Jump to content

The mysterious goth looking woman from the Fire Emblem Awakening.


King Marth 64
 Share

  

45 members have voted

  1. 1. How do you think this woman might be?

    • I think she might be a Recruitable Player
    • I think she might be a Recruited Enemy
    • I think she might be an Unrecruited Boss Enemy
    • I think she might be an Unrecruited Ally


Recommended Posts

The problem with names like Shaman and Druid is that they imply the art they practice is occult and mysterious (particularly Shaman) whereas Mages explain several times that magic in FE is an established and well understood art: Canas and Pelleas are scholarly bookworms not spiritual mediums or priests.

Also, class names are for the player as a way of identifying and characterising the class and all the people who occupy it, so what the names Shaman and Druid imply to us is different to what the characters tell us. I've though for a while that Warlock and Sorcerer fit and describe dark magic users better because the connotations we take from them agrees with what we know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It was in neither remake or PoR, and had a very small showing (both from a recruitable and enemy perspective) in FERD.

It was in FE11/12, just not as a separate magic type, exactly like the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that their ranks are Tome A and Tome C, rather than Dark anything or Light anything so they don't count.

In other words, they weren't separate magic types, but rather all magic rolled up into one type, just like in the original games. "Dark" spells were still present, just like how "Fire" spells were still present when FE6 condensed the elemental magic. The difference here is, because FE11 and FE12 are remakes and using the classifications of FE1 and FE3, it's obvious that it was never intended to be a lasting change, but rather a temporary reversion to the old system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're not seperate weapons types so they don't REALLY exist in those games, much like how Hammers are not a distinct weapon type in any of the game where the Hammer appears. And Fire (along with Thunder and Wind) doesn't exist in FE6 (and 7/8) because it (and the other two) were replaced by "Anima", "Fire" as a weapon type only exists in the Jugdral and Tellius games.

And being a temporary change is irrelevant to this argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, you can argue that Fire, Thunder, and Wind don't exist in the GBA games... but how are you actually going to accept that, knowing quite well that despite being lumped into Anima, they're still made to be distinct?

FE11/12 still have a few exclusively Dark magics, including Worm. They're obviously meant to be for Dark magic users. Just because the system castrates individual recognition doesn't mean there's no individuality in weapon types. Meshing all three weapon types into a single 'Weapon' category won't suddenly make the differences between the three non-existent.

It's not called whatever-Magic, but it still is.

Edited by Celice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's not a seperate weapon type, then it doesn't really exist.

Are you saying Iron and Steel weapons don't exist now? There are about eight weapons per FE game that beg to differ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so FE4 and FE10 have such classes. FE5 and FE9 do not. Sounds like it doesn't make much of a difference.

And you're still not answering my question. The way Thunder magic existed in those games was not in the way Swords exist in every game; there is no dispute as to that. All I am saying is that there are other forms in which a group of equipment can exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Groups of equipment" =/= "Actual weapon types" and I'm only talking about the latter.

And it still has a rank of its own in FE5 and FE10.

Problem is, the rest of us are not only talking about the weapon types as explicitly defined by the game, and yet you persistently ignore that fact. All I and others are trying to say is that dark/thunder/whatever magic exists in some form as some group of equipment, not necessarily a group explicitly defined by the game as a weapon type.

Of course Thunder magic has a rank of its own in FE5/9; that's exactly my point: Classes being named after the group of equipment isn't actually relevant. Just as there is no need for Iron/Steel Fighters or an Iron/Steel weapon rank for Iron/Steel to exist as clear groups of equipment, there is no need for Dark/Thunder Mages or a Dark/Thunder rank for Dark/Thunder to exist as clear groups of equipment

Edited by Othin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if Dark Magic isn't its own weapon type then it doesn't exist period.

Is somehow not the same as

if Steel Sword isn't its own weapon type then it doesn't exist period.

:huh:

I'd really like to see how you come to these differing opinions about the same qualitative issue.

What weapon types exist in the original FE1, according to you, then? That might shine some light on how you get to these views.

Edited by Celice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...