Is Nohr too evil (and is Hoshido too good)?

[Zachmac]

When I heard that you could pick either side of the war in this game, I was pretty excited. In the last game, Awakening, we fought against Plegia was a desert country ruled by a mad king and who's primary religion is basically a bunch of psychopathic demon worshipers. Even the two characters who you could recruit from Plegia, Henry and Tharja, were both pretty messed up in their own special ways. I figured that even if the Hoshido route made it a typical fight of good vs evil, the Nohrian route would of had a lot more focus on grey morality.

From my understanding now, however, the only "grey" morality in the Nohr route was if loyalty to your adoptive siblings was really worth invading Hoshido over. I haven't spoiled much for myself, but it sounds like that everyone on both side agrees that Nohr is basically the bad guy here.

There's the characters as well. When I played Sacred Stones, I loved how not one of the 5 characters you could recruit from Grado were bad people. While there are several good people in Nohr(like Arthur), a good chunk of them are still pretty messed up anyway. There's Zero, who's sadistic. There's Belka, who'll kill anyone for money. And then, worst of all, there's Pieri, who kills innocents for fun(and then they say "oh but it's okay she's a good person she just doesn't know any better").

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe they did try to justify Hoshido's invasion a little. I really hope so, but after hearing people's impressions of the game's plot, that really doesn't seem to be the case. Do they even try to provide any justification for the war other then "Because Garon says so"?

Edited August 17, 2015 by Zachmac

[Twylis]

​Nohr's portrayed as pretty unambiguously evil, but it's almost entirely Garon's fault (without involving spoilers). The Nohrian allies are portrayed more as victims of terrible circumstances than they are evil - they all have justifications for their actions, and typically come off as a bit deeper in terms of characterisation than their Hoshidan counterparts because of it. Belka and Pieri happen to be two of my favourite Fates characters, despite my overall Hoshido preference.

​The grey morality in Nohr is indeed very poorly executed, though. It's more just the avatar deciding to take a very roundabout approach to fixing everything that involves a lot of senseless deaths and ultimately warrants the question of why a more pragmatic, immediate-murder approach wasn't taken.

[Phantom037]

Are the country and leader presented as irredeemably evil? absolutely

Are the regular people and recuitable characters evil? not really...

This is less of a case of white vs black morality and more white vs really dark gray. The Nohrian characters are definitely shiftier on the surface, but most of their "quirks" stem from the country being so dirt poor. It would be great if they expanded upon this during the main story, but oh well.

[Alazen]

I suggest including a spoiler warning.

​Nohr's portrayed as pretty unambiguously evil, but it's almost entirely Garon's fault (without involving spoilers).

That doesn't address the issue at all.

Nohr's ruler being portrayed so dastardly in contrast to Hoshido's is already dubious. Revealing that Nohr has been ruled over by a slimeman goes past the edge. The actual Garon is underexplored, we know little of his views and policies.

This is less of a case of white vs black morality and more white vs really dark gray. The Nohrian characters are definitely shiftier on the surface, but most of their "quirks" stem from the country being so dirt poor. It would be great if they expanded upon this during the main story, but oh well.

What warrants having either of the kingdoms as "white"? Also, being less poor than your enemy nation doesn't prevent you from having social ills, be they serious infighting, or forces committing war crimes. Edited August 17, 2015 by Alazen

[DIO]

Nohr's actual portrayal reminds me of how the Fire Nation was treated in the orignal Avatar: TLA series; it's royal leader was flat-out evil compared to the misguided or just plain downtrodden common folk...Then again, Nohr loses points for how Garon

Isn't 'really' in control of his own actions anymore.

And then Hoshido, where the most ambiguous thing (I've heard) is

something about a brainwashing barrier?

So yeah; Nohr's too cartoonishly evil, Hoshido's too cartoonishly good.

[mimasho]

Yeaaah I just spoiled the Nohr storyline for myself by reading the entire summary before actually playing it...

and now all I want to do is stay far far away from it.

imo, they make Nohr seem so ridiculously evil that it feels wrong to even join their side in the first place.

(not that all characters are bad, it's just that even if you play as a Nohrian, you have conflicts within your own nation that almost seem to overshadow the actual Hoshido vs. Nohr thing. It's more like potentially good parts of Nohr we still have a conscience vs. evil bad Nohr kill destroy everything)

[Sunwoo]

Methinks that Nohr just suffered from crappy writing in general. Are Hoshido and Nohr portrayed as too good and too evil, respectively? Probably, yeah … but I think that's more of a side effect of poor writing than anything else. It kind of feels like they had no idea what to do or where to go with Nohr. I don't think it's so much that Nohr is evil, but the storyline that was picked for the Nohr path kind of requires everyone (and I mean EVERYONE) to be stupid or "OOC" or both.

Imagine a hypothetical Nohr path where Nohr crushed Hoshido early, no earlier than chapter 10 but no later than 15, and it was Garon's actions towards a defeated Hoshido that actually started the revolution because his own people and even his own kids were disgusted by his actions. That might've been a better story, and would not have required a certain cheap cop-out reveal. You guys know which one I'm talking about.

[Great Geargia Gateway]

(Oh hey, you did make a thread :D)

Nohr's story is so bad, said by many that played, and it isn't what we expected when we first heard about it. Instead, we got a pretty bad plot and Aqua planning random crap whilst you do it. Either way, no matter path you play, you're playing the good guy in a bitter sweet complete story game.

[blah the Prussian]

I don't know if Nohr would be unrealistically evil. I mean, Nazi Germany if it was in an FE game would be called unrealistically evil.

[nordopolica]

On one hand, yes, absolutely.

However if this were a normal Fire Emblem game I wouldn't really be bothered by it, I don't think. If consumers only had the choice of buying one FE game that offered no choice and went down a linear story path like prior games, Nohr would fit in really well with the other evil countries with a few great sympathetic characters. The problem is that you can literally pay $40 for this game and it seems like an afterthought. Hell, it even exerts an enormous amount of effort in making sure you know you made the wrong choice - your character is always saying as such, after all.

If you side with them, maybe Kamui shouldn't have been such a little dweeb about it and should have been characterised to be the type of person who doesn't mind conquering a foreign land for glory, or maybe they should've made the emotional connection with their "father" (the unspeakably evil Garon) a little more sympathetic.

They did a lot of things wrong and it sucks because the premise was just so good.

And even through all that, I prefer Nohr for its characters and gameplay, which reinforces just how much wasted potential that path had.

[Alazen]

I don't know if Nohr would be unrealistically evil. I mean, Nazi Germany if it was in an FE game would be called unrealistically evil.

Except the issue isn't that Nohr is "evil", it's that the kingdom is portrayed as dastardly whereas Hoshido is sunny while doing nothing wrong (or what it does wrong is underexplored). The alliance that took on the Axis had opportunists, empires and hegemons. There was an island with the largest colonial empire of its time (Great Britain), A paranoid police state (USSR), and a continental power which enforced a segregation policy focused on race and would later take advantage of WW2's devastation to reach across the world (USA).

On one hand, yes, absolutely.

However if this were a normal Fire Emblem game I wouldn't really be bothered by it, I don't think. If consumers only had the choice of buying one FE game that offered no choice and went down a linear story path like prior games, Nohr would fit in really well with the other evil countries with a few great sympathetic characters.

Past FEs did better when it comes "greying" two or more nations in a war.

Edited August 17, 2015 by Alazen

[Thane]

Nohr's actual portrayal reminds me of how the Fire Nation was treated in the orignal Avatar: TLA series; it's royal leader was flat-out evil compared to the misguided or just plain downtrodden common folk...

Yet even though it's a kids show, it has far, far more complexity and depth than Fire Emblem Fates could ever even pretend to have. You actually get to see the everyday life of the Fire Nation, how Zuko suffers from having a batshit insane father and sister and most importantly, you get to see villains from the other two living nations - hell, even in a flashback they show us Air Nation monks arguing and being overly strict which, while that's not villain material, shows the viewer that being a monk there wasn't like living in a Mary Suetopia. It also shows us rebels from the Fire Nation, and unlike in Fates, it actually affects the story - Aang prematurely wants to learn firebending, fails hard, and is scared to do it afterwards, giving the protagonist yet another obstacle to overcome mentally.

It also helps that the Fire Lord's actions are always his own, rather than being the subject of a ridiculous cop-out.

[nordopolica]

Past FEs did better when it comes "greying" two or more nations in a war.

This is part of Fates' problem, I feel. There really are only two nations that matter, and even they aren't explored in any particular depth other than "this one is evil, this one is good." The war is shallow and the reasons are not explored adequately, and the lesser principalities that could contribute to world-building are portrayed as one-chapter throwaways, again as either bad or good.

I would mention Awakening's black-and-white morality, but it's pretty much universally considered bad, so I'll refrain.

7 was good at muddying up Lycia from being perfect, what with the marquess of Laus and Ostia's past. The Black Fang had the Reeds (that Lloyd will not attack Nino is a perfect example and a personal favourite) and the Morphs were interesting. Garon, Ganz and Macbeth are not.

Still, I think that Nohr wouldn't have been as widely criticised if it were simply an enemy faction similar to Bern or Grado or Daein or Plegia or what have you, from which you could recruit allies.

It has the same Fire Emblem-style

"king possessed by evil god"

thing going on, morally grey characters (Nohr siblings) as well as those conflicted in their loyalties (Marx) but also some willing to defect.

[blah the Prussian]

Except the issue isn't that Nohr is "evil", it's that the kingdom is portrayed as dastardly whereas Hoshido is sunny while doing nothing wrong (or what it does wrong is underexplored). The alliance that took on the Axis had opportunists, empires and hegemons. There was an island with the largest colonial empire of its time (Great Britain), A paranoid police state (USSR), and a continental power which enforced a segregation policy focused on race and would later take advantage of WW2's devastation to reach across the world (USA).

Past FEs did better when it comes "greying" two or more nations in a war.

True. I definitely think Hoshido is unrealistically good. A purely evil opponent, however, is not a bad thing so long as you execute it realistically (like, for example, the Jacobins in the alternate history Look to the West)

[Alazen]

Maybe we should have seen the Hoshido bias coming when it was revealed that Nohr's shtick would be that it has to be "reformed".

Edited August 17, 2015 by Alazen

[FrostyFireMage]

It kind of makes sense for Nohr to be morally questionable and Hoshido to be mostly good.

Think about it: Nohr is shown to be kind of a shithole - people would probably have to backstab and tread over their fellows in order to survive. Whereas Hoshido seems to be blessed with bountiful resources - people have less reason to resort to immoral actions.

It wouldn't really make sense for both countries to have the same amount of virtuous/depraved people.

[Alazen]

Except that's not how assorted conflicts have gone in this world or multiple past FEs. Zofia from Gaiden in particular should be noted for how not only it splits during a civil war between Alm's army and the forces of Dozer (usurper who wiped out most of Zofia's royal family), but it's pointed out how the kingdom fell into corruption thanks to its prosperity (or Mila's babying).

Edited August 22, 2015 by Alazen

[FrostyFireMage]

Except Rigel isn't depicted as a hive of lowlives and cutthroats and the polar opposite of Sofia in terms of social stability.

I wouldn't be surprised if the localizing team took the whole 'well-written story' claim to heart and took pains to edit the narrative so that blatant story-line problems are changed or removed.

It wouldn't be the first time they made changes to the gameplay/story.

[Alazen]

Both Zofia and Rigel were led astray. Mycen and Duma tell Alm that. Zofia was green and corrupt, Rigel was strong and brutal. The narrative didn't paint either kingdom as sunny while doing nothing wrong.

That is ''greying'' a conflict. Fates manages to do worse job at that than a video game on the NES.

Also, Hoshido's leadership is portrayed in a noticeably more sunny manner than Nohr's. Fake Garon, Ganz, and Macbeth are all baby eaters, Marx is a lackey, and the actual Garon is underexplored.

By the way, look up Imperial Japan's activities in WW2 and say that being less poor than your enemy (that is, assorted targets for Japanese expansion) should make you the ''white'' side.

Edited August 17, 2015 by Alazen

[blah the Prussian]

Actually, one of the reasons that Japan went to war was that it wasn't all that rich. It was resource starved and surrounded by places that weren't. A better example would be Belgium and the Congo.

[Emperor Hardin]

Short answer to the topic title, yes.

[Phantom037]

What warrants having either of the kingdoms as "white"? Also, being less poor than your enemy nation doesn't prevent you from having social ills, be they serious infighting, or forces committing war crimes.

You kinda just answered your own question. Hoshido (at least as far as I know) doesn't struggle with any of those problems in the main story. It's always presented as the morally superior option, and even characters like Oboro who are stated to hate Nohr never have it shown as a particularly bad thing. The closest thing to infighting I've seen is Takumi not liking the avatar too much, and I haven't heard anything about any war crimes.

[Emperor Hardin]

Even Hoshidan bosses like Kumagera, who wears human skulls, aren't portrayed as evil. He's shown giving the Nohrian forces plenty of chances to leave the battle, and he only wants to kill Garon.

The Nohrian bosses such as Daniela, who boasts about giving you a long, and gruesome death, just seem to be evil.

[Alazen]

Actually, one of the reasons that Japan went to war was that it wasn't all that rich. It was resource starved and surrounded by places that weren't. A better example would be Belgium and the Congo.

Japan's GDP per capita was higher was higher than China, Taiwan, and Korea's by 1935.

[Thane]

I'm afraid comparing the story to real life examples is a futile endeavor, seeing as Garon essentially invades Hoshido "for teh lulz" more than anything else - not even the Nohr siblings mention a lack of resources justifying an invasion; it's simply not a motive that's part of the story. It could've made the war more gray, but that aspect is non-existent.

Hell, Ryouma even says he'll donate a bunch of food in Birthright, meaning that if there was a genuine motive behind Garon's actions, it could've been solved with some diplomacy, apparently.