Let's Play Fire Emblem: The Sacred Stones (Restoration Queen Edit)

I actually do want to talk about the characters in general, but before I jabber about most of what I want to talk about in that regard, I want to ask if your policy on spoilers extends to the literal manual, because Sacred Stones actually had a nice chart of what every class promoted into, which is important to my assessment of many characters in various ways not obvious at this stage but obvious when you have the manual.

So talking about promoted classes and such yay or nay, is basically my question? Particularly the generic promoted classes and not like, special stuff like lords.
Ooh that sounds very nice. Is there a place I can download this chart?
Stuff in the manual is permissible, yes.
Moulder healing scratches is going to be a stock experience; in the GBA fire emblems it is tremendously important to keep healers healing even when it's a waste, because otherwise they aggressively fall behind in experience. This stops being important on promotion.
Oh it's a Fire Emblem standard. Let's see, I believe there's yet another comic on this...
 
Last edited:
Ooh that sounds very nice. Is there a place I can download this chart?

Behold!

The entire English-language manual, preserved for free by the Internet Archive. The class info is about 2/3rds in.

(Note that the manual is misleading and at times outright wrong; for example, the class list/chart is missing an entire promoted class!)

I too read Renais as French-sounding, so I treat it like I would treat a French loanword. I got 'Renaisian' by analogy with Parisian. You see, in French all of those silent final consonants 'reappear' when you add something else to the end of the word and they're no longer final.

Oh yeah, Paris is a silent 's' in French. I guess that makes sense. 'Renaisian' looks ugly/hard to parse to my eye, though... hmm.

Food for thought, anyway.

I think I see what you're talking about already. Eirika captures Mulan with four characters and an ambiguous number of mooks? No comment. Let's get on with the plot. Ephraim captures Renvall with four characters and an ambiguous number of mooks?

Yeah, like that. It's not at all subtle.

What can I say? I view commenting as a reciprocal social activity. When you started participating in my thread, I followed the link in your signature and read some of your blog posts. (Your posts about Bioshock also helped me understand some feelings about that game I was unable to put into words...That the vaunted 'moral choice' system is simplistic, and that Frank Fontaine as a villain doesn't fit with the rest of the game.)

Ah, that makes sense. And glad to be of service.

Really, the problem of fortifications is also fed by the fact that you can't model a siege in turn-based combat mode. Characters will give battle even when they really shouldn't, because the developers want to avoid sieges.

You could argue that, but I'd disagree. What I didn't explicitly say is that the writing is where this is concentrated; gameplay-wise, there's multiple examples in the series of assaults on dense fortifications that put up strenuous resistance (Assaulting Hoshido in Conquest, for example), and even a few defense missions where you hold your ground with a brutal defense line, as well as the more widespread mechanics point of Forts and (castle) Gates being ferocious defensive terrain...

... vs the writing only rarely showing any sign of thinking of castles as defensive strongpoints at all.

I'd rather expand on this when you get to one of the most jaw-droppingly dumb examples yourself, though, so I can be less vague.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, like that. It's not at all subtle.
It's not subtle but it's fairly important to Ephraim's route IIRC. It's been a decade since I played the game but I hesitate to call Eirika not being as impressive as Ephraim in the textual details sexism when there's no reason for her or anyone around her to be as confident as Ephraim and Kyle are.
 
Ooh that sounds very nice. Is there a place I can download this chart?
Stuff in the manual is permissible, yes.
So lemme just ramble then about every character to some degree and my opinions and reasons (that are not spoilers) thereof. Every character recruited so far I guess plus some not recruited.

Anyways.

Eirika

As noted by Ghoul King, a number of fans have a strangely negative opinion on Eirika. Objectively, she's actually among the stronger units, among other things, boasting respectable stats for her starting level and the highest growth total in the game- this isn't saying much, mind, because growth totals in Sacred Stones vary from 250%~ total (someone not yet seen) to Eirika's 350% total. Basically, a 3 stat level up is pretty average, anything better is good no matter who you are. Anyways.

She's held back mostly by being a sword user in a game where swords are mostly not that good. Ephraim largely outcompetes her less on stats and more because lances higher might and lower accuracy is usually a bit better, and axes go farther still.
Ephraim

Mechanically, Ephraim is good, storywise, he's more interesting than I expected. Anything further on his character will have to wait til we have more than one chapter, though, because we really don't have anything other than HE IS A VALIANT TACTICAL GENIUS WHO CARES ABOUT HIS FAMILY.

Most notably, Reginleif is essentially a lance Rapier- Rapiers are a lord staple going back to Marth, and Reginleif has all the core expected properties but as applied to a lance statline. This basically just means it is better, particularly because Sacred Stones is a game where weapon effective damage multiplies the Might of the weapon... and only the might of a the weapon. Thus, every additional point of Might goes three times as far when hitting cavalry and armors, so even if Ephraim is flubbing his strength growths, he can probably kill key cavalry and armors for ages as long as you don't use Reginleif too aggressively.

Seth

Seth is, unfortunately, bad. He's useful enough in the short term, but here's the thing about Seth: a lot of fans consider him to be a specific variation of the Jeigan archetype whereby they actually are good later. I understand why, because he actually has good growths, unlike Jeigan- but his bases are so bad for his level that he's basically worse than everyone who can become a paladin at the same level in paladin.

Making matters worse, Sacred Stones is the first full- second total- example in the series of branching promotions. Cavaliers, like Franz, can become a Paladin like Seth, or they can become a Great Knight (which was actually introduced by Sacred Stones).

Great Knights on the downside boast less movement and the armor typing, making them vulnerable to anti armor weapons in addition to anti horse, but on the plus side can additionally wield axes and have generally better stat caps and greater constitution. Net result, aside tedium, they tend to the better choice. By 'tedium', I mean that, for some reason, Great Knights movement animations are strangely slow, so your turns wind up taking longer to play out.

Anyways, the point is in mechanical terms it's generally optimal to make Cavaliers Great Knights over Paladins, and even if you just make them Paladins, literally every cavalier expects to be largely better than Seth at the same level.

So he doesn't hold up once the rest catch up.

Franz

Franz is a cavalier. He's interesting for reasons you've already noted, complicating the Two Cavalier dynamic by existing alongside it, but he's largely what I can only call unremarkable mechanically. I don't personally find him all that interesting of a character, either, but more importantly he's largely neither particularly good nor particularly bad. If you want a cavalier, he works. if you don't, you can use someone else just fine. he's unexceptional.

Gilliam

Gilliam is great. He's a fun character, but he's also a Knight. Knights have excellent stats, particularly constitution, and great promotions, sharing Great Knight with Cavaliers and having unique access to promoting to Generals, who are arguably the best class in the game.

Gilliam is unlikely to let you down if you use him, but he's also someone who you can reasonably pass up; what's good about him is being a good unit, generic. He doesn't offer essential utility like flight, thief skills, etc.

Moulder

Moulder is forgettable for all reasons but one; his class. Moulder is your first healer, which means you should reliably want to use him until at least Natasha, and really having a second healer if only to healer your primary healer is a big deal, too.

More than that, Moulder's Priest can promote to either a Sage, who use Light, Staves, and Anima magic, or what you should actually generally do, a Bishop. Bishops can only use Light and Staves, but Bishops are one of a short list of classes with a special ability and not just stats and proficiencies, and it's a doozy, so anyone who can be made a Bishop will be good as a Bishop.

Vanessa

Vanessa is a pegasus knight. Vanessa has some interesting character bits, but none of them really come up until you meet other characters or have her support enough to start jabbering about them independently. Pegasus Knights are respectably useful, given flight, and for the moment she's the only option you have, so in spite of the weaknesses the class tends to bring she definitely has a clear place in the team

Somewhat bizarrely, in Sacred Stones Pegasus Knights can promote to ride Wyverns. This may be in part a callback to early fire emblem treating Wyverns as the advanced form. Anyways, you either make them Falco Knights who are Pegasus Knights that can sword, or Wyvern Knights who... well, they're what Valter is, actually- Glen is not, incidentally, he has a different sprite which marks him as the other promoted Wyvern class, the Wyvern Lord, which only Wyvern Riders can promote to.

Wyvern Knights can only wield lances but have the upshot of having a chance to ignore defense entirely on any attack at random. It's a solid option, especially as they boast higher constitution than Falco Knights and the pegasus knights tend to suffer from low constitution.

Colm

Colm is a thief, and the statistically best in the game. This means you'll want to use him, probably, unless his stats happen to turn out really badly, in which case you can bench him later.

Important note: Thieves, like nearly every class in Sacred Stones, have two promotion options. The Rogue, and the Assassin. When the time comes, save yourself the headache and make him a Rogue; Rogues can do everything Thieves can do and more. Assassins can do some of the things Thieves can do, and have a very small chance to instantly kill enemies when attacking them as their sole significant advantage over Rogues. Given that this is not very important and certainly not reliable, it does not make up for your thief no longer being able to do all the important thief things.

Neimi

You basically want at least one of every weapon user because reasons. Archers are the only unpromoted class to wield bows; the Ranger, Sniper, and Warrior are the only promoted classes. This leads to a very short list of characters that can wield a bow at all, and for some of them you have to promote them in questionable ways to get it.

Basically, out of your current character list, Neimi is the better candidate for long term bow use, and only Garcia can otherwise fill in.

You'll want to promote her to a Ranger, generally. Snipers, unfortunately, are bad in Sacred Stones. They have an ability that makes them automatically hit- sometimes. And by 'sometimes', I mean it happens a percent of the time equal to their skill, which means if it's likely to happen they were already likely to hit. Rangers meanwhile boast the ability to use swords and, for some reason, cross rivers? I don't get it. Point though is that Neimi because vastly more reliable if she can SET BAYONET AND CHARGE and will still use a bow only very slightly maybe arguably worse than as a sniper.

Garcia

Speaking of Garcia, I seem to have forgotten him and Ross for a second, was trying to do this in order. Ah well. Anyways, Garcia is on a somewhat short list of axe users and an even shorter list of options for using a bow. He's a fun guy and statistically he's... well, he's also forgettable. Not so terrible as to warn against using, not so great as to be a given. Still, axe users are nice, and his promotion options are both respectable. Like Gilliam, he boasts excellent constitution, so can use most weapons with no penalty.

He will tend to be outshone by his own son in the long term, though.

Ross

Ross is an experiment. Ross is the first example in the game of a concept new to sacred stones; what people usually call trainee classes. This is a set of three classes that are effectively a sort of level 0 class. When Ross reaches level 10, he stops gaining experience, and at the end of that mission, announces some variation on I FEEL STRONGER and force promotes himself- your choice between a fighter, like his father before him, or a water walking pirate. Given Pirates can become Berserkers and berserkers are great, generally I would recommend denying his character arc and not making him like his father before him, sailing the high seas instead, but it's hardly like he'll pan out to weak if you go fighter. Just less optimal overall.

At which point he's a level 1 unit probably stronger than most normal level 1 units would be.

Artur

Artur is a monk. This means, like a Priest, he can promote to a bishop. In the meantime, he's a light mage, in a game with evil monsters, where light beats dark. You do the math, dude tends to be a solid contributor even before you make him a bishop, plus he's a nice fella. Not much to say otherwise.

Lute

Lute is incredibly popular among the fans. I'm not personally super fond of her, but Sacred stones is very much a mage's playground, so she's a good choice.

If you do use her, it's generally better to promote to Sage than Mage Knight, because Mage Knights lacking light magic and being vulnerable to horse slayers is not a good trade off for what little they get in areas like movement.

Joshua

Joshua is the first myrmidon in the game. A mercenary, and following in a fine fire emblem tradition, he's... actually kinda mechanically bad? He does well intially, and he's okay long term, but he's held back by the fact that character growths tend to be similar totals and he has such high bases and growths in skill and speed in specific that he... well, he tends to cap those stats and then wind up with dead growths, in practice. So he underperforms what his stats should theoretically mean.

He's short term fine though. One special note, the manual erroneously indicates Myrmidons (swordfighters there) can only promote to swordmasters. This is not true, they can also promote to Assassins. Assassins are not very good, overall, but if you want more thief ability they technically have parts of the package, though I forget exactly what- I think they could use lockpicks, but not steal? Anyways.

Natasha

Natasha is a good person and a surprisingly deep character, at least in the supports. In the short term, she's a second healer, she usually winds up stronger than Moulder as I recall, and she too can become a Bishop, and Bishop is such a good class you should generally be of the opinion you can't have too many Bishops, so she's definitely a good choice mechanically.

She can also become a Valkyrie, but why would you do that to yourself? They're mounted Bishops, in effect, except they don't get the special skill that's why Bishops are so good.

Trivia note: Valkyries and Mage Knights are both arguable new. In the preceding GBA games, Sages, Bishops, and Druids each used staves plus one part of the Anima/Light/Dark trinity, and then you had Valkyries, who used anima and staves from horseback.

Sacred Stones made it so Druids can use Anima in addition to Dark and staves, sages can use Light in addition to Anima and Staves, Bishops picked up a new special skill in lieu of a weapon type, and now you have Valkyries who use light and staves from horseback and Mage Knights who use Anima and Staves from horseback. So basically the Mage Knight is the old Valkyrie by mechanics and the Valkyrie by name.

Kyle and Forde

Kyle is big. I mean that literally, for some reason he has one more constitution than Franz, Forde, and if in the same class, Seth. This is not a large advantage but does mean Kyle is likely to be slightly mechanically better but luck matters more to who to use.

In mechanics terms Franz, Forde, and Kyle are all pretty interchangable. They all usually but not invariably turn out well, they all have the same class which makes it easy to drop an unfavorite in favor of one of the others, etc. I don't particularly like Kyle, though I'm a little more fond of Forde, buuut they're also my favorite iteration of the red/green cavalier dealie in the series (that I'm familiar with) which I usually actively dislike, so they have that going for them.

The Grado Generals

Duessel, Selena, and Glen do indeed have their own gemstone titles, which I believe all get dropped eventually in the story? In any event, they do indeed have them, though I can't remember if you have to dig into character descriptions and such or if they actually have those titles see use.

Otherwise, no comment yet on them.

So How About Those Stats

Stats in Sacred Stones have different caps between classes, mostly. By mostly I mean 'well, for promoted classes'. For all player classes HP caps at 60, and Luck at 30. For all unpromoted classes, everything else has a cap of 20. Promoted classes increase the cap on those stats to anywhere from 21-30, except constitution which still always caps at 20 but this doesn't matter bar strange edge cases and exploits because constitution is only gained on promotion or through stat increase items.

Anyways, this affects what classes are good to a degree, because eg Generals have better potential strength and defense than most classes etc. It's only to a degree, though, because most characters have to be fed stat boosters or get tremendously lucky to cap a stat.

Still, this is one reason Seth is bad, actually- as noted, HP caps at 60, though enemies can ignore this and bosses later on often do. But Seth starts with only 30 HP, and can only gain at best 19 from level ups, which means he almost always winds up behind in HP, and usually by a large degree, compared to the various Cavaliers by the time they catch up.

By contrast, Ross is extremely likely to cap his HP between a high growth and the extra levels he gets to gain, plus the extra round of promotion gains.
 
Look, sometimes you just want to go "Oops, all cavalry."
to be fair 'all cavalry' is a viable choice of challenge run if you want to spice things up without just, like, winding up unable to field a full team of guys. But my main point is unfortunately the valkyrie is distinctly lacking in merit compared to just going Bishop.
 
Seth

Seth is, unfortunately, bad. He's useful enough in the short term, but here's the thing about Seth: a lot of fans consider him to be a specific variation of the Jeigan archetype whereby they actually are good later. I understand why, because he actually has good growths, unlike Jeigan- but his bases are so bad for his level that he's basically worse than everyone who can become a paladin at the same level in paladin.

Making matters worse, Sacred Stones is the first full- second total- example in the series of branching promotions. Cavaliers, like Franz, can become a Paladin like Seth, or they can become a Great Knight (which was actually introduced by Sacred Stones).

Great Knights on the downside boast less movement and the armor typing, making them vulnerable to anti armor weapons in addition to anti horse, but on the plus side can additionally wield axes and have generally better stat caps and greater constitution. Net result, aside tedium, they tend to the better choice. By 'tedium', I mean that, for some reason, Great Knights movement animations are strangely slow, so your turns wind up taking longer to play out.

Anyways, the point is in mechanical terms it's generally optimal to make Cavaliers Great Knights over Paladins, and even if you just make them Paladins, literally every cavalier expects to be largely better than Seth at the same level.

So he doesn't hold up once the rest catch up.

I get it's your opinion and there are other units I want to comment on, but this is so wrong I barely know how to respond.

If we take Franz and wait for promotion so you can do 20/20 for max stats, who I think of as the best of the cav options we've seen so far. He'll barely outdo a Seth who's also taken to 20. I don't want to go into great detail because we've been asked to avoid growth discussions, but Seth's "low" hp is more than made up for by his higher def and much higher res than the other cavs will hit(Kyle, the bulky cav, going Great Knight, will have him by a point of def).

Recently I played through SS, on a challenge run, and deployed level 3 Seth to the 2nd to last map in the game. A point where quite a few other units were 15/10 or 20/5 and he still put in good work. The MVP of my last run, ended the game with 44 hp, something he'll most likely surpass.
 
I get it's your opinion and there are other units I want to comment on, but this is so wrong I barely know how to respond.

If we take Franz and wait for promotion so you can do 20/20 for max stats, who I think of as the best of the cav options we've seen so far. He'll barely outdo a Seth who's also taken to 20. I don't want to go into great detail because we've been asked to avoid growth discussions, but Seth's "low" hp is more than made up for by his higher def and much higher res than the other cavs will hit(Kyle, the bulky cav, going Great Knight, will have him by a point of def).

Recently I played through SS, on a challenge run, and deployed level 3 Seth to the 2nd to last map in the game. A point where quite a few other units were 15/10 or 20/5 and he still put in good work. The MVP of my last run, ended the game with 44 hp, something he'll most likely surpass.
Serenes Forest has a nice, easy set of charts summarizing average stats at each level, and the Let's Player has already mentioned looking up growths of specific characters so I'm going to assume they don't care to keep the invisible, unfindable growth rates some spoiler given the game never actually reveals what each character's growths are. Ignoring the topic of what exact level you expect to end the game, in part because that has varied throughout the series and arguably constitutes a spoiler, let's just compare Franz to Seth as a Paladin and at both level 1 promoted and level 20 promoted.

At level 1 Paladin Seth has 30 HP, 14 Strength, 13 Skill, 12 Speed, 13 Luck, 11 Defense, and 8 Resistance.

As a level 1 Paladin, Franz expects on average to have 37.2 HP, 15.6 Strength, 13.6 Skill, 17.5 Speed, 9.6 Luck, 12.75 Defense, and 5.8 Resist. Of course, you can't actually have fractional values, but that's just how growth rates work out- Obviously, your actual Franz will usually be better in some and worse in others unpredictably. On the other hand, the difference here is that Franz is better in every metric except luck and resistance, including an average staggering 5-6 speed advantage in a game where doubling occurs for a four point difference.

Level 20 Paladin Seth on average has 47.1 HP, 23.5 Strength, 21.55 Skill, 20.55 Speed, 17.75 Luck, 18.6 Defense, and 13.7 Resist.

Leven 20 Paladin Franz, meanwhile, on average has 52.4 HP, 23.2 Strength, 21.2 Skill, 24 Speed (and only that low because that's the Paladin cap- he statistically expects to cap it at a mere level 14 promoted), 17.2 Luck, 17.5 defense, and 9.6 Resist. In other words, yes, Seth has mostly pulled ahead, but by 'ahead' I mean technically. He has an expected less than full point advantage in skill, strength, and luck, and slightly more than a point of defense, and a little over four points of resist, but is still multiple points of speed and HP behind, and this comparison highlights one clear fact; until the very high levels of promotion, Franz brought to level 20 and promoted will outclass Seth at nearly everything, with Seth slowly catching up and always being more vulnerable in HP total and more vulnerable to being doubled, only better at the low promoted levels in the sense that he has higher resist and is less likely to be crit but being overall more fragile and strictly less lethal.

By a similar token, Level 1 Paladin Kyle has 40.5 HP, 17.5 Strength, 13 skill, 14 speed, 9 Luck, 14.75 Defense, and 5 Resist. Just like Franz, this is equal or better in every single area than Level 1 Seth except Luck and Resist. Level 1 Paladin Forde averages 37.9 HP, 13.6 Strength, 16 Skill, 15.3 Speed, 11.9 Luck, 12.8 Defense, and 6.5 Resist. Again, Seth is only advantaged in Luck and Resist, making him clearly less lethal and only arguably tougher and only at all against magic.

I'm not going to go through the effort of rattling off all the level 20 values, because I've already quite made my point: Seth will be frail and ineffectual compared to the other Cavaliers of Renais, until very high levels indeed, and given Sacred Stones experience rubber banding it's hard to leave him with a significant level lead without intentionally hamstringing your overall team growth.

That he is debatably better at 20 is neat, but requires you saddle yourself with him, stuck in a bad class and being clearly worse at the low promoted levels if you put the others in his class because you just like Paladins or whatever.
 
It's not subtle but it's fairly important to Ephraim's route IIRC. It's been a decade since I played the game but I hesitate to call Eirika not being as impressive as Ephraim in the textual details sexism when there's no reason for her or anyone around her to be as confident as Ephraim and Kyle are.

I have no idea what you're trying to say here, honestly.

Rangers meanwhile boast the ability to use swords and, for some reason, cross rivers? I don't get it.

It's because they're Nomadic Troopers with a new name.

For Vocalist and anyone else unaware: the previous GBA games had a Nomad class, which were Bow-wielding cavalry. They weren't just 'a Cavalier carrying a Bow', though, but were tied up in Sacae, ie Fantasy Mongols rather than Fantasy Europeans, and as part of representing this whole thing Nomads got broadly superior ability to move through rough terrain, where other cavalry are all bad in rough terrain.

Then Sacred Stones has no Sacae or analogous group, which is probably why Nomads were dropped... but their promotion got recycled to fill out this branching promotion system, and kept the Nomad movement rules.

No idea whether that's an oversight or was retained intentionally.

I get it's your opinion and there are other units I want to comment on, but this is so wrong I barely know how to respond.

If we take Franz and wait for promotion so you can do 20/20 for max stats, who I think of as the best of the cav options we've seen so far. He'll barely outdo a Seth who's also taken to 20. I don't want to go into great detail because we've been asked to avoid growth discussions, but Seth's "low" hp is more than made up for by his higher def and much higher res than the other cavs will hit(Kyle, the bulky cav, going Great Knight, will have him by a point of def).

Recently I played through SS, on a challenge run, and deployed level 3 Seth to the 2nd to last map in the game. A point where quite a few other units were 15/10 or 20/5 and he still put in good work. The MVP of my last run, ended the game with 44 hp, something he'll most likely surpass.

I've noticed the FE fandom is prone to focusing on 'expected growths' when discussing characters and treating them as axiomatically factual, and I've always found this odd.

In actual play, you're not comparing Seth to The Average Expected Stats Of A Given Cavalier. In 'vanilla' play, you're comparing him against whoever turned out well enough to be worth promoting and continuing to use. By default this will be whoever grew best, which will often mean people who are overall above their averages.

This is and always has been a big reason why prepromotes tend to be bad; even if they're actually 'on target' with what a non-promoted peer's Average Results are, you're usually comparing them against someone who is 'blessed' and so is better than them anyway.

And 20/20 is overkill for beating the main game on Hard, so even if the odds are good a given run's Seth will pull ahead of the same run's Franz by 20/20... who cares, if nobody is going to get to 20/20 in the first place?
 
Serenes Forest has a nice, easy set of charts summarizing average stats at each level, and the Let's Player has already mentioned looking up growths of specific characters so I'm going to assume they don't care to keep the invisible, unfindable growth rates some spoiler given the game never actually reveals what each character's growths are. Ignoring the topic of what exact level you expect to end the game, in part because that has varied throughout the series and arguably constitutes a spoiler, let's just compare Franz to Seth as a Paladin and at both level 1 promoted and level 20 promoted.

At level 1 Paladin Seth has 30 HP, 14 Strength, 13 Skill, 12 Speed, 13 Luck, 11 Defense, and 8 Resistance.

As a level 1 Paladin, Franz expects on average to have 37.2 HP, 15.6 Strength, 13.6 Skill, 17.5 Speed, 9.6 Luck, 12.75 Defense, and 5.8 Resist. Of course, you can't actually have fractional values, but that's just how growth rates work out- Obviously, your actual Franz will usually be better in some and worse in others unpredictably. On the other hand, the difference here is that Franz is better in every metric except luck and resistance, including an average staggering 5-6 speed advantage in a game where doubling occurs for a four point difference.

Level 20 Paladin Seth on average has 47.1 HP, 23.5 Strength, 21.55 Skill, 20.55 Speed, 17.75 Luck, 18.6 Defense, and 13.7 Resist.

Leven 20 Paladin Franz, meanwhile, on average has 52.4 HP, 23.2 Strength, 21.2 Skill, 24 Speed (and only that low because that's the Paladin cap- he statistically expects to cap it at a mere level 14 promoted), 17.2 Luck, 17.5 defense, and 9.6 Resist. In other words, yes, Seth has mostly pulled ahead, but by 'ahead' I mean technically. He has an expected less than full point advantage in skill, strength, and luck, and slightly more than a point of defense, and a little over four points of resist, but is still multiple points of speed and HP behind, and this comparison highlights one clear fact; until the very high levels of promotion, Franz brought to level 20 and promoted will outclass Seth at nearly everything, with Seth slowly catching up and always being more vulnerable in HP total and more vulnerable to being doubled, only better at the low promoted levels in the sense that he has higher resist and is less likely to be crit but being overall more fragile and strictly less lethal.

By a similar token, Level 1 Paladin Kyle has 40.5 HP, 17.5 Strength, 13 skill, 14 speed, 9 Luck, 14.75 Defense, and 5 Resist. Just like Franz, this is equal or better in every single area than Level 1 Seth except Luck and Resist. Level 1 Paladin Forde averages 37.9 HP, 13.6 Strength, 16 Skill, 15.3 Speed, 11.9 Luck, 12.8 Defense, and 6.5 Resist. Again, Seth is only advantaged in Luck and Resist, making him clearly less lethal and only arguably tougher and only at all against magic.

I'm not going to go through the effort of rattling off all the level 20 values, because I've already quite made my point: Seth will be frail and ineffectual compared to the other Cavaliers of Renais, until very high levels indeed, and given Sacred Stones experience rubber banding it's hard to leave him with a significant level lead without intentionally hamstringing your overall team growth.

That he is debatably better at 20 is neat, but requires you saddle yourself with him, stuck in a bad class and being clearly worse at the low promoted levels if you put the others in his class because you just like Paladins or whatever.

Alright, I think the biggest question I have here is: what assumption are you making that somehow causes the Great Knight to be the better class compared to Paladin? Because... it's generally considered a completely unbalanced promotion option in favor of the Paladin over the Great Knight. Sure, slightly better caps and axes are nice, but you also lose out on a full 2 points of movement (which believe me is a lot in a Fire Emblem game).

Not to mention, this is all pretty dependent on how you play Sacred Stones in particular. See, if your intention is to grind levels so everyone gets to 20/20, then sure, Franz and the other cavaliers catch up to Seth eventually... but that's if you decide to spend time grinding. If you don't? Sacred Stones is actually a fairly short game overall, nobody's going to be hitting 20/20, meaning Seth easily pulls ahead because an even somewhat used utility Seth is going to be level 5-6, maybe higher, by the time the other characters are going to be promoting. And in the same vein, this means stat caps don't matter because if you aren't grinding, you aren't likely to be hitting stat caps... meaning that benefit of going Great Knight also goes out the window. Granted, this does depend entirely on if Vocalist intends to stick with maybe light grinding like the Arena, speed through the game directly chapter to chapter to keep the LP going steady, or even just go whole hog "I want everyone to be level 20 as soon as grinding is available".

Also also... it's been mentioned before that Sacred Stones is considered one of the easier Fire Emblem games, and part of that is generally lower enemy quality. Part of what low enemy quality does is make a game more enemy phase focused because tanky characters can just run to the front lines with a 1-2 range weapon and counter everyone to death, but another part of what it does is means... Seth starts the game nearly endgame ready with his base stats, and only gets stronger from there because he has some of the best growths in the game.

Point being, "Seth is terrible actually" is genuinely a godawful take on every objective level, and in every single dedicated FE community I've ever seen he's generally regarded as the best character in the game.
I've noticed the FE fandom is prone to focusing on 'expected growths' when discussing characters and treating them as axiomatically factual, and I've always found this odd.

In actual play, you're not comparing Seth to The Average Expected Stats Of A Given Cavalier. In 'vanilla' play, you're comparing him against whoever turned out well enough to be worth promoting and continuing to use. By default this will be whoever grew best, which will often mean people who are overall above their averages.

This is and always has been a big reason why prepromotes tend to be bad; even if they're actually 'on target' with what a non-promoted peer's Average Results are, you're usually comparing them against someone who is 'blessed' and so is better than them anyway.

And 20/20 is overkill for beating the main game on Hard, so even if the odds are good a given run's Seth will pull ahead of the same run's Franz by 20/20... who cares, if nobody is going to get to 20/20 in the first place?
Expected growths are focused on because... that's the averages that come up mathematically, so there's really nothing else to compare if you're trying to make a comparison. It's generally a bit silly to go "well you see actually Vanessa is the tankiest character in the game because in my playthrough she leveled HP and Defense every single level!" Sure, you might have had that experience, heck I've had that kind of experience in FE6 where Shanna once decided "actually I want to have 14 defense by chapter 9" and became a flying tank, but you know... you could also have a run where your favorite unit decides "hm today I will get 3 points of luck and 2 HP and that is all for 7 levels". 50% growths in a major stat tends to sound great, until you realize that's a coin flip every level - and a coin can still come up tails multiple times in a row.

And this goes into what makes prepromotes often considered good compared to a growths unit - they already have a strong baseline of stats, instead of a potential promise of maybe good stats, maybe better stats, maybe poopy dumpster stats. So when Franz or Kyle or Forde has a run of bad luck and might have to get dropped from the team, Seth is already there. Seth will always have at least 14 strength, 12 speed, and 11 defense, he will never ever in the entire game be lower than that even if growths were turned off entirely. Heck, he'll also throw in starting ranks of A in Swords and Lances both so he can use basically every single sword and lance in the game where others have to grind those ranks up from something lower! (more or less of an issue depending on the game, granted, Sacred Stones weapon ranks level decently quickly and most characters join with fair enough ranks). That's another thing a lot of pre-promotes tend to bring, by the by - Where a freshly promoted unit who gains a new weapon type will generally be stuck grinding it up from E with fire tomes or heal staves or iron weapons, a prepromote gets to waltz in saying "fill me up with silver weapons and physic staves".

And this isn't even getting into the fact that "growth units end up better" also varies from game to game. Sacred Stones I think growth units do tend to surpass their pre-promote equivalents on an average run (besides Seth, he's pretty ridiculous), but then you look at some of the other GBA games and you have nonsense like Pent going "oh hey you want a pre-promote Sage with higher averages than an equally raised Mage but also starts with A rank Staves instead of E"? Or a Hero who shows up with the only Brave Sword in the game but also some stats in the low 20s (higher on hard mode as if that wasn't enough), or an Assassin 1 point from maxed strength and mid-20s on his speed and skill. Or a Berserker with 50 base HP and some stupidly solid defenses to back that up (who gives a Berseker 16 resistance???)

Now, in the end, does this mean you have to use Seth or prepromotes in general? Fuck no, I tend to dumpster every single one of them on my playthroughs so I can go "look at my boy Ross, look at how strong he has become", I love watching numbers go up as these dumb little children explode into murder-blender army-wreckers. It's just that it's kind of silly to then point at that and think it makes them actually the best units, as if they didn't have to first deal with an entire chunk of the game where they were much more vulnerable to a single mistake on the player's part getting them killed, or are technically relying on RNG to see if they actually turn out as good as an already dedicated pre-promote unit or not.

...Well, not really the first post I intended to make in this thread, but I'll say hey it's fun to see someone playing Sacred Stones for the first time, even if I've never checked out the Restoration Queen mod myself before! It's genuinely a pretty great entry into the GBA Fire Emblem games since it's short and self-contained, with some fairly strong characters when you dig into the support conversations and the like, along with just the right amount of customization in split promotions and the occasional class skill that I enjoy since I'm an old GBA-raised curmudgeon who raises my stick to yell at the clouds with how newer FE games go all "swap classes everywhere, learn ALL THE SKILLS".
 
I have no idea what you're trying to say here, honestly.
Fair and I don't want to try and say anything while being vague to avoid spoilers. Feel free to ignore this, but spoilers for Ephraim's character and the rest of the game:
The game very deliberately plays up Ephraim's accomplishment and doesn't make a big deal out of Eirika's similar wins because the narrations reflects how they feel about it. Ephraim is a confident warrior and general who on some level enjoys not being directly responsible for anyone other than his men while Eirika hates everything about the situation and sets that aside out of concern for the common people of Renais and for Ephraim.

This contrasting dynamic is the foundation of their characterisation and plays into the story on every level and I'd argue that the game portrays Eirika as the one being more right about the initial part of the war. I don't remember enough of Ephraim's route to say which one was more right beyond suspecting they were both best for the plot of their routes.
 
Point being, "Seth is terrible actually" is genuinely a godawful take on every objective level, and in every single dedicated FE community I've ever seen he's generally regarded as the best character in the game.
No, Seth is objectively terrible. I literally just mathematically showed this- at level 1 Paladin the other candidates 'expect' to largely outclass him.

The idea that it's a bad take on every objectively level when he is, objectively, statistically weak on average and with essentially no special merit to his name is farcical.

I pointed out that he can't cap HP, and this is an example of the point; Seth is only a Good Unit if you take it as gospel everyone will hit their averages AND that level 20 promoted is the important level. If you consider the fact that characters can beat the odds, starting higher level is largely detrimental; it makes you a solid plan b. Seth is okay, not good, okay, if the random number gods rolled in and went 'yeah fuck you, your franz, forde, and kyle all suck'. If any of them happened to get a few good levels early, they're probably going to be better than him full stop; again, on average he's behind them all at level 1, if they happen to have a few lucky 5-7 stat gain levels early they'll pull even farther ahead of these averages, and he pulls ahead by precious few points on average. If you stick to whoever turned out best, they will outclass Seth basically guaranteed.

Which is a general thing. Strong prepromotes make a solid backup plan, but there is literally no reason to not use overperformers, naturally good classes, and lords, and Seth is in a class that even if you accept that it's better (with no axes when axes are less generally available and generally better than the other physical weapon types, and less constitution making it typically the case that the Great Knight is functionally higher speed- in point of fact, male cavaliers literally gain more speed promoting to great knight than they do when promoting to paladin, an additional 2 constitution, and the stat cap in speed is the same when speed is one of the most important stats and the other is strength/magic which the great knight also gains more of) you have a pile of other candidates to fill- and as I pointed out they all average better than him until high levels.

Sacred Stones does not enforce average stats either, which is really important to note, because if even one of the other cavaliers levels unusually well, then Seth has an even more uphill climb ahead of him when eg Average Franz is barely, arguably passed in quality in the last few levels, kinda, you know, if you squint and pick the bad class. If Franz has an unusual number of good early levels, this does not cause him to be 'owed' bad levels. You expect going forward for him to on average hit his averages still, except from a higher point. And yes, he can fail to do so, but so can Seth- and there's stats like HP where Seth can full stop never cap them no matter how lucky he is.

Seth is, at best, mediocre. He is a mediocre that you can count on existing as a fall back if you don't get him killed early, but he is, at best, mediocre, unless specifically him happens to buck the odds and level unusually well, which is the exact thing you're saying the potential of should be ignored in discussing unit quality.

EDIT:

Let's break down in more detail the differences between a Paladin and a Great Knight.

In general, in Sacred Stones the things that actually differ between classes are as follows:

  1. Any special abilities they have. Many classes have none, especially unpromoted, and it's relatively rare, furthermore, to choose between special abilities.
  2. What their actual promotion stat gains are; this functions bidirectionally, in the sense that even when promoting to the same class in the case of overlapping promotion options, they will see different exact stat gains, and in the sense that eg whether you make a Fighter a Warrior or Hero will yield different stat gains.
  3. What weapon types they can wield, but not to what degree; excepting the existence of myrmidon/swordmaster exclusive swords, every weapon is a specific tier of a specific proficiency, or is the rare case of a 'preference' weapon. Technically preference weapons could be argued to not exist in Sacred Stones, as unlike some other games to use that mechanic every character with a unique weapon also has a unique class, well, except I think the myrmidon unique classifies as preference but whatever. Point is some other fire emblems actually give specific characters unique weapons. The other point is that in Sacred Stones if you have a weapon skill you can get to A in it, and if you're promoted you can get to S in one of the weapon skills you have, and only one, and this is dynamic. Other games in the series give class based caps on individual weapon ranks, Sacred Stones does not.
  4. What the max stats are.
  5. What it's movement and defensive typings are, ie you do actually have to be a pegasus or wyvern to fly, and if you're an armor knight, you are vulnerable to anti armor weapons etc.
Note that in general, male and female version of the same classes have different caps and different promotion games because that's how fire emblem rolls. Accordingly, I will only be speaking of male Cavaliers here, because the presence or absence of female cavaliers in Sacred Stones would constitute a spoiler of sorts one way or another.

A male Cavalier who promotes to Paladin gains +2 HP, +1 Strength, +1 Skill, +1 Speed, +2 Defense, +1 Resist, +2 Constitution, 1 point of movement, and 30 points of weapon EXP in swords. Note that luck is never directly affected by promotion.

A male Cavalier who promotes to Great Knight gains +3 HP, +2 Strength, +1 Skill, +2 Speed, +2 Defense, +1 Resist, +4 Constitution, actually loses one point of movement, and gains an instant D in Axes. Note that excepting the relatively worthless gain in sword weapon exp and the loss in movement, this is a strictly better statline.

Male Paladins have stat caps of 60 HP and 30 Luck, like everyone including the Great Knight, and there's also technically a stat cap of 15 move speed but this only comes up through boots based shenanigans and is likewise equal between all classes. Also true but largely irrelevant is both have a cap of 25 constitution; since this doesn't grow except through level, only stat item shenanigans can lead to it mattering. For the stats that actually can differ in a general case, Male Paladins boast a cap of 25 Strength, 26 Skill, 24 Speed, 25 Defense, and 25 Resist.

Male Great Knights boast a cap of 28 Strength, 24 Skill, 24 Speed, 29 Defense, and 25 Resist. Great Knight is, just like on promotion gains, only narrowly worse, having a lower skill cap- but none of the male paladins are likely to cap skill anyways, as either class.

Great Knights and Paladins classify as the same movement type.

So the actual differences run as thus: a Paladin will have less HP, Strength, Speed, and Constitution, statements avertable only if the character winds up stat capping and only in the case of HP and Speed. The Great Knight has potentially better defense, and to a lesser degree potentially worse skill, and potentially even more better strength in addition to a guaranteed extra point. The Great Knight can use axes, but moves two less tiles than the Paladin per turn, and is vulnerable to armor slayers... but unless you know a specific map specifically threatens with an armor slayer over a horse slayer, the Paladin is not reliably better off than the Great Knight while having reliably less speed and HP to defend with. They still must fear the spike damage of slayer weapons.

In short, the only case in which a Paladin is a meritful choice over a Great Knight is when what you actually want is a Falco Knight or Wyvern Lord, but there's a pesky bow enemy around, or you have specific narrow concerns about a specific armored unit that, nevertheless, you want to send the cavalry in particular near and not like, use your mages or swordmasters instead.
 
Last edited:
Expected growths are focused on because... that's the averages that come up mathematically, so there's really nothing else to compare if you're trying to make a comparison. It's generally a bit silly to go "well you see actually Vanessa is the tankiest character in the game because in my playthrough she leveled HP and Defense every single level!" Sure, you might have had that experience, heck I've had that kind of experience in FE6 where Shanna once decided "actually I want to have 14 defense by chapter 9" and became a flying tank, but you know... you could also have a run where your favorite unit decides "hm today I will get 3 points of luck and 2 HP and that is all for 7 levels". 50% growths in a major stat tends to sound great, until you realize that's a coin flip every level - and a coin can still come up tails multiple times in a row.

And this goes into what makes prepromotes often considered good compared to a growths unit - they already have a strong baseline of stats, instead of a potential promise of maybe good stats, maybe better stats, maybe poopy dumpster stats. So when Franz or Kyle or Forde has a run of bad luck and might have to get dropped from the team, Seth is already there. Seth will always have at least 14 strength, 12 speed, and 11 defense, he will never ever in the entire game be lower than that even if growths were turned off entirely. Heck, he'll also throw in starting ranks of A in Swords and Lances both so he can use basically every single sword and lance in the game where others have to grind those ranks up from something lower! (more or less of an issue depending on the game, granted, Sacred Stones weapon ranks level decently quickly and most characters join with fair enough ranks). That's another thing a lot of pre-promotes tend to bring, by the by - Where a freshly promoted unit who gains a new weapon type will generally be stuck grinding it up from E with fire tomes or heal staves or iron weapons, a prepromote gets to waltz in saying "fill me up with silver weapons and physic staves".

I feel like you've misunderstood my confusion? I get why, for example, certain kinds of challenge runs will pick to immediately focus on a character because their growths make them the safest choice and the challenge run doesn't let them do the default 'spread experience around, see who turns out well, then focus on those people'.

But comparing the averages of non-promoted characters to the bases of prepromotes is something I've seen done on a number of occasions, and it -among other wonky comparison approaches- has always baffled me, especially in the games where most classes are well-populated. (If you have 1 non-promote and 1 prepromote of a given class, your odds of the prepromote not being outclassed are way higher than if you have 4 non-promotes of that class)

Again: you're basically never comparing Seth to Perfectly Average Franz in a run. You're usually comparing him against whichever Cavalier turned out amazing. And that's how most games in the series work by default, as far as 'prepromotes vs non-promoted peers'.

By a similar token, the weapon rank point is... often misleading? With the very noteworthy exception of Staves, in the GBA games (Among others) stat growth can easily eclipse a weapon rank advantage, where a Level 16 not-yet-promoted character using a D or C rank weapon turns out to hit harder and more accurately than a prepromote peer who's using an A-rank weapon. (Even aside the incentives in the games with weapon durability to shy away from heavy usage of high-ranking weapons, which normally break quickly and are expensive or outright irreplaceable)

People who argue 'Seth is endgame-ready out the box, and that's fantastic' make sense to me, even if it's not a perspective I can personally get behind. But people who use 'this prepromote is a little ahead of some of the averages of non-promoted peers' as a foundation to argue things along the lines of 'the prepromote invalidates their unpromoted peers' (Which is the kind of thing I've seen people literally argue regarding Seth) usually look to me like they're letting easy math trick them into thinking of the mechanics in a manner divorced from what they're actually experiencing. To wit: a Sacred Stones run that raises all the Cavaliers will basically always end up with at least one of them blowing Seth out of the water.

(You are correct there are individual prepromotes in the series who have such great bases that their non-promoted peers need absurd luck to be equal by the time they catch up in level, but Seth is not one of them and nobody was suggesting All Prepromotes Are Terrible, so I don't really get why you're bringing it up?)
 
I will be perfectly blunt, when I play Fire Emblem (and especially when I played Fire Emblem back in the day) I entirely ignore stats and just use whatever characters I happen to like.

Yes, this means that ~40% of my army takes double damage from bows most of the time.
 
I will be perfectly blunt, when I play Fire Emblem (and especially when I played Fire Emblem back in the day) I entirely ignore stats and just use whatever characters I happen to like.

Yes, this means that ~40% of my army takes double damage from bows most of the time.
The secret of fire emblem is that a unit doesn't even need to excel or be blessed to be good or even just useable.

One of my favourite things about fire emblem is the way you can use units temporarily and then bench them satisfied with them doing their job. I think that's a fun role to have.
 
Last edited:
No, Seth is objectively terrible. I literally just mathematically showed this- at level 1 Paladin the other candidates 'expect' to largely outclass him.

Seth is really good because every map you deploy him on and every kill you give him makes the game easier.

There's enough xp to go around for leveling a bunch of other units as well as him getting some of it less efficiently and that's without any grinding in monster maps or on the tower.

Seth solos are easier than Seth-less runs.

Seth will be frail and ineffectual compared to the other Cavaliers of Renais, until very high levels indeed, and given Sacred Stones experience rubber banding it's hard to leave him with a significant level lead without intentionally hamstringing your overall team growth.

That he is debatably better at 20 is neat, but requires you saddle yourself with him, stuck in a bad class and being clearly worse at the low promoted levels if you put the others in his class because you just like Paladins or whatever.

Second point, Paladin's a fantastic class. Great Knight's a reasonable alternative choice to it. If someone says they prefer Great Knight to Paladin, I might not feel the same way because I think gaining axes doesn't make up for the added vulnerability and lost move. I'm not going to call it a bad choice though.

You want to know bad classes? Sword Master and Sniper who're stuck with 1 weapon type, that don't have 1-2 range, and are still on low movement. The extra crit Sword Master gets is not worth those disadvantages.

Beyond that, Seth being ineffectual compared to any other character is... I'm not even sure we played the same game.

From the Serenes forest tables. Sure, a rng blessed other cav will become better than him. Seth will have fallen from your best combat unit to merely being 2nd or 3rd place. He's not FE6 Marcus who falls off on his 5th map where unpromoted cavs will already have better stats. By the time one of the others is ready to promote, he'll likely be somewhere between level 3 and 5 just from normal use.

I've noticed the FE fandom is prone to focusing on 'expected growths' when discussing characters and treating them as axiomatically factual, and I've always found this odd.

In actual play, you're not comparing Seth to The Average Expected Stats Of A Given Cavalier. In 'vanilla' play, you're comparing him against whoever turned out well enough to be worth promoting and continuing to use. By default this will be whoever grew best, which will often mean people who are overall above their averages.

This is mostly because of how much rng is involved. It's possible for almost any unit to become an unstoppable juggernaut that kills entire maps solo, but without looking at the averages you have no idea who's more likely to be able to do that than others.

In my most recent SS run, the units who did that for me were Eirika and three characters who would be spoilers to talk about.

Of them, the other three characters had the right bases to expect to be able to pull this off, Eirika didn't. Mine was Str and Def blessed to the tune of 4 Str and 3 Def. She was slower than average, but that didn't matter because she has so much speed that she was still doubling everything.

Some games are also caps based where the main question is "what does this unit look like when they max out their stats and how hard is it to get them there". Radiant Dawn, Awakening, Fates, and Engage are the main ones I'm thinking about there.

And 20/20 is overkill for beating the main game on Hard, so even if the odds are good a given run's Seth will pull ahead of the same run's Franz by 20/20... who cares, if nobody is going to get to 20/20 in the first place?
Again: you're basically never comparing Seth to Perfectly Average Franz in a run. You're usually comparing him against whichever Cavalier turned out amazing. And that's how most games in the series work by default, as far as 'prepromotes vs non-promoted peers'.

I completely agree, but this is why I felt like I needed to comment about that advice regarding Seth. If you promote earlier than 20, which is often a good idea in GBA games, Seth winds up even better in comparison because it's unlikely that any of them are going to hit more than one stat caps(besides that low 24 speed cap anyway).

With any of the other pre-promotes in game, your unprompted units will eclipse them with average growths. With Seth, he's good enough and will have gained enough levels by the time they might promote that your other cavs need to actually get lucky to beat him.
 
Last edited:
I'm gonna be blunt, Terra: if you ask people who do low-turncount runs of the game who the best character is, they'll say Seth. If you ask people who do speedruns of the game who the best character is, they'll say Seth. If you ask people who do semi-serious runs of the game who the best character is, they'll say Seth. On most "draft races", Seth is outright banned past the first few chapters because giving a player sole access to him is seen as making the whole thing totally unbalanced. If you look up a random unit tier list on Google, it'll say Seth. In fact, if you look up "Sacred Stones tier list", this is the first result.

This wasn't some random jackoff, either; this was a community-made list on Reddit. He got voted there, and the reason for the jokey tier names is that it was generally agreed on that Seth so thoroughly dominated his niche that other units were considered viable in large part because they did something Seth couldn't (flying), or could help Seth out in some way (staff access, dancing).

Because here's the thing: we're not comparing Seth to the other characters, we're comparing him to the enemies. You know, the things you're fighting in Sacred Stones, because Sacred Stones isn't a PVP game (barring that side mode that nobody ever plays where the only thing that matters is character stat caps because you can grind statboosters). And let's look at the enemies in what's supposed to be the hardest challenge in the game's main campaign, the final chapter:



This chapter's a straight shot to the boss. Nearly all the enemies in the way in the way of that boss are wights. They have stats in the range of 38-41 HP, 14-15 Str, 11-12 Skl, 10-12 Spd, 2-4 Lck, 8-10 Def, and 7-9 Res, and are equipped with steel weapons that have 8-10 Might, with the occasional Killing Edge user (but come on, you have the Hoplon Guard at this point, right?).

Here's the average level 15 Seth:



So for those not on ball with their numbers, this Seth doubles every single one of the wights, and it's not even close. If he uses the regular ol' silver lance in his inventory in Chapter 1, he one-rounds them. Conversely, if we round up, the strongest wights are dealing 8 damage to him--meaning that if he fights five wights, and all of their attacks hit, he's still not at serious risk of dying. This is a Seth with no statboosters, not level-capped, nothing funky going on aside from a weapon you should have nine of at this point, and he can wipe out a good chunk of the enemies on the map before he needs healing.

Even if you look at the stronger enemies on the map, like the dracozombies or the deathgoyles, you rarely see Attack values creep above the 30-mark, and Speed values tend to be around the low teens. These enemies can threaten Seth, but none of them go higher than four-rounding him. The only enemies on the map that he can't double are the gwyllgi (those wolf things), which have Speed in the 20+ range, but they're tucked in the top left corner of the map and there's only two of them, meaning it's pretty easy to go the entire round without ever engaging one.

And you might be thinking, "well, what about those gorgons? Those are pretty nasty." And you're right; they are pretty nasty, with their Demon Surge giving them a whole 36 Attack. The thing is, Seth is still one of the better units for gorgon-hunting, since he starts with 8 Resistance and has a solid 30% growth, which puts him above just about every non-mage or pegasus unit in the game, getting three-shotted if he has a Pure Water or Barrier boost--and if he's been trained up to use Audhulma, he gets four-shotted. Of course, if he's got a sacred weapon, he can just one-shot them before they even get a chance to attack him. And keep in mind that none of the gorgons actually block the way to the boss, making it pretty feasible to just ignore them.

He doesn't do poorly against the boss, either, since said boss is a mage with a very heavy tome. This Seth has 57 Attack with Audhulma, enough to kill the boss in three hits--he takes very heavy damage in the process, borderline one-shot territory without some kind of Res-boost, but this means that if you've got Tethys on hand, you could actually feasibly kill him in a single round with Seth.

And this is all just physical combat stuff. Apart from that, Seth has the highest grounded movement in the game, can carry and drop any unit with 14 Con or less, and can move again after performing non-attack actions. This means that even if you don't want to use him to solo the map (which he can absolutely do with the proper support), he can still function effectively as a utility unit.

And again: this is the final chapter of the game--or at least, the final chapter to be an actual chapter, since Part 2 is just you locked in a room with an unguarded boss who's inside your range and weak to all those cool weapons you've been picking up, a boss who, on most serious playthroughs, is going down in two turns at most. This is the point in the game where Seth should be at his worst--and instead, he is, at worst, somewhat average, and at best, incredibly effective.

When you combine that with the entire half of the game or so where most enemies are struggling to even damage him, I'm not sure how you can look at him and go "lol he sucks, great knight is better, 5/10."
 
Last edited:
Alright, I might have been a bit overly hostile on account to lack of sleep last night responding, sorry about that. But to further respond to Terra's points:

The problem with going "actually other characters better than Seth at 20/20", or even 20/1 is that... Sacred Stones is a short game, even by FE standards. It doesn't have a very high chapter count, or a lot of side chapters, so in the first place you're extremely unlikely to be hitting level 20/20 and stat caps outside of if you decide to grind. Which hey, fair enough if you decide to do so, but at that point literally every character is in fact top tier because you can just take a pitstop to go "and then I max leveled everyone" and even on Hard Mode, Sacred Stones is a game with fairly weak enemy quality. So because of that, even base stats Seth is still viable in the lategame, because you don't get extra credit or extra EXP for overkill, he still does fine killing things.

And this is ignoring the fact that you've glossed over like... nobody else even can promote until almost halfway through the game, so Seth already has the promoted advantage for the first half of the game minimum, you can't say "actually character is mid" when they're literally the strongest options available for half the game. It's exactly why even the Jagen types that do heavily fall off like FE6 Marcus or of course OG Jagen himself are still rated highly - they might become dead weight past chapter 10 or whatever, but up until that point they're a high movement monster with good weapon access that starts with a ~20 use delete button in the form of a Silver Lance that nobody else is going to be using for a while. And Seth is one of those who doesn't fall off - might eventually fall behind his contemporaries, but is still more than good enough to show up in later chapters with good growths and bases both.

As for the Great Knight VS Paladin thing, looking back over it I can see the arguments for Great Knight and might have put it down a bit more than it deserves, but overall I still think Paladin tends to be the better class option. Just to start with 8 movement is yes, objectively superior to 6 movement, and sure fliers get even better mobility with ignoring terrain but that's counteracted by the fact that map design tends to be much more liberal with archers than with items like horseslayers, not to mention some maps that added mobility doesn't actually mean anything. Just in the chapters played so far, Chapter 3 and 5x are both "indoor" maps which tend to both lack terrain that will slow down your horses beyond the occasional pillar, and also have actual walls your fliers can't just float over. And it's Fire Emblem, you know there's going to be more indoor maps. So in general, that increased mobility tends to be a very nice boon.

As for Constitution, I'm actually going to go wild and argue that the 13 constitution the average Great Knight has is worse than the 11 constitution of most of your Paladin options. Why? Because of how few weapons actually weigh that much to be an issue, and because of how the rescue system works. In terms of weapons, there's actually very few swords and lances (the weapon types the Paladin has access to) that weigh more than 11, and a number of these like the Blade-class swords don't tend to either be skipped because of their abysmal hit rates, or because they're overkill compared to standard weapons while having more price and less durability. You can throw axe access in the mix, sure, and that does give Great Knights higher potential attack... but again, enemy quality in FE8 isn't the greatest, so often I find just sword and lance coverage is more than enough and you don't need the extra might.

Anyways, for Constitution and Rescue, the way Rescue works with mounted units is that unlike foot units where their rescue stat is 1 point lower than their Constitution, they instead get a Rescue stat of 25 minus their Constitution, or 20 minus their Constitution if they're a WEAK LITTLE GIRL (seriously what the hell Intelligent Systems what does being a girl have to do with how fat your horse is???). So with 11 Con, your male Paladins end up with 14 rescue - generally enough to pick up and move almost any character in the game with their superior movement. Meanwhile, Great Knights end up with 11 or 12 rescue - still fairly good, but there's a few more characters who break that threshold who you might have wanted to ferry around. Not a huge deal overall, but it's another reason I'll personally take Paladin over Great Knight in most runs.

As for the stat caps argument... really, it rarely if ever matters just playing through Sacred Stones? Again, short game, not a lot of time to be hitting those caps on most characters including these ones. If you check those vaunted 20/20 levelup stats for Franz, Kyle and Forde, you'll see that despite the higher caps of Great Knight the only characters who even hit Paladin caps are Franz who usually maxes his speed (which has an equal cap across both classes) and Kyle will max his strength (which is fair, his averages end up hitting the higher Great Knight cap, and if I make anyone a Great Knight it's usually Kyle).

Like, overall in the end, personal preference reigns supreme. Sure, I've just done a whole writeup on why I prefer Paladins and why Seth is a pretty great unit, but again this doesn't stop me from usually benching Seth anyways because I just have more fun watching the munchkin characters beef up. There's a character coming up eventually who's widely regarded as easily the worst character in the entire game, and I've still gone out of my way to train them up on Ironman runs because I find it fun. I just don't agree with the sentiment of "Seth bad", because... it's absolutely wrong, and if you talk to anyone in the wider Fire Emblem community who's analyzed Sacred Stones for anything from casual play to LTCs and challenge runs, Seth is always considered one of the best units in the game.
 
This is mostly because of how much rng is involved. It's possible for almost any unit to become an unstoppable juggernaut that kills entire maps solo, but without looking at the averages you have no idea who's more likely to be able to do that than others.

I feel like my actual point is getting completely missed here?

Like, let's talk a flipping-coins experiment. You have 20 coins. You flip all of them. The average result is of course that you get 10 heads and 10 tails. Your actual result on a given try probably isn't actually 10 heads and 10 tails, but it'll often be pretty close, and if you repeat this and write your results down hundreds of times, the trend over time is that you'll drift closer and closer to a 50% ratio for your global results.

That's a pretty normal sort of RNG scenario thingy that you can use as a metaphor for a number of game designs... and it's not actually even marginally equivalent to what's happening in a Fire Emblem run.

So imagine our coin-flipping experiment decides that Getting Heads Is Good, we want the most heads, ideally we want All Heads. Furthermore, we're not simply flipping 20 coins in a batch and writing our results down and then moving on to the next batch, we're actually doing a batch of batches, and then we pick one batch of out of all those batches to be our preferred result, discarding all the other results. We'll say we do 5 batches, meaning we flip 20 coins, write down the results, and then do that 4 more times, before picking only one of those 5 as our preferred result.

If we do that, what we'll find is that the batch we ultimately pick as our Winning Batch is more than 10 heads way more than 50% of the time. Adding more trials just makes this even more reliably true. After all, we don't need all our batches to be above the average, we need any of them to be above the average; to actually end up at or below 10 heads requires all our batches to fail to be above-average, when we expect roughly 50% of our batches to be above-average. (So with 5 batches we pick 1 of, we expect something like 3% of our final results to not be above-average)

This is a metaphor/comparison point much more equivalent to Fire Emblem's system.

Put into plain English: it's not simply that it's possible for a non-promote to beat their averages and pull ahead of a prepromote peer who is theoretically equal to the averages of all their non-promoted peers (To simplify and ignore that generally everybody has different growths and bases, because that's distracting from the point), it's that it's acually expected that raising several characters will result in some people ending up above their averages. Since you have limited deployment slots in these games, you give deployment slots to your characters who turned out well (Or that you simply cannot do without on the mission for some reason, which complicates things a bit, but I'm driving at a point here), rather than who turned out poorly, and so your team quality skews above character averages by default.

This is pretty fundamental to the Fire Emblem framework, and I'm not sure I've ever seen a discussion make the slightest attempt to account for the fact that it's true.

And stuff like your response of 'it's possible for almost any unit to become an unstoppable juggernaut' comes across like an example of that. It's not simply 'possible' for someone on your team to turn out amazing -it's actually likely, assuming you're spreading experience around so a variety of people get the opportunity to roll those dice. You can't predict who your 'god' unit is going to be, of course, but it's genuinely surprising if a run through a full game simply never has anyone end up noticeably ahead of the curve.
 
Last edited:
Like, overall in the end, personal preference reigns supreme. Sure, I've just done a whole writeup on why I prefer Paladins and why Seth is a pretty great unit, but again this doesn't stop me from usually benching Seth anyways because I just have more fun watching the munchkin characters beef up. There's a character coming up eventually who's widely regarded as easily the worst character in the entire game, and I've still gone out of my way to train them up on Ironman runs because I find it fun. I just don't agree with the sentiment of "Seth bad", because... it's absolutely wrong, and if you talk to anyone in the wider Fire Emblem community who's analyzed Sacred Stones for anything from casual play to LTCs and challenge runs, Seth is always considered one of the best units in the game.
Yeah, it really has to be reiterated: you can use anyone you want if you're competent at the game or willing to take your time. If you don't like using Jagen because you find using him unsatisfying or you prefer a zero-to-hero narrative, then that's perfectly reasonable (though personally, I think it's actually way cooler when Jagen finds his way onto an endgame team than it is when he's never used). It's when people are like "lmao you're using JAGEN??? what are you, a NOOB, don't you know he STEALS XP, you need to save that XP for Gordin and Est, they pwn all" that I tell the person to shut up.
 
As for the stat caps argument... really, it rarely if ever matters just playing through Sacred Stones? Again, short game, not a lot of time to be hitting those caps on most characters including these ones. If you check those vaunted 20/20 levelup stats for Franz, Kyle and Forde, you'll see that despite the higher caps of Great Knight the only characters who even hit Paladin caps are Franz who usually maxes his speed (which has an equal cap across both classes) and Kyle will max his strength (which is fair, his averages end up hitting the higher Great Knight cap, and if I make anyone a Great Knight it's usually Kyle).
The problem with ignoring the stat caps is that Great Knights have better stats full stop. You can ignore the stat caps, but if you promote a character to great knight they literally get larger gains.

This means the minimum quality of a Great Knight is better and so is the maximum. The only way for a great knight to be worse than a Paladin is if the Paladin is independently better, and the Great Knight has an insurmountable constitution advantage, and the Great Knight can use every weapon the Paladin can and more, and the more part of that is axes which are a very large advantage to have access to.

I laid this out in some detail, though to be fair it was in an edit so one might have missed it.

(I'm not going to respond to most of the posts in large part because I've already made my arguments and the counter arguments have an awful lot of 'Everyone Agrees so it's right!'. This is an argument that says people arguing heliocentric systems when everyone agreed in fact that the sun orbited the earth were wrong. If I am wrong about the objective quality of great knights vs paladins, this is true because of getting facts on the ground wrong. It is not made true by lots of people thinking I am wrong, and an appeal to outside popularity does not make it true.

In general, Sacred Stones strong rubberbanding and Seth's weak for his level stats make him bad. He is likely to be surpassed, while in a mediocre class, and this doesn't change because 'oh but I can point to TIER LISTS'. We're not talking about speed running and challenge runs and all that! We're talking about playing the game normally here)
 
In general, Sacred Stones strong rubberbanding and Seth's weak for his level stats make him bad. He is likely to be surpassed, while in a mediocre class, and this doesn't change because 'oh but I can point to TIER LISTS'. We're not talking about speed running and challenge runs and all that! We're talking about playing the game normally here)
Alright, at this point? Please just define your "normally" playing of Sacred Stones, because it really feels like we're just talking past each other. I define a "normal" playthrough of a Fire Emblem game as just playing through the game, not too much worry about turn counts or LTC nonsense, but also not spending twelve hours grinding every character to max level because that takes out all the fun for me. And in Sacred Stones, any playthrough that isn't grinding levels is one where Seth starts off as your best unit, and ends up as still one of your better units. Hell, if you want I can throw back to my original playthrough of the game almost 20 years ago where I did grind everyone up to 20/20... and promptly discovered that Seth still had competitive stats with Franz, who I had made a Paladin. A bit weaker in some categories like speed, and a bit better in some categories like defense and resistance, but still 100% viable.
 
The problem with ignoring the stat caps is that Great Knights have better stats full stop. You can ignore the stat caps, but if you promote a character to great knight they literally get larger gains.

This means the minimum quality of a Great Knight is better and so is the maximum. The only way for a great knight to be worse than a Paladin is if the Paladin is independently better, and the Great Knight has an insurmountable constitution advantage, and the Great Knight can use every weapon the Paladin can and more, and the more part of that is axes which are a very large advantage to have access to.

I laid this out in some detail, though to be fair it was in an edit so one might have missed it.

(I'm not going to respond to most of the posts in large part because I've already made my arguments and the counter arguments have an awful lot of 'Everyone Agrees so it's right!'. This is an argument that says people arguing heliocentric systems when everyone agreed in fact that the sun orbited the earth were wrong. If I am wrong about the objective quality of great knights vs paladins, this is true because of getting facts on the ground wrong. It is not made true by lots of people thinking I am wrong, and an appeal to outside popularity does not make it true.

In general, Sacred Stones strong rubberbanding and Seth's weak for his level stats make him bad. He is likely to be surpassed, while in a mediocre class, and this doesn't change because 'oh but I can point to TIER LISTS'. We're not talking about speed running and challenge runs and all that! We're talking about playing the game normally here)
I feel like "a subpar Seth can effectively solo endgame levels" is a pretty concrete argument that basically disproves everything you're saying here, and the fact that you're pointing to tier lists rather than addressing that point indicates that you didn't actually read that post?
 
The problem with ignoring the stat caps is that Great Knights have better stats full stop. You can ignore the stat caps, but if you promote a character to great knight they literally get larger gains.

This means the minimum quality of a Great Knight is better and so is the maximum. The only way for a great knight to be worse than a Paladin is if the Paladin is independently better, and the Great Knight has an insurmountable constitution advantage, and the Great Knight can use every weapon the Paladin can and more, and the more part of that is axes which are a very large advantage to have access to.

I laid this out in some detail, though to be fair it was in an edit so one might have missed it.

(I'm not going to respond to most of the posts in large part because I've already made my arguments and the counter arguments have an awful lot of 'Everyone Agrees so it's right!'. This is an argument that says people arguing heliocentric systems when everyone agreed in fact that the sun orbited the earth were wrong. If I am wrong about the objective quality of great knights vs paladins, this is true because of getting facts on the ground wrong. It is not made true by lots of people thinking I am wrong, and an appeal to outside popularity does not make it true.

In general, Sacred Stones strong rubberbanding and Seth's weak for his level stats make him bad. He is likely to be surpassed, while in a mediocre class, and this doesn't change because 'oh but I can point to TIER LISTS'. We're not talking about speed running and challenge runs and all that! We're talking about playing the game normally here)
Yeah, those better stats? A +1 to Strength, Speed, and Defense, and a +2 to Constitution. At the time that you should be promoting, considering you're claiming for a 20/1 promotion, that is piddly. You don't need the speed boost--Sacred Stones enemies are slow as balls; that was already shown off in my above post where the only enemy on the final chapter with an attack speed above 15 were a pair of dogs tucked into the upper corner. The Con boost, meanwhile, as McFluffles pointed out, is actually arguably a downside. You know how many weapons slow down a promoted paladin Franz? Four. And two of them are Brave weapons, so it doesn't even matter either way. (Kyle has higher Con, so he gets slowed down by even less.) Meanwhile, he loses an entire category of characters he can normally rescue.

Oh, right, and you drop to 6 Movement, which means your cavalier unit now has the same mobility as a foot unit. Even if you're not speedrunning or LTCing the game, loss of Movement is a huge deal--losing movement means burnt villages, recruitable characters getting overwhelmed and wiped out, side objectives failed, units being left out of formation and killed. A unit with high mobility is far more valuable than a unit with low mobility--especially a high-mobility unit that can carry people, meaning that they can carry over that mobility to other characters, unless the lower-mobility unit has some huge advantages. A marginal combat boost is not a huge advantage. Being able to use steel axes when you're probably most of the way to silver lances is not a huge advantage.

And again, we're not comparing Chapter 1 base Seth to 20/1 Franz. We're comparing them at the time you get Franz to 20/1, at which point, assuming they've killed the same number of enemies, Seth is probably closer to level 8--the gap in XP gain between a low-level promoted character and a high-level unpromoted character is really not that big. At that point, the only significant lead Franz has is, like... 2 Speed. Franz can try to catch up to Seth further after that point, but as long as they're being used equally, much like Achilles and the tortoise, the gap between them won't vanish (at least, not until they both cap out). This is also ignoring the fact that Franz isn't catching up to Seth and hitting 20/1 until about 2/3 of the way into the game; prior to that point, Seth is just strictly better.

And even that's a fallacy because, again, we shouldn't be comparing Seth to Franz at all--we should be comparing him to the enemies. The enemies in Sacred Stones are not strong enough for a point of Strength or Defense on a promoted character to matter that much. Most of them are slow as shit, and the really dangerous endgame stuff can be two-shotted by endgame weapons. Meanwhile, a character that can quickly rush to the frontlines and start slaughtering them right away, or grab a healer who you left in enemy range, or get a sluggish general or dancer up to where they need to be, is valuable.

Basically what I hear is, you're sacrificing the main thing that makes a cavalry unit something you want to use, in return for being able to use weapons that you'll rarely actually need, and calling the character who can fight viably at base level in Chapter 14, even before accounting for them having some of the highest growths in the game, a dogshit unit nobody should ever use. That's not heliocentricism, that's the fucking hollow Earth.
 
Last edited:
Alright, at this point? Please just define your "normally" playing of Sacred Stones, because it really feels like we're just talking past each other. I define a "normal" playthrough of a Fire Emblem game as just playing through the game, not too much worry about turn counts or LTC nonsense, but also not spending twelve hours grinding every character to max level because that takes out all the fun for me. And in Sacred Stones, any playthrough that isn't grinding levels is one where Seth starts off as your best unit, and ends up as still one of your better units. Hell, if you want I can throw back to my original playthrough of the game almost 20 years ago where I did grind everyone up to 20/20... and promptly discovered that Seth still had competitive stats with Franz, who I had made a Paladin. A bit weaker in some categories like speed, and a bit better in some categories like defense and resistance, but still 100% viable.
Normally playing a Fire Emblem game would, in general, be, you know.

Using units that prove effective over units that don't, ie drop units that are proving too squishy or non-lethal at least if this remains true after they gain a few levels etc. Probably use some units that aren't proving effective just because you like them personally so if they're not sucking too outrageously bad you can use statboosters to catch them up.

Not accepting deaths except perhaps in rare cases, because as far as I'm aware nobody not doing an ironman run normally accepts deaths on any kind of regular basis. Certainly, the game directly disincentivizes it.

Valuing EXP in general, which means generally full clearing maps unless a time limit or just some corner enemy being really lethal and not worth the trouble. Totally understandable to skip a killer weapon berserker in some corner guarding nothing if you don't want to risk restarting the map. This also, however, means not aggressively dumpstering EXP for literally no reason, aka using Seth at all. If you don't absolutely need to use Seth to bail your ass out of a fire, you shouldn't. Quick lesson/refresher for anyone who doesn't know or doesn't remember the EXP formula in Sacred Stones: very roughly you get 30 EXP for doing damage to an on-level opponent and twice~ that for killing an enemy, plus various things like bosses and thieves give a flat bonus value. The amount for fighting raises or lowers by 1 per level (with kills remaining double before the flat bonus), with promoted units being effectively considered 20 levels up over their listed level, essentially taking it as a given you waited for max before promoting them. This means initially fighting things with Seth is a gargantuan waste of experience, given you are seriously slowing the development of lower units in catching up to him while only very slightly speeding his growth compared to waiting til everyone has mostly caught up in level to him. At which point people have mostly passed Seth in stats.

Not grinding beyond being thorough unless you're struggling with a map or really want to catch up someone who's overly low level and resultantly hard to level while actually clearing maps.

It's viscerally unpleasant and mechanically suboptimal and largely unneeded to have Seth fight anything ever, given it wastes EXP, until people have largely caught up to him at which point he sucks. He's going to be a below average unit unless it's specifically overgrinding him avoiding that.

Basically what I hear is, you're sacrificing the main thing that makes a cavalry unit something you want to use, in return for being able to use weapons that you'll rarely actually need, and calling the character who can fight viably at base level in Chapter 14, even before accounting for them having some of the highest growths in the game, a dogshit unit nobody should ever use. That's not heliocentricism, that's the fucking hollow Earth.
Love how the arguments continue to be 'TERRABRAND IS OBVIOUSLY STUPID OR CRAZY' and not actually arguments as to how the guy with objectively bad stats until excessively high levels in an oversaturated class is, somehow, magically not objectively bad. Love how all the arguments that are materially true hinge on one or both of 'bro waste experience by evenly using units rather than trying to give kills to units of similar levels to what they're killing, which is mechanically optimal' and 'bro seth is good if I count the fact that enemies are bad only in exactly Seth's favor. The fact that enemies suck compared to him changes the fact that he sucks compared to the competition, even though this same statement means the enemies suck even more compared to actually good units'.

Yep. TERRABRAND IS STUPID OR CRAZY, BASED ON THESE INTERNALLY INCONSISTENT ARGUMENTS. What good faith reasonable arguments we have here.
 
Back
Top