Disappointed in one Endwalker Aspect [SPOILERS]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

Issues which disappear if the timeline was simply split. Then their timeline could be saved without impacting our own. As for the trouble of WoL returning to the present, there isn't any evidence of such a thing being impossible, G'raha never even made an attempt for such a thing.


I've never understood this argument. We see in Elpis that new Trust members can be switched in at any time.

---

In regards to the timeline being split, yes us changing the past doesn't wipe out our original timeline. However without us returning to our present, said timeline lacks the knowledge of and ability to fight meteion and permanently end the final days. Sure they could just flee the star but meteion's song is broadcasting to every corner of the universe, there is simply no where they could run where the final days wouldn't follow, therefore dooming them all to die. This means they can't be saved and there in lies the question, do you choose to save people you've just met from certain death and doom your friends to die? or do you instead save your friends and leave the virtual strangers to die?

It is true that there is no evidence that we couldn't cross the timelines and save both, but in the same vein there is no evidence that says we could either. Again it comes down to whether or not you value the lives of the scions more than the lives of the ancients or visa versa, you can likely save one group but we have no possible way of knowing if you could save both.

On the trust point, I agree that trust members can be swapped out in scenario mode, although this wasn't something we knew they wanted to do before endwalker released and in hindsight it does make this sort of a moot point. But before endwalker the only exception to the scions being the only trust npc's was lyna in Holminster Switch and even then she was supplementary and not replacing the scions. But even during the endwalker MSQ I knew they couldn't kill off the scions because during Ultima Thule there was no one else to replace them in the final dungeon for the trust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Catching up on the discussion, I feel like we're no closer to understanding how sundering the world is equivalent to outright killing it. But the real question is: why should we forcibly equivocate the two?

Ah, Venat, the mitotic murderer. You know, life is full of these little setbacks. One moment you're a veritable god, able to create and extinguish entire species with the snap of your imagination. The next, you're just a mere Hyur (unless you had the good sense to fantasia), with taxes to pay and laundry to do. Perhaps growing up and facing the real world feels kinda, sorta, maybe as bad as dying. But that's a critical distinction - it isn't the same as dying. And that which doesn't kill you... makes you Azem.

Don't get me wrong, I understand full well that Venat is the true main villain of this story (the writers got it all wrong, they're just out to foist a friendship and love agenda). Thank goodness that we're smarter than them. But why are we so invested in making Venat out to be the big bad in the first place?

---

Disingenuity doesn't suit you.

Quote:

---

If you want to understand Venat's actions, then you really need to look at them through the lens of Azem. Her attitudes and decisions, whether you agree with them or not, are well in keeping with someone who has spent many lifetimes in that role.

---

I don't think it's in keeping with Venat-as-Azem to do nothing and allow all her friends across the world to die. Between the end of Elpis and post-first sacrifice she appears to have done absolutely nothing. WoL certainly would not have sat back and burdened some future generation with resolving the conflict.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kordarion

It is true that there is no evidence that we couldn't cross the timelines and save both, but in the same vein there is no evidence that says we could either.

---

We are easily able to travel back and forth in time once the connection is established. Why should the portal be irreparably closed just because a branch in the timeline is created?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

We are easily able to travel back and forth in time once the connection is established. Why should the portal be irreparably closed just because a branch in the timeline is created?

---

We don't know the portal wouldn't be irreparably closed, it could stay open but that doesn't mean it WILL stay open. That's what I'm trying to point out here is that we DON'T know what would happen, it could stay open or it could close we just don't know. That's what I'm trying to say IS THAT NO ONE KNOWS WHAT WILL HAPPEN and that basing your argument on an unprovable fact and then asking people who question your unproven belief to prove you wrong when you can't seem to provide evidence that you are right is pretty disingenuous.

Prove that we can in fact travel between branch timelines in game and I will graciously concede defeat in this debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

I don't think it's in keeping with Venat-as-Azem to do nothing and allow all her friends across the world to die. Between the end of Elpis and post-first sacrifice she appears to have done absolutely nothing. WoL certainly would not have sat back and burdened some future generation with resolving the conflict.

---

Just because we don't know what events happened during a period of time doesn't mean nothing happened during that time period. Because that is what you are arguing, that our lack of knowledge of what Venat did must mean she did nothing. She may have sat on her arse and done nothing but the way she has been characterised pre-sundering suggests that she wouldn't and it would be well out of character for her to do nothing instead of trying to do something. But in the end we don't know and you simply make baseless assumptions and present them as facts despite have no basis for them. If anyone is being disingenuous here it is you for pushing your personal beliefs as fact without providing any evidence or reasoning as to why that would happen.

I mean, as far as I thought before reading this that IS the case. Hydaelyn may not have come across as a 'big bad' but she most definitely did temper us with her 'blessing of light'. The whole "hear, feel, think" -- that's her instructions just like the tempered hear the will of primals. The only difference is Hydaelyn is not focused on making a big flame or eating earth crystals. She is obsessed with Etheirys providing an adequate answer to Hermes's test

This is how Meteion tests for friendship upon meeting others:
I wish to hear your words, share your feelings, know your thoughts

Hydaelyn grew you into an aethero-dynamis payload. You are just a bomb delivery system. That's why she tells you to
Hear, feel, think

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kordarion

Just because we don't know what events happened during a period of time doesn't mean nothing happened during that time period. Because that is what you are arguing, that our lack of knowledge of what Venat did must mean she did nothing. She may have sat on her arse and done nothing but the way she has been characterised pre-sundering suggests that she wouldn't and it would be well out of character for her to do nothing instead of trying to do something. But in the end we don't know and you simply make baseless assumptions and present them as facts despite have no basis for them. If anyone is being disingenuous here it is you for pushing your personal beliefs as fact without providing any evidence or reasoning as to why that would happen.

---

I mean, we actually know from lore that she was active the entire time through the Echo over generations. There may not be a lot of action going on in suppressing Zodiark, but that also required constant intervening on her part to keep aether flowing properly and dense enough to avoid the Final Days and buy WoL as much time as possible.

Less like sitting on one's butt and more like the burden of Atlas

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kordarion

We don't know the portal wouldn't be irreparably closed, it could stay open but that doesn't mean it WILL stay open. That's what I'm trying to point out here is that we DON'T know what would happen, it could stay open or it could close we just don't know.

---

And yet the argument against helping is predicated on the idea that it is impossible, when that isn't even supposed anywhere in the story. Even if someone were to think that so, how many times have we done the impossible before to save people? Since when is it accepted to give up on saving people because of the perceived hurdles to doing it? We already know with the Crystal Tower that multi-timeline time travel is possible, at the very least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kordarion

Just because we don't know what events happened during a period of time doesn't mean nothing happened during that time period. Because that is what you are arguing, that our lack of knowledge of what Venat did must mean she did nothing. She may have sat on her arse and done nothing but the way she has been characterised pre-sundering suggests that she wouldn't and it would be well out of character for her to do nothing instead of trying to do something. But in the end we don't know and you simply make baseless assumptions and present them as facts despite have no basis for them. If anyone is being disingenuous here it is you for pushing your personal beliefs as fact without providing any evidence or reasoning as to why that would happen.

---

A moment ago you insisted I provide evidence to support my position, so I'll ask that of you now - Where is your evidence of Venat's action during that period? I assume she did nothing because there is no evidence she did anything, and even tangential evidence she did not, such as the complete lack of any rescued outsiders among her group in Akademia and the non-element of the defenses that she suggests making at the end of Elpis. Why should I believe she acted? Because it would be "in her character"? Based on her stated beliefs I should also not think that she would reach the conclusion that her people would never change, yet that is the notion she hit upon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

And yet the argument against helping is predicated on the idea that it is impossible, when that isn't even supposed anywhere in the story.

---

G'raha's time travel is NOT proof of multi-timeline travel, he DID NOT TRAVEL BETWEEN BRANCHES, instead he traveled back to the past of his OWN branch and that was the catalyst for the branching timelines.
G'raha time travels to change the past = creation of the branch timeline.

It is true we regularly do impossible things , and that our characters don't like to give up on saving people if they can help it but can we really? Based on the fact that this is how our characters are framed by the writers maybe, as an entirely meta reason, it is impossible because the whole point of endwalker is to move on from the ancients and the past and to tell new stories beyond them. So it stands to reason then that it would be impossible to cross branch timelines not because of an in game reason but because the writers want to move on from the unsundered world and wouldn't be able to if they had you save it.

We don't have any proof of Venat taking action i'll admit that, there is no proof she did anything. But the absence of proof is not proof of her doing nothing. For me it makes sense for her to still have acted considering that during our goodbye in Elpis she mentions that she has plans to make a group separate from the convocation to deal with the upcoming crisis. Admittedly this could be her moving straight onto plan sundering but we don't know and as I will say again and again lack of knowledge of her actions does not mean she didn't do anything.

Also do you remember at what point she says her people will never change, I do. It happens AFTER the final days, after they have summoned Zodiark and refused to move forward from their tragedy, not before but after. She didn't give up on her people changing until after her supposed inactivity. That I believe counters your point of her inaction due to giving up on her people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StealthPaladin

I mean, we actually know from lore that she was active the entire time through the Echo over generations. There may not be a lot of action going on in suppressing Zodiark, but that also required constant intervening on her part to keep aether flowing properly and dense enough to avoid the Final Days and buy WoL as much time as possible.

Less like sitting on one's butt and more like the burden of Atlas

---

I agree with you that we do know what she was doing post sundering but the conversation we are having is over the ambiguity of Venat's actions in-between our adventure in Elpis and the start of the final days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Catching up on the discussion, I feel like we're no closer to understanding how sundering the world is equivalent to outright killing it.

---

I'll paint you a picture then. One that will never be seen in game, of course.

When the Sundering happened, it happened when Venat was fighting Zodiark at the end of their battle. If the whole of the world wasn't engaged in fighting her, then where were they? What were they doing? Think for a moment about the Marvel Cinematic Universe's portrayal of, "The Snap." Suddenly half of the world's population was deleted. This lead to things like planes suddenly missing both pilots and the planes crashing, killing any not disintegrated by The Snap. Car wrecks. Ship line snap back, suddenly bereft of crew, now causes mooring lines to bisect the rest of the crew.

Well... the Sundering did that too, albeit rather differently.

Suddenly, every Ancient Etheirysian and all life beyond them was split into 14 fragments, dumber and weaker than before, bereft of powers. Not enough Aether in the body to use Creation magicks. But we know the Ancients were always tending to dangerous life forms they'd created or guided through selective breeding. Everything physical reduced in size by about 3 times. Well, anyway, these beings that rely solely on creation magicks and most of who know not battle, are suddenly bereft of the means to defend themselves from the things they create. Many die this way.

Then there's the natural disasters we know still happen, ala the volcano. Natural catastrophes that could be stopped, are now split into 14 catastrophes instead, and now no one on the planet has the power or know-how to stop them.

What of the facilities that require excessive amounts of aether to levitate? Do they merely reduce down proportionally and stay aloft, or does their specific design still demand 14x the amount of aether than they now have access to because they are engineered machines, and they plummet, dooming all in the facility?

How about those working with toxic concepts? We know in our present there are many venomous things, some of which even exude toxic fumes. Whether by spell or natural resilience, the Ancients could resist and work with it. Now they don't have the power to project that spell nor the natural resilience. I haven't seen a gas mask in game, have you? They now asphyxiate on toxins and die.

What of those walking on the water as a favorite pastime, perhaps watching their dolphin-like Hpemde creations? The aether thins, and the spell holding them aloft breaks, their robe wet, drags them down, and they drown.

The last thing I can think of... there are some spells in the game that draw on a user's personal aether. As we understand them, the Ancients invoked all of their creation magicks via their own personal aether reserve. What happens then, post Sundering, to the Ancients who actually remember the invocations, and try to force to use them? They consume all of their bodily aether and die, attempting to do what they'd always done.

Of course, none of this is shown. It's merely the imaginings of a madman.

As far as your musings on Venat as Azem aka Naked Snake and The Boss analogy... ehhh.... It's a clear write in that seeks to force a more substantial connection between us and character we never really knew but wanted to know. It's an easy Shake n Bake method of, "We want you to like this character. They are and made you!" It falls flat completely right out of the gate for me, because it's telling, not showing. It's in the same vein as, "Here go get my dagger melded with materia. It's my weapon of choice." ala Minfilia, only to never seen actual Minfilia fight with that dagger. It's not a real development of her character, just a laundry list fact I have to take at face value.