• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About vanguard333

  • Birthday 11/13/1997

Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Fire Emblem Game
    Path of Radiance


  • I fight for...

Recent Profile Visitors

740 profile views
  1. Create a Class

    Yeah; I admit I didn't really think it through. Just to clarify: to which ability are you referring?
  2. Create a Class

    I do have one idea. I don't know what the class should be called, but I know it would promote to a class called either Vanguard or Champion: Armoured front-line fighters. They are the first ones to be sent out, and they charge headlong into the heat of battle. They thrive on the battlefield, and live for audacity. They have fairly balanced stats similar to a paladin, but with a greater HP growth and smaller resistance growth. They fight on foot and wear a mix of plate and cloth armour as well as a cape. They can use swords and axes. Skills: Level 1: Crowd Control: +10 hit/dodge for every enemy within 2 spaces. Level 10: Charge the Line: charge forward; weapon at the ready; dealing damage to every enemy you pass. Level 5 Promoted: Sweeping Cut: Deal damage to all adjacent opponents. Level 15 Promoted: Break the Line: Skill % chance to deal 2x damage to opponent and scatter all enemies within 2 spaces if ability activates during the player phase. Scattering means they are all shoved 1 space in a random direction away from the person who activated the skill.
  3. I have long thought that they should make a prequel game that's about Anri, Iote and them in the first war with the Dohlr Empire. I think it would be really interesting. I would especially like it if Iote was the point of view character for at least a few chapters or so. Seeing him go from young slave carted off to Dohlr to being the first to tame a wyvern and the founder of Macedon, especially if the fact that wyverns are degenerated manaketes (or at least their descendants) is brought up or revealed to Iote. It could also reveal the origins of Iote's shield. It would also be cool if they used the game to explain how an Earth Dragon can become a Dark Dragon.
  4. Class names that don't make sense?

    This. Even if you just look at Christian priests, Catholic priests aren't allowed to marry, Protestant priests usually are allowed, while East Orthodox priests are allowed to marry so long as they were married before becoming priests. Still, what is a priest doing on the battlefield? Even if they're just something along the lines of a combat medic. Perhaps if they were part of a militaristic monastic order like the Knights Hospitaller or Knights Templar. Anyway, back to class names that don't make sense, a Berserker was basically a Viking Age champion; the name being believed to derive from them wearing bear pelts as a status symbol. At least Path of Radiance had the bear pelt bit. They weren't an upgraded bandit or anything like that. They probably used axes, though that's mainly because Viking Age warriors really liked using axes.
  5. Finally; someone else has pointed this out. Anyway, some things I'm sick and tired of seeing in FE: 10-year-old looking female playable manaketes (that usually are divine dragons). It's repetitive, boring, and weird. How about a young adult male wyvern manakete? It could be interesting, especially any support conversations he might have with wyvern riders in the lord's army. Massive two-handed swords being used with one hand. It is theoretically possible, even with something the size of a zweihander, but it would be very tiring, very quickly. Young prince lords with bland personalities. Marth, Alm, Roy, etc. Lets have something different.
  6. Which types of villains do you prefer?

    It all depends. I've seen both types done very well, and I've seen both types done very badly. For the former, there have been classic examples like Ganondorf and The Joker, and one or two great examples in FE such as Ashnard. For the latter, there have been classic examples like Amon, and one or two great examples in FE such as Sephirian. Not only that, but the two types are not mutually exclusive. If anything, it is more of a spectrum. For example: Ganondorf is traditionally the former. However, Wind Waker provided a different take on Ganondorf:
  7. What's your favorite Pokemon?

    It's interesting. I really like a few different Pokémon for different reasons: Aegislash for being a sword Pokémon, Cubone for its backstory (and Mimikyu for a similarly sad backstory), Gallade for being a Pokémon version of a chivalrous swordsman, etc. Yet, my favourite Pokémon of all time... is Torterra. And, to be honest, I can't really explain why. My first ever Pokémon game that I bought was Diamond, and Turtwig was the starter that I chose, so at first I thought it might've been nostalgia. But Diamond wasn't the first Pokémon game that I played; Fire Red was. Plus, there had to be a reason I chose Turtwig in the first place. So it isn't that. But I can't think of any other reason why Torterra is my favourite Pokémon. He's not very good competitively (though I never play competitively, so that's beside the point), he doesn't have the most interesting backstory; there isn't really anything that sets Torterra apart from the rest. And yet, Torterra is my favourite Pokémon.
  8. New Smash Bros Characters.

    What do you mean; as playable characters, assist trophies, trophies, characters that make a cameo appearance on a Fire Emblem-themed stage? In all seriousness, if this is just what new character I want to see in Smash Bros. 5. a) change the title of the thread, and b) Micaiah. Light magic would be cool to see, and she would bring something different to the roster. She could even have a special attack Thani (based on her unique tome), that sends opponents further the heavier they are, rather than the lighter they are. For example: Kirby wouldn't be sent very far, but metal Ganondorf would be sent flying.
  9. Class names that don't make sense?

    Paladins: They were Charlemagne's elite warriors. They may have been cavalry, but they predated the Vikings, let alone knights, if they existed at all, as they are the subject of legend and folklore. Though I will admit, Fire Emblem's paladins are closer to the real ones than most fantasy paladins. Not only that, but ninjas weren't even fighters or assassins: they were spies. Not just throughout time, but also area, and who you asked. There was no standard recognized code of chivalry throughout all of Europe. Each feudal lord had different expectations for their knights. For them, chivalry was what they said makes a good knight; they rules they had to follow. Then, there were also medieval writers writing their own romanticized ideals of chivalry; their way of saying all knights, regardless of feudal lord, should also follow the writer's idea of what made a good knight. Knights were primarily cavalry throughout most of Europe. However, some Scottish knights would dismount to lead their schiltrons (basically rows of men with two-handed spears), and, during the Hundred-Years War, English Knights would dismount as a tactic. So armoured infantry being knights does make some sense in that regard. Honestly though, given that knighthood was a title, and quite a few FE knights aren't knights, man-at-arms would be a better name for them. Man-at-arms was the military rank. All knights were men-at-arms, not all men-at-arms were knights. Druids: people have already pointed out that they were basically Celtic religious figures. Yes, the Romans gave Druids a bad reputation. However, if you look at the surviving Celtic folklore, none that I have read involved druids practicing any kind of ritual sacrifices or anything like that; the most evil magic used by druids in the folklore being forcibly shapeshifting someone else into an animal. Speaking of which: there's a reason fantasy druids are usually nature mages. Most of their magic in Celtic folklore either involves potions or shapeshifting into animals. Does he sing? Or tell stories of events that have happened? I ask because those things fit a bard as well, and I don't know if he does those or not, as I haven't played the game Lewyn is in. Halberdiers: They can't even use halberds, since halberds in FE are listed as axes, when they appear at all. If anything, PoR halberdiers are really pikemen, while RD halberdiers are basically a medieval fantasy version of a Greek Hoplite (because of the shield).
  10. Baldrick; I think a lot of this is us simply misunderstanding each other. No; I don't think that at all. I am well-aware that he doesn't just mean "someone who can kill Duma (though that is a big part of what needed to be done)." A person can be aware of what they consider a personal failing, and still not learn from it or be rid of it. I already explained how I reconcile these viewpoints: Rudolf cares about people other than himself, and is doing what he's doing because he believes it will save Valentia. But, because of his "strength is everything" mentality, his approach to saving the world; the way in which he is attempting to save Valentia, led to him becoming a villain. I just thought it adds to the tragedy of such a character if he's well-aware of what he's become, but thinks he cannot change. Does that make sense? Also, I merely listed three possible reasons why he said, "May you never forget how to be kind" and merely said which one I personally like: the one that suggests he's saying that because he doesn't want Alm to end up like him. Like Jotari, I think that the writers were a bit confused as to what they wanted Rudolf to be. You do realize those changes were to update a game made in the 1990s? Those changes were meant to expand on what was there. I don't have an answer because I'm drawing directly from the games, and that's a question both Gaiden and Echoes left unanswered. But I will give a theory: Getting rid of the Duma Faithful would have been far easier said than done. They are the mooches feeding off of I mean devout servants of Duma. Rudolf was simply among the first to notice Duma had gone mad and the end of Duma and Mila was coming. Many were either ignorant, or refusing to accept that it was so. So, in addition to the power they have from being servants of Duma, the Duma Faithful likely had significant influence in all of Rigel for their service to Duma. If Rudolf said, "Duma is dying! We must put him down and give him a death he'd want!" The Duma Faithful naturally would oppose him, and Rigel would likely be split: believe the emperor, or believe the servants of their god? Not only that, but the Duma Faithful are Rigelians. Rudolf would not only be ordering his men commit a seeming act of sheer heresy, he would also be ordering that they kill their own countrymen. Even as an Emperor, Rudolf could not give an order like that. Also, even if he could give such an order, and could lead the Rigelian army against the Duma Faithful, the witches could teleport, and the Duma Faithful could summon flying monsters, and Alm would be an infant in Rigel. They would do everything in their power to get into wherever Alm the brand-bearing infant is, and kill him to prevent the prophecy and keep Duma alive. But, a brand-bearer who is leading Valentia; that could order such an attack on Duma and the Duma Faithful without anyone questioning it. He didn't raise Berkut; Berkut's parents did (if I recall correctly). That's mentioned both in the Berkut Rinea memory prism and briefly in Berkut's last conversation with Alm if I recall correctly. Berkut was simply Rudolf's heir apparent due to Berkut seemingly being Rudolf's closest living relative, since Alm was kept a secret. No; that's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying that it is not the first thing on Rudolf's mind; it probably being a distant third at best on his reasons to give Alm to Mycen: one being that he trusts Mycen, and the other being to get Alm away from the Duma Faithful; both of those being the reasons he gave to Mycen for why. That might have been a side-benefit he thought of when thinking of his overarching plan, but it's not top or even top 2 on his reasons why he gave Alm to Mycen. Does that make sense? Oh... Okay. I misunderstood what you meant. My apologies. In that case, then I agree.
  11. That was me. Funny how you bring up the eyes, because I made a big note of that when I brought up Ashnard. It's quite obvious when looking at Ashnard's design that the eyes convey one thing: violent sociopath. That's one way in which they differ. Both Rudolf and Ashnard are rulers of militaristic nations. But where Ashnard, underneath, is bats--t insane, Rudolf is a good-intentioned man who believes because of Rigelian Strength is Everything that he has to wage war to achieve his ends. I personally have no real problem with Rudolf's SoV appearance (though I do like that comparison to Byron), since Rudolf is supposed to be a father to his men. Plus; that moustache needed to go. However I personally would have made the eyes not so much more villainous, so much as more... worn down (for lack of a better way of putting it): I would have given him the expression of a man worn down by a ~16-year long plot and a continent-wide war. The eyes of a man that would fall completely apart at any moment; only keeping going at the thought of his son, and how he must see his plan through to ensure the future for his son.
  12. Why is Falchion called Falchion?

    You're right about it not being a falchion. However, an arming sword is specifically a one-handed sword. If you look at some of the images of each version of the Fachion: Marth's, Chrom's, and even Alm's (which is a different sword), they all often have a grip that's long enough for two hands. So, I would say it's more of a longsword. In fact, in some pictures of Marth's version of the Falchion, the blade is almost (but not quite) narrow enough for the sword to be an Estoc and I am well aware that, in saying that, a few people reading this will be thinking, "R1, R1, R1, R1, R1, R1, R1, R1, R1, R1..." In any case, it is a medieval longsword. Not really (to the are you overthinking question). Even if you are overthinking it, I'm a HEMA (historical European martial arts) practitioner, so I end up overthinking this stuff a lot more than that. For instance: why does Ragnell have such a wide blade and widen even more at the tip? Why is there a giant hole in the Awakening Falchion's handle?
  13. First off; what exactly do you mean by "explain away"? Second of all, all I was trying to do was point out that my original argument that you quoted specifically had to do with what is learned about Rudolf before the Reveal, and you responded by bringing up something after the reveal. I knew about the memory prism; it just wasn't relevant to what I had been saying at the time. Also, "Rudolf's acceptance of Mila's philosophy". We weren't ignoring it, and I wasn't trying to explain it away. It was an incorrect interpretation you brought up and backed up with a cherrypicked half of a sentence, and I then pointed out what Rudolf actually said and what he meant of it, based on his stated reasons for his meaning, which were in the very parts that you ignored when you took half a sentence out of context. Speaking of which: Yes, I do recall saying that. In fact, here's the full paragraph: I was specifically talking about how the game botched it's attempts to convey its points, and what I felt Alm should have said in the moment of the reveal that would have helped. I was talking about how Alm should have called out Rudolf on the "conquer the continent" plan and how their intentions may have been good, but their strength-is-everything mentality led him to wage a continent-wide war just to achieve his ends. You took something I said completely out of context as if somehow negated a completely different point. The question of why he didn't try to get rid of the Duma Faithful himself is a question a lot of people have been asking, and I don't have an answer for you. What I do know, and have shown with a full quote of the entire thing Rudolf said, is that he himself says he's giving Alm to Mycen to keep him away from the Duma Faithful until Alm is ready. Perhaps he himself couldn't without it being a massive heresy and setting all of Rigel against him? I honestly do not know. I do know that he considered Mycen capable of raising Alm into a strong man despite raising Alm in Zofia. After all, he said, "Promise me, my friend. Promise you will shape my boy into a true champion before that day comes." Berkut didn't have the brand. Though I agree that him treating Berkut like a pawn wasn't very good. Wait; what? I was saying that I think you might be cherrypicking the "key points", which I already showed you took out of context and likely misinterpreted, that you were using to argue your point about Rudolf and Mila. No one was accusing you of denying Rudolf considering Duma's philosophy important. That's a bit like saying, "I would be if a blue whale's tongue weighs as much as an elephant." Why do you think anyone was suggesting that you were, "denying that Rudolf considers Duma's philosophy important"? Seriously; I have high-functioning autism, so I know my communication is lacking at times. So please, tell me what it is you think I'm saying, so that I can try to clarify. No; I disagree, and for reasons that I already mentioned. as I said before, they are foils. They have a number of similarities, but a few key differences. They both have the same, "strength is everything" mentality, but they do differ in a key area: Rudolf cares about his family, the well-being of Valentia, and is a father to his men (one of the few things we learn of him pre-reveal), while Ashnard is a sociopath. Honestly; I was just talking about personal preference. I like that particular interpretation simply because it would add to the tragedy of his character (I mean that in a literary sense); him being aware that he's been numb to kindness, and wanting Alm to not be the same. Here's why: Rudolf: Look at his left hand. Mycen: …The Brand! Rudolf: Indeed. Two children with such a mark are prophesied to save Valentia from ruin. And now my son has been born with it. I also hear tale of a newborn Zofian princess who has this selfsame mark. Mycen: Two children… Then Valentia’s end is drawing near? Is Duma’s madness to blame? Rudolf: Yes. His time is running short. He's mentioning Celica specifically because of the brand. He's explaining to Mycen why he's entrusting Mycen to raise Alm; the reason being the brand. Rudolf knows Duma's going mad, and he knows about the prophecy about two brand-bearers. No; I wasn't saying he takes prophecies as evidence at hand; I was saying he was taking the fact that two children have been born with the brand right around the time Rudolf's noticed the warning signs of Duma's madness as evidence at hand, and quite a considerable amount of it, that the prophecy is coming true. Mycen: Are you mad?! What father would hand off his newborn child?! I love you most dear, but I must know the reason for this request. Rudolf: Yes. The reason… Alm here is destined to one day champion Valentia. Mycen: How can you know this? Rudolf: Look at his left hand. Mycen: …The Brand! Rudolf: Indeed. Two children with such a mark are prophesied to save Valentia from ruin. And now my son has been born with it. I also hear tale of a newborn Zofian princess who has this selfsame mark. Mycen: Two children… Then Valentia’s end is drawing near? Is Duma’s madness to blame? Rudolf: Yes. His time is running short. Mycen: I see… Again, you took a sentence out of context.