Who Should Be a Future Legendary?

[DraceEmpressa]

honestly though, the problem with FE is that, with really few exceptions like Hilda and Ursula,  good looks almost always meant sympathetic. Especially bishies. Ashnard is good looking hunky DILF,  while  have a good goal is still mostly a psycho when Sephiran who has much more softer physical features have more symphathetic backstory and personality. 

 

back to the topic, I don't want the Legendary Heroes that is alts of maingame characters are locked to the lords as most of them use swords. The "love interests" have more varying niches than the lords, that sure says a lot. 

[Lau]

You know what I'm going to say.

Marth really should have been first in line to be a Legendary Hero, and considering that Ike already had a Brave variant...I remember when they revealed L!Ike and I just sat there like wtf, IS?

Just give my boy some love, IS, jeez Louise...

[Skyla]

Micaiah, as a light priestess. But instead of a legendary banner, I hope she's on a regular one like Eirika and Chrom.

I swear those 8% banner are the most infuriating thing I've ever gone through. My L!Ike struggle was insane.

[r_n]

Donnel the hero

all the stats

the best skills

fancy duds

still wearing the pot on his head

[SSbardock84]

Marth, Roy, and Eliwood.

[Strullemia]

Tiki should get one since she has the power to replace Naga in one of the Awakening dlc. Since I doubt that they'd give us legendary Naga she would be a good fit for the legendary dragon unt.

Edited March 19, 2018 by Hekselka

[Lewyn]

7 hours ago, Etheus said:

I'm well aware of that. The problem is that there is an essential ingredient for such a villain to work - pre-transformation backstory. 

The reason why Lyon works and Garon doesn't is that Lyon's transformation was a risk taken to achieve what he perceived to be a great potential good. Garon, on the other hand, is just a victim and a pawn. 

If Surtr is revealed via cutscene or historical story chapter to have knowingly made that choice for a morally justifiable reason (such as saving his own nation from invaders or preparing the world for a greater threat), he could retrospectively become a great character. Until then, he's just a bore.

Yeah we hear through Xander that Garon was once handsome, strong and a great king.  However this pre puppet Garon isn't explored much.  Lyon is one of the most brilliantly written characters and really executes the concept well makes the player really feel for him.

I'm hoping Surtr gets developed well, yes right now he is one of those boring cartoonish villains with no redeeming qualities.  Burn innocent villagers, torture individuals before killing them, turns on his allies, arrogant, would likely kill his daughters if they fail, etc.  

Perhaps Surtr asked the Queen of Nifl for help, a type of resource that could possibly save his wife who was suffering from some terrible chronic illness.  The Queen coldly refused, and his wife suffered and suffered before death.  It is an illness that has killed many Muspell perhaps something akin to Bubonic plague.  This kills his soul and he falls into deep despair, isolating himself from everyone.  This is when Loki enters the picture and persuades him to use the flames.  

[Lewyn]

3 hours ago, Skylorella Con said:

Micaiah, as a light priestess. But instead of a legendary banner, I hope she's on a regular one like Eirika and Chrom.

I swear those 8% banner are the most infuriating thing I've ever gone through. My L!Ike struggle was insane.

but we all got a free L!Ike.  Once that FEH channel came announcing there would be a vote, as well as saying L!Ike was the next legendary hero it was a notice to myself and many that there is no need to pull for him on the banner unless you are going for merges.

[bottlegnomes]

8 hours ago, Etheus said:

I'm well aware of that. The problem is that there is an essential ingredient for such a villain to work - pre-transformation backstory. 

The reason why Lyon works and Garon doesn't is that Lyon's transformation was a risk taken to achieve what he perceived to be a great potential good. Garon, on the other hand, is just a victim and a pawn. 

If Surtr is revealed via cutscene or historical story chapter to have knowingly made that choice for a morally justifiable reason (such as saving his own nation from invaders or preparing the world for a greater threat), he could retrospectively become a great character. Until then, he's just a bore.

I'm so sick of this mentality. Sometimes people are just shitty. Not every villain has to have a tragic backstory or be some naive do-gooder who made a deal that bit them in the ass. Some conquerors do it to stabilize their kingdom; some do it because they want more people to tax so they can be richer. History is full of both.

Yeah, just always falling back on evil because they're a dick is lazy, but so is always falling back on turned bad because a bad thing happened to them. The key is how the character is handled. The Joker is probably the single most popular villain in comic books and his motivations generally range from let me show you why people are shitty (Dark Knight) to because I can and it's fun (TAS), both versions of which are beloved. Probably more because of Ledger's and Hamill's stellar performances and the writers good handling than any intrinsic value to the characters. 

When you're falling back on tropes, which either of these types are--power-hungry conqueror or naive/corrupted do-gooder--it's how they're executed. I'm not saying Sutr is the greatest villain ever, but giving him a tragic backstory is just as hacky a way to cover up lazy writing as justifying his douchiness with some magic that destroys your soul.

I'm done ranting now.

Edited March 20, 2018 by bottlegnomes

[Fabulously Olivier]

26 minutes ago, bottlegnomes said:

I'm so sick of this mentality. Sometimes people are just shitty. Not every villain has to have a tragic backstory or be some naive do-gooder who made a deal that bit them in the ass. Some conquerors do it to stabilize their kingdom; some do it because they want more people to tax so they can be richer. History is full of both.

Yeah, just always falling back on evil because they're a dick is lazy, but so is always falling back on turned bad because a bad thing happened to them. The key is how the character is handled. The Joker is probably the single most popular villain in comic books and his motivations generally range from let me show you why people are shitty (Dark Knight) to because I can and it's fun (TAS), both versions of which are beloved. Probably more because of Ledger's and Hamill's stellar performances and the writers good handling than any intrinsic value to the characters. 

When you're falling back on tropes, which either of these types are--power-hungry conqueror or naive/corrupted do-gooder--it's how they're executed. I'm not saying Sutr is the greatest villain ever, but giving him a tragic backstory is just as hacky a way to cover up lazy writing as justifying his douchiness with some magic that destroys your soul.

I'm done ranting now.

The Joker is effectively the force of nature. The reason why he works is because he represents a force (ie: insanity or chaos). A force of nature villain is not interesting in and of themselves, but they serve to effectively challenge the protagonist mentally. On his own, the Joker is not some incredible villain. He works because Batman works. He brings out the best in Batman, and thus serves a greater narrative purpose. 

 

A good (stand-alone) villain is a hero in his own mind, because that's how normal people function. That's how you make a believable villain. If one wants to make an evil for its own sake villain, this generally only works as a result of actual insanity - a deviation from normal human behavior. Insanity is fun and compelling to explore in literature in its own right, mind you, and I'm certainly not knocking that. But no, people are not "just shitty" without some type of cognitive dysfunction, cruel upbringing, or indoctrination. Even the worst tyrants in history typically believed that what they were doing was morally justifiable. 

[bottlegnomes]

3 hours ago, Etheus said:

The Joker is effectively the force of nature. The reason why he works is because he represents a force (ie: insanity or chaos). A force of nature villain is not interesting in and of themselves, but they serve to effectively challenge the protagonist mentally. On his own, the Joker is not some incredible villain. He works because Batman works. He brings out the best in Batman, and thus serves a greater narrative purpose. 

 

A good (stand-alone) villain is a hero in his own mind, because that's how normal people function. That's how you make a believable villain. If one wants to make an evil for its own sake villain, this generally only works as a result of actual insanity - a deviation from normal human behavior. Insanity is fun and compelling to explore in literature in its own right, mind you, and I'm certainly not knocking that. But no, people are not "just shitty" without some type of cognitive dysfunction, cruel upbringing, or indoctrination. Even the worst tyrants in history typically believed that what they were doing was morally justifiable. 

Sutr can even argued ad a force if nature. He's making Veronica question her practices. The Askrs are less directly affected, but by your own definition, Sutr works because he forces Veronica to address and question herself.

People are heroes in their own mind is a very noble way of stating it. People do what they can justify to themselves. Some people are only concerned with helping themselves and therefore if they can justify it as it helps me achieve my goals, it's okay. Sutr, like Ashnard seems to be of the opinion that might makes right and those who lose to you should either fall in line or be dealt with as the stronger sees appropriate. The difference is that Sutr is entirely self-serving, and most likely a hypocrite (as @XRay has mentioned a few times), while Ashnard took it further and was somewhere between a Social Darwinist and an applied Darwinist if that's even a term. The difference in quality between the two is that Ashnard was explored more. Sutr's just been there to go rawr and chase you. Do you really think all the people in Hollywood, and elsewhere but it's certainly been showing up there a lot recently, that sexually harass and assault people are doing it because they were indoctrinated (arguably by society, but then that gets into arguably everyone is) or have some sort of mental dysfunction (also arguable but again, that gets into what is a mental dysfunction and who has one and why them and not someone else)? It's probably much more because they want to and they can justify it as I can get away with it and I'm not really hurting them or they deserve it for dressing like a slut or if they really didn't want me to they would've fought more. Sutr is the same, except his is I'm stronger than you so you do what I say or you suffer. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with that type of character. It's how they're handled.

Maybe it's confirmation bias, but it seems liken all I ever see about Sutr and most FE villains, though to a much lesser extent, is they're not obscenely sympathetic so they suck. Fix them by giving them some tragic backstory. It gets old because when executed poorly it's a hacky way of making a character seem like they have depth.

Sorry for the messy post. I was/am on my phone so I just kind of wrote things as I thought of them and can't edit super well.

Edited March 20, 2018 by bottlegnomes

[Troykv]

9 hours ago, Skylorella Con said:

Micaiah, as a light priestess. But instead of a legendary banner, I hope she's on a regular one like Eirika and Chrom.

I swear those 8% banner are the most infuriating thing I've ever gone through. My L!Ike struggle was insane.

I need to prepare for the next Earth Season, maybe Micaiah appears o.o

[XRay]

4 hours ago, Etheus said:

A good (stand-alone) villain is a hero in his own mind, because that's how normal people function. That's how you make a believable villain. If one wants to make an evil for its own sake villain, this generally only works as a result of actual insanity - a deviation from normal human behavior. Insanity is fun and compelling to explore in literature in its own right, mind you, and I'm certainly not knocking that. But no, people are not "just shitty" without some type of cognitive dysfunction, cruel upbringing, or indoctrination. Even the worst tyrants in history typically believed that what they were doing was morally justifiable. 

 

3 hours ago, bottlegnomes said:

Maybe it's confirmation bias, but it seems liken all I ever see about Sutr and most FE villains, though to a much lesser extent, is they're not obscenely sympathetic so they suck. Fix them by giving them some tragic backstory. It gets old because when executed poorly it's a hacky way of making a character seem like they have depth.

I think pure asshole villains and sympathetic villains are both fine; I guess I do not really have a preference.

So far, I think Surtr is a pretty good villain because he is such a douche bag and very hate-able (or maybe I just have low standards). Sometimes, you just need someone to punch and hate and feel good taking out your anger and frustration on them, similar to how some people take pleasire in wallowing in sorrow by reading a tragedy. Surtr with his jerk face is perfect for that, and I want to let him have a taste of his own medicine by having Reinhardt slowly fist him to death and shoving Berserk Armads down his throat to show him what a "real" exclusive Weapon should be like (Sinmara's effect is so stupid and weak in my opinion, I would argue that it is detrimental to the unit and team running it; that fucking coward does not even realize it because that wuss is hiding behind plot armor). As a fictional character, he is a safe outlet to bring the worst out of me, and if he were not so apathetic and his daughters so loveable, I have no qualms brutalizing his daughters and loved ones in front him.

Giving him a sympathetic back story is fine by me too, although that does not really do anything besides switching my target of hatred to Múspellflame or whatever it is that is possessing Surtr. If it is a stupid evil fire entity, then having Fjorm or Gunnthrá torture it by dangling a piece of ice over it and watch it put itself out from the melted ice water is just as satisfying.

If Surtr is released as a legendary hero though, I think I would be more amused than pisses off. I do not think I mind watching NPCs kill him in the Training Tower a few times.

Edited March 20, 2018 by XRay

[Lewyn]

Joker is not just for being a force that draws interesting response out of Batman, but also what that force in general entails.  Chaos, it equals unpredictability.  His actions, methods, what he will do or even say next are difficult to predict.  This is a big reason, besides his relationship to Batman, that he has so outshone the other villains many of which have deeper back stories and more development.  

It is also why it is not comparable to Surtr.  Yes Surtr is a force, but a very predictable one atm.  Conquer everything, rule the universe, torture people for fun.  Now I am in agreement than villains don't need to be sympathetic necessarily, particularly the they were sweet innocents before but now evil, however they need to be interesting in some way.  That could be strange quirks/habits, being a certain way with an almost hypocritical exception, having a might is right philosophy but going in detail as to the reasoning perhaps supporting that if humans were like animals where the strongest and fittest survive there would be less disease and more general happiness.  

[Vaximillian]

28 minutes ago, Lewyn said:

It is also why it is not comparable to Surtr.  Yes Surtr is a force, but a very predictable one atm.  Conquer everything, rule the universe, torture people for fun. 

Surtr is fire. Fire consumes all it can without thinking or justification.

[Skyla]

9 hours ago, Lewyn said:

but we all got a free L!Ike.  Once that FEH channel came announcing there would be a vote, as well as saying L!Ike was the next legendary hero it was a notice to myself and many that there is no need to pull for him on the banner unless you are going for merges.

Due to all the backlash Ike recieved, I was convinced he wasn't going to win. (Guess I was mistaken but Tharja was pretty close to beating him) And the results were to be announced after the duration of the banner he was featured in. So i didn't wanted to miss him.

Him returning on a future banner didn't even cross my mind for some odd reason.

3 hours ago, Troykv said:

I need to prepare for the next Earth Season, maybe Micaiah appears o.o

She did get a new cipher with Ike so I'm hoping she'll be our next Earth hero. (Even though 8% banners are hell). I still want her!!!

[Jotari]

I enjoy Surtr's brutish one note personality, but I'm pretty sure it's because I have like zero expectations when it comes to the story of Heroes. I never thought they were going to give me a decent villain, so I'm perfectly fine enjoying a rather bad one.

[bottlegnomes]

As @XRay, @Vaximillian, and @Jotari said, Surtr (yay me not being able to spell for a whole day ) has a motive and is fairly consistent within his character. Sure, he's not the greatest, but he's there to be hateable and provide motion to the story. But yeah, this is the whole gist I was getting at. One's not intrinsically better; it's how you handle them. Is Surtr Shakespeare's Iago? No, but is he Fates Iago? Also no. He's much more straightforward and not nearly as bungled.

@Lewyn I'd argue that a hypocritical villain is just as cliche as every other thing that's been discussed in this thread. How many times has there been a villain who was merciless or had a might is right philosophy, but when they were losing, they begged the hero for forgiveness? Not saying that's any worse than someone who's just power hungry or completely consistent, but again, it's not intrinsically better and can be terrible if handled poorly.

To quote Nasir Bin Olu Dara Jones, "No idea's original/There's nothing new under the sun/It's never what you do, but how it's done." That's a little overly zealous, since you can have new takes on something, but it gets the general gist across. If you execute a generally cliche idea well, it can be good or even great, but you can bungle the most fascinating concept to the point of it being awful.

Edited March 20, 2018 by bottlegnomes

[Hero_Lucina]

Veronica or for shits and giggles Anthony

[Hilda]

7 hours ago, Skylorella Con said:

Due to all the backlash Ike recieved, I was convinced he wasn't going to win. (Guess I was mistaken but Tharja was pretty close to beating him) And the results were to be announced after the duration of the banner he was featured in. So i didn't wanted to miss him.

Him returning on a future banner didn't even cross my mind for some odd reason.

She did get a new cipher with Ike so I'm hoping she'll be our next Earth hero. (Even though 8% banners are hell). I still want her!!!

we are talking here about Ike.  I mean Ike. The Abs, biceps, triceps Ike! What could possibly have gone wrong!

[bottlegnomes]

9 minutes ago, Hilda said:

we are talking here about Ike.  I mean Ike. The Abs, biceps, triceps Ike! What could possibly have gone wrong!

This just occurred to me: Why is Ike so popular? Neither game he's in sold particularly well, both are liked by the fandom but not absolutely beloved though also not hated, they're old and difficult to find, he's in smash but he hasn't been in the longest, and I don't think he's considered an amazing character there. Not complaining since I like Ike plenty, just weird since he doesn't seem to be the clear cut victor in any individual regard, but he's still absolutely one of the most popular. Guess it's just the confluence of all those. He appeals to old fans since he's from more old-school FEs, unlike Lucina and Chrom, he's in Smash, but unlike Marth and Roy his games are available worldwide and in the case of Shadow Dragon not hated by a sizable amount of the fandom, and he does have the case of being the first non-noble MC. Just seemed weird to me.

[Arthur97]

11 minutes ago, bottlegnomes said:

This just occurred to me: Why is Ike so popular? Neither game he's in sold particularly well, both are liked by the fandom but not absolutely beloved though also not hated, they're old and difficult to find, he's in smash but he hasn't been in the longest, and I don't think he's considered an amazing character there. Not complaining since I like Ike plenty, just weird since he doesn't seem to be the clear cut victor in any individual regard, but he's still absolutely one of the most popular. Guess it's just the confluence of all those. He appeals to old fans since he's from more old-school FEs, unlike Lucina and Chrom, he's in Smash, but unlike Marth and Roy his games are available worldwide and in the case of Shadow Dragon not hated by a sizable amount of the fandom, and he does have the case of being the first non-noble MC. Just seemed weird to me.

He has Smash memes too. That probably helped.

[bottlegnomes]

9 minutes ago, Arthur97 said:

He has Smash memes too. That probably helped.

He does?

Edit: Oh, right I fight for my friends.

Edited March 20, 2018 by bottlegnomes

[Fabulously Olivier]

25 minutes ago, bottlegnomes said:

This just occurred to me: Why is Ike so popular? Neither game he's in sold particularly well, both are liked by the fandom but not absolutely beloved though also not hated, they're old and difficult to find, he's in smash but he hasn't been in the longest, and I don't think he's considered an amazing character there. Not complaining since I like Ike plenty, just weird since he doesn't seem to be the clear cut victor in any individual regard, but he's still absolutely one of the most popular. Guess it's just the confluence of all those. He appeals to old fans since he's from more old-school FEs, unlike Lucina and Chrom, he's in Smash, but unlike Marth and Roy his games are available worldwide and in the case of Shadow Dragon not hated by a sizable amount of the fandom, and he does have the case of being the first non-noble MC. Just seemed weird to me.

For in series fandom, he's a much more grounded, well-developed lord than is typical of the series. The Tellius games are very well written in general and have carried excellent word of mouth through the fanbase over time. It didn't help sales numbers, but that has much to do with the poor release timings of these games relative to the life cycles of their respective consoles.

Out of series fandom is definitely a Smash thing. I can only speak anecdotally here, but every person I've asked in the western Smash fandom generally perceives Marth as "that androgynous guy with a tiara." In contrast, Ike is aesthetically more appealing to the western audience. Not to mention, Ike's Smash dialogue being localized and Marth's not being localized has made the former more relatable.

Of course, Shadow Dragon hasn't helped Marth gain an image in the west. It desperately needed the attention to modern storytelling standards that Shadows of Valentia got.

Edited March 20, 2018 by Etheus

[Arthur97]

1 minute ago, bottlegnomes said:

He does?

Edit: Oh, right I fight for my friends.

Don't forget that you'll get no sympathy from him.