Who knew the 6.15 Omega Quests… (Spoilers)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alenore

It shows us a flawed Venat, but it works, characters obviously not always making the best decisions.

---

Except we don't get "flawed" Venat. We get 'tragic heroine' Venat who is venerated. Despite what's been said in interviews and the seeming walk back of the positive narrative surrounding her, all throughout 6.0 she is treated as benevolent, kind, loving, and good, who made the best and only choice (despite evidence to the contrary). The Scions kick into full hypocrite mode in regards to her despite the fact she is the embodiment of everything they have historically fought against and condemned, the WoL is not given any dialog options that aren't favorable to her, and Emet-Selch's characterization was completely broken in order to "commend" her in UT. The single only person who calls out what she's done is herself and she has no regrets, her ending is exactly what she wanted.

Nuance was stripped out of EW in order to prop up her character, so we're left with what is essentially an antagonist (regardless of whether or not she was well-intentioned) being presented as a protagonist and there was too much dissonance for a lot of people for me to agree that it 'worked'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alenore

...

---

The simplest reference is from your first meeting with Hyth 2.0 in Amaurot.

'There were, however, those who disagreed with this plan. They argued that enough had been sacrificed to Zodiark - that this new world should belong to the lives newly born. These dissidents surrendered their life energies in the creation of Hydaelyn, an incarnation of their opposing belief. And for the first time in history, our people stood divided... Know you, then, how this conflict ended?'

It's worth noting of course that Hyth was killed off in the first set of sacrifices, so he strictly speaking wouldn't have been around for any of this. But Hyth 2.0's viewpoint is probably a reflection of how Emet perceived their respective goals.

I think that creating a task force of 'Scion-like Amaurotians' creates its own set of problems. The Ascians struggled enormously with the question of whether we could even be considered actual living beings, as Emet casually uses this to justify the murder of seven planets filled with people. A lot of this comes down to the simple fact that their society equates aether with power, much like the Garleans value strength above all else. Even Hythlodaeus considers himself to be inferior by virtue of having reduced aether reserves compared to Emet. But everything that we've seen recently suggests the opposite, that dynamis is the more powerful and more abundant energy source. I would really be fascinated to see a culture built around dynamis manipulation, as they may very well have the same sort of misconceptions about us, except over our souls being needlessly dense.

Most of the arguments against Venat's plan come down to whether you unquestioningly trust the Convocation's judgement or not. But I think the underlying message is that while the Amaurotians may appear 'god-like', they're still human and fallible. I'll be especially interested to see what the motivations of their Speaker are around Pandaemonium.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

We are not Azem, especially not when Azem exists in the story as a distinct (if unseen) character who is talked about separately. We do not have their powers or their memories, or even their entire soul. Emet and Hyth are long-term friends with Azem but have only just met us.

Just because we look like Azem and remind people of Azem does not make us Azem. We are the inheritor of their legacy but a separate person.

It doesn't serve as a "universal noun for the player character" because it refers to someone else.

---

Well, we could still be that Azem - it just might not have happened yet (;

But I’m fine with us being called WOL for the time being…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

A lot of this comes down to the simple fact that their society equates aether with power, much like the Garleans value strength above all else. Even Hythlodaeus considers himself to be inferior by virtue of having reduced aether reserves compared to Emet.

---

hythlodaeus holds an extremely high government position, is never shown to be disrespected by anybody (if anything people think very highly of him, he was nominated to have one of the top positions in governance and only didn't get it because he refused, emet-selch thinks the world of him) and there's an entire sidequest in amaurot about the amaurotines making accommodations for people who aren't skilled at using aether. that he has low self-esteem has no correlation to others' perceptions of him or broader society, just like anyone in any position in our society can be afflicted with depression.

Quote:

---

Most of the arguments against Venat's plan come down to whether you unquestioningly trust the Convocation's judgement or not.

---

lmao. nah

Hyth has a rare aetheric talent for identifying souls that nobody other than Emet has. You would expect that his other qualities as an individual, least of which include his intellect, knowledge of tactics, and diplomacy would make him recognize his own value as a potential Convocation member. His inferiority complex is absolutely a reflection of his society's value system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Hyth has a rare aetheric talent for identifying souls that nobody other than Emet has. You would expect that his other qualities as an individual, least of which include his intellect, knowledge of tactics, and diplomacy would make him recognize his own value as a potential Convocation member. His inferiority complex is absolutely a reflection of his society's value system.

---

that's not how human brains with depression work. objectively. i've had loved ones list out my own strengths and positive qualities, i know objectively they're not really incorrect, and, surprise surprise, i'm still depressed and deal with low self-esteem.

i would be more inclined to believe his inferiority complex is a reflection of more than his own brain if we ever saw any other ancient, ever, talking down to him for being unable to use aether well.

I don't recall any official materials stating that Hythlodaeus suffered from MDD, and I certainly can't see how you'd correlate his experiences to the DSM/ICD criteriae.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

I don't recall any official materials stating that Hythlodaeus suffered from MDD, and I certainly can't see how you'd correlate his experiences to the DSM/ICD criteriae.

---

I don’t recall any official materials stating that Hythlodaeus’ inferiority complex is absolutely a reflection of his society's value system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Except we don't get "flawed" Venat. We get 'tragic heroine' Venat who is venerated. Despite what's been said in interviews and the seeming walk back of the positive narrative surrounding her, all throughout 6.0 she is treated as benevolent, kind, loving, and good, who made the best and only choice (despite evidence to the contrary).

---

Been replaying EW recently, and the craziest thing to me related to this is the fact that Krile praises her like a sycophant.

In the level 83 quests, Venat takes over Krile's body, uses almost all of her aether to teleport to Tower of Bab-il, and then to redirect Fandaniel and Zenos to land a crater away. Leaves the body like, "I asked much of her." Krile is then bedridden to recover for a bit, and compares it to G'raha Tia nearly killing himself to give all of the people in Tower of Zot a cushy landing.

So Venat literally almost kills Krile.

Later on at the level 89 quests after the Garlemald Final Days instance, the WoL informs all the Scions about their Elpis ventures. During the following discussion Krile asks, "Do you suppose Hydaelyn's given up her pursuit of Meteion?" You're given dialogue choices to respond to this. They are:

1. The Venat I know would never give up! (The WoL has known her for a day and a half. Simp much?)
2. No, but Meteion is still out there.

Selecting 2 yields this response from Krile:

"Aye, though not for lack of trying on Hydaelyn's part. Surely, that's why She used me as a conduit for Her will, and provided such clues as the Elpis flower. I believe She has been waiting... ...For mankind to answer Hermes's question."

More discussion about how to reach/deal with Meteion follows, and then the optional talking with the Scions in-between quests yields this from Krile:

"After you left for Garlemald, I went to Labyrinthos and tried to reach Hydaelyn using the Elpis flowers. Alas, my attempts were in vain. I can only assume that She spent a vast amount of Her power in the confrontation with Fandaniel and is presently unable to communicate. Indeed as Her presence left my body, I could feel how faint it had grown..."

So... after Venat used almost all of Krile's corporeal aether, Krile still thinks that Hydaelyn was using her own power, that Hydaelyn is on the verge of fading away, so much so that she cannot talk to us. Turns out not to be the case. Krile continues to be a lemming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyrerus

Been replaying EW recently, and the craziest thing to me related to this is the fact that Krile praises her like a sycophant.

---

Krile is basically just Minfilia 2.0, or Mini-filia. :P It's why I don't like her. The end of ShB they're supposed to be questioning Hydaelyn's motivations after discovering she's a primal only for Krile to find her so irresistibly charming she gives her body to her.

The Scions have always been zealous towards Hydaelyn, so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised when it comes to her all logic and conviction go straight out the window. The fact that they never had an issue with her telling Minfilia to kill herself or abandoning her until she let Hydaelyn use her body as a vessel is hand waved as Minfilia "following her heart" and somehow "free will" (despite Minfilia initially yelling "No!"). Thancred, the one Scion who should have anger issues towards her due to his obsession with Minfilia, refuses to even think about it (literally, he says as much after Qitana Ravel). Minfilia is Trashcan Man from The Stand, "My life for you!" and Thancred just goes along with it.

I still maintain that EW would make a lot more sense if Hydaelyn tempered and it's laughable to me that she is seemingly the only primal in existence with no negative side effects. Hell, Emet essentially describes Venat as a Mary Sue in Elpis. The whole thing is just ridiculous to me. I've never seen a narrative so contorted to try to force people to love a character as much as EW is.

At least Ardbert was based.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alenore

I seem to recall one such quote, but I can't seem to find it now. Do you have it around? It doesn't seem to be in Anamnesis.
As for your 1, not necessarily. Beings of similar aether density already exist in the world, namely the multitude of familiars.

---

I don't recall any indication that standard familiars have thin aether. Wasn't there a sidequest where researchers were concerned we were so aetherially thin and needed more aether?

Meteion proves that it's possible to build familiars differently, but that doesn't mean it's standard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shookbeast

Well, we could still be that Azem - it just might not have happened yet (;

---

Regardless of if that wild theory comes to pass, we aren't Azem now, even if future-us could be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Hyth has a rare aetheric talent for identifying souls that nobody other than Emet has. You would expect that his other qualities as an individual, least of which include his intellect, knowledge of tactics, and diplomacy would make him recognize his own value as a potential Convocation member. His inferiority complex is absolutely a reflection of his society's value system.

---

He acknowledges that he is the stronger in aetherial sight, but weaker in other fields. We simply haven't seen enough to confirm whether this is self-deprecation or an honest judgement of his abilities – which in any case are being applied well in a different role.

I don't get the impression that he "feels inferior", rather that he knows his limits and is comfortable in acknowledging them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyrerus

So... after Venat used almost all of Krile's corporeal aether...

---

I didn't get a sense that was the case. Teleporting put some strain on Krile, but my impression was that Hydaelyn used her power to relocate Krile.

At very least, using "almost all of her corporeal aether" doesn't sound like a phrase they used within the game, and doesn't sound particularly healthy given that the body itself it made of aether. So if anything, Hydaelyn drained whatever excess aether Krile normally has for spellcasting, but not "all of her aether".

I don't recall her being all that concerned at Raha collapsing after his spellcasting at Zot either. From memory, it's more "empty battery" than "brink of death".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alenore

I seem to recall one such quote, but I can't seem to find it now. Do you have it around? It doesn't seem to be in Anamnesis.
As for your 1, not necessarily. Beings of similar aether density already exist in the world, namely the multitude of familiars.
We weren't efficient against Meteion because we had torebuild civilization multiple times and had incredibly foreign motivations compared to Ancients. In fact, out outlook on life is quite similar to Venat's, and I suppose Azem's as well.

---

Lyth posted one source. Another comes from Tales from the Shadows:

Quote:

---

This was soon after Zodiark became the will of the star, and our Final Days were averted. The people were divided, unable to decide what to do with the future that now stretched out before them. Many wished to trade the new life which had sprung forth to reclaim those lost in sacrifice to Zodiark. No small number, however, insisted that the fate of our world should be entrusted to those selfsame freshly minted souls. All were at our wits' end.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alenore

So no, I argue to integrate them into society as full fledged ancients who made a sacrifice in order to fix the Meteion problem, and they may choose to be rejoined after their purpose is over or continue as mortals in that society.

---

A single generation isn’t enough to develop new methods of manipulating magic, nor philosophies and perspectives on life that incorporate an understanding of inevitable death. And then once one generation passes to the next, and these new beings grow up alongside the immortal ancients ruling over paradise, so how long does it take before they start demanding ways back? One of the points of mortality was to get people to face despair, to go to the breaking point and still move forward, but if they knew they could hit the eject button why wouldn’t they? And if they couldn’t, how long until bitterness and envy set in?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alenore

Even if they were to create a society, I doubt Emet-Selch and the other Ascians would have much issue with how things are done in Sharlayan. A civilization guided by Ancients wouldn't necessarily end in tragedy.
And then, if mortals tried to go full Ancientsong way, how would it end? Rejoin, and become Ancients? Well, one experiment failed, 12000 years of experiment to go!

---

They wouldn’t have 12,000 years though. They’d need time for these societies to develop, to grow and flourish in ways the Ancients never had to learn. And the Ancients wouldn’t have any problem with Sharlayan until it started messing with their “perfect” world. Species driven to extinction, forests and ecosystems cut down en masse, barring the Ancients completely abandoning their current purpose I do not believe they would accept that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alenore

Even in the liveletter, when Yoshi-P breaches the subject, he says it's something Venat believes, not that there wasn't any other way. She sees Zodiark being summoned, and comes to the conclusion that they'll just go toward their end, envisionning them ending in a similar way as the Plenty. So she decided to sunder everything.
Yoshi-P even mentions that Alphinaud was right when he contested Emet-Selch's right to judge mankind, and that the same applied to Venat.

---

Yoshi P also mentions that the developers viewed the Plenty as the natural end for the Ancients. Based on what we see in Elpis and beyond, I do think that is where they end up as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

...

---

I think you'd probably be much more inclined to see Hythlodaeus as having an inferiority complex after running a Ktisis Hyperboreia trust, and having him repeat 'I'm not entirely useless!' for the better part of twenty minutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

Yoshi P also mentions that the developers viewed the Plenty as the natural end for the Ancients. Based on what we see in Elpis and beyond, I do think that is where they end up as well.

---

Which is something I already thought about when I reached this part of the dungeon. They are bascially looking a lot like the ancients, just in white.

And its hinted at in Elpis too. With Hermes asking the question on what happens if we are all satisfied. If the Ancients reached their goal of making the planet perfect enough in their eyes. If they then all die. He also cant wrap his head around the fact that his mentor bascially wants to kill himself since he saw his role as finished while Hermes thought that he could still do so much good.

We then have the side quest where the Ancients praise us for our ideas and one admits that their creativitiy has gone stale. So they are seemingly already at a point where they have problems with that. The shark later is also an indication. Hythlos is seemingly starting to get annoyed at so many shark concepts which often even makes no sense and I asked myself what these would bring to the planet?

Venat is also asked when she will return to the star...bascially asking her when she will kill herself...

So yes them becoming another Plenty makes sense. After all they will reach a point where the planet is filled enough with creatures that they bascially have nothing else to do. Thus they die.

I also wonder how they would react if they learned about the heath death of the universe. Would they not care or would they be like the Ea, asking themselves what it was all for if their paradise will one day be destroyed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

I think you'd probably be much more inclined to see Hythlodaeus as having an inferiority complex after running a Ktisis Hyperboreia trust, and having him repeat 'I'm not entirely useless!' for the better part of twenty minutes.

---

I did play that. It comes across as self-deprecating humour to me.

They always could look for new planets, and dying to start over is not that different from our "gathering small pieces of happiness only to loose em again and start over"... And the sharks... id rather get that as an joke of something gets trendy and ppl suddenly flood him with it. Thats something very human to do lol...

Venat broke with an tradition, sure they ask her when she wanna go, but theyre not "do it soon or we do it!" so i dont really see the problem there - consider they dont seem to have a natural death and we have 0 Idea how old she actually was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

So in your eyes the Ea made the right choice in self-terminating? Lets imagine the Ancients also discover the heat death of the universe, having already succeeded at "perfecting" Etheirys and completing their purpose. Would you say its only logical that they also self-terminate?

---

If the ancients live as long as the Ea will, with no other way to die except suicide, yes. it is a perfectly logical choice to make, being alive is a choice, not a virtue.

Really, what else are they supposed to do? The best option they have, by far, is death. Whether it happens now or eventually doesn't really matter when we have no idea how old they are already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

So the question stands is it preferable to be the Ea and feel that the only option is oblivion, or the Sundered and perhaps through ignorance (and perhaps through something else) live to flourish and have fulfilling lives?

---

I think you're missing my point here. The sundered are not on an alternate path, they are just much much less advanced than the Ea. The Ea did not fail somehow, they weren't conquered, they had a strong drive to fight for scientific progress and a better understanding of the universe, and their reward was a guarantee that their lives would eventually become nightmarish if they allowed themselves to live on.

The horror of their fate is that they did everything right. the only way to avoid a similar fate is to refuse fixing much about your life, and to not care about understanding the universe. Their dead end is a near inevitability.

It's not really comparable to death, they're already showing that many of them were willing to die. Even less comparable to death considering reincarnation is somewhat of a thing in this universe, we don't really have to fear what comes after. It's more similar to someone seeing everything they love die or be destroyed, and then being locked in a sensory isolation tank for the rest of their lives, with no hope to change this (though at least they'll die eventually).

The omega stuff allowing us to say that none of the three ancients were justified in their actions is the closest we're going to get to a realistic take on the topic.

I did have more typed up in reply for this, but I completely forgot to send it, so just gonna post this part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Krile is basically just Minfilia 2.0, or Mini-filia. :P It's why I don't like her. The end of ShB they're supposed to be questioning Hydaelyn's motivations after discovering she's a primal only for Krile to find her so irresistibly charming she gives her body to her.

The Scions have always been zealous towards Hydaelyn, so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised when it comes to her all logic and conviction go straight out the window. The fact that they never had an issue with her telling Minfilia to kill herself or abandoning her until she let Hydaelyn use her body as a vessel is hand waved as Minfilia "following her heart" and somehow "free will" (despite Minfilia initially yelling "No!"). Thancred, the one Scion who should have anger issues towards her due to his obsession with Minfilia, refuses to even think about it (literally, he says as much after Qitana Ravel). Minfilia is Trashcan Man from The Stand, "My life for you!" and Thancred just goes along with it.

I still maintain that EW would make a lot more sense if Hydaelyn tempered and it's laughable to me that she is seemingly the only primal in existence with no negative side effects. Hell, Emet essentially describes Venat as a Mary Sue in Elpis. The whole thing is just ridiculous to me. I've never seen a narrative so contorted to try to force people to love a character as much as EW is.

At least Ardbert was based.

---

The particularly egregious part is that they're still doing it. In the revised Porta Decumana that was originally a part of the Praetorium, she talks the usual spiel of "I haven't the strength to shield thee again"..... but apparently her and our "hope" (dear Gods every time I hear the words hope or despair I just cringe now, like I'm suffering PTSD) still yet possesses the power to fully fill our LB3 bar to full and fully resurrect us when Lahabrea kills us. In the Myths of the Realms they're connecting old quotes and plot points to Hydaelyn and the Endwalker's plot points when they had nothing to do with each other before. So yeah, for a saga that's apparently over and done with after 6.0, the patches content has an awful lot of moral wankitude and backwards retcons going on to prop up a dead woman yet further.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordGiggles

I think you're missing my point here. The sundered are not on an alternate path, they are just much much less advanced than the Ea. The Ea did not fail somehow, they weren't conquered, they had a strong drive to fight for scientific progress and a better understanding of the universe, and their reward was a guarantee that their lives would eventually become nightmarish if they allowed themselves to live on.

---

My understanding is that the Ea effectively did fail themselves by seeking to become immortal and consequently discovered that "forever" is an unpleasantly long time and will involve watching the universe become a lightless void. The failure is not seeking better lives in general, but the idea that living beyond a natural lifespan is inherently better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordGiggles

...

---

The 'heat death' of the universe that's being referenced here as a 'popular science concept' is not a cataclysmic event. The first law of thermodynamics tells us that energy cannot be created or destroyed. You can draw an equivalence between mass and energy if you want to be strict about this, but barring something 'external' to the universe inputting in energy, the starting total energy that we can work with is finite. As you perform energy conversions, some of that energy gets converted to heat, which then diffuses out and causes the average molecular kinetic energy to rise (i.e. temperature), which causes the degree of disorder or 'entropy' of the system to rise.

In practice, this is not a reversible process (you can theoretically have an reversible adiabatic process where the net change in entropy is zero, but you cannot even theoretically decrease entropy over time). As a result of the second law of thermodynamics, the total usable energy of a closed system decreases over time. In the limit as time approaches infinity, the total energy gets converted into heat, which then diffuses out over infinite space, and then the temperature goes to absolute zero.

You'll note that I said 'in the limit'. Diffusion equations take an infinite amount of time to completely average out. That means that you never actually reach this time point, although you'll get progressively closer to this zero usable energy state over time (albeit progressively more slowly). It also assumes that the universe is a closed system, which we really have no way of knowing. There could be an army of small duracell rabbits dumping fresh energy in from the outside.

This is also the reasoning behind why perpetual motion machines do not exist.

Philosophically, you can interpret this to mean that all things are transient and fleeting, which fits in with our own experience of life as humans. And the real question being asked is philosophical, not literal: Why live, when all things surely perish? Why learn, when all knowledge is eventually lost? And the resolution to this conflict is in Y'shtola's response. It's about the journey. Even if we're all eventually destined to 'lose', that doesn't stop us from having a ton of fun along the way. Nihilism is not a sustainable philosophical stance. It's just a temporary place, a bus stop for lost souls.

If you really want to be critical, it's worth noting that most of the 'failed' civilizations in Endwalker are built entirely around a singular viewpoint that encapsulates the entirety of society. In particular, the Ea, the Plenty, the Omicrons, and even the Amaurotians have progressed towards some form of 'collective' hivemind viewpoint that deemphasizes individuality and personal expression. In practice with human society, one person could be having a philosophical meltdown over the inevitable end of all things, while another could be having the absolute time of their life. In a way, dissention and diversity makes society robust, and is why we're able to get past all these little hiccups.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Krile is basically just Minfilia 2.0, or Mini-filia. :P It's why I don't like her. The end of ShB they're supposed to be questioning Hydaelyn's motivations after discovering she's a primal only for Krile to find her so irresistibly charming she gives her body to her.

The Scions have always been zealous towards Hydaelyn, so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised when it comes to her all logic and conviction go straight out the window. The fact that they never had an issue with her telling Minfilia to kill herself or abandoning her until she let Hydaelyn use her body as a vessel is hand waved as Minfilia "following her heart" and somehow "free will" (despite Minfilia initially yelling "No!"). Thancred, the one Scion who should have anger issues towards her due to his obsession with Minfilia, refuses to even think about it (literally, he says as much after Qitana Ravel). Minfilia is Trashcan Man from The Stand, "My life for you!" and Thancred just goes along with it.

---

What happened to Minfilia was basically entrapment. You know, just trust the inscrutable voice in your head as you've always trusted (for no discernible reason)...aaaand now you'll "live" and die as her puppet or you'll just die in the lifestream achieving nothing and helping no one as your soul gets reduced to nothingness. It makes me sick just thinking about it again. Everyone who's dealt with Hydaelyn has met with a terrible fate, one way or another, whether they were against her or her allies. I'm so glad that monster is dead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordGiggles

If the ancients live as long as the Ea will, with no other way to die except suicide, yes. it is a perfectly logical choice to make, being alive is a choice, not a virtue.

Really, what else are they supposed to do? The best option they have, by far, is death. Whether it happens now or eventually doesn't really matter when we have no idea how old they are already.

---

The Ea as individuals can choose as they wish. As a collective however deciding that life isn’t worth living for any future generations is the failure. Their children can be mortal, and informed by their mistakes can blaze a better path.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordGiggles

I think you're missing my point here. The sundered are not on an alternate path, they are just much much less advanced than the Ea. The Ea did not fail somehow, they weren't conquered, they had a strong drive to fight for scientific progress and a better understanding of the universe, and their reward was a guarantee that their lives would eventually become nightmarish if they allowed themselves to live on.

---

Then don’t live that long, and celebrate the life you did have. The Sundered now have a universes wealth of examples of what not to do. They can find their way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordGiggles

The horror of their fate is that they did everything right. the only way to avoid a similar fate is to refuse fixing much about your life, and to not care about understanding the universe. Their dead end is a near inevitability.

---

Many species did everything right, that’s Meteions point in her argument. It does not change the answer however, that one still can find a reason to keep going even if faced with that inevitability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordGiggles

It's not really comparable to death, they're already showing that many of them were willing to die. Even less comparable to death considering reincarnation is somewhat of a thing in this universe, we don't really have to fear what comes after. It's more similar to someone seeing everything they love die or be destroyed, and then being locked in a sensory isolation tank for the rest of their lives, with no hope to change this (though at least they'll die eventually).

---

I think many fear what comes after, why else would the Ancients be so horrified by the Final Days? Even just losing who you were is agony.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordGiggles

The omega stuff allowing us to say that none of the three ancients were justified in their actions is the closest we're going to get to a realistic take on the topic.

I did have more typed up in reply for this, but I completely forgot to send it, so just gonna post this part.

---

I respect your take but disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Misplaced_Marbles

What happened to Minfilia was basically entrapment. You know, just trust the inscrutable voice in your head as you've always trusted (for no discernible reason)...aaaand now you'll "live" and die as her puppet or you'll just die in the lifestream achieving nothing and helping no one as your soul gets reduced to nothingness. It makes me sick just thinking about it again. Everyone who's dealt with Hydaelyn has met with a terrible fate, one way or another, whether they were against her or her allies. I'm so glad that monster is dead.

---

Guess it’s trolling hours again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

The Ea as individuals can choose as they wish. As a collective however deciding that life isn’t worth living for any future generations is the failure. Their children can be mortal, and informed by their mistakes can blaze a better path.

---

I don't think the Ea can have children. They collectively abandoned their bodies and became immortal energy beings.

Maybe some didn't, and continued to live normal lives, and the race became extinct eons ago while the immortal ones lived on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kuroka

They always could look for new planets, and dying to start over is not that different from our "gathering small pieces of happiness only to loose em again and start over"... And the sharks... id rather get that as an joke of something gets trendy and ppl suddenly flood him with it. Thats something very human to do lol...

Venat broke with an tradition, sure they ask her when she wanna go, but theyre not "do it soon or we do it!" so i dont really see the problem there - consider they dont seem to have a natural death and we have 0 Idea how old she actually was.

---

But the whole sharks thing seemed to have been something that has been happening for some time now. Just look at the Fenrir. We get told what the original thought behind its creation was. Even when we tour Emet's biased memory of Amaurot we get told the create something cause it's the new fad thing was happening up to the Final Days. When it comes off as the only outlet people have to express themselves is through their creations how long will it take before others get to thinking like Hermes and go what's the point? The ones who seemed to be innovative are those few who were seen as strange as they were creating things and experimenting on things without the use of creation magic. We don't know how long between our time in Elpis and the Final Days were, but they were already showing signs of staleness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

I don't think the Ea can have children. They collectively abandoned their bodies and became immortal energy beings.

Maybe some didn't, and continued to live normal lives, and the race became extinct eons ago while the immortal ones lived on.

---

I’m sure they could find a way to make reproduction in some form a possibility again. If any species could its them.

And based on the fact that both the Omicrons and the Dragons both had schisms, I’m sure the Ea had theirs as well. What exactly happened to them would be cool to know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Philosophically, you can interpret this to mean that all things are transient and fleeting, which fits in with our own experience of life as humans. And the real question being asked is philosophical, not literal: Why live, when all things surely perish? Why learn, when all knowledge is eventually lost? And the resolution to this conflict is in Y'shtola's response. It's about the journey. Even if we're all eventually destined to 'lose', that doesn't stop us from having a ton of fun along the way. Nihilism is not a sustainable philosophical stance. It's just a temporary place, a bus stop for lost souls.

---

All well and good as a philosophical musing, but not exactly convincing to the Ea considering that they would literally live to see the universe turn into a cold void of nothingness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SannaR

they were already showing signs of staleness.

---

We're playing a game called Final Fantasy 14.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

Guess it’s trolling hours again.

---

Huh? How so? A decent amount of posters have always found Minfilia's fate to be pretty alarming - even some of us who didn't particularly care for her as a character.

Furthermore, simply disliking or voicing displeasure towards Venat does not equal 'trolling'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Huh? How so? A decent amount of posters have always found Minfilia's fate to be pretty alarming - even some of us who didn't particularly care for her as a character.

Furthermore, simply disliking or voicing displeasure towards Venat does not equal 'trolling'.

---

Because it’s a complete strawman of Minfilia and Venats actions and the reasons behind it. Hydaelyn was nearly dry of aether and called out to a noted ally for aid who made clear time and time again she wanted to help. There’s nothing indicating that Minfilia wished to not be the Word of the Mother or that she was going to die if she didn’t say yes, and it’s made clear that her decision were her own. The game explicitly says she did so because she wished to.

And that post wasn’t just voicing disagreement or displeasure. It’s just trying to piss people off.

I wouldn't consider it to be a 'strawman'. Each and every single one of Venat's victories are built upon the demise of other people. The vast majority of them completely without consent at that. To say nothing of the artwork for the patch where Minfilia's fate was first revealed:

https://i.imgur.com/e7lsr1c.png

Furthermore, people are perfectly free to come to their own conclusions regardless particular characters - especially if their actions are controversial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I wouldn't consider it to be a 'strawman'. Each and every single one of Venat's victories are built upon the demise of other people. The vast majority of them completely without consent at that. To say nothing of the artwork for the patch where Minfilia's fate was first revealed:

https://i.imgur.com/e7lsr1c.png

Furthermore, people are perfectly free to come to their own conclusions regardless particular characters - especially if their actions are controversial.

---

Wasn't Yoshi actually asked about that artwork recently though and basically said that "it meant nothing" and has no connection or bearing on EW's story? If that was the case, then whatever reasoning that may have been behind back then has since been retconned anyway (yet another one I guess). I'm not trying to make a judgement either way, just looking at it objectively.

I think it's worth looking at the events leading up to the showdown on the First.

• Igeyorhm wrecks havoc on the Thirteenth, killing off nearly all of the inhabitants of that world with the resulting Flood of Darkness and turning them into aether-starved voidsent, a state that their souls have been stuck in for the past 10000 years.
• Elidibus recruits a couple of survivors and attempts to use them to manipulate Ardbert's crew on the First. Ardbert spares Cylva and kills Mitron and Logrif, causing the Flood of Light and turning Mitron into Eden.
• Elidibus tries to manipulate Ardbert's crew into causing havoc on the Source. After listening to their story, Minifillia voluntarily returns with Ardbert's and friends as the Oracle to help them hold back the Flood of Light.
• Stymied by Minfilia's efforts over the next 100 or so years, Emet approaches the then leader of Eulmore, and infuses his unborn son Vauthry with a lightwarden's essence, so that Eulmore could speed up the process of aetherically corrupting the people on the First into lightwardens.
• Elidibus makes a plan to augment Emet's efforts on the First by unleashing a deadly chemical weapon, the Black Rose, to annhilate millions of Eorzeans as well as his own Garlean people.
• Elidibus is foiled when Zenos shows up as an unnamed Garlean soldier, and literally stares the Ascian down until he flees in panic, leaving both the body and his pride behind. Zenos destroys the chemical weapons.
• Emet hatches a plan to aetherically corrupt his long lost friend, the player character, into a Lightwarden in order to trigger the Eighth Umbral Calamity. It backfires when Emet is impaled with extreme prejudice by that selfsame light.

I can understand if you want to root for the villains. They're really entertaining characters. But I don't think that you can use moral indignation to justify their actions. You can sympathize with Emet. You can understand why he did what he did. But you can't really say that it was anything other than self-serving and evil. He's a fallen hero, and Endwalker was his redemption arc of sorts.

The only way that you can try to justify what they did is by trying to distract as much attention away from the Ascians' actions as possible. But why bother? Just embrace his villainy. It's what makes him fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

The Ea as individuals can choose as they wish. As a collective however deciding that life isn’t worth living for any future generations is the failure. Their children can be mortal, and informed by their mistakes can blaze a better path.

---

Their unborn children don't actually exist, and nobody is obliged to reproduce if they don't want to (assuming the Ea even can). They are, as individuals, choosing as they wish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

Many species did everything right, that’s Meteions point in her argument. It does not change the answer however, that one still can find a reason to keep going even if faced with that inevitability.

---

This reason being? Why should they have to live in effectively unending torment, adrift in a universe that is entirely dead? Sure, they could hang around and kill themselves later on, but what's the point if nothing is going to actually change in the meantime? It's easy to talk about finding a way or choosing a different path, but it's not worth much without saying what that is, or how it avoids all the other dead ends.

I would love to see more about what happened between them reaching the conclusion they did and reaching the state they're in at the moment though, I think it's the most interesting of the dead ends we saw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

The 'heat death' of the universe that's being referenced here as a 'popular science concept' is not a cataclysmic event.

---

Not quoting the full message for reply size purposes, but this is pretty misleading. It's not a literal immediate apocalypse, but for a being that cannot die outside extremely specific mechanisms, the inevitable end of all things is absolutely equivalent to a cataclysmic event. It's an ongoing succession of cataclysms over an enormous period of time, assuming it does indeed occur in this universe, which we have no reason to believe otherwise.

As for your interpretation of the philosophical question being asked, this "And the resolution to this conflict is in Y'shtola's response. It's about the journey." does not at all work as a counter. How do you think the Ea got to this state in the first place?

The Ea are in a situation where they are permanent in a universe where effectively everything else is not. If you don't follow the path they have, you're eventually going to succumb to another fate. If you're not supposed to follow the aforementioned journey to its end, and not supposed to push too hard to improve your life, how are you any better than any of the innumerable other civilisations that wiped themselves out over time? What do you do when the problems you're allowed to solve are all solved? How do you stop people trying to solve them anyway?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Nihilism is not a sustainable philosophical stance. It's just a temporary place, a bus stop for lost souls.

---

I don't think that you believe this, it's a nice sounding quote but it's clearly not true. "Sustainability" is also pretty irrelevant to topics surrounding existentialism. Philosophy isn't designed around making people feel good, and there's nothing within nihilism that stops them from doing so in the first place.

And I do agree regarding the hive mind aspect, but it's not super applicable to the Ea, we see and hear of some very different reactions they have. The dragons are pretty bad this way though, guess it's just a limitation of trying to show several radically different outcomes in a single zone?

That's not what the Ea are saying, though. Let's have a closer look.

'If you understand this - understand aught of our tale - you will abandon your quest for knowledge. Ignorance is truly bliss. If you would cling to your illusory happiness, remain primitive and pure. It is the only way.'

The Ea believe that if they hadn't have discovered the truth, they could have been happy. The central ideal around which they built their society on was the pursuit of knowledge. Their despair was that their ideal was meaningless.

And Y'shtola's counterpoint to that is:

'As you yourself said, the subject matter is beyond my comprehension. And that, I accept, is true. I do not possess the knowledge to prove or disprove your conclusion. In my mortal years, I doubt that I could even approach the wisdom of the Ea. But of one thing I am absolutely certain: I would not be happier in ignorance.

The most important lesson I've learned... is that learning isn't simply passing one's eyes over words. Nay... 'tis when understood for oneself that knowledge attains its true value. And that is what has sustained me. Driven me onward in joy and wonder, in anger and sorrow. The universe may end, and may all be for naught. But I will live as I always have.

I will always seek out new knowledge. And no conclusion of yours, no matter how grim, can dampen my desire.'

And this latter point personally resonates with me.

I find it strange that you'd hold an opinion at all about what any of my beliefs are. Existentialism and Nihilism do force us to confront some interesting questions and assumptions about our belief systems. But you can always find the answers for yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

[I]'As you yourself said, the subject matter is beyond my comprehension. And that, I accept, is true. I do not possess the knowledge to prove or disprove your conclusion. In my mortal years, I doubt that I could even approach the wisdom of the Ea. But of one thing I am absolutely certain: I would not be happier in ignorance.

The most important lesson I've learned... is that learning isn't simply passing one's eyes over words. Nay... 'tis when understood for oneself that knowledge attains its true value. And that is what has sustained me. Driven me onward in joy and wonder, in anger and sorrow. The universe may end, and may all be for naught. But I will live as I always have.

---

Yes, and this does not work as a counter, because they have already spent almost certainly a huge, huge amount of time living as they always had, driving onwards to find out more about the universe and reality. It's the entire reason they're in the state they are, they didn't just pop into reality with an understanding of the universe so incredibly more advanced than any other species we see or even hear of.

Y'shtola saying that she's just going to keep being curious anyway is really easy to say when she'll almost certainly be dead within the next century, and has no actual reason to care about the end of the universe. Like she's what, 30? Forgive me if I don't think "well I still want to know stuff though" is a particularly compelling argument against a race of beings that already know more than anyone we've seen, and that will live on forever.

She's really just not even trying to understand the difference between the sundered and the Ea, despite saying she knows she'll never come even close to their wisdom.

"The universe may end, and may all be for naught." has an extremely different impact when you will personally exist and live on beyond the end of the universe, compared to a situation where you could multiply your expected lifespan by a million and still never come close to seeing it. There's just not really much of an argument in this quote at all, it's barely more than a "nuh uh".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

I find it strange that you'd hold an opinion at all about what any of my beliefs are. Existentialism and Nihilism do force us to confront some interesting questions and assumptions about our belief systems. But you can always find the answers for yourself.

---

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, that you don't actually think a belief we've seen people hold across hundreds and hundreds of years and that is an incredibly influential one in any discussion of existential topics, is somehow not sustainable. It's not really something that is influenced by how people feel about it, it's either correct or it is not (of course nihilism isn't a single claim or argument, but I'm being reductionist for etiquette reasons). With regards to existential nihilism in particular, life either has an intrinsic meaning or it doesn't. Finding your own reason to go on doesn't go against any of this really.

Everyone's experience is unique. Just because someone older than you tells you something isn't worth doing doesn't mean that you might not decide to see it for yourself. The Ea decided that their lives weren't worth living, but that's really their call. But I do think that the acquisition of knowledge for its own sake is something that many people find enjoyable, myself included, even purely for the challenge of it. So I can personally understand where Y'shtola is coming from, even if the Ea have lost the 'magic' of discovery themselves.

Nihilism is the philosophical equivalent of being a teenager. It's momentous for its time, but most people eventually move on past the angst to bigger and brighter things. It's a fantastic starting place, though, and well worth experiencing at least at some point in one's life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

Hydaelyn was nearly dry of aether

---

Clearly not.

Quote:

---

There’s nothing indicating that Minfilia wished to not be the Word of the Mother or that she was going to die if she didn’t say yes,

---

She was drifting in the aetherial sea. If she didn't say yes, she would have died or at least suffered permanent injury. Ultimately, Minfilia being made Word of the Mother wasn't even hugely relevant to the story, because there's not much she did that Venat shouldn't have been able to do on her own regardless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

[*]Emet hatches a plan to aetherically corrupt his long lost friend, the player character, into a Lightwarden in order to trigger the Eighth Umbral Calamity. It backfires when Emet is impaled with extreme prejudice by that selfsame light.

---

It's kind of funny to think that even at this point anybody can legitimately be so confused about Emet's motivations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Nihilism is the philosophical equivalent of being a teenager. It's momentous for its time, but most people eventually move on past the angst to bigger and brighter things.

---

Almost a million people kill themselves every single year, to say nothing of the countless millions more that suffer from persistent depression or conditions which will never improve, and philosophies about the inherent lack of meaning in existence go back thousands of years. To characterize the idea of not finding value in life as nothing more than a passing phase of teenage angst is frankly just ignorant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I wouldn't consider it to be a 'strawman'. Each and every single one of Venat's victories are built upon the demise of other people. The vast majority of them completely without consent at that. To say nothing of the artwork for the patch where Minfilia's fate was first revealed:

https://i.imgur.com/e7lsr1c.png

Furthermore, people are perfectly free to come to their own conclusions regardless particular characters - especially if their actions are controversial.

---

Yes, generally when two groups fight one group loses and that sucks for that group.

And I have a question. You yourself have argued that the Scions, the Sundered and just in general those who can be considered part of Hydaelyns group, haven’t suffered enough to justify their later victories in the story. So explain this to me, how is it possible that simultaneously Hydaelyns allies suffer so terribly due to her actions as to make siding with her unadvisable or even immoral, and that those in her group are apparently not “earning” their victories by virtue of their lack of suffering?

There’s a contradiction here I believe.

And always with that artwork. It’s literally the only thing you can use to argue that now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

Clearly not.

---

She literally burnt through her soul. How was she not lacking in aether. This is stated consistently since the end of ARR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

?

---

Having a nihilistic philosophical viewpoint doesn't automatically make you depressed. Take moral nihilism, for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaraGrace

Yes, generally when two groups fight one group loses and that sucks for that group.

And I have a question. You yourself have argued that the Scions, the Sundered and just in general those who can be considered part of Hydaelyns group, haven’t suffered enough to justify their later victories in the story. So explain this to me, how is it possible that simultaneously Hydaelyns allies suffer so terribly due to her actions as to make siding with her unadvisable or even immoral, and that those in her group are apparently not “earning” their victories by virtue of their lack of suffering?

There’s a contradiction here I believe.

---

I wouldn't consider it to be a contradiction, especially since I - and various other posters - have consistently asked for a balanced narrative rather than suffering for suffering's sake or conveniently having a situation where the antagonists stand to lose absolutely everything that they care about whilst the protagonists walk away with barely a scratch by comparison. I'm also not inclined to pay much heed to sophistry stemming from video game characters of all things, especially not those who preach about overcoming 'despair' whilst being exposed to very little of it in a direct capacity.

You're free to come to your own personal takes and conclusions, of course - just as myself and others are perfectly happy to do the same. Especially since there is no obligation for players to like or root for Venat or any other character for that matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I wouldn't consider it to be a contradiction, especially since I - and various other posters - have consistently asked for a balanced narrative rather than suffering for suffering's sake or conveniently having a situation where the antagonists stand to lose absolutely everything that they care about whilst the protagonists walk away with barely a scratch by comparison. I'm also not inclined to pay much heed to sophistry stemming from video game characters of all things, especially not those who preach about overcoming 'despair' whilst being exposed to very little of it in a direct capacity.

---

You said

Quote:

---

Each and every single one of Venat's victories are built upon the demise of other people.

---

In reference to the costs of victory for Hydaelyns ally’s, costs that include people losing loved ones and friends.

So are they suffering for sufferings sake or are they walking away with barely a scratch? Asking for a balanced narrative is fine, but I don’t think you can criticize a story for having characters sacrifice too much and not enough at the same times. Just feels like an odd criticism.