What is your unpopular Fire Emblem opinion?

[Hawkwing]

5 hours ago, NekoKnight said:

The Awakening support growth speed can be rather arbitrary at times, like Gaius being the fastest support for Tharja of all people.

You could make the argument that they support fast between each other because they're the only two first generation units that are recruited from the enemy side. Or that they're the two most unscrupulous members of the army. Or that Gaius is one of the few people who isn't afraid of Tharja, and so on.

I wouldn't use the word "arbitrary" for describing the support growth in Awakening, as all of them could have a reason behind why it exists. However, said reasoning can definitely range in how well it works. For instance, Libra supports fast with the two people who are sole survivors of their respective groups, while Ricken converses with a shapeshifter and a person who loves their mount. Kellam with Miriel and Vaike with Nowi make more sense with their supports in mind (where the former pairing has one of the more low-key yet sweeter romances in the game, and the latter reveals that Vaike is surprisingly good with kids), and Donnel, Robin, and Lon'qu don't support fast with anyone of the opposite gender due to the former two having absolutely no experience with anyone else in the army (although amnesia and being optional also have something to do with) while the latter has gynophobia, and so on. As I said, they all have a reason behind it, though some are better than others.

[Acacia Sgt]

3 hours ago, X-Naut said:

It's never explicitly stated but the sequel implies Arran was the canon choice by him being the Jagen replacement.

I know. What I mean is that outside cases like those, where by default you are missing one character because it's one or the other, FE very rarely stablishes someone wasn't recruited. Of course, usually it's because direct sequels aren't that common to begin with, but still...

[DarthR0xas]

55 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

I know. What I mean is that outside cases like those, where by default you are missing one character because it's one or the other, FE very rarely stablishes someone wasn't recruited. Of course, usually it's because direct sequels aren't that common to begin with, but still...

I think you meant to say the opposite, since direct sequels or sidequels are very common in FE. Also since that sentence doesn't really make sense with the one preceding it. FE1 has the sidequel of FE2, showing, at the very least, that the Pegasi sisters and Camus canonically survive/were recruited. Then FE3 comes, and basically everyone survives/was recruited. With FE4, you have the sidequel of FE5, which establishes that Bridget, Leif, and others who I'm too lazy to properly go into survive/were born/were recruited. Despite the final chapters being a significant retcon of FE4's chapter 9, the fact that they still remain canon, and that Leif continues with Seliph's army afterwards is enough to say that the games are intrinsically linked. That said, as the latter game, anything FE5 says is taken at a higher precedent, since it shows a more accurate vision of what Kaga wanted. FE7 has FE6, showing that basically any person who has kids canonically survives in order to bear them so they could be recruited, which also means said unit was canonically recruited, and any character who appears in the story also survives. FE8 is the only odd one out, since it has no connections. FE9 has FE10, everyone survives/was recruited, even if you transfer over (except for poor ol' Largo). FE11 and 12 are remakes, re-establishing the canon of FE1 and 3. FE13 shows at the very least that Marth, Caeda, and Tiki survived, as well as some others that the game makes reference towards that I am blanking on right now. FE14 shows that Owain, Inigo, and Severa are canonically born/recruited, which means their parents would have to survive. I'd also wager the existence of Asugi, Rhajat, and Caeldori means that Gaius, Tharja, and Cordelia survive, and for Gaius and Tharja that they were recruited, but that's more headcanon than anything else. FE15 is a remake of FE2, already went over that. 

[Acacia Sgt]

3 minutes ago, DarthR0xas said:

I think you meant to say the opposite, since direct sequels or sidequels are very common in FE. Also since that sentence doesn't really make sense with the one preceding it. FE1 has the sidequel of FE2, showing, at the very least, that the Pegasi sisters and Camus canonically survive/were recruited. Then FE3 comes, and basically everyone survives/was recruited. With FE4, you have the sidequel of FE5, which establishes that Bridget, Leif, and others who I'm too lazy to properly go into survive/were born/were recruited. Despite the final chapters being a significant retcon of FE4's chapter 9, the fact that they still remain canon, and that Leif continues with Seliph's army afterwards is enough to say that the games are intrinsically linked. That said, as the latter game, anything FE5 says is taken at a higher precedent, since it shows a more accurate vision of what Kaga wanted. FE7 has FE6, showing that basically any person who has kids canonically survives in order to bear them so they could be recruited, which also means said unit was canonically recruited, and any character who appears in the story also survives. FE8 is the only odd one out, since it has no connections. FE9 has FE10, everyone survives/was recruited, even if you transfer over (except for poor ol' Largo). FE11 and 12 are remakes, re-establishing the canon of FE1 and 3. FE13 shows at the very least that Marth, Caeda, and Tiki survived, as well as some others that the game makes reference towards that I am blanking on right now. FE14 shows that Owain, Inigo, and Severa are canonically born/recruited, which means their parents would have to survive. I'd also wager the existence of Asugi, Rhajat, and Caeldori means that Gaius, Tharja, and Cordelia survive, and for Gaius and Tharja that they were recruited, but that's more headcanon than anything else. FE15 is a remake of FE2, already went over that. 

I suppose it's only if we go pedantic about it. Shadows of Valentia and Thraccia are side-stories, Blazing Sword a prequel, and Awakening is a distant sequel. Only Mystery/NewMystery and Radiant Dawn qualify as direct sequels. These are the ideal scenarios to define if someone was or wasn't recruited in the previous adventure. Outside of course of scenarios like Fates using the multiverse route to have Awakening characters in it.

I meant about not being recruited, not about being recruited. Which is the point. We always are shown that people did got recruited and that stuff, but rarely were the opposite happens. Which leads to my opinion of not assuming everyone does join the player army if it's not stated otherwise.

[Acacia Sgt]

3 minutes ago, DarthR0xas said:

I think you meant to say the opposite, since direct sequels or sidequels are very common in FE. Also since that sentence doesn't really make sense with the one preceding it. FE1 has the sidequel of FE2, showing, at the very least, that the Pegasi sisters and Camus canonically survive/were recruited. Then FE3 comes, and basically everyone survives/was recruited. With FE4, you have the sidequel of FE5, which establishes that Bridget, Leif, and others who I'm too lazy to properly go into survive/were born/were recruited. Despite the final chapters being a significant retcon of FE4's chapter 9, the fact that they still remain canon, and that Leif continues with Seliph's army afterwards is enough to say that the games are intrinsically linked. That said, as the latter game, anything FE5 says is taken at a higher precedent, since it shows a more accurate vision of what Kaga wanted. FE7 has FE6, showing that basically any person who has kids canonically survives in order to bear them so they could be recruited, which also means said unit was canonically recruited, and any character who appears in the story also survives. FE8 is the only odd one out, since it has no connections. FE9 has FE10, everyone survives/was recruited, even if you transfer over (except for poor ol' Largo). FE11 and 12 are remakes, re-establishing the canon of FE1 and 3. FE13 shows at the very least that Marth, Caeda, and Tiki survived, as well as some others that the game makes reference towards that I am blanking on right now. FE14 shows that Owain, Inigo, and Severa are canonically born/recruited, which means their parents would have to survive. I'd also wager the existence of Asugi, Rhajat, and Caeldori means that Gaius, Tharja, and Cordelia survive, and for Gaius and Tharja that they were recruited, but that's more headcanon than anything else. FE15 is a remake of FE2, already went over that. 

I suppose it's only if we go pedantic about it. Shadows of Valentia and Thraccia are side-stories, Blazing Sword a prequel, and Awakening is a distant sequel. Only Mystery/NewMystery and Radiant Dawn qualify as direct sequels. These are the ideal scenarios to define if someone was or wasn't recruited in the previous adventure. Outside of course of scenarios like Fates using the multiverse route to have Awakening characters in it.

I meant about not being recruited, not about being recruited. Which is the point. We always are shown that people did got recruited and that stuff, but rarely were the opposite happens. Which leads to my opinion of not assuming everyone does join the player army if it's not stated otherwise.

[Etrurian emperor]

12 hours ago, Slumber said:

That's a tricky one, but I'd say Pelleas lives, Sephiran dies. Pelleas dying, while an interesting plot point, does feel pretty out of character for Micaiah. Sephiran, meanwhile, has no real reason to continue living past the events of RD. For the guy who orchestrated everything that happened, it feels like he gets off with a slap on the wrist.

But it's not a hill I'd die on. I could accept any variation of "Pelleas lives/dies and Sephiran lives/dies".

Sephiran living for several thousands of years longer would also be somewhat tragic for Zelgius. Yune makes it a point to mention how much in sync their souls were meaning Zelgius would probably get pretty lonely in the afterlife.

But Sephiran does have a reason to keep living. Sanaki is still a child and the last chapters in the game really drive home that they are pretty much father and daughter. I could see Sephiran using his extra years of like to make it up to Sanaki and guide her further, maybe even looking after Sanaki's legacy and heirs when she's gone.

Edited February 5, 2019 by Etrurian emperor

[Icelerate]

On 04/02/2019 at 1:02 AM, NekoKnight said:

I see. I agree with your reasoning for Micaiah although the relationship being romantic instead of platonic has some strange implications. I would consider Lyn to be the closest thing to a canon love interest to Hector if only for their chemistry and shared scenes as main characters.

There aren't a lot of canon lord pairings to compare to. Marth and Caeda, and Sigurd and Deirdre come from very underwritten games so there isn't a lot to say there. I don't know about Leif but Roy, Eirika, Ephraim, Ike, Chrom and Corrin don't seem to have canon love interests (although some have more probable love interests). Alm and Celica have negative chemistry, in my opinion (Alm's saint like patience could make him a partner for anyone).

What do you mean by the relationship being romantic instead of platonic has strange implications?

Do you prefer Alm with Faye? Just kidding.  I think it would be better for the plot and their relationship if Celica helped Alm liberate Zofia but afterwards abandon Alm because he wanted to invade Rigel while Celica wanted to opt a defensive stance. 

[Icelerate]

On 04/02/2019 at 6:11 PM, Slumber said:

That's a tricky one, but I'd say Pelleas lives, Sephiran dies. Pelleas dying, while an interesting plot point, does feel pretty out of character for Micaiah. Sephiran, meanwhile, has no real reason to continue living past the events of RD. For the guy who orchestrated everything that happened, it feels like he gets off with a slap on the wrist.

But it's not a hill I'd die on. I could accept any variation of "Pelleas lives/dies and Sephiran lives/dies".

I don't see how Pelleas dying is out of character for Micaiah. The only difference between the second and third option is that Micaiah gets a last minute vision that suggests that killing Pelleas is a bad idea even though she was going through with it either way. 

[ping]

16 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

What do you mean by the relationship being romantic instead of platonic has strange implications?

Let's just say that Sigmund Freud would suckle at his cigar extra hard if he got Sothe on his couch.

[Ottservia]

I know I’ve stated this on a different thread but this seems to be a more appropriate place for it. Anyway I feel SoV’s story is worse than awakening’s story. Hell I’d go as far as to say it’s almost as bad as fates’ story. The only reason it isn’t is because it has better villains and presentation than fates. 

[Slumber]

1 hour ago, Icelerate said:

I don't see how Pelleas dying is out of character for Micaiah. The only difference between the second and third option is that Micaiah gets a last minute vision that suggests that killing Pelleas is a bad idea even though she was going through with it either way. 

Right, but she's strong-armed into the decision, and doesn't really fight it as much as you'd expect out of her character. And then the option to pass the deed off to Tauroneo just adds to the weirdness.

It feels like the "Wait, maybe we shouldn't kill Pelleas" option should have been the default for Micaiah's character, and only comes into consideration in a second playthrough because of somewhat contrived plot reasons.

Edited February 7, 2019 by Slumber

[JimmyBeans]

1 hour ago, Ottservia said:

I know I’ve stated this on a different thread but this seems to be a more appropriate place for it. Anyway I feel SoV’s story is worse than awakening’s story. Hell I’d go as far as to say it’s almost as bad as fates’ story. The only reason it isn’t is because it has better villains and presentation than fates. 

I disagree.

I think Echoes definitely has the best story of the 3ds games and I'd go as far to say Kaga's stories work better than every post-kaga game and the only thing that has held a candle to it is Tellius. (I guess that is my unpopular opinion)

What the post-kaga games have over the OG games are soul, which is why the aspect of the old games getting remade are really fascinating to me it's just a shame that we have only gotten one remake with good production values.

The point I want to make is that Echoes story just works so much better than Fates and Awakening it's major downside is that some of the fluff they added created some really head scratching scenes when it came to certain areas in the story, but those came far fewer in number when compared to the previous 2 games.

But alas, that is my opinion.

[Interdimensional Observer]

1 hour ago, ping said:

Let's just say that Sigmund Freud would suckle at his cigar extra hard if he got Sothe on his couch.

Ah the infamous Oedipus Complex, now who is the father whom Sothe wants to kill to sexually claim his mother?

Freud had some nice ideas like Id-Ego-Superego, but others like this were absurd.

[Ottservia]

1 hour ago, JimmyBeans said:

I disagree.

I think Echoes definitely has the best story of the 3ds games and I'd go as far to say Kaga's stories work better than every post-kaga game and the only thing that has held a candle to it is Tellius. (I guess that is my unpopular opinion)

What the post-kaga games have over the OG games are soul, which is why the aspect of the old games getting remade are really fascinating to me it's just a shame that we have only gotten one remake with good production values.

The point I want to make is that Echoes story just works so much better than Fates and Awakening it's major downside is that some of the fluff they added created some really head scratching scenes when it came to certain areas in the story, but those came far fewer in number when compared to the previous 2 games.

But alas, that is my opinion.

I mean I can't speak for fe4 or 5 for how well those stories are written but note how I say SoV specifically here cause the problems I have with this story do not in anyway apply to the original gaiden(ok well maybe a little but not really considering how barebones that story is). Regardless there is one simple reason I say awakening has a better story. SoV contradicts itself and awakening, for all of it's problems, does not. All the themes and messages SoV's tries to go for(like hard work beating natural talent, it is not the the station of your birth that defines what you are/aren't capable of,  you cannot rule with strength or kindness alone, etc.) are contradicted in some form or fashion and it's not at all subtle about it. By mila it is not. Like Alm is supposed to represent the theme of "It is not a man's status or blood ties that define what he can accomplish but rather it is his effort and willingness to push forward that does" but that idea just sort of gets flushed down the toilet when you learn alm is the prince of rigel and it's because of that fact he is able to wield the royal sword(one of the best swords both lore wise and gameplay wise). Only those with royal blood can enter the vault and wield falchion which is the only sword capable of slaying duma. You see what I'm trying to say here?  But anyway those are just my thoughts on the matter.

Edited February 7, 2019 by Ottservia

[JimmyBeans]

1 hour ago, Ottservia said:

I mean I can't speak for fe4 or 5 for how well those stories are written but note how I say SoV specifically here cause the problems I have with this story do not in anyway apply to the original gaiden(ok well maybe a little but not really considering how barebones that story is). Regardless there is one simple reason I say awakening has a better story. SoV contradicts itself and awakening, for all of it's problems, does not. All the themes and messages SoV's tries to go for(like hard work beating natural talent, it is not the the station of your birth that defines what you are/aren't capable of,  you cannot rule with strength or kindness alone, etc.) are contradicted in some form or fashion and it's not at all subtle about it. By mila it is not. Like Alm is supposed to represent the theme of "It is not a man's status or blood ties that define what he can accomplish but rather it is his effort and willingness to push forward that does" but that idea just sort of gets flushed down the toilet when you learn alm is the prince of rigel and it's because of that fact he is able to wield the royal sword(one of the best swords both lore wise and gameplay wise). Only those with royal blood can enter the vault and wield falchion which is the only sword capable of slaying duma. You see what I'm trying to say here?  But anyway those are just my thoughts on the matter.

Yes I was aware you only meant SoV and I only say that SoV is the best of the 3ds for the reasons i stated sorry for the confusion on that matter.

As for the rest of your post I've always thought the whole "Alm contradicts his theme" was a little weird. Let me Explain...

To say that is the theme of the game is missing out on the many themes SoV presents and even when only talking about Alm's route. The Commoner vs. Noble theme is the main theme of Chapter 1 and Chapter 3 (alms route) and has many events such as the infighting with Fernand, Berkut's ideals, and Clive's growing suspicion of Alm as the 2 former events take place and grow. Throughout all of chapter 3 Alm faces that question time and again and it Clive finally admits hes wrong after Alm is able to save Delthea and then stands up for him in front of Berkut and Fernand at the beginning of chapter 4 and that wraps up that theme nicely. 

The game transitions eventually to destiny and responsibility as Alm is tied back to the foreshadowing Mycen gave us at Zofia Castle at the end chapter 1.

The reason I have a distaste for the argument of Alm contradicting his own theme is because it would of been lame to dwell on "noble vs. commoner" while Alm was marching down to slay Duma and get falchion (hopefully not in that order). It is a bit weird that they went with theme knowing what Alm's identity is I will give you that, but it still added a nice conflict for Alm to face in the early days of him joining the deliverance.

To me even with that odd choice paired against a game that has 3-4 stories scrunched in to 1, with only 1 of those being really good with the others dragging the 1st arc down filling the story with contrivances does not hold a lot of weight with me, but then again that's just me.

[Slumber]

2 hours ago, Ottservia said:

like hard work beating natural talent, it is not the the station of your birth that defines what you are/aren't capable of,  you cannot rule with strength or kindness alone, etc.

How does Echoes' story contradict any of these? The only one that's iffy is the very first one, since everything gets handed to Alm, born with natural talent(And Royal Blood).

#2 is still reinforced by the story besides Alm and Celica eventually becoming rulers. Beyond this, all of your commoner allies generally end up in the exact same spots as their noble comrades in the epilogues. Clive and Claire don't end up better off than Gray, Tobin, Forsyth, etc. Kamui's a random nomad and founds a country.

#3 is the entire point of the story. The game never fails to show that the reason people respect and follow Alm and Celica is because they're both strong and kind. And they become the rulers of the entire continent, building one that exists to fulfill theme #2 that you mention.

And as for Awakening never contradicting itself, it depends on what you consider the themes of Awakening. Chrom's personal arc is one giant contradiction. Him losing Emmeryn is supposed to be a big push to him maturing and becoming Exalt. He gets over the loss and begins doing things that he otherwise wouldn't(Like taking help from Validar) when out of options. And then the final choice of the game exists solely because Chrom suddenly cannot cope with losing somebody, and is willing to doom the world 1000 years down the line because of it. The last chapter of the game is just the writers going "haha Chrom actually didn't grow at all".

Edited February 8, 2019 by Slumber

[Hawkwing]

2 hours ago, Ottservia said:

I mean I can't speak for fe4 or 5 for how well those stories are written but note how I say SoV specifically here cause the problems I have with this story do not in anyway apply to the original gaiden(ok well maybe a little but not really considering how barebones that story is). Regardless there is one simple reason I say awakening has a better story. SoV contradicts itself and awakening, for all of it's problems, does not. All the themes and messages SoV's tries to go for(like hard work beating natural talent, it is not the the station of your birth that defines what you are/aren't capable of,  you cannot rule with strength or kindness alone, etc.) are contradicted in some form or fashion and it's not at all subtle about it. By mila it is not. Like Alm is supposed to represent the theme of "It is not a man's status or blood ties that define what he can accomplish but rather it is his effort and willingness to push forward that does" but that idea just sort of gets flushed down the toilet when you learn alm is the prince of rigel and it's because of that fact he is able to wield the royal sword(one of the best swords both lore wise and gameplay wise). Only those with royal blood can enter the vault and wield falchion which is the only sword capable of slaying duma. You see what I'm trying to say here?  But anyway those are just my thoughts on the matter.

I have the greatest mixed feelings over the addition of the "It's a persons character, not their status, that determines their worth" lesson in Shadows of Valentia.

From a narrative standpoint, it is among the most blatant examples I can think of of a story breaking its own aesop. Since the twist was part of the original game, the writers had to know what the addition of this lesson would ultimately imply, so it couldn't have been an accident on their part. I can understand inserting it to add dramatic irony to the mix, but even if it is there to a small degree, it isn't as prominent as it should be. Even if I do enjoy the story of SoV, I really can't blame anyone if this single change from the original Gaiden is enough to dislike the story as a whole, or at least rank it lower in a comparison

Yet... when looking at things from the perspective of the characters in the world, I actually don't mind how it was handled. Alm only learns about his true heritage near the very end of the game. For all he knows, the only thing special about him is being personally trained by Mycen, which could explain Alms strengths as a soldier despite his lack of experience. Everywhere else, Alm believes he's just an average joe that has risen up to the occasion, and thus can state the lesson about "titles not mattering" unironically from that perspective.

I do think it was a missed opportunity that Alm never says his mind about this lesson being broken or how he was handed the title of Rigels Emperor despite previously stating that he has little interest in becoming king of Zofia after the conflict is over even though several people believe that's exactly what he is going to do. However, it doesn't bother me too much because it could be chalked up to Alm focusing on the impending threat of Duma and still being in shock over having every blood relative dead in a short amount of time, so the full responsibility of what it means to be Emperor hasn't sunk in yet. It also doesn't bother me because this could easily be explored in DLC, an expansion pack, or even a sequel, and I would love to see the cast of characters interact with each other more, as well as what the reign of a united Valentia was like in its first few years.

Long story short, I hate this addition from a narrative standpoint, as it's a very blatant and avoidable case of breaking an otherwise great aesop, yet at the same time I enjoy that Alm's actions make sense for why he promotes this lesson, and I believe the aftermath of the game would be extremely interesting to explore in a sequel of some sorts.

[Interdimensional Observer]

5 minutes ago, Slumber said:

And as for Awakening never contradicting itself, it depends on what you consider the themes of Awakening. Chrom's personal arc is one giant contradiction. Him losing Emmeryn is supposed to be a big push to him maturing and becoming Exalt. He gets over the loss and begins doing things that he otherwise wouldn't(Like taking help from Validar) when out of options. And then the final choice of the game exists solely because Chrom suddenly cannot cope with losing somebody, and is willing to doom the world 1000 years down the line because of it. The last chapter of the game is just the writers going "haha Chrom actually didn't grow at all".

Well there is also supposed to be fate and destiny and all that stuff. But the thing is, that theme is so nebulous, more open than all of Sacae and the worst maps in all of FE combined. It isn't just Awakening's problem, how any story deals with fate is tricky, and probably most of the time poorly handled. Odin Sphere is the one time where I think I've seen it done well, the lesson being "Do not try to defy fate, do one's duty in it" since if you try to break from prophecy, the world is reduced to nothing. 99.9999% of things die even when prophecy is followed, but something is better than nothing.

 

Also, not to get FF too much in here, but I will say that Squall sorta kinda commits a similar error, not exactly the same, but well, you should know well. I'm in agreement with your criticism of Chrom, it's the one thing keeping me back from considering him good. I like his blending of the physical and behavioral Marthian and Hectorian conceptions of lordship, but that lone choice needed to be written better. It's perhaps worse than Ephraim after 5x for me, although Ephraim on the whole is slower burn that burns worse.

Although I have come to realize that if he had just said "Sorry Robin, no hard feelings, but you need to go", that would have been counterproductive. As in "What? -You're TELLING ME TO DIE?! What happened to our friendship?! Screw you! Grima we are ONE!".

The best solution would have been to have Chrom mope a little, but then get a hold of themselves and say "The weight of the world is on your shoulders Robin. I can't bear the thought of losing you, but neither can I ignore the peace of mind the future would have if Grima ceased to exist. I'm not the one who has to die, I can't make this decision. Only you have the right to decide. Whichever you pick, I'll abide by it, no hard feelings.".

That would pass the burden to the player without Chrom interfering in it. Do they refuse fictional death due to bonds to fictional people? Or do they accept a fictional mortal sacrifice because it could save countless generations of fictional people from fictional evil? It would also avoid making Chrom too sentimental or too cold.

[Ottservia]

1 minute ago, Slumber said:

#2 is still reinforced by the story besides Alm and Celica eventually becoming rulers. Beyond this, all of your commoner allies generally end up in the exact same spots as their noble comrades in the epilogues. Clive and Claire don't end up better off than Gray, Tobin, Forsyth, etc. Kamui's a random nomad and founds a country.

Because Alm is SUPPOSED to be the MAIN catalyst to that theme not gray or tobin because THEY are never really given that much focus. Yes you can make an argument for forscyth and python that much I will agree. However, again, they are never given enough focus within the story to really leave the impact necessary for it to work. And even if you were to make that argument, The game makes it very explicitly clear that these characters will NEVER be on the level of Alm because THEY were not born with the special birthmark to do all the special things that alm does(slaying duma,wielding royal sword, etc.) . Hell, Tobin even says so himself in one of his base conversations. Alm is the focus of this story and as such needs to embody the core themes of this narrative which he doesn't. The story presents him as a part of that conflict and as an important piece into exploring that conflict but by the very nature of how alm's character is written he cannot do that. It just leads to a very muddled message of "only the chosen one can do anything of worth in this world but just don't be dick about it" 

13 minutes ago, Slumber said:

#3 is the entire point of the story. The game never fails to show that the reason people respect and follow Alm and Celica is because they're both strong and kind. And they become the rulers of the entire continent, building one that exists to fulfill theme #2 that you mention.

It may be the entire point of the game but that doesn't mean it's handled well. Then again maybe contradiction isn't the right word here but more so it tries to tell a morally grey story but can't because it's too busy trying to make Alm look like the good guy in literally every situation. Think about it for a moment and how the story tries to present this idea. There is a reason as to why there are two lords here. Alm is supposed to represent Duma's ideologies at least to a degree and the same goes for Celica but for mila. This fine. I actually really like this idea of two characters being representative of two opposing yet symbiotic ideologies where the positives of offset the flaws of the other. Alone they will fall but in having a piece of the other within themselves they are able to grow and mature beyond the pitfalls of their respective philosophies(it's one of the reasons I like Naruto so much but I digress). For the most part the theme is handled relatively well at least as far as Celica is concerned anyway. Where it falls apart however is with(once again) Alm. he DOES NOT represent duma at all in the slightest and he is ALWAYS portrayed as being on the right side of the argument and with a story like this that can't work. The whole point is that neither of them are supposed to be correct but neither of them are entirely wrong either. It's supposed to allow us as players to draw our own conclusions as we watch the events of the story unfold. However Alm is always as being right so anyone who disagrees with him is wrong meaning Celica is wrong as well as the players who agree with her. She just comes off as unreasonable B*tch at the end of act 2 which should not be case if you're going for a story like this. Now that's not to say Celica can be portrayed as wrong later in the story and that Alm can't realize the message of the story sooner than she does. when presented in this way, however, it just kind of destroys any semblance of moral grey the story is going for.

Now about Alm not representing Duma, one can make the argument that what Berkut is for and I sort of agree with this. However I feel like it could've been handled a lot better. Y'see the problem with Alm is that he is never challenged or reflective of his own ideals(at least not until the end anyway and even then it's barely which just makes it feel forced). Like I feel what would've made the story so much better if we got to see more of Alm in a negative light. If we get to see him fail or hell even go too far at one point. Have that rigelian blood really show it's ugly head and have him work to overcome that. This would work really with the theme of "the station of your birth does not define who you are" and instead of detracting from the theme, this would allow alm to add to it. Like have him actually start acting like Berkut just a little in the opposite fashion. This would make berkut into an even better Foil to Alm and the narrative could exploit this by having Alm realize this either on his own or with the help of his friends. 

[Interdimensional Observer]

2 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Now about Alm not representing Duma, one can make the argument that what Berkut is for and I sort of agree with this. However I feel like it could've been handled a lot better. Y'see the problem with Alm is that he is never challenged or reflective of his own ideals(at least not until the end anyway and even then it's barely which just makes it feel forced). Like I feel what would've made the story so much better if we got to see more of Alm in a negative light. If we get to see him fail or hell even go too far at one point. Have that rigelian blood really show it's ugly head and have him work to overcome that. This would work really with the theme of "the station of your birth does not define who you are" and instead of detracting from the theme, this would allow alm to add to it. Like have him actually start acting like Berkut just a little in the opposite fashion. This would make berkut into an even better Foil to Alm and the narrative could exploit this by having Alm realize this either on his own or with the help of his friends. 

I'm curious how one would carry this out factoring in the gameplay though. The choice of SoV to abide strictly by most of Gaiden's battle arrangements sounds like it would be difficult to work around. Alm taking Castle Zofia just after meeting the resistance for instance. He has to in SoV, because they chose not to mess with this remake too much, and therefore they couldn't add in new battles after the meetup, but before Castle liberation. Similarly, the choice to restrict the Treasury to Alm is because it was so in Gaiden.

[Ottservia]

10 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

I'm curious how one would carry this out factoring in the gameplay though. The choice of SoV to abide strictly by most of Gaiden's battle arrangements sounds like it would be difficult to work around. Alm taking Castle Zofia just after meeting the resistance for instance. He has to in SoV, because they chose not to mess with this remake too much, and therefore they couldn't add in new battles after the meetup, but before Castle liberation. Similarly, the choice to restrict the Treasury to Alm is because it was so in Gaiden.

I mean I suppose I was being a bit too ambitious when giving my examples but honestly all the story would really need to do is add like one or two dialogue scenes(or hell even a support) showcasing Alm being kind of barbaric? aggressive? like just kind of show how much he's willing to do just to crush rigel. Again just a few lines would do the trick and then when he sees how far Berkut seems to be falling, he snaps out of it. Like he realizes what kind of person he will slowly become and then there ya go. Have him sort of start acting like how he was in the awakening DLC instead of generic A1 light novel protagonist #456. Cause if we had gotten that Alm instead(even for just a little bit), then the story would've been infinitely better.

Edited February 8, 2019 by Ottservia

[Slumber]

21 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Because Alm is SUPPOSED to be the MAIN catalyst to that theme not gray or tobin because THEY are never really given that much focus. Yes you can make an argument for forscyth and python that much I will agree. However, again, they are never given enough focus within the story to really leave the impact necessary for it to work. And even if you were to make that argument, The game makes it very explicitly clear that these characters will NEVER be on the level of Alm because THEY were not born with the special birthmark to do all the special things that alm does(slaying duma,wielding royal sword, etc.) . Hell, Tobin even says so himself in one of his base conversations. Alm is the focus of this story and as such needs to embody the core themes of this narrative which he doesn't. The story presents him as a part of that conflict and as an important piece into exploring that conflict but by the very nature of how alm's character is written he cannot do that. It just leads to a very muddled message of "only the chosen one can do anything of worth in this world but just don't be dick about it" 

It may be the entire point of the game but that doesn't mean it's handled well. Then again maybe contradiction isn't the right word here but more so it tries to tell a morally grey story but can't because it's too busy trying to make Alm look like the good guy in literally every situation. Think about it for a moment and how the story tries to present this idea. There is a reason as to why there are two lords here. Alm is supposed to represent Duma's ideologies at least to a degree and the same goes for Celica but for mila. This fine. I actually really like this idea of two characters being representative of two opposing yet symbiotic ideologies where the positives of offset the flaws of the other. Alone they will fall but in having a piece of the other within themselves they are able to grow and mature beyond the pitfalls of their respective philosophies(it's one of the reasons I like Naruto so much but I digress). For the most part the theme is handled relatively well at least as far as Celica is concerned anyway. Where it falls apart however is with(once again) Alm. he DOES NOT represent duma at all in the slightest and he is ALWAYS portrayed as being on the right side of the argument and with a story like this that can't work. The whole point is that neither of them are supposed to be correct but neither of them are entirely wrong either. It's supposed to allow us as players to draw our own conclusions as we watch the events of the story unfold. However Alm is always as being right so anyone who disagrees with him is wrong meaning Celica is wrong as well as the players who agree with her. She just comes off as unreasonable B*tch at the end of act 2 which should not be case if you're going for a story like this. Now that's not to say Celica can be portrayed as wrong later in the story and that Alm can't realize the message of the story sooner than she does. when presented in this way, however, it just kind of destroys any semblance of moral grey the story is going for.

I overall agree that these themes aren't handled well. A lot of the themes of Echoes get muddied by Alm being royalty. I just wouldn't say they're outright bad, or that they're contradicted, and it's something I see a lot of people say when knocking SoV's story, but rarely see anybody explain in any real depth.

Some of the saving grace is what @Interdimensional Observer  says. Alm being royalty may make us immediately feel that some of these themes get downplayed, but they do make more sense in the context of the game itself.

[JimmyBeans]

27 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

(snip)

Lets back up a bit... The game and story has some issues and I agree with some of the things you say about it but the point im making (along with slumber I assume) is that these things detract a lot less from the story than you think (atleast to me).

I just don't understand how these themes make Echoes so inferior to Awakenings all over the place story... Let's not forget about the Grima's resurrection that nullified the point of the entire relevancy of collecting all the stones.

[Ottservia]

1 minute ago, JimmyBeans said:

Lets back up a bit... The game and story has some issues and I agree with some of the things you say about it but the point im making (along with slumber I assume) is that these things detract a lot less from the story than you think (atleast to me).

I just don't understand how these themes make Echoes so inferior to Awakenings all over the place story... Let's not forget about the Grima's resurrection that nullified the point of the entire relevancy of collecting all the stones.

You see the problem with echoes it tries to present a theme or message but just falls flat on its face in it's delivery. I mean to an extent awakening does this as well just not as egregiously. Cause the thing about awakening, is that the themes it presents aren't contradicted just delivered in a very rushed manner.

Awakening, as far as I can tell anyway has two(maybe three) core themes:

1. we are not set on a predestined path. Fate is not absolute. YOU have the power to change your fate no matter dire it may seem.

2. passing the torch to the next generation or to twist it in a more negative light burdening future generations with the previous generations' failings.

Neither theme is not necessarily contradicted and even when it seems that way, they story is doing it intentionally to further explore the theme and corrects any contradiction by the end of the story(unless of course you wanna count spotpass characters but even then). Grima's Resurrection is not a contradiction of the story's themes. Again it's just a product of a rushed development which I am not excusing btw. I'm just saying it's not a contradiction. Again the main issue with awakening's story is that it's rushed leaving a lot of things underdeveloped namely the villains and world. Awakening at least succeeds somewhat in delivering on those core themes. The future kids, chrom, and emmeryn are examples of the second one while robin and Lucina are examples of the former. And if given more chapters devoted to developing some key aspects to those characters(for example giving a little more insight into who gangrel is as a person and what plegia as a nation truly stands for) then the story could've been so much but with with the way it is, It's alright not great but not terrible either.

The difference with echoes is that with every theme or message it tries to present, it just falls flat on its face. Every time it tries it fails spectacularly. Like awakening at the very least gets SOME things right. Echoes meanwhile is too busy making Alm look good to care about how any of it would affect the narrative as whole. Now one could argue awakening is similiar with robin and chrom. Both Alm and Chrom are paragon-esque characters. However here's the difference. Awakening and echoes are two fundamentally different stories. A paragon character like Chrom works within his story because for one it's not supposed to be as grey a story as SoV. Yes, there are grey elements to awakening's story but it's not focused on as heavily and the story itself does not require to the degree that SoV's story does. Cause y'know its core themes do not necessarily require that level of moral ambiguity in order to be executed well. The whole point of Chrom's character is to grow into a paragon by accepting the torch passed on to him and growing into the exalt his nation needs. Chrom is hot headed and reckless leading him act without thinking of the consequences of his actions. It's only after emmeryn's sacrifice and Robin's influence that he learns to cool his head a little bit and think rationally which is a quality a nation's leader needs. Is it rushed? Could it have been done better? yes, most certainly. However, at the very least it's consistent and the story knows what exactly it wants to do.

Alm in the meanwhile does not fulfill the role he is meant fulfill(that being a slight representation of duma's ideologies of strength) but instead is just a paragon which that kind of protagonist does not work with the story this game is trying to tell. It clashes with the core themes of the story and muddles its messages. Chrom and Robin enhance and perpetuate the themes of their story. Alm only detracts from his. Really it's the ways these two stories screw up is why I think awakening is better. A story's themes are, at least to me, the most important aspects of any given narrative. Why? because it's the one aspect of a story that ties into everything else from the characters, world, plot, etc. Without anything to really tie the story together, it just kind of turns into a mess(like fates for example). It's those things that make a story last. What gets people talking for years after its initial release. So to screw it up like that is just not okay to me.

[NekoKnight]

7 hours ago, Icelerate said:

What do you mean by the relationship being romantic instead of platonic has strange implications?

Do you prefer Alm with Faye? Just kidding.  I think it would be better for the plot and their relationship if Celica helped Alm liberate Zofia but afterwards abandon Alm because he wanted to invade Rigel while Celica wanted to opt a defensive stance. 

While the game is a bit ambiguous as to the nature of Sothe and Micaiah's relationship, Micaiah did act as a maternal figure to Sothe and Sothe describes her in PoR as "like family" iirc. It's not as sketchy as the Fates royals and Corrin but it makes me wonder how their relationship developed into a romantic one.

I think the best written relationships have two people that can give something the other lacks. Micaiah has a selfless nature that draws people to her cause but she is also reckless which can get her into hot water, which makes Sothe's realist personality complimentary. Lyn's hangups about the death of her clan cause her to be judgemental but she also has the emotional range that Hector lacks.

Unfortunately for Celica, I don't see what she can give to Alm, because Alm is perfect. Every choice he makes is the right choice and his outlook on life is proven to be the correct one by the end of the game. Celica, meanwhile is wrong about everything. She's secretive and yet she lashes out at others for not understanding her. It seems like they're only together because fate said so and not because their relationship really developed to that point. Also, I don't really buy them still caring  about each other that strongly considering they only knew each other for a brief period and then they were separated for many years.

I agree that they should have spent more time together before the split. Celica should have left Alm when it was clear their ideals were too different as opposed to her just flipping out over Alm's innocuous comments and leaving without explaining anything.