I think this is the crux of what makes an Eikon an Eikon. There's seemingly nothing in the Singularity Reactor/Triad Control that could be sustaining the Triad, either. Both Odin/Zantetsuken and the Triad seem to be in some way self sustaining.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibi
The Dark Divinity 3.0
Printable View
-
09-22-2015, 04:27 AMHarz
-
09-22-2015, 05:19 AMThe_NPC
1st time posting in lore, but the basic idea I get from reading this is: 1)The swords the Primal/Elkon 2)its like a suped up uber-Zodiac relic, full spirited bonded & sentiant & 3)With rumors that the "real" Odin is in the Waring Triad we wonder WTF the swords up to tempering/possesing random ppl making them a Odin-Wanabee & letting them have control
Here's my "idea" if anyone's seen "Heavens Lost Property" or understands the "Master-Servent" concept then think this: The "Sword" being bonded to the Bad-ass that was Odin & loving killing as it does actually likes being used as its shape states... as a weapon of slicy death by Odin. that may explain why it always makes "someone" look/act like Odin & give them control of its use cause A) it wants to only be used by only Him (Her in case of fem avi beating FATE Odin) & B)it wants it to not just look the part cause it has "Master abandonment over-attachment" issues
Enjoy my Idea/view ^.^ -
09-22-2015, 05:19 AMFebrusQuote:
Originally Posted by Ibi
That's the part that's so strange about Odin. First they say that Odin is the Primal. Then they say he was a historical figure, and that the sword, which goes by the name of Zantetsuken, is the Primal, and we have no idea if it was summoned, if it's a self sustaining entity, or if it was simply made somehow.
If there is such a strong difference between Eikon, Elder Primal, and Primal (we've got levels of godship now...) than I'm not sure Zentetsuken falls into any of them. In theory, if it is a "summoned" entity, than the prayers that would sustain it could only be the general sense of fighting worship that warriors the land over have (which may have been what they were implying when they talked about the "God of Fighting" reference). After all, as a player base, our sole purpose is to fight. That being said, I'm not sure a world wide desire for glorious combat matches 5000 years, give or take, of torture induced prayer....
If it's an Eikon, though, than what of Odin? Why does it always assume the same form? Why do the two have this seemingly unbreakable bond? One thing is certain, Odin's part in all of this is not yet done. So, I think it's safe to assume that the relationship between him and the sword, as well as the true history of what happened all those years ago, will have to be the focus of the next installment of Odin. I think Odin's story is the one that has the most potential to answer our questions about the different levels of Gods (going all the way up to hydalyn... (sp?) and Zodiark.). -
09-22-2015, 05:23 AMFebrusWe actually don't know that yet. There's a door at the back of the Singularity Reactor that is sealed off by some major chains (I'll get the coordinates next time I log in) which I'm assuming is going to be the entrance of that Raid/Trial/Dungeon. The door seems to tunnel under the warring triad, so I think we can assume that the Triad is actually a giant tower that cuts straight through the Island... Leaving a lot of space for lord knows what. I, for one, can't wait for that door to open.Quote:
Originally Posted by Harz
-
09-22-2015, 05:30 AMFebrusTo know that, I think we have to find out a lot more about what happened in the past between Odin, Urth, and Wiyu. Specifically, why were Urth and the Allagan's at odds? What was the conflict about and why did Odin get involved in the first place? If we figure these things out, we may have a better idea about Odin's motivations.Quote:
Originally Posted by lokoxDZz
Personally, Odin's spoken FATE dialogue is what has all but convinced me that Odin was, in fact, a warrior no different from us back in his day who managed to cross the threshold and attain God-like Powers, but, in regards to his motivations, the only thing we have to go on is that he is seemingly still searching for Urth, who may or may not be dead (Allagans, man... weird.). It is possible that the sword is simply manifesting the version of Odin that it is most familiar with (the one from 5000 years ago) but why? Why relive the past over and over with each incarnation? From the sword's perspective, it doesn't make sense. -
09-22-2015, 05:49 AMVeloxThe Triad is actually stored within the Centrifugal Crystal Engine right besides the Aetheryte at Helix. You can actually walk into it, but all that's there now is a maintenance module that keeps spouting something about a core breech.Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
-
09-22-2015, 06:51 AMFebrusThen... What's with the statue way up by the Flagship? And what's behind the hidden door that has a billion chains on it? .... Must look into this...Quote:
Originally Posted by Velox
Either way, there are a lot of structures on Azys Lla that have a deceptive amount of space in them. Even considering the size of both Dungeons that take place on that Island, it would be hard to imagine there was that much room inside just from looking at it from without. So, its still possible that there are more secrets to be found. -
09-22-2015, 11:13 AMBerethosThe statue is probably a result of the same kind of Allagan ego that led them to build a gaudy crystal tower and turn a former warship into a museum with a redundant name that both suggest neverending. It's their hood ornament, so to speak.Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
-
09-24-2015, 08:22 AMVolsung
Interesting idea. If the sword is what is providing the worship.
Wouldn't matter if the sword was created. If it was sentient, and had a strong desire for a strong master (or maybe it's original owner/maker) it could use a person's aether to summon. -
09-25-2015, 05:22 AMShirobiThere is no difference. The devs have made this clear. An "Eikon" is just the word used by the allag for the extremely powerful primals. You might call a souped up street racer a dragster, but its still a car. Just a very fast car.Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
-
09-25-2015, 05:24 AMShirobiWhats your source? Because in the cut scenes they make it pretty clear that the Knights went into the ship looking for the Warring Triad stored inside.Quote:
Originally Posted by Velox
-
09-25-2015, 05:25 AMShirobiWhat are you talking about? That's exactly what it states. The Allagan had no word "primal", they had "Toshin" and "Eikon". "Toshin" was what we would calla powerful primal, "Eikon" is what we might call an "elder primal" or a very powerful primal. But at the end of the day a primal is a primal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibi
-
09-25-2015, 06:20 PMFebrusThat's pretty much how I took it when I read it too, but some people seem to be expressing the opinion that the Eikons are somehow fundamentally different from the other Primals. Personally, I don't think the Allagans or Garleans would distinguish one from the other, except, maybe, on a scale of how annoying they are to deal with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirobi
The dev's made it clear that the Garlean's adopted the word "Eikon," so we can assume they were using the whole, "when in Rome" attitude. Especially because the Dev's stated that they used it as a derogatory term. This, also, would likely be an adopted attitude towards all Primals that they inherited from Allagans. After all, I think it's pretty clear that the Allagan's did not worship any Primals, nor did they fear or respect them. We're talking about a race of people who created weapons with the singular purpose of decimating Primals (ultima and omega weapons), managed to capture and seal Bahamut, and went so far as to continually summon him so they could siphon off his power uing a legion of suspended animation torture victims.
in the end, I think your metaphor for it is an accurate interpretation and is somewhat proved by the notion of Extreme Primals. The lore is that each Primal's incarnation can be stronger or weaker depending on the method of summoning and the amount of supplies used; yet, no one refers to Titan as an Eikon when he hits the steroids. It's not like they graduate out of one level of godship into another. It's just that some Primals, like Bahamut, are more threatening or difficult to handle. (I don't think we can include Odin in this list, as, at the time of the Allagans, he would have still been just a man).
That being said, there are some deities that I would say do not fall into the "Primal" definition, but they're the really big ones like Zodiark or Hydelyn (Sp?). -
09-25-2015, 06:22 PMFebrusThen I might be right about that big chained door after all... Still haven't gotten the coordinates. Kinda forgot. I'll post them next time I log in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirobi
-
09-25-2015, 06:32 PMFebrusIf it were the original owner/maker than it definitely wouldn't summon Odin all the time, since it was pretty much confirmed he wasn't the original owner. However, it is an interesting idea that the sword is providing the worship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Volsung
If the sword is sentient (like a zodiac weapon) than, in theory, it should be possible for the sword to provide the worship (which would make for an interesting set of Trials for a new Zodiac quest line, now that I think on it. if all of the original weapons summoned their original owners for you to fight. How cool would that be?). Odin would still be the Primal, since he's being summoned using a mortal medium. It would point at the sword being an object, rather than a primal itself, though. I'm friendly to this idea, personally.. only, it would mean that if Zantetsuken is ever destroyed, Odin would cease to exist as a Primal entirely... which would kinda suck (though I'm sure the realm would be thankful).
The only problem (if you can call it that) with the sentient sword idea is that, despite the Dark Divinity quest heavily implying that the sword is the source of Odin's continued revivals, it has never, not once, shown any sign of sentience. In both the Trial and the FATE, Odin does all the talking. The sword appears to be just a sword. That doesn't mean it's not sentient, mind you. Our Zodiac weapons supposedly achieved consciousness, but they never spoke to us either... much to my disappointment. -
09-25-2015, 11:56 PMSilverArrow20XXAll the Devs said is that the Allag called powerful Primals Eikons. That doesn't mean that all Eikons are Primals. Unukalhai says it's a word the Allag used to refer to godlike beings. I think it's as simple as that. All godlike beings can be referred to as Eikons. Primals are specifically entities brought into being and sustained with prayer and aether. Unukalhai heavily implies that Odin and the Warring Triad are not Primals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirobi
Ferraris and Jeeps are both cars, but Jeep isn't just another word for Ferrari. -
09-26-2015, 07:04 AMBerethosThey definitely did make it clear regarding how Garlean uses the word, and also made it clear that the word was the "a term used long ago by the Allagans to describe the powerful summons."Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
On the other hand, we should be careful with fully attributing characteristics of the Allagan empire based on the "Allagan wanna-be" Garlean Empire, and by extension the full original nature of the term eikon and the beings to which it refers.
For Eorzea in the present time, and the Garlean Empire trying to take over, Primal and Eikon respectively currently refer almost exclusively to an entity created by the coalescence of aether in the presence of a sufficient amount of aether as a result of the worship/belief/will of a specific group that is almost exclusively the practice of the "beast tribes" of Eorzea (Shiva being the first major known exception - Louisoux/Phoenix is much less known to characters/NPCs in the game world, and it was really her that first began to change our understanding of how primals worked in the first place - followed by King Thordan), and such a process requires sufficient amounts of both requirements listed above and resummoning by that same process or continued sustenance through feeding of aether (usually in the form of crystals, concentrated as it is).
When Eorzean's and Garleans speak of primals, that's what they are talking about.
When Unukalhai mentions the eikon threat, that's what our character immediately assumes he's talking about - which he then corrects us on his intended meaning, and that he's using it as the Allagans apparently did...
Which, at this point, leads me to one of two conclusions:
1) The summoned beings called eikons by the Allagan empire all fall into a general category of "beings created by a coalescence of aether" that is likewise occupied by the primals we know and have faced, and so they are fundamentally the same, but details of their summoning, continued existence, dissipation, etc. are different and can deviate from what we currently have seen (still making them summoned beings, but not fully equivalent to primals, as in you wouldn't be able to exchange the name of one for the other and be totally accurate)...
Or
2) When Unukalhai corrects us, his intent was to point out that he's not talking about the primals we've already faced, sans Odin, but other ones that exist that were faced and imprisoned by the Allagan empire, but are otherwise identical in how they work when compared to the primals you have met.
Which does kind of bring me back to my first point - if we knew that we could rely on how the Garlean Empire has taken the information and used it to be an accurate representation of the Allagan Empire used it, then we could almost certainly see the second conclusion as being correct...but we already know that there is much that the Garlean Empire doesn't understand when it comes to the Allagan Empire, and so while they are taking on the "when in Rome" attitude we can't, with certainty, say that their attitudes and beliefs represent what the Allagan Empire likewise believed...at least so far as fully defining and understanding a specific word is concerned. -
09-26-2015, 11:30 AMFebrusWhereas it's true that we should be careful to not retro-apply characteristics to the Allagans by how the Garleans act or supposedly see the Allagans themselves, I was actually thinking of other evidence when I assumed those characteristics apply to the Allagans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Berethos
For example, we know with certainty that the Allagans fought Primal Bahamut, defeated him, and then set up a fancy set of devices to capture his essence and siphon his power. This is hardly the attitude of a group of people who have a healthy respect for the so-called gods of other races. We also know that the Allagans did not seem to worship any Gods themselves and sought to trespass on the plane of gods through research and accumulation of power. Xande even went so far as to try and harness the power of Darkness itself which, according to the lore, would be loosely tied to Zodiark (being the god on the dark side of the scale, opposite to Hydaelyn). It's a bit of a leap, but the Allagans had some lofty ambitions if they thought they could abuse the power of that particular god. From what we know of the Allagans, I think it's safe to assume that they saw the "Gods" as something to be eventually conquered by their Empire.
Also, Louisoix/Pheonix and Shiva were not the fist Gods to make us question the nature of Primals (well, they might have been the first to make the moronic NPC's question it, but not the players). Odin, technically, is the first, since he has been around the longest and we still don't really get how his summoning works with certainty. However, the ones that I find more interesting in regards to the difference between Eikons and Primals are the "Extreme" versions of Garuda, Titan, and Ifrit. Not many people follow that lore, but those three, supposedly average, Primals attained power far superior to their original incarnations not because of an increase in aether (though they still do require an obscene amount of it), but because of a ritual sacrifice. Similar to Odin, Phoenix, and Shiva, the Extreme versions of the original Primals required a living body to achieve their summoning at a level high above their original or Hard incarnations. This was the defining feature explaining their strength. Yet, no one has ever referred to them as Eikons, and I think that has a lot to do with the fact that these 3 Primals are bound to Eorzea. They aren't referred to as Eikons because those who used the term originally are no where to be found and the Garleans are from another country.
I agree that we certainly can't just take the Garlean's word for it, since we don't even know how much they know about the Allagans or the nature of Primals, but there seems to be more cultural and geographic evidence that explains the distinction between "Eikon" and "Primal" that there is to prove that they are somehow fundamentally different. Especially because some of those differences that people have pointed out have actually been shared with the so-called "Lesser Primals" when summoned in their stronger form. In fact, the only characteristic that we can say is unique among one confirmed Eikon, Odin, is that he is self sustaining (and even this may not be the case if the sword theory turns out to be true). Alexander and Bahamut do not share this trait, as they have confirmed summoners. So, so far, there's a lot more evidence pointing to it being a cultural/geographical/language distinction than there is to say that it is an inherent difference in nature. -
09-26-2015, 02:06 PMBerethosWhich would be the case if the second conclusion I mentioned turns out to be the intended meaning from Unukalhai, or a meaning similar to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
I also don't think there's that much evidence pointing to it being a cultural/geographical/language distinction - some, but not much. We have the modern use of it via the Garlean empire, and the Lore panel comment that describes it only as the name Allag used for the powerful summons without further clarification on those summons (so we don't have evidence for or against it including entities that share a fundamental basis yet differ in ways not seen yet that are removed enough from the exact process that involve Eorzean primals for them to be considered different than primals, at least not from the lore panel), and that's about it.
That Allag almost certainly didn't worship any gods and some of them actually sought godhood isn't actually terribly relevant to the Garleans using the word eikon in the exact same fashion. At most, with Garlean being the copy cat, it suggests they are at least partially correct, and that leaves room for the issue of eikons to go either way, for now.
And again, there's the apparent distinction being made by Unukalhai (the more I consider his sentence, the less I think it likely he's just referring to primals we have yet to meet):
"Ah, but I speak not of the primals, with which you are exceedingly well acquainted. It may interest you to know that the term “eikon” and the beings to which it refers precede the Garlean Empire by eras. You see, it is the name by which the Allagans called godlike beings, the Dark Divinity Odin among them."
If the difference between primal and eikon were a cultural/geographical/language distinction, why would he specifically call out that he's speaking "not of the primals" but rather something else, treating them as separate beings in those comments?
As a side note - that one part of the answer from the lore panel has certainly muddied the waters, as it seems to almost contradict what Unukalhai said. -
09-27-2015, 07:51 AMFebrusSimply put, because the beings that Eorzeans refer to as Primals, are spent. I think it's safe to assume that, at this point in the story, we have seen all of the Primals Eorzea has to offer. There are no other beast tribes that we know of, and we have fought and killed every Primal in Eorzea at least twice, sometimes thrice. So, when that little spawn says "I speak not of Primals, with which you are exceedingly well acquainted" he's basically saying, "oh, not Shiva, Ramuh, Ifrit, Titan, Garuda, or Leviathan. We're done with them." It's basically a declaration that the story is moving away from Eorzea, which is why Odin is such a good choice to bridge the gap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Berethos
Odin has been in Eorzea, (and even titled an "Elder Primal" in the local lingo), but he's not from Eorzea. His origins are from the Allagan Empire (and much further North, if we follow his lore). So, he is the first of a new breed of Primals that we will be dealing with as the story takes us further away from the country of Eorzea - to lands unknown, with Gods that we do not know, have never met, or, in some cases, have never even heard of. In the case of the Garlean Empire and the Allagan Empire (regardless of how different those two Empires are from one another), they both refer to "god-like" beings as Eikons, not Primals. In the Garlean's case, this has been proven by the 2.0 story line when Van Belsar refers to the Primals in Eorzea as Eikons as well. He does not distinguish between Primals and Eikons. They're one in the same to him. It's just a different word. Which means that any "Primals" we run into in the Garlean Empire (if we ever go there) would be referred to by the locals as "Eikons."
It's true that we can't make the same claim with the same certainty for the Allagan Empire, but, as of yet, it doesn't seem like it would be an outlandish assumption. Honestly, given what we know about the only "God-like" beings we've actually met that had anything to do with the Allagan Empire (Odin and Bahamut) they seem like Primals. Super strong Primals, sure, but Primals. It would seem that the Allagans just used the word Eikons, and that that spawn is using the same term to refer to Allagan related Primals that we have yet to meet. -
09-27-2015, 02:35 PMBerethosThat's the thing...were he meaning to say that it's a different group of beings that are primals and just go by a different name because of their location of origin, he wouldn't be treating them as separate beings. When he says "the term 'eikon' and the beings to which it refers" he's at that point appearing to treat them like they are something different, rather than simply something with a different name. In fact, it seems to suggest, according to the little brat, that the term eikon belongs exclusively to those godlike beings the Allagans encountered...Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
Which comes back around to the idea posited earlier that eikons and primals are subtypes in a more general class of being, but are not the same thing (the way ahriman and succubi are both voidsent, but you wouldn't consider them to be the same).
Unless he's actually being pedantic, and the comment was supposed to be a "just so you know that I know the original meaning and origin of the word" style grandstanding, which would mean that your conclusion would be pretty much spot on and the little white-robed punk is just being a little pain. -
09-28-2015, 10:48 AMFebrusActually, treating them as separate beings is exactly what he, and we, would do. Consider in our world's terms.Quote:
Originally Posted by Berethos
European settlers originally called this continent "The Americas," but we don't all share the same moniker. "America" encompasses North America and South America, and within those are distinct countries that would probably be insulted to be simply lumped into the same moniker as one another (Ie: Canadians and Americans would never consider each other to be the "same," despite both, technically, being on the American continent). When we travel to foreign countries, the people we meet do not simply call us all "American," or even just "human." They identify us from our country of origin and the name we gave our people in our own language (with varied degrees of pronunciation butchery). They treat us as separate beings.
Normally, I would consider this to be the same in the case of Primals vs. Eikons. There is only one little detail that makes me question it at all.
In the notes, they explicitly state that the Allagans did not have the word "Primal," but instead used the word "Toshin" (God of fighting) which they later relate to another term that seems to link Odin, in particular, to the Warring Triad in some way that we are not yet aware of. As of yet (at least not to my knowledge), we have yet to see the word "Toshin" actually be used in any in game dialogue at all; however, the notes seem to imply that it would be the word used in place of "Primal." Therefore, if the Allagans ran into Titan, they would refer to him as a "Toshin," instead of "Primal."
Here's the catch: The dev's also explicitly stated that the word "Eikon" referred to "Powerful Summons." Given that both the terms "Toshin" and "Primal" refer to "God-like" beings that have been summoned, it is pretty clear that the term simply refers to powerful "Primals" or "Toshins." Which means that Primals and Eikons are the same thing. They're not fundamentally different in any way at all. The only difference (that the dev's have currently made us aware of) is their level of strength.
Therefore:
1. Primal = Toshin
2. Elder Primal = Eikon.
They're the same. He only specifies them as different because of their country of origin, the term used in their resident language, the fact that we have not met any of these Primals yet, and, as you said, that little spawn is a pedantic prick who likes to rub his superior intellect in our faces. -
01-11-2016, 05:03 PMMatthew0320
Very interesting theory. The Allagan Warrior that could've imprisoned Odin could have been the Phlegethon (the final boss of Crystal Tower: Labyrinth of the Ancients) before he was experimented upon. NOAH Reports detail this: "Imperial annals paint him as a murderous villain, but the writings of the commonfolk reveal Phlegethon's status as a hero of the people."
The CT dates back a few thousands years, we know this because the Allagan Empire was destroyed thousands of years prior, before the order of Magi (those responsible for the Void Ark). So even though he was a part of the Empire before turning against Xande's corrupt rule before being experimented on he could've 'stopped' Odin. -
01-12-2016, 01:15 PMAlberelIt's been stated that the Summoner Wiyu was the one to defeat and seal Odin. The original Summoner relic quest covers the event in a little detail.Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew0320
This thread has perplexed me though. It was seemingly created post 3.0 yet is debating things we've known for quite some time. I don't get why there is a debate here about if eikon = primal when the very text that sparked the discussion is very clear that they're NOT the same thing. -
01-12-2016, 04:23 PMBelhiBecause like all things in game it came from an NPC and NPCs can either be wrong or only half right. Primals and Eikons share a lot of properties so the question is what actually makes them different and are Eikons completely different to primals or are they just a special type of primal?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberel
-
01-12-2016, 08:33 PMAnonymoose
Not to get too philosophical, but there are shades of different when it comes to what things get distinct names. There is a differentiation between what the English client calls Primals (banshin) and what the English client calls Eikons (tonshin), but are we talking Rock vs. Truck (not even close) or Truck vs. SUV (not all that different)?
To explain my theory on the matter, I'd like to use language as a parallel. English changes bit by bit, day by day, year by year. How far back do you go to start noticing nuances? How long until certain turns of phrase change? Until certain words appear or disappear? Letters? Until sightless becomes ſightleſs?
Now, stop taking hops. Take a skip!
Aaand a jump!Quote:
And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes,
to ferne halwes, kowthe in sondry londes
We give distinct names to the languages in these examples... but they're all English.Quote:
HWÆT, WE GAR-DEna in geardagum,
þeodcyninga þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon!
If you teach seven cycles of the eras worth of people the basic art of summoning, I would imagine that a juxtaposition of something summoned today versus something summoned five thousand years ago would yield some differences. I think the Primals and Eikons are quite different ... just Game of Thrones to Beowulf different ... not Harry Potter to the freakin' Mahabarata different. Hells, just going from 1562 to 1572(+5) you go from Ifrit to King Thordan.
You put Ifrit and Odin in a room together, sure, they're different. Put Ifrit and Odin in a room with Atomos and a Paissa? Ehhh...
That's my 2 gil. -
01-12-2016, 10:11 PMBerethosThere's still room for interpretation in the original text though, so I wouldn't describe it as very clear. The lore Q&A regarding the word usage is also a catalyst for the debate, as it seems to contradict the game text a little and casts eikon and primal as the same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberel
-
01-12-2016, 11:34 PMFrederick22
wait... has being not already being cleared that primals and eikons are the very same thing?
The allagans called eikons to the primals that were really powerfull but were still primals ( being that consume aether and need sustain from a group of supporters ).
The garleans use this word with misunderstood and called eikon to all primals?
Why we are still debating this? -
01-13-2016, 01:52 AMKaiser-AceBecause Primals need worship to maintain their physical form while True Eikons seems to be able to sustain their form without followers. Thus implying an as yet unknown diffrence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frederick22
Personally I think The True Eikons like the Triad are the actual Old Gods that Allag battled and that Bahamut was the first True Primal that being a false God based on thought/memory. -
01-13-2016, 04:01 AMFebrus
Whoa! I haven't seen this thread in a while. Kinda makes me wonder when this questline will be continued. It has been a while ...
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by Belhi
Also, at the time, there was an untrustworthy and unfamiliar in-game character saying one thing and game developers in the Q&A saying another, and neither of them were completely clear on the matter. It caused a lot of polarization in the thread. -
01-13-2016, 04:17 AMFebrusOnly this is not true either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace
In-game, both Bahamut and Odin are referred to as Eikons (well, Bahamut is actually referred to as an "Elder-Primal," but he is often put in the same category as Odin). Bahamut was confirmed to be summoned by the thousands of captive dragons that were being tortured by the Allagans within Dalamud, and Odin (who was explicitly referred to as a Eikon), has been confirmed to be summoned by his sword, Zantetsuken, using a similar method to the Extreme Primal summonings for Titan, Ifrit, Garuda, and the normal Primal summonings of Shiva and Thordan. The sword possesses a host and refashions Odin's body. Having followers is not required. You just need a body to snatch.
Technically, though, your theory is still possible if we consider the real Odin and the real Bahamut. It's possible that the little midget in Minfilia's office was not referring to the Odin or Bahamut we fought, but the original beings that those primals were made to look like. It's an interesting idea made more so by the fact that the he explicitly singles out Odin. It would seem to imply that Odin is still alive somewhere, which is possible given that we don't know what actually happened to Odin's true body.
Personally, I think it's a bit of a stretch. It is more likely that this all just falls to a simple matter of the translation of the in-game text falling flat, especially given what the Dev's have stated on the subject in the Q&A, but it is an interesting idea. It would be pretty cool if the real Odin was still kicking out there somewhere. -
01-13-2016, 06:41 AMBerethosHopefully 3.2 will bring some juicy new information since we're apparently facing one of these eikons of old...Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
As a side note, I had missed the additional dialog you can get from him outside quest conversations, and if I was hoping for any clarification it just left me confused - when asked why he was chosen despite being so young, he says he has "an intimate knowledge of the primal mind" and also says, preempting our apparent curiosity, that "you need not understand the nature of a power to use it, do you? It is much the same with the Echo, I imagine." Infuriatingly enigmatic so many months later. -
01-13-2016, 08:14 AMBelhiActually the main difference between thinks we know are Primals and Eikons (mainly Odin) is that Odin requires no worshipers. Odin's origin is very different to what we have heard from other primals. Koji Fox, in an interview I think, said that Odin was a warrior from the north who came south to protect Urth, who was at the time an enemy of Allag. To try and do this he took up a cursed blade that turned him into the Odin, the Dark Divinity. Id say its safe to say the original Odin is at least physically long dead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
Now firstly this is a primal/eikon with no worshippers to sustain it. Bahamut had thousands of worshipers in stasis sustaining him.
Secondly, is that the Odin we have now seems to retain its original identity and purpose even though it has switched bodies multiple times.
Thirdly, the story seems to suggest it was an artefact, not a ritual that originally created the Odin the Eikon.
Also I don't think they mentioned Bahamut being an Eikon in the new quests. He is very much a Primal in the same vain as Ifrit or Titan, just more powerful.
Now the interesting thing will be to see what the deal is with the Warring Triad. Unless they have worshippers stuck in vats somewhere it seems likely their worshipers died out long ago too. This again would suggest there is a difference with them. -
01-13-2016, 08:58 AMmyahele
If anything its the sword zantetsuken that's eikon and "odin" is the avatar that it creates for itself from the body it "tempers"
Perhaps Odin the person -being such a powerful warrior- was the 1st and only one to tame Zantetsuken/ considered worthy (assuming it was an Eikon that liked mind controlling it's wielder/ cliche sentient sword) and when the real Odin was killed, it was Zantetsuken that recreated Odin the Primal.
So the Legends surrounding Odin could very well be based on reality? Legends states that he picked up Zantetsuken from from an Auri warrior, then somewhere along the line went to help Wiyu against allagans ? Somehow died/ got killed and that's when Zantetsuken recreated Odin the Primal which was eventually defeated and sealed by Wiyu for obvious reasons. -
01-13-2016, 10:01 AMKaiser-AceThat's long been my theory.Quote:
Originally Posted by myahele
That Zantetsuken is an Eikon and is using it's possessed wielder as a catalyst to summon The Elder Primal Odin so that it may once more be weilded by the most powerful swordsman it has ever encountered. -
01-13-2016, 10:56 AMBelhi
It is curious that even with new bodies the 'Odin' Zantetsuken creates seems to share identity and goals of the original Odin. Its like Zantetsuken created the original Odin and since then has simple recreated that original.
Regardless there is no need for worshipers since Zantetsuken isn't worshiped and nor it the Odin it manifests. Even if you argue the tempered individual is a worshiper that would still create moments where Zantetsuken had no worshipers.
Anonymoose might be on the right track. The entity might be effectively the same. The difference lies in how it came into being. Odin, rather than having worshipers, turns a mortal into a primal then acts as a device to perpetuate that summon. I wonder how it got a reputation as a cursed blade to begin with? Was Odin the first primal/eikon it created or was it considered cursed for another reason?
I also wonder what caused Urth to become an enemy of the Allag and if it had anything to do with Zantetsuken. -
01-13-2016, 04:57 PMFebrusI always found this, in particular, to be a very questionable comment and a pretty firm basis for not trusting him. I mean, that's like saying, "you don't have to know how a gun works to actually use it, right?" Well ... strictly speaking, you're not wrong, but that's not exactly the most responsible attitude towards the topic ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Berethos
-
01-13-2016, 05:34 PMFebrusAgain, this really depends on which Odin we are talking about, which Odin is being referred to as an Eikon, and the nature of Zantetsuken.Quote:
Originally Posted by Belhi
If Unukalhai is referring to the original Odin when he speaks of eikons, then this would seem to be correct. The mortal Odin required no followers to attain a truly amazing power (that we know of. It's possible he had followers of some kind, but we would never know). It would actually seem that the "true Odin" has more in common with the WoL/WoD than he does with a Primal, but that's a whole other thing.
If Unukalhai is referring to the Odin which we have fought, then it's not so simple. Similar to Shiva, "Odin" seems to only need a body and the sword. The sword simply acts as the crystal medium, little more than a great conduit of aether. Zantetsuken always remains after Odin's deathl, and it would seem that the sword has no worshipers ... only that's not exactly accurate.
No one has a shrine for Zantetsuken, certainly, but every warrior who uses a sword puts their faith into it. Odin (who was in desperate need for the strongest of weapons and pried this one out of an easterner's cold dead hands) put more faith into it than any other owner. He fought a whole war with it. Further, FFXIV already has a pretty well established basis for object worship with spirit bonding (which renders the weapon un-trade-able, and therefore unusable by any other person), aetheric weapon drops (which supposedly have the residual aether of the dead wielder trapped within) and the relic quest (Atma, Anmia, Zodiac mahatma / zeta). Zantetsuken has been around for more than 1000 years. Each new host feeds the sword their aether and possibly the aether of the enemies they defeat (if you follow the Anima/Zodiac lore). If you consider all of these things, then that's a lot of worship that has been provided to sustain its essence and an awful lot of followers who believed in the blade's strength.
Regardless, the nature of Odin (the current Odin that we fight) seems to boil down to the nature of his sword and how it has evolved over the time it has been killing people. It's entirely possible that it is simply cursed, and Odin's essence remains within the sword (probably via spirit bond) and is drawn out with each new host. This would imply that (assuming Zantetsuken is the "eikon") it requires no followers. However, it's also entirely possible that the sword itself is a primal that has been sustaining itself off of the worship of its hosts, tempering each new one as they prove their worth by defeating Odin's incarnation and living off of their aether. Given that the Dev's themselves have summed up the difference between the two words as little more than a language distinction (though they were still painfully vague on the topic) it's hard to say for sure which way this will go. Personally, I think it's a mix of the two, but only because I think it would have some pretty interesting lore implications for the Anima questline. We'll have to wait and see though.
Also, I too think that it is entirely likely that Odin's physical body is dead. However, the crystal imprisonment was empty when they examined it, and it would not be the first time that we've seen the Allagan's suspend someone's life for 1000's of years. That fact alone makes me hesitant to write off the possibility that he is still kicking. I highly doubt he is, but it wouldn't be the first time SE pulled the whole "suspended animation / sealed in crystal/aether/ blah blah blah" card on us. -
01-16-2016, 12:55 AMWalielQuote:
Originally Posted by Shirobi
As far as I know:Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
Toshin = JP term for Eikon
Banshin = JP term for Primal
Elder Primal = Very old Primal.
Banshin and Toshin are what the Japense call Primal and Eikon. That's all. -
01-17-2016, 06:40 AMmyahele
Maybe the recent news about Thordans Knights being. "Blessed" by Thordan can give us a clue about the nature of Odin?
Perhaps Zantetsuken is the Eikon while Odin is the body the "cursed" individual takes after picking up the sword?