Fire Emblem Three Houses Thoughts - Part 2: The Narrative of Golden Deer

Hello, and welcome to the second part in my write up series on Fire Emblem Three Houses. Here, I continue my thoughts and experiences on my first playthrough of the game through the Golden Deer path, focusing primarily on the narrative. So without further ado, let’s begin, and I will do so by walking through my experience with the game as the narrative progressed.

WARNING, THE FOLLOWING POST CONTAINS SPOILERS FOR THE ENTIRE STORY OF GOLDEN DEER IN FIRE EMBLEM: THREE HOUSES

I am really happy that I went into this game with very little if any spoilers. I knew there was a time skip and war, but had no idea how it would go down. So I progressed through the story, training my team, getting to know my students, recruiting others, trying to get along with everyone, getting to know the world, etc. I liked it, I really enjoyed the first half of Three Houses. I had no idea where it was going, what was going on with the Flame Emperor, and I liked getting to slowly understand the world and its many characters.

To be honest, as I reached the turning point, I theorized that given the Flame Emperor had the word ‘flame’ in it, and that Byleth had the Crest of Flames, the game would be similar to Fire Emblem Awakening, and have the villain be a dark version of the main character.

But the reveal, my god, the reveal and subsequent events that led to war blew my mind so much. I never suspected Edelgard was the Flame Emperor. Furthermore, I never expected the war to break out between the houses. I don’t know why, it seems obvious in hindsight, but I thought if war did break out, it would be a united battle that has the houses working together against a common foe. There would be a similar story for the war in all three paths, with the main difference being which part of the battlefield you were on. Boy, I was way way off, and I am so glad, because I vastly prefer what takes place.

I think the part of the game that features the Flame Emperor reveal, the declaration of war, and the time skip was probably my favorite part of the game. Let's start with the declaration. What really caught me off guard was just how amazingly real the game depicted war and how well…tragic it was. Because when war is declared, suddenly everyone’s lives are changed dramatically, usually for the worse. The characters of Black Eagles are now forced to choose a side in a conflict they might not even want. The characters of Blue Lions and Golden Deer must now face a quick stark choice of whether they want to join the fight against the empire or not. It is so out of nowhere and throws everything into complete chaos, with characters reacting to it in wildly different ways from great sadness to shock to strong anger. It was incredible seeing characters not want to be forced to pick a side as things became so polarized that fighting was the only option.

What really made it tragic though, was everything that came before. I've never played a game that depicts war, but has you play so much of the game before the war breaks out. I had well over 50 hours into Three Houses by the time I reached this point, and I had become…comfortable. I was comfortable in this nice world where sure there is tension between the three houses, but they get along. They put their differences aside and defend the church and stability of the land together. I got used to seeing all the characters from the houses and getting to know them, and the game did such a lovely job of making you feel a part of this generally peaceful and fun world…

And then it is all ripped away. The main reason Three Houses has my favorite depiction of war, is that you get to see what it was like before, how peaceful it was and how happy everyone seemed in their daily routine. But when the war breaks out, suddenly these friends of yours…you now must fight. It’s so tragic, and seeing what seemed like stable friendships suddenly tear apart, seeing characters lose their once calm demeanor and start to break down as things became polarized and unstable, it really made me thankful I don’t live during a period of war, and just…really hate war. Because this game, thanks to the monastery especially, lets you see the real impact of war on all these characters at an individual level, and it was unbelievable to experience. I had grown so comfortable in this environment that when the rug was pulled out from under me, I was left with a feeling of utter shock and deep sadness that I never expected from a Nintendo game. It was incredible, and I can definitely say that the battle before the time skip, against Edelgard, was easily my favorite battle of the game. I loved how the music perfectly conveyed the feeling of being overwhelmed, not just from the massive army you were now facing, but emotionally, from not knowing what to do as the chaos of war began, and you could only watch helplessly as old friends left and you lost the stability and comfort you’ve known for so long for reasons outside of your control. I will never forget it.

Afterwards, I was blown away by the time skip. The battle you have, in which you reunite with all your old students, see how they’ve all changed and grown up in your absence, getting to fight beside them once more, it was so awesome and made me so happy, such that I’ll never forget it. The new designs made it memorable, but additionally, it was the narrative and emotions that really stuck. Before this battle was nothing but hopelessness and sadness: sadness at the war breaking out, at being overwhelmed at the empire’s forces, at disappearing for 5 years, seeing the damaged war torn world, all I felt were emotions of shock and sadness. But then…to see all your old students again, remember your promise from five years ago, it really conveyed a sense of hope, and that in these tough times, we can do this. It made me feel closer to the Golden Deer squad, and ready to take on the war ahead. It suddenly felt like we could do it, despite all the awful stuff that has happened, we could and will fight for a better world. It was another high point for me.

These were my favorite moments of the game. And well…these take place at the halfway point of the game, not its conclusion. Because unfortunately, my biggest problem with Three Houses was that the narrative of the Golden Deer arc in the second half felt rushed. I have many problems with it, but I will try to keep them short in the bigger discussion I want to have:

First, the three-way battle that takes place after the time skip. This was meant to be an epic showdown between the three houses, five years later. It was good, I enjoyed the battle overall. However, I left disappointed due to some issues, with the big one being that it felt way too similar to the previous three way battle. I could not believe that the map was the exact same, in five years the landscape had not changed at all? The Three Houses even start off in the same positions as the battle five years ago. The song for the battle is also a remix of the song for the first one. Essentially, the battle tries so hard to be similar to the previous one that I found it too similar, to the point that it hurt my ability to get immersed in the battle. I also found it strange that the Golden Deer and Blue Lions teams did not work together given their common enemy, but again, the battle just had to be exactly like the first one, so they couldn’t change that.

Second, the war against the Adrestian Empire. I found it strange how quickly the Alliance was able to defeat the empire. All it took was one battle on the bridge to unite the Alliance, and only one important fort had to be taken to charge the capital and take out Edelgard. It happened so quickly that…again, it was difficult for me to suspend my disbelief and get into the narrative. The first half of the game was so slow paced, I could not believe how quickly the war progressed in comparison. There had been five years of fighting with no end to the war in sight. Now, less then one year after Byleth returns, the war is already ending? I found that hard to believe.

Third, the finale. After defeating Edelgard, you battle the real threat, the shadow threat. Once again, I was struck at how quickly this goes: it only takes one battle to defeat the shadow allies of the empire, and then only one battle to defeat Nemesis.  The final battle was especially strange given that in Fire Emblem Fates, all three of its paths end in finales that last two battles back to back, but here the final battle was only one. Then after you achieve victory, there is a short cutscene explaining what happened afterwards, and then the story simply ends and shows what happened to all the characters. This is no scene showing Claude and Byleth after the battle, no scene of them at the monastery declaring a new era, no scene of Rhea’s funeral, it felt rushed. That is what all my problems with the second half of the game boil down to. I thought that after the time skip I was only one third through the game and that the war would last twice as long as the pre war missions. Alas, that was actually the halfway point, and because of this, I think the developers were given too few missions to wrap up the war, such that there was no way it wouldn’t feel rushed. 

 

That being said, I do not think it is fair to accuse Three Houses of being rushed. I think the main issue here, the real reason the second half of the game felt rushed, is that well…..I only played through one path. There are three other paths I have yet to play, that all have their own unique characters, missions, etc. I’m nowhere near done with the game. This leads to a question: is the main problem of Three Houses that it has too many paths? Would I have enjoyed the game more had it had less paths? It would be tempting to say so, however, I am skeptical.

Why? Well, let’s do a thought experiment. Let’s say Three Houses did not have three (or four) paths for you to choose from, but only one. What would that be like? Are previous Fire Emblem games like that? Of course, in fact, Awakening is a perfect case study. Awakening does not have multiple paths, it is one long journey through a great story with great characters. It works, as I love that game. However…I can’t help but notice that with these games, the story feels black and white. Unlike Three Houses, in which you can choose to be on either side of the conflict, in Awakening you are on one side. Because of this, I would argue it is almost inevitable then, to portray your side as the good guys and those who oppose you as the bad guys. This is fine, although less interesting then more grey conflicts. I really like that in Three Houses you can be on other sides in this conflict, it has me excited to play the other paths, and I could not do that in Awakening. So…giving Three Houses only one path sounds like a bad idea to me.

One could follow this up with “well, what about two paths? Then you can choose a side and have a longer experience with more polish put into it.” This is true, however…I still think there is a problem. For it just so happens that there is another Fire Emblem game that allows us a case study: Fire Emblem Fates. Because this is how Fates works, it is a story that sees you enter a war, and you have the option of choosing one of two sides, it is a two path structure (It is not three. The Revelations Path is specifically stated as one you do not play first. When you first buy the game, you will choose either Birthright or Conquest.). And you know what, letting you fight on both sides is nice, it does make the conflict feel a little more interesting, but…how interesting is it? This I think is a problem with games that only give you two choices, they inevitably fall into the trap of giving you a binary choice, one that portrays each as being the polar opposite of the other. How many games that have a choice of two paths label them as good and evil? Look at Fire Emblem Fates, the Conquest path clearly has the evil war like kingdom, contrasted against the peace-loving beautiful kingdom of Birthright, they are complete opposites. Because of this, I would argue that while giving the player the option to choose between two paths should theoretically lead to a more interesting narrative than a one path structure, it is still not very interesting, because only giving two options leads to simple choices between opposites.

These thoughts are why, despite my problems with the game possibly stemming from its large number of paths, I still prefer Three Houses to be the three (of four) path structure it is. I have yet to play the other routes, and do not know how they will go down, but from talking with a friend who has played through all the paths, I have an idea. According to my friend, the time skip leads to a war with Edelgard and the ambitious empire on one side, and Dmitiri/the Kingdom and the Church of Seiros, firm defenders of stability and tradition, on the other. Claude and Golden Deer then are in an interesting position where they don’t completely take sides but try to diplomatically work their way through this difficult time, only acting when the cards fall in their favor.

If this is true, which I will confirm through my future playthroughs, this makes the Golden Deer path really interesting: a unique take on how to respond to wars that you would not normally see in video games. It is precisely because Three Houses has more then two options that it requires the creation of more grey and interesting responses to the war, resulting in the Golden Deer house. It is not the polar opposite of either Black Eagles nor Blue Lions, yet feels like it opposes both of them in its opposition of direct combat and desire to find a diplomatic solution. It makes for an interesting path, and one that I especially love, because that is the closest to how I would react from an outbreak of war.

Despite this, the Golden Deer narrative never feels that different from the other routes, or how I theorize them to be. Again, I don’t know for sure, but given Golden Deer’s emphasis on not cutting out any potential ally, the political nation is an Alliance after all, and the theme of breaking down barriers as Claude formed an important alliance with Almyra, I found it strange that there was no attempt to try and ally with members of the Kingdom or the Empire. I was especially surprised that after defeating Edelgard, Byleth and Claude choose to kill her rather then spare her. I will admit, as someone who felt great sadness and hatred for the war as it broke out, a part of me did despise Edelgard and want to kill her, however…when the moment came, I did not want to, and I can’t help but feel like Claude would not have either. I theorize however, that in the other paths the leaders of the other houses will die, and because Golden Deer can’t be that different from the other paths, they had to not have Claude ally with either the kingdom, Empire, or any of their vassals. But I think it should have, Claude allying with the empire or kingdom and making deals in the background is exactly what he and the alliance would do, moreso then the other two at least, and as a result, I wasn’t sure what to take away from the narrative as a whole. What was the theme? It was supposedly about breaking down barriers and bringing people together, but the lack of reconciliation with the kingdom and empire made this fall flat for me. It might have been about preserving and changing the church of seiros, but Rhea died and there was no conclusion or ending for what happened to the Church, so that didn’t go anywhere. In general, I wasn’t sure what to take away from the experience, which was my biggest issue with it.

However, there was so much potential, and I love the Golden Deer path for that alone. I love how unique it is not just from the other paths but from war narratives in general. Claude did not take a side (at least not as strongly as the others), and I believe this sort of narrative could be something special in future games if we get more like it. For this reason I hope the next Fire Emblem game has more then two paths, despite it causing the narrative to feel rushed (I theorize at least). Furthermore, what I really loved about Three Houses, and why I think I would call it my favorite Fire Emblem overall, is how interesting the story is in how many different angles you can approach it from. It makes you reflect on your choices.

This was another part of the narrative I loved, its interpretation of choice. Often in video games the player makes a choice and it has immediate consequences, so you are encouraged to think about your choices. In Fire Emblem Fates for example, when you choose which path to take, you know it will lead to the destruction of the other should you win the war. There will be consequences.

But in Three Houses, because you make the major choices during the first half of the game, when things are fine and peace reigns, you don’t realize the ramifications of what you’ve done until much later. Looking back, I chose Golden Deer for no serious reasons, I just related to the house and its characters the most. Additionally, when I chose who to recruit, I chose Mercedes and Petra merely because I liked them, and Annette because she was Mercedes’ best friend. I did not think much about these choices.

But then the war breaks out, shit goes down, and those choices you made now have massive ramifications. One of the most memorable moments for me in the game was when Edelgard declared war, the Empire was now at war with the Church, which I would likely side with and defend as part of the Alliance, and that because I chose to recruit Petra, her island nation of Brigid was now under the control of the enemy. I thought “if Petra fights on my side, what if Edelgard then punishes her island nation harshly as punishment for her treason?” It made me wonder if I made the wrong choice. I approached Petra full of emotion, and our conversation stuck with me. Looking back, I wondered how I could have made such a huge choice that would have massive geopolitical effects without thinking much of it. I was considering recruiting other characters from Black Eagles who I thought would not want to side with her, but I chose not to for this reason. I feared if Edelgard learned of their treason she would punish their families in some way, which I did not think they would want. It was really cool how this one choice had huge ramifications and made me stop and question why I did what I did.

I had a similar experience during the three-way battle after the time skip. During that battle, you fight and kill almost all the characters from Blue Lions. At one point you battle some mages and healers, and as I fought them it dawned on me that “oh my god, if I hadn’t recruited Mercedes and Annette, this would be them, they’d be dying at my hand.” It made me pause, be thankful I chose to save them, but then look to the other Blue Lions students and feel sad. Who was I to choose which characters should live and die? It was strange, but I felt partially responsible for the characters of Blue Lions dying, despite having little association with them. It made me wonder why I chose to recruit Mercedes and Annette for casual reasons when it would have such consequences. I really loved that these experiences made me reflect on my choices and what criteria I use to make them. It taught me that choices can have massive ramifications, so think them through, much better then games that have the effects of you choices take place immediately.

Those are the big thoughts I had with regard to the narrative of Golden Deer and Fire Emblem: Three Houses in general. I hope you enjoyed them, and please look forward to part three, in which I will go in depth on the characters of Golden Deer and my experience with them. There's so much to say on this incredibly fascinating and fun game!