Death unto Dawn page up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turethir

I'd say the stakes and tension are already high enough what with Fandaniel threatening the end of the world. A character death needs to make sense and add to the narrative if it's to achieve anything.

---

Nobody dying at the end of the world absolutely would murder the stakes though. A bunch of unknown NPCs maybe dying across the world doesn't have any meaning to it.

I mean the end of 1.0 had weight to it because everyone actually saw the world get majorly changed (which they can't exactly do now), and Louisoix died. Imagine if he'd lived through his confrontation with Bahamut, it would be terrible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

There really haven't been many, if any, main character deaths since Heavensward, we're kind of overdue for it lest stakes and tension be seriously undermined if it hasn't already.

---

Not a single Scion death would bring any meaningful amount of emotion to the end of this story that couldn't be brought by having moments with them on screen. There is no such thing as "being overdue" for a character death. The writers are skilled and have delivered an incredible narrative that included impactful deaths where they meant the most and were necessary to move character growth along.

Character deaths aren't some sort of requirement for a good story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KaerisKlyne

Not a single Scion death would bring any meaningful amount of emotion to the end of this story that couldn't be brought by having moments with them on screen. There is no such thing as "being overdue" for a character death. The writers are skilled and have delivered an incredible narrative that included impactful deaths where they meant the most and were necessary to move character growth along.

---

Except one of the main themes of the story is loss and learning to let go. It's disingenuous to make that a major factor of the narrative only to have everyone close to the main character survive everything all the time no matter the odds or how bad the situation is.
Would Thancred's arc in ShB work if Minfilia was still alive inside Ryne and could just speak through her whenever she wanted? Would anyone really care a fraction as much about Haurchefant if he was still just sitting in Camp Dragonhead making cameos during holiday events? You shouldn't just kill characters left right and center, but when it's narratively appropriate characters absolutely SHOULD die.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

Would anyone really care a fraction as much about Haurchefant if he was still just sitting in Camp Dragonhead making cameos during holiday events?

---

I cared about Haurchefant a great deal and that's why his death had a huge impact on me. On the other hand I did not have enough time to get attached to Moenbryda so her death did nothing to me.

I hope we come out of the Finale without a death. I think killing of characters is always a cheap way for emotions. "Fake death too"
Its much harder to get some emotion out of you audience without killing of Characters. So I hope they show us their best writing and give us the emotional Finale we deserve without killing of someone.

The finale won't be much of a finale if nobody of note dies, especially if it's meant to be a recreation of the Final Days. Obviously things aren't likely to be quite as bad as how it went the first time around otherwise there wouldn't be much left to work with.

Yet it does become stale when the drama and build up amounts to very little. We've two completely unapologetic villains this time around in the form of Zenos and Fandaniel. If they don't end up killing anyone of note then I'd find that to be rather disappointing.

I strongly disagree with the idea that killing characters is 'cheap'. It isn't, but a lot of people get overly attached to even the most minor of characters these days and fiercely oppose anything bad happening to them as a result.

I've said this many times around these parts before, but I don't care for death for the sake of death either. Yet there's a troubling trend in the modern day where even a minor character being killed off is seen as 'needlessly gritty', with false comparisons drawn to the likes of Game of Thrones which have a much higher death toll.

It stands to reason that if too much death is a bad thing, then too little death is as well. Personally I find the antagonists in this game far more tolerable and sympathetic because they have actual stakes to deal with and don't just have all their problems solved through increasingly contrived plot devices. I mostly roll my eyes at most of the protagonists because it's a safe bet that the vast majority of them will be completely safe and never actually have anything bad happen to them by comparison. Which, as a result, makes all their whining about how hard done by they supposedly are come across as quite tone deaf.

There's also the simple fact that tastes differ and that the game is, by it's very nature as an MMO, designed to appeal to a broad variety of different tastes. With that in mind, for the finale to be satisfying then it'd need to be designed to appeal to different groups of players. Including those of us who like to see a bit more depth and consequence to the narratives we invest in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

Except one of the main themes of the story is loss and learning to let go. It's disingenuous to make that a major factor of the narrative only to have everyone close to the main character survive everything all the time no matter the odds or how bad the situation is.
Would Thancred's arc in ShB work if Minfilia was still alive inside Ryne and could just speak through her whenever she wanted? Would anyone really care a fraction as much about Haurchefant if he was still just sitting in Camp Dragonhead making cameos during holiday events? You shouldn't just kill characters left right and center, but when it's narratively appropriate characters absolutely SHOULD die.

---

Agreed. We're up against some powerful opponents. Have been in SHB too but it only resulted in a very few, minor character deaths that had next to zero impact for me.

Whatever reasons some might offer for never killing off a character, death can force change in the setting, and it's interesting to write around and is a good reminder of the fact that there is genuine danger in the setting. If, at the point where the entire world is engulfed in an apocalypse, no one of note dies, it simply removes any element of danger or risk. No matter how "skilled" the writers are.

I also find this notion of "deserving" a finale a bit peculiar but then I find the entire concept of payoff to stem from a sense of entitlement. ;) Doesn't mean you can't dislike an ending - I might well not like what they have planned, but not having any deaths just to protect certain people's feelings is not something that I consider should be an imperative for them when they write.

You've had SB and SHB now with no major character deaths outside of antagonists, so I don't see the issue with a couple in 6.0. It is an apocalypse, make it feel like one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erendis

I cared about Haurchefant a great deal and that's why his death had a huge impact on me. On the other hand I did not have enough time to get attached to Moenbryda so her death did nothing to me.

---

All the more reason why simply killing off a couple of minor characters as part of a quota isn't really going to hit the mark. For example, even if they offed Lyse, I doubt many people would care since she hasn't got much of a presence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

Except one of the main themes of the story is loss and learning to let go. It's disingenuous to make that a major factor of the narrative only to have everyone close to the main character survive everything all the time no matter the odds or how bad the situation is.
Would Thancred's arc in ShB work if Minfilia was still alive inside Ryne and could just speak through her whenever she wanted? Would anyone really care a fraction as much about Haurchefant if he was still just sitting in Camp Dragonhead making cameos during holiday events? You shouldn't just kill characters left right and center, but when it's narratively appropriate characters absolutely SHOULD die.

---

Agreed. There were multiple times characters in ShB should’ve died but didnt. I’m tired of them pandering to the community playing around killing off a character because people are sensitive. It’s the final expansion of this story arc there needs to be some actual consequences for the Protags. ShB was supposed to be the darkest, grittiest expansion where we faced against the strongest foes yet, but for some reason there were absolutely no consequences for the “heroes.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turethir

I'd say the stakes and tension are already high enough what with Fandaniel threatening the end of the world. A character death needs to make sense and add to the narrative if it's to achieve anything.

---

How is that tension high though, if nothing comes out from it? If we know that everything’s going to be okay and everyone is going to survive, what’s the point then?Theres no tension just because he says oh i’m gonna end the world. But we face no consequences from it which, considering ishgard housing is coming in 6.1, already kind of proves nothing significant is gonna happen lol.