If you had to rely on one Fire Emblem lord for protection, who would it be?

[Interdimensional Observer]

2 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Anyway, If I could have a FE lord as bodyguard, then I go with Micaiah. As much feats they can do, I doubt even the likes of Ike can guard you from a mugger with a firearm reliably. Micaiah may not either, but her foresight powers could give us ample warning time to act, and she could use a Warp staff to send me away from the danger. Or something.

Or she could take lessons from Grandpa or get some help unique to her via a little bird and apply a blessing that makes you closer to invincible. You have less need for a bodyguard if your skin and clothes are coated in magic enough to make most attacks go *tink!*.

 

6 hours ago, Slumber said:

Just like a husband is supposed to be near his wife at all times, and we know how that turned out.

I think you're being a little excessive here. Sigurd had a job of enforcing Grannvalian policy in Agustria. Technically he could have commanded from the castle, but I guess that just wasn't something he likes to do. Deidre on the other hand wanted to care for their baby, which is fine, since she wasn't the greatest of fighters anyhow. The heir to Chalphy should've had a token few bodyguards though.

Also, Manfroy is hard to beat in the "warp and win" department. He spends FE4 doing this successfully until he just doesn't in the final chapter.

[Slumber]

18 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

I think you're being a little excessive here. Sigurd had a job of enforcing Grannvalian policy in Agustria. Technically he could have commanded from the castle, but I guess that just wasn't something he likes to do. Deidre on the other hand wanted to care for their baby, which is fine, since she wasn't the greatest of fighters anyhow. The heir to Chalphy should've had a token few bodyguards though.

Also, Manfroy is hard to beat in the "warp and win" department. He spends FE4 doing this successfully until he just doesn't in the final chapter.

I don't think it's too much to not want a bodyguard who couldn't protect their spouse.

Was Sigurd at a disadvantage in that scenario? Yes. Is there ever a situation where Sigurd isn't in a disadvantage in all ways but martial strength? I don't think so. Starting at chapter 3, Sigurd's life becomes a series of failures because he starts getting put in situations that he can't just brute-force his way through.

It just amuses me that anyone would pick the lord who has the biggest friendly body count under their belt, and the lord who was designed to fail in order to show the flaws in the heroic lord archetype, as their bodyguard. Especially when there is a lord who partially rose to prominence through being a bodyguard.

If the argument is just "Sigurd's strong", why not just pick Seliph? He has all the strength of Sigurd by the end of FE4, and he wasn't designed from the outset to be destined for failure.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Slumber

[Acacia Sgt]

3 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Or she could take lessons from Grandpa or get some help unique to her via a little bird and apply a blessing that makes you closer to invincible. You have less need for a bodyguard if your skin and clothes are coated in magic enough to make most attacks go *tink!*.

 

I think you're being a little excessive here. Sigurd had a job of enforcing Grannvalian policy in Agustria. Technically he could have commanded from the castle, but I guess that just wasn't something he likes to do. Deidre on the other hand wanted to care for their baby, which is fine, since she wasn't the greatest of fighters anyhow. The heir to Chalphy should've had a token few bodyguards though.

Also, Manfroy is hard to beat in the "warp and win" department. He spends FE4 doing this successfully until he just doesn't in the final chapter.

Hmm, she could do that? I must admit it's been quite a while since I last played RD.

 

On the subject of Dierdre's kidnapping, I have to agree that it's a bit absurd to blame Sigurd for that one. Sigurd is not omniscient to know about "warp in warp out", and it's quite likely the castle wasn't left guard-less. It was Dierdre's own fault for wanting to leave without some kind of escort. Though to be fair, Manfroy knew where to warp in, so he likely already was spying on them, or had someone doing that for him. He was likely waiting for any opportunity to catch Dierdre by surprise. Or heck, could've been done while they're sleeping and Sigurd would wake up to her wife already gone.

 

[Interdimensional Observer]

1 minute ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Hmm, she could do that? I must admit it's been quite a while since I last played RD.

Well Yune does give that 4-F-3 weapon blessing while in Micaiah, and if one can bless weapons, armor is wholly possible too. With practice, I'd think Micaiah could in theory do that on her own, not as strong as if she were an outright goddess, but something good.

 

4 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Or heck, could've been done while they're sleeping and Sigurd would wake up to her wife already gone.

True, could be. Since I don't see FE4's battles lasting a just single day. Every other game, that is feasible. FE4's giant maps makes me think it was longer than that, otherwise it'd be way too easy to traverse entire kingdoms. We just don't see the day & night cycling, which would have put even more stress on a 16-bit game, in an era when storage space was limited.

[Acacia Sgt]

10 minutes ago, Slumber said:

It just amuses me that anyone would pick the lord who has the biggest friendly body count under their belt, and the lord who was designed to fail in order to show the flaws in the heroic lord archetype, as their bodyguard. Especially when there is a lord who partially rose to prominence through being a bodyguard.

If the argument is just "Sigurd's strong", why not just pick Seliph? He has all the strength of Sigurd by the end of FE4, and he wasn't designed from the outset to be destined for failure.

To be fair, it's two very different things. The thing is, I don't think any lord has actually been in the position to protect someoen while on their lonesome, which is what this tread asks about. Even Ike has the help of his fellow mercs, but in this thread's scenario, he'd be on his own. How reliable would he be then? It applies for the rest as well. We almost never see them do this, less doing so while on their own. This is why anyone could still think Sigurd could still have potential as a personal bodyguard since it's not something that can be judged from his track record as a leader.

5 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Well Yune does give that 4-F-3 weapon blessing while in Micaiah, and if one can bless weapons, armor is wholly possible too. With practice, I'd think Micaiah could in theory do that on her own, not as strong as if she were an outright goddess, but something good.

 

True, could be. Since I don't see FE4's battles lasting a just single day. Every other game, that is feasible. FE4's giant maps makes me think it was longer than that, otherwise it'd be way too easy to traverse entire kingdoms. We just don't see the day & night cycling, which would have put even more stress on a 16-bit game, in an era when storage space was limited.

Well, I'm not sure if to count Yune as part of the package, as she is a separate entity from Micaiah.

 

I agree on that. It's quite apparent when we have entire countries represented in a single map. FE has never been to scale, except during the indoor maps perhaps and a few select ones otherwise. So even if Dierdre had accompanied Sigurd to Madino, it would've likely taken days to reach it, so plenty of opportunities for Manfroy to snatch her away.

[Slumber]

12 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

To be fair, it's two very different things. The thing is, I don't think any lord has actually been in the position to protect someoen while on their lonesome, which is what this tread asks about. Even Ike has the help of his fellow mercs, but in this thread's scenario, he'd be on his own. How reliable would he be then? It applies for the rest as well. We almost never see them do this, less doing so while on their own. This is why anyone could still think Sigurd could still have potential as a personal bodyguard since it's not something that can be judged from his track record as a leader.

That's the mindset I've been under, though. There are two lords who were generally forced to pay really hard for bullheaded decisions in the franchise. Sigurd and Leif. Both of them suffer the worst when they disregard the advice of their tacticians and act on their own, but Sigurd suffers way harder for it, and he get himself in more trouble for his own decisions.

You get people like Eirika and Celica making a few dumb decisions when acting for themselves, but it really doesn't amount to much, and they're convinced into doing those things. Sigurd and Leif make bad decisions all on their own.

Like, this is a goofy "What if" thread, but I'm assuming we're in comparable worlds that would require the protection of these people. This, on top of Sigurd being a bad decision making machine, makes him far and away the sketchiest lord to want to be protected by. If it's just "Oh, no, just for your daily life and nothing changes", then sure. Sigurd would probably be fine.

Actually I'm not even sure in this case. Remember that Sigurd essentially started a continental war(Or at least heavily instigated it, kicking the bee's nest that is Jugdral's political climate) because a friend of his was captured, and that snowballed into a personal crusade against the corrupt leaders of the continent. What would that correlate to if some dudes were talking shit to me at a bar? How long until that turns into him dragging me to Afghanistan and fighting the Taliban or trying to overthrow North Korea? I don't trust a planet cracking sword to protect me from bullets.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Slumber

[Acacia Sgt]

25 minutes ago, Slumber said:

That's the mindset I've been under, though. There are two lords who were generally forced to pay really hard for bullheaded decisions in the franchise. Sigurd and Leif. Both of them suffer the worst when they disregard the advice of their tacticians and act on their own, but Sigurd suffers way harder for it, and he get himself in more trouble for his own decisions.

You get people like Eirika and Celica making a few dumb decisions when acting for themselves, but it really doesn't amount to much, and they're convinced into doing those things. Sigurd and Leif make bad decisions all on their own.

Like, this is a goofy "What if" thread, but I'm assuming we're in comparable worlds that would require the protection of these people. This, on top of Sigurd being a bad decision making machine, makes him far and away the sketchiest lord to want to be protected by. If it's just "Oh, no, just for your daily life and nothing changes", then sure. Sigurd would probably be fine.

Hmm, what sort of decisions Sigurd makes that would be considered bad? From his position, I don't see what could be considered as really bad. It's important to remember he's not privy to all what we the players see.

Quote

Actually I'm not even sure in this case. Remember that Sigurd essentially started a continental war(Or at least heavily instigated it, kicking the bee's nest that is Jugdral's political climate) because a friend of his was captured, and that snowballed into a personal crusade against the corrupt leaders of the continent. What would that correlate to if some dudes were talking shit to me at a bar? How long until that turns into him dragging me to Afghanistan and fighting the Taliban or trying to overthrow North Korea? I don't trust a planet cracking sword to protect me from bullets.

It's not really Sigurd's fault there. Verdane, manipulated by the Loptyrean Sect, had essentially declare war on Grannvale by staging an invasion and taking hostage the daughter of one of the main dukes. Which it ain't a minor thing, mind you. Sigurd was simply the guy who was in position to fix this. King Batouh was manipulated and his sons except Jamke were all eager to fight. Sigurd had little choice but to essentially defeat the entire country.

WIth Agustria it's the same. It's true that Sigurd's actions in Verdane scared them, but as dialogue between Eldigan and Elliot shows, the Agustrian Lords were already anti-Grannvale. Then Prince Shagall commits patricide, the King didn't wanted war by the way, and decided to declare war himself. Once again Sigurd is placed on the defensive and has to take action. Perhaps his only mistake is staying to see the whole job all the way through, but it ended up being a bless in disguise, since once he had to deal with the Orgahill Pirates, who were also the aggressors, he was in prime position to escape once Lombard and Reptor brand his family as traitors.

If Sigurd had gone with his father to Isaach, like most of the other duchy heirs did, then it would've been someone else in his place, comitting almost all of the same actions. Verdane's transgression was something above him in scale. Grannvale would've done something anyway, causing the whole snowball to roll.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Acacia Sgt

[Slumber]

47 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Hmm, what sort of decisions Sigurd makes that would be considered bad? From his position, I don't see what could be considered as really bad. It's important to remember he's not privy to all what we the players see.

The entirety of Gen 1 is ultimately Sigurd's decision. He brings Oifey on as his adviser, but it doesn't amount to too much.

While it's noble and just to effectively go to war with Verdane for a friend, Sigurd doesn't live in a noble and just world, and this whole event makes Jugdral up for grabs in the eyes of a lot of the rulers. He's strong, but he's ill prepared to handle most of the events from chapter 2 onward when he stops dealing with weak armies, bandits and bands of mercenaries. A big one is that Claude warns him that Arvis seems to have his own agenda after Kurth is killed, and it probably isn't super great for Sigurd... yeah. He makes himself the perfect scapegoat for Reptor and Langobalt by diving headfirst into war without thinking about it, in an incredibly hostile environment, after Lex himself acknowledges to Sigurd that his father hates Chalphy. Taken with the fact that Dozel as a whole is known as a war happy kingdom that will go to war at the drop of the hat.

Queen Rahna ALSO brings this up and tells Sigurd that marching south is a bad idea. Also Silesia gets dragged into the war because Langobalt follows Sigurd there, but Sigurd was invited by Rahna, so that's kind of a wash. Not a good idea on either of their parts. Had Sigurd actually stayed in Silesia like she suggested, there's a decent chance Byron would have made it there(Not sure if anyone would have been able to tend his wounds any better, so he might have died there, too) and they probably would have been able to put up much more of a fight against the proto-Granvalle army. No saving Quan and Ethlin here, though, so that wouldn't have really changed.

Obviously, as the player, we know what's happening much more clearly. We see the scheming. But so many lords and advisers are able to side step the massive tragedies that Sigurd just walks into, because Sigurd goes from 0 to 100 faster than just about any lord in the franchise. A lot of gen 1 can be summed up as "Hey Sigurd, maybe you shouldn't do that." and Sigurd going "Oh, I'm gonna do the FUCK out of that!" Only in much more flowery language.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Slumber

[Acacia Sgt]

7 minutes ago, Slumber said:

The entirety of Gen 1 is ultimately Sigurd's decision. He brings Oifey on as his adviser, but it doesn't amount to too much.

While it's noble and just to effectively go to war with Verdane for a friend, Sigurd doesn't live in a noble and just world, and this whole event makes Jugdral up for grabs in the eyes of a lot of the rulers. He's strong, but he's ill prepared to handle most of the events from chapter 2 onward when he stops dealing with weak armies, bandits and bands of mercenaries. A big one is that Claude warns him that Arvis seems to have his own agenda after Kurth is killed... yeah. He makes himself the perfect scapegoat for Reptor and Langobalt by diving headfirst into war without thinking about it, in an incredibly hostile environment, after Lex himself acknowledges to Sigurd that his father hates Chalphy. Taken with the fact that Dozel as a whole is known as a war happy kingdom that will go to war at the drop of the hat.

Queen Rahna ALSO brings this up and tells Sigurd that marching south is a bad idea. Also Silesia gets dragged into the war because Langobalt follows Sigurd there, but Sigurd was invited by Rahna, so that's kind of a wash. Not a good idea on either of their parts.

Obviously, as the player, we know what's happening much more clearly. We see the scheming. But so many lords and advisers are able to side step the massive tragedies that Sigurd just walks into, because Sigurd goes from 0 to 100 faster than just about any lord in the franchise.

It wasn't just to rescue a friend. Verdane was basically staging an invasion. Sigurd was the closest to do anything about it, so he pushed them back to the border. Now, even if he had decided to leave Edain to her fate and leave Evans, it wouldn't change the fact Verdane would've simply launched another invasion. True, he could simply stay on the defensive and repel Verdane's attacks again and again, but it wouldn't change the fact Shagall would kill his own father and declare war on Grannvale as well. Again, even if we assume Sigurd stays on the defensive, leaving Eldigan and Lachesis to die, Lombard and Reptor would still pin the blame of Kurth's death on Vyron. Sigurd would still be branded traitor as well, it's not like it mattered he himself was on the opposite side of the continent from where the deed happened. The whole Chalphy family was blamed.

In this case, being near the Verdane border instead of Orgahill, Sigurd would've had little opportunity to flee. And having to defend from attacks from both Verdane and Agustria means they won't have the strength to protect him even if they decided to put the whole border wars behind. Well, Miletos is not that far. But then it will simply be an alternate Silesse once Grannvale forces go there to try to grab him. And that's if he goes, since only since Queen Rahna offered him asylum, he even thought of leaving Orgahill. Not sure if anyone in Miletos would extend the same courtesy. Speaking of Silesse, it would still be weakened by the civil war. Maios and Daccar would've tried to take over, Sigurd being there or not. Finally, Lombard and Reptor would still be backstabbed by Arvis.

Overall, the only true mistake that Sigurd can be blamed for is that going headfirst into Verdane means Dierdre leaves the forest, thus allowing Manfroy to eventually find her. Wait, no, Dierdre was already outside. She was in Marpha, even met Edain. If Sigurd hadn't save her from the ruffian harrassing her, she wouldn't have gone back to the safety of the Spirit Forest. It would've only been a matter of time before the Loptyrean Cult found her, since there'd be no Sigurd to disrupt operations. On the other hand, meeting Sigurd makes Dierdre want to leave once he passes through the Forest to meet with King Batouh, making her vulnerable again. On the other other hand, no Sigurd means the Loptyrean Cult could eventually find the forest and Dierdre anyway even if she managed to return from Marpha.

I think at the end of the day, Sigurd can only be said to be unlucky. He's dammned no matters what he does. At that point, you can hardly say he makes bad decision when it seems the game's rigged against from the start.

[Slumber]

13 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

It wasn't just to rescue a friend. Verdane was basically staging an invasion. Sigurd was the closest to do anything about it, so he pushed them back to the border. Now, even if he had decided to leave Edain to her fate and leave Evans, it wouldn't change the fact Verdane would've simply launched another invasion. True, he could simply stay on the defensive and repel Verdane's attacks again and again, but it wouldn't change the fact Shagall would kill his own father and declare war on Grannvale as well. Again, even if we assume Sigurd stays on the defensive, leaving Eldigan and Lachesis to die, Lombard and Reptor would still pin the blame of Kurth's death on Vyron. Sigurd would still be branded traitor as well, it's not like it mattered he himself was on the opposite side of the continent from where the deed happened. The whole Chalphy family was blamed.

In this case, being near the Verdane border instead of Orgahill, Sigurd would've had little opportunity to flee. And having to defend from attacks from both Verdane and Agustria means they won't have the strength to protect him even if they decided to put the whole border wars behind. Well, Miletos is not that far. But then it will simply be an alternate Silesse once Grannvale forces go there to try to grab him. And that's if he goes, since only since Queen Rahna offered him asylum, he even thought of leaving Orgahill. Not sure if anyone in Miletos would extend the same courtesy. Speaking of Silesse, it would still be weakened by the civil war. Maios and Daccar would've tried to take over, Sigurd being there or not. Finally, Lombard and Reptor would still be backstabbed by Arvis.

Overall, the only true mistake that Sigurd can be blamed for is that going headfirst into Verdane means Dierdre leaves the forest, thus allowing Manfroy to eventually find her. Wait, no, Dierdre was already outside. She was in Marpha, even met Edain. If Sigurd hadn't save her from the ruffian harrassing her, she wouldn't have gone back to the safety of the Spirit Forest. It would've only been a matter of time before the Loptyrean Cult found her, since there'd be no Sigurd to disrupt operations. On the other hand, meeting Sigurd makes Dierdre want to leave once he passes through the Forest to meet with King Batouh, making her vulnerable again. On the other other hand, no Sigurd means the Loptyrean Cult could eventually find the forest and Dierdre anyway even if she managed to return from Marpha.

I think at the end of the day, Sigurd can only be said to be unlucky. He's dammned no matters what he does. At that point, you can hardly say he makes bad decision when it seems the game's rigged against from the start.

Staying on the defensive would have probably been preferable, really. Sigurd wasn't privy to either Verdane or Augustria's actions beyond the kidnapping of Edain, which is where the escalation starts, and from there, Sigurd's crusade picks up steam. 

Byron was blamed, but it wasn't just him that got framed. Because Sigurd's been on the move, he was also blamed as an active party in the murder. Both Claude and Langobalt acknowledge this, and it would have been much, much harder to pin the blame on somebody who hasn't been conquering left and right for over a year(I think 2 years pass between the prologue and chapter 3? Maybe a year and a half?).

Sigurd's unlucky, but there's much more to it than him being unlucky. It's a deliberate design choice to have Sigurd be headstrong and idealistic, only for it to backfire. He's given warnings, advice, and hints of the bad rumblings in the continent, and he pays for disregarding a lot of it. Even if he goes on his crusade, there were still places in the endgame where he could have turned it around. As I mentioned, Silesia would have probably been a much easier position to hold, which Rahna suggested, and he really had no reason to just walk into Velthomer and just expect everything to be hunky-dory, which Claude warned him about. These are probably the two biggest mistakes he makes in the end game.

If Sigurd wasn't Sigurd, gen 1 would have been radically different.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Slumber

[Eltosian Kadath]

1 hour ago, Slumber said:

I don't think it's too much to not want a bodyguard who couldn't protect their spouse.

Ok if we are going to judge Sigurd for his inability to protect a family member miles away under the protection of an entire castle, we should also judge Ike for his inability to protect (and in some interpretations effectively caused the death of) a family member right in front of him.

Now on to more evidence that Hector is the correct answer, Hector is one of the only Lords shown in the story to be highly perceptive. On multiple occasions he spots assassins lying in wait before they have the chance to strike, he spots the ambush in Laus, and has the common sense not to trust the assassin in their midst. Now that isn't going to beat supernatural foresight of Micaiah, but Hector has a better shot of dealing with the assassins he spots than Micaiah would.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Eltosian Kadath
fixing typographical errors

[Acacia Sgt]

11 minutes ago, Slumber said:

Staying on the defensive would have probably been preferable, really. Sigurd wasn't privy to either Verdane or Augustria's actions beyond the kidnapping of Edain, which is where the escalation starts, and from there, Sigurd's crusade picks up steam. 

Byron was blamed, but it wasn't just him that got framed. Because Sigurd's been on the move, he was also blamed as an active party in the murder. Both Claude and Langobalt acknowledge this, and it would have been much, much harder to pin the blame on somebody who hasn't been conquering left and right for over a year(I think 2 years pass between the prologue and chapter 3? Maybe a year and a half?).

Sigurd's unlucky, but there's much more to it than him being unlucky. It's a deliberate design choice to have Sigurd be headstrong and idealistic, only for it to backfire. He's given warnings, advice, and hints of the bad rumblings in the continent, and he pays for disregarding a lot of it. Even if he goes on his crusade, there were still places in the endgame where he could have turned it around. As I mentioned, Silesia would have probably been a much easier position to hold, which Rahna suggested, and he really had no reason to just walk into Velthomer and just expect everything to be hunky-dory, which Claude warned him about. These are probably the two biggest mistakes he makes in the end game.

If Sigurd wasn't Sigurd, gen 1 would have been radically different.

Things as they are, the escalation would've still happened. Whether Sigurd stays put or not doesn't really change it much.

He wasn't blamed for being on the move, or as an active party. He was accused of being a coonspirator of the plot, not of the deed. It matters little where he is, the accusation is that the whole family decided to kill Prince Kurth. It mattered little who did the actual did. That's not going to depend of what he was doing since Verdane's invasion.

The thing about the warnings and rumors is that he's more often than not in a position where he's unable to do anything anyway. The things surrounding Lombard and Reptor, well, they're over yonder in Isaach while he's in Grannvale. Not much he can do. It's true he could've stayed in Silesse, but Grannvale would've still invaded. They already took Lubeck Castle. Even if eventually Arvis backstabs Lombard and Reptor, there is still one crucial fact. Sigurd is not aware of Arvis's true intentions. No, he's never warned about Arvis. Claude only bings up Lombard and Reptor. The most he says about Arvis is that he's not on his side, but also saying he has no enmity towards him. Sigurd had no reason to think that means Arvis was against him. Neutral at best. As such, why would he think it's a bad decision to head to Barhara once Lombard and Reptor were dead? Everything shown and pointed to him leaned to those two, nothing on Arvis. Sigurd can't be blamed that Arvis was simply very good at hiding his true intentions. Apparently, when Claude went to Blaggi Towers for answers, he was able to learn about Lombard and Reptor's conspiracy... but nothing on Arvis or that it was him who was the ringleader. Really, check the script, nothing about Arvis. If not even that uncovers Arvis, then what grounds Sigurd had to distrust him? It's hardly naivete in play. The only ones who ever accused Arvis of having an agenda were Lombard and Reptor themselves, and it's not like they'd ever tell that to Sigurd.

Ultimately, the situation that was Jugdral in the years 757-760 was a special case that Sigurd had the bad luck to be involved with. The chances of that happening again are not quite big, which is why placing Sigurd in a completely different role and scenario, you can't really say that history will repeat.

[Slumber]

32 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Things as they are, the escalation would've still happened. Whether Sigurd stays put or not doesn't really change it much.

He wasn't blamed for being on the move, or as an active party. He was accused of being a coonspirator of the plot, not of the deed. It matters little where he is, the accusation is that the whole family decided to kill Prince Kurth. It mattered little who did the actual did. That's not going to depend of what he was doing since Verdane's invasion.

The thing about the warnings and rumors is that he's more often than not in a position where he's unable to do anything anyway. The things surrounding Lombard and Reptor, well, they're over yonder in Isaach while he's in Grannvale. Not much he can do. It's true he could've stayed in Silesse, but Grannvale would've still invaded. They already took Lubeck Castle. Even if eventually Arvis backstabs Lombard and Reptor, there is still one crucial fact. Sigurd is not aware of Arvis's true intentions. No, he's never warned about Arvis. Claude only bings up Lombard and Reptor. The most he says about Arvis is that he's not on his side, but also saying he has no enmity towards him. Sigurd had no reason to think that means Arvis was against him. Neutral at best. As such, why would he think it's a bad decision to head to Barhara once Lombard and Reptor were dead? Everything shown and pointed to him leaned to those two, nothing on Arvis. Sigurd can't be blamed that Arvis was simply very good at hiding his true intentions. Apparently, when Claude went to Blaggi Towers for answers, he was able to learn about Lombard and Reptor's conspiracy... but nothing on Arvis or that it was him who was the ringleader. Really, check the script, nothing about Arvis. If not even that uncovers Arvis, then what grounds Sigurd had to distrust him? It's hardly naivete in play. The only ones who ever accused Arvis of having an agenda were Lombard and Reptor themselves, and it's not like they'd ever tell that to Sigurd.

Ultimately, the situation that was Jugdral in the years 757-760 was a special case that Sigurd had the bad luck to be involved with. The chances of that happening again are not quite big, which is why placing Sigurd in a completely different role and scenario, you can't really say that history will repeat.

I admit I got Claud's suggestion that Sigurd was an active party wrong, but Langobalt changes his accusations in a following conversation in the same chapter that Sigurd's army was involved directly, and not as conspirator(At least his accusation makes 0 sense if he's implying Sigurd's entire army conspired with Bryon to kill Kurth). I'll write this one off as just reading it differently, but it still would have been more difficult to really accuse Sigurd of too much if he just stayed home.

Also, explain Sigurd not having any options when it came to marching south vs. staying in Silesia. It would have been much easier to defend, and he would have avoided the part where he finds himself exactly where Arvis wants him. There's really no upside to marching through the desert instead. It actually would have actively hampered Arvis' plans, since dealing with Reptor was a big part of it, and it wouldn't have left Silesia open for occupation(At least not immediately if Sigurd still falls in Silesia). Sigurd has no way of knowing this, but he's also explicitly warned that going his way is the more dangerous option. He put himself in more danger and ended up helping Arvis's plan in the process.

And again, Sigurd really has no reason to trust Arvis, and Claud told him as much. Look at the script you linked. When Sigurd presses Claud about Arvis, Claud basically throws his hands up and says Arvis's not mad at Sigurd, but he's also probably not on Sigurd's side. At best, Sigurd can take this as Arvis as a neutral party who is acting on his own. This still gives Sigurd no reason to think things are cool between him and Arvis when he makes it through Velthomer to Belhalla. Aida just sits on the sidelines and tells him to fuck off until Reptor's dealt with and then she starts going on and on about how Arvis knew Sigurd did nothing wrong as they're already making their way to Belhalla. She then proceeds to say he's got his whole royal guard ready and Arvis will meet him as soon as he gets there. She couldn't make the invitation any more suspicious, and when taken with Claud's initial statement that he's probably not acting in Sigurd's best interests, it just drives it home further that Sigurd isn't making a smart decision by immediately making for Belhalla.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Slumber

[Acacia Sgt]

5 minutes ago, Slumber said:

I admit I got Claud's suggestion that Sigurd was an active party wrong, but Langobalt changes his accusations in a following conversation in the same chapter that Sigurd's army was involved directly, and not as conspirator(At least his accusation makes 0 sense if he's implying Sigurd's entire army conspired with Bryon to kill Kurth). I'll write this one off as just reading it differently, but it still would have been more difficult to really accuse Sigurd of too much if he just stayed home.

Also, explain Sigurd not having any options when it came to marching south vs. staying in Silesia. It would have been much easier to defend, and he would have avoided the part where he finds himself exactly where Arvis wants him. There's really no upside to marching through the desert instead. It actually would have actively hampered Arvis' plans, since dealing with Reptor was a big part of it, and it wouldn't have left Silesia open for occupation(At least not immediately if Sigurd still falls in Silesia).

And again, Sigurd really has no reason to trust Arvis, and Claud told him as much. Look at the script you linked. When Sigurd presses Claud about Arvis, Claud basically throws his hands up and says Arvis's not mad at Sigurd, but he's also probably not on Sigurd's side. Sigurd has no reason to think things are cool between him and Arvis when he makes it through Velthomer to Belhalla. Aida just sits on the sidelines and tells him to fuck off until Reptor's dealt with and then she starts going on and on about how Arvis knew Sigurd did nothing wrong as they're already making their way to Belhalla. She then proceeds to say he's got his whole royal guard ready and Arvis will meet him as soon as he gets there. She couldn't make the invitation any more suspicious, and when taken with Claud's initial statement that he's probably not acting in Sigurd's best interests, it just drives it home further that Sigurd isn't making a smart decision by immediately making for Belhalla.

I think his lines are not meant to be taken literally. As in, "he's part of the plot, he's also responsible for the deed". It's absurd to think he is talking about Sigurd being involved personally, since he's nowhere near Isaach, where Kurth got killed. Whether on Orgahill or Chalphy. This last part I agree. Part of the dirt thrown at Sigurd was also that he had Prince Shannan under his care. If he had stayed home, this wouldn't be. Then again, the only time this is brought up is when Arvis is telling King Azmur when the latter showed doubts of Sigurd and Vyron really being rebels. Something else about Sigurd, true or not, would've still surfaced to pin him as conspirator. Or perhaps not even that.

At that point, it mattered little if Sigurd stayed in Silesse or not. Arvis would've still backstabbed Lombard and Reptor. If Sigurd stays put, once Slayder, Andrei, and Lombard fall, if Sigurd still stays put, then Arvis would tell Reptor to march, then he's the one ambushed in the desert. The forces in Phinora are Velthomer's, so once Arvis gives the word, BAM, Reptor is toast. Then it's just a matter of sending a messenger to Sigurd saying that the "truth" has been uncovered with Lombard and Reptor's deads, and he's welcome to come back to Grannvale. This would bait Sigurd to come anyway. Again, he has little reason to suspect there's more to the conspiracy than just Lombard and Reptor. Perhaps marching towards Grannvale isn't an upside, but it wasn't a downside either. Besides, he only traversed the desert's edge, not through it like what Quan planned to do.

Again, things aren't always "With us or against us". Just because Arvis isn't vouching for his innocence, it doesn't mean Sigurd must think he's doing the opposite. Even if so, Sigurd would think it's only because of Lombard and Reptor's lies, not knowing Arvis was also spreading them. Also, Claude points out that Reptor had control of the Council. That's why Sigurd doesn't question the sudden 180 once he's dead. As for the royal guard and stuff... well, in his mind, the "real" masterminds were dead, and he thought he was being cleared of the falsely accused charges. It's not hard to think he was expecting some sort of big ceremony because it was that kind of a big deal. With Vyron dead, he's the next Duke of Chalphy, not a small position within Grannvale's hierarchy. Again, since he had little reason to suspect Arvis, he wouldn't think it was all just a giant trap since Grannvale still thought he was a traitor. Aida's invitation would not soud suspicious to him. She didn't quite told him that, but rather that he should focus on Reptor first, then they'll talk once things calm down. Claude never said about Arvis not acting in Sigurd's best interest, either. To Sigurd, nothing says heading to Barhahra once Lombard and Reptor are dead is a bad idea.

[Slumber]

49 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

At that point, it mattered little if Sigurd stayed in Silesse or not. Arvis would've still backstabbed Lombard and Reptor. If Sigurd stays put, once Slayder, Andrei, and Lombard fall, if Sigurd still stays put, then Arvis would tell Reptor to march, then he's the one ambushed in the desert. The forces in Phinora are Velthomer's, so once Arvis gives the word, BAM, Reptor is toast. Then it's just a matter of sending a messenger to Sigurd saying that the "truth" has been uncovered with Lombard and Reptor's deads, and he's welcome to come back to Grannvale. This would bait Sigurd to come anyway. Again, he has little reason to suspect there's more to the conspiracy than just Lombard and Reptor. Perhaps marching towards Grannvale isn't an upside, but it wasn't a downside either. Besides, he only traversed the desert's edge, not through it like what Quan planned to do.

Does this not sound incredibly suspicious to you? Sigurd has little reason to suspect there's more to the conspiracy than Langobalt and Reptor, but Sigurd also has no reason to assume others aren't involved. Everyone would have had their ear to the ground, considering the continent is in full-fledged war by that point. People aren't just sitting on their asses and going "Whelp, half of the continent's rulers are dead. Who knows what that's about." It doesn't help that Sigurd sees Langobalt and Reptor recruiting people in chapters 3 and 4 to help take down Sigurd, and it continues into chapter 5, though Sigurd wouldn't really know about that in a hypothetical scenario where he stays in Silesia.

Having a huge conflict surrounding your actions be settled by somebody else, then that person going "Oh, whoops. You can come back now." is incredibly sketchy. Regardless it still would have been the smarter option. Even if the end result was the same, Sigurd went through more trouble for arguably less payoff because... ??? He just kinda wanted to, which the gen 1 treats as a character flaw of Sigurd's.

Also, we don't know how well Arvis would have been able to handle Langobalt and Reptor without Sigurd going south. We have some idea on Reptor, since Aida turns on him and helps, but Langobalt was always both muscle and the schemer of the two. Taken together, we have no idea how Arvis would have handled them both. Word could have gotten out that Arvis was part of the plan if one learned that Arvis betrayed the other.

And the "going through the desert" comment isn't supposed to be taken as part of the argument. Just mentioning that to get from Lubeck to Velthomer and Belhalla, Sigurd needed to go through a portion of the desert. 

49 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Again, things aren't always "With us or against us". Just because Arvis isn't vouching for his innocence, it doesn't mean Sigurd must think he's doing the opposite. Even if so, Sigurd would think it's only because of Lombard and Reptor's lies, not knowing Arvis was also spreading them. Also, Claude points out that Reptor had control of the Council. That's why Sigurd doesn't question the sudden 180 once he's dead. As for the royal guard and stuff... well, in his mind, the "real" masterminds were dead, and he thought he was being cleared of the falsely accused charges. It's not hard to think he was expecting some sort of big ceremony because it was that kind of a big deal. With Vyron dead, he's the next Duke of Chalphy, not a small position within Grannvale's hierarchy. Again, since he had little reason to suspect Arvis, he wouldn't think it was all just a giant trap since Grannvale still thought he was a traitor. Aida's invitation would not soud suspicious to him. She didn't quite told him that, but rather that he should focus on Reptor first, then they'll talk once things calm down. Claude never said about Arvis not acting in Sigurd's best interest, either. To Sigurd, nothing says heading to Barhahra once Lombard and Reptor are dead is a bad idea.

We're reading this in two totally different ways. Sigurd asks "What does Arvis think?", Claud says "I don't think he's on your side". Completely divorced from a black and white "with me or against me" mentality, Claud is flat out saying that Sigurd should really only expect Arvis to be neutral at best. We also know Arvis is doing... something, though only Langobalt and Reptor know exactly(Well, not exactly) what this entails. Taken together, Sigurd knows "Arvis is doing something" and "It may or may not be harmful to me", which isn't grounds for Sigurd to trust him by any means. You're right, it's also not grounds to not trust him, but part of what makes Lords and advisers in this franchise good at their jobs is reading a situation. Jugdral is not like any other continent in the franchise. It's harsh, brutal and unforgiving, and Sigurd should know this.

From that, it shouldn't be too big of a leap to see Aida pretty emphatically saying "Arvis knew you were innocent all along! Ride along to Belhalla where they'll celebrate your victory!" as a small red flag, made much, much, muuuuuuuch bigger by her also saying that Arvis' personal army will be there and that Arvis badly wants to meet with Sigurd. Nothing about it sounds like it's on the up-and-up.

It's at this point that either Sigurd's "Act first, think second" attitude is to blame, or his idealism. Both of which are, again, fatal flaws of his that are part of the deconstruction happening with his character.

Even back in elementary school, I would have found it incredibly suspicious if I was caught up in some crazy neighborhood drama, and my best friend, not even a near stranger who somebody told me probably isn't on my side, said "Hey, look. I believe you. Come over to my house, there's a cake for you here. All of my friends are here and we all have slap bracelets and nerf guns."

I'm reasonably sure that's an Ed, Edd, n' Eddy(Maybe Hey Arnold or Recess) episode, and the Eds fell for the same shit Sigurd did.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Slumber

[redlight]

7 hours ago, Slumber said:

You can make as many excuses as you want, but nobody in the franchise has proven to be a worse bodyguard in the franchise than Sigurd.

If you want to argue with me then at least say something in defense of your point instead of just saying "you''re making up excuses". From what I've read about your responses to other people you're convinced that Sigurd is the worst lord and isn't capable of anything. Some of things you say in this topic I don't disagree with, but some I do. If that's what you think and changing your mind is impossible then so be it

[Michelaar]

Obvious answer would be Ike, but since I can't stand stoic people and it would probably be important that I get along with my bodyguard, I'm going to go ahead and say Ephraim.

[vanguard333]

13 hours ago, Anacybele said:

Ike! I love him, and he's so strong that he's considered the strongest hero in lore! Just ask Old Hubba and the Askrs. :3 And as pointed out, he already basically has experience as a bodyguard since he protected Elincia.

Chrom going to herd sheep though lmao. XD

If I could pick anybody besides a lord though, then no doubt it's Freddy Bear. He IS a bodyguard! And very strong! <3

Wow; of all the jokes I made; the one about Chrom is the one getting the most laughs (all the laughs; it seems). I honestly did not expect that. With all the talk about Sigurd, I thought the "rotisserie dinner at Arvis' house" joke would be the one getting all the laughs. 

[Bagfisch]

10 hours ago, Eltosian Kadath said:

How has Hector not entered this discussion yet? Sure he has issues with mages and their ilk, but Ike is no mage killer either. Plus Hector is far more loyal than a self proclaimed mercenary who could be coerced with coin or word to switch sides (assuming your enemies didn't buy his loyalty already). Plus Hector is the only lord capable of rescuing all Wyvern riders/knights/lords in his game, and there is no way that I exist in a Fire Emblem universe and do not find a way to ride a Wyvern... or die trying. The Runner up award goes to Sigurd who is not only the strongest lord stat wise but also canon wise (except when Ike is powered by Yune in the final strike, only then does he reach holy blood with holy blade levels of strength and match Sigurd) but also wouldn't slow me and my wyvern down.

I mean if we go by that Seliph has even higher endgame stats and even more (un)holy blood.

At least strong enough to take down the ancient evil by means of high stats alone.

[Eltosian Kadath]

39 minutes ago, Bagfisch said:

I mean if we go by that Seliph has even higher endgame stats and even more (un)holy blood.

At least strong enough to take down the ancient evil by means of high stats alone.

Endgame isn't everything, Sigurd is amazing right out of the gate, while Seliph needs a bit of time to hit god tier; although your assessment of Seliph by end game is accurate (kinda, for Seliph to actually take out the monster that is Julius team support is necessary on top of the stats).

[Anacybele]

3 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

Wow; of all the jokes I made; the one about Chrom is the one getting the most laughs (all the laughs; it seems). I honestly did not expect that. With all the talk about Sigurd, I thought the "rotisserie dinner at Arvis' house" joke would be the one getting all the laughs. 

I must not have seen that one, my bad. But both are funny. lol

[omegaxis1]

If Robin counts as the lord, then him. Having a tactician that can plan and counter anyone that might come after you is smart.

[Lau]

I've got to go with Chrom, because he comes with Robin as an added bonus - they're a package deal, hahah!

[vanguard333]

8 hours ago, Anacybele said:

I must not have seen that one, my bad. But both are funny. lol

Thanks. I'm glad they're getting some laughs.

After typing why I think Ike is the obvious choice, I then thought about his competition and figured it would be a prime opportunity for a clever joke or two... or a dozen or so, that also illustrate why the others wouldn't make good bodyguards: Marth's duty to the throne, Corrin's naiveté, Micaiah often being the one with a bodyguard rather than being a bodyguard,  Celica being dependent on Micaiah, etc. 

The problem ultimately became that for some of the FE lords, I don't know much about them and couldn't make a joke. What I said about Roy being a strategist and not a fighter isn't written in any kind of funny way, and for Erika and Lyn, I don't know enough about them to make any kind of comment. 

Are any of my joke-criticisms not that funny? Are any of them inaccurate or in need of some work? Just wondering.