Author Topic: Three Houses and Politics  (Read 6728 times)

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
Three Houses and Politics
« on: February 05, 2020, 05:16:34 AM »
Reiska posed a question to chat one day about Three Houses.

“Why do different people of different ideological stripes have such different reactions to this game’s plot?”

Spoilers for all routes, obviously.

I decided to tackle this as a question. A few ground rules:

-I am trying my best to take things in good faith. This isn’t to say that I am unwilling to criticize in characters or their actions, but I will try to understand different players’ points of view.
Note: With that being said, I am proudly in the pro-Edelgard, anti-Rhea camp and my opinions are generally seen from within that lens.
-I will not use loaded words such as ‘fascist’, ‘cultist’, or ‘waifu’. I don’t think that these terms engender positive discourse, so I will abstain from using them.
-I will try my best to cite things from in-game text as well as I can remember them. Some of the history stuff is just pulled from the Fire Emblem Wiki.

The game’s fundamental question that it presents you is “When is revolution justified?” So this essay aims to explore:

1. How strong is Rhea’s influence on society and what are her goals for the continent of Fodlan?
2. Do the social conditions in Fodlan at the time of the game necessitate large-scale upheaval?

I think most people would agree that, under certain conditions, revolution is the most just course of action. For a modern example, few would see a violent uprising to get rid of a repressive regime like the current North Korea leadership to be unjustified. On the other hand, most people would also agree that overthrowing a stable, peaceful government whose citizens are satisfied would not be a just course of action. The case of Fodlan clearly lies somewhere between these two extremes, but where?

1. How strong is Rhea’s influence on society and what are her goals for the continent of Fodlan?

The relationship between the three countries and the Church of Seiros

The Adrestian Empire once primarily occupied the continent. About 400 years ago, the Holy Kingdom of Faerghus broke off from the Empire in a conflict called the War of the Eagle and Lion. Loog, the King of Lions, rebels against the Empire and the Church ends up mediating the end of the war and establishing the Holy Kingdom. The Church formally crowns Loog as the first king. About 100 years later the Kingdom split into two, forming the Leicester Alliance in the Crescent Moon War. Edelgard, in her case for going to war with the Church of Seiros (end of Chapter 11 speech), states that this split into three countries was instigated by the church, with the goals of dividing humanity and thus increasing the Church’s influence and authority. In Chapter 11, Manuela has a monastery dialogue that corroborates this idea; she comments on the oddity of the fact that Garrech Mach Monastery is situated in the exact centre of the three countries, despite having been built before the Kingdom and the Alliance were created.

Edelgard also states in Chapter 14 that she believes that Seiros/Rhea collected the artifacts of the 10 Elites after they were defeated in battle and then distributed them with the intention of starting a conflict between the Empire and the soon-to-be-Kingdom. There is nothing else in the game that contradicts this or confirms this (as far as I know), but it would make sense that Seiros had the artifacts of her defeated foes and since they are heirlooms passed from generation to generation today that at some point they were given to the Crest-bearers. Whether this was with any ill intention or not, as Edelgard claims, is up to interpretation. Seiros/Rhea doesn’t seem very pleased that humans have them, but she also has the mechanisms to take them back if she wanted, and has not. This might reflect her complicated feelings on the weapons due to their origin.

(Sylvain, in his paralogue, states that his family was concerned that Rhea was going to confiscate the Lance of Ruin as a result of Miklan’s actions, which sets precedence for the Church of Seiros having some degree of ownership/authority over those artifacts.)

The Church of Seiros as a center of power in Fodlan

There is a lot of evidence that establishes the Church of Seiros as an institution with a lot of power over the people of Fodlan.

-Pretty much all of the plot related to Lonato and Christophe.
 
1. In Ashe and Catherine’s support, we learn that Christophe was framed for his supposed role in the Tragedy of Duscur, but was executed because he was plotting against Rhea. So in other words, she executes someone for a crime they didn’t commit, and says it’s fine because they committed another unproven crime.
2. Lonato was a just and honest man, according to those who know him, but he started a rebellion and his head was put on the chopping block due to rebelling against the Central Church
3. In Blue Lions route, she commands the king-in-waiting to take up arms against a nobleman from his own country. That strongly implies that she has significant sway over even the royalty of Fodlan.
4. "I pray the students learned a valuable lesson about the fate that awaits all those who are foolish enough to point their blades toward the heavens."

-She crowns the kings and emperors of Fodlan

-All nobility are required to show piety to the Church as a part of their noble obligations (both Lorenz and Ferdinand talk about this, and Claude is seen as an outsider for not being very faithful.)

-The church has its own personal military that is praised as the most elite fighting force on the continent. In Alois/Shamir’s paralogue, the Knights of Seiros are sent to defend Derdriu, the capital of the Alliance, which clearly shows how much stronger the Church is militarily than the Alliance.

-In Crimson Flower, she (with her personal army) goes to the Holy Kingdom of Faerghus and makes it the new seat of her power. It isn’t clear who is in charge of this combined Church-Faerghus alliance but Dimitri certainly doesn’t seem to be predominantly in control of affairs.

-I generally feel that the Church’s hold is strongest in Faerghus, followed by the Alliance, followed by the Empire where the Church is the weakest. Reading some of the backstory on the Wiki, I see that the Southern Church tried to cause chaos in the Empire a few decades ago and was disbanded, which means that there is no core church in the Empire anymore.


What is Rhea’s view on the aristocratic system?

In the school that the church runs: On one hand, she expresses a desire to have the students at the monastery mingle with students of different social castes. On the other hand, she sets up a school system that is only accessible to those with large sums of money (the money requirement is discussed in Ignatz’s support with Byleth and Leonie’s support with Raphael, I believe). This indicates that this institution has been primarily set up as a way to train the children of elite people (and extract money from them, more cynically), but is technically not barred off from the common class. It’s just more difficult for the poor due to the money requirement.

Otherwise, she seems to see value in Fodlan’s nobility system as a means of maintaining her own power. In her post-Miklan dialogue, she expresses concern that the people will ‘lose faith in the nobility’ if they learn about the Demonic Beast transformation. However, we also know that Rhea likes to keep things related to transformation under wraps (see the scene where Seteth confiscates Claude’s documents about the Immaculate One), so that might be her primary motive rather than her stated goal during that scene.

Rhea does not necessarily intend malice toward any particular group of people and is quite pleasant to individual people. We see both Catherine and Cyril, two examples of people who idolize Rhea. In Remire, she takes in children who are orphaned by the events that occur there. She does seem to legitimately care about individual people that she likes, but her primary concern is making sure that people who oppose her are punished and that her own rule is upheld.

Most of your missions in Part 1 are primarily done with the purpose of defending the Church’s interests and honor, rather than helping the citizens of the nation with the wider spread problems of violence. Just to review…

(Chapter 1 - Battle vs. other houses)
Chapter 2 - Bandits have taken over Zanado Canyon, a sacred site in the Church of Seiros.
Chapter 3- Lonato. Lonato is directly challenging the authority of the church and thus is executed.
Chapter 4- Defending Rhea from a purported assassination plot which turns out to be a cover for robbing the Tomb of Seiros. This one is interesting because Rhea states that she feels like she is in no danger, but the church is being dishonored and thus you must destroy her enemies.
Chapter 5 - Miklan. Miklan has stolen a Hero’s Relic, which Rhea is very concerned about falling in the wrong hands, but it is clear that her concern is primarily out of desire to keep the Relics’ secrets under wraps rather than to protect the people who are being oppressed by Miklan et al.
Chapter 6- Flayn’s kidnapping. Defending the draconic bloodline.
(Chapter 7 - The Battle of the Eagle and Lion)
Chapter 8 - Remire. Again, people opposed to the church causing chaos. You can argue that this one is more out of concern for the citizens than some of the previous ones, where she expresses basically no concerns about the people’s suffering, but it is also beneficial to her directly.
Chapter 9 - Demonic Beasts in the school.
Chapter 10 - Kronya/Solon.
Chapter 11 - Desecrating the holy tomb. All three of these are in direct opposition to the Church and are serious threats.

I feel like the main times we see missions that are done of concern for the citizens of the countries are paralogues, which are initiated by different PCs from those territories rather than the Church directly (although the Church does give its permission). A few examples include Felix, Sylvain, Ignatz/Raph, and Dedue, all of which serve to protect the common people of their respective countries.

On the other hand, the paralogues that primarily concern Church characters, such as Seteth/Flayn and Ashe/Catherine, are primarily conflicts within the Church of Seiros, where both sides accuse each other of heresy. And as with most real-life conflicts like this, neither side comes off particularly well. In Seteth/Flayn’s paralogue, not only do both sides commit violence over sectarian differences over possession of a holy site, but the player is commanded to cut down fleeing enemies for their heresy.

How long has Rhea/Seiros been ruling Fodlan/the Church of Seiros and what is her leadership like?

One difference between Rhea and many real life authoritarian leaders is the fact that she is seemingly immortal and has been ruling for a long time. But for how long? Unfortunately, there isn’t a lot of evidence that I have found that can state this definitively one way or another. We know that Jeralt is 113 years old, according to Alois/Byleth support, which places his blood transfusion to around 70-90 years ago, depending on how fast Jeralt ages + how old he was when it happened. We know that Rhea/Seiros was in charge of the church at that juncture. The other thing that we know is that Byleth is the 13th experiment that Rhea/Seiros does to try to revive Sothis, and her mother was the 12th. Rhea/Seiros states that she ‘created’ Byleth’s mother. Whether that is through vat experiments or birth is something I am unclear on, but what this does establish is that Rhea/Seiros has been at the very least active and ruling for most of if not all of the last 1000 years.

She clearly wields a lot of authority; we see Seteth, the seeming second most powerful member of the Church, defer to her on numerous occasions. Even when reasonable criticisms of her plans are voiced, she is able to command obedience simply by stating that this is her will. If she tells you to jump, you better damn well jump.

As a side note, I don’t think Rhea/Seiros is a Machiavellian mastermind. In Crimson Flower, she spends most of her time stuck in a trauma loop, incapable of making any rational arguments, due to having her authority challenged by her mother’s vessel. This is pretty consistent with the rest of her character work, where she primarily uses force of will, rather than reason or manipulation, to enact the things she desires. This style of leadership is perhaps why there is a lot of unrest and people dissatisfied with her rule.

So this all leads to…

2. Does the social condition in Fodlan at the time of the game necessitate large-scale upheaval?

So, what kind of world is Fodlan today?

The three major powers in Fodlan are currently at peace with each other, with the Central Church as a stabilizing force in the continent. Not that all seems to be well….

Violence is rampant:
-There is genocide in Duscur four years before the game starts, which is instigated primarily by Kingdom citizens who hate brown people, after nobles of the country and TWSID plotted the murder of the king. We see the naked racism against the remaining Duscur people crop up in a variety of different places in the game, including Dedue’s paralgoue, Dimitri/Dedue support, and even Ingrid/Felix expressing racist ideology.
-There is a lot of chaos in Faerghus; it seems to be fairly close to a failed state (see Felix/Sylvain paralogues). The Central Church seems to not be concerned with re-establishing order in Faerghus except for the instances where the events directly pertain to the Church (Lonato rebelling against the Church, Miklan possessing a Relic without having a Crest), so Faerghus has been in disorder for at least the last 4 years since the death of the king.
-There was a war between Faerghus and Sreng that ended about 10 years ago.
-Violence is so ingrained in the culture of Faerghus that both Dimitri and Felix learned to wield a weapon before they could write their own names. There is no suggestion that their experiences are atypical of Faerghus nobility.
-In the Alliance, the Duke of Gloucester, according to Raphael/Ignatz’s paralogue, assassinates the heir to House Riegan. The Alliance seems to be more stable than the Kingdom, but is constantly fending off pirates (Alois/Shamir’s paralogue; they are attacking the capital city of Derdriu, which is not a great sign) and Almyra is constantly a threat to invade. There seems to be a baseline amount of general banditry in the Alliance as well, although not as much as in the Kingdom.
-In the Empire, there was a large war against Dagda and Brigid, who tried to invade about ten years ago. I feel like the Empire is overall the best off; not sure there is as much banditry there but…
-Hanneman’s sister is killed by a nobleman for the crime of not bearing a Crest-baby (Edelgard A support)
-Bernadetta is beaten for not being good enough trophy wife material (Byleth B support)
-Dorothea mentions that she has to teach herself how to wield a weapon in order to protect herself while in the opera, implicitly from sexual assault (Felix A support)

The caste system is hugely important in the political structure of all three countries:
-People are valued primarily for their Crests;  Sylvain, Ingrid, Mercedes are all three examples of this culture.
-We see this manifest differently in the different countries. The Imperial nobility are indolent and coast primarily on their wealth, Crests, and family name, the Faerghus nobility are hyper-chivalrous and obsessed with honor, and the Alliance nobility are always politicking and in-fighting, involving all people, not just themselves. We see three different versions of unpleasant aristocratic cultures in these three countries.

While we don’t get many looks from the eyes of commoners in this game, what we do get tells us that they have a rough life:
-Ashe is so poor that, despite being one of the most virtuous people in the game, he turns to a life of crime in order for he and his younger siblings to survive. (from Ashe/Byleth B support)
-Dorothea, an orphan in the imperial capital, grew up drinking from drains and digging food from the trash. She was spit on and kicked by noblemen. As luck would have it, she ended up becoming an opera star, and instead was objectified by the same nobles who treated her poorly on the street. She believes that the goddess and ‘her noble regime’ are responsible for her suffering, which lends further credence to the nobility’s strong ties with the church. (from Dorothea/Hanneman B and Ferdie/Dorothea A)

It seems like a pretty typical European society during the height of the Papacy (except that the Pope has an actual army), but many of the people who live in the society itself are much more progressive and forward-thinking than the society that they live in. Many of the students question the values of the society that they’ve grown up in (Felix, Sylvain, Lysithea, Ingrid, Mercedes, Dorothea, Edelgard, Linhardt). In some ways the people who live in the world seem more progressive than the antiquated systems of government and social order that control their lives, and this incongruence will inherently lead to conflict of some kind. As established a few paragraphs ago, it seems as if Rhea/Seiros has been in charge of Fodlan into the knowable past and therefore we can assume that she will continue to be in charge of Fodlan for the foreseeable future, given no disruption of the status quo. And it seems as if Rhea is largely happy with the current structure of the world, so we can infer that the world won’t really change without some sort of conflict.

Could a solution have been reached that didn’t involve a war?

I don’t believe a peaceful solution could have been reached that involves Rhea/Seiros conceding power. We see example after example of how Rhea acts when her authority is questioned, and nothing in her behavior in Part 1 suggests that she will be reasoned with on this subject. To be honest, I think this would be an excellent course of action to take if your goal were to be executed.

I think the best-case scenario would be an alliance between Edelgard and Claude where each of them work together to seize power from the Church of Seiros. This would still end up as a large-scale conflict engulfing the continent, but ideally with both the Empire and Alliance on the same side, the war would have been less lengthy. I think the honest truth is that both Edelgard and Claude are control freaks and want things to be the way they want them, so I feel like an alliance between the two of them would ultimately have ended in failure, even if it worked out initially. And both of them are playing dangerous games involving defying the Church of Seiros while going to school at the monastery; in particular, if Edelgard reached out to Claude and he betrayed her to the church, it would end all of her plans, and almost certainly her life. Neither party had a good reason to trust the other, and good reason not to.

It is often said that Claude has a lot of the radical left trappings of Edelgard without being as violent/militant, but in practice, I’m not sure what Claude’s plan to take over/reform Fodlan was, before the war started. He definitely wants to take over Fodlan; in Crimson Flower, he explicitly states that he wanted to rule the continent. In his own route, he happily takes advantage of a large conflict once it is happening in order to consolidate the continent under his rule or that of someone close to him. During the war, he even brings a foreign military into Fodlan in order to achieve his goal, calling into question his reputation in the fandom as the one who seeks peaceful solutions.

But Luther, none of that answered the original question “Why do different people of different ideological stripes have such different reactions to this game’s plot?”

Good thinking, brain worm. The answer to #2 is “depends on who you ask”.

I think people who support Rhea have a few different reasons for doing so. One, some people believe that tradition and order are important parts of the social contract and government in general. The Church’s influence has been a stabilizing presence on the world, and while the world isn’t perfect, Rhea is a voice of moderation and reason and helps solve problems when they arise. For people of relatively conservative ideology who believe that the government’s primary role is to maintain order, Rhea’s actions are completely justified. In some debates over this game, some people have stated that “if you don’t oppose Rhea/Seiros, she is a very nice person!”. It is similar to the sentiment “good citizens wouldn’t get in trouble with the law” or views that “those hurt by the police deserve what they got”.

Another common pro-Rhea argument I’ve seen primarily comes from VW’s final scenes, where Rhea/Seiros reveals that her family was brutally slaughtered by the Nemesis and the 10 Elites 1000 years ago, and how she holds this long-standing sorrow in her heart about it, not to mention a distrust of humanity. To be honest, I feel that while this may explain her actions, it does not excuse them, nor in any way influences whether a revolution against her regime is justified or not. She can have legitimate grievances against humanity and still be an unfit ruler.

The third group of Rhea supporters I have encountered are people who have no problem with Rhea behavior in Part 1. To say that the authoritarian behavior of Rhea/Seiros in Part 1 is not enough reason to start a war against her is fair; saying that her behavior is totally, 100% fine confuses and alarms me. I feel that this might be due to the perception of Rhea as a “good guy” because she is initially presented as calm and motherly (channelling similarly designed Fire Emblem characters Emmeryn and Mikoto), and because she shows kindness and trust toward the main character. It’s not as if the game is trying to hide her faults; two of your most trusted companions Jeralt and Sothis both caution you to be wary of Rhea. But as the Milgram experiment showed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment), many people have an inherent desire to obey an authority figure, particularly one who is reasonable to them, even as evidence mounts that what they are doing is wrong.

Edelgard, on the other hand, proposes that the Crest system, the nobility, and the church are all parts of a broken system, with the Church at its core, which needs to be removed and replaced. She acknowledges that her plan to do so, which involves a violent removal of Rhea and her followers from power, is one that promises short-term pain for Fodlan, but she believes that the long-term gains are easily worth the sacrifice.

The nature of these long-term gains is something that she gives a lot of consideration to. Edelgard, in her various supports, explores ideas on how to make the post-church world a better place; in her Hanneman support, they discuss how to eliminate the Crest system by either trying to remove them or by giving everyone access to them. In her Ferdinand support, they discuss free education as a way of decreasing inequality, closing the gap between the rich and the poor. In her Caspar support, she discusses her plans to have people earn titles rather than inherit them. In her Linhardt support, she discusses establishing a research institute for Crests and Relics. In her Manuela support, they talk about the place that faith and religion will hold in the new order, and Edelgard gains appreciation for the value of faith despite her contempt for organized religion. I think her fans are drawn to her care for the society she plans to build in this post-church world. I think Edelgard appeals more to people who have had to deal with the church’s powerful influence on society and other stripes of progressives that feel that our current world is unsatisfactory.

(Of course, some people like the characters for superficial reasons and take sides based on that but I am not really interested in that as a point of discussion.)

I think the answer to the question “Does the social condition in Fodlan at the time of the game necessitate large-scale upheaval?” comes down to whether one feels the ends justifies the means. Does Edelgard’s new vision for the world (more egalitarian, less stratified, more free and less controlled by a central church power) counter-balance the life lost in the war? In 300 years, will the people of Fodlan think of this event the same as people think of the French Revolution in our world today; a turbulent and violent event that brought about positive social change to the world? Or will it be seen as a vanity project, a way to stamp one’s name on history?

(Interestingly, Edelgard asks this very question in her C support with Dorothea: will she be remembered as “the revolutionary who guided the Empire to a new dawn...or the foolish ruler who took her revolution too far”?)

Unlike most game character rivalries, I think Edelgard versus Rhea gets people riled up because of its real world implications. “How could you think that war is justified?” “How could you believe that this status quo is acceptable, especially with an immortal ruler?” These questions are heavier than more typical fandom debates, such as one’s favorite ships or whether Caspar or Raphael is a better unit.

So why do you side with Edelgard?

In my analysis of the justification of revolution, I looked at the sum total of society’s ills as well as the unwillingness of Rhea’s administration to do anything about them, preferring to prioritize consolidation of its own power. I think for her to continue to be in power indefinitely is a grave mistake, and one that could hinder the social and political progress of Fodlan for the foreseeable future. I do not believe that peaceful methods are a realistic option for dealing with a power-hungry authoritarian and as a result I believe that a revolution is the only feasible solution to the problem.

I also do not believe that, as a risk-vs.-reward, that Edelgard reaching out to Claude is a good idea. It is a nice thought, and one that would have made the game different (and shorter!) than the one that we have, but as outlined above, I do not believe that it makes much sense in the context of both characters’ situations in Part 1. And in Part 2, Edelgard conquers Derdriu for a simple reason: she doesn’t want to be flanked by Claude while fighting against the Church, which is a real risk given Claude’s ambitions.

I do not believe that Edelgard and Dimitri could feasibly ally with each other because they are too ideologically different. One of the more interesting scenes in the game is on Azure Moon where the two of them discuss these differences and conclude that they are simply too far apart to compromise. Dimitri argues that “pushing your own sense of justice and your own ideals onto even one other person is nothing more than self-righteousness”. Edelgard responds with “Maybe it is self-righteousness, but it doesn’t matter. Someone has to take action and put a stop to this world’s endless, blood-stained history!” Despite Edelgard being the supposed ‘villain’ of the route, I found myself agreeing with her. Isn’t the point of being a leader to make decisions for many people, sometimes decisions that are difficult and unpopular at the time?

Does your choice of first route determine your outlook on this argument?

I think there is some correlation between the first set of eyes you see the game through and your ultimate opinion on this debate. On the other hand, I played Azure Moon first, and I still prefer Edelgard’s revolution to a world of stagnation, so maybe not completely. It might be a chicken or egg thing though; does Edelgard’s route, with its obviously coldly rational and assertive female lead, inherently appeal more to those who would be more inclined to give into its narrative? As a player, it would be interesting to rewind and play a different route first, but sadly, unlike Byleth, I do not have access to Divine Pulse.

But Luther, Edelgard bands with the Dubstepping Mole People, doesn’t that make her a bad girl?

On the day Edelgard was born
The nurses all gathered ‘round
To gaze in wide wonder
At the bitch they had found
The head nurse spoke up and said leave this one alone
They could tell right away that she was bad to the bone….
buh-buh-buh-bad

Don’t worry kids, her pet Hubert will deal with them in the epilogue. The enemy of your enemy, as it turns out, is just your enemy in the future. More seriously, I think that Edelgard saw them as a means to an end, just as she sees many other things. I don’t think it is a particularly noble thing for her to do, and she obviously despises them, but she defers dealing with them until post-game because they are useful tools at the time.

But Luther, Edelgard lies to her friends about who nukes Arianrhod, doesn’t that make her a bad girl?

A means to an end. For god’s sake brain worm, she wears fucking devil horns and she is called the Lady of Deceit. We love her because she’s buh-buh-buh-bad.

So what you’re saying is that she isn’t the nicest person in the world but she is doing what is overall best for the world so we should side with her anyway?

Yes.

Well, that was over 5000 words. Now I sleep~
« Last Edit: February 05, 2020, 05:23:06 AM by Luther Lansfeld »
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Fudozukushi

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1552
  • Born to hunt Death Knights
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2020, 06:27:19 AM »
Your words are good.  But have my less good words.

-A lot of people will point out that Gerreg Mach is where it is because of the Holy Tomb.  But the point is that the three countries split around it and I am always glad when someone gets that correct.

-Rhea absolutely hands out the Relics if it furthers her own position.  We blatantly see this going on with Byleth and the SotC then get a repeat with the oath she gets from Sylvain and the Lance.  I fully do think she used it to get Loog and later Leicester to rebel.

-Rhea has been sending out royalty to due her biding for years.  No one even really bats an eye at the thought of the House Leads going to do the church's deeds.  She is so far above them it's scary.

-Heck, I'm pretty sure it's in the Alois/Shamir paralogue where they say the Eastern Church controls eastern Fodlan.

-In the English it said Dimitri submitted to Rhea in CF but the JP has it has an equal partnership.

-The Southern Church just didn't try to cause chaos, it tried to cause an outright coup.  The emperor only expelled the bishop and church too, it didn't eradicate them.  Either under mercy or under the idea of crossing Rhea.

-Jeralt's age is sorta more nebulous, I think, but whatever.  Seteth says another archbishop was responsible for the Fodlan's Locket construction (or Officers Academy) so either Rhea steps aside from public view once in a while or he's lying.

-Faerghus and Sreng are still at war.  Faerghus just conquered the southern half of it in its war.  Now its just those mountains dividing them.

-There's also outright violent inner-border conflicts within the Alliance (Hi Acheron!)

-Also House Goneril's Almyran slaves that Rhea blatantly knows about because of Cyril.

-House Hyrm territory has bandit troubles its own.  As did Remire at the start, but uhhh, you know...  Though Jeralt talks about how strange it is bandits would be there.  He also talks about unrest in the western reaches.

-Additional wrinkle to Dorothea's awful circumstances was she was conceived on the chance of being a Crest baby.  Yep!  What a lovely system...

-Claude is seeking the Sword of the Creator and constantly talking about how its power can destroy mountains and guess what kind of geographical feature separates Fodlan and Almyra?

-"As long as I'm the boot everything is fine!"

-All the factions are willing to side with shady or outright garbage people to get what they want so siding with the molemen means Edelgard is the worst is just a shit argument.  Faerghus is Faerghus and I would honestly argue worse than the molemen, Claude allies with Almyra who uses actual pre-teen child soldiers and all three side with the church which is the church.

SnowFire

  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4935
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2020, 07:12:29 AM »
An interesting read, nice write-up!  I should post my own thoughts eventually too, at least on Verdant Wind + Crimson Flower, but a few thoughts... 

Quote
3. In Blue Lions route, she commands the king-in-waiting to take up arms against a nobleman from his own country. That strongly implies that she has significant sway over even the royalty of Fodlan.

In Alois/Shamir’s paralogue, the Knights of Seiros are sent to defend Derdriu, the capital of the Alliance, which clearly shows how much stronger the Church is militarily than the Alliance.

There's a term in fandom communities about Watsonian approaches & Doyelist approaches to fiction.  (A rare time where TVTropes is in fact an authoritative source: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WatsonianVersusDoylist ).  I'd argue that these two plot points should be looked at more from a Doyelist, real life perspective to see what's going on.  (If there's some silly pop culture reference in a Working Designs game, this isn't a sign that people on the moon took knowledge of 90s memes with them into space within the logic of the game, it's a sign the game writers were having a bit of fun.)  I'm not sure we should put too much weight on this. 

To switch things up a bit: you didn't include in your questions for why you support Edelgard her actions in Chapter 11 of the Black Eagles route, where she and her soldiers will potentially fight and kill you & your characters.  And I agree it's not a useful line of complaint to bring up, because the reason is obvious: budget.  IntSys clearly ran out of time & money in making the game, and they didn't want to make two versions of C11 similar to the two versions of C12, so eh screw it C11 happens as if you're on Silver Snow no matter what.  That said, if taken really seriously, then C11 if I thought it was an intentional plot point would essentially tank any Edelgard sympathy: even if I agree with someone entirely, I don't want to work with them after they tried to murder me and my friends!

I think the above two issues are the same kind of thing.  Why can Rhea order Dimitri around to fight Miklan, rather than using Gilbert & church troops?  Because narratively the player needs an excuse to find out the Horrible Truth behind crests and more about the screwed-up way nobility treats the crestless.  Why is there a paralogue mission in Derdriu against pirates?  Because IntSys already made the Derdriu map for Crimson Flower C14, and making 3H maps was more expensive than the old sprite-based maps, so they wanted to reuse it and found some excuse to do so.  The real-life explanation hangs too heavily over these maps to take too much in-universe knowledge from them. 

(Hubert's paralogue is another example that needs the Doyelist treatment - it makes absolutely no damn sense in-universe, none, please send your army to help our boys in trouble who sent word a few days ago, but you can do it whenever you like, wait a month if you want, no hurry to contain the rampaiging beasts, the mages will always be 30 seconds away from death when you show up.  But it's good gameplay and a good excuse to learn a bit about Lord Arundel.  Nobody minds Ramza's weird knack for arriving just as NPCs are about to be attacked.)

Quote
During the war, he even brings a foreign military into Fodlan in order to achieve his goal, calling into question his reputation in the fandom as the one who seeks peaceful solutions.
This comes off as pretty damn noble, though.  In CF, it's defensively; in VW, it's still mostly defensively from the standpoint that a war already started and we gotta finish it.  In both, it's supposed to be a bit of a proof to the Alliance that Almyra needn't be their enemy.  I do agree it'd be interesting to see what the writers think Claude's plan for reform / conquest / alliance was if Edelgard tripped off the Goddess Tower and died or something before things heated up.  Certainly I can see a scenario where he brought in Almyra to conquer the continent himself which would definitely dampen his sneaky first cred, but maybe not.

Quote
Another common pro-Rhea argument I’ve seen primarily comes from VW’s final scenes, where Rhea/Seiros reveals that her family was brutally slaughtered by the Nemesis and the 10 Elites 1000 years ago, and how she holds this long-standing sorrow in her heart about it, not to mention a distrust of humanity. To be honest, I feel that while this may explain her actions, it does not excuse them, nor in any way influences whether a revolution against her regime is justified or not. She can have legitimate grievances against humanity and still be an unfit ruler.
I know I brought this one up.  I don't think there's any contradiction here!  I think this bit of history is legitimately pro-Rhea and makes her sympathetic, and I also agree that she's still an unfit ruler.  It just changes the color of how we fill in the blanks for things we don't know.  For example, for insane tyrants like Garon or Ashnard, we can safely assume that nothing about their rule was any good, even the parts we aren't explicitly told about.  Rhea, I'm a lot more willing to assume that many of the decisions she made were non-controversial, or general good-government maintain the peace stuff.  It's unclear how long Rhea actually ruled, but she definitely ruled the past ~100 years and during the war against Nemesis.  It suggests to me at least that she was somebody who was genuinely trying to do the right thing by her people and for her human allies, but grew impatient with dissent.  She's trying to do right, but is shitty at it in precisely the way powerful politicians are in real life - they think they're perfect, they think anyone opposing them must be a villain, they don't listen to the counselors saying "are you sure this is a good idea."  This makes her a very compelling and sympathetic villain!  Both potentially redeemable, and potentially psychotic.  In the same way that to the extent Edelgard herself as a villain - and she has those accents at times - is also a compelling and sympathetic villain, 'cuz she's right.  Seiros stood up against Nemesis, Edelgard stood up against Seiros, the great chain of hero to villain continues onward, etc. per Dorothea & Edelgard's support, as you noted.

I have no idea if this is anyone else on the Internet or just me, but to the extent that Fodlan feels like a "real" place, something else in Rhea's favor (maybe?) is just that she's realistic in how actual nobles treat attempts to mess with their rule.  They're ALL assholes, so arguably Rhea might be a tolerable asshole, or at least a Great asshole?  Basically a matter of setting expectations and standards.  That gets a bit into what exactly the time period we should assume for 3H is..  I think CK mentioned that it feels like a bit of a mix of several time periods.  Basically, Rhea might be okay for the 1500s, but by the time of the French Revolution, she's guillotine bait.  Somewhere in the middle (1750s?), she's in-between.  Like...  Henry VIII is, objectively speaking, a horrible psychopath who murdered his wives, treated others like shit, executed advisors for the crime of being right, was an egomaniac, etc.  But he was also a "Great" king who was revered in English history for a long time: somebody who won wars, who was a player on the world stage, who stood up to the Church (so he could crown himself mini-Pope of his own kingdom), an intellectual, a warrior-king.  We would consider a person like that all-bad by today's standards (hahaha, so I would have said in 2015, okay, let's call that "should consider such a person all-bad"), but by the standards of the era, they might count as someone borderline with both good & bad.  Or Ivan the Terrible in Russia in the 1500s, who like Edelgard conquered a bunch of shit, sacked & executed the useless Russian nobility, freed Russia from tribute, etc., but also probably executed random people who got in his way and had a generally volatile personality.  If you're in some grimdark psuedo-realistic world, Rhea comes off better strictly due to dint of low expectations.  Rhea has the problem that in JRPG fiction, she's competing with a bunch of unrealistically wise and noble and perfect rulers like Mikoto who are unrealistically "nice" because clearly a descendant of Amaterasu would never be a bad person.  Or something.  So when Rhea comes off at her best - lategame VW say - it's refreshing to me because it depicts a horrific nobility asshole who is still your ally and didn't exactly mean badly, which is annoyingly rare.

--
Also, re Edelgard teaming up with the Molemen: Ehhhh not gonna go as far as Fudo on this one, the Molemen for better or for worse are officially Pure Evil and letting them be in charge of anything will just lead to trouble.  More specifically, even if you don't think they're that bad, they explicitly murder Byleth's dad for no particularly good reason, and clearly also want to murder Byleth as well, so in-character you-as-Byleth have pretty good reason to be pissed at Edelgard for teaming up with them in a way that isn't true about say Faerghus, who isn't explicitly trying to murder the player avatar.  It's definitely a serious downside.  Which makes Edelgard interesting!  But definitely villainous in this aspect, it's one of her bad sides.

--
As another comment stolen directly from Elf & Ciato - something that is interesting about Fodlan compared to many JRPG lands is just how bad of a shape things are in at the start of the game  (without also being some sort of dystopia like, say, FF13).  It's also precisely why Three Houses has interesting politics in it.  In happy idyllic lands threatened by a comic book supervillain, there's not a lot of politics to be had, barring the question of collaboration vs. hopeless resistance I guess.  3H starts with a rotting, corrupt structure shambling along in an uneasy peace, but not every person that's part of it is directly bad, exactly.  Plenty of well-meaning people trapped perputating the existing problems, including Rhea herself.  Pretty much any change to be had will be for the better; but how will it be accomplished, and will it stick?  Tough questions, and ones that all the Lords think about.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2020, 07:44:09 AM by SnowFire »

Random Consonant

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 2188
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2020, 09:19:38 PM »
Quote
Also, re Edelgard teaming up with the Molemen: Ehhhh not gonna go as far as Fudo on this one, the Molemen for better or for worse are officially Pure Evil and letting them be in charge of anything will just lead to trouble.  More specifically, even if you don't think they're that bad, they explicitly murder Byleth's dad for no particularly good reason, and clearly also want to murder Byleth as well, so in-character you-as-Byleth have pretty good reason to be pissed at Edelgard for teaming up with them in a way that isn't true about say Faerghus, who isn't explicitly trying to murder the player avatar.  It's definitely a serious downside.  Which makes Edelgard interesting!  But definitely villainous in this aspect, it's one of her bad sides.

On the other hand if the Dubstep Molemen didn't exist the only real thing that changes (ok there's the blood reconstruction surgery bit but considering that researching how to give people Crests is an established thing in the game this is an easy enough rewrite if you need to keep it in for argument's sake) is that Edelgard isn't tarred by association with them.  I mean pre-timeskip, Edelgard's only truly negative actions are:

1) Hiring bandits to kill Claude and Dimitri
2) Using the Western Church to attempt to steal the Sword of the Creator
3) Assaulting the Holy Tomb to steal the crest stones within for the purpose of creating demonic beasts

And it's highly probable that 2 and 3 would not have happened as they did without necessitating a further rewrite of the plot if the Dubstep Molemen weren't in the picture.  This can't really be said of the events that transpired in Faerghus because corrupt asshole nobles plotting against reform-minded kings is a thing that happens regardless of sinister shadowy figures pulling a violent find/replace, and the act of genocide that followed is the product of a xenophobic culture that adheres to some very toxic notions and of the three nations Faerghus is the most loyal to the Church and the status quo it creates, nor of Almyra which is off doing its own thing which ultimately contributes to Fodlan's xenophobic culture so yeah considering Edelgard wants the Dubstep Molemen guillotined as much as everyone else does and delivers on it whenever she can get away with it I agree it's pretty shit reasoning since the only reason they're there (narratively speaking) is that so we don't have a clear good guy to root for because neither Claude or Dimitri have clear solutions to dealing with the off-screen baby eaters.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2020, 10:03:47 PM by Random Consonant »

Dark Holy Elf

  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 8134
  • Well-behaved women seldom make history
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2020, 04:04:36 AM »
Lots of good stuff. I obviously agree with most of what Luther said (shock, I know). One thing I do want to address:

Quote
This comes off as pretty damn noble, though.  In CF, it's defensively; in VW, it's still mostly defensively from the standpoint that a war already started and we gotta finish it.

In VW it's about as "defensive" as the US dropping atomic bombs on Japan in WW2; they're used not to protect Alliance territory, but to speed up the end of the war (i.e. conquer Adrestia more quickly), and thus hopefully result in less loss of life overall. There's some nobility in that, but I don't think it's the only reason.

Claude consistently demonstrates a desire to become the leader of a united Fodlan and/or have a friend of his in that position (see: his conversation with Byleth about the future of the Alliance and Fodlan in VW, his admission to Edelgard in CF if he survives Derdriu, and his ceding of Alliance territory to Dimitri in AM), I don't think you can overlook the other reason to bring in Almyra; it allows him to outright conquer Adrestia (and possibly cow the surviving Faerghus nobility into bending the knee as well, although this is speculation on my part since VW doesn't really address Faerghus specifics) instead of finding some sort of peace agreement which would preserve borders within Fodlan, which he adamantly does not want.

(related note: I like Claude a lot, but I do think the fandom is a bit soft on him. Precisely because Edelgard and Dimitri are so obviously morally complex, I think some players who crave someone more morally pure gravitate to him as "the nice one" and exaggerate his niceness because that's what they want to see. There's a lot about him that isn't that nice! Of course, that's why I like him: if I wanted a lord who was nice all the time I'd be hyping Marth or Seliph or Roy and excuse me I think I threw up in my mouth a little.)

Erwin Schrödinger will kill you like a cat in a box.
Maybe.

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2020, 04:51:36 AM »
Quote
There's a term in fandom communities about Watsonian approaches & Doyelist approaches to fiction.  (A rare time where TVTropes is in fact an authoritative source: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WatsonianVersusDoylist ).  I'd argue that these two plot points should be looked at more from a Doyelist, real life perspective to see what's going on.  (If there's some silly pop culture reference in a Working Designs game, this isn't a sign that people on the moon took knowledge of 90s memes with them into space within the logic of the game, it's a sign the game writers were having a bit of fun.)  I'm not sure we should put too much weight on this. 

To switch things up a bit: you didn't include in your questions for why you support Edelgard her actions in Chapter 11 of the Black Eagles route, where she and her soldiers will potentially fight and kill you & your characters.  And I agree it's not a useful line of complaint to bring up, because the reason is obvious: budget.  IntSys clearly ran out of time & money in making the game, and they didn't want to make two versions of C11 similar to the two versions of C12, so eh screw it C11 happens as if you're on Silver Snow no matter what.  That said, if taken really seriously, then C11 if I thought it was an intentional plot point would essentially tank any Edelgard sympathy: even if I agree with someone entirely, I don't want to work with them after they tried to murder me and my friends!

I think the above two issues are the same kind of thing.  Why can Rhea order Dimitri around to fight Miklan, rather than using Gilbert & church troops?  Because narratively the player needs an excuse to find out the Horrible Truth behind crests and more about the screwed-up way nobility treats the crestless.  Why is there a paralogue mission in Derdriu against pirates?  Because IntSys already made the Derdriu map for Crimson Flower C14, and making 3H maps was more expensive than the old sprite-based maps, so they wanted to reuse it and found some excuse to do so.  The real-life explanation hangs too heavily over these maps to take too much in-universe knowledge from them. 

(Hubert's paralogue is another example that needs the Doyelist treatment - it makes absolutely no damn sense in-universe, none, please send your army to help our boys in trouble who sent word a few days ago, but you can do it whenever you like, wait a month if you want, no hurry to contain the rampaiging beasts, the mages will always be 30 seconds away from death when you show up.  But it's good gameplay and a good excuse to learn a bit about Lord Arundel.  Nobody minds Ramza's weird knack for arriving just as NPCs are about to be attacked.)


The reason I didn’t bring up the Edelgard in Chapter 11 thing is because it has nothing to do with my three thesis statements:

1. Why do different people of different ideological stripes have such different reactions to this game’s plot?
2. How strong is Rhea’s influence on society and what are her goals for the continent of Fodlan?
3. Do the social conditions in Fodlan at the time of the game necessitate large-scale upheaval?

You’ll notice that my post never mentioned the decision as the player because that is outside of the scope of this post. Although, I will mention that in Chapter 11, the units who are in your characters’ ranges at the beginning of the battle will only steal from the tombs rather than attacking your units, and it’s only when you move to aggro that Edelgard’s units start engaging with you. So it’s more accurate to say that you tried to murder them. Maybe it’s because Byleth fell into the desire to inherently follow the authority figure like the people in the Milgram experiment. ;) For what it's worth, I would have liked the option to just end the battle after failing to do anything at the very least.

Anyway…

So… because of this ‘Doyelist’ approach, we are supposed to ignore the fact that Rhea runs an academy for -nobility- and -royalty- and orders them to do her bidding? Just as a reminder, after the mission she says "I pray the students learned a valuable lesson about the fate that awaits all those who are foolish enough to point their blades toward the heavens." If this is supposed to be narrative contrivance, why does the plot frame it as her asserting dominance over the students?

Re: Alois/Shamir paralogue: There are like 40 maps in the game to recycle if you wanted to (and tricks that they use to disguise the fact that they recycle some of them, like Marianne’s paralogue having the same map as Bernadetta and Petra’s) and Derdriu is already used twice for plot battles, so the choice of Derdriu doesn’t just feel like some random choice. These are choices that the game made in its plot and setting. By contrast, the timing of Hubert’s paralogue is not setting building or an important part of the world, so it is allowed to occur at the player’s convenience. And the Lunar example is so out of the realm of what is being discussed here that I don’t think I will bother with it.


Quote
I know I brought this one up.  I don't think there's any contradiction here!  I think this bit of history is legitimately pro-Rhea and makes her sympathetic, and I also agree that she's still an unfit ruler.  It just changes the color of how we fill in the blanks for things we don't know.  For example, for insane tyrants like Garon or Ashnard, we can safely assume that nothing about their rule was any good, even the parts we aren't explicitly told about.  Rhea, I'm a lot more willing to assume that many of the decisions she made were non-controversial, or general good-government maintain the peace stuff.  It's unclear how long Rhea actually ruled, but she definitely ruled the past ~100 years and during the war against Nemesis.  It suggests to me at least that she was somebody who was genuinely trying to do the right thing by her people and for her human allies, but grew impatient with dissent.  She's trying to do right, but is shitty at it in precisely the way powerful politicians are in real life - they think they're perfect, they think anyone opposing them must be a villain, they don't listen to the counselors saying "are you sure this is a good idea."  This makes her a very compelling and sympathetic villain!  Both potentially redeemable, and potentially psychotic.  In the same way that to the extent Edelgard herself as a villain - and she has those accents at times - is also a compelling and sympathetic villain, 'cuz she's right.  Seiros stood up against Nemesis, Edelgard stood up against Seiros, the great chain of hero to villain continues onward, etc. per Dorothea & Edelgard's support, as you noted.

For what it’s worth, this line of reasoning was not an attack on you specifically (not to be mean, but I have found you to be too evasive to have a good view on what you actually think, and that continues even after this post). I have seen much stronger opinions on this front in the sense that people think that this plot point invalidates Edelgard’s argument against Rhea, which is patently false. And yes, 100% agree that Rhea is way more grey and less of an insane tyrant than Garon and Ashnard, and that’s what makes this question even possible (the question in Fates is “WHY THE FUCK DON’T YOU JUST OFF THIS OLD CRUSTY BASTARD?” which isn’t as exciting). Once place I don’t agree (if I am understanding you right) is that Edelgard is similar in that she doesn’t listen to her advisors. I feel like in her supports with both Ferdinand and Manuela (discussed in the main post) that she shows herself willing to consider alternate points of view on the way the world will run once she becomes the ruler. She does have a strong ideology and sticks to that, but she is flexible on the specifics as shown in those conversations.

Quote
Basically a matter of setting expectations and standards.  That gets a bit into what exactly the time period we should assume for 3H is..  I think CK mentioned that it feels like a bit of a mix of several time periods.  Basically, Rhea might be okay for the 1500s, but by the time of the French Revolution, she's guillotine bait.  Somewhere in the middle (1750s?), she's in-between.  Like...  Henry VIII is, objectively speaking, a horrible psychopath who murdered his wives, treated others like shit, executed advisors for the crime of being right, was an egomaniac, etc.  But he was also a "Great" king who was revered in English history for a long time: somebody who won wars, who was a player on the world stage, who stood up to the Church (so he could crown himself mini-Pope of his own kingdom), an intellectual, a warrior-king.  We would consider a person like that all-bad by today's standards (hahaha, so I would have said in 2015, okay, let's call that "should consider such a person all-bad"), but by the standards of the era, they might count as someone borderline with both good & bad.  Or Ivan the Terrible in Russia in the 1500s, who like Edelgard conquered a bunch of shit, sacked & executed the useless Russian nobility, freed Russia from tribute, etc., but also probably executed random people who got in his way and had a generally volatile personality.  If you're in some grimdark psuedo-realistic world, Rhea comes off better strictly due to dint of low expectations.

This is one of the reasons I talked about how society seems to be shifting in the world of 3H, and in a way that doesn’t favor having a ruler like Rhea. Many of the students are openly dissatisfied with the church (all three lords express some form of distaste for the church, Dorothea, Lin, Dorothea) so obviously those ideas are out in the public sphere to some extent, pegging us well past the 1500’s (ask Giordano Bruno how putting ideas that mildly opposed Church doctrine worked out for him in late 1500’s). Maybe the expectations for rulers aren’t that high, but when proposed an alternate, the alternate seems good (at least when proposed by another authority figure :)).

You can argue that the generational shift that we see from many of the students is unrealistic and is more for garnering the good will of the player than necessarily for realism, but the fact remains that you have these relatively progressive people stuck in a not-very-progressive society. Even Dimitri, who is the least progressive of the three lords, is more socially progressive than you’d expect given his upbringing, as he is neither a misogynist nor a racist, both traits which seem pretty typical in Faerghus society. Pseudo-Enlightenment era feels right to me, but I won’t claim to be an expert.

(related note: I like Claude a lot, but I do think the fandom is a bit soft on him. Precisely because Edelgard and Dimitri are so obviously morally complex, I think some players who crave someone more morally pure gravitate to him as "the nice one" and exaggerate his niceness because that's what they want to see. There's a lot about him that isn't that nice!

If I am not stopped by laziness, the sexiest man in Fodlan is going to be the next subject of dissection.
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

SnowFire

  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4935
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2020, 11:46:19 AM »
On the Church's stature: The Church is an important player (and shouldn't be considered some sort of above-the-fray non-entity) but they're not *directly* a government either with a military that is as important / large as the 3 governments; they're more like elite special forces dispatched by the UN or NATO.  That said, I really don't get the impression from the game that it's trying to imply that the Church military is larger than the Alliance based on Alois & Shamir's paralogue.  The reason I brought up Hubert's Paralogue and dumb Lunar lines is...  they don't make any sense, so there's no point attempting to concoct some in-universe explanation for them.  Sword & Shield of Seiros doesn't make any sense either.  It's transparently an excuse to have some Fire Emblem gameplay.  Even if the Alliance was so hapless as to be unable to defend their own capital, that would mean that the Church should station some long-term troops there, not send students off gallivanting on a weekend.  But the first half of the game is students off gallivanting on a weekend to solve everything, so that's how it's gonna be.  (And even if the Paralogue is taken super seriously, apparently there aren't spare Church soldiers anyway, hence the students...  maybe both the Church & the Alliance are at the end of their rope by that view.)  I suspect that with a larger budget, or if tilesets were cheaper, that paralogue would have taken place in Sleepy Port Town In the Middle Of Nowhere rather than Deirdru.

On Rhea "teaching the students a lesson," and educating the nobility more generally: Yep, it's a well-done piece of character work!  Establishes crystal-clear that as the mouthpiece for the Goddess, defying her is defying the Goddess.  Entirely agree that a lot of the Church's influence, if not direct rule, is surely due to educating the would-be rulers, similar to scions of the Indian elite being educated in Britain or the like during the early 1900s.  So I don't think there's any disagreement there.  I meant more specifically the implications of Rhea flexing to order *Dimitri*, or really any of the other would-be leaders, to take out the trash with Miklan, which I agree seem to be above and beyond "headmaster of the school" authority.  To go back to real-world analogues - the Pope can sort of order (Catholic) leaders around, on some things, but not everything.  That's the impression I get 3H was trying to paint of the scope of Rhea's authority: very influential, but not directly their superior, more like an equal.  The Miklan deal is probably the most extreme thing Rhea orders the kids around on, and implies she might be even more powerful than that.  I'm hesitant to use it to think that the writers meant to imply that due to the narrative need to tell Miklan's story, though.

On CF C11: Eh, I already agree it's not relevant for the politics of the game (more relevant for Byleth's personal motivations if taken seriously at all) and also agree that some form of map skip would be nice for CF, but there's lots of Fire Emblem maps where Lord Blackskull orders his dread troops to attack and dismember the heroes, but actually everybody stands still and waits for Our Heroes to engage them.  Don't think we can read too much in from the gameplay there.  Which thankfully doesn't matter because I don't think we can read much from this chapter regardless, of course.

Edelgard listening to advisers: Yep, she definitely does that, even if she feels she can't show her softer side to non-Byleth (/Hubert?) people.  Didn't mean to imply otherwise.  To the extent that Edelgard might be similar, it would be to what happens after Crimson Flower if the writers felt sufficiently cynical, but they didn't give us some post-ending narrative of "Edelgard became paranoid and fearful toward her old age, ordering any old ally who voiced doubts exiled," so we can assume that didn't happen. 

What is SnowFire's view anyway?!: I'm somebody who thinks the French Revolution was just, if that helps!  I'm someone eternally frustrated with just how often the kings and princesses and nobles are "good" in fiction, while it's the prime minister / advisor / commoner moved up who's "bad" in fiction.  I think 3H is a huge step in the right direction here, although it's a little muddled since basically all of the noble PCs are sympathetic.  Even Lorenz is ultimately not a bad person, and he's the closest the game gets. 

In response to your questions, though, for the "do conditions necessitate upheaval" - Absolutely throw Fodlan's existing order in the trash, the conditions DO necessitate upheaval.  I don't see how anybody can play the game and not come to that conclusion!  The main issue with Edelgard - and this comes down to how much we-the-player should "trust" Edelgard's judgment - is was it necessary to attack the church (and thus the Kingdom / Alliance)?  She clearly thinks it was, and she's not presented as a fool.  That said, from a more abstract perspective, it'd be interesting to wonder what would have happened if Edelgard had simply kicked the Church out of Imperial territory and set to cleaning its own house first - make her reforms in just one state, rather than conquest first then reforms.  It's possible (likely?) that the Church would have rallied the Kingdom & Alliance to attack, but would this have gone anywhere?  Hard to say.  For real history, the nobility of various European nations DID attack the new French Republic, but also made a total incompetent shitshow of it, for example.  For an example of "reform in one country" still being exciting and violent - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cristero_War is an interesting read, the secularist Mexican government vs. an over-powerful Catholic Church, was a bit of a prelude to the Spanish Civil War.  (Of course, the other complicating factor here is that the Church really is working against Satanists and their pals, but that good aspect of the Church just makes it a great and complex setting.)

For your question about Rhea, her influence, and her goals - Well, as stated above, I don't think Rhea is quite as powerful as you take her.  Rhea's endorsement of the aristocratic system is also in a bit of a weird place.  The game is crystal clear that Rhea has one goal above all else: revive Sothis.  Her secondary goal is to protect the Children of the Goddess (/ maybe even revive the others from Zanado?), which is mostly herself, Seteth, and Flayn in-game.   Everything else is a distant third, which includes being a good steward of the humans under her care, which is part of the problem when that isn't goal #1.  The impression I get from the plot dump toward the end of Verdant Wind is that the whole idea of the aristocracy was a crazypants lie meant to further goal #2: protect the Children of the Goddess by concealing the origins of the power of the Saints and the 10 Elites.  Pretend the Goddess just handed out goodies, rather than it being something any ol' human can get if you're willing to kill a dragon, or the Saints actually being dragons themselves.  In other words, the aristocracy is there due to a motive that has absolutely nothing to do with Rhea's idea of good governance, but rather what Rhea thinks will work best by her people.  Now, if you're Edelgard, you really couldn't give less of a shit about the motive Rhea had for doing this shitty thing, just stop doing it!  But I do think Rhea is rather..  distant from such questions.  As noted, she's perfectly capable of being warm and compassionate on an individual level (Cyril, etc.), but she treats the mass of humanity with some disinterest as long as they aren't opposing her or spouting heresy.  So I'm not sure she really has any long-term goals here for Fodland society.  Just stick the car's shift in neutral and keep doing what really matters, which is crazy science experiments to revive Sothis, and don't let anybody know about how the Children of the Goddess work. (Again, let me state that "disinterest" is a terrible thing for a government!  So she's still being a bad leader even if she isn't pushing the aristocratic system particularly hard, or thinks it's a great way to run things.  She thinks it's a useful lie and has moved on to more important things.)

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #7 on: February 08, 2020, 01:33:43 AM »
On Rhea "teaching the students a lesson," and educating the nobility more generally: Yep, it's a well-done piece of character work!  Establishes crystal-clear that as the mouthpiece for the Goddess, defying her is defying the Goddess.  Entirely agree that a lot of the Church's influence, if not direct rule, is surely due to educating the would-be rulers, similar to scions of the Indian elite being educated in Britain or the like during the early 1900s.  So I don't think there's any disagreement there.  I meant more specifically the implications of Rhea flexing to order *Dimitri*, or really any of the other would-be leaders, to take out the trash with Miklan, which I agree seem to be above and beyond "headmaster of the school" authority.  To go back to real-world analogues - the Pope can sort of order (Catholic) leaders around, on some things, but not everything.  That's the impression I get 3H was trying to paint of the scope of Rhea's authority: very influential, but not directly their superior, more like an equal.  The Miklan deal is probably the most extreme thing Rhea orders the kids around on, and implies she might be even more powerful than that.  I'm hesitant to use it to think that the writers meant to imply that due to the narrative need to tell Miklan's story, though.

Selectively dismissing events that happen within the game’s plot results in an incomplete picture of Rhea’s role in the political situation. As you stated in your post, Edelgard isn’t a fool, and she seems to believe that Rhea holds the keys of power in the country, and the evidence I put forth backs that up. (I am generally willing to ignore paralogues, because most of the paralogues are mildly nonsensical in one way or another, but the main plot stuff I am definitely not!)

Quote
On CF C11: Eh, I already agree it's not relevant for the politics of the game (more relevant for Byleth's personal motivations if taken seriously at all) and also agree that some form of map skip would be nice for CF, but there's lots of Fire Emblem maps where Lord Blackskull orders his dread troops to attack and dismember the heroes, but actually everybody stands still and waits for Our Heroes to engage them.  Don't think we can read too much in from the gameplay there.  Which thankfully doesn't matter because I don't think we can read much from this chapter regardless, of course.

I can't think of another map in the series that has the primary enemy force (not thieves) move into your range and not engage with your units ever. Those units will complete their task and leave the battlefield because their task was not to engage you! She has ordered her troops to plunder the tomb, which is what they are doing, not attacking you! YOU are ordered to fight her. YOU are the aggressor of combat.

Rhea: Professor. Destroy these villainous traitors who dare dishonor our creator!
[party gasps]
Edelgard: I’m sorry, my teacher. I cut this path, and now I must follow it. My friends…. I ask that all of you stay back! It is not my intention to fight you.

Yeah this is not exactly ‘Lord Blackskull and his dread troops attack and dismember the heroes’ (Rhea sounds much closer to Lord Blackskull TBH). Her intentions are clearly stated. Again, this isn’t to say that robbing the Holy Tomb is a particularly nice thing to do, but that is what she is doing.

Quote
Edelgard listening to advisers: Yep, she definitely does that, even if she feels she can't show her softer side to non-Byleth (/Hubert?) people.  Didn't mean to imply otherwise.  To the extent that Edelgard might be similar, it would be to what happens after Crimson Flower if the writers felt sufficiently cynical, but they didn't give us some post-ending narrative of "Edelgard became paranoid and fearful toward her old age, ordering any old ally who voiced doubts exiled," so we can assume that didn't happen. 

I think Fudo is more of the person to ask on this particular factoid, but the implication is that Edelgard does not believe herself to have a long lifespan, like Lysthiea. Despite what her haters might say, she isn’t really in it for the tyrannical hard-on. What Edelgard does have, for better or for worse, is a Messiah complex. She believes she is the only one who can fix this wretched world. Many of her endings imply that she didn’t spend her whole life ruling, even.

Quote
What is SnowFire's view anyway?!: I'm somebody who thinks the French Revolution was just, if that helps!  I'm someone eternally frustrated with just how often the kings and princesses and nobles are "good" in fiction, while it's the prime minister / advisor / commoner moved up who's "bad" in fiction.  I think 3H is a huge step in the right direction here, although it's a little muddled since basically all of the noble PCs are sympathetic.  Even Lorenz is ultimately not a bad person, and he's the closest the game gets. 

In response to your questions, though, for the "do conditions necessitate upheaval" - Absolutely throw Fodlan's existing order in the trash, the conditions DO necessitate upheaval.  I don't see how anybody can play the game and not come to that conclusion!  The main issue with Edelgard - and this comes down to how much we-the-player should "trust" Edelgard's judgment - is was it necessary to attack the church (and thus the Kingdom / Alliance)?  She clearly thinks it was, and she's not presented as a fool.  That said, from a more abstract perspective, it'd be interesting to wonder what would have happened if Edelgard had simply kicked the Church out of Imperial territory and set to cleaning its own house first - make her reforms in just one state, rather than conquest first then reforms.  It's possible (likely?) that the Church would have rallied the Kingdom & Alliance to attack, but would this have gone anywhere?  Hard to say.  For real history, the nobility of various European nations DID attack the new French Republic, but also made a total incompetent shitshow of it, for example.  For an example of "reform in one country" still being exciting and violent - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cristero_War is an interesting read, the secularist Mexican government vs. an over-powerful Catholic Church, was a bit of a prelude to the Spanish Civil War.  (Of course, the other complicating factor here is that the Church really is working against Satanists and their pals, but that good aspect of the Church just makes it a great and complex setting.)

As Fudo and I both discussed above, the Church has been at least partially removed from Empire territory to basically no effect.

I think this is as good a time as any to dissect what makes Edelgard tick:

1. She believes that, due to her unfortunate genetic experimentation, that she is uniquely positioned to shake up the world in a way that ‘normal’, non-genetically modified people cannot. Thus the Messiah complex.
2. She believes that Rhea, an immortal dragon who is controlling Fodlan from the Church, is the centerpiece of the problem. As a result, reform in her country alone is a Band-aid solution at best that will probably not last past your own (potentially short) life span. At worst (and more likely), Rhea will send the army after her as a result of kicking out the Church.
3. Edelgard’s father Ionius IX tries to decrease the power and sway of the nobility and is permanently dispowered because of it. Why in the world would she make the same mistake?
4. “The longer we took the revolt, the more victims this crooked world would have claimed. I weighed the victims of war against the victims of the world as it is now, and I chose the former.” (C21 AM) I think the core message is that she believes that the continent, not just the Empire, is suffering from incompetent, disinterested (to steal your word from below) governance and that the longer that incompetent, disinterested government is allowed to exist, the longer humanity will suffer from casual negligence, which she considers an unacceptable injustice.
5. Faerghus is clearly the worst off of the three nations and we see this front and center through Lonato and Miklan’s chapters. A lot of the most atrocious activities in the game occur there. From an ethical perspective, I think Edelgard thinks that the long-term benefit to Faerghus outweighs the short-term pain, as stated above.

Now, is #4 true or not? That’s really what it boils down to. I think this is where Rhea’s immortality comes into play. If Edelgard believes that an disinterested/incompetent, potential permanent ruler is causing excess death, over time that will add up to being greater than the cost of war. Of course, that depends a lot on a)how many excess death per year there are (and how much you think Rhea is responsible for those), b) how quickly humanity can transition into a world that is less violent, and c)if this new version of the world can consistently prevent those deaths from occurring.

My take is that as long as Rhea is in power, the world will be effectively permanently late-medieval, at least from the religious perspective, due to her suppression of dissenting ideas, which she is more effective at than the corresponding late-medieval Catholic Church due to having an army and being immortal. Not perfect, of course; we see people who question her authority and the moral righteousness of the church, but she is difficult to stand against for anyone short of a world leader.  If the decision is between the prospect of living in a perpetually late medieval world vs. building something new, with humanity at its centre rather than some incompetent/disinterested leader… the answer is obvious, at least to me.

Quote
Now, if you're Edelgard, you really couldn't give less of a shit about the motive Rhea had for doing this shitty thing, just stop doing it!  But I do think Rhea is rather..  distant from such questions.  As noted, she's perfectly capable of being warm and compassionate on an individual level (Cyril, etc.), but she treats the mass of humanity with some disinterest as long as they aren't opposing her or spouting heresy.  So I'm not sure she really has any long-term goals here for Fodlan society.  Just stick the car's shift in neutral and keep doing what really matters, which is crazy science experiments to revive Sothis, and don't let anybody know about how the Children of the Goddess work. (Again, let me state that "disinterest" is a terrible thing for a government!  So she's still being a bad leader even if she isn't pushing the aristocratic system particularly hard, or thinks it's a great way to run things.  She thinks it's a useful lie and has moved on to more important things.)

100% agree.

I think one thing that she does that is quite unethical is the thing I mentioned in the first part about Lonato’s son.

“In Ashe and Catherine’s support, we learn that Christophe was framed for his supposed role in the Tragedy of Duscur, but was executed because he was plotting against Rhea. So in other words, she executes someone for a crime they didn’t commit, and says it’s fine because they committed another unproven crime.”
 
Lost in the original argument I made is that she doesn’t care who actually committed this crime! The King of Faerghus is murdered and she uses it as a political tool to rid herself of a dissenter instead. The people of Faerghus put trust in her and it was betrayed, using it to further her own agenda instead.
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Cmdr_King

  • Strong and Full of Love
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5562
  • Is Gay
    • View Profile
    • CK Blog
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #8 on: February 08, 2020, 02:13:10 AM »
It's worth remembering that the costs of war in a pre-industrial state like Fodlan is far lower than it would be for us.  There's simply not the same level of infrastructure and interdependence between regions there that we have.  Heck, given that they employ primarily magical healing, as long as people aren't targetting the doctors it should be less grisly than even real life pre-industrial conflicts.

It's just weird to gel the state of Fodlan with the fact Edelgard is practicing leninist revolution and Claude over here being a 20th century Globalist.  Heck, even Dimitri settles on something akin to enlightenment era kingship, all of which were post-industrial philosophies.
CK: She is the female you
Snow: Speaking of Sluts!

<NotMiki> I mean, we're talking life vs. liberty, with the pursuit of happiness providing color commentary.

Fudozukushi

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1552
  • Born to hunt Death Knights
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #9 on: February 11, 2020, 02:35:04 PM »
Edelgard's lifespan is somewhat muddled.  We obviously have Lysithea for loads of evidence for the limitations linking it.  However Lysithea's circumstances can be attributed to her Crests being at odds compared to Edelgard's being more in-sync.  Their paired ending specifically talks about returning their lost time!  In the ENG.  It isn't mentioned in the JP and otherwise not mentioned anywhere else whatsoever.  But considering how closed off Edelgard is, it makes some sense why she wouldn't go blabbing this, even to Lysithea and Byleth.  Her ending with Linhardt also sort of alludes to it.

Like certain specifics of Claude's outlook and goals, or the splitting of the Empire, I think there's enough evidence for Edelgard to be suffering from Twin Crests timespan even if it's not stated outright.  A lot of the lyrics in Edge of Dawn also allude to this.  Not that it's part of game story but eeg....


Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
Luther’s Top 7 Favorite Three Houses characters
« Reply #10 on: February 29, 2020, 10:29:25 PM »
Luther’s Top 7 Favorite Three Houses characters
 
Why seven? Why not.
 
#7 Sylvain Jose Gautier (minor spoilers for earlygame)
 
Iconic quote: “You were free. Nobody pretended to like you. I kind of hate you for that... You were a spoiled brat who should pay for that Crest. Maybe I'll collect the debt.”
 
What I like about Sylvain: This is the first of the trio of broken, messy Faerghus men I will talk about in this post. Each of them have an aspect of broken-ness which stems from the culture that they were raised in. Many of the characters in this game wear a mask, a false, incomplete version of themselves that they present to the world. Sylvain intentionally perpetuates this vision of himself as an idiot who is the stereotypical RPG playboy. He is irresponsible and reckless in his personal affairs, and he doesn’t train as much as his housemates, leading to a reputation as a layabout who uses his good looks and wealth to attract women.
 
Sylvain is primarily focused on the expectations foisted onto him by virtue of being born with a Crest and how it has ruined his relationship with his brother, has toxified his views on women, and made him generally distrustful of others. He seems to intentionally pursue shallow, unfulfilling relationships because he sees women as the enemy, manipulators who only care about him due to his Crest and his wealth. We see this pattern of distrust over and over, whether justified (Hilda, Dorothea) or not (Mercedes, Byleth). His misogyny filters into his supports with almost every single female character, from his dismissive treatment of Ingrid’s issues with him to Lysithea’s “so my age isn’t the reason you ignore my wishes; it’s my gender.” He sees women not as friends or equals but as objects to play with. (Okay, fine, he sees Ingrid as his second mommy, to clean up his messes, so much better).
 
His backstory explains his behavior, even if it doesn’t justify it. He has an older brother, Miklan, who ends up being an opponent in the main story. Miklan is born without a Crest, which in the Gautier family is considered to be unacceptable and worthy of being disinherited. When Sylvain was born, he was elevated above his brother immediately, leading to conflict throughout Sylvain’s life because of his parents’ preference for him. His brother hated him and tried to kill him on multiple occasions. He ends up building a wall around himself, sealing off his trio of friends, his family, and obviously women who just want to use him for his Crest and money. (He and Dorothea’s support chain is very good because it explores this. Definitely worth a read if you haven’t seen it.)
 
Sylvain is rarely portrayed as admirable; everything in his life is driven by his deeply selfish and thoughtless behavior. Especially for a character who never does anything overtly evil and isn’t an edgelord, Sylvain is quite a bad person. He is manipulative and attention-seeking even to his closest friends (in his A+ support with Felix, he pretends to be dead to elicit sympathy from Felix!), and while I have some degree of sympathy for the difficulty he faces trusting people, he is a deeply privileged individual who faces the problem of too many people wanting to date him and his parents pampering him too much, so it is hard to fully sympathize with him. One of his more positive character traits is that he isn’t racist against Dedue, which is nice but if “not being racist” is one of your more positive character traits… that’s not great.
 
Also, holy shit, in his support with Felix, they reveal that they made a promise to ‘die together’. Making a promise to die together, rather than to grow old together, has to be peak Faerghus Man.
 
In the Mercedes support, we see the mask crack. This is the closest we ever see to ‘real’ Sylvain; a deeply wounded individual who craves for people to love him for who he is, not what he is. He is angry at a world that he sees as unjust, a culture that values something that you have no control over as the primary measure of your worth. In the A support, he reflects on the points in the previous paragraph; that many people have difficult lives and that his brother suffered more than he ever has for his Crest.
 
Sylvain’s depression is very obvious post-timeskip, although I suspect it is there all along. Most of his post-TS monastery quotes are very dark, and in VW, he alludes directly to “living like he wants to die”. I also find that his portrait and different smile post-TS makes him look less happy. He doesn’t seem to value his own life all that much and decides to live in a self-destructive, hedonistic way, and if he dies, well, what the fuck ever.
 
What I think they could have done better: I feel like the three friends’ supports could have been a bit more complete and delve further into their relationships with each other, but in particular, I think Sylvain’s relationships with other characters tend to be stronger than his with the friend group. I also found some of his supports mildly repetitive; I understand that it is part of the point, of course, but it means that he doesn’t have as much variety in character traits shown in his supports compared to some of the other better characters.
 
#6 Claude von Riegan (major spoilers for Verdant Wind)
 
Iconic quote: “But let's table this fascinating discussion for just a moment. Now that we've gotten in some small talk, I'd like to know what you're hiding. You are hiding something, right? Your lineage, perhaps?”

What I like about Claude: As the only representative of Golden Deer house, I think Claude exemplifies both the strengths and the weaknesses of the house of characters in general; he is fun and lighthearted, but not as well-rounded as some of the other characters in the game.
 
Pre-timeskip, I think Claude is pleasantly enjoyable as a main character, with his voracious appetite for knowledge, humorous quips, and his ambiguously questionably behavior and motives. There are definitely such shades of Sylvain here in their selfishiness and disregard for other people’s feelings; he is relentless in his pursuit of knowledge and pursuit of his goals, and often does not consider the feelings of others while in that pursuit. A couple of really good examples of this are his support with Ignatz (where he pushes his own (we’ll say unorthodox) views onto the hapless Ignatz, who sputters in response) and his support with Marianne, where he shows little care for her emotional state or her feelings in pursuit of knowledge about her family and Crests. Unlike Sylvain, who exudes this general apathy about all things, Claude has goals, ambitions, and ideas, and he seems to consider people as tools to achieve the things that he holds dear.
 
He is casually manipulative in that teenager way; he knows that he is brighter than the people around him and doesn’t mind being known as a schemer, and in fact takes pride in that fact. In some ways his overtness about scheming hinders his goals in the sense that people are suspicious of his intentions, but it’s very realistic in the sense that he is only seventeen and is adjusting to a culture that he doesn’t quite understand. One interesting thing about Claude is that he reminds me of people who have privilege, in his case as the future leader of the Alliance, but want to sit around with other people and argue about theoretical issues (sometimes theoretical only to the privileged person) with people who don’t feel comfortable arguing with someone above their station. I remember commenting to Elfboy that Claude was a “mansplainer”. Elfboy responded that he treats everyone that way, not just women, and I completely agree. He doesn’t fully comprehend power dynamics, particularly because he sees himself as a bit of a victim of the culture, an ‘outsider’ as he phrases it, but I feel like his perspective is warped by his desire to not see how he is in a position of power.
 
Post-timeskip is where we really see the character come into fruition. The ‘outsider’ chip on the shoulder and the frivolous jokes about poisoning people and schemes are gone, replaced with a well-polished, well-groomed leader, but we see quickly that the manipulative edge is still there. He speaks openly to Byleth about reeling in the church, and using Byleth’s newfound voice of the church to bludgeon the other members of the Alliance in line. I also lowkey love that Claude gets ‘love points’ when you ask him “Do you wish Rhea was dead?”. I enjoy his symbiotic relationship with Hilda; both have a keen sense of how to manipulate people and how to utilize people to achieve their goals. I think Hilda complements him quite well; she has more of an understanding of how people tick emotionally, whereas Claude knows how people tick intellectually. I think he doesn’t really ‘get’ people on an emotional level, but is good enough at faking it that he gets by pretty well. (Although Hilda calls him out on his fake smile.)
 
Aside from Claude’s much more favorable position in the world, the character he reminds me a bit of is Delita. Both end up jaded by a world that wronged them and decide that the logical response to that is to use people to achieve their goals. Both have noble goals and are driven and focused, but both have trouble with losing their humanity and empathy in the process of that pursuit.
 
We see the end of his scheme in VW; he installs Byleth as the leader of Fodlan and goes to become the King of Almyra, the beginning of his new world. Despite becoming a continent leader, Byleth feels very much like a pawn in the manipulator’s game. Claude is the driver and schemer and has The Plan, and you are just one (big) part of that plan.
 
Ultimately, Claude’s goals are noble but feel like they only really fix the problem that Claude himself has dealt with directly; discrimination against people of different nationalities. This isn’t to trivialize Claude’s point, but it feels like he hasn’t really thought about what type of future he wants for the country aside from making a nation without borders. The game actually makes a point of showing how Claude doesn’t really get the problems other people go through; he is shocked when he learns that Cyril was suffering in Almyra. Yes, Claude, there are poor people in Almyra! The Crest system is shit! Faerghus is a chivalry-obsessed shithole! These are issues that plague Fodlan that don’t seem to fully come into his view. He never even mentions Duscur, which is the an instance of racism that results in genocide that happens in Fodlan in the last decade.
 
At the end of the day, what kind of government does he want to establish? What is the plan post-unification? (And I have to ask; is unification really a priority in this broken society?) While this might sound like a criticism of Claude, it’s more a criticism of people who seem like they want to see Claude as this good guy with great ideas, even though he doesn’t really seem to care about the problems of society aside from the establishment of a borderless world. Edelgard even makes reference to this in VW; she asks if he really understands what needs to be done to fix this broken society, implying that she doesn’t think he fully comprehends the depths of the problems of Fodlan, and based on his priorities and behaviour, I would agree with her.
 
And that’s fine. Viewing things from your own lens and doing things that are supported by that lens is fine. He is a character that is simultaneously oppressed and privileged and he brings with him all that implies. He ends up feeling both sympathetic but he is also a person who makes me deeply uncomfortable with his selfishness and manipulativeness. And yet, he’s probably the overall most moral of the three lords!
 
What I think they could have done better: It takes a while to put all of the pieces together, but we discover that he is Almyran royalty (which is only confirmed in some endings) and desires to unify Fodlan and Almyra. He uses his connections in Almyra to bring a separate military force in, loyal to him rather than loyal to the Alliance. I feel like the game does a poor job of dissecting this point; if the people of Fodlan are so xenophobic, why do they take this military takeover of their hated enemies so… easily?  His supports are also relatively weak and don’t explore the philosophical areas that both Edelgard’s and Dimitri’s do, choosing often to go for humor, with somewhat mixed results.
 
I also think Lorenz is a character who should have been a good foil to Claude, but unlike Ferdinand (who is an unabashedly good person and has some really good points with respect to Edelgard) and Felix (who is pretty much on point about his criticisms of Dimitri), I feel like Lorenz’s role in the story is to be always wrong, which doesn’t make for much interesting discourse. Their A support is mostly Lorenz validating Claude and Claude going oh I guess Lorenz is okay too. It could have been a really effective support, but instead it is just kind of underwhelming, emphasizing that Lorenz is just not as qualified as Claude.
 
I feel like his secrets are too tightly kept, and as a result his character work doesn’t feel as complete as some of the other characters in the game, especially his backstory. I feel like because of Claude’s tightly kept secrets that we never truly get to see inside of his head in the way that we do with the other lords and even some of the secondary characters like Dorothea and Felix. And despite having a lot less screen time, I feel like Delita ultimately feels like a more complete character because we see the conclusion of his story from a human perspective in that final scene, not just from the perspective of what he accomplished. Now, you guys know that I am a big fan of Delita and saying that a character is worse than him isn’t really a complaint, but it is what it is.
 
#5 Felix Hugo Fraldarius (major spoilers for Azure Moon)
 
Iconic quote: “Chivalry begets the worship and glorification of death. Am I alone in finding that grotesque?”
 
What I like about Felix: Felix, as the second member of team Faerghus Man, is in some ways the linking connection between all of the different aspects of Faerghus culture that we see in the game. At first he appears to be the stereotypical douchey man obsessed with fighting, but as you peel back the layers of armor that Felix has put up, you realize that he is both quite damaged and quite sympathetic.
 
As a character, Felix is a composite of his relationships with a few different characters. His relationship with his father is quite strained, as we see in Felix’s paralogue. He berates his ‘old man’ for being weak and foolish, but after the battle, we realize that what really bothers Felix is that his dad, as a certified Faerghus Man, prioritizes the feelings of the dead king, Lambert, over the hurt and anguish being felt by people who are still alive and exist on this planet. You realize that the ruination of their relationship stems primarily from Felix’s brother, Glenn, who was killed four/nine years ago in the Tragedy of Duscur. He accepts that his brother is dead, but does not accept that his father has turned it into this noble, glorious death, and seems to think that Glenn being dead is preferable to the disgrace of being a knight whose charges (the king and queen of Faerghus) were killed but he still lives. Felix alludes to this in his paralogue, saying “If I died, you’d say the same thing about me. ‘He died like a true knight.’” In the main plot, Felix avoids Rodrigue when he comes to the monastery, which Ingrid is aghast at. In AM, the issue is explored further when Rodrigue joins your army. Rodrigue clearly thinks that Felix is bratty and childish, which he is, but he is also largely correct about the massive, gaping issues with his country’s culture.
 
Felix is notoriously bad at expressing how he actually feels and prefers to be generically filled with malice, saying things such as "The thing I hate most about my old man is the crazed nonsense that comes out of his mouth." The ‘crazed nonsense’ is, of course, related to Rodrigue’s obsession with both the dead king and glorifying the death of his son Glenn, but Rodrigue dies before Felix is able to sort out his feelings with his father, assuming that would have ever happened. He has a Comment Box letter after Rodrigue dies, expressing regret that he ‘struck’ his father and is no longer able to apologize to him for it. He clearly feels very upset about his father’s death, despite their strained relationship. His A support with Dimitri elaborates on the fact that, while he is sad about his father’s death, he will not allow it to consume him.
 
Above all things, the obsession with death and the dead is Felix’s #1 hangup, and the hangup that causes him to isolate himself from his classmates and his friends. He sees Faerghus’s chivalrous culture as “glorifying and worshipping death”, and he doesn’t understand why people think this is a good idea and furthermore, he doesn’t want to be friends with anyone who thinks that glorifying and worshipping death is a good idea. So he shuts them out, using his training as a way to distance himself from others.
 
Felix’s relationships with the other three friends is fraught with his tangled emotions on the culture that he lives in. His relationship with Sylvain is the best of the three, but he is still -very- irritated with Sylvain’s inattentiveness and recklessness. Felix sees Sylvain’s behavior as potentially leading to his death, and although he never says it, you can infer that Felix wants Sylvain to take his own life and death more seriously than he does. Even to the end of that support, Sylvain is flippant about his own death, to Felix’s disgust. His relationship with Ingrid is worse because of their differences in opinion regarding Glenn, who was Ingrid’s fiancé. She sees his life and death as the picture of chivalry and knighthood, whereas Felix sees his death as a waste. He ends up being condescending and misogynist toward her, telling her “You're not meant to be a knight. Go find a husband.” Ultimately, they reconcile, realizing that they both have things that they want to protect, but neither of them really relent on their core beliefs. While the two of them pairing up would be logical from the perspective of noble matchmaking, I feel like the game doesn’t really want you to go for it.
 
One of the most crucial relationships, and one that really defines Felix, is his extremely complex and messed up relationship with Dimitri. In Faerghus culture, there is a strong emphasis on proper address. As a result, most of the characters address Dimitri as “Your Highness”. The two exceptions are Mercedes (who doesn’t care much for convention and follows the beat of her own drum) and Felix, who addresses him as ‘the boar’. Interestingly, while this doesn’t crop up in English, since we are less into honorifics, in Japanese Felix does use proper address for other people, including Seteth, but he uses insulting terminology for Dimitri specifically. At first, I assumed that Felix’s issue with Dimitri would be related to Rodrigue, who seemed to like Dimitri quite a lot. I was expecting a typical story of a jealous anime rival. Instead, as we delve into both of their characters, we realize that there is something very real to Felix’s complaints about Dimitri, especially in light of the entire game’s story.
 
Early in the game, Felix tells Byleth that “beyond all the princely polish, he’s an animal, nothing more. He will chew you up and spit you out.”  We learn that Dimitri and Felix used to be best friends, but in the C support between them, Felix talks about his surprise - terror - horror? at Dimitri’s behavior during their first fight, which was putting down a rebellion in Faerghus territory. Dimitri turns into a blood-crazed beast, killing and loving every second of it. Felix laments that “the Dimitri he knew died in Duscur, just like his brother”. This support ends up being our first glimpse into what is to come in Azure Moon. As we start to watch Dimitri unravel in the late part of White Clouds, Felix notices too,and he is worried. Worried because, even though Dimitri is blood-thirsty and mad, he is the only hope that their ravaged country has left. We also see his feelings on Dimitri spill over in his support with Dedue. He grills Dedue, asking if he would “slaughter civilians for the boar” and Dedue says that he would, and Felix is disgusted by the “rabid cur” who serves the boar.
 
Post-timeskip, Felix is unsurprised at Dimitri’s wretched behavior, having already witnessed it in their very first battle together. He bounces between privately expressing great concern for the future of Faerghus / their cause / Dimitri’s severe mental illness (to Byleth) to being a ruthless jackass to Dimitri / Rodrigue whenever he feels the need to. After trying to convince Byleth not to go along with Dimitri’s batshit plan and Dimitri answering with, let’s call it, ‘crazed nonsense’ about honoring the dead, and Felix just ragequits the whole damn conversation. It’s obvious that Felix cares deeply for Dimitri, even if he says horrible things about him, and you can see this across routes. More than any other character from Faerghus, Felix talks a lot about Dimitri and worries about him.
 
Ultimately, Dimitri’s behavior ends up causing the death of Felix’s father, which ends up finally helping Dimitri realize what a tool he has been. The A support between Felix and Dimitri is the final time that they interact, and it happens only after Rodrigue’s death. It might be my favorite exchange in the game:
 
Felix: Sometimes you have an animal's face, contorted with anger and bloodlust. At other times, a man's, with a friendly smile. Which is your true face?
Dimitri: Do not waste your breath on questions with such obvious answers. They are both the real me.
 
The thing I really liked about this is how fitting it is to several different characters in the game, from Edelgard to Dimitri to Rhea, all characters who show the capacity for both great and terrible things. After that, they discuss the difference between honoring the dead and allowing death to control your life, and honestly, they don’t really reach much understanding of each other, since their worldviews are so fundamentally incompatible. Felix is inflexible in his stance against chivalry and believes that obsessing over dead people is an unacceptable way of living, and Dimitri believes that honoring the dead is the only way he can continue to live. Despite the Internet’s penchant for shipping these two, I must say, it seems like a match made in hell to me.
 
One of the fascinating things about Felix is how frequently he is both right and an acidic jackass. While we see his (justified) anger at the three friends and Rodrigue, he is needlessly cruel to all of them, and we also see how his behavior is a barrier to him making friends / finding romantic partners. Sometimes he is outright rude with little cause (Dorothea, Mercedes), sometimes he is weird and condescending (Ashe), and sometimes he is just socially awkward and has trouble being friendly, even when he wants to be (Annette, Bernadetta). I think both the supports with Bernie and Annette are really humanizing for Felix; unlike most of the rest, which are tainted by his emotions toward chivalry / family / general distrust, those two supports show him trying to be a normal person and failing miserably. Felix / Annette shipper for life.
 
And then, at the end, I came up with all of these theories about Felix, and thought to myself “Maybe I am just reading too much into this character and he isn’t a critique of chivalry/death culture”, and then I watched Felix/Seteth, which confirms that, without a doubt, this character is exactly who we thought he was.
 
What they could have done better: I think A+ supports with both Dimitri and Ingrid would have been a nice rounding to the characters’ relationships with each other, and his support with Sylvain feels a little too much like filler. Probably the single biggest thing that would have helped Felix is integrating him more firmly into the main plot rather than having him stick primarily in the periphery, with some teasing of being part of the main plot.
 
#4 Hubert von Vestra (major spoilers for all routes, but especially Crimson Flower)
 
Iconic quote: “Please leave the violence to me. A leader must be seen as pure. Above the fray. Allow me to paint the path that lies before you red with the blood of your enemies. I will do it gladly.”
 
What I like about Hubert: We see so rarely in fiction a male character who plays a subservient role to a female antagonist in a genuine way (i.e. not to secretly subvert her or anything). This game actually has two: both Hubert and Seteth play this role in different routes. I love Hubert because his passion for the cause is very genuine and not contingent on reciprocated romantic feelings. It’s refreshing to see a male-female relationship, which is complex and not necessarily romantic (even in their paired ending, it is stated that they never truly sort out their true feelings for one another). I remember seeing someone call Hubert an incel once; I feel like Hubert is an anti-incel; a man who sees a woman for her dreams, ambitions, and ideals, rather than her ‘sexual value’. He states that he has awe and empathy and trust and hope for Edelgard, and he wants to walk the same path with her without it necessarily being a path of romance. And I think that is beautiful.
 
Pre-timeskip, Hubert is very suspicious of other people and reluctant to trust Byleth. At the time, Hubert comes off as mildly insufferable and perhaps mockable with his unsubtle attempts to intimidate Byleth. In hindsight, we realize that he is really sizing up Byleth to see if he/she can be part of The Plan. All of his actions are aiming to the singular goal; making sure that Edelgard’s ambitions to change the world come into fruition. He is standoffish and cold, especially when you are not playing on Edelgard’s route.
 
Post-timeskip (more accurately, after Chapter 11, which is honestly de facto post-TS, especially on Crimson Flower) we see a change in Hubert. He is still cold and logical, but he is happy that you have joined the cause. One of my favorite scenes is when Hubert sets aside Byleth and explains the plan for dealing with Those Who Slither in the Dark, where he explains how much he (and Edelgard) desire to eliminate them. I love how his voice drips with contempt as he talks about them. He in general works very effectively at his role as an advisor; he feels like the orchestrator/planner of most of the large-scale events that happen in Part 2.
 
He clearly idolizes Edelgard, but with that idolization he places a lot of responsibility on her shoulders; he feels simultaneously like her servant, her confidant, but also her keeper. In her supports with Byleth, we see the effect that his expectations have on Edelgard; she is deeply concerned with how she will appear to Hubert, what he would think about her actions, and how even though (because?) he’s so logical and through that she finds him so suffocating.  In her support with him, she asks him if he regrets being bound to her journey and thus being deprived of a normal life. He scoffs at this; he says that having a purpose is so much better than living as a selfish manbaby like many of the other aristocrats in the Empire. (I feel like this statement reflects more about Edelgard’s feelings on the subject, but we can delve into that particular topic when we get to the writeup on her, which if you know anything about me you know is coming.) Many of his supports involve, in some way, his devotion to the cause.
 
Despite his devotion to Edelgard, he is secretive, which is obviously good for a person of his job description. However, it makes him difficult to support emotionally, and Edelgard find this side of him very frustrating, as seen in her support with him. She feels like he doesn’t put enough trust in her as a human being and wants to keep the deepest, darkest secrets buried.
 
Edelgard and Hubert’s relationship is complex, because both of them have feelings for each other that mix together love (both romantic and non-romantic), devotion, concern, and duty. Both have obligations to each other that alter each of their lives in very meaningful ways. It is difficult to talk about Hubert without talking about Edelgard, because her ambitions are so tied in with his actions. As we see both in his Ferdinand support (which I will talk about) and his Shamir support, despite his devotion, he does show willingness to defy her orders if he considers it overall beneficial to her, with the justification that:
 
Hubert: Lady Edelgard's time is rightfully occupied with a great deal of concern and contemplation. Her affairs are of far greater consequence than a trifle like this. Much rests on the decisions she makes. But little details of this kind happen to be my area of expertise. So I simply handle them. Better that than to burden her with needless debate.
 
I find this quite logical and reasonable, but in the Ferdinand support, we explore the pros and cons of this philosophy. In the C support, Hubert calls out Ferdie for being a childish manbaby who is obsessed with proving he is better than Edelgard. (In hindsight and realizing just how much planning and scheming that Hubert/Edelgard were doing, can you imagine listening to Ferdinand prattle on about how he wants to prove that he’s better than Edelgard in some sort of anime duel?) Of course, Ferdie does have a point: if you want your liege to be successful, you should challenge them if they are wrong! Whereas Hubert believes that he shouldn’t burden Edelgard with arguments when he can make his own judgments about ‘trifles’. The C and B support mostly outline their philosophical differences / general dislike of each other, but in the A, Hubert praises Ferdinand for his positivity and tenacity, even if he’s a “contemptible degenerate”. You see in this support that they come to respect one another, even if they have significantly different outlooks on the world.
 
One consistent thing about Hubert is how he struggles to express positive feelings about people who aren’t Edelgard, and we see a classic example of this in his support with Ferdinand. While he’s learned to respect Ferdinand for his good points, he finds it more natural to scoff at him. In their A+, which mostly exists to flaunt how rampantly they want to bang each other, he is dismissive and insulting to Ferdie initially, but he ends up admitting that he did indeed buy Ferdinand a present and they exchange gifts after a bit of laughter.
 
He hasn’t experienced as much overt trauma as some of the other characters, but we know that his father is at the harsh and mostly likely at least mildly abusive. He ends up purging his father for his role in the Insurrection of Seven, and we see in his support with Hanneman that, when confronted with the idea that maybe his father had his reasons for what he did, like serving the Empire, Hubert shuts him down. (It sounds like Ionius was trying to consolidate power, which we don’t learn quite enough about to judge, but there is obviously an argument for going against that regardless.) I don’t think Hubert wants to be confronted with the idea that he was wrong to kill his father, which is a profoundly human emotion (and would ruin his facade of not caring about emotional attachments).
 
I liked how the support between him and Byleth explores the depth of his contempt for the goddess, having judged her for “not properly governed this world”. (The perception of the goddess as this uncaring deity is echoed in Dimitri’s Goddess Tower sequence, which I will discuss later.) I’m not sure if his contempt for the church is acquired naturally or is just a consequence of his devotion to Edelgard, but there is clearly a great deal of malice there.
 
In their C support, Dorothea ribs Hubert for thinking he’s in an opera, and I couldn’t agree with her more. He is very theatrical and always phrases things with a dramatic flair, especially in his boss quotes / pre-battle dialogues in AM/VW/SS. He and Dorothea have a really good connection with each other: both characters are very utilitarian and see everything as part of a greater goal. Whereas, Dorothea wants to secure herself a happy future, Hubert wants to help see Edelgard’s/his dreams. I actually see Hubert is one of the very few good matches for Dorothea among her male suitors in the cast, and she is the only woman who seems suitably utilitarian for his interests.
 
One final thing I wanted to talk about is his role in VW/SS, where he sends a letter to the party about the slitherers and their intentions. It shows that Hubert does care about the world and does want to do the right thing, but also shows his general distrust and contempt for people who aren’t part of his side. I thought it was quite a good touch and I really like how it is voiced in his voice and it is just perfect.
 
Also, I really like his post-timeskip design and his voice acting. I think he transitions from awkward goth kid to full grand vizier quite naturally, and he seems to be much more comfortable post-timeskip.
 
What they could have done better: I would have liked for him to have more supports, as he is a character who has a few less supports than the cast average. I also feel like his backstory and relationship with his father could have been more thoroughly explored, as well as his father’s relationship with Hanneman. I would have liked to see that as an A support at the very least. His support with Edelgard is interesting and I am not 100% sure how I feel about it, but I feel like that should have been more of a core character-anchoring support.

I WILL FINISH THIS LATER, FUCK, I’M TIRED
« Last Edit: March 11, 2020, 05:26:43 PM by Luther Lansfeld »
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Fudozukushi

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1552
  • Born to hunt Death Knights
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #11 on: February 29, 2020, 11:21:27 PM »
I've read that Edelgard/Hubert were actually made much more romantic in the English translation.  The Japanese was apparently pretty platonic.  Though like 90% of this I can't for the life of me ever find that post again.

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #12 on: March 01, 2020, 03:36:47 PM »
I don't think it's very romantic even in English. The end of their A support reads to me more as weird Hubert humor (kinda like Bernie's support in general) than genuine infatuation. Hubert's a weird dude, and they do have weird feelings for each other just as a matter of proximity. I think they are not a great fit for each other; Edelgard finds him too stifling.
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
Luther’s Top 7 Favorite Three Houses characters part 2
« Reply #13 on: March 11, 2020, 04:32:45 AM »
#3 Dorothea Arnault (major spoilers for Crimson Flower)

Iconic quote: “You were like a bee, Ferdinand. A bee attracted to a flower in full bloom.”

What I like about Dorothea: Aside from Claude, who occupies a unique position as the ‘outsider’ lord, Dorothea is the only character on this list who does not have strong, direct ties to at least one other really important character. Unlike Claude, who is very privileged due to his status as the grandson of the leader of the Alliance, Dorothea is really our primary eyes into what commoners in the realm, particularly the Empire, live like. Inherently, this means that Dorothea is a bit less important to the overall plot of the game, with her primary character development coming from her supports. Fortunately, her supports are almost universally fantastic, offering a wide range of views and philosophies.

Dorothea’s goal for coming to the monastery is simple; fall in love with a (hopefully wealthy) suitor and have a story of happily-ever-after. She bears a great deal of shame for her mission, as we see explored in a few supports, but she also sees it as a necessary part of securing her future. Because she feels insecure about her wealth and knows that her beauty will fade, she is steadfast on this front. We are supposed to feel sympathy for her (because she feels like she –has- to do this to survive) but also we are supposed to feel that she may be doing the wrong thing.

Of course, the matter is complicated by the fact that, to be frank, she finds men, as a group, rather distasteful. She references several times that she goes on dates with men who are wealthy and “presumably have a tolerable personality”. Her casual ambivalence about the quality of man that she is going to marry is belied by the fact that she asks in the Question Box if she could possibly find a man who is both good spouse and rich. But in practice, she seems to have not found much in the way of good suitors. In her Edelgard A support, she references the fact that she’s received a present from a suitor, but she can’t remember who that suitor is.

Her most hostile interactions with men in the cast are primarily with Felix and Sylvain, two men who seem to have her pegged as a gold-digger. She verbally spars with Sylvain about each of them being these weird mirror images of each other, both chasing after people who have superficially attractive traits while hating one another for that. It ends up with them deciding to collectively tolerate one another, despite each of them feeling some malice for each other. Felix ends up just brushing her off initially and then learns that she is a good sword fighter, mostly because she had to protect herself from nobles who tried to mess with her while she was in the opera. (There is an implication that it is due to sexual assault, but the game never outright states it.) I think Dorothea has a measure of respect for Felix for doing his own thing, even while being perplexed by his antisocial behavior.

Her interactions with the male Eagles are all interesting, and each reveals a bit about Dorothea as well as the culture of Adrestia. Caspar and her discuss how searching for a potential suitor is similar to training. Dorothea scoffs at this at first, but Caspar, in his ‘dumb guy wisdom’, explains that both of them are trying to do their best to get by in a world that is unjust and does not value people based on egalitarian principles, but rather traditional rank and order. Linhardt doesn’t fully grasp what it’s like to be a common person in Adrestia, and just advised Dorothea to “just ignore people complaining about her”. While Linhardt, a man of wealth and rank, can largely follow this advise scot-free, it comes off as tone-deaf for a commoner who is deeply invested in what others think of her because of her low social station. Her support with Hubert is, as talked about before, transactional and civil, as they mutually respect each other and both understand ‘the game’.

In Ferdinand’s support, most of her hostility for men, particularly noble men, is laid bare. Dorothea talks about her experience as a street rat, begging for scraps and being spat on by the nobles of Enbarr. Once she became an opera star, though, all of this changed. She saw the nobles’ attitudes change from disdain to infatuation, but she wasn’t impressed because she saw them for what they really were: opportunists and fakes. Her hateful treatment of Ferdinand was based on that; she thought that he was just another one of them, with friendly smiles for her at the academy, but looking down his nose at her when she was an orphan. She reveals that she wants to like Ferdinand, but it’s hard for her not to see him in that light. We also learn in her Hanneman support that she was a rejected Crest-baby; born to a noble father and released onto the streets once it was found that she did not have a Crest. (She believes that her father hit on her at the opera, but she is not certain.)

Dorothea is a very natural ally for Edelgard due to her disdain for the church (“I'd hardly call myself devout. After all, it was thanks to the goddess and her noble regime that I suffered so much as a child”) and her desire to overthrow the class system. One of the interesting things about Dorothea is that, despite her keen awareness of their status, the nobility surrounding her do not intimidate her. Her support with Edelgard, for example, goes into Edelgard’s desire for reform quite quickly, even in the C support, and Dorothea seems supportive of Edelgard’s grand ambitions. As early as the B support, she tries to get into Edelgard’s pants. She seems much more comfortable and natural hitting on women than men, as shown both in this support and the Petra support. While Dorothea comes off as distant, cold, and at times rude to many male characters, she is kind and warm toward the women of the cast. (This is a bit of a contrast to her dark mirror image, Sylvain, who is especially bad to women but is generally manipulative and unpleasant to everyone he interacts with to a certain extent.)

Post-timeskip, we see that Dorothea, like many of the other characters whose backgrounds are less warlike, has a great distaste for war. In Crimson Flower, we see that while she believes in the cause and thinks it’s a necessary evil, she is not happy to participate in the horrors that this war inflicts. Much like Sylvain, we see a less happy and chipper version of Dorothea in the second half of the game; for all that she seems less devastatingly depressed than Sylvain. I think both take the war harder than most of the other characters.

Dorothea’s supports across the board are enjoyable and explore a lot of key issues that the game lies to explore: nobility, birthright, reasons for marriage, happiness, and privilege. She has absolutely fantastic English voice acting, perfectly inflecting her flirtiness, her anger, and her disgust with the perfect amount of pizzazz and charm. I think the character really benefits from the good voice acting.

One other thing I like about Dorothea is that she is sexually active before the game starts, which seems so rare for a Japanese game. Apparently that is something that some male fans complained about her in Japan, which I guess shows why games don’t do it very often. Ick. She is beautiful, she knows it, and she is willing to use her assets to further herself. I don’t think this makes her the most admirable person, but it does make her interesting, and a little more morally complex than she might have been as the underdog street rat otherwise. I think games sometimes have a tendency to make commoner characters insufferable because of some sort of weird reverse superiority complex “I know so much more about the world than nobles”. There are a couple of examples in this game which I won’t bother talking about, but I think they did a better job of avoiding that trope with her. She is not always shown in the best light because of her moral complexity, although I do think the game overall sides with her more often than not.

Eat the rich.

What they could have done better: Dorothea is limited by her lack of involvement in the main story and her support with Byleth is surprisingly weak for a character whose supports I generally really enjoy. Unfortunately, that’s the one that everyone will see!

#2 Edelgard von Hresvelg (major spoilers for all routes, but especially Crimson Flower / Azure Moon)

Iconic quote: “Have you ever wondered if the only way to create a truly free world is to dispense with the goddess and the Crests?”

What I like about Edelgard: Edelgard, for better or for worse, is the lightning rod of many many Internet debates, and she will be the lightning rod of many many more. I’ve seen every view from “Edelgard did nothing wrong” to “Edelgard is basically Hitler”, and all things in between.

To examine Edelgard fully, I would like to talk first about her role as a main character and catalyst of her own story, and then her role as a major antagonist on the other routes, because we see facets of her in the other routes that are not her own.

So first I will talk about the perspective from the Black Eagles route. At first glance, she is a fairly typical overachieving and relatively mature teenage girl, with a bit of Mean Girls antagonist mixed in for good measure. She holds everyone around her to high standards, including the Perfect Silent Main character and definitely including herself. We see this theme crop up again and again in the main story. Each lord has their own unique responses and interactions with Byleth, and in Edelgard’s case, she seems quite annoyed that Byleth is sent to be the professor but doesn’t know the ropes of being a professor. I think she lets this annoyance slip occasionally, but her disdain is primarily directed at the church/Rhea rather than Byleth themselves, sending someone to do a job that they aren’t properly trained for. I can’t say I really blame Edelgard for this disdain, especially as someone who values competence. (I am reading a book about the gulag system in the Soviet Union, and it reminds me of how the Soviets assigned untrained people to do major projects such as building railways and bridges. Training people for their job is important and good!)

It is relatively quickly when you start to get the first glimpses that Edelgard is more than just a demanding imperial princess; she is 100% interested in overthrowing the system, and she lets these facts dribble through during both the Lonato and Miklan battles. In the scene after Lonato, she ruminates on the fact that she, like Lonato, is willing to drag common people into her ideological conflicts, and that “death in service of a greater cause is not a death in vain”. In the aftermath of Miklan’s, she talks admiringly of Miklan, lamenting that a talented individual had to turn to crime because his family rejected him due to his lack of Crest. She acknowledges that he went too far, but overall she reserves most of her rage for the system that has created this inequality, not Miklan himself. She ends this scene with the quote from above; a bit of heresy sprinkled in for good measure. This is the point where you really start to see that she is a radical through and through. Hubert is alarmed by the fact that she’s so open with the professor about their plans, but above all things, Edelgard wants to put her trust in other people, even though she’s been let down so many times before.

While I played Blue Lions first, I also watched Black Eagles. The tonal difference between Dimitri’s rather muted resignation in his conversations surrounding both Lonato and Miklan versus Edelgard’s contemplative in the case of Lonato and rabble-rousing, almost heretical in the case of Miklan is quite a big difference. Dimitri says the things that you think a main character would say in these circumstances, whereas Edelgard uses them as a way to bring up her overarching agenda. Everything is about the struggle, Comrade.

This focus on the struggle crops up in a lot of her early supports as she tries to figure out who is on board for the large-scale societal changes that she is planning on implementing. She quickly finds an ally in Dorothea, and while Caspar believes that “she always tries to make everything about herself”, she believes that he is on board for her dreams of egalitarianism. She finds Petra to be a competent, trustworthy ally, even if she is somewhat wary of her.

On the other hand, she finds Bernadetta incomprehensible, Linhardt useless, and Ferdinand annoying. We see flashes of irritability in all of these supports, although she does try to mask it (not very well, I’d say). Edelgard seems to be generally displeased and irritable for a majority of Part 1, although sometimes she tries to be sociable and pleasant. Often, her attempts at humor come off as stiff, like a boss trying to make jokes with their employees unsuccessfully. She even says in one of her monastery dialogues that she feels “out of place in a festive atmosphere”.

I feel like one of Three Houses’s biggest weaknesses is having a silent main, but sometimes the use of the silent main’s supports is well-executed. Edelgard’s supports give you great insight into why she is the way she is and the basis for which she has constructed her worldview. Her captors tortured her and vile experiments were performed on her, leaving her with superpowers, but also PTSD and psychological trauma. But rather than merely concocting a revenge plot to get at her captors, she sees an opportunity to remake the world in her image, to make a world that is just and fair, that is free from religious dogma, and one that people can rise from low means to influence the world.

If you are interested in reading more about Edelgard’s manifestation of PTSD, I found this post extremely insightful. https://www.reddit.com/r/fireemblem/comments/d3lf59/edelgards_ptsdhow_three_houses_sensitively/f03whuy/ It helped me understand better the more subtle aspects of her character, such as her irritability and her inability to remember an important event that crops up in the game.

Edelgard really REALLY dislikes the Church of Seiros, which crops up over and over throughout the game. We see her radical heresy shine through in Chapter 5 in her dialogue with Gilbert and later Byleth. I think she sees religion as a crutch for people to capitulate in tradition authority and sees how faith in a goddess leads people to live unfulfilling lives, only serving a singular goal of worshipping a goddess. In her Azure Moon Chapter 21 dialogue and in her Crimson Flower ending, she talks people should depend on one another and have faith in their own strength instead of blind obedience to a goddess. It is a profoundly humanist stance, which gives agency to people, as opposed to the Church of Seiros, which saddles people with worship of a deity.

I think Edelgard resonates really strongly to those of us who have left religion by working through these same problems and coming up with the same solutions. I have often contemplated the amount of total time people have spent worshipping and praying a god that most likely does not exist, and how even if this god did exist, would they have created humanity with the sole purpose of worshipping and exalting them? I think for those of us who have left religion, she presents The Argument; that humanity does not need religion or superstition to dictate our lives, and that we can be happy and love one another without god. A common tactic to attack atheism is to discuss the pointlessness of existence, to which I say “leaving the world a better place for your fellow man is a good enough point for me”.  (Of course, in the context of Three Houses, we know that, at one time, there was a goddess, unlike in our world. Edelgard does not deny the existence of the goddess, but she sees the modern interpretation of the goddess as a way for an immortal race of dragons to rule over the continent, which is… largely accurate.)

We see her get into a philosophical discussion with a person of faith, Manuela, about the function of faith in Manuela’s life. After understanding Manuela’s point of view, that spiritual guidance helps her feel a sense of purpose in her life, Edelgard re-evaluates her universal distaste for religion, seeing it as having a utilitarian purpose in Manuela’s life. Manuela compares her own religious values with hero worship and tells Edelgard “you’re the reason some people get up in the morning”. Edelgard finds this embarrassing but otherwise the point is well taken. She still overall sees religion and faith as hindrances to intelligent discussion, as she alludes to in her own paralogue. Despite being from countries besides Fodlan, she sees Almyrans and Dagdans as more natural allies to her than the people of Faerghus, because of the latter are devoted to the Church of Seiros.

Edelgard catalyzes most of the events that happen in the first part of the game; she collaborates with Those Who Slither in the Dark to cause chaos in the Church, although she hates them and find their methods extremely distasteful. She walks a thin line between her morality and her desire to start trouble for the church because, as the not-so-subtle-name implies (thanks Hubert), TWSD are pretty much baby-eating assholes. In her estimation, though, using them as tools to crack the church’s 1000 year reign over Fodlan is an important part of her plans, even if she plans to take them out afterwards. Even very early, we see tension between the Flame Emperor and the others. After the battle at Remire, Edelgard asks Byleth if “maybe one day the Flame Emperor will appear to you without his mask, and you can decide what to believe”.

One really interesting scene before the big reveal in Chapter 11 is after Jeralt dies, in Chapter 10. The three lords all have very different reactions to Byleth’s sorrow; Dimitri meets her with equal sadness, Claude with insatiable curiosity (and mild insensitivity), and Edelgard with advice that she carried with her during the Worst of Times, which is basically keep moving forward, because the world isn’t going to wait for you. Many people dislike her in this scene because she’s a ‘bitch’. First of all, yes, she’s a bitch, did you not catch the memo? Second of all, this is how she dealt with her massive trauma – conceal, don’t feel, throw all of the pain into the darkness and KEEP MOVING. To not keep moving would be to dishonor her dead family. She asks you if you are going to stay stuck in the past or think of the future that is fast approaching. Of course, she knows what is coming.

I’ve already talked quite a bit about Chapter 11 and ‘the decision’ in this topic, but Edelgard’s assumption during this sequence is that Byleth’s loyalty to the Church of Seiros, as one of its members, outweighs their loyalty to Edelgard. In Chapter 1, we see Edelgard’s disappointment that Byleth has been recruited as a faculty at the Academy; she seems to consider Byleth out of her reach once that happens. She, after all, is trying to upend and overthrow an entrenched power structure. You can debate how much the game convinces you that should take her side, and I’ve already made my case here, but she is surprised, but very happy, when you take her side over Rhea, and immediately you delve into her plans and ideas for the future and her justification for her revolution — her war to rid the continent of longstanding tyranny and anti-logic.

She struggles more than Hubert with the implications of starting a war. She contemplates that — on her command, people will die, both her own countrymen and her enemies. Again, I spilled many words in this topic to why I believe her revolution is justified and well founded; the world as it is is ruled by irrationality, primarily by blood superiority and religious principles. She belives that by doing something now, by enduring pain now, you build a world that isn’t based on violence and birthright, which will lead to overall less death over a long period of time. Of course, this bakes in the assumption that a world that is more rational and less violent is actually built. We see examples in our own history of examples of when this is right and when this is wrong, but overall I think our world is a better place for having overthrown feudal systems. She sends out her manifesto to the different lords of the Alliance and the Kingdom, hoping to garner their favor and decrease the amount of bloodshed that is coming.

Of course, she has a Messiah complex because she believes she is the only person with the power and resources to reshape the world. We see this crop up in her attitude, her supports, and her relief at the ability to share her immense burden with Byleth. The secrets she has to keep while at the academy weigh heavily on her, and while Hubert is a great confidant and staunch ally, he is absolutely terrible emotional support, as his primary goal is to push her and make sure that the plan goes exactly as it is supposed to. As I mentioned in the post about him, she knows that he’s right and reasonable and that hard work has to be done to make this dream a reality, but goddammit, wouldn’t it be nice to just -enjoy life- for five fucking seconds?

Her decision to incorporate TWSD in her plans is one of the moral conundrums that she faces in her quest, but ultimately she decides to use their power for as long as they are useful and then rid of them. Was ridding the world of the church’s strong influence worth incorporating these monsters into her plans? She believes that using them is necessary for winning the war against the church, and I will infer that she knows what she’s talking about. However, they do commit war crimes during their alliance with her, and that is something that she bears heavily on her. We see in our own history people allying with distasteful, even evil people. I am reminded of our cooperation with Stalin during and after WWII; by sending the exiled Cossacks back to Russia, we gave them a death sentence. We allied with one mass murderer to rid ourselves of another. In order to fully comprehend the calculus behind her decision, I think I would want a little more information than the game gave.

Post-timeskip, we see a more relaxed Edelgard, despite being in the midst of a major war. In her supports, we see a change in her behavior toward the previously mentioned Ferdinand, Linhardt, and Bernadetta, because she is trying to not just be irritable and understand them all a bit better. In her Ferdinand support, they discuss the possibility of using universal education as a way to even the playing field for commoners in her search for an egalitarian society, and she learns to see past his goofiness and realize that he, too, cares deeply for his country and the people who live in it, whereas before she saw him as an obstacle and a dolt. In her Bernie support, she doesn’t really understand Bernie, but she at least learns to accept her with all of her eccentricities; she explains to Bernie that having her as a friend has made her less prone to anger and more understanding. They both talk about how you can trust plants on sight, unlike people. Yikes!

And she figures out a way to make Linhardt useful by utilizing his talents. Her supports with Dorothea reflect their shared values; both want to deconstruct the existing power structures and replace them with ones that value fairness and justice.

She is very fond of Byleth post-timeskip, and I speculate that it’s because Byleth taking her side helped renew her faith in humanity and made her feel loved. Not just needed for the cause, which is how Hubert makes her feel, but loved as a human being. She finds it reaffirming and life altering that someone cares enough about her to stick their neck out for her and will oppose the goddess and 1000 years of history because they believe in her cause. Edelgard responds to this with a mixture of adoration, love, and appreciation, and we see this reflected in the scene where we find Edelgard painting a picture of Byleth. (I don’t think it is clear that that is what she’s doing, the first time I watched it, but once it is confirmed it certainly makes sense.) Edelgard has always had to be this perfect, Messiah-like leader who shows no flaws, and she is ashamed to be seen doing something that she is not good at. I have seen people claim that her behavior is unrealistic, as if people with trauma and who start wars can’t also be profoundly human, but I think it is deeply humanizing and symbolizes her journey away from trauma.

One random monastery dialogue from Edelgard in Crimson Flower reveals a lot about the way she thinks. She says that she doesn’t understand why the Alliance has to fight against her; they are going to lose, and lives will be lost, so why don’t they just surrender? This is, of course, both logical and ridiculously imperious, which fits perfectly with her general worldview. One of the other really interesting scenes in CF for Edelgard is the scene where she lies about the nukes that destroyed Arianrod, using it as a way to galvanize her side against Rhea, while also hiding the prominence of the slitherers. (I don’t think the nukes are a very effective plot point in general, but this is the only use of them in the story that is of any real interest.) This isn’t really a nice thing to do, but it’s effective, and that is what she cares about more than anything else.

At the end of the day, her beef is primarily with Rhea and the Church of Seiros, and she feels bad to have to fight both Claude and Dimitri. In Claude’s case, if you finish the fight with her, you will be given an option to spare him, and he goes back to Almyra. Although she is somewhat uncomfortable with such a scheming man being left alive, she ends up being merciful because they are basically on the same side, even if they have different approaches on solving the problem. Dimitri, on the other hand, has allied himself and tied his fate with Rhea, who has taken refuge in his kingdom. He is less reform-minded than Claude and is chiefly interested in his pursuit of revenge against Edelgard for her perceived sins, and his primary goal is to eliminate her. Edelgard ends up killing Dimitri, saying that he would have made a good king in a peaceful era, and she mourns his death. When confronted about crying for Dimitri, she responds with “The Edelgard who sheds tears died long ago.” Despite her bluster, it is clear that she still has feelings for Dimitri and laments that he was caught in Arundel’s schemes to sow chaos in Faerghus.

Ultimately, though, Rhea is her real target, and she has no time for the sycophants and brainwashed who follow her. When Rhea ends up burning Fhirdiad to the ground in response to the imperial army’s advance, this only proves Edelgard’s dislike of Rhea true. Edelgard ends her boss conversation with Rhea with “I never betrayed you. I didn’t believe in you from the start!” After the battle, you see the quote, again reflecting her humanist ideology: “When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other…there’s no need for gods.” The era of dragons is over and Edelgard’s dream comes into fruition.

And yet in her S support, we still see her struggle with the concept of being loved and valued by another human being for who she is, not what she is.

“Maybe it is self-righteousness, but it doesn’t matter. Someone has to take action and put a stop to this world’s endless, blood-stained history!” Despite claims to the contrary, Edelgard outside of her own route is consistent with her behavior in her own route. I already cited a consistent humanist ideology from both Crimson Flower and Azure Moon above, but even her core ideology is the same. She will do anything to win, in all routes, all of the time. Much like how in Crimson Flower we see Rhea transform from ‘benevolent’ ruler to raging monster when the cards are down, we see Edelgard in her moments of desperation. Unlike Rhea, she values human life and does not burn down her capital city (yes, I’ve seen this claimed as a point against her), but nor does she want to be around if she does not win. In many ways she sees her life to exist solely for the purpose of achieving her goals, and without that, she does not desire to be around and have to endure more suffering than she already has. Byleth (in VW/SS) and Dimitri (in AM) both try to spare her, but ultimately she dies on her own terms.

In all of the routes, the war seems to have moved surprisingly little during the five years of the timeskip, although moreso in AM/VW/SS due to Cornelia’s coup of the western parts of Faerghus. Also, her reason for keeping Rhea alive in those routes is a source of speculation and mystery. To be honest, I’m not really sure, but it is certainly more evidence that she isn’t just a mad tyrant or madwoman. Why she transforms into Hegemon Edelgard (which I guess is her ‘trump card’ and the only real evidence of this large power she possesses that is referenced at other points) is a mystery and likely just related to gameplay rather than plot, although you can argue she had extra time to prepare it, and it’s a way to show that in action. Incidentally, despite my previous analysis of Hubert focusing on the fact that he wants her to achieve her goals no matter what, he actually doesn’t approve of her plan to transform, as we see in AM Chapter 19. In this case, we see him protest against this idea because he does care about her, he’s just bad at showing it.

There are three scenes; one in all the non-CF routes, one in AM, and one in SS (and VW, but it doesn’t make as much sense there) that are really worth talking about from her antagonist perspective. After Chapter 11, there is a scene where she rallies the troops into war, presenting her case that Rhea is corrupt and self-serving. I really liked the scene that replaced in CF, but this version is really good too. Again, she presents her case. Her scene with Dimitri in Chapter 21 AM is as clear as anything in the game about her motives and her ideology, presenting the war as the only way to bring justice to a wretched, unfair world. And lastly, in SS, we see the scene after the fight with her where she is dying, and tells Byleth that she wanted to walk with her. This is a reflection of the previous statements about CF about how Edelgard felt so good about Byleth taking her side that she becomes infatuated with them because she needed someone to love and to love her back.

There are many, many bad takes about Edelgard on the Internet and addressing every single one of them might cause the heat death of the universe, but one particular one seems to stick; that’s she’s a fascist. (Cue https://youtu.be/SNciSjBTkGA “Your favorite ship is Edeleth if you’ve gotten into five Internet arguments about how Edelgard is not a fascist”.)  Fascism has a few key tenets; traditionalism, ultra-authoritarian, ultra-nationalist, and blood purity. Edelgard is anti-establishment and traditional authority, and believes in pretty much the opposite of the blood purity that is literally one of the societal problems that she’s trying to fix, so those two claims are relatively easy to deflect, and those are the two that defines someone as fascist, so I think this argument is over. But is she ultra-authoritarian? She talks about wanting to delegate tasks to competent people and she seems to have a place for transitioning out of power, although the endings are not clear on when that really happens, if ever. I would describe her as more authoritarian than not, but ultra- seems a bit extreme. She is patriotic and believes that the Empire under her rule is fighting for good, but does her identity as an imperial citizen trump everything? Considering her admiration for other cultures, as referenced above, I would say no. Again, she is patriotic, but ultra-nationalist? No way. I feel like this is a claim put forth by people who don’t realize that fascism is not the only model of authoritarianism or more likely just people who are trying to get under other people’s skin.

I would personally describe her as a bit Napoleon, a bit Lenin, and a bit of the modern anti-religion left thrown into a blender. She is progressive, ambitious, controlling, and believes that the ends of a better world justify the means. We see her progressive stances over and over again, through her supports and dialogue with a variety of different characters. Whether you are buying what she is selling or not, she is complex and drives the game’s story in a way that no one else does. To classify her as simply ‘evil’ because she is a conqueror misses the point (as does classifying Rhea is purely evil, as I spoke about previously in this topic.)

Overall, Three Houses makes its female protagonist the center of the story, its most discussed and analyzed and dissected and loved and hated, and sometimes its main villain. It is a really bold move that I would have never expected from a series that so often features black and white characters and binary morality, and is often not very brave. They go all in with her, and whether you think she’s perfectly justified and the next coming or an evil harpy who loves starting wars and drinking the blood of baby unicorns, the history of gaming is better for having her in it.

For her post-timeskip design, she is wielding a giant axe, dressed all in red with a devil horned crown. I remember reading some of the previous information on Three Houses and seeing that design and going “Whoa!” Her design evokes a bit of a Lucifer feel, as do a few other things surrounding her, such as her rebellion against god and the fact that her theme song is “The Edge of Dawn” (Lucifer is referred to as “the son of dawn” in the Bible). She transforms from a somewhat generic, pretty anime girl to a stately but badass warrior woman in this new design, and I love it.  One of the subtle things about Edelgard is how she projects herself as very competent, always seeming in control despite being the smallest person in the room. She is bold, fierce, and doesn’t take shit from anyone.

Her supports are almost universally high quality. My favorites include: Dorothea, Caspar, Byleth, Hubert, Bernie, Lysithea, Manuela, Hanneman. I really like how so many of them talk about political and religious philosophy, and how she wants to be open-minded to the way other people think.

What they could have done better: A few details surrounding her motivations with the slitherers. I think the reason for all of the things that occur in the monastery in Part 1 isn’t always clear, and on a replay, those answers aren’t necessarily there. I feel like the game had more of an idea about what it wanted to be post-timeskip, and they use the academy to warm you up to the characters rather than having amazing plot on its own. There is also the questionable execution of the plot point in Chapter 11, which I think works really well on Dimitri’s route but not so much on the others, but it works especially poorly on Crimson Flower because “and no one ever spoke of that again!” The scenario needed to be reworked altogether, I think. None of these are specific complaints about her character work, but rather plot points surrounding her.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2020, 11:20:28 PM by Luther Lansfeld »
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
Luther’s Top 7 Favorite Three Houses characters part 3
« Reply #14 on: March 11, 2020, 04:34:21 AM »
#1 Dimitri Alexandre Blaiddyd (spoilers for all routes, but especially Azure Moon)

Content note: Discussion of suicide ideation and mental illness.

Iconic quote: “As the sole survivor that day, do I… do I have the right to live for myself?”

In this topic and in the Games thread, I have referenced the mythical Faerghus Man a few times, and I want to clarify what I mean by this. Faerghus is a culture dominated by loyalty and chivalry, but in the current version of their culture, this loyalty is often given to the dead rather than the living. The fixation with death and the feelings, thoughts, and hopes of dead people is a central theme in Dimitri’s story. When I say Faerghus Man, I am mostly referring to the culture of fatalism and as Felix states it, “the glorification and worship of death”. Ingrid and Catherine both have some aspects of the Faerghus Man, but Dimitri, Rodrigue, and Gilbert all three share an enduring fixation with the dead, and in CF, we see Dedue embrace his own version of the Faerghus Man. Felix and Sylvain try to escape from the death cult and it leaves its scars on both, but they still vow to die together. They are, to quote Nick Cave, “entwined together in this culture of death”.

What I like about Dimitri: Obviously, I have chosen a quote that is not the most iconic, but it is the quote that I feel best encapsulates the character. While Edelgard is an intellectually satisfying character, with her development centered on ideas of justice, fairness, liberty, and freedom from religious tyranny, Dimitri’s appeal as a character is emotionally charged and fraught with uncomfortable discussions about mental illness and the toll that they have on many people’s lives. But Dimitri’s story is also one of hope and redemption. As Elly put it, “Dimitri is a man of big feelings more than anything.”

Viewing Dimitri from this lens is important because it is essential for understanding why he gets caught in a cycle of violence and why it is important to have conversations around the character that go deeper than just “oh, he’s a violent man”. It is recognizing that his violence comes from a place of trauma and self-loathing, and more importantly, talking about how to translate that trauma and self-loathing into healing. Much like Edelgard, he builds a wall around himself and wears a mask to hide the real self. Both suffer from trauma, but they respond to it in much different ways. Edelgard’s response to trauma is to bury it deep within her and to focus on building the best future that she can, but despite it being quite a big secret, she is actually willing to divulge after knowing Byleth for around half a year. Dimitri, pre-timeskip, keeps his own trauma even more buried and hidden, although once you know what to look for on a replay, you see the subtle signs that he is suffering. And unlike Edelgard, his goal is not grandiose or ambitious – his goal is to avenge his family, regardless of if he lives or dies.

When you meet Dimitri, he seems like a polite young man who respects and loves the members of his house. During the beginning of the game, when the lords introduce their house members, Dimitri is unfailingly polite and praises each one of them for their talents (even Sylvain), as opposed to both Edelgard and Claude who are more judgmental toward their house members. He is, however, quite flustered when you ask about him, worrying that his sad backstory will color your view of him. Unlike Edelgard, who immediately wants you to prove your mettle, Dimitri seeks your approval and, mostly in hindsight, has some pretty severe social anxiety and is quite socially awkward.

His relationships with the other Lions are fraught with awkwardness. Because many of his closest friends and loved ones died in the Tragedy of Duscur, he has lived a quite lonely existence for the past four years, and he craves friendship from his fellow classmates. However, he is not very comfortable around other people, and to add to it, Faerghus’s culture is quite rigid about proper respect shown to royalty, and this ends in Dimitri struggling to make connections with his classmates. His support with Dedue at first comes off as a bit generic/daft; the prince who wants his servant to not worry about titles and just call him by name! But we find out that he considers Dedue as like a brother to him because he has no other family, and is frustrated with his perception that Dedue is trying to distance himself from him because of formality. Their B support ends with a melancholy “If you wish it so, you may continue to think of yourself as my vassal. I clearly cannot stop you. We need not be anything more, or anything less. If that is what you wish, Dedue, so be it.” His supports with both Ashe and Annette are fraught with awkwardness as well, with his social anxiety clogging up the lines of communication.

His relationship with Ingrid is interesting. They seem to align on many things and generally have similar feelings about the culture of Faerghus, as a contrast to both Felix and Sylvain who defy the cultural norms. One of the themes of the four friends is that they suck at communicating with each other, and it seems that Ingrid does not understand the depth of Dimitri’s trauma. In their B support, she gets very angry with him. She says that she is proud of Glenn (her fiancé who died in Duscur)’s death, and he responds that if she had seen Glenn in his last moments that she wouldn’t have said that. She thinks that Dimitri is spitting on his memory by saying that his death was needless because Glenn died protecting Dimitri. He reveals that he saw agony and regret in Glenn’s face as he died, and that there were no proud, knightly deaths on that day. It’s obvious that both of them are still hurting, and once you realize that Dimitri does not want to be alive, you understand more why he said that Glenn’s death was needless, even if it wasn’t the right thing to say to his mourning former fiancée.

Mercedes is probably the closest Dimitri has to a normal support relationship built on reciprocity. Mercie, unlike the rest of the Lions, calls him by his name rather than his title, and she greatly desires to be friends with him. He trains her in how to fight with a sword, and in exchange, she teaches him to sew. In this support we see that a goofy trait of his (that he breaks things) is something he finds deeply shameful (“My inability to control my own strength is humiliating.”) Mercie, in her way, tries to make him feel better about it, and explains that he just needs to keep practicing. (Thanks, teacher Mercie.)

Also, while I did not see this support pre-timeskip, apparently his B support with Gilbert is technically available. It’s, uh, really dark:

Gilbert: Even so... You have changed since that fateful day, Your Highness. Perhaps too much. I worry that in your pain, you have locked away your true feelings. Your passion is dulled. And your vigor faded.
Dimitri: You want to hear my true feelings, Gustave? Then let me ask you this. Why did you save my life that day? Why did you not allow me to die along with the others? If you truly wish to atone for your sins... Then take my life, here and now.

The game has a variety of warning signs about Dimitri’s desire to no longer be alive, but this is the ironclad evidence. I’m not sure when you can access this support, but it gives you insight into Dimitri’s depressive, fatalistic way of thinking.

We see flashes of anger boil through, as we see at the end of Chapter 1. He is visibly upset at Lonato and how he brings his own people into the fight against the church, and killing civilians particularly perturbs him. He scorns the idea of fighting for “some implacable just cause”, which sets him in contrast to Edelgard, who believes that her just cause is worth involving civilians. At first, he seemed like a pretty generic Fire Emblem main character, but we get some dribbles of something more sinister lurking beneath. Sothis references it at the beginning, and Felix has that very ominous early dialogue mentioned in Felix’s writeup, where he tells that Dimitri will chew you up and spit you out. Dimitri struggles to reconcile the two parts of himself; the peaceful, shy teenager that he wants to be and the angry and violent side that sometimes bubbles to the surface. He talks about a side of himself that he is ‘chilled to the bone’ by, which we learn is his violent side.

The interesting thing about Dimitri pre-timeskip is that he is sweet and almost clingy to Byleth. He has an often-quoted line after the rescue of Flayn, “Professor, your smile is absolutely mesmerizing!” He is over-affectionate at times, almost like a puppy that just really wants someone to love him. He craves a sense of community and togetherness, but he doesn’t really know how to be anything but socially awkward. Which is why his later behavior is so heartbreaking.

We see him express doubt in the goddess’s love in his Goddess Tower support, where he states that he isn’t sure if there is a goddess, but if there is, it seems as if she does not care about the comings and goings of normal humans. His experience seems to have shattered his faith in the goddess of Fodlan, which is fairly common among survivors of trauma.

The first big warning sign about Dimitri’s descent into darkness is in Chapter 8, where we see the events at Remire Village. He starts ranting wildly, talking about how he wants to rip their skulls off for this grave injustice and flies into a rage when you suggest that the Flame Emperor tried to reach out to you (yes, you lose support points with him for this). Soon after, he reveals that the only reason that he came to Garreg Mach is for revenge, and he will do anything to achieve it. He becomes a different man in the late stage of Part 1; his voice is maniac, he becomes sleepless, with headaches and nightmares of the death of his loved ones, and his friendly facade, while not completely gone, is replaced with anger and grief. Felix comments that ‘the boar is becoming unhinged’. We see his softer side return in the scene with Byleth after Jeralt’s, where he reaches out to them to try to help them with their recovery, but it does not last.

We learn that Dimitri and Edelgard met each other as children during Edelgard’s exile, and Dimitri remembers Edelgard teaching him how to dance; she was, unsurprisingly, a strict instructor, and we see young Edelgard scolding young Dimitri on his dancing. (We see brown-haired Edelgard, which is a bit of a mystery in Dimitri’s quest, although obviously explained in hers.) Byleth asks Dimitri if he wants to reconnect with her, but he says no. (CS shows explicitly that Dimitri tries to fish for information and Edelgard doesn’t remember him, for reasons outlined by that PTSD post I linked from Reddit.) Dimitri is pretty socially skittish in the best of times, and he seems uneasy around Edelgard, likely because she doesn’t remember him.

In Dimitri / Sylvain’s C support, Sylvain teases Dimitri for giving a girl a dagger as a token of his love. This is negative infinity ‘game’, and peak Faerghus Man, so Sylvain mocks him for it. “If you had only asked me first, the situation with the dagger could have been avoided!” he teased. Since I guess Byleth or player-god creeped on them during this support, when Dimitri embarrassedly asks “Can you guess what I gave her as a parting gift?” one of the options is a dagger (the other two being normal gifts that one might buy a girl). By narrative convenience, Dimitri finds the Flame Emperor scheming with the baddies, and finds the dagger left behind. He is beside himself, and…

All of this comes to a head in Chapter 11 with the reveal of the Flame Emperor. The hint was there, of course, but when it actually happens, he flips his shit, screaming “Is this some kind of twisted joke?” and he cuts through the soldiers in a mad rage. He has more or less unraveled at this point, raving about killing that woman and getting his revenge. In the cutscene before Chapter 12, Dedue says to him “Your Highness, you do not seem well” In which he responds with “Nothing could be farther from the truth. I am so happy I can hardly contain myself. My loved ones, they want her head, her life. They’ve whispered as much to me.”



In both Edelgard and Claude’s routes, the return after five years is a happy reunion, where both of the lords are excited to see Byleth again. There are hugs and friendly words and in Edelgard’s case a friendly loving family of friends waiting, and in Claude’s case, you have Claude’s beautiful visage.

Yeah, sorry mate, you played the wrong route if you wanted happy. You walk up a stairwell lined with corpses and find a haunted Dimitri, asking you if you are “another ghost here to haunt him”. After deciding you are neither ghost nor a spy, he comes up with a plan to “rid the monastery of rodents”, meaning bandits. Despite Byleth’s appeal to the humanity of the bandits, he raves about the strong preying on the weak. We also learn that Dimitri was imprisoned on his return to Fhirdiad for the death of his uncle, and Dedue died breaking him out. His voice sounds gravely and weathered, more depressed and less manic than pre-timeskip.

Most of Dimitri’s plans are mostly just wild ravings about Edelgard and heading to the Imperial capital to decapitate her. He stands alone, hunched, and lashes out at you if you try to try to talk to him in the monastery. Felix is very worried about ‘the boar’ despite his deflections, and Ingrid ruminates on Dimitri’s feelings, but other members of the army, like Annette and Ashe, seem largely terrified of him.

In Chapter 14 in all three non-CF routes, you fight against Randolph, an imperial soldier. In this route, you get Randolph and Fleche talking about the “one-eyed demon” who has mercilessly slaughtered many imperial troops. After the battle, in one of the most gut-punch parts of this game, Dimitri mocks Randolph for his deluded idea of justice, which involves conquering other nations, and he says that it is absurd that Randolph would claim to do this “for the people”. The scene has interesting camera work because Dimitri is glowering over the point of view of the camera, where Randolph is laying. As Dimitri goes to torture Randolph, Byleth kills him instead, and Dimitri gets pissed. In probably the most emblematically horrifying moment in this route, Byleth tells Dimitri “I miss the Dimitri I once knew.” He responds with “The Dimitri you once knew is dead, and in his place, a bloodstained monster. If you do not approve of what I’ve become, then kill me. If you insist that you cannot… then I will use you and your friends until the flesh falls from your bones.”

Not only is his behavior deplorable on its own, but also he betrays the expectations of an entire country, as the culture of Faerghus puts a heavy emphasis on the symbolic value of the royal family. He’s really irritable and hateful and wants everyone to leave him alone and let him die. Ultimately, his behavior is rooted in deep self-hatred, and in daring Byleth to kill him, he reveals that the primary thing he wants is death. He wants to be released from the guilt and expectation that he is drowning in. He feels guilty about his violent nature and is unable to process his own pain, so he keeps moving, driven by revenge.

I think one of my great frustrations with this game’s fanbase is the tribalism that has sprung up from the conceit of the game. This was of course cultivated by advertising and the framing “Choose whose side you are taking”, which probably results in higher sales numbers, but it also amped the tribalism that was already inevitably going to exist. The framing could have been better in a game that the point is that all sides have a point but all sides do things that are morally questionable. Edelgard’s fanbase has their share of people who largely see her actions as justified and will defend her to the death, but I feel like Dimitri’s most ardent supporters excuse him committing war crimes because the other side started the war. Dimitri’s actions have no purpose except to be brutal and horrific, and the game repeatedly hammers home that this is not okay! In Chapter… I believe 15, there is a priest in the monastery that expresses surprise that he finds Dimitri patting a child on the head, saying that didn’t know that the prince had that sort of humanity in him. Nothing from this part of the game should make you feel like you are doing the right thing (I feel like the game could barely have made this more obvious), but because of some tribal tendencies exacerbated by the game’s conceit, people feel the need to defend their ‘side’ anyway. This isn’t to say that you can’t conclude that, as a whole, that Dimitri’s actions end in a fairer and more just world than Edelgard’s, but to excuse his sins misses the point of his route!

Anyway, Gilbert and Rodrigue try, but are unable to convince him to focus on saving the Kingdom because he thirsts for revenge so deeply. We see a few cracks in Dimitri’s armor. The first is the return of Dedue. Dedue, at the brink of death, was rescued by his people and nursed by to health. Dimitri is surprised and almost… happy? He sounds like himself again for the first time since the timeskip. But still, he decides to march on Gronder, even with the reservations of his retinue. The pre-battle video behavior is ‘normal’ at this point if you’ve been playing this route, although I can see how you might be confused if you played VW first. In VW, Dimitri dies after Gronder in a fit of rage, rushing toward Edelgard.

In Azure Moon, we see that Fleche tries to kill him in a revenge-crazed plan, and she ends up killing Rodrigue instead (poor Rodrigue, always dies). After this, we see what is dubbed “the rain scene” by the AM fanbase. Byleth sees Dimitri, ready to rush off to his death (as seen in VW), and they try to talk sense into him. Finally, after five months of acting like a madman, he asks Byleth, “So tell me, what should I live for?” And they respond with “Live for what you believe in.” And then he finally opens up and talks about the immense guilt that he has born for the last nine years, for living when everyone else around him died. And then he allows himself to live again.

This scene never fails to make me cry. As someone who has suffered from anxiety, depression, and some lesser forms of survivor’s guilt, allowing yourself space to live for yourself is a powerful message. That having a space to heal is important. I know that there are some mixed feelings on Dimitri’s character arc from a mental health perspective, because it supposedly portrays people with mental illness as violent, but I never really took it that way. He is violent because he lives in a culture where violence is applauded and considered noble and honorable; Ingrid, Rodrigue, Gilbert take more exception with the poorly devised plans and disregard for his country than they do with specifically the violence. Both Felix and Sylvian, who are also shades of mentally ill, reject the violence and irrationality in their culture in their own way, but they are considered more atypical for their responses than Dimitri is.

It makes me reflect on how we as a society have used different methods ‘treating’ mental illness, and certainly in the south, men getting treated for their mental illnesses by, you know, counseling, is generally considered to be ‘unmanly’. My father and my older brother both used alcohol, and in my dad’s case drugs and violence, to ‘treat’ their mental illness, which is unhelpful and ends up hurting others. I see this as similar; a man using the tools that he’s given to deal with trauma and mental illness, and it ends up hurting those around him. (https://acain882.wixsite.com/magic/post/the-mirror-reflecting-death-content-warning-suicide-ideation If you want to read way more of my writing because you have been inflicted with the crazy AND haven’t already read it, I wrote this sometime last year.)

After all of this, Dimitri apologizes to his friends for his horrific behavior, and they decide to march to Fhirdiad. And we start getting supports again, hooray.

His support with Dedue is very interesting because the support changes dramatically in tone once the scab is ripped off and Dimitri’s brokenness is bared for all to see. He explains to Dedue that, in him surviving the Tragedy of Duscur, Dimitri was able to justify to himself why he himself survived (which is one of the reasons why Dimitri goes mad after Dedue ‘dies’). Dimitri tells Dedue, in his over-affectionate way, that Dedue is “irreplaceable and cherished” and that he wants Dedue to see him as a friend, not as his vassal/servant. Dedue tells him that if Dimitri will work to help the people of Duscur that Dedue will indeed consider him a friend.

A lot of his A supports show his shame for everything that he’s done; he doesn’t believe he is deserving of friendship after all he has done, but his friends give it to him anyway. Mercie, always the levelheaded one, says that she’s “tired of this self-deprecation!” Felix and Dimitri I talked about in the Felix writeup, but it mostly shows that some things won’t have a happy, clean ending and that the differences between them are irreconcilable. We learn in his Flayn support that he has had no sense of taste since the Tragedy (which the game hints at in a few places but doesn’t hard confirm until Flayn A), and in his Marianne support, they discuss the reasons that the goddess has allowed them to continue to live while others around them have died, concluding that there must be a reason for it and that they should hang onto life together.

He doesn’t completely let go of his rage, though. In the fight with Cornelia to liberate Fhirdiad, he gets angry, promising to destroy her. She taunts him, telling him that his stepmother never loved him, and that he’s a poor prince who is unloved by everyone. After the battle, he faces his people for the first time in five years. He is reluctant; who would want a king whose hands are stained red with blood? But the crowd cheers, and Dimitri weeps. “These are happy tears, my friend.” Big feelings indeed. After a while, he realizes that, even if his stepmother never loved him, he has other people in his life who love him, and that counts for a lot.

He decides to parley with Edelgard to try to understand her point of view, despite believing that she won’t come. But she does come. He asks her why she decided to start this senseless war, and she explains that she believed that this course of action would lead to the least overall death in the end. He scoffs at this, not understand how she can’t see the horrors of war. It’s an interesting scene because the game doesn’t really portray one of them as more ‘right’ than the other, but presents each side as worth considering. As I have already alluded to in this space, I think Edelgard’s argument is quite strong in this scene, but Dimitri is an incrementalist and he finds Edelgard’s radical solution to be unacceptable. Dimitri gives her the dagger back, and she speaks of her long-forgotten friend, the one who gave her the tool to cut herself a new future. They both tried to understand each other, but ultimately their views were not compatible, and so they must fight.

In the last scene, we see Dimitri reach his hand to Edelgard, and she rejects him, throwing the dagger at him, and he kills her. He looks back, but Byleth leads him into the future. He is not completely better, or even close, and he will likely need help with his mental illness for the rest of his life. But hope is there. He decides to dedicate the rest of his days to defending the weak and the innocent.

I think CF Dimitri is a character that makes more sense through the lens of having played Azure Moon. In this route, his country has been co-opted by Rhea. He doesn’t have much love for the church or the goddess, but he has replaced his rage with brutal, unchecked depression, and he doesn’t really care about a cause or ruling, only death. (Hubert comments, “He will do almost anything, these days”. Hubert is of course biased as the emperor’s propaganda minister.) There are two versions of his death scene; one with Edelgard, which doesn’t shine too much light on him (more of an interesting scene for El than him), but the one with Dedue, which you get if you kill Dedue before he transforms, brings a little insight. In this scene, Dedue tells Dimitri that his life has been meaningful after the death of his family in Duscur thanks to Dimitri. The worst part about this is how Dimitri doesn’t see how much Dedue cares for him until it’s too late, which reflects some of the same themes present in AM where Dimitri doesn’t understand why people care about him.

I love how many layers there are to his mental illness; not just the obvious, in-your-face ones, but his anxiety and inability to see the good in himself, a trait that is so ubiquitous among people with anxiety. Whoever wrote this character obviously understood the depth in which anxiety damages your life by warping your relationships with other people. I have played games and read books with mentally ill characters before, but the wide variety of symptoms and social interactions made Dimitri’s resonate to me more. Faerghus has a distinctly rural/southern feel and the social problems that are rooted from its society feel very familiar to me. I also like how they committed to making him do terrible things, not just a fake out, but also really go there. Dimitri is voice acted impeccably by Chris Hackney, who does the wide range of emotional states so well. I think most of the cast is well done, but he and Dorothea stand out on that front.

A few worthwhile supports of his: Mercedes, Felix, Dedue, Ingrid, Marianne. I don’t think his support game is as good as Edelgard, but he has a few decent supports. The Sylvain one is one of the few 3H supports I found legitimately funny, and not just for being dark as fuck.

What they could have done better: The ultimate question of “What exactly happened in Duscur?” is not adequately answered. That is definitely a point of frustration for me.

Are you guys ready for some Silver Snow roasting? Because I am. In Silver Snow, the two male lords are largely forgotten by this nonsensical, piece of shit route. The battle of Gronder happens, but you don’t fight it in. Claude is maybe dead and maybe injured, but he never appears on screen and whether he’s dead or injured never comes up, since you magically occupy all of his territory for some reason. If you were paying attention, you might have noticed that this happens because well, we’ll think of a reason later.

He’s lucky to have never appeared on screen, because ‘Dimitri’ does after you learn of his death in Gronder, reminding you that he exists, and that perhaps you should have, in fact, played a less shitty route than Silver Snow, you fuckwit. I think he literally says ‘I wish you would have joined me, Professor. Maybe things would have been different.’ or something, I’m not looking it up, who do you think I am. He is clearly signaling that you should just delete your fucking save file and start a different route. Is this Dimitri a ghost? A spirit? A vision (even though you’ve never seen post-TS Dimitri in SS so you wouldn’t know what to envision?) Does he come to you because you have Sothis’ heart implanted into your body? I hope you weren’t expecting an answer, idiot, because why the fuck are you even playing this?

Byleth passes out and this plot point is never spoken of again. Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?

--


Well, that was a lot of words, and I had a lot of fun writing this. I really loved both Blue Lions/Azure Moon and Black Eagles/Crimson Flower for its ability to really engage me with its characters and moving beyond well-trodden character tropes into characters with a lot of moving parts and varying degrees of trauma, mental illness, and social maladjustment, whether that is social anxiety, irritability, or just being a sociopath.

I think Dimitri and Edelgard shape their routes in such a meaningful way; I think Black Eagles has the strongest White Clouds, largely due to following Edelgard’s machinations and seeing the game’s #1 mover do her thing. While I praised Crimson Flower for having Hubert in a really prominent role and having some interesting character work for Edelgard through supports and monastery dialogue, Dimitri’s character arc in Azure Moon makes that an overall more compelling story than the examination of the mystique of Edelgard the Conqueror.

While I am not as big a fan of Golden Deer/Verdant Wind, I still really liked Claude and think he is an excellent execution of the more traditional hero, even though he isn’t fully traditional with his penchant for casual manipulation. I feel like I’d have been very satisfied with Claude as the only main character of a Fire Emblem (not so much his route, as I think the plot of VW is a bit of a mess and feels cobbled from AM’s and SS’s spare parts, but Claude himself is quite cool). While there are a couple of Deer that I like besides Claude (Lysithea and Hilda), neither of them have the level of character depth that the secondary Eagles and Lions have, so neither of them made it on this list.

To round out a Top Ten, which I will not be making, I would probably put Ferdinand, Lysithea, and depending on how far on the axis of “fuck this bitch” to “okay, she’s a good character, fine”, probably either Rhea or Petra or maybe Hilda. While I am reasonably fond of Ferdie, Lysithea, Petra, and Hilda, I don’t really have as much to say about any of them, and Rhea is someone I have complex feelings about.

Thanks for reading.  :D ;D (Also, I had to split this post because it was 'over 65000 characters'. Holy shit.)
« Last Edit: March 11, 2020, 06:37:25 AM by Luther Lansfeld »
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Fudozukushi

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1552
  • Born to hunt Death Knights
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #15 on: March 11, 2020, 07:25:15 AM »
I'd rather disagree on her finding Linhardt useless.  She actually highly values his capabilities she's just frustrated he has no desire to put them to use.

Almost all her supports are actually about her thinking of the positions of other people.  Yes, they're viewed in a lens of "I'm going to make sure X has a fair shot" but she's always trying to keep her conversations focused on the other party.  It's the rarer ones that focus on her (like Byleth).

I can (and have) written many boring words on Byleth/Edelgard.  Even just in the paralogue she latches unto them due to an infatuation both because they saved her an an idealization of Byleth basically being her dream come true.  This even carries over to the other Part 2s where they don't interact as much and you get that ridiculous AI change for Hegemon Husk.

The Lucifer parallels are probably intended and I saw a good analysis why a while back.  But Edge of Dawn doesn't have much to do with it, because, well that's not the name of the song whatsoever.  Only Treehouse could somehow get that from a song named: Hresvelgr no Shoujo.  I think even the most barebones hint of sanity can tell you that doesn't mean Edge of Dawn.  (Guess what other Edelgard-related song also got translated wrong...)  Though since Dawn is part of the lyrics continuing on from that I'd still find it shaky as Byleth is the one positioned as dawn due to their roll as the sun.

Translation rant continued addressing a prior point.  The Chapter 11 scene was much worse in English.  Just to shorten it, her ultimate line is supposed to be "reaching out my (Edlegard's) hand when it came time for you (Byleth) to move forward".  Not the English's "reach out my hand when it comes time for me (Edelgard) to move forward" which is kind of... insane.

Also Solon was totally robbed of #1.  He's got a really creepy voice and his staff is named the Circe staff and all it does his weigh him down and he kills all the peasants and no one suspects him and he's all greek and stuff and he's a dark mage like Hubert and he hates the sun like I do and he kills the enemy of our dad what's not to like.  He's also almost as pale as I am and his eyes are cool black and he's got like the prison teardrop tatoos except they're more badarse.

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #16 on: March 12, 2020, 05:38:07 PM »
I agree that most of her supports are about the other person, but all viewed through the lens of her political struggle against the traditions of the empire. Also, Linhardt in his current state is rather useless; she wants to utilize his talents for things besides uselessness.

It's actually funny how much that one word changes the tone of that scene. The way it is written in English, I interpreted as a hint of what is coming, but if it's not intended to be that, that is very interesting.

Also, Fudo, does Solon have a sweet peacock boa, like the master of fashion THALES? You're totally off-base for the TRUE #1.
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Grefter

  • Villain.
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 10386
  • True and Honest. Smarter. More aggressive.
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #17 on: March 13, 2020, 01:03:47 AM »
I am behind because I have been off the forums for a bit so haven't completely read through all of this, but some thoughts I had that I wanted to get out of the brain and stress test by having them in text.

I had a weird epiphany the other day that struck me while I was playing Edelgard's route that seems may be fairly obvious in retrospect, this is without having finished routes other than Claude and Ashen Wolves DLC but generally getting the gist.

I was trying to gather a better idea behind why Rhea consolidates power as much as she does, why collect and then disperse and control an entire continent when she is effectively an immortal nearly unkillable being.  She clearly has some attachments to other people but she also expects to outlive most of them (like even Seteth and Flayn?   What is the lifespan on former saints or whatever?).   Like obviously its Fire Emblem we are dealing with pretty broad brushes even in Three Houses, but even as broad as the Bolshy Edel and Liberty Claude brush, but you get to pinpoint exact points in their narrative that are why they function the way they do.

Rhea's clearly happens back in what is depicted in the intro dream sequence, but that doesn't really answer why she wants to create an autocratic theocracy to keep things in check and to try and prevent things from progressing beyond what she can control vs just like burning the fuck out of everything.

So after overthinking it too much I remembered I was playing a Fire Emblem game and that the reason the dragon wants to consolidate power is because she is a fucking dragon and dragons have hoards.

duh.
NO MORE POKEMON - Meeplelard.
The king perfect of the DL is and always will be Excal. - Superaielman
Don't worry, just jam it in anyway. - SirAlex
Gravellers are like, G-Unit - Trancey.

Cmdr_King

  • Strong and Full of Love
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5562
  • Is Gay
    • View Profile
    • CK Blog
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #18 on: March 13, 2020, 02:07:07 AM »
My pet theory on that is Rhea's biding her time until the whole "resurrect mommy" plan comes to fruition.  She seems awfully sure that if you take someone with Sothis' holy blood and stuff her crest stone into them, if you do it properly you'll get an empty vessel that Sothis will inhabit. 
And if THAT works, well hoarding the hero relics (which of course are just dragon bones with crest stones in them) and creating a religious/sociological reason to breed and track the bloodlines of all the people who had the corresponding holy blood could easily serve the primary purpose of having all the 'parts' to revive those dragons once the process is refined.  That it gives her a caste of administrators who are incentivized to jockey for position amongst themselves rather than actually challenge her rule is just a perk.
CK: She is the female you
Snow: Speaking of Sluts!

<NotMiki> I mean, we're talking life vs. liberty, with the pursuit of happiness providing color commentary.

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #19 on: March 13, 2020, 06:24:07 PM »
Rhea has the classic 'nice' narcissist personality; she wants to be nice to humanity and love people, but is ultimately self-serving and prioritizes her authority and control over everything else. CK's point with Sothis is also true, but she has been trying this for what 1000 years and it hasn't worked yet so ? ? ? ?
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
Why Is Silver Snow Messy?
« Reply #20 on: March 18, 2020, 06:18:18 AM »
In honor of the social distancing, here's some more Three Houses rambling.

Why is Silver Snow Messy? A Theorycraft

Three Houses is a game that centers four characters at its core; Edelgard, Rhea, Dimitri, and Claude. So logically, each of the four routes would address the points of view of each of those characters and explain why you should side with them and like them. I explored why a player would like all three of the lords in my previous essays. Claude wants to change the world through open borders, Edelgard wants to change the world through radical actions, and Dimitri wants to change the world through incrementalism. However, Silver Snow is not really about Rhea and why you should like her. I would argue that the game doesn’t really want you to like Rhea, and thus doesn’t want to make a route about you liking her, but this leaves the fourth route in a bit of an awkward space writing-wise. What is it supposed to be about, then?

I have wondered if the original plan for the game was simply a split between a pro-Edelgard route, the one we know now as Crimson Flower, and an anti-Edelgard route, the route now known as Silver Snow. Edelgard feels like the focal character who drives the game’s plot, and the plot ultimately turns on her decision to go to war with the church. But… if you’ve played Silver Snow, you can see the obvious problem with this idea. Who is your PC cast in the anti-Edelgard route? Do you keep the Black Eagles? Do you get a whole new party and essentially have to build characters over? Is there a proper main character to replace Edelgard who drives the plot in a meaningful way?

Instead, the role of the anti-Edelgard route is divided between Azure Moon, with the compassionate conservative incrementalist main character Dimitri, who doesn’t see the purpose in starting this world to cause wholesale change, and Verdant Wind, where Claude intellectually aligns with Edelgard but thinks her methods are too extreme, like the dirty centrist that he is. The routes both incorporate the church into the plans as part of their opposition to the Empire, particularly in VW, but the church is never at the core of either route. It is two different approaches to the same conclusion; that Edelgard has gone too far and needs to stop. (You can argue about Claude’s motives and how self-serving they are, but that’s for another day.) The scene in Chapter 21 of Azure Moon is the star scene in terms of laying out two opposing ideologies between Dimitri and Edelgard. This scene only works because of Dimitri’s character work; it would feel hollow replaced with Rhea or Seteth or Flayn or any other church member because it would come off as self-serving.

With Dimitri and Claude, they explore the space of the main character who opposes Edelgard for their own reasons. So… what space does Silver Snow occupy? I commented in this thread that Verdant Wind was cobbled from Azure Moon and Silver Snow’s extra parts, and I stand by that statement. However, while I think the idea of Silver Snow was devised first (the scene after Edelgard’s defeat, the Silver Snow army coloration in some of the videos, the general church feel of the route compared to AM all make me think this), I think VW was plotted out to completion and Silver Snow steals its plotting. Of course, Verdant Wind is designed with the Alliance as your core constituency, which means that you need to address the Alliance if the Alliance is an independent entity that is not part of the Church.

Or so you thought. Instead, the Alliance is barely mentioned and the Kingdom only barely more so, because the route largely cares about neither. Dimitri and Claude play no role in this story because their existence serves the purpose of being two sides of the same anti-Edelgard coin, but because this route is devised in a pre-Dimitri and pre-Claude conceit of the game; they don’t really need to be part of the story. As I snarked, Dimitri does appear to tell you you’ve made a terrible mistake in playing this route, and Claude disappears altogether, his fate unknown. So does this route serve philosophically as an anti-Edelgard route as well? Not really. It is philosophically incoherent; in fact, some of its (few) fans disagree entirely on the purpose of the route. I’ve seen both people who believe that it’s the best route because the silent main would be the best fixer of all the world’s problems (I guess if the silent main is a stand-in for “whatever is literally the best thing to do which I, random player, would think of obviously”) and some people who think that the world is Just Fine As Is, Thanks and that Edelgard is a crazy bitch for wanting to overthrow the church. Nor is it the Luther fantasy route, which is just to make you feel like human garbage for playing it, You Boot-Licking Authoritarian Toady. As someone who enjoys feeling bad, the appeal of playing as the toady of a tyrannical medieval pope sounds ideal for maximum human garbagedom.

Instead, it feels like a route where you go through the motions of replicating Claude’s route, but because you don’t have Claude to provide the bulk of the dialogue/a strange tingling in your nether regions/ a driving force for the story, it feels hollow and dull. In each route, you have these corny, almost cringey scenes with the former students of your house saying dorky things, but in Silver Snow, it is literally the worst because it highlights how all of these characters were designed to be connected with the Empire and Edelgard and instead they are here, with you, betraying their country, for some reason. THEY DECIDED TO SHOW UP TO FULFILL THE PROMISE EVEN THOUGH THEY MADE THE PROMISE WITH EDELGARD QUESTION MARK

A review:

1.   Dorothea. Hates the church. Is an Imperial citizen who ideologically aligns with Edelgard. Why does she side with the church?
2.   Caspar. Is the son of the highest ranking person in the Imperial military. Always came off as loyal to his family. Is literally defending the system that fucked him over.
3.   Linhardt. Got out of bed and opposed the Empire. Why?
4.   Bernadetta. Got out of her room and opposed the Empire. Why?
5.   Petra. Is siding with an extremely weak entity with no defined leader / a power vacuum due to lack of Rhea. In Silver Snow, the underdog aspect is played up a lot, and you are part of a weak force. Petra’s motivation is purely to serve Brigid, and taking the side of the weakest force does not seem like the way to best serve Brigid.
6.   Ferdinand. Okay, this one does make sense, because she does disinherit his family. His supports in this route are really weird, though.

These scenes are so bad because it highlights the questions “Why are they with me, again?” and makes you realize that these characters have no chemistry with Seteth and Flayn, who are your (half-assed) replacements for Edelgard and Hubert. So in essence, every single student feels like an out-of-house character, which is not a good feeling from a storytelling perspective. And obviously neither character has much support density with the Eagles, unlike El and Hubie. This is almost the problem on launch, a fault in the conceit of a purely anti-Edelgard route that does not feature characters from the other countries. This problem is very difficult to patch with the story as it is. The characters are motivated by the greatness of the silent main I guess!!! Which honestly doesn’t jive well for me compared to self-motivation and core values.

Obviously in all of the routes, the cross-house characters fit in an awkward niche, but Silver Snow is particularly bizarre for many of the characters.

Felix - In CF, you can argue he has become nihilistic and given up on the culture he despises. In VW, he has given up on Faerghus as the best place to be to win the war. Silver Snow just doesn’t make sense.
Sylvain - SS upholds the system that Sylvain hates. Nope.
Annette - Honestly doesn’t fit other routes period.
Ingrid - Some corner CF arguments for Ingrid due to smashing of patriarchal bullshit norms, but otherwise doesn’t make sense off-route.
Ashe - Actually doesn’t come back in SS until Chapter 15 because his house sides with the Empire.
Lorenz - Actually doesn’t come back in SS until Chapter 16 because his family sides with the Empire.
Hilda - Doesn’t really fit other routes.
Lysithea - Generally doesn’t seem like she’d buy into all of the horseshit / anti-logic of just randomly up and leaving her family to join some ragtag cause.

For another random plot hole, part of the point of Claude’s route is that you have a bit of a triple alliance between Leicester, Almyra, and the church and that trio helps you defeat the Empire. In Silver Snow, the alliance is literally just the church with a small assist from JUDITH. First of all, why the fuck is Judith helping the church instead of Claude? Oh right, because we copy and pasted this route from Verdant Wind and didn’t bother thinking of another character to fit in this role, so sure. Anyway, there isn’t really a solid alliance formed, but you still make identical military gains. Is this because Claude, the master tactician is secretly very stupid because he can’t come up with the schemes that you minus 2/3 of your army can to win easily, or is it because this is the poorly thought out copy and pastey fanfic version of the game? Let’s just scrub Nader and Claude out of the game and rely on the might of the Mighty Main Character or something (even though that Mighty Main Character is in VW…)

So because there’s no one driving the story and Claude and Dimitri are gone, does Edelgard fill the empty space because this is the PUREST ANTI-EDELGARD ROUTE? Ha, you fool. Edelgard has one extra scene in SS, and that’s an anime duel cutscene at the beginning of the route before Hunting By Daybreak. It is bizarre; why is Edelgard there? Otherwise, though, this route does not serve the function of being an effective anti-Edelgard route. Certainly less than AM, which has multiple extra Edelgard scenes than none of the others have, and AM presents the philosophical opposition to Edelgard much more effectively than SS does.

There are a couple of divergent scenes from VW late, mostly ones involving Rhea, but I felt like aside from the scene where you learn about Byleth’s mother being a lab experiment for Rhea, that Silver Snow’s version isn’t super-informative and that VW’s is more so? And that certainly isn’t a particularly sympathizing scene for Rhea, especially considering to the degree in which we have to take Rhea’s word for anything, which in a vacuum is irrational and you probably shouldn’t do. Silver Snow ends with you killing Rhea because she goes crazy, which I guess gets Rhea out of the picture so you can rule the continent, but Seteth, who has been her bff for a long time, seems to not really care very much? He is pretty blasé about the whole thing, which is really weird. It seems like you should be a little more upset about this, mate!

Seteth is probably one of Silver Snow’s big disappointments. He serves the role as the replacement main character in many ways; he is the character who is forced on Hunting By Daybreak, and he leads most of the cutscenes. He suffers from a few problems compared to the lords. The lords all feel like natural leaders to a certain extent; people ho can drive movements and forge plots, and they have Strong Opinions and Feelings on things that happen in the world. Their supports are always interesting and always inform you of things about them that shape their worldview. Byleth, on the other hand, plays the role of advisor to the stronger willed and more driven lords. Seteth also plays this role to Rhea, and unlike the lords’ supports, Seteth often plays a backseat role as advisor or mentor to many of the students in his supports, and because he is so static and not very driven, he comes off as relatively bland as a main.

So you have a route with two passive advisors (Seteth and Byleth) who want to take a backseat to other characters, and as a result there is a real lack of driving force in the story. Unfortunately, Seteth does not play a significant role in mentoring any of the Eagles except Bernadetta, which is honestly not my favorite support due to its cringiness. The other problem with Seteth is that information about him, even more than Claude, is deeply buried within the game and at times not even present. To this day, I am not certain how long Seteth has been awake vs. being asleep in the backstory, and that feels like something I really should know. He feels like he works pretty well in his role as an administrator and as Rhea’s manservant / toady, but his role as one of the saints feels under-explored, partially because of just how much of the game tries to keep it a secret. I feel like Silver Snow should have had that explained early in Part 2 and it could have explored what it means to be a dragon, how he and Flayn feel about living in a world so different than the one they grew up in, their feelings on Rhea, how they feel betrayed by a human trying to overthrow their power, how they feel about Byleth being potentially a dragon and implanted with the goddess’s soul, etc. This would have given the route a distinct purpose. Even if you don’t want to make the route about Rhea, make it about something, and I think an exploration of the dragon-people is as good of a purpose as any.

So why does the route exist? Could the game have not just had the three lords as the three routes, and called it a day? Did the route need a split? I think the primary purpose is that you make a choice to side with Edelgard, which is significant in the context of Edelgard’s development, but did an entire route need to be made just to fulfill that absence of making that choice? Did we need an option to escape from the being the bad bad girl? I think all of these factors together are the reason it exists, but the passion that went into the other routes obviously isn’t present here.

So, how do you fix this route? Here’s Luther’s fantasy version of the pseudo-villain Silver Snow alternate.

This route is split into two parts. The first part is dealing with Edelgard, who will be the antagonist of the first half of Silver Snow since she’s an apostate. Give her a few extra scenes, I say, to build her up more effectively as a church antagonist and bonafide False Goddess. Claude allies himself with you along with the Almyran army, explaining why you are able to win the battles that are fought on VW. I’d make this Myrridin->Merceus->Enbarr->Enbarr, followed by Shambhala to finish off the molemen and even throw Nemesis in there as a zombie pet of Thales, to wrap up that plot point.

But, oh no! During the time that you have been working tirelessly to save the world from molemen, your pal Claude has been consolidating power in both the Alliance and the Kingdom, using the Almyran military that he brought in to ‘help your cause’. You can see this playing out however you want. In my version of the game, Hilda is unrecruitable and is Claude’s second in command / shit stirrer. Claude being the main villain of this route makes sense because he hates the church and would enjoy attempting to subtly subvert their power. When you win, Rhea can be re-seated as the power in Fodlan, or if you want to up Claude’s villain chops, he could off her with some iocane poison and you could become immortal god pope instead. Maybe you move the post-TS monastery battle to fighting Claude, and add in some other battlefields like Derdriu. Like Nemesis, I wouldn’t make Claude a kaiju villain, but just a normal human badass as the final boss. He can explain to you his grand vision to make the world have open borders and embrace a more open, friendly culture based on mutual respect. And then you put him down. I have no opinion on how Dimitri fits into this story; he doesn’t really seem like he would fit particularly well in it and that’s fine?

A route with you opposing Edelgard followed by Claude could be interesting. Claude certainly could have a more antagonist/villainous setup than he currently has, and in some ways Silver Snow is a logical place to put this more sinister version of Claude. Because you end up fighting both Edelgard and Claude, two visionary reformers, you end up feeling a bit of a bad taste in your mouth as you likely made the world a worse place. Are there ways to write Silver Snow that don’t involve shitting on you as a premise? Of course, but I think you veer too much into either silent main worship or Rhea apologism, neither of which fits the game, and are also both a pretty shitty message. The more conservative plan would be to simply add a lot more of the dragon people’s backstory to at least allow you to understand better where they come from. I just want the route to make me feel something other than “man, I sure wish I was playing another, better route”.

tldr; Don't play Silver Snow.
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
The Portrayals of Anxiety / Depression / Trauma in Three Houses
« Reply #21 on: March 24, 2020, 05:42:39 PM »
Still socially distanced. Still writing.

The Portrayals of Anxiety / Depression / Trauma in Three Houses

Content warning: Discussion of anxiety, depression, suicide ideation, and trauma

One of the things that brings a different spin to Three Houses compared to other Fire Emblems and most games of the genre is its number of people who suffer from various forms of mental illness, and the diversity in which those illnesses manifest. Two of the three main characters have suffered significant trauma in their backstory, and in both cases those forge their core values heading into the future, but there are a lot of other characters who suffer from various permutations of mental illness. Some of them I find very relatable, some of them less so, but from what I’ve seen, different people feel very strongly about relating to a variety of the different types of mental illness shown. In most of the characters, we see hints of a path to recovery and feeling at least a bit better, but most of them still need some help and will likely need that help and support for a long time.

Bernadetta

Bernadetta is probably the single most in-your-face example of a character with severe anxiety in this game. For people with anxiety disorders, I think Bernadetta is hilarious because she is the literal manifestation of anxiety, in your face. She thinks what many of us with anxiety disorders feel; that people are secretly angry with us and hate us and don’t want us around. We don’t really have the ability to turn this off and it often affects our day-to-day social functioning. Of course, most people with anxiety don’t say these things because they are socially inappropriate, but many of us feel it. Most people I’ve talked to that have anxiety really enjoy Bernadetta because, yes, this is what having anxiety is actually like. We laugh with her because anxiety can be baffling and crippling and irrational, and if all of our friends knew the things we were thinking, they would probably think we were pretty strange too. Some people are a little less happy with her because her supports are ‘making fun of anxiety’, and while I sympathize with this stance if you think the game is kicking down, I personally feel that the game spends most of its time kicking people who are mean to her and making fun of the absurdity of the scumbag brain. Scumbag brain makes no sense and most of us who have it understand that it doesn’t, at least on some level.

Bernadetta is happy being in her own company. She isn’t depressed; she enjoys knitting and sewing and writing and reading and nerding over plants and is very happy, thank you very much. She stands up for herself when people try to make her do things she doesn’t want to do, like Caspar and Ferdinand, and you root for her in almost all of her supports, including Hubert, who is unnecessarily dickish to her, and Linhardt, where they get on each other’s nerves and end up deciding to “be alone, together”. She obviously has this great capacity for love and empathy for others, when she isn’t caught in her own world. She comes out of her room in Chapter 10 to bring Jeralt flowers, and she really wants to be helpful and useful to others even though she finds it hard and is sometimes caught in her own world. As I mentioned earlier, Edelgard finds Bernadetta incomprehensible, but if you get their ending, Edelgard builds a Fort Bernie in the Imperial Palace so Bernie can be happy.

One of my favorite quotes from Bernie is this: “When I mess up or even when it's just a bad day, it's hard for me to step outside. I'm too scared. But the next day, I try again...because I know that one mistake doesn't ruin everything.”

We find out in a few places that she is abused by her father in his desire to make her into a submissive wife. Two places this shows up are in her supports with Dorothea and Byleth, where we can track her social problems to her past interactions with her father, who worked to socially isolate her by banning her from being friends with rabble and tied her to a chair. This frames the way she interacts with people in general; she jumps to conclusions that people are trying to hurt her, manipulative her, or secretly want to do something bad to her. This is framed in the context of her abuser, who cared little for her feelings in pursuit of making her obey. In Crimson Flower, Bernadetta smiles when she finds out that Edelgard has stripped her father of his power. (Also, her father is the Minister of Religious Affairs, showing you how much the game respects its state religion. :))

Post-timeskip Bernie on CF is something that I found refreshing and life-affirming. She is no longer as reclusive as she once was, no longer holing up in her room, but she hasn’t lost her distinct Bernie anxiety. She does hole up in her room in all of the other routes though, including Silver Snow, which further emphasizes my message that Bernie probably doesn’t belong on Silver Snow. :) Unlike pre-timeskip, where she has this shaggy, unkempt hair, post-TS she is at least trying to look nice. And by god, Bernie, aren’t we all trying to be less of a mess?

Love this girl. <3

Dorothea

Dorothea doesn’t have a lot of faith in humanity, and particularly nobility. Her background shapes this, as she was abandoned by her father, kicked and spat on as a street rat, and then preyed upon by rich men once she got hot and famous, and now she is cynical about anyone trying to hit on her or suck up to her. We learn that she has learned to wield a weapon for self-defense, and she’s not just crazy for this; Manuela says the same thing. Dorothea feels guilty about her plan to marry up, and she ends up being quite self-conscious about being perceived as a gold-digger. It is a complex subject and one that we saw replicated in our own society, especially societies that don’t give women equal representation and rights.

Particularly after the timeskip, we see Dorothea’s general dislike for war show through. I don’t think she really considered the possibility of fighting in a war as a part of attending the academy, even though she in theory approves of what the war is being fought for. She contemplates the nature of fighting and death, and the act of pretending that nothing has happened and that the world can be the way it’s always been. I wouldn’t call her full-blown depressed but she is quite melancholy, reflecting her life experience and how the war has reshaped all of her relationships.

The most affirming thing about Dorothea is the pleasure she finds in her relationships with women, especially those with Petra and Edelgard. Edelgard and Dorothea share a lot of core values and have a reciprocated respect for one another, and she and Petra hit it off quickly, bonding over small things like food and braiding hair. Dorothea reaches out to Petra because she’s worried that Petra will feel lonely away from home. Petra is a bit confused, but ultimately feels really nice that Dorothea would reach out and try to make her feel better. I really like both of those supports because women are so often portrayed as catty and insecure about other women, but this is a dynamic that is overblown / has some misogynist overtones. In real life, I have found that women love, respect, and care for each other, contrary to media portrayal.

Edelgard

Edelgard struggles deeply with the idea that people could love her for who she is, not what she is. She has borne the weight of the world and her siblings’ deaths on her shoulders, and she finds the expectations to be suffocating. She is often irritable and pushes people away, and has flashbacks to her traumatic experience from her childhood. Because her father was powerless to stop the people who hurt her, she finds herself unable to trust people going forward. She has Hubert, but Hubert is suffocating and the worst emotional support ever. (Sorry, Hubie.)

We see that Edelgard ends up becoming infatuated with Byleth because Byleth cares for her, and that being cared for as a human being is a new experience for her. In CF, her life-affirming thing is the love and support she gets from her friends, including Dorothea, Petra, Bernadetta, as well as Byleth. Unlike most of the other characters, she is more affected by her trauma in a call to action way, rather than a “oh god my brain is sabotaging me” way. She learns to relax around other people and delegate tasks to those who are worthy of them. And I think that’s a big step for her.

Dimitri

Dimitri is basically a ball of mental illness, combining anxiety, depression, PTSD, and psychosis into a ball of rage and deep-seated self-hatred. His father is decapitated in front of him when he was 13 years old and ever since then, he has been a wreck of a human, unable to process his emotions in any healthy way, bottling them up and then releasing them into a bloody, violent rage when he gets angry about injustice. He finds himself deeply disturbed by this violent side that he tries to keep under wraps, but because violence is so engrained into his culture, it is a part of him.

Dimitri, unlike Bernadetta and Marianne, is an excellent faker and is able to be functional because he believes that it is his obligation to be a good role model and example for his fellow students. He is humorless, dour, and very socially awkward, but it doesn’t really spawn into messy, ugly depression until late Part 1, where he falls into restlessness and panic, unable to function normally. He wants to die and spirals into a dark place, living like a savage beast for five years and taking his rage out on everyone who comes near him. When you meet him again, he refuses to speak with you and pushes you away from him, driven only by his desire for death and revenge. Eventually, he cracks and decides to stop acting like a maniac, but he is still withered down by self-hatred, fantasies about death, and the voice in his head that tell him that he is not worthy of love and not worthy of life.

The most affirming thing for Dimitri is that he does seem to be getting better toward the end of the game as he realizes that people care about him and that he isn’t just an unredeemable, hatable monster who shouldn’t exist. He learns to love those around him and to cope with his sense of loss, although he admits that he will likely need help until the day he dies. And you know, that’s okay. You can’t just push a magical button and make everything better. It’s a process that takes a lot of time.

Sylvain

Faerghus depression powers activate. Sylvain, as mentioned before, is a dark mirror of Dorothea, suspicious of everyone and everything because of his upbringing. He thinks his parents see him as a tool to pass on the family legacy, and that women see him as a tool to wealth and power. It has left him with a sense that no one really cares about him. He dates women, considering them tools to play with, just as they consider him, in his view, which brings about his hedonistic worldview; if everyone just wants to fuck me because I’m rich and have a Crest, then why does anything matter? And the three people who he can trust to not manipulate him - Dimitri, Felix, and Ingrid — are all shades of fucked up by the Tragedy of Duscur. We never really see the exact details in game about how the friend group was fractured aside from Felix and Dimitri’s falling out, but there is obviously some very bad blood in the group of friends aside from Sylvain. Because Sylvain knows no other way to navigate the world besides manipulation, he is emotionally manipulative to his friends.

He also matches Dorothea with his distaste for war. He was raised in a warrior culture and was expected to be a fighter on the front lines of his province, but he seems to loathe it! Regardless of route, Sylvain seems pretty miserable and has fallen into nihilism along with his hedonism. While he does not desire to be dead like Dimitri, he doesn’t really see his life as particularly worth having, either.

The most affirming thing about Sylvain is how Mercedes gets through to him on a human level in their supports. Aside from Mercie, Sylvain never truly expresses his feelings to anyone, but Mercie, with her calm demeanor and genuine care for other people’s feelings, breaks through Sylvain’s bullshit barrier with a mix of callouts “Sure, sure” and empathizing with him because of her experience with her own family being used as Crest pawns. This is the one place that you feel good about Sylvain’s future, both in terms of depression and his worth as a human being.

Gilbert

Gilbert, unlike the rest of the people on this list, is an older man, and thus his manifestations of depression and anxiety scan a bit differently than the younger people in the cast. When I described the Faerghus Man in this topic, I was basically describing Gilbert. Gilbert, after the Tragedy of Duscur, abandoned his family and knightly vows because he failed his king in allowing him to die. Ever since then, he has been repenting for his sin by cutting off his family, refusing to contact them or reach them by letter. As far as they know, he is dead.

Pre-timeskip, he is a knight serving the Knights of Seiros, and he has a gloomy, joyless expression on his face all of the time. As the game goes on, we learn that his daughter, Annette, has followed him to the monastery to try to locate her father, who has been missing for four years. She confronts him about his absenteeism, begging him to return to their family. He responds with “if you want me out of your life forever, just say the word”.  He seems to approach the world with the baseline desire to give up his life, because of his shame and guilt for allowing his king to die on his watch. Dimitri and Annette both try to convince him otherwise, and tell him how much they like him, but he doesn’t care. He is so buried in his own shame, guilt, and self-loathing that he just shuts down any attempt to help him or cheer him up.

Post-timeskip depends on route. In CF, he dies in the last battle, to honor his king (probably Lambert rather than Dimitri…), he doesn’t appear in VW, and in SS, he tries to recruit the Knights, but fails, says that he is going to fight a lost cause, and presumably dies. In AM, he finds Dimitri and works with him, but is unable to stand up to the delusional prince. He see him fall into even more despair because he believes that Dimitri is the only hope for the kingdom, and he is watching his former pupil spiral down a self-destructive road. I wouldn’t say he becomes more depressed as much as his behavior is confirmation of the ever-present dourness that emanates from Gilbert. Unlike the younger cast members, who hopefully would have more hope of recovery, Gilbert feels like he will be stuck in a depressive, self-hating spiral for the rest of his life.

The most affirming thing about Gilbert is how legitimately proud he seems of Dimitri as Dimitri recovers from his own mental illness. After seeing Dimitri recover, at least someone has finally been able to move on from the Tragedy.

Marianne

An honest confession is that I really didn’t like Marianne after watching a lot of her supports. Unlike Dimitri and Bernadetta, whose manifestations of anxiety and/or depression felt very familiar to me, Mariann’s did not. I felt like Marianne was the media caricature version of depression; she is sad, she looks downcast, and someone inevitably comes to rescue her from her sadness, and she cheers up. There is a repetitiveness to her supports which I find grating, most of which start with her Being Sad (C) and then her antisocialness causing tension (B) and then ending with Marianne feeling Affirmed About Life Now, Thanks (A). I don’t really like invoking the word ‘waifu’, but to me, she felt like someone who was designed to cater primarily to men who wanted to save a sad girl, rather than the focus being on an accurate and complex portrayal of depression. I also felt that her reasons for depression are underexplored and mostly seem to be rooted in superstition, which is quite unrelatable and for me not very interesting compared to the more complex things that motivate other characters.

Now, while I still have those complaints and am not fan, I have seen multiple people who suffer from depression say that they relate to Marianne and I respect that not everyone’s mode of depression and anxiety is the same as mine. I like her support with DImitri because it is fullblown depression and questioning the value of one’s own life, on display, for all to see.

Ignatz

Ignatz is another case of a character who suffers from anxiety without necessarily suffering from depression. Like Bernadetta, he has responsibilities placed on his shoulders, and he finds them to be oppressive. We see his anxiety interfere with his relationship with Raphael, because he carries the guilt of the death of Raphael’s parents on his shoulders, even though objectively his feelings are somewhat irrational. And Lorenz offers him a sweet deal; become a knight who does art, but Ignatz is uncomfortable with getting help from Lorenz, so he waffles about it. And Lysithea… woof. She is brutal to the poor boy, and more than anything, you just wanna give him a hug. Also, Claude is a dick to him and I want to dunk Claude in a toilet. I feel the same way about people being mean to Ignatz as I do about people being mean to Bernie; just stop! Although  don’t have as strong feelings about Ignatz as I do about Bernie.

The most affirming thing about Marianne and Ignatz is their support together, which is very sweet, loving, and genuinely adorable. I hope they are happy together. <3

Other characters who have some various social issues include Linhardt (bored and sleepy all of the time, but likely short of depression), Felix (pushes everyone away to build a giant wall around himself to hide from his awful culture) and Hubert (gets off on creeping people out and has some daddy issues). I think these characters fall into a slightly different category than on the anxiety/depression spectrum, but all three are certainly a bit off-kilter at the very least. Lysithea and Dedue are both characters who are holding up pretty well all things considered, but seem like they could crack as well sooner or later.

Thanks for reading. <3
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 05:55:09 PM by Luther Lansfeld »
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
The Portrayal of Women in Three Houses - Part 1 - General Musing
« Reply #22 on: May 17, 2020, 04:17:18 PM »
The Portrayal of Women in Three Houses - Part 1 - General Musing

It’s been a while since I’ve posted in this topic, so I decided to tackle an oldie but a goodie for Ciato mainstay topics. If you’ve read some of my previous posts on Ys 8 or Trails in the Sky, you know that I am interested in how women as a whole are portrayed in games.

What I think Three Houses does well on this front is that its story is fundamentally centered on two women: Edelgard and Rhea. Above all other characters, these characters are essential to the story and undeletable in a way that no one else is, not even the male protagonists Dimitri and Claude. Edelgard is a person of action and she is the one who precipitates the events that make the second half of the game what it is, and Rhea is the fundamental cause for what Edelgard does. Regardless of if you see them as heroes or villains or something in between, without these two, the game would not resemble what it is now. I find that having the two most important characters, the big plot drivers, as women in JRPGs is very rare.

Edelgard in particular is a character who has personality traits that are fairly male coded in the structure of many forms of media. She is strong-willed, ambitious, and has a vision for the future that she is really willing to do anything to achieve. She believes that her lofty goals and ambitions for the world are worth fighting for, even at the cost of her humanity. She has accepted that history may see her as a villain, but she is willing to pay the price. She reminds me of a variant on Jowy Atreides, with some more protagonist style development due to having more screentime and a role as a main character. I could dissect the similarities and differences between the two characters, but both are driven more by a goal for the world at large than personal advancement, and both are willing to do everything to achieve it. While not as reminiscent of other characters of this archetype, she fits into an array of morally grey, hyper driven characters from various RPGs I’ve played who are almost exclusively male. She is methodical, logical, and presents her cases, especially in her own supports and interactions with her allies. She sees the church as a rotting institution of oppression, greed, and tyranny and she wants to -destroy- it and build a better world in its place. These ambitions are often only ones that men are allowed to have, at least as fervently as Edelgard does.

While I think the role that she plays in the story is male-coded, she espouses rampantly left-wing ideology, and there is a sense of catharsis in her extreme measures to deal with a corrupt, authoritarian regime, especially in the age of Trump. Because her character work, along with her placement on the LBGTQ+ spectrum (more on that later), she evokes strong emotions in a group of people who tend to enjoy the crushing of traditional gender roles, which makes the choice of Edelgard as female a rational choice on the part of the writers. Still, in a series that tends toward being too conservative and traditional with its gender roles, Edelgard is a breath of fresh air. While she does have to share the spotlight with the two male leads, she feels elevated above both in importance, and not because she is a plucky underdog (sorry Eirika, I still love you too!).



Also, can we throw the ‘girl pose’ with the hands demurely on the chest in the trash forever?

One interesting part of Edelgard is that she grapples with being strong versus being vulnerable, which feels like a more feminine character arc, especially for a female ruler, but it is often not a story told about a protagonist ruler. There are some subtleties about the way the story navigates the character; she is a (relatively) petite woman, thin and 5’2”, but she stands proudly and strong and projects herself in a way that often makes you not notice her small stature. As mentioned before in Hubert’s writeup, I think the game goes through pains to ensure that Hubert never feels like he is trying to dominate her or usurp her authority in any way, and he often blends in the background of their scenes together, which feels like a very deliberate scene direction choice. He is her sub-ordinate and that is all he desires to be. The female ruler who is considered ‘out of her league’ by her male peers has already been tread before even in this series (hi Elincia) and is a pretty common trope, so the fact that the game doesn’t dwell on this issue is rather refreshing.

Rhea is a bit more traditional in design, but she makes up for it by being a psychotic tyrant who does crazy science experiments to try to resurrect god. She feels like a much more realistic, less baby-eating version of the evil pope, and that is, again, way more often than not, a male’s role. I think her methods of control (more subtle) as well as her general sense of tranquility that she brings are both more feminine traits, which partially contribute to her being more sympathetic than your average evil pope (along with her tragic backstory, of course). She is powerful and domineering and in general just as ruthless as your average evil pope.

Of course, I don’t think women need to play roles traditionally occupied by men to be valid. Lysithea feels like female students that all teachers have seen before; driven, interested in knowledge, high-achieving, and perpetually annoyed with the distractions around her. She is ruthless and cutting. I love her line to Sylvain “Ah, so it isn't my age that's to blame for you breezing over my wishes. It's my gender.” She can smell bullshit from a mile away and isn’t afraid to tell you about it. Hilda is a full tilt manipulator; flirting is the first step in her playbook, but unlike many of these other characters who are often portrayed as kind of stupid outside of their flirting skills, she is smart and cunning and can manipulate on other levels (see Marianne, Lorenz). One of the interesting things about her and Claude is that they are the gendered mirrors of each other; he is intellectually manipulative but struggles to be empathic and doesn’t always understand how people tick emotionally, whereas Hilda has no interest in politics but can navigate feelings and emotions very well.

The game, unlike many fantasy settings, discards the idea of a nominally egalitarian society, and embraces that it exists in a patriarchal culture. But unlike in most fantasy media, where patriarchal culture is used as an excuse to focus solely on the lives and doings of men, it gives itself space to examine the effects of patriarchal societies on women. The women of Faerghus - Ingrid, Annette, and Mercedes — all endure the residual effects of the male dominated culture that they grew up in. Ingrid has a pretty simple character concept; a woman who wants to be a knight in a world where women are used as bargaining chips for marriage. When I was in Grade 6, I read ‘The Lioness Quartet’ by Tamora Pierce about a girl who disguises herself as a boy in order to become a knight, and she goes through trials and tribulations as she tries to disguise her identity, and later grapples with misogyny as a result of being the ‘girl knight’. Ingrid takes a different path and chooses to live the way she wants and by her own rules, rather than trying to pretend she is something that she’s not. The interesting thing about Ingrid is that she is very innately law-abiding and lives strictly by the codes of conduct; she is very stiff and formal compared to most of the other characters in the game, but she is fiercely determined to break through the ceiling and to become a knight. She has trouble expressing how she feels about her father’s meddling to her male friends, who either don’t care about the plight of women like Sylvain or will use it to get under her skin like Felix (he tells her to ‘get a husband’ in response to her talking about wanting to be a knight). In the case of Dimitri, he tries his best to uplift her and to see her as an equal but does not fully comprehend the extent to which the pressure from her father affects her life. And she has trouble confiding in him because of the complicated relationship between lord and knight, which is the lens in which she views their relationship, and perhaps subconsciously because she believes he may think the things her father thinks, even if he won’t express them. (For what it’s worth, I don’t think Dimitri feels this way. I get the feeling Dimitri respects the hell out of Ingrid and is angry with himself when he treats her badly.)

On the other hand, she finds a female friend that she can confide in: Mercie. Both she and Mercedes are used as bargaining chips by their respective fathers for marriage, but both are fiercely independent and try their best to navigate a misogynist world. They are not face-stepping bitches like Lysithea and Edelgard or punch-throwing sasslords like Dorothea, but they are both strong in their own way. And god both are good at cutting through bullshit. Mercedes comes off as very feminine; she is very understated in her often pointed but subtle insults at some of the more insufferable men in the cast, namely Lorenz and Sylvain, and she gently mocks Ferdinand for being a bit of a twit. I think Mercie is a character that I didn’t appreciate at first glance but there are a lot of subtleties to her character that makes her more enjoyable than I thought. Mercie is quite adaptable and has a flexible view of morality, which comes primarily from her troubled backstory and being related to a serial killer. (And I should mention that, while her ties to said serial killer are a part of who she is, she is not solely defined by those ties.)

Annette seems to have not been used as a bargaining chip by her uncle because of her Crest; whether it be due to age, respect for Annette’s father, or the lack of desperation that the Galatea family has due to financial concerns, she is not really in the conversation as a bargaining chip for marriage. I can’t definitively say that Annette’s relationship with her father should be viewed negatively from a feminist lens, but he definitely elevated his feelings (I need penance!) over the feelings of his female family members. I wonder if Gilbert abandoning his wife and daughter would have been done if he had a son instead? (And if Gilbert were a woman who abandoned her children, I feel like she would be looked upon with more scorn. But let’s not get into that.) I’m not as satisfied with Annette on this front; she is strong and independent, but she does have the rather irritating female character trait of tripping, which I’m not sure I’ve ever met anyone who actually likes this trope. Oh well.

Dorothea is one of the cast stars for a variety of reasons; she is outspoken, independent, funny, self-loathing, beautiful, and deeply skeptical of any bullshit that men have to sell. As I mentioned before in Dorothea’s writeup, she gets along beautifully with women in a display of female solidarity that feels much more realistic and resonant from my experiences. Fiction often likes to portray women as tearing each other down, but Dorothea lifts other women (Edie, Petra, Manuela) up, while having no patience for mansplaining (Linhardt, Ferdinand), gross men who see women as objects (Sylvain, Lorenz), and men who see her as nothing but a vapid gold-digger (Felix, Sylvain). She is intelligent and can trade barbs with the best of them; we see this in her supports with Sylvain, Felix, and Hubert. And her struggles are rooted in an aristocratic system which sees women as useful primarily for their sexual value and beauty, not their brains or kindness or anything else. The game doesn’t come right out and say it, but it is implied that both Manuela and Dorothea train in sword fighting for the purpose of fending off potential sexual assaults during their time in the opera. None of this ‘women are the same as men’ rawr girl power stuff. Women are strong and powerful and diverse, but they are not ‘the same’ as men. Dorothea cannot be switched in for an identical male character. It just doesn’t really work.

Petra is a woman who comes from a warrior culture which seems to emphasize combat prowess in all of its peoples, regardless of gender. While we don’t see much of Brigid, it seems to be more egalitarian than Fodlan, and she reflects this in her values. She is very philosophical about death and brings a unique perspective to a society which is both xenophobic and misogynist. Much like many of the game’s other female characters, she doesn’t fall into traditional gender norms and her frankness is, again, often a trait associated with male characters. I have wanted to use this descriptor so many times in this essay but I will use it here; Petra is fierce and unrelenting and holds firmly to her core values, while still keeping a feminine core; she loves braiding her hair and bonding with her female allies.

Bernadetta brings an alternate perspective to the story that no other character else does; the crippling anxiety and trauma that persistent abuse can bring, in her case perpetuated on her because of her inability or lack of desire to conform to ‘good wife material’. This is a very real and very pervasive idea that is drilled into many young girls; it is something I’ve both experienced and heard from other people, often only after digging deep or confessing my own feelings in the subject. The expectation to be ‘good wife material’, i.e., submissive and under heel, drives Bernadetta to severe anxiety, and we see that she is recovering from the trauma of her abuse after the timeskip.

Catherine and Leonie and Shamir also fall into the category of strong women who live for their own values, although I don’t have as much to say about those characters as I do about the others. Catherine and Leonie fall a bit more into a traditional tomboy trope, although I will give a shoutout to Leonie for owning the hell out of Felix for being a misogynist asshole to her. Shamir is closer to Petra in sentiment but less well-developed. There are also women who fall into a bit more traditional female roles, such as Manuela, Marianne, and Flayn, but stereotypes/tropes are fine if you represent a wider array of female personality types and experiences rather than making those stereotypes your sole means for representing an entire gender.

The game falters in a few places from a feminist front. One thing that stood out to me is how few of the older generation characters in the game are women and how few characters speak about being significantly affected by their mothers, compared to the many characters who have complex (often bad) relationships with their fathers. While they put a great deal of effort into representing the full spectrum in their playable cast, the non-playable cast aside from Rhea are largely male, although I will mention Judith in VW as well, who is reasonably important (although less important than Rodrigue in AM). Most of the influencers of character backstories are also male, mostly the fathers and brothers of the respective characters. Claude, Dimitri/Edelgard, and Dedue are about the only characters who talk about their mother figures in any meaningful way (Mercie/Bernie/Dorothea all mention their mothers in passing, but are influenced less by their mothers than their fathers by a lot).

But overall, I think the game did an excellent job of having strong, complex, diverse female representation. It is not afraid to tell stories about women specifically in the context of their oppression, but it does not let those women be defined by their oppression. Not every woman in the story is oppressed on the basis of gender (Edelgard would literally stomp on you if you tried shit with her), but it is a unifying theme among several of the women in the story. I think it is a power move from a social justice perspective to not make an egalitarian world, but nor is the theme of ‘girl power!’ so shoved down your throat that you feel like you are being talked down to like a four year old.

Part 2 is going to be my attempt to look at Three Houses through the lens of intersectional feminism; I will be discussing the representation of women of color and LBGTQ+ women, as well as a discussion of body diversity/body positivity in the context of the series as a whole. I will talk about both what I think was done well and what I think can be done better in the future.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2020, 07:25:34 PM by Luther Lansfeld »
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Luther Lansfeld

  • Global Moderator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5064
  • Her will demands it.
    • View Profile
Part 2 - The Intersections of Three Houses
« Reply #23 on: May 24, 2020, 12:53:53 AM »
Part 2 - The Intersections of Three Houses

In Part 1 I outlined why I think Three Houses is a good game from a feminist perspective; it highlights a variety of different female experiences and those experiences are variable, realistic, and generally interesting. Now I’d like to dig a little deeper into its representation of women outside of white (or whatever hybrid of white and Japanese you want to call it, but Fodlan is clearly evoking a European feel in particular), straight, cisgender women. As a white person and a cisgender person, I obviously have trouble speaking to the full extent of people’s experiences from other perspectives, but I am going to try to dissect things to the extent that I can and compile ideas that I’ve gleaned from people with more expertise than me.

There are two women from outside of Fodlan, Petra who is from the island nation of Brigid and Shamir who is from a neighbouring country of Dagda. In the case of Petra, we learn that Brigid is a nation of warriors regardless of gender. I feel like this is a fairly common trope for representation of outsider nations; that unlike the European-style ‘main’ country, the outsider country is warlike and egalitarian in that warrior-like culture. I think Petra is a really cool character and offers a very interesting and unique perspective to the game, and not just as a way to develop the main setting of Fodlan. The game obviously has a great deal of respect for her and I find her views refreshing and frank without being rude. One contentious thing about Petra is that she speaks in broken English; it isn’t really a parody of broken English in an offensive way, but feels like the way someone might actually develop language skills if they were pretty far along the path. I know that some people find it offensive, but I personally didn’t find it so. My biggest specific complaint about Petra is that she should have been integrated into the main plot more seamlessly rather than feeling like a pure side character. I am also not sure about how I feel about Petra being so accepting of her circumstances as a hostage of the Empire; she rolls with it pretty well, but I would have liked to have seen a bit more vulnerability on that front. (You could do a similar dissection with Dedue and draw a similar conclusion, but they explore the issue of oppression due to race deeper with Dedue, even if it isn’t as focal as it should have been.) Race and xenophobia don’t seem to be things that she deals with on a character level, and that feels a bit off to me.

Shamir is also a warrior, a mercenary from a distant land. Unlike Petra, from whom we learn a lot about her background and home country, we learn very little about Dagda, partially because Shamir is not a very well-developed character, much like many of the other Church-aligned characters. She is unquestionably ‘cool’ and supposed to be a canonical badass, but I don’t have a great read for her personality compared to many other characters in the game, and particularly her opinion on her own homeland.

In my opinion, it would have been nice to see a woman of color represented in the (main) game who isn’t a warrior. Many more versed people in race theory than me have written about how white women are often considered to be fragile and dainty whereas women of color are not viewed as delicate, often portrayed as ‘manly’ and tough rather than weak (this as a way to justify the treatment of black women in the time of slavery, as well as I’m sure many other things…). This game seems to reinforce that stereotype; that the white women experience the effects of a patriarchal society, but women of color are not viewed within that same lens within the game, despite the fact that all women suffer from patriarchy in real life, and often women of color experience it in a different way than white women do.

The other thing I would have liked to have seen is more representation of women of color; I think with the setup of three different nations that you could have made one of the nations made up of people of color rather than three variants of Euro-white-person-land. I understand that the game uses Claude’s brownness as a indicator of his mixed heritage, but I think they could have made the Alliance less European without too much change at all. And I would have liked to have seen more variation in the skin color of the women of color. Dedue is significantly darker skinned than any of the women, and Claude and Cyril are both dark-haired whereas Petra and Shamir both have anime purple/blue.




And Dedue, for reference:



Shamir is very light-skinned but reads to me as very Asian, although if she wasn’t from a foreign country I might just see her as white; Petra is darker-skinned but still not very dark. Whereas Dedue is very distinctly dark-skinned.

The DLC added a new character, Hapi, who is the darkest skinned women in the cast.


Unlike Petra and Shamir, who are from a foreign land, Hapi is from Faerghus, but she lives in a distant, isolated village. As Elly pointed out, she seems to be channelling a bit of a Romani vibe, although obviously in a different context. Perhaps this is a response to complaints about the lack of color diversity in its female cast? She is an outsider and quite independent; less of a warrior woman and more of a snarky bitch, which fits the general vibe that 3H goes for with its women. Women of color suffer significantly from having their attractiveness judged based on the color of their skin by mainstream society, and 3H does us a disservice by not bucking that trend. Like, have actually black women instead of ‘vaguely dark-skinned but might be tanned’. For a game that is progressive on many fronts, it could do better on this one. Three women of color is already a higher number than I believe the series has had previously, but I would love to see them continue to improve in future games and have more skin tone diversity.

LBGTQ+ female representation, on the other hand, is a place that the game has made significant progress compared to previous entries in the series. While there has been scattered lesbian characters (Heather) and some limited dating options (Rhajat, which is kinda weird btw) and some minor innuendo (Lyn and Florina), the series has been reluctant commit to having lesbian or even bisexual female characters. This game has three people who have same-sex female endings with Byleth: Edelgard, Dorothea, and Mercedes.

Edelgard can marry both gender avatars characters and otherwise seems to have some romantic chemistry with both Manuela and Dorothea, although the game is not explicit about the relationship between either in their endings, whereas it is more explicit with both Ferdinand and Caspar. Edelgard strikes me as someone who has a bit more natural affinity for women than men overall, but I can see her as bisexual pretty easily considering the bulk of her work.

Dorothea is the same (has some romantic chemistry with Edelgard/Manuela), but her romantic chemistry with Petra is much more in-your-face and less coded in subtext. Dorothea also isn’t all that fond of the men that she talks with, although ends up marrying them if she gets the highest support rank with them. (Which always makes me feel a little gross, to be honest.) I feel like the game missed an opportunity with Edelgard and Dorothea’s relationship because the support is so so gay but the ending is ambiguous, and I’m not certain why they chose to make that decision. I think the game would have been better to just make Dorothea even more gay than she is and have her support with Edelgard lead to the ending it deserved. She even hits on Ingrid, the straightest woman in Fodlan! She is so clearly gay!

Mercedes reads to me as the least gay of the three women but can still hook up with female Byleth. She has some limited innuendo with Annette, but I would say it’s closer to the Lyn/Florina category than anything that the game is formally trying to push. I also want to throw in that, from what I’ve heard, many trans women resonate with Mercie compared to some of the cast’s other women, but I can’t speak too much to that. Just that I’ve seen it a few times before, related to both her voice work and her changing figure.

The three same-sex supportable women are diverse enough from each other that I am not really concerned on a representation front; Dorothea is a bit of a man hater, a common trope for lesbians in fiction, but she does it in a pretty funny and cathartic way, and I never felt like she was remotely problematic on that front (and I feel like her fanbase has a lot of lesbians, so I would say they agree with me). Edie and Mercie seem to be more just generally flexible, as does Petra. A shoutout to Petra for having a same-sex partner who isn’t the silent main!  Aside from the Dorothea/Petra, I feel like the most obviously lesbian pairing outside of Byleth is Catherine/Shamir, who have some serious lesbian energy, far beyond any pairing that the series has had before. Their ending is somewhat ambiguous, but they go on a journey together to Shamir’s homeland and beat up evildoers. And I wish that some of these ‘ambiguous’ relationships were instead explicit and really owned the queerness of the game in a much more complete way. ‘Going on a journey together’ feels like a slippery way out of 100% committing to same-sex relationships (while still appealing to the fanbase who likes same-sex pairings).

Do I wish that the game would just have characters who only have same-sex relationships? Yes, I think that would be a good thing. It feels cowardly and pandering to people who want plausible deniability about homosexuality in games, and with Dorothea as an example of a woman who feels like she vastly prefers women over men, it felt like a chance to have a primarily homosexual character that they ended up not going with. The Edelgard / Dorothea support stands out in particular as “this really should have led to a romantic ending”, considering how non-traditional Edelgard is, how attracted to Dorothea she seems to be, and how Edelgard clearly does not care about producing an heir, because she wants to rid of the inheritance system altogether. As more and more young people are questioning both their sexuality and gender, it would be nice to see media that can respond to that. Again, having bisexual characters is desirable, but having homosexual characters represents a wider spectrum of the experience of people as a whole. I would also like to see more trans and/or genderqueer characters in games, and as 3H seems like it has acquired quite a progressive fanbase (at least in the West) due to its appeals on those fronts, I feel like the series could have more queer representation.

As for the subject of body diversity… well. I actually feel like 3H is less progressive on this front than many other Fire Emblems, which often have at least one or two quite tall women and one or two non-conventionally attractive women in its PC cast. Aside from Flayn, who has an appeal on a dragon girl front for being cute, all of the women are reasonably attractive, and there are certainly no women as ugly as Vaida or Dorothy. And I noticed that very few of the women are notably above average height, whereas many of the male PCs are. This reinforces stereotypes in both directions, presuming that the game focused on conventional attractiveness as one of its vectors (and it clearly did). The tallest woman in 3H is Catherine at 5’9”, which honestly isn’t that tall for a woman - and if you take the equivalent height for a man, which is about 6’2”, there are several men who are there or above — Dimitri, Hubert, Lorenz (all 6’2), Hanneman, Raphael (6’3”), Balthus (6’6”), and Dedue (6’9”). (We could also discuss this with respect to male beauty standards on the flip side, but I feel less qualified to talk about that). And as in many other RPGs, there is an absence of overweight characters but particularly women. There aren’t really even any ‘buff’ women; even Catherine and Shamir are quite lean, despite there being some space to make them buffer. If Dorothea is your idea of a ‘curvy’ woman… yeah, not really.

Watching Indivisible after playing 3H, I was struck at how much better Indivisible does on the front of both body diversity and having women of color. Indivisible does a great job with its diverse cast, and although less romantic-based than 3H, seemed to represent a spectrum of queerness just fine. (The game doesn’t have very good character work or plot, but it is exceptional on diversity.) I would look at Indivisible, but well written, as a roadmap to the future. (And please make sure that you consult those groups during your work and include them on your staff too!)

Part 3 is going to focus on the male characters in Three Houses and their relationships with women.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2020, 01:03:00 AM by Luther Lansfeld »
When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other...
There’s no need for gods.

http://backloggery.com/ciato

Profile pic by (@bunneshi) on twitter!

Fudozukushi

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1552
  • Born to hunt Death Knights
    • View Profile
Re: Three Houses and Politics
« Reply #24 on: May 24, 2020, 04:24:37 AM »
As usual the gayness of it all was subdued compared to the JP.  Along with a lot of general purpose flirting too.  One of Edelgard's Tea Time lines where she flirts with Byleth was outright cut in half.

Also apparently Shamir's first love was ambiguous in Jp.

Petra's broken speaking is another ENG thing.  Since she otherwise just takes it slow and steady.

I think part of the reason for a lack of diverse body types is due to the lazy way the game handles class changing.  All class-changed PCs just use modified generic classes for their own.  This normally isn't that big a deal because everyone has that same body type.  But it came to my intention when Constance suddenly doubled in width because her uniform model is actually incredibly skinny.

The comment on Edelgard's height is by far one of my favorite bits.  The way the game's camera focuses her, as either in command and powerful or vulnerable just on the tilt of the view is amazing.

I think as it is only maybe one PC doesn't have his father mentioned at some point (though I'm including lumping parents in as a mention).  Certain characters definitely feel like they should have some relationship with their mother considering how completely opposite their father they act.  And someone like Sylvain should have an incredibly strained relationship with his.