What's the whole deal with hate for sword-wielding lords?

[Corrobin]

I don't really get it.

[Re: The weirdo.]

Swords generally are considered the weakest weapon type, as they don't, Usually anyway, have a reliable 1/2 range attack, and lords are generally footlocked and late promoting, all together making a mess of a unit. 

[Etrurian emperor]

Because its a little bit boring by now. So far the vast majority of the lords use Swords  with only one lord for Axes, one for lances and just two lords as mages. Some variety would be nice.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Etrurian emperor

[Hawkwing]

Mostly the lack of variety, the fact that it can occasionally screw some lords over in some levels (Roy is the worst offender, as his game isn't afraid to shove lance-using enemies down your throat is some of the earlier levels), and the fact that it's among the most common weapon type in the series (seriously, take a look at any class tree, and you can see how many use swords).

That, at it's caused some balance concerns in spin-offs such as Warriors (the "too many swords" meme/concern came about for a reason) and Heroes (again, sword users are the most common weapon type in that game).

[SavageVolug]

I think it mainly has to do with that the vast majority of all lords wield swords, in the entirety of the Fire Emblem franchise there have only been two deviations from this. The first being Hector an Axe lord and the second was Ephraim a Lance lord aside from these two every single lord in the franchise wields a sword as his/her primary weapon.

There is of course the fact that swords are the weakest weapon stat wise and have no 1-2 range alternatives like you do with the axe line or lance line for that matter. There are weapons like the Lightning Sword, Light Brand etc but for the most part the opportunity to aquire these weapons are few and far between. Whereas it is usually easy to aquire handaxes or javelins for all those that can use one. Additionally those weapons work off of a magic stat so that's another limiting factor there, although in pre-awakening games these weapons did a pretty good amount of damage even if the one wielding it did not have a remarkable magic stat. This may still be true even now but when you have characters that have a good magic stat AND can use swords there's little reason to give such a sword to someone with a poor magic stat.

So ultimately I think it has more to do with people would enjoy a little more weapon variety in the lords especially when so many of them wield swords and on top of that a lot of the classes in Fire Emblem either start of wielding swords or in most cases can wield swords upon promotion. People would like a lot of variety in that regard. Interestingly swords in medieval warfare were a poor weapon choice when fighting someone in full plate armor or even chainmail for that matter, axes or lances on the other hand were a better choice.

[Re: The weirdo.]

Oh hi @Hawkwing . Another thing is that, generally, Sword locked lords are completely inferior to mercenaries.

 

[Vaximillian]

I’m fine with swordlords and wouldn’t mind more. But it’s just me.

[Interdimensional Observer]

Banality in crossovers, and the fact that FE has had a sword lord in every single game when there are are at least 4 other equally important weapon types in FE, are the two biggest issues.

The "Swords are weak" argument is only relevant to FE7 and beyond. FE6 seems to be the game where they are roughly equal to the others, better in the Western Isles, worse for the rest. Everything pre-6, and Swords are more or less the best, so there is no issue about being locked to them then.

[Jotari]

Its been done over a dozen times already. Variety is the spice of life. That's why I'm essentially saying what almost everyone here has pointed out already.

[Strullemia]

There have been too many + there is no convenient non magic sword version of the Javelin/Hand Axe. It's really annoying that sword lords can't counter enemies unless they have a magic sword or a legendary weapon.

 

[Shadow Mir]

43 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Its been done over a dozen times already. Variety is the spice of life. That's why I'm essentially saying what almost everyone here has pointed out already.

At the same time, I'd say variety is overrated. I'd generally rather use another cavalier than a fighter, even if the fighter makes my team more varied.

[Emperor Hardin]

Its because crossover games like Fire Emblem Warriors get redundant rosters as so many main characters are fragile and fast infantry sword users.

[Jotari]

2 hours ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

At the same time, I'd say variety is overrated. I'd generally rather use another cavalier than a fighter, even if the fighter makes my team more varied.

Makes your team more varied, but it'd also be a boring ass game if the fighters didn't exist at all (no offense to FE2/3!). Of course Cavaliers having no harm objective weakness is another matter of discussion.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Jotari

[Lau]

Swords don't bother me, they always look cool.

That being said...can we get a bow Lord?

[Thane]

I've never noticed any "hate", just people wanting variation, especially now in a time of frequent spin-offs where it actually affects the balance of the roster. I don't know if you confused people joking about how common sword lords are with hatred. 

 

[Ae†her]

I didn't know people hated swords. Is it because they're too balanced in terms of Mt/Hit/Avo? or something? I mean I know most enemy units wield lances and axes, but then wouldn't that make lance wielding units just as effective in that case?

Swords are probably the coolest looking weapon too, so I don't mind most lords wielding swords. FE lords are supposed to be the cool looking ones most of the time.

[Modamy]

3 hours ago, Ae†her said:

I didn't know people hated swords. Is it because they're too balanced in terms of Mt/Hit/Avo? or something? I mean I know most enemy units wield lances and axes, but then wouldn't that make lance wielding units just as effective in that case?

Swords are probably the coolest looking weapon too, so I don't mind most lords wielding swords. FE lords are supposed to be the cool looking ones most of the time.

Swords are less popular because in more recent games they are just outclassed by axes and lances. In the old games swords were just accurate and low weight and in comparison to the other weapon types which had higher might, but low hit and high weight. The down sides were just so extreme that swords beat them out entirely. By FE 7 the weapon stats were a bit more balanced which helped out the other two but the game also had an abundance of enemies carrying 1-2 range weapons which swords could not counter because they had no readily available 1-2 range option so now swords which were dominant in FE 1-6 were now the worst weapon type until Radiant Dawn gave them a 1-2 range option. Then in 11 and 12 that changed again with enemies and weapons being rebalanced in the remakes resulting in swords being bad again and having no 1-2 range. Fates eventually came along and just gave the 3 main physical weapons equally crappy 1-2 range weapons, but then it also added bows, tomes, and hidden weapons to the triangle and hidden weapons alone, with their debuffs and equal might to all the other weapon types, probably beats out everything else. In short, Fire Emblem is pretty bad at finding a way to balance its weapons and swords in recent history are typically the worst type so having our main character stuck to the worst weapons type, at least until promotion, is pretty bad.

[Shadow Mir]

31 minutes ago, Modamy said:

Swords are less popular because in more recent games they are just outclassed by axes and lances. In the old games swords were just accurate and low weight and in comparison to the other weapon types which had higher might, but low hit and high weight. The down sides were just so extreme that swords beat them out entirely. By FE 7 the weapon stats were a bit more balanced which helped out the other two but the game also had an abundance of enemies carrying 1-2 range weapons which swords could not counter because they had no readily available 1-2 range option so now swords which were dominant in FE 1-6 were now the worst weapon type until Radiant Dawn gave them a 1-2 range option. Then in 11 and 12 that changed again with enemies and weapons being rebalanced in the remakes resulting in swords being bad again and having no 1-2 range. Fates eventually came along and just gave the 3 main physical weapons equally crappy 1-2 range weapons, but then it also added bows, tomes, and hidden weapons to the triangle and hidden weapons alone, with their debuffs and equal might to all the other weapon types, probably beats out everything else. In short, Fire Emblem is pretty bad at finding a way to balance its weapons and swords in recent history are typically the worst type so having our main character stuck to the worst weapons type, at least until promotion, is pretty bad.

I disagree with the bolded - hidden weapons aren't exactly known for being strong (note the strongest one that doesn't debuff you or hurt you is all of 7 might...), and neither are most of the classes that can use them...

[Jotari]

14 minutes ago, Levant Mir Celestia said:

I disagree with the bolded - hidden weapons aren't exactly known for being strong (note the strongest one that doesn't debuff you or hurt you is all of 7 might...), and neither are most of the classes that can use them...

Yeah, but that point becomes less relevant as the further you get into the game and strength becomes more important for dealing damage. Like, a loss of ten might isn't that big a deal when you have aproximately 40 strength. You'll still be dealing a tonne of damage on each hit. Not to mention they also have 1-2 range universally. The only thing really balancing hidden weapons is the units themselves tend to have low strength and are quite flimsy (which, I suppose, isn't really a bad idea, give the statistically worst class the statistically best weapon. The only thing that really upsets it is that you can make anyone a Dread Fighter. Of course debuffing in general is much more of a boon to enemy units than players since enemies tend to die pretty quickly. They would have worked much better in a game more like Gaiden where you have powerful, low density enemies).

[Icelerate]

Actually, most sword wielding lords are not hated as much as ones who don't use swords. It's the more unconventional lords who either don't use swords or have another primary weapon that get more hate such as Corrin, Robin, Kris, Ephraim and Micaiah. 

Edited February 16, 2018 by Icelerate

[Interdimensional Observer]

37 minutes ago, Icelerate said:

Corrin, Robin, Kris

Corrin is a sword user. The Dragonstone is rather niche and has no bearing on Fates's plot, while the Yato is the blade of destiny, gets two upgrades per rout, and which makes Corrin more special than the Dstone does. Corrin is first and foremost a sword lord, the only reason the d-powers get emphasized at all is because IS has to find a way to make the reuse of sword for the umpteenth time unique.

Robin- yes the Tome is emphasized even in Awakening's video clips, likely thanks to Chrom and Lucina being swordies like most lords, and it being easier to depict magic combat from a first person perspective. However, Robin in Awakening starts gameplay-wise equally capable of using Swords and Magic.

Kris- Kris has no fixed class, however both pieces of official artwork show them with a sword.

Reclass? Not canonical. Otherwise Chrom could be considered not a sword lord if I made him a Sniper, or Lucina a Pegasus Knight/one of two million things. 

And it is worth noting none of these characters are disliked for their weapon choice. Ephraim has brash 99% of the time flawless perfectionism- he could use a sword and it'd make no difference on this. They could have made Corrin an Assassin Lord with the Dagger Ne Plus Ultra, and it wouldn't address most of the real issues with Corrin.

Robin is disliked? I'm not big on them myself, but I thought they were generally loved?

 

[vanguard333]

It's not really hate (hate is a very strong word); it's more that there's been so many of them. It's like how there's been so many dragon final bosses. As with the dragon final bosses, a lot of the sword-wielding FE lords reuse a lot of the same formula:

A prince or noble's son. Give them blue hair. Too many with blue hair? Alright, give them green or red hair then. Their kingdom is the first to be invaded, their father is killed or too sickly to lead the people, and the prince takes up a magic sword and, with his blandness and supposed charm and charisma, gets praised and treated as special by other units for no reason, and leads the army to victory. Marth started it; then came Alm, Sigurd, Seliph, Roy, Eliwood, Lyn, Erika, Chrom, Lucina, etc.

Even Ike, as different as he is by being a) a peasant, b) actually a good unit, c) having his own personality than the generic bland prince, and d) being my favourite FE character of all time, still has the blue-haired sword-wielding part of the archetype. Alm had the chance to be different, if only by virtue of personality, but SoV really didn't bother trying to establish his personality; instead largely making him another Marth.

If you look at the FE lords that don't fall into this mold, you have the following: Celica, Hector, Ephraim, and Micaiah. Not a long list, and each has their problems:

Celica only doesn't fit the mold because she uses magic in addition to a sword. She starts out being equal to Alm in Gaiden/SoV being their story, but Celica gets shoved off to the side and made little more than a damsel in distress for Alm to rescue.

I haven't played the game with Lyn, Eliwood, and Hector. But, from what I have heard and read, Hector largely plays second-fiddle to Eliwood. Despite Eliwood being the redhead, Hector is the Ron Weasley in their dynamic. Hector also only escapes the archetype due to his personality and due to being the only FE lord that uses axes as his primary weapon.

Ephraim, from what little I know about him, is a spear-wielding Marth with Ike's recklessness.

Micaiah is probably the most original character on this list. She only uses light magic (and later healing staves), only learns about her heritage at the end of the game, where it's irrelevant anyways as she chooses Daein, etc. However, she is often accused of being overshadowed by the plot in favour of Ike.

So... yeah; a lot of sword-wielding lords, a lot of them so similar that there's little to distinguish between them, and 3/4 non-sword wielders play second-fiddle.

[Jotari]

13 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

It's not really hate (hate is a very strong word); it's more that there's been so many of them. It's like how there's been so many dragon final bosses. As with the dragon final bosses, a lot of the sword-wielding FE lords reuse a lot of the same formula:

A prince or noble's son. Give them blue hair. Too many with blue hair? Alright, give them green or red hair then. Their kingdom is the first to be invaded, their father is killed or too sickly to lead the people, and the prince takes up a magic sword and, with his blandness and supposed charm and charisma, gets praised and treated as special by other units for no reason, and leads the army to victory. Marth started it; then came Alm, Sigurd, Seliph, Roy, Eliwood, Lyn, Erika, Chrom, Lucina, etc.

Even Ike, as different as he is by being a) a peasant, b) actually a good unit, c) having his own personality than the generic bland prince, and d) being my favourite FE character of all time, still has the blue-haired sword-wielding part of the archetype. Alm had the chance to be different, if only by virtue of personality, but SoV really didn't bother trying to establish his personality; instead largely making him another Marth.

If you look at the FE lords that don't fall into this mold, you have the following: Celica, Hector, Ephraim, and Micaiah. Not a long list, and each has their problems:

Celica only doesn't fit the mold because she uses magic in addition to a sword. She starts out being equal to Alm in Gaiden/SoV being their story, but Celica gets shoved off to the side and made little more than a damsel in distress for Alm to rescue.

I haven't played the game with Lyn, Eliwood, and Hector. But, from what I have heard and read, Hector largely plays second-fiddle to Eliwood. Despite Eliwood being the redhead, Hector is the Ron Weasley in their dynamic. Hector also only escapes the archetype due to his personality and due to being the only FE lord that uses axes as his primary weapon.

Ephraim, from what little I know about him, is a spear-wielding Marth with Ike's recklessness.

Micaiah is probably the most original character on this list. She only uses light magic (and later healing staves), only learns about her heritage at the end of the game, where it's irrelevant anyways as she chooses Daein, etc. However, she is often accused of being overshadowed by the plot in favour of Ike.

So... yeah; a lot of sword-wielding lords, a lot of them so similar that there's little to distinguish between them, and 3/4 non-sword wielders play second-fiddle.

What do you mean actually making them a good unit? Aside from Roy and Eliwood, what protagonist in the series isn't above average as a unit? Most of them can steamroll the game.

Edited February 17, 2018 by Jotari

[Corrobin]

22 minutes ago, Jotari said:

What do you mean actually making them a good unit? Aside from Roy and Eliwood, what protagonist in the series isn't above average as a unit? Most of them can steamroll the game.

Lief

[Emperor Hardin]

15 hours ago, Lau said:

That being said...can we get a bow Lord?

Spoiler

Though legally not a Fire Emblem, Tearring Saga has a Bow lord(pic above) and he is pretty cool.

36 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

It's not really hate (hate is a very strong word); it's more that there's been so many of them. It's like how there's been so many dragon final bosses. As with the dragon final bosses, a lot of the sword-wielding FE lords reuse a lot of the same formula:

A prince or noble's son. Give them blue hair. Too many with blue hair? Alright, give them green or red hair then. Their kingdom is the first to be invaded, their father is killed or too sickly to lead the people, and the prince takes up a magic sword and, with his blandness and supposed charm and charisma, gets praised and treated as special by other units for no reason, and leads the army to victory. Marth started it; then came Alm, Sigurd, Seliph, Roy, Eliwood, Lyn, Erika, Chrom, Lucina, etc.

Even Ike, as different as he is by being a) a peasant, b) actually a good unit, c) having his own personality than the generic bland prince, and d) being my favourite FE character of all time, still has the blue-haired sword-wielding part of the archetype. Alm had the chance to be different, if only by virtue of personality, but SoV really didn't bother trying to establish his personality; instead largely making him another Marth.

If you look at the FE lords that don't fall into this mold, you have the following: Celica, Hector, Ephraim, and Micaiah. Not a long list, and each has their problems:

Ike is more middle class as he leads a mercenary troop and

Spoiler

Gawain

was a knight of Daein.

2 hours ago, Icelerate said:

Actually, most sword wielding lords are not hated as much as ones who don't use swords. It's the more unconventional lords who either don't use swords or have another primary weapon that get more hate such as Corrin, Robin, Kris, Ephraim and Micaiah. 

Corrin: Uses a sword mostly with the dragon stone being a sidearm.

Robin: Uses a sword and tomes, artwork shows him with a sword.

Kris: All artwork depicts him as an infantry sword unit.

Ephraim: I've only met one person who dislikes him.

Micaiah: Does indeed not wield a sword and I have seen some hate against her, though I like her myself.

Edited February 17, 2018 by Emperor Hardin