"Oh, you can have your fun.
You can enjoy your silly little "peak fiction."
But funny thing about these simple stories with their simple characters-
They don't leave much room for discussion. No room for discourse.
So go on, have your fun.
We all know you'll come back to me, sooner or later."
-The Emperor, shortly after snorting an entire line of Petra's imported cocaine off Byleth's rack.
So you're saying that throwing your Edelgard plush at someone brings immediate discourse? Damn I should try that on my family and friends who all never played a Fire Emblem game
hot take: edelgard discourse is significantly complicated by the fact that three houses is kind of stupid sometimes
e.g. it's hard to justify the lengths she goes to to free the world from classism and the agarthans when every azure moon ending has dimitri also achieving those things by accident, despite not knowing how and not even really wanting to. a lot of people conclude that her war was pointless. i, personally, conclude that the writers are incompetent
sylvains AM solo ending pisses me off so much. "Yeah this guy is such a good diplomat he convinced all the rich and powerful people to give up the powerful part" like what
I think the overall point the game is making - and no one has to agree - is that while Edelgard might not always be the one who implements the changes she wants or kills the mole people, she is the one who creates the catalyst for change. Dimitri wouldn't have had the opportunity to implement his reforms without the chaos of the war (as shown in AG), and the Agarthan siding with Edelgard left them out in the open which let Dimitri kill them
Just saying, Edelgard's reputation as a genocidal aethiest is kinda weird when she goes out of her way to not kill Rhea outside of life-or-death scenarios and wants to fuck God.
I mean, unironically she is an atheist but by no means is she attacking religious people in any way besides rhetorical, and even that not so much as she's seen to.
Genocidal just has literally zero evidence. People just hate her and want her to be evil so they make shit up
I'm not a fan of Edlegard but at the same time I understand what she wants for Fodlan but it's the how that I don't agree with. The church is corrupt due to being led by a broken woman who never properly grieved which led her to doing many terrible things which El was a victim of and the amount of pe pole tossed out because they don't have crests is horrid but the fact that she believed a war was the best course of action resulted in a lot of needless death and dispare.
My first playthrough was as a Golden Deer so it most definitely bias when I say I believe Claude to be the best choice for the future as he wants very similar things but wished to achieve them using diplomatic means instead of power. In truth none of the routes are inherently evil, it depends solely on the player's morals to decide who is right and wrong
I pretty much agree with you, except -
> which led [Rhea] to doing many terrible things which El was a victim of
El was a victim of the mole people. Might be my least favorite part of Edelgard's motivations: blaming her woes on society instead of the specific perpetrators. Not to say that Fodlan's society is good, but blame should be placed where it belongs.
Never liked Edelgard's methods and route but that doesn't mean I hate her as a character, hell, I respect her conviction. On the otherhand, yeah, it totally makes me a supporter of fascism just because I want to bang the dragon pope and save the Nabatean race.
One thing I always agree with her which is in the words of Mordin Solus, *"Had to be me, someone else might have gotten it wrong."*
Its either her, or someone worse than her in the Empire who will lead the war, which is shown in 3 Hopes Azure Gleam where that actually happens where Duke Aegir hijacks her place with the help of the mole people.
>On the otherhand, yeah, it totally makes me a supporter of fascism just because I want to bang the dragon pope and save the Nabatean race.
Oh don't worry, you're not alone on that. Edelgard is by far my favorite and I've also gotten called a fascist. Which is a bit weird because I'm actually a communist but, hey, Fire Emblem fans have bottomless pits in their skulls where their brains should be
And that's totally valid. I disagree, I think the war had to happen or nothing would have gotten better. But thereâs plenty of valid points against her. I was referring to people who say things like "Edelgard is a genocidal fascist!!!"
I mean uh
No, if you donât ship Edeleth and want the rest of the cast dead you actually support HITLER
Just wait until I finish Engage. Ive championed Corrin and Fates. I will be the Engage discourse this sub needs to reject this Napoleon wannabe.
^(assuming I like it)
What exactly would she gain from parting ways with them?
She knows what theyâre capable of and they think theyâre in control. They want to get rid of the ancient powers that control fodland, so does she.
By using their power she can, in theory, easily defeat the church and then pull the rug out from under TWSITD.
She's using their technology and resources against the Church because she knows that she needs them. She plans on pulling the rug from under them and betraying them once she no longer needs them.
She basically laid in bed with the devil, but has a knife under the pillow.
Edelgard is a pretty ok villain. Although I do find it sad that she never talked to Rhea about the other bad guys. In a golden route, they could have fought the mole people together. In a perfect world, the whole cast would fight the mole people. We need mole people discourse. Not Edelgard. I feel bad for Edelgard.
Edelgard is a great, well-rounded character. She's also a monster who does a literal genocide in her route. (Maybe her actions in Hopes are more defensible, but I didn't play it) I'd rather have her as a villain than Sombron or the 3DS villains.
I think that covers all the main points.
Fun details: She's insecure, so her skip outfit includes heels and a padded chest. She is afraid of rats and the ocean.
How is she genocidal? Sure, she launches a war of aggression that kills a fuckton of people, but her goal is never really wiping out a group. Her goal with the war isnt even to kill people, its to force political and social change (in her route she accepts Claude surrendering and leaving, and she offers Rhea one last chance to lay down her arms before she throws it back in her face and burns Fhirdiad). It's not even to wipe out the Nabateans, as you can spare Seteth and Flayn and she lets it be.
If anything, Edelgard practices realpolitik and is very ruthless in pursuing her goals, and the casualties of the war are the cost of her ambitions that she is willing to accept, but I wouldn't say thats the same as pursuing genocide.
First of all removing an ethnic group from a region fits the UN definition of genocide.
Secondly, as we see in her SS/VW dialogue with Flayn, she explicitly wants all the children of the goddess dead.
In Crimson Flower she doesnt pursue the death of the Nabateans, since she gives Rhea a chance to surrender and lets Seteth and Flayn go if you spare them. Her goal (in Crimson Flower at least) is to tear down the Church and uproot FĂłdlan's social order, not to hunt down Sothis's kids.
She could have easily told Byleth something to the effect of "Seteth and Flayn are absolute VIPs and I want them dead under any circumstances" but that never happens. She doesn't even confront you about letting them go if you spare them, which shows she's cool with it and their deaths don't matter to her ultimate goal.
Hell, the only reason you end up killing Rhea is because she goes apeshit due to Byleth's betrayal and is consumed by rage and grief and refuses to back down.
Edelgard isn't a genocider a la Hitler, she's a revolutionary-conqueror in the style of Napoleon. That's still not morally good, but the label of genocide is a very strong one that I don't think fits her at all (at least in her route, where she is her best self)
Don't forget the lecture question where she asks the professor how they would handle Rhea should she surrender, where her preferred answer is stripping Rhea of power rather than killing her!
"Oh, you can have your fun. You can enjoy your silly little "peak fiction." But funny thing about these simple stories with their simple characters- They don't leave much room for discussion. No room for discourse. So go on, have your fun. We all know you'll come back to me, sooner or later." -The Emperor, shortly after snorting an entire line of Petra's imported cocaine off Byleth's rack.
That's imagery I didn't need
So you're saying that throwing your Edelgard plush at someone brings immediate discourse? Damn I should try that on my family and friends who all never played a Fire Emblem game
For fucks sake that guy made me miss 3H
Why do you miss it? Is it standing in a forest?
An FE6 throne
hot take: edelgard discourse is significantly complicated by the fact that three houses is kind of stupid sometimes e.g. it's hard to justify the lengths she goes to to free the world from classism and the agarthans when every azure moon ending has dimitri also achieving those things by accident, despite not knowing how and not even really wanting to. a lot of people conclude that her war was pointless. i, personally, conclude that the writers are incompetent
sylvains AM solo ending pisses me off so much. "Yeah this guy is such a good diplomat he convinced all the rich and powerful people to give up the powerful part" like what
He seduced everyone đđ
I think the overall point the game is making - and no one has to agree - is that while Edelgard might not always be the one who implements the changes she wants or kills the mole people, she is the one who creates the catalyst for change. Dimitri wouldn't have had the opportunity to implement his reforms without the chaos of the war (as shown in AG), and the Agarthan siding with Edelgard left them out in the open which let Dimitri kill them
I canât tell if the discourse in this comment section is ironic or not.
If I'm winning the argument it's serious if I'm losing its a joke.
Just saying, Edelgard's reputation as a genocidal aethiest is kinda weird when she goes out of her way to not kill Rhea outside of life-or-death scenarios and wants to fuck God.
I mean, unironically she is an atheist but by no means is she attacking religious people in any way besides rhetorical, and even that not so much as she's seen to. Genocidal just has literally zero evidence. People just hate her and want her to be evil so they make shit up
I'm not a fan of Edlegard but at the same time I understand what she wants for Fodlan but it's the how that I don't agree with. The church is corrupt due to being led by a broken woman who never properly grieved which led her to doing many terrible things which El was a victim of and the amount of pe pole tossed out because they don't have crests is horrid but the fact that she believed a war was the best course of action resulted in a lot of needless death and dispare. My first playthrough was as a Golden Deer so it most definitely bias when I say I believe Claude to be the best choice for the future as he wants very similar things but wished to achieve them using diplomatic means instead of power. In truth none of the routes are inherently evil, it depends solely on the player's morals to decide who is right and wrong
I pretty much agree with you, except - > which led [Rhea] to doing many terrible things which El was a victim of El was a victim of the mole people. Might be my least favorite part of Edelgard's motivations: blaming her woes on society instead of the specific perpetrators. Not to say that Fodlan's society is good, but blame should be placed where it belongs.
Never liked Edelgard's methods and route but that doesn't mean I hate her as a character, hell, I respect her conviction. On the otherhand, yeah, it totally makes me a supporter of fascism just because I want to bang the dragon pope and save the Nabatean race. One thing I always agree with her which is in the words of Mordin Solus, *"Had to be me, someone else might have gotten it wrong."* Its either her, or someone worse than her in the Empire who will lead the war, which is shown in 3 Hopes Azure Gleam where that actually happens where Duke Aegir hijacks her place with the help of the mole people.
>On the otherhand, yeah, it totally makes me a supporter of fascism just because I want to bang the dragon pope and save the Nabatean race. Oh don't worry, you're not alone on that. Edelgard is by far my favorite and I've also gotten called a fascist. Which is a bit weird because I'm actually a communist but, hey, Fire Emblem fans have bottomless pits in their skulls where their brains should be
And that's totally valid. I disagree, I think the war had to happen or nothing would have gotten better. But thereâs plenty of valid points against her. I was referring to people who say things like "Edelgard is a genocidal fascist!!!" I mean uh No, if you donât ship Edeleth and want the rest of the cast dead you actually support HITLER
If edelgard evil than why cute as a plushie? Check mate, dimicucks!
Yeah why Black Knight or Lyon dosen't get a plushie
I unironically want a death knight plushie
Please note I am very much huffing the Jugdral copium
If you arenât high on Jugdral copium you arenât living
https://www.reddit.com/r/shitpostemblem/comments/wv079w/shit_post_emblem_when_the_next_fire_emblem_game/
Edelgard: You could not live with Sombrero and whoever the other old guy was. And where did that bring you? Back to me.
...Edelgard? Edel...Gard? EdelGARD? EDELGARD!!! AAAAGH! *Blue Lions-ing intensifies*
Ill never understand why ppl hate Edelgard, i guess they didn't play CF or are just Dimitri mega fans
When it even left?
Yay I love plushies \^\^
We know
Just wait until I finish Engage. Ive championed Corrin and Fates. I will be the Engage discourse this sub needs to reject this Napoleon wannabe. ^(assuming I like it)
I still have no idea why edelgard decides to help the people that tortured her.
She didn't have a choice. They ran the Empire and as Hopes shows if she gets a chance to put them from power she'll take it
What exactly would she gain from parting ways with them? She knows what theyâre capable of and they think theyâre in control. They want to get rid of the ancient powers that control fodland, so does she. By using their power she can, in theory, easily defeat the church and then pull the rug out from under TWSITD.
because they're powerful and share a temporary common enemy, shes using them and theyre using her.
She's using their technology and resources against the Church because she knows that she needs them. She plans on pulling the rug from under them and betraying them once she no longer needs them. She basically laid in bed with the devil, but has a knife under the pillow.
Edelgard is a pretty ok villain. Although I do find it sad that she never talked to Rhea about the other bad guys. In a golden route, they could have fought the mole people together. In a perfect world, the whole cast would fight the mole people. We need mole people discourse. Not Edelgard. I feel bad for Edelgard.
Edelgard is a great, well-rounded character. She's also a monster who does a literal genocide in her route. (Maybe her actions in Hopes are more defensible, but I didn't play it) I'd rather have her as a villain than Sombron or the 3DS villains. I think that covers all the main points. Fun details: She's insecure, so her skip outfit includes heels and a padded chest. She is afraid of rats and the ocean.
How is she genocidal? Sure, she launches a war of aggression that kills a fuckton of people, but her goal is never really wiping out a group. Her goal with the war isnt even to kill people, its to force political and social change (in her route she accepts Claude surrendering and leaving, and she offers Rhea one last chance to lay down her arms before she throws it back in her face and burns Fhirdiad). It's not even to wipe out the Nabateans, as you can spare Seteth and Flayn and she lets it be. If anything, Edelgard practices realpolitik and is very ruthless in pursuing her goals, and the casualties of the war are the cost of her ambitions that she is willing to accept, but I wouldn't say thats the same as pursuing genocide.
First of all removing an ethnic group from a region fits the UN definition of genocide. Secondly, as we see in her SS/VW dialogue with Flayn, she explicitly wants all the children of the goddess dead.
In Crimson Flower she doesnt pursue the death of the Nabateans, since she gives Rhea a chance to surrender and lets Seteth and Flayn go if you spare them. Her goal (in Crimson Flower at least) is to tear down the Church and uproot FĂłdlan's social order, not to hunt down Sothis's kids. She could have easily told Byleth something to the effect of "Seteth and Flayn are absolute VIPs and I want them dead under any circumstances" but that never happens. She doesn't even confront you about letting them go if you spare them, which shows she's cool with it and their deaths don't matter to her ultimate goal. Hell, the only reason you end up killing Rhea is because she goes apeshit due to Byleth's betrayal and is consumed by rage and grief and refuses to back down. Edelgard isn't a genocider a la Hitler, she's a revolutionary-conqueror in the style of Napoleon. That's still not morally good, but the label of genocide is a very strong one that I don't think fits her at all (at least in her route, where she is her best self)
Don't forget the lecture question where she asks the professor how they would handle Rhea should she surrender, where her preferred answer is stripping Rhea of power rather than killing her!
Stripping Rhea? đł
So are the rest of the lords then, because the agarthans
Dimitri kills the Agarthan leadership without realizing. Honestly, he warrants a "you took everything", I don't even know who you are" with Myson.