#ladlegard

[deathbirby]

just randomly thinking about Hopes again and like. man. whoever lead the writing for the characters must have had a RAGING hate boner for Claude specifically. wtf was that writing they had it OUT for him and for what reason 😭

It was so fucking awful I have no idea how they dropped the ball with him so hard. Edelgard had to look good so Claude goes into the gutter to become her ally! Even if that makes him dumb as rocks and removes every original trait he once had.

#grey borb #gw was the worst route in hopes #azure gleam is fine imo #idc for edelboo getting brainwashed she shouldnt have started a 2 front war without weeding out the snakes #and scarlet blaze is #ugh #but its what you expect from ladlegard #but FUCKING HELL #gw made me facepalm so many times #literally “im surrounded by idiots” moments everywhere

[saviourkingslut]

Apparently the three 3H lords are gonna be DLC for Engage and ohhhhh did they make Ede.lgard Uglygard lmao. Deadass she looks 12

SGJGGDFHHV YOU'RE NOT WRONG. jesus christ. they massacred my boy dimitri too but this is just pathetic. she doesn't even look like herself what the fuck. and they want me to pay for this shit? hello??

#also immediately pissed off by the way that the 3h part of the trailer is focused on ladlegard only #she gets a whole ass voice line wherein she's immediately a bitch ('we were just growing weary of each other's company' stfu) #and the cam is always centred on her #dimitri??? doesn't even have a voiceline?? #asks #once again intsys gives her preferential treatment #engage critical

[femblem-emblem-throuses-houses]

edelgard be like "the church divided fódlan by making the kingdom and the alliance!!!!" meanwhile the faerghans practically worship the guy who led their army during that time they fought a war to be free from adrestia (and the church impliedly didn't even want them to!) and so much of their cultural imagery is derived from their independence war like edelgard my sister in seiros i think you might just be adrestian

#fire emblem meta #and that's without getting into the empire's implied history of prejudice against faerghus??? #ladlegard please......

[twin-wishing-stars]

Inhales

Exhales

Edelgard: wakes up after *checks watch* TWO YEARS just to throw herself at hubert and then dom him. At five in the morning.

#it is nice having her back. shes very interesting. love her. #I'm very tired and very lazy rn bc i got like 3 hours sleep and i wanna go back to bed but shes like #THE HOUSE IS A MESS HOW ARE YOU LIVING IN SQUALOR #listen ladlegard I'm tired and i literally just have to take out trash and wipe stuff down. breathe bitch #anyway #god in other news #not safe for ganyus #I Forgot How Much I Love Domming Large Subservient Men #god hes such a good dog....

[miseko97]

On the one hand I want to support Rhea on the next voting gaunlet cause she deserves it... On the other hand Eliwood is right there and he's my favourite lord of the series... Aghh I don't know what to do...

#i'll probably go for Eliwood #and hope enough people go with Rhea to make her win against Edelwoo #i hopei Rhea doesn't loose on the first round because the stans will probably go gotcha! #but we know that with Ladlegard they will always twist whatever circumstance to suit supreme leader #p.s. eliwood vs fallen ninian breaks my heart 😭

[butwhatifidothis]

The ladlegard slander in the QRTs of the original post I used to pray for times like this 😭

(this is an ask but it had a link to a tweet in it and don't wanna risk the person gettin' shit thrown at them lol)

(for context of the OP in question, it's basically "man remember the crazy times when people thought Edelgard was a VILLAIN why would anyone think that" *inserts screenshots of her "When humanity stands strong and people reach out for each other... there's no need for gods" quotes from CF*)

Going through the QRTs of that post was definitely a fuckin' riot lmao. Some of my favorites:

and my personal (totally unbiased) favorite:

#ask #anon #<- technically lmao #anti edelgard #anti-edelgard #edelgard discourse #edelgard critical #just to be safe #like bruh this shit's hilarious lmaoooo #also Dimitri and Claude could’ve kissed just once i'm just sayin-

[fireemblems24]

It's funnier cause Dimitri himself outright state that he doesn't really believe much in Serios faith or that Sothis will come to save them during his Goddess tower scene. He sees religion and faith more of a comfort/security that some people rely on (i.e a support system). And I think the major difference is that Dimitri tries to look at the bigger picture/different perspectives the best he can. Ladlegard on the other hand believes that everyone can and should be like her and be self-reliant and if they can't, then it's their own fault. The closest she gets to trying to understand different perspectives is during her support with Manuela but it's kinda undermined by Manuela seeing Ladlegard as a goddess. It's very much the collectivist (Dimitri) vs individualist (Ladlegard) mindset.

You're spot on. I think a lot of people miss that, for Dimitri, he's not laser-focused on something like faith or Church of Serios, but just the concept of support in general. This reflects in his endings too, with him more than anyone else focusing on building government systems to support people who need it most.

I don't necessarily think Edelgard thinks everyone should be like her, but that those who aren't are not worthy of advancing. She highly respects talent and wants to promote talent once its already shown itself and does show some capacity to work around things with Linhardt. What she fails at, in my opinion, is fostering talent in those who have lacked the opportunity to show it or value talents outside ones that can get easily graded.

It would be really interesting to examine Dimitri representing a more Eastern mind-set of collective good vs Edelgard representing a more Western mind-set of individual ability. That might help explain why she seems better received in the Western nations.

[faroreswinds]

One thing I would say that Ladlegard and Rhea have in common is both of them are motivated by nostalgia. Ladlegard wants Fodlan to go back to the way it once was (i.e it was just Adrestia), while Rhea wants to revive Sothis so that she could guide the people of Fodlan just like the pre-genocide days. The difference though is Ladlegard's nostalgia is rooted in revanchist nationalism in addition to trauma whereas Rhea's nostalgia is rooted in trauma and loss.

Yup, many people have pointed out how similar both Edelgard and Rhea are.

There are even fanfictions about it!

#anon asks #Edelgard discourse

[emblemxeno]

So a tumblr user who talks about Faerghus and Lambert had to delete their blog because a bunch of Ladlestans attacked/harassed them off and it wasn't even because they were talking about Ladlegard. I cannot stress how much Ladlestans are scum.

Yeesh, there's certainly some... not great folks in that group yeah.

#queue #fire emblem discourse #edelgardiscourse

[dimiclaudeblaigan]

whaaaat? Clyde stans say that they """like""" his """moral grayness""" before turning around and saying that literally everything he did was Good Actually? and edelstans do the exact same thing with Edelfart for the exact same reasons and over the exact same ideals and decisions Clyde makes in Hopes (since Clyde is Ladlegard 2.0)?

what a coincidence, certainly not indicative of who the majority of Clyde stans (or even fans) are, nope. definitely DOESN'T explain why so many Clyde fans are rude, pretentious, and prone to projection ("we're the REAL Claude fans!! everyone who doesn't like Clyde never REALLY liked Claude!!" sure bud tell yourself that) i promise.

Basically, yeah. They think it's "the real him", citing that one interview (that didn't actually say Claude was planned to be super shady, just that he wasn't quite as "good" as he turned out to be (but the final version is obviously something they were comfortable and satisifed with or they wouldn't have bothered).

Apparently they think it's "good" because he's "only invading Faerghus and killing their people to get to and kill Rhea, who is Very BaD". From almost every person in support of GW Claude, it's an extremely tunnel visioned mindset of the ends justifying the means only as long as Rhea is killed... and as someone who has been actively part of Joe Z's community for about three years now, I can absolutely without question and with full confidence tell you that most of the Claude community absolutely despises Rhea and takes full enjoyment of the idea of Claude murdering her.

Yes, I am being serious and no, I am not exaggerating. I was in his livestreams on Twitch so I could see the chat. Some of the shit I've seen is pretty appalling honestly. I love Joe, but his takes on Claude were a bit sketchy for me because he was part of the "let's go kill Rhea because she's evil" brigade. The Claude community at large typically knows of his content, but it's not just his community and it's not just the people outside of his community - it's both.

You're completely right about the Claude stans too, sadly. Not all Claude fans do that, not even all GW Claude fans, but I've seen my faaair share of "we're the real fans" and "you don't understand him" from people who prefer his behavior in Hopes. Apparently they wholly missed the part where Hopes was an AU, or maybe they just imagined the eye patch on Dimitri the whole time and never noticed.

I don't have a problem with people liking the writing or liking that version of Claude, but most of the ones I've met or seen posts from are like... very pushy and aggressive about it. Thankfully most of them did catch the racist understones and don't support that, i.e. actual Claude fans and not uwugard stans, though of course uwugard stans don't care about that at all because yes, certainly, let the brown man be questionable and do evil things for our Totally Not Evil white waifu. Yaaaawn.

It also really sucks because I only know a few people who liked GW Claude without liking him in a hypocritcal way. Like sure, you can find it interesting and still like him while understanding what he did wasn't good or justifiable (justifiable because he did not choose violence as a last resort in any of his battles, whether they were fights he picked/started or not). The closest he came was begging his abusive, hateful brother to stop fighting him, which was... uh... yeah, okay). It's just that the ones who now think they're the "true fans" are very loud and mean.

Like nah, I'm gonna keep liking my big brained Claude who can fight his battles with words and secrecy. Everyone else is doing the violence thing, so I'm perfectly happy with Claude being the outlier and being the unexpectedly different one. I happen to like the contrast in his personality, wanting to bring people together and make everyone happy pappy sunshine and rainbowy friends, while still having that fear of rejection, of being hated and feeling the need to be sneaky and secretive because he's paranoid. I like the guy who makes poisons that are "relatively harmelss" and sleeps with a knife under his pillow, but who also wants to be lighthearted, learn to love others and be loved in return for the first time in his life. That was a fun, interesting, detailed character.

Pretty sure I'm a "true Claude fan" just like the next guy who likes GW Claude but isn't a dick to other people about it.

#DCB Ask #I hate how the whole ''if you don't like him this way you're not a real fan'' started #bc like why was it even necessary to start that shit? why did ppl have to decide to be haughty abt it? #it just makes me dislike GW as a whole when I rly enjoyed the first half of it

[burr-ell]

I think Edelkinnies needs to understand defensive/reactive behavior cause there's a difference between instigating an attack, and fighting back to protect your country, family and self. Rhea and Dimitri are reactive, they act in reaction to someone else causing crap (whether it be the Slithers, ladlegard, etc).

exactly like. obviously, real actual war crimes are bad no matter who committed them; no, america is not off the hook for GIs raping women on the eastern front or morale bombings or dropping nukes on civilian targets because it was still bad.

but like...first of all, someone please point me to the real actual war crimes claude or rhea did canonically across all routes (not just the lameass glorified bonus route) versus the real actual war crimes that edelgard did or condoned. it's not even close. second of all, let's not beat around the bush here—the casual way dimitri threatens to torture randolph to death implies that he's done it before, and that absolutely is horrible and not justified. the difference is, dimitri knows the things he's done are horrible, even when he's in the throes of a five-year-long mental breakdown. he's not only incredibly remorseful when he comes back to himself, he also chooses to atone by being a leader who's genuinely responsive to the needs of the oppressed rather than merely wrathful toward oppressors.

#the closest you could get to claude doing a war crime is MAYBE him setting acheron's house on fire #which um. compared with human experimentation and invading a monastery housing orphans? cry me a river #fe3h discourse #asks

[deathbirby]

You know it's really insane that Edelstans are saying that the Nabateans HAD to be evil because they MUST have been ruling over humans badly for people to have wanted to kill them, when these people also say that the innocent and righteous Ionius was unjustly and undeservedly taken down by pure evil nobles. And when it's actually CANONICALLY the case that the Hresvelg children (AND House Ordelia's children!) suffered because of someone else's greed for power.

Ignoring that Ionius was a tyrant, THEY ARE THE ONES SAYING that completely innocent people absolutely can be wrongly persecuted through THEIR INTERPRETATION OF IONIUS. And the character who THEY LIKE's family is even further proof of this sort of thing happening, now to entire GROUPS of people. But hmm, suddenly it's totally okay to say that every single Nabatean that was killed in Nemesis' genocide was evil and totally deserved it... wonder if there's a reason why that is......

Because the Nabateans killed their grandma.

It's just bias. They want their Ladlegard von Babygirl to be perfect so everyone associated with her has to be good and everyone against her is the scum of the earth.

#edelgard discourse #grey borb #i still cant get over the “the nabateans had slaves/serfs” as an argument against them #there is no hope anon #there is no hope trying to convince them #like you clearly show the double standard #but theyll go through hoops to justify it

[saviourkingslut]

reminder that if you're an edelstan and i catch you on my blog or touching my shit in general i am blocking you. goodbye

#following the fire emblem tag is bad bc it keeps suggesting edelstan posts to me #but good also bc it tells me exactly who to block #if you like ladlegard and you're normal abt it i have no quarrel with you it's the stans specifically #fire emblem

[lananiscorner]

I am so tired of fans always ALWAYS putting the responsibility of understanding Ladlegard on Dimitri. Why should it be the victim that must communicate, forgive, and understand the person that had wronged them? Why should Dimitri ask the reason why Ladlegard is waging a war against the Church when SHE IS HURTING HIS PEOPLE?! WHY SHOULD HE PRIORITIZE THE REASONING OF AN INVADER WHO DOESN'T EVEN GIVE A FUCK ABOUT HIM GOING AS FAR AS SHUTTING DOWN THEIR CONVERSATION AND REFUSING HIS EFFORTS TO CONNECT WITH HER?! JUST WHY?!

The double standard is insane because Ladlegard was never held this kind of responsibility in 3 Houses when Dimitri wants her dead. She gets a pass on never communicating or understanding him. She never reached out even once. SHE IS CELEBRATED FOR LYING TO HIS FACE, BLAMING HIM FOR PROTECTTING HIS PEOPLE, AND THEN KILLING HIM!

Sorry for the rant but I'm just so so sick of seeing that comment. Why should the victim be responsible for redeeming the monsters that hurt them?! It's not up to Dimitri to redeem Ladlegard. Only Ladlegard can do that.

Thanks for your ask, anon, and no worries about the rant--we all need to vent sometimes.

Doylist answer: Fire Emblem has long since grappled with benign sexism wherein evil women must be either brainwashed or actually secretly right. They cannot be evil just for the sake of being evil (bless Cornelia, she's the baddest bitch in 3 Houses). 3 Hopes has the additional problem of being developed by people for whom Unification Is Good Actually™ is kind of the baseline of their franchise.

Watsonian answer: Dimitri is a bleeding heart with way too little self-esteem and way too much empathy to NOT put the blame on himself first and at least try to understand Edel.

Personally, I think it's all bullshit and it doesn't matter what Edel's goals are--even if she really was aiming for and capable of creating the perfect utopia where everyone is happy and dandy--the moment you rob graves and disrespect a sovereign nation's border (or two) and declare war on them unprovoked, you deserve to be stopped.

I think a lot of people forget that the first step to redemption is not forgiveness--it's understanding and acknowledging the harm you have caused others (read: not a "woe is me, so much blood at my feet" self-pity party), followed by a sincere apology and at least an attempt to make amends for your transgressions. And that burden is entirely on the one who is in need of redemption, not anybody else. Forgiveness is a grace that may be extended by the ones you wronged, but it is not required, nor should it be expected.

#asks #anon #Edelgard critical

[travelling-on-the-octopath]

Maybe the worst thing about GW!Claude's decision to not team up with the Church because he "doesn't trust" the Church/Dimitri and to team up with Ladlegard because Church Bad... is the fact that AG exists. Where Claude just teams up with Dimitri and the oh so Bad Church to fight back against the Empire anyway, despite "not trusting" them.

So why exactly does he side with Ladlegard, after she directly lies to his face about not trying to conquer Leicester (after multiple attacks on Derdriu and invading Leicester at all)? Why not just team up with Dimitri and the Church again, seeing how that is in fact something he is willing to do? The circumstances between the two routes of him siding with Dimitri or Ladlegard don't justify the change either, because there... pretty much is no difference.

I just. Can't believe how clumsily and poorly Claude was handled in this game. How can they not know what to do with him by now, after promising to bring in Almyra - you know, Claude's actual personal conflict? Just go with that! Let him have his own story! Stop giving him knock-off versions of other people's routes (SS for VW, CF for GW)! I promise it's not that complicated 😭

it's literally so sad sfgljdgkj like he's SUCH an interesting character, let alone a route lord. let him be interesting you fuckwads!!! honestly.

#fe #fe3h (the remix) #fewth spoilers #s dunks on clyde #s responds #fire emblem warriors: three hopes spoilers #anonymous metropolis

[gascon-en-exil]

What are your thoughts on the concept of hindsight critique i.e criticizing a character's actions/decisions based on knowing what's going to happen next due to already experiencing the narrative before? For eg, criticizing Ladlegard for being ignorant towards Fodlan's history, having the wrong information/facts and blaming the wrong people when she's just acting on what she knows and what she's been told (she's still the villain fwiw).

I'm a pretty staunch Doylist when it comes to media criticism, so talking about a character acting based on limited information when the audience has the whole picture (or as whole as it's ever going to get, anyway) is a bit difficult for me. I inevitably start thinking instead about why Edelgard is so misinformed, and what this does for her character and for the story. The obvious answer is, of course, that the writers split the worldbuilding across four routes and made the question of who is and who isn't a reliable narrator an ambiguous one, presumably out of a desire to be clever and/or to cultivate fandom faction wars for marketing purposes (which it absolutely did).

In light of that I have to consider the question: if Edelgard instead knew the truth, would she behave differently? I'd say not, because her biggest character flaw is her extreme tunnel vision; she believes only in her own truth and her own willpower, and that as a result only she can arbitrate Fódlan's future. That's classic villain logic, particularly as it's undercut by the numerous similarities in epilogues and character end cards across all routes (not to mention how she only gets her desired outcome in either game if she's allied with Byleth, reminding us that what both Three Houses and Three Hopes are selling above all else is player pandering with Edelgard as their top-billing waifu). Edelgard never wavers or compromises, only even conceding to a shaky truce with Claude in SB and GW when she realizes that fighting a war on two fronts at the same time isn't going so hot for her.

Even if she were to learn who really created Crests, and who really broke up the Empire and why, she'd simply work those into her existing worldview which wouldn't have to change much at all. Either way she still wants the continent united under her and her loyal supporters, and the Agarthans, the church, the Kingdom, and sometimes the Alliance all stand in the way of that. Criticizing her for not knowing the whole story when I don't think it would make much difference either way doesn't strike me as all that useful.

#Fire Emblem #FE16 #Fire Emblem Three Houses #Fire Emblem Three Hopes