What is Ascian prime? (Spoilers for Shadowbringers)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absimiliard

Note that Emet-Selch claims to be stifled by his vessel of flesh right before impaling himself and initiating the second phase. The implication there is that his power was being restrained, seemingly significantly, by the host body he was inhabiting. Another thing I would point out is that his second form increases in size just after his mentioning of being raised up by the prayers of his fallen brethren. It seems more like he's emulating a primal by drawing strength from the prayers of the Ancients sleeping within Zodiark to further augment the already impressive might of his true aetherial (see: hostless) self. Could be both though.

What makes it difficult for me to believe he took in a bunch of Ascian souls is their imprisonment within Zodiark. With Zodiark split, one would think those souls quite well beyond his reach for the time being.

---

While his powering up does seem to be based somewhat on the prayers of the fallen Ascians, one thing to consider is that many died in the Final Days and there were likely even more casualties in the war against Hydaelyn that led to the Sundering.

Also, he's Hades. I'd be super-disappointed if he doesn't have some control over the souls of the dead, considering.

As a side tangent, was anyone else kind of taken out of the moment when he said his name was Hades? It's such a common name across fiction that compared to Emet-Selch I was like "well that's not very imposing."

I mean it was an awesome scene and battle and I loved every moment of it, but that line gave me an awkward pause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeanneOrnitier

As a side tangent, was anyone else kind of taken out of the moment when he said his name was Hades? It's such a common name across fiction that compared to Emet-Selch I was like "well that's not very imposing."

I mean it was an awesome scene and battle and I loved every moment of it, but that line gave me an awkward pause.

---

Considering the lack of foreshadowing of such a thing, yes. We knew Emet-Selch was less a name and more a title, but we didn't know any of their true names, nor did we have any suggestions of what the Ascian origins could be. If we had heard rumours of ancient Gods and their powers, then maybe this could have been a huge reveal, but with him just bringing up a greek gods name out of the blue its just... ok?

I know FF games have had Hades before, as a summon and as an enemy, but he rarely if ever actually has much influence on the story. Though I do see he was a final boss in a FFXI expansion.

Still, perhaps it's something to gleam more Ascian lore from in the future. Strange that they dive straight into this revelation with Hades though. I guess Hythlodaeus is a distinctly Greek name and could have been seen as the launching point of this greek mythology angle, but still...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hezzlocks

Considering the lack of foreshadowing of such a thing, yes. We knew Emet-Selch was less a name and more a title, but we didn't know any of their true names, nor did we have any suggestions of what the Ascian origins could be. If we had heard rumours of ancient Gods and their powers, then maybe this could have been a huge reveal, but with him just bringing up a greek gods name out of the blue its just... ok?

I know FF games have had Hades before, as a summon and as an enemy, but he rarely if ever actually has much influence on the story. Though I do see he was a final boss in a FFXI expansion.

Still, perhaps it's something to gleam more Ascian lore from in the future. Strange that they dive straight into this revelation with Hades though. I guess Hythlodaeus is a distinctly Greek name and could have been seen as the launching point of this greek mythology angle, but still...

---

You can tell by Emet-Selch's design that he was heavily inspired by previous iterations. It may have just been their way of slipping in yet another reference, in which case it's just a name and has no real meaning beyond that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hezzlocks

Considering the lack of foreshadowing of such a thing, yes. We knew Emet-Selch was less a name and more a title, but we didn't know any of their true names, nor did we have any suggestions of what the Ascian origins could be. If we had heard rumours of ancient Gods and their powers, then maybe this could have been a huge reveal, but with him just bringing up a greek gods name out of the blue its just... ok?

I know FF games have had Hades before, as a summon and as an enemy, but he rarely if ever actually has much influence on the story. Though I do see he was a final boss in a FFXI expansion.

Still, perhaps it's something to gleam more Ascian lore from in the future. Strange that they dive straight into this revelation with Hades though. I guess Hythlodaeus is a distinctly Greek name and could have been seen as the launching point of this greek mythology angle, but still...

---

I imagine it's both a launching point and an opportunity for a reference, since pegasi were apparently created as a result of a stray thought entering someone's mind during the use of creation magic and a lot of the architecture around the end of Akademia Anyder looks very Greco-Roman.

A great many things about Amaurot are based on Ancient Greece, from the reflections of Platonic musings to the ideas about education and the importance of rhetoric. Soooo many people completely misunderstand the side quest in the school of rhetoric because they don’t know enough about Greek history. Debate in ancient Athens was a art form where rhetorical persuasion and flourish was the point; it was often considered to demonstrate your skill more effectively if you argued for or against something you had no strong feelings about. The two Amaurotians who go to the hall of rhetoric to discuss the possible actions in the face of calamity are not advocating either course. Nor are they dismissing it. They are engaging in a debate for the sake of debate and thus honing their rhetorical skills. To them the word rhetorical doesn't mean something specious, as we misuse it to mean these days, but something valuable and useful.

It makes me cringe so much when I hear people arguing on these very forums that Amaurotine society was clearly oppressive and bad because these two individuals have this RHETORICAL debate. This kind of thing is the meat and bones of philosophy, and the Ancient Greek culture - whilst certainly not faultless by any means - is widely viewed as admirable and influential.

There are many things about Amaurot that bother me - the main one being their attitude to individuality - but at the same time the shades espouse some fascinating arguments that are interesting to ponder. The idea that keeping one's individual merit and character private so as not to cause jealousy for example. That's a real conundrum. I have not heard anything in that city to suggest that it was authoritarian and repressive in any dictatorial way. The very fact that they encourage debate so profoundly makes that utterly clear.