Is anyone else dying to get to Garlemald?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odstarva

Now I know you're trolling.

Good work though, you had everyone fooled!

---

I'm dead serious but you rather everyone be Nazis an support the empire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YianKutku

I feel that there is an excluded middle here.

---

If you support the empire you support Nazi Germany. There is no middle ground

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klonoa7

Right.... So I supposed the Garleans didn't try to crash a freaking moon into the planet which would have ended all life as we know it

---

Well if you actually knew about the lore the moon didn't destroy the world, only eorzea for the most part and not even all of it was destroyed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klonoa7

If you support the empire you support Nazi Germany. There is no middle ground

---

???

Are you alright there, buddy? You do realise this is a forum to discuss the lore of a fictional setting, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VargasVermillion

Well if you actually knew about the lore the moon didn't destroy the world, only eorzea for the most part and not even all of it was destroyed.

---

Because it never completed it's descent and instead Bahamut broke free (while exploding dalamud into pieces (which still caused a lot of damage but not as much as it would have if it were whole). Meanwhile if not for Louisoix's sacrifice Bahamut would have been free to ravage the world with no one to stop it. The fact remains that is entirely Garlemalds fault they knew what they were doing and they went along with it anyways. Lets also not forget what they did to Midgard which really screwed our planet over. You so desperately want to think they're good when they are not.

If you bothered to do your research then you'd know that many Garleans were opposed to using Dalamud as a weapon. You might want to, you know, actually study the lore before accusing people of supporting Nazi Germany.

Just look at various real world countries throughout modern and distant history. Many have inflicted atrocities upon each other. That does not make every single person living within those countries guilty by association or worthy of death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klonoa7

Because it never completed it's descent and instead Bahamut broke free (while exploding dalamud into pieces (which still caused a lot of damage but not as much as it would have if it were whole). Meanwhile if not for Louisoix's sacrifice Bahamut would have been free to ravage the world with no one to stop it. The fact remains that is entirely Garlemalds fault they knew what they were doing and they went along with it anyways. Lets also not forget what they did to Midgard which really screwed our planet over. You so desperately want to think they're good when they are not.

---

No one in this thread has outright stated garleans are good.

THen what do you suggest as a permanent way of ending the imperial threat, peace is not an option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klonoa7

peace is not an option.

---

... said the Ishgardians about the dragons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klonoa7

THen what do you suggest as a permanent way of ending the imperial threat, peace is not an option.

---

Whether you like it or not it will be, Garlemald will end the way of ishgard if the story remains as predictable as it is. WoL and pals will stop garleans and meet some of the more pacifist royals and turn it into a republic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klonoa7

THen what do you suggest as a permanent way of ending the imperial threat, peace is not an option.

---

...peace clearly is an option, since many Garleans have proven themselves to be reasonable and honourable. Garlemald will require changes in regards to how it operates moving forward but it is highly unlikely that it is going to be wiped out by the Eorzeans or the Warrior of Light. It's also a massive sprawling entity and so dismantling it would bring an immense amount of chaos - and good luck justifying ruining and ending the lives of the countless men, women and children living in Garlean territory.

I just get vibes of FF6, when the empire comes asking for help after screwing up/espers went on a rampage and flew off. Its either that or the PoW thing Judging by the map though, its pretty hard to think were headed anywhere else. It
ll probably be ascian related

Well, there's the Garlean Consulate in Kugane. That could easily be used to host meetings between the Warrior of Light, some of his key allies and at least one prominent individual serving Garlemald.

There's also the matter of Regula's dying words regarding the Emperor and how he may have need of the Warrior of Light someday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

...peace clearly is an option, since many Garleans have proven themselves to be reasonable and honourable. Garlemald will require changes in regards to how it operates moving forward but it is highly unlikely that it is going to be wiped out by the Eorzeans or the Warrior of Light. It's also a massive sprawling entity and so dismantling it would bring an immense amount of chaos - and good luck justifying ruining and ending the lives of the countless men, women and children living in Garlean territory.

---

Not to mention outright war with Garlemald is likely exactly what the Ascians want anyway. The Garleans don't exist just to be an antagonist for our characters, they'll end up screwing with other things off-screen, perhaps as a side result of our actions. Remember that Lakshimi got summoned because the Garleans accidentally killed an Ananta hostage during their retreat from the bridge our forces had just taken.

(On a side note, I have a feeling there's going to be a big reveal about why pure-blooded Garleans cannot use magic.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YianKutku

... said the Ishgardians about the dragons.

---

Ishgardians were the instigators of the war, their ancestors betrayed their Dragon allies out of greed and murdered Ratatoskr while their leaders since conspired to keep the truth buried and spread lies about how the dragons attacked them when they discovered Coerthas. Even after truth was freed many refused to accept it and wanted to continue the war the only reason the peace ultimately succeeded was because said people were either killed or commit suicide in the aftermath of their riot. With the conspirators out of the way the only real obstacle was nidhogg's shade which may have served to boost the public's idea of making peace with the dragons (due to seeing their most hated enemy attempting to murder his own kind who was attempting to make peace)

That said, Isgaard was in the wrong, not the dragons. Nidhogg went insane however and his death was inevitable. He was willing to kill his own kind (including his brother and Niece; who was acting as a diplomat at the time) to complete his goals

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SaitoHikari

accidentally killed an Ananta hostage during their retreat from the bridge our forces had just taken.

---

There was nothing accidental about it. This was Fordola, the same Fordola who committed genocide against her own people under the excuse "I'd win them their freedom"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klonoa7

There was nothing accidental about it. This was Fordola, the same Fordola who committed genocide against her own people under the excuse "I'd win them their freedom"

---

IIRC the quest/cutscene specifically mentions that one of the soldiers panicked and struck the prisoner during the confrontation, a pretty far cry from Fordola straight up executing her.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SaitoHikari

IIRC the quest/cutscene specifically mentions that one of the soldiers panicked and struck the prisoner during the confrontation, a pretty far cry from Fordola straight up executing her.

---

All they had to do was let the prisoner go and make a run for it while the queen was busy reuniting with her daughter to advert the entire crisis. Instead they chose to kill the prisoner, probably thinking the Ananta would be too full of despair to fight.

Of course that'd mean no Lakshmi fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SaitoHikari

-snip-

---

Mm. The Ascians thrive off of bloodshed and strife by their own admittance - every nation, every leader, every peasant is but a convenient tool for them to exploit. So has it been throughout history. Even Elidibus is seemingly playing the same game as the rest of the Ascians only in a more calculated manner. He manipulated the Warriors of Darkness. He gave the Eyes of Nidhogg to Ilberd. Now he's seeking to either sweet talk or coerce the Emperor of Garlemald. Clearly he doesn't necessarily care about the Emperor or Garlemald - because if he did then he probably wouldn't have thrown the Eyes of Nidhogg at Ilberd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klonoa7

There was nothing accidental about it. This was Fordola, the same Fordola who committed genocide against her own people under the excuse "I'd win them their freedom"

---

The hell? She didn't "commit genocide". She performed a strike that hit the people under her command, sure, but neither that nor what the skulls were doing suggest she was performing a genocide. In fact, genocide probably would have resulted in her turning on the empire, since the Ala Mihgans cannot be free if the Ala Mighans are all dead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kallera

The hell? She didn't "commit genocide". She performed a strike that hit the people under her command, sure, but neither that nor what the skulls were doing suggest she was performing a genocide. In fact, genocide probably would have resulted in her turning on the empire, since the Ala Mihgans cannot be free if the Ala Mighans are all dead.

---

Yes, she did. Her and her skulls had no problem whatsoever killing Ala Mhigans such as shown in Ala Gannha, Rhalgr's Reach, and Specula Imperatoris (which also killed her skulls and several imperials as well).. Your logic is so very flawed. You say "genocide probably would have resulted in her turning on the empire, since the Ala Mihgans cannot be free if the Ala Mighans are all dead." yet her every action leads further and further towards that end.

Perhaps you should look up the definition of genocide.

If Fordola is guilty of 'genocide' then so, too, is Aymeric given that he put a lot of his own people to the sword as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Perhaps you should look up the definition of genocide.

---

Mass Murder which is indeed what Fordola and her skulls were doing to their own people

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klonoa7

Mass Murder which is indeed what Fordola and her skulls were doing to their own people

---

That is not the definition of genocide, and it is not what Fordola did. And i hesistate to call fighting the Ala Mighan RESISTANCE "genocide", as they do not comprise of all Ala Mihgans. Even the resistance gets in on killing Ala Mighans when they suspect them of not resisting with the empire along with them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Perhaps you should look up the definition of genocide.

If Fordola is guilty of 'genocide' then so, too, is Aymeric given that he put a lot of his own people to the sword as well.

---

The only thing Aymeric is guilty of is Patricide which could not be helped considering his father's ambitions made him just just as bad as Garlemald.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kallera

That is not the definition of genocide. And i hesistate to call fighting the Ala Mighan RESISTANCE "genocide", as they do not comprise of all Ala Mihgans. Even the resistance gets in on killing Ala Mighans when they suspect them of not resisting with the empire along with them.

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_definitions

1982: Genocide is the deliberate destruction, in whole or in part, by a government or its agents, of a racial, sexual, religious, tribal or political minority. It can involve not only mass murder, but also starvation, forced deportation, and political, economic and biological subjugation. Genocide involves three major components: ideology, technology, and bureaucracy/organization

1984: [Genocide is] the planned destruction, since the mid-nineteenth century, of a racial, national, or ethnic group as such, by the following means: (a) selective mass murder of elites or parts of the population; (b) elimination of national (racial, ethnic) culture and religious life with the intent of "denationalization"; (c) enslavement, with the same intent; (d) destruction of national (racial, ethnic) economic life, with the same intent; (e) biological decimation through the kidnapping of children, or the prevention of normal family life, with the same intent…. [Holocaust is] the planned physical annihilation, for ideological or pseudo-religious reasons, of all the members of a national, ethnic, or racial group

1987: Genocide is the deliberate, organized destruction, in whole or in large part, of racial or ethnic groups by a government or its agents. It can involve not only mass murder, but also forced deportation (ethnic cleansing), systematic rape, and economic and biological subjugation.

1988: the promotion and execution of policies by a state or its agents which result in the deaths of a substantial portion of a group

1990: Genocide is a form of one-sided mass killing in which a state or other authority intends to destroy a group, as that group and membership in it are defined by the perpetrator

I stand by what I said

An Ala Mighan killing other Ala Mighans is not genocide, they were being ruled, however poor that rule was, they were clearly not being exterminated. The idea to train Fordola and the skulls would not have been considered if wiping them out was the plan. and Zenos is too stupid with his "I'm off to hunt me some game!" shtick to consider wiping out his enemies.

@Kallera

And if they find out that their technology is hurting Hydaelyn they could simply change their way or do it less. Exactly how nobody in their right mind would say that we should kill of all modern real world people because our life style is hurting the planet. No there would be no genocide involved. (And unlike Garlemald we do know that the death of a lot of people would just destroy another shard and cause a calamity. And on top of that none of the current city stated showed any kind of sign that they want to kill any living Garlean.)

Also its all on Garlemald itself. If they went back to their own continent and leave the beast man alone, they would not need to summon their primal again. (A lot do it out of fear for their lives) Also leavin Eorzea alone means, that the city states could finally concentrate on getting better with their own situation thus they could finally try to get better with their neighbors beast tribes. All of this would lead to less summoning thus less suffering for Hydaelyn.

So I am not sure how you came to the idea that this would mean Genocide. Especially since none of the current city states showed any ambition to conquer the world. ;)

--

Anyway I still have not heard about the true positive things that Garlemald did? I mean you have one soldier that called is underlings away before Eorzea came, so the civilians suffered less for this (but the village is not really positive about Garlemald itself) and you have some told stories about some unknown countries that have it great under their rule. But as long as we were not there and talked to people I will remain skeptic about it. The points Cilia used are really not that positive because Garlemald uses most of it to conquer the world that does not want it. And even in the worst dictatorship you will find kind and good people that are doing the right thing. So not sure if the actions of some side NPCs are truly showing the good side of the empire itself.

You also have two "honorable" important Garlean enemies (Gaius and Regula) but they are definitely not "many". In this expansion alone we had no single good Garlean (that is in any way important).

Please I am just really curious and since I am biased towards disliking them, maybe I cant see the good things but it would be nice if people finally wrote why they want to side with them, or why they are Grey and not black. (And I mean the government, not the citizens itself)

All that I see is people trying to say how bad Eorzea is, yet we already said that we know that no country is without bad stuff. But in the end they also have done lots of good stuff, thus they are way more balanced (or nuanced). Garlemald is really looking quite black at the moment.

@Klonoa7: Please stop with this talk about wanting to kill every single Garlean person..if we went with something like that we would be no better than them and you also would kill a lot of innocent people. Also Fordola was not committing Genocide. The situations in Rhalgrs Reach was simply a war situation. And sadly you will have to kill in war. She is a bad person but she definitely did not mass kill people.

To Klonoa's point, if it is all their fault, as in everything in the setting, and truly as black as you say, then why let them live? Wasn't Zenos enough of a lesson, of letting your enemies live long enough to foster the strength to come at you again. Are you going to be satisfied with them coming back into governance after they are inevitably crushed? Are you willing to let them choose a decision that you may not agree with?

If you cannot find something to relate to, either you do not know enough about them, or you know all you care to. It sounds like you are arguing that they are irredeemable, while at the same time sparing these irredeemable people for traits you don't believe exist in them... Is that the case?

I do not see it as all their fault, especially with the primal problem given the setting and their limitations, so the point is pretty much moot to me. I'm aware that there are facets about that society that need to change, much like Ishgard when we first went there. I'm waiting for the sane representations of Garlean government to appear on screen as well, as I know they exist, and that npcs from the empire have discussed about them. Indeed, they couldn't have an empire without it.

But if you cannot see anything worth relating with them and do not see it in the future then calls for their annihilation are bound to exist.

Edit: I'm thinking (hoping really) that we are arguing the same point. I haven't looked foward to this conflict.

Let me preface this by stating I do not like the Nazi comparisons. They are both trite and distasteful. However, I will not deny that the similarities are self-evident. That is all I will say on the matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klonoa7

-snip-

---

1. I don't blame the rest of the world for disliking magitek due to, yes, the Allagans, Mhachi, and Garleans. However there is nothing inherently wrong with embracing technology. Quality of life could be vastly improved and, as the Ironworks have shown, there are benefits to technology.

2. The world is a harsh and unforgiving place; the Garleans just make it worse than it already is. This is why they are the villains. Even without the Garleans things wouldn't be sugar and rainbows - Eorzea has its social, political, and territorial struggles even without them. (I played all of Stormblood and only skipped a couple cutscenes here and there because of not wanting to miss DPS queues. Even before then I made no effort to hide my distaste for the Empire.)

3. The Garlean military, the only part of their society we've seen thus far, is supposed to run on merit. However during Stormblood it should have become painfully clear this only applied to Gaius' XIVth Legion. They kill a lot of people - their own countrymen, even - but that's the military for you. And the Garleans. I never said they were nice.

... Fordola labors under the false belief that by proving the Ala Mhigans equal to the Garleans they will be given a degree of autonomy back - in modern terms she wants Ala Mhigo to become a state within the Garlean Empire rather than an occupied territory. Gaius' relative progressiveness probably instilled this belief in her, and back then it might have had some truth to it... but under Zenos? No way.

I agree with cillia about the using germany as a comparison, Its a step too far to facilitate discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kallera

I agree with cillia about the using germany as a comparison, Its a step too far to facilitate discussion.

---

But she also pointed out that there are similarities that cant just be ignored. (Even if this seemingly makes some uncomfortable) I do agree that nobody is something like that in the real life if they like Garlemald. (Because liking something in fiction will never mean that you like that in real life too.) But I just dont see why its going too far with that regime but not with the roman or British empire. All of this is part of the history of earth and if we allow real life examples in some points we should also allow it in others.

Anyway I am still kinda hoping that people will point out what good side the empire has or which good actions the empire ever showed.

There aren't really many similarities at all. Garlemald is based almost entirely off of the Roman Empire, which whilst far from perfect brought with it a lot of good in terms of art, culture, language, education, architecture and inventions. It's also somewhat based off of the British Empire to a lesser extent.

We can look at other periods of history, too, such as the Victorian age of enlightenment. That advanced civilisation immensely but it wasn't without flaws or dubious experimentation. The Victorian stance on medical issues, for instance, was rather harsh and misguided...but at the same time it was a necessary evil as it helped to push society forward and contributed to what we see today. Even the present day isn't without such flaws - one needs only look at what many countries politicians are involved in when it comes to scandals, their loyalties and financial interests, their policies and so on.

As far as Garlemald's good side is concerned, many aspects have been pointed out already. The most important aspect, however, is that FFXIV follows a somewhat steady formula. Ishgard was not painted in a flattering light - we were literally seeing innocent people accused of being heretics and thrown off of a cliff to perish and rot at the bottom of a dark, lonely chasm. That did not mean that every Ishgardian we met was a bad apple, though. Nor did we seek to intervene in their ways until it became apparent that there was more to the conflict between Nidhogg's brood and Ishgard's people.

Zenos, too, was introduced as a horrific individual. By his own admittance, though, he cared not for Garlemald or his father's cause. He was also written off as a monster by his own father who stated that such men were not made for thrones. Before Zenos controlled Ala Mhigo Gaius held the reins and by all accounts he was harsh but fair, often defending the people of Gyr Abania against the darker elements of Garlemald.

Then there's a side quest in Gyr Abania where a Garlean in charge of a particular settlement surrenders the place to the Ala Mhigan Resistance without a fight. The people within are reluctant to hand him over to the Eorzean Alliance and Resistance because they fear that he will be executed.

The reason? Once he took command he treated them exceptionally well, to the point where he became beloved by those who resided there. This aligns very much with the likes of Gaius and Regula - and it is highly likely that there are more men and women like them elsewhere.

Furthermore, the same Garlean points out that it is fascinating how different regions under Garlean control can be. In some places, the people there would sooner seek death to end their suffering whilst in other locations there is prosperity and life is virtually unchanged. This aligns very much with, again, the Roman and British Empires.

We will inevitably see more of Garlemald in due time and as always the Warrior of Light and his allies will likely seek to cut out the rot that exists, learn the truths of Garlemald's origins and see the other side of the story. They'll meet more Garleans worthy of respect and aid them - and be helped in turn.

We're not going there to wipe it off of the map. If that was the intention then the groundwork for moral greyness would not have been laid.

Trying to say that there is a universal good that a nation brings to the table is not very obvious. At the end of the day, all nations act with their own interests and benefits in mind, all nations do this.

For example, I could point to Garlemeld reviving the magitek industry, which has apparently greatly improved domestic life as well as military life, but we haven't seen those examples being a nation outside and with hostilities.

Or I could point to their devotion to scientific and medical research. So long as the information is verified and bears fruit, it is of use, and be used in different settings. The changes to the Garlean genome to enable magic can certainly be part of a practice that be used to reasearch and treat many ills written off by others.

Or i could point to engineering and archetecture. They know how to build structures that last really well and really fast. They have security systems that, with a little foresight into not having the guy with the key in front, would keep a lot of people out easier than any wall dart trap or guy with an axe.

And do you honestly think every beast tribe is somehow innocent and pure in the face of the primal question? We have seen what tempering does to the affected, that there is still no cure, and that crystals are in no short supply. That the garleans can topple primals with their forces easier is a amazing tool that may have saved many lives, and could one day see a dawn where society does not need the warrior of light in order to function. Who knows how many Bismarcks or Garudas may have been prevented because of it. Could we have even faced these beings without the insight brought by Cid?

If you think they use all of that solely for the pupose of kicking lalafells and puppies, i really do not know what else to tell you.

I hope one day the people of Eorzea will realize that we should embrace empire and take down these false Gods (giant talking crystal) who clame to rule our lives .

I hope we get to see territories run by more sensible viceroys because we only seen Zenos who ran both Gyr Abania and Othard to the detriment of his own nation to get a adrenaline rush.

Well, this thread got unpleasant fast. To answer the original question, not really. I don't expect them to be able to portray a nuenced society very well. Stormbloodhad problems with its MSQ that still irk me. Why is a single legion in charge of such wildly separate provinces? Why does no reinforcements show up? Why does the Emperor allow Xenos to make a game out of two entire provinces? Sure, you can explain it away, but "because xenos wanted a BFF" reduced an interesting Empire to clicheness. Still liked SB but felt lit it really failed to display the strength of the Empire.

The easiest solution would be to simply introduce a Garlean Legion that upholds a similar sense of honour to the likes of Regula and Baut. For those unfamiliar, Baut is a Garlean formerly in command of one of the liberated settlements in Gyr Abania. The people there loved him so much that they conspired to refuse to hand him over to the Eorzean Alliance and Ala Mhigan Resistance because his leadership was both fair and just. We also know that not all the lands under Garlean rule are cesspits - some places are virtually unchanged and prosper.

I believe we'll see the better sides of Garlemald in due time. The groundwork has already been laid - it's just a matter of waiting for the story to head towards a more cordial approach to Garlemald. With any luck we'll see the Garlean Consulate used to hold talks with someone prominent hailing from Garlemald itself who wishes to put an end to the needless bloodshed on both sides. That very much aligns with the goals of the Warrior of Light and Scions...or at least it should align with their goals. Blind vengeance isn't the right route to take, especially since the Garleans were persecuted themselves in the past.

Though I do hope we don't see more 'revolutions'. Garlemald needs reform, not to be the punching bag for another expansion or two. Now that we're moving away from Eorzea, too, I'd rather see Eorzea's influence on the world stage lessen so that we can see other regions prosper and shine - including Garlemald.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alleo

But she also pointed out that there are similarities that cant just be ignored. (Even if this seemingly makes some uncomfortable) I do agree that nobody is something like that in the real life if they like Garlemald. (Because liking something in fiction will never mean that you like that in real life too.) But I just dont see why its going too far with that regime but not with the roman or British empire. All of this is part of the history of earth and if we allow real life examples in some points we should also allow it in others.

---

People dislike bringing up the Nazis because they feel not only that it's disrespectful to the still-living survivors of that horror, the term is thrown about rather liberally on the internet, and doing so inevitably leads to someone being labeled a Nazi sympathizer and the discussion / debate devolving into a flame war. It never leads to anything good. I personally have no problems with it (so long as there are rather clear and direct parallels) or avoiding accusations of Nazi sympathy... but in the interest of keeping things civil so the discussion / debate can continue, I avoid it.

However...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

There aren't really many similarities at all. Garlemald is based almost entirely off of the Roman Empire, which whilst far from perfect brought with it a lot of good in terms of art, culture, language, education, architecture and inventions. It's also somewhat based off of the British Empire to a lesser extent.

...

We're not going there to wipe it off of the map. If that was the intention then the groundwork for moral greyness would not have been laid.

---

This kind of invites it.

While there are no perfect records of Roman history, there are some marked differences in how Rome and Garlemald conduct themselves. (Or how Rome conducted itself. You know what I mean.) The first that comes to mind is how foreign sovereigns from conquered territories were treated. Rome tended to send the rulers of such territories to Rome itself, indulge them in the pleasures of the imperial city, and then send them home as loyal citizens. Garlemald... does not. As I recall they held Kaien in Doma Castle for twenty-five years until his death during the failed rebellion.

Rome was largely content to leave the civilians of its provinces alone, provided they pay their taxes and obey their laws. Garlemald will forcefully (and deceitfully) conscript civilians into military service if it wants to. (Did Rome? I can't remember off the top of my head.) Cf. the villagers of Namai, who were pressed into service for the Confederacy's defiance. Like Garlemald, Roman military service guaranteed citizenship, but Roman conscription lasted only six years... not twenty.

Rome also never developed or deployed chemical weapons. Garlemald has them, but only Gaius' decency (which was born of a selfish desire to have something to rule, not genuine benevolence) prevented it from being deployed.

Is it true that we tend to see the bad sides of places before we go there, only to find out there's more to the picture than that? Certainly. Ishgard was like that. Ala Mhigo was like that. (Doma... I don't recall anyone acting or saying anything bad about it.) Yet... I can only draw conclusions with what I know. What I've seen. What I've seen, especially in 4.0, does not paint Garlemald in a positive light. At all. Granted we were fighting a wild dog of war, but even Gaius and Regula weren't exactly the sort of genuinely benevolent Garlean national we need to go there on peaceful terms. (One declared his ability to conquer Eorzea gave him the right to do so, the other called us savages even while proposing cooperation. Though he did sacrifice himself for someone else shortly thereafter...) I'd also counsel against using Gaius as the baseline for how Garlean legates govern their lands and treat their people - he was well-noted for his relative progressiveness and meritocracy, attitudes no other Garlean has been shown to share. (Or: the VIth thinks Regula got his station by being Varis' friend, the XIIth thinks Fordola got her station by whoring herself out for it.)

I'll never say Garlemald is irredeemable. I'll never condone glassing the place - that's not an acceptable solution. Still, unless we get someone who is not a power-hungry tyrant into a position of power, clashes with the Empire will continue. And the whole "savages" thing still really, really rustles my jimmies.

I'd be very interested to see how people in provinces outside Eorzea and Othard feel about their rulers and how they are treated. Very interested...

Ehh, it's late and I need to get to bed. (I got a sweet Gordian Katana though!) In short... while I don't deny that Garlemald could be better than what we've seen, I can only draw conclusions based on what we've seen, and it's not flattering.

Regula was shown to be benevolent, though.

- He refused to strike at Ulk...(?) due to him being a child.
- He also refused to strike at Krile as well.
- When Y'shtola criticised him for wanting to work with the Warrior of Light and the Scions to put an end to Zurvan despite being responsible for Ysayle's demise he pointed out that he, too, had lost those he cared about. Namely his men. Arguably he had lost more since Ysayle was but one person and everybody else who came to Azyz Lla survived.
- His primary concern upon Zurvan starting to break free from his bindings was to defend not only his own men but the Warrior of Light and the Scions as well.
- He literally died to protect a child.

Regula and other Garleans referring to Eorzeans as 'savages' isn't entirely incorrect from their perspective. Furthermore, it's not as if the Garleans are not referred to in worse terms by Eorzeans themselves at various points. Not entirely unjustified, either - but the 'savages' term likely stems from bitterness at how poorly Garleans were treated before Garlemald came to be a successful Empire. Even putting Garlemald aside there's a lot of racism within Eorzea itself in both the past and present.