Tumgik
#azure moon
mochipicchu776 · 2 days
Text
Tumblr media
The post-Azure Moon epilogue I needed
37 notes · View notes
wild-moss-art · 8 months
Text
Tumblr media
this is how I feel when I play azure moon
3K notes · View notes
iubworks · 2 months
Text
Tumblr media
Sylvain Jose Gautier
650 notes · View notes
callileonn · 7 months
Text
Tumblr media
mitris :-)
1K notes · View notes
captain-maes-art · 3 days
Text
Tumblr media
🌑🦁
221 notes · View notes
cosmosnout · 8 months
Text
Tumblr media
Winter
851 notes · View notes
themisteriousentity · 5 months
Text
"Golden Deer is boring though it's lackluster, the characters aren't as strong as the other paths there's less conflict-"
You fool. You absolute buffon. Golden Deer is perfectly designed. Not only does it feed into the whole "alliance" theme well by having the characters still work together despite their differences and feelings well before hitting those A supports, but it's ALSO the only route that actually puts the focus on YOU the player. Or, rather, Byleth themself
Black Eagle is about whether or not you can agree to Edelgard's ideals of acceptable sacrifice and perspective that there's only 1 way to do things. The branching happens when you decide whether or not you agree, but ultimately it just explores opposing or agreeing with Edelgard. Anything more than that is really just incidental to that main concept, whether it's Crimson Flower or Silver Snow, the entire time you're focused either on helping Edelgard achieve her goals or you're focused on showing her how wrong she is alongside the Black Eagles who think it's their duty to correct Edelgard's wrongs (and I have a whole separate thing in regards to how the cast acts in Crimson Flower verses Silver Snow). It works really well for characters designed around an empire, a domineering form of government where (usually) a singular ruler determines the course and focus
Blue Lions is focused entirely on working on past issues and learning to bring yourself into the present, but it's done almost entirely through the cast more than the player. The Blue Lions themselves all have their own traumas and deep-seated past issues that hinder or help progress. While both Blue Lions and Black Eagles have a lot in common when it comes to traumatized characters and ideology, the ideology is front and center, while in Boue Lions, their interpersonal conflicts are front and center. This shows especially in the final (non romance) scene, where Dimitri decides that his personal attachment to Edelgard and past memories still matter, and he reaches out a hand, despite her immediately trying to kill him. It's fitting for a route designed around a kingdom, which is usually built entirely on interpersonal dealings between the ruling class
Golden Deer, however, is designed very differently. Unlike the other 3 routes, the player, or more specifically Byleth, is put as the driving force instead of the Lord. And this is actually what makes Golden Deer such a good route and one with the best ending of all of them. Claude has ideals, but he isn't a person who wants to force others to follow his path like Edelgard. Claude has lived a life of strife where his past motivates him, but it doesn't chain him the same way it does Dimitri. Instead, he works on understanding everyone around him and working together towards agreed upon goals, while taking on stuff that isn't agreed upon onto himself. But more than that, while all the Lord's value your opinion, Claude is the only one who actually takes what Byleth wants (rather than just what they think about specific matters) into consideration for his plans. Repeatedly you tell Seteth in Silver Snow that you don't want to kill Edelgard, but he pushes that you have no choice. Pretty much the entire first half of Azure Moon is Dimitri ignoring you. And in Crimson Flower, you've all but completely submitted to Edelgard's will with a couple of exceptions (which actually proves my point because it's specifically in regards to the Golden Deer because you can fight the entirety of Crimson Flower while sparing all of them except for Judith). But in Verdant Wind, Claude doesn't hide that he has a problem with the church and wants Rhea gone. In Golden Wildfire, without Byleth, he's more than happy to just get rid of her without a second thought. But when Byleth is the protagonist, he goes out of his way to accommodate your wants into his plans and goals. When you express as the player that you want to reason with Edelgard and ponder if you can't walk the same path, Claude agrees with you and says he'll make it happen if he can, with the other Golden Deer mostly agreeing. When that,can't happen you both lament the fact that Edelgard gave you no choice together. He makes finding Rhea a priority, mostly because as curious as he is in general, he wants to help you find out answers only Rhea can give you. And all of the Golden Deer do this to some extent, with each other but also with you as the player. I think Hilda and Marianne's A supports with Byleth show this best personally, but that's a personal opinion. And it just works so well for a route designed around the idea of an alliance, people coming together and agreeing to work towards a goal bigger than themselves
And that's not to say the other routes aren't as good as Golden Deer, they're all equally well written, but it just makes me sad when I see people giving the Golden Deer route grief just because the characters aren't the same when it does its theme so beautifully
398 notes · View notes
rorah · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
The forbidden post. The handholding Dimileth lewd
This! everything about them is about WARM HANDS loving couple. So nasty of them and their size difference. I can't. (We're missing one with their first little cub)
1K notes · View notes
sleepy-bear-tm · 7 months
Text
Tumblr media
"Is this some kind of twisted joke?"
272 notes · View notes
nulliphy · 7 months
Text
Tumblr media
AZURE MOON by nulliphy TIMELAPSE ⋄ WEBSITE ⋄ STORE
358 notes · View notes
int800art · 22 days
Text
Tumblr media
102 notes · View notes
isan0rt · 7 months
Text
I feel like I haven't really seen the fe3h fandom talk too much about how clearly Azure Moon is an adaptation of Hamlet. Like not even subtly Hamlet (like, see, he's the lion king, get it, haha, because... It's Hamlet).
Dimitri is obvious; he's the prince whose uncle has become king, due to a conspiracy he's trying to uncover, spurred on by his murdered father's restless ghost. Pursuing this vengeance drives him mad, and he becomes increasingly erratic as vengeance continues to escape him.
Dedue is Horatio; Hamlet's best friend (but one he met more recently than his other friends), always at his side and loyal no matter how far Hamlet falls, but formal with him right up until Hamlet dies for his revenge. Crimson Flower Dedue practically delivers the "Goodnight, sweet prince" line in the game if you defeat him before he can transform himself.
The rest spends a lot of effort making subversions; Rufus is Claudius, and this is played straight in Three Hopes, where Dimitri gets justice before he loses his mind and so he never reaches the depths of despair he does in Azure Moon. But in Three Houses this gets subverted; Rufus is still actually the Claudius, but Dimitri has miscast Edelgard in the role. This also allows Patricia to serve as Gertrude, forcing Dimitri to grapple with whether his (step)mother was complicit in his father's murder and whether she has more loyalty to the murderer than to him. Rufus then shifts into the Polonius role, as it's after his death (allegedly at the hand of Dimitri himself) that everything starts going to shit.
Felix, meanwhile, I think is Laertes (with Glenn and Rodrigue serving as Ophelia and Polonius for him (side side note I personally think Glenn was one of Dimitri's first crushes but that's neither here nor there)). The death of one curdles Laertes's positive childhood friendship feelings towards Hamlet (and Felix towards Dimitri) and then the death of the second fully solidifies Laertes's feeling that Hamlet must be stopped.
In Azure Moon, this gets subverted, in that Dimitri reverses course here, where Hamlet doubles down. As a result, Laertes turns his sword against Hamlet, while Felix returns to a shaky companionship with Dimitri. But crucially, if Felix does get recruited to other routes and turns his sword against Dimitri, he basically cannot have a happy ending - the same way Laertes dies for turning against Hamlet.
I don't have a snappy conclusion or anything (are Ingrid and Sylvain Rosencrantz and Guildenstern? Unclear) but I think it's fascinating.
202 notes · View notes
frickingnerd · 4 months
Text
the words i most regret are the ones i never meant to leave unsaid
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
pairing: dimitri alexandre blaiddyd x gn!reader
summary: out of all of the regrets dimitri has, being unable to tell you how he feels about you is his biggest regret...
Tumblr media
during the last five years, dimitri has been piling up regrets. even before that, he was fueled by nothing but regret. so many people had died and he was unable to do anything about it. there wasn't a day where he wondered what could've been, how things might've changed if he only… but no, it never brought him anywhere. it was all just wishful thinking. he couldn't do anything but pile up more and more regrets with each passing day, as they began to consume him and turn him into nothing but a monster. 
and out of all those regrets, there was one that weighed down on him especially heavy. one thing swore he would never forgive himself for. 
the thing he regretted the most was never telling you how he felt about you.
dimitri had loved you more than anything. when it seemed like darkness would consume him, you brought light into his life. you had saved him time and time again. but in the end, he was unable to save you. 
you were killed by soldiers of the adrestian empire, trying to protect him, after he had run into battle without thinking. you died in his arms that day, bleeding out from your wounds. your last words were his name, as you desperately reached out his hand to touch his face. 
dimitri had never been able to forget that sight. nor had he been able to forgive himself for letting you die in his stead. but what haunted him the most was that he had always taken you for granted. he had never told you that he loved you, never thanked you for your help and never offered any compensation. you gave him everything and got nothing in return. you even gave your life for his, when it should've been him who died that day…
Tumblr media
82 notes · View notes
iubworks · 2 months
Text
Tumblr media
Dedue Molinaro
782 notes · View notes
vr-trash · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media
thought i should share this piece i did in february.. definitely one of my favorite drawings. [ quote is from grief lessons: four plays by euripides ]
[ ID: a 4 panel digital drawing of Dimitri and Edelgard from fire emblem: three houses at the battle at gronder field. Panel one shows a split of them facing each other, Edelgard on the left, in front of some pine trees, and Dimitri on the right, surrounded by fire. The text above it reads “Why does tragedy exist?”.
Panel two is a close up of Dimitri’s eyes, angry and warm from the fire around him. The text above it reads “Because you are full of rage.”
Panel three is another split panel of them facing each other, but this time with them both facing the viewer head on. Edelgard’s expression is stern but calm, whereas Dimitri’s is angry and vengeful. The text above it reads “Why are you full of rage?”
Panel four is a close up on Edelgard’s eyes, with her stern and calm expression remaining intact. Her eyes are focused on the battle ahead of her, and you can see the gemstone from her headdress between her eyebrows. The text above it reads “Because you are full of grief.”. End. ]
822 notes · View notes
fireemblems24 · 11 months
Text
The Misinterpretation of Dimitri
Specifically, I'm referencing the frequent misinterpretation of his dialogue with Edelgard towards the end of Azure Moon.
I've seen people claim Dimitri is arguing for the necessity of Church of Seiros/faith and/or divine right of kings. That, because people are weak, they need the people in power to protect them in contrast to Edelgard who wants to empower the people and doesn't think they need to rely on anyone.
This is interpreting Dimitri and Azure Moon through and Edelgard and Crimson Flower lens and not at all what Dimitri's saying here.
Faith and religion play little to no role in Dimitri's life or Azure Moon's plot. Nor does the divine right of kings. Those are motifs and themes explored in Edelgard's story, not Dimitri's. The argument above is only true if you view the whole game through a crimson-colored lens.
So what is Dimitri actually saying? That the bootstraps mentality doesn't work for everyone. Some people need help - many kinds of help.
More relevant to Dimitri and AM's story is the importance of emotional support and having people to rely on. To a lesser extent, it's also Dimitri's reaction to living in poverty while on the run. He understands that some people need emotional support and time to properly grieve to move on from trauma. He also understands that some people don't have access to proper food, shelter, etc . . . and will need government assistance to move forward. He's arguing that Edelgard's ways leaves behind the people who need something or someone to lean on, hence "the path of the strong."
He isn't even saying everyone is like this. Right in that dialogue he acknowledges Edelgard as an exception. Edelgard doesn't need time to grieve. She processes trauma by pushing forward. While I am personally uncomfortable labeling that as "strong" compared to grieving as "weak," that's an argument for another time. As an imperial princess and then Emperor, she has no lack for resources either, unlike Dimitri during his time on the run and the others living in poverty he came in contact with.
So, no. Dimitri's not arguing that faith is a necessity, but that it is needed by some. He's pointing out that Edelgard's ways strip people from safety nets - regardless of the form it comes in. He's also arguing that people at the bottom need people at the top to provide for them to lessen the inequality gap - not necessarily in the form of a king - but that Edelgard's war leave them destitute and her meritocracy unable to compete as long as they're "weak" in any way.
Does this mean Edelgard's wrong and Dimitri's right? No. There's flaws with Dimitri's rulership too, but what he's pointing out here is a major flaw in Edelgard's beliefs and ideas about government and it should be explored as such rather than seen in a borderline bad faith interpretation.
397 notes · View notes