#again: thank you norbah for all of the edelgard discussion

[iturbide]

I think theres been a misunderstanding ,I dont disagree with that as edelgards goal,im saying conquest is her ultimate goal specifically because she wants to enact her own changes across all fodlan.

She does not want to stop at adrestia , she wants it done across the whole continent and she believes it must be her making those reforms. Even if Dimitri and Claude want similar changes (and we actually see Dimitri making reforms) she still believes it needs to be *her* at the head. And that means conquering the Kingdom and Alliance to return the "superior" Adrestian Empire back to its former glory with *her* holding the reigns.

that's why she will not stop even if Rhea is dead , even if the central church is gone, and even if she already made her reforms in Adrestia and has control over the southern church . its the " raze it all to the ground and rebuild it from the ashes" mentality.

Oh and Im glad you mentioned the branches of the church because she... doesn't actually care about them.

On claudes route she tells claude that as long as his people don't follow the central church she does not care who they follow , so they're free to follow the eastern church over her own southern church.

The branches appear to be largely Independent from the central church. Thats why the western church is able to get away with xenophobia and their multiple attempts to kill Rhea. That's also why edelgard is able to revive the Southern church and control it herself with no interference from Rhea.

Edelgards reforms are in regards to the nobility and system of inheriting titles, not necessarily the faith itself. Thats why she focuses solely on the central church while largely ignoring the other churches. as you said, it's because she believes the "monstrous beast" that leads the central church is the reason for everything she condemns (fodlan being divided , the system of nobility and inheritance, the obsession with crests, etc.)

Tldr: im not disagreeing with you. My point was that all conquerors make similar justifications for their wars. even if they believe their cause is righteous, the end result is the same.

I still feel like you're unfairly boiling down Edelgard to a 2-dimensional figure, though. As I said, I can't comment on Three Hopes, and I don't personally consider it canon, so I am not speaking in regards to anything from that game -- but in Three Houses, it's not just rote imperialism that drives her.

It's true that she believes that she needs to be at the head of change -- but this, in Three Houses, stems from the fact that by her own admission, she believes that Claude and Dimitri are on Rhea's side. She says as much after her class escapes from Garreg Mach after the attack on the Holy Tomb:

The Church of Seiros has great influence and power. Their control over the lords of the Kingdom and the Alliance is nearly absolute.

Again, she is wrong about this. This is not an accurate assessment of the situation -- in truth, several noble heirs from the Kingdom have every reason to hate either the Crest System or the Church itself (including Ashe and Sylvain), while there are prominent nobles in the Alliance who basically pay lip service to the Church because they feel it's expected of their station, including Lorenz:

The truth is, I am not a particularly devoted believer either. But it would be unbecoming for a noble like me to neglect his prayers, wouldn't it?

But Edelgard lives in a situation where trust is dangerous. She doesn't remember her time in Faerghus as a child, and therefore doesn't remember Dimitri; all she has to go off of are the close historic ties between the Kingdom and the Church (a belief undoubtedly strengthened by Dimitri taking Rhea in after the fall of the monastery in Crimson Flower). And Claude is widely regarded as an untrustworthy schemer, not just by Edelgard but by Garreg Mach at large, so there's nothing he could say to win her over.

So no, Edelgard does feel like she has to be the one heading change -- because she can't open up enough to trust anyone else to do it. Again, this does not make her a bad character. This is part of what makes her as a character interesting and compelling. Again, I don't think it's fair to boil Edelgard's character down to Lady Walhart, which is what it feels like you're doing in these messages. She's not: she set out to do this because she saw a legitimate problem, and unfortunately her solution involves brute forcing a solution.