Roster Prediction Discussion Thread

[Hotfeet444]

GROOSTON.

WIELDER OF THE TRIFORCE OF POWER PROTEIN.

I wonder if Groose is as much a fan of (Taco) Bell as Gaston.

 

[YoshiandToad]

Actually; here's something maybe one of you can clear up for me. Relevancy.

I just saw this over at the Rumours and Leaks thread:

Isnt smashs job to bring not relevant characters into the spotlight and help them like fire emblem and kid icarus? I can see it happening for K. Rool

K. Rool is relevant though...
Mach Rider on the other hand...

So what the **** is relevancy classed as these days? We see it used often as both an argument and a counter argument of whether relevancy is important or not. Are Ice Climbers relevant? Has being in Smash MADE them relevant?

K. Rool's been out the loop for years, yet people still consider him relevant, yet the F-Zero characters and Krystal seem to not be seen as relevant these days.

The **** is relevancy in this context?

 

[Depressed Gengar]

Cranky Kong?

 

[Scoliosis Jones]

Actually; here's something maybe one of you can clear up for me. Relevancy.

I just saw this over at the Rumours and Leaks thread:





So what the **** is relevancy classed as these days? We see it used often as both an argument and a counter argument of whether relevancy is important or not. Are Ice Climbers relevant? Has being in Smash MADE them relevant?

K. Rool's been out the loop for years, yet people still consider him relevant, yet the F-Zero characters and Krystal seem to not be seen as relevant these days.

The **** is relevancy in this context?

The purpose of reviving retro character is mainly because they haven't been relevant to much of anything lately, and for a long time.

There are different types of relevance scenarios. K.Rool is very relevant to DK as a whole. To the recent games? No, not really.

Then you've got something like F-Zero. Is Goroh relevant to F-Zero? Certainly. Is F-Zero relevant to anything Nintendo in the last 10 years? Not much besides Nintendoland and retro throwbacks.

Relevancy can mean several different things really. It can't just be about a specific thing, because one character can be relevant to a bunch of different things.

Basically, relevancy =/= recency all the time. It can mean overall importance or just to the recent things.

 

[Substitution]

Actually; here's something maybe one of you can clear up for me. Relevancy.

I just saw this over at the Rumours and Leaks thread:





So what the **** is relevancy classed as these days? We see it used often as both an argument and a counter argument of whether relevancy is important or not. Are Ice Climbers relevant? Has being in Smash MADE them relevant?

K. Rool's been out the loop for years, yet people still consider him relevant, yet the F-Zero characters and Krystal seem to not be seen as relevant these days.

The **** is relevancy in this context?

Well, to be fair. Smash isn't about relevancy. Ice Climbers we're put in because retro. There was a certain charm to them that Sakurai liked.
But, there is at least that chance of them coming back, through some reboot.
Am I saying it's possible? Of course not. If that was the case, Mother, F-Zero, and plenty of others would've already have gotten a reboot.
But, then again, look at Pit.

 

[YoshiandToad]

The purpose of reviving retro character is mainly because they haven't been relevant to much of anything lately, and for a long time.

There are different types of relevance scenarios. K.Rool is very relevant to DK as a whole. To the recent games? No, not really.

Then you've got something like F-Zero. Is Goroh relevant to F-Zero? Certainly. Is F-Zero relevant to anything Nintendo in the last 10 years? Not much besides Nintendoland and retro throwbacks.

Relevancy can mean several different things really. It can't just be about a specific thing, because one character can be relevant to a bunch of different things.

Ah, so the relevancy people refer to isn't just about the character, but the franchises importance of recent? Okay, that makes more sense why Krystal, Goroh and Black Shadow aren't seen as relevant as K. Rool despite their comparable appearances of recent years.

Thanks Scoliosis.

Well, to be fair. Smash isn't about relevancy. Ice Climbers we're put in because retro. There was a certain charm to them that Sakurai liked.
But, there is at least that chance of them coming back, through some reboot.
Am I saying it's possible? Of course not. If that was the case, Mother, F-Zero, and plenty of others would've already have gotten a reboot.
But, then again, look at Pit.

I wasn't particularly questioning whether relevancy is important to Smash, as that's been discussed to death by both pro-relevancy ignorant newites and "MUH RELEVANCY" witty responders who have a differing opinion on the matter.

I was just wondering what made one character more relevant than another according to Smashboards is all.

 

[BKupa666]

So what the **** is relevancy classed as these days? We see it used often as both an argument and a counter argument of whether relevancy is important or not. Are Ice Climbers relevant? Has being in Smash MADE them relevant?

K. Rool's been out the loop for years, yet people still consider him relevant, yet the F-Zero characters and Krystal seem to not be seen as relevant these days.

The **** is relevancy in this context?

It's a non-factor that linear thinkers try to extrapolate from the Pokemon and Fire Emblem franchises, where its existence is noted by Sakurai, to the roster as a whole, where it is...not.

What is relevance in common context, though? It's, if a character has appeared in their series' latest game, one that has to have been released as recently as the user dictates, it's relevant. Everything else is not and thus has no chance.

 

[Morbi]

The purpose of reviving retro character is mainly because they haven't been relevant to much of anything lately, and for a long time.

There are different types of relevance scenarios. K.Rool is very relevant to DK as a whole. To the recent games? No, not really.

Then you've got something like F-Zero. Is Goroh relevant to F-Zero? Certainly. Is F-Zero relevant to anything Nintendo in the last 10 years? Not much besides Nintendoland and retro throwbacks.

Relevancy can mean several different things really. It can't just be about a specific thing, because one character can be relevant to a bunch of different things.

Basically, relevancy =/= recency all the time. It can mean overall importance or just to the recent things.

Smashboards... what game was this site dedicated to again? Boards... no. Smash... maybe?

 

[Starcutter]

Relevancy is directly related to requests, with characters being fresh on people's minds.

Example: after phoenix wright dual destiny came out, there was many requests for phoenix on miiverse.

 

[andimidna]

So? This is a crossover fighting game. When has canon been the focus of a crossover fighting game?
That won't be happening though, the change is too radical and make Link an entirely different character. That's like saying Dedede should be able to become Masked Dedede by using his down special or that F.L.U.D.D. should be an alternate moveset for Mario. You're diverting away from what the character was originally intended for and you're not making Link the same character from the previous game that people are accustomed to playing as. It's just not going to happen to Link, if you want a Wolf Link + Midna make them a separate character all together instead of hindering Link.
Many of the characters that were only in 1-3 games are representing their own franchise. Things work differently when you're part of a large franchise like LoZ.
I'm just saying that if you're expecting Link to become Wolf Link in his moveset, you're setting yourself up for disappointment. Support whoever you like, don't let me stop you from doing that.

Yea, it's not canon, so the incarnation being different wouldn't matter, but he is TP Link so that doesn't matter. I'm suggesting the transformation happen after his new final smash. Just like Samus got in Brawl. An equally radical change. Link transformed from adult to young in OoT and we got both, but I'm not sure on the likelihood of a separate character. Having TP Link w/o Wolf Link is like if we had MM Link but he didn't use any masks, or if we had ALBW Link that didn't use Ravio's Bracelet. It's his main mechanic that separates him from the rest of the incarnations. And there is already a different incarnation of Link confirmed with the same moveset. Something Samus fans didn't have in Brawl. Although ZSS didn't hurt Samus, she was even better IMO.

 

[Scoliosis Jones]

Ah, so the relevancy people refer to isn't just about the character, but the franchises importance of recent? Okay, that makes more sense why Krystal, Goroh and Black Shadow aren't seen as relevant as K. Rool despite their comparable appearances of recent years.

Thanks Scoliosis.

At least that's the way I see it.

Series like Pokémon and Fire Emblem are series that have a constant shift in cast members, so it only makes sense to have their new characters get in. Although, for FE, I think Marth and Ike should stay as they are very iconic to the series, moreso than most other lords.

For Pokémon, you pretty much have to do it that way, as there are now over 700, so with the Pokémon they deem their most marketable, those Pokémon have the best chance.

The problem with Roy and Mewtwo, is that Mewtwo is very very relevant to X & Y, whereas Roy isn't relevant to what is happening in Fire Emblem besides his DLC appearance. Marth and Ike both have 2 games devoted to them, so they have more series importance to them than several other lords including Roy.

The difference is that Mewtwo is still relevant to his series, while Roy pretty much isn't even if he did appear in Melee. That hardly matters now really.

Other series however, have classic and iconic characters who aren't recent, and don't really have a changing cast. DK is one of them. The main cast hardly changes, besides the forgettable Tiki's and new baddies in Tropical Freeze. K.Rool will always be THE Bad Guy of DK, as Ridley will be to Metroid. The casts aren't subject to heavily changing. That's why recent events hardly have an effect on them.

The only way K.Rool can lose out to a character with a more recent appearance, is if Dixie or Cranky gets in over him, and that may not even be because of recency, because the other two are very iconic as well.

EDIT: @ Morbi , sure, F-Zero has relevance to Smash Bros., but besides that it's lacking compared to several other series. That is fact.

 

[Morbi]

At least that's the way I see it.

Series like Pokémon and Fire Emblem are series that have a constant shift in cast members, so it only makes sense to have their new characters get in. Although, for FE, I think Marth and Ike should stay as they are very iconic to the series, moreso than most other lords.

For Pokémon, you pretty much have to do it that way, as there are now over 700, so with the Pokémon they deem their most marketable, those Pokémon have the best chance.

The problem with Roy and Mewtwo, is that Mewtwo is very very relevant to X & Y, whereas Roy isn't relevant to what is happening in Fire Emblem besides his DLC appearance. Marth and Ike both have 2 games devoted to them, so they have more series importance to them than several other lords including Roy.

The difference is that Mewtwo is still relevant to his series, while Roy pretty much isn't even if he did appear in Melee. That hardly matters now really.

Other series however, have classic and iconic characters who aren't recent, and don't really have a changing cast. DK is one of them. The main cast hardly changes, besides the forgettable Tiki's and new baddies in Tropical Freeze. K.Rool will always be THE Bad Guy of DK, as Ridley will be to Metroid. The casts are subject to heavily changing. That's why recent events hardly have an effect on them.

The only way K.Rool can lose out to a character with a more recent appearance, is if Dixie or Cranky gets in over him, and that may not even be because of recency, because the other two are very iconic as well.

EDIT: @ Morbi , sure, F-Zero has relevance to Smash Bros., but besides that it's lacking compared to several other series. That is fact.

In the context of Smash, I would hope that it is logical to assert that F-Zero has the only pertinent relevance necessary. Especially when you compare it to several other series. That is fact.

What new Pokemon character got in a Pokemon slot aside from Lucario? I don't understand relevancy in the context of Pokemon. The entire Pokemon cast is first-generation aside from our boy, Lucario. 700 Pokemon... but they only market a dozen or so. They promote even less in their movies and games. Some that they do promote, wouldn't work in Smash. Pokemon is more "prominence" based than "relevancy" based.

 

[The Nerd]

At least that's the way I see it.

Series like Pokémon and Fire Emblem are series that have a constant shift in cast members, so it only makes sense to have their new characters get in. Although, for FE, I think Marth and Ike should stay as they are very iconic to the series, moreso than most other lords.

For Pokémon, you pretty much have to do it that way, as there are now over 700, so with the Pokémon they deem their most marketable, those Pokémon have the best chance.

The problem with Roy and Mewtwo, is that Mewtwo is very very relevant to X & Y, whereas Roy isn't relevant to what is happening in Fire Emblem besides his DLC appearance. Marth and Ike both have 2 games devoted to them, so they have more series importance to them than several other lords including Roy.

The difference is that Mewtwo is still relevant to his series, while Roy pretty much isn't even if he did appear in Melee. That hardly matters now really.

Other series however, have classic and iconic characters who aren't recent, and don't really have a changing cast. DK is one of them. The main cast hardly changes, besides the forgettable Tiki's and new baddies in Tropical Freeze. K.Rool will always be THE Bad Guy of DK, as Ridley will be to Metroid. The casts aren't subject to heavily changing. That's why recent events hardly have an effect on them.

The only way K.Rool can lose out to a character with a more recent appearance, is if Dixie or Cranky gets in over him, and that may not even be because of recency, because the other two are very iconic as well.

This is a really excellent way to look at it I think. Game series that are constantly shifting their cast needs to be updated, but series that are more static can have older characters.

I think under this argument our most likely Zelda newcomer is Ganon as he appears in his first few games; giant pig dude with a staff. Impa, Ghirahim, etc. are all transient. Maybe an argument could be made for Toon Zelda, but I don't like her as a concept so I'm going to bury my head in the sand and just say no. It also allows Ganon to get his own moveset AND keep his current; just give him two slots. Link already has two and Zelda has Shiek; our great king of evil could use another to keep up! Really though, nearly every other character in Zelda seems transient. Impa is around on occasion, but she varies dramatically from game to game. As much as I'd like her, this is a pretty reasonable argument against her.

 

[Scoliosis Jones]

In the context of Smash, I would hope that it is logical to assert that F-Zero has the only pertinent relevance necessary. Especially when you compare it to several other series. That is fact.

What new Pokemon character got in a Pokemon slot aside from Lucario? I don't understand relevancy in the context of Pokemon. The entire Pokemon cast is first-generation aside from our boy, Lucario. 700 Pokemon... but they only market a dozen or so. They promote even less in their movies and games. Some that they do promote, wouldn't work in Smash. Pokemon is more "prominence" based than "relevancy" based.

Mewtwo got in Melee, mostly because of the Movie that had come out beforehand (however early that was), not to mention had (and still has) sustainable popularity for Smash Bros. Not to mention, I'm pretty sure Mewtwo was planned for the first Smash Bros.

The problem with F-Zero, is that in a game that celebrates past and present of Nintendo as a gaming company, it hasn't received a new character since Smash's inception, and hasn't had anything new since it's last (although great) game on the GCN. Since, we have seen basically nothing new. Though I doubt relevance matters in this situation. Sakurai will pick an F-Zero character if he wants one.

Pichu I WOULD say, but he was a joke clone character that was picked simply for that role.

 

[Deleted member]

Yea, it's not canon, so the incarnation being different wouldn't matter, but he is TP Link so that doesn't matter. I'm suggesting the transformation happen after his new final smash. Just like Samus got in Brawl. An equally radical change. Link transformed from adult to young in OoT and we got both, but I'm not sure on the likelihood of a separate character. Having TP Link w/o Wolf Link is like if we had MM Link but he didn't use any masks, or if we had ALBW Link that didn't use Ravio's Bracelet. It's his main mechanic that separates him from the rest of the incarnations. And there is already a different incarnation of Link confirmed with the same moveset. Something Samus fans didn't have in Brawl. Although ZSS didn't hurt Samus, she was even better IMO.

The only reason we "got" both young and adult OoT Link in Melee is because Young Link was an easy clone option when clones were being included late in development.
Aside from that, Link in Smash is meant to be a universal composite Link rather than one specific one. While it so happens that he is TP style in Brawl and Smash 4, he is not the TP Link.
Worth noting is that despite being TP style, Link in Brawl has a fairy that may or may not be Navi of OoT. Furthermore, he is shown in Smash 4 to use sword trails that are quite similar to the ones used in Skyward Sword.

And then again, by the reasoning you give, since we have TP Zelda, she shouldn't be using magic that is only present in OoT (that not even that Zelda used) nor be able to go into Sheik Mode. Instead, she should be using a rapier and magic she used while she was Ganondorf's puppet.

 

[Morbi]

This is a really excellent way to look at it I think. Game series that are constantly shifting their cast needs to be updated, but series that are more static can have older characters.

I think under this argument our most likely Zelda newcomer is Ganon as he appears in his first few games; giant pig dude with a staff. Impa, Ghirahim, etc. are all transient. Maybe an argument could be made for Toon Zelda, but I don't like her as a concept so I'm going to bury my head in the sand and just say no. It also allows Ganon to get his own moveset AND keep his current; just give him two slots. Link already has two and Zelda has Shiek; our great king of evil could use another to keep up! Really though, nearly every other character in Zelda seems transient. Impa is around on occasion, but she varies dramatically from game to game. As much as I'd like her, this is a pretty reasonable argument against her.

I agree with this sentiment, might as well add a second "Ganondorf," as we already have a second incarnation of every character at this point in time. His implied intent would indicate that he was going to add two extra Zelda's. So giving us one extra Ganondorf instead seems reasonable. As you stated, it is a way to keep Falcondorf, but give the character a unique move-set. So it fixes a detrimental aspect of the character whilst adding to the concept.

 

[andimidna]

Cranky Kong?

That brings back bad memories of VGX when I thought they would confirm Zelda U and it would be a sequel to TP. Way over-hyped... and then Cranky Kong and Cranky Reggie...
...
Cranky Kong for Smash!

The only reason we "got" both young and adult OoT Link in Melee is because Young Link was an easy clone option when clones were being included late in development.
Aside from that, Link in Smash is meant to be a universal composite Link rather than one specific one. While it so happens that he is TP style in Brawl and Smash 4, he is not the TP Link.
Worth noting is that despite being TP style, Link in Brawl has a fairy that may or may not be Navi of OoT. Furthermore, he is shown in Smash 4 to use sword trails that are quite similar to the ones used in Skyward Sword.

And then again, by the reasoning you give, since we have TP Zelda, she shouldn't be using magic that is only present in OoT (that not even that Zelda used) nor be able to go into Sheik Mode. Instead, she should be using a rapier and magic she used while she was Ganondorf's puppet.

Nope. I didn't say that at all. Not what I meant. Sorry.

But if you want to find one thing unlike TP Link that SSB Link has go right ahead.
PS, fairies are in TP.
PS, I don't care about borrowed moves, OoT Link came first in SSB.
And how could his sword moves represent SS when he's holding it in his left hand?

 

[MagnesD3]

Impa is far from confirmed but if sheik is cut I feel she is a shoe in. I won't be surprised either way.

 

[Morbi]

The only reason we "got" both young and adult OoT Link in Melee is because Young Link was an easy clone option when clones were being included late in development.
Aside from that, Link in Smash is meant to be a universal composite Link rather than one specific one. While it so happens that he is TP style in Brawl and Smash 4, he is not the TP Link.
Worth noting is that despite being TP style, Link in Brawl has a fairy that may or may not be Navi of OoT. Furthermore, he is shown in Smash 4 to use sword trails that are quite similar to the ones used in Skyward Sword.

And then again, by the reasoning you give, since we have TP Zelda, she shouldn't be using magic that is only present in OoT (that not even that Zelda used) nor be able to go into Sheik Mode. Instead, she should be using a rapier and magic she used while she was Ganondorf's puppet.

Link has his Gale Boomerang in the same vein that Toon Link has his Wind Waker. I agree that they are meant to be universal interpretations of each character, but he is predominantly based on the Twilight Princess variant. I am pretty sure that the fairy is just an allusion to the Wii version of the game, the players reticule is a fairy. Even if it isn't, Link didn't have the fairy in Melee, the game where he predominantly represented OoT Link. In that event, I speculate that it is simply a generic fairy, like the item (similar to Young Link's milk).

 

[deebeethedeity]

I agree with this sentiment, might as well add a second "Ganondorf," as we already have a second incarnation of every character at this point in time. His implied intent would indicate that he was going to add two extra Zelda's. So giving us one extra Ganondorf instead seems reasonable. As you stated, it is a way to keep Falcondorf, but give the character a unique move-set. So it fixes a detrimental aspect of the character whilst adding to the concept.

....I thought ganondorf was the same in all games just the links and zeldas were different

 

[Morbi]

....I thought ganondorf was the same in all games just the links and zeldas were different

I am sorry, I used Ganon and Ganondorf interchangeably, just a habit of mine.

 

[deebeethedeity]

Lol I find it weird ganondorf hasnt flipped his top over seeing link but it being a different one every time

 

[Knight Dude]

Your user name upsets me!

Sorry...random dude I don't know.

If tails gets in I want zero for megaman.

Megaman and Zero, no one can handle that technology.

....I thought ganondorf was the same in all games just the links and zeldas were different

Ganon was reincarnated like once or twice I think. Other than that, he's only been offed in Wind Waker and Twilight Princess.

 

[Tepig2000]

So the topic now is Ganondorf? I hope he gets buffed, the only characters I can't use well (in a casual level) are the Hyrule tier, R.O.B. and the heavyweights (except for Wario, he is fine).

 

[andimidna]

If transformation characters hadn't happened, nobody would have guessed it. Imagine people requesting TP Zelda turn into OoT Sheik, Samus losing her suit for a new moveset, Squirtle, Ivysaur, and Charizard part of the same character... it's not like we've never been surprised. And every transformation/duo has been obvious. This doesn't seem like a stretch at all IMO. And it would be a great alternative to add apopular Zelda character over a whole new slot that could represent a more important Zelda character. I don't see Wolf Link impossible. Midna is still very popular. If anybody hated the change, they could play as Toon Link.

 

[Morbi]

Sorry...random dude I don't know.




Megaman and Zero, no one can handle that technology.



Ganon was reincarnated like once or twice I think. Other than that, he's only been offed in Wind Waker and Twilight Princess.

It is funny, because his username is @I_hate_usernames

So the topic now is Ganondorf? I hope he gets buffed, the only characters I can't use well (in a casual level) are the Hyrule tier, R.O.B. and the heavyweights (except for Wario, he is fine).

Buffs are always nice, I can use him well at the casual level, but I would like him to be a little more competitive.

 

[Deleted member]

Nope. I didn't say that at all. Not what I meant. Sorry.

Then what, pray tell, are you saying? Because it sounds to me that you're saying that Link should transform into Wolf Link because he's the TP Link.

 

[Knight Dude]

Ganondorf buffs would make everyone happy. I would Boot Stomp everyone all day. And finish them off with the Sparta Kick.

 

[Tepig2000]

These are the characters I can play well at a competitive level:

Spoiler

None.

 

[Sharkarat]

I think under this argument our most likely Zelda newcomer is Ganon as he appears in his first few games; giant pig dude with a staff.

The problem with arguing seperate Ganon as the most likely is that Ganon was already in smash (Brawl), as the final smash of Ganondorf.

 

[Depressed Gengar]

Generally, only characters I suck at are Ganondorf and Lucas.
Also, @ Hotfeet444 have you seen my revamped moveset yet? It's back a few pages.

 

[Morbi]

Then what, pray tell, are you saying? Because it sounds to me that you're saying that Link should transform into Wolf Link because he's the TP Link.

That is all I wanted like 6 or 7 years ago...

 

[Deleted member]

The problem with arguing seperate Ganon as the most likely is that Ganon was already in smash (Brawl), as the final smash of Ganondorf.

If we can have two Links, we can have two Ganons. Final Smash version would be wolf-boar version from TP, playable version would be blue pig with trident version from....most other games Ganon is present.

 

[Scoliosis Jones]

I don't get the whole Wolf Link thing either. I just don't see it happening now that TP is old as it is when we have SS, and the fact that it would be out of nowhere to include that in a moveset at this point.

 

[Morbi]

I don't get the whole Wolf Link thing either. I just don't see it happening now that TP is old as it is when we have SS, and the fact that it would be out of nowhere to include that in a moveset at this point.

When I used to support that idea, 6 or 7 years ago, I wanted it to be his Final Smash. Obviously it is too late for that.

 

[KingofPhantoms]

Wolf Link and Midna would be a dream of mine come true. No way it's gonna happen at this point though.

 

[Hotfeet444]

Generally, only characters I suck at are Ganondorf and Lucas.
Also, @ Hotfeet444 have you seen my revamped moveset yet? It's back a few pages.

I haven't, but I'll go take a look. Know which specific page it's on so I don't accidentally overlook it?

 

[Knight Dude]

If we can have two Links, we can have two Ganons. Final Smash version would be wolf-boar version from TP, playable version would be blue pig with trident version from....most other games Ganon is present.

I get why people would want that, But I'm more interested in seeing the Ganondorf we have now become less of a clone.

I don't get the whole Wolf Link thing either. I just don't see it happening now that TP is old as it is when we have SS, and the fact that it would be out of nowhere to include that in a moveset at this point.

Well the idea of someone on a mount if interesting, and for most people, Wolf Link is the first to come to mind. I'm not extremely interested in the idea myself, but it wouldn't be terrible. But that ship has sailed.

Here's a random question, do we have anyone that can use an axe? I'd like to see if we have any options.

 

[Morbi]

I get why people would want that, But I'm more interested in seeing the Ganondorf we have now become less of a clone.



Well the idea of someone on a mount if interesting, and for most people, Wolf Link is the first to come to mind. I'm not extremely interested in the idea myself, but it wouldn't be terrible. But that ship has sailed.

Here's a random question, do we have anyone that can use an axe? I'd like to see if we have any options.

Villager uses an ax. That is one of the only reasons I intend to main him.

 

[Rebellious Treecko]

Here's a random question, do we have anyone that can use an axe? I'd like to see if we have any options.

Hector from Fire Emblem 7. (and 6, more or less)

One of the 3 main Protaganists in the game, along with Lyn and Eliwood. (Roy's father)

----