How would you feel about a genuinely villainous/malicious Divine Dragon?

[Extrasolar]

...Or a benevolent and good Earth Dragon?

Really, one of the biggest disappointments as far as dragon and dragon lore in Fire Emblem goes is the fact that a lot of it is black and white, and no matter what the universe, dragon conventions as a whole tend to stay the same. Divine Dragons are almost universally portrayed as good, benevolent, wise, and such, whereas Earth Dragons as a whole tend to get the shaft by being portrayed as overly prideful, violent, and generally unreasonable.

It wasn't until Tellius that we got dark-based dragons that weren't completely evil (and one of them is still antagonistic in that he's overbearing and strict), and that hasn't been a thing since then.

A role reversal of the two would be extremely refreshing in my opinion. Give me an arrogant Divine Dragon so convinced of her supremacy that she looks down upon the little human insects. That she believes that they should worship her, that she is the perfect form of life, and that all others exist only to serve her. (Or him and he, since I'm all for more male Manaketes in the series in general.)

I find Ashera a good/refreshing villain in the vein that she's light-based and an incarnation of order, but antagonistic, whereas her dark- and chaos-based counterpart is an ally and good.

So would you want to see an evil or villainous Divine Dragon? Why or why not? And what other changes to the common dragon lore/conventions in the series would you like to see in future games and why?

As a side note:

Spoilers for Shadows of Valentia below. Do not open spoiler if you don't want to know.
 

Spoiler

Duma is a Divine Dragon, but he's not really evil, just pragmatic and ruthless. Mila's not absolved of blame concerning their actions and their ideas that humans "needed" them to prosper on Valentia either, so I don't really count him among them.

 

Edited April 7, 2017 by Extrasolar

[Topaz Light]

I am all for doing away with species-based morality, as a thing, wherever it may appear, so I'd be down to see either or both of those things. I've always kinda wished that Dragons as a race were delved into more and treated as more human, rather than so often just being used as monsters or deities. Different Dragons of the same subspecies should have different personalities, different views and stances on important matters, different moral compasses, etc. just like humans do! It's not like all Earth Dragons, all Divine Dragons, all Fire Dragons, etc. are each their own respective hive mind or anything; they'd each have their own unique perspective on the world that could lead them down any number of paths, just like it could a human.

[NekoKnight]

As Topaz said, I'm more interested in dragons being individuals rather than having a single one bucking a universal species morality.  That's why I think a game covering the scouring would be really interesting because you have dragons opposed to humans, dragons who want to warp another dragon against her will and dragons who don't want to fight anyone. 

I think you should add a more neutral option to your poll. I don't think dragons need to all fit a universal morality but I'm not in favor of it if the dragon is just a token exception.

[Thane]

I'm tired of dragons in gaming in general, especially in Fire Emblem. so I wouldn't mind getting rid of them completely for an installment or two. I want more focus to be on the human elements, rather than gods, ancient evils and other powerful forces like dragons.

Edited April 7, 2017 by Thane

[Extrasolar]

13 minutes ago, NekoKnight said:

I think you should add a more neutral option to your poll. I don't think dragons need to all fit a universal morality but I'm not in favor of it if the dragon is just a token exception.

Will do!

I'm definitely not advising it so much as a token, but a subversion of the black and white tendency. I'm all for lots of evil Divine Dragons and/or lots of good Earth Dragons...just...give me something to work with here that's different, in other words.

Also added a "gtfo with the dragons for a little bit" option.

10 minutes ago, Thane said:

I'm tired of dragons in gaming in general, especially in Fire Emblem. so I wouldn't mind getting rid of them completely for an installment or two. I want more focus to be on the human elements, rather than gods, ancient evils and other powerful forces like dragons.

I think the reason why we don't just get simple "human vs. human" conflict is the lack of epicness or scope. It's one thing for an army to defeat a warrior king, and it's another for them to defeat a god or an extremely powerful dragon.

It's hard to make a completely human dude as intimidating as a mad god and make it believable, or give him as wide of a scope.

Most fantasy ends with the protagonists combating non-human, ancient and malevolent entities for that reason.

I think only Path of Radiance and Thracia 776 have a completely human final boss/main villain if I recall correctly, and even then, Ashnard's souped up with magical and barely-understood power.

Edited April 7, 2017 by Extrasolar

[NekoKnight]

30 minutes ago, Thane said:

I'm tired of dragons in gaming in general, especially in Fire Emblem. so I wouldn't mind getting rid of them completely for an installment or two. I want more focus to be on the human elements, rather than gods, ancient evils and other powerful forces like dragons.

If dragons do make a return, I certainly hope they are a faction rather than "There is one dragon in the universe and he's cray-cray so he wants to undo all creation". What you call "human elements" are not exclusive to humans. The dragons in Tellius, for example, could just as easily been a faction of humans.

 

[Party Moth]

 

Spoilers for Echoes:

Spoiler

I was really hoping that Duma and Mila would be earth dragons, given that Mila is an "earth goddess" whose disappearance marks failing crops, as well as the fact that every sane earth dragon thus far has been fairly anti-human. Some of the FE1 Endgame enemy phase motif appearing in Duma's battle theme would also serve as a possible suggestion in that direction.

I personally like dragons being meddled with or involved via human faults rather than being inherently good or evil overall. They can exist and have a massive affect on human civilization and world around them, but conflicts invoking them should be drenched with human error and characteristics.

Edited April 7, 2017 by Party Moth

[Rothene]

I kind of like the distinctive behavioral difference between Divine and Earth dragons. Them being inherently good or evil sets them apart from the 'mortal races' I tend to view them as some sort of ascension from the mortal-ish normal manaketes that we hardly get any of. Kind of like paragons of their own kind like you see in older RPG concepts where a human starts neutral, but overtime choose one of two extremes of self sacrifice vs personal desire. The former is a lonely path as you become the ultimate slave to the will of others and berefit of true friends who care about you and not about the benefit you bring, while the latter is the lonely path but you are beholden to no one and truly free.

I mean all these Divine dragons have been sacrificing their own kind for humankind's benefit. If you were an average Manakete, Divine dragons are the true villains to you. The term Divine dragons now feel more like a title HUMANS gave because of their beneficial nature to HUMANS. Earth also doesn't have directly evil implications, and you can say they champion the land itself that humans tend to despoil with their buildings and need to change the environment to survive.

I'm all for more Manakete's and each are individuals who are deciding which side of the sliding scales of 'Shepherd the allegedly high potential human race' or 'Seek to protect the world from ignorant selfish overgrown children(humans)'. I wouldn't mind another fates-esque route split if you get to make meaningful decisions on those two extremes as yet another manakete leading humans who raise you in hopes you lead them to glory over the manaketes like Iduon(or however you spell her name from FE6). Give more Manaketes, and more special stones like FE11/12. Which will give the distinction of humans are bound by class because of their short lifespan, so they need to master a profession to make any meaningful contributions but Manaketes with longer lives can instead switch between many versatile forms as a sign of their quality.

Edited April 7, 2017 by Rothene

[Thane]

2 hours ago, Extrasolar said:

I think the reason why we don't just get simple "human vs. human" conflict is the lack of epicness or scope. It's one thing for an army to defeat a warrior king, and it's another for them to defeat a god or an extremely powerful dragon.

But how epic is it if we keep seeing it time and time again? Sure, it can be done in a lot of different ways and some games or books or what have you have far superior build-up than others, but the sheer number of stories that seem to use the same formula with little changes dillutes the epicness of it all. Fire Emblem is a series that, for all its differences spread across many titles, is remarkably traditional when it comes to its villains and could really use a break from the monotony of it all.

2 hours ago, Extrasolar said:

It's hard to make a completely human dude as intimidating as a mad god and make it believable, or give him as wide of a scope.

I strongly disagree with this. Well-written human villains are inherently scarier to me because they can show so many more relatable aspects than any world-ending dragon ever could. 

I'd also argue that a smaller scope is just what Fire Emblem needs. Make it more personal and relatable than yet another world in danger of being wiped out. It becomes the same old thing we've seen so many times, and caring about an entire world is hard - it's a faceless mass - but caring about people is easier. That's why I'm so fond of Persona 4 and Ghost Trick, because the focus almost always remains on something much more tangible.

1 hour ago, NekoKnight said:

If dragons do make a return, I certainly hope they are a faction rather than "There is one dragon in the universe and he's cray-cray so he wants to undo all creation". What you call "human elements" are not exclusive to humans. The dragons in Tellius, for example, could just as easily been a faction of humans.

That's fair, I could live with that. I mean, we'd still probably get the usual "dragons are smarter, more powerful, sexier and better at poker than humans, but you humans have *insert relevant aspect of humanity that's a theme of the game*" line thrown in our faces, but it's certainly more bearable than yet another bloody world-ending dragon,

[Luchi]

Is this the early 1990s again? Evil dragon bosses? Wut? How on earth can you relate to something like that?

In all seriousness, dragons need to go. Just give me a well-written relatable, human villain. Man vs. Man can be extremely compelling if done well. The god-vs-man ( shudders at RD ) or sealed-evil-in-a-can endgame boss can be found in virtually every single jRPG since 1986 ( that's how old the genre is if we're counting from Dragon Quest I ) and as a developer of the genre myself, I'm pretty sick and tired of it tbqh. :/ 

Though given the direction that FE's writing is going in, I don't expect a villain on par with Arvis or Lyon to appear for a very long time.

[Thane]

6 minutes ago, Luchi said:

Though given the direction that FE's writing is going in, I don't expect a villain on par with Arvis or Lyon to appear for a very long time.

Do you have a minute to talk about our lord and savior Walhart?

[Luchi]

I haven't played FE13, so nope.

[Thane]

4 minutes ago, Luchi said:

I haven't played FE13, so nope.

He fights for a world of man, not gods. Join the Imperial Army today!

[Rothene]

5 minutes ago, Luchi said:

Is this the early 1990s again? Evil dragon bosses? Wut? How on earth can you relate to something like that?

In all seriousness, dragons need to go. Just give me a well-written relatable, human villain. Man vs. Man can be extremely compelling if done well. The god-vs-man ( shudders at RD ) or sealed-evil-in-a-can endgame boss can be found in virtually every single jRPG since 1986 ( that's how old the genre is if we're counting from Dragon Quest I ) and as a developer of the genre myself, I'm pretty sick and tired of it tbqh. :/ 

Though given the direction that FE's writing is going in, I don't expect a villain on par with Arvis or Lyon to appear for a very long time.

I'm a little different than you in that regard. The less I can understand of the entity to be faced due to their 'alieness' the exciting it becomes because everyone starts pondering on what exactly does it want? Is it because we try to package some other entity's behavior in our human standard and arrogantly assume that all other things follow in line is why we can never understand what we face and why we inevitably lead to conflict. What we perceive as normal like the grayness of morality as applied to humans can be completely bizarre to the other who see things in absolutes and see humans clinging to middle grounds as self denial and refusing to admit they can't live up to supposed universal good standards, the same way we can call those who see things in black and white as being in denial.

If you are big, powerful and invincible, it is a lot easier to preach universal love because the weaker smaller ones can't really harm you. And a lot easier to not even care about stuff that can't hurt you since...them hating you doesn't hurt, right? Something of different inherent size and strength leads to different outlook in life.

You could argue that Divine dragons are human-like in their care for humans the same way we have people who care for other living beings and would easily cuddle and protect the baby animal and let the wolf starve. The way people say, "We are more advanced than our animal cousins, so it is our responsibility to set an example and care for them."

Arvis could have been a great villain, but he felt underwhelming towards the end because of how little agency I felt he had. To me, he was just some normal bloke pulled around, like a tool instead of a person.

I find the Earth dragon intriguing mainly because FE1 story felt like human propaganda. Why would Naga betray her own kind, to hand over the world and all its resources to humans who are clearly capable for much flaws humans exhibit while the dragons? Why champion another species that is volatile and by all accounts less capable of extending love and care for another species?

[Refa]

If you want black/white in your dragons, you need look no further than fire dragons.

[Heptade]

No one should be completely good or completely evil, I'm all for grey vs. grey conflicts.

As for the dragons, I really appreciated their portrayal in the Tellius duology. They probably were generally wiser than the average Beorc or non-Dragon Laguz, but that had to do with the fact that they lived that much longer than everyone else, and thus had more time to mature mentally. Still, Dheginsea was ultimately an antagonist, albeit a well-intentioned one. Ena and Nasir did some shady things as well, even though they also had understandable motives. And they had to deal with human-like issues, such as Almedha's mental illness, and weren't divine in any way. I believe they should go back to something similar.

As an unrelated side-note, a Naesala-like main antagonist (without the blood pact thing) would be a dream come true for me.

[Interdimensional Observer]

Give us evil Divines, good Earths, and how about exploring dragons that aren't one of these tribes? Dragonology is so underdeveloped for all its importance in FE.

But let us axe the dragons entirely, or relegate them to a secondary role. Relying too much on the supernatural can detract from human conflict. Make the mythological the tool, the inert object, make the human the prime mover of the world.

4 hours ago, Thane said:

Do you have a minute to talk about our lord and savior Walhart?

I like Walhart, as underdeveloped as he is. He is brutal in his actions, but he is a Humanist, an Atheistic Humanist. His concern is for humanity and protecting it from itself and from interlopers like Grima. Is he a little too harsh, a little too self-centered? Does he hire one awfully kindergarten-evil underling? Yes to all of those. But there is a selfless idealogical side beneath that selfish love of conquest. Praise to Walhart!

Praise too to Travant, to Gangrel, to Ashnard, to Zephiel, to Sephiran! Praise to all FE villains who were not moved by the inhuman, and who went their ways without such, or who used it for their own ends. Pity to Naesala, to Lyon, to Nergal, to Gharnef, to Garon, to all who were moved by the alien supernatural! And immolation unto Manfroy, unto Riev, and unto Validar for they with all stupidity gave themselves wholeheartedly to the foreign anathema of Man!

Edited April 7, 2017 by Interdimensional Observer

[maybe]

thank you for having an option for "please do not the dragons again"

i'm really tired of seeing dragons do bad shit in fire emblem. i'd really love it if they had a bigger focus on actual human conflicts. i don't hate the use of dragons but it's definitely gotten stale and I'd like at least one game based solely on human characters. despite the plot about mila and duma, I actually thought echoes might've been on a good track with

Spoiler

berkut, whose motivation initially seems much more interesting, being rudolf's nephew and wanting to protect his..  girlfriend? not sure if they're married or not

but of course, duma gets brought into that too, as well as him wanting to be powerful and kill rudolf's real heir. i think it could still be good, but i'm disappointed that they couldn't have just one solely human conflict

 

Edited April 7, 2017 by unique

[Extrasolar]

2 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Give us evil Divines, good Earths, and how about exploring dragons that aren't one of these tribes? Dragonology is so underdeveloped for all its importance in FE.

100% agreed on this point. I'd love more screen time and development to the different facets of the dragon tribes - maybe each one's unique culture and viewpoint on the world and humans? Give us more screen time to the Earth Dragons, the Ice Dragons, the Fire Dragons...what have you.

I know all dragons are individuals, but I'm certain there are some commonalities members of the same tribe hold in common. Do they have different traditions?

6 hours ago, Rothene said:

I find the Earth dragon intriguing mainly because FE1 story felt like human propaganda. Why would Naga betray her own kind, to hand over the world and all its resources to humans who are clearly capable for much flaws humans exhibit while the dragons? Why champion another species that is volatile and by all accounts less capable of extending love and care for another species?

Yeah, I feel like this was an element woefully unfocused on in the Archanea saga. The fact that the Earth Dragons definitely had a point, that their refusal to hand the world over to humans, shed their powerful dragon forms, and their conflict with Naga are all very understandable. As benevolent and wise as Naga is, she was stanning for humans pretty hard, especially at the expense of her own species. Of course, the dragons were screwed no matter what way you sliced it, but...I'd argue that the Earth Dragon rage was justified, and yeesh, for a little innocuous race, the humans sure caused a lot of hurt feelings and anger between dragons.

The Archanea dragon conflict was pretty gray on paper, but we only ever saw good and benevolent Divine Dragons and evil/greedy/unreasonable Earth Dragons.

All of it is woefully undeveloped. We get Xane saying a few things about how humanity picked on dragons and how a ton of dragons disagreed with Naga (other than the Earth Dragons), but we never see it.

6 hours ago, Rothene said:

Arvis could have been a great villain, but he felt underwhelming towards the end because of how little agency I felt he had. To me, he was just some normal bloke pulled around, like a tool instead of a person.

To an extent, he absolutely was. But that's where part of the tragedy is. He's a well-meaning guy (with some pretty heavy character flaws) blackmailed and threatened into allowing/doing some pretty horrible stuff by those more powerful with him, with a greater reach in scope and heavy dark, ancient powers at their disposal.

6 hours ago, Rothene said:

You could argue that Divine dragons are human-like in their care for humans the same way we have people who care for other living beings and would easily cuddle and protect the baby animal and let the wolf starve. The way people say, "We are more advanced than our animal cousins, so it is our responsibility to set an example and care for them."

This point of view is a bit flawed, though, because humans are much more capable and sentient, whereas animals aren't. Animals in captivity depend on humans for all of their needs, whereas humans are more than capable of hunting, learning, and building their own civilizations.

I actually really like the idea of Divine Dragons getting so far into themselves that they forget that they're not the hottest thing since sliced bread, though.

What would be interesting imo is a Divine Dragon or even a group of Divine Dragons that thought this way - they don't realize that they're basically calling humans "weak, stupid and helpless" in their zeal to "care for them" and "guide them."

Dark theory/writing time. A Divine Dragon human zoo. Humans are kept to "protect them" from themselves, other dragons, and each other. They don't realize that they're stripping away the rights and freedoms of these people, and their abilities at self-determination.

If the human protagonists find out, they call out the dragons in a "what the hell are you guys doing?" moment. Dragons react defensively. Of course the humans just don't understand. The Divines are wiser than they could ever hope to be...

Your Divine Dragon villain need not be a cackling evil, of course.

6 hours ago, Thane said:

I strongly disagree with this. Well-written human villains are inherently scarier to me because they can show so many more relatable aspects than any world-ending dragon ever could. 

You definitely have a point here. I do enjoy a well-written human vs. human conflict, and it's definitely the most relatable for us hoomans because it could conceivably happen, whereas malevolent gods and gigantic pretty dragons couldn't. Having a personal-fueled conflict can definitely work in Fire Emblem and has worked in the past (Thracia, and to an extent Path of Radiance - Ashnard is mostly an afterthought, since the real conflict is between Ike and the Black Knight).

But the question becomes, in a world where gods and the most amazingly powerful of dragons exist, why wouldn't humans try to invoke them, gain their power, or even subvert their power for their own ends? Why would people with these amazing, world-changing powers sit idly by and not get involved with the smaller, less powerful races? I think it becomes a question of realism. (I know, it's odd talking about realism in a fantasy series, but...)

Unless you completely excised gods and dragons from a particular installment had it it be a realistic fantasy with a simple conflict between kingdoms, I just don't see the gods and dragons just chilling and taking a backseat in the affairs of humans, unless they do so an individual basis or their leader inexplicably demands isolationism (and even then, there would be plenty of dragons just itching to ignore that). And personally, I just don't see FE dropping one of the things it's most famous for (dragons and dragon involvement/lore, and to a lesser extent powerful gods and demons).

Not saying it wouldn't be interested to get one or two games where humans were explicitly the focus, but unless you're dropping part of the magic angle (used in the sense of literal magic, not necessarily "what makes the series work"), I don't think dragons and gods are going anywhere. We're gonna have our magical, god-blessed weapons and amulets and artifacts.

Unless you go the the Tellius route with your dragons and made them essentially "normal" people...and even the Tellius dragons in lore were built up as people of mass destruction.

6 hours ago, Thane said:

I'd also argue that a smaller scope is just what Fire Emblem needs. Make it more personal and relatable than yet another world in danger of being wiped out.

A conflict between higher powers doesn't necessarily have to be world-ending or world-destroying; what about the potential for humanity to lose all of its free will or self-determination, or something similar? I'd argue that that's the most terrifying thing of all.

"Man vs. God" or "Man vs. Force of Nature" stories work because it's the ultimate underdog story - against all odds, normal people triumphing over what they realistically could never surmount.  I like that story, personally, because it's a narrative of hope. A narrative that says that no matter how "small" and "insignificant" you are on paper, you can accomplish amazing things.

That your "gods" are not invincible or non-flawed.

2 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Praise too to Travant, to Gangrel, to Ashnard, to Zephiel, to Sephiran! Praise to all FE villains who were not moved by the inhuman, and who went their ways without such, or who used it for their own ends.

Wellll... Sephiran was definitely moved by Ashera during her attempted omnicide of all of Tellius...kind of. Granted, it was more out of his own despair and fatigue with his long life that he went through with that, but part of it was still his loyalty to Ashera and he was still at the goddess' beck and call when it came to fighting Ike's army.

Plus, while Ashnard was definitely working for himself, he still dipped into ancient magical power in order to try and achieve his goals, so I wouldn't say he was not moved by the inhuman at all.

The others you mention, though, definitely fair.

@Refa Out of curiosity, what do you mean by black/white Fire Dragons? Fire Dragons are mostly portrayed as antagonistic, but we do at least have Bantu as one of the good ones,and Salamander is backstory Dragons count. We haven't gotten a single evil Divine Dragon yet, or a single good Earth Dragon.

Edited April 7, 2017 by Extrasolar

[Refa]

There's also Pyrathi, which is a neutral state that just wants to remain neutral.  I never got the impression that all Fire Dragons were good/evil in the same way I did with Divine/Earth dragons.  I'm not refuting what you said (which is probably all true), just saying that there is some variance in one of the other species of dragons.  FE3 attempted to flesh out the wyverns and the ice dragons, but I still don't really know too much about them other than they were too prideful to adopt human forms.

[NoirCore]

I'm all up for simply having dragons living alongside humans as equals in a world where the bad guy isn't harnessing draconic power or anything dragon-related. Like, throw in a few tribes of dragons (like fire, wind, light and darkness or something) and have some members of all tribes support the heroes and some other members support their enemies as a few chapter bosses and even mook soldiers, while the rest are citizens that may or may not be in support of either their country they live in or their own morals, like how humans are themselves in the games.

I'd like for manaketes to just be like humans in individuality with the only difference being their dragon transformations and long lifespan, and the final boss be something else than a dragon.

[Thane]

31 minutes ago, Extrasolar said:

But the question becomes, in a world where gods and the most amazingly powerful of dragons exist, why wouldn't humans try to invoke them, gain their power, or even subvert their power for their own ends? Why would people with these amazing, world-changing powers sit idly by and not get involved with the smaller, less powerful races? I think it becomes a question of realism. (I know, it's odd talking about realism in a fantasy series, but...)

It's not odd talking about realism in fantasy - you can make someone believe the impossible but not the improbable. I'd argue that the vast majority of works of fiction need some kind of reality to adhere to.

That said, your argument opens a whole bunch of cans of worms. How would a lesser creature get control of the bigger ones? Just how many of them are there, and how can such powerful creatures coexist with smaller races? It's all up to the story, so saying "it's a question of realism" doesn't work because it all depends on the world you're building. Ergo, there's no need to involve dragons, ancient evils or arcane forces all the time. 

Also, I vote for a story with that stuff kept to a minimum for the next installment anyway.

1 hour ago, Extrasolar said:

I just don't see FE dropping one of the things it's most famous for (dragons and dragon involvement/lore, and to a lesser extent powerful gods and demons).

"Most famous for"? That's a very strange reasoning. First of all, I associate a lot of things with Fire Emblem with a lot of things, but for some reason I rarely think about dragons, maybe because I dislike how they're usually handled.

Secondly, being stuck in tradition is not a good thing at all. Even though the series is very old, its villains remain way more interchangeable than they should. Changing up the formula in that regard is necessary, I'd argue.

1 hour ago, Extrasolar said:

A conflict between higher powers doesn't necessarily have to be world-ending or world-destroying; what about the potential for humanity to lose all of its free will or self-determination, or something similar? I'd argue that that's the most terrifying thing of all.

I'd argue that's the same thing, and it's most likely achieved by the same supernatural forces that could end the world anyway. It's still a global game over for humanity, just with a different label on the tin.

1 hour ago, Extrasolar said:

"Man vs. God" or "Man vs. Force of Nature" stories work because it's the ultimate underdog story - against all odds, normal people triumphing over what they realistically could never surmount.  I like that story, personally, because it's a narrative of hope. A narrative that says that no matter how "small" and "insignificant" you are on paper, you can accomplish amazing things.

"Ultimate underdog story"? I'd say Rocky is a far better underdog story than any group of supermodel teenagers going up against yet another bloody dragon we know is going to be defeated because they're just the final stop on a journey which has mostly been success after success.

1 hour ago, Extrasolar said:

That your "gods" are not invincible or non-flawed.

Isn't this a super common theme which has already been done in Fire Emblem anyway? Why repeat it?

[Interdimensional Observer]

1 hour ago, Extrasolar said:

Plus, while Ashnard was definitely working for himself, he still dipped into ancient magical power in order to try and achieve his goals, so I wouldn't say he was not moved by the inhuman at all.

Ashnard using Lehran's Medallion is no different from a random mage casting Fire or a cleric Heal. Magical things exist in FE, they always will and I have zero problems with that. When magic is used by humans, I don't have a problem. What I was waxing poetic against was when humans are doing only or primarily the bidding of magical beings.

Sephiran I admit is blurry- acting both on his own initiative and his goddess's- and that works too. I damned Validar because all he is a tool of Grima who willingly gives his own life for it- he has no independent motives. Sephiran I'd argue died not only for Ashera, but also out of his weariness with life and wanting to end it- he did try suicide several times Nasir/Gareth says. And suicide would defy his eternal duty to Ashera.

Relevant to this discussion babbling about a non-FE series and fanfiction you can ignore:

Spoiler

Suikoden tries to keep things on a smaller scale and a little more realistic. The first game is entirely in one empire, and the second is in one republic and a small rival kingdom. The magical True Runes and destiny intervene, but they are largely secondary to what humans are doing. The final bosses are but manifestations of True Rune power summoned by a human and the rune creations have no will of their own. Suikoden isn't perfect by a long shot don't get me wrong, but I think FE could try doing something similar on a thematic level.

Spoiler

In my Fates rewrites, I tried to tone down things like the Yato, the Rainbow Sage, and abolished Anankos for instance. However, I invented a Dusk Vein, a Dawn Vein and several other special dragon veins, which play a minor role on BR and CQ, and a bigger one on the more magical Rev. rewrite. The key thing is, that I kept the focus on the Hoshidan and Nohrian royal families. And the final bosses: Mikoto, Garon, and Cadros (the evil middle sibling of Arete and Mikoto), though they take dragon forms at the end (Mikoto has her loyal to the end Takumi take Dawn Dragon Incarnate form), are humans, albeit motivated by extreme human emotions. No gods manipulate things, ever.

 

Edited April 7, 2017 by Interdimensional Observer

[Rothene]

1 hour ago, Extrasolar said:

This point of view is a bit flawed, though, because humans are much more capable and sentient, whereas animals aren't. Animals in captivity depend on humans for all of their needs, whereas humans are more than capable of hunting, learning, and building their own civilizations.

I actually really like the idea of Divine Dragons getting so far into themselves that they forget that they're not the hottest thing since sliced bread, though.

What would be interesting imo is a Divine Dragon or even a group of Divine Dragons that thought this way - they don't realize that they're basically calling humans "weak, stupid and helpless" in their zeal to "care for them" and "guide them."

Dark theory/writing time. A Divine Dragon human zoo. Humans are kept to "protect them" from themselves, other dragons, and each other. They don't realize that they're stripping away the rights and freedoms of these people, and their abilities at self-determination.

If the human protagonists find out, they call out the dragons in a "what the hell are you guys doing?" moment. Dragons react defensively. Of course the humans just don't understand. The Divines are wiser than they could ever hope to be...

Your Divine Dragon villain need not be a cackling evil, of course.

Would be interesting if someone figured out how to write Dragons as if they are indeed on a whole new plane of thinking compared to humans as humans are to animals. Supposedly super wise and long lived things in fantasy tend to feel too humanly flawed to me and end up like humans...just with odd bits tacked on. A story telling on how utterly unrelateable the other is, and all things are shown through acts and let us the players interpret and discern and justify why the Dragons do what they do and realise measuring things by our normal standards will fail. I feel if such storytelling could occur, it can be quite humbling.

About the Dark Divine dragon theory, I feel it is already explored via Ashera. If you think about it, everything her full self and both halves do is all out of genuine love for the sentient race. Heck, when the Chaotic side went berserk, she ended up really taking lives that cannot be reversed. The Lawful side turned people to stone, but that can be reversed is a sign of her love and mercy if strongly misguided as she was now half her full self and thus cannot see from another perspective. I think she is the best FE 'villain' so far because the core intention and motive of her is sort of purely 'good'. And in the end, she survives the ordeals of her mistake by the very beings she loves, brought back to sanity with her two halves merging into one again and growing wiser and stronger as her children do. Rare is there a 'villain' who ends up 'winning' in a sense that she isn't dead, she can continue existing wiser and stronger learning from her mistakes and improving herself. Oh and her creations still to some degree love her. It's not the typical Benevolent entity corrupted and eradicated from the world to free the entity from reigning in the creation, but rather healed and show signs of growth and learning to better perform her responsibilities. I found that bit moving when I completed FE10 of how an almighty being learns and move on even if it does humanize her.

Though if you interpret the goddess at the end to be the Chaotic half only, then I guess my interpretation isn't nearly as correct. 

[Extrasolar]

1 hour ago, Thane said:

That said, your argument opens a whole bunch of cans of worms. How would a lesser creature get control of the bigger ones? Just how many of them are there, and how can such powerful creatures coexist with smaller races? It's all up to the story, so saying "it's a question of realism" doesn't work because it all depends on the world you're building. Ergo, there's no need to involve dragons, ancient evils or arcane forces all the time. 

God-slaying and dragon-slaying weaponry? Magical blood shenanigans? Really cool magical stuff? Maybe a pact that the godly beings are slaves to that the humans can invoke, like the whole "true name" thing, or something? (I'll admit I'm thinking of a lot of the stories of powerful fae being brought low by humans due to some pretty amusing things they completely overlooked, since of course they thought themselves all-powerful).

Those questions are exactly what would be interesting to explore. In FE as of now, we do have the conflict between the Divine and Earth dragons boiling down to "how do we react/exist alongside/or enslave humanity." But I'd argue that the potential of that idea has never been completely explored, and thus, I'd like to see the whole of the debate between beings with the power to change the world irreversibly.

How do they handle such power responsibly? Are they entitled to rule, just because they far outstrip the humans and other races in power? Should they react with their world-changing powers to "edit" what they don't like about humanity or human civilization? What is good in the context of godly power? What is evil?

Do human lives matter, because they're so short in comparison to a dragon's or a god's? Should a god use its wisdom to "steer" humanity to what they consider "betterment"?

Really, the conflict and arguments could go many ways, and I find that really interesting. That's why I don't want to see the end of gods and dragons in FE. I just ask for a more balanced point of view with these powerful beings.

44 minutes ago, Rothene said:

A story telling on how utterly unrelateable the other is, and all things are shown through acts and let us the players interpret and discern and justify why the Dragons do what they do and realise measuring things by our normal standards will fail. I feel if such storytelling could occur, it can be quite humbling.

I'll admit something like this could be very interesting, especially when you're focusing on how the humans react too. How does one really analyze the actions of an ethereal being whose thinking patterns and customs are so alien? How does one live with the idea that you've got godly beings with the power to end your own life and that of your civilization?

That would be cool to explore.

1 hour ago, Thane said:

I'd argue that's the same thing, and it's most likely achieved by the same supernatural forces that could end the world anyway. It's still a global game over for humanity, just with a different label on the tin.

Not necessarily. There are plenty of people who would welcome the idea that they wouldn't have to struggle to find themselves or struggle to figure out what they wanted to do in life. I'm certain tons of people would welcome the idea.

With purely human entities, you can't really realistically stamp out all free will or dissent, since people simply don't have that power. I know dictatorships are and were a thing, but even then, it's impossible to be the thought police unless we're talking magical power and brainwashing, which leans heavily to the supernatural in the first place. Rebellions will always pop up when human dictators are involved. They're just human, after all.

1 hour ago, Thane said:

Isn't this a super common theme which has already been done in Fire Emblem anyway? Why repeat it?

This may be me being biased, but it's because we live in a world which practically worships and glorifies authority and power. The strong rule, and the weak are basically screwed from the get-go. I like messages that subvert it - that say, just because you're lucky enough to have power enough to lord it over others doesn't mean your every whim is correct, doesn't mean you can abuse your authority and connections to fuck over people who don't deserve it. In our world people in higher positions are virtually untouchable, beyond reproach by us "common" folk. They get away with a lot of shit that no one else can.

Stories that say "no, you're not above us just because you hold this power" really are needed in our current world. Doesn't mean these same "weaklings" can't rise up and topple you just as quickly, so watch yourself.

1 hour ago, Thane said:

"Most famous for"? That's a very strange reasoning. First of all, I associate a lot of things with Fire Emblem with a lot of things, but for some reason I rarely think about dragons, maybe because I dislike how they're usually handled.

Really? Huh, from my point of view dragons and FE are almost always synonymous, just with how large a role they usually play in the games, especially with the fact that dragons are most often Fire Emblem's equivalent of gods (Ashera being the only explicitly non-dragon god featured in the series, iirc). Dragons, magical artifacts, and magical bloodlines scream "Fire Emblem" to me, because all of those were featured so heavily.

1 hour ago, Thane said:

"Ultimate underdog story"? I'd say Rocky is a far better underdog story than any group of supermodel teenagers going up against yet another bloody dragon we know is going to be defeated because they're just the final stop on a journey which has mostly been success after success.

Well, sure, we know that the good guys are going to win, but that's a constant with pretty much every story. I mean, with Rocky, we know Rocky is going to win. That much is obvious. But we watch anyway to see the journey, the struggles, and how he gets there. I hate bringing out this old cliche, but it's the journey, not the destination.

Rocky is an underdog story, but it's still a question of incredibly buff and fit human vs. incredibly buff and fit human the whole way through. Sure, Rocky has to conquer both himself and his limitations to win, but it's still well within the scope of possibility. I'd say humans going up against something they on paper are completely out of the league of is a better underdog story. That's why, imo, it's so cathartic when they win.

But that's just me. I really dig stories which allow humans to thumb their nose at godly figures, especially if said godly figures are trying to exert authority over the humans without their consent. Chalk it up to the rebellious nature within me.

Edited April 7, 2017 by Extrasolar