BUR #13921 has been rejected.
create implication selena_(fire_emblem_fates) -> severa_(fire_emblem)
Both are the same person.
Posted under Tags
BUR #13921 has been rejected.
create implication selena_(fire_emblem_fates) -> severa_(fire_emblem)
Both are the same person.
If we do this, we should add odin_(fire_emblem) -> owain_(fire_emblem) and laslow_(fire_emblem) -> inigo_(fire_emblem), for the same reason.
LoneShadowStar said:
BUR #13921 has been rejected.
create implication selena_(fire_emblem_fates) -> severa_(fire_emblem)
Both are the same person.
This is currently listed behind spoiler tags in her wiki, it should be unspoilered if this BUR is accepted.
I don't think it has ever been a spoiler, and I don't think it has ever been confirmed either.
That said, I'm against this implication, because other than the aforementioned dubious canonicity, it will make outfit implications be multi-layered (which evazion is against of), and there are fringe cases like rhajat (fire emblem) which are the same person but not quite.
The_Bob said:
It is canon that Selena/Odin/Laslow are the same people as Severa/Owain/Inigo (see this line for one example). I hear your other objections, though.
Oh, good point, didn't know that line.
However I'll still lean towards not considering it, because (at least according to the wiki) Rhajat's S support with Corrin "implies" that she and Corrin are past incarnations of Tharja and Robin. But that would also mean that the Selena/Odin/Laslow we know are not in Fates, because they're all children of Awakening characters.
Because of this and the possibility of future discussions about the canonicity of it all, I would just ignore that line.
The bulk update request #13921 (forum #228527) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
