Lugh (FE6)Edit

Suggested by GreatDane112 for Merric archetype. Opposed by User:Nauibotics. The result should be decided by the majority. For the time being, leave it off the article. -- Khang (talk)

@fandom 04:11, May 3, 2017 (UTC)

After putting some thought to this, I think I support GreatDane112's suggestion. Lugh is the first recruitable mage, and his mother is Nino, which would at least explain his skill with magic, despite not being raised or taught by her. Without a mentor stated by him, I suppose this is a good reason for consideration? -- Khang (talk)@fandom12:27, May 4, 2017 (UTC)
It's not that I oppose his reasoning, but here's where things become super gray. How much does Lugh fulfill the archetype? Here's what Lugh fulfills: He is the first mage and he is of similar personality. However, we've denied certain characters in other games who have Merric traits like Ricken for example. Otherarrow stated that because Ricken is the second mage AND has no acknowledge teacher, we weren't supposed to count him. This is even though Ricken is the first MALE mage, has a similar personality, and is a Wind Mage. GreatDane insisted on putting the "friendship to the Lord character" point, which is true for Merric and a lot in his archetype, but Lugh is not friends with Roy, joining him to make Bern pay for destroying his home, not because he's friends with Roy. Ricken on the other hand, idolizes Chrom so at least there is some bond between the two that has been established. It's like how strict we've been on a lot of these archetypes like Navarre/Lon'qu. Lon'qu is in personality the same as Navarre, but because he's not fought as an enemy nor is there a canon relationship with the Lena-like character of the game, Lissa, we don't include him on that Archetype, despite the strong similarities. It's up to you guys. I only have been acting in the manner I have because of how strict Otherarrow has been on adding characters to this page. If he did not allow Ricken to be on the page mainly because he has no identified mentor, I doubt Lugh would fly either and why he wasn't on the page before this whole debate. —Nauibotics (talk) 03:06, May 9, 2017 (UTC)

Nasir and Ena (FE9)Edit

I feel they should count for the Malledus Archetype, as they act as a tactical confidant for Ike (and Petrine in Ena's case) in Path of Radiance. They seem to check the boxes off for what counts as one. GreatDane112 (talk) 12:41, May 3, 2017 (UTC)

But they're not Ike's main tactical confidant like most Malledus are. Soren and Titania fulfil that role much more than Nasir and Ena.—Nauibotics (talk) 18:43, May 3, 2017 (UTC)
But they still fulfill that role to at least some degree, they may not be Ike's main tacticians, but when they are they bring forth some of the most important ones in the story. I'd also argue Ena to be something of a villanous example (even if it's only temporary) as she does act as Petrine's main tactical accompaniment and a foil to Soren who fulfills the archetype for much the same reasons that Ena does. I don't think there has to be just Soren and Titania when Nasir and Ena are behind a good amount of the important decisions behind both sides. GreatDane112 (talk) 18:50, May 3, 2017 (UTC)


I don't believe Ephraim, Eirika, Lucina and Azura should be included in the Caeda archetype since they actually are Lord characters in their respective games. I'm also not sure about Deirde's inclusion; she's important, but not "secondary protagonist" important the Julia is in the Second Generation Are You Serious (talk) 16:02, May 4, 2017 (UTC)

I'd contest Azura, she's essentially Corrin's right-hand and main love interest, checking the boxes for the Archetype. She's also not the protagonist, which is the main criteria of the Lord. GreatDane112 (talk) 17:39, May 4, 2017 (UTC)
Thinking about it, Ephraim and Eirika are dual Lords. One has a slightly reduced role in the other's route, but they are both important throughout the entire game. I think that much is confirmed. Lucina is interesting and more Caeda like given she has a supporting role in the first half of Awakening and is more involved directly in the second half, but is essentially just slightly less important than Chrom or the Avatar in terms of the story events. Awakening is really the story of the Chrom and Avatar.
As for Azura, she's not the Avatar's main love interest as much as the game does not have canon pairings. This point makes even less sense if the Avatar is female as there is no same-sex S-Support between Azura and the female Avatar. I would say Azura has Lord qualities, but she's essentially a deuteragonist when compared to the story being mainly about the Avatar. Azura is the most prominent ally and heavily involved in all three routes, more so than any past Caeda has been. If anything the entire Hoshidan and Nohrian siblings are Caedas too in terms of their importance in the Birthright and Conquest stories respectively. Hard to say. This is one of those archetypes that is really hard to define (and was only added recently I might add).—Nauibotics (talk) 00:58, May 5, 2017 (UTC)

Corrin (FE 14) is a Malledeus??? Edit

Ive noticed someone added in Corrin/Avatar for the "Malledeus" section... which is completely untrue as Corrin is not the strategist to the lord... HE IS THE lord character... and he also is not knowledgeable at all about the land... If anything Azura (for revelations, or perhaps the other stories as well... considering the major part she plays) is the Malledeus of FE 14.. ~~Ronman5~~

Corrin, aka the Fates Avatar, is the main Lord character, that much is confirmed. Azura is more like Caeda. Important to the plot, not just a strategist for the Avatar.The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nauibotics (talk • contribs).
True I suppose... but taking a shot at the dark here... Corrin is no strategist... thats why he certaintly is not the "Malledeus" of the group... and I said Azura as while she is a Caeda, she is the one to lead them through the invisible kingdom... But I do see points about that... I believe there truely is no "Malledeus" of FE 14. ~~Ronman5~~

Kliff and Est in FE 15 Edit

Kliff has been arguably nerfed in Echoes, making him more average. So I'm not sure if he should be considered his archetype anymore. However, it's a bit strange to just have FE 2 next to his name, when he obviously also appears in FE 15. Est also has the same issue as broken down by a user on reddit. So, I'm not sure how you all want to tackle this.

Darthkeeper (talk) 08:05, May 16, 2017 (UTC)Darthkeeper

IMO, both should be included. Sophia IS included after all, and she is even worse than FE15 Est (her bad stats are legendary among people who played FE6). Then there's Rina (that 10% Str/Def on a cavalier) and Ewan (He has lower growth total than Lute for god's sake). But still, why did they have to butcher Est more in each successive game?
As for Kliff, IMO he still fits the archetype, being a LVL 1 villager. As far as I know Mozu was not particularly impressive statwise, yet she counts.
Kruggov (talk) 09:31, May 16, 2017 (UTC)

Berkut and FernandEdit

Berkut is a complex one. From what I've seen he can either be a Michalis (Due to his determination to rule Rigel and beat Alm) or a Camus (He know that Rigel is on the brink of destruction, yet he still fights for his dying country). However I'm having trouble deciding which archetype he fits into. So I thought I can get get some help deciding where he belongs.

As for Fernand. I'm wondering if he is even based off a archetype. Again what are your opinions? MasterTEH (talk) 15:45, May 20, 2017 (UTC)

I see Berkut as the Michalis archetype, personally.
Fernand, on the other hand, could be part of a new archetype - a type of prejudiced characters who gain that attitude after a tragedy. Oboro from Fates also goes under this category. ...Though personality-wise, he'd be the harsh and sharp-tongued type with an irritable, snappish attitude when provoked, and flustered when teased. Also unpredictable when something pisses him off. And that describes both Fernand and Saizo.
Death Goddess Raiden (talk) 09:52, June 5, 2017 (UTC)

Caeda archetype is too inconsistentEdit

It should be something like early game Pegasus Knight or important female character who is charismatic. Like there is a pattern with Caeda, Karin, and Lilina recruiting many units, but I don't see Deidre and Sothe having any connection to them besides being love interests to the protagonist. Emperor Hardin (talk) 02:48, May 23, 2017 (UTC)

Love interest/family relation and heavily involved in the plot. That's all there is for this archetype and they fit, no? -- Khang (talk)@fandom11:17, May 23, 2017 (UTC)
The Caeda archetype seems to be one we determined ourselves (that definitely, with complete certainty, was not on the article when I started reading this wiki back in 2011) so it appears to be the matter of however we define it. This we might have to wait for Otherarrow to return for. --Thenewguy34 15:48, May 23, 2017 (UTC)
I caught this browsing by chance (I still read the wiki!) and if I was still actively editing and stressing myself out curating this particular page, I'd have axed this one, for what it's worth. Don't take this as "this is what you must do" or anything though, I'm just passing by.--Otherarrow (talk) 16:18, May 23, 2017 (UTC)
I actually have never been bothered looking at this page until you're away. Now that I'm involved, all I can see is that this page is way too subjective. Unless we find a better way to present this page, where people could have a clearer view of the key conditions of each archetype (lorewise/statwise), this page will never stop being the page with most revisions/edit wars. -- Khang (talk)@fandom 16:37, May 23, 2017 (UTC)
L Any Love interest that is involved with the plot is far too generic for my tastes. There needs to be a specific pattern. I think it needs to be rewritten or axed as Otherarrow suggested.

Some characters that should probably be added Edit

I really think that Ricken (FE13) definitely qualifies for the Merrick archetype; as do Lon'qu (FE13) as a Navarre, and Mark (FE7) as a Malledus. I could maybe argue that Sumia (FE13) is a Caeda, though that's kind of debatable. Actually, as noted above, this archetype in of itself is really debatable; maybe it could be specifically a Pegasus Knight who is also a love interest, is implied to be the most "canon", and/or is heavily involved in the plot? I've noticed that love interests that tend to be pushed the most tend to be Pegasus Knights (or are false love interests in the case of Elincia). Or maybe perhaps a love interest character who can recruit other characters?

Also, I don't know if this counts as an archetype, and I could be wrong since I'm relatively new to this fandom, but I've noticed that if the Lord has a sister that isn't a Lord themselves (or at least one of them if there's many, i.e. Corrin), they are overwhelmingly likely to be healers. Mainly, Elice, Mist, Lissa, Elise and Sakura come to mind. Is this an "Elice archetype" or just a coincidence?

Teetdidkya (talk) 10:48, May 25, 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the most subjective place on the wiki. The characters you proposed have all been rejected to my memory, and why? I have no idea, this should be changed somehow.
Your new archetype proposal doesn't seem to be qualified imo, simply cuz there are not enough candidates, and 2 of your candidates already belonged to the Maria archetype (Mist and Elise). -- Khang (talk)@fandom 15:02, May 25, 2017 (UTC)

Ricken does not belong in the Merric archetype, as he does not have a mentor or teacher that ultimately has foresight over his training - every member of the Merric archetype does, and Ricken does not.

Lon'qu is not a recruitable enemy, a necessity to be a member of the Navarre archetype.

Mark as a Malledus I do not remember being brought up; if Otherarrow did reject Mark as a Malledus I would have to hear his rationale first. I see your point but I have a very strong feeling Otherarrow may have removed him from that list in the past.

I removed the Caeda archetype and so far Khang has not objected to its removal so that idea is rather dead. --Thenewguy34 15:35, May 25, 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't the one suggested or added the Caeda archetype though, but since it got issues, so yeah, gone it should. -- Khang (talk)@fandom 16:11, May 25, 2017 (UTC)

A page for rejected archetypes? Edit

So I've been thinking if this would help, like creating another page (such as [Archetype/Rejected]) to include rejected characters of certain archetypes or even an archetype in a whole. This would likely reduce some issues with the page, like people will know why their choices were rejected and other people won't add the similar ones later. Any thoughts? -- Khang (talk)

@fandom 16:21, May 25, 2017 (UTC)

That would probably for the best, but Archetypes are so subjective that in some cases character X counts for one person, but not another (like, is Iagohans a Michalis? Are Boyd and Nolan Bord and Cord despite the two not being associated with each other in any way? etc). I will say though, having rejected archetype ideas is probably a good idea until we can dig up those artbook scans of IS's official take on these, as folks tend to group together characters as a thing under some pretty general things, such as "all first of X class" or "all members of X class who don't fit archetype Y".
Ideally, this page would only include the archetypes we definitely know are things, like Cain and Abel we know are things and who IS lists for them up to New Mystery (ironically, Cain 2 and Alva aren't), we know Jagen is a thing (and I read once that IS considers Oifey and Jagen as interchangeable but no source on that), but do we know if Merric is a thing? If Jeorge is a thing? Etc.
Also, if it wasn't completely unprofessional to do, I'd put in large text, big bold letters "Mustafa is a not a Camus" at the top of the page.--Otherarrow (talk) 23:19, May 26, 2017 (UTC)
I mean, this Archetype page in general is hard to classify. I mean we are pretty strict on it, but the outlines requiring that the characters follow strict personality quirks or game circumstances If we were to do a Rejected page, then I think the best way would be to do like a character misconception for each character where we explain why certain characters are not qualified for certain archetypes. At the same time, it still leave the room for debate about characters and we have overturned previously unmentioned types if there are enough evidence. But I suppose we could just copy the pages section by section and just mention why certain character's don't fit.

For example, using our ever popular Mustafa and recently Scarlet:


  • Mustafa - While Mustafa does not bear ill will to the player's army and allows his men to leave the battlefield, Mustafa does not play as large of a role in the story. He appear in one sole chapter and is the boss of that sole chapter. He fights against the player not out of loyalty to his nation, but fear to the repercussions if he turns tailcoat.


  • Scarlet - While clad in Red like most Minervas, she does not join the player's army after being convinced by the main Lord of the game to switch sides and fight their homeland. Scarlet was already rebelling against Nohr by the time the player encounters and recruits her in Birthright and fights against Vallan, whom she has no prior connection to prior to being recruited.

Something like that. What do you think?—Nauibotics (talk) 03:52, September 15, 2017 (UTC)

Sounds good to me =] -- Khang (talk)@fandom11:38, September 15, 2017 (UTC)
Alright I finally got around to making the page so check it out: Archetype/RejectedNauibotics (talk) 02:24, September 25, 2017 (UTC)

So should O'Neill count as a Gazzak? Edit

I'm unsure about counting O'Neill as a member of the Gazzak/beginning bandit archetype. While he fits more criteria and is thuggish, O'neill is a member of the Grado army and unlike Dimaggio or Gerrard is never implied to take part in pillaging. I've also added Thief Head from Echoes, but slightly unsure as he's on the third encounter in the game, but is the first boss in Echoes to not be a wholly generic unit. Anyone else have anything to add or suggest? Emperor Hardin (talk) 21:32, June 6, 2017 (UTC)

Should there be an Orson archetype?Edit

I had this thought after playing SoV, what with Berkut and his romance with Rinea, even after her death and rebirth as a witch, and his descent into madness, which is kinda like Orson and Monica, with Lyon bringing her back from the dead as a zombie. This might just be wishful thinking that IS might do more villains like Orson (who is really good in my eyes), but I think it's worth noting.

The thing is, there are only two examples of that happening. I do not recall there being any other examples of characters like Orson and Berkut in the series. Its not enough to qualify them as an Archetype.—Nauibotics (talk) 04:35, June 13, 2017 (UTC)

It feels like there's an unmarked archetype. I'm not exactly sure WHEN it began, but I certainly feel it is there. The Lowen/Franz archetype. Often, when we get the Red and Green knights, there seems to be a third unit of the same class who wears yellow. They will either have very high defense, but weak attack power (See Lowen and Valbar) or have higher Attack and lower Defense (see Franz, Makalov, and Kagero). While part of me wants to also mention Kellam, he is a different class from Awakening's Cain/Abel duo plus excels in both Strength and Defense. Otherwise, this strange trend -- one extreme or the other on the third yellow knight -- does feel like a trend. Thought? 03:47, June 15, 2017 (UTC)

But here's some problems with that "Archetype"; first off, some of your "examples" are pretty weak. Lowen has no affiliation to either Sain or Kent. Same could be said of Valbar to Lukas and Forsyth, Makalov to Kieran and Oscar. Second an archetype needs more than just color similarites, personality is often consistent among Archetypes. Lastly, they need some special trait that separates them from other characters like Navarre is generally an enemy recruited Myrmidon or Merric being a Wind Mage taught by a Wendell. All of these "Lowen/Franz" units really have nothing that feels similar other than perhaps a yellow color affinity. —Nauibotics (talk) 09:19, June 15, 2017 (UTC)
Your proposal is also based on stats, which is fairly subjective imo, not to mention the inconsistency. --Khang (talk)@fandom 10:22, June 15, 2017 (UTC)

Is Iago a Gharnef?Edit

He's an evil sorcerer and schemer.Urd the Dork (talk) 13:39, June 18, 2017 (UTC) 

No, Gharnefs manipulate the events of the game themselves and are largely responsible for the main conflict. Iago schemes for Garon, but is not responsible for Garon's turn to evil, and has no connection to Anankos. The overall events of the game would have occurred regardless without him, something that isn't true of Gharnefs. -AdmiralTails (talk) 19:06, June 21, 2018 (UTC)

Lachesis Archetype?Edit

I feel like there are enough of these characters to fill it in. They're all nobles, posh, pampered, and are very annoying if you don't know them. Some of them have a brother whom they are extremely attached to. So would this count as an archetype even though some of them don't share classes?

RagingFE (talk) 14:02, July 6, 2017 (UTC)RagingFE

And your candidates? -- Khang (talk)@fandom 14:57, July 6, 2017 (UTC)
My personal additions would be Lachesis, Clarine, maybe Priscilla, Maribelle, and Echoes Clair.
RagingFE (talk) 02:39, July 13, 2017 (UTC)RagingFE
  1. Your candidates are not consistent with the personality condition as you proposed (Priscilla and Clair).
  2. They don't share classes (Lachesis and Clair)
  3. The only conditions that they probably fulfill is being nobles, and having a close brother (though I'm uncertain if Maribelle have one).
Too many issues, so no for me. -- Khang (talk)@fandom 15:04, July 21, 2017 (UTC)

Tactitian (FE7)Edit

The Tactitian of Blazing Blade should be a Malledus right? He's the one giving out the strategies and talks to the main lord in the very same way certain characters would talk to a Malledus. He should count right?GreatDane112 (talk) 21:38, July 18, 2017 (UTC)

He's a complete non-character with no dialogue or presence in the story whatsoever. So no.--Otherarrow (talk) 21:55, July 18, 2017 (UTC)

Jeorge as the other archer archetype?Edit

Noticed that several archers like Jeorge, Klein, Innes, Shinon and Takumi fit here. They tend to be more aloof than the Gordins they mentored and more often than not can show up as Snipers.Urd the Dork (talk) 15:32, July 30, 2017 (UTC) 

Mae and BoeyEdit

So I have taken a notice in something. Mae and Boey seem to also represent the Cain and Abel Archetype. Boey wears green based clothing while Mae wears red based clothing. Also, their stats seem to work in the same manner as the archetype. Sure, Mae is the more laid back one while Boey is more serious, but the archetype does have it labeled that some Cain and Abel are either reversed or different. Omegaxis1 (talk) 14:38, July 20, 2017 (UTC)

Opposed. I think the key condition for them to fulfill for the archetype here is that they must be cavaliers. Along with the red/green condition, they are 2 clear conditions that are not subjective. -- Khang (talk)@fandom14:42, July 21, 2017 (UTC)
I can't say that non-cavaliers are an issue, after all both Kaze-Saizo (ninjas) and Lukas-Forsyth (soldiers) pairs are included. Although I'm a bit iffy about Mae and Boey counting for Cain/Abel, just noting that non-cav pairs have appeared before. Kruggov (talk) 15:09, July 21, 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, we've already had non-cavaliers be done at this point. I still move that Mae and Boey be included. Because it sort of makes sense if you think about it. Celica and Alm travel their own routes. So they're bound to come across some archetypes of their own. Alm finds the Cain/Abel archetype with Lukas/Forsyth, and Celica has Mae/Boy as her Cain/Abel archetype. Omegaxis1 (talk) 15:18, July 21, 2017 (UTC)
I don't think Boey is "green enough", especially his original art. Then again Forsyth and Lukas count now. Which I can see why, but am also a little puzzled about.
Darthkeeper (talk) 09:26, July 30, 2017 (UTC)
There's been no movement on this topic, so I'll say it again. Based on their personalities and how the series has been going with the Cain and Abel archetype, Mae ad Boey are definitely fitting of the same archetype and believe firmly that they should be listed under such archetype in the wiki page. Omegaxis1 (talk) 22:21, August 28, 2017 (UTC)
If non-cavalier is acceptable here, then I don't see any reason to object. -- Khang (talk)@fandom 11:41, September 2, 2017 (UTC)

Felicia/Jakob as Oifeys? Edit

Do Felicia or Jakob really qualify as Oifeys? While they do join in poromoted classes, they are about as powerul as a tier 1 character (with accelerated exp gain and 40 levels to compensate). Kruggov (talk) 15:05, September 3, 2017 (UTC)

Well, the only part of them that is slightly off is their starting stats. Otherwise, they do have the makings of an Oifey IMO. They are Promoted units who are received early in the game, are slightly weaker than a Jagen (in this case Revelation Gunter) in terms of their starting stats, have decent growths allowing them to function well throughout the game, and are slightly older than the Main lord (at least Jakob fulfills this, but Felicia might not). Either way, I believe that they fit the description rather well.—Nauibotics (talk) 20:41, September 3, 2017 (UTC)
I think it's more of a case of circumstance that they're promoted units. They're designed to be a maid/butler, so they have to be promoted. Their internal level is 1 (or really low), effectively making them like any other early game unit. Where as an Oifey doesn't gain that much exp like any other standard promoted unit. My other point is more subjective and contraversial, so I'll omit it. Typically an Oifey/Jagen is a "crutch" character that can hold enemies off, weaken them, get you out of a tight spot, etc. Felicia and Jakob don't really do this. You could argue they can perform these actions, but they do it just as well as any other "standard" unit. Darthkeeper (talk) 23:04, September 24, 2017 (UTC)

Fighter/Berserker Archetype?Edit

Should there be an archtype for low defense, high STR/SPD solo fighters/berserkers, like Largo, Vaike, or Charlotte? I'm assuming that there need to be about five examples to form an archetype, I just haven't played enough games to get a feel for the unit functionality of any others. GermanTacoss (talk) 03:13, September 24, 2017 (UTC)

You may need more than just stats criteria to define a new archetype, something that is apparent enough to see, stats alone is just too subjective and hard to recognize. --Khang (talk)@fandom 03:25, September 24, 2017 (UTC)
What you're describing is the typical traits of the class. Sure there are outliers, such as Hinata who is a slower more bulky myrmidon/samurai, but again that's an outlier. Sometimes thre are even changes to classes, but as your proposal stands, it's not substantial enough to be an archetype. Darthkeeper (talk) 23:08, September 24, 2017 (UTC)
Archetypes are usually defined by three things. Similar stat trends, similar personality quirks, and similar story roles. We would need something to define a commonality for a fighter/berserker archetype outside of just stats. If not, we could do a lot of Archetypes for similar stat trends.—Nauibotics (talk) 01:46, September 25, 2017 (UTC)

Protagonist/Lord archetype Edit

Should there be a section for the main character, whose death always results in a game over? I know that's already covered by the Lord page, but some characters whose deaths result in game overs aren't counted as Lords. Plus, Lucina is a lord, but her death is not a game over. There's:

There's a couple other characters who could also count, like Elincia and Sothe, but I haven't played enough of the Tellius series to know. Dont Be a Sad Panda (talk) 17:40, October 10, 2017 (UTC)

Because the archetype is basically "List of lords/avatars". For Chars who are not lords, but still give a game over when they die, it's more interesting, but limited to Enteh/Katri/Shigen from TearRing Saga, Ward from Berwick Saga (AFAIK), chars like Sothe or Elincia from FE10 (also not for the entire game), and avatars.
Except being a lord does not equal being a protagonist, as Lucina and the avatars show. It also obviously wouldn't include characters who must not die in only one or two chapters, like Nephenee. Dont Be a Sad Panda (talk) 18:11, October 10, 2017 (UTC)
Okay, so this is a "Marth" Archetype? Do we really need to make a section for them? Other Archetypes need more context of their similarities and are noted more by players who have played more than one game in the series. If we do keep them, why not make a section for the Medeus then (the god-like final bosses?). This archetype is much too obvious and is techincaly already noted on the Lord page. Keep in mind that this Archetype page has existed for years. Do we really need a section devoted to THE most common Archetype for an obvious character type in the FE series? I say no since it is painfully obvious. This "Marth" archetype and my hypothetical "Medeus" archetype are really unecessary as anyone with any sense of how literature and stories goes knows what a protagonist is and can recognize that all Lord and Lord-like characters share similar traits. This page is more meant for specific units who share unique traits with other characters across the series. Not every game has a Navarre and not every game has a Wendell. However several games do contain characters like the originals.—Nauibotics (talk) 20:40, October 10, 2017 (UTC)
And I agree, except I do think there are a couple of notable exceptions, such as Robin, Kris (not required for every chapter, yet their death causes a Game Over), and Lucina (not required for every chapter, nor does her death cause a game over). Plus, not every protagonist is a Lord, with this archetype, we can remove the Lord-like notes on the Lord page. I do think a Medeus archetype would be cool, as the dragon final boss is a recurring trope in the series, yet there is no category for them.Dont Be a Sad Panda (talk) 00:32, October 11, 2017 (UTC)
I still feel that it is an unnecessary Archetype given the fact that it is the most obvious trend throughout the series and their only similarities are that their deaths causes an instant game over. Characterization varies, character traits vary, even their stat trends vary. As for the Medeus archetype I mentioned, it's of similar principal and it was more to make a point of not needing to point out the obvious on this page for a character trend that really does not take rocket science to identify. We know that the main lords are the main protagonist and if they die it's game over. It's been that way since the beginning and I strongly doubt that any person who had played FE games could tell this. Even the Medeus. It's obvious that the final boss is usually some sort of godlike being who manipulated the events of the game, thus is the main protagonist. (I say don't put dragons because Ashera is basically the same as the others, just not a huge hulking dragon or heck, a giant demon like Formortis). I strongly doubt you'll get support to have it added but I suppose you can try to convince others to agree with you. That would be the best course of action.—Nauibotics (talk) 06:41, October 11, 2017 (UTC)
Strongly oppose. The criteria for this archetype is main characters, whose death always results in a game over? It's not an archetype, it's just how the games work. No offense, but I don't think this suggestion is even worth a mention in the rejected archetypes page. -- Khang (talk)@fandom14:27, October 11, 2017 (UTC)
Alright, but if not here, then where? I tried putting Kris and Robin on the Lord page, but because they are not required for every map, I guess they don't count. Plus, there are other characters who could count as Lord-like that aren't listed, mostly from Radiant Dawn.Dont Be a Sad Panda (talk) 17:02, October 11, 2017 (UTC)

Okay, after doing some research, I found some more potential Lords, and as far as I know, they are not listed any where else on the wiki. Although, most of these characters are only Lords for a chapter or two.:

I should note though, that while the Archanea Saga and Heirs of Fate characters are only in one chapter, in those chapters, you use units separate from the main game. Also, TV Tropes lists this as an archetype, though I know this doesn't mean anything. Dont Be a Sad Panda (talk) 01:51, October 25, 2017 (UTC)

Ok, here's what defines a Lord in Fire Emblem. They are the main character(s) of their respective games and the defacto leader of their respective armies. They cannot die narratively at any point in the story as their death in battle instantly forces a game over. Save for Nyna, Sothe, Elincia, Geoffrey, and Lucia, none of these character are even remotely important outside of the respective chapter when these game over deaths apply. Rowan and Lianna are just straight up Lord characters. This is pushing things WAY too far and hardly qualifies as an archetype. You need several similar personality trends, recruitment methods, plot trends, appearance consistencies, and game quirks. Their only commonality is that they have a chapter where they cannot die. Personalities and recruitment trends are not consistent. Ergo, this is a further rejected IMO.
I don't know if you understand what an Archetype actually is. An Archetype is an overarching trend and characteristics/personalities displayed by multiple characters across a medium. You can't say an archetype is like "Well Pink Hair is a common trait in a lot of characters, so that's a trend" or "We got the big hulking Knight guy, that's an archetype." No, an Archetype requires very clear trends of specific unique traits that separates them from other characters. Otherwise we'd just be saying that Hawkeye, Largo, Vaike, and Basilio are an archetype just because they are Berserkers/Warriors that don't wear shirts. It doesn't work like that. What else do they share? Gameplay circumstances? No. Story Role? No. Personality? Barely.—Nauibotics (talk) 05:22, October 25, 2017 (UTC)

I believe that we should but the Lord archetype down, but split it in to two seperate categories: The Peaceful Lord and the Martial Lord.

Peacful Lords:

Peaceful Lords are the first type of lord. These characters tend to have a dislike of fighting and war, but still fight to ensure peace. Due to their usual optimistic personality, they can be a bit naive. Some of these lords eventually have character development that reduces their naivity and learn that fighting is sometimes required.

Martial Lords:

As opposed to the Peaceful Lords, these lords prefer to fight first and reason later. They tend to be a bit more gruff compared to the more pacifisic lords listed above. Some of them go through character development as well, and learn to think about how all actions have effects. At first, the two archetypes were more similar, but have since differated.

I just feel like there are two types of lords and they should be seperated. Plus, Corrin doesn't have the Lord class even though (s)he fits the Lord archetype. Ma321 (talk) 00:50, January 18, 2018 (UTC)

But still, does this warrant an actual mention? You know that these are shared traits over the course of the series and this Archetype is, again, extremely obvious. These are not contained traits to the FE series alone, you can easily give blanket personality categories to literally every single JRPG protagonist out there. That's why we have not made a Lord category because they are just literally a literary protagonist with general protagonist traits that they expand upon in a particular manner.—Nauibotics (talk) 02:05, January 18, 2018 (UTC)
He's got a point. What's the point of the archetype here when it is literally THE most obvious one? It honestly goes without saying because its the main protagonist(s). Omegaxis1 (talk) 02:20, January 18, 2018 (UTC)

Why is Reinhardt a Camus? Edit

He shows none of the traits required of the Archetype, even going so far as to be actively against Leif and his army being convinced his sister was brainwashed because she joined up with them. Ablast6 (talk) 01:50, October 11, 2017 (UTC)

None? You sure? "Only fights for the bad guys out of blind loyalty to their liege" Check. "Has loved ones in the player army who they will fight anyway" Check. "Cares about the wellbeing of their subordinates". I admit I am not super big on Thracia 776's plot but the very fact that he frets over Olwen and tries to "debrainwash" her seems like a check to me? While not explicitly part of the archetype, he also has a black outfit motif, like Camus before him, and has a horse. Removing a character meant to be a clear deconstruction of the Camus archetype because he doesn't hit every point on a checklist seems kinda counterproductive.--Otherarrow (talk) 16:10, October 11, 2017 (UTC)
Like Camus, Reinhardt is worshipped by his subordinates as one of the greatest knights on the continent, being considered the second coming of Tordo, is respected by the enemy, is purposefully much harder then most bosses in the game, and turns down an opportunity to surrender out of loyalty to Freege. Going actively against the player army out of his free will is what makes him a Camus and is why Yen'fay isn't one. Also when was there an offical Camus archetype list? Emperor Hardin (talk) 21:23, October 11, 2017 (UTC)

Julius Archetype Edit

Should there be an Archetype for characters who are only evil because possesion? 

Julius, Lyon, and Garon, and Warriors Spoiler are some examples, and i think there are more, but they're escaping me right nowMariokemon (talk) 02:31, October 25, 2017 (UTC)

We need more candidates for an archetype to be recognized. -- Khang (talk)@fandom12:09, October 25, 2017 (UTC)
Conquest Takumi (he is an enemy, but doesn't really become evil until his posession by Anankos), Revelation Gunter (iffy on that, as he is not evil for long), Veronica (if I assume correctly, she is controlled by whoever it is that is the true BB of Heroes), Awakening Avatar (from bad future that is, posessed by Grima), Marla and Hestia (i think the game mentions they didn't willingly sell their souls to Duma?), maybe even Hardin (if posession by Darksphere counts).
Also I think we should establish whether the archetype lists people that are EVIL because of posession, or people who are ANTAGONISTS because of posession. If it's the latter we can strike Takumi from the list, as he is an antagonist either way. Kruggov (talk) 13:38, October 25, 2017 (UTC)
If I recall correctly, wasn't Takumi possesed from the start? Or at least since u joined Nohr?Mariokemon (talk) 14:38, October 25, 2017 (UTC)
Takumi is possessed when he is kidnapped in Birthright and at some point in Conquest (either when he "died" or earlier). He is not possessed in Revelation. Marla and Hestia are Witches which makes them more or less living corpses forcefully loyal to Duma rather than being possessed by Duma himself. —Nauibotics (talk) 19:53, October 25, 2017 (UTC)
This indeed seems like a potential archetype, consider the candidates: Hardin, Julius, Lyon, Garon, Veronica (or Bruno, he seems to fit more). They do share a common trait of personality before and after being possessed: gentle or kindhearted -> ruthless, cruel. I'm not sure about the Awakening Avatar though, he's kind of different from the rest aside from being possessed. -- Khang (talk)@fandom 11:20, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

Does Valter counts? Because while he was corrupted by a lance, rather than possesion, it kind of fits the Archetype. Also, what about Darios and Vigarde? --2804:7F2:8180:5362:221:97FF:FE74:C72D 13:01, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

Valter was not posessed. More like the lance drove him batshit crazy. IIRC, supports with Duessel show that Valter was still a jerk even before using the lance, it's just his negative character traits grew exponentally afterwards.
Darios is a definite yes - he is the "Warriors Spoiler" up above.
Vigarde is a no for the same reasons Nauibotics declined Marla/Hesita - he is pretty much a corpse controlled by Lyon. Kruggov (talk) 16:38, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

Pardon, I haven't noticed it was mentioned above. To be fair, it doesn't seem to make that much difference, as the writing is quite on the wall. What about SoV act 5 and FE8 dragon spoilers, then?

if by Dragon Spoiler, you mean Morva, its the same with Vigarde. He's pretty much a skelleton controled by Reiv Mariokemon (talk) 23:52, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

So as it stands, we have a good number of candidates 

am i missing anyone? Mariokemon (talk) 05:01, October 30, 2017 (UTC)

I'd strike Takumi and Gunter from the list, with the established list, they don't seem to fit well enough, being possessed but later recover and join the player, while the others are possessed and recover only until they're near death or never recover at all. With that said, I'd strike Veronica too, as the story of FEH is far from ending, it's hard to tell if/how she is possessed. The candidates left would be:
  • Hardin (FE3/12)
  • Julius (FE4)
  • Lyon (FE8)
  • Garon (FE14)
  • Takumi (FE14 Conquest) - Edited
  • Darios (FEW)
An archetype should have solid criterias, or else the list would end up too long and subjective. What we have so far: Characters that become evil due to possession, they share a common trait of personality before and after being possessed, and possibly, become a major antagonist from the point they're possessed onwards. --Khang (talk)@fandom 11:10, October 30, 2017 (UTC)
But Takumi is placed for Conquest, not Birthright or Revelations. Like Xander is the Camus archetype in Birthright, Takumi never joins us in Conquest and gets completely possessed by Anankos. So he would still fit the bill for the Julius archetype. Omegaxis1 (talk) 12:23, October 30, 2017 (UTC)
Alright, edited the list. -- Khang (talk)@fandom 11:28, October 31, 2017 (UTC)
Hardin is the only one here who was possesed by an object, not a living being. Should he still qualify?  Also, while Gunter does join in Revalations, he is evil thanks to Anankos. Mariokemon (talk) 15:09, October 31, 2017 (UTC)
Hardin is possessed by the Darksphere which is no merely object, it contains the soul of Gharnef. For Gunter, as I pointed out, despite being possessed and becoming evil, he still recovers and joins the player which makes him not fit with the rest. -- Khang (talk)@fandom 10:48, November 3, 2017 (UTC)
Actually, Gharnef's soul was already released from the Darksphere, as he was merely just a spirit in FE12. He tried to have his body restored, but the body was destroyed before it could be fully revived. So the Darksphere itself was what influenced Hardin. But for the Julius archetype, it still fits, as the archetype should be people that are genuinely good natured, but still get possessed by something malevolent. The Darksphere might be an object, but it possesses Hardin nonetheless. Omegaxis1 (talk) 10:58, November 3, 2017 (UTC)

Rowan and Lianna Samson/Arran? Edit

You can only pick one at the start, and you dont get to play as the other one (with a few exeptions) so do they count?Mariokemon (talk) 15:30, October 25, 2017 (UTC)

I haven't played Warriors to know about it but if I may ask a question, in the Story Mode, since you pick to play as Rowan or Lianna, is the other one absolutely unable to be played in the Story Mode after you choose one of them? If both can be played in the main story simultaneously, then no. Samson/Arran is defined by the complete inability to play as the other unit you did not choose in the story without playing another playthrough of the game. —Nauibotics (talk) 21:22, October 25, 2017 (UTC)
They are playable after the army splits. As such, they don't belong in the archetype. Kruggov (talk) 16:38, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

Est and Kliff ArchetypeEdit

Wouldn't those two archtypes be the same thing, like Jagens and Oifeys?Their only distinction is being that one is lte game and one is early game. So should their be something like "Pure Ests" and "Kliffs"? They both start off with bad stats but are usually saved by good growths. ThunderBrine (talk) 20:01, October 25, 2017 (UTC)

The Jagen Archetype defining trait is where all units in this archetype share the trait of being an early game promoted unit with strong starting stats in comparison to the rest of the cast but are inferior to many units who come in afterwards in the long run. More often than not, they serve a mentor role or are retainers for the main Lord. Jagen Archetype gets two separate categories since they follow two trends of either a veteran soldier of great age who grows poorly due to their age or ailment, resulting in inferior ending stats compared to other units or a soldier that is slightly older than the main lords, but still relatively young, and has competent growths that make them reliable units in the end with the rest of the army. They share a lot, but differ in two aspects.
Ests are trained units obtained late game, but are not statistically bad with their starting stat totals when compared to other units who are obtained or trained to their level. Ests members only downside is that their late availability makes them hard to immediately put to use without careful planning to train, but are immediately strong investments due to strong growth rates. Kliffs are Villager/Trainee units who grow exponentially due to innate potential due to their growth rates but are hindered by the fact that their starting classes are ill suited for battle, leading to poor starting stats. Their only shared traits are strong growths. Recruitment time is not the same, starting base stats are not the same, and more often than not, narrative role is not the same. Merging the Est and Kliff archetype makes no sense as they share only stat growth similarities, which really Kliffs are MUCH stronger, and nothing else.—Nauibotics (talk) 21:19, October 25, 2017 (UTC)

Catria ArchetypeEdit

This is more a story-wise archetype than a gameplay-wise archetype, and it about all the character who have experienced unrequited love, which the series has made quite a batch. While Catria and Palla both experience this at the same time, Catria tends to be more famous.

There's Catria (with Marth), Palla (with Abel), Faye (with Alm), Clair (with Alm), Tobin (with Clair), Leon (with Valbar), Delthea (with Clive), Reinhardt (with Ishtar), Lyon (with Eirika), Titania (with Griel), Meg (with Zihark), Cordelia (with Chrom), etc.

Would it be worthy enough to be considered an archetype or no? ThunderBrine (talk) 01:26, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

Again, you need more solid similarities such as, again, personalities, stat growths trends, story roles, etc. There are no other common link between these characters aside from an unrequited love, which is not something unique to Fire Emblem. This would be another rejected. Heck, half of these characters are not defined by these unrequited loves. Half of these, that unrequited love is barely a foot note of their character. I don't define Catria, Palla, Leon, Delthea, Lyon, and Titania by these unrequited loves they have. Half the time, these are mentioned on the side. Some like Faye, Reinhardt, Meg, and Cordelia are though. But even then, these character share nothing in common elsewhere.
Rule of thumb, to define an archetype you need similar personalities, story roles, growth rates, and special gameplay quirks. You should be able to fulfill at least three of these. Also, shared starting classes are often a defining factor but not always. You need to really hone in on finding these sorts of consistencies rather than proposing just one particular characterization that just so happens to apply to a few select characters. The problem with all of your proposed archetypes thus far are that they are centered around a singular trait that are not really unique and definitive to the character. These things you propose are trends, not Archetypes.

Nauibotics (talk) 03:12, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

Riev or Lyon for Gharnef? Edit

It seems to be a back and forth for who is the gharnef here.  Riev is the one summoning the monsters, hes the cause of of a lot of the trouble in the game, and he is fought before the finale. Lyon kinda fits, but why wouldn't Riev too? Mariokemon (talk) 01:18, October 27, 2017 (UTC)

Lyon fits perfectly, not kinda. Riev does not qualify, because he's not responsible for the main conflict in FE8, which is the revival of the Demon King. Also, minor but still matters, he's not defeated before the final boss. -- Khang (talk)@fandom 10:56, October 28, 2017 (UTC)

Jeorge Lucina Edit

I think she qualfies.  She claims to be a travler by the name of Marth, but later revealed to be Chrom's daughter, making her plot important  Mariokemon (talk) 15:41, October 27, 2017 (UTC)

Naesala, a Michalis? Edit

While this is more debatable in RD, isn't Naesala a Michalis in PoR? He makes his ambitions very clear, as many of his actions are for the sake of his ambitions, he fights the player as part of the enemy army and isn't recruitable until the very last chapter.--2804:7F2:8180:5362:221:97FF:FE74:C72D 16:12, October 27, 2017 (UTC)

Cornelius archetype Edit

While looking at discussions, I saw someone referencing certain characters such as Emmeryn and Mikoto as a Cornelius type, meaning characters, usually being royal figures, who tend to die early on in the story. While some of them aren't even playable, such a recurring role wouldn't be considered an archetype?-- 00:05, November 3, 2017 (UTC)

well, I mean, that certainly does happen. I can name Hector, Elbert, Uther, Fado, and Greil as other examples of this happening. It could work out, all things considered.—Nauibotics (talk) 02:01, November 3, 2017 (UTC)

Is it parents dying early or at all? Since Elbert is midgame, and Uther is endgame. Mariokemon (talk) 03:14, November 3, 2017 (UTC)
"Royal figures who tend to die early on in the story" does sound like a potential archetype, but "While some of them aren't even playable" is too vague. Need more common traits. -- Khang (talk)@fandom 10:54, November 3, 2017 (UTC)
They are usually related to the main characters, normally are killed by enemy forces, something like that?--2804:7F2:8180:59AC:221:97FF:FE74:C72D 23:48, November 5, 2017 (UTC)
Well, Elbert does die relatively late, but he techincally disappears early enough that Eliwoods initial part of his quest is to find his father. I can make a small exception for him since he is in the end killed by the main antagonist's army so I kept this in mind when writing the headline for this archetype.
Here's my proposed headline for this hypothetical archetype. "Named after Cornelius from Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon and the Blade of Light, Corneliuses are parental figures to the main Lord of the game or another key member of the army. More often than not, they are the monarch of a kingdom or otherwise a person of great importance to several people in the army. They are narratively killed in the story, majority of the time before the story starts or within the early chapters of the game. Their killer is usually a member of the enemy army the Lord of the game fights for a majority of the game. Their death usually spurs the Lord character into action during the war. They are non-playable characters in the story and are only encountered as field NPCs or Ally characters.
Hopefully this looks good.—Nauibotics (talk) 03:52, November 6, 2017 (UTC)
Does look more like an archetype now. What about Fado, you mentioned him but why was he absent from your list? And Sigurd, he's kind of special, being a playable unit and all in the 1st generation, but he does fit perfectly in the 2nd generation? -- Khang (talk)@fandom11:20, November 6, 2017 (UTC)
Oh, right I forgot to put him. I edited my above list. As for Sigurd for Seliph, I can see it applying since Genealogy of the Holy War was two separate stories in one. Technically even Deirdre could apply for Julia and Seliph as well.—Nauibotics (talk) 18:45, November 6, 2017 (UTC)
If that's the case, wouldn't Quan or Ethlyn be considered this as well, especially given that, chronologically, Leif spurs into action way before Seliph?--2804:7F2:8180:BB98:221:97FF:FE74:C72D 03:03, November 7, 2017 (UTC)
Then I suppose it would be:
Khang (talk)@fandom11:23, November 7, 2017 (UTC)
So in any case, is this an approved Archetype? I find this one to be a solid one worth mentioning. —Nauibotics (talk) 21:05, November 8, 2017 (UTC)
No objection so far so yea, it's approved.-- Khang (talk)@fandom 11:20, November 13, 2017 (UTC)
So is this gonna be added to list? Mariokemon (talk) 07:18, November 18, 2017 (UTC)
Yup, I will add it right now.—Nauibotics (talk) 12:24, November 18, 2017 (UTC)

Is Hans a Michalis? Edit

he is mad, bloodthirsty, and wants power for himself. Mariokemon (talk) 05:46, November 3, 2017 (UTC)

Eh, he's sort of a stretch. I hardly put him on level with Michalis or even some of the more extreme examples like Lekain or even Gangrel. Hans does not feel like a Michalis IMO.—Nauibotics (talk) 09:25, November 3, 2017 (UTC)

Secondary mage archetype? Edit

Ok, I got the idea of this archetype when I was browsing the character pages, and noticed quite a few characters of those chracteristics:

  • Young, female mage. Personality wise, they are usually cheerful, but have their sad moments.
  • Lost a parent or a sibling. One of their motivations might be revenge for this.
  • (Almost) never first recruited mage.
  • Focus on Fire or Light magic.
  • Statistically, they have a lot of attack, usually at expense of having paper-thin defenses, with average to below average speed.
  • Even if they join late, they join with low level. (Like Ests)

Here is the list of characters for the archetype:

So, what do you think? Is this any good? --Kruggov (talk) 14:41, November 6, 2017 (UTC)

Nino is an Est though. I'd add Orochi to this though as she fulfills everything except for Fire/Light Magic as Hoshido magic lacks elemental basis. Even Mae could qualify for this.—Nauibotics (talk) 18:38, November 6, 2017 (UTC)
For Nino - Who says she can't be both? It's not like she'll be the first one to fill multiple archetypes (looks at Miranda).
For Orochi - The main reason I didn't add her is because, well, she's quite a bit older than the rest. Aside from that though? She might fit.
For Mae - I KNEW I forgot someone... Kruggov (talk) 19:57, November 6, 2017 (UTC)
Hm...I still dunno for Nino and even Sanaki. All the other females on this list are recruited very early in their respective games and are either the first or second one. Both Nino and Sanaki are not playable until very late in their game, the former is more like Est than anything while Sanaki is...perhaps of similar nature.
As for other's i've considered to add, there is also Ilyana and Lute who are early game females who matches nearly everything except for personality where they are more quirky than cheerful. Even Miriel could qualify if we were to twist the personality even more and say that they are either cheerful or eccentric, but like the Merric archetype, have a particular affinity for using Fire/Light magic. Though Ilyana would be an outlier in this instance due to her affinity for thunder magic.–Nauibotics (talk) 20:50, November 6, 2017 (UTC)
The thing is that Lute, Ilyana, Miriel and Orochi miss is age criteria - all of them are at least as old as the lord, if not older. Possibly Lute too. Second, they didn't have a loss - Linde lost Miloah, Delthea... actually didn't, but IIRC, her relationship with Luthier is very strained, Tine/Linda lost their mothers, Miranda her father, Meriah lost Mios, Lilina lost Hector, Nino lost the entire famity twice over, and Sanaki lost her grandmother (although it's not recent). And, as you noted, Ilyana misses Fire/Light magic focus. I might actually remove Tailtiu from the list, as she also misses two points. Kruggov (talk) 13:09, November 7, 2017 (UTC)
While Orochi does not have the parental loss, her parents are not respected due to their often dubious fortunes, leading her to try and be a proper diviner. Plus she did lose Mikoto who she was very close to (and practically another mother). But Ilyana and Lute, yeah I can't justify them. Age wise, only Miriel misses it really. Linde looks roughly 16, Delthea, Nino, and Sanaki are about 13-14 in appearance. Orochi is definitely not as young looking as the latter three, but does seem similar to Linde and definitely does not appear as mature as Miriel.—Nauibotics (talk) 01:16, November 9, 2017 (UTC)
Well, these do seem like trending characteristics that many female mages have to be consisdered an archetype. So what's the valid list we have so far? -- Khang (talk)@fandom13:02, November 21, 2017 (UTC)
Then I'm putting the archetype on a page. You won't be against it, would you? Kruggov (talk) 16:31, November 21, 2017 (UTC)
Alright, it's on the page. Although, I don't think my wording for the archetype description is any good - can anyone make it better pls? Kruggov (talk) 16:55, November 22, 2017 (UTC)
I added Orochi because she does fit all aspects (losing a loved one (Mikoto), being the second mage recruited in Revelation, focusing on light magic (which is what Hoshido Magic is based on), and being relatively young (Linde is around 16 years old, while the youngest, Delthea, is 13, giving this archetype a wide age range). If we allow Delthea who lacks the parental loss, only having a strained familial connection, we should include Orochi as the only problem we had was that she seemed older than the others. IMO, she does not appear older or at least as dramatically older than Linde than say Miriel. I also revised the Archetype blurb to sound more in line with the rest of the page.
edit: I also forgot, if we were making Mae an additional exception for this archetype as she has no known family, but otherwise fits a lot of the Archetype's points: Relatively young? Yup. Focus on Fire and/or Light? Check. Loss of a family? Unclear. More raw Magic power statistically than Boey (FE2/15 Merric) but less defense? Yes indeed.—Nauibotics (talk) 10:36, November 23, 2017 (UTC)


Ewan from FE8 is listed here as a member of the Merric archetype when this is completely wrong. The only characteristics that Ewan fulfills of the Merric archetype are that he is trained by the Wendell character (Saleh, in this case) and that he's young and energetic. He has none of the other requirements; Ewan doesn't get recruited until chapter 12, begins with a Fire tome rather than any kind of Wind magic, and is the fourth mage character recruited (after Artur, Lute, and Saleh). He is not a Merric and should not be included as such. Langjake51 (talk) 18:19, November 6, 2017 (UTC)

I agree that he sticks out like a sore thumb. Though technically the part you got wrong is his recruitment order. He's the second mage character recruited. Artur is a Monk, which is techically a separate class from Mages and Saleh is recruited after Ewan in both Eirika and Ephraim's routes. But yeah, other than that he only fulfills the characteristics and being trained by Wendell. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nauibotics (talk • contribs).
Actually, Ewan is recruited after Saleh on Eirika mode. They're on the same map, but Saleh is right from the start, while for Ewan you have to enther a house. Kruggov (talk) 20:25, November 6, 2017 (UTC)

Merric/Wendell Archetype issuesEdit

I feel that Merric's archetype has become too restrictive as it causes a lot of issues, mainly the issue of recruitment order and insistence on the whole Wind Magic thing even though several already are known to wield Fire Magic if not Wind. Several characters I feel are Merrics but we are not including them because they are recruited second. I feel that recruitment order is generally consistent with Merrics always being early game mages, generally the first of them all. More often than not, they are most proficient with Wind Magic and most notably are trained by a mentor that they themselves identify at some point. They are also all generally spirited, young, and energetic, which applies to a lot of characters we've had debates over before like Lugh, Ricken, and Tormod and now considering Ewan as seen above.

Like for these considered Merrics, we have the following issues:

  • Lugh - First Mage and shares personality but starts with Fire tome and has no known mentor
  • Ewan - Shares personality and has Saleh as his mentor but is the second Mage and starts with Fire tome
  • Tormod - Shares personality and has Calil as a mentor but is the third Mage and starts with Fire tome. Soren is hardly a Merric in terms of personality, but he checks off every other requirement. Tormod is the one to have the Merric personality.
  • Ricken - Uses Wind Tome and shares personality but has no known mentor and is second Mage

But this also causes issues for Wendell too as we have the two from the Rejected page that I put but in some ways they do fulfill certain requirements just only one issue and I decided to add Cecilia for reasons explained below.

  • Cecilia - Mentor to both Roy and Lilina, but particularly Lilina for the aspect of being a Magic teacher. She is a Magic unit and fulfills the stat and recruitment time parameters. The only thing is that Lilina is obviously not Merric like a majority serve but still, her trait of being a teacher is one of her strongest traits.
  • Saleh - due to Ewan's Merric status being debated, this would cause Saleh to lose footing if we remove Ewan. Otherwise, he fulfills the stat and recruitment parameters as well.
  • Calill - Mentor to Tormod, is a Magic user, and fulfills the stat and recruitment parameters. However, again, we do not consider her as she is not the mentor to the Merric, Soren.
  • Fuga - Mentor to Hayato is basically his only claim to fame, though he does have the same parameters. However, he is not a magic user like the rest in his base class, though he does have the capability to do so in his class set. The only other thing is the rather specific means of recruitment.

Let me know what you think. —Nauibotics (talk) 19:49, November 6, 2017 (UTC)

IMO, the "Focus on Wind" should not be used for characters from GBA games, as the only non legendary Wind tome there is FE6 Aircalibur. Similarly, the "First joining" should be lessened to "Early-game joining". That would still bar Tormod (who obviously focuses on Fire magic, and Ch.16 is by no means "early-game") and possibly Ewan (again, Ch.12 is not exactly early-game, not to mention, IMO, he makes a much better Shaman than he does a Mage) but will let both Lugh and Ricken in.
Similarly, Wendell requirement of "Mentor to Merric" should be lessened to "Mentor to another Magic user", which would let us get Cecilia and Calil in, as well as solidfy Saleh's position. Fuga I'm still a bit iffy. Also I'm tempted to propose Berwick Saga Percival for Wendell, but the fact that he's not a prepromote hurts his position. Kruggov (talk) 20:14, November 6, 2017 (UTC)
From what I can see, words like "usually", "often" are pretty much abused on the page. They don't help enforce the archetype criterias but rather make it more confusing and leave the page more room for debate. For example, "A Merric usually excels in Wind magic... Their mentor is often the Wendell of the game", does this mean every Merric excels in Wind, their mentors are all Wendells? Or it means there are cases where Merrics don't excel in Wind and their mentors are not Wendells?
Tl;dr, words like "usually", "often" should be removed where possible to enforce the criterias. For this case, I would suggest making changes that enforce the "Wendell - Merric" relationship, as it's probably the most prominent criteria this archetype should rely on. That said, I agree "focus on wind" should be removed due to game mechanics difference, but "first joining" should be removed completely, the Merric and Wendell lists would then be as follow (though I question these archetype appearance in FE4 and TS):
  • Merric (FE1/3/11/12)
  • Boey (FE2/15)
  • Arthur/Amid (FE4) - mentor?
  • Asbel (FE5)
  • Maruju (TS) - mentor?
  • Erk (FE7)
  • Ewan (FE8)
  • Soren Tormod (FE9) - Soren has no named mentor
  • Aegina (BS) - mentor?
  • Hayato (FE14) - mentor is not Wendell
  • Wendell (FE1/3/11/12)
  • Nomah (FE2/15)
  • Claud (FE4) - pupil?
  • Ced (FE5)
  • Lee (TS) - pupil?
  • Pent (FE7)
  • Saleh (FE8)
  • Calill (FE9)
With this, I no longer see any issue, at least that's what I see. -- Khang (talk)@fandom11:23, November 7, 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, Khang, but I disagree. I think we shouldn't cross-link Wendells and Merrics, as that will make the archetype more restrictive for both. As we have now, (and I mean list on the main page) 1) all Merrics focus on wind magic (either it's their main type, like Asbel/Soren, or it's the type they start with, like Amid) - it's excusable for GBA mages and Hayato not to, so Boey is the only one to miss this. 2) All Merrics are first joining mages - Ewan and BR Hayato miss this, Boey is on the fence due to joining at the same time as another mage. 3) Age and personality - both are inconsistent and should be removed (Merric/Maruju are more subdued and are about the same age as a lord, Boey/Asbel/Ewan/Hayato are more energetic and young, Arthur/Amid/Soren are major snarkers, with Arthur/Amid looking the same age as Seliph while Soren is a dragon branded) 4) Mentored by another mage - most fit. Merric by Wendell, Boey by Nomah, Arthur/Amid by Lewyn IIRC, Asbel by Ced, Maruju by Eisenbach, Erk by Pent, Ewan by Saleh. Hayato, as you noted, is not mentored by a mage, but the general idea is still present. The ones to miss this completely are Soren and possibly Aegina (lack of knowledge about BS, i hate you). 5) Mentored by Wendell - IMO that's not a criteria, but an observation - most of noted mentors are Wendells.
As for Wendells, Claud mentors Sleuf, and Lee... actually IDK about him, he seems more like an expy of Boah than Wendell. The closest to actual Wendell expy is Alfred, and I don't know if he mentors someone or not. Kruggov (talk) 13:09, November 7, 2017 (UTC)

Hetzel (FE10) Edit

I disagree on him being a Camus. He doesn't fight for his country or honor, he fights because he is a coward and he doesn't join you because he is too afraid of what Lekain will do, or at least think of him. Unnamedgoon (talk) 20:49, November 8, 2017 (UTC)

Micaiah and SotheEdit

Would those two count as a Camus archetype in Radiant Dawn? Least for one of the parts. Yeah, Daein was forced to fight for Begnion, and thus they are on the wrong side, but Micaiah and Sothe were perfectly able to leave if they wanted to, even being offered the chance to leave. But Micaiah didn't leave out of a sense of love and duty for Daein, and Sothe was loyal to Micaiah. So neither joined the right side no matter what, despite knowing they are in the wrong, and having to fight good people. 

It's only when Ashera finally arrived and basically turned everyone to stone that they were finally able to join, because at that point, the nations they were fighitng for were no longer a factor, and had to go for the sake of the world. Still not sure if this counts as Camus archetype, but it feels like they do fit the bill. Omegaxis1 (talk) 14:41, November 10, 2017 (UTC)

Techincally no. The issue that forces them to fight against Ike's side is resolved and the two join forces. Camuses do not join the player's army under any circumstances. Also, while yes they are fighting for Daein out of loyalty, keep in mind, the only reason why Daein is in the wrong at that point in the game is due to the Blood Pact, which is forcing the nation to fight for Begnion. Basically, they are being blackmailed into fighting, not out of Daein's overall best interests. Michaiah and Sothe do not qualify as a Camus in my opinion.—Nauibotics (talk) 19:53, November 10, 2017 (UTC)

How to edit the page? Edit

The page has lots of grammar errors like "Oifey's" instead of "Oifeys" and capitalizing the first letter of red and green, but I can't edit it. How do you edit it? Unnamedgoon (talk) 20:23, November 19, 2017 (UTC)

Edit Template:Archetype. -- Khang (talk)@fandom 15:07, November 20, 2017 (UTC)

Guys who look like girls Edit

Could this be an archetype? it has happened at least 4 times, the same as a Julias, so the amount isnt an issue. all 4 of them are blonde, and calm natured. all are mistaken for being female at some point. Elphin, Lucius, Libra, and Forrest are the ones who come to mind. Mariokemon (talk) 06:57, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

technically Forrest has no definite hair color given the nature of Fates children, but this trend has become more apparent. Also, this is a very small archetype given that there are only four out of the 15 games. The shortest is Kliff as well as Bord and Cord with 5, so we need 1 more to make it equal to these. —Nauibotics (talk) 10:46, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

Surtr Edit

Is it too early to put him in the Rudolf archetype? Unnamedgoon (talk) 22:01, November 28, 2017 (UTC)

No? Unnamedgoon (talk) 22:53, December 19, 2017 (UTC)

Fits the description except I doubt that his eventual defeat is going to mark the end of Heroes, but certainly at least for Book II. Either way I think he qualifies.—Nauibotics (talk) 23:52, December 19, 2017 (UTC)

Tiki Archetype? Edit

I just saw that Tiki archetype was added. It's... Something rubs me wrong about it. It just seems too generic, like former Gordin/Draug archetypes. If anyone has anything to say about this... Kruggov (talk) 20:25, January 8, 2018 (UTC)

It was discussed several years ago by Otherarrow and some other user Here. For now, i removed it from the page since it needs to be deliberated since it is a wholly "new" archetype and the specifics needs to be detailed.
So anyways, the core of this proposed archetype is from what RadiantDawnLord posted:
"Named after the character from Shadow Dragon, it is an archetype of a character who is usually of the Manakete class, or any class that allows the user to turn into a dragon. They bear the appearance of a child, or at least they are of the age of children, especially in "dragon years". They usually appear around the second half or the third part of the games. Most of their stats start out as very poor, but they make up for it by equipping Dragonstones, or similar weapons, that enhance their stats, making them decent enough against tougher enemies. They also share a very close relationship with a main character, whether they are sibling-like or parent-and-child." He proposed Tiki, Fae, Myrrh, Nowi, and Kana
There are some issues with what is proposed:
1. The sibling-like or parent-and-child relationship with a main character is too vague. Tiki and Myrrh has a relationship with one of the Lords (Marth and Ephraim respectively), but Fae does not have a relationship with Roy or even Lilina, only Sophia, Igrene, and the final boss Idunn alongside any other person she can support. Nowi is debatable since her bond with Chrom and Lucina is non-existent and the Avatar is not quite as prominent since they can support everyone. It is not the reason why she joins the army and her relationship with them is just friendly (not parent-child or sibling-like) unless they S-Support. Kana, being the Avatar's child, does have a literal parent-child relationship, but technically, Kana is not young in appearance despite their age, is not full-blooded Manakete or even part-Manakete, and really does not fit the stat make-up proposed due to the nature of Child stats in Fates. If we were to add Nah here, its the same problem as Nowi and only if she is the daughter of the Avatar.
2. While recruitment is consistent for Tiki, Fae, and Myrrh as all three are recruited in the last third of their games, Nowi is recruited on the 8th chapter out of 26, which is the first third. Kana can basically be recruited as early as Chapter 6 or as late as the Endgame while Nah is Chapter 13 or Endgame as well.
3. Tiki, Fae, and Myrrh do technically fit the bill of late game weak character starting statwise but has their Dragonstone which makes them powerful. However, there is the restriction that they are held back by the limited uses of their stone (generally) as their stone is the sole stone in the game while Nowi, Nah, and Kana basically have unlimited stones and are not really held back by their low starting stats due to the ability to grind on top of the easy access to stones.
In the end, this needs to be ironed out and clarified. The only shared traits they are: 1. Young girls who are Manaketes and thus can transform into dragons. 2. Are several hundred or a thousand years old but still take on the appearance of a young girl. Technically, this has only four representatives which is not enough to make it an Archetype so either this needs to be revised or it is a no go until the next Fire Emblem game possibly.—Nauibotics (talk) 20:55, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
    • Sorry about that. I wanted to add a new archetype on Tiki and her similar incarnates, but I didn't realize that they need to be clarified before they can be confirmed. RadiantDawnLord (talk) 21:23, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
It's fine. It IS the most debated page on this wiki, but for the sake of professional appearances it does need to be deliberated before we add a completely new archetype or even a new representative. It is not that I'm shutting it down completely, but we have to be super strict on what qualifies as a new Archetype. At least this one is a little more sensible than some of the ones proposed last year. I can understand how it fits a certain archetype. But given that only three really fits the bill of the proposed archetype, it is less than Kliff archetype and Bord and Cord's who each has five solid representatives and is the smallest Archetypes on the page. —Nauibotics (talk) 21:38, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
  • Well, if you ask me, this would work as an archetype as several games do hold this kind of thing. But some cases should be altered. Maybe instead of saying that they have a close relationship with a main character, write that they hold some kind of intimacy or fondness with a character in the party. This would work out with Fae, who is close to Sophia, and for Nowi, who could end up marrying any guy. And Tiki can also count for Awakening as well, since she is from a Paralogue that comes in the second arc. And the thing about Kana's age is that while she is biologically the age she appears in, she is actually older than she really should be, since she came out of the Hyperbolic Time Chamber mechanic of Fates. Omegaxis1 (talk) 21:44, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
Fondness is relative IMO in regards to Nowi when the nature of Supports varies in Awakening. It is like when we do not consider Colm as a Julian despite the fact that he is stats-wise the same, only that his "Lena" equivalent is Neimi, who is not a Cleric, and is thus not included. Also, there is no canon age for Kana. They do not remark on their chronological ages at any point in any of their conversations so that is a huge assumption on our part to hypothesize if they are actually little kids chronologically or only biologically assuming time flow of the Deeprealms.. But at the same time, consider that their parent, the Avatar seems to age physically naturally like other human characters of Fates so I think it can be safe to say that they are aging the same since they are even less "dragon" than the Avatar, only that they are chronologically less than 1, but biologically 10-12-ish due to Deeprealm shenanigans.—Nauibotics (talk) 22:18, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
  • I think it was mentioned in Tiki and Corrin's support in Warriors that Corrin can age normally despite being part dragon. Actually, on the subject of this archetype, aren't the Tikis usually have some kind of guardian with them? Someone that at the very least tries to watch out for them? Bantu was Tiki's caretaker, and by extension, Gotoh is similar, since he was first tasked to watch over Tiki. And Gregor also was trying to save Nowi from the Grimleal, even if she was hostile towards him at first. And given how Fae and Myrrh are, someone was bound to try and watch out for them as well. Omegaxis1 (talk) 22:37, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
Right, but that makes Kana an outlier then as she was one of the proposed members since they do not have a mentioned age, which is core for the physical aspect of the Tikis, so the applicable members are down to four. Tiki has Bantu/Gotoh/Xane, Fae technically has Hawkeye/Igrene, and Myrrh has Saleh. These three Manaketes had dedicated servants/guardians long before the story was established. Nowi is a bit of a stretch, Gregor did rescue her, but he was not assigned to do so like the rest, he just stumbled upon her. Physical wise, she checks out, and her personality fits, but she does not fulfill the in-game combat trends and is recruited FAR earlier than the rest. Kana does not fit outright.—Nauibotics (talk) 23:01, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
So the only ones that remain consistent in every sense of the Tiki archetype so far are Tiki herself, Fae, and Myrrh. Kana really can't work out because of how she is the same age as she appears in, since her and Corrin age as regular humans. Nowi's issue is that while she fits on other aspects, Nowi has neither any guardian, nor any close relationship with others storywise. And you say that we need at least 5 to make this work?
Actually, what about Kurthnaga? He joins late game, has a young appearance but is very much older than others, has guardians. Omegaxis1 (talk) 23:24, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
Essentially 5 is the rule of thumb, but not necessarily official. Currently, that is the least number of representatives. Kurthnaga could work, though only in Radiant Dawn (FE10). Ena could fit too all things considered and she's playable in both 9 & 10.—Nauibotics (talk) 23:31, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
Understandable. So Kurthnaga and Ena also fit the Tiki archetype. Ena definitely fits since Nasir is her guardian that looks after her. Though Ena only joins if Nasir dies facing the Black Knight. Omegaxis1 (talk) 23:36, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
Ah, I've forgotten about that. So...Ena and Kurthnaga is debatable but applicable. I think the only thing that could be up for debate about them is their physical appearances. Tiki, Fae, Myrrh, and Nowi are all roughly 10-12 in appearance while Ena and Kurthnaga are probably within the 13-18 age range.—Nauibotics (talk) 23:54, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
Ena definitely has issues due to how she's recruited, and canonically she never joins the party because Nasir is alive in Radiant Dawn. But the conditions for Tiki archetypes should be based on when they are recruited, have some form of guardian in their lives, and are older than they appear. And statwise is that they are frail one way, powerful the other. Kurthnaga would definitely fit that role. But in that case, our total comes to 4: Tiki, Fae, Myrrh, and Kurthnaga. Omegaxis1 (talk) 23:57, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
  • Just saying, when I first saw the page it only had 3 representatives. I COULD have removed it, knowing an archetype needs at least 5 representatives, but I decided to try and save it.Unnamedgoon (talk) 22:52, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
It is not unsalvageable, but there needs to be more definite ties between the supposed 5 that are undoubtedly consistent. Their only real consistency between the first four are the physical appearance in contrast to the old biological age and the ability to transform into a dragon. Kana has the physical aspect and the dragon, but not the old age. Nowi, on the otherhand, is much like the other characters of Awakening in regards to the Archetype page. She is certainly like the other three, like how Lon'qu is like Navarres or Ricken is like Merrics stat wise and physically, but supports of Awakening with their "anyone can S-Support opposite gender character" devalues the importance often of the character's relationships to other units since you an make Gaius have a relationship with the Lissa, but you do not have to and you can leave it as if the two never shared a bond in the first place. In fact, outside of the chapter when you recruit Gregor and Nowi together, that can be the sole time the two have a shared bond. Also she is an early game unit, whereas Tiki, Fae, and Myrrh are towards the end of the game.—Nauibotics (talk) 23:01, January 8, 2018 (UTC)
This trend is recurrent enough that it's worth mentioning, Tiki (twice), Fae, Myrrh and Kurthnaga check off the main boxes, while Nowi checks off enough boxes to qualify. Are You Serious (talk) 10:44, January 9, 2018 (UTC)
So since we've discussed it, we have the 5 representatives, I suppose I'll make the first draft of this new "archetype's" header. I also added the fact that all of them are being targeted by the enemy nation the player is facing as Tiki is captured by Dolhr, Fae by Bern, Myrrh by Grado, Kurth by Bengion in FE10, and Nowi by Plegia since that is a common trait too.
"Named after Tiki from Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon and the Blade of Light, Tikis are characters who appear to be very young, generally taking on the appearance of a child, but are actually several hundred years old because they have a draconic heritage, either being a Manakete or the Telius equivalent Dragon tribe Laguz. Tikis are generally kidnapped by the enemy nation the protagonist is facing, leading to their eventual rescue and recruitment as a result. They are also protected by a dedicated servant or a guardian who had been protecting them for some time before they are encountered. As units, Tikis are generally very frail units who are weak in their human forms but thanks to their ability to transform into their Dragon forms, they become powerful units in combat and have solid growths otherwise."
Members of the Tiki Archetype are:
Tiki (FE1/3/11/12)
Fae (FE6)
Myrrh (FE8)
Kurthnaga (FE10)
Nowi (FE13)
What do you guys think?—Nauibotics (talk) 05:30, January 12, 2018 (UTC)
  • Wait, was Begnion targetting Kurth in Radiant Dawn? I cannot remember. However, this list looks good to me. Omegaxis1 (talk) 13:43, January 12, 2018
  • Ditto. Unnamedgoon (talk) 13:52, January 12, 2018 (UTC)
  • No, they did not. However, he WAS captured by Begnion, then rescued - it's just that his captors never even knew he was a Laguz, and the rescue happened very early, while Kurthnaga didn't join until Endgame. Kruggov (talk) 15:41, January 12, 2018 (UTC)
  • So is the archetype now approved and can be added? Omegaxis1 (talk) 18:43, January 17, 2018 (UTC)
Looks good enough to me so I say aye. Need to wait for more confirmations.—Nauibotics (talk) 01:14, January 18, 2018 (UTC)

Gotoh Black Knight Edit

He does come in at the end of Part 1, and is SUPER strong. If Karel from FE6 counts, I don't see why Black Knight shoudn't Mariokemon (talk) 00:58, January 15, 2018 (UTC)

Wolf and Sedger Edit

I think these 2 should qualiffy for Cain and Abel.  They join together, wear red/pink and green, and excell in different stats. Mariokemon (talk) 17:12, January 23, 2018 (UTC)

By that logic, would Dolph and Macellan also be this archetype as well? ThunderBrine (talk) 04:58, February 19, 2018 (UTC)

Let's take a look at what the Cain and Abel archetype represents:

"Named after Cain and Abel, a Cavalier duo from Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon and the Blade of Light. Cains and Abels are two units recruited in the army who share the same base class, usually two Cavaliers, and have a shared connection that has been established long before the story started. The duo is often highlighted by the fact that one wears red armor while the other is clad in green armor. Cains are usually clad in red, have a more serious personality, and tend to favor Strength, Defense, and HP growths. Abels are usually clad in green, have a more laidback personality, and tend to favor Speed, Skill, and Luck growths."

If Wolf/Sedger and Dolph/Macellan matches these descriptions, then they are in. Omegaxis1 (talk) 14:28, February 19, 2018 (UTC)

which they do, so i say add em in Mariokemon (talk) 21:23, March 9, 2018 (UTC)

Lethe and Lyre Edit

Was talking with a friend, and he notice while playing Radiant Dawn that Lethe and Lyre meet all the requirements of a Cain and Able archetype: Lethe wears green, has a serious personality, and favours Strength and HP, while Lyre wears red, has a more playful attitude, and favours Skill and Speed. The only thing I see that doesn't match up are that the colours are swapped, but the preferred stats of Sully and Stahl are swapped, so I don't think that's an issue. Unless anyone can come up with a reason not to, I think they belong there. Lorrif22 Assassin (talk) 15:38, February 23, 2018 (UTC)

Can Hoshido and Nohr be archetypes of Arran and Samson? Edit

Can Hoshido and Nohr be archetypes of Arran and Samson, since in the either Birthright and Conquest (NOT Revelation), you have to choose to side either one side and you'll end up fighting against the other? I think it's should be archetyped as a group rather than individually, since both Hoshido and Nohr have been fighting against each other for who knows how long. What do you guys think? RadiantDawnLord (talk) 22:29, February 23, 2018 (UTC)

Possibly, because apparently the idea of Hoshido/Nohr story split was born from Arran and Samson. However, I will say that normally the Arran and Samson does not have a story effect like FE15. Plus Revelation exists so there IS a way to get all characters in the end in one route.—Nauibotics (talk) 02:48, March 1, 2018 (UTC)
  • ahem*...I just said "NOT in the Revelation route". RadiantDawnLord (talk) 23:04, March 11, 2018 (UTC)
It would have to be a special exception at best. And yes I know you said "Not in the Revelation Route", but the point of the Arran and Samson is that you are given a choice between characters, but overall, the choice is not wholly affecting the playthrough. You are not consciously choosing which units you take, you are forced into a set roster in a storyline where you cannot bring the ones you did not choose into the same scenario. Hence, you cannot choose to take Hana instead of Effie in Conquest. Perhaps if this was more like Pokémon where you have a different version but the story is the same, perhaps, but thinking about it, your choice is for story, not characters.—Nauibotics (talk) 04:53, March 12, 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I understand. Thank you. And I'm sorry if I was rude. RadiantDawnLord (talk) 18:03, April 30, 2018 (UTC)

Laegjarn as a Camus?Edit

She demonstartes most of the traits: Bearing no ill will towards the Askrians, fighting out of Loyalty to Surtr, and concerned about the well being of the Nifl citizens. Pokedude14 (talk) 22:02, February 27, 2018 (UTC)

She appeared in just a single chapter. Camus is also someone that will never join the heroes. It's too soon to make the call that she's a Camus. Omegaxis1 (talk) 01:27, February 28, 2018 (UTC)

I think it is too early to say as well. Plus she lacks two traits. She does not have someone in the Askran/Nifl army whom she is connected to and has not given any of her allies the command to leave if they desire. Perhaps with time she will check out, but for now, not yet.—Nauibotics (talk) 02:37, March 1, 2018 (UTC)
At this point, we now have a possible connection to Fjorm, but there remains the uncertainty that she will never (canonically) join us. Especially considering that, if anything, her loyalty seems to be wavering. The Camus archetype is really one that she can never fulfill as long as she is alive, both out of the possibility of defecting, and that the Camus archetype is really defined by going as far as to die for that to which they are loyal, and doing so. --AdmiralTails (talk) 16:55, June 21, 2018 (UTC)
How so? She "encountered" Fjorm prior, but that does not establish a connection. In order for her to qualify, Laevataein would need to join the army because it would give her a stronger connection to the player's army. If that happens, then yes, she becomes a Camus. For now, not so.—Nauibotics (talk) 19:22, June 21, 2018 (UTC)
It's a bit of a weak connection compared to some of the others members of the Archetype, but at the end of Book 2 Chapter 10, she seems to show some concern for if Fjorm survived the battle with Surtr, implying that the discussion during her capture had some impact on her, and that some part of her does care for Fjorm. Depending where things go with that I would argue it could count, especially since other members of the archetype don't have especially strong connections. For now I agree it's not enough though, simply that she has the potential to become one depending on her future actions. --AdmiralTails (talk) 20:14, June 21, 2018 (UTC)
Certainly in the future. Book II is only halfway done so there is still room for it to happen.—Nauibotics (talk) 20:20, June 21, 2018 (UTC)

Keaton and Kaden as Bord and Cord archetypes?Edit

In the Revelation route in Fates, can Keaton and Kaden be the archetypes of Bord and Cord? Kaden mainly focuses on agility, while Keaton mainly focuses on strength and durability, both appear and join in the same chapter, and both are wielding the same weapon (namely Beaststone). Or does the Bord and Cord archetype really have to appear much earlier in the games and have to be axemen? RadiantDawnLord (talk) 23:09, March 11, 2018 (UTC)

Pretty much axe fighters only. The only way I'd accept none axemen is if they were in thematically similar classes like the similar burly Tiger Laguz and had the look of Bord/Cord. Emperor Hardin (talk) 04:16, March 12, 2018 (UTC)

Also Bord and Cords tend to have sort of connection. Keaton and Kaden don't besides the fact they're both beats units, which isn't really a connection.Darthkeeper (talk) 04:19, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

Aren't Hans and Kotaro archetypes of Michalis?Edit

I've watched the videos on YouTube and read the description carefully that Michalis' are "one who is mad, vain, or ambitious and will do anything to claim power for themselves, but are still considered as pawns by the main antagonist". I've read the articles on both Hans and Kotaro, AND watch certain Fire Emblem Fates videos on YouTube, and it actually mentioned that Kotaro is really ambitious at claiming power and wants to take over Hoshido, while Hans is really a madman who will do anything obtain power by hurting/killing others. If they're not really the Archetypes of Michalis, then please explain why. (Bump) RadiantDawnLord (talk) 00:59, March 23, 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm...maybe Hans. Kotaro is a one time villain who really does not have that large of a bearing on the plot as most Michalises are. —Nauibotics (talk) 19:50, April 11, 2018 (UTC)

if one time villains don't count, then why is Bryce and Shirahim concidered Camus'? 2607:FEA8:3BA0:E49:7F:FE9F:AB0A:38AB 21:11, July 29, 2018 (UTC)

Is Lima IV a Cornelius?Edit

Lima IV is the one of the main lord's fathers, Celica's (also Conrad but I don't know if that matters as much), the ruler of Zofia before the game beings, killed after the prologue of the game by Desaix, a member of the army the Deliverance was originally fighting, his death caused Alm to join the Deliverance (and also kind of caused Celica to start her Pilgramage) and is an NPC character. If he isn't an explanation would be nice. Emberwind22 (talk) 01:34, April 7, 2018 (UTC)

Maybe. The only thing is that Corneliuses are respected by members of the army. Lima IV is the lone exception in personality as he is pretty vain and slothful, a far cry from most Cornelius. His death DOES spur the beginning of the plot, but Rudolf's impending conquest is the bigger driving force. I would say maybe. Not too sure.—Nauibotics (talk) 19:52, April 11, 2018 (UTC)

Corneliuses being respectable isn't necessarily a rule, only their relation to the main character, so I'm inclined to consider him as such. By the way, within the context of book II, can Gunnthrá be considered a Cornelius?

Lima IV in addition to being an antagonist, is also not a warrior of any kind and even in leadership, he left most of the work to his advisors. Basically I'd say "no, he isn't an example." Emperor Hardin (talk) 03:57, April 12, 2018 (UTC)
So yeah, that was my point of my earlier bit. Lima IV is not really a leader like most of the other Cornelius' are. Heck I think most people have low opinions about him. Most citizenry and playable characters mourn Cornelius' death and other members of his archetype. Most people responded to Lima's death with indifference at best.—Nauibotics (talk) 20:00, April 12, 2018 (UTC)

Wyvern archetype? Edit

"So... I was browsing the TVTropes page of character archetypes and saw THIS:

"The Wyvern Duo

The Wyvern Duo are usually a pair of Wyvern Knights who are always related to each other. The most common scenario is that they're from the enemy nation, which is usually the nation that houses Wyvern Knights, and decided that their Empire crossed the line, they're in the wrong and so decided to join the heroes to set the nation right. A most common similarity can also be found in their colors, similar to Cain and Abel, except with Red and Black. For some reason, this pair is often fairer to the sex, you often get one boy and one girl, and the girl is almost always red. And they rarely join in the same time, similar to Merric and Linde, so if one joined and became your primary Wyvern Knight, you might end up not using the other, or benching the first-joiner until the second one came along. And the earlier joining time is usually mid-game.

In the earlier days, only the red Wyvern Knight would join you, but eventually both would join, forming this archetype. If that happens, usually it's the female who joins first. This is why at first the archetype used to be named after the first female example of this: Minerva. There are other instances of this, however."

This is directly copied from TVTropes, and it did intrigue me somewhat. I wonder if this is something worth considering. Kruggov (talk) 07:01, April 30, 2018 (UTC)

Technically this is already listed under the Minerva section. —Nauibotics (talk) 08:53, April 30, 2018 (UTC)
The way I see it, they essentially replaced Minerva archetype with this one. Kruggov (talk) 09:48, April 30, 2018 (UTC)

The Failed Cassanova Archetype?Edit

Something I noticed mentioned in MaxHP's channel when he was talking about Gatrie and Astrid, he mentioned how in several scenarios, there is always this particular character that would have this personality of being the flirt, the womanizer, a failed Cassanova, or just someone that wants to find love with little success. We have Sain from Blazing Blade, Inigo and Virion from Awakening, Laslow and Soleil from Fates, Joshua from Sacred Stones, Roger from the Archanea series, and Gatrie from the Tellius series. 

Wonder if that could be it's own archetype? Omegaxis1 (talk) 12:54, April 30, 2018 (UTC)

The only problem I have with this is that all of your mentioned characters share little commonality outside of their personality traits. Inigo/Soleil are the only two that share the same class and none of them share a consistent recruit time. I say no.—Nauibotics (talk) 05:56, May 18, 2018 (UTC)
Far too general and vague, I feel. Emperor Hardin (talk) 06:41, May 18, 2018 (UTC)

Archetype for Dark Mages?Edit

Hey, I was wondering if there's going to be an archetype for units who are Dark Mages? It should be like "Dark Mages who aren't intentionally bad to begin with in the series (even though they may or may not appear as enemies), but can come across as introverted/shy/quiet/sour/creepy". The only characters I can come up with are Knoll, Tharja, and Nyx.

Any suggestions? RadiantDawnLord (talk) 21:27, May 17, 2018 (UTC)

The only problem I have with this is that it is loose to define a character that is "unintentionally bad" with Dark Mages/Shamans. The following are the known Dark Mage/Shaman Characters and the application to your supposed Archetype:
  • Salem (FE5) - The first real one who can apply. He is a Shaman of Loptous and is required to be captured in order to recruit and persuade to fight against them.
  • Raigh (FE6) - Other than his desire to spread Dark Magic across Elibe, he is not evil nor misguided, but is an enemy when recruited so perhaps.
  • Canas (FE7) - Definitely not. He is not an enemy when encountered.
  • Knoll (FE8) - Eh, maybe. He assisted Lyon in making the Dark Stone to ressurect Vigard, but was unaware of Lyon's later act of destroying the Sacred Stone. He is also not encountered as an Enemy.
  • Pelleas (FE10) - Possibly applicable. He was being manipulated by Begnion into fighting for them through a blood pact. He can be fought against in certain chapters.
  • Etzel (FE12) - He is encountered as an enemy in this game, but is not evil or misguided either...maybe can work out.
  • Tharja (FE13) - She is an enemy and only follows Plegia because its her nation, though she is not particularly loyal to it. Works out.
  • Henry (FE13) - Not encountered as an enemy, but is ambiguous as he only joins the Shepherds on a whim.
  • Avers (FE13) - She is encountered as an enemy, manipulated by Validar into fighting the Shepherds, and joins after realizing the truth. The only thing is that this occurs in a Paralogue, so it can be up to debate on if this qualifies.
  • Nyx (FE14) - She is never encountered as an enemy and is not loyal to Nohr by any means. Other than being a Dark Mage, she has no shared traits.
  • Odin (FE14) - Is encountered as an enemy mage though only on Birthright where you fight him while Conquest and Revelation he is an ally only.
  • Leo (FE14) - Probably the only applicable one and only on Revelation again even though he is never fought.

So there. I cannot say if this is cohesive enough to make an archetype out of this. But if we can refine their traits down (especially stats and story role similarities) then we can make it work. For now though, aside from all being Dark magic users, —Nauibotics (talk) 06:17, May 18, 2018 (UTC)

I'm going to say no. Salem is an ex cultist, Raigh is normal, Canas is a scholar, Knoll is another scholar, Pelleas is a spirit charmer/prince, Etzel is a melancholy scholar, Tharja is a nihilist, Henry is a loon. Basically there's not a lot in common. Tearring Saga and Berwick Saga do seem to have a small trend similar to Salem where the sole playable Dark magic user is a former member of the evil cult, but its too small and vague to qualify either. The GBA trilogy seemed to have a small trend of the first recruitable base Shaman being a scientific intellectual, but the theme didn't last afterwards. Emperor Hardin (talk) 06:44, May 18, 2018 (UTC)

Nuibaba/Hilda Archetype? Edit

Not sure if this archetype qualifies, but basically, this archetype lists the overly cruel and sometimes egostistical female characters that manipulate the conflicts behind the scenes. Alternatively, this could maybe be seen as the female equivalent to the Gharnef archetype. Members of this archetype are often, but not always magic users.

Members: Hilda (FE4 2nd Generation) Sonia (FE7; Was considering putting Ursula, but she isn’t really that manipulative throughout FE7) Eremiya (FE12) Aversa (FE13) Arete (FE14) Nuibaba (Appears in FE2, but only this archetype in FE15) Loki (FEH)

If you want a better explanation of this archetype, TVTropes has a similar archetype called “The Dark Lady” in this page. [1] 03:35, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

Arete doesn't manipulate anything in Revelation and is more of a forced enforcer for Anankos. Plus she is not really cruel/egotistical, just devoutly loyal under the influence of brainwashing. Nuibaba's gains are not really to the benefit of the main antagonist's ambitions overall, more for herself and her devotion to Medusa, not Duma. Eremiya does not actually manipulate any events aside from Katarina's storyline which are side chapters. Plus she is a product of brainwashing which shows that she was not actually cruel prior to Gharnef's manipulation. Hilda, Sonia, Aversa (to an extent), and Loki do check out. - Nauibotics (talk) 06:41, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

Aversa was also brainwashed and not cruel of her own volition. The only two of those characters that are close to a real archetype are Hilda and Sonia. Emperor Hardin (talk) 20:54, August 29, 2018 (UTC)

This is a tad awkward to say, but does Excellus count? Omegaxis1 (talk) 21:19, August 29, 2018 (UTC)

No problem taken. I would say no on Excellus, unlike Hilda and Sonia, the character isn't the matriarch of a large family that antagonizes the protagonist. Emperor Hardin (talk) 06:22, August 31, 2018 (UTC)

Actually, does them being brainwashed really make what they had done really null and void? Eremiya and Aversa, while brainwashed, yes, still had committed atrocious actions, and did manipulate events behind the scenes, and the story had depicted them to be cruel and sadistic. Even if it changes later on and they are brainwashed, that doesn't truly make what the archetype depicts null. Okay, maybe not Eremiya, since her threat was only on the side chapters, but Aversa should count still since she does manipulate some events. And does this archetype needs to be some head of family or matriarch as Emperor Hardin says? Excellus does antagonist the protag, does manipulate events, and given that Excellus is considered transgender, can't exactly rule Excellus out. But maybe since Excellus is referred as a guy, maybe that does take Excellus out. Omegaxis1 (talk) 13:50, September 4, 2018 (UTC)

Eremiya still doesn't count as you mentioned, and let's say we do count Aversa. Let's look at who is proposed so far. Remember we need 5 members to confirm it:
  • Hilda - Fulfills every aspect.
  • Sonia - Fulfills every aspect.
  • Eremiya - Is brainwashed and only affects side chapters, not the plot as a whole.
  • Aversa - Basically fulfills every aspect, but is brainwashed into the role.
  • Excellus - Is not a woman, but is maybe transgender, and really only affects a small portion of the Valm arc, not the plot as a whole like a "female Gharnef" like the archetype is trying to be suggested.
  • Arete - She really isn't manipulating any of the events of Revelation Fates. She is just a brainwashed enforcer.
  • Nuibaba - Other than a small manipulation in SoV revolving around Berkut and Zeke, she has no real bearing on the overall plot as a whole since you can completely skip her side quest (and lose a few units). Plus her goals are completely separate from Jedah's as her loyalty is to Medusa, not Duma.
  • Loki - Fulfills every aspect.
In the end, we have 3 clean passes and 1 tentative one that needs debate. Still not enough to make it an Archetype.-Nauibotics (talk) 16:56, September 4, 2018 (UTC)

Nuibaba, Excellus, and Loki aren't the matriarch of a large family, nor does they have a female ward that turns against them like Hilda and Sonia. Again only Hilda and Sonia are part of an archetype. Emperor Hardin (talk) 18:04, September 4, 2018 (UTC)

I need to ask. Why does this need to be a matriarch exactly? The point is to have someone that plays a role behind the scenes and manipulates events, right? Where does the matriarch role actually come in? Also, since you also use TearRing Saga characters for archetypes, I think Karla represents this. She seduced the king of Canaan and had them wage war against the rest of the continent. Omegaxis1 (talk) 20:16, September 21, 2018 (UTC)

This sounds more like a general trope of fiction than an archetype.Darthkeeper (talk) 10:40, October 6, 2018 (UTC)

Xemcel archetype? Edit

Note: I’m the same guy who suggested the Hilda archetype. I just thought up of another potential archetype that could be added.

The Xemcel is a loyal servant to either the final boss or the main antagonist, but are usually not terribly noble or honorable, and sometimes even manipulative, which separates them from the Camus archetype. They are fought usually one or two chapters before the final chapter.

In a nutshell, this archetype is like a mix between the Gharnef and Camus archetypes.

Examples: Xemcel (FE1/11) Nehring (FE3/12)* Jahn (FE6) Limstella (FE7) Hans and Iago (FE14, not in Revelation)

  • Nehring is a bit of a special case, as while he is fought five chapters before the true final boss, he is loyal to the final boss of the bad ending, and is fought in the chapter prior, so I say it counts.

If you have any opposing arguments, please let me know so I can try to work this out. 15:56, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

Edit: Decided to make a few edits to make this archetype more consistent.

A loyal servant to either the final boss, or one of the main antagonists who is fought near the endgame shortly before or with their leader. Either not as important to the game or do hold ill will towards the player to differentiate this archetype from the Camus archetype.

Examples: Xemcel (FE1/11) Mueller (FE2/FE15 Alm’s Path) Nehring (FE3/FE12) The Deadlords (FE4/5) Jahn (FE6) Yogi (FE7 Lyn’s Tale) Limstella (FE7) Bryce (FE9) Hans and Iago (FE14 not Revelation) 16:33, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

Looks like noone’s making any objections. Is it alright if someone adds this in, or does someone want to bring a counter-argument to this archetype? 03:04, August 30, 2018 (UTC)

No. There are no consistent similarities through your examples. "Xemcel is a final guardian loyal to Medeus and is last to be fought before the final boss." Yes, they are all the last non-final bosses encountered. But cruelty is not consistent. Limstella is passive and indifferent and Bryce is honorable. Xemcell, Mueller, Yogi and Nehring, thus have no time to really establish a personality aside from usual loyalty shouts towards their liege. Deadlords are not fit to be a part of this "archetype" either because they are 12 individuals with literally no personality, just reanimated, powerful corpses. Heck, even if Loyalty were a factor, then that would lead Hans and Iago away from it because Hans is a power hungry criminal who cares not who he serves so long as he can ascend in status while Iago is a cruel, but cowardly schemer who is so inconsequential to the ambitions of Garon in Birthright and Conquest that even he finds very little worth in him. I say this is a "No".Nauibotics (talk) 05:19, August 30, 2018 (UTC)

Would Groznyi count as a Gazzak? Edit

  • First boss in Eliwood’s tale.
  • Low level Axe user. (Level 5)
  • Only 4 skill.
  • Bandit of Caelin.

Only thing I could think of against him is that he’s not part of a group of bandits. Other than that, sounds fine to me. Does anybody else think so? 04:42, September 4, 2018 (UTC)

He seems to fit. Speaking of which, I should get rid of Bazba, he's the boss of chapter 3. The closest equivalent to a Gazzak in Sacred Stones is O'Neill, who isn't a bandit. Emperor Hardin (talk) 18:06, September 4, 2018 (UTC)

Gotoh and Nagi from FE11 for the Arran and Samson Archetype? Edit

Would Gotoh and Nagi work as part of the Arran and Samson archetype. Looks like the only criteria to be part of the archetype is that both of them can never be playable at the same time, which both characters fall under, given that which one you get depends on whether or not you went to Chapter 24x. 02:06, September 7, 2018 (UTC)

They don't qualify. The Arran and Samson Archetype is one that you are given a choice between the two. Nagi and Gotoh are a "pair", but Nagi is only available if you kill Tiki and the Falchion is not recovered while Gotoh comes in if you fulfill this. In fact, if you do save Tiki and recover the Falchion, you are given no indicator to Nagi's existence entirely in FE11. Their recruitment mirrored recruitment is decided by circumstances, not free choice.-Nauibotics (talk) 02:31, September 7, 2018 (UTC)

More Camus Archetype members and Rejected Camus Archetype members?Edit

ThunderBrine (talk) 21:58, September 18, 2018 (UTC) Do the following characters quality as Camus, or at least as Rejected Camus? If they are rejected, then I have already written up a possible reason.

  • Lloyd/Linus (FE7) - Lloyd and Linus Reed are top ranking members of the opposing group, the Black Fang. While they do not like the orders and methods being put on them by their step-mother, Sonia, they stay allianced because of their father. Both do not hold ill will toward the player, with Nino fighting with the player, and only start to upon hearing that their brother had died to the player, rather than Limstella. They refuse to step down, even when falling victim to Nino's pleas for surrender.
  • Uhai (FE7) - Uhai is a high ranking member of the opposing group, the Black Fang. He does not trust Nergal and his associates, along with the changes they brung, but stays anyway because the group still felt like home to him. He is seen as quite honorable, as when he took Lyn as hostage, but refused to kill her, and relays helpful and crucial information to the player. However, members of the Camus archetype play a moderate role in the story, appearing several times before they are fought while Uhai appears in one chapter alone.
  • Hetzel (FE10) - Hetzel plays the role of an important enemy who holds little no ill will towards the player's army. He never condoned the immoral actions of the Senate against the herons or the apostle, and even expresses joy when he sees Rafiel in safe condition. However, he is very cowardly and only opts to do the right thing when he does not feel threatened. He is shown expressing deep regret or trying to making excuses for his behavior, showing a less honorable side to him.
  • Yen'fay (FE13) - Yen'fay is an enemy general who had his country decimated and taken over, and thus being forced to serve as the underling of his conqueror, Walhart. He refuses to leave the army, out of fear that her sister, Say'ri, will be hunted down and killed by Excellus and co. However, his loyalty to his continent is not as genuine as other members of the Camus archetype.

Also, since Shirahim only appears in one chapter and his loyalty is shaky, does he count as a rejected Camus?

Well, I can't say for the other characters, but the case of Lloyd and Linus is iffy at best, because the surving brother fights against the Elibean lords not out of loyalty to the fang, but to seek vengeance against his killers.--2804:7F2:8180:E1D0:221:97FF:FE74:C72D 15:11, December 1, 2018 (UTC)

Would Jaffar count as a Lorenz? Edit

After looking through the archetype somewhat, I believe Jaffar could potentially qualify for the Lorenz archetype (or at least a rejected Lorenz).

  • Important member of the Black Fang who turns on them after being persuaded by Nino and realizing Sonia has turned the Black Fang evil.
  • Difficult to recruit (Needs to be talked to by the Est character (Nino) who starts of weak, needs to survive 15 turns while being constantly attacked by enemies, chapter he is recruited in is a Fog of War chapter)

Only thing that I could see getting in his way is that he starts off as a Green/Other Unit, while other members of the archetype start out as Red/Enemy Units. Any thoughts on the matter? 22:56, September 23, 2018 (UTC)

He seems to qualify. Starting off as a red unit doesn’t seem to be a requirement considering Duessel is also part of the archetype despite starting off green in Ephraim Chapter 10. I’ll give it a yes for now. BlazingLarvesta0636 (talk) 17:25, November 29, 2018 (UTC)

Alm and Celica Archetype? Edit

Story-Wise: Alm and Celica are the lords of Fire Emblem Gaiden, and have a very deep bond with each other, going back to their childhood. They also get married at the end of the game. Members of the Alm and Celica archetype share a very deep bond with each other, being either lovers or siblings (just friends or only potentially lovers does not qualify for the archetype, else basically every pair of Lords would be this archetype). This archetype can be seen as sort of a Lord version of the Cain and Abel archetype.

Gameplay-Wise: Both members of the archetype are Lords, or otherwise characters whose deaths will result in a game over, in their respective games. Ironically, despite their connections, both members of the archetype never join at the same time.

Members of the archetype include:

  • Debatably, given that they both join at the same time in Episode 4. However, Nyna is available in episodes 1 & 4, while Camus is only playable in 4, so there is an argument that could be made in favor of their inclusion.

Rejected Alm and Celica pairs include:

  • Marth and Caeda (FE1/3/11/12; Ceada is not a Lord, also joins at the same time as Marth in Book 1)
  • Seliph and Julia (FE4; Julia is not a Lord)
  • Leif and Nanna (FE4/5; Leif is not a Lord in FE4 and joins at the same time as Nanna in that game, also Nanna is not a Lord in either game)
  • Roy and Lilina (FE6; Lilila is not a Lord)
  • Lyn and either Eliwood or Hector (FE7; Eliwood and Hector are not lovers or siblings, and the way endings in FE7 work do not confirm without a doubt any romance with Lyn.)
  • Marth and Kris (FE12; Marth and Kris are not siblings nor lovers, Marth is in fact already engaged with Caeda by this point.)
  • Chrom and Robin (FE13; Join at the same time, also like the FE7 example, their romance for each other is not confirmed.)
  • Corrin and Azura (FE14; Azura is not a Lord)

Any thoughts or changes? 03:52, September 27, 2018 (UTC)

The problem with your proposed archetype are mainly towards Micaiah and Sothe/Alfonse and Sharena. Sothe is not a Lord nor is nearly as plot important as Micaiah save for being her "protector". He can't even recruit anyone which is a main feature of most Lords. This one has the largest amount of inconsistency with the others of this proposed archetype given that you rejected several more notable people such as Marth and Caeda (the latter can recruit people but also can die).
Alfonse and Sharena are "recruited" at the same time in Heroes and their "deaths" in heroes do not result in a game over due to the game's nature. I'd give them a provisional pass because of the mechanics of Heroes.
Heck, you could just leave Eliwood and Hector since the two are "brothers" and life long friends due to a blood oath the two took.
I am not sure if this is clear enough to add.-Nauibotics (talk) 17:13, September 27, 2018 (UTC)

(Note: I’m the same guy from before. I’m just using another IP address because I’m in a different location RN.)

Alright, so a I decided to make some tweaks to the archetype to maybe make the criteria less strict and more consistent. How does this sound?

Story-wise: Alm and Celica are the lords of Fire Emblem Gaiden who have ties going as far back as before the events of the game. The relationships between characters in this archetype can be either deep friendships (especially romantic) or family relations. Sometimes, one of the two is not a lord, but is still very important to the plot, nonetheless.

Gameplay-wise: Being lords/plot-important characters, Alm and Celica duos are early-game recruits. Ironically, they never join at the same time.

Members of this archetype include:

Rejected Alm and Celica pairs include:

  • Marth and Caeda (FE1/FE11) (Both join at the same time in FE1, and Marth has not yet mmet Caeda in the Prologue of FE11)
  • Marth and Merric (FE1/3/11/12) (Merric, while somewhat plot-important, is not as important to the story as other members of this archetype, and has stronger ties with Elice, who is not a lord.)
  • Sigurd and Deirdre (FE4 Gen 1) (Had not yet met when FE4 began.)
  • Quan and Ethlyn (FE4 Gen 1) (Join at the same time, and neither are lords)
  • Seliph and Julia (FE4 Gen 2) (Same as Sigued and Deirdre.)
  • Camus and Nyna (BSFE) (Either they have not yet if all episodes are examined as the same campaign, or the both join at the same time in Episode 4 if they are examined independently. Either way, one of the rules is not followed.)
  • Lyn (FE7) (Has not yet met either of the other two lords yet when FE7 starts.)
  • Ike and Mist (FE9/FE10) (Mist suffers from the same issues as Merric.)
  • Ike and Soren (FE10) (Both join at the same time in FE10.)
  • Marth and Chris (FE12) (Same As Sigurd and Deirdre.)
  • Chris and Katarina (FE12) (Same as Sigurd and Deirdre, and Katarina joins lategame.)
  • Chrom and Lucina (FE13) (While Lucina does know Chrom from before the events of the game, Chrom does not reciprocate this knowledge. Lucina also joins mid-game.)
  • Chrom and Robin (FE13) (Same as Sigurd and Deirdre.)
  • Corrin and Azura (FE14) (Same as Sigurd and Deirdre.)
  • Corrin and Felicia/Jakob (FE14) (Felicia and Jakob are not as important to the plot as other characters.)

Any further thoughts or changes? 16:20, September 28, 2018 (UTC)

You can merely state that they have a strong pre-established bond, rather than putting the whole "(especially romantic)" tag since only 4 of the 9 are romantically involved, 4 are siblings, and Also Soren and Ike establish their bond near the beginning of FE9, not prior, hence they shouldn't be a counted duo.
The only thing is that generally speaking, when forming an archetype, you need to hit the following three things:
1. A story/character theme(s) that is consistent amongst multiple games. For the most part check.
2. Similar stats and growths. For the most part, no, the variations are so wide that there is no consistency. This one can be debated for NPCs and enemy Archetypes. However, playable archetypes are up for debate since a vast majority do abide by this, but a few, like Lorenz and Samson/Arran are not so strict, but have some story/gameplay thing so specific about their Archetype that we use that as the exception.
3. Similar personalities/design traits between members. i.e. Cain & Abel are red and green cavaliers, one is always serious, the other is laid back. I can say that maybe, one is more a martial lord while the other is a pacifistic lord, though Marth/Caeda are fighting out of necessity and would rather not fight.
If you can clarify these things, maybe we can start a vote to include it. However, I will warn that we have shot down Protagonist related archetypes if you read some of the ones above.-Nauibotics (talk) 17:43, September 28, 2018 (UTC)

After thinking it over, I think we can get a poll started. 1. Pretty much agree on this one. Shouldn’t be a problem. 2. If other archetypes like Lorenz and Arran/Samson don’t have similar stat growths, I’m sure we can excuse this one as well, as long as everything else regarding the pairs in this archetype qualify. 3. This is the one I find could be the most debatable. I could maybe see Marth and Roy as at least more martial then their Celica counterparts, despite being more pacifistic than other martial lords in the franchise. We may have to reject those two pairs if we’re going to include that as part of the criteria.

That said, I think with those tweaks and the removal of the Ike/Soren pair, this could work as an archetype. 04:28, October 10, 2018 (UTC)

The Kempf Archetypes Edit

Another like Michalis archetypes, the Kempf archetypes must like ugly beautiful face and ax-Crazy be like.

This is how Camus and Michalis Archetypes? Edit

Camus is a Noble (Anti-Villains), he cannot recuit be Enemy or NPC something. Ishtar is the same like Camus and Hardin Archetpes. Michalis is s Rival to Marth (Lord) and His Sisters (Sibling), if he become to Player like Gotoh Archetypes or in the Final Boss like Hardin Archetypes.

Camus Archetypes:
Ishtar Archetypes:
Michalis Archetypes:
There already are Camus and Michalis Archetypes and half of each examples are not consistent. No need for those. Half of your Ishtars are Camuses. Altena is a kidnapping victim. Flora is not willingly fighting your army out of loyalty, but blackmail, Hinoka is fighting you because YOU are wrong, Rev. Scarlet and Rinea are posessed and mind controlled. No consistency. No need for this to be any archetype in any form. -Nauibotics (talk) 03:02, October 13, 2018 (UTC)
Adding Micaiah and Ena are also no since both join your army afterwards whereas all other members do not.-Nauibotics (talk) 02:59, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

Sub-Oifey Archetypes Edit

Oifey as a Cavalier?

I don't understand what this archetype is supposed to be. I assume these are Rejected examples of Oifeys? The problem is that all three are not pre-promoted units, ergo they are obviously not related to the Oifey in any manner. It's not worth mentioning.-Nauibotics (talk) 10:05, November 30, 2018 (UTC)

Matthis Archetype? Edit

Matthis characters are early-mid game paladins. Personality-wise, they tend to be either vain, flirtatious, or immature. They often have a partner, whether it be a sibling or close ally, who is often not fond of their behavior but still fights with them nonetheless.

Possible members:

Also, on a side note, I noticed that there are quite a few discussions that have yet to be answered. If anybody could respond to those, I would appreciate it. 17:52, November 27, 2018 (UTC)

These guys are all Cavaliers, not Paladins. Second, no consistent stats or game roles. Personality is not consistent: Matthis is a coward, Sain is a unabashed flirt, Makalov is a slacker, Luke is a somewhat narcisistic individual, and Peri is a sociopathic killer. This is not even a character trope. No consistency aside from class. This is a No-Nauibotics (talk) 10:11, November 30, 2018 (UTC)

Yukimura for Gotoh or Rejected Gotoh? Edit

I was considering maybe adding Yukimura from FE14 Birthright as a Gotoh or at least a rejected Gotoh. Reasons he could qualify:

  • Joins late-game (At the earliest, he can join after completing Chapter 22 out of 28.)
  • Starting stats are pretty high aside from Mag, but considering he’s not a magic unit, this can be excused.
  • Serves as a mission control and guardian figure for Hoshido.

Reasons he might need to be rejected:

  • Does not play as big of a role in Birthright as other Gotoh characters normally do.
  • Is not a conventional recruit, as he is recruited by upgrading the automatons to level 3 instead of in the middle of a chapter.
  • Gotohs have very high growths, while Yukimura’s growths are not very good aside from Skl and maybe Res. Everything else is 35% or less.

BlazingLarvesta0636 (talk) 02:49, December 15, 2018 (UTC)

Sub-Archetype for Arran and Samson? Edit

I’ve noticed that there have been a few instances in the later games where there are a duo/group of characters that initially the player can only have one of similar to the Arran and Samson archetype, but later on in the game, the player can get the other character instead of never being able to get them in the same save file. I was considering making a sub-archetype out of these instances for Arran and Samson, similar to what Oifey is for the Jagen archetype.

Here are the examples I could think of:

BlazingLarvesta0636 (talk) 15:11, December 20, 2018 (UTC)

With the Brave Heroes, I'll say no. They have no bearing on the plot of Heroes and due to the gacha way of obtaining them in the first place, you aren't even guaranteed to obtain them even through luck.-Nauibotics (talk) 22:37, December 20, 2018 (UTC)

Archetypes for Subspace Emissary characters? Edit

Should we include characters from the Subspace Emissary from Super Smash Bros. Brawl into this page? If so, here are a few suggestions I had in mind.

  • Peach and Zelda for my suggested Innes/Duesell archetype.
  • Petey Piranha for Gazzak.
  • Palutena for Malledus.
  • Wario for Michalis.
  • Bowser for Lorenz.
  • Ganondorf for Gharnef.
  • King Dedede and Sonic for Gotoh.

BlazingLarvesta0636 (talk) 18:27, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

No. The Smash story of Brawl has no bearing to the FE Franchise aside from including Ike and Marth.-Nauibotics (talk) 02:56, January 3, 2019 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.