#there IS a way to do that. it'd inevitably take away a charm to Claude's character but it DOES still exist

[butwhatifidothis]

Ngl, I think "Claude that kills" is not inherently in and of itself uninteresting or bad. It is kinda basic as a "shocking character twist," but I could in some ways buy Claude being forced to "make hard decisions like these" in times where his foe absolutely refuses to back down and it being more prominent in Hopes - the guy might've offered mercy to Eddie, but she refuses and dies (by Byleth's hand, but still), and kills both the Death Knight and Hubert (plus Ladislava and Randolph) without really pausing.

...but they just... don't explore anything of that idea to make it work in Hopes. He's forced to kill Shahid when Shahid makes it clear he won't stop until he's dead, then... he aligns with Eddie (and while he pays lip service to not trusting her, he then proceeds to parrot her words and become Ede-lite...), callously abandons an ally to die just to make a fight easier (and then this is used to make him learn the lesson that he should totally trust and help Eddie in the future), and enflames a border conflict (which *should* really be a point he'd hesitate over, but naaaah...) just to make his invasion easier...

Like, I could buy a "Claude becomes more willing to kill to protect those he cares about," its a tad lame but sure, but... there's just nothing to explain why he would just become a much worse person in ways that don't make sense to his character. Or, put another way, "morally ambiguous Claude" is fine... But that character SHOULD still be Claude, not "Eddie but worse because we really whitewashed her this game."

Well, there's also to keep in mind that at least with Hubert, upon receiving his letter Claude does lament on being unable to talk with him due to Hubert's stubbornness, after admitting that Hubert might have been a better man than he gave him credit for due to said letter. And however much sense it makes for him to care this much about a classmate he barely knew, he did still get saddened over having to outright kill Edelgard. He was willing to kill them, but only because they were unwilling to compromise and they were so committed to inflicting violence - if he had it his way it would've never come to this.

But, yeah, I do see what you mean otherwise lmao - I didn't mean to say that there's no instance at all where Claude becoming more willing to kill is a bad thing. It's somewhat predictable, but it is one way to get a new experience from Claude for the player to appreciate. But here, it's just all over the place.

It's bad for Claude to sacrifice people who barely a week ago were trying to murder him and his friends and his people so that his own people get out a battle safely. He's throwing away lives, he's no better than nobles who see mercs as disposable, he's broken the GD's trust in him! Invading Faerghus? Bringing in Sreng? Those innocent lives that Claude actually threw away? That's fine - doesn't have to get chewed out for that! People might can mumble about being uncomfy about it in camp, but no more criticisms to Claude's face - not bad enough for that, unlike with Randolph which was obviously worse! /s

It's, like, backwards pretty much. I say that the Randolph Sacrifice is more about him breaking the GD's trust in him than it is about the sacrificing thing even though the scene is mostly about Claude being wrong to sacrifice lives... because that's the lesson that makes more sense to take from it in the long run. It's makes no sense for "sacrificing lives in needless conflict" to be the main cause for concern and upset from the GD regarding Claude's actions, when he goes on to sacrifice way more lives in way more pointless conflicts and they barely give a shit about it. The Sreng shit is fuckin' laughably and infinitely more serious than letting Randolph die, and yet they do not care nearly as much about the former as they do the latter.

And, like, the supposed catalyst for this change in Claude's demeanor is killing Shahid. The guy who was trying to violently conquer Fodlan and was trying to kill Claude in order to do so. So, like... instead of Claude going after Edelgard with this newfound violence - you know, the person who is trying to violently conquer Fodlan and tried to kill him in order to do so - instead he... goes after the Kingdom and Church. Almost completely ignoring the Empire, save for the one thing he does against it... which is the one thing he is actually criticized for doing in his route.

So instead of Claude continuing the fight he had with Edelgard - that fight he was doing pretty damn well in before he Becomes Violence - Claude just mindlessly believes her when she says that Church Bad and focuses all of his giga violence onto it. Isn't it convenient for Edelgard, that Claude had this drastic change in character that pretty much exclusively benefits her? Even with her behaving exactly like the supposed catalyst for Claude's violence, nothing happens to her save for a few generals dying - she even gets her ass saved from the hot water she threw herself in by Claude despite him being more inclined to violent/callous methods of winning now and despite her death allowing for Leicester (and Fodlan) getting peace, lucky lucky!

It's just, like, so obvious that Claude was written to service Edelgard? Like, very, very obvious. Damn near everything he does in GW's Part 2 does nothing to help him and everything to help Edelgard. This isn't a story about how Claude gradually grows more violent before becoming a better version of himself - like I said, he just becomes violent, stays violent, and stagnates completely. This is just the writers making it to where Edelgard can get what she wants at the expense of a group of characters they clearly did not care for

#ask #anon #clyde discourse #fire emblem warrior: three hopes spoilers #fire emblem warriors three hopes spoilers #like. the only thing the Church ''does'' against Claude is... be willing to take in minor noble houses #that INDEPENDENTLY chose to leave the Federation. since Claude's way of ruling made them toothless #that's it. it's not nearly enough to justify what Claude does to them #and nothing else in the story properly explains Claude's decisions or methods or conclusions #and why they differ SO drastically from his 3H counterpart #there IS a way to do that. it'd inevitably take away a charm to Claude's character but it DOES still exist #but that is DAMN sure not what Hopes did lmao not by a long shot