But he never really provided the personal threat that Gangrel did. All he wanted to do was conquer the world. ![]() (And I apologize, I can't seem to get this out of bold font.)įirst of all, his motives. It's also a plus for him that his arc ties nicely with Grima, so even after to kill him, you think back to him with Aversa. He had a strong connection to each of the main characters (killing Emmeryn (Chrom), kidnapping Maribelle (Lissa), hurting civilians (Emmeryn)) and always felt present. You always knew you were going after him, he represented different ideals - yes, he was crazy. He was always a force within his arc (that's why I think arc affects villain "worth"). Revenge, that others wanted, lead into his madness. He had a past to tie him in with the siblings from the start, and his motives were believable: he just wanted revenge for what Chrom's father did to them, and most people in Plegia didn't seem to disagree (well, everyone came to Emmeryn's execution - the sacrifice thing I think is a different story because it was a sacrifice). They felt like the worked together (no, not romantically because he's mine). As a character, he provided a perfect foil to both Chrom and Emmeryn, and he honestly had a really good "chemistry" (or bad I suppose) with them. You may think that that's unfair, and that's not what I question is asked (I mean, who would really think the Warm Arc was better than the Plegia one?). However, this also ends up fight between arcs as well as characters. Gangrel in an of himself, I feel, worked better as a villain. "They both should not have been brought back from the dead." or, "I do not have an opinion on the spotpass characters."Īs that does not contribute to the topic. That said, who do you think is a better villian? And please don't say anything like, The good thing about him though, is that, unlike Gangrel, he did not give into darkness in his conquest, and it earned him undenying confidence and pride. He has had to earn his place through bloodshed. ![]() ![]() He didn't have a tough childhood or anything, and doesn't have any right to inflict it on others. Walhart - Walhart had no major emotion reason for starting a war, other than uniting to stop Grima, and that's basically the same as Gangrel uniting against Valm. He should not have turned to darkness like he did and do it through force. Gangrel was made King, and never had to earn it from bloodshed, unlike Walhart. Gangrel should have had every right to blame them for it, but not to turn into evil and start a war. Gangrel - Gangrel's country was devastated from Emmeryn's father's war against Plegia. Here's my good and bad thoughts about each character: So, someone brought up the idea of a Gangrel VS.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |