really know where this idea came from) has the Japanese text, too, I'd bet plugging it into Google translate should give you at least some garbled idea, if you want something other than my word. I know a lot of stuff following the game came out really fast, so I guess this line fell through the cracks?

Edited January 16, 2016 by blinkingbrave

[NekoKnight]

Yeah, that's essentially right. I already paraphrased it earlier in the thread when it first came up, so I'm not gonna do it again, haha.

If the translation/summary you follow (because I guess you were keeping up with a incorrect one? Sorry, I don't really know where this idea came from) has the Japanese text, too, I'd bet plugging it into Google translate should give you at least some garbled idea, if you want something other than my word. I know a lot of stuff following the game came out really fast, so I guess this line fell through the cracks?

Do you have a source of the script for the Japanese? I want to translate it and compare my conclusion with a Japanese friend.

Also, who claimed it was a mistranslation?

Edited January 16, 2016 by NekoKnight

[blinkingbrave]

Here's a gameplay video with the original Japanese. Marx's first passage.

Edit: Actually, ya know what... I'm just going to remove everything I just said. So, just the passage.

Edited January 16, 2016 by blinkingbrave

[Thane]

Those are some interesting ideas for story and game play integration.I like the idea of Garon sending you on a suicide mission AFTER you disobey him, as opposed to right after Kamui displays his loyalty by returning from Hoshido, as it is in the actual game. Talk about mustache twirlingly evil.

As for the story, I think it was a poor choice to constantly show the protagonist's helplessness in defying his orders. I don't care if you want to call that realistic, I want to play as someone with real agency! Imagine if an RPG made your character incredibly weak with no fighting talent because "realistically" that orphan abandoned on a farm won't grow up to be a powerful warrior. Great, you nailed realism and ruined game design!

It's not even realism within the context of the game itself; Kamui actually regresses as a character. He's ready to sacrifice his life to stand up against Garon to defend two strangers (Suzukaze and Rinka) in the second chapter of the game, actively fending of both fireballs and Xander, yet doesn't stand up to Garon's lackeys when they go on killing sprees three times later on in Conquest.

It's not even realism because Kamui has the possibility to both fight back, flee or go back to Hoshido, but he doesn't because he values four siblings and some servants more than an entire nation, even though he's a bleeding heart who has stood up for strangers in the past. It just doesn't make sense. Even if he were afraid for himself or his friends and family, from an in-game story standpoint, he wouldn't stand for Garon's evil due to his supposed overbearing selflessness (yet he's still selfish because he stays with Nohr. This narrative is twisted as fuck). And even if that weren't the case, it's still as NekoKnight says: you'd sacrifice actually telling a story for realism that goes against its very own story.

[NekoKnight]

Here's a gameplay video with the original Japanese. Marx's first passage.

Edit: Actually, ya know what... I'm just going to remove everything I just said. So, just the passage.

I've read the Japanese and what he says (being as literal as possible) "However, if you're lying, you will be judged a traitor and the entire army will become your enemy. " He doesn't say specifically how he would react, but considering he uses "betrayed us" (私たちを裏切った), I think it would be reaching to say he wouldn't also turn against Kamui. It's irrelevant whether he would personally kill Kamui or not, however. The problem with the narrative is that Marx's support of your rebellion hinges on Garon literally being a monster, instead of merely being a figurative monster. If Gooron didn't immediately try to kill them all after the reveal, it's uncertain if even him being a slime monster would be the deciding factor.

It's not even realism within the context of the game itself; Kamui actually regresses as a character. He's ready to sacrifice his life to stand up against Garon to defend two strangers (Suzukaze and Rinka) in the second chapter of the game, actively fending of both fireballs and Xander, yet doesn't stand up to Garon's lackeys when they go on killing sprees three times later on in Conquest.

It's not even realism because Kamui has the possibility to both fight back, flee or go back to Hoshido, but he doesn't because he values four siblings and some servants more than an entire nation, even though he's a bleeding heart who has stood up for strangers in the past. It just doesn't make sense. Even if he were afraid for himself or his friends and family, from an in-game story standpoint, he wouldn't stand for Garon's evil due to his supposed overbearing selflessness (yet he's still selfish because he stays with Nohr. This narrative is twisted as fuck). And even if that weren't the case, it's still as NekoKnight says: you'd sacrifice actually telling a story for realism that goes against its very own story.

I've heard one interpretation of the initial encounter of Kamui protecting Suzukaze and Rinka as being because of his naivete of the consequences of disobedience, which I could accept. What I don't accept is that Kamui could not and would not ever defect back or try to rebel, despite all the shit he sees and puts up with, including him immediately being sent on a suicide mission (to subvert an innocent village no less). Because we don't actually control what Kamui does outside of choosing which route he takes, I'm led to believe that Hoshido!Kamui and Nohr!Kamui are the same person (not a good/evil split). Hoshido!Kamui is a moral person, but Nohr!Kamui doesn't take the moral choice and try to stop the war, even if it means making Garon his enemy. He supports Garon, almost to the very end with "But Kamui tried not to kill people!" being his flimsy excuse of not actually being a bad guy.

Pro Tip: Defeating enemies and leaving them vulnerable to your evil bosses is still bad.

Edited January 16, 2016 by NekoKnight

[Thane]

I've heard one interpretation of the initial encounter of Kamui protecting Suzukaze and Rinka as being because of his naivete of the consequences of disobedience, which I could accept. What I don't accept is that Kamui could not and would not ever defect back or try to rebel, despite all the shit he sees and puts up with, including him immediately being sent on a suicide mission (to subvert an innocent village no less). Because we don't actually control what Kamui does outside of choosing which route he takes, I'm led to believe that Hoshido!Kamui and Nohr!Kamui are the same person (not a good/evil split). Hoshido!Kamui is a moral person, but Nohr!Kamui doesn't take the moral choice and try to stop the war, even if it means making Garon his enemy. He supports Garon, almost to the very end with "But Kamui tried not to kill people!" being his flimsy excuse of not actually being a bad guy.

Pro Tip: Defeating enemies and leaving them vulnerable to your evil bosses is still bad.

It's pretty weird to assume his naïvité gets lost along the way considering he not only doesn't grow as a character in any route, but he chooses to turn a blind eye to the evil sword of doom that just exploded and killed his mother which was given to him by Garon in Conquest. The fact of the matter is that Kamui comes across as stupid, spineless and selfish for doing what Garon says, not realistic.

[blinkingbrave]

I've read the Japanese and what he says (being as literal as possible) "However, if you're lying, you will be judged a traitor and the entire army will become your enemy. " He doesn't say specifically how he would react, but considering he uses "betrayed us" (私たちを裏切った), I think it would be reaching to say he wouldn't also turn against Kamui. It's irrelevant whether he would personally kill Kamui or not, however. The problem with the narrative is that Marx's support of your rebellion hinges on Garon literally being a monster, instead of merely being a figurative monster. If Gooron didn't immediately try to kill them all after the reveal, it's uncertain if even him being a slime monster would be the deciding factor.

But the point is, he doesn't say how he would react or even who's judging her a traitor. 'Betrayed us' doesn't say anything one way or the other about him, his actions, even his thoughts on the matter, etc. It's not a line that's blatant and murder-y, even in the other translation. You've still got the same context, the same need for reading comprehension (most importantly), the same detached ambiguity Marx applies to a good deal of his lines, etc.

And I hadn't said Marx wouldn't turn on Kamui (at least, I don't think I did earlier, and if I did I must have misspoke because I don't believe it). Not gonna go into what I think would've happened because it's complicated and really just not relevant as it never actually happened. My only point is that there's nothing to indicate to what direction he would go or (more importantly with Marx) to what degree. Any interpretation requires reading comprehension and some personal analysis, and honestly, since it falls on opinion, there's really no right or wrong conclusion. Even if I had said Marx wouldn't turn on Kamui (in truth, I believe the situation far more complicated), there's nothing to say that idea is just definitively wrong (though whoever's presenting it should certainly have some other lines to support their idea). Anymore than the idea that he would turn on her is wrong either, tbh. We just don't know what would've happened, leaving everything speculation.

Ultimately, like interpretation of the passage itself, whether or not this is a problem with the narrative falls on opinion, so I'm not gonna bother arguing about it. There's really nothing that objectively says that Marx basing his decision on whether or not Garon is a slime monster is a problem with the narrative. Obviously, it's going to feel personally inferior to whatever you and I think should happen (unless you're someone who wanted exactly this, I suppose) because our headcanons cater directly to what we personally want to see in the story. And are based on interpretations/opinions the story may not have even held/pushed/emphasized as much as we did to begin with. And don't necessarily have to include the burden of considering the entire narrative and its message, the other two narratives and their message, all the lil details of the characters, etc.

Edited January 16, 2016 by blinkingbrave

[NekoKnight]

I'd disagree that the quality of narrative elements in purely subjective but I respect that you don't want to argue about it further. We've all been there and back again.

For the sake of counseling our dear Ghast, however, I do want to bring up points important to the flow of the story, this one being that Marx and the others wouldn't turn on Garon until he was literally a murderous goo monster, and not for anything else he did. One part I find interesting in that no one talks about it is that both Leon and Camilla say they cant fight Gooron because he's still their father, even after seeing his true form. Gooron could have just chilled there, not try to kill all his children and continue to rule.

Drop the villain ball, Garon! It's seriously bad for your health!

[blinkingbrave]

I'd disagree that the quality of narrative elements in purely subjective but I respect that you don't want to argue about it further. We've all been there and back again.

Well, I don't really want to argue about the particular point in the actual text (because I feel like we've had discussions on similar root ideas), but you'll have to convince me on the quality of narrative elements being purely subjective.

Under the cut because this is kinda off topic:

Almost any sort of discussion in this thread that doesn't simply state what the text says/characters do veers more towards subjective. For anything interpretation, effect on the narrative, etc to be objective, we'd need to know the mind of the author(s). Then we could more definitively point to various moments and say 'yes, I know it was intended to do that.' So a discussion about Leon/Camilla (or any of Leon's relationships), for example, can stray somewhat closer to objective because we definitively know what their intended relationship had been. Imo, death of the author renders this whole thing moot and forces all interpretation of writing to be subjective, but whatever. We range into deeper literary stuff there.

Anything not explicitly stated that you can't point to the author's intentions and assess based on that has to be subjective. There's just no way around it. It can be less subjective (I go into FE14 with no prior story expectations, hearing seriously nothing about anything) or more subjective (I go into FE14 with the story I'm expecting already in mind, or I go in intent on picking it apart and finding every plothole, or I go in intent on loving every second, etc), which is muuuuch easier, but ultimately, it's based on your own, personal interpretation of the text. What you think it's trying to do and how well it does that varies from person to person because we just don't know what the author was trying to do. And that's the crux of the issue with objectively judging writing quality. No one knows anything.

Like how you can read Fight Club as LGBT novel, a vampire novel, or however many other things and not teeeechnically be wrong.

Not to say there's no merit in writing analysis or anything. I love interpreting the text, and I love reading other's interpretations. It's fun and engaging and helps me improve as a writer. Writing quality is a lil less my cup of tea (more the sort of person that likes sharing ideas and/or gushing), but I imagine it's much the same way for people who enjoy that aspect of writing analysis.

On topic, I know I don't really talk about Leon and Camilla in this scene because I find Marx kinda the linchpin, as the person whose support is most important. Not that they aren't saying anything interesting, but it's just... that scene the first time around felt to me more about Marx's lack of dialogue than what everyone else was saying. It felt designed to build up tension before Marx's reaction, rather than to simply say what they said. Not that what they said didn't add to their characters, but that felt to me like the secondary objective.

Edited January 17, 2016 by blinkingbrave

[Tsuky]

I would usually join in on the ranting, but I think I've done enough of that in other threads :P So, gonna take a break and ask a genuine question: was the reasoning behind Garon kidnapping Kamui ever elaborated upon? Does he just get a thrill out of abusing children? If he wanted Kamui's power, then shouldn't he get Kamui to like him first so Kamui can be easily manipulated into obeying him later? And that brings up another problem: why does he want to kill Kamui at every turn if power was the reason behind the kidnapping? I'm pretty sure this isn't explained in Birthright or Conquest. Is it explained in Revelations (which I haven't read in detail yet)? Anyway, it's such an important event in the story but I can't make sense of it...

Edited January 18, 2016 by Tsuky

[Sunwoo]

As far as I know, Garon gives Kamui a vague ass answer at the end of the Hoshido path … something about using them to kill Mikoto. Except even before the route split, he tries to have Ganz kill Kamui in chapter 3, so this doesn't really make sense. Let's just say that it's never properly explained and call it a day.

[ghast]

sup.

Quick question since im back to studying up fates again.

Is Revelations actually the canon path, or is it just the path that brings the most unknowns together/ is the least bittersweet ending?

[The DanMan]

sup.

Quick question since im back to studying up fates again.

Is Revelations actually the canon path, or is it just the path that brings the most unknowns together/ is the least bittersweet ending?

It's not "officially" canon, insofar as we know.

However, for all practical purposes it is for the reasons you specified.

[Thane]

sup.

Quick question since im back to studying up fates again.

Is Revelations actually the canon path, or is it just the path that brings the most unknowns together/ is the least bittersweet ending?

The game flat out calls the other two paths wrong, so take from that what you will.

[ghast]

The game flat out calls the other two paths wrong, so take from that what you will.

can you refer to me that part or copy paste that moment in particular?

anything to kind of explain it really if you don't mind

[arvilino]

As far as I know, Garon gives Kamui a vague ass answer at the end of the Hoshido path … something about using them to kill Mikoto. Except even before the route split, he tries to have Ganz kill Kamui in chapter 3, so this doesn't really make sense. Let's just say that it's never properly explained and call it a day.

Chapter 3 is a set up to get Corrin to Hoshido it's just not apparent until later because Garon is intentionally deceiving Corrin for the first parts of the game to make sure he/she goes to Hoshido with the Ganglari without realising Garon wants him/her to.

Garon's plan to kill Mikoto is to make sure Corrin is ready to fight(Chapter 1) and hands Corrin the Ganglari and makes sure he can face Hoshidans(Chapter 2) then he sends Corrin to an "abandoned" outpost at the border between Nohr and Hoshido with Hanz to intentionally cause a fight(chapter 3). Corrin wins and but is going to be ambushed by more hoshido forces lead by Saizou, defeated and captured(and inevitably recognised)...except the Nohr siblings save him. Hanz is there as a back up plan to both make sure the battle happens and to make sure Corrin goes to Hoshido by knocking Gunther and Corrin into the infinite Chasm(which is also connected to Hoshido)...except Corrin defeats him and makes him retreat, but ends up in Hoshido anyway.

Edited February 9, 2016 by arvilino

[NekoKnight]

Chapter 3 is a set up to get Corrin to Hoshido it's just not apparent until later because Garon is intentionally deceiving Corrin for the first parts of the game to make sure he/she goes to Hoshido with the Ganglari without realising Garon wants him/her to.

Garon's plan to kill Mikoto is to make sure Corrin is ready to fight(Chapter 1) and hands Corrin the Ganglari and makes sure he can face Hoshidans(Chapter 2) then he sends Corrin to an "abandoned" outpost at the border between Nohr and Hoshido with Hanz to intentionally cause a fight(chapter 3). Corrin wins and but is going to be ambushed by more hoshido forces lead by Saizou, defeated and captured(and inevitably recognised)...except the Nohr siblings save him. Hanz is there as a back up plan to both make sure the battle happens and to make sure Corrin goes to Hoshido by knocking Gunther and Corrin into the infinite Chasm(which is also connected to Hoshido)...except Corrin defeats him and makes him retreat, but ends up in Hoshido anyway.

This...is a really convoluted plan. Garon wants to send Kamui to Hoshido so he can assassinate Mikoto. So he hopes Kamui will be overwhelmed and captured by Hoshidans, but that doesn't happen so he has Ganz there to try and kill him because....??? Why not just skip the battle entirely if the plan was always to just knock him into the infinite chasm (for possession??)? Why is Kamui needed at all when Anankos can summon phantoms in to Hoshido anyway?

[Fyras4]

This...is a really convoluted plan. Garon wants to send Kamui to Hoshido so he can assassinate Mikoto. So he hopes Kamui will be overwhelmed and captured by Hoshidans, but that doesn't happen so he has Ganz there to try and kill him because....??? Why not just skip the battle entirely if the plan was always to just knock him into the infinite chasm (for possession??)? Why is Kamui needed at all when Anankos can summon phantoms in to Hoshido anyway?

Why make it easy at all...? Although I can see the reasoning behind Garon's planning; if the idea was always to get Kamui possessed/in Hoshido, then he could achieve it either way...one plan required that he/she be in the Chasm and the other required him/her to be captured. Whatever happens first would benefit him either way.

Although the way it plays out then the idea was to get rid of both of them when Kamui was captured; get rid of the Queen, get rid of her kid and as a bonus get rid of the shield on the Hoshido capital (or something...I keep forgetting).

Edited February 9, 2016 by Fyras4