The True Tragedy of Three Houses

[Darkmoon6789]

14 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

His belief isn't wrong per se. The "strong" and "those that have power" very much SHOULD use that power responsibly for those that are "weak" or don't hold the power that nobility do. 

The flaw, from my perspective, is the belief that "nobility" are the ones in power. Dimitri ends up following the belief of bloodline and being born to power. But because they are "born to power," they are born with a responsibility. This is something, ironically, shared by nobles like Ferdinand and Lorenz, who believe in the nobility, but view that it is a noble's duty to use their power for the sake of the commoners.

However, this is the interesting thing.

You can actually see that BOTH Edelgard and Dimitri's forms of government, if combined, actually would hold a LOT more merit. 

Edelgard's government allows for anyone to hold positions of power, thus allows those that have the will and desire to rise to power and earn it, so no one is divided by the concept of being "born" to power, but "earning" power. And Dimitri's system allows those without power to still get a chance to be heard and thus would actually help to mitigate the problem of corruption. 

If you actually combine these two... you would actually have a true path toward democracy. 

If only the two of them could get along. Still don't see why those given power in Edelgard's system wouldn't still have the same responsibility as a noble in having a duty to protect those beneath them.

[omegaxis1]

Just now, Darkmoon6789 said:

If only the two of them could get along. Still don't see why those given power in Edelgard's system wouldn't still have the same responsibility as a noble in having a duty to protect those beneath them.

Of course. Edelgard's system is still very progressive due to how she introduces education for commoners. It's not possible for commoners to rise in status and know how to perform the jobs of former nobles unless they become educated. The more free thinkers there are, the more chances for the betterment of people's lives in general. Education is very important for a reason. 

Also, the influence of Crests actually makes me realize something else. In Hanneman and Edelgard's support, Hanneman's sister was married off to a noble that was losing his influence. The purpose of the marriage was to get a child with a Crest. Thing is, though, this makes Crests basically like a quick shortcut to power, rather than actually putting in hard work and effort to restore your influence. If the nobleman had actually been a competent noble that knew how to do his job, rather than ride on his title and being desperate for a Crest, then he'd have been fine.

[Darkmoon6789]

33 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Of course. Edelgard's system is still very progressive due to how she introduces education for commoners. It's not possible for commoners to rise in status and know how to perform the jobs of former nobles unless they become educated. The more free thinkers there are, the more chances for the betterment of people's lives in general. Education is very important for a reason. 

Also, the influence of Crests actually makes me realize something else. In Hanneman and Edelgard's support, Hanneman's sister was married off to a noble that was losing his influence. The purpose of the marriage was to get a child with a Crest. Thing is, though, this makes Crests basically like a quick shortcut to power, rather than actually putting in hard work and effort to restore your influence. If the nobleman had actually been a competent noble that knew how to do his job, rather than ride on his title and being desperate for a Crest, then he'd have been fine.

As evidenced by competent nobles like Ferdinand staying in power in cri m son flower

Everything I seen in game seem to suggest Edelgard is right about crests. Plus the thinning of the original bloodlines will make crests rarer and rarer with time. Pushing nobles to desperate measures like blood reconstruction surgery in a desperste attempt to stay relevant, and this will only get worse with time

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

2 hours ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

I never understood why Dimitri thinks that the weak cannot survive in Edelgard's world, is it because the commoners would no longer be protected by the nobility as they don't exist? I see no reason why the week would have it any worse under Edelgard and Dimitri, selecting your leaders based on merit rather than bloodline doesn't change the basic duty of acting in the good of every citizen of the kingdom. Isn't calling the commoners weak just on her way to keep down and justify the power nobles have over them?

Under Edelgard any commoner have a chance to rise to any position, which they will not under the mission of any other Lord as they are assumed weak and incapable of leadership. 

I see a couple possible ways to look at this.

The first is a darker twist on "meritocracy". There was another leader with meritocratic ideals, who believed that one's strength, drive, and overall ability should matter more than the station of their birth. He made appointments based on the strength he saw in others, and even invited those who could defeat him to do so. His name was Ashnard.

The concern that arises from meritocratic systems is, what happens to the people who don't have the ability or the drive, whether a result of birth or circumstance, to rise up in life? Will they find their quality of life stagnate, or even decline? If the toughest and brightest farmers get the best soil to till, what's left for the rest? The ones, I believe, Dimitri refers to as "weak"? We may think of a "welfare system", or "social safety net", but it's unclear if such things were even conceived of, much less created, by Edelgard.

Obviously, we don't get a complete picture of the world Edelgard creates. And she's nowhere near the cruel bastard that Ashnard is. But I do think there's a sliver of similarity between their worldviews. And I bear concern that, depending on the ideals and structures promoted by the "Empire of Fódlan", a future successor to Edelgard may turn out to be something of an Ashnard.

The second perspective is a religious one. The Church of Seiros is an important part of life to many people in Fódlan (particularly in Dimitri's homeland of Faerghus), and Edelgard fights directly against it (to be clear, not without cause). Not only that, but at times Edelgard publicly questions the existence of the Goddess herself. Edelgard believes that "humanity doesn't need gods", and she's welcome to believe that.

But many people do have a faith in the Goddess that they rely on, as a way of guiding their morals and making sense of the world. To try to "enlighten" them, she asserts that she knows their own needs, and capabilities, better than they do - an overstep, in my opinion. Edelgard, and many of her allies, are happy to live without religion or divine interference. But to the faithful, it's the bedrock of their lives that she's blasting away at - and Dimitri fears that many, with their support base torn away, will mentally crumble.

At least, that's my perspective on the matter. If it sounds anti-Edelgard, it's only for the sake of brevity, and because the prompting post was trying to understand Dimitri's anti-El stance. I don't think that CF Dimitri has a perfect understanding either, but I do see at least a couple rational lines of objection to Edelgard's mission.

[Jotari]

11 hours ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

Well, Edelgard does have really appealing character design. 

Just look at her, her appearance just screams elegance, but appearance isn't the only reason I think I was drawn to her. First impressions of her personality is that of a very refined but competitive young lady, she seems to have been very no nonsense attitude, but can surprisingly relax and show great amounts of compassion and understanding. It quickly becomes obvious that despite her noble status, does not consider herself superior to commoners or those without crests. She also states in very early supports that she has a distaste for the nobility system. So overall, she does make a very great first impression. 

One thing that should be mentioned about her post time skip appearance, this outfit contains all kinds of visual clues to her character. First and foremost, why is her colour scheme, primarily red and white and not red and black like the colour of the Empire? I believe this is to reflect the contrast between her true nature and the actions she feels are necessary to take. The white part of her outfit is displayed primarily on the inner side of her cloak, and the inner layer of her dress. Representing her good intentions and in the noble character, but this layer is hidden from most observers like not all could perceive her well-meaning intentions through her actions. Which brings me to the red representing the bloodied path she walks to bring about change. She is a literal crimson flower, a white rose stained with blood. 

The Crown representing her position as Emperor, the horms attached to it, the inherent corruption that comes with absolute power. The axe, made by the Agarthans represents how she will use the Agarthans as a tool to accomplish her goals. I also notice how she has hearts all over her outfit, one pair which are crossed out, perhaps representing her sense of empathy and perhaps how she's trying to suppress it in order to do what she feels must be done.

Do you think I am overanalysing or do you think at least part of this was intended in her design?

I think that's pretty spot on actually. In fact I'd read into it a bit further as I've seen other people have and say the horns are meant to be some kind of ironic devil imagery mimicking Rhea's own horns.

11 hours ago, Crysta said:

I think he means she's a poorly designed character functionally because she's not a centerpiece of every route like an antagonist ought to be, not her physical appearance.

And just like he thinks I'm just arguing for the sake of arguing, I feel he's complaining for the sake of complaining lol

I don't really want Edelgard to be the centerpiece of any route other than her own, even if she's the antagonist. It'd feel out of place if I was somehow privy to her plans, feelings or motivations when there's no real reason for Byleth to be privy to such things. Beyond breaking immersion, it'd also make playing the rest of the game less appealing. She's better as a more distant, mysterious obstacle in this particular story structure.

But I guess YMMV, as it is with most things. 

No I was expressly talking about visual character design on that point. I think the fact that you misinterpreted that means you're not actually reading the majority of my posts. Because I think I was rather explicit about it in the post I was quoting Darkmoon.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Jotari

[omegaxis1]

21 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I see a couple possible ways to look at this.

The first is a darker twist on "meritocracy". There was another leader with meritocratic ideals, who believed that one's strength, drive, and overall ability should matter more than the station of their birth. He made appointments based on the strength he saw in others, and even invited those who could defeat him to do so. His name was Ashnard.

The concern that arises from meritocratic systems is, what happens to the people who don't have the ability or the drive, whether a result of birth or circumstance, to rise up in life? Will they find their quality of life stagnate, or even decline? If the toughest and brightest farmers get the best soil to till, what's left for the rest? The ones, I believe, Dimitri refers to as "weak"? We may think of a "welfare system", or "social safety net", but it's unclear if such things were even conceived of, much less created, by Edelgard.

Obviously, we don't get a complete picture of the world Edelgard creates. And she's nowhere near the cruel bastard that Ashnard is. But I do think there's a sliver of similarity between their worldviews. And I bear concern that, depending on the ideals and structures promoted by the "Empire of Fódlan", a future successor to Edelgard may turn out to be something of an Ashnard.

This part is definitely what Dimitri is possibly worrying about. Cause all he's seeing now is a war where lives are being trampled upon with no regard to the people that cannot fight for themselves and are suffering as a result. To him, he is possibly seeing Edelgard's believe as one without any form of "safety net" where only the strong can thrive. 

And yes, even if a commoner were to get the position, there's no telling if that commoner won't have their own bias or issues. I have faith that Edelgard herself will have chosen a good successor, but whether that person can choose a good successor is debatable. There's overall too many unknown variables so pretty much anything goes.

21 minutes ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

The second perspective is a religious one. The Church of Seiros is an important part of life to many people in Fódlan (particularly in Dimitri's homeland of Faerghus), and Edelgard fights directly against it (to be clear, not without cause). Not only that, but at times Edelgard publicly questions the existence of the Goddess herself. Edelgard believes that "humanity doesn't need gods", and she's welcome to believe that.

But many people do have a faith in the Goddess that they rely on, as a way of guiding their morals and making sense of the world. To try to "enlighten" them, she asserts that she knows their own needs, and capabilities, better than they do - an overstep, in my opinion. Edelgard, and many of her allies, are happy to live without religion or divine interference. But to the faithful, it's the bedrock of their lives that she's blasting away at - and Dimitri fears that many, with their support base torn away, will mentally crumble.

This one, I would actually say isn't much of a problem, least on Edelgard's stance in Crimson Flower. Her support with Manuela is something that regards Edelgard in understanding the importance of faith that people have over religion and the role it plays for them emotionally and can actually structure someone to derive strength from. But overall, Edelgard never has any issues with people holding belief in the religion. 

This is even mentioned in her battle quote against Rhea and in Ferdinand and Mercedes's C support in Part 2 of CF.

Quote

Edelgard: I have only made an enemy of the church, not of the faith.

-

Ferdinand: Even Edelgard, who opposes the church's methods, does not deny us the right to pray to the goddess.

Not to mention that Edelgard actually does restore the Church in the endings, with Linhardt/Bernadetta and Hanneman/Manuela's endings show as such.

Plus, in regards to CF, the case of Rhea, the archbishop, losing her mind made a lot of people unwilling to follow her. And when the people of Fhirdiad ultimately got saved by Edelgard from Rhea, the latter whom ordered Fhirdiad to be put to the torch, it basically would act as a symbol that Edelgard is the righteous one ad Rhea was the monster.

However, if this is in regards to the non-CF routes, then yes, there's definitely a lot more issues, since there is the problem that Edelgard might not be as willing to accept the religion or be tolerant of it. Though it could be the Agarthans, with Edelgard not keeping them on a proper leash.

22 minutes ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

As evidenced by competent nobles like Ferdinand staying in power in cri m son flower

Everything I seen in game seem to suggest Edelgard is right about crests. Plus the thinning of the original bloodlines will make crests rarer and rarer with time. Pushing nobles to desperate measures like blood reconstruction surgery in a desperste attempt to stay relevant, and this will only get worse with time

Yeah. The nobles of Adrestia actually put Edelgard and her siblings into the dungeon to experiment on them to get a Major Crest.

[Jotari]

7 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

Except that wasn't their motivation at all. Both of them were driven not out of a sense of righteous reasons. Not out of a sense of obligation. But rather just plain revenge. Dimitri makes it abundantly clear in a multitude of lines that he wants revenge on Edelgard for Duscur. Rhea also makes it clear that she wants revenge, because she accuses Byleth of "stealing" her mother like Nemesis. Neither of them are actually thinking in regards for their people in actuality, but just for their own satisfaction. Or in Dimitri's case, the satisfaction of the ghosts in his head.

I think if that were really the case then Dimitri would have been the one completely onboard with Dedue's turning people into monsters strategy. Dimitri is the same character so vengeance is part of him, but he is also undeniable fighting for his kingdom's freedom. Most of his words in that route is even about his friends having died in vain if he loses. If Dimitri was really the revenge obsessed maniac you think he is in Crimson Flowers he'd be cursing his friends in competence when they die instead of apologizing to them. And obviously in this route he is much more mentally together in the other routes. It was a conscious choice for him to have a less piraty character design. They easily could have made Dimitri more of the boar in Crimson Flower, but they clearly didn't.

That being said it's all of that is moot as even if we disagree on Dimitri's motivation, the fact that we do means we both agree that he has tangible motivations in Crimson Flower, which was my original point.

7 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

I think you are confusing the case of how this particular multi-route story is. 

This is the story of how every side in the war have their own story. Dimitri, Claude, Edelgad. They each have a story behind them. Are we supposed to understand them in all the routes? No. We learn shards, or tiny portions in each route.

Yes, and in having a weak (or essentially nonexistent) antagonist Dimitri, Claude and Byleth's routes are less effective as narratives.

 

Edited March 5, 2020 by Jotari

[Etrurian emperor]

1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said:

Also, the influence of Crests actually makes me realize something else. In Hanneman and Edelgard's support, Hanneman's sister was married off to a noble that was losing his influence. The purpose of the marriage was to get a child with a Crest. Thing is, though, this makes Crests basically like a quick shortcut to power, rather than actually putting in hard work and effort to restore your influence. If the nobleman had actually been a competent noble that knew how to do his job, rather than ride on his title and being desperate for a Crest, then he'd have been fine.

Though its not always the noble's fault that they are declining. Ingrid's father is more than willing to use Ingrid's crest regardless how she feels on the matter but the barren lands of his home region also doesn't really give him many other options.

Despite being terrible the decline of house Varley also isn't really the count's fault since a house dedicated to maintaining ties to the church would naturally struggle when the relation between church and empire breaks down. 

By all accounts Ingrid's dad seems fairly capable and for all his flaws being incompetent doesn't seem to be one of them for Varley, yet their only real hopes seem to be abusing the crests of their daughters. 

[omegaxis1]

15 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I think if that were really the case then Dimitri would have been the one completely onboard with Dedue's turning people into monsters strategy. Dimitri is the same character so vengeance is part of him, but he is also undeniable fighting for his kingdom's freedom. Most of his words in that route is even about his friends having died in vain if he loses. If Dimitri was really the revenge obsessed maniac you think he is in Crimson Flowers he'd be cursing his friends in competence when they die instead of apologizing to them. And obviously in this route he is much more mentally together in the other routes. It was a conscious choice for him to have a less piraty character design. They easily could have made Dimitri more of the boar in Crimson Flower, but they clearly didn't.

That being said it's all of that is moot as even if we disagree on Dimitri's motivation, the fact that we do means we both agree that he has tangible motivations in Crimson Flower, which was my original point.

Not really. Hubert himself states that while there are some things Dimitri still would not do, he's still willing to do almost anything. Also, something I mentioned earlier is that Dimitri in CF is like a more refined version of the boar Dimitri. Someone that is capable of thinking and still acting a bit like the part 1 self, but still holds the ferocity and obsessive desire for revenge. Hence why one of the things Dimitri was willing to do was deceive Rhea and try to use her as bait to fight the Empire, so he could flank, while he told her that he would fight in the frontlines and she would flank.

He's perfectly able to think of strategies and not just go and say "KILL EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM!" Hence why he would not act like you claim, where he would mock the others. You fail to recall how there are several times Dimitri's lines in CF are all about his desire for revenge. He literally has a talk with Rhea about who they will kill, with Dimitri making it clear that the entire war is irrelevant, and he just wants Edelgard. 

Also, as Sylvian pointed out, Dimitri is known as the Tempest King because of how he leaves nothing left on a battlefield after winning, so while he doesn't say the above line, he still acts in accordance to it. Which actually makes CF Dimitri FAR more dangerous. It's to the point that he's unable to see his own hypocritical words, contrary to the other Dimitris. Despite how he still is merciless in battle, he's overall no longer acknowledges himself as a monster, but rather singles only Edelgard as the monster. Hence why his defeat quotes in the other routes is him acknowledge that he deserves to die and calls himself a monster. CF has Dimitri not calling himself that, but still clinging to how he won't die. 

While the nation has a justifiable reason for fighting the Empire, Dimitri was not driven by said justifiable ones. As I mentioned, revenge is not justifiable. 

23 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Yes, and in having a weak (or essentially nonexistent) antagonist Dimitri, Claude and Byleth's routes are less effective as narratives.

Those routes were always the weakest. Very weak themes and consistency. Frankly, Hegemon Edelgard should have been the Silver Snow final antagonist. 

19 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Though its not always the noble's fault that they are declining. Ingrid's father is more than willing to use Ingrid's crest regardless how she feels on the matter but the barren lands of his home region also doesn't really give him many other options.

Despite being terrible the decline of house Varley also isn't really the count's fault since a house dedicated to maintaining ties to the church would naturally struggle when the relation between church and empire breaks down. 

By all accounts Ingrid's dad seems fairly capable and for all his flaws being incompetent doesn't seem to be one of them for Varley, yet their only real hopes seem to be abusing the crests of their daughters. 

Except as proven with Ingrid in non-AM routes, by working hard and actually learning more proper agriculture techniques (even mentioned in the Raph ending with Ingrid), the land can end up being transformed into a bountiful one for harvest. While there are obviously cases of noble houses that can be on the decline, putting everything on someone being born with a Crest and trying to get influence from that is investing too much into chance, and also endangering that person's future or how it would affect them. 

Also, House Varley wasn't actually on the decline. Keep in mind that Varley still maintains plenty of profits from the fact that they are from a region where they can use the resources extracted from the mountains to produce armor and weapons. Also, Varley adapted still to try and work on other fields that put him into friction with other nobles, but it shows that Varley is not one to just give up and not seek alternatives if something goes awry. 

And while Varley is 99% of a shitty father, there's still the case that he was 1% a decent father given how the only reason he had beaten Yuri was because Yuri was actually an assassin and Varley was trying to protect his daughter. 

[Darkmoon6789]

1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

I see a couple possible ways to look at this.

The first is a darker twist on "meritocracy". There was another leader with meritocratic ideals, who believed that one's strength, drive, and overall ability should matter more than the station of their birth. He made appointments based on the strength he saw in others, and even invited those who could defeat him to do so. His name was Ashnard.

The concern that arises from meritocratic systems is, what happens to the people who don't have the ability or the drive, whether a result of birth or circumstance, to rise up in life? Will they find their quality of life stagnate, or even decline? If the toughest and brightest farmers get the best soil to till, what's left for the rest? The ones, I believe, Dimitri refers to as "weak"? We may think of a "welfare system", or "social safety net", but it's unclear if such things were even conceived of, much less created, by Edelgard.

Obviously, we don't get a complete picture of the world Edelgard creates. And she's nowhere near the cruel bastard that Ashnard is. But I do think there's a sliver of similarity between their worldviews. And I bear concern that, depending on the ideals and structures promoted by the "Empire of Fódlan", a future successor to Edelgard may turn out to be something of an Ashnard.

The second perspective is a religious one. The Church of Seiros is an important part of life to many people in Fódlan (particularly in Dimitri's homeland of Faerghus), and Edelgard fights directly against it (to be clear, not without cause). Not only that, but at times Edelgard publicly questions the existence of the Goddess herself. Edelgard believes that "humanity doesn't need gods", and she's welcome to believe that.

But many people do have a faith in the Goddess that they rely on, as a way of guiding their morals and making sense of the world. To try to "enlighten" them, she asserts that she knows their own needs, and capabilities, better than they do - an overstep, in my opinion. Edelgard, and many of her allies, are happy to live without religion or divine interference. But to the faithful, it's the bedrock of their lives that she's blasting away at - and Dimitri fears that many, with their support base torn away, will mentally crumble.

At least, that's my perspective on the matter. If it sounds anti-Edelgard, it's only for the sake of brevity, and because the prompting post was trying to understand Dimitri's anti-El stance. I don't think that CF Dimitri has a perfect understanding either, but I do see at least a couple rational lines of objection to Edelgard's mission.

It does make sense, it is a weakness of capitalism as well which is also a form of meritocracy. I think a perfect society needs both a welfare system and an incentive to succeed. But I don't think welfare in it's current form existed back in medieval times so no nation in Fodlan would have it.  

What game was Ashnard from? He does sound like a darker representation of Edelgard's philosophy. It is likely at least one future emperor will be like him, Edelgard will probably be considered the height if the Empires golden age and it might decline dliwly from there. But if the empire is ruled by a tyrant, another Flame Emperor will raise their banner in revolt, taking inspiration from Edelgard. The Flame Emperor is less a person than a symbol of those who raises their arms against tyrants.

 

 

Edited March 5, 2020 by Darkmoon6789

[omegaxis1]

Just now, Darkmoon6789 said:

What game was Ashnard from? He does sound like a darker representation of Edelgard's philosophy. It is likely at least one future emperor will be like him, Edelgard will probably be considered the height if the Empires golden age and it might decline dliwly from there. But if the empire is ruled by a tyrant, another Flame Emperor will raise their banner in revolt, taking inspiration from Edelgard. The Flame Emperor is less a person than a symbol of those who raises their arms against tyrants.

He's from the Tellius series, in Path of Radiance. He has this quote when you fight against him with a certain character:

Quote

Ashnard: I do. Oh, how I do... It's true. The world may be destroyed by the coming of the dark god. Then again, it may not. I question the way in which our society is designed. No matter what strength a person has, it is the station he is born into that controls his destiny. And you cannot control where you will be born. Do you believe that a person of low birth should simply endure the curse of his station? I think not. If you are stronger than those around you, you should benefit from your strength. This is why I will use my strength to remake this world. Class and rank will not matter. Human and sub-human will not matter. The strong will possess everything. The weak will submit to their will. Is this not the meaning of peace?

Ashnard is very much a dark counterpart to Edelgard. But even so, some people genuinely did appreciate what Ashnard had done for them. 

Quote

Sothe: You know, Ashnard wasn't such a bad king. At least, as far as we could see. If you were strong enough, you could rise up and become a knight one day. You could escape the filthy slums. He was the only king who ever gave us that chance. That hope.

He made his nation become one where only those that were strong would gain rank and status.

[Slyfox]

7 hours ago, Crysta said:

That makes marginally more sense but seems... uncharacteristic of Byleth/Claude’s army?

A lot happens off screen. We only control the main army, and Fodlan is a big place. It's mentioned that Caspar's father was in and around the Kingdom lands, nowhere near where SS and VW take place. It would make sense that he was put to death (or killed in battle, as a couple of you would argue) by whatever armies (or militias, most likely) were near those areas. It's also feasible that the Church of Seiros put him to death, although it does seem a little too soon for them to reach that far (he dies not long after Edelgard does, I think).

Uncharacteristic of the armies? I wouldn't say so. Fire Emblem, since the beginning, has always been a brutal, medieval fantasy land where life invariably sucks in war, and atrocities happen. It's just that we typically only play a cast of special, goody two shoes snowflakes because otherwise it would be an unbearable series for many players. The Church is full of bigotry, same as the Alliance. We just don't personally see them at their worst through the eyes of our protagonists (edit: okay sometimes we do, my point still stands).

Still, I think it's more likely that whatever Kingdom remnants were there offed him when the Empire lost, seeing as he would have impacted them directly more than any other area.

 

As far as incomplete routes go, it's a love/hate relationship for me. I felt rather empty when I finished my first route, the lack of information was a little bewildering. On one hand, only knowing what your army knows is very realistic and I appreciate it to an extent. That said, it also reduces my enjoyment of the game, simply because you have to go through the same thing over and over before you find the other relevant story bits. Does it make for a better story? I'd say yes. But at the cost of a game that could have been more enjoyable, since it becomes just a series of fights with little payoff.

And no, I'm not knocking on Three Houses, it's already my favorite Fire Emblem.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Slyfox

[Icelerate]

15 hours ago, Jotari said:

I like Alvis's character, doesn't mean I think he's a morally good person. That being said I don't necessarily dislike Edelgard. I have issues with her, but as I said earlier I have issues with a lot of characters in Three Houses. I have issues with people trying to twist the narrative to suggest Crimson Flower is the only lense of the game worth analyzing through, but Edelgard herself has some certainly good points as a character. Actually probably my biggest complaint about her is what a poor antagonist she makes as (and I played Crimson Flower as my third route) we really have little idea as to what she actually wants. We get her big speech before the time skip and then she basically vanishes for the entire rest of the story until you kill her (and funnily enough this is the biggest problem I have with Rhea too...the second half of Three Houses is mostly a whole lot of nothing really. Just talking to your lord, and not even that in Silver Snow).

 

We're not talking about morality here. Do you think Arvis is a superior character than Edelgard? 

I don't know who is suggesting CF is the only route that should be analysed. Not even the most hardcore Edelgard fans say that every other route should be ignored. 

While Edelgard can use more presence, I think in Blue Lions, we do see Edelgard quite a bit. We see her on Gronder's Field, in the negotiation with Dimitri and in the finale. Those three times are when she actually interacts with the playable cast. Other than that, I do recall her having dialogue with Hubert as well in cut-scenes much like how Ashnard would have dialogue with the BK and Petrine which allowed us to see what he was up to even though he didn't interact with the playable cast until the final chapter. I know you love Arvis and Sephiran and I don't see how they have more screen-time and presence than Edelgard. 

And Edelgard showing up more often and getting defeated constantly or just leaving would weaken her character by making her incompetent. 

[Crysta]

2 hours ago, Jotari said:

No I was expressly talking about visual character design on that point. I think the fact that you misinterpreted that means you're not actually reading the majority of my posts. Because I think I was rather explicit about it in the post I was quoting Darkmoon.

I'm reading them if I'm quoting them, but I did somehow miss that part. My bad.

51 minutes ago, Slyfox said:

A lot happens off screen. We only control the main army, and Fodlan is a big place. It's mentioned that Caspar's father was in and around the Kingdom lands, nowhere near where SS and VW take place. It would make sense that he was put to death (or killed in battle, as a couple of you would argue) by whatever armies (or militias, most likely) were near those areas. It's also feasible that the Church of Seiros put him to death, although it does seem a little too soon for them to reach that far (he dies not long after Edelgard does, I think).

Him being killed in battle is definitely believable. And that's how I read it, so that's why I was confused when you contended with 100% certainty that it was an execution. Pretty sure that would have stuck in my head.

54 minutes ago, Slyfox said:

Uncharacteristic of the armies? I wouldn't say so. Fire Emblem, since the beginning, has always been a brutal, medieval fantasy land where life invariably sucks in war, and atrocities happen. It's just that we typically only play a cast of special, goody two shoes snowflakes because otherwise it would be an unbearable series for many players. The Church is full of bigotry, same as the Alliance. We just don't personally see them at their worst through the eyes of our protagonists (edit: okay sometimes we do, my point still stands).

Uncharacteristic of FE armies, but not armies in general. The only FE execution I remember happening on-screen is with Randolph and that was more of a mercy kill. Are you ever in command of an army that is prone to an occasional war crime or atrocity?

It still strikes me as a bit of a stretch, but alright, I guess.

As for Edelgard and her faith, I recall the Manuela support chain essentially her struggling with the dilemma that she may hurt Manuela if she completely eradicates the church. But I also can't recall offhand how it actually resolved.

[Jotari]

5 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

Not really. Hubert himself states that while there are some things Dimitri still would not do, he's still willing to do almost anything. Also, something I mentioned earlier is that Dimitri in CF is like a more refined version of the boar Dimitri. Someone that is capable of thinking and still acting a bit like the part 1 self, but still holds the ferocity and obsessive desire for revenge. Hence why one of the things Dimitri was willing to do was deceive Rhea and try to use her as bait to fight the Empire, so he could flank, while he told her that he would fight in the frontlines and she would flank.

He's perfectly able to think of strategies and not just go and say "KILL EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM!" Hence why he would not act like you claim, where he would mock the others. You fail to recall how there are several times Dimitri's lines in CF are all about his desire for revenge. He literally has a talk with Rhea about who they will kill, with Dimitri making it clear that the entire war is irrelevant, and he just wants Edelgard. 

Also, as Sylvian pointed out, Dimitri is known as the Tempest King because of how he leaves nothing left on a battlefield after winning, so while he doesn't say the above line, he still acts in accordance to it. Which actually makes CF Dimitri FAR more dangerous. It's to the point that he's unable to see his own hypocritical words, contrary to the other Dimitris. Despite how he still is merciless in battle, he's overall no longer acknowledges himself as a monster, but rather singles only Edelgard as the monster. Hence why his defeat quotes in the other routes is him acknowledge that he deserves to die and calls himself a monster. CF has Dimitri not calling himself that, but still clinging to how he won't die. 

While the nation has a justifiable reason for fighting the Empire, Dimitri was not driven by said justifiable ones. As I mentioned, revenge is not justifiable. 

Those routes were always the weakest. Very weak themes and consistency. Frankly, Hegemon Edelgard should have been the Silver Snow final antagonist. 

Except as proven with Ingrid in non-AM routes, by working hard and actually learning more proper agriculture techniques (even mentioned in the Raph ending with Ingrid), the land can end up being transformed into a bountiful one for harvest. While there are obviously cases of noble houses that can be on the decline, putting everything on someone being born with a Crest and trying to get influence from that is investing too much into chance, and also endangering that person's future or how it would affect them. 

Also, House Varley wasn't actually on the decline. Keep in mind that Varley still maintains plenty of profits from the fact that they are from a region where they can use the resources extracted from the mountains to produce armor and weapons. Also, Varley adapted still to try and work on other fields that put him into friction with other nobles, but it shows that Varley is not one to just give up and not seek alternatives if something goes awry. 

And while Varley is 99% of a shitty father, there's still the case that he was 1% a decent father given how the only reason he had beaten Yuri was because Yuri was actually an assassin and Varley was trying to protect his daughter. 

1. I'm not forgetting that (because I looked up all his lines before posting), that's why I said he is still the same character and revenge is still part of him. Where we disagree is that I think it is inaccurate to say that is all, or even mostly part of him. Dimitri is very much still fighting for his kingdom too. If he wasn't, and it was purely revenge, then he would literally be the same character we see in Verdant Wind.

2. I think Nemesis would have worked the best as Silver Snow's final boss given Byleth is a successor to Nemesis in a way. Hegemon Edelgard is fine as Dimitri's final boss (even though I think as a story the real test for Dimitri's vengeance would be the capacity to live alongside Edelgard, which he tries by hoping up diplomacy, but that he fails and kills Edelgard always comes with the sense of "oh you say you weren't fighting for revenge but you still accomplished the exact same goals as if you were". But that's less a Fire Emblem problem and more that this is a video game so a peaceful mediated ending just isn't as viable for the medium).

3 hours ago, Icelerate said:

We're not talking about morality here. Do you think Arvis is a superior character than Edelgard? 

I don't know who is suggesting CF is the only route that should be analysed. Not even the most hardcore Edelgard fans say that every other route should be ignored. 

While Edelgard can use more presence, I think in Blue Lions, we do see Edelgard quite a bit. We see her on Gronder's Field, in the negotiation with Dimitri and in the finale. Those three times are when she actually interacts with the playable cast. Other than that, I do recall her having dialogue with Hubert as well in cut-scenes much like how Ashnard would have dialogue with the BK and Petrine which allowed us to see what he was up to even though he didn't interact with the playable cast until the final chapter. I know you love Arvis and Sephiran and I don't see how they have more screen-time and presence than Edelgard. 

And Edelgard showing up more often and getting defeated constantly or just leaving would weaken her character by making her incompetent. 

You assume I wouldn't make those same complaints for those characters too, and I absolutely do. Ashnard in particular who has a grand total of one scene to interact with Ike. Though in Ashnard's defense (but more to give an example of what I'm talking about and would like more of from Edelgard) he does do one thing during the course of the game other than start the war and that's send the Black Knight to steal the medallion, this is an action against the heroes that influences their story (though not all that majorly given the medallion can do it's thing anywhere). Edelgard gets nothing of that. It's just send soldiers to attack. It enforces no change on the characters.

Regarding Sephiran he gets quite a bit of action and presence, but it's all very too heavy directed towards the end of the game. Radiant Dawn is the first Fire Emblem game I played (as it's a sequel, not recommended) and I barely had any clue who Sephiran was until the moment I fought him. He was just some guy the characters kept mentioning.  And one of my earliest topics on Serenes was questioning what Sephiran even did in Radiant Dawn to awaken Ashera (as the events seem mostly natural). These are massive problems with Sephiran as a character. I only grew to like him on repeat playthroughs when I could analyze his story in isolation and not part of the narrative as a whole. But since we want our stories to be part of an actual whole, Sephiran does fail as a villain in a somewhat significant way.

Onto Alvis one of my biggest complaints is that we don't see enough of him in the first generation and it's something I hope we see more of in a remake via memory prisims. The limited appearance in the second gen I don't mind so much as he does something pretty big at the end of chapter 5 that can sustain him as a force in the narrative without appearing for a while, you might say something similar about Edelgard starting the war, but I think the Barhara massacre caused more waves in the narrative than Edelgard's war (narrative, not world). Maybe if she killed Rhea on screen and the player wasn't lead to have ambivalent feelings for Rhea she could have the same effect. Instead she just captures Rhea and the only drive as am audience member I felt was to resolve the ambiguity of a non Edelgard character's state. In his post time skip appearance Alvis also manages to be more interesting than Edelgard by essentially betraying his own side while still fighting Seliph. Edelgard post time skip is just "Fight me."

What might be clear now is that if I like something chances are I have a lot to criticize it about. I could write such diatribes about a fair few villains in the series (though I dont think presence and inaction are an inherent issue with Fire Emblem villains as some do manage to have both or don't need both due to ensemble. He'll Nergal almost has too much presence to the point where you question why he doesn't just kill everyone).

Edited March 5, 2020 by Jotari

[Darkmoon6789]

8 minutes ago, Jotari said:

1. I'm not forgetting that (because I looked up all his lines before posting), that's why I said he is still the same character and revenge is still part of him. Where we disagree is that I think it is inaccurate to say that is all, or even mostly part of him. Dimitri is very much still fighting for his kingdom too. If he wasn't, and it was purely revenge, then he would literally be the same character we see in Verdant Wind.

2. I think Nemesis would have worked the best as Silver Snow's final boss given Byleth is a successor to Nemesis in a way. Hegemon Edelgard is fine as Dimitri's final boss (even though I think as a story the real test for Dimitri's vengeance would be the capacity to live alongside Edelgard, which he tries by hoping up diplomacy, but that he fails and kills Edelgard always comes with the sense of "oh you say you weren't fighting for revenge but you still accomplished the exact same goals as if you were". But that's less a Fire Emblem problem and more that this is a video game so a peaceful mediated ending just isn't as viable for the medium).

You assume I wouldn't make those same complaints for those characters too, and I absolutely do. Ashnard in particular who has a grand total of one scene to interact with Ike. Though in Ashnard's defense (but more to give an example of what I'm talking about and would like more of from Edelgard) he does do one thing during the course of the game other than start the war and that's send the Black Knight to steal the medallion, this is an action against the heroes that influences their story (though not all that majorly given the medallion can do it's thing anywhere). Edelgard gets nothing of that. It's just send soldiers to attack. It enforces no change on the characters.

Regarding Sephiran he gets quite a bit of action and presence, but it's all very too heavy directed towards the end of the game. Radiant Dawn is the first Fire Emblem game I played (as it's a sequel, not recommended) and I barely had any clue who Sephiran was until the moment I fought him. He was just some guy the characters kept mentioning.  And one of my earliest topics on Serenes was questioning what Sephiran even did in Radiant Dawn to awaken Ashera (as the events seem mostly natural). These are massive problems with Sephiran as a character. I only grew to like him on repeat playthroughs when I could analyze his story in isolation and not part of the narrative as a whole. But since we want our stories to be part of an actual whole, Sephiran does fail as a villain in a somewhat significant way.

Onto Alvis one of my biggest complaints is that we don't see enough of him in the first generation and it's something I hope we see more of in a remake via memory prisims. The limited appearance in the second gen I don't mind so much as he does something pretty big at the end of chapter 5 that can sustain him as a force in the narrative without appearing for a while, you might say something similar about Edelgard starting the war, but I think the Barhara massacre caused more waves in the narrative than Edelgard's war (narrative, not world). Maybe if she killed Rhea on screen and the player wasn't lead to have ambivalent feelings for Rhea she could have the same effect. Instead she just captures Rhea and the only drive as am audience member I felt was to resolve the ambiguity of a non Edelgard character's state. In his post time skip appearance Alvis also manages to be more interesting than Edelgard by essentially betraying his own side while still fighting Seliph. Edelgard post time skip is just "Fight me."

You know, if Edelgard actually survived azure moon and reconciled with Dimitri, that might be enough to push it to my favourite ending in the entire game. You do have a point that it would better drive home Dimitri getting over his need for vengeance, but I guess it would also undermine the tragedy. But I don't dislike a happy ending

Granted, some people would probably complain that Edelgard got off scotch free. Knowing what humans are like. 

[Jotari]

20 minutes ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

You know, if Edelgard actually survived azure moon and reconciled with Dimitri, that might be enough to push it to my favourite ending in the entire game. You do have a point that it would better drive home Dimitri getting over his need for vengeance, but I guess it would also undermine the tragedy. But I don't dislike a happy ending

Granted, some people would probably complain that Edelgard got off scotch free. Knowing what humans are like. 

Like I said I feel it could work in other mediums buy in video games there lies a very large expectation to take down the threat in a final show down. Off the top of my head I can think of that ends with the protagonist simply refusing to fight the main villain and actually going through with it is Lunar Genesis. Which personally I liked as a balwsy move, but let's just say in general it wasn't the most popular of games (though probably more for other gameplay based reasons).

[Darkmoon6789]

3 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Like I said I feel it could work in other mediums buy in video games there lies a very large expectation to take down the threat in a final show down. Off the top of my head I can think of that ends with the protagonist simply refusing to fight the main villain and actually going through with it is Lunar Genesis. Which personally I liked as a balwsy move, but let's just say in general it wasn't the most popular of games (though probably more for other gameplay based reasons).

I mean, you could have the reconciliation happening after the defeat of the Hedgemon Husk and Edelgard transforming back, the only thing to change would be the cutscene where Edelgard stabs Dimitri.

Granted, it might be very out of character for Edelgard to accept. But part of me wished she did. But I do get the feeling it would be easier for Dimitri to live in Edelgard's preferred future than vice versa. But presumably if the reconciliation happened they would make some kind of compromise, but I am not sure what that would be. 

[omegaxis1]

8 hours ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

You know, if Edelgard actually survived azure moon and reconciled with Dimitri, that might be enough to push it to my favourite ending in the entire game. You do have a point that it would better drive home Dimitri getting over his need for vengeance, but I guess it would also undermine the tragedy. But I don't dislike a happy ending

Granted, some people would probably complain that Edelgard got off scotch free. Knowing what humans are like. 

Actually, I theorized that if Edelgard was let free, it would undermine Dimitri's authority with people, as people would hate that the one that started the war got away, and Edelgard being alive will have the other Imperials in the army want to keep the war going, and the Agarthans as well would not want Edelgard to die on them, so they'd use her. Hell, her survival might have the Agarthans want her to be used as a Crest Baby maker. 

Edelgard being spared might honestly have been absolutely necessary. Hence why the Agarthans only back off ad retreat back to Shambhala after she dies. 

[Darkmoon6789]

3 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

Actually, I theorized that if Edelgard was let free, it would undermine Dimitri's authority with people, as people would hate that the one that started the war got away, and Edelgard being alive will have the other Imperials in the army want to keep the war going, and the Agarthans as well would not want Edelgard to die on them, so they'd use her. Hell, her survival might have the Agarthans want her to be used as a Crest Baby maker. 

Edelgard being spared might honestly have been absolutely necessary. Hence why the Agarthans only back off ad retreat back to Shambhala after she dies. 

It is interesting that this is the exact argument Edelgard uses for why Byleth must kill her in verdant wind. It would make a quicker end to the war and knowing that her sacrifice would prevent the unnecessary loss of further life now knowing her bright future will never come to pass, Edelgard is willing to die in order to undermine the Agarthans, who she knows cannot be allowed to claim final victory now that she is not around anymore.  

Edelgard, self-sacrificing until the end. 

Her being used by the Agarthans as a crest baby maker also has implications so horrifying that for Edelgard, it would be a fate worse than death. I am just imagining Thales locking her up for the rest of her life for this purpose, while unspeakable things were done to her. Is Thales this level of evil? Probably. Edelgard is better off dead in this scenario. At the very least, she does deserve an honourable death.

But I do think that Edelgard being spared in azure moon has less severe consequences because Thales is already dead. But Edelgard might still be right in that her survival would prolong the period of resistance for the Imperial army. But I really don't like catering to the demands of vengeance from the general populace, I think it sets a bad example in saying retribution is justified when it isn't.

In pretty much any reality, it would be hard to convince Edelgard not want to die after her loss. I might not like it but Edelgard knows it is the most pragmatic decision. Just another reason I would move heaven and earth to make sure Edelgard wins, it is the only way for her to live a long and happy life, something that became unlikely ever since the Agarthans ruined her life by making her their test subject.

I cannot properly describe the level of absolut hatred that I have for the Agarthans because of what they did to Edelgard. 

[omegaxis1]

21 hours ago, Jotari said:

I think if that were really the case then Dimitri would have been the one completely onboard with Dedue's turning people into monsters strategy. Dimitri is the same character so vengeance is part of him, but he is also undeniable fighting for his kingdom's freedom. Most of his words in that route is even about his friends having died in vain if he loses. If Dimitri was really the revenge obsessed maniac you think he is in Crimson Flowers he'd be cursing his friends in competence when they die instead of apologizing to them. And obviously in this route he is much more mentally together in the other routes. It was a conscious choice for him to have a less piraty character design. They easily could have made Dimitri more of the boar in Crimson Flower, but they clearly didn't.

That being said it's all of that is moot as even if we disagree on Dimitri's motivation, the fact that we do means we both agree that he has tangible motivations in Crimson Flower, which was my original point.

Again, you seem to be thinking that CF Dimitri should still oughta act like the other versions of Dimitri if he's revenge obsessed as those versions, when no, that's not the case. This is like a more refined madness instead of the wild madness that we get in the other routes. This is cause he doesn't go around as a murder hobo for five years after the coup. Here, Dimitri's madness makes him worse in the sense that he really WILL use other people get the edge on others, while portraying himself as someone that is righteous person. 

Consider how Felix has been portraying Dimitri, as someone that pretends to be righteous, but is really just a monster underneath. 

CF is everything Felix portrayed him as. 

Dimitri pretends to be righteous, but really he's in this for revenge. 

It's stated by Sylvain:

Quote

Sylvain: Some people are so in awe of King Dimitri, they call him the Tempest King. After he wins, there won't be anything left. He'll be a storm, leaving nothing behind. He hates the Empire so much he's willing to do anything to bring it down. 

> Byleth Choice 1: He hates the Empire? 

> Sylvain: Yeah, because of the role the Empire played in the Tragedy of Duscur. You know, even back at the Officers Academy, he never had much to do with anyone from the Empire. 

> Byleth Choice 2: He wasn't like that before?

> Sylvain: No. Then again, maybe we didn't actually know him at all. 

And this is further pointed out by Felix as well:

Quote

Felix: Yet, the Knights of Seiros remain. As does the boar. What terrifies me most is his stubbornness. He'll keep on fighting to the last man. He's a monster. I've seen it firsthand.

You are thinking that Dimitri is fighting for his Kingdom, but this is overall contradicted by several of his lines as to why he's in this war:

Quote

Dimitri: There is only one person I am after. I have no interest in any other prey.

-

Dimitri: Ah, here you are, Edelgard...at your eternal resting place. You have trampled and stolen and blinded yourself to the truth. Today, I will have vengeance for all you have done!

-

Dimitri: Edelgard! You... I will kill you! You will know the regret of my father, who was killed for you! Of my stepmother, who was slain by her own daughter! You will bow your head before all of the lives you trampled for your ideals before you die in misery! 

-

Dimitri: Dedue... It seems I will die...before I can get revenge for everyone...

Dimitri is overall someone that puts revenge as his priority first and foremost. Anything in regards to protecting his Kingdom is secondary or just something he uses as a means to an end for himself for the sake of revenge. 

He was not fighting for the sake of freedom. It was for revenge. It's why the chapter is called "Field of Revenge" in the first place.

And in the end, what makes him more dangerous is because he still acts like some righteous person, unwilling to believe he is wrong. He will use even dirty tricks and deceit to win battles. 

It's even noted in the dialogue once again:

Quote

Hubert: Now that I think about it, the Kingdom's army is quite different than it once was. They have taken a position of interception. In the past, the king would have introduced himself before beginning a fair fight. 

Edelgard: A fair fight... The words alone remind me of how he once was. Don't you agree, Professor? 

-

Hubert: Well, at the present, the words "fair fight" do not seem to suit Dimitri anymore. He dislikes making victims of his friends, but other than that, he will do most anything these days... If he stops at nothing to continue the onslaught, I cannot imagine what will become of the battlefield.

----

Dimitri: No need to worry yourself. Even if I am defeated, the Blaiddyd bloodline will live on. And the Kingdom's territory has never been rich in resources. If the castle falls under siege, our loss is inevitable. I will deploy my army onto the plains and wait for the enemy. Please position your forces so that they can flank the Imperial army. 

-

Church Soldier: Yes, Lady Seiros. Because of the rain, we have no yet confirmed the position of our enemy or of the Kingdom army...

Rhea: Search the route to Fhirdiad. It is unlikely that they have strayed far from it. When you discover the Imperial army's main force, commence the attack. If the Kingdom's army has already engaged, flank the enemy as planned. 

-

Dimitri: I was hoping they would strike the church first... We must have miscalculated the rate of their advance. Reorganize the formation. We have no choice but to buy time until the church arrives. It will be a long battle... Are you afraid, Dedue?

Compared to the boar phase Dimitri in the other routes, this Dimitri is trying to actually worse because he's now willing to lie and deceive others to give him an edge in battle. The concept of fair fight doesn't exist to him any longer. Even the boar phase Dimitri might have been reckless, but still brutally honest with his beliefs.

But in CF? Not so much. 

In fact, him acting like a righteous person and criticizing Edelgard is incredibly hypocritical of him when he's in this war cause he wants to kill Edelgard.

Guess having two eyes made him even more blind. 

Ironic, really.

3 hours ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

But I do think that Edelgard being spared in azure moon has less severe consequences because Thales is already dead. But Edelgard might still be right in that her survival would prolong the period of resistance for the Imperial army. But I really don't like catering to the demands of vengeance from the general populace, I think it sets a bad example in saying retribution is justified when it isn't.

As I said, letting Edelgard go is unlikely to be accepted. Keep in mind that Faerghus is still the nation that went and committed genocide on Duscur for the belief that they were the ones that killed Lambert. Edelgard, who started the war, will have the hatred of MANY people from the continent, especially Faerghus. It would undermine Dimitri's authority, and the Empire would not accept the concept of defeat from Faerghus of all nations, since it was Loog that made the rebellion that first split the Empire in the first place. The Agarthans would undoubtedly use festering hatred for their own use. Sure, there'd be Imperial remnants that oughta still rebel against the Kingdom even after the war, which I don't know why there isn't, it'd no longer be at a strength that would match the new Kingdom. 

Edited March 5, 2020 by omegaxis1

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said:

Again, you seem to be thinking that CF Dimitri should still oughta act like the other versions of Dimitri if he's revenge obsessed as those versions, when no, that's not the case. This is like a more refined madness instead of the wild madness that we get in the other routes. This is cause he doesn't go around as a murder hobo for five years after the coup. Here, Dimitri's madness makes him worse in the sense that he really WILL use other people get the edge on others, while portraying himself as someone that is righteous person. 

Consider how Felix has been portraying Dimitri, as someone that pretends to be righteous, but is really just a monster underneath. 

CF is everything Felix portrayed him as. 

Dimitri pretends to be righteous, but really he's in this for revenge. 

It's stated by Sylvain:

And this is further pointed out by Felix as well:

You are thinking that Dimitri is fighting for his Kingdom, but this is overall contradicted by several of his lines as to why he's in this war:

Dimitri is overall someone that puts revenge as his priority first and foremost. Anything in regards to protecting his Kingdom is secondary or just something he uses as a means to an end for himself for the sake of revenge. 

He was not fighting for the sake of freedom. It was for revenge. It's why the chapter is called "Field of Revenge" in the first place.

And in the end, what makes him more dangerous is because he still acts like some righteous person, unwilling to believe he is wrong. He will use even dirty tricks and deceit to win battles. 

It's even noted in the dialogue once again:

Compared to the boar phase Dimitri in the other routes, this Dimitri is trying to actually worse because he's now willing to lie and deceive others to give him an edge in battle. The concept of fair fight doesn't exist to him any longer. Even the boar phase Dimitri might have been reckless, but still brutally honest with his beliefs.

But in CF? Not so much. 

In fact, him acting like a righteous person and criticizing Edelgard is incredibly hypocritical of him when he's in this war cause he wants to kill Edelgard.

Guess having two eyes made him even more blind. 

Ironic, really.

As I said, letting Edelgard go is unlikely to be accepted. Keep in mind that Faerghus is still the nation that went and committed genocide on Duscur for the belief that they were the ones that killed Lambert. Edelgard, who started the war, will have the hatred of MANY people from the continent, especially Faerghus. It would undermine Dimitri's authority, and the Empire would not accept the concept of defeat from Faerghus of all nations, since it was Loog that made the rebellion that first split the Empire in the first place. The Agarthans would undoubtedly use festering hatred for their own use. Sure, there'd be Imperial remnants that oughta still rebel against the Kingdom even after the war, which I don't know why there isn't, it'd no longer be at a strength that would match the new Kingdom. 

You already responded to that quote. This is my most recent statement on the matter.

16 hours ago, Jotari said:

1. I'm not forgetting that (because I looked up all his lines before posting), that's why I said he is still the same character and revenge is still part of him. Where we disagree is that I think it is inaccurate to say that is all, or even mostly part of him. Dimitri is very much still fighting for his kingdom too. If he wasn't, and it was purely revenge, then he would literally be the same character we see in Verdant Wind.

Basically there are aspects of him that are outright righteous that you are denying and calling fake because there are aspects that aren't.

[Darkmoon6789]

1 hour ago, omegaxis1 said:

Again, you seem to be thinking that CF Dimitri should still oughta act like the other versions of Dimitri if he's revenge obsessed as those versions, when no, that's not the case. This is like a more refined madness instead of the wild madness that we get in the other routes. This is cause he doesn't go around as a murder hobo for five years after the coup. Here, Dimitri's madness makes him worse in the sense that he really WILL use other people get the edge on others, while portraying himself as someone that is righteous person. 

Consider how Felix has been portraying Dimitri, as someone that pretends to be righteous, but is really just a monster underneath. 

CF is everything Felix portrayed him as. 

Dimitri pretends to be righteous, but really he's in this for revenge. 

It's stated by Sylvain:

And this is further pointed out by Felix as well:

You are thinking that Dimitri is fighting for his Kingdom, but this is overall contradicted by several of his lines as to why he's in this war:

Dimitri is overall someone that puts revenge as his priority first and foremost. Anything in regards to protecting his Kingdom is secondary or just something he uses as a means to an end for himself for the sake of revenge. 

He was not fighting for the sake of freedom. It was for revenge. It's why the chapter is called "Field of Revenge" in the first place.

And in the end, what makes him more dangerous is because he still acts like some righteous person, unwilling to believe he is wrong. He will use even dirty tricks and deceit to win battles. 

It's even noted in the dialogue once again:

Compared to the boar phase Dimitri in the other routes, this Dimitri is trying to actually worse because he's now willing to lie and deceive others to give him an edge in battle. The concept of fair fight doesn't exist to him any longer. Even the boar phase Dimitri might have been reckless, but still brutally honest with his beliefs.

But in CF? Not so much. 

In fact, him acting like a righteous person and criticizing Edelgard is incredibly hypocritical of him when he's in this war cause he wants to kill Edelgard.

Guess having two eyes made him even more blind. 

Ironic, really.

As I said, letting Edelgard go is unlikely to be accepted. Keep in mind that Faerghus is still the nation that went and committed genocide on Duscur for the belief that they were the ones that killed Lambert. Edelgard, who started the war, will have the hatred of MANY people from the continent, especially Faerghus. It would undermine Dimitri's authority, and the Empire would not accept the concept of defeat from Faerghus of all nations, since it was Loog that made the rebellion that first split the Empire in the first place. The Agarthans would undoubtedly use festering hatred for their own use. Sure, there'd be Imperial remnants that oughta still rebel against the Kingdom even after the war, which I don't know why there isn't, it'd no longer be at a strength that would match the new Kingdom. 

So in other words, Edelgard knows what she is doing in insisting on her own death.

Never liked the attitude of the people of Faerghus. Their genocide in Duscur is worse than Edelgard's war in nearly every way in my opinion, at least she didn't kill every last man, woman and child and left the entire nation in ruins. Her motives were also alot more noble than petty revenge. They dare to judge Edelgard when they are guilty of worse. Now imagine if a survivor of Duscur would do the same to Faerghus as they did to Duscur. 

[omegaxis1]

26 minutes ago, Jotari said:

You already responded to that quote. This is my most recent statement on the matter.

Basically there are aspects of him that are outright righteous that you are denying and calling fake because there are aspects that aren't.

Because the sense of righteous that you think is there isn't actually there. It's why I mention that in CF, he's everything that Felix calls him out as, someone that pretends to be righteous, when he's really just masking his desire for revenge. The entire point of Azure Moon being a redemption arc for Dimitri is due to how Dimitri needs to learn what it is that he wants. In CF, Dimitri doesn't get this redemption arc, and what he "wants" to do is something that is driven primarily to what his ghosts want.

Dimitri isn't fighting this war because he wants to defend his nation. He's fighting this war because he's out for revenge, but this time, he really will use other people. 

That's the entire point of how each route is basically a case of Byleth being there, and the role he plays for the lord. Without Byleth, the other lords end up losing themselves. 

16 minutes ago, Darkmoon6789 said:

So in other words, Edelgard knows what she is doing in insisting on her own death.

Never liked the attitude of the people of Faerghus. Their genocide in Duscur is worse than Edelgard's war in nearly every way in my opinion, at least she didn't kill every last man, woman and child and left the entire nation in ruins. Her motives were also alot more noble than petty revenge. They dare to judge Edelgard when they are guilty of worse. Now imagine if a survivor of Duscur would do the same to Faerghus as they did to Duscur. 

Edelgard's always been someone that states that she considers every scenario, which is what she tells Constance if you have her fight Edelgard in Chapter 11 of the BE route, where Edelgard states that she never talked cause she considered every possible scenario. And even tells Constance to admit what Constance would have done had Edelgard told her, which Constance declares that she'd have tried to stop Edelgard, which Edelgard reconfirms why she never bothered to tell her.

I'm with you there. I always considered Faerghus to be the worst of the nations even before the game came out. 

Dimitri explaining that people in Faerghus are taught to hold a weapon before a pen. Great way of saying that they prefer violence over diplomacy. I always had issues in regards to such a situation, cause it's just a glorified way of being barbaric. 

[Jotari]

2 hours ago, omegaxis1 said:

Because the sense of righteous that you think is there isn't actually there. It's why I mention that in CF, he's everything that Felix calls him out as, someone that pretends to be righteous, when he's really just masking his desire for revenge. The entire point of Azure Moon being a redemption arc for Dimitri is due to how Dimitri needs to learn what it is that he wants. In CF, Dimitri doesn't get this redemption arc, and what he "wants" to do is something that is driven primarily to what his ghosts want.

Dimitri isn't fighting this war because he wants to defend his nation. He's fighting this war because he's out for revenge, but this time, he really will use other people. 

That's the entire point of how each route is basically a case of Byleth being there, and the role he plays for the lord. Without Byleth, the other lords end up losing themselves. 

Edelgard's always been someone that states that she considers every scenario, which is what she tells Constance if you have her fight Edelgard in Chapter 11 of the BE route, where Edelgard states that she never talked cause she considered every possible scenario. And even tells Constance to admit what Constance would have done had Edelgard told her, which Constance declares that she'd have tried to stop Edelgard, which Edelgard reconfirms why she never bothered to tell her.

I'm with you there. I always considered Faerghus to be the worst of the nations even before the game came out. 

Dimitri explaining that people in Faerghus are taught to hold a weapon before a pen. Great way of saying that they prefer violence over diplomacy. I always had issues in regards to such a situation, cause it's just a glorified way of being barbaric. 

That's you're view of the matter, which is very black and white (which seems to be how you view most aspects of the story). My view is if that were really the authorial intent, if Dimitri really didn't care about his country men and his kingdom then it would be him stooping to using his soldiers as crest beasts, not Dedue. They put in a line explicitly showing Dimitri had ignorance of that plan, I think there's a reason for that. If they wanted to show that Dimitri was completely revenge obsessed and didn't have a care at all for his country then it would be him turning his soldiers into crests beasts and they would not be willing volunteers.

Edited March 6, 2020 by Jotari