Robin V Corrin

[NekoKnight]

I'm sorry, my tropespeak isn't what it used to be and 'moral dissonance' didn't feel like the appropriate description. Regardless, my complaint isn't that Robin's actions were 'unethical' persay, but that Micaiah doing so is treated as, while not necessarily 'evil', as a vicious tactic rather than something that's nothing out of the ordinary. I'm actually more pissed about Robin's ability to pull such a tactic of with little preparation or planning and have it succeed flawlessly than I am about any moral implications and don't even get me started on the fucking volcano level.

I was going to write a whole spiel about this, but I'm really exhausted now (sleep is for the weak!), so I'll give the short version; Awakening's lack of moral complexity benefits Robin in that he is presented as being morally right and gets away with it because the villains are so obviously evil that they make HYDRA look benign by comparison. However, Fates attempting to keep the same 'the avatar is always right' storyline while attempting a more morally complex plot not only forces Corrin into a role that doesn't suit them (as leader of the army), but also denies him the opportunity to grow as a character, often while derailing other characters in the process and leading to a lot of undeserved (or rather, undeserved in my opinion) hate, despite the fact that a lot of what people claim makes Corrin a terrible character can be largely attributed to other characters or the overall narrative as opposed to any failings on Corrin's part.

And yes, this is the 'short' version.

'Tropespeak' don't sound like no language to me. English, motherfucker, do you speak it!?

I think the point of Sanaki's criticism (if it can even be called that) of Micaiah is less about the tactic itself, rather she's questioning Micaiah's motives. Daein doesn't really have a reason to be fighting in the war so to go as far as using oil and fire to kill off every single member of Sanaki's party (herself included) is atypical of what they know of Micaiah. Micaiah is desperate to win and Sanaki wants to know why.

As a moral paragon, Kamui was undeniably the wrong sort of protagonist for a morally grey kingdom. Other characters stunted his character growth by their constant coddling and the expectation that Kamui was some chosen hero. All that said, he is still a person with agency and his actions in the plot should be judged for their merit (without resorting to meta explanations why he has no choice but to be a bad character). I think we'll have to agree to disagree on Kamui's lack of culpability for his actions.

[Hunter Nightblood]

So a while ago someone asked what would happen if Robin and Corrin changed games? After thinking about it, here's my honest opinion.

Robin has two main character traits, he's a great tactician and he values the bonds between people above all else. So, there would be no "Birthright" or "Conquest." Robin would definitely try to pull what Corrin did and get both sides to stop fighting. From there, the first part of Revelations would play out pretty similarly to what Corrin did, although I don't think he would have fallen for the faceless trying to kill them thing. When they reach Valla, Robin would have allowed Anthony to join their group; however, he would also have seen through Anthony's disguise rather quickly. Also, Scarlet still would have died, just like Emmeryn did, because Robin can't plan for things he doesn't know about. That being said, he probably would have figured out it was Gunter a lot sooner. Other than that, Robin pretty much would have followed Revelations to the letter, he just would have been a bit more efficient about it.

Corrin, on the other hand, would be a Shepherd, and that's it. Robin was made the tactician of the Shepherds be he was really good at it. Corrin isn't. Chrom still would have allowed Corrin to join though, because let's face it, Corrin is a powerful fighter and would be a great asset in battle. So basically, the plot would be Chrom getting his ass kicked around until he learns strategy.

[Lann La Mirah]

Character-wise: (Can't really speak for the guy versions--haven't played either game as the guy.) Robin. A lot of you guys summed up my issues with Corrin: Naive to the point of stupidity, yet the characters don't really call her out on anything she does bad except for Takumi in Conquest. And worse, she doesn't really change. :I Despite those issues and some other ones I'm probably forgetting, I actually like Corrin for the most part. Just not as much as Robin.

Why can't we have an Avatar that's Hector cool?

Gameplay-wise: I like the Grandmaster better than the Nohrian Prince/ss. But I will admit that Robin is TOO good. I love tomes, so the Nohrian Noble isn't bad. I wasn't huge on the Hoshidan variety though.

[Time the Crestfallen]

As a moral paragon, Kamui was undeniably the wrong sort of protagonist for a morally grey kingdom. Other characters stunted his character growth by their constant coddling and the expectation that Kamui was some chosen hero. All that said, he is still a person with agency and his actions in the plot should be judged for their merit (without resorting to meta explanations why he has no choice but to be a bad character). I think we'll have to agree to disagree on Kamui's lack of culpability for his actions.

Probably. We've already discussed this at length, so I don't see either of us changing our minds now.

[cgRIPPER]

I really hate to say it, but I have to say Corrin is the better character.

My reasoning for this is a little bit weird, but hear me out please.

Both of these characters are horrible examples of self-insert MCs. The difference between them is that while Corrin is basically just a self-insert character, Robin is a tactical self-insert tactician character who is good at tactics. The game (in the supports especially) is so over-the-top about shoving "Hey, did you know this guy is really good at tactics?" down our throats that I find it impossible to insert myself into Robin's perspective for even a short period of time. Corrin on the other hand, I can at least forget about the differences for a while because he's so bland.

Self-insert characters suck, but if it's gonna be a self-insert character I better at least be able to insert myself into that character. If I can't do that, then they are a total failure.

On a slightly separate note, am I the only one that wanted Robin to be done in the way that the tactician was in FE7?

[maninbluejumpsuit]

I really hate to say it, but I have to say Corrin is the better character.

My reasoning for this is a little bit weird, but hear me out please.

Both of these characters are horrible examples of self-insert MCs. The difference between them is that while Corrin is basically just a self-insert character, Robin is a tactical self-insert tactician character who is good at tactics. The game (in the supports especially) is so over-the-top about shoving "Hey, did you know this guy is really good at tactics?" down our throats that I find it impossible to insert myself into Robin's perspective for even a short period of time. Corrin on the other hand, I can at least forget about the differences for a while because he's so bland.

Self-insert characters suck, but if it's gonna be a self-insert character I better at least be able to insert myself into that character. If I can't do that, then they are a total failure.

On a slightly separate note, am I the only one that wanted Robin to be done in the way that the tactician was in FE7?

I just finished posting something about self inserts in the character poll thread, but basically, I hate MCorrin as a self-insert because of his ignorance, stupid decisions, and being coddled by his older brothers.

Sure, Robin is a tactician with a more established character, which should make the self-insert a bit harder to pull off, but at least it's easier to agree with Robin's decisions, and understand why Robin makes them.

[NekoKnight]

I really hate to say it, but I have to say Corrin is the better character.

My reasoning for this is a little bit weird, but hear me out please.

Both of these characters are horrible examples of self-insert MCs. The difference between them is that while Corrin is basically just a self-insert character, Robin is a tactical self-insert tactician character who is good at tactics. The game (in the supports especially) is so over-the-top about shoving "Hey, did you know this guy is really good at tactics?" down our throats that I find it impossible to insert myself into Robin's perspective for even a short period of time. Corrin on the other hand, I can at least forget about the differences for a while because he's so bland.

Self-insert characters suck, but if it's gonna be a self-insert character I better at least be able to insert myself into that character. If I can't do that, then they are a total failure.

On a slightly separate note, am I the only one that wanted Robin to be done in the way that the tactician was in FE7?

That's something I haven't heard before, a character criticized for not being enough of a self-insert.

[Thane]

That's something I haven't heard before, a character criticized for not being enough of a self-insert.

Apparently, having a brain makes a self-insert worse.

I think I need to sit down.

[Roflolxp54]

I really hate to say it, but I have to say Corrin is the better character.

My reasoning for this is a little bit weird, but hear me out please.

Both of these characters are horrible examples of self-insert MCs. The difference between them is that while Corrin is basically just a self-insert character, Robin is a tactical self-insert tactician character who is good at tactics. The game (in the supports especially) is so over-the-top about shoving "Hey, did you know this guy is really good at tactics?" down our throats that I find it impossible to insert myself into Robin's perspective for even a short period of time. Corrin on the other hand, I can at least forget about the differences for a while because he's so bland.

Self-insert characters suck, but if it's gonna be a self-insert character I better at least be able to insert myself into that character. If I can't do that, then they are a total failure.

On a slightly separate note, am I the only one that wanted Robin to be done in the way that the tactician was in FE7?

Well, the thing is that you, the player, are playing Fire Emblem, which is supposed to be a turn-based tactical RPG -- therefore, it does make sense that the player avatar is a tactician of some sort (Mark from FE7 and Robin from FE13 are flatout tacticians, and Kris from FE12 is a commander).

The whole praising stuff is pretty much there to stroke your ego:

-FE7: whole nations went to WAR in order to recruit Mark after his disappearance according to his A/S Tactician rank ending (that's pretty much over the top if you ask me)

-FE13: the praise is rather shallow on lower difficulties since it is the easiest and most broken FE, but on Lunatic(+) Classic without any grinding, it could be well-deserved (on top of Robin pulling off what the English did against the Spanish Armada in like the 1580s). Robin also has his own failings as a tactician though that's because he wasn't aware (hierophant being a spy; Risen archers showing up during the rescue mission; Validar being able to control him)

-FE12: Kris does get a sort of rating (in the form of praise or criticism) based on how many allies are still alive at the end of certain chapters, and does receive a comment based on how high one of his stats is at the start of certain chapters. You also get to see his and some of his comrades' training days

Corrin doesn't exactly come off as a credible tactician at all, given that he's been playing Rapunzel for much of his life. He hardly has any experience before he's sent out into the world outside of sparring, yet he's still treated like the Messiah.

Edited May 15, 2016 by Roflolxp54

[TheWerdna]

So a while ago someone asked what would happen if Robin and Corrin changed games? After thinking about it, here's my honest opinion.

Robin has two main character traits, he's a great tactician and he values the bonds between people above all else. So, there would be no "Birthright" or "Conquest." Robin would definitely try to pull what Corrin did and get both sides to stop fighting. From there, the first part of Revelations would play out pretty similarly to what Corrin did, although I don't think he would have fallen for the faceless trying to kill them thing. When they reach Valla, Robin would have allowed Anthony to join their group; however, he would also have seen through Anthony's disguise rather quickly. Also, Scarlet still would have died, just like Emmeryn did, because Robin can't plan for things he doesn't know about. That being said, he probably would have figured out it was Gunter a lot sooner. Other than that, Robin pretty much would have followed Revelations to the letter, he just would have been a bit more efficient about it.

Corrin, on the other hand, would be a Shepherd, and that's it. Robin was made the tactician of the Shepherds be he was really good at it. Corrin isn't. Chrom still would have allowed Corrin to join though, because let's face it, Corrin is a powerful fighter and would be a great asset in battle. So basically, the plot would be Chrom getting his ass kicked around until he learns strategy.

But you forget, Corrin is apparently a genius tactician despite the fact we see zero evidence of this and his supports with Leo imply the exact opposite. We even have Chrom say it in the before Awakening DLC as well as the Amiibo Robin say it, because Corrin is a well written character and totally not a sueish special snowflake. /sarcasm.

Edited May 15, 2016 by TheWerdna

[TheWerdna]

I really hate to say it, but I have to say Corrin is the better character.

My reasoning for this is a little bit weird, but hear me out please.

Both of these characters are horrible examples of self-insert MCs. The difference between them is that while Corrin is basically just a self-insert character, Robin is a tactical self-insert tactician character who is good at tactics. The game (in the supports especially) is so over-the-top about shoving "Hey, did you know this guy is really good at tactics?" down our throats that I find it impossible to insert myself into Robin's perspective for even a short period of time. Corrin on the other hand, I can at least forget about the differences for a while because he's so bland.

Self-insert characters suck, but if it's gonna be a self-insert character I better at least be able to insert myself into that character. If I can't do that, then they are a total failure.

On a slightly separate note, am I the only one that wanted Robin to be done in the way that the tactician was in FE7?

See, I like the fact that Robin has a more distinct personality and is less of a self insert. I tend to like my game protagonists to have their own characters in of themselves even if there are aspects the player can control

[cgRIPPER]

Like I said, I know my reasoning is a bit weird lol.

[Butterfly Pink]

I voted Robin for both. I felt Robin was a better established character, and Robin allowed for the player to fill any role they wished with ease.

I do like Corrin's aesthetic better, and I find Conquest!Corrin more interesting than Awakening or the other two Fates routes. However, this largely comes from the fact that Corrin is not the leader. Corrin, at best, is a general in Garon's army. By choosing the siblings Corrin's known his/her whole life, Corrin finds themselves at the whim of a man who wishes only to see them suffer. A lot of people laud Corrin as an idiot, and they certainly start out that way, but over time Corrin (in my perception) clearly sees what Garon's doing, clearly sees they're committing atrocities, and becomes an antihero, doing terrible deeds that will very likely leave their name reviled for all time in order to rid the world of an evil in the only way they can.

Conquest!Corrin doesn't have the might of the Hoshidan people, nor the strong combined force Revelations!Corrin does. To directly oppose Garon would have been suicide. Also, throughout the route, all of the siblings remain loyal to Garon. They might have believed Corrin, but I'm sure many would be complaining if they had.

I suppose, if you see Corrin as an independent actor with agency in that route, I can understand the disdain. However, I see them as a good person serving a tyrant, forced to commit atrocities in order to (eventually) vanquish a greater evil.

If only the writing had been better, and Corrin weren't so flat and boring (though, to be honest, I think that extends to the majority of the Fates cast), I'd definitely be goin' the other direction on this.

[cgRIPPER]

@butterfly pink
It's one heck of a stretch to call Nohrrin an antihero, and that's precisely what many people wanted him to be and why they are now disappointed since he's not really.

[Time the Crestfallen]

@butterfly pink

It's one heck of a stretch to call Nohrrin an antihero, and that's precisely what many people wanted him to be and why they are now disappointed since he's not really.

Corrin's actions are that of an anti-hero (doing terrible things and insisting that it's for the greater good), it's just that the game won't acknowledge them as such.

[NekoKnight]

Corrin's actions are that of an anti-hero (doing terrible things and insisting that it's for the greater good), it's just that the game won't acknowledge them as such.

I'd say he's a blend of anti-villain and a classic hero.

He's consistently trying to do the right thing and sparing as many lives as possible making him a classic hero, but his willingness to side with the bad guys (and this is the more favorable interpretation) to reach a noble goal makes him an anti-villain. Alternatively he's a tragic hero (by his own appraisal) and always considered his actions were for the greater good. The only sorta anti-hero thing he does is kill Ganz and Macbeth, and considering it was more self-defense than his own assassination attempt, it's still pretty close to classic hero.

[Time the Crestfallen]

I'd say he's a blend of anti-villain and a classic hero.

He's consistently trying to do the right thing and sparing as many lives as possible making him a classic hero, but his willingness to side with the bad guys (and this is the more favorable interpretation) to reach a noble goal makes him an anti-villain. Alternatively he's a tragic hero (by his own appraisal) and always considered his actions were for the greater good. The only sorta anti-hero thing he does is kill Ganz and Macbeth, and considering it was more self-defense than his own assassination attempt, it's still pretty close to classic hero.

And yet the game still portrays him as the kind of moral paragon that only Superman in the 1970's and below could match.

This is either the best or the worst comparison ever. You decide!

[Butterfly Pink]

The Hoshidans revile Corrin (and rightfully so). I'm sure there are many Nohrians who blame Corrin for the atrocities of Hans and Iago following his non-lethal subduing of the various rebellions across the land. Corrin, on several, occasions, talks as if bearing the weight of their sins on their shoulders. Sure the Nohrian siblings don't seem to react to it, but this is just another day in the service of Garon to them. Corrin, meanwhile, has been sheltered the whole time, and doesn't have their callous response to service.

Yes, the Azura thing was really stupid. However, to blame Corrin alone when no one else in the cast figured it out either is disingenuous. However, everything else seems largely consistent with the narrative. Corrin is ignorant. Corrin is sheltered. Corrin is surrounded by people that, whenever they question Garon's actions, dismiss those questions, or reply "not now". It is never now. Why would Corrin think they'd suddenly trust them?

Corrin, was, in their perception, committing the lesser of two evils. I do think the "battles without casualties" are a farce, but I don't let my units die, and healing magic exists, so why not?

Maybe I'm forgetting something (very possible), but when I played it, I thought it (for the most part) did what it intended to rather well. It could have been better, absolutely, but that is true about everything in Fates from a writing standpoint.

[NekoKnight]

Yes, the Azura thing was really stupid. However, to blame Corrin alone when no one else in the cast figured it out either is disingenuous. However, everything else seems largely consistent with the narrative. Corrin is ignorant. Corrin is sheltered. Corrin is surrounded by people that, whenever they question Garon's actions, dismiss those questions, or reply "not now". It is never now. Why would Corrin think they'd suddenly trust them?

A lot of people blame the characters other than Corrin. Xander for his stubborn loyalty to a monster, Azura for her nonsensical plan and most of the siblings for coddling the main character.

Defenders of Nohrrin often bring up his naivete and the behavior of his siblings to justify the plot, but the plot never addresses these as actual problems. When does the game say that Corrin was making bad choices because of his sheltered life? When does Corrin express frustration at his inability to trust his siblings? The game doesn't frame Corrin and his siblings as flawed. Their behavior is just to railroad the plot towards a conquest.

[Time the Crestfallen]

A lot of people blame the characters other than Corrin. Xander for his stubborn loyalty to a monster, Azura for her nonsensical plan and most of the siblings for coddling the main character.

Defenders of Nohrrin often bring up his naivete and the behavior of his siblings to justify the plot, but the plot never addresses these as actual problems. When does the game say that Corrin was making bad choices because of his sheltered life? When does Corrin express frustration at his inability to trust his siblings? The game doesn't frame Corrin and his siblings as flawed. Their behavior is just to railroad the plot towards a conquest.

Yes, all of that is true. But why is it Corrin's fault that the game's plot is a railroad and never wants us to believe that he's wrong? The game won't say that Corrin is making bad choices because of his sheltered life, even if it is a reasonable thing to say, because the game doesn't want Corrin wrong to be in the first place.

[Butterfly Pink]

When does the game say that Corrin was making bad choices because of his sheltered life?

Considering his circumstances, I don't think Corrin was making any terribly bad decisions.

When does Corrin express frustration at his inability to trust his siblings?

I concur on this point. I do wish it'd been brought up.

... but the plot never addresses these as actual problems

Should it? In most literature I've read, the author doesn't go (He did this because...). We're expected, as intelligent beings, to use some level of thought to understand the circumstances of the character, and why the character would do such a thing. Now, it is a lot more prevalent in anime, but most people I know (maybe we're a minority?) find that practice utterly ridiculous. (We just saw you do the thing. You don't have to explain it. You're in combat, using fighting techniques is a thing you do in combat.)

As I said, everything makes sense (save the Azura bit) from Corrin's perspective. Why join Nohr when Garon is a bad dude who tried to turn him in to a Ganglari suicide bomb? Corrin didn't "join Nohr". He sided with the siblings (family) who have been there all his life and loved him. Why follow all of Garon's unreasonable and ridiculous demands? Even if Corrin wasn't smart enough to figure out they can't take Garon on single-handedly at that point (doubtful), I'm pretty sure they know they can't take on an entire nation (they aren't Robin :D ). Besides, early on, Azura hasn't made clear Garon's true nature either, so Corrin may have been suffering some of the same lingering familial attachments that so plague the rest of the royal cast.

It is possible my own interpretation is glossing over major plot holes. I just like the fact that Corrin is a small part of a large war in Conquest, while in Birthright he's the leader and vanguard of the Hoshidan forces, that have been separated and rendered ineffective, and proceeds to reunite them, and successfully conduct a precision strike against Nohr. Considering there's no indication of a meaningful military movement by Hoshido in Birthright, it doesn't make sense that the bulk of the Nohrian host wouldn't have moved against Corrin's ragtag forces once it was clear they were the primary force (which would definitely be evident prior to getting Ryoma) and destroyed them.

As I said before though, the writing in this game is by far the worst part of it.

[NekoKnight]

Yes, all of that is true. But why is it Corrin's fault that the game's plot is a railroad and never wants us to believe that he's wrong? The game won't say that Corrin is making bad choices because of his sheltered life, even if it is a reasonable thing to say, because the game doesn't want Corrin wrong to be in the first place.

Of course the plot is railroading him but you can't separate his character from the writing. We can't say "Corrin is the kind of person who usually makes smart decisions but the plot forced him to be dumb" unless we want to judge him by his Revelation and Birthright personalities, and say that choosing Nohr (and all the dumb choices thereafter) was OOC.

It's hard to phrase this but I want to know what you think Corrin's value was before Conquest railroaded him. You say what happened wasn't his fault, but what were his core principles that were misrepresented by the plot?

Should it? In most literature I've read, the author doesn't go (He did this because...). We're expected, as intelligent beings, to use some level of thought to understand the circumstances of the character, and why the character would do such a thing. Now, it is a lot more prevalent in anime, but most people I know (maybe we're a minority?) find that practice utterly ridiculous. (We just saw you do the thing. You don't have to explain it. You're in combat, using fighting techniques is a thing you do in combat.)

As I said, everything makes sense (save the Azura bit) from Corrin's perspective. Why join Nohr when Garon is a bad dude who tried to turn him in to a Ganglari suicide bomb? Corrin didn't "join Nohr". He sided with the siblings (family) who have been there all his life and loved him. Why follow all of Garon's unreasonable and ridiculous demands? Even if Corrin wasn't smart enough to figure out they can't take Garon on single-handedly at that point (doubtful), I'm pretty sure they know they can't take on an entire nation (they aren't Robin :D ). Besides, early on, Azura hasn't made clear Garon's true nature either, so Corrin may have been suffering some of the same lingering familial attachments that so plague the rest of the royal cast.

Corrin's naivete is only ever brought up as a positive to show how innocent he is (his penchant for trusting people). No one broaches the topic that Corrin realistically shouldn't be in a position of leadership or that Corrin wants to do more but is limited by his inability to trust his siblings. These would be legitimate reasons for his poor judgements, but the plot never acknowledges (directly or implied) that as a reason. Corrin just makes bad choices. All of the main characters make bad choices in Conquest.

[spoiler=Things Corrin should know better]

"Why join Nohr when Garon is a bad dude who tried to turn him in to a Ganglari suicide bomb? Corrin didn't "join Nohr". He sided with the siblings (family) who have been there all his life and loved him."

Garon is the king of Nohr. It's part of the package when you return to Nohrian society. When the most powerful man in Nohr wants you dead, even for your siblings, you should not go back.

"Why follow all of Garon's unreasonable and ridiculous demands? Even if Corrin wasn't smart enough to figure out they can't take Garon on single-handedly at that point (doubtful), I'm pretty sure they know they can't take on an entire nation (they aren't Robin :D )."

Corrin should be smart enough to not go back to a man who is going to make him do things he doesn't agree with (such as warmongering and killing prisoners). Corrin has no plan to stop the war so he's entirely at fault for putting himself in a state of helplessness.

"Besides, early on, Azura hasn't made clear Garon's true nature either, so Corrin may have been suffering some of the same lingering familial attachments that so plague the rest of the royal cast."

Garon wasn't a nice guy even before the Gooron reveal. And by 'not a nice guy' I mean he attempted to have Corrin murdered several times before the route split even happened.

I think they could have made a good better plot if it showed Corrin struggling in a world he doesn't understand, surrounded by people who (in their efforts to shield him from everything) don't help him. Alas, Corrin is portrayed as a classic hero with painful amounts of protagonist-centered morality.

Maybe this is what Phillius was talking about...

[Time the Crestfallen]

I think they could have made a good better plot if it showed Corrin struggling in a world he doesn't understand, surrounded by people who (in their efforts to shield him from everything) don't help him. Alas, Corrin is portrayed as a classic hero with painful amounts of protagonist-centered morality.

Maybe this is what Phillius was talking about...

Yes. All of the yes. Apologies for my bad explanation.

What Corrin does is painfully bad, I fully understand that. But what I take issue with is people seemingly saying that Corrin himself is an inherently shitty protagonist who fails on all levels. In Conquest, Corrin's actions are anti-hero/anti-villainish in nature, but the game wants to have it both ways and still make Corrin undeniably in the right i.e. the Yato choosing someone destined to save the world and the siblings on whatever side isn't chosen forgiving Corrin for everything he does. Corrin needed a narrative like Sigurd's for Conquest (albeit not necessarily ending in his death); he needed to be punished to hell and back for his naivete and idealism, but the game won't do that because doing so would be implying that Corrin can make a wrong choice, which it doesn't want to do.

tl;dr: Yes, a lot of what Corrin does in the plot is inexcusable, but how much of it is Corrin being an inherently shitty protagonist and how much of it is Corrin being shoved into a narrative that at best doesn't suit him at all and at worst is just flat-out broken, regardless of who the protagonist is.

[NekoKnight]

Yes. All of the yes. Apologies for my bad explanation.

What Corrin does is painfully bad, I fully understand that. But what I take issue with is people seemingly saying that Corrin himself is an inherently shitty protagonist who fails on all levels. In Conquest, Corrin's actions are anti-hero/anti-villainish in nature, but the game wants to have it both ways and still make Corrin undeniably in the right i.e. the Yato choosing someone destined to save the world and the siblings on whatever side isn't chosen forgiving Corrin for everything he does. Corrin needed a narrative like Sigurd's for Conquest (albeit not necessarily ending in his death); he needed to be punished to hell and back for his naivete and idealism, but the game won't do that because doing so would be implying that Corrin can make a wrong choice, which it doesn't want to do.

tl;dr: Yes, a lot of what Corrin does in the plot is inexcusable, but how much of it is Corrin being an inherently shitty protagonist and how much of it is Corrin being shoved into a narrative that at best doesn't suit him at all and at worst is just flat-out broken, regardless of who the protagonist is.

Okay, I think we see eye to eye on this now. Someone bust out the party hats and champagne.

I think part of the reason people blame Kamui so much for Conquest is his character isn't well defined. Naivete is a canon element of his character but even in the routes where Kamui isn't backing Team Baby Eater, the naivete doesn't influence his behavior very much (he shouldn't have trusted Anthony but that was a non-issue that Kamui was quickly pardoned for). I suppose you could look at him defending Rinka and Suzukaze and nearly being killed for it as an example but we never really see it again as a trait with consequences.

Unfortunately, we don't have a better canon Kamui to compare to, so my overall appraisal remains low. But I will acknowledge he could have been better if the writing around him wasn't so dismal.

[Time the Crestfallen]

Okay, I think we see eye to eye on this now. Someone bust out the party hats and champagne.

I think part of the reason people blame Kamui so much for Conquest is his character isn't well defined. Naivete is a canon element of his character but even in the routes where Kamui isn't backing Team Baby Eater, the naivete doesn't influence his behavior very much (he shouldn't have trusted Anthony but that was a non-issue that Kamui was quickly pardoned for). I suppose you could look at him defending Rinka and Suzukaze and nearly being killed for it as an example but we never really see it again as a trait with consequences.

Unfortunately, we don't have a better canon Kamui to compare to, so my overall appraisal remains low. But I will acknowledge he could have been better if the writing around him wasn't so dismal.

Definitely in the story, but it's much better in the supports and that could probably be the tagline for Fates.

Fire Emblem Fates: They're much better in the supports, we promise!

Regardless, I'm just glad we're on the same page now.