In regards to something involving the main cast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Y'all can post essays about it all you like, it doesn't change the fact that for months when it was the Ancients doing it it was wrong, now that it's Y'shtola it's because we're somehow missing context (read: subjective interpretation) or skipped scenes. Conveniently coming from the same handful of self-admitted Ancient haters. I don't hate Y'shtola and I don't particularly care about her familiars other than the sheer hypocrisy of it, which was the point of the thread.

Committing to things like playing god and creating life is wrong or genocide is wrong but, oh, not if they do it because they had reasons. Just no. There's no conversation to be had about that because now it's just pure bias. You can agree or disagree with something, but at least own that it's based on your personal preferences and isn't objective observation.

---

Are you implying that your opinions are based on objectiveness, not subjective interpretation and bias?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Y'all can post essays about it all you like, it doesn't change the fact that for months when it was the Ancients doing it it was wrong, now that it's Y'shtola it's because we're somehow missing context (read: subjective interpretation) or skipped scenes. Conveniently coming from the same handful of self-admitted Ancient haters. I don't hate Y'shtola and I don't particularly care about her familiars other than the sheer hypocrisy of it, which was the point of the thread.

Committing to things like playing god and creating life is wrong or genocide is wrong but, oh, not if they do it because they had reasons. Just no. There's no conversation to be had about that because now it's just pure bias. You can agree or disagree with something, but at least own that it's based on your personal preferences and isn't objective observation.

---

Yet context DOES matter. Context is HUGE in XIV. To dismiss it is foolish

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tehmon

Are you implying that your opinions are based on objectiveness, not subjective interpretation and bias?

---

Not at all, I have biases just like everyone else. Like I said, it's the hypocrisy that bugs me. I probably wouldn't have given the Y'shtola familiars a second thought if it hadn't been for equivalent or lesser actions being cited as negatives against Ancients. Unfortunately, this seems to be a recurring theme like OP mentioned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Y'all can post essays about it all you like, it doesn't change the fact that for months when it was the Ancients doing it it was wrong, now that it's Y'shtola it's because we're somehow missing context (read: subjective interpretation) or skipped scenes. Conveniently coming from the same handful of self-admitted Ancient haters. I don't hate Y'shtola and I don't particularly care about her familiars other than the sheer hypocrisy of it, which was the point of the thread.

---

Y'shtola wasn't creating life. She also didn't create them just for fun. Nor was she flippant about the results.

There you go, no essay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Y'all can post essays about it all you like, it doesn't change the fact that for months when it was the Ancients doing it it was wrong, now that it's Y'shtola it's because we're somehow missing context (read: subjective interpretation) or skipped scenes. Conveniently coming from the same handful of self-admitted Ancient haters. I don't hate Y'shtola and I don't particularly care about her familiars other than the sheer hypocrisy of it, which was the point of the thread.

Committing to things like playing god and creating life is wrong or genocide is wrong but, oh, not if they do it because they had reasons. Just no. There's no conversation to be had about that because now it's just pure bias. You can agree or disagree with something, but at least own that it's based on your personal preferences and isn't objective observation.

---

the nixies had no impulse or sentience outside of fulfilling yshtolas simple order. ancient creations were meant to live and reproduce after being "perfected". there is a difference.

Not really a difference between the two. Ancients didn't create life, they created familiars (with the intent of helping the environment/planet yes) but it was the planet that gave the familiars life/a soul. If the planet just so happened to give Ysholta's familiar's life at that time, would you still be saying the same thing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Y'all can post essays about it all you like, it doesn't change the fact that for months when it was the Ancients doing it it was wrong, now that it's Y'shtola it's because we're somehow missing context (read: subjective interpretation) or skipped scenes. Conveniently coming from the same handful of self-admitted Ancient haters. I don't hate Y'shtola and I don't particularly care about her familiars other than the sheer hypocrisy of it, which was the point of the thread.

Committing to things like playing god and creating life is wrong or genocide is wrong but, oh, not if they do it because they had reasons. Just no. There's no conversation to be had about that because now it's just pure bias. You can agree or disagree with something, but at least own that it's based on your personal preferences and isn't objective observation.

---

Because there totally wasn’t essays all over the lore forums on the Ancients and their morals. Honestly, all this post seems to be interested in is engaging in an extreme form of whataboutism without actually engaging with the ideas and suggestions that people have posted, are posting, or will in the future post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krithas

Not really a difference between the two. Ancients didn't create life, they created familiars (with the intent of helping the environment/planet yes) but it was the planet that gave the familiars life/a soul. If the planet just so happened to give Ysholta's familiar's life at that time, would you still be saying the same thing?

---

100% would change my tune and say “hey Ysthola the hell you doin?”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krithas

Not really a difference between the two. Ancients didn't create life, they created familiars (with the intent of helping the environment/planet yes) but it was the planet that gave the familiars life/a soul. If the planet just so happened to give Ysholta's familiar's life at that time, would you still be saying the same thing?

---

I'd be pissed off at fate for stepping in at the most ironic time for suddenly giving that familiar the sentience to comprehend the pain it was in at exactly that point. What the hell, existence, why would you give that nixie the gift of a soul at the point where the only thing it could learn from that and take into further lives would be the agony of having its existence rotted from the inside?

And then as a member of an audience experiencing a story I'd recognize that the only reasons that a writer would write such a turn of events would be to either be pointlessly dark, or to put a crime on Y'shtola that reasonably speaking she'd have never once intended or expected.

I actually did find Y'shtola's actions quite questionable, and found it weird that nobody in our presence acknowledge the nixie turning into a voidsent. But I am also going to side-eye the ancients and how they treat their creations.

Also, I actually like the ancients, but I do not buy that they were morally superior to us, that their civilization was a paradise for all, OR that their world should be allowed to exist over ours, or that the sundered are more flawed than the ancients were. Yet that doesn't mean I don't secretly hate to love Emet-Selch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tehmon

I actually did find Y'shtola's actions quite questionable, and found it weird that nobody in our presence acknowledge the nixie turning into a voidsent. But I am also going to side-eye the ancients and how they treat their creations.

---

Sounds like we agree then.

Quote:

---

Also, I actually like the ancients, but I do not buy that they were morally superior to us, that their civilization was a paradise for all, OR that their world should be allowed to exist over ours, or that the sundered are more flawed than the ancients were. Yet that doesn't mean I don't secretly hate to love Emet-Selch.

---

Likewise, I don't believe the unsundered are morally inferior to the sundered or that their world deserved to be destroyed. Personally, I thought part of the point of Elpis was to show that the two aren't dissimilar.