FANDOM


TemplateArchives Archives: #1, #2, #3

Other suggestions for character archetypes? Edit

Besides the Subspace Emissary characters, I also had a few other suggestions for characters in archetypes in mind.

  • Alm (FE2/15) for Jeorge/Lewyn - Is introduced as a simple villager from Ram Village, but is later revealed to be the lost son of Emperor Rudolf.
  • Eliwood and Hector (FE7) for my suggested Innes/Duesell archetype - Once the player beats the game, they have the option of either choosing to play Eliwood's tale or Hector's tale. Which lord they pick will be playable right from Chapter 11, while the other lord does not join until Chapter 12.
  • Ursula (FE7) for Michalis - I've seen this one flying around on certain pages and am not too sure about this one myself, but Ursula is a rather cold and heartless member of the Black Fang who seems more concerned about herself (and Sonia) than the other members, similar to the likes of Kempf and Narcian. Her ambition also sees her becoming a pawn of Nergal, as she is subsequently turned into a Morph after Chapter 26E/28H.
  • Rajaion (FE9) for Hardin - Is initially a kind dragon Laguz, but gets captured and has Izuka's feral drug used on him to make him into Ashnard 's personal mount. While he is not fought directly, he is technically fought as the final boss of Path of Radiance as Ashnard's mount, and regains his sanity shortly before dying after being defeated by Ike's army.
  • Izuka (FE10) for Gharnef - Is a major antagonist in Radiant Dawn, and is responsible for creating the feral drug that turned several Laguz, including the aforementioned Rajaion, feral.
  • Yukimura (FE14 Birthright) for Gotoh - Already explained above.
  • Ryoma (FE14 Revelation) for Navarre - Admittedly, this one is rather shaky, but hear me out. In the Revelation route, Ryoma is initially encountered as an enemy unit in Chapter 13, and while he is not talked to in order to be recruited, Corrin is still able to convince him to fight for their cause by Chapter 16. He also comes with a personal weapon and skill akin to a Killing Edge, has high speed and skill growths, and has ties to the Lena equivalent, Sakura.
  • Azura (FE14 Revelation) for Jeorge/Lewyn - While her status as a royal is known from the start, her status as a Vallite is not revealed until early in the Revelation route.

I also had a suggestion for a new archetype: The Elice archetype. Elice characters are characters, usually princesses, who are close to the lord or another main characer, and are kidnapped or otherwise held hostage by the villains for a majority of the game. Not all members of this archetype are recruited, but those that are join as late-game recruits. In games with this archetype, one of the main goals of the lord is to rescue the Elice character. Suggeted members for this archetype are:

BlazingLarvesta0636 (talk) 19:27, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

My comments for each character here are in response to the games I've played. Other character suggestions might or might not fit the archetypes, so pls don't add them until further replies.
  • Alm - except he is the protagonist which makes him different from the rest..
  • Eliwood/Hector - your sub archetype suggestion is still too vague with so few candidates so far.
  • Ursula - she doesn't seek power, she just worships Sonia and listen to every her commands, so rejected.
  • Rajaion - you said it yourself, he is Ashnard's mount and not fought directly. Also he's not possessed, but drugged.
  • Izuka - we got Sephiran as the Gharnef candidate, you can't have more than one candidate for this archetype, it makes no sense to have many individuals manipulate the main events of a game.
Elice archetype - an archetype should be easy to recognize throughout the franchise, not to mention your candidates are not all valid for your archetype suggestion:
  • Mila is a god and barely meet your criterias
  • Lena is of her own archetype, which can easily be mistaken with this
  • Altena is kidnapped but also raised by Travant, which makes her different
  • Eyvel? I couldn't recall any part where she got kidnapped.
Also, don't add non-canon FE games such as SSB series. -- Khang (talk) 04:46, May 13, 2019 (UTC)

Fernand for Camus ArchetypeEdit

Looking at the dialogue that Fernand has, Fernand as an antagonist really seems to be driven by his beliefs and loyalty towards that very belief. I cannot articulate it that easily, but this reddit thread that discusses Fernand's character really goes over it and I feel that Fernand is VERY much in tune to how Camus functions.

https://old.reddit.com/r/fireemblem/comments/abwgd7/the_heroes_of_valentia_episode_28_fernand_to/

So hopefully you guys agree as well.Omegaxis1 (talk) 20:23, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

Revenge-seeking Archetype? Edit

I’ve noticed that in a few installments in the series, there tends to be that one enemy boss that, while may or may not be fighting out of loyalty, also fights the player out of revenge for killing a loved one. It’s kind of like a revenge-driven version of the Camus archetype.

Here’s my picks for the archetype:

I’m considering adding these as well, but I’m sort of on the fence about them for a few reasons.

  • Brunnya (FE6) She does fight for her dead leader, Zephiel, but doesn’t seem to have too mucch ill will against Roy despite this.
  • Aversa (FE13) She does fight out of revenge for killing Validar in Ch. 25, but considering she was supposedly brainwashed at that point, I’m unsure about this one.
  • Berkut (FE15) He does fight out of revenge in the final chapter, but not for a lost loved one (in fact, he killed his loved one himself).
  • Laevatein (FEH Book II) She does not die at the end of her story, but other than that, her Ch. 13 fight does fit the bill.

BlazingLarvesta0636 (talk) 17:41, May 12, 2019 (UTC)

Again, I have to emphasize that an archetype should be easy to recognize throughout the franchise, with as minimal inconsistency as possible. You shouldn't call it an archetype when you got barely 3 picks, and still unsure with most of your candidates. Also, if a candidate doesn't fulfill all criterias, they're out. -- Khang (talk) 04:53, May 13, 2019 (UTC)

Three Houses Archetypes?Edit

SPOILERS AHEAD. Been thinking about who from FE16 could fit into some of these archetypes. Note that this will contain SPOILERS.

Edelgard fits all the requirements to be a Rudolf. She rules her kingdom as an emperor, she initiates a war with neighboring countries for her own ambitions, is arguably the most major human antagonist in the game, and IIRC in all the routes, her death is either a prelude to the endgame or IS the endgame. She's a shoo-in.

Edelgard may also qualify for the Michalis archetype, as she claimed the power to herself in order to solve a problem in an ineffective way. While she qualifies being a Rudolf, the gullible and naive way she acted from her position in addition to how she allied with the big bad boss for reasons that really make you question either her intellect or insatiable power thirst, making her the perfect pawn for the antagonist to use throughout the game.

Jeralt can be a Cornelius. He's a mentor figure for the main character, is narratively killed by a faction of major antagonists, and his death spurs the protagonist into action (here, against the Flame Emperor and Those Who Slither In The Dark). He's not royalty, but he has strong ties to the Church of Seiros, a major influential body.

Flayn is kind of a toss-up between three: Maria, Lene, and Tiki, but she's most like Tiki, despite not being a divine dragon (though she does possess divine power in some capacity, due to being the original bearer of the Major Crest of Cethleann). She appears to be very young, despite being over 1000, she's kidnapped by the enemy at some point and eventually rescued, and has a strong guardian figure who is also playable in Seteth.

Shamir I think is an Ogma despite not being a sword wielding male. Prior to coming to the monastery she was a mercenary, she helps guard a noble figure in Rhea, and her ending describes her disappearing after the war. Like what the Ogma archetype describes.


I still need to experience 3H more to talk more definitively, so I won't expand on these, but here are some others that I think could fit in some archetypes. Cyril as a Kliff, Thales and/or Solon as a Gharnef, and Hanneman and/or Manuela as Wendells.

Aaronarium (talk) 07:35, July 31, 2019 (UTC)

Explaining RationaleEdit

I want to take this opportunity to explain the rationale behind Flayn as a Tiki because SOMEONE keeps deleting it and YES I'm petty.

Flayn is unequivocably a Tiki. She fits literally all the requirements. She has the appearance of an adolescent but is actually over 1000 years old. This is because her true identity is that of Cethleann, who fought alongside Seiros in the war of heroes over 1000 years prior to FE16. She is like this because she has draconic heritage. Sothis is literally her grandmother, and other people related to Sothis, like Rhea, can shapeshift into dragons, much like a Manakete or Dragon Laguz can. She is kidnapped by an enemy faction and is later rescued and recruited. She also has a playable guardian figure in Seteth.

"But wait!", you ask. "Although Flayn is related to someone who can shapeshift into a dragon, she can't transform herself. Therefore she is NOT a Tiki because Tikis have to be able to transform into dragons". First, all archetypes are arbitrary, and no character exists that fits an archetype in the exact same way others in that archetype do, so the hair splitting to EXCLUDE characters from an archetype is pointless.

More importantly, this statement is patently false. Although Flayn cannot shapeshift over the course of the game, Seteth (who is also a Child of the Goddess) says at the end of the Silver Snow route that he and Flayn lost their ability to transform long ago, while it seems Rhea never lost it. Flayn has the capacity to transform into a dragon. She's a Tiki.


Aaronarium (talk) 08:18, August 14, 2019 (UTC)

We have been pretty strict about this page in general as we have to have consistency present for the story, appearance, AND gameplay aspects of a character. Yes she is older than she appears and yes concept art shows her with the point ears. She fills story criteria, but gameplay wise she is vastly different from other members of the Tiki Archetype. Just because she could turn into a dragon in the past by a statement by Seteth is not enough to qualify unless she actually does as all other members have clearly been shown doing so in story AND in gameplay. Heck, we don't allow Kana on this as they can actually transform, but do not meet the age quirk. Also Ninian would qualify more than she does because she actually does transform in story into a dragon, but not in gameplay and not just because someone said she could in the past or whatever. Unless she gains access to her transformation, for now, she is not a Tiki. Keep in mind, there will be future content for Three Houses so that may change, she does not meet all requirements at the current moment to be a Tiki. She does, however, qualify as a Maria.-Nauibotics (talk) 17:43, August 14, 2019 (UTC)
But here's where you're losing me. You say we need to have consistency present for story, appearance, AND gameplay, but the Archetypes page allows for flexibility all the time by saying things like "ABC archetype is usually XYZ", or by providing asterisks to explain why so-and-so character is in fact a part of this archetype. For a couple examples, Dalen/Gyral need an asterisk to explain why they are an Arran/Samson, despite not fulfilling part of what the archetype description describes: that the one you side with can be recruited. For the same archetype, Tibarn, Giffca, and Naesala are listed for PoR, but the only Arran/Samson thing they do is that you choose one to help you in the endgame, while the others are unavailable. They don't do something with a village closing off or the non-chosen ones becoming bosses when you do choose. For one more, Boey is listed as the Merric of FE2/15, but he has no connection to the Wendell of that game, Nomah, outside of indirect things like their residency at Novis, and their passive support. However, he still fulfills the conditions to be a Merric because the page says that the mentor of the Merric is OFTEN (not always) the Wendell of the game. While I get that we need consistency to even justify the existence of a fanmade term like archetypes, my point is that I don't understand your assertion that archetypes need to fit this hard and fast description in order to fit a given archetype when archetypes that are already on the page and have been there for a while already take liberties with the categorization. We either need a truly concrete set of rules for classification, or we need to allow leniency so we can show a trend with a type of character even when that character isn't a perfect fit for the archetype. The page as it exists now wants to have it both ways, and I don't think that's something either of us want.
Aaronarium (talk) 20:37, August 14, 2019 (UTC)
You do not need to create a brand new section just to make a reply
Let's break down each of your things:
Dalen/Gyral require it because the situation is still present where you can choose one over the other like the archetype is present, but neither are recruitable. Same for the Catherine/Shamir quest in Three Houses. It doesn't affect their recruitment, but you are forced to complete the request for one over the over for the item.
Same for Tibarn, Giffca, Naesala. The point is that for the Arran/Samson archetype is that you are choosing one character over another/others in which the non-chosen units are not playable in that route. Sonia and Deen are not encountered in villages. The one you decided to fight causes the other to join you. The village situation for Arran/Samson was the original premise. It is the most often set up for their Archetype.
The clear cut premise of the Merric archetype is that they are the first mage recruited in game and has a clear cut mentor mentioned in game. The priory is known for teaching Valentian magic to its residence and Nomah is one of the teachers there. Boey fulfills the Merric Archetype to a T.
Other than that, welcome to the Archetype page, the most controversial page on the entire Wiki! The point I'm making specifically regarding Archetypes here, that has been established for years mind you, is that we are listing characters who can fulfill both story And gameplay consistencies of the originals. It is important to fulfill both as they generate a true consistency in both as it will prevent just a page about "All characters who are myrmidons are Navarres" or "All Clerics are Lenas".
In regards to Flayn being a Tiki is really far off from the other members already on the page. An implied ability to transform that was lost during their extended lifespans is not enough when she cannot do it in game while all others clearly demonstrate this ability as COMBAT units, not just narratively. If there are enough examples within an archetype to make an "Often" predicate to a condition then we are more than willing to add special caveats. More often than not, it is the gameplay that first ties the characters together, then the story solidifies and weeds out outliers who are of the same class as members, but clearly have nothing to do with the Archetype.
You are free to debate if she belongs in the Archetype, but my stance on the matter is that she is more of a Maria than a Tiki as
She is the second healer recruited
Is a young appearing female
Has plot importance heritage
Has perks and options other healers do not have (she is the only Rescue staff user) as well as her Major crest ability.
If you want to make it a vote you are free to do so-Nauibotics (talk) 21:31, August 14, 2019 (UTC)
First, I couldn't finagle the formatting to make a separate paragraph, it would just smash the text against yours and I didn't know if a different topic was preferable for the sake of neatness.
If you want to talk about making a vote, then it should be about a community consensus as to what constitutes membership to an archetype than about any singular opinion. While I still disagree with you when you say she isn't a Tiki, this disagreement should at least have a concrete metric with which to judge the sides, as opposed to being judged against the arbitrary nature of the page. Questions like these should have definitive answers: If a character fits the story requirements for an archetype but not gameplay requirements, should they be included in the archetype? What about the reverse? To what extent should archetypes be strictly enforced? To what extent are archetypes flexible outside of the description on the page? Maybe the page could benefit from archetypes having something like a section where archetype-adjacent characters are listed. This way the descriptors for each archetype can be made more definitive without risking the exclusion of characters who can in some way further educate the reader more on how IS utilizes trends in their design process. I'm open to other options, and while I know I may be seeming contentious about this, I really do just like the page, and think its a shame that, in my opinion, the system of categorization currently in place does the page's purpose (to inform on the usage of trends throughout the series) a disservice.


Aaronarium (talk) 06:23, August 15, 2019 (UTC)

Well regardless, if you want to put it up for a vote then it I am all for it. In terms of the rules of the page, The main point is that the character should hit story and gameplay aspects of a character. All of them should adhere to these as much as possible as missing one or the other makes them less similar.
Strictness may seem like a disservice, but it really keeps the page focused on the clear cut archetypes that occur both gameplay and storywise that is universally shared amongst these units.
I can already know that you wish to Approve of Flayn and I Oppose it. So that is one each. We will need to gather more to come to a verdict.
In my opinion, once again, Flayn DOES fit the story criteria. I agree that it is consistent with the archetype. She DOES NOT fit the gameplay aspect since she is not a character who can transform in and out of a Dragon form during gameplay like the existing 5 on the page. That is my reasoning.—Nauibotics (talk) 09:20, August 15, 2019 (UTC)

Adding some other three houses units? Edit

Could Petra be considered a "Navarre" archetype as she has growths to be more balanced into being one who crits more and as a myrmidon. However she also has that ability that increases her critical hit rate.

Also interestingly I would also like to think that Manuela and Hannenman are Cain/Abel archetypes Manuela's growthrates (as a commoner) has higher hp, strength, speed and defense while Hannenman has higher Magic, Resistance and Dex growths (they are both tied in luck growth)

Petra isn't a a recruitable enemy, so she's not a Navarre, but I do think Hanneman and Manuela make for an interesting case of Cain and Abel Are You Serious (talk) 04:25, August 16, 2019 (UTC)

Yeah that was the part I was curious on as also while do also share the "Opposite personalities" that the Cain/Abel archetype are known for (like how Kent and Sain are opposites personality wise, or Sully and Stahl). The only thing they really lack is the color scheming Also the two can be recruited on the same chapter (Chapter 8 I believe) so I guess that does help with the credence with them being Cain/Abel

Catherine and Shamir as Three Houses' Cain/Abel duo?Edit

I think Catherine and Shamir should be considered a red and green duo. It's not as obvious when just looking at their portraits, but looking at them in-game, especially side-by-side, they are clearly wearing red and green themed outfits, even if Shamir's shade of green is a bit unusual. Plus, their relationship fits with other members of the archetype from previous games. They are partners in battle with a lot of dialogue between them, and both serve as knights of Seiros with Rhea as their liege. Even their personalities fit, with Catherine (red) being very exuberant and Shamir (green) being much calmer. The only aspect that isn't part of the pattern is the fact that they have different base classes. But then again, it was thought that the archetype was exclusively cavaliers until Saizo and Kaze came along. This is probably the one archetype that I think the developers intentionally put into every game as a sort of easter egg, so I definitely see this as part of the archetype, even if its not as traditional of one.

Beadger (talk) 20:41, August 23, 2019 (UTC)

Three Houses is generally difficult to classify with past archetypes. Personality wise, I can kind of see the similarities but the outlier is, as you pointed out, they do not share the same starting class, which all previous members do.—Nauibotics (talk) 21:30, August 23, 2019 (UTC)


Yeah, I figured that would be the main argument. I still personally consider Catherine and Shamir to be the designated red/green duo of Three Houses, but I understand that, because of their classes, they aren't technically part of the Cain/Abel archetype. The thing is, with Three Houses' game design, it would be really difficult to have a red/green duo that does fit every criteria of previous members of the archetype. Since the majority of characters start as a blank slate, all the others are obviously going to be pretty diverse to balance the playable units. I don't think there are any two non-student characters that share the same starting class. Having a traditional Cain/Abel duo would just be an unnecessary imbalance of classes among a small group of units.

Beadger (talk) 00:24, August 24, 2019 (UTC)



I just realized something. Technically, Oscar and Kieran have different starting classes- Oscar is a lance knight, Kieran is an axe knight.

Beadger (talk) 03:45, August 24, 2019 (UTC)

Technically yes, Oscar and Kieran are different starting classes, but that's only because Tellius splits the Cavalier class into separate classes based on their specialized weapon. Same goes for Mages and what not. That is more of a technicality in wording than in actual execution. Catherine and Shamir are completely different classes.——Nauibotics (talk) 17:39, August 26, 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand that. I wasn't really using it as an argument, just pointing out that claiming the Cain/Abel archetype have to be the same class isn't completely accurate, since certain exceptions exist. I'm satisfied with my viewpoint that Catherine and Shamir are an intentional red/green duo, but technically not actually being part of the Cain and Abel archetype since they lack the similar class and opposing stats.

Beadger (talk) 23:06, August 26, 2019 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.