The State of the Ascians (Assume Spoilers as of TODAY)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

I'm giving her some benefit of doubt, because I don't think she's outright malevolent, but to pretend Zodiark is just some ebul blood good (when the bulk of the sacrifices were voluntary and necessary given the state of the world, and the final stage doesn't even lead Venat to question the benign intentions of the Convocation, implying it was parsable in terms of the ancients' moral code(s)), and she is perfection in crystal form, is just rather uncharitable at this point.

---

Is anyone in this thread arguing that Zodiark is an ebul blood god? It's been a long, long time since I've seen someone assume Zodiark's evil. For my part, even before Zodiark was revealed to be a Primal, I was of the opinion that we just knew too little about the guy to say one way or another. We knew the ASCIANS were evil - or, at least, performing evil acts, and doing it in Zodiark's name - but it was unclear whether Zodiark sanctioned their activities, or was even aware of what they were doing.

Even after the big reveal, the story has gone out of its way, it seems, to avoid portraying Zodiark's character in any way, shape, or form. We've heard why and how the Convocation summoned him, we've heard what he did, and we've heard the sacrifices the Convocation continued to make to give him power, but we know nothing of Zodiark's agency in all of this. The fact that all of the Convocation were Tempered by him seems to indicate that he has SOME kind of will (since Tempering is basically an unresistable imposition of will), but not all actions taken by the Tempered are necessarily direct commands from their god.

At any rate, one thing to bear in mind about Hydaelyn is that the ONLY concrete evidence we have of wrongdoing or duplicity on her part is the misinformation we got from her regarding her and Zodiark's origins - and that, most likely, was written before the writers had fleshed out the TRUE origin that we now know. It may be hasty to assume that those words were intended as foreshadowing of Hydaelyn's eventual descent into a role as adversary. I honestly wonder if the writers even remember they wrote it (or if they're even the same writers). I believe that Koji Fox once stated that the writers really aren't much interested in keeping track of the lore except in the most broad strokes, and that it's up to him to try to mesh the things they write into the world's lore. What they wrote this time may have simply been too great a stretch for him to overcome.

Writers: Okay, so we've decided that Zo and Hy are Primals, created by the precursors of the Ascians!
Koji: Er, well, Hydaelyn told us she and Zodiark existed at the dawn of time before all else...?
Witers: Shush, we've got an awesome story going. *Writes it anyway.*
Koji: *Gets a biiiig headache.*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LineageRazor

Is anyone in this thread arguing that Zodiark is an ebul blood god? It's been a long, long time since I've seen someone assume Zodiark's evil. For my part, even before Zodiark was revealed to be a Primal, I was of the opinion that we just knew too little about the guy to say one way or another. We knew the ASCIANS were evil - or, at least, performing evil acts, and doing it in Zodiark's name - but it was unclear whether Zodiark sanctioned their activities, or was even aware of what they were doing.

Even after the big reveal, the story has gone out of its way, it seems, to avoid portraying Zodiark's character in any way, shape, or form. We've heard why and how the Convocation summoned him, we've heard what he did, and we've heard the sacrifices the Convocation continued to make to give him power, but we know nothing of Zodiark's agency in all of this. The fact that all of the Convocation were Tempered by him seems to indicate that he has SOME kind of will (since Tempering is basically an unresistable imposition of will), but not all actions taken by the Tempered are necessarily direct commands from their god.

---

I always had doubts that Zodiark would be "evil". Besides the too-evident-cliché, I specifically had in mind FFXII's Zodiark, whose bio states that he was the only esper created by the Occuria that did not revolted against them, but because they feared his power, they bound him and kept him eternally in an infant form. All of this has been properly portrayed, Elidibus being a child who volunteered to become His heart included. FFXII's Zodiark is also referred as the Keeper of Precepts, and with enough aether we do know Zodiark can weave the laws of creation anew. And it is curious, the story of the Ivalician espers, because the one who rebelled against the Occuria was Ultima, the Holy-elemental esper, and the one who never took part in anything, perhaps because he was an infant, was Zodiark, the Dark-elemental esper.

Whatever the case, becoming the Heart of an elder primal such as Hydaelyn and Zodiark might be the same principle as what Ysayle, Zenos and Yotsuyu did. Zenos says that with full control of the Echo, one can bend a primal to their will, and he demonstrates with Shinryu. Of course, Hydaelyn and Zodiark are way more powerful, but I would say that with Elidibus as His core, Zodiark would have hardly any bad intention. Venat... well, we do not know much about her. She is a complicated character in FFXII and I suspect it will be the same here, but if Hydaelyn's command is "banish the darkness", I have to wonder if that will not put Her at odds with us, fully acknowledged Warrior of Darkness by Elidibus-Heart-of-Zodiark himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

She is a primal implanted into the star without the benefit of the people who created it to oversee it and that is all she is. We have yet to understand how she impacts the Aetherial Sea and if that impact is adverse or not - the fact that the 80 AST quest points to it being saturated with light, much like the First, means it probably is not without consequence.

---

I'm not seeing anything in Leveva's dialogue that indicates she's talking about light as in the aether being Light-aspected, but simply as an analogy of what drawing aether from stars vs the planet is like. It's the difference between gathering tiny amounts of aether/light from each of those distant sources vs the intensity of a single source incredibly close.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erendis

From Exarch's presentation I concluded that the Source was already flooded with light from the First and rejoining was imminent. Even though we prevented the rejoining as of yet we did nothing to restore the dark/light balance on the Source so it makes perfect sense that Aetherial sea would still be saturated with Light. This also makes Black Rose still very very dangerous.
So far nothing has come of the msq quest where we assisted the scientist while he was measuring aether levels in South Shroud (apart from poor Wilred's fate). My belief is that aether level was not actually low, but instead aether was slowed down by light which had already flooded from the First.

---

It can also be interpreted that way but so does the notion that the Primal serving as the will of the star has an effect on its aether. After all, I am fairly sure the choice of darkness for Zodiark was deliberate, and not just because Lahabrea liked purple - it would be intended to influence the aether of the world. If so, it'd be peculiar indeed if her aspect did not do the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LineageRazor

Is anyone in this thread arguing that Zodiark is an ebul blood god? It's been a long, long time since I've seen someone assume Zodiark's evil. For my part, even before Zodiark was revealed to be a Primal, I was of the opinion that we just knew too little about the guy to say one way or another. We knew the ASCIANS were evil - or, at least, performing evil acts, and doing it in Zodiark's name - but it was unclear whether Zodiark sanctioned their activities, or was even aware of what they were doing.

---

I am not referring specifically to this thread but only to an argument I have seen crop up several times on other sites, including Reddit, as well as various Discord servers. So although you may not have seen it in recent times, I certainly have.

Regarding their acts being 'evil', I take it as a matter of perspective. The unsundered are higher life forms. They see the present life forms as having weak, worn down souls attached to them that resemble nothing they were once familiar with. They have shorter life spans and, as per dialogue by Elidibus/Lahabrea, they grow weaker even as the world is rejoined (and they refer to this as them playing Hydaelyn's game in the JP dialogue.) We have yet to see how this jives with the understanding that the Rejoinings reinforce the world, but it may all fit it in together. For the sundered Ascians you could chalk it up to them understanding that the world has suffered what they consider to be a grievous harm, that they see as their duty to rectify.

I really don't see the vantage point of the unsundered as any different to how we humans view 'lesser' animals, or how the characters in the setting view the same, or various monsters etc. Emet even refers to them as malformed. Does it put them at odds with the sundered life forms? Yes. Mostly because their vision is mutually exclusive with the world remaining sundered.

Quote:

---

Even after the big reveal, the story has gone out of its way, it seems, to avoid portraying Zodiark's character in any way, shape, or form. We've heard why and how the Convocation summoned him, we've heard what he did, and we've heard the sacrifices the Convocation continued to make to give him power, but we know nothing of Zodiark's agency in all of this. The fact that all of the Convocation were Tempered by him seems to indicate that he has SOME kind of will (since Tempering is basically an unresistable imposition of will), but not all actions taken by the Tempered are necessarily direct commands from their god.

---

That depends on how you take tempering. Is it intended to imprint the Primal's will on the summoners? Is it more of creating an energy network that allows it to expand its domain, as per the dialogue here? It's certainly not uniform in erasing the will of the tempered and beyond ensuring a motive to see to the Primal's revival should it be banished, what we know if its characteristics is limited. He certainly has some will and persona, as Elidibus speaks of him in the third person, but I think it's fair to say neither faction regarded tempering as much of an issue. Her summoners certainly thought little of it given that they were just about to summon a Primal themselves. ;) They also don't bring it up in terms of the Convocation's motivations being clouded by it.

Quote:

---

At any rate, one thing to bear in mind about Hydaelyn is that the ONLY concrete evidence we have of wrongdoing or duplicity on her part is the misinformation we got from her regarding her and Zodiark's origins - and that, most likely, was written before the writers had fleshed out the TRUE origin that we now know. It may be hasty to assume that those words were intended as foreshadowing of Hydaelyn's eventual descent into a role as adversary. I honestly wonder if the writers even remember they wrote it (or if they're even the same writers). I believe that Koji Fox once stated that the writers really aren't much interested in keeping track of the lore except in the most broad strokes, and that it's up to him to try to mesh the things they write into the world's lore. What they wrote this time may have simply been too great a stretch for him to overcome.

---

Like I said, the out they may well give her is that she, as the Primal, is unaware of it. That's fine and logical. Where it is more questionable is in terms of Venat's role. Although the use of the name is not a guarantee that they will reprise the role her namesake played, it is, all the same, an interesting choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadowMeowth

I always had doubts that Zodiark would be "evil". Besides the too-evident-cliché, I specifically had in mind FFXII's Zodiark, whose bio states that he was the only esper created by the Occuria that did not revolted against them, but because they feared his power, they bound him and kept him eternally in an infant form. All of this has been properly portrayed, Elidibus being a child who volunteered to become His heart included. FFXII's Zodiark is also referred as the Keeper of Precepts, and with enough aether we do know Zodiark can weave the laws of creation anew. And it is curious, the story of the Ivalician espers, because the one who rebelled against the Occuria was Ultima, the Holy-elemental esper, and the one who never took part in anything, perhaps because he was an infant, was Zodiark, the Dark-elemental esper.

Whatever the case, becoming the Heart of an elder primal such as Hydaelyn and Zodiark might be the same principle as what Ysayle, Zenos and Yotsuyu did. Zenos says that with full control of the Echo, one can bend a primal to their will, and he demonstrates with Shinryu. Of course, Hydaelyn and Zodiark are way more powerful, but I would say that with Elidibus as His core, Zodiark would have hardly any bad intention. Venat... well, we do not know much about her. She is a complicated character in FFXII and I suspect it will be the same here, but if Hydaelyn's command is "banish the darkness", I have to wonder if that will not put Her at odds with us, fully acknowledged Warrior of Darkness by Elidibus-Heart-of-Zodiark himself.

---

Complicated is to put it mildly. Although some may construe its intentions as benign, the consequences of removing the influence of the Occuria were nothing short of disastrous, resulting in the vanishing of magic from the world, and the non-human races vanishing. Does it sound a little like accidentally (?) splitting the world into 14 and thus weakening it? I suspect both her facet of ensuring memories of the ancient world did not survive, and her impetus to banish the darkness, might be factors here. I am awaiting to see how they will handle Venat, Fandaniel and Zenos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

I'm not seeing anything in Leveva's dialogue that indicates she's talking about light as in the aether being Light-aspected, but simply as an analogy of what drawing aether from stars vs the planet is like. It's the difference between gathering tiny amounts of aether/light from each of those distant sources vs the intensity of a single source incredibly close.

---

I mean it's there. What you're really saying is you're choosing to interpret it some other way. That is fine. I think it is a little more than just an analogy in this case, given the vivid description, and it makes perfect logical sense given that she is ensconced in the Aetherial Sea and aspected towards light. Not to mention that if her crystal is an auracite, they don't exactly contain the energy in them.

In fact, it has been speculated that darkness was chosen as the energy for Zodiark given its propensity towards activity (=faster regeneration of the world.) If so, the question would arise how is it that he would affect the world thus, through his aether, and not she?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

Complicated is to put it mildly. Although some may construe its intentions as benign, the consequences of removing the influence of the Occuria were nothing short of disastrous, resulting in the vanishing of magic from the world, and the non-human races vanishing. Does it sound a little like accidentally (?) splitting the world into 14 and thus weakening it? I suspect both her facet of ensuring memories of the ancient world did not survive, and her impetus to banish the darkness, might be factors here. I am awaiting to see how they will handle Venat, Fandaniel and Zenos.

---

I'm glad you mentioned this. Particularly about Venat. Since he was the heart of Hydaelyn does that mean he exists like Elidibus and could have been someone in the story who was always on our side?

If I take a stab at it, I'd say it was Louisiox. This would pass his legacy to the twins and explain the knowledge he used at the battle of Carteneau (these events may have played out differently, but I never played 1.0). This would also explain the sending us from Carteneau to the beginning of ARR from the Coils cutscene.

Quote:

---

Like, FFX is a comparable example of God is evil, and it belabors the point throughout the entire game, in demonstrating how Yevon has perpetuated a broken system upon the world that traps all its people in a spiral of death. FFXIV hasn't done anywhere near that groundwork, and Hydaelyn's actions have been infinitely more benevolent.

---

I don't know, I think XIV has been laying that groundwork for years. Just listen to Answers or Dragonsong, look at the main conflicts of the game, it's all about a circle of conflict and mistakes that's been repeating for thousands of years, and Hydaelyn's summoning and subsequent sundering of the world is a very large part of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

Complicated is to put it mildly. Although some may construe its intentions as benign, the consequences of removing the influence of the Occuria were nothing short of disastrous, resulting in the vanishing of magic from the world, and the non-human races vanishing. Does it sound a little like accidentally (?) splitting the world into 14 and thus weakening it? I suspect both her facet of ensuring memories of the ancient world did not survive, and her impetus to banish the darkness, might be factors here. I am awaiting to see how they will handle Venat, Fandaniel and Zenos.

---

It /does/ sound quite a bit to what happened to the world of Ivalice, aye. Regarding Hydaelyn / Venat and Zenos and Fandaniel, I see here a pattern that reminds me a lot of FFXII. Venat supported and aided Vayne Solidor, heir to the Archadian Empire, to achieve her goal of removing Occurian influence, which led to a bloody conquest on Vayne's part. Vayne was aided as well by rather eccentric and dramatic Doctor Cid, who had his own reasons to support Vayne's crusade, namely For Science™. Balthier even calls him out in the Pharos of Ridorana about wanting to become a god himself. Now, of course comparing Vayne to Zenos in terms of motivations would be an insult to Vayne, but there is the fact that Zenos was largely inspired by him, not to mention he was legatus of the XIIth Legion. Fandaniel could work as an evil(er) version of Doctor Cid, starting from the point of "shaking the shackles off". Both Zenos and Fandaniel wear white now and after the First shenanigans you shall excuse me but I have reasons to be wary of white. So, would that mean they will earn / force Venat / Hydaelyn's support? Since, you know, they apparently are targeting Zodiark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

It can also be interpreted that way but so does the notion that the Primal serving as the will of the star has an effect on its aether. After all, I am fairly sure the choice of darkness for Zodiark was deliberate, and not just because Lahabrea liked purple - it would be intended to influence the aether of the world. If so, it'd be peculiar indeed if her aspect did not do the same.

---

I am sorry but the Lahabrea-liking-purple bit reminded me of this thing and now I cannot stop snickering.

https://i.imgur.com/z1F0QRPl.png

Made even funnier when you realize Lahabrea's memory crystal was "sky blue" and the violet one was Emet-Selch's.

The thing is... Hydaelyn really doesn't fit the "goddess" trope at all when it comes to the "Killing God" trope. Especially when it comes to a formal worship. Usually with a "Killing God" story, there's an entire major religion that gets shown to be false and part of the story is about how the world has to learn to function with the knowledge that the religion was based on lies. Which... no one really "believes" in Hydalyn in that way. In FFXIV, there is no major religion that worships Hydaelyn; we instead see lots of different religions that worship different kinds of beings in different ways. Hydalyn not being a "real" god? No one would care; most people don't know she exists in the first place. There is no "Religion of Yu Yevon" that relies on her existence to keep order in society.

For that matter, Hydaelyn isn't interested in the day-to-day running of the world. How people think of her does not matter to her. What matters is keeping the supernatural beings who are trying to manipulate history in check. In fact... the worst I can say about Hydaelyn is that she might be too passive in how she handles the Ascians. But like... that's a way better side to err on than being too involved.

There's also the fact that... the writers of FFXIV love foreshadowing. And when it comes to "foreshadowing", Hydalyn has just about nothing. Mainly because she got blasted by Ultima in 2.0 and hasn't had any energy to even talk to us. All of our meetings with her or the Word of the Mother have been on some kind of time-crunch because Hydaelyn is so weak, she can barely talk to us at all. And when she has managed to talk to us, it's about the really important stuff; like why Zoidark and her were fighting and why Zoidark is an enemy. Or sending Minfillia to save the 1st Shard from destruction in a last-ditch measure. We've never had the luxury of time to really sit down with her and have a long drawn out conversation ever.

Which also means... She could very well have known the truth and knew she couldn't talk to us for a long time... and so just told us the really important stuff about Zodiark and the Ascians we needed to know at that moment. For all we know, she was planning to tell us what actually happened later and has simply never had the chance to because the 1st Shard needed to be dealt with which meant Minfilia had to go. And the only reason Hydaelyn could talk to us after 2.0 in the first place was because Minfilia was there to give her more energy. With Minfillia gone for good... who knows how we'll be able to talk to her again? We could actually never get the chance with Hydaelyn being as weak as she is...

I'm just going to put it in the plainest terms I can, and not say anything elsewhere for the time being:

Hydaelyn has not been set up in a Demiurge / Yaladabaoth / Shin Megami Tensei YHVH role. She lends the PC and others power to accomplish goals they have in common; namely stopping the Ascians' genocidal / omnicidal plans, something most people would agree is a completely reasonable thing to do. Her duplicitous context doesn't make a difference, and she hasn't been shown to compel service. She acts only in opposition to the Ascians, doesn't compel service, has to act through mortals by granting them power and hoping her read on them is right, and doesn't take that power away should her read be wrong.

Shadowbringers does make her shady insofar as some of her earlier exposition turned out to be lies (retcons probably), but it also defines her raison d'etre as a primal, and that needs to be taken into account when discussing what she does and why. She exists solely to bind Zodiark and in so doing prevent the Ascians from feeding mortals to him to resurrect the long-dead Ancients. That's it. That is the only reason she does anything. Everything she does is geared toward that singular purpose.

Now, is it possible they'll have Hydaelyn go the Demiurge route? Sure, it's possible - but there's no evidence suggesting that's the direction things are headed. It's equally possible that once all the Ascians are dead, being bereft of worshipers Zodiark will truly die and Hydaelyn will either fade away due to her purpose having been fulfilled or just... hang out in the aetherial sea, I guess? (Sounds much more likely to me.) Point is we can throw out possibilities all day; without evidence to back anything up it's little more than baseless speculation.

Why did Hydaelyn lie, beyond the Doylist answer of retcons? I don't know, but given she's shown herself to be magnanimous toward the races of man (and indeed, the sentiment behind her summoning was that they should be more than livestock to feed Zodiark) I'm not wont to ascribe ill intent towards her. If they do go the Demiurge route with Hydaelyn I will have no problem killing her, but it's not something I see in the cards right now.

To me, whatever argument about Hydaelyn's alleged benevolence does not change the fact that She is a primal. Zodiark is too and He has not be shown to be malevolent (to be fair, we do not know hardly anything from Zodiark and the will / command He was given of "hope / salvation / deliverance" is definitely not an evil one). If Zodiark is gone, Hydaelyn must disappear as well. There is already an imbalance between Light and Dark in the Source that the Ascians have been talking about ever since 2.0 and this is with Zodiark still having a (sundered) presence. If He is gone, the only major force in existence would be Light. And that would be bad. The First was the best example.

In short: in the end, the circumstances and details are relevant, but the outcome should, in my opinion, be the same. They both should disappear. Their very existence begets conflict. Primals are a blight upon the star, no matter the form they take. We are the eikon-slayer. As Azem we opposed both of their summonings and at the time our past self fled from the conflict. I feel like their arc should end, in their current incarnation, right the wrong of the Ancients: causing the first (civil) war that signaled the start of many, many tragedies.

I feel that if we have to fight Hydaelin, it's not because she's evil but because we have to. If we kill Zodiark, we have to kill Hydaelyn as well to keep the balance between light and dark. Hydaelyn herself probably will ask us to kill her.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yuella

I feel that if we have to fight Hydaelin, it's not because she's evil but because we have to. If we kill Zodiark, we have to kill Hydaelyn as well to keep the balance between light and dark. Hydaelyn herself probably will ask us to kill her.

---

This is another option I thought based on (again) references. Pray forgive me for my ignorance, FFXI players, but was there not a god in one of the expansions whose problem was he had / wanted to off himself and he could not? Because it could be indeed Hydaelyn's situation in such an scenario.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yuella

I feel that if we have to fight Hydaelin, it's not because she's evil but because we have to. If we kill Zodiark, we have to kill Hydaelyn as well to keep the balance between light and dark. Hydaelyn herself probably will ask us to kill her.

---

This seems a lot more likely to me.

The most likely scenario I see for Hydaelyn dying is her pulling a move like she did in 2.0 to protect us from Ultima. She'd rather let herself get hurt than see us die. Protecting us from Zodiark doing something that would result in us dying before Zoidark ends? That's right up her alley.

One problem I see is that we don't know a lot about what role Hydaelyn plays in the world order at the moment. It could be that killing her won't effect the world in some way. On the other hand... she is the one who Sundered the World. It could be that her being alive is what is keeping it (and Zoidark) Sundered. And if she died the Sundering would end... Which could be... really bad. We know a Calamity happens on the Source when a Rejoining happens. There's six other Shards and the Void still around; all with people on them. If killing Hydaelyn would make like... six or seven Rejoinings happen all at once, I can see that not being something anyone wants to do.

For everyone saying Hydaelyn is a primal and we should kill her just on principle... It's pointed out by characters in-universe that if Rhamu and Alexander weren't huge drains on the aether in the environment, they'd be fine to leave alone. Rhamu doesn't Temper people without them asking him for it first. Alexander doesn't temper anyone. Heck, we don't even actually kill Alexander; he makes a time-bubble around himself that freezes him in one instant of time so he won't continuously be an aether drain. We have no evidence of Hydaelyn being a drain on the Lifestream (quite the contrary; she's in the Lifestream which is nothing but aether and is so low on energy/aether she can't talk to us anymore). And we have no solid evidence of her Tempering anyone. Or of her meddling in history when Ascians weren't already meddling. Unless our knowledge of either of those facts changes, no one in-game is going to have a good reason to kill her. It would be too much effort for no known benefits (and a lot of unknown ways things could go catastrophically wrong).


There's also the fact that... how do you kill something that isn't even in the physical world? Hydaelyn is in the Lifestream already... which is where the aether of unsummoned Primals hangs out anyway. If we do kill Zodiark, all his aether is going to go straight to the Lifestream. He's just.. not going to be a physical entity in the world most likely? Or maybe calling them a consciousness is better? It's entirely possible that Hydaelyn or Zoidark can't be really killed by design too. The entire reason both of them were summoned to begin with was to be the Will of the Star, and I can see the Ancients wanting to make that Creation really fool-proof when it comes to things like it dying easily. For all we know, they're just a bunch of aether in the Lifestream already and the only way to really "get rid of them" is to do what Hydaelyn did to Zoidark: removing their aether from the Lifestream and locking them up in some prison world.

If anything... I have an easier time seeing Zodiark and Hydaelyn reconciling their difference and them both becoming the the Will of the Star by the end than I see the WoL having to kill Hydaelyn themselves. There's... no internal narrative reason to do so yet and this far into the Hydaelyn/Zoidark conflict, I'd expect to see something much more concrete pointing in that direction than anything we have so far. It's too late in the story to introduce a "surprise! you have to kill the being who has been backing you this entire time because they're bad!" plot and have it work as well as the FFXIV story team likes their ideas working.

Quote:

---

She lends the PC and others power to accomplish goals they have in common

---

Goals that she effectively forced them to have. And I don't mean in the "she tempered you" way or even the "she hid knowledge from you that may have changed your opinion" way, but rather the "the state of the world and your very being that she is responsible for creating leaves you no choice but to align with her" way.

Quote:

---

Her duplicitous context doesn't make a difference

---

I really feel like it does.

Quote:

---

doesn't compel service

---

Minfillia seemed extremely compelled. As well as Middy. And Ryne and all that on the First, they never had a choice.

Quote:

---

has to act through mortals by granting them power and hoping her read on them is right, and doesn't take that power away should her read be wrong.

---

She does ignore their plight when it suits her though. Urianger had to effectively barge into her room and poke her in the eye to get her to help the First.

Quote:

---

namely stopping the Ascians' genocidal / omnicidal plans

---

I'm just going to say it - Hydaelyn's status quo for the world is infinitely more genocidal than the plans of the Ascians. She is responsible for more death than they could ever dream of causing, every living being that has ever died on any of the shards or the Source can ultimately owe that loss of life to Hydaelyn.

Quote:

---

She exists solely to bind Zodiark

---

This is extremely debatable. Hydaelyn taking up her position in the Lifestream, hearfeelthinking anyone who awakens the Echo regardless or whether they have anything to do with the Ascians or not, bargaining for Midgarsormr to die, give up his aether to her, and eternally enter her service guarding whatever is beneath Silvertear, she does more than only keep watch on Zodiark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

Goals that she effectively forced them to have. And I don't mean in the "she tempered you" way or even the "she hid knowledge from you that may have changed your opinion" way, but rather the "the state of the world and your very being that she is responsible for creating leaves you no choice but to align with her" way.


I really feel like it does.


Minfillia seemed extremely compelled. As well as Middy. And Ryne and all that on the First, they never had a choice.


She does ignore their plight when it suits her though. Urianger had to effectively barge into her room and poke her in the eye to get her to help the First.


I'm just going to say it - Hydaelyn's status quo for the world is infinitely more genocidal than the plans of the Ascians. She is responsible for more death than they could ever dream of causing, every living being that has ever died on any of the shards or the Source can ultimately owe that loss of life to Hydaelyn.


This is extremely debatable. Hydaelyn taking up her position in the Lifestream, hearfeelthinking anyone who awakens the Echo regardless or whether they have anything to do with the Ascians or not, bargaining for Midgarsormr to die, give up his aether to her, and eternally enter her service guarding whatever is beneath Silvertear, she does more than only keep watch on Zodiark.

---

All of this. Thank you.

https://i.imgur.com/IsEXRnS.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

I'm just going to say it - Hydaelyn's status quo for the world is infinitely more genocidal than the plans of the Ascians. She is responsible for more death than they could ever dream of causing, every living being that has ever died on any of the shards or the Source can ultimately owe that loss of life to Hydaelyn.

---

How so? She was summoned after half (or was it 3 quarters?) the population already gave up their lives, and so far her plans seems tobe aimed towards preserving the existing life.

If its because of the Calamities as your post seems to imply, keep in mind that those are on the Ascians, and as such both have a reactionary and vengeful bent to them and are aimed with hindering her in the first place

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morningstar1337

How so? She was summoned after half (or was it 3 quarters?) the population already gave up their lives, and so far her plans seems tobe aimed towards preserving the existing life.

If its because of the Calamities as your post seems to imply, keep in mind that those are on the Ascians, and as such both have a reactionary and vengeful bent to them ad are aimed with hindering her in the first place

---

By sundering the star, she made people mortal (at least, that's implied). Therefore anyone that dies to natural causes can be attributed to her actions. And that'd be a lot of lives lost over the last 12000 years. Compared to the Ascians willing to kill everyone once, she'd have killed everyone 120 times over already (and that's just on the source), and would be responsible for many more. From that perspective it's very easy to see the Ascian cause as morally correct, you'd prevent billions of deaths by bringing back the old world so that people will be immortal again.

Introducing mortality in a world of immortals is really freaking evil if it was intentional, and an eternal curse for those that lived to see it happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vulcwen

By sundering the star, she made people mortal (at least, that's implied). Therefore anyone that dies to natural causes can be attributed to her actions. And that'd be a lot of lives lost over the last 12000 years. Compared to the Ascians willing to kill everyone once, she'd have killed everyone 120 times over already (and that's just on the source), and would be responsible for many more. From that perspective it's very easy to see the Ascian cause as morally correct, you'd prevent billions of deaths by bringing back the old world so that people will be immortal again.

Introducing mortality in a world of immortals is really freaking evil if it was intentional, and an eternal curse for those that lived to see it happen.

---

Kinda makes sense (though still kinda iffy, a genocide is usually considered a mass murder, with intent, and specifically the removal of an ethnicity or its culture from the planet. And the Aumarotines didn't seem like the "can't be killed" type of immortality. A death by natural cause could be blamed on her, but I kinda doubt that was her intention, even as shady as she seems), though it also depends on your view of reincarnation (as in whether or not people are the same as their past lives). and yet I still kinda doubt that it is comparable, especially since their plans require throwing all of mortal life into the pyre. Past, present and (as evidenced by the Exarch's original timeline) future. All of this to bring back a people that is clearly evidenced to be long gone to begin with (think the Ship of Theseus Paradox, Aumarotines born after the Ascians' success would be immortal, capable of godlike creation magic and larger than even highlanders, but they would still be fundamentally different form the people that the Convocation personally knows, and those that they personally knew, etc).

Plus we also don't know if it was intentional we didn't see any confirmation of Venat and co going "for the sake of this star we must shorten all lifespans". Though I now want to know exactly who created the "new life" that Venat's faction fought to safeguard, because chances are likely that they were the ones that coded in mortality and thus who created them is germane.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vulcwen

By sundering the star, she made people mortal (at least, that's implied). Therefore anyone that dies to natural causes can be attributed to her actions. And that'd be a lot of lives lost over the last 12000 years. Compared to the Ascians willing to kill everyone once, she'd have killed everyone 120 times over already (and that's just on the source), and would be responsible for many more. From that perspective it's very easy to see the Ascian cause as morally correct, you'd prevent billions of deaths by bringing back the old world so that people will be immortal again.

Introducing mortality in a world of immortals is really freaking evil if it was intentional, and an eternal curse for those that lived to see it happen.

---

The Ancients were /nigh/ immortal. Emet says they could live "for an age", but I assume accidents and illness and overly old age happened. If people did not die, then Emet would not be seeing the souls traversing the Lifestream. The Ancients revered the Underworld and their relationship with the concept of death was curious. Sometimes they were too quick to surrender their own life force For Science™️ and that makes me suspect it was their souls were not affected by reincarnation and perhaps they were reborn with another name and family but to the Ancients what seems to truly identify each other is the soul. They often refer to others they are not acquainted with as "soul" instead of "man / woman / person".

That being said, though Hydaelyn's power is not to destroy but to enervate, that means what She split in fourteen of the Ancients as well was 1) their lifespan, 2) their endurance to remain as themselves in the currents of the Lifestream. Those two elements combined are what comprised mortality, and even if the Sundering was accidental, it was still Her doing. For the Unsundered, they were now seeing death everywhere, they could not even make friends or form a family with them outliving them all; Emet was probably the most affected by this, as he did try coexistence with mortals.

I think that the mortal races (spoken and beastmen, the Sahagin priest was able to awaken the Echo) are the result of the Sundering and the races might represent a fragment of what defined the Ancients as a race. What I understood from Hythlodaeus' account was that there were animals and plants and the like, and it was their life force that would nurture Zodiark when the star recovered. For them it would be the same as harvesting for us. And they knew it would take time to be safe to do so. Venat and her followers did not give the Convocation the chance to see if the plan worked so we will probably never know.

We really gonna make chopped up arguments that take hours to deal with again? I mean, if you're gonna do so, at least have the stones to actually attribute your quotes. I've no taste for going back to the dark days of yesteryear, but if you insist... just this once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

Goals that she effectively forced them to have. And I don't mean in the "she tempered you" way or even the "she hid knowledge from you that may have changed your opinion" way, but rather the "the state of the world and your very being that she is responsible for creating leaves you no choice but to align with her" way.

---

Something that may have been unintentional, and really, the problem is the Ascians' unwillingness (or inability) to accept the losses incurred during the Final Days. It's not clear whether or not Hydaelyn intended to sunder the Star and every living being on it; she is responsible regardless, but it is the Ascians who refuse to accept the way things are and go about committing genocide and omnicide for their own ends. The Ascians are just as responsible for "forcing" our goals on us as Hydaelyn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

I really feel like it does.

---

It changes the context, nothing more. Regardless of context the Ascians would still be trying to commit genocide / omnicide, and it's entirely reasonable we'd go against them for the sake of self-preservation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

Minfillia seemed extremely compelled. As well as Middy. And Ryne and all that on the First, they never had a choice.

---

To say one is compelled is to say they are forced to do something, or have no choice. The situation surrounding Minfilia and "the Word of the Mother" is, admittedly, very shady, but ultimately it was Minfilia's choice to put her faith in, listen to, and become Hydaelyn's mouthpiece. Midgardsormr made a bargain for refuge, as far as anyone can tell, entirely of his own volition. Ryne's situation is more Minfilia's fault than Hydaelyn directly, and the Flood of Light on the First is not her fault at all. People rely on her, but she herself does not force them to do so - outside factors (Ascian machinations, Omega's pursuit, the Flood of Light (again, Ascians)) often drive them to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

She does ignore their plight when it suits her though. Urianger had to effectively barge into her room and poke her in the eye to get her to help the First.

---

Due to weakness brought about by Ascian machinations. One can't fault her for not helping when she lacks the power to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

I'm just going to say it - Hydaelyn's status quo for the world is infinitely more genocidal than the plans of the Ascians. She is responsible for more death than they could ever dream of causing, every living being that has ever died on any of the shards or the Source can ultimately owe that loss of life to Hydaelyn.

---

You're stating all life was immortal pre-Sundering. It was not.

Again, the sundering of the Star was, to the best of anyone's knowledge, an unintended side-effect of sundering Zodiark in order to fulfill her directive of binding him. The death that cause was unintended, more likely than not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

This is extremely debatable. Hydaelyn taking up her position in the Lifestream, hearfeelthinking anyone who awakens the Echo regardless or whether they have anything to do with the Ascians or not, bargaining for Midgarsormr to die, give up his aether to her, and eternally enter her service guarding whatever is beneath Silvertear, she does more than only keep watch on Zodiark.

---

Is it? What has Hydaelyn done that pursues any other or a contrary goal?

If we're to believe Emet-Selch at face value, Hydaelyn exists solely to bind Zodiark and keep him from acting with impunity - and the sentiment behind her creation was that the future should belong to those living in the present, rather than those selfsame lives being little more than livestock to fuel his powers. Whatever she may do, whatever she may say, everything she does is geared toward those goals.

Unless you're going to call Emet-Selch a liar, and then doubt everything he told us.

Now, before "certain posters" start the "agree to disagree" shtick, I'm fine with that. Ideological differences aren't a bad thing, but I've no interest in these diatribes (I made a special exception just for you! Don't you feel lucky?), and if we're just going to beat around the bush for the umpteenth time there's no point to this. So believe whatever you want; I really don't care.

Quote:

---

A death by natural cause could be blamed on her, but I kinda doubt that was her intention, even as shady as she seems

---

I'm not sure billions of counts of manslaughter or negligent homicide is any better than murder.

Quote:

---

I still kinda doubt that it is comparable, especially since their plans require throwing all of mortal life into the pyre.

---

Here's the million-gil question - What does it actually matter? Everyone they've killed has a max lifespan of maybe a hundred or so years anyway, and they will all inevitably be reborn through the Lifestream to do it again regardless. Killing them all once versus keeping them in squalor and allowing them to die infinite times isn't even a moral dilemma, the former option is simply superior.

Quote:

---

Though I now want to know exactly who created the "new life" that Venat's faction fought to safeguard, because chances are likely that they were the ones that coded in mortality and thus who created them is germane.

---

We don't actually know if that new life was inferior in any way to Ancient life. In fact we don't know if that new life was even sapient life, though I'd doubt it.

Quote:

---

the problem is the Ascians' unwillingness (or inability) to accept the losses incurred during the Final Days.

---

Okay, so why shouldn't conquered peoples just lay down and "accept their losses" to the Garleans? Why shouldn't Ishgard have accepted punishment at the claws of Nidhogg? Why shouldn't the Warriors of Darkness have accepted that the First was lost and allowed the Calamity so their people's souls were saved?

"For those we have lost, for those we can yet save", is one of the main running lines of the game. The Ascians lost their people, but they could yet save them, and had promised to do so, moreover after they'd all died to save the world.

Quote:

---

The Ascians are just as responsible for "forcing" our goals on us as Hydaelyn.

---

People on Hydaelyn's world would be dying and killing each other regardless of the Ascian's involvement. In the old world the Ancients lived in a post-scarcity society where disputes were solved with debate and communion of the soul, it's inarguable that the world she created was worse than the one she destroyed.

Quote:

---

It changes the context, nothing more.

---

Context is important. And the context here is that she doesn't trust the life she created, the very people she is enlisting the aid of, to know the truth of the conflict they're fighting in, or the reality of her own origins. That is a very bad look. It shows that even she doesn't think she's justified enough that people won't turn against her. This isn't even theoretical, we know WoLs have learned the truth in the past and subsequently joined the Ascians.

Quote:

---

The situation surrounding Minfilia and "the Word of the Mother" is, admittedly, very shady, but ultimately it was Minfilia's choice to put her faith in, listen to, and become Hydaelyn's mouthpiece.

---

Pictured: Informed consent.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CaP_wu5XEAEOShj.jpg:large

Quote:

---

Midgardsormr made a bargain for refuge, as far as anyone can tell, entirely of his own volition.

---

"Pledge your soul to me, give me your aether, and guard this lake for eternity and your children may live - Or, get lost and die in space", is, frankly, less a bargain and more an impossible ultimatum. I'll also say, it's stated that "As the Ascians serve as instruments of Zodiark's will, so to must others carry out the will of Hydaelyn." There's an equivalence being drawn there.

Quote:

---

One can't fault her for not helping when she lacks the power to do so.

---

She could literally have the power to help if she just asked for it. All of the Warriors of Darkness would gladly have given up their crystals to allow Hydaelyn to intercede. We see with Matoya that crystals of light are just left lying around after she hands them out. I don't even understand how she still exists after 12,000 years if she never takes aether into herself, that should be impossible.

Also, I'll note, the timeline of the First/Hydaelyn weakening here is vague at best. There's no guarantee she was incapable of acting when they were begging her to - We see even in Shadowbringers she's capable of enlisting new sprout WoLs any time they unlock the Echo.

Quote:

---

You're stating all life was immortal pre-Sundering. It was not.

---

Whether they were fully immortal, extremely long-lived, or possessed the abilities we see with the Echo that allow one to transcend death, they did not at all face death with the same regularity modern souls do. To say nothing of the peaceful, advanced, and seemingly post-scarcity nature of their society.

Quote:

---

Again, the sundering of the Star was, to the best of anyone's knowledge, an unintended side-effect of sundering Zodiark in order to fulfill her directive of binding him. The death that cause was unintended, more likely than not.

---

This is deep supposition. Anyder summoned Hydaelyn with the ability to sunder while knowing that Zodiark was serving as the Will of the Star and arbiter of the laws of reality. In fact, they say themselves that one of the primary reasons they had to summon Hydaelyn and oppose him was not only to keep him in check, but because they didn't believe he offered a true, permanent solution, that he couldn't even forestall their doom. Venat openly states that should they choose to go forward with their own solution, they would suffer "the eternal condemnation of their brethren".

That does not sound like someone who did not anticipate the outcome of their actions.

Quote:

---

What has Hydaelyn done that pursues any other or a contrary goal?

---

Zodiark is sealed in the moon. Yet Hydaelyn bound Midgardsormr to Silvertear Lake, to guard it forever. The Anyder state that summoning Hydaelyn was meant to offer a permanent solution to the destruction of the Final Days. Meaning, the binding of Zodiark is not her only objective.

Quote:

---

Unless you're going to call Emet-Selch a liar

---

Of everything Emet speaks of, the motivations behind Hydaelyn's summoning is what he is least qualified to give full and accurate information on.

Quote:

---

Now, before "certain posters" start the "agree to disagree" shtick, I'm fine with that. Ideological differences aren't a bad thing, but I've no interest in these diatribes (I made a special exception just for you! Don't you feel lucky?), and if we're just going to beat around the bush for the umpteenth time there's no point to this. So believe whatever you want; I really don't care.

---

Chill with the passive aggression, damn. I don't know who you're referring to, but take it to them instead.

I think there's a conflation of Hydaelyn's purpose or nature and her personality.

(I realise that there are two view to take on whether her interactions with us thus far are genuine or deceptive, but if I have to acknowledge that every time I talk about her intentions then my post is going to be very stop-start. So please assume that any time I talk about her personality it comes with an if we can take her expressed love for life and humanity at face value attached to it.)

We used to think (or at least the game portrayed her as) a mother-goddess figure. We now know that isn't the case and that she's really a primal, but that does not stop her from being a primal programmed to act with the personality of a mother-goddess.

Her nature as a primal does not automatically overrule her personality of concern for "her children" or her desire to protect them. We have seen other primals with similar benevolence: Ramuh, protector of the forest and the sylphs, concerned that his own presence will destroy what he is called to protect; Alexander, designed to find the best possible future and willing to conclude it's the one that involves taking himself out of the equation.

I think it's quite possible that Hydaelyn would be similarly willing to be brought to an end if the threat of Zodiark is neutralised first. She's also in a very different position in that she doesn't seem to be sapping aether from the land, or she should rightfully be full of it from being submerged in the Lifestream itself and drawing power over thousands of years.

It's a fact that she sundered the star. It's pure conjecture whether she intended to do so or not, and what she actually thinks of having done so - she may deeply regret that it happened.

Debating the ethics of the Sundering feels like a distraction in some ways, because at very least there are two different angles it can be approached from.

There's the theoretical view of how such a proposition should be regarded from the ancients' perspective - that is, at the point where the world was not sundered, debating the ethics of whether doing such a thing to safeguard against a perceived greater threat would be justified. (And it's worth noting that a similar debate could be held regarding the Convocation's decision to summon Zodiark in the first place and "rewrite the laws of the star", but we can't have that debate because we don't understand the exact nature of the threat and what that rewriting would actually entail.)

The thing is, that question of whether it would be ethical to do it is irrelevant. By intent or by accident, the star was sundered and the practical question is that now that it is broken, would it be less harmful to repair it or to let the shards continue to exist? "Repair" involves inflicting a great deal of pain and suffering upon the people of the shards, and doesn't resolve the perceived threat of Zodiark.

If we suppose that Hydalyn's core objective might be something like "protect life as it currently exists and don't let it be sacrificed to bring back the past" then while the star was whole, she acted in a way that she thought would protect it (sealing Zodiark) and perhaps-inadvertently broke it on a greater scale. Now that it's broken, "life as it currently exists" is the fractured life of the shards, and she is compelled to protect that life.

Again, all of this is dependent on where the story goes in future and what Hydaelyn actually has to say for herself at whatever point we confront her with these new questions. She could be malevolent and that could be revealed in future, at which point I will be forced to drop all this theorising and move on to making new theories under that understanding, but for now I don't think the right plot hooks have been placed for such a revelation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

Pictured: Informed consent.

---

I agree that picture is unsettling, but it seems such a weird out-of-place thing. Are they really revealing that Hydaelyn is evilly capturing Minfilia in some promo art while the game itself portrays her as willing and devoted? Why is this not shown within the game itself, leaving us to interpret Hydaelyn as benevolent because we missed this key piece of context hidden away in an artwork... where, exactly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

I agree that picture is unsettling, but it seems such a weird out-of-place thing. Are they really revealing that Hydaelyn is evilly capturing Minfilia in some promo art while the game itself portrays her as willing and devoted? Why is this not shown within the game itself, leaving us to interpret Hydaelyn as benevolent because we missed this key piece of context hidden away in an artwork... where, exactly?

---

It is a known fact that those born in servitude / slavery often were happy with their lot if they were not badly mistreated. Here in Spain, after the Civil War and the dictatorship of 40 years, elders and those who lived through a part of it speak of that they did not even know they were living under a dictatorship unless they traveled to another country, and they they were absolutely baffled at the differences. Why they did not know? That life had been the only thing they knew and thus believed it to be right. Besides, and this happens in many dictatorial regimes, knowledge from outside (books, movies, whatever) is restricted; some people had to have their books for university sent from South America to Spain because they simply were not published here. In fact, we see people in Doma and Ala Mhigo balk at freedom, as Yugiri points out; in their case is more about fear than ignorance, but still, the core fact remains.

What I am trying to say is, even if you do not see Minfilia acting as a slave, it does not change the fact that she is. She is not being whipped or purposefully harmed, but she was whisked away from her people. And knowing Minfilia and her faith in Hydaelyn, telling her she had to surrender her will and everything she was to act as Her Word, she would have done so. Urianger, in fact, uses his plot not just to charge Hydaelyn a bit with the Crystals of Light, but because of that, he could demand Minfilia to be released from being the Word of the Mother. Of course, Minfilia travels to the First and we know what happened there, but the thing is: she did so because of Hydaelyn's command, or because she made the choice then? Ryne reveals in 5.3 that she has never heard Hydaelyn's voice, something Minfilia was known for, and should not the Oracle of Light have a direct connection with Her? Ryne, too, can reverse Light tempering / influence, as we see with the Eulmorans and later containing the WoL/D's Lightwarden transformation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadowMeowth

What I am trying to say is, even if you do not see Minfilia acting as a slave, it does not change the fact that she is. She is not being whipped or purposefully harmed, but she was whisked away from her people. And knowing Minfilia and her faith in Hydaelyn, telling her she had to surrender her will and everything she was to act as Her Word, she would have done so. [...] Of course, Minfilia travels to the First and we know what happened there, but the thing is: she did so because of Hydaelyn's command, or because she made the choice then?

---

The thing is, yes if Hydaelyn if malevolent and Minfilia was deceived into trusting Her, then Minfilia would willingly do this because of her misplaced faith in Hydaelyn.

That in itself is not proof that Hydaelyn is malevolent, because it would play out the same if Hydaelyn is genuine and has only called Minfilia to Her out of dire need.

For a similar circumstance, compare G'raha's response when you question him (in cutscene #1 of Hope's Confluence) if he considered other paths. He says he did, but ultimately while he had the choice to turn away, "it was no choice at all".

It's perhaps hard for us to conceive from our own comfortable viewpoint - certainly for me - to be bold enough to dedicate your life to a cause and be willing to give up everything for the good of others. But that's what these people are willing to do: to put aside their own wants and dreams to act for the greater good. Minfilia goes willingly to Hydaelyn, placing faith in Her call, and later to the First because she alone can save its destruction. If she had the right to refuse that mission, could she willingly do so? I don't believe she would. Without being compelled, by her own morals she personally could not make the choice to not save the First just so she could go back to her friends.

With or without Hydaelyn's influence, the choice to act for the good of others over taking a more comfortable path for herself is, again, no choice at all.

Minfillia's character, even going all the way to 1.0, was that she wanted to make a difference in the world. All her goals worked toward the stability of the realm and world. Like many other people, we, in our world-saving way, are the person she wants to be like the most. Because we're the one actually saving the world. So when Minfillia gets the chance to "save the world" she is going to take that. Weather that is by helping Hydaelyn still be capable of talking to us or going to a totally different world to save it. It is what we would have done if we were asked instead!

And a lot of people in-game operate on that logic. "What would the Warrior of Light do?" is what the vast majority of people we meet in ARR, in HW, in ShB, in StB are asking themselves. And the answer all of them come up with is: The Warrior of Light would give sacrificially of themselves so the world wouldn't be doomed. That's the entire reason the Ironworks crazy plan to time-travel in the doomed timel-line works. They told people they were coming up with a crazy plan to save the Warrior of Light, the person everyone wants to be like, in a different time-line and that reason was good enough for a world to willingly make sure it's own past would never happen.

Which is... heh... If you ever look at the end of Final Fantasy I, sacrificing your own time/world to change time so a new and better one happens instead happens there too.

So if you think people blinding having faith in an ideal makes them a slave to it... than the ideal we represent to people is the biggest slave-driver in the entire game. We have that much influence that a truly mind-boggling amount of people will do whatever they think will live up to that ideal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ObsidianFire

"What would the Warrior of Light do?" is what the vast majority of people we meet in ARR, in HW, in ShB, in StB are asking themselves. And the answer all of them come up with is: The Warrior of Light would give sacrificially of themselves so the world wouldn't be doomed. That's the entire reason the Ironworks crazy plan to time-travel in the doomed timel-line works. They told people they were coming up with a crazy plan to save the Warrior of Light, the person everyone wants to be like, in a different time-line and that reason was good enough for a world to willingly make sure it's own past would never happen.

---

This is, too, what motivated Elidibus, a child, to volunteer as sacrifice for the greater good. Early in 5.3, Alphinaud notes that he believed the surge of heroism amongst the people of the First as Elidibus' ruse, but he admits having been wrong, for it is something that every single individual has always had, and the only thing Elidibus did was giving it a name. Some people, of course, are willing to go to greater lengths for this ideal than others. And then it is when it becomes a complicated thing: heroism giving way to martyrdom. Which is probably why Emet hated the concept of heroism because after a long life such as his, he has not only been direct witness to half his people and Elidibus giving their lives in exchange of the greater good, but he has probably seen it happen again and again in mortal heroes. So much death and tragedy caused by this ideal.

And it turns out that we know Zodiark grew powerful because of the hope of salvation these heroic acts caused. The Exarch calls out to Elidibus twisting this pure ideal of altruism for his machinations, but the Ascians too were victims of that. Zodiark was not even commanding them to do anything, but at least the Unsundered gave up their principles, their wants, their dreams, to save their people as well. The difference is that we see in them what this does to an individual over the course of eons, opposed to the fleeting life of a mortal who maybe will not have enough time to experience that bitterness. But Ardbert does speak of that and he has only had 100 years to mull it over. Zodiark and Hydaelyn's modus operandi, whatever benevolent, malevolent or unwilling or not, ultimately ammounts to taking advantage of the intrinsec wish for helping others to their own devices. Of course none of the Ancients would oppose to giving their life for saving their race. Of course no one would refuse giving up their dreams for the greater good. It is no choice at all. But, again, this whole conflict highly depends on which side are you on. Be in Zodiark side and you will doom the mortal races to extintion. Be in Hydaelyn's side and you will doom the Ancients' race to extintion. The question is, is there not a middle point in this whole conflict? The way I see it, the wisest would be pulling an Azem again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadowMeowth

Be in Zodiark side and you will doom the mortal races to extintion. Be in Hydaelyn's side and you will doom the Ancients' race to extintion. The question is, is there not a middle point in this whole conflict? The way I see it, the wisest would be pulling an Azem again.

---

You do have the option of offering Elidibus a compromise during 5.3's MSQ; should you do so, he simply rebuffs you by stating your willingness to compromise means your ideals are flawed. You can't make a compromise - tread a middle ground - with someone unwilling to do the same.

Similarly, Azem's decision to remain neutral in the conflict, while noble on paper, is a flawed ideal identical to the Sharlayans' own neutrality. "To ignore the plight of those one might conceivably save is not wisdom, it is indolence," as Louisoix said. By remaining neutral in the conflict s/he doomed the world to the Sundering; it's debatable whether or not the world would have been Sundered with or without action on Azem's part, but the point is they did nothing to stop it one way or the other. (This is assuming Azem remained neutral post-summonings; the only thing we know for sure is that they weren't on board with the summonings to begin with, most likely due to their role giving them greater faith in the capabilities of ordinary people. How they reacted once the summons were carried out remains unknown.)

It's nice to believe otherwise, but sometimes you have to take a side. When it comes to that... place all your bets on the one you think is right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

You do have the option of offering Elidibus a compromise during 5.3's MSQ; should you do so, he simply rebuffs you by stating your willingness to compromise means your ideals are flawed. You can't make a compromise - tread a middle ground - with someone unwilling to do the same.

Similarly, Azem's decision to remain neutral in the conflict, while noble on paper, is a flawed ideal identical to the Sharlayans' own neutrality. "To ignore the plight of those one might conceivably save is not wisdom, it is indolence," as Louisoix said. By remaining neutral in the conflict s/he doomed the world to the Sundering; it's debatable whether or not the world would have been Sundered with or without action on Azem's part, but the point is they did nothing to stop it one way or the other. (This is assuming Azem remained neutral post-summonings; the only thing we know for sure is that they weren't on board with the summonings to begin with, most likely due to their role giving them greater faith in the capabilities of ordinary people. How they reacted once the summons were carried out remains unknown.)

It's nice to believe otherwise, but sometimes you have to take a side. When it comes to that... place all your bets on the one you think is right.

---

I expressed myself wrong. When I said "pulling an Azem" I meant "taking a third option", and that could mean staying neutral (or whatever Azem did, it is true we do not truly know that part) or try finding another path that benefits both sides.

However, to be fair with Elidibus, he is a primal. You cannot reason with a primal, they are defined by the will that forms them. Elidibus does not even remember why he fights, but he knows he has a duty, and his very nature compels him to carry it out even if it costs him his life. But in the end we do manage to reach out to him, even if it is just before he is absorbed into the Crystal Tower.

There is this thing, however, speaking of Elidibus and having discussed the topic of the Ascians' tempering, that prickles my curiosity. It is often said that the only sure way to free someone from tempering is through death. Lahabrea's soul was eaten by King Thordan, so I will not take him into account, but though we used white auracite against the other two Unsundered, it was not in the way we did with Igeyorhm and Nabriales. The Crystal Tower absorbs Elidibus' essence but we do not blast it away, and the auracite is used to stay Emet in place and he actually breaks free. They both disperse into ambient aether, and Emet's soul seems to be chilling in the Lifestream because he can answer Azem's crystal call. Does that mean that the Unsundered, while out of the scene, have been untempered through their corporeal death? That could be certainly interesting. Opinions on this?

Quote:

---

The thing is, that question of whether it would be ethical to do it is irrelevant. By intent or by accident, the star was sundered and the practical question is that now that it is broken, would it be less harmful to repair it or to let the shards continue to exist? "Repair" involves inflicting a great deal of pain and suffering upon the people of the shards, and doesn't resolve the perceived threat of Zodiark.

---

I don't think the ethics of the original situation are irrelevant. The reasoning behind the Anyder summoning Hydaelyn in opposition to Zodiark is important - If the beliefs in the necessity of their course were flawed somehow, then the entire chain of events and current circumstances of the world become extremely questionable. After all, we've dealt with countless tribes that have summoned their Primals out of the belief that doing so was necessary for their survival, but we've killed them all regardless because the long-term consequences of those summonings couldn't be borne. If their perception of the threat of Zodiark was simply born out of fear, Hydaelyn's summoning was no different from those we've encountered in the past. And this is especially pertinent, because we know for a fact that back then, when the decision was being made, Azem did not support the summoning of Hydaelyn. You didn't believe it was the right thing to do. So it seems like even back then, the PC's stance on the summoning of Primals was the same that it is now - No good can come of it.

As for the pain and suffering inflicted through reparation, we need to look at the situation and decide whether the ongoing circumstances are better or worse than the costs necessary to revise course. I think if we look at it over time, the sacrifices needed in the moment are far outweighed by the overall suffering that have occurred to now and will occur in the future. That's just my belief based on what we now know, but again it doesn't necessarily mean Hydaelyn is "evil".

Quote:

---

She could be malevolent and that could be revealed in future,

---

I don't believe she's malevolent. I think she's very misguided, and in turn misguiding others. For example, Minfilia. I don't think the art is showing Hydaelyn "evilly capturing" her, but is visually representative of Minfilia being entwined with something like thorned chains. She did as Hydaelyn willed out of faith, but that faith was misplaced and born out of ignorance. Can we really say that if she had known what we do now, she would have chosen the same path, and given up her freedom to act as Hydaelyn's mouthpiece? This is why I said "Pictured: Informed consent". Because in order to truly give consent on something, especially your own freedom, you need to really know what you're doing and why.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ObsidianFire

So if you think people blinding having faith in an ideal makes them a slave to it... than the ideal we represent to people is the biggest slave-driver in the entire game. We have that much influence that a truly mind-boggling amount of people will do whatever they think will live up to that ideal.

---

But in fact, that ideal is not the truth. The closest thing to the ideals of WoL is fighting for salvation without sacrificing others. This was the conclusion of both you and Alphinaud in 3.2 and 3.3, to reject more sacrifices for the greater good, and instead resolve to try to save everyone even if you might fail. I think this is exactly why Azem rejected the summoning of both Zodiark and Hydaelyn, because both of them could only offer sacrifice and death. And in the ancient past you might have failed to find a solution, but that doesn't mean one still can't be found.

One thing I don't get is the idea that Ascians are tempered by Zodiark. Emet-Selch does mention during his reveal that Zodiark and Hydaelyn are primals that "we (Ascians) are tempered by Zodiark and we serve Him, simple as that" but the 5.X patches have revealed to us that the Echo was not a blessing of Hydaelyn or Zodiark but something the Ancients (and by extension the shards of the Ancients) possessed and that Hydaelyn has been sending out a constant signal to those who have it, not gifting it like we previously believed. So if the Echo was something that existed before the primals and that the Echo protects people from tempering, why is it said that the Ascians are tempered by Zodiark and the theory we could be tempered by Hydaelyn?

Are Ascians somehow tempered despite having the Echo? Emet-Selch is more about lies of omission so him straight up lying about being tempered seems out of character for him, but past this reveal Emet-Selch went on more about Amourot and the world that was than Zodiark, treating him more like a means to an end than anything. Even Lahabrea, in the patches leading up to Heavensward, seemed to have been more about himself than Zodiark, in the cutscene after Nabriales' death his relayed from Elidibus to Lahabrea, he states "The earth is fertile, and the seeds well sown. By my will, they shall reap salvation unlike any the world has know" and Elidibus quite pointedly responds "By His will." and Lahabrea just states "...by His will" before slinking off to Ishgard. This kind of talk doesn't sound like someone tempered. As for Elidibus, we now know his devotion to the plan was not from tempering but being a piece of the primal Zodiark Himself.

So are Ascians actually tempered or was the devotion (most) the Unsundered had to restoring their world akin to being tempered in that they could not be swayed from their course? Lesser Ascians like Fandaniel don't seem like they care at all and making a boxing match between what was thought to be the God he's devoted to and the sworn enemy that laid Him low a fun plan to enact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

You do have the option of offering Elidibus a compromise during 5.3's MSQ; should you do so, he simply rebuffs you by stating your willingness to compromise means your ideals are flawed. You can't make a compromise - tread a middle ground - with someone unwilling to do the same.

Similarly, Azem's decision to remain neutral in the conflict, while noble on paper, is a flawed ideal identical to the Sharlayans' own neutrality. "To ignore the plight of those one might conceivably save is not wisdom, it is indolence," as Louisoix said. By remaining neutral in the conflict s/he doomed the world to the Sundering; it's debatable whether or not the world would have been Sundered with or without action on Azem's part, but the point is they did nothing to stop it one way or the other. (This is assuming Azem remained neutral post-summonings; the only thing we know for sure is that they weren't on board with the summonings to begin with, most likely due to their role giving them greater faith in the capabilities of ordinary people. How they reacted once the summons were carried out remains unknown.)

It's nice to believe otherwise, but sometimes you have to take a side. When it comes to that... place all your bets on the one you think is right.

---

I agree, even if this places the player character's backstory in a bad light. Which leads me to believe there is a third, better option than summoning Hydaelyn or Zodiark. What that is, at this juncture, doesn't appear obvious to me.

Furthermore, if we are Azem pursuing the third option, how did we end up being Hydaelyn's chosen? Wouldn't picking us be a mistake if we ever figured out who we really were and learned about what happened in the past?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

But in fact, that ideal is not the truth. The closest thing to the ideals of WoL is fighting for salvation without sacrificing others. This was the conclusion of both you and Alphinaud in 3.2 and 3.3, to reject more sacrifices for the greater good, and instead resolve to try to save everyone even if you might fail.

---

Oh, the WoL doesn't sacrifice other people! No, we sacrifice ourselves! And other people definetly notice!

One of the main reasons people love us and want to be like us is because we are not a hypocrite. We don't tell other people to sacrifice themselves for us. We don't even ask them to. Instead we deny our own wants a lot of the time to try to solve other people's problems by ourselves. And are then shocked when those other people we were helping out also sacrifice themselves for us. We never have asked anyone to save us. Not Minfillia, not Moenbryda, not Harchefaut, not Yasale, not the people of the doomed time-line, etc. But they still did it anyway.

The truth of the matter is, sometimes we are the "other person" whose problems someone else is solving. And denying people their right to chose to sacrifice themselves would make us the biggest hypocrite of all. Everyone needs to be saved sometimes, even us. But we've never forced anyone to save us; everyone who has done that has decided to all on their own. But it's also undeniable that without our example, a lot of people wouldn't have been inspired to give of themselves sacrificially just like we do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hank_Hotspur

So are Ascians actually tempered or was the devotion (most) the Unsundered had to restoring their world akin to being tempered in that they could not be swayed from their course? Lesser Ascians like Fandaniel don't seem like they care at all and making a boxing match between what was thought to be the God he's devoted to and the sworn enemy that laid Him low a fun plan to enact.

---

How types of Tempering works depends a lot on the Primal doing the Tempering. Even Ifrit, who mainly has a kind of Tempering that robs people of any personality, is capable of Tempering people subtly to the point no one knows they are Tempered until that person brings the Amalja'a down on their heads. We see a very broad range of Tempering effects throughout the game. Lakshmi is probably a Primal to consider as she can Temper people while not outright destroying their personalities.

Zodiark just seems to have a very subtle form of Tempering that just seems to "nudge" what the Convoction wants. Everything the Convocation does after they summons Zoidark ultimately results in Zoidark gaining more aether. The "why" of why Zoidark gets aether shifts around a bit, but the solution is always "give Zoidark more aether so he can fix our problem for us". I have no doubt that Emet-Selch and the Unsundered Ascians genuinely loved their world and their people and genuinely missed them. I do think Zoidark played a part in blinding them to other realities around them (like the other races that came after the Ancients being people) so that they would think he was the only way to "solve" their loss. And for Zodiark to solve that loss, he needed aether...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kesey

Furthermore, if we are Azem pursuing the third option, how did we end up being Hydaelyn's chosen? Wouldn't picking us be a mistake if we ever figured out who we really were and learned about what happened in the past?

---

What I think happened is that Azem stopped staying neutral and did pick a side... which wasn't Zoidark's. Azem's entire role centers around going around the world and solving people's problems. Which probably gave Azem a much different perspective on the Last Days. So there was probably a lot more reasons than just "summoning a god is bad" that led Azem to not wanting to summon Zoidark.

Once Zoidark and Hydaelyn are both summoned though... there's no way to put the genie back in the bottle probably. One off them was going to end up as the Will of the Star most likely. So it was probably a question of "between Zoidark and Hydaelyn, which one would be less bad for the world in the long run" and Zoidark had already effectively asked for aether equivalent to half the current population of the world after being summoned... and even after getting all that aether, he had asked for more aether, to the point the Convocation was willing to deliberately raise life up only to sacrifice it later. Meanwhile, Hydalyn just wants Zoidark sealed and for him to leave the world alone. So I think Azem picked the least worst option at the time. Or for all we know... Hydaelyn Sundering Zoidark was the 3rd Option Azem came up with...

Fortunately, I think we'll get a good idea of what Azem really did back then. Emet-Selch made a memorial crystal of his memories of us after the Sundering happened. And our signature Echo ability is seeing into the past of people and objects...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadowMeowth

... Emet's soul seems to be chilling in the Lifestream because he can answer Azem's crystal call. Does that mean that the Unsundered, while out of the scene, have been untempered through their corporeal death? That could be certainly interesting. Opinions on this?

---

If the logic we're given in 2.0 still holds true then yes, return to the Lifestream does undo tempering. (Ascians' corporeal forms can be repeatedly killed to no end due to their ability to cheat death.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kesey

I agree, even if this places the player character's backstory in a bad light. Which leads me to believe there is a third, better option than summoning Hydaelyn or Zodiark. What that is, at this juncture, doesn't appear obvious to me.

Furthermore, if we are Azem pursuing the third option, how did we end up being Hydaelyn's chosen? Wouldn't picking us be a mistake if we ever figured out who we really were and learned about what happened in the past?

---

If we're to take Emet-Selch's account at face value, summoning Zodiark was a grim necessity to stop the Final Days. Summoning Hydaelyn was never a necessity, but a world where life exists as nothing more than livestock to feed a false deity in exchange for "miracles" has so many problems it's unreal. Third options are nice to have or try to make, but due to time constraints or unwillingness to compromise, sometimes there aren't any to be had.

We don't really know what Azem did in response to the summons. Something to keep in mind however is that we are not Azem: we are our own person, even if we have similar tendencies and possess (most of) Azem's soul. Further Azem's defining characteristic was aligning with anyone and everyone to do good; while s/he may not have condoned the summons of Zodiark and Hydaelyn, if their goals aligned there would be no reason not to work with them.

Us being "Hydaelyn's chosen" has less to do with Hydaelyn choosing us, and more to do with our innate goodness catching her attention. Lending us her power could backfire if we learned the truth, but given our goals in-universe have only ever been to protect Eorzea from those who would do it harm, it's a pretty low risk to take. Hydaelyn does not and never has demanded blind faith and obedience in exchange for her favor. In fact it appears that Hydaelyn places blind faith in mortals she thinks will advance her cause, even if that ends up not being the case further down the line (such as Saint Ajora and the Warriors of Darkness during 3.X).

We don't expunge primals, halt Gaius' ambitions, end the Dragonsong War, liberate Doma and Ala Mhigo, or rail against Emet-Selch's plans because Hydaelyn tells us to. We do these things because we have to, because we are compelled - not by Hydaelyn, but by our own conscience.

... that's how I see it, anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ObsidianFire

Zodiark just seems to have a very subtle form of Tempering that just seems to "nudge" what the Convoction wants.

---

And then there's Lahabrea, who goes on about Zodiark being the One True God and Hydaelyn being a False God(dess), even though literally nobody actively worships Hydaelyn as a deity. (We acknowledge her existence and also concede that she has godlike powers, but we don't worship her.)

Not even the Sundered necessarily see Zodiark as a god, as shown by Fandaniel. So I have no idea why Lahabrea got tempered hard enough to believe Zodiark to be the True God, when even Emet-Selch went "yeah, Zodiark's a Primal, he tempered us, next question". And Lahabrea's condescending dismissal of Elidibus also seems weird in light of the revelation that Elidibus is a Primal-made portion of Zodiark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YianKutku

And then there's Lahabrea, who goes on about Zodiark being the One True God and Hydaelyn being a False God(dess), even though literally nobody actively worships Hydaelyn as a deity. (We acknowledge her existence and also concede that she has godlike powers, but we don't worship her.)

---

Worship might not be the right word, but I think those who are aware of Hydaelyn certainly revere her in the same way they do the Twelve. (We don't see anyone actively worship them either, but I'm sure they do.) Things like saying "may you walk in the light of the Crystal" instead of invoking the Twelve or another specific god.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YianKutku

Cut because too many characters.

---

Besides the point that both are false gods, the first one that "earned" the right to be called a god would be Zodiark, being will of the star made manifest and the whole thing, but whatever the point, they are both primals. However, in Lahabrea's defense (and I am not known for advocating in favor of Lahabrea) I speculate that, as the resident most prominent scholar and sage researching phantomology, the brunt of Zodiark's summoning would have fallen to him, and he probably directed the energies, the concept, that formed Zodiark. In any case, the way the Ascians refer to Zodiark as the one true god seems more like a formality than true belief. To be fair, except Elidibus because we know he does not have much of a choice there, even the Unsundered see Zodiark more like a means to an end: Lahabrea for whatever he is scheming and Elidibus has to admonish him, and Emet does not bat an eye when admitting that the only thing he expects from Zodiark is to have his people and his loved ones back. Rejoining the worlds, yes, of course the Unsundered work to that end, but that does not mean they necessarily enjoy the idea; at least Emet does not, because he himself admits he has been searching for "a path of lesser tragedy" for a long time. So the Rejoining is probably more about Zodiark's purpose (and I cannot blame the will of the star for wanting to become whole) seeping into His tempered and driving this compulsion.

As for the sundered Ascians, if Fandaniel is setting a precedent, then they definitely are not chained in service to Zodiark. And it would make sense because they are sundered, which means they ascended to their seats when Zodiark was already bound inside the moon, and He would have a hard time tempering anyone in that state. The only way I see them being tempered is if Elidibus had any hand in their ascension since he is a primal, but the one who had the constellation crystals was Emet, and Elidibus was quite taken aback when we give them to him. Perhaps the sundered Ascians are influenced, but not tempered; therefore, as Saint Ajora did in Hydaelyn's case, they can turn against Zodiark.

Concerning Lahabrea's condescending dismissal of Elidibus, well... Considering that Elidibus was suffering a bad case of fog-of-ages, I can see Lahabrea forgetting that Elidibus is actually a primal. So far, the only one who truly remembers things rather reliably is Emet, and he did because he made great efforts to not forget. And this is obvious because he littered every single nation we know he had a hand on with specific references to that which he did not want to forget, and the only Ascian who remembered the Fourteenth seat was him, and it was because he broke Ancient law and crafted Azem's crystal and held onto it hidden from the others for 12000 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YianKutku

And then there's Lahabrea, who goes on about Zodiark being the One True God and Hydaelyn being a False God(dess), even though literally nobody actively worships Hydaelyn as a deity. (We acknowledge her existence and also concede that she has godlike powers, but we don't worship her.)

Not even the Sundered necessarily see Zodiark as a god, as shown by Fandaniel. So I have no idea why Lahabrea got tempered hard enough to believe Zodiark to be the True God, when even Emet-Selch went "yeah, Zodiark's a Primal, he tempered us, next question". And Lahabrea's condescending dismissal of Elidibus also seems weird in light of the revelation that Elidibus is a Primal-made portion of Zodiark.

---

Lahabrea wasn't exactly right in the head. Didn't Emet say somewhere that Lahabrea body hopping so much broke his mind or something?

Something about Hydelyn

Something that has been a little off with Hydelyn is how has that name become synonymous with the very Star itself. There is 'Mother' Hydelyn the primal and then there is Hydelyn the world, does worshipping the world itself empower Hydelyn the primal? Did she set this up after the Sundering to keep her existence known in some way to provide a source of faith like how Elidibus did with the WoL fable or is it just a herring?

Hydelyn had a power source for aether, the lifestream/Underworld, but faith is equally important to preserve herself, there is no way that Elidibus, Emet-Selch and Lahabrea would've done it, so did Hydelyn split Venat off early on in order to establish a way to garner said faith, or did she early on when she tried gaining champions give out her name as the very Star itself?

I feel that is a lot more mysteries surrounding Hydelyn than Zodiark right now and I sincerely hope we go and talk to her by 6.0.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeanneOrnitier

Lahabrea wasn't exactly right in the head. Didn't Emet say somewhere that Lahabrea body hopping so much broke his mind or something?

---

It reduced his power due to the effort needed to wrest control of bodies from their owners. No mention of it reducing his mental faculties was ever made.