Which cultures has FF drawn inspiration from? obviously japanese for samurai/ninja
medieval england for knights?
others?
That is quite the hefty question you got there. Final Fantasy derives much of it’s themes and mythos from cultures around the world. I suggest checking out the Name Origins section of the site for more information. If you have more specific queries, feel free to ask me, Cid, or anyone else on the boards.
I should say that the knights of the Final Fantasy series have not seemed like some particularly drawn from mediaeval England. In fact, from what I have seen, they are just sword-wielding armoured warriors and not that much like mediaeval knights.
But yes, look in the Compendium.
Depends on what Knight you are talking about. The FF I Knights may just be burly guys with armor but the FFT Knights were obviously medieval warriors.
Name it, there’s been at least one reference. Largest references are Japanese, Medieval Europe, and Norse Mythology.
I’d say Final Fantasy Tactics closely relates in several aspects to traditional knights and governments of medieval times more closely than any of those other ff games. Particularly how it brings elements in that are reminicent of the Catholic Church and how wars were waged.
– Edited to another topic so this one can stay on track
I admit that I have not played FFT very much, so I believe you. The only thing which I remember is that Ramza goes to some sort of military academy to learn to be a knight or something. That is not traditionally mediaeval at all, since one became a knight by becoming first a page and then a squire under the tutorship of another knight or magnate. Traning in the military academy does not appear into well into modern times in Western civilisation. However, what did seem realistic was that Ramza (if I remember correctly) could become a knight because of his noble birth.
Combatwise, though, I guess that they are more mediaeval. I presume that are cavalry in FFT or something and can use lances as well as swords and heavy armour, shields, helmets, etc…
Actually, now that perc brings that up, RPG knights aren’t really very much like medieval knights at all. The middle ages knights would be calvary, riding upon horses and using lances. We never see them in rpgs really, besides shing force games, and that’s about as close as you get. The knights we see are usually infantry, using swords and attacking on their feet. Not that I’m sure some knights weren’t like that, my medieval knowledge is scare at best, but they weren’t that common in comparison to calvary knights i think. but with the armor, ff knights usually are the heavy armor wearers.
edit: though i suppose the knightrs of fft ‘can’ become calvary, if you put them on chocobos.
Yes, heavily armoured knights fighting on foot were not common in mediaeval European warfare, mostly because their style of fighting simply was far, far more effective on horseback than it was on foot, even though the plate armour of the later Middle Ages, very often misrepresented in films and elsewhere as clumsy and heavy, is actually not very heavy nor restricts movement very much thanks to its design of rivets and sliding plates. What the heavily armoured knights of the Final Fantasy games do in battle on foot (aside from magic or other wild limit breaks or whatever) is certainly not unrealistic in terms of mediaeval armour.
The Gariland Academy seemed to be exclusively for nobles (Delita got in thanks to Balbanes). All the other knights in the game minus Cid (Who was probably in the same position as Ramza) were either orphans/descendants of other knights trained by the church (Temple/Shrine Knights like Beowulf and Meliadoul) or had a non-specified origin (Agrias, Gafgarion).
There are several cultures mixed in FFT’s classes, like Ninjas, Oracles and Samurai from Japan or Geomancers (I’m guessing these are based on Shamans). The Lancers are more mythical than anything else (Since it was one of the two classes they got when they split the TRUE Dragoner/Dragoon in half) as are the assorted mages. The Dancers are sort of Arabian.
True Knight in an RPG - Stiener
Big, Dumb, Blindly following “duty” and “Honor”…
He may be the closest we have to a knight.
I know way too much about this kind of thing. My FFVI tenth anniversary essay included the symbolism for every FFVI character’s name (before I cut it, afterwards, I think it had four). In other words, you can ask me a specific thing; I’ll probably know.
Actually, I cannot agree, he was a served as more of a guard, did he not? I mean, he may have been classified as a knight, and was head of the knights of pluto, but the majority of his and his “knights” duties included maintaining posts, and keeping the other knights in line, but I cannot deny his size and vapidity. He just seemed more like a glorified usher than anything else. Wow, what a tangential thing to disagree with, wrong thread, too, sorry.
You can’t use FF IX as a good definition of anything. The whole game was put into a “silly thing symbolizing some other very deep thing” format, such as the cute little mage struggling to know what is the meaning of “life”.
Yeah, Steiner was a crappy example for a Knight, but you also have two white Mages/Summoners, a blue mage that eats his enemies and a Thief/Bard. Besides for the Dragoon, Monk and Black Mage, there aren’t any definite classes in FF IX.
Just so you know, Beo, we aren’t picking apart your topic, we’re normally like this.
When you think about it there rerally isn’t much of a good medieval knight in any of the Final Fantasy games. Mostly it’s just a term given to the main fighter type class that uses swords. But really their more like guards, or in Steiner’s case, Captain of the guards. If anything, Cecil is probably the closaest you have to a true knight. But are we rerally gonna expect accurate portrayels of things in video games based on fiction?
I suppose that “visual classification” is all but standard in most video games, as it would be to a certain extent in real life, for example, if one were walking down the street, and saw a person standing upright, in full, stereotypical “middle age british” armor, (obviously depending upon one’s origin, one would guess the person’s sex, or purpose) one, when referring to the person, or recalling the story of having sited said person, would probably use the term “knight”, just to relay the image as opposed to imply or assume their purpose for standing their or allegiance to local royalty. Yeah, what I just said, had a point when I started, I swear, but as I read over it, said point becomes pretty lost. I think it was more of an attempt to “philosophically” justify the usage of the term, or rather said terms of classification when seemingly or technically inappropriate.
Now heres a question - Are we talking about the REALISTIC knights of medieval times or are we talking about the “idealistic” knights of the times…
As in, are we referring to the morals that Noble men of “Knighthood” were to bear the burden of…?
I cannot claim to know one way or another, but I’d dare say that many “Knights” were not the honorable paladin figures that we read about in fairey tales or Camelot lore…
I’d go a step further and wager that like most human beings in power, they could (and would) often times take advantage of thier possition of rank.
Thats just my assumption based on general human nature, not because I know any knights.
And - on an even larger step in this direction - I’ll say that IF “Knights” were of that type, then why WOULDNT the Nobles and Knights of final fantasy tactics be similar to the ones of the real world? Those were some corrupt bastards… If you’ve played Tactics then you know what I mean.
Human beings are human beings, Izlude, and no human being is an ideal. Yet, if you read most mediaeval romances, you will find that many knights even in romance have their share of flaws. In Le Morte d’Arthur, for instance, only a small number of the Knights of the Round Table, on account of what we know about their deeds, would actually truly fit into the mould of what you call a paladin: Galahad, Bors, Percival, Lamorack, and Gareth namely. Lancelot and Tristram would basically fit in before each of them commits adultery, and possibly not even Lancelot depending on how one interprets his level of piety. Some other minor characters might fit into the mould, but we do not know that much about all of what they do.
What records and chronicles we do have from the Middle Ages, like the Chronicles of Jean Froissart, show real knights as perfectly human: some would seem to be, in fact, quite noble and honourable, whilst others are perfectly villainous and cruel.