Gotta go to the Locked pages thread for that.
Eating a Vanilluxe will give you frostbite.
Team Rocket Boss.
Is Edelgard's Adaptational nice guy trope correct? Because this isn't exactly the same story as Houses, and because of different events, Edelgard is more nice in this one.
Nor is Three Hopes an adaptation of any sort. It's a What If?? alternative take on the story we saw in Houses.
If it was a movie of Three Houses where Edelgard is far more kinder than her game self, then the trope is correct.
Edited by RedHunter543 I'll teach you a lesson about just how cruel the world can be. That's my job, as an adult. Hide / Show Replies
I'd say that it's not correct. Not only because it's not an adaptation but is an alternative take (in the same way that the routes are alternative takes), but also because some of those better qualities listed in the trope are present in Three Houses. Remember that Linhardt and Dorothea both point out she can care too much at times, and Seteth and Manuela both point out that people follow her because of her better qualities.
The sad, REAL American dichotomy
Role Model
I wanted to remove the entry for Control Freak. That trope is only one interpretation of "losing control", which is clearly meant to mean something else in the original Japanese. Additionally, the entire entry itself is full of disqualifying points, and more exist. The only pro "control freak" example given is her choosing how she dies in Azure Moon, and we know from the game's main theme and elsewhere that she chooses to die not because of a loss of control, but to give the war a definitive hero in Dimitri and villain in herself.
The sad, REAL American dichotomy
So, I wanted to add another point to Ancestral Weapon, mostly regarding her weapon Labraunda from Three Hopes, as it is a Sacred Weapon linked to her Crest of Seiros. Would probably go something like...
- Played straight by her axe in Three Hopes, Labraunda, which is another Sacred Weapon linked to the Crest of Seiros. A conversation with a scholar NPC on Ch 9 of Scarlet Blaze reveals while most of the Sacred Weapons are controlled by the Central Church, several were lost with their whereabouts unknown and Labraunda was found as part of a concentrated search by the Empire before the war for such weapons. Given Edelgard lost out on Aymr due to severing ties with those who slither in the dark and the Church clearly wouldn't be interested in giving her the Sword or Shield of Seiros given her plans, it makes sense she would want a viable replacement in order to go toe-to-toe with the Heroes' Relics and Sacred Weapons of her opponents without a handicap.
The Social Outcast
Proposed an addition to the "Your Days Are Numbered" entry to state that her shortened lifespan is one of the reasons she resorts to extreme measures and immediate reforms: She wants to see her desired changes be made within her lifetime, and she knows she's running out of time.
So, anyone wanna update Edie's Magic Knight entry to account for her personal skill in Three Hopes, just like for Dimitri and Claude (Mage Marksman in his case)? In said game, Edelgard's attacks deal fire damage by default. I can't add it myself since her page is locked due to edit warring(?).
It's not just a boulder, it's a Rock. :^) Hide / Show Replies
I don't think that counts. I've been told she's an excellent Gremory in Three Hopes due to her spell list, but that doesn't make her a Magic Knight.
Team Rocket Boss.
Okay, i'd like to contest the Dark Messiah trope on Edelgard. Her MO is more knight templar than dark messiah.
1: She doesn't really try to convince the masses that she's their only hope like a Dark Messiah does, nor does she present herself as a messiah like say Kane. Her goal is to abolish the Church as a power and humanity's reliance on gods as shown in CF's finale, so the dark messiah aspect is contrary to her goals. She may see herself as the only one who can save the world, but it's vital that a Dark Messiah preach their message and present themselves as a savior hence coming of as an evil messiah, Edelgard is a hard core atheist and is aware she is doing dirty business.
2: She does not inspire fanatical loyalty at all in her troops like Kane of the Brotherhood does. Even Hubert is willing to go behind her back and prepare contingencies should she lose. The way she inspires loyalty is through her meritocracy ideals and actions as shown with Ladislava and Constance Even in CF, most troops don't really worship her or her beliefs like Felix, Sylvain and Marianne, they believe in Byleth who is more of a messiah than Edelgard is. Edelgard even admits to Constance the reason she didn't reveal herself as the Flame Emperor is because she knows the others would oppose her, a Dark Messiah is utterly convinced of their righteousness and would not be able to comprehend the idea of a sane person not following them.
3: At no point does she try to rally students against the Church or inspire people by presenting herself as a savior, she may believe herself the only one who can save Fodlan but she really doesn't focus on convincing people, even in CF where she prints out manifestos, It still doesn't inspire people to revere her personally and actually costs her allies. The laconic states A ruthless and often Ax-Crazy demagogue who obtains absolute power or otherwise secures the fanatical following of a substantial multitude by presenting themselves as a savior. Edelgard's power comes from her empire and troops loyal to her ideals not because they think she's a savior. And even the Agarthans view her as a pawn despite saying she's their greatest creation.
Edelgard isn't like Kane where she cultivates a cult of personality nor does she present herself as a holy savior to the masses come to strike down the wicked false Church. She's more mankind is superior to gods and doesn't need a messiah. She's an atheist, an imperialist who sees conquering Fodlan as the only way to a better future and does not care if people believe in her or not, she barely tries to convince Dimitri that she wasn't responsible for the tragedy. Calling her a dark messiah is a misrepresentation of her M.O and belief system. She's a knight templar and most of her archetypes also think they are the only ones who can save the world, but the Dark Messiah has religious trappings to the role and present themselves as a holy saviour which is what seperates them from knight templars. No one in the Empire is screaming " EDELGARD LIVES IN DEATH " like the Brotherhood.
Edited by RedHunter543 I'll teach you a lesson about just how cruel the world can be. That's my job, as an adult. Hide / Show Replies
In relation to this, Seteth (who initially speculates Edelgard could be trying to set herself up as some kind of false deity) later admits in Silver Snow that her followers are not loyal out of fear or any sense of extremism (I forget his exact words).
Maybe the entry's text could remain, but be moved to/added to the Knight Templar entry?
I think that would bloat the Knight Templar entry, and it already establishes the depths Edelgard is willing to sink to when achieving her ambitions.
Like even picking her side, isn't enough to stop her from waging conquest, she may do it more humanely, but she's still starting a war which is still going to kill a bunch of people.
At this point, Byleth on CF would be a better case of a Dark Messiah, given how the students rally around them than Edelgard and how they are the reincarnation of Sothis. Byleth IS the factor that decides if the rest of the Eagles are going to follow Edelgard after all.
Edited by RedHunter543 I'll teach you a lesson about just how cruel the world can be. That's my job, as an adult.
From the Dark Messiah page: "They'll usually be a Knight Templar, with enough good acts and intentions to stay from outright villainy, but they stand on very slippery and muddy ground."
DM and KT are not mutually exclusive tropes, so Edelgard being a better fit for one of them does not disqualify her from the other. In fact, being a KT actually strengthens her case to be a DM.
1. Dark Messiahs are presented as potential but ruthless saviors in the story, and since Edelgard thinks of herself as a savior of the world, that is enough. Despite the trope name, a Dark Messiah does not have to be religious, so Edelgard being anti-religious is irrelevant to whether or not she qualifies. From the DM page: "May or may not be secretly spreading the Religion of Evil," Also, atheists are people who don't believe in gods, but since Edelgard (correctly) believes that a goddess exists, she's not an atheist by definition. Naytheist and misotheist describe her more accurately.
2. You seem to be under the impression that having fanatical followers is a requirement to being a Dark Messiah, RedHunter543. While having a cult is common, it's not required. From the DM page "...but usually assembles a Cult around themselves..." Usually does not mean always. Some examples on the page, like Anakin/Vader, Loki, Daenerys (but she's only a DM in the final season) and Ultron do not have cults. I'm also not sure why you think a DM can't comprehend a sane person not following them because nothing in the article says that.
3. Dark Messiahs don't always have to be seeking followers. And how do you that her troops don't view her as a savior? In the Well-Intentioned Extremist video example on this page, Edelgard gives a rallying speech about getting rid of the church. Wouldn't you view someone trying to get rid of a corrupt religion as a savior? And if they're loyal to her ideals, wouldn't they view her as a savior?
In both your edit reason of your second deletion and in your first post here, you avoided acknowledging and/or disputing the criteria that Edelgard does meet to be a Dark Messiah. Let's go over some that criteria:
- Graduated from the school of Utopia Justifies the Means (wages a war to get rid of the church and crests because her version of a perfect world doesn't have them).
- A character with delusions of (or actual feats to back up) being a Messianic Archetype (believes that she's the only person who can save Fodlan and help all humans, and MAs always try to save a lot of people).
- Is a dark-gray character at best.
- Has Pet the Dog moments but ruthless enough to sacrifice the dog (she's a good friend in her support conversations and compliments Bernadetta in their B-support, but Edelgard is willing to light a hill on fire to slow down her enemies, even if Bernadetta is still on it).
- Underhanded tactics and preemptive strikes (hires bandits to assassinate Dimitri and Claude, her raid in the Holy Tomb before officially declaring war, uses demonic beasts, etc.).
I would also like to note that given the amount of times "usually," "may (or may not)" and other similar words/phrases are used in the article, and the diversity in examples on the article, Dark Messiah is a pretty flexible trope when it comes to who qualifies. Whether or not this is a bad thing and DM needs stricter, more defined criteria is a discussion for another day and thread. But for now, Edelgard meets enough criteria to be a Dark Messiah.
Edited by Kevjro7
I must say, that's well reasoned. I guess one could say trope definitions are sometimes more a art than a science. Thanks for taking the time to explain your argument in such detail.
Edited by Perentie
1. She doesn’t say that she’s the only hope outright to her follower, true. But she presents herself as the leader that will lead them to a new future and a united Fodlan which, of course, will entice Adrestians to follow her regardless of whether they worship her in a religious way or not. And as Kevjro and the example of Dark Messiah trope page pointed out, not all Dark Messiahs have to be religious.
2. Her followers are indeed fanatic, even if they don't necessarily share her exact thoughts. The whole point of Hubert is that he’s so loyal to her he’ll do anything for her sake even as it goes against what expected of him as long as it helps Edelgard in any way. Even his letter to your chosen is to ensure Edelgard has the last laugh against the Slithers, not because he is being nice to you for the sake of it. Ladislava more often than not just emphasizes on how she's indebted to El rather than the latter's ideals of meritocracy. Randolph is, well, glodyseeker Randolph who's willing to die for his master. It's true that her normal troops don’t really worship her or her belief of meritocracy but they do follow her into a continental war because of the other things she herself preaches that they believe in ("Church bad" and "glory to the Empire" as the two most forefront ideas).
Also, Edelgard knows others would oppose her, but that’s not necessarily exclusive from the fact that she’s convinced she's in the utmost right. A Dark Messiah can understand that others would not follow them, what makes the difference is that most normal people will ignore and let it go, but a [DM] will most likely force their way and idea onto the resister until they’re on their knees, which is exactly what Edelgard does.
Take a trope page's example, Homura in PMMM knows and understands that Madoka and others will not agree with what she’s done to her and the world, but the former didn’t care because ‘she knows best and everyone should take what she gives them’. Sounds familiar?
3. Like Kevjro said, DM don’t always actively seek followers, in many cases, people will flock to them if conditions are met. As a princess and then Emperor, Edelgard is in a perfect and natural position to have troops fledge their loyalty to her by default. With her speaking out against the church to give people a scapegoat for all the unfortunate things, and then with her conquest across the continent that appeals to their nationalism and a new sense of identity, Edelgard has essentially turned herself into a savior/revolutionist figure that people attach themselves to whether it’s intentional on her part or not. The fact that she makes the Emperor position into an absolute power doesn't help either.
Overall, you seem to think that a Dark Messiah must declare or actively think themselves to be a glorious and religious savior to be counted as a DM but it's not quite like that. A cult of personality can develop on its own without deliberation on the DM's part. What matters is the actions, and El has done many things and has traits that fit to be a DM, not just a Knight Templar.
Edited by Mei-may
Aah but on the second part, Edlegard does not see herself as a messiah, she views herself as the only one who can fix Fodlan by conquering, not by winning hearts and minds and does not present herself some messiah sent by Sothis despite having two vaunted crests.
The criteria i didn't take note of is too similar too generic Knight templar stuff, as you noted, and as for the examples you cited, there is very important context in the pages ignored, such as Anakin being the subject of a space prophecy and being called the chosen one. Something that is never applied to Edelgard, there is no holy trappings surrounding her nor does she ever have any messiah tropes to her which is an important part of the Dark Messiah trope. The examples you cited on the second part are not enough to fit the messianic archetype page, Edelgard does not view herself as the chosen by Sothis thanks to her crests for example.
At this point, this discussion has merely shown that Dark Messiah as a trope needs to be rechecked. Many villains would say they are the only ones who can save the world, such as Lex Luthor, but he isn't a Dark messiah and if we go by that logic, then every anti-villain would be considered a dark messiah. It is an important distinction that Dark Messiah's are either an evil counterpart to the messiah or are messiah's for an evil cause. A knight templar and a Dark messiah can be the same thing, such as Kane from Command and conquer, BUT Edelgard's M.O has little to do with presenting herself as the only option, her M.O is becoming the only option through conquest and crushing her opponents.
And as for how her troops don't see her as a saviour, look at the dialouges for the units in CF, guys like Sylvain and Felix don't care for the cause, and even Randolph who is born and bred Adrestian is out for personal glory rather than Edelgard's vision. People like Ladislava and Hubert who do respect her, and care for her ideals, are not worshiping her in a way befitting a dark messiah. At best, most of Edelgard's generic imperial troops view her as a way to make Adrestia the dominant power, and again, even the Agarthans who helped make her, view her as an expendable pawm, not evil jesus.
Again, most of the criteria you state that Edelegard fits are so generic, that it can apply to a majority of anti-villains, and what is the Dark Messiah if they are not a messiah of some sort?
Edelgard may fit some criteria as you state, but they are too vague and generic anti-villain tropes without the specific flavor of Dark messiah and merely expose a weakness in the criteria of Dark messiah. Kane of the Brotherhood, Edelgard isn't. By the logic of these posts, every knight templar is a dark messiah. Clearly Dark Messiah as a trope needs to be reevaluated to separate a clear Dark Messiah like Kane from a conqueror like Edelgard.
People like Walhart are worshiped like a god by the people under them, but despite Edelgard being based on his archetype, no one is labeling Edelgard as a goddess among mortals. The entire meaning of messiah has religious trappings and worship surrounding it, you cannot act like it's not a vital part of the meaning.
Edelgard doesn't even try to force people to fight for her unwillingly. She gives up trying to convince Byleth to join her once they merge with Sothis, and is shocked if CF is chosen, and repeatedly asks if the Black Eagles are sure they would fight with her without preaching or force.
Additionally, in routes where she's the clear villain, she implores Byleth to kill her to ensure peace instead of trying to convince them that she's what Fodlan needs, and in AM's ending, her attempting to stab Dimitri has been argued as a way to force him to kill her. These actions are contrary to what you cite as a dark messiah.
Lastly, if Edelgard under thos criteria fits Dark Messiah, then what about Ashnard or Arvis why don't they have Dark Messiah on their pages but Walhart does? Because Walhart unlike those three is explicitly worshiped by his followers as a god among men and that is what separates him from Edelgard who never venerates herself as a messiah and is willing to leave her throne to a successor, in VW admits she would have worked with Claude due to similar ideals, and admits defeat to Byleth in two routes, actions a Dark Messiah under the criteria you posit would NEVER DO.
Edited by RedHunter543 I'll teach you a lesson about just how cruel the world can be. That's my job, as an adult.
To add on the discussion, Edelgard has NO messianic archetype tropes which is a necessity for Dark Messiah as shown in the other discussion pages.
Besides, the trope is made redundant in that Edelgard already has a Satanic archetype trope.
Edited by RedHunter543 I'll teach you a lesson about just how cruel the world can be. That's my job, as an adult.
So i've been thinking while on the trope talk. With one of the definitions being a Messiah for the bad guys for Dark Messiah, perhaps we can rephrase the trope to emphasis how the Agarthans experimented on her to be the Dark Messiah for the Agarthans and lead to the demise of their enemies, but it's a more complicated example in that the Agarthans while they view her as their greatest creation, they still abuse her, while Edelgard may be willing to cooperate with them, still openly plots their destruction?
I'll teach you a lesson about just how cruel the world can be. That's my job, as an adult.
That certainly seems like it's a detail worth adding at least, as a big part of Edelgard's role is how some of it was manufactured/forced onto her. However, I'm expecting rephrasing the rest of the existing entry could meet with some resistance.
The Dark Messiah Trope Talk thread
seems to agree that this is the definition of the trope: A ruthless villain or Anti-Villain who presents themselves as a savior and preaches about creating a utopia. This describes Edelgard very well, so I'm content with the entry staying. If anyone has any objections to this definition, take them to the Dark Messiah Trope Talk thread.
On the Trope "Irony" being removed by @Vampire Bhudda.
Can it return in a new form please? Because there is really in VW no irony that is more delicious than Edelgard criticizing Claude/Khalid having not enough/sufficient knowledge, in order to rule over Fódlan, yet most of her knowledge is based on half-truths and flat-out wrong information, making her the one without sufficent knowledge to lead a continent.
Does the "Irony" still exist or can it be added again?
Edited by Tropetalker
So, anyone wanna update Edie's Magic Knight entry to account for her personal skill in Three Hopes, just like for Dimitri and Claude (Mage Marksman in his case)? In said game, Edelgard's attacks deal fire damage by default. I can't add it myself since her page is locked due to edit warring(?).
(edit: wait, I should start a new discussion)
Edited by KonoeJerry It's not just a boulder, it's a Rock. :^)
Got a discussion on cleaning up the page if anyone's interested:
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=16640351460A38867500&page=1
In response to an edit by Perentie today;
- I'm Not a Hero, I'm...: In Three Hopes Edelgard clarifies to Balthus in their B-Support that she is not compassionate, rather she is "hopelessly committed" to her ideals. She makes it clear on many occassions that while she sees the end goal as worthwhile, she does not regard the actions she takes even indepedent of the Agarthans as "good" in any typical sense, and even acknowledges (or at least doesn't argue against Shez saying it) that the world she is seeking to build may not even end up any better than the current Fódlan. After all, at the end of the day she did instigate a massive war of conquest and is on threat of death forcing subjugated nations in Fódlan to do what she wants, and she does not expect many who suffer from her actions will ever forgive her, nor should they necessarily do so.
This is pretty fine, but I feel like we can drop the last paragraph (from "after all" and onward) and lose nothing? It's just editorializing on her character, and Edelgard's character page in general is a mess of examples editorializing on her or having actual arguments from what appears to be multiple different tropers within the trope descriptions proper. This character page is in dire need of a cleanup, really.
Edited by Raxis Hide / Show Replies
I'm not necessarily against that, but for the sake of argument I just felt it made sense to acknowledge how often Edelgard in Three Hopes makes note that she did start and war and all that implies. I feel like some fans trivialize this part of her actions, and really got the feeling that the writers wanted it hammered in that Edelgard at least in her route acknowledges some downsides to what she is doing. To me it was quite meaningful when after their first battle Rhea said Edelgard would never be forgiven for what she is doing and Edelgard's response was to sincerely admit that she believes much the same about herself, and so wanted to make some mention of this in the entry. I might also argue that there are quite a few entries on her page in more need of trimming down than this one, but do what you think is needed.
Edited by Perentie
Mentioning that she started a war is fine, but your specific wording, "of conquest and is on threat of death forcing subjugated nations in Fódlan to do what she wants" feels overly argumentative.
Also, were you referring to their battle in Hopes? Because unless I remember incorrectly, Rhea accuses Edelgard of breaking the peace and Edelgard says she has no idea what Rhea is talking about.
On the last point, I don't intend to make sweeping changes unilaterally. That's something that'll require discussion.
Perhaps so, though its certainly how Hubert and other characters word what Edelgard is doing on multiple occasions (one of Hubert's standard start of battle lines is referring to Edelgard's "path of conquest"). They call it conquest and repeatedly note they are when necessary using threats of violence in order to get others to align with them. We could use tamer terminology, but I figured it was okay to use the words the game uses. Regarding the Rhea battle, the quote from Edelgard I mentioned happens right after Rhea is forced to retreat ("No, I don't suppose I will be," is what Edelgard says to herself regarding being forgiven if I recall right), the quote you mentioned happens when the battle starts with her.
Edited by Perentie
I'm taking issue with Great Keith's latest post here:
* And Then What?: In her A-Support with Ferdinand, he proposes to her that if she plans on destroying the current concept of nobility, then it must be replaced with something else. Edelgard's response all but states she hadn't thought that far ahead.
This is not true. Her support conversation with Constance shows she's actually thought quite deeply on what will follow removing the current concept of nobility, she's simply intrigued at the prospect of mass education that he proposes. Does anyone have a problem with this edit being removed?
Additionally, the same poster has created Nice Mean And In Between examples on Dimitri, Edelgard, and Claude (respectively). I don't think this really fits since there's no point in the story where this is appropriate for all three of them; Edelgard softens up and becomes considerably more friendly by the time skip, Dimitri becomes a cruel person to his former friends during the first half of the time skip, and Claude's "nice" aspects early on are an act.
Edited by Raxis Hide / Show Replies
Reading the support myself, it doesn't even sound like Edelgard didn't have any ideas what to do after, she was just more interested on hearing what Ferdinand had to argue.
Continue the bloodline, Fujimaru!
It's been nearly a month and despite the fact that I sent Great Keith a pm inviting them to discuss the matter here, they've yet to do so. I'm pulling the example.
Edited by Raxis
Tropers/Blackress and Tropers/Perentie are in dispute over this example:
- Failure Gambit: The combined events of Three Houses and Three Hopes' first chapters make it possible Kostas was intended to fail his mission to kill "as many noble pipsqueaks as possible" due to Edelgard deliberately luring him towards Remire Village (possibly counting on the same rumor Shez did about Jeralt's Mercenaries being there), and that the real reason he was hired to begin with was to scare away the teacher the Church intended to hire for the sake of having Jeritza claim their spot instead.
I thought it best to hash things out here to avoid an edit war.
Perentie's complaint being, "directly targeting students rather than teachers makes this rather different from "all but stated." I mean why even tell Kostas to kill as many noble students as possible when attacking the teachers would at least avoid putting so many teenagers in danger."
I see no contradiction with giving Kostas false orders, given he's an idiot and shouts that he has to kill at least one student when he gets agitated. Telling him something akin to, "just cause some trouble," would probably get him to book it once the battle started turning against him, stifling the effect of his attack.
"It's still possible Edelgard hoped to weaken the noble class by getting rid of some heirs."
This now seems unlikely. If she wanted Claude and Dimitri killed, why would she follow them into the forest and then do nothing to help them get killed?
"And while Edelgard knew of the village, she didn't know mercenaries were there (even Shez wasn't sure)."
Remire is still the most likely place to find refuge after Claude unexpectedly ran into the forest.
Hide / Show Replies
Good call man.
To me, the fact Warriors: Three Hopes reveals Edelgard was the one leading Dimitri and Claude on purpose towards Remire Village (the place which ends up saving them in Three Houses) despite the fact she hired Kostas to "kill as many nobles as possible" heavily implies the whole thing had been a set-up from the beginning. And while the theory isn't really new per se, the new evidence Three Hopes provides gives it a ton of ground to stand on (if not outright confirm it) compared to 2 years ago.
Frankly it just seems foolish on Edelgard's part to rely on so many guesses if her plan was really to just scare away a teacher and not get anyone killed. I think she's smarter than that. In Three Hopes one of the npcs in camp even notes that the only reason the rest of the students got out of the attack unscathed was because the house leaders led away the bulk of the bandit's forces (and since as far as we know this only happened because of Claude, it makes it harder to say this was part of Edelgard's plan). In my view at least Edelgard would have had more safeguards in place, heck in Three Houses she ends up almost getting killed. In Three Hopes we see how much she thinks things through, only attempting to rescue Monica because a bunch of specific circumstances coincided to make it feasible. She declares war on the Central Church only after two years of preparing her forces and using the Western Church to draw away a large portion of the Knioghts of Seiros, leaving the Monastery much less defended.
In contrast this supposed plan would rely on her being right that the teacher would run off, that Kostas or his men wouldn't get lucky and kill random students before she (or rather, Claude) could lead them away, that Kostas would actually send most of his men after a few students instead of continuing to attack the bulk of them, and that Remire would actually offer safety (as opposed to being relatively helpless against bandits like most villages in Fire Emblem are). And if she knew for sure mercenaries were there then she'd have to somehow be better at keeping track of Jeralt than Shez, and be sure they would actually be prepared and willing to help.
As for why she would join Claude and Dimitri in running away, it could be seen as suspicious if she was the only House Leader to not join in diverting the attack. And once she did run off with them it increased her survival chances to cooperate with them.
I admit the idea it was all planned is possible, but I take issue with it being said in a term as certain as "all but stated."
Edited by Perentie
Normally I would agree with you on that it would be wrong to call it an "all but stated" situation, but Warriors: Three Hopes also shows later in Edelgard's route that she had a very clear plan to save Monica, that the aftermath of Kostas' death was was definitively not your conventional miracle (which wouldn't fit her anyways since her present self isn't exactly whom you would call religious), and also that, per her own words, everyone ended up "exactly where we need them".
The chances Edelgard's scheme of hiring Kostas ended up being "just a happy accident" becomes very unlikely in retrospective after Three Hopes, in particular as Three Houses alone shows Edelgard is very much capable of playing the long game (ex:her whole coup against Duke Aegir and quick strike against the church after declaring war). And while there is room for argument that the whole thing could very well be a Retcon, the empty gaps of info filled by Three Hopes ultimately fit so well it might as well been there from the very beginning but removed because it wasn't relevant to the plot, which is something that actually happened during 3H's development if the last interview is anything to go by:
- Yokota: And Kusakihara-san is great with little details like that; I think it’s just incredible. You wrote out an extensive history for Fódlan from the beginning just to use as reference materials for development, even if we weren’t going to use all of it in-game. You’re the kind of guy that’d write about things happening thousands of years before the era the story would even take place during – that’s incredible.(…)''Kusakihara: I feel like all of the development team’s passion and investment in the project served as its foundation, and coupled with the massive amount of data poured into it, I think it really gave the game a life of its own.
If you want to change it back then it won't be that big a deal to me, but like with rescuing Monica I would advise adding that whatever Edelgard's initial plan was regarding the bandits she had to adapt it on the fly and the details remain obscure.
That is, it's made pretty clear that Edelgard didn't expect to be able to rescue Monica at all, rather she changed her initial plan a bunch because she realized that where the bandits retreated to and the fact that the church was sending Jeritza's class after them gave her an unforeseen opportunity. Her whole conversation with Hubert about it emphasizes repeatedly that it wasn't the original plan.
Apologies if you were not trying to say Edelgard planned to rescue Monica from the start. That said, her ability to quickly adapt her initial plan does now that I think about it make it more possible that the whole thing with Kostas was more complicated than an attempt to kill off nobles. I dare to hope that later in the game we might get something resembling a detailed explanation for her reasoning though, as the whole idea of doing all that just to make Jeritza a teacher of one house seems unwarranted. Yes it worked out great to save Monica, but again that was not the initial plan (said initial plan presumably still involving making Jeritza a house teacher). That is he was already teaching combat in the monastery, making him a house teacher on top of that would only give an added benefit on the off chance that a mission from the church involving the class he was in charge of would benefit her having influence over (unlikely considering most class missions are stated to not be any more consequential than killing bandits).
Fair enough. Neither game ever explains what exactly Edelgard planned to do with Jeritza's new position in her original plan, so if there are no issues, I'm planning to make the entry look like this:
- Failure Gambit: The combined events of Three Houses and Three Hopes' first chapters suggest Kostas' orders of "kill as many noble pipsqueaks as possible" was in likelyhood an elaborate scheme to scare away the teacher the Church intended to hire for the sake of Jeritza claiming his spot instead, and that Kostas wasn't intended to succeed at all. The fact the latter's death in Three Hopes gave Edelgard the opportunity to save Monica from the Agarthans was also another side effect in her favor.
The idea with it is to acknowledge that, while Edelgard's plan for Kostas isn't 100% explicit as one would like, his failure at killing the Three House leaders was, per the clues in-game, intended at the very least (notice how Kostas in this scene didn't knew he was gonna be chased by a Knight of Seiros, while Edelgard is instead focused on the one factor she didn't foresaw aka Byleth) (And yeah, I never said Monica's rescue was always part of the plan).
Team Rocket Boss.
I disagree with segregating Three Houses and Heroes tropes and here's why:
Heroes IS canon to their characters even if you disagree with the choices made.
Arguing it's an adaptational change to justify Edelgard working with non humans is nonsense since she still works with divine characters in gameplay AND story anyway. I'd argue it's more clarification than outright character change.
Like CF frames her as the devil to Seiros's divine themes. Dragons in FE and in eastern culture ARE divine influenced. A large part of her motivation is to abolish the church and what she sees as it's control over Fodlan.
Heroes IS canon to the series, even IS considers it a mainline game, so even if you disagree with characterization, it's still part of the canon and putting it in a separate folder is nonsense.
Like the point of heroes is to further expand on characterizations of the cast once their game is up and advertise said games. This is also to clarify and give depth to characters such as Grima during their confessions.
I say just put back the Heroes tropes into their main folders. Additionally if we go this course, then we have to add folder and pertinent tropes arguing that Heroes is an adaptation and not valid to the source material, such as Grima being a generic doomsday villain in Awakening but hinting at a then let me be evil and humans are bastards backstory in Heroes. As I have stated, arguing that tropes in Heroes is invalid to Three Houses just invites further bloat.
Edited by RedHunter543 I'll teach you a lesson about just how cruel the world can be. That's my job, as an adult. Hide / Show Replies
I really don't get why the Heroes tropes need to be put under a different folder in general (see: Claude's page). It feels like the person editing these 3H pages doesn't want to mix them together even though other pages do.
Continue the bloodline, Fujimaru!
Vampire Buddha has expressed contention in the forums over if Heroes is canon to the series and a valid portrayal of it's characers and disagrees with Edelgard's portrayal there, despite IS stating Heroes counts as a mainline game and that Brave Edelgard is a valid way of characterizing her conflict with Gods.
There is no need to put tropes in a different folder, and there are STILL tropes in Heroes that are in her main page like distaff counterpart noting that she has the same stat line as Walhart and that she intends to be the last of the Hresvelgr in power through blood.
Edited by RedHunter543 I'll teach you a lesson about just how cruel the world can be. That's my job, as an adult.
This has nothing to do with whether Heroes is in continuity or not. It's about the works in which tropes appear.
Let's take Adaptational Attractiveness. Fire Emblem: Three Houses is a game released on the Switch in 2019. It is the first appearance of Edelgard von Hresvelg, and is not an adaptation of an existing work.
Fire Emblem Heroes is a game originally released on Android and iThings in 2017 and updated more or less continuously since then. It's also not an adaptation, but Tropes Are Flexible so adaptation tropes can reasonably apply.
Fire Emblem Heroes has, by my estimation, five versions of Edelgard, one of which is her Final Boss form. In Fire Emblem: Three Houses, this form is a hideous monster
◊. It's different in Fire Emblem Heroes; in that game, her portrait is a human with some monster bits
◊. Hence, Adaptational Attractiveness.
So as we can see, Adaptational Attractiveness is not present anywhere in Fire Emblem: Three Houses, since it's not an adaptation of anything.
Adaptational Attractiveness is present in Fire Emblem Heroes, a separate game which is not Fire Emblem: Three Houses.
Therefore, it seems to me most logical that Adaptational Attractiveness should be listed somewhere on Videogame.Fire Emblem Heroes, which is the work it is present in, and not anywhere on Videogame.Fire Emblem Three Houses, which is not the game it is present in.
But the wiki hivemind thinks differently, so in that case, I feel like it makes the most sense that, if a trope or event is present in Fire Emblem Heroes and not in Fire Emblem: Three Houses, it should be listed in its own section.
The same applies to, for example Premortem Oneliner, which is often different in Heroes and in the source games.
Edited by VampireBuddha Ukrainian Red Cross
At the very least, the tropes applicable to or only "revealed' in Heroes should have their own separate folders. At the least. By all rights, Heroes tropes seem like the sort of thing that belong on the page for that game, but I'll admit that I'm unaware of any discussions of canonicity.
TBH, the trope pages for Heroes are really bloated as they are (mainly due to the various gameplay tropes), so just transferring character tropes there would bloat the pages even more and make it hard to pinpoint stuff. So character stuff that relate to the character should be on the regular character page, and I don't think they should be separated from the standard tropes (No, Kronya's Knife Nut trope should not be split up just because she is a Dagger user in Heroes). Though as a side note, I don't think Hegemon Edelgard fits Adaptational Attractiveness since we don't see her transform on-screen and probably would fit Adaptational Ugliness instead since we don't get to see her having the partially transformed state in 3H.
Continue the bloodline, Fujimaru!
Just weighing in. For the record, I don't care either way whether the tropes are segregated are not, but I do feel that they should be covered on the character pages because otherwise you're going to have a character page a mile and a half long on the Heroes page.
I suggest any character relevant tropes or information from heroes stay in their character pages, while tropes that have adaptational in the name, such as the aforementioned attractive/ugliness tropes just go to the Heroes Main page, tropes like the aforementioned attractive/ugliness can fit the main page and we don't need to make character pages for it.
As TPPR 10 has noted there are character tropes that should not be segregated like Kronya being a knife nut.
But something like Adaptational personality change does not really fit Edelgard, Dimitri or Grima who have their characters expanded/elaborated on in Heroes and isn't actually a change and in the case of Seiros, actually foreshadows her arc in SS. Character details should just be put in their respective troper pages.
Edited by RedHunter543 I'll teach you a lesson about just how cruel the world can be. That's my job, as an adult.
Thanks for the support, Nubian. Which, if any, games Heroes is in continuity with is irrelevant; my issue is that it doesn't make sense for tropes to be listed on the page for a game they don't appear in, while not being listed on the page for the game they do appear in.
Others: I agree that Characters.Fire Emblem Heroes should be restricted to the OCs and Anna. If it was up to me, I'd rearrange the rest of the tropes into categories, one of which would cover tropes applying to summoned Heroes that are not present in the base game, but I realise that's not a popular position.
Red brings up Grima being remotely sympathetic in Heroes. I'll take his word for it that is true, since my evil Robin is Lv 1/4*. However, that is something which is not present in Awakening, but is present in Heroes, so it's the sort of thing that should go in its own section.
If I may cite precedent to support my own position, look at how character tropes are handled on Videogame.The Legend Of Zelda Breath Of The Wild and Videogame.Hyrule Warriors Age Of Calamity. Age of Calamity was marketed and presented as the official prequel to Breath of the Wild, showing players the story of how Link, Zelda, and the original Four Champions defeated Calamity Ganon. But, in order to have a happy ending, the writers used time travel shenanigans to make things go differently. However, that time travel also brings in some characters directly from Breath of the Wild, so even with things happening differently in Age of Calamity's present, the future characters are explicitly, definitively the same ones from Breath of the Wild. However, even though they are the same characters, any tropes they exhibit in Age of Calamity are listed on Characters.Hyrule Warriors Age Of Calamity rather than on Characters.The Legend Of Zelda Breath Of The Wild.
Given that precedent, it seems to me that the right thing to do would be to put those tropes somewhere on Videogame.Fire Emblem Heroes or a subpage, especially since a good number of the summoned Heroes are explicitly not from the source games (Queen Camilla, anybody?)
Ukrainian Red Cross
IMO, if the character's tropes have to be separated per entry, then they must showcase facets which weren't previously shown or hinted before in their home game. That, or if it features an Alternate Self with enough notable differences to warrant the split.
^That's the basis I used when I initially separated them. An example of the form "Trope: X happens, and in Heroes, Y happens" is fine. But in the case of "Trope: In Heroes, Z happens", if we're not going to list that trope on the page for the game it appears in, it should at least be in its own section.
Ukrainian Red Cross
Calendar enthusiast
I made abig giant edit. Here are my reasons.
I replaced all instances of "Nabateans" with "Children of the Goddess", since that's the term used in the game.
I removed all quotation marks around "those who slither in the dark" because that's a description, not their name.
I rephrased a few examples to not imply that Crimson Flower is a default route.
Since we're apparently including tropes that only happen in Fire Emblem Heroes on pages that aren't Videogame.Fire Emblem Heroes, I've moved those tropes to their own folder. I will be doing that for all other Fire Emblem characters in the future; Edelgard just happened to be the first one I got to.
Tropes I removed:
- Ambition Is Evil: On routes where she is not chosen, her relentless ambition pits her against everyone from her classmates to her closest friends, who are all astonished that she'd go to war to topple centuries of establishment. Her willingness to commit questionable acts and take advantage of other evildoers works in the name of that ambition is what gets the other three factions of the game to paint her as evil. Obviously subverted on Crimson Flower where you see her motivations, as she explains her end goals, offers her friends a chance to leave if they disagree, her friends in the Black Eagles temper the more ruthless actions she would otherwise take in the name of her ambitions, and she voluntarily steps down from power once she has achieved her societal reforms.
This isn't ambition, really.
- (Benevolent Mage Ruler)
She can only do this in the Crimson Flower route, when she's under the player's control and avoids the brutal acts of war taken in other routes, averting the Sorcerous Overlord trope.
One, this is a spoiler. Two, she doesn't avoid any of the more brutal acts of war on CF; I don't know where people get the idea she does.
- Born Unlucky: It's less obvious than other series-wide examples of this (such as Joshua or Arthur), but let's just say that she didn't exactly have the best life, and all due to unfortunate circumstances that generally were beyond her control at the time. Becomes Fridge Brilliance when you look at her Luck Stat, which is basically one of the only stats she's bad at.
Bad stuff happening does not make one Born Unlucky.
- Boobs Of Steel: Post-timeskip Edelgard’s breasts are noticeably larger, and she still opts to use large axes as her primary means of attack. She is also physically strong enough to hold back Byleth's Sword of the Creator with a rapier in a brief sword clash.
Dorothea's breasts are bigger. Yes, that is what the trope means.
- (Character Development)
This is also clearly shown at what may be her lowest point in [[spoiler:the Holy Tomb; she openly uses Demonic Beasts (which explicitly involves people being forced to hold crest stones and thus turned painfully into horrific monsters) and Metodey. If Byleth sides with her, she stops using Demonic Beasts entirely for the rest of her campaign against the Church, Faerghus, and Leicester (though those who slither in the dark still use them, much to Edelgard and Hubert's chagrin), and only includes well-meaning hard workers who earned their posts in the Imperial Army among her army's leadership.
Edelgard keeps using monsters. They're not part of the BESF for mechanical reasons, but they're still part of her army, just offscreen.
- (Earn Your Happy Ending)
- Edelgard has the only ending where those who slither in the dark are definitely defeated, with the other routes leaving it unclear or even having their remnants attack.
The CF ending is no more definitive than VW, it's just phrased a bit differently.
- Everyone Has Standards: Despite allying with those who slither in the dark when it comes to their goals, she has shown absolute disgust in their methods and actions of causing chaos in Fódlan, and turns against them at the end of the Crimson Flower route.
This trope is about having lines you won't cross, not about crossing those lines but feeling bad about it.
- Expy:
- She's very similar to Lelouch vi Britannia. Both seek to overthrow a corrupt, stagnant, and oppressive status quo, both take up masked alter-egos in order to advance their goals, and both are opposed by chivalrous idealists with deeply troubled pasts. Outside of Crimson Flower, both assume the throne of Emperor and in the process become dangerously close to becoming the monsters they sought to destroy, and both accept their own deaths in order to ensure world peace.
- If Claude, her fellow Lord, had Yang Wen-Li from Legend of Galactic Heroes as a major source of inspiration, Edelgard — most notably her Crimson Flower self — is rather close to Reinhard von Lohengramm from the same work. Like him, she is an attractive, charismatic and confident Byronic Heroine in charge of an empire with prominent elements — down to naming conventions — of a German Fantasy Counterpart Culture; she displays a great amount of arrogance and a Well-Intentioned Extremist outlook, leaning towards an Anti-Villain/Anti-Hero, depending on interpretation. Like Reinhard, Edelgard harbors a passionate desire to reorganize the realm with any possible means, greatly dislikes the traditional order that favors the corrupt, power-hungry nobles, and wants to build a future where every person is judged on their personal merits rather than the 'proper' lineage (or, in her case, possession of a "right" Crest). Both of them will also stop at nothing to achieve their dreams of a more egalitarian and progressive society, even if it takes a war to do it. However, thanks to the presence of several friends, both display their softer sides more and moderate their more extreme views. Eventually, both become the victorious rulers of their realms (Galactic Empire for Reinhard, re-unified Adrestian Empire for Edelgard) and lead them into the Golden Age — while still in their early-to-mid twenties.
This is Fan Myopia
- (Fantastic Racism)
- Her dialogue as the Flame Emperor in Heroes reveals that she holds no better views of those who slither in the dark, in fact it could easily being worse, viewing them as monsters rather than humans. This is implied during her discussion with Thales about Duscur, where she says "There will be no salvation for your kind".
- When it comes to human races, it's inverted. Edelgard is far more tolerant, such as not looking down on Petra and treating her fairly, and being willing to open up Fódlan's borders and start friendly foreign relations with Almyrans in contrast to certain members of the Church looking down on outsiders and forbidding contact with other nations.
These examples are mundane racism, not the fantastic kind.
- First Girl Wins: On the Crimson Flower route, she's the first potential love interest for either gender Byleth to join the party.
That is not what that trope means.
- (Foil)
- Interestingly enough, she happens to be one to Zephiel of all people, ideology wise. Both are willing to wage a war with the entire continent to achieve the world they want...but where they differ is who they think it should belong to. Zephiel has a strong hatred for humans in general and believes that the world needs to be given back to the dragons, who are essentially like gods to Elibe. Edelgard on the other hand believes that Fódlan is better off out of the hands of the gods, church, and dragons, and instead put into the hands of mankind itself. Both went through tragedies that inspired them to be this way, with Zephiel constantly having to avoid his father's assassination attempts and Edelgard constantly being experimented on over her crest during her childhood.
Foils have to be in the same story.
- (Game-Breaking Injury)
It also likely explains why she feels the need to become the Hegemon Husk during the final battle, as she never does so in Verdant Wind or Silver Snow despite being in similarly dire circumstances.
No, she only becomes Hegemon Husk on Azure Moon because that's when she has access to the "anomaly".
- Heroes Prefer Swords: Downplayed. While her primary weapon is an axe, she consistently uses swords as a backup on all routes other than her own. On Silver Snow she uses the Sword of Seiros in a cutscene duel with Byleth, while on Azure Moon and Verdant Wind she uses it as her secondary weapon in the Battle at Gronder, likely because she's prone to blowing through Aymr's uses with Raging Storm.
Edelgard straight-up prefers axes. She uses a sword only in certain circumstances when she's an enemy. At her most heroic, she'll only use swords if you decide to give her a non-standard build.
- (Hypocrite)
- On the Verdant Wind route, she declares to Claude that she cannot entrust Fódlan to him despite having similar ideals due to having insufficient knowledge of Fódlan's suffering. While she has knowledge of some of the modern day injustices that plague Fódlan, she is unaware of the context around them (Crests being a responsibility used to protect the nation in Faerghus, etc.), and, unbeknownst to her, is actually ignorant of crucial aspects of Fódlan's past. Specifically, she doesn't know that Nemesis was a bandit who committed genocide on the Children of the Goddess, and that he and his lackeys consumed those they slaughtered for power and turned the Goddess' body into a weapon (these details are only known by Rhea and a few others before the end of the war, though). Had she known this, she would have realized that Rhea was primarily driven by pain and loss, just like her, rather than being purely motivated to control humanity. Ironically, Claude ends up being the only lord who gets to learn most of this information after he pressures a weakened Rhea enough.
She isn't being hypocritical here, she's just operating on incomplete information.
- In a small case of Gameplay and Story Segregation, a major rallying cry of Edelgard's revolution is a complete upheaval of the nobility system. Edelgard wants to do away with crests and the inheritance-based system that the old social structure provided, complete with the removal of noble titles. Despite this, in a number of character end cards like Ferdinand, Lorenz and Constance's, Edelgard specifically rewards classmates who sided with her with the titles they would've obtained normally under the previous social order. Two notable exception can happen with Caspar and Manuela however, as they can become the new Minister of Military Affairs and Prime Minister respectively only in Crimson Flower due to their contributions, as neither has the ability to earn those respective titles otherwise. It's also worth noting that in her A-support with Constance, Edelgard comments she intends to make the transition to the new social order smooth and gradual, and that the old nobility will be forced to act as government officials and be elected through popular vote if they intend on remaining in their position.
This also isn't actually hypocritical; they do in fact demonstrate their worthiness to hold those positions.
- Internal Reformist: She wants to abolish the system of hereditary monarchy, which is the main reason she's in power. To achieve this for the rest of the continent, she overthrows Rhea and abolishes the Church's central authority, bringing her into conflict with the other nations.
It's not internal when she's forcing it on external parties.
- (Irony)
- Her raid on the Holy Tomb in Chapter 11 is considered a Moral Event Horizon by several characters In-Universe, most notably Rhea herself, who immediately demands her execution. But the only way to actually stop Edelgard from her unsavory goal of using the Crest Stones she's gathered to create more Demonic Beasts is to take her side and choose to protect her, which will promptly send Rhea into a murderous rage.
One, they're also horrified that she was the Flame Emperor all along and is allied with those who slither in the dark. Two, we see in Hubert's paralogue that the Adrestian Empire is still using Demonic Beasts in battle, they just aren't part of the Black Eagle Strike Force.
- Not So Different:
- One of the few supports she has with a character outside of her own household is Lysithea. This might seem odd at first, considering the Empire's role in her backstory, but it turns out that the two actually share a lot in common, with them both being victims of the horrific Crest experiments, and losing their siblings to gain a second Crest they did not want. On Verdant Wind, Lysithea will speak to her if they end up fighting and take it upon herself to kill Thales in Edelgard's place.
- Edelgard is similar to her sworn enemy Seiros. Both were Nice Girls who had horrible tragedies occur when they were young (the Red Canyon and Crest experimentation), and developed obsessions with destroying what had wronged them (Nemesis and the system of nobility/Church of Seiros, respectively). Both have severe trust issues and often find it difficult to admit fault, communicate, or compromise at all. Both ultimately are willing to go to almost any extreme to see their goals (the revival of Sothis in Seiros' case, the reformation of Fódlan by her hand in Edelgard's case), and most ironically, both have Byleth as their Morality Chain, and both represent the Reverse High Priestess; otherwise, Rhea acts more like a foil to Edelgard, showing their contrasting desires and ideals despite having similar experiences. In a darker & tragic sense, should Edelgard emerge as the victor of the conflict while she ultimately achieves peace, she still does so through propagating a false (or to be more precise in Edelgard's case, incomplete) version of history just like Rhea did before her.
- When breaking it down to the basics, despite their contrasting political ideas, both Dimitri and Edelgard are willing to inflict significant harm on the living out of a sense of responsibility towards people who are already dead.
This trope is actually about characters realising they're not so different.
- Promoted to Playable: The Emperor class has been previously reserved for, well... The Emperor. Hardin and Arvis, specifically. Three Houses is the first game to make it available to the player as Edelgard's final story promotion, which occurs late in the Crimson Flower route.
PTP is about characters, not the names of classes.
- Religious and Mythological Theme Naming: Her last name comes from Hræsvelgr, a giant from Norse Mythology who can take the form of a black eagle. Fitting considering the name of the house she leads.
Theme Naming tropes are about themes; this example is Meaningful Name, and is already listed under that trope.
- Suicide by Cop: One possible interpretation of her death in Azure Moon; she attacks Dimitri nonlethally and gets run through by his spear.
Dimitri isn't a cop.
- Super Drowning Skills: In her C-support with Bernadetta, Edelgard admits she's deathly afraid of the sea and cannot swim.
Super Drowning Skills is a game mechanic, which isn't present in Three Houses.
- Suspiciously Similar Substitute: To Arvis. Both Arvis and Edelgard have massive ambitions to bring long-lasting peace to the continent and free it from suffering and oppression, have Teeth-Clenched Teamwork with a shadowy cult with a more malicious agenda, and ultimately kill a lord in the process of achieving these ambitions. They also spend the first half of the game as an ally (Edelgard especially if you are on the Crimson Flower route), and the first half of the game ends with them betraying the main character to further their ambitions and goals. Both Arvis and Silver Snow/Verdant Wind Edelgard spend the second half of the game as an antagonist, but are overshadowed as a threat by said malicious cult. Finally, both Edelgard (on Crimson Flower) and Arvis (for the first several years of his reign) bring about a better era for their continents.
SSS is about cast changes; Genealogy and Three Houses are completely separate continuities.
- (War Is Glorious)
For bonus points the battle axe has long been associated with feminism, making her invoke war and conflict as a symbol of female empowerment
That's a stretch, considering her enemies are also women, and both sides have an approximately equal gender ratio.
Ukrainian Red Cross Hide / Show Replies
"Dimitri isn't a cop."
Suicide by Cop is not literally about getting law enforcement to kill you. It is merely committing suicide by getting someone else to kill you.
Continue the bloodline, Fujimaru!
^ TPPR is correct.
The trope isn't about literal cops. It's about someone committing suicide by forcing someone else to kill them.
Hubert's paralogue showed that TWSITD were still using demonic beasts, not that the Empire's army was.
But then the argument can be made that since the slithers are allied with them, and they are plainly still using mass-prudced demonic beasts, the Empire is in effect still using them. Furthermore, Hubert and Edelgard maintain they still need the help of the slithers to win the war, even in Crimson Flower, which leads to the question of just what the slithers are doing to help them if not providing them with demonic beasts. Sure they made Edelgard a weapon, but that was awhile ago and wouldn't explain why she thinks she still needs to work with them.
On the other hand, I'm not aware of anything that explicitly says the Empire is still using demonic beasts in the war effort (not that we would necessarily know if they did as the only battles we see or hear about are the ones involving the Black Eagle Strike Force). Hence those who like Edelgard might prefer to think she ceased to use demonic beasts after the battle in the Holy Tomb, while those who have more mixed feelings on her may be more likely to consider the possibility or likelihood that she did keep using the beasts but kept them away from battles she was a part of. I think it could go either way, but the fact she still needs them is a strong suggestion that she is still using their resources, including demonic beasts.
Edited by Perentie
There is indeed nothing in the game that outright confirms that the Empire uses demonic beasts on Crimson Flower. The OP is well reasoned on most of their other edits, but this one seems biased.
What is confirmed on CF is that Edelgard is trying to distance herself more from TWSITD. This is seen as early as Chapter 12, which is how Rhea escapes and the Kingdom still stands. Notice how we don't see demonic beasts at all in the CF version of the attack on Garreg Mach. And she attacks Arianrhod as a pre-emptive strike against TWSITD. With all this in mind, I doubt Edelgard uses demonic beasts on Crimson Flower.
Wasn't it mentioned by Hanneman that there are demonic beasts in the army? Shouldn't this count?
I think it would indeed count if he mentions it on the Crimson Flower route in reference to something from after Edelgard declared war. Which part of the game are you referring to Hanneman saying this? Nobody disputes that Edelgard did use Demonic Beasts in the raid on the Holy Tomb for instance, but that happens on every route.
I heard about that a little bit ago. Supposedly, he says this in Chapter 14. Very few people bring this up, but anytime they do, people counter with saying that it’s being misinterpreted and that TWSITD did create them for war assets but the Empire isn’t using them as such.
…yes, it’s a stretch, I’ll admit it myself. But I don’t know how else to explain this line as I can’t understand why the fuck the game developers would include this line on the route where you side with Edelgard.
Look, I get it. When it comes to morality, Edelgard isn’t exactly Superman or Captain America, or Marth and Chrom if we use Fire Emblem examples. Even on Crimson Flower, she still actively conquers the neutral Alliance and pins the blame for Arianrhod’s destruction on the Church. I get that. But this throwaway line would take it to a whole other level for Crimson Flower Edelgard. Those two other actions tie in with a grayer anti-hero, but not this one. If Hanneman really says this line, it was a terrible idea on the writers’ part.
Edited by ThePantherMan
Hanneman said the following in chapter 14:
Hanneman:
"I think you should know...
Professor, I think you should be made aware of a certain group working with the Imperial army. They are the same lot that invented a technique to turn monsters into war assets. It's quite obvious their trick draws on the power of the Crest Stones, but... There is something more to it than that. Some secret I have yet to decipher. I suppose I need to better understand what kind of people they are. Who are they? What do they want? For her part, Miss Edelgard is cooperating, yet does not hide her hostility towards them. I suspect we should prepare in case the day should come when we must combat these strange people."
So while Edelgard does not use them, she still coorperates with the creators of these demonic beasts, for which she can held accountable for. Also it must be stressed out that part of the Imperial army belongs to the regent Volkhardt von Arundel, who is just Thales and his subordinates would employ mostly the demonic beasts.
I can concede that she still WORKS with people who use demonic beasts, no matter how much she expresses disgust over them. That much is made perfectly clear throughout Crimson Flower. And I guess I can see Thales/Arundel making his specific part of the Imperial army using demonic beasts.
Edited by ThePantherMan
These entries are being edit warred over. Please discuss them here instead of edit warring:
- Big Bad: She is the main antagonist and last opponent on the Azure Moon route, being the leader of the forces trying to conquer the continent and Dimitri's most personal foe.
- Big Bad Ensemble: It's ultimately revealed that she's the Flame Emperor and one of the game's main antagonists alongside Thales, and stopping her efforts to conquer Fódlan is your primary objective through most of Part II if you don't side with her. However, Thales has his own separate agenda and is far more evil than her, and dealing with him is one of Edelgard's objectives after the war ends (and you take care of him on Silver Snow, Azure Moon (as Arundel), and Verdant Wind).
In the context of Azure Moon, Edelgard is for all intents and purposes the main antagonist of the story: her shenanigans cause most of the problems faced by the protagonists, directly opposes Dimitri both ideologically and goal-wise, she gets to be the Final Boss and the story even wraps up with her defeat. In that sense, I see nothing wrong with this trope being in her page.
As for the second one, I think the description fits more a downplayed Big Bad Duumvirate than a proper ensemble, given both sides are working together for a common purpose yet are in constant friction with one another and very much can't wait to get rid of the other once they have fulfilled their purpose.
I agree that Big Bad is valid here, and that a downplayed Big Bad Duumvirate entry fits the second example better.
she's not the big bad because she's only the final boss for Dimitri. 3/4ths of the story goes against it and brings in other elements. by the same logic of her being big bad just because shes the final boss of one route. you would also say that takumi is also the big bad of fire emblem fates when that is clearly not what is going on, additionally the person who added it back in said that thales isn't the big bad because you kill him before edelgard in azure moon, well by that same logic that would mean the nameless fire dragon that nergal summoned is the big bad of fe7 and nergal isn't even though the entire story has had nergal as the antagonist. furthermore, the reason the trope fits thales so much better is because he is either the mastermind behind or heavily involved in many of the events of the recent history of the games world that kick off the main plot, most notably, the insurrection of the seven and the tragedy of duscur and is involved in the main plot of the game as an antagonist to all the lords including edelgard on all routes.
Edited by Starseeker300
A Greater Scope Villain is (quoting the trope page here) "a threat/villainous presence that's more dangerous, affects more people, or is more significant than the story's current Big Bad in the setting as a whole, but isn't causing the conflict of the immediate story (and may have little to do with it at all)." Yes, Thales is responsible for the Insurrection of the Seven and the Tragedy of Duscur. Events which took place in the backstory. He's not very active during the main story, preferring to let Edelgard take command of the war effort instead. Heck, look at the entries on his character page:
- Big Bad: Wavers between this and Greater-Scope Villain depending on the route. As the leader of "those who slither in the dark" and the one with the closest connection with Edelgard's past, he's directly responsible for Edelgard's ambitions and resources. Stopping Edelgard destroys his main agent of Fódlan's destruction, and even in the Crimson Flower route, Edelgard recognizes he's the threat that must be stopped after defeating the Church and unifying Fódlan.
- Big Bad Ensemble: He's one of the overall main antagonists alongside Edelgard or, only in the Crimson Flower route, Rhea. He is far and away the most malevolent and dangerous character in the game, and all of the heroes save Dimitri want to kill him to bring peace to Fódlan. note
- Greater-Scope Villain: On the Azure Moon route. He is directly responsible for driving Edelgard to villainy and providing many of the resources she uses, but she is the focus villain of the route and Dimitri unceremoniously kills him without ever truly learning his role in the plot.
Nobody has put their foot down on a definitive consensus, so I'm throwing my two cents in. I feel Edelgard does fit both tropes, and is the Big Bad of Azure Moon. On Azure Moon, she is personally responsible for the game's main conflict. She is the central villainous figure who opposes Dimitri. She is the one whose death brings peace to the continent. On Silver Snow/Verdant Wind, she is still the one who fires the first shot. Her defeat is still a necessary step towards bringing about peace.
I think a mod should judge one way or the other.
Sorry for the late reply man, but I'm gonna revive discussion on this at least for one of the tropes.
I stand by my opinion Big Bad Ensemble should be replaced with Big Bad Duumvirate (or at the very least a downplayed one given the backstabbing involved), as both the Empire and Agarthans are working together and for a common goal for most of the game. Gameplay-wise and after the timeskip, not only there is only one map in the game where you fight only Agarthans (as in all the others they fight along with the Empire), the whole point of Hubert's paralogue is literally saving some of Thales' goons in the Sealed Forest from their own Demonic Beasts.
The Planet Master
Could Edelgard (in a rather twisted way admittedly) be considered an expy of Joan of arc? Again in a rather twisted way.
Moon Star of Limbo, Give me the might, the muscle, the menace, of MON*STAR! Hide / Show Replies
No.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
I want to remove the phrase "Edelgard's refusal to compromise," from the Who Will Bell the Cat? entry. I'm pretty sure I'm the one who wrote that part in the first place, but it's redundant with later parts of that sentence.
The sad, REAL American dichotomy Hide / Show Replies