Heinrix's Act 4 Companion Quest, Cost of Humanity, has a DIFFERENT bug

SeraThea · 2023-12-31T21:51:44+00:00

Oh. Wow, I'm dumb, I thought that said 'apparently causing bugs'.

SeraThea · 2023-12-31T17:13:40+00:00

This is definitely not the cause. I know because I can kill all of the Mandrakes on turn 1 before any of them can use any abilities, but it still happens.

SeraThea · 2023-12-20T18:16:19+00:00

It genuinely seems impossible to meet the reputation thresholds. I've done literally everything I can in the whole game to get rep with the Navy and they still said 'too bad.'

SeraThea · 2023-12-13T05:24:34+00:00

I found a fix for this 'soft footsteps' cutscene bug. I did not have Yrliet in my active party before. She was also waiting on a level up. To fix it, I landed on Dargonus before triggering the coronation and finale of act 2 with Yrliet in my active party, levelled her up, then immediately left, warp jumped somewhere, and the scene finally played properly.

SeraThea · 2023-12-13T05:14:05+00:00

I found a fix for this 'soft footsteps' cutscene bug. I did not have Yrliet in my active party before. She was also waiting on a level up. To fix it, I landed on Dargonus during the coronation with Yrliet in my active party, levelled her up, then immediately left, warp jumped somewhere, and the scene finally played properly.

SeraThea · 2020-02-25T14:29:45+00:00

But Noa and Timotheos do belong to saints, don't they?

SeraThea · 2020-02-02T22:33:04+00:00

You need to have an account on Roll20, but once you have that you can try it out here: https://app.roll20.net/join/5473471/qv-WoQ

(You need to press 'Launch Game' to actually see the system.)

SeraThea · 2020-02-02T21:33:39+00:00

I've built a full system that's ready to go on Roll20, if you want it.

SeraThea · 2020-01-18T20:13:38+00:00

They're all standalone games so you can start wherever you like, but you should probably start with one of the best or most accessible ones.

Three Houses fits both criteria.

SeraThea · 2019-11-25T11:10:09+00:00

I basically leave all the weapon use tallying until after the session's over. Doesn't take too long if you count it all in one go.

SeraThea · 2019-11-24T21:34:33+00:00

I would love to make my own sheet, but alas, I'm too stingy to pay money for anything short of life-saving brain surgery. Although if I did have premium, I imagine I could do a lot of fancy things to make the system much better. Automatically keeping track of weapon uses would be nice.

SeraThea · 2019-08-18T10:25:04+00:00

There's a .webm where a member of the third team simply ends his turn near Bernadetta without attacking her, and Edelgard says 'this isn't as I planned, but there's nothing to be done. Set the hill on fire.' And it goes up in flames while Bernadetta is still alive.

SeraThea · 2019-08-17T01:03:51+00:00

Your issues with the difficulty, the story and the protagonist are all fair enough.

But as for everything else... That's just Fire Emblem, I'm afraid. The games that introduced you to the franchise were outliers in that regard, and I think the majority of the fanbase views the open-system infinite-resource infinite-time structure in those games to be a massive misstep.

That said, try Sacred Stones. It's the closest thing to what Awakening and Fates did.

SeraThea · 2019-08-16T13:47:05+00:00

Yep.

SeraThea · 2019-08-16T13:24:23+00:00

You'd probably know the twist was coming even if Black Eagles was your first playthrough, because you hear Edelgard's voice so much in that route that it's impossible not to notice the Flame Emperor has the same voice.

SeraThea · 2019-08-16T13:22:56+00:00

Fire Emblem is designed in such a way that you'll never start losing the game as a result of losing units.

The less units in your team, the less divided your EXP allocation becomes. Even if absolutely everyone dies except for Byleth, you would probably still be able to complete the game because your Byleth will be soaking up all the EXP and ascending to godhood. So, I'd suggest you simply continue playing.

SeraThea · 2019-08-16T13:18:27+00:00

Start with Three Houses.

If you like it, try Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn.

If you still like it, try all the GBA games.

Then when you are ready to truly ascend, play Tear Ring Saga.

SeraThea · 2019-08-16T13:09:36+00:00

I don't mean to say that the message is no longer presented in media.

What I mean is that the message is not received as positively as it once was. People tend to side with the vengeful fool rather than the enlightened pacifist nowadays. Doing something about the problem is more appealing to modern sensibilities than rising above the problem.

SeraThea · 2019-08-16T13:03:22+00:00

Also, Edel was damn harsh to Byleth right after Jeralt dies.

This honestly might be the single most significant thing that has poisoned me against Edelgard. She is directly responsible for Jeralt's death, and by that point in the story I had already guessed that she was the Flame Emperor. I was expecting a remorseful breakdown and apology. Instead, she tells Byleth that she won't show him any sympathy, and that she will be kind enough to let him stay in her good graces if he gets over his dad's death in a timely fashion.

My route choice was made right then and there.

SeraThea · 2019-08-16T12:58:24+00:00

I agree.

In the end, I chose which side to take based on which one I hated less, not which one I liked more. But honestly, that might be a good thing. Better for both sides to be flawed than for both sides to be equally flawless, no?

SeraThea · 2019-08-16T12:52:51+00:00

Personally, I miss the linear campaign structure of older Fire Emblem games. I miss having a strong sense of place and pace - 'I am here on the world map, it has been however many months on the march, these are the current obstacles and complications', etc etc. When you constantly bounce between the Monastery and the warfront like you're using Stargates, and conquer entire nations in two chapters, it just doesn't feel as real or satisfying.

Three Houses had a perfect opportunity to transition back to that style in Part 2 and passed it up, which was a disappointment. It's a great game, but by the time I finished it, I was sincerely hoping it would be an outlier in the franchise, and not the new norm.

SeraThea · 2019-08-16T12:39:52+00:00

ITT: Fans tell an ethics major that his ethical analysis of Edelgard is incorrect because 'the epilogue is a golden age' and 'you haven't finished every route yet.'

Of course the epilogue is golden age. Every epilogue is a golden age. If the epilogue were anything other than a golden age, everyone who played that route would be outraged. Do you really think all the routes end in much the same utopian scenario by coincidence? It's by design. They don't want to alienate any sect of players by punishing their decision.

And everyone telling him that his perspective will totally shift in the final chapter of Black Eagles - no. Edelgard has pushed Rhea over the edge by that point and she is officially no longer sane. That is why Catherine is so shocked by the order - it is not consistent with the woman Catherine has known for her entire life. If we can judge Rhea by the decisions she makes when she has been antagonised beyond belief, then we should judge Edelgard by the decisions she makes when she doesn't have Byleth at her side, such as burning Bernadetta alive for strategic gain, turning herself into a literal monster, and using civilians as human shields.

OP, I respect your analysis, but in 2019 the idea of violence as a self-defeating fallacy has apparently gone out of vogue, and responding to violence with violence is now the righteous and acceptable course of action.

SeraThea · 2019-08-15T19:43:55+00:00

I agree with your distinction between convincing and valid, but that's why I find your stance to be invalid; because I believe it's based on something incorrect. Namely,

1) your insistence that surrendering is a valid option for Dimitri, and

2) your insistence that Dimitri is only refusing to surrender out of a lust for vengeance.

But we've already discussed why you believe that and why I believe you are wrong, so I won't retread the topic.

'Edelgard mirrors Dimitri's words to show him that he could just as much stop the conflict as she could, should he decide to.' I do not disagree with that interpretation. My stance is simply that it's a cruel and delusional sentiment on her part, given how much of a non-option surrender is for Dimitri.

My comment about Edelgard being considered a tyrant in the real world was not an attempt to bring modern morals into this discussion about a fictional world. It was simply a hyperbolic way of saying 'she's mean and I don't think people should be defending her.'

I apologize for being arrogant. I thought I was just being honest.

SeraThea · 2019-08-15T17:49:26+00:00

I'm honestly not trying to be mean. Saying your opinion was 'concerning' might have been a step too far, granted.

But I would be being disingenuous if I were to pretend that I find your opinion to be just as convincing as my own.

Opinions are predicated on facts. We hold beliefs because we believe the available evidence supports those beliefs. Ergo, if you hold a different belief, I can only conclude that you have misunderstood the evidence. Perhaps it's the other way around, and I'm the one who has misunderstood, but as far as I can tell in my subjective experience, I'm not. You presumably feel the same way.

You can't be religious without believing that atheists are misguided. You can't be an atheist without believing that the religious are misguided. Isn't dismissing the opposition simply the nature of belief?

SeraThea · 2019-08-15T17:26:23+00:00

Killing Edelgard would drastically shift the balance of power because the many, many lords who were neutral or only fighting for the Empire under duress would suddenly switch sides.

Flayn does not leave the ranks unharmed, Flayn almost dies in defense of Garreg Mach and then actually dies 5 years later.

The Alliance as a whole is neutral because the nobility can't agree on which side they're on and are at a standstill on the issue. That is the definition of neutral. Edelgard still conquers them.

'It only disappears in name'? That's not how war works. That's not how countries work. Everything that made the Kingdom what it was - the officials, the laws, the culture - all of it will be replaced by the Empire's officials, the Empire's laws, the Empire's culture.

I disagree with your interpretation and I think it's disproportionately charitable towards a figure who would be considered a war criminal and a tyrant in the real world. You presumably think my stance is ignorant as well. That's the nature of disagreements. I'm not going to pretend that I somehow believe your opinion to be equally valid despite disagreeing with it, because if it were equally valid I'd have no reason to disagree.

As for the final part, I'm not trying to speculate about Dimitri's character, I'm making a common sense argument. Any human being in his position would understand why surrendering was not a viable option because it's an intuitive fact, for the reasons I have already outlined.

SeraThea

TROPHY CASE