#rhea discourse

[raxistaicho]

An ill-fitting throne, like an ill-fitting crown

When I was last playing Three Houses, I was struck again by how small Byleth looks, seated on Sothis's throne:

They just look so fantastically unfitting for the throne.

Female Byleth can't even touch her heels to the ground, and while male Byleth can do that much, the arm rests are too far apart for him to use them properly, and he visibly has to sit so far forward that he can't rest his back against the back of the throne, either.

A pretty common theory is that Sothis was huge when she was alive, and aside from just the sheer size of the throne this is supported by, of all the grotesque things, the Sword of the Creator itself:

It's pretty easy to infer that the serrated portion of the blade was crafted from Sothis's spine. A person's spine generally constitutes 25% of their total height, and the Sword of the Creator is huge, especially compared to Female Byleth:

With Byleth being 5'4'', Sothis could easily be between seven and eight feet tall. She'd easily dwarf everyone else in the game, including Dedue and Nemesis.

Where am I going with this?

Byleth not being big enough to sit properly upon Sothis's throne is symbolic in a way: they're being pressed into a position that doesn't suit them. Just look at how uncomfortable and uncertain they seem, particularly female Byleth.

[pandp-author]

Rhea killed Sitri, y'all.

real take, BTW. Not making this up.

[problematic-fodlan]

Rhea is the punching bag this fandom likes to pretend edelgard is.

So much so there is a tag called "good Rhea" because the default is treating her like the bad guy. You can't even assume her depiction will be neutral, it'll be one or the other.

So much for "morally grayness."

-

[hauntedaeon]

If I see in 2025 one more person being mean to someone else because “Edelgard was right!” “Dimitri was right!” Or “Rhea was right!” I’m going to lose my damn mind. All of them are some degree of fucked up and there’s no 100% best choice. Even Claude is very morally questionable sometimes. All the lords + Rhea are complex characters with both positive admirable traits and huge flaws and that’s one of the things to me that makes 3h so great to me and gives it such staying power. None of them are fully right and none of them (including Rhea) are fully wrong. Discussion about them is very useful as all have their points and it sucks when people just start insulting other fans for who they like. In 2025 let’s have more meaningful discussion about the game we all like and less petty insults and name calling!

(Edits made)

[azure-clockwork]

I love three houses discourse because I'm pretty sure everyone just picks their route based on which house leader they're the most gay for and then tries to defend their pick by pointing out the other sides's war crimes via twitter memes. Reader, all four of them do substantial quantities of war crimes. So many. We're just here because the woman with Issues and a big fuck-off axe said so, and then we gotta justify everything she did in the name of dismantling the class system. I mean, I'm here for that, but you could also try justifying Charm Man uses poison and perfidy to try to stop racism, A Sad Little Meow Meow gives no quarter instead of doing therapy, or the Thicc Pope tries to bring back her mom via human experimentation, depending on your tastes

[pandp-author]

The biggest issue with trying to discuss about Rhea and her faults is that the discussion is almost always framed in giving her the least charitable explanation behind why she did what did or does (which has mostly been debunked by the Nintendo dream interview) as well as assuming that she's indeed guilty of everything she's been accused of (mostly by edelgard and later Claude, even though they're the complete opposite of a unbiased source, so their claims *at best* can only be taken with a big spoonful of salt)

[pandp-author]

As someone who likes Rhea, it feels as though I have to work with scraps and what the writers *tried* to do, rather than what they accomplished, which is not much.

One such example is her told but not shown relationship with Cyril--you could apply this to anyone she's close to but let's focus here. Rhea rescued Cyril from slavery from the Goneril's and gave him a home in Garreg Mach, showing Rhea's compassion and kindness for others, something she will do again for the survivors of Remire. To show his gratitude, Cyril decides to do odd jobs at Garreg Mach, something Rhea not only doesn't oppose, but enables, as she gives him tasks herself. We are meant to see this as Rhea humoring him, as whenever Cyril is tired because he's doing too much it's because he's giving himself more tasks to do. We can analyze *why* Cyril feels this way, but the issue here is that Rhea doesn't stop him.

We can explain away why, such as the fact that Rhea and Cyril don't have a support together that may explain their dynamic (its ups and downs) but the fact is that they don't even get monastery dialogue, or a cutscene or anything! Explaining that it's because of time constraints/budget or whatever doesn't take away the fact that Rhea looks as though she doesn't pay Cyril that much mind because she's never shown to reach out to him. Rhea's inaction says just as much as her actions. It's all told from Cyril's perspective and it's abundantly clear he's viewing her through rose tinted glasses.

On top of looking like Rhea doesn't mind that Cyril is overworking himself (which I'm certain it's not what the writers wanted to convey) She doesn't know he can't read. It doesn't matter that Cyril explains that he's been actively keeping it a secret to everyone (except Mercedes for some reason) It does not look good on Rhea (or Shamir or Byleth, for that matter) that he's gone long enough not knowing how to write and read and that Lysithea had to practically ambush him to get him to learn.

Cyril has potential, and he's not going to reach him because he's limiting himself, because of his attachment to Rhea. She should've told him that he can have a future, a life, outside of her and that "leaving" her behind wouldn't have made her mad or hurt in the slightest, she would've been happy for him. Instead, it's Seteth who has to step in and tell him as much, which doesn't help the image of the relationship between Rhea and Cyril.

And Rhea's problems with Cyril can be extrapolated to other aspects of her character. Rhea doesn't... seem to do much of anything. Which maybe was part of the point, I've said before that Rhea's real problem is her passivity, but that still can hurt her image as a sympathetic character, and she's meant to be one, Silver Snow saying as much.

It's like the second time I've said it but still it's funny how i regularly defend characters i have a negative opinion for. Namely Dimitri and Rhea.

I'll say this if the grievances i had with them didn't exist they actually would've been one of my favorite 3h characters.

[problematic-fodlan]

“Cured of Rhea’s experiments”? Plural? And what experiments? Byleth was born stillborn. Rhea put Sothis’s heart inside her and Byleth lived. That is literally the one thing she did.

-

[strawberry-slices]

fe3h discourse finally disproven

Rhea and Edelgard are actually besties and they hang out here’s my proof

[butwhatifidothis]

"When Edelgard says her 'Should the one leading the people of the world be someone with humanity or a creature that can merely masquerade as a human at will?' line she wasn't saying she thought Nabateans shouldn't rule over humans, only that that was what Rhea and Nemesis were fighting over."

Edelgard still literally believes that Nabateans shouldn't rule over the people. Like she says that. Extremely clearly. In multiple places, but most blatantly, explicitly, and directly during this moment.

Trying to say "She's not saying that's what she believes, she's just saying that's what happened" would be a credible argument if she didn't then go on to very plainly show off that that is, in fact, what she believes

[curse-d-owl]

Me: Rhea has power over Fodlan and she abuses her power to support racism and nationalism. She can protect Catherine from Faerghus despite being a wanted criminal, take away their heroes relics, allowed fodlan to oppress foreign nations, she aided Faerghus in killing Duscur rebels who are trying to reclaim their homeland, deported a Dagdan refugee for practicing their own religion and has religious tenets forbidding foreigners from freely entering Fodlan. Politicians with less power than her like Dimitri and Sylvain did what she refused to do by righting the wrongs of their territory. How can you argue otherwise?

The smartest Rhea fan: The devs build Three Houses around Silver Snow, Edelgard is meant to be a villain, Byleth is a reference to the Buddha's nutsack, Rhea is a genocide vic-

Me: That doesn't answer my fucking question.

[bowbowis]

In a World for Humanity... There's No Need for Gods...

People trying to make out that CF is the bad ending because Byleth loses their godhood really need to learn about context. As Edelgard says in the very same scene, "when humanity stands strong, and people reach out for each other, there's no need for gods." Byleth's loss of divinity isn't a tragedy because because their godhood is, and always has been, redundant.

Byleth the god didn't show Edelgard she could be loved, or help Dimitri find redemption, or teach Claude to trust others; Byleth the person did. Only one person in the game reduces Byleth to their status a vessel for Sothis's power, and that's Rhea, something even she admits she was wrong for doing in her S-Support. Edelgard doesn't weep in the end of CF because she's mourning that Byleth lost the Godess's power, she weeps because she's overjoyed that the person she loves, the part of Byleth that truly matters, survived.

[bowbowis]

If you teach a commoner to read, he might learn about things beyond his immediate experiences. If he learns about things beyond his immediate experiences, he might start thinking about them. If he starts thinking about things beyond his immediate experiences, he might find himself dissatisfied with the current state of affairs. If he is dissatisfied with the current state of affairs, he might start writing about it. If he starts writing about his dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs, he might share his ideas about how things could be better. If he starts sharing ideas about how things could be better, they might not align with your narrative. If they don't align with your narrative, people might start questioning your authority. If people start questioning your authority, they might rebel. If they rebel, they might win. If they win, you'll lose your position of power and influence. This is why you don't teach commoners to read.

Alright I need to rant.

So Cyril right? You know him, but probably not well. So how exactly did he end up in Rhea’s dragon claws?

Okay so Rhea rescued Cyril, right? Pretty good of her, right?

Why the fuck is she letting a 12 year old work for her? Almost all his lines are about work this, work that, Rhea that. Like, he’s a child. Someone get this child into childcare services or something. No offense to him, but he deserves better then working under the church.

Edit: I ALMOST FORGOT. HE CAN’T READ. Why isn’t Rhea teaching this poor kid to read wtf

[diaphin93]

Just as a thinkbit:

From a pro-church perspective, the church loses all divine and religious authority in Crimson Flower. After all, Byleth is the literal living Vessel and chosen Successor of the Goddess Sothis, so Edelgard being crowned with Byleth as her witness makes her indeed a divinely ordained Emperor. So Rheas duty as Archbishop would have been to bend the knee and accept Edelgards authority the second Byleth protected her in an act of divine intervention.

[raxistaicho]

Please don’t take this as an attack on you or anything, I’m just curious. What makes you annoyed with Dimitri stans? Is it when they like him uncritically or something?

That's a really broad question, I don't really mind Dimitri or Rhea stans, I just mind when they try to airbrush some of the things the characters do. Like call what he did to Randolph not torture because technically Byleth kills him before he can get physical.

[problematic-fodlan]

It makes me really uncomfortable actually reading takes that are like “Rhea’s true nature is what she shows in one route where she loses everything, therefore all Nabateans are impulsive and dangerous monsters at their core that should be killed or imprisoned” like hmm where have we heard rhetoric like “these people are inherently dangerous” before

-