Criticizing Ryoma - What is acceptable in War or perhaps not

[blah the Prussian]

I was arguing that it was morally questionable. I used the GC and the long history of people having rules of warfare to say that people, in general, have lines they feel shouldn't be crossed even in times of war. And that it is fair for some people to feel that Ryoma's choice here was morally questionable.

I did address what I feel about Elise being an enemy combatant. I'll reiterate here though. I feel if someone is unable to fight they no longer are an enemy combatant.

That is true of POWs, but not of wounded soldiers, because they can and will be able to fight in the future. While it is a war crime to kill wounded soldiers, it is not as such to not save them. As for what Ryoma did being morally questionable, that is irrelevant in my eyes.

[Red Lilies]

That is true of POWs, but not of wounded soldiers, because they can and will be able to fight in the future. While it is a war crime to kill wounded soldiers, it is not as such to not save them. As for what Ryoma did being morally questionable, that is irrelevant in my eyes.

This looks like something that comes down to opinion so it is unlikely to be settled.

I say when you are physically unable to fight, you are out of commission. Your potential to become a combatant down the line feels irrelevant to the current inability present. You're saying regardless of ability to fight, if you have ever fought and may fight again you're a combatant.

I'm saying that out right killing someone unable to fight and just standing by when you could save them are the same thing. You're saying it's wrong to actively kill an out of commission solider but alright to stand by and let them die. I think we're unlikely to come to an agreement here, since we seem to be arguing about opinions and takes on a definition.

As to the moral part, considering I was arguing the action was immoral in my original post, it's relevant to the discussion but I understand if you are not looking to discuss that part and only looking to clarify what I meant by non-combatant. Hopefully I've made that clearer now.

Agree to disagree then?

[Dandy Druid]

Never have I ever seen so many forums about the actions of characters and discussions on whether people like them or not in a Fire Emblem game.

Like seriously, you may hate some characters, but I think that means the script writers of Fates really did their jobs. If so much of the cast was able to evoke this much emotion and opinions out of all of you, then consider their characterization a job well done.

[blah the Prussian]

This looks like something that comes down to opinion so it is unlikely to be settled.

I say when you are physically unable to fight, you are out of commission. Your potential to become a combatant down the line feels irrelevant to the current inability present. You're saying regardless of ability to fight, if you have ever fought and may fight again you're a combatant.

I'm saying that out right killing someone unable to fight and just standing by when you could save them are the same thing. You're saying it's wrong to actively kill an out of commission solider but alright to stand by and let them die. I think we're unlikely to come to an agreement here, since we seem to be arguing about opinions and takes on a definition.

As to the moral part, considering I was arguing the action was immoral in my original post, it's relevant to the discussion but I understand if you are not looking to discuss that part and only looking to clarify what I meant by non-combatant. Hopefully I've made that clearer now.

Agree to disagree then?

Yes, I suppose so. Basically, though, if helping an enemy soldier will hurt your own chances, don't do it. Ryoma is royalty with an obligation to protect his kingdom; he doesn't have time for honor.

[Lanko]

Yes, I suppose so. Basically, though, if helping an enemy soldier will hurt your own chances, don't do it. Ryoma is royalty with an obligation to protect his kingdom; he doesn't have time for honor.

He was honorable enough to allow Elise to go free unharmed if Corn came back with him. He could have demanded her as a prisoner in exchange for treatment. And even Camilla too, who was also there.

The point of immorality against Ryoma here is moot, as there was an enemy army, fully armed, in their own territory, all ready to fight him. It would be different if everyone else was also sick, unarmed or had surrendered.

Edited April 14, 2016 by Lanko

[Roxachronc]

You should be wondering why he did not kill her or use her as a hostage to force Corrin to surrender instead of criticizing him IMO.

You want to apply real world logic ingame? fine, what would you do if your long lost little brother that you love betrays you and threatens you without giving you a proper explanation? and that happens exactly when your step-mother just died in front of you and you need to inherit a country since you are the new heir and also need to stop an incoming invasion.

Like I am far more surprised that Ryouma did not go insane instead of not helping an enemy, with all the things he needed to take care at the moment I think it is pretty obvious that you cannot be helping a potential threat.

[blah the Prussian]

You should be wondering why he did not kill her or use her as a hostage to force Corrin to surrender instead of criticizing him IMO.

You want to apply real world logic ingame? fine, what would you do if your long lost little brother that you love betrays you and threatens you without giving you a proper explanation? and that happens exactly when your step-mother just died in front of you and you need to inherit a country since you are the new heir and also need to stop an incoming invasion.

Like I am far more surprised that Ryouma did not go insane instead of not helping an enemy, with all the things he needed to take care at the moment I think it is pretty obvious that you cannot be helping a potential threat.

Well to be fair Ryoma didn't have Elise in captivity. He didn't really have the ability to kill her or use her as a hostage. Although, had he killed her that would have been wrong, as killing POWs is bad. And the game does generally treat anything even considered dishonorable like I treat Woodrow Wilson (bad) so Ryoma would look like a bit of a hypocrite if he took her hostage. He didn't, though, so there is no debate.

[Tolvir]

Never have I ever seen so many forums about the actions of characters and discussions on whether people like them or not in a Fire Emblem game.

Like seriously, you may hate some characters, but I think that means the script writers of Fates really did their jobs. If so much of the cast was able to evoke this much emotion and opinions out of all of you, then consider their characterization a job well done.

This pretty much. When I first played through, I wanted to beat the hell out of Ryoma. And then didnt because he had at least 6-7 levels on me and would whup my ass before I could get him below half.

Another thing I want to point out is, even if it is considered "dishonorable" to be completely honest considering the twisted way honor worked for the Japanese. As long as Ryoma wasnt the one that "killed" her, even if his actions led to her death, then that wouldnt be considered dishonorable. It is if he practically took his sword and killed her that way, and even then we have no idea how Hoshidan honor works, for all we know kicking puppies is bad, but throwing kittens like footballs are ok. Medieval sense of right and wrong often got a little twisted. Like Punisher levels of twisted.

Edited April 14, 2016 by Tolvir

[blah the Prussian]

Okay wait, the script writers did not do their jobs. The story is shit.

[Thane]

Okay wait, the script writers did not do their jobs. The story is shit.

Seriously though, what's up? What was the hair that broke the camel's back?

Edit: Oh, thought this was your reaction thread. Welp, now I just feel silly.

Edited April 14, 2016 by Thane

[blah the Prussian]

Seriously though, what's up? What was the hair that broke the camel's back?

Edit: Oh, thought this was your reaction thread. Welp, now I just feel silly.

Well, the hair that broke the camel's back was the whole "Get Garon to sit on Hoshido's throne even though why the fuck would Garon do that if it would reveal him?" I'm just getting depressed by the story because there are so many better stories I have in my head.

[NekoKnight]

Well, the hair that broke the camel's back was the whole "Get Garon to sit on Hoshido's throne even though why the fuck would Garon do that if it would reveal him?" I'm just getting depressed by the story because there are so many better stories I have in my head.

Eyyyy, welcome to the club. You're a little late but we saved a slice of cake for you.

[Tolvir]

Well the story sucks for sure, but they did a good job at some of the more emotional scenes such as Chapter 6 when you are choosing, and some of those cutscenes. The story overall and structure may of been terrible, but that doesnt mean the entire thing was horrible. Give credit where credit is due, dont just trash the entire thing.

Edited April 14, 2016 by Tolvir

[Kuroi Tsubasa Tenshi]

I dunno, I feel like C6 is pretty subjective on its emotional value. Like, Hoshido comes on way too strong and then I barely know these characters who are insisting that Corrin is theirs, like some kind of toy to fight over. Nohr is a bit better because they get a way stronger introduction, but even then, they've still got a bunch of off-putting lines going on where it's like they also see Corrin as a toy to fight over. It just sapped all the emotion out of the scene for me. And I'm pretty sure the devs didn't intend both sides to come across that way, so I'd be lying if I said I thought they did a good job here.

I guess one that I feel they did do okay with at first was Gunter. Gut reaction on my first run was that I cared more about him and Jakob than any of the siblings. And I say at first because my first and only complete encounter with the storylines thus far as Conquest and for a good chunk of chapters after Gunter's death, everyone just kind of forgets that he even existed.

[shadowofchaos]

The only emotion I felt the entire game was on Chapter 5. Probably because Mikoto reminds me of my mother on looks and feel of unconditional love despite the situation of Kamui knowing them for barely a day.

...but I also understand that doesn't fly with a lot of people. There's not enough time to care about her in most cases. I feel like the exception, because I did feel like crying.

As for other stuff and plot twists, I had a "What" reaction more than anything else.

Edited April 14, 2016 by shadowofchaos

[Kuroi Tsubasa Tenshi]

I think I can give Mikoto herself a bit of a pass on the whole heavy-handedness on the grounds that she at least gives some acknowledgement to the fact that Corrin is in a very strange and awkward position and at least tries to work around it. This is in contrast to almost all the Hoshido siblings who more or less assume Corrin is going to come back into their embrace with no reservations. Especially cringe-worthy is the end of C4 where Hinoka is openly racist about the entirety of Nohr right in front of Corrin (and then the whole scene is made weird because Corrin apparently doesn't even have a word to say about that). Ryoma is maybe the next closest to empathic in that he vaguely thinks about Corrin's feelings in that statement that the whole kidnapping bit is a lot to take in, but his priority after that seems to be just proving how evil Nohr is to the point that he drags Corrin off to a battlefield. Then Takumi is actively hostile in an attempt to push away a Corrin he probably assumes wants back into the family. I mean, he has every right to be suspicious, but his approach is far from endearing (ironically, this is probably the most realistic response, but that's not going to score any points with the person he's directing his anger at). Finally, Sakura is a giant doormat who says very little when her other siblings are mouthing off. Nooot really something that's going to build an emotional response from me. Basically, Mikoto was the only one giving Hoshido any kind of positive impression and then she got offed pretty much as soon as she was introduced.

Now, Sakura and Takumi (meanwhile, Hinoka spends more time threatening to cut Zola than anything else) have been coming across more sympathetically in Birthright, but that's more than a little late to help with C6.

[blah the Prussian]

I think that the entire thing would mesh much better if Corrin openly defended the Nohrians against Hinoka. Then, there could be a fight resulting in only Ryoma and maybe Sakura trusting Corrin, and that makes the choice far more difficult; if I was in Corrin's position I would have gone with Hoshido no question, I just chose Conquest because I heard the gameplay was better. One way to make the choice more difficult is to have most of Hoshido hate Corrin, not just Takumi Trump.

[shadowofchaos]

Takumi Trump.

I agree with a lot of your points, and I know you hate Takumi, but can you please choose a different nickname? For someone that happens to view Takumi in a positive fashion, but still acknowledges his faults, I feel like you comparing him to Trump means you don't even acknowledge the fact that he's well enough written to have the most realistic reaction to disliking Kamui and has a positive point in his characterization as a human being.

Despite the absolute stupidity you feel he had in Chapter 10, that is no where near the atrocity it takes to be called "Trump".

Moving on...

The plot overall suffers from appealing to the "crowd emotions" like how they tried it with Emelina/Emmeryn in FE13. Except they really did it multiple times, even so much that certain plot elements are so unbelievable that all parts of the fandom admit that the suspension of disbelief is only barely kept if at all.

Most obvious example: Baby realms.

FE14 can really hook you in... if you think with your heart and have personal attachments to the characters in the first place.

A personal moral compass for the player... such as how Ryouma's situation with the ongoing debate with Elise.

Edited April 14, 2016 by shadowofchaos

[blah the Prussian]

I agree with a lot of your points, and I know you hate Takumi, but can you please choose a different nickname? For someone that happens to view Takumi in a positive fashion, but still acknowledges his faults, I feel like you comparing him to Trump means you don't even acknowledge the fact that he's well enough written to have the most realistic reaction to disliking Kamui and has a positive point in his characterization as a human being.

Despite the absolute stupidity you feel he had in Chapter 10, that is no where near the atrocity it takes to be called "Trump".

Moving on...

The plot overall suffers from appealing to the "crowd emotions" like how they tried it with Emelina/Emmeryn in FE13. Except they really did it multiple times, even so much that certain plot elements are so unbelievable that all parts of the fandom admit that the suspension of disbelief is only barely kept if at all.

Most obvious example: Baby realms.

FE14 can really hook you in... if you think who your heart and have personal attachments to the characters in the first place.

A personal moral compass for the player... such as how Ryouma's situation with the ongoing debate with Elise.

I have never seriously compared Takumi to Donald Trump. It is entirely in jest. It is okay if you think it's an unfunny joke, but I am not serious about it. But, I mean, come on, when they have him defending a wall what choice do I have? I do acknowledge that he is well written as a villain, because I consider him to be one of the two villains of Conquest along with BOB.

[saisymbolic]

I posted this on another thread but I personally think they should have started the game with the decision and then expanded upon each family in their respective routes.

The way the game attempts to make you feel some sort of attachment towards both families within the span of five chapters (minus the prologue) was not the best way of going about it, in my opinion. A lot of people did feel that the game did its job--and did it well--but, in my opinion, the only reason I chose Conquest was because of aesthetics; I literally did not give a single crap about either family before the decision. It was only until after I saw them in their routes did I begin to feel for characters.

Then, the entire premise and theme of the games (choices; deal with the consequences of your choices) was turned moot due to the appearance of a certain route. No longer can I feel bittersweet and contemplative over my choices. Now, I can just bring all my beloved siblings together with no strings attached because it is the true route.

>:X IS, why did you do this to me?

At any rate, back on topic, there are things to criticize every character over. Why is it necessary to home in on a single character?

Can someone make a pinned topic for the complaints, hate, beef for the whole story of Fire Emblem Fates? I feel it might help in cutting down topics that reiterate the same things a lot of people have been saying over the course of Fates being in existence.

Edited April 14, 2016 by SaiSymbolic

[Azure Sen]

Never have I ever seen so many forums about the actions of characters and discussions on whether people like them or not in a Fire Emblem game.

Like seriously, you may hate some characters, but I think that means the script writers of Fates really did their jobs. If so much of the cast was able to evoke this much emotion and opinions out of all of you, then consider their characterization a job well done.

I mean, the writers certainly did their jobs because the game exists, but they didn't do their job well. One of the characters who evokes the most emotion in me is Xander, and that's because of how awful his characterization is. While there were a few moments that worked for me (Mikoto's death, Ryoma and Takumi's fates in Conquest, some of the supports), it's kind of overshadowed by the fact that I got so frustrated by the bad writing on Conquest that I gave up playing it and watched the cutscenes elsewhere because of how little I cared about the fates of any of its "heroes."

Another thing I want to point out is, even if it is considered "dishonorable" to be completely honest considering the twisted way honor worked for the Japanese. As long as Ryoma wasnt the one that "killed" her, even if his actions led to her death, then that wouldnt be considered dishonorable. It is if he practically took his sword and killed her that way, and even then we have no idea how Hoshidan honor works, for all we know kicking puppies is bad, but throwing kittens like footballs are ok.

No code of honor except maybe a personal one would have found what Ryoma did "dishonorable." Most institutional honor codes do not involve showing mercy to the enemy, and would have consider him bowing to Corrin's demands as showing weakness in the face of the enemy and thus bringing dishonor upon himself. Now if Elise was a civilian and Ryoma's actions led to her death, it would be a different story.

Edited April 14, 2016 by AzureSen

[Lanko]

Never have I ever seen so many forums about the actions of characters and discussions on whether people like them or not in a Fire Emblem game.

Like seriously, you may hate some characters, but I think that means the script writers of Fates really did their jobs. If so much of the cast was able to evoke this much emotion and opinions out of all of you, then consider their characterization a job well done.

No, it's because they didn't. Its bad writing and lack of clarity leads to confusion like this.

Another thing wrong is that we don't hate or give a free pass to Ryoma because we love him. All points raised against him were addressed logically and with what we got in the game, not with fanboyism.

[NekoKnight]

This is in contrast to almost all the Hoshido siblings who more or less assume Corrin is going to come back into their embrace with no reservations. Especially cringe-worthy is the end of C4 where Hinoka is openly racist about the entirety of Nohr right in front of Corrin (and then the whole scene is made weird because Corrin apparently doesn't even have a word to say about that).

For Hinoka who has devoted much of her life to become a warrior and retrieve her lost sibling, it makes sense that she would be so emotionally invested that she doesn't consider that maybe Kamui wasn't miserable in captivity and doesn't dislike the Nohrians as much as she does. As for Kamui's reaction, I feel there are two ways to interpret this. 1. He's overwhelmed by all of these revelations about his 'true' family. 2. Hinoka's animosity towards Nohr is really awkward for him because he probably self-identifies as a Nohrian. That said, I think they were really trying to keep Kamui as neutral as possible before the route split so there wouldn't be as many inconsistencies in his attitude after the fact.

But we should try to stay on topic. This is a thread about Ryoma.

Edited April 14, 2016 by NekoKnight

[Pretty_Handsome]

I think I can give Mikoto herself a bit of a pass on the whole heavy-handedness on the grounds that she at least gives some acknowledgement to the fact that Corrin is in a very strange and awkward position and at least tries to work around it. This is in contrast to almost all the Hoshido siblings who more or less assume Corrin is going to come back into their embrace with no reservations. Especially cringe-worthy is the end of C4 where Hinoka is openly racist about the entirety of Nohr right in front of Corrin (and then the whole scene is made weird because Corrin apparently doesn't even have a word to say about that). Ryoma is maybe the next closest to empathic in that he vaguely thinks about Corrin's feelings in that statement that the whole kidnapping bit is a lot to take in, but his priority after that seems to be just proving how evil Nohr is to the point that he drags Corrin off to a battlefield. Then Takumi is actively hostile in an attempt to push away a Corrin he probably assumes wants back into the family. I mean, he has every right to be suspicious, but his approach is far from endearing (ironically, this is probably the most realistic response, but that's not going to score any points with the person he's directing his anger at). Finally, Sakura is a giant doormat who says very little when her other siblings are mouthing off. Nooot really something that's going to build an emotional response from me. Basically, Mikoto was the only one giving Hoshido any kind of positive impression and then she got offed pretty much as soon as she was introduced.

Now, Sakura and Takumi (meanwhile, Hinoka spends more time threatening to cut Zola than anything else) have been coming across more sympathetically in Birthright, but that's more than a little late to help with C6.

Openly racist? Please. Nohr killed her father, sends faceless to kill innocents, kidnapped and brainwashed Corrin, killed her mother, tried to kill Corrin, and are invading them.

Hinoka is right to call them Nohrian Scum as they're scum who happen to be the hated Nohrian invaders.

Zola is not in their side, he literally tried to capture the Royals and betrays you multiple times. The only one he doesn't want Garon to kill is Corrin. He happily would watch the rest be killed by his plot.

Edited April 14, 2016 by Pretty_Handsome

[BruceLee]

Never have I ever seen so many forums about the actions of characters and discussions on whether people like them or not in a Fire Emblem game.

Like seriously, you may hate some characters, but I think that means the script writers of Fates really did their jobs. If so much of the cast was able to evoke this much emotion and opinions out of all of you, then consider their characterization a job well done.

That's some weird logic you got there.

If so many people are expressing their discontent with the writing then it means that the writers did not do their job well.