3.5/4.0 Speculation & Discussion (Spoilers)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Balipu

Sure, we know she learned from the artifacts, but we really don't know how she learned. I'm hardly an expert, but interacting with Allagan artifacts might not be easy. She may have had help.

---

Yes, she MIGHT have, but there's no evidence that she did (outside of the amassed records and science teams at her disposal). If you're going to use this to support the idea that the Ascians are involved in Garlean affairs, you need direct evidence, and Nael working with the Ascians has never even been kind of implied.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Balipu

If their suggestions can lead to Ultima Weapon being unleashed on Eorzea it doesn't really matter how much of it was Gaius' idea and how much was Lahabrea. Any Garlean solution with Ascian input will fail, and it will fail because of the Ascian input.

---

But that's...not what the discussion was about? I didn't say anything about who was primarily responsible for Ultima. You were using Gaius' involvement with Lahabrea to suggest that the Ascians were manipulating Garlemald behind the scenes, which in turn was being used to suggest that Garlemald couldn't be blamed for their actions. I disagreed; as Gaius was rogue at the time, it's evidence of nothing other than his own desperation.

We do know that the Ascians are keeping an eye on Garlemald, but certain pieces of dialog actually imply that their approach is entirely hands-off - an offhand, unconcerned remark about them "playing their part." They clearly fit into the greater Ascian scheme, but if the Ascians were directly involved their affairs and governance, don't you think we'd have at least gotten a hint of it? And then, of course, there's the very direct claim made by Yoshida that the Ascians are going to play a much smaller role in 4.0 - which, incidentally, is a story that will bring Garlemald back to the forefront. If that isn't evidence against Ascian manipulation in Garlemald, I don't know what is.

I like arguing with you. You make it challenging.

While it is likely that "Nael" was really doing everything on her own, we did see Lahabrea observing the Battle of Cartenau with the typical Ascian "All according to keikaku" attitude. It was a calamity after all. It's what they do. They had to be involved somehow.

Gaius was just brought up as a precedent for Ascian involvement in Garlean affairs. The part about Ultima you quothed was in response of your point after that, about how the Ascians merely give suggestions instead of directly controlling people. And it really doesn't matter cause the end result is still something that benefits the Ascians. Like I said before, any Garlean solution to the Primal threat with Ascian input will fail, even if it is done with the best of intentions.

I do not think we would have heared if the Ascians were involved with Garlean governance considering we never even saw Emperor Solus, and Varis was on screen for five minutes. 4.0 will be the first time we will see how they govern areas.

Yes, we wil see less of the Ascians, thankfully, but we can't be sure how much less that actually is. In 3.0 We battled two Ascian overlords and Elidibus sent the Warriors of Darkness to fight us. Less than this can be still quite a lot.

Ultimately it's Zodiark and the Ascians that are the 'big bads' in this setting. Even then, arguably, Hydaelyn still isn't telling us everything and we know that we can't eliminate the Ascians completely as balance between 'Light' and 'Dark' is essential for the world's survival. The Garleans may be acting purely on their own terms, as well intentioned extremists. They see the 'bigger picture' and don't have the convenient plot device that is the Warrior of Light to solve all their problems.

Imagine for a moment that Eorzea was forced to endure all its current problems without the Warrior of Light. What would have happened? How would those problems be solved instead, assuming they weren't completely catastrophic/hopeless? We know that Primals can be killed by regular people but it's at a great cost as evidenced by the lengthy 'Company of Heroes' quest chain in Eastern La Noscea. Chances are to survive Eorzea would have resorted to increasingly brutal means to attempt to survive and endure - perhaps even going on the offensive to completely wipe out the Beast Tribes to ensure that they don't have to deal with Primals/Eikons being summoned over and over and over again, Tempering and slaughtering many of their people in the process.

It's one of the nuances that will become more obvious when we see more of the lands where the Warrior of Light isn't available to be a 'quick convenient fix' to whatever new threat emerges.

Lands like Gyr Abania?

Yes we need darkness as well as light. Problem is Darkness is somehow more harmful than light, so the correct forumla would be something like: 65% Light - 35% Darkness.

Tomorrow we will get the patch with the Zurvan fight and the first half of the main scenario. We might not learn a lot more about the Garleans just yet, but Yoshi-P did promise us more info about the Void and all the shards. As well as a cliffhanger.

Any last minute guesses everyone? Place your bets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Imagine for a moment that Eorzea was forced to endure all its current problems without the Warrior of Light. What would have happened?

---

Ascians have a field day as they go on teaching everyone who's getting a little desperate the secret behind primal summoning, Ultima magicks or other nice gimmicks of dark sorcery without opposition. Mass tempering ensues - first all of Ishgard by King Thordan and the heretics by Lady Shiva, later every city state and beast tribe with their respective primals, until it's only primals and their thralls fighting other primals and their thralls. Hydaelyn, meanwhile, bleeds and Elidibus has a very stern talk with one of his colleagues as they might lose the source world at this rate.
-> New protagonists are the ascians trying to fix the mess they have created.

Fun!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zojha

Ascians have a field day as they go on teaching everyone who's getting a little desperate the secret behind primal summoning, Ultima magicks or other nice gimmicks of dark sorcery without opposition. Mass tempering ensues - first all of Ishgard by King Thordan and the heretics by Lady Shiva, later every city state and beast tribe with their respective primals, until it's only primals and their thralls fighting other primals and their thralls. Hydaelyn, meanwhile, bleeds and Elidibus has a very stern talk with one of his colleagues as they might lose the source world at this rate.
-> New protagonists are the ascians trying to fix the mess they have created.

Fun!

---

You know, that wouldn't be all that bad to play. But I wonder. Would they really do that? Simply let the primals loose I mean? The previous calamities were more creative than that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

The Garleans may be acting purely on their own terms, as well intentioned extremists. They see the 'bigger picture' and don't have the convenient plot device that is the Warrior of Light to solve all their problems.

Imagine for a moment that Eorzea was forced to endure all its current problems without the Warrior of Light. What would have happened?

It's one of the nuances that will become more obvious when we see more of the lands where the Warrior of Light isn't available to be a 'quick convenient fix' to whatever new threat emerges.

---

This is partially speculated on by Alphinaud and Allisaie, and we can probably fill in the blanks.

Eorzean relations with the beast tribes would have gotten worse, leading to an all out war that would have had mixed results at best, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Gridania would have the best chance against the Ixal and the isolationist sylphs, Uldah would hold their own with great losses against the Amaljaa, and Limsa, even if it have an answer to titan, would likely have no feasible answer against Leviathan. Weakened as they are, they would have taken Gaius' offer of surrender, who would in turn be betrayed by Lahabrea's hijacking of the Ultima Weapon once he nabs the Beastmen's Primals. Simply put, Gaius' plans of making Eorzea part of the Empire would be in ruins once Lahabrea starts joyriding with the Ultima Weapon.

Notice the key here for Lahabrea winning is Gaius' want for the Ultima Weapon, if Gaius had the resources and wherewithal to conventionally wipe out the Beastmen, Lahabrea's plans get a lot dicier.

The primal problem becomes unsolvable, because even with the Ultima Weapon, no one is in place to stymie its players beneath it.

I would be really disappointed if Unukalhai and Cait Sith will pull the "noble sacrifice" card in order to prevent ___ from ending in the wrong hands.

Hopefully I am wrong, but I can see Cait Sith take the Nullstone + Void Ark to unknown location so that such power won't used again. In the case of Unukalhai, he probably will have to return to his own world ... or sacrifice himself to save WoL after being so inspired the WoL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Imagine for a moment that Eorzea was forced to endure all its current problems without the Warrior of Light. What would have happened? How would those problems be solved instead, assuming they weren't completely catastrophic/hopeless?

---

What you're doing here is presuming guilt based on a possibility. Could Eorzea have endured the frequent primal attacks of the past six years without us? Perhaps. Perhaps not. But they endured +/- 1,500 years of relatively peaceful coexistence with each other and the beast tribes before the Battle of Silvertear Skies, so I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and say they would not go on a campaign of genocide. Might that have resulted in the destruction of Eorzean civilization? Perhaps... but dealing in possibilities is unwise, and presuming guilt based on possibilities doubly so.

Now, imagine for a moment that primals were not a thing. The world was not going to end because people could summon living mako reactors. Look at it from a purely political perspective. Would Garlemald still be on its never-ending campaign of conquest? Yes it would - we know this because prior to their invasion of Othard the Garleans were barely even aware of the existence of primals, let alone what they are and how detrimental they are to the world. They had already conquered all Ilsabard before getting there, and were unaware of primals before beginning their campaign. Their attempts to stop primal summonings are as much an effort to ease their path of conquest as they are an effort to preserve Hydaelyn (if only so they can rule over it).

You don't get to play the "Well-Intentioned Extremist" card when even without the ambiguous necessity of those extreme actions you'd still be doing them. Would they have declared genocide on the beast tribes? Perhaps not, but everything else - the war machine, the unending conquest, and the brutalization of conquered peoples - would still hold.

I get to play the 'Well Intentioned Extremist' card because that's exactly what Garlemald is depicted as being. Just like they're depicted as having their own motivations and reasoning for doing what they're doing as well as justifications for their actions from their own perspective.

Feel free to create your own thread for the circular arguments regarding Garlemald's morality though. I'd appreciate it immensely if the bulk of this particular thread wasn't led astray by tiresome repetitions of stuff that has already been discussed over and over in previous threads between the same select few individuals. It's clear at this point that we're not going to budge so I'm not entirely sure what this accomplishes beyond 'getting the last word in'.

I'm sure there's plenty of other people - both lurkers and regulars - who are equally as weary of having to scrolls past the same points being brought up again and again. Especially when there's a bunch of other issues to be discussed instead.

That's not to suggest that this is a demand, mind you. More of a polite request.