In the topic of 3 Houses, I think Dimitri is a deconstruction of the lord archetype. On a glance, he’s your average main fire emblem lord: charismatic, charming young man with a blue color scheme that lost his parents, is a capable leader and has above-average powers that make him unique, but instead of being a somewhat artificial character that always stands against evil and values his friends, his past broke him, he constantly suffers because of it and you don’t see it until the end of the first arc, it’s a really good deconstruction of the main lord archetype, in my opinion, and is one of the reasons why 3 Houses is a standout to so many players.
4 Likes
roy is memorable cuz i have replayed a lot of fe6
4 Likes
I don’t know about Roy… But PUNK ROY? Absolutely 
no love for fe6 bros, but roy is actually a wiser and smarter strategist than leif overall. That makes him more unique for a 15 yo who is more badass and can lead an army better than any of yall.
Which in terms of this conversation, makes Roy less memorable. Again, a sword lord that does the right thing, greater cause and the rest of the archeotype. He is perfectly capable of doing everything right from the beggining and even when he does something wrong, it magically turns right (refer to chapter 8x ending).
Meanwhile Leif is immature. He fails a lot of times, and these failings have grave consecuencies. Then he learns from his mistakes in order to get closer to what he thinks he should be: Seliph, the archeotypical lord from Holy war… But at least Leif had to work his way through failings and struggles to get where he is, unlike his average main character cousin. Leif learns, and little by little starts doing things right, turning into a new man who is closer to Sigurd’s shadow than his son will ever be.
I think being weak af lord makes him memorable? At least it changes the gameplay perspective of the series like having an actual “king” piece of the game or having someone you have to protect is what makes fe a purely strategy game.
Dude, we were never speaking about stats here. We were speaking about what makes a lord memorable as a character. You know, personality, character development, etc. It doesn’t matter wheter he is weaker or not than Roy. Roy is an archeotypical lord with 0 originality behind him, like Marth or Ephraim. Leif has a lot more to him than being perfect from minute 1 and having the personality of a potato.
Are we not? But stats and gameplay-story integration does matter for how memorable a character is. I don’t think Hector would be as memorable as a protagonist if not for the fact he feels completely different not just character wise, but also gameplay wise, due to being an armor knight like axe user instead of your average mercenary like sword lord.
If Hector had the same character as he does ingame, but was just another sword lord who felt exactly like eliwood gameplay wise he would not be nearly as memorable.
1 Like
Yes, we were never speaking about stats here. But sure, let’s bring them up. Yes, Hector’s armored class is interesting. That only makes my point about Roy stronger. Besides, I already stated on my very first post that Hector using an axe is interesting even though it doesn’t make him any less well written, which is what we are talking about here.
I only played FE7 and FE8 to completion. Aside from the GBA games that I completed, I also finished Awakening, Revelation and Shadows of Valentia, for the 3DS.
I can list all of the playable characters from FE7 and FE8 by heart, however I can’t do the same for the 3DS game characters.
Lyndis, Eliwood and Hector are the most memorable for me because they had an interesting dynamic. Throwing Ninian and Nergal into the mix made the cast even more memorable. Nergal was obsessed with creating his morphs, compared to Leon who is more of a tragic hero who died trying to save his kingdom.
Even though I find other character designs more interesting and pleasing to the eye, I cannot deny that Hector has some of the most impressive traits of all FE protagonists I’ve analyzed.
3 Likes
Well… Lyndis, Eliwood and Hector by themselves are not that great, except for Hector (all this in my opinion). However and as you stated, mixing them together makes them memorable as a group.
2 Likes
I think Lyndis is quite unique, being a Sacaen and all. Her class, stats and identity connect her to myrmidons, swordmasters, nomads and nomadic troopers.
Personally, I love Eliwood. His name is cute, he wears a circlet and he’s sensitive. He is based loosely on various characters from medieval European legend. His ancestor is called Roland, which is a direct reference to France’s Charlemagne.
What is interesting is how people become inspired by the same mythology and write stories that reference it. This is good because it helps characters become more memorable, when they are based on script that has been studied by thousands throughout time.
4 Likes
I enjoy more “archetypical”, “bland” Lords like Marth, Seliph, Roy, Eliwood and Eirika because they’re righteous, fair and noble to a fault, are the perfect leaders to rally around for their conflict of choice, and are most compelling as a result.
1 Like
I like using archetypes too, which are also known as ‘tropes’. Sometimes I consult this website here: https://tvtropes.org/
Telling the same story might not be as original, but it allows a writer to play with those archetypes and arrange them differently.
1 Like
If we’re talking very specifically about the memorability of Fire Emblem protagonists, or even just video game protagonists more generally, I think a protagonist’s “gameplay design” should be just as much fair game to discuss as any other aspect of them. A creative work is all parts of itself, and how a main protagonist plays serves an undeniable role in forming the impression they make and how they’re remembered going forward, as is evidenced by characters like Sigurd, Roy, and Hector.
If the subject is about protagonists of fictional stories in the broadest sense possible, I can see a case for excluding medium-specific parts of how characters might be portrayed, like how a playable character is designed and balanced in a video game. Still, to discount that aspect entirely is, in my mind, to dismiss a non-negligible factor in the reception of relevant characters. It should at least be acknowledged, even if not made the main focus.
2 Likes