What are your thoughts on Alear?

[Jotari]

5 minutes ago, DivineDragon_Goddess said:

Does it tho? I mean not necessarily them turning into a dragon but more so the person responsible for them being able to do so, he who cannot be named aka the Silent Dragon. It’s not Corrin who influences the story but the fact he’s their father. 

Well what plot points would need to be altered if Corrin couldn't turn into a dragon? Their rage in chapter 5, Kana's plagerising of the same plot point in their paralogue and the Birthright final boss. Anankos could still be Corrin's father even if Corrin isn't a dragon (and as far as I can recall, Anankos being Corrin's father isn't even a part of the main game as it's only revealed in the DLC). Corrin being a dragon is something that would be trivially easy to write out of the story. I'm not upset that they're a dragon. More breath units for Heroes. But it is a very undervalued aspect of Fates's story.

[vanguard333]

2 hours ago, Sentinel07 said:

If them turning into a dragon is a thing, then yeah hopefully it's actually a major thing.

It always mind-boggled me how much of a non-factor Corrin turning into a dragon was. It literally never comes up outside of Chapter 5 outside of Kana's Paralogue. Heck, they never even bother showing things like whether the Hoshido and Nohrian siblings knew about it before hand or if Corrin knew (since they're not too surprised by it) among many other questions.

Yeah, it was especially jarring considering how prominently it appeared in all the advertising, to the point where it looked like it was going to be a major factor in the story. Of course, all that footage that made it seem really important was all from chapter 5.

 

7 hours ago, Armchair General said:

Everything looks good and all, but they're kind of playing it safe by having another sword user instead of just doing something absurd with it (like the Sword of the Creator, setting the Yato on fire, having TWO Falchions).

I agree about the sword not really having anything special about it; it's just another sword; a sword with an overly thick guard that looks rather ugly, but just another sword, nonetheless. It doesn't seem to have anything to suggest it has any kind of history compared to something like the Sword of the Creator which was clearly made from dragon bone and whose overall design suggested the sword had a very dark history. I don't mind the lack of absurdities, but the sword doesn't really have anything that makes it stand out either.

[Armchair General]

24 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

a sword with an overly thick guard that looks rather ugly,

In all fairness, the crossguard is molded in the shape of an dragon's wings.

[Fire Emblem Fan]

One thing I will add is that I actually like the heterochromia. It's the one, singular thing about Alear's design that doesn't put me off. As someone with heterochromia myself, it's neat seeing it in Fire Emblem, one of my favorite game series.

[joevar]

when will IS realize making POV character both male and female at the same time limit the potential writing of character? by making Robin, Corrin, Byleth,  both male and female means their actions must be within the middle of male and female. theres no strong reaction from them that i got from playing. 

to make it simple, see Eirika and Ephraim. sure its a bad example as far what woman and man could do, but you can easily recognize which action and reaction Eirika will do as opposed to Ephraim. theres none of that with R, C, B. because theres not enough leeway in FE gameplay like a western RPG with heavy dialogue+choice to make a distinction. i wish they would just give us Female Lord, be it in the like of Eirika, Miciah, or even Lyn personality rather than vague choose your gender/form/etc but the choice is as trivial as changing outfit in-game

[Jotari]

46 minutes ago, joevar said:

when will IS realize making POV character both male and female at the same time limit the potential writing of character? by making Robin, Corrin, Byleth,  both male and female means their actions must be within the middle of male and female. theres no strong reaction from them that i got from playing. 

to make it simple, see Eirika and Ephraim. sure its a bad example as far what woman and man could do, but you can easily recognize which action and reaction Eirika will do as opposed to Ephraim. theres none of that with R, C, B. because theres not enough leeway in FE gameplay like a western RPG with heavy dialogue+choice to make a distinction. i wish they would just give us Female Lord, be it in the like of Eirika, Miciah, or even Lyn personality rather than vague choose your gender/form/etc but the choice is as trivial as changing outfit in-game

So do you see Marth as a female Lord?

1 hour ago, Fire Emblem Fan said:

One thing I will add is that I actually like the heterochromia. It's the one, singular thing about Alear's design that doesn't put me off. As someone with heterochromia myself, it's neat seeing it in Fire Emblem, one of my favorite game series.

They're not the first Fire Emblem character with heterochromia (hi Idunn and Ranulf, and apparently Peri).

Edited September 23, 2022 by Jotari

[Sentinel07]

2 hours ago, joevar said:

when will IS realize making POV character both male and female at the same time limit the potential writing of character? by making Robin, Corrin, Byleth,  both male and female means their actions must be within the middle of male and female. theres no strong reaction from them that i got from playing. 

to make it simple, see Eirika and Ephraim. sure its a bad example as far what woman and man could do, but you can easily recognize which action and reaction Eirika will do as opposed to Ephraim. theres none of that with R, C, B. because theres not enough leeway in FE gameplay like a western RPG with heavy dialogue+choice to make a distinction. i wish they would just give us Female Lord, be it in the like of Eirika, Miciah, or even Lyn personality rather than vague choose your gender/form/etc but the choice is as trivial as changing outfit in-game

I agree.

Part of my issue with Avatars in Fire Emblem is that, when you do things like allow free choice of gender and allow them to support every single character, it means you have to make them generic enough to where gender doesn't matter in their interactions and they can hold a conversation with every single different personality in their army.

[joevar]

3 hours ago, Jotari said:

So do you see Marth as a female Lord?

i truly dont know why you're asking that. maybe i made some big typo?

but if you really just want an answer, then no.

Edited September 23, 2022 by joevar

[Jotari]

3 hours ago, joevar said:

i truly dont know why you're asking that. maybe i made some big typo?

but if you really just want an answer, then no.

Well it's because Marth is a softer character much more akin to Ephraim than Eirika. Were he female I don't think there'd be any real change in his dialogue or actions. While there are of course sterotypes and common features across the genders, there's no plot point, at least within the confines of a typical Fire Emblem story, where I'd call bullshit on a character doing it because of their gender. That being said I do think Fire Emblem has a Generic McEveryman issue in their modern titles. But it's not the fault of the avatars having assignable genders, it's just the way modern Fire Emblem is with it's attempt at mass appeal. The case in point is Alm, who despite being a character known as the conqueror is just as generic as any other Fire Emblem protagonist since Micaiah. You could give Alm a gender swap option with no trouble (Celica I feel doesn't fall into this everyman trap as much, but she comes with her own truck of problems). 

[vanguard333]

9 hours ago, Armchair General said:

In all fairness, the crossguard is molded in the shape of a dragon's wings.

The Sword of the Creator had a crossguard molded in the shape of a dragon's wings as well and its guard looked more reasonable; the guard was no thicker than the blade itself.

[joevar]

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

Well it's because Marth is a softer character much more akin to Ephraim than Eirika. Were he female I don't think there'd be any real change in his dialogue or actions. While there are of course sterotypes and common features across the genders, there's no plot point, at least within the confines of a typical Fire Emblem story, where I'd call bullshit on a character doing it because of their gender. That being said I do think Fire Emblem has a Generic McEveryman issue in their modern titles. But it's not the fault of the avatars having assignable genders, it's just the way modern Fire Emblem is with it's attempt at mass appeal. The case in point is Alm, who despite being a character known as the conqueror is just as generic as any other Fire Emblem protagonist since Micaiah. You could give Alm a gender swap option with no trouble (Celica I feel doesn't fall into this everyman trap as much, but she comes with her own truck of problems). 

oh, im not just talking about plot point. but the whole characterization though. because when people talk about byleth its always about what they do in cutscenes. but while talking about non-lord supporting characters, its more often than not about how are they doing in support convo. see the differences?  and why do you think my suggestion to give dedicated/focusing on sole female lord clash with FE attempt at mass appeal? this should  still be in line with how IS want female demographic to be more engaged with Fire emblem.  we already have plenty male lord, this way we can even out the number. just like how they choose Lyn (or even Lucina) despite the other lord are more Lordy in game standpoint. uh oh did i dismiss Edelgard? tsk tsk. in the same game Edelgard appear, theres also 2 male lord thats also happen to be interesting.

sure plot point in FE are less dictated by character which seems it wont really matter , but im sure character dynamic could very well change greatly. if choosing alear gender also means changing route then i wont care about this matter at all. Alm being swapped to female mean we might not see faye being an annoyance tho. but Faye to (female) Alm could be like Mae was with Celica. or you could have a character that gets jealous because a female lord gets to inherit the kindom despite theres till male heir. Granted theres no real succession plot in FE since the family get killed usually, so we dont really see that. having fixed gender could actually matter both in plot point or support convo if they write them as non generic or even non-teenager. 

or should i say the free gender avatar is like someone who's too concious of others, so they try to blend too much to the people they talk with, their personality gets blurred

Edited September 23, 2022 by joevar

[Jotari]

2 hours ago, joevar said:

oh, im not just talking about plot point. but the whole characterization though. because when people talk about byleth its always about what they do in cutscenes. but while talking about non-lord supporting characters, its more often than not about how are they doing in support convo. see the differences?  and why do you think my suggestion to give dedicated/focusing on sole female lord clash with FE attempt at mass appeal? this should  still be in line with how IS want female demographic to be more engaged with Fire emblem.  we already have plenty male lord, this way we can even out the number. just like how they choose Lyn (or even Lucina) despite the other lord are more Lordy in game standpoint. uh oh did i dismiss Edelgard? tsk tsk. in the same game Edelgard appear, theres also 2 male lord thats also happen to be interesting.

sure plot point in FE are less dictated by character which seems it wont really matter , but im sure character dynamic could very well change greatly. if choosing alear gender also means changing route then i wont care about this matter at all. Alm being swapped to female mean we might not see faye being an annoyance tho. but Faye to (female) Alm could be like Mae was with Celica. or you could have a character that gets jealous because a female lord gets to inherit the kindom despite theres till male heir. Granted theres no real succession plot in FE since the family get killed usually, so we dont really see that. having fixed gender could actually matter both in plot point or support convo if they write them as non generic or even non-teenager. 

or should i say the free gender avatar is like someone who's too concious of others, so they try to blend too much to the people they talk with, their personality gets blurred

Oh I'm not objecting to the notion of a sole female lord. It's something that I've wanted for a long time too. Though more out of some sense of OCD than anything else. My main point was that the gender of a character does not restrict them in Fire Emblem. For the gender of a character to matter the story needs to be about gender and sexuality. Yes, most female characters are going to trend feminine and most male characters are going to trend masculine, but characters that trend the opposite way absolutely do exist. You could turn Ike into a woman and retain all the dialogue shifting out only pronouns and that will still be a functioning character. Will fem!Ike be as popular as male Ike, well that will probably depend a lot on the character design and peoples biases about gender (even with the avatars we see people very split on what design looks better, female Byleth seemed particularly polarizing back in the day with some people reviling the design yet a silent majority preferring it). Ike as a man is more traditional, but a non traditional character (like Marth is to some extent) is going to function just as much as a character. Likewise Faye could still exist with a gender swapped Alm. Again it'd be less traditional, but still more than possible (and not even unprecedented given the existence of Thraja and her Fates Clone). Sure, you could add gender and sexuality into the Fire Emblem  universe and have some kind of inheritance dispute plot, but that's really not something Fire Emblem has ever been interested in, even before it started doing Avatars. The setting has always been an unrealistically gender egalitarian medieval society. The only examples I can think of where gender actually plays directly into the character is Sully complaining about the (completely undemonstrated) sexism and, more pointedly Charlotte from Fates who feels the need to bury her true self and act more feminine to attract a sugar daddy (that's two out of the literal thousand Fire Emblem characters that exist). I guess maybe the Traps too, to some extent, but even that's more of a recurring joke than an actual exploration of gender and gender roles.

Edited September 23, 2022 by Jotari

[Yexin]

i'm not liking them as of now, but it's also true that, as far as characterization goes, we've seen little to nothing

i fear another "everyone loves and worships you" situation, and i don't know about anyone else, but i don't play videogames so that i can feel somewhat accomplished by seeing an in-game boring and generic representation of me as aplayer being continuously praised because apparently that's what people like to see; guess what, i am not "people"

this said, the apparent absence of S-rank supports kinda gives me hope in the fact that the worship factor won't be present at an unbearable level, and in the fact that there will be no child units as well

design-wise, i don't dislike Alear in official artworks, but their in-game models make me think they've yet to complete their hair texture

their battle animations look decently cool, at least

Edited September 23, 2022 by Yexin

[Ivy Wife Supremacy]

32 minutes ago, Yexin said:

the apparent absence of S-rank supports kinda gives me hope in the fact that the worship factor won't be present at an unbearable level, and in the fact that there will be no child units as well

Doubt S Supports won’t be included screenshots are of very early builds of the game plus there’s enough spaces for S heck for all we know that character could be the Alois/Gilbert character but don’t want to make that misleading  mistake from Three Houses again. It’s very popular it ain’t getting axed for no reason they’d get heavy backlash also it’s probably for the ending anyway. Child units would make 0 sense as Emblem rings is the main mechanic here.

Edited September 23, 2022 by Mage Goddess Lysithea

[Jotari]

34 minutes ago, Mage Goddess Lysithea said:

Doubt S Supports won’t be included screenshots are of very early builds of the game plus there’s enough spaces for S heck for all we know that character could be the Alois/Gilbert character but don’t want to make that misleading  mistake from Three Houses again. It’s very popular it ain’t getting axed for no reason they’d get heavy backlash also it’s probably for the ending anyway. Child units would make 0 sense as Emblem rings is the main mechanic here.

Nah, they'll make it so you can S rank Sigurd to create Seliph.

[joevar]

46 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Oh I'm not objecting to the notion of a sole female lord. It's something that I've wanted for a long time too. Though more out of some sense of OCD than anything else. My main point was that the gender of a character does not restrict them in Fire Emblem. For the gender of a character to matter the story needs to be about gender and sexuality. Yes, most female characters are going to trend feminine and most male characters are going to trend masculine, but characters that trend the opposite way absolutely do exist. You could turn Ike into a woman and retain all the dialogue shifting out only pronouns and that will still be a functioning character. Will fem!Ike be as popular as male Ike, well that will probably depend a lot on the character design and peoples biases about gender (even with the avatars we see people very split on what design looks better, female Byleth seemed particularly polarizing back in the day with some people reviling the design yet a silent majority preferring it). Ike as a man is more traditional, but a non traditional character (like Marth is to some extent) is going to function just as much as a character. Likewise Faye could still exist with a gender swapped Alm. Again it'd be less traditional, but still more than possible (and not even unprecedented given the existence of Thraja and her Fates Clone). Sure, you could add gender and sexuality into the Fire Emblem  universe and have some kind of inheritance dispute plot, but that's really not something Fire Emblem has ever been interested in, even before it started doing Avatars. The setting has always been an unrealistically gender egalitarian medieval society. The only examples I can think of where gender actually plays directly into the character is Sully complaining about the (completely undemonstrated) sexism and, more pointedly Charlotte from Fates who feels the need to bury her true self and act more feminine to attract a sugar daddy (that's two out of the literal thousand Fire Emblem characters that exist).

Even  if a female Lord that naturally / pretend to act more masculine than the average Female char of their age, or a Male lord that act more feminine than the usual/expected were to happen, they could still get a reaction and become part of characterization that serve as discussion between in game char. not just a part of fan speculation / headcanon discussion. but you can literally see it in game. Let's see  a simple example how it could be part of the main plot but not support convo: a female lord act more masculine than expected and rise against the invader much to the joy of her retainer who's ready to fight even without their lord participating. this way they are glad despite the princess are left (insert dead family tradition in early game) the retainer wont run with their tails between their legs just to save the lord lineage, but actually confront the enemy. 

im actually didnt want to specify which form of action female and male will take in the og post because i already recognize that, and thats not the problem at all.

but you cant have any of that when the game treat the avatar/pov character with both option resulting in having perfect gender neutrality for them or rather feels like no gender at all. Hence why i said its almost as pointless as changing outfit into a bikini or speedo going into battle, since no one and nothing will react to that options. Ok, maybe there is after all: which is support character preference in pairing aka S support toward the POV char, but thats like pretty far down on the list of reasons why people praise or even hate in terms of characterization. 

[Jotari]

9 minutes ago, joevar said:

Even  if a female Lord that naturally / pretend to act more masculine than the average Female char of their age, or a Male lord that act more feminine than the usual/expected were to happen, they could still get a reaction and become part of characterization that serve as discussion between in game char. not just a part of fan speculation / headcanon discussion. but you can literally see it in game. Let's see  a simple example how it could be part of the main plot but not support convo: a female lord act more masculine than expected and rise against the invader much to the joy of her retainer who's ready to fight even without their lord participating. this way they are glad despite the princess are left (insert dead family tradition in early game) the retainer wont run with their tails between their legs just to save the lord lineage, but actually confront the enemy. 

im actually didnt want to specify which form of action female and male will take in the og post because i already recognize that, and thats not the problem at all.

but you cant have any of that when the game treat the avatar/pov character with both option resulting in having perfect gender neutrality for them or rather feels like no gender at all. Hence why i said its almost as pointless as changing outfit into a bikini or speedo going into battle, since no one and nothing will react to that options. Ok, maybe there is after all: which is support character preference in pairing aka S support toward the POV char, but thats like pretty far down on the list of reasons why people praise or even hate in terms of characterization. 

Again, I'm not saying you can't explore gender and sexuality in Fire Emblem. I'm saying that Fire Emblem hasn't done this. They've never even made a passing attempt with any of their main story lines. It has been several side characters in the single digits (and most of them from more recent years). In other words stories without a focus on a character's genitals have been the norm both before and after the advent of Avatars. This is not an "issue" (if you want to call it that) with Avatars, it's an issue with Fire Emblem. Likewise the Everyman protagonist is an issue with Fire Emblem, not with the Avatars (as I, at least personally, think Alm demonstrates, and honestly, to be frank, several Fire Emblem protagonists even before Awakening). As far as potential to explore sexuality, yeah, you could totally do that with Avatars too. Have different characters react in significantly different ways based on the gender of your avatar. Maybe even some alternate chapters as a result of major characters making different decisions. Are they going to do that? No, I highly doubt it. But likewise if they go back to a designated gender for protagonists, I doubt they're going to dive into a story about what it means to be a man or a woman in society.

Edited September 23, 2022 by Jotari

[Sidereal Wraith]

I find the design to be rather underwhelming. The hair is too gaudy and loud, while his/her clothing is rather bland. Overall I think Alear will be more or less remembered for the memes more then anything else.

[Taho]

5 hours ago, Jotari said:

As far as potential to explore sexuality, yeah, you could totally do that with Avatars too. Have different characters react in significantly different ways based on the gender of your avatar. Maybe even some alternate chapters as a result of major characters making different decisions. Are they going to do that? No, I highly doubt it. But likewise if they go back to a designated gender for protagonists, I doubt they're going to dive into a story about what it means to be a man or a woman in society.

My memory might be fuzzy but I seem to recall Chrom getting all flustered because he walked in on F!Robin in the bath on their C or B suport convo. I'm pretty sure the dialogue was different for M!Robin. That's an example of a projection of sexuality on an avatar character that - imo - kinda worked, and actually made me want to marry Chrom and Robin on my first playthrough, because I thought that interaction - even though very manga in nature -  was sweet.

As for Alear's design, well big surprise there, I really like the F!Alear design, but I'm hugely partial to extremely long hair, no matter what colour they are. I have more issues with Cramme and Framme's faces, which look super weird to me, with eyes the size of basketballs.

What I do want from Alear, though, and which I probably won't get, is for them to fail. I'd love to see them fall from grace, yet keep the support of their small band of fighters, so they can lead them into a form of exile, only to win their place back with their blood and sweat and tears, fighting their way through the bad guys who have taken over. Or something along those lines. Like Gallia's retreat in Radiant Dawn, and Daein stepping in to stop them. That was a great piece of narrative that really made you care for the plot and the characters.

Do you think there's a chance we might get that? Something a little darker than "I'm Toothpaste-dragon-chan, bow to my super powers" and then you defeat realm after realm, recruit the nice ones, take their emblems and challenge the evil-pruple-flame-dragon-sama? I'll try not to get my hopes up, but now that I've said it, I really want to see it on screen =P

[Sunwoo]

In all fairness @Jotari I can kind of see where @joevar is talking about when it comes to the avatar not having a set gender limiting their potential characterization. Because if everything about FE1 was kept the same except for Marth's gender, Marth wouldn't have been able to wield Falchion. The story could've really gone somewhere interesting with the struggles of a princess who wants to save her kingdom and seal away the dark dragon in a world where that is the job of a prince. Also, while Julia and Julius are not lords, it would be interesting to see how switching their genders might affect the story, seeing as how in Jugdral guys inherit before girls. Would a female Julius be given basically free reign over Grandvale like how a male one was? Likewise, would Greil have taught Ike the sword if he were female and Mist was male? What if both were female?

There are just so many minor details that a simple gender swap can do to make characters a little different based on whether they're male or female.

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, Sunwoo said:

In all fairness @Jotari I can kind of see where @joevar is talking about when it comes to the avatar not having a set gender limiting their potential characterization. Because if everything about FE1 was kept the same except for Marth's gender, Marth wouldn't have been able to wield Falchion. The story could've really gone somewhere interesting with the struggles of a princess who wants to save her kingdom and seal away the dark dragon in a world where that is the job of a prince. Also, while Julia and Julius are not lords, it would be interesting to see how switching their genders might affect the story, seeing as how in Jugdral guys inherit before girls. Would a female Julius be given basically free reign over Grandvale like how a male one was? Likewise, would Greil have taught Ike the sword if he were female and Mist was male? What if both were female?

There are just so many minor details that a simple gender swap can do to make characters a little different based on whether they're male or female.

Marth could still wield the Falchion if he were a girl. Lucina is clearly seen wielding the same weapon in later games and she's almost certainly a woman (as for Elice, I guess she just wasn't trying hard enpugh).

[Sunwoo]

23 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Marth could still wield the Falchion if he were a girl. Lucina is clearly seen wielding the same weapon in later games and she's almost certainly a woman (as for Elice, I guess she just wasn't trying hard enpugh).

Wasn't that a retcon though? I swear I remember something in one of the original games or the remakes saying that women couldn't wield Falchion in Archanea. EDIT: I'd be okay with a female Marth realizing that women can wield the Falchion if they were worthy just like any man though, and it was just a sexist mistaken belief that women were unable to use it.

Edited September 24, 2022 by Sunwoo

[Fire Emblem Fan]

21 hours ago, Jotari said:

They're not the first Fire Emblem character with heterochromia (hi Idunn and Ranulf, and apparently Peri).

I know. The more the merrier.

[Jotari]

50 minutes ago, Sunwoo said:

Wasn't that a retcon though? I swear I remember something in one of the original games or the remakes saying that women couldn't wield Falchion in Archanea. EDIT: I'd be okay with a female Marth realizing that women can wield the Falchion if they were worthy just like any man though, and it was just a sexist mistaken belief that women were unable to use it.

Nope. The closest thing to a claim like that is Malledus saying that Marth is the only one of Anri's bloodline and the only one that can wield Falchion. But even then, they had no idea whether Elice was alive or not and even if she were, she's clearly not a fighter. The only thing to suggest women can't wield Falchion is the fact that a class changed Elice in Shadow Dragon DS can't. The game itself never actually says she can't.

Now off or lore and onto narrative. Even if Marth had been a woman, she would have been wielding Falchion in the first game. Because when they set out to make Dark Dragon and the Sword of Light, they didn't set out to make a game about a person who couldn't wield their ancestral weapon due to arbitrary reasons. They set out to make a game about a hero slaying a dark dragon using a sword of light. Male or female, that would be the same for the game's story. As I've said several times now, it's not the variable gender of the Avatar that's stopping these kinds of plot, it's that a major exploration of gender has never been on the cards for Fire Emblem.

Now, as it happens, they in fact did later make a story about a character who can't use their ancestral weapons due to arbitrary reasons. It just wasn't arbitrary magical sexism, it wasn't the much more inconsistent mendelian genetics. I'm, of course, talking about Leif, who can't use any holy weapons. And that is something he legitimately feels inadequate about in Thracia. So even when it comes to stuff like that, gender isn't strictly necessary.

Edited September 24, 2022 by Jotari

[Acacia Sgt]

I'd say, both Alear look fine to me. Sure, still a bit early to fully tell on what their character will be, but I doubt I'd truly be disappointed with the end result. I've yet to be when it comes to FE, anyway.

1 hour ago, Sunwoo said:

Wasn't that a retcon though? I swear I remember something in one of the original games or the remakes saying that women couldn't wield Falchion in Archanea. EDIT: I'd be okay with a female Marth realizing that women can wield the Falchion if they were worthy just like any man though, and it was just a sexist mistaken belief that women were unable to use it.

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

Nope. The closest thing to a claim like that is Malledus saying that Marth is the only one of Anri's bloodline and the only one that can wield Falchion. But even then, they had no idea whether Elice was alive or not and even if she were, she's clearly not a fighter. The only thing to suggest women can't wield Falchion is the fact that a class changed Elice in Shadow Dragon DS can't. The game itself never actually says she can't.

Now off or lore and onto narrative. Even if Marth had been a woman, she would have been wielding Falchion in the first game. Because when they set out to make Dark Dragon and the Sword of Light, they didn't set out to make a game about a person who couldn't wield their ancestral weapon due to arbitrary reasons. They set out to make a game about a hero slaying a dark dragon using a sword of light. Male or female, that would be the same for the game's story. As I've said several times now, it's not the variable gender of the Avatar that's stopping these kinds of plot, it's that a major exploration of gender has never been on the cards for Fire Emblem.

Now, as it happens, they in fact did later make a story about a character who can't use their ancestral weapons due to arbitrary reasons. It just wasn't arbitrary magical sexism, it wasn't the much more inconsistent mendelian genetics. I'm, of course, talking about Leif, who can't use any holy weapons. And that is something he legitimately feels inadequate about in Thracia. So even when it comes to stuff like that, gender isn't strictly necessary.

Actually, this is what it is said, in SD's Prologue II:

Elice:
If something befalls Father, Marth will become the last person in the entire world worthy of wielding the Falchion.

It's similar to the Japanese script:
"If something should happen to his father, Mars is the only male member of the Alithia royal family. He will be the world's only heir to the sacred sword, Pharcyon." (Translated with DeepL)

Which is... odd to say the least. Then again, they did ensure every princess could use Aum when reclassed, so Elice still not being able to use Falchion must've been deliberate, then.

2 hours ago, Jotari said:

Marth could still wield the Falchion if he were a girl. Lucina is clearly seen wielding the same weapon in later games and she's almost certainly a woman (as for Elice, I guess she just wasn't trying hard enpugh).

Considering Falchion was broken, reforged, and re-blessed, it's clear that the conditions to wield Falchion changed during the two thousand year gap between Marth and Chrom's times.

Edited September 24, 2022 by Acacia Sgt