The Reasoning behind The Sundering? (*6.0 Endwalker Spoilers*)

We still don't even know if Zodiark could've actually brought back those who were sacrificed as true resurrection has repeatedly been shown as something out of reach of man and the cycle of life and death something that cannot be reversed, so sacrificing countless lives in the name of possible benefit, especially if those lives were sentient beings like the beast tribes comes across as...questionable.

The sudden shift in the Ancients' attitude of finding death in service to the star acceptable to something terrible that needed to be undone comes across to me as a likely product of Zodiark's tempering them with the selfsame desire he was summoned with; to return the world to the way it once was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KageTokage

We still don't even know if Zodiark could've actually brought back those who were sacrificed as true resurrection has repeatedly been shown as something out of reach of man and the cycle of life and death something that cannot be reversed, so sacrificing countless lives in the name of possible benefit, especially if those lives were sentient beings like the beast tribes comes across as...questionable.

The sudden shift in the Ancients' attitude of finding death in service to the star acceptable to something terrible that needed to be undone comes across to me as a likely product of Zodiark's tempering them with the selfsame desire he was summoned with; to return the world to the way it once was.

---

The reason Zodiark could have brought back the dead was that, as we see on the moon, the souls of the ancients sacrificed to Zodiark remained within his essence. As far as I can tell they weren't trying to bring back those who died in the final days but rather were planning on sacrificing other life to replace the aether of their sacrificed brethren. Like replacing a battery but with souls and a potentially unwilling replacement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KageTokage

We still don't even know if Zodiark could've actually brought back those who were sacrificed as true resurrection has repeatedly been shown as something out of reach of man and the cycle of life and death something that cannot be reversed, so sacrificing countless lives in the name of possible benefit, especially if those lives were sentient beings like the beast tribes comes across as...questionable.

The sudden shift in the Ancients' attitude of finding death in service to the star acceptable to something terrible that needed to be undone comes across to me as a likely product of Zodiark's tempering them with the selfsame desire he was summoned with; to return the world to the way it once was.

---

You can definitely question whether it was an influence of Zodiark or whether it was just... horrifically poor coping mechanisms. Both are equally viable.

I personally read it more as the latter. These are people insanely comfortable in their ways, who both haven't seen any meaningful hardships and have lived comfortably at the top of a status quo for ages. So when something horrible happens, they just don't have any practiced mental process on how to deal with it. This leads to them making bad decisions, because quite frankly, the right decision is way harder. And I suspect a similar reason is why they so immediately betrayed their ideals; because up until then, their ideals were easy to uphold, since they benefited from them. When things suddenly turned in such a way where their comfort and their ideals were at odds? That's even hard for modern humans to uphold, and we're used to asking ourselves those questions.

The more I've thought about it, the more I've realized why the "new life" conflict would not have worked. It seems clear the writers want the players to like the Ancients, we're even meant to like Hermes. Had the new life contained humanoids they would've been even more vilified in players' minds. Likewise, had Hydaelyn's primary reason for the sundering been to protect new life in the absence of humanoids then she would have come across as some kind of "vegan eco-terrorist", as one person put it, and we're supposed to like her too. It also doesn't make any sense for the Ancients to sacrifice themselves to bring back non-Ancient humanoids. The priority would have been on restoring the basics for the planet to be inhabitable, re-creating ecosystems, etc.

As for the rest, the Ancients who sacrificed themselves to Zodiark didn't return to the star, which changes things substantially. I wouldn't want the souls of my loved ones trapped inside of a primal indefinitely either. I'm surprised they went that direction because, in my mind, it makes the third sacrifice far more justifiable if only in terms of their souls being released.

I suppose it's fine to trap souls in Zodiark if they aren't from Amaurot, then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpectrePhantasia

...

---

This was a binary decision, with Venat's faction on one side, and the Convocation and the rest of society on the other. Do you sacrifice the lives of the other, lesser souls on the star to bring back your dead friends to resume their roles as 'stewards', or do you move forward into the future with the survivors that you have? The convocation refused to negotiate, so Venat became Hydaelyn and performed the sundering. If Elidibus is negotiating this discussion, it's going to be to one of these two viewpoints regardless.

So at the end of the day, either Elidibus convinces to Venat's faction to agree with the Convocation's plan, they sacrifice all the non-Ancients on the planet and happily live out a hedonistic lifestyle until Zodiark runs out of batteries and they all die, or Elidibus convinces the Convocation to act responsibly and listen to Venat. Although I would question how effective he'd be at any of this post-summoning, with his mind and memories in shambles. I'd also question why Elidibus arguing the case would make things any different than when Venat or her friends tried. Emet thought that he was a bore. And as the recording of Venat points out in Anamnesis Anyder,

'Yet it is plain they will not countenance a permanent solution. That being the case, we must ask ourselves a simple question: are we prepared to pursue our chosen course, even should it mean suffering the eternal condemnation of our brethren? If so, I see no further reason to demur. Let us bring forth the Light that shall ever after keep the Darkness in check.'

It doesn't matter, at the end of the day, if the Convocation could be made to come around to Venat's viewpoint. Is this the right thing to do? If so, then act.

The bit about the Eighth Umbral Calamity is a false analogy. Had they said 'Let's use Zodiark to prevent the Final Days from even happening,' then you could compare the two. But we don't know if that's in the scope of Zodiark's powers or not, nor was it ever suggested. For 'Stewards of the Star', the snippets we get of Amaurot show that it's a very insular society that isn't really all that interested in what happens outside of its own walls. Calamity affecting an advanced civilization on another continent? Why is that our issue? Volcano about to wipe out a village and some delicious polygonal grapes? Well, let's chat philosophy about it while it erupts. If it doesn't immediately impact their cozy lifestyle, they're not that concerned about it. They were all too happy to live with a temporary fix.

The reason why Venat performed the sundering was to weaken mankind's innate aetheric power which would take creation magic out of the equation and make mankind mortal.

The sundering cutscene showed that the majority of Amaurothians would do anything other than embracing the fact that despair and suffering were part and parcel of living. Venat knew this would prevent the ancients from ever defeating Meteon and truly stopping the end day. And although it was never explained, this also implies that Zodiark was probably not a long-term solution to stop the final days. The star would probably eventually run out of aether. I suspect this may be explored post 6.0.

In any case, we know that primals require alot of aether to sustain so I am guessing that constant sacrifice is required to keep Zodiark going. Knowing Venat, this probably went against her principles and the sundering could be partially attributed to her own selfish ideals. The results were clear.

1. Mankind lost the power for creation at will and had to constantly strive for survival. This suffering allowed mankind (or at least the scions) to develop the fortitude to not relent even when experiencing utter despair. This was key to defeating Meteon.

2. Curtailed Zodiark's power and allowed him to be jailed on the moon. This prevented the final days while reducing the amount of aether required to sustain him until mankind was ready to face Meteon. There is no evidence for the latter but also no evidence that Zodiark continued to consume a large quantity of aether. Haedelyn might have directly controlled the amount of aether being fed to Zodiark and was only giving enough to sustain him.

3. Might not have been intentional but the reduction in mankind's aether also allowed man to sense and utilize Dynamis as a power. This was used to overcome the despair in Ultima Thule, and more importantly allowed Meteon to overcome her own despair.

But perhaps more importantly, how was Venat even able to enact the sundering. Wouldn't it have required immense strength? It was not clear how many followers she had. Could there be more behind this?

EDIT: Ultima Thule also suggests that the paradise that the Amaurothian sought was bound to fail. Had the sundering not happened, Etherys would have been just another example on Ultima Thule.

Remember in all of this Azem did not side with Venat and the others that wanted to summon Hydaelyn. So it is possible that writers want us to recognize that Venat and the Convocation were both wrong.

Not quite. Azem 'defected' and the seat was left empty before the Convocation had reached a decision on Zodiark. Venat's followers tried to send word out to Azem, but received no response. The real question is: where is Azem during all this?

The circumstances around Azem's departure were considered to be so grave that the Convocation refused to commemorate them with a soul crystal, and Emet had to make one in secret. I don't think that's a simple disagreement about a decision. Even when Azem had gone against the Convocation previously, Azem was just censured. With the likes of Hyth, Elidibus, and Emet all as close friends in Azem's corner, it would have to be something serious for which there was no simple defense. Something like, say, being accused of seriously injuring or even killing a senior Convocation member, perhaps? This is why I think we won't have a satisfactory resolution to these questions for another eighteen months.

Let's not get sidetracked here. One side had respect for life, the other did not.
Let's not both-sides that fact here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayche

Let's not get sidetracked here. One side had respect for life, the other did not.
Let's not both-sides that fact here.

---

Which side is it that you think had respect for life? Because I've seen pro-hydaelyn and pro-zodiark/ancients people both claim their side has respect for life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kordarion

Which side is it that you think had respect for life? Because I've seen pro-hydaelyn and pro-zodiark/ancients people both claim their side has respect for life.

---

You know, one side was not going to genocide about all of the natural world for their cousin's lost soul.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayche

You know, one side was not going to genocide about all of the natural world for their cousin's lost soul.

---

I agree, the ancients routinely made, altered and removed species based on their changing whims and arbitrary definition of natural order. I was just curious because while I took your statement as the ancients didn't have the greatest respect for life I didn't want to be presumptuous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayche

You know, one side was not going to genocide about all of the natural world for their cousin's lost soul.

---

I am both baffled and amused by this statement. It applies so much to both sides, I'm honestly not sure which one you mean. If its intentional you have my genuine admiration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Apothecarist

But perhaps more importantly, how was Venat even able to enact the sundering. Wouldn't it have required immense strength? It was not clear how many followers she had. Could there be more behind this?

---

Considering the missing body parts on Zodiark during the fight with Fandaniel, it's very likely that the Sundering was 13 slices with surgical precision, each one aiming for a weak point in Zodiark's design along with an exact amount of souls. This was likely possible because of the difference between concepts. Zodiark was created merely to control the flow of aether around the planet and save it, without the idea of battle in mind. Hydaelyn was likely created with the idea of battle and thus had the knowledge and skill to perform the Sundering without issues, especially considering that an AZEM was the heart of her.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Not quite. Azem 'defected' and the seat was left empty before the Convocation had reached a decision on Zodiark. Venat's followers tried to send word out to Azem, but received no response. The real question is: where is Azem during all this?

---

This is likely going to deal with the overarching plot of the next big multi-expansion story arc, considering the devs themselves stated that the 6.x patches are going to be leading into the next arc. So either we find out this expansion, or we don't and it's going to be the focal point of the next one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayche

You know, one side was not going to genocide about all of the natural world for their cousin's lost soul.

---

There has been way more death and suffering as a result of Venats decision then would have been if she let the Convocation carry out their plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

The more I've thought about it, the more I've realized why the "new life" conflict would not have worked. It seems clear the writers want the players to like the Ancients, we're even meant to like Hermes. Had the new life contained humanoids they would've been even more vilified in players' minds.

As for the rest, the Ancients who sacrificed themselves to Zodiark didn't return to the star, which changes things substantially. I wouldn't want the souls of my loved ones trapped inside of a primal indefinitely either. I'm surprised they went that direction because, in my mind, it makes the third sacrifice far more justifiable if only in terms of their souls being released.

---

We can like the Ancients and still find the actions of the Ascians horrible so I honestly see no problem with it being sentient life. (And even the Ancients probably would have had no problem with undoing us, since they saw us just as a familiar) It could also showcase how such people can be changed by tragedy (and tempering).

And about the sacrifice: Emet himself says that such a sacrifice would be held in high honor and that he would never cheapen that by creating fake shades. Yet he still did in the end. I think it was great how they showed the change in him. Also the people inside Zodiark seemed fine with that. They just were really depressed about the fact that Zodiark was bound right now but being Zodiark themselves? I got the feeling that they liked it. What better way to be the "drop of blood" for their beloved planet by being the will itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lersayil

I am both baffled and amused by this statement. It applies so much to both sides, I'm honestly not sure which one you mean. If its intentional you have my admiration.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Necrotica

There has been way more death and suffering as a result of Venats decision then would have been if she let the Convocation carry out their plan.

---

I don't know what moral calculus is being applied here, but I do not know how the death of the whole natural world is somehow equalized to the demotion of few god-wizards. God-Wizards, who on the record, were responsible for their own doom. So when one god-wizard is turned into 13 farmers and fishers, and natural order gets to, you know, not get disintegrated, I fail to see the math here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Necrotica

There has been way more death and suffering as a result of Venats decision then would have been if she let the Convocation carry out their plan.

---

Most definitely. Because if everyone retreats into hedonistic pursuits, pretends that the Final Days are no longer an issue, and dies and accepts oblivion quicker, then there will be far fewer lives brought into this world to subsequently experience suffering and death. You can only suffer and die if you've been born in the first place.

Or alternatively, 'in my personal value system, sundering someone is the spiritual equivalent of putting anchovies on pizza, which in turn is the ethical equivalent of killing them outright.'

Pointless arguments aside, did anyone else catch that Venat has some sort of link to Thavnair's old gods? From 'When All Hope Seems Lost':

'Know this my children. There is more ugliness than beauty in this world.
To live is to suffer. To drink of calamity and drown in anguish. To toil and be tested, always and ever.
'Tis a perilous path you walk. Death lurks in the dark, and is the sole promise that awaits at journey's end.
You will tremble with terror. You will weep tears of anger and despair...
...but do not avert your eyes. See your life for what it is.
Then will you see how the hardships make you strong.
Every doubt reforged as scales for your armor. Every agony to temper your blade.'

I didn't pick up on this the first time because we're only introduced to Venat afterwards. I'm really interested in what Myths of the Realm will turn up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

This was a binary decision
.

---

Grouping things into black and white like that is not only unrealistic for the setting, but precisely what the creators of the game discourage. You're putting words into Elidibus's mouth when you claim that all he would do upon essentially waving a white flag and withdrawing himself from Zodiark (Leaving Zodiark vulnerable) would be to say 'our side is right' and that's it. Just go back in? That's ridiculous. He was the one put on the pedestal to steer the course of the final days as Zodiark's heart. And you're going to imply that he has no authority as a current member of the Convocation, just because Emet-selch called him a bore in a completely divorced context? The one whose seat is specifically in place to mediate conflict? That everyone would turn a deaf ear after he's left their ship without a rudder? I cannot say I share your view of this at all, and quoting the exact same scene from before Hydaelyn's summoning is meaningless, when none of this seemed to happen before she was around.

Would Zodiark run out of batteries, so to speak? Well, it's likely Meteion would find a workaround, as she was looking to speed up the universe's demise, but what Zodiark did do was buy them time. A lot of time. 12000 years of time, and likely a whole lot more barring Fandaniel. I find a fully functioning Ancient society working ceaselessly for those millennia toward a single goal, to be an infinitely more reliable option than the whimsical dart toss that Venat ended up choosing (one that has already failed before, in Graha's timeline, as Endwalker's story has doomed it).

Your conclusions about the Ancient society are also rather one-sided. In the novella you mention, no one in the volcanic isle was said to be in danger, they were aware of the eruption well in advance, and Emet-selch notes they were probably already evacuating. Azem's motivations were kind, yet also based in 'I want to eat grape.' You say they were indifferent to lands beyond their own, but in Akademia Anyder we see reports of them dispatching phantomologists to afflicted areas across the oceans when the Final Days were just beginning, to combat the 'mounting threat.' How isolationist of them. Debate of their noninterference in other matters was also just that, debate. To imply they had their eternal condemnation coming because of the way their society was currently structured is silly to me. We spent an entire expansion and then some showing how societies are able to change, and that isn't limited to Sundered societies. Through side quests in Elpis you help Ancients hold rites for their past creations, you implant the idea of familiars having the potential to gain a soul, and most importantly, you convince Emet-selch, an Unsundered who endured thousands of years of despair and tragedy, that the sundered races had worth. They can absolutely change.

Hmm... do we sacrifice unwilling non-Amaurotian souls to Zodiark to get our friends back? (Y/N?)

I didn't know that there was a third way to answer a 'Yes/No' question. And yes, the Amaurotians very clearly did change for the better. Just not as Amaurotians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayche

I don't know what moral calculus is being applied here, but I do not know how the death of the whole natural world is somehow equalized to the demotion of few god-wizards. God-Wizards, who on the record, were responsible for their own doom. So when one god-wizard is turned into 13 farmers and fishers, and natural order gets to, you know, not get disintegrated, I fail to see the math here.

---

Indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayche

I don't know what moral calculus is being applied here, but I do not know how the death of the whole natural world is somehow equalized to the demotion of few god-wizards. God-Wizards, who on the record, were responsible for their own doom. So when one god-wizard is turned into 13 farmers and fishers, and natural order gets to, you know, not get disintegrated, I fail to see the math here.

---

Guess it wasn't then... a shame. The best and most generous reading on the sundering is that Venat wiped out a civilization AND the natural order of the now restored planet. She didn't literally kill the individuals, just took their soul, sliced it up into 14 pieces and created 14 new individuals who had a soul similar to the original, but none of the memories. Oh and she also shortened their lifespans by a good amount. Even by the games own lore standards, that is as close as you can get to the process of death without calling it such. There are differences, but none that really affects the moral dilemma. She herself admits her deeds as terrible.

She almost literally did what the Ancients planned to, but in the reverse. She sacrificed her own people for the life that would grow in their wake and the potential she saw in that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpectrePhantasia

(one that has already failed before, in Graha's timeline, as Endwalker's story has doomed it).

---

How, though? By your own admission Zodiark would have bought a lot more time without Fandaniel's interference, and Fandaniel wouldn't have had the means to pull his plan off without the events of Shadowbringers. At minimum Emet-Selch would still be around, and almost certainly Elidibus as well (unless we someone managed to completely take him out in that timeline, which was unlikely since we didn't have the auracite), and neither of them would have even remotely allowed Fandaniel to do this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ilenya

How, though? By your own admission Zodiark would have bought a lot more time without Fandaniel's interference, and Fandaniel wouldn't have had the means to pull his plan off without the events of Shadowbringers. At minimum Emet-Selch would still be around, and almost certainly Elidibus as well (unless we someone managed to completely take him out in that timeline, which was unlikely since we didn't have the auracite), and neither of them would have even remotely allowed Fandaniel to do this.

---

I mean in a general universe sense, that timeline is screwed. Etheirys itself is probably fine for a good while, but it stands to reason the Rejoining is probably going to happen in full that timeline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpectrePhantasia

I mean in a general universe sense, that timeline is screwed. Etheirys itself is probably fine for a good while, but it stands to reason the Rejoining is probably going to happen in full that timeline.

---

Even in the “failed” timeline, hope can still remain, even if the end is seemingly assured. People will still rebuild, live their lives, have moments of happiness, etc. Maybe they’ll find another way. Maybe not.

There are infinite potential ways the 8UC/AE timeline can go. Infinite ways they survive, infinite ways they don't. Until we observe a given timeline, it can go any way imaginable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpectrePhantasia

I mean in a general universe sense, that timeline is screwed. Etheirys itself is probably fine for a good while, but it stands to reason the Rejoining is probably going to happen in full that timeline.

---

It depends. Despite what Venat says about struggling harder with Zodiark's shackling with each Rejoining, the Ascians also have it more difficult due to any opposition getting stronger souls. Despite the desperation stated in prior expansions, it turned out in Endwalker that there was actually zero desperation for Hydaelyn. She had her final battle power stack and the mothercrystal. If she really needed Emet-selch to die, she could dish that out, as necessary, for the delay of her own plan (which might not even delay it, since she'll have more years to sit and gather power, though that may be balanced by the increased tax of keeping Big Z under wraps).

Of course, there's no way to enact the exact time conundrum since no time machine in that timeline, at least none that the Ironworks have. Alexander still exists, so all that remains as necessary is killing Elidibus in some manner that causes him to get merged into Alexander, such that he pulls a similar scenario to send the next WoL back in time.

So the nations change and it's a century after the last story with Midgardsormr waking up, but everything eventually shifts to being similar beats in different places. With a new 9/14 WoL.

And even with that speculation, there's still a ton the short story never told us. Like, what happened to Zenos and his body in that timeline? Would a cure for tempering still be discovered short of Alisaie's experience in the First?

The possibilities aren't endless, and it's a lot more than they could tell us in a short story, but the protagonists always have the advantage in this story in the same way that the players always have advantage in the fights. The antagonists are designed to be beaten, plot contrivance or otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyrerus

With a new 9/14 WoL.

---

Given that a 7/14 WoL killed Lahabrea, I would think the other unsundered wouldn't take any more risks. Any new adventurer who appeared to be making strides would need to be snuffed out immediately and decisively.

I recall someone somewhere mentioning that the Ascians were only one or two Rejoinings away from freeing Zodiark, and that would've meant they won? In the light of recent events I find this strange, but w/e.

Can anyone recall who said so, or if its discarded lore, or if I'm just pulling stuff from where the sun don't shine? Might be relevant to the fate of the Graha timeline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Given that a 7/14 WoL killed Lahabrea, I would think the other unsundered wouldn't take any more risks. Any new adventurer who appeared to be making strides would need to be snuffed out immediately and decisively.

---

8/14 .... 1+7 is 8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lersayil

I recall someone somewhere mentioning that the Ascians were only one or two Rejoinings away from freeing Zodiark, and that would've meant they won? In the light of recent events I find this strange, but w/e.

Can anyone recall who said so, or if its discarded lore, or if I'm just pulling stuff from where the sun don't shine? Might be relevant to the fate of the Graha timeline.

---

I think the reason people get that was from the post-Antitower scene, where it was described in vagueries that things were getting dire enough that the next Rejoining was Team Hydaelyn's last chance. Unclear at the time if that was because of an issue on Hydaelyn's end, the world's end, or just because at that point the Ascians could pivot in strategy to something even harder to stop, but given what we know of G'raha's timeline it probably wasn't the last one, or else they'd have been more active.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Given that a 7/14 WoL killed Lahabrea, I would think the other unsundered wouldn't take any more risks. Any new adventurer who appeared to be making strides would need to be snuffed out immediately and decisively.

---

Actually, a 7/14 WoL didn't kill Lahabrea, a 7/14 Thordan did; we just bruised him up a bit. Hell, given we don't even know if Thordan had the Echo and so was a sundered soul, a fraction might not even be useful. An 8/14 WoL did kill Emet-Selch, but that hadn't yet happened in that timeline. Perhaps even more alarming, though, was that in both timelines, a 1/14 Ardbert killed both Loghrif and (apparently) Mitron.


I don't think the fact the Ascians were no-shows in G'raha's timeline was actually all that important, though. Remember that the Seventh Calamity was actually the odd one out in terms of not sending the world back to the stone age, so suddenly the Ascians had to work pretty quickly as far as their timescale goes. The way Rejoinings normally went was that it took centuries until anything of much note to them happened, so the Ascians being quiet until rebuildings had fully gotten started was actually the norm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Given that a 7/14 WoL killed Lahabrea, I would think the other unsundered wouldn't take any more risks. Any new adventurer who appeared to be making strides would need to be snuffed out immediately and decisively.

---

Igeyorhm already pulled this stunt on the thirteenth. The end result was a Flood of Darkness that left it completely bereft of Aether and unable to be rejoined to the source. It's discussed in the EE, page 213.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

I think the reason people get that was from the post-Antitower scene, where it was described in vagueries that things were getting dire enough that the next Rejoining was Team Hydaelyn's last chance. Unclear at the time if that was because of an issue on Hydaelyn's end, the world's end, or just because at that point the Ascians could pivot in strategy to something even harder to stop, but given what we know of G'raha's timeline it probably wasn't the last one, or else they'd have been more active.



Actually, a 7/14 WoL didn't kill Lahabrea, a 7/14 Thordan did; we just bruised him up a bit. Hell, given we don't even know if Thordan had the Echo and so was a sundered soul, a fraction might not even be useful. An 8/14 WoL did kill Emet-Selch, but that hadn't yet happened in that timeline. Perhaps even more alarming, though, was that in both timelines, a 1/14 Ardbert killed both Loghrif and (apparently) Mitron.


I don't think the fact the Ascians were no-shows in G'raha's timeline was actually all that important, though. Remember that the Seventh Calamity was actually the odd one out in terms of not sending the world back to the stone age, so suddenly the Ascians had to work pretty quickly as far as their timescale goes. The way Rejoinings normally went was that it took centuries until anything of much note to them happened, so the Ascians being quiet until rebuildings had fully gotten started was actually the norm.

---

We were 8/14 now 9/14 1 source plus 7 different rejoining at 1/14 each. When Ardbert joined with us that added another 1/14

1 plus 7 is 8 plus 1 more is 9...

Math. :P I always hear Emet in my head saying, "A vaunted hero of the Source, seven times rejoined."

I knew I should have referenced "If I Were an Evil Overlord" in my response since that's what I was thinking about when I wrote it. Lots of good advice for the Ascians in there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Math. :P I always hear Emet in my head saying, "A vaunted hero of the Source, seven times rejoined."

I knew I should have referenced "If I Were an Evil Overlord" in my response since that's what I was thinking about when I wrote it. Lots of good advice for the Ascians in there.

---

I hate math too lol but yeah the 7 times is more meaning at seperate... well times lol for the lack if better terminology. Or I could possible say 7 different periods or such. But yeah I hate math...

Damn i just came up with a perfect pizza metaphor that i should have used... oh well I'll try to remember it for another day..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rannie

We were 8/14 now 9/14 1 source plus 7 different rejoining at 1/14 each. When Ardbert joined with us that added another 1/14

1 plus 7 is 8 plus 1 more is 9...

---

I fumbled that, but the math on us is still less important than the math on Ardbert.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

I fumbled that, but the math on us is still less important than the math on Ardbert.

---

Ehh, sorta? We do ours solo, and with greater being's aether vessels. Ardbert did his with five crystals of light and the channeling of the other WoDs. That's only 5/14ths, granted, but Loghrif and Mitron fused are still not whole. And it did only kill Loghrif, merely mutating Mitron into the first Sineater, so it wasn't a clean kill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rannie

We were 8/14 now 9/14 1 source plus 7 different rejoining at 1/14 each. When Ardbert joined with us that added another 1/14

1 plus 7 is 8 plus 1 more is 9...

---

There is one weird thing with that math: We where NOT ON the Source when 7 rejoining took place, since they happen after Calamity. We where sent into the future by Lousiuax. There was no dramatic soul rejoining moment in the ARR story as it was with Ardbert. and there is oood chance we are not yet 7 times rejoined when we get Ardberts shard.

And introduction of Dynamis just sledgehammered all this Aetheric soul power scaling by introducing factor that does not follow pure math when calculating results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pofruin

There is one weird thing with that math: We where NOT ON the Source when 7 rejoining took place, since they happen after Calamity. We where sent into the future by Lousiuax. There was no dramatic soul rejoining moment in the ARR story as it was with Ardbert. and there is oood chance we are not yet 7 times rejoined when we get Ardberts shard.

And introduction of Dynamis just sledgehammered all this Aetheric soul power scaling by introducing factor that does not follow pure math when calculating results.

---

That was already touched upon the rejoining happened when the calamity hit. Only the 1.0 players had been sent to the future no one from 2.0 was. Also Beq Lugg specifically states that while the scions souls where denser than the ones on the 1st ours was the densest of all. Meaning our joining with Ardbert. If our souls had only been rejoined the same amount (meaning no rejoining from the 7th umbral calamity) then that dog thing wouldn't have made such a comment.

Also since it was said earlier too, even Emet said we were 7 times rejoined while we were waiting for the ladder to be fixed before joining with Ardbet.

Read through this thread, and the thoughts on what Venat did and whether she was justified...

I have to admit, after seeing the story play out, I was not convinced that Venat did the right thing. Her decision to withhold information and try to guide her people to saving themselves, even with the foreknowledge that this DIDN'T WORK, seemed nonsensical. At the very least, she should have shared what she knew about Metion once it became clear that things were falling apart. Even if everything worked out in the end, even if the actions taken eventually resulted in the defeat of Metion (something the Ancients might possibly never have been able to do themselves; the best they could manage was shield themselves from her influence), I was not convinced that Venat might have done a better job if she'd shared her hidden knowledge with her people, just as we chose to share our hidden knowledge of the future with her and the others.

That said, I seriously think there's an aspect of Blue and Orange morality going on here that has to be taken into consideration. Hermes was sad. He was sad because the other Ancients couldn't seem to understand that their creations could suffer, that they could fear death, that they could feel pain. Eventually, he enacted his memory erasure plan to ensure that the Ancients themselves would eventually face a trial to decide whether they were fit for survival.

I think there can be little doubt that the Ancients held themselves as being a tier apart from their creations, above them and fundamentally superior and of greater intrinsic importance. Certainly, they might favor such creations, bear affection for them - but that affection is much like the affection that we have for pets, even in cases where the creations are clearly intelligent beings. Several of the Elpis quests made it quite clear that even intelligent creations were seen as disposable and replaceable (such as the quest where we're instructed to allow the beast to rip us apart if it became a choice between its life and ours - it's an important research specimen, after all, and we're just a familiar!).

More than that, though, there were some strong hints that the Ancients did not hold their OWN lives in especially high regard, either. It's a regular occurrence, for instance, for an Ancient to simply decide that they've done enough and that it is time to die. Half of all the Ancients decided to sacrifice their own lives to birth Zodiark, and while that seems like a breathtaking spectacle of altruism from our perspective, to the Ancients it might not have been quite so unimaginable.

As another being from this culture in which Life - both that of the Ancients and not - is considered to be ultimately not that important, Venat's decision becomes a bit more understandable, even if it seems monstrous to us. She held back from spilling the beans regarding her future knowledge specifically because she was willing to allow Hermes's experiment to play out, to see if they would be able to prove themselves worthy of continuing to exist on the planet. It was a test which, in her estimation, they failed, as their solution was to hide behind Zodiark and ignore the underlying problem - and further, to hypocritically destroy the creations in which they'd claimed to have placed so much importance, simply to bring back their lost brethren. Where did their high-and-mighty ideals about maintaining ecological balance on the planet go once their collective back was to the wall?

This irreverence for the value of life was both what allowed Venat to do as she did, and also what prevented the Convocation and the rest of the Ancients from finding a lasting solution. The same irreverence for life is quite likely what would have lead the Ancients to their eventual doom - possibly one similar to that of the third leg of the Dead Ends, a world so utterly free of strife that its people had lost all meaning to their existence and any will to live. It was time to allow a new people to step up to bat.

The Sundering resulted in life forms whose existences were brutish, painful, and short. Life is fleeting and precious, and the living claw and scrape for as much of it as they can. Carelessness for life like that displayed by the Ancients, both in regards to their creations and to themselves, is regarded as abhorrent. While by no means guaranteed, this new form of life had a chance to overcome the tests that had laid every other galactic civilization low - and so far, they have.

tl;dr, it's hard to swallow what Venat did, when looking at it from our own perspective. The game, however, paints Venat as being from a culture where such an abominable act might not be quite so abominable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LineageRazor

snip

---

Pretty well reasoned and overall great read!

Two points of doubt I'd like your take on:

• Do you think Hermes' test to be fair, and if so, does the Sundered (unlike the Ancients) getting hints and direct help from Venat not mess with the morals behind her decision?
• Do you think Venats answer to the "too perfect" society via sundering and suffering will provide a long term answer to the issue, and if yes, what is your reasoning? Wouldn't the sundered sooner or later reach a point of advancement akin to the Ancients at their height? (bad, biased, but still somewhat relevant example: the Allagan Empire)