When are we supposed to stop fighting?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KariTheFox

The issue is that "pyschopathic genocide loving Venat who killed her own people because she hated thier culture so much" is not really a valid or insightful reading of the text. It requires asbcribing motivations and character traits to Venat that are not there. It can be your headcanon, sure. But it's not supported by anything in the game.

If you want to debate the morality of the sundering, you can do that. But it becomes wholly unproductive when all the discussiom keeps coming back to is mudslinging against Venat.

Also we're not talking about the Garleans or Emet-Selch right now, why does the fact that in unrelated conversations some third parties said things about Garleans/Emet-Selch have any bearing on how this conversation is conducted?

---

Because i’m being told not to give certain attributes to a character, when this was done to said characters i mentioned and no one bat an eye. Imo there’s a bit to support her absolutely snapping. Between her walk of shame and the 180 her character does whilst also contradicting her own preaching. It seems she had a bit of a mental break and that’s if i’m being generous. It’s not much of a leap when you piece together the lies,secrets, and manipulation she’s done over the gamess lifespan. I wouldn’t say it’s unproductive. it’s getting a discussion going, and if enough people are critiquing the character. then clearly there is something wrong with said character. Whether it be the writing or whatnot, but people have already pointed out the flaws of this, for example the very obvious bias towards her that the writing takes.

I guess I must have missed the part where we learned that the 3rd sacrifice was the first step of them moving on. Do we even know if the 2nd summoning was also done by people who were willing to give up their lives to get the planet healing again? I'm leaning towards the new life being sentient as from what we know Venat's group wanted them to be handed the baton. We also know it wasn't as aetherically dense as the Ancients were and must have looked strange enough that many saw it as mishapen. Depending on what a Meteion says about how planetary lifestreams work it could have been alien life that was reborn. How can so many be sure that if she did choose to tell even post Zodiark the things she knew that they'd of listened? There was an impasse or Elidibus wouldn't have felt a need to detach himself from Zodiark. Heck even if they did listen both Hythlodaeus and Emet agreed that Hermes was making the test a fair one before we escaped.

Yes, Azem went to the volcanic island. Most of the convocation were fine with the choices given the inhabitants of the island saying that any and all who didn't want to die by said Volcano had already done so. Those who stayed we're given to assume we're fine with their at time time presumed death. It was Azem who went nah screw that when I know I can save everyone and got Hythlodaeus to help out by allowing them to use the Ifrita concept. For me the biggest question and what the heck and it looks like a dick move is Azem just deciding to go with neither plan. Either they had prophetic visions or Venat clued them in on some things. Cause it doesn't fit with what little we've been told about their personality.

Are both what Venat did and the rejoinings dick moves? Heck yeah. Is what the future Ironworks a dick move? Not really? They had no way and still didn't have a away to know if their plan succeeded or not. They just know the tower got yeeted and Midgardsormr woke up after a 200yr long nap and regardless of their plan's outcome they still existed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SannaR

I guess I must have missed the part where we learned that the 3rd sacrifice was the first step of them moving on. Do we even know if the 2nd summoning was also done by people who were willing to give up their lives to get the planet healing again? I'm leaning towards the new life being sentient as from what we know Venat's group wanted them to be handed the baton. We also know it wasn't as aetherically dense as the Ancients were and must have looked strange enough that many saw it as mishapen. Depending on what a Meteion says about how planetary lifestreams work it could have been alien life that was reborn. How can so many be sure that if she did choose to tell even post Zodiark the things she knew that they'd of listened? There was an impasse or Elidibus wouldn't have felt a need to detach himself from Zodiark. Heck even if they did listen both Hythlodaeus and Emet agreed that Hermes was making the test a fair one before we escaped.

Yes, Azem went to the volcanic island. Most of the convocation were fine with the choices given the inhabitants of the island saying that any and all who didn't want to die by said Volcano had already done so. Those who stayed we're given to assume we're fine with their at time time presumed death. It was Azem who went nah screw that when I know I can save everyone and got Hythlodaeus to help out by allowing them to use the Ifrita concept. For me the biggest question and what the heck and it looks like a dick move is Azem just deciding to go with neither plan. Either they had prophetic visions or Venat clued them in on some things. Cause it doesn't fit with what little we've been told about their personality.

Are both what Venat did and the rejoinings dick moves? Heck yeah. Is what the future Ironworks a dick move? Not really? They had no way and still didn't have a away to know if their plan succeeded or not. They just know the tower got yeeted and Midgardsormr woke up after a 200yr long nap and regardless of their plan's outcome they still existed.

---

I still am of the mindset that Azem went to seek a third option that would eliminate the need both for Zodiark's summoning and the Sundering. Which would very much imply Venat did not tell them either, as the recordings in Anyder suggest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

We don’t even know if it was people though.

---

Turk explicitly said even if they were. Which is what I was responding to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SannaR

snip

---

If you read what i said, based on Hythlo's dialogue, after the 3rd sacrifice they would return to their duties of stewarding the star. Yes we know both the 1st and 2nd set were done voluntarily. My point isnt so much post zodiark as it is prior. She had the knowledge of everything prior to the final days. Emer has to do his duty whether he believes her or not, we see this with our claim, he thinks its crazy but he still has to investigate. He also knows though, that he was mind wiped. Its as simple as her saying hey, this is why you were mind wiped, this is what happened etc.

My point about ironworks was its the same situation as the ancients. They didnt know if their plan would succeed, however they did understand that messing with time could have the side effect of erasing them all and killing everyone in that timeline, but they went along with it anyway. They were willing to sacrifice every single person in that timeline to bring back the wol and reverse the calamity brought unto them. Thats my point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slatersev

Turk explicitly said even if they were. Which is what I was responding to.

---

Yes i understand that which is why the rest of my post was talking about if it was theoretically true. Sorry for the confusion :) Thing is though, is it just me or did they kind of drop the whole 3rd sacrifice thing. I dont remember it being mentioned much in Endwalker.

We know the second stage was consensual. We don't know what the third stage involved, because nothing whatsoever is known about it in terms of specifics, other than the possibility that it is the very "new life" seeded by Zodiark, strongly implying creations of one sort or another, since that is something this primal is very readily capable of realising. Source here. If that is the case it could range anywhere from animals to plants to familiars. The last are unlikely to gain souls, but it's not impossible (Meteion suggests it) and so one could paint a scenario where such infantile beings, with some guidance, could inherit the star. This stage was one that divided their society (Convocation included) with the exact reasons for this broader division unspecified (it's given in very general terms, as in securing the best way forward for the star), resulting in Elidibus emerging to mediate the dispute. So they may have even been deterred from it if given adequate reason. Nonetheless, it is not really mentioned in EW, and instead the fast-forward cutscene with her takes place whilst the sky is still on fire with monsters flying about, with ancients who for all we know may be ready to sacrifice themselves (in line with what happened during the second set.) These scenes are not literal in nature and stem from her memory, so it's difficult to say, and they premise the whole dispute on their willingness (or not) to accept her words.

Opposition to the sacrifices is always framed in a specific context (=trying to restore things as they were resulting in their eventual doom) when we actually get the motives from her mouth, e.g. here, here, and here where she affirms Y'shtola's framing of her motives. My guess is that her faction never premised this on the morality of such sacrifices but rather on the consequences of them, and thus the exhortation to leave things as are and leave the world to the "new life". Problem being, without explicitly referring to the reasons for her fears (fate of the Plenty, Meteion's existence), it would come across as a caprice. Even Y'shtola struggles to believe pursuit of perfection could cause a world to end until she sees it in the Dead Ends, and this is after she's been told everything by the MC and Hydaelyn. So mere words to that effect won't convince a civilisation that once had managed to extirpate all manner of ills. Alas, they never got more than that.

That said, if we have a problem with the ancients utilising their creations in such a way, then it's worth remembering the sundered are not particularly sentimental about life forms they see as instrumental themselves, be it: any number of living beings (not limited to animals but also featuring various sapient beings) slaughtered for a variety of purposes in fates or elsewhere (e.g. Ul'dah coliseum), including being raised up for this task; ditto with familiars; feeding souls, sapient or otherwise, to this little munchkin; arcane entities such as summoners' arcanima and egi or primals summoned purely for utility's purposes. And the list goes on. And they are not alone in this. The dragons for example will also mind control beings lesser to them to utilise in their war with man. Yet not once does she raise this issue with her "children". In spite of all of this, the sundered nonetheless assert their right to exist in the face of beings which would wipe them out, such as Meteion, Omega or the Red Girl. So let's not pretend the ancients have some unique hurdle to overcome here or would be unique in rendering up beings they deemed lesser to restore their own from the limbo inside Zodiark (bearing in mind he was deemed essential as a protector of the star.) We ourselves don't regard all life as equal, even when it is arguably sapient to varying degrees, neither do the sundered, nor do various higher beings in the setting.

Since the language surrounding the "new life" implies it was in its infancy, could the issue have been that the Ancients were essentially going to have to raise the new life themselves before it could be sacrificed? I mean, if someone handed me a box of kittens and said care for them until they're adults and then they'll be offered to Zodiark I couldn't do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleretic

Venat's choice was, and I've been saying this for months, morally questionable but strategically correct.

---

Venat's choice was - "it all worked itself out in the end" aside - strategically miserable.

Let's really think about this for a moment. She knows that aetherial density can counteract the effects of Dynamis. She knows that Zodiark's aetherial shield is tied to his existence and is the only thing protecting the planet. And she knows that Meteion is gathering power at the edge of the universe. In this situation, in what way does it make sense for her to not aid in the planet's defense or Zodiark's creation, and then to sunder Zodiark and reduce the aetherial density of everything in existence by 13/14ths? As it stands the fact that Zodiark's aetherial currents weren't rendered useless by this is a major plothole, from the outset this had the potential to restart the Final Days instantly. Even the idea that this wouldn't dissolve Zodiark or undo his protection through the disruption to his form alone is a major leap. Not to mention that the necessity of using Dynamis to combat Meteion wasn't well established, and Venat saw firsthand that her despair was enough to bring WoL to their knees while the others were unaffected. On the topic of WoL at the very least this allows Venat to know that - Through some series of events (because WoL didn't know the details) and presuming the timeline goes unchanged - the Sundering won't just destroy the planet. But WoL was also from a seemingly doomed future where Venat apparently had no recourse but to try and plan an escape, so moving things in that direction is really not a positive idea. Then there's the fact that she never told humanity about either the threat of Meteion nor the ideals she wanted them to either have or not have, meaning she's providing very little direction here other than "Ascians evil, Zodiark evil, kill", which is counter-productive in the extreme. The very creation of the thirteen shards, whose existence is utterly dependent on the Source's survival yet all of which are isolated from each other and incapable of defending themselves, is really a raw absurdity. Let's not even get into the non-exploration of any alternative ideas for countering Meteion.

I can go on but these are some of the primary criticisms of her strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lurina

I think the cause of a lot of these problems comes down to the fact that Shadowbringers was written as a realist narrative ("things happen based on the choices and competing needs of the characters"), while Enwalker is very much an idealist ("things happen for bigger picture, thematically-driven reasons") one. They're fine in isolation, but they go together like oil and water, which is not great since they're so inter-dependent.

---

Excellently put.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lurina

I think the cause of a lot of these problems comes down to the fact that Shadowbringers was written as a realist narrative ("things happen based on the choices and competing needs of the characters"), while Enwalker is very much an idealist ("things happen for bigger picture, thematically-driven reasons") one. They're fine in isolation, but they go together like oil and water, which is not great since they're so inter-dependent.

---

This actually makes a lot of sense and is probably why I prefer EW's story. I like idealistic, thematically driven stories much more than realist ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Since the language surrounding the "new life" implies it was in its infancy, could the issue have been that the Ancients were essentially going to have to raise the new life themselves before it could be sacrificed? I mean, if someone handed me a box of kittens and said care for them until they're adults and then they'll be offered to Zodiark I couldn't do it.

---

It was stated that they would have to wait a bit until enough of the new life could be enough aether to become a proper swap out for those who went in the initial summoning.