Red Lilies

Opinion went up: Sakura: I thought she’d be really meek and annoying, but in the end she really upholds the “quiet strength” idea. She feels like a character who faces her fears and overcomes, not to mention she clearly thinks a lot about the people she spends time with and is very loyal. Scarlet: A previously “meh” character who really shined the story and in her supports with F!Corrin. Pity she only gets two supports and M!Corrin is a poor one. Kagero: Least favorite ninja when she was announced due to design, the character supports really made her shine. She is thoughtful, well rounded and my fav ninja hands down. Her friendship with Orochi probably sealed the deal for me, but overall her loyalty, caring and beastly stats she had in all my runs makes her one of my favorite characters overall. Leo: Tbh, I didn’t have much of an opinion on him one way or another before playing the game, but I really ended up liking him as he more or less treats Corrin as an adult (unlike other siblings) and takes time to explain things to them. I also feel he struggles to relate to people but still tries too in his supports, often gives second chances (which suggests to me he’s actually an idealist despite being “pragmatic”. Maybe he’s an optimistic realist? Cautious idealist? Hmm…), and his growth with Forest helped me like him too (though typically I’m not a fan of any of the kids). Opinion went down: Keaton: At this point my dislike for him is high enough I don’t even remember what I was excited about for him. The trash gimmick comes up way too often to the point I don’t remember anything else about his character. Except that he thinks Peiri kill animals is wrong, but they both should kill more humans. Xander: Ugh. Was so excited for Xander’s character, both through his description and design. Instead, got an idiot who actively buries his head in the sand while blathering on about “how can anything be fair in this unfair world” as he proceeds to be unable to consider anyone other than his father at any time. I could write an essay on the frustration I have for how Xander was written. Ugh. Azura: Really disappointed on how she was handled. She basically exists a part Deus ex machine and part exposition dump. Honestly the whole “too mysterious to tell and oooh seeeecrets” aspect of her personality throughout Conquest and Birthright made me really hope she’d secretly turn out a villain. And thus she turned out really disappointing to me when she wasn’t the true villain and manipulator of the series. At least then her character and odd inability to affect things while somehow knowing everything would have been justified. :/

This looks like something that comes down to opinion so it is unlikely to be settled. I say when you are physically unable to fight, you are out of commission. Your potential to become a combatant down the line feels irrelevant to the current inability present. You're saying regardless of ability to fight, if you have ever fought and may fight again you're a combatant. I'm saying that out right killing someone unable to fight and just standing by when you could save them are the same thing. You're saying it's wrong to actively kill an out of commission solider but alright to stand by and let them die. I think we're unlikely to come to an agreement here, since we seem to be arguing about opinions and takes on a definition. As to the moral part, considering I was arguing the action was immoral in my original post, it's relevant to the discussion but I understand if you are not looking to discuss that part and only looking to clarify what I meant by non-combatant. Hopefully I've made that clearer now. Agree to disagree then?

I was arguing that it was morally questionable. I used the GC and the long history of people having rules of warfare to say that people, in general, have lines they feel shouldn't be crossed even in times of war. And that it is fair for some people to feel that Ryoma's choice here was morally questionable. I did address what I feel about Elise being an enemy combatant. I'll reiterate here though. I feel if someone is unable to fight they no longer are an enemy combatant.

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic here. GC was in the Victorian Era, but there is a long history in the world of rules that people followed during war time. For example, General George Washington, head of the Continental Army, adopted a series of policies regarding the care and treatment of prisoners of war. Those policies included a prohibition against the denial of quarter -- that is, a prohibition on refusing to take captured enemy soldiers as prisoners. There are whole books on the history of war and laws about what was considered ok, and many date back past the Middle Ages. GC is only one of the most recent

Ok, thanks for the personal attack to start. Heaven forbid I look towards a system of long held, historical rules that set a precedence for humans to have a certain set of either written or unwritten rules of what is considered inhumane and humane in warfare. I was not, as I stated, saying our real life rules apply in a fictional setting. But we often use fictional setting to explore real life issues such as morals and inhumane or humane actions. So I do believe it is completely fine for me to say that “several centuries of military practice suggest that the universal belief that we should hold certain humanitarian standards in war support the likelihood that there were standards in Nohr and Hoshido as well. And history also shows leaders willing to do anything to win generally find those wins short-lived. We are 150 years (6 generations) into the Geneva conventions, and we humans keep adding to them. So I think they do speak to a very human conviction that might doesn't make right.” This is me stating that morals do exist in game because the game is an exploration of humans. And yes, as an exploration of humans I do feel I can look at a character had and have a reaction to their behavior and a judgement on whether I think it’s a moral one and consistent with what has previously been presented as a “good” aligned character. This has nothing to do with my age. It has everything to do with me looking at this from a story moment. What are they trying to say about Ryoma? What does his actions make the player feel? Can we consider it inhumane? Is it fair for some players to feel he went to fair? Is it fair for some players to feel it was the right choice? (The answer to both these last two is yes, imo. Which is what my argument was actually about. That it is fair to judge a “good” aligned character on actions that feel immoral.) I find putting your own men in danger for a personal motivation is behaving in an emotional manor that is not ok. As a leader your concerns should be immediate threats and the men under you. Hunting down a potential future threat while ignoring current ones, forcing a fight that was avoidable is doing this and thus I think it was poor decision making. He's actions don't feel logical. I was saying we can’t justify immoral actions in the moment in based on what has yet to happen. But people so far have argued pretty compellingly why Ryoma might not want to be addressing a goodwill or treatment of enemy standards. I will still state that I feel his actions were immoral and it is fair for people to feel his actions were immoral, pragmatic notwithstanding. Considering Corrin has yet to do much of a murderous rampage? So far in the story Corrin has dealt with uprisings (which narratively stated didn’t involve casualties), held out against Takumi until they could retreat, and took one fortress. The last shows some initiative. But Corrin hasn’t done much wreaking havoc yet narratively. And an actively attacking army does feel more pressing than a small band of men who have yet to take much part in the war. I feel it isn’t an open and shut case. I seemed to have misstepped with the bring up of the real life treaties because a lot of people seem to be focused on them when I wasn’t trying to use them as “Clearly the game is following this” but more of “several centuries of military practice suggest that the universal belief that we should hold certain humanitarian standards in war support give precedence for people to feel upset by a character who is generally portrayed as “good” to fail to show it.” And history also shows leaders willing to do anything to win generally find those wins short-lived. We are 150 years (6 generations) into the Geneva conventions, and we humans keep adding to them. So I think they do speak to a very human conviction that might doesn't make right. People feel strongly about this because they do feel the actions are immoral. I have budged. I admitted last post that I hadn’t considered the fact that Rinka would have been considered Royal. I still haven’t budged on the logic of Ryoma being at the castle in the first place because I feel there is still a lack of a good or compelling reason why Ryoma was there, placing his men’s in danger all for a personal vendetta. Since I also haven’t seen much compelling reason as to why Corrin is currently such a threat. My argument was that people do have a precedent for feeling that Ryoma acted immorally. And that yes, it does reflect on him as a character and it’s fair for people to want to address this. It’s also fair to argue that, as I believe you are, the pragmatic win Ryoma would have gotten out weight the potential immoralities of his actions. But given he had to make several questionable decisions to even be in the place to allowing Elise to die (crossing enemy territory with an army, leaving the front to do so, holding castle with little to know strategic value, forcing a fight to get what he wanted – a personal desire over a tactical one), the sudden pragmatic view he has just regarding Elise also feels forced and like poor writing.

Corrin(m) vs Corrin(f) (avatar)—Corrin (F) get the better hair so gets my vote. Kana(m) vs Kana(f) (avatar child) – Kana (f) because then I can make her marry Forrest and have fashion son. Felicia vs Jakob vs Flora (maid/butler) – Felicia in terms of gameplay, Flora as personality as she stands up for what she believes is right at the cost of her friends in her mind. Silas vs Sophie vs Xander vs Gunter vs Seigbert vs Peri (cavalier/great knight) – I like Silas best, but then I’m a sucker for best childhood friends being reunited. Hinoka vs Shigure vs Caeldori vs Subaki vs Reina (pegasus/kinshii) – Subaki. I mean, he is perfect. Takumi vs Kiragi vs Setsuna (archer) – Takumi and Setsuna are both beast archers, but I like Setsuna’s design better and her airheadness somehow doesn’t get on my nerves Niles vs Nina vs Shura (outlaw) – Nina for best design, Niles for best all around guy. Forrest vs Elise vs Dwyver (trabadour) – As much as I’d like to say Elise for her total usefulness in game, Forrest and his fashion win hands down and for being proud and confident in his hobbies. Sakura vs Mitama vs Azama (cleric) – Sakura, hands down. Fab healer and great once she get a forged bow. I also like how she struggles with her failings and works to improve. Saizo vs Kagero vs Kaze vs Asugi (ninja) – Kaze for being always there for the player. My only ninja in every playthrough. Plus he can get Xander ninja. Also has great friendship with Silas imo. Midori vs Mozu vs Yukimura vs Azura (etc group) – Midori. I like her class and her dedication to healing Fuga vs Ryoma vs Hinata vs Hana vs Hisame (swordmasters) – Hinata as I could actually probably be friends with him. Rhajat vs Hayato vs Orochi vs Izana (mages) – Orochi. Trolls ftw. Odin vs Nyx vs Ophelia (dark mages) – Odin. Awakening bias shines through. Arthur vs Charlotte vs Rinkah (axe users) – Charlotte for never getting blood on her white outfit. That takes talent. For being an interesting take on a character and what they’ll do to alter themselves to provide for others. Percy vs Beruka vs Camilla vs Scarlet (wyverns) – Scarlet. Freckles ftw. Oboro vs Shiro (lancers) – Oboro. I’ve never used Shiro…. Effie vs Benny vs Ignatius (knights) – Effie is my favorite. She is not the smartest but is hardworking and dedicated and this speaks to me. Soliel vs Lazlow vs Selena (mercenaries) – Lazlow because frankly I’d have put Selena under knightfliers. Kaden vs Selkie vs Veloruia vs Keaton (shifters) – I kinda dislike all of them? I guess Kaden because he’s done the best in RNG and been a fab unit in all my playthroughs.

You articulated my point better than I have, so yes this is a lot of what I was getting at, along with I'm still confused to as why Ryoma thought it was ok to march so far into enemy territory with his men on the word of an enemy and then be trigger happy. I have a problem from a moral stand point (aka I didn't think it in line with a good character for Ryoma to act the way he did, though I can also see it from a pragmatic stand point) and I have a problem from a tactical standpoint of what he was doing there in the first place and endangering his men for a personal vendetta while an invasion of his land was going on. So I think it's fair to be frustrated by his actions, but don't expect everyone to feel the same way (especially on the moral front)

1)But the offer wasn’t made. So we can’t say what Corrin would have said. Corrin isn’t surrendering at this point because the Rainbow Sage has told them they must follow the path in order to bring peace. But that doesn’t mean Corrin needs to let Elise die – I will argue that surrendering her to the enemy is actually a good move for Corrin because it secures Elise’s health and safety, lets Corrin continue on their path and shows Ryoma that Corrin is willing to talk over fighting. 2)He has no obligation to negotiate. I agree. But that brings me back to my point of what was he doing there in the first place? And that I judge his actions in going to Macarath as irrational and endangering his men for personal needs. Which is not a good mark in a leader. I’ll clarify. If the goal was to take Corrin out, why not ambush? This makes me believe that taking Corrin out wasn’t the actual objective. Further Ryoma literally states when Corrin refuses to come with him that Ryoma will force it. “The sting of my blade will return you to your senses! You’re coming home today!” It is emotional. It is about taking Corrin back. Ryoma’s goal was to capture Corrin and he did not consider any other options nor acted in a rational manner. Macarath is super far into enemy territory. Ryoma is traveling there on the word of an enemy because his sibling is going to be there, yet can’t spend more than thirty seconds talking to them? And so yes, he’s acting irrationally, not pragmatically and I do think that we can critizice him for that without everyone saying the only reason the scene and behavior bothered people was because “Poor little cute Elise was in danger!”. I do call Marx out. I’ll happily list all the annoying things all the royals do over the course of the game. The fact I’m arguing that Ryoma made bad decisions here is a fact that is completely separate from this. Or perhaps that is slightly wrong, the fact I am calling Ryoma out is because he’s the one who gets his actions defended. So I wanted to lay out what I believed the argument to be an see what people had to say. I can’t claim I wasn’t “picking a fight” since technically I am trying to have a discussion with opposing viewpoints and I did ask for it. But I wasn’t looking for a potshot taking squabble, which some responders have given me. I was and am looking to have points addressed, and am happy to be convinced otherwise on my current standing. I have simply felt that up to this point the arguments calling Ryoma out have been poorly stated and often lacked that parts that I personally believed held most weight (the impractical part of marching across the country to fight an enemy general on intel he receives from a questionable source as opposed to dealing with the more obvious threats at the border) --this seems contradictory. Please explain more clearly. Fair And Ryoma was happy to believe the tip off. And cross miles of enemy territory leaving the front to do so. Macarthe is very deep in Nohr. Corrin is not part of the main army nor fighting on the front lines, yet Ryoma chose to go after him. On enemy intel. It feels contrived. Because handing Elise over would have secured her treatment? Ryoma has no reason to believe Corrin wouldn’t hand over the Yato. He if had asked, or you know, talked to Corrin at all other than offering the ultimatum, things might have been different. Maybe Corrin would have explained things and what the Rainbow Sage told them. Maybe not. We’ll never know because Ryoma was being trigger happy. If you’re going to argue that Ryoma was confident enough he knew he could just fight his way back to Hoshido rather than secure safe passage for his men, why isn’t he confident enough to talk to Corrin for any length of time – especially when Corrin wants to talk? Perhaps because he’s trigger happy? This is arguing plot over personal motivations, so I doubt we’ll agree. I’d argue the invasion would have continued and Ryoma wouldn’t have gained anything but creating a martyr by taking Corrin or letting Elise die. I was actually arguing that Ryoma should treat the enemy how he hopes his family would be treated if they were taken prisoner. So far, Corrin has made it clear they’ll fight for Hoshido prisoners and keep them alive. However, letting Elise die is setting Ryoma up to creating a Corrin who might let Hoshido sisters die in revenge. Or it creates a martyr and Nohr fights harder due to the loss of the princess, bolstering a previously lack-luster army that wasn’t super invested in the fight. We don’t know. 1)I never said surrender yourself, but surrender your sister 2)Yes but Ryoma doesn’t know that. I’d be very interested in that exchange. Hoshido clearly believes in Yato’s power, yet Ryoma doesn’t even want to take the time to discuss what Corrin’s goals and motivations are? Seems to me this would have fixed a lot of problems, and Corrin was trying to do that here but Ryoma was very trigger happy and pressed the fight. 3)Ok, but the motivations behind Ryoma is what I’m addressing, not the need for a non ambush map. Once we bring game mechanics into this it no longer becomes a discussion on character actions and whether or not people should feel the character acted poorly. I’m happy to leave it at bad writing though, if you are. 4)But why was he in enemy territory? Because he came to see Corrin and force them to return with them. At the risk of his own men. In favor of leaving the active fighting at the border. His actions are personal from where I stand and his choice to use Elise to further it is just one of the many things I feel he was doing wrong at the scene. He just is a bad leader in this scene and suddenly becoming “pragmatic” once he’s made decisions which are not pragmatic feels forced. 5)I am arguing his presence there in the first place is logical and hardly strategic and thus reflects poorly on him as a leader. I do think Xander is wrong in many parts of the game. How is it double standards to also think Ryoma acted as a poor leader? I do call Marx out. I’ll happily list all the annoying things all the royals do over the course of the game. The fact I’m arguing that Ryoma made bad decisions here is a fact that is completely separate from this. Or perhaps that is slightly wrong, the fact I am calling Ryoma out is because he’s the one who gets his actions defended. So I wanted to lay out what I believed the argument to be and see what people had to say. I did address in my last post that I feel Corrin should have behaved differently. But how I judge Corrin on their actions is separated from how I’m judging Ryoma. Who I feel was acting immorally and emotionally, and not living up to his title as crown prince. Corrin and Elise may be a threat, but they are a threat Ryoma had to go out of his way to address and ignore current pressing attacks on his boarder. In order to address a threat that has yet to make a move on Hoshido. And then he doesn’t bother to try to talk or listen to Corrin, he picks a fight. I feel this reflects poorly on him. Yes. I am saying we can’t use future events to claim past actions are justified. Ryoma did refuse to talk. Corrin asked to talk, said they wanted and were working for peace and Ryoma ignored them and attacked while corrin was still talking. Corrin is being manipulated, I agree. I’m happy to have a different conversation via pm or another thread on what Corrin should have done, but I’m currently looking at Ryoma and his actions. Please explain how at this point in the story Corrin appears the biggest threat over the currently invading army at the border? And Ryoma did press the fight. He attacked while Corrin wanted to talk say “I’ll show you with my blade then and take you home!” it is unclear how tribes are viewed in the social hierarchy, but I’ll concede until I’ve checked further that Rinka would have been considered noble. Kaze likely wasn’t because his clan wasn’t exactly discussed as being politically active and were ninjas. I don’t feel I’m ignoring the facts, but if you feel I am then this discussion is likely pointless from your point of view. I’m attempting to address what I feel was a failing of character by Ryoma, in what I feel has been a poorly articulated argument in the past. Maybe you feel I’m still poorly articulating it. But the fact that every time someone says “I feel Ryoma acted poorly here” the only thing that get throw back at them is “You only care because Elise is cute!” is missing a lot of what the scene was portraying imho. I can’t claim I wasn’t “picking a fight” since technically I am trying to have a discussion with opposing viewpoints and I did ask for it. But I wasn’t looking for a potshot taking squabble, which some responders have given me. I was and am looking to have points addressed, and am happy to be convinced otherwise on my current standing. I have simply felt that up to this point the arguments calling Ryoma out have been poorly stated and often lacked that parts that I personally believed held most weight (the impractical part of marching across the country to fight an enemy general on intel he receives from a questionable source as opposed to dealing with the more obvious threats at the border) well that feels a bit personal. But perhaps I haven’t explained myself very well. I brought up the real world treaties in order to point out that historically humans have always had very prominent feelings on the way people should be treated in war. And that because we do have those feelings, it is fair for someone to feel that Ryoma acted immorally in this scene. And that people’s opinion that it was immoral shouldn’t be simply dismissed as “you only care because Elise is cute”. I have multiple reasons I’m bothered by Ryoma’s behavior and wished to outline them and hear people’s opinions.

1) No I'm not just complaining Ryoma acted dishonorably. I'm complaining if I say he acted dishonorably people claim he didn't. That even if he did, it was logical and practical although it was Ryoma failing consider more than what he wanted - Corrin. If it was me, I'd give my sick sister over to have her cured in a heart beat if it would save her life. (though I'd also surrender myself. So eh). But Elise also wasn't given a mission or have to fear to prove herself to her father. So Corrin might have more of a reason to fear going with Ryoma then just handing Elise over. He was never given the option, so we'll never know. 2)Corrin could have given Ryoma Yato, the sacred sword. He could have actually talked to Corrin - maybe some problems could have been worked out. It just felt lazy to have him suddenly attack and demand Corrin. It feel annoying and frustrating. We can blame the writing, which I do, but it's writing about Ryoma, so I when I say it feel frustrating it also felt out of character. GC provides limited protection to victims, including: Persons taking no active part in hostilities should be treated humanely (including military persons who have ceased to be active as a result of sickness, injury, or detention). The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. Not left to die. It's not limited to just the in power part. Ryoma could have offered her assistance but instead used her for emotional blackmail. It also lacks a certain amount of feeling justified due to being at least in part feeling emotional on Ryoma's part. This has been pointed out by others as being 'only my option' but considering the amount of maneuvering (plus willingness to trust an enemy political figure's information) to get to Corrin, and then to give up a lot of potential political power (could have ambushed and taken all the army prisoner) just to get Corrin feels emotional to me, not practical.

I'm clearly too slow to respond to everyone fast enough. I'll just forever be behind.... I'm not complaining Ryoma was doing something morally ambiguous. That's my point. He is doing something morally ambigous. Which I do think, however, we can call him on. My complain is thus: All the other characters get called on their actions by players, yet for some reason when anyone suggests Ryoma did something morally ambigous he get defended as being logical and pragmatic. This makes me frustrated as I struggle to see the choice as logical and it is morally ambiguous so I'd like to be able to say "hey he did this thing that wasn't cool" without people saying "nah, it was totally fair for him to do that" I'm fine with him doing morally ambiguous things. But we should be allowed to call him on it as we do other characters (and I'll maintain I think it was a poor decision on his part but that's a separate matter from the moral part) But he's seen that multiple Nohr royals acted to save both Kaze and Rinka. He's seen Corrin is alive and healthy. He has reason to believe that Nohr might treat his family well. But yes, he does have reason to think otherwise as well. I guess it comes down to whether or not he is treating the enemy as he hopes his family would be treated (and there is at least some evidence is possible) or he's given up on the country as a whole. Options: Hand Elise over as a prisoner for treatment. Offer to give Yato back. Offer money to supply his troops. Offer Ryoma free passage back to Hoshido, given he was deep in enemy territory. Not sure how losing Corrin would be a massive blow to Nohr since the leaders of country actively try to kill him. They clearly had eggs in other baskets. I will concede the sword. I had forgotten Yato and the practicality removing it from the field would be.

Ok, but that isn't what Ryoma asks at all. He just askes for Corrin. He literally is fine for Corrin's army, made up with other generals of Nohr to keep running around as long as he gets Corrin. That doesn't feel smart. As for alternatives: 1. Offer to take Elise as a prisoner and treat her. Now he has a captive he knows Corrin cares about. Political hostages are useful. He also has no reason to believe King Garon might not consider chatting once he has his daughter (we know as the audience he won't but there is no reason for Ryoma to think that a father wouldn't value a blood child. Further he knows the other Nohr siblings care about each other. Now he's got a prisoner to use against Xander, Camilla, Leo - all generals for Nohr) 2. Discuss what Corrin WOULD be willing to trade for the medicine. Which he doesn't. He offers an ultimatum and then attacks. 3. Set up an ambush and take out Corrin before the army knows Ryoma is there - this is actually a much more tactical move if taking out an enemy general is the goal. But it's not. Getting Corrin is the goal. This kinda makes his move feel hollow. Either he wanted to take out Corrin and lacked the intelligence to do it properly, or he felt the need to confront Corrin and talk or he believe you should face your opponent openly. If it was the first, well that makes him not very good at his job. If it was the second, why didn't he talk to Corrin other than offering the ultimatum and then attacking without discussing other options. If it was the last, well he fails to continue to be honorable by using emotional blackmail. Do people not call out Iago for being an asshole due to his treatment of Takumi? I was unaware people thought highly of him. :P Since it has been brought up, yes I do judge Iago for being an asshole. But the situation was also different. Corrin didn't ask to negotiate and then was attacked while trying to discuss terms. I think the statement about it being more of an negotiation attempt that Corrin honestly deserved is a tough one to argue against because it is fundamentally an opinion. I disagree, because there were other options but Ryoma only wanted one outcome - Corrin to leave with him. When Corrin said no, Ryoma said he'd forced him to fight and then come with him. Ryoma doesn't even offer the chance for Elise to be a prisoner of war, so it's not on Corrin. Ryoma also attacked before Corrin finished speaking, so never got to offer any alternatives. All in all it doesn't feel like it's on Corrin nor does it feel like Ryoma was acting rationally. We're arguing over whether or not Ryoma is aware of Nohr's villians being "comically evil and one dimensional". I suppose you're right. I shouldn't call any character out on being flawed if I can, as a viewer, know objectively the other side is MORE flawed, even if the in game characters lack this extra knowledge. In game cannon, there is no evidence Nohr will treat captive royals poor, but evidence they'll treat them with at minimum (going off Corrin): Keeping them alive, keeping them healthy and lack of torture. Fair. Corrin has fought against Hoshido. But they can't be the only general doing so, and they are unlikely to be the one currently most threatening Hoshido. However, I don't think I'm failing to address the practical side of it. Ryoma marching into enemy terriory after a single general who is not currently any of the generally fighting on the border or in Hoshido does seem less than practical in my opinion. If Corrin had shown to be a significant threat by this point against Hoshido, I may by it as a completely strategic move. But they haven't. So far they've "Managed not to get killed at the port" and "managed to take out Hinoka and gang without killing them". I struggle to believe Corrin is the biggest threat to Hoshido at this time, yet Ryoma still goes after them. He also refuses to talk to Corrin and demands Corrin leave with him and then attacks when Corrin asks to talk instead. Seems emotional to me. But I'll accept that that is an opinion and is unlikely to get resolved.

History has a lot to do with it. We can only judge people on how they will act based on what we've seen. So far, Ryoma has seen Nohr not kill his siblings when they were taken as hostages. So he has no reason to believe any other case will be different unless he does something to change that - such as treating a non-combative poorly. I got the impression that neither Rinkah nor Kaze were seen as nobles by Nohr. So that might be me mis-remembering. But royals were certainly viewed as royals and had a history of being treated well as prisoners. So it doesn't exactly feel like a good reflection on Hoshido being 'better' people or a logical choice for Ryoma to actively start a fight and prevent Elise from getting help. So I think it's fair to call him on it.

Ok, having some internet issues so got a lot more responses faster than I had time to reply. Sorry! Also, again if youre sick of the subject, feel free not to respond. -- I never said it had anything to do with Elise being a innocent little puppy. Actually I believe I pointed out that at the time Elise was Hocs de combat also known as non-combative because she was too sick. I don’t care whether Elise is cute or if it was another sibiling – I am arguing that as a non-combative she no longer was a threat. That said, Ryoma has plenty of reasons to be mad at Corrin and Nohr. But that doesn’t make his decision logical, in fact it only highlights that he was coming from an emotional place. Never argued that the ending was well written or happy. What I argued was his actions in the moment were not from an honorable and good place. You can’t say that what happened later meant that it justified Ryoma’s actions earlier. Ryoma didn’t know any of that was going to happen. He refused to talk or parley even though his opponent asked for it (another big no-no of war throughout history) and then attacked. You say if Corrin had returned to Hoshido to talk it out it might have worked – maybe if Ryoma had taken two seconds to think over his actions – aka crossing miles of enemy territory after a ‘general’ who had so far not set foot on Hoshido soil or been involved in any skirmishes on Hoshido land, then threatening to fight instead of listening even though his opponent wished to talk rather than fight – then maybe they could’ve worked together and reached some sort of agreement or plan or anything. I do think Corrin should have surrendered. But surrendering or not has no reflection on Ryoma’s actions. He picked the fight, he pressed the fight, he tried to use emotional blackmail on Corrin. Yes. Stated as before since we’re into copying and pasting atm: Ryoma’s refusal to give Elise medicine or let her have access to doctors? I’ve seen it argued that it’s pragmatic, but it’s not. He loses nothing by allowing her treatment. However, considering she is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. He loses any goodwill they might otherwise have. One might argue that the goodwill was never there, but to Ryoma there is no evidence of this. At the time of the incident, Ryoma has no reason to believe Nohr will treat any imprisoned family members poorly. While Nohr has treated its prisoners of low birth poorly (see Kaze and Rinka), it currently has a history of treating prisoners of high birth well. After all, his last sibling to be taken by Nohr wasn’t killed....and was raised as a royal. Letting Elise die is almost guaranteed to change this. Saving her, however, builds goodwill towards how himself or his family might be treated during the war. Definitely not logical or smart, especially since Nohrrin was willing to negotiate, so it was not like he didn’t have any other choice. Ryoma was the one who made the choice that it was surrender or fight. History shows there is very little actual killing of prisoners of noble birth because the cost is usually so high. You want to treat your prisoners how you hope your enemy will treat them. Geneva Convention (GC) doesn’t only cover combat medics. In this case I was refuring to the part of the Convention that state that sick combatants are no longer considered enemy combatants and thus are protected under that. But I mostly brought up GC to illustrate the long standing history we have in beliefs of rules of war. We are 150 years (6 generations) into the Geneva conventions, and we humans keep adding to them. So I think they do speak to a very human conviction that might doesn't make right. And several centuries of military practice suggest that the universal belief that we should hold certain humanitarian standards in war support the likelihood that there were standards in Nohr and Hoshido as well Elise would not be considered an enemy combative under GC due to her sickness. So not fair game. And as stated above, history shows that people have always held humanitarian standards and beliefs about war and leaders who broke these where unpopular and usually didn’t have long term success. So not exactly reflecting well on Ryoma. And yes I get it’s a game – but that doesn’t mean I can’t be annoyed at Ryoma’s lack of ability to assess a situation well. Even looking at just the Elise part, she is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. At this time he has no reason to think that if his family is taken prisoner they’ll be treated poorly (his one example of a live situation is Corrin, who was treated well). So antagonizing Nohr and giving them reason to kill his family is not in his favor. And if we’re looking at it from a “Nohr did worse already!” stand point, then it becomes a question of whether or not Ryoma should sink to their level. And I think it is fair to criticizes him for doing so. Never said it had anything with her being adult or not. It has everything to do with me judging him poorly for picking a fight in a situation where the enemy actively asking to talk instead, and refusing to allow aid to a dying person, and using that person as emotional black mail. History actually shows us this is not the case in the majority of the situations. Ryoma has reason to want to make sure that there is goodwill if the case that his family gets taken prisoner. Historically nobles were very well treated when captured for this very reason – they wanted to make sure their families would be well treated if taken by the other side. I actually agree with your Pragmatic first part, but I don’t think Ryoma’s actions were pragmatic at all. He march across miles of enemy territories, after his missing sibling so he could “bring Corrin home”. Even though it put his men in danger and wouldn’t win them any strategic advantage. When faced with Corrin he pressed a fight, even though there were other options. All of this suggests it’s emotional for him, not logical 1:No but that doesn’t mean we should be allowed to judge a supposed good and honorable man for acting in a way that appears inhuman. And a supposed general acting like an emotional invested child. We blame Corrin for the lack of actual stratigy, what was Ryoma doing marching so far into enemy territory after one person and picking a fight when the other side didn’t want one and oftered to have negotiation? Not acting like a military commander . I never said it has anything with Elise being a healer. It has everything to do with what is morally ok. We don’t attack civilians (which Hoshido did suggest they follow that rule), and we generally don't kill people who can't fight back. If Elise was active, this wouldn't be an issue. But she wasn't. 2:Ok, I didn’t make this clear enough, clearly. Elise, sick and out of commission is not what is generally considered an “enemy” combatant. In our universe, which yes I know is not FE, that is not a combatant. This, as is usually understood by rules of what is considered humane, is therefore people feeling like it was not moral is totally valid. Further, which I also realize I failed to make clear, when I said “let her pass” I meant surrender Elise so she could receive treatment. This would have meant she was a prisoner of Hoshido, but got to live. Historically (in our world) this was an actual practice. And yes, once again I get FE is not real and is made up. But if the characters are to be believable they should act in a manner that is believable as humans. And history shows that humans are very particular about having rules of war. Also Ryoma has reason to want to make sure that there is goodwill if the case that his family gets taken prisoner. Historically nobles were very well treated when captured for this very reason – they wanted to make sure their families would be well treated if taken by the other side. Elise is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. At this time he has no reason to think that if his family is taken prisoner they’ll be treated poorly (his one example of a live situation is Corrin, who was treated well). So antagonizing Nohr and giving them reason to kill his family is not in his favor. At this time he has no reason to believe Nohr might not treat his family well – history in Nohr has shown Nohr does treat them well. SO he does have a lot to lose by actively preventing her from seeking aid and dying. 3:Actually I used Ryome endangering his men as an example of how he’s acting emotional over logical. He is literally only at the castle because he’s looking for Corrin. He is ignoring the actual fighting going on at the border to be there, after Corrin who so far has done no actual fighting against Hoshido. That means it is not strategic. As for what his men might be thinking, which I never actually addressed, letting the enemy, who is sick and unable to fight die because you’re upset your brother has chosen the other side doesn’t reflect well on a commander. People don’t like following assholes. Further, people often don’t like fighting when then don’t have too What is right isn’t always the “nice” thing. However, what is right is usually the morally correct one. Letting someone die to further your personal vendetta is something that someone can and should be judged for. As I stated before, feel free not to post if you’re tired or sick of discussing this None of my argument had anything to do with it being Elise. I understand you're tired of explaining your view point, but don't ignore everything I said in favor of a completely unstated, irrelevant point. If it was Camilla or Xander I would still think Ryoma behaved badly. He was not acting either morally nor strategically. Garon is another matter entirely. He would be strategic to let die (actually maybe Xander as well, but considering there are 3 other heirs to the throne, not really), though perhaps not morally. THIS^ Telling Corrin its "come back with me or fight" and not allowing any other options although Corrin was will to negotiate does not reflect well on Ryoma and is something to be criticized. He then followed it up by attacking Corrin while Corrin was still trying to talk - Corrin didn't even get a chance to agree to the fight. Not exactly honorable either.

I know this has been touched on in more than one thread - usually one not just about the topic - and seeing it again might annoy some people. If you don’t want to rehash your side of the argument, that’s fine. Skip this thread. But I feel that what I consider my side, the side of wanting to criticize Ryoma for his actions is often not well argued or fails to touch on the parts that really bother me about his actions here. I’ve always felt there is a real lack of clarity to why Ryoma comes across badly here. I mean, I remember reading discussions surrounding dislike of Robin’s actions in Awakening when the enemy fleet is burned and the lack of remorse/discussion among the characters about the act. But for some reason whenever someone says “Ryoma was kinda a jerk in Chapter 12” he gets defended a lot. But while Nohr is presented as a “morally ambiguous place” that often does questionable things, the story presents Hoshido as good and honorable. Which is why it is so easy to have a kneejerk disgusted reaction of Ryoma’s choices in Chapter 12. Because it’s a guy claiming he’s on the high ground while doing questionable things. Skip to the end for the Tl;dr version. We can look at it this way – people were so bothered by the treatment in war of prisoners and the wounded, we got the Geneva Conventions (back in 1860s) which defines the basic rights of wartime prisoners (civilians and military personnel); established protections for the wounded and sick; and established protections for the civilians in and around a war-zone. Specifically it states that persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat (aka taken out of combat) by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely. To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture, taking of hostages, outrages upon dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, executions. Plus a second part which states after combat the wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. But the Geneva Conventions weren’t the first historical event where people came out and considered just what was considered ‘acceptable’ during times of war – there is much literature on basically the treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked that date quite a ways back. Back in the day, that could include the injured giving their parole (a promise not to fight) and retaining their weapons, or giving up all their weapons in order to pass. But, more problematically, what if you have a cultural tradition of killing the enemy’s badly wounded, or not giving aid? – people turned around and returned the ‘favor’. Many cultures therefor went out of their way to do both. Saladin sending his physicians to a sick Richard the Lionheart – talk about an early example of helping an enemy who was not all that well liked by his enemies because it was honorable and the right thing to do in Saladin’s eyes. A similar debate was engendered when Edward I took the female relatives of Robert the Bruce captive, then hung them in cages outside the castle walls for years at a time as bait to get Robert to surrender. Edward claimed he was justified because Robert the Bruce had been excommunicated, and bringing him to heel was more important than other moral imperatives. There was, however, a lot of criticism, both straight up moral outrage and worry about what might happen if English noble noncombatants were captured. – though this is a much more extreme example. I’m outlining this not as an argument that Fate’s had this sort of laws in place, but that humans have long had a knee jerk reaction to certain acts they define as inhumane. Ryoma’s act in the chapter where he not only refuses to allow Elise to seek aid but then uses her as a bargaining chip to get what he wants can easily fall under what people classify as lacking morals. Some of my personal problems with his acts here are thus: - He uses Elise’s condition to further a person vendetta – not to help the war effort: He wants Nohrrin, not a surrender of the Nohrian army. (If you’re going to do something questionable, at least make it useful. As it stood, he didn’t do anything to actually help end the war here and still went down a path that put a non-combatant (as outlined by hocs de combat) in danger. I struggle to even tell myself that Ryoma “was trying to capture an enemy general” since at this point Nohrrin has actually not held any campaigns on Hoshido soil, unlike other divisions of the Nohr army, nor was Nohrrin currently heading to fight on Hoshido soil. Nohrrin is running around dealing with uprising in Nohr. Which mean Ryoma had to ignore all those segments of the army actually fighting Hoshido along the border to enter Nohr and track down Nohrrin. I can’t see it as anything other than personal) - He puts his own men at risk to literally stop Nohrrin from saving Elise – he was not holding the castle because it was strategic, but because he knew Nohrrin would be there and wanted Nohrin back. “I’ve been waiting for you!”(This makes me irked as his ability to lead and his lack of care for the men under him. He shows he’d rather put his own men in danger to take a location in the first place just to confront Nohrrin. Then when Nohrrin proposes they don’t have to fight, that Nohrrin only wants the medicine Ryoma pushes the fight. He engages even though other options are on the table – and Nohrrin is willing to negotiate - and does so because he wants Nohrrin. This kinda ties back with my first point of personal vendetta, but has to do with endangering your men for something personal) - He is aware of Elise’s condition and doesn’t offer aid: When presented with the reason why Nohrian was there, he didn’t care (this goes against the previously presented ‘kind’ and ‘honorable’ character Ryoma. Would you consider it inhumane if an enemy commander refused to let a sick and dying person past to receive aid? He could have let just Elise past. Or let a doctor leave. But he refused both options – well, ok, they’re not presented, but there is hardly any discussion about his options. Once Nohrian refuses to surrender but wants to talk it out, Ryoma literally attacks instead, saying it’s surrender or fight, no in between. You could easily argue that Nohrian wasn’t even given a chance to request a doctor or turn Elise over to the enemy to be treated. Neither action reflects particularly well on Ryoma imho. He chose to let Elise suffer to further his agenda that wasn’t even a strategic or military one. This is a hard thing to feel good about, especially since the game has set up Ryoma as a “good” and “honorable” man. It’s the same thing with Xander being a “good” and “honorable” man who is tortured by his actions which he commits in the name of “duty”. At least the game acknowledges his actions are wrong, yet Ryoma doesn’t even see the moral problems with his.). Now, that all being said, it is clear from the game that Hoshido regularly employs practices that would be against today’s morality standards about war. Jacob and Oboro have a conversation about battlefield ‘clean-up’ aka, killing the wounded. This is also directly against today’s standards. But the reason I’m outlining this is I often see people saying we shouldn’t hold Ryoma’s actions in Chapter 12 against him. But that’s ignoring the understanding of war and rules we hold today. (I’ll note here that Japan subscribes to the Geneva Conventions. So it’s likely that their current society does take umbrage with poor treatment of wounded and sick. So this might actually be a purposeful enacting of trying to create disgust with a “good” man). By the morals and rules of warfare we uphold today, his actions are something that results in kneejerk disgust . Even more so because he’s been present as an honorable and good man who claims to be better than Nohr. But that isn’t shown through his actions. I think leaders should lead, not extort. Which was what Ryoma was doing in Chapter 12, and worse, he was doing it for personal reasons, not combative ones. So I think it is fair for people to hold these actions against him. Tl;dr In the end, I am bothered by the claim that Ryoma’s actions were logical – he marched across enemy territory to confront his missing sibling and get them to come back with him. Not logical, emotional. Once he’s there, even though the option is on the table to discuss things, he demands surrender or fight – putting the lives of his men in danger in favor of a personal need to have a sibling “come home” with him. Still emotional, not logical. Further, a poor sign of leadership as he’s literally prioritizing his personal need over his men. His refusal to give Elise medicine or let her have access to doctors? I’ve seen it argued that it’s pragmatic, but it’s not. He loses nothing by allowing her treatment. However, considering she is a royal who he is willing to let die in a non-combative situation, he has now set the standard for how his own sisters and brother might be treated as prisoners. He loses any goodwill they might otherwise have. One might argue that the goodwill was never there, but to Ryoma there is no evidence of this. While Nohr has treated its prisoners of low birth poorly (see Kaze and Rinka), it currently has a history of treating prisoners of high birth well. After all, his last sibling to be taken by Nohr wasn’t killed....and was raised as a royal. Letting Elise die is almost guaranteed to change this. Saving her, however, builds goodwill towards how himself or his family might be treated during the war. Definitely not logical or smart, especially since Nohrrin was willing to negotiate, so it was not like he didn’t have any other choice. Ryoma was the one who made the choice that it was surrender or fight. So this is my argument that we should be able to hold Ryoma’s actions against him as they feel moral questionable, that he did not act logically nor pragmatically, and that he failed to behave in manner befitting a leader and general.

Detailed 5th to 1st because I have too much time on my hands today: 5th: Robin/Chrom: Eh, tbh, despite Robin/Chrom is sorta OTP for me when Robin is male or female. But mostly because they get a huge amount of interaction from the story. If it was based on supports alone, I wouldn’t like Chrom/F!Robin much at all – Male Robin gets waaaaay better supports for Chrom. Added bonus: Even Lucina ships them when Robin doesn't marry Chrom. 4th: Maribelle/Vaike: I actually like a lot of Maribelle’s supports, the girl really got a wealth of good ones, but I particularly like her’s and Vaikes because it is one of those that revels a bunch about Vaike (Also why I’m fond of his and Lissa’s) and is sorta about both of them trying to better themselves as people. I feel a majority of Vaike’s supports center around him being stubborn and well, stupid, and him bragging about being strong, but Maribelle’s doesn’t. Vaike considers (and notices) Maribelle’s moods, wants to help her see the common folk as more than ‘uncouth’, ends up question his own prejudices, idk, it’s nice to see Vaike thinking. Added bonus: It also shows apples are the most desirable fruit in Ylisse. 3rd: Robin/Gaius: I’m forever a sucker for supports about learning to trust, and that’s what this one feels about down to a T. The support builds trust, they become friends, it feels there was a bond building whether or not it goes to romance. Possibly a bit unfair, because I bet I was later biased towards this support as well by their cute summer scramble. Added bonus: it had the best (so bad it was perfect) confession line. So terrible. So amazing. 2nd: Virion/Panne: Panne and Virion have a great convo that is one of the few that directly talks about Virion’s past and provides insight to his future motives as well as delving into some of the ways Panne sees the world. Basically it plays like two war veterans getting to know each other past the exterior – it even has drinking under the moon and vows of bettering the world and post war excursions together. And all of that prior to S-supports (Which is good – both have better s-supports, but this one holds together because of the history and friendship built in C-A). Added bonus: Panne is clearly easily bribed with wine. Plus Virion is not flirting with her for a majority of the support. 1st: Cordelia/Kellum: You know, a lot of supports end with characters learning to value Kellum – it’s always nice to read one that starts with someone valuing Kellam. This support reads as Kellum not seeing the value in himself even as Cordelia points it out (from C) and Cordelia going lengths to prove it to him by beating him at his own stealth skills and ‘learning’ to see him. He then flips the script by pointing out her worth as well. For two characters that spend a lot of time feeling as if they’re not good enough, it is super nice to see them propping each other up and not allowing negative talk. She also jokes far more in the support than I recall her doing elsewhere, both at herself and at Kellam. She’s playful, determined, and interested in him. He doesn’t shine as much in the support as she does, but also comes across as dedicated, thoughtful and shy. Honestly this support defined the characters for me, so it was a disappointment seen some of Cordelia’s supports later. Makes me think Kellam bring out the best in her. Added bonus: Chrom and Cordelia’s love for him isn’t mentioned ONCE. At all. This was actually my first support for Cordelia and I never realized how Chrom obsessed she was until later playthroughs. Honorable mentions: Tharja/Libra, Stalh/Sully, Gregor/Cordelia, Laurent/Lucina, M!Robin/Cherche, Chrom/Olivia, F!Robin/Virion(actually, this one may have actually been my 5th...oops)