Camilla vs Hinoka (Conquest chapter 11 spoilers)

[BruceLee]

In chapter 11, If you confront Hinoka with Camilla, she pretty much shoves it in Hinoka's face how Kamui has chosen her over Hinoka, before beating her up together with Kamui. Shouldn't Camilla of all people be able sympathize with Hinoka? That dialogue makes Camilla come off as a horrible person in my eyes.

I feel bad for Hinoka, poor girl.

And another thing. Kamui ordered for all of the Hoshidans in that chapter to be spared. At the end of the chapter as the injured Hohidans are fleeing, Camilla asks Kamui: Are you sure you don't want us to chase after them? If we hurry, we can still kill all of them. Like wtf is wrong with this chick?

If there's one thing that really irks me about Conquest, it's how people who do horrible things for no reason are protrayed as good and lovable people.

Edited February 23, 2016 by BruceLee

[Nukemind]

From what I've seen, in all routes but Relevations the Nohr siblings take a hit from both the villain and the idiot bats. Camilla actually has really, REALLY nice supports with Honika. She actually isn't that bad of a person, but being raised by King Creepy Face and his advisors gives a really warped sense of morality for the siblings.

[Water Mage]

Now that I think about it, isn't this fight between Hinoka and Camilla the only time the royals sibilings have a boss conversations against each other?

I'm kinda disapointed that there isn't Sakura vs Elise, Takumi vs Leo and Ryoma vs Xander boss conversations.

[Katryn]

That is definiely messed up on both accounts.

As for your final comment, however: in fiction it is vital that good people do questionable things / have quirks that might be annoying, and bad people retain some good traits. Without blending at least a fraction of the opposite into a character we get someone like Garon. Further, the good (or bad) things people do do not so much negate or incapacitate a person (or even more importantly here, a character) from taking an action that is of an opposite mindset.

Not to excuse Camilla (again, what?!) but I would theorize the logic in having her say that (from a writer's perspective) was either to indicate to the player her insecurity / neediness with regard to Corrin, or (2) to mess with Hinoka's head and get her emotional so that she will be more likely to make poor judgements when they fight. As for the comment to Corrin at the end, my guess is that the intent was either (1) to show how Camilla is really ruthless toward enemies (and even potentially to show she has taken moral damage from her time with Garon) and / or (2) to use her as a foil to again show how good / kind / etc. Corrin is.

Let me end be again saying both of those things are totally messed up. And as usual that I haven't seen this scene, so I am looking at it from an outside perspective. But at a glance, the above would be my theories.

[Nukemind]

Now that I think about it, isn't this fight between Hinoka and Camilla the only time the royals sibilings have a boss conversations against each other?

I'm kinda disapointed that there isn't Sakura vs Elise, Takumi vs Leo and Ryoma vs Xander boss conversations.

Takumi vs Leo would be interesting. Ones a thinker, but I wager he's an inferior fighter. Elise vs Sakura would just be them being nice to each other and healing each other. Ryoma vs Xander... I can't predict. Stats are similar, actions are similar, even mindset is (somewhat) similar. I would love all three.

I do agree with Katryn above me. Good people must do bad, and bad good. Otherwise you end up with Mary Sue's and Evil for Evil's Sake. I much prefer heroes with a touch of grey, and villains with a touch of light.

[Thane]

Takumi vs Leo would be interesting. Ones a thinker, but I wager he's an inferior fighter. Elise vs Sakura would just be them being nice to each other and healing each other. Ryoma vs Xander... I can't predict. Stats are similar, actions are similar, even mindset is (somewhat) similar. I would love all three.

I do agree with Katryn above me. Good people must do bad, and bad good. Otherwise you end up with Mary Sue's and Evil for Evil's Sake. I much prefer heroes with a touch of grey, and villains with a touch of light.

Just want to point out that their support (at least in Japanese) makes it very clear that they both are; they're both interested in philosophy.

[BruceLee]

From what I've seen, in all routes but Relevations the Nohr siblings take a hit from both the villain and the idiot bats. Camilla actually has really, REALLY nice supports with Honika. She actually isn't that bad of a person, but being raised by King Creepy Face and his advisors gives a really warped sense of morality for the siblings.

I'm aware, i've read the support, it is actually nice. But it doesn't change the fact that this happened.

That is definiely messed up on both accounts.

As for your final comment, however: in fiction it is vital that good people do questionable things / have quirks that might be annoying, and bad people retain some good traits. Without blending at least a fraction of the opposite into a character we get someone like Garon. Further, the good (or bad) things people do do not so much negate or incapacitate a person (or even more importantly here, a character) from taking an action that is of an opposite mindset.

Not to excuse Camilla (again, what?!) but I would theorize the logic in having her say that (from a writer's perspective) was either to indicate to the player her insecurity / neediness with regard to Corrin, or (2) to mess with Hinoka's head and get her emotional so that she will be more likely to make poor judgements when they fight. As for the comment to Corrin at the end, my guess is that the intent was either (1) to show how Camilla is really ruthless toward enemies (and even potentially to show she has taken moral damage from her time with Garon) and / or (2) to use her as a foil to again show how good / kind / etc. Corrin is.

Let me end be again saying both of those things are totally messed up. And as usual that I haven't seen this scene, so I am looking at it from an outside perspective. But at a glance, the above would be my theories.

Thanks for the input. I get what you're saying, it's not good to have a character be completely good or completely evil, we have Garon as proof of that.

But when a character has fucked up traits/does fucked up things, i want them to be acknowledged. It's not the horrible actions that irritate me, it's the fact that the horrible actions aren't acknowledged and swept under the rug. Like the game expects me to not have a problem with those horrible things.

Edited February 23, 2016 by BruceLee

[Time the Crestfallen]

Camilla being ruthless to enemies is an actual character trait of hers. It gets mentioned in her support with Laslow and in chapter 3, where Elise says she's a different person on the battlefield (sorry about the para-phrasing).

[Thane]

I'm aware, i've read the support, it is actually nice. But it doesn't change the fact that this happened.

Thanks for the input. I get what you're saying, it's not good to have a character be completely good or completely evil, we have Garon as proof of that.

But when a character has fucked up traits/does fucked up things, i want them to be acknowledged. It's not the horrible actions that irritate me, it's the fact that the horrible actions aren't acknowledged and swept under the rug. Like the game expects me to not have a problem with those horrible things.

Well it also wants you to think Peri murdering people for fun and not understanding why that's a bad thing is okay.

[BruceLee]

Camilla being ruthless to enemies is an actual character trait of hers. It gets mentioned in her support with Laslow and in chapter 3, where Elise says she's a different person on the battlefield (sorry about the para-phrasing).

Those Hoshidans were defeated and fleeing. Being ruthless to your enemies doesn't excuse you for wanting to chase after injured, defeated and fleeing Hoshidans and massacre them.

Well it also wants you to think Peri murdering people for fun and not understanding why that's a bad thing is okay.

Ugh Peri. Do the writers assume the people playing their games have no moral values?

Edited February 23, 2016 by BruceLee

[Nukemind]

Just want to point out that their support (at least in Japanese) makes it very clear that they both are; they're both interested in philosophy.

I see, honestly haven't done TO MANY of his supports, though a few. I got a woodsman-hunter vibe from him, will have to crack down and get some supports with him.

[Time the Crestfallen]

Those Hoshidans were defeated and fleeing. Being ruthless to your enemies doesn't excuse you for wanting to chase after injured, defeated and fleeing Hoshidans and massacre them.

It's not a good character trait (in that it's not something she should be proud of), but the way you phrased your original post made it sound as if she's doing this for no reason whatsoever.

[BruceLee]

It's not a good character trait (in that it's not something she should be proud of), but the way you phrased your original post made it sound as if she's doing this for no reason whatsoever.

She is doing it for no reason in that scene(or wants to atleast). What reason is there to chase after the Hoshidans to kill them after they have already fled? It's not to protect Kamui which she normally proclaims.

[NekoKnight]

More than Camilla standing out from "normal" behavior, scenes like this really say to me that Kamui is the black sheep in Nohr. Kamui is always the one preaching compassion and mercy but his other siblings are very selective in their compassion. An interesting comparison to this scene is chapter 22.

After the battle, Marx orders the Hoshidan soldiers to surrender, promising to spare their lives if they do. After Garon orders the massacre of the surrendered soldiers, Kamui and Marx are outraged. Apparently it's okay for Camilla to advocate hunting the fleeing Hoshidans down to the last man in chapter 11 but it's a horrifying conclusion in chapter 22.

Perhaps one could argue that Marx felt his honor was stained by Garon undoing his promise of mercy, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to me that the Nohrian siblings can sometimes be super gung ho about slaughtering Hoshidans and then act compassionate in other scenes.

Edited February 23, 2016 by NekoKnight

[Time the Crestfallen]

She is doing it for no reason in that scene(or wants to atleast). What reason is there to chase after the Hoshidans to kill them after they have already fled? It's not to protect Kamui which she normally proclaims.

That was bad phrasing on my part. When I said 'no reason', I was trying to say you made it sound like it was OOC and had no basis in her personality.

[Katryn]

Having been raised by Garon, it's entirely possible that Camilla would feel letting them live, period, just gives them another chance to attack her (and Corrin) another day. By killing them and leaving a massacre for their allies to find she mongers fear, confusion, etc. within the Hoshidan troops. By killing them she reiterates to her own troops that they do not want to screw with her / defy her / etc. By killing them she in turn makes Corrin look good in Garon's eyes (or at the very least she may feel this could be the case) since one of Garon's goals is to make Corrin corrupt / evil.

The resulting massacre that would ensue is never good, nor would any of these justifications ever make it right. However, they do explain that there are a multitude of potential motivations and since we are discussing fiction that is the key.

As for why no one is saying "Camilla, you are a very bad person."? (I'm not trying to put this exact phrase in your mouth, btw--I'm just using the most blatantly simple rebuke for the sake of convenience) (1) Who's going to feel they have the authority to say that? The soldiers? The fleeing Hoshidans? Corrin? She / he has already done what was necessary be preventing the needless slaughter. Doing anything to upset Camilla at this time would seem unwise to me, considering that we are discussing the fact that she wants to kill fleeing soldiers. Further, I have not seen this section so I cannot vouch for whether the plot has time for a further interlude with regard to this issue to occur.

And ultimately, the game should not need to tell us when people are behaving badly. If a character feels another character is out of line and they argue about it / something happens that is 100% fine. That's conflict and character development and that can most definitely work. But it has to fit within the context of the story being told (or in FE's case it could find its way into a support). It cannot just be doled out at will because "OMG that was bad and no one said it was bad so people will know for sure it is bad." (I sincerely hope that's not what you were going for and I have my doubts that it is, just to be clear.) Good writing doesn't tell is how things are; ideally it shows us. A shot of someone letting out a breath of relief because they don't have to kill defenseless people would have a more subtle impact able to be interpreted by the player as opposed to someone directly calling Camilla on it.

Admittedly, it does get tougher to really talk about how writing can work within the formats of FE since we are working with short bits of dialogue, character facial expressions and short image clips mostly. In the end, though, any morality they were trying to imply did its job--you felt that Camilla had it wrong. Generally, it is important to let the reader / player / audience deduce morality rather than feeding it directly to them.

[Thane]

Admittedly, it does get tougher to really talk about how writing can work within the formats of FE since we are working with short bits of dialogue, character facial expressions and short image clips mostly.

This may come across as nitpicking, but didn't Suikoden II do this in 1998? It not only has a lot of characters just like Fire Emblem, but also even gameplay sections which are very similar, and the story and characters there pretty much blows anything Fire Emblem has ever written out of the water.

What I mean to say is, the format can't be used as an excuse at all; it may increase the challenge, sure, but compelling stories and characters that at least make sense are definitely possible.

[Elieson]

Generations of longtime war

Hoshidans have been trying to kill Kamui at every turn ever since Kamui said "im not going back to you"

Takumi ordered the death of Kamui, "traitor" in chapter 10

Suddenly Camilla is bad for wanting to kill the people trying to behead her little [brother/sister]

No, i think Camilla is being sensible here. Sure it perpetuates the wartime relationship between nations but Camilla was just there in Ch10 where Takumi swore to outright kill Kamui. If anything, Word should have spread to Hoshido about Kamui and their efforts in the Ice Tribe to Takumi by now, so he could be less of a monster.

[Katryn]

This may come across as nitpicking, but didn't Suikoden II do this in 1998? It not only has a lot of characters just like Fire Emblem, but also even gameplay sections which are very similar, and the story and characters there pretty much blows anything Fire Emblem has ever written out of the water.

What I mean to say is, the format can't be used as an excuse at all; it may increase the challenge, sure, but compelling stories and characters that at least make sense are definitely possible.

I entirely agree with you that format should not be an excuse. The principles of good character, plot, etc. are universal within storytelling; they are not strictly bound to any one medium. My point there was moreso to clarify that while I have ideas the games medium is not my area of expertise. My ideas may be valid but I am not entirely able to explain what would need to happen to correct the problem within the format we are discussing.

I am a strong believer that if you can't actually present a way to fix what is broken, you need to at least acknowledge that someone else made what is there / what you are critiquing. It's a lot easier to take something apart than it is to create it.

As for Suikoden, I unfortunately did not have a proper opportunity to play that so I cannot give an opinion on whether I agree with your thoughts or not. I had the chance to rent one of those games as a kid but I remember totally not understanding it and being overwhelmed, so my family did not actually purchase it. (Shame. I would probably appreciate it looking back.)

Edited February 23, 2016 by Katryn

[MCProductions]

Generations of longtime war

Hoshidans have been trying to kill Kamui at every turn ever since Kamui said "im not going back to you"

Takumi ordered the death of Kamui, "traitor" in chapter 10

Suddenly Camilla is bad for wanting to kill the people trying to behead her little [brother/sister]

No, i think Camilla is being sensible here. Sure it perpetuates the wartime relationship between nations but Camilla was just there in Ch10 where Takumi swore to outright kill Kamui. If anything, Word should have spread to Hoshido about Kamui and their efforts in the Ice Tribe to Takumi by now, so he could be less of a monster.

This

Considering the Hoshidans are the ones with the Ninja intelligence network, they should know about what happened in the Ice Tribe, yet they STILL assume Corrin is a heartless monster. Camilla's first instinct is to protect her family, and her logic could easily be "if I let them live, they could threaten us a later day". Is it right to kill retreating soldiers, no, but this scene did not make me raise an eyebrow.

As for the boss convo, traditional tactics to unnerve Hinoka, not gloating imo.

[Thane]

I entirely agree with you that format should not be an excuse. The principles of good character, plot, etc. are universal within storytelling; they are not strictly bound to any one medium. My point there was moreso to clarify that while I have ideas the games medium is not my area of expertise. My ideas may be valid but I am not entirely able to explain what would need to happen to correct the problem within the format we are discussing.

I am a strong believer that if you can't actually present a way to fix what is broken, you need to at least acknowledge that someone else made what is there / what you are critiquing. It's a lot easier to take something apart than it is to create it.

As for Suikoden, I unfortunately did not have a proper opportunity to play that so I cannot give an opinion on whether I agree with your thoughts or not. I had the chance to rent one of those games as a kid but I remember totally not understanding it and being overwhelmed, so my family did not actually purchase it. (Shame. I would probably appreciate it looking back.)

Oh, we can definitely agree on that. I appreciate your longer, more detailed posts. I might've just jumped to conclusions because I've seen an argument like that before to excuse Fire Emblem's subpar writing just in general.

Of course, you must always be able to criticize something even though you're not a writer; I'm not an actor but I can critique performances made by other actors, for instance.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Thane

[BruceLee]

Slaughtering soldiers who have surrendered is wrong and evil. Period. Don't even try to justify that.

I don't need a character to call out Camilla or point out she's doing bad things. What i want is for the game to stick to it's decisions. If you're gonna have Camilla be a person who can justify to herself the slaughter of surrendered soldiers, then i will see her as a bad person. And that's where the problem lies, even though Camilla does stuff like that, the game is still portraying her as a good person. It's like the writers aren't taking me seriously.

[Time the Crestfallen]

I entirely agree with you that format should not be an excuse. The principles of good character, plot, etc. are universal within storytelling; they are not strictly bound to any one medium. My point there was moreso to clarify that while I have ideas the games medium is not my area of expertise. My ideas may be valid but I am not entirely able to explain what would need to happen to correct the problem within the format we are discussing.

I am a strong believer that if you can't actually present a way to fix what is broken, you need to at least acknowledge that someone else made what is there / what you are critiquing. It's a lot easier to take something apart than it is to create it.

As for Suikoden, I unfortunately did not have a proper opportunity to play that so I cannot give an opinion on whether I agree with your thoughts or not. I had the chance to rent one of those games as a kid but I remember totally not understanding it and being overwhelmed, so my family did not actually purchase it. (Shame. I would probably appreciate it looking back.)

That's somewhat true, but most people who critique something aren't paid, professional writers or have inside knowledge on the process is done. It's like Neil Gaiman said; when people tell you something's wrong or doesn't work for them, they are almost always right. When they tell you exactly what they think is wrong and how to fix it, they are almost always wrong.

[Tolvir]

Yeah I was a little surprised at that line from Camila, especially since she didn't have a problem sparing them in the previous chapter. It didn't make any sense, and felt almost a little out of character because while she is ruthless, she isn't an evil person willing to slaughter people. If this was the case, then the siblings in Nohr wouldn't of let Kaze and Rinkah go. They also wouldn't of listened to Corrin when he says not to kill them.

On the other hand Hinoka is the one I really feel bad for between the split. She was the one that truly lost something compared to the other siblings. It really made me feel bad for my decision, as compared to Takumi who made me want to kick his teeth in.

[BruceLee]

Yeah I was a little surprised at that line from Camila, especially since she didn't have a problem sparing them in the previous chapter. It didn't make any sense, and felt almost a little out of character because while she is ruthless, she isn't an evil person willing to slaughter people. If this was the case, then the siblings in Nohr wouldn't of let Kaze and Rinkah go. They also wouldn't of listened to Corrin when he says not to kill them.

On the other hand Hinoka is the one I really feel bad for between the split. She was the one that truly lost something compared to the other siblings. It really made me feel bad for my decision, as compared to Takumi who made me want to kick his teeth in.

Exactly my point. It's inconsistensy. In this scene she comes off as evil and heartless, but that's not how she's portrayed through the rest of the game.

That's the problem. The game acts like it never happened.

Yeah, i also feel bad for Hinoka. She spent almost her entire life training just to get Kamui back. Then when she finally reunites with him, he gets her mother killed(not his fault but still), and then abandons her again for the people who are invading her country.

Edited February 23, 2016 by BruceLee