Camilla vs Hinoka (Conquest chapter 11 spoilers)

[Atticus Lee]

Because the enemy can come back and fight. Minus Corrin, most of the units are already okay with killing during a battle, so it's safe to say that they would have done so if Corrin didn't order it. Camilla is simply asking Corrin again after the battle because they all know that the Hoshidan forces will comeback to fight again and that will cause more individual troubles for them. I also don't recall Camilla or Corrin saying anything related to sparing enemies in chapter 10 (the previous chapter).

Another thing, the enemy didn't surrender, they were just too injured to continue battling after the initial battle. There is nothing out of character for Camilla here. She's just being pragmatic after Corrin's first explicit (to us audience) order to her to not kill.

Attacking a surrendering enemy isn't objectively "evil", especially in wartime because war goes beyond the individual. If they however had a champion battle or a final battle that would end the war, then it'd be unethical to kill surrendering enemies because they have no immediate intention to continue or to support fighting.

[BruceLee]

Do you even know what war crimes are?

[Atticus Lee]

Do you even know what war crimes are?

I'm not specifically knowledgeable about those, but I do know they exist. But they only became a code of ethics for us because of our world's war history and the agreements of those war crimes by a great number of nations. This is about the world in Fates and their war history (which we don't know). I understand and respect that you believe her words (and possibly her character) in this particular chapter to be amoral, but that doesn't make her "evil", horrible, or reasonless by any objective means.

[BruceLee]

I'm not specifically knowledgeable about those, but I do know they exist. But they only became a code of ethics for us because of our world's war history and the agreements of those war crimes by a great number of nations. This is about the world in Fates and their war history (which we don't know). I understand and respect that you believe her words (and possibly her character) in this particular chapter to be amoral, but that doesn't make her "evil", horrible, or reasonless by any objective means.

We can agree to disagree, but i must say it shocks me when i see people actually defend such horrible actions. And this is not the first time i've come across these types of comments on this forum when discussing Nohr's story.

[Elieson]

We can agree to disagree, but i must say it shocks me when i see people actually defend such horrible actions. And this is not the first time i've come across these types of comments on this forum when discussing Nohr's story.

It shocks me that you're absolutely refusing to consider that in the Fates-iverse, this kind of behaviour can be both expected and justified. your type of bias behaviour is what tends to starts battles, not end them.

I'd like your response to this please.

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.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Elieson

[BruceLee]

It shocks me that you're absolutely refusing to consider that in the Fates-iverse, this kind of behaviour can be both expected and justified. your type of bias behaviour is what tends to starts battles, not end them.

I'd like your response to this please.

No that kind of behaviour can not be justified in the Fates verse, and if you think so then you clearly haven't played/seen the entire game.

Conquest chapter 22. War crimes are not justified. Not for us and not in the Fates verse.

Response to the quoted:

Of course Hoshidans have been trying to kill Kamui, he has joined the people that are invading their country and as far as they know is responsible for their queen's death.

It's a war. But once one side has surrendered the fight is over, killing people who have no will to fight is murder.

Edited February 23, 2016 by BruceLee

[Atticus Lee]

Uh, I know you said you agreed to disagree with me and I was going to end there, but now you're kinda confusing me.

Killing surrendered enemies, who have no will to fight is wrong. Yes I agree. But no one in this chapter surrendered. They instigated a battle (kidnapping the Rainbow Sage) and were ready to kill and be killed. At the end of the battle they were all injured and told by Corrin to retreat (which is different from surrendering).

I won't read the spoiler because I'm not that far into the game yet, but you seem to be okay with Hoshidans killing Corrin based off the circumstances of misunderstandings and possibly propaganda, which is a subjective matter versus what you've been arguing which is that the code of war ethics in our world (which is objective because a bunch of us greater nations agree to it) is also what we should be basing the Fates world off of disregarding all of their circumstances.

?????

[BruceLee]

Uh, I know you said you agreed to disagree with me and I was going to end there, but now you're kinda confusing me.

Killing surrendered enemies, who have no will to fight is wrong. Yes I agree. But no one in this chapter surrendered. They instigated a battle (kidnapping the Rainbow Sage) and were ready to kill and be killed. At the end of the battle they were all injured and told by Corrin to retreat (which is different from surrendering).

I won't read the spoiler because I'm not that far into the game yet, but you seem to be okay with Hoshidans killing Corrin based off the circumstances of misunderstandings and possibly propaganda, which is a subjective matter versus what you've been arguing which is that the code of war ethics in our world (which is objective because a bunch of us greater nations agree to it) is also what we should be basing the Fates world off of disregarding all of their circumstances.

?????

Yes Corrin let them retreat, but that doesn't mean they couldn't have chosen to continue fighting(which would be dumb but still), they accepted the loss and stopped fighting. Nohr could have taken them captive if they're worried about them coming back and attacking again.

When did i say that that? I said their desire to kill Corrin is justified based on what they know.

What are you talking about. I've merely responded to those who are defending war crimes, both in the real world and in the Fates verse. War crimes can not be justified, is basically my argument.

Anyway, i really dislike these kind of discussions. This is not what i had in mind when i created this thread -_-

Edited February 23, 2016 by BruceLee

[Tsuky]

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.

This. As long as they keep it consistent, things may be less s*itty. I don't even think the morality of actions are in consideration anymore, since Xander has someone like Peri for a retainer. But the flip flopping is just ridiculous. Also [spoiler=] If Camilla wanted to hunt everyone down in Chapter 11, then what made her agree to spare Hinoka in Chapter 24? From Nohr's perspective, it probably is sensible to go after the enemy in case they retaliate. But why not do that with Hinoka? It can't be because of Corrin, since he asked her to spare their lives in both cases. Isn't it a greater risk to leave Hinoka alive than random Hoshidan soldiers?

[spoiler=] Also, on a somewhat unrelated note, I just went back and looked at chapter 24 again, and I found Hinoka's actions really dumb. She said she wanted to come along with Corrin to convince Ryoma. Uh, convince him to do what? Let Garon waltz through Hoshido and sit on the throne (which is Corrin's plan)? What if Garon is like "ooooh, lemme kill some civilians around here before I go enjoy myself on the throne?" Corrin and the Nohrian siblings won't be able to do anything since they have zero control over what Garon does, so why in the world would Hinoka think that it's a good idea to get her brother to give up defending Hoshido? And Hinoka doesn't know about the Valla curse, so what does she think Corrin is even doing in Hoshido, with Garon and the Nohrian army already at their doorstep? What makes her think that going along with Corrin will "stop the war"?

Yeah, can someone explain this to me please? I'm really confused.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Tsuky

[BruceLee]

This. As long as they keep it consistent, things may be less s*itty. But it seems like the plot is just being "oh, you need to be compassionate here" and "oh, you need to act like an a**hole here." The flip flopping is ridiculous. Also [spoiler=] If Camilla wanted to hunt everyone down in Chapter 11, then what made her agree to spare Hinoka in Chapter 24? From Nohr's perspective, it probably is sensible to go after the enemy in case they retaliate. But why not do that with Hinoka? It can't be because of Corrin, since he asked her to spare their lives in both cases. Isn't it a greater risk to leave Hinoka alive than random Hoshidan soldiers?

[spoiler=] Also, on a slightly unrelated note, I just went back and looked at chapter 24 again, and I found Hinoka's actions really dumb. She said she wanted to come along with Corrin to convince Ryoma. Uh, convince him to do what? Let Garon waltz through Hoshido and sit on the throne (which is Corrin's plan)? What if Garon is like "ooooh, lemme kill some civilians around here before I enjoy myself on the throne?" Corrin and the Nohrian siblings won't be able to do anything since they have zero control over what Garon does, so why in the world would Hinoka think that it's a good idea to get her brother to give up defending Hoshido? And Hinoka doesn't know about the Valla curse, so what does she think Corrin is even doing in Hoshido, with Garon and the Nohrian army already at their doorstep? What makes her think that going along with Corrin will "stop the war"?

Yeah, can someone explain this to me please? I'm really confused.

Yes that's pretty much my point. Camilla's actions don't line up with the way she is portrayed.

As for your last spoiler:

It is simply dumb. Corrin and the Nohr army have invaded Hoshido, there should be no reason at all for Hinoka to go with them, let alone even forgive Corrin. Not to mention she thought they killed Sakura when she said that.

[Tsuky]

Yes that's pretty much my point. Camilla's actions don't line up with the way she is portrayed.

As for your last spoiler:

It is simply dumb. Corrin and the Nohr army have invaded Hoshido, there should be no reason at all for Hinoka to go with them, let alone even forgive Corrin. Not to mention she thought they killed Sakura when she said that.

Sigh... Hinoka, why u waste your good design.

[spoiler=] Now I really want to see how Ryoma would've reacted if she actually went with Corrin:

Hinoka: Big brother, I have great news! We can all stop fighting now! Corrin is promising to end the war for everyone, so it doesn't matter that Garon and his goons are out there wreaking havoc anymore!

Ryoma: ...wtf.

[BruceLee]

Sigh... Hinoka, why u waste your good design.

[spoiler=] Now I really want to see how Ryoma would've reacted if she actually went with Corrin:

Hinoka: Big brother, I have great news! We can all stop fighting now! Corrin is promising to end the war for everyone, so it doesn't matter that Garon and his goons are out there wreaking havoc anymore!

Ryoma: ...wtf.

I fear they'd give him a dumb reaction as well lol.

You know the writers will fuck up any character that gets in the way of their plot :(

[Tsuky]

I fear they'd give him a dumb reaction as well lol.

You know the writers will fuck up any character that gets in the way of their plot :(

That's very true. Ryoma has had a few "wtf" moments as well, so I wouldn't be surprised if he agrees to all of this nonsense XD

[Nukemind]

Do you even know what war crimes are?

Chasing and Massacring RETREATING troops is actually not technically illegal, as they are combatants, but pretty much every nation would frown upon it. Massacring SURRENDERED troops is, as they are no longer technically combatants, but rather prisoners of war the moment that they are taken by the enemy. There is a reason Hussars and other light cavalry was used in history: if you play Total War you see it a little, but they were mainly to chase retreating (but not surrendered) troops, as well as to harrass the enemy and various other quasi-legal activities. Then again, Hussars are arguably descendants (not biological but tactics/unit wise) of Hunnic Horsemen.

War Crimes include but are not limited to: Using Poison Gas, killing those who have surrendered, attack on unarmed non-combatants in war zones, attack of enemy ships not carrying munitions, attack of medical personnel, and.... well there is a good bit more. Geneva is fairly detailed.

Then again, Nohr might not even have the concept of war crimes, this isn't our world, it's a different world with a different history and different cultures (though they are remarkably similar, or at least Hoshido is basically a romanticized Sengoku Jidai-ish era Japan. At least tech wise, with there being little to no infighting).

[Ema Skye]

Then again, Nohr might not even have the concept of war crimes, this isn't our world, it's a different world with a different history and different cultures (though they are remarkably similar, or at least Hoshido is basically a romanticized Sengoku Jidai-ish era Japan. At least tech wise, with there being little to no infighting).

This is honestly a really good point.

You can't (and shouldn't) judge a fictional world by reality's rules because fiction isn't reality. If Nohr has no concept of war crimes (as it appears to), then you can't call Camilla a war criminal because war crimes don't exist in her world.

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.

This is your problem, not the game's problem.

Camilla is a good person on the Nohr route. She's a bad person on the Hoshido route. The color of her map sprite gives it all away.

If you don't see Camilla as a good person, don't play Conquest (and maybe Revelation depending on how much it bugs you). It's that simple.

[Nukemind]

Can I also once again point out the upbringing and life of the siblings (and even some of the common people of Nohr), including but not limited to during and prior the game -
[spoiler=Some Spoilers of Both Story and Supports]The killing of other siblings, a constant threat of death, the fact that none of the siblings are fully related, the fact that for all appearances Nohr is poverty stricken or at least has poor soil- proven in Kamui and Azura supports- the fact the "King" has no problem killing anyone, even his older kids, if they fail, not just turn on him- see Kamui and Camilla in Relevations, Convicted Criminals being allowed free because they are good fighters, what I can only assume is a king who is not governing his realm well, massive war, Sorcerer's who are forced to RISK THEIR LIFE to summon Faceless, etc.

[NekoKnight]

Chasing and Massacring RETREATING troops is actually not technically illegal, as they are combatants, but pretty much every nation would frown upon it. Massacring SURRENDERED troops is, as they are no longer technically combatants, but rather prisoners of war the moment that they are taken by the enemy. There is a reason Hussars and other light cavalry was used in history: if you play Total War you see it a little, but they were mainly to chase retreating (but not surrendered) troops, as well as to harrass the enemy and various other quasi-legal activities. Then again, Hussars are arguably descendants (not biological but tactics/unit wise) of Hunnic Horsemen.

This. Routing retreating troops is a common tactic in history (retreating soldiers are easier to kill than soldiers who fight to the last man). That in itself isn't a dishonorable tactic, and you do it for a martial advantage. There is a difference between surrender and withdrawal, and retreating, however.

Does Kamui let Hinoka's forces go after they surrender or do they withdraw without Kamui's permission? If it's the former, then hunting them down afterwards would be the same as killing captured prisoners. The nuance is whether quarter was promised by the victorious side.

[Nukemind]

This. Routing retreating troops is a common tactic in history (retreating soldiers are easier to kill than soldiers who fight to the last man). That in itself isn't a dishonorable tactic, and you do it for a martial advantage. There is a difference between surrender and withdrawal, and retreating, however.

Does Kamui let Hinoka's forces go after they surrender or do they withdraw without Kamui's permission? If it's the former, then hunting them down afterwards would be the same as killing captured prisoners. The nuance is whether quarter was promised by the victorious side.

True, I haven't played to it in Conquest. And I agree with you, if the admit defeat and withdraw, it's wrong to attack them. BUT if it was just a disorganized breaking of the lines, it's completely fine. ESPECIALLY if they are holding weapons. If they throwdown their weapons and put up their hands, they have every right to be treated as a PoW.

Whilst this is all true in our universe, I would assume since this is a fantasy romanticised middle ages, it WOULD be true there as well.

[NekoKnight]

True, I haven't played to it in Conquest. And I agree with you, if the admit defeat and withdraw, it's wrong to attack them. BUT if it was just a disorganized breaking of the lines, it's completely fine. ESPECIALLY if they are holding weapons. If they throwdown their weapons and put up their hands, they have every right to be treated as a PoW.

Whilst this is all true in our universe, I would assume since this is a fantasy romanticised middle ages, it WOULD be true there as well.

In real life, I can't imagine a defeated force being allowed to leave alive, least of all with their weapons. They'd either be captured or killed. Unlike games where we can win a battle with no casualties, a real life battle will always have a cost and letting people walk away scot-free would be a fatal decision. But Fire Emblem isn't like real life. If Kamui (misguided tool that he is) wants to allow the enemy to retreat, he can.

[Nukemind]

In real life, I can't imagine a defeated force being allowed to leave alive, least of all with their weapons. They'd either be captured or killed. Unlike games where we can win a battle with no casualties, a real life battle will always have a cost and letting people walk away scot-free would be a fatal decision. But Fire Emblem isn't like real life. If Kamui (misguided tool that he is) wants to allow the enemy to retreat, he can.

Oh you misunderstand me. I agree in the Middle Ages we would cut them down. Even today we would. But I meant if the enemy SURRENDERS these days we will imprison them, and I assume that "morality" would be common in a fantasy middle age as well. I know all to well the costs of battle, not from personal experience but from my grandfather, who lost all three of his brothers. He was the only one who COULDN"T fight, due to a heart murmur, and so he was at home as one by one they got a letter. He still talks about it alot... and I'm of topic again. My mind wanders, my apologies.

I also assume in every battle there are a lot of soldiers we don't see. Whilst the A team of royals is fighting, there has to be other troops. A group of 40ish people can't topple a country: at least not in open battles

[NekoKnight]

Oh you misunderstand me. I agree in the Middle Ages we would cut them down. Even today we would. But I meant if the enemy SURRENDERS these days we will imprison them, and I assume that "morality" would be common in a fantasy middle age as well. I know all to well the costs of battle, not from personal experience but from my grandfather, who lost all three of his brothers. He was the only one who COULDN"T fight, due to a heart murmur, and so he was at home as one by one they got a letter. He still talks about it alot... and I'm of topic again. My mind wanders, my apologies.

I also assume in every battle there are a lot of soldiers we don't see. Whilst the A team of royals is fighting, there has to be other troops. A group of 40ish people can't topple a country: at least not in open battles

I wasn't disagreeing with you, just commenting on the subject. In real life, enemies wouldn't be allowed to retreat without consequence so I think people are using that to interpret Camilla wanting to hunt them all down as fair game. I was just saying that in the romanticized setting that we have, it wouldn't be right for the Nohrians to kill the retreating soldiers if they explicitly offered to let them leave peacefully.

[Magikarpador]

I honestly really liked Camilla there. I mean, she's obviously trying to get under her skin, and it's working. They were already going to fight and all anyway.

[Nukemind]

I wasn't disagreeing with you, just commenting on the subject. In real life, enemies wouldn't be allowed to retreat without consequence so I think people are using that to interpret Camilla wanting to hunt them all down as fair game. I was just saying that in the romanticized setting that we have, it wouldn't be right for the Nohrians to kill the retreating soldiers if they explicitly offered to let them leave peacefully.

Ah now I gotcha. Thought you were arguing against what I was saying. I think we are in total agreement.

I honestly really liked Camilla there. I mean, she's obviously trying to get under her skin, and it's working. They were already going to fight and all anyway.

It's said all's fair in love and war. Whilst not completely true, the instance infringes on both. She's a lot better character than many give her credit for.

[Magikarpador]

Ah now I gotcha. Thought you were arguing against what I was saying. I think we are in total agreement.

It's said all's fair in love and war. Whilst not completely true, the instance infringes on both. She's a lot better character than many give her credit for.

Well, i married her, so yeah, it didn't make me think any less of her. In fact, I remember smiling at the scene and how good her verbal jabs were. It was difficult to sympathize much with anyone from Hoshido as they hardly hold back themselves.

[Nukemind]

Well, i married her, so yeah, it didn't make me think any less of her. In fact, I remember smiling at the scene and how good her verbal jabs were. It was difficult to sympathize much with anyone from Hoshido as they hardly hold back themselves.

I... I sympathize with Hinoka (and am on the fence of Camilla or Flora...). She trained her whole life to rescue Corrin, got him back, then had her world ripped from her. But I sympathize more with the Nohrians, who had brothers and sisters killed without any way to protect them, didn't know if they themselves were next, etc.