Feedback: Feeling disappointed by 6.55's narrative, and thus unsure about Dawntrail

1.0>Dawntrash.

Also, we didn't end the ancients. The ascians did. They messed up the 13th. That happened long before we joined the fight and prevented them from realizing their goal anyways, so beyond that they were just killing off worlds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

If you want to look up a definition, then look up the one for humanoid. They aren't human. They're also not real. Your invoking of the Convention is inappropriate and childish.

---

After reviewing the term "humanoid", I would have to conclude all races in FFXIV would class as humanoids in your view with the closest races to actual humans being Hyur (on the basis of appearance, but not real humans due to being able to use magic) and Garlean (on the basis of lack of magic and only one minor difference in appearance). As such, would you view rejoining events as a form of genocide committed by the Ascians, as they too have committed acts that would classify as genocide? In addition, inside of the UC8 timeline, the Garlean Empire committed the act of genocide via releasing Black Rose and inadvertently caused the 8th Umbral Calamity? I would assume you would have no issue saying these acts are genocidal acts, but to do so would mean you are being selective in where you are using the definition and are thus biased towards a specific party, which is extremely hypocritical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

Your invoking of the Convention is inappropriate and childish.

---

see

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

Also, divorcing it from the legal definition isn't something I've ever heard of-- there's not some general version of it. The general terms, and in fact even the French word, are rooted in the legal definition.

---

The term genocide was brought into the game during Stormblood where Alphinaud uses it when addressing what Varis was willing to do. Because you have just admitted there is no way to divorce the word from the legal definition, which is rooted inside of the convention, you would have to take that up with the writers themselves for introducing it into the game, not me for simply using the language the game provides to me to use. Are the writers childish for using the term genocide? I don't particularly think so, but it would appear you would have to believe this is the case as they were the ones who used it in the context of the game first. This would also be true with the French localization of the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

And I do not have to follow the French translation. I already explained that localizations are not the law, and historically have been proven to be inaccurate. That doesn't mean you can't follow them in general, it does mean they are occasionally inaccurate. Given no other translation uses the term, this may be one such case.

---

You are entitled to being allowed to say one version is more right than the other, but it doesn't make your argument correct. In terms of the writing team, all versions are to be treated as equals and, as such, none of them can be discounted because you wish to win an argument. The English version tends to have the most inaccuracies when it comes to how the story is told in Japanese, as I have compared the Japanese version of the game to the English and French versions of the game. I personally do not know anyone who speaks German to ensure I am understanding that version correctly, thus I tend to not use that version when I argue. With that being said, there are translations that you can find of the French, German, and Japanese versions that use an accurate translation and do not have any localization performed on them. I highly recommend looking at them if you want to seriously consider arguing lore points as all versions are equally viable in an argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

Also, we didn't end the ancients. The ascians did. They messed up the 13th. That happened long before we joined the fight and prevented them from realizing their goal anyways, so beyond that they were just killing off worlds.

---

yeah i wonder what their plan was for it. was it to get 13/14 and say "good enough" or eventually get to what Golbez the 2nd's plan was and just brute forcing a calamity by expat'ing all of the 13th and killing them on the source

The "new life" you all are talking about did not yet exist and the "planet recovering" is irrelevant whether it happened or not.

Also "it probably was hundreds of thousands or years" lol-- ok. That certainly wasn't how fast the Final Days happened once Zodiark's shield went down.

I did say in another thread and it seems relevant here that in the beginning, during ARR, it is hinted at a few times that we and others with the echo are tempered by Hydaelyn. We would then be subject to the same biases as the Ascians were with Zodiark. It also appears that Zodiark doesn't consume Aether just by existing, but in order to perform the star altering tasks the ancients wanted to it to then they would have to sacrifice more lives to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeebPolice

Very good, citizen. Also what you spoke of earlier in this thread reminded me of something I learned in the Weeaboo Police Academy. That "war is the continuation of policy with other means" and we see many examples of this in Eorzea's history.

---

This sounds a lot like international relations theory, and yes I do see this as being present in FFXIV as well. Nation A wants something from Nation B, and Nation A attempts to achieve that through diplomatic solutions such as negotiation or trade which ultimately ends in failure. So what do they do next? They take it by force via conflict/war or perhaps the threat of force (coercion). Yeah, international relations and geopolitics is interesting stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ath192

btw, I have no idea why I spent the last 15 pages defending your point lmao. But I'm done. LOL. People will believe whatever they want to. And this applies to us as well.

---

Lol, true. I just thought it was a neat little topic to discuss because we can see the obvious parallels in FFXIV's universe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LilimoLimomo

G'raha Tia's bridge speech

---

It was indeed very infantilizing. It had a meta-narrative air about it in English that read like, "Well, if you have no interest in this, then go play other games!" In addition to having him quote Hydaelyn's hear, feel, think mantra to boot.

Was it the same in other languages, I wonder? I know I'm bit late on the weigh in for OP, but it's a great OP that lays out my concerns wholly as well.

If this is the face of the main villain, I don't want to be the good guys

https://media.tenor.com/TYXFOBMebN4A...enat-ffxiv.gif

Post her in the playboy bunny outfit or don't post her at all. SMH Bloblawah. SMH!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boblawblah

If this is the face of the main villain, I don't want to be the good guys

https://media.tenor.com/TYXFOBMebN4A...enat-ffxiv.gif

---

Yeah, the writers are banking on that. Under the argument she's evil, there is all the murders, mutilations and manipulations and under the argument she's good, well, look how pretty she is. And she likes us enough to sentence billions of people to painful deaths to create us. What a lovely lady.

And that right there is what haunts me. Because to get onboard with what she did, you have to buy into good genocides.

What does any of this have to do with the OP?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lady_Silvermoon

Because to get onboard with what she did, you have to buy into good genocides.

---

https://media1.tenor.com/m/16YeXU_-q...t-its-fine.gif

I am 100% on board with that. Why you might ask? Because it's not real and I love Venat. Sure, sure, try to make people feel bad because 'GENOCIDE!!!!' WOOOOO scary!!! Na, we don't care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boblawblah

Because it's not real and I love Venat.

---

But you won't even post the sauce :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyrerus

But you won't even post the sauce :(

---

I'm sorry :( I don't have the original source, I just found that and saved it as a bookmark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boblawblah

I am 100% on board with that. Why you might ask? Because it's not real and I love Venat. Sure, sure, try to make people feel bad because 'GENOCIDE!!!!' WOOOOO scary!!! Na, we don't care.

---

Pretty much this.

The most confusing part for me about this is ... the alternative to a Venat's genocide is a Zodiak's genocide which would be something far worse. I also often asked can they provide a scenario where a solution can be found where no one have to be scarified, no tyrant, no genocide happen? Despite asking that for years, that question always get ignored, much less getting a satisfactory answer. I sometime wonder if they're just missing the point of fiction, or simply being contrarian for its own shake, or whether they're not familiar with settings that are not always unicorn and rainbow.

Take the Warhammer 40k for example:

- Space Marine is Cool.
- Inquisitor are badarse.
- The God Emperor is awesome.

But any of them would make even Hitler look like a saint. After all, xenophobic, racist, slavery are actually among the least offensive attributes you can list for humanity in that universe, dictatorship is often considered to be virtues, not tyranny. For example, what can be worse than being a slave? How about being turn into a servitor (mindless mechanical zombie) so you can be a slave for eternity? And if someone enjoy this work, it's not because they're celebrated all these things, but because we enjoy the fiction, that's it.

Some of the argument here kinda me once a while I would come across someone who try to argue the Warhammer's humanity is trashed by the modern 20th-21th century moral standard and should just let itself be wiped out. Like ... they're technically not wrong, but I do wonder how can someone miss the point of fiction that hard.

Why dont we just say it. The ancients were on a plane ride to Hell, and Venant decided it was faster to just crash the plane..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swordsman

This sounds a lot like international relations theory, and yes I do see this as being present in FFXIV as well. Nation A wants something from Nation B, and Nation A attempts to achieve that through diplomatic solutions such as negotiation or trade which ultimately ends in failure. So what do they do next? They take it by force via conflict/war or perhaps the threat of force (coercion). Yeah, international relations and geopolitics is interesting stuff.

---

Precisely, citizen. Now you are starting to understand our position and the penultimate goal of the Weeaboo Police Department. The Lalafells are animals. They don't respect diplomacy or the spoken word, and we cannot treat with them. They only know power and force which is where the Weeaboo Police Department comes in. That is why we fight, citizen.





May your blades never dull.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raven2014

The most confusing part for me about this is ... the alternative to a Venat's genocide is a Zodiak's genocide which would be something far worse. I also often asked can they provide a scenario where a solution can be found where no one have to be scarified, no tyrant, no genocide happen? Despite asking that for years, that question always get ignored, much less getting a satisfactory answer.

---

Really? There were actually a few answers to that question in the bigger thread on this subject. That being said it is 800+ pages so I can understand not seeing them. The only clarifier I would ask on this is what would you consider an answer and more importantly what would you consider a satisfactory answer? For me the only scenario that really matters is "Can Venat just tell the leaders about the events of Elpis and about Meteion?" I'm not overly concerned with the result of that though.

I really just think the Ancients got shafted in a large part by Venat and I just want them to have had a chance with proper warning. They made a 12,000+ year temporary solution in Zodiark whom still worked in pieces. They did that with no prior knowledge so if Venat just told them what was going on then they could probably do better with more time to prepare. If they don't though and they all die that's still fine/satisfactory to me because they had the chance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SieyaM

I did say in another thread and it seems relevant here that in the beginning, during ARR, it is hinted at a few times that we and others with the echo are tempered by Hydaelyn. We would then be subject to the same biases as the Ascians were with Zodiark. It also appears that Zodiark doesn't consume Aether just by existing, but in order to perform the star altering tasks the ancients wanted to it to then they would have to sacrifice more lives to it.

---

it was confirmed that hyda doesnt temper anyone, although they kinda forget about the echo much at all in favor of the blessing, which was a spell venat could always use anyways. Kinda strange considering krille and iceheart

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xirean

If they don't though and they all die that's still fine/satisfactory to me because they had the chance.

---

The problem with that whether you are fine (or not fine) with it won't be relevant anyway. Because FF14 itself wouldn't exist. Had Venat tried to alter the time line and the Ancient still failed, Etheryl would simply become another jewel on Metion's crow and Eozia would never come into existence. Our story would end even before it begins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raven2014

The problem with that whether you are fine (or not fine) with it won't be relevant anyway. Because FF14 itself wouldn't exist. Had Venat tried to alter the time line and the Ancient still failed, Etheryl would simply become another jewel on Metion's crow and Eozia would never come into existence. Our story would end even before it begins.

---

The problem is, you don't actually know that. That is completely theoretical. The timeline G'raha came from may potentially still exist because he does. So regardless of what happens to the world, the WoL that travels to Elpis will very likely still exist when they go back through the portal. And even if it is simply a mono timeline fiction, so what? It's ok for G'raha to potentially delete a timeline to save a world and its people, but it's not ok for the WoL to do the same? I've long held the belief that if they game lets me shake hands with a memory it better not expect me to not try and save that memory.

"To ignore the plight of those one might conceivably save is not wisdom—it is indolence." - Louisoix

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4clubbedace

it was confirmed that hyda doesnt temper anyone, although they kinda forget about the echo much at all in favor of the blessing, which was a spell venat could always use anyways. Kinda strange considering krille and iceheart

---

Honestly the Blessing of Light is extremely close to tempering, from my understanding. Ifrit even suggest that we are tempered when he tries to temper us in the beginning of ARR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xirean

The problem is, you don't actually know that. That is completely theoretical. The timeline G'raha came from may potentially still exist because he does. So regardless of what happens to the world, the WoL that travels to Elpis will very likely still exist when they go back through the portal. And even if it is simply a mono timeline fiction, so what? It's ok for G'raha to potentially delete a timeline to save a world and its people, but it's not ok for the WoL to do the same? I've long held the belief that if they game lets me shake hands with a memory it better not expect me to not try and save that memory.

"To ignore the plight of those one might conceivably save is not wisdom—it is indolence." - Louisoix




Honestly the Blessing of Light is extremely close to tempering, from my understanding. Ifrit even suggest that we are tempered when he tries to temper us in the beginning of ARR.

---

Grahas(or the exarchs) original time line isn't deleted. It continues on to its end. But he can't save it by doing what he did. That was the point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xirean

The problem is, you don't actually know that. That is completely theoretical. The timeline G'raha came from may potentially still exist because he does. So regardless of what happens to the world, the WoL that travels to Elpis will very likely still exist when they go back through the portal. And even if it is simply a mono timeline fiction, so what? It's ok for G'raha to potentially delete a timeline to save a world and its people, but it's not ok for the WoL to do the same? I've long held the belief that if they game lets me shake hands with a memory it better not expect me to not try and save that memory.

"To ignore the plight of those one might conceivably save is not wisdom—it is indolence." - Louisoix

---

Except we did try ... and failed. We were supposed NOT to try to do anything to alter the timeline and simply was on a fact finding mission. But when pressed by Venat after she discovered our "secret", the WoL pondered and (probably against better judgement) decided to reveal the future anyway. But that's exactly lead to the whole Elpis shenanigan. By the end of the Elpis arc, I think both our WoL and Venat had deduced any further attempt to alter the future is futile. Whether it's due to writing inconsistency, or simply due to the travel method, our version of time travel is not the same of the one employed by G'raha. G'raha managed to split the time line, while our followed the law of casual paradox:

- if we try to stop calamity, than it is that very effort that will cause the calamity.
- if we don't try to stop the calamity, than it will happen exactly because of our inaction.

For example, it's possible that Fedaniel would retain his sanity if he only hear the Meteion's report. He may even agree with Emer-Setch judgement and shut her down. But because of the "knowledge" about the future that our WoL disclose to him that pushed him over the edge and broke him.

In any case, "not trying" isn't something our WoL should be stand trial for ... like I said we did try ... and fail. And even if we didn't fail (or Venat tried again after we left), the only possibility is we gonna split the timeline again - making a different time line where the Ancient survive. But the Ancient in our time line gonna get screwed no matter what, that's an unchangeable fact regardless of you using the ShB or EW time travel version.

Quote:

---

Honestly the Blessing of Light is extremely close to tempering, from my understanding. Ifrit even suggest that we are tempered when he tries to temper us in the beginning of ARR.

---

But Ifrit's word is not gospel though, he only stated what the feel like the most correct assumption. In Primal logic, the only reason he can't temp a person is when that person is already tempered by another primal, which is what he think the Blessing is. The Elpis segment left no ambiguity what it is: her signature "traveler ward" spell, something she casts way before she became a primal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raven2014

Except we did try ... and failed. We were supposed NOT to try to do anything to alter the timeline and simply was on a fact finding mission. But when pressed by Venat after she discovered our "secret", the WoL pondered and (probably against better judgement) decided to reveal the future anyway. But that's exactly lead to the whole Elpis shenanigan. By the end of the Elpis arc, I think both our WoL and Venat had deduced any further attempt to alter the future is futile. Whether it's due to writing inconsistency, or simply due to the travel method, our version of time travel is not the same of the one employed by G'raha. G'raha managed to split the time line, while our followed the law of casual paradox:

- if we try to stop calamity, than it is that very effort that will cause the calamity.
- if we don't try to stop the calamity, than it will happen exactly because of our inaction.

For example, it's possible that Fedaniel would retain his sanity if he only hear the Meteion's report. He may even agree with Emer-Setch judgement and shut her down. But because of the "knowledge" about the future that our WoL disclose to him that pushed him over the edge and broke him.

In any case, "not trying" isn't something our WoL should be stand trial for ... like I said we did try ... and fail. And even if we didn't fail (or Venat tried again after we left), the only possibility is we gonna split the timeline again - making a different time line where the Ancient survive. But the Ancient in our time line gonna get screwed no matter what, that's an unchangeable fact regardless of you using the ShB or EW time travel version.

---

That's a great set of theories that I wish the game took the time to explore. Honestly if the story never had the WoL become solid and instead stay as a tiny time ghost through all of Elpis and it still played out the same way I would have been fine with that as well. Instead they become solid and say nothing until it's forced out of them which is probably the worst way to do it imo. Either way we have noway to know for sure if the WoL's actions directly led to the events that played out or not. The timeline we play through is a loop confirmed by Hydaelyn dialogue during the meeting in the Etherial Sea and further confirmed by Emet's lines in UT. We don't get to see if it's actually the casual paradox as you describe, but I would have really enjoyed if the game let us explore that and find out with absolute certainty.


I do hope though that you at least would consider this an answer to your initial question though. You didn't say what would or wouldn't be, would you mind letting me know?

Quote:

---

But Ifrit's word is not gospel though, he only stated what the feel like the most correct assumption. In Primal logic, the only reason he can't temp a person is when that person is already tempered by another primal, which is what he think the Blessing is. The Elpis segment left no ambiguity what it is: her signature "traveler ward" spell, something she casts way before she became a primal.

---

I never said his word is gospel. Merely that it clearly reflects similar to what he is used to. You're free to disagree with that, however the events of EW make a lot more sense if Hydaelyn actually does temper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raven2014

Except we did try ... and failed. We were supposed NOT to try to do anything to alter the timeline and simply was on a fact finding mission. But when pressed by Venat after she discovered our "secret", the WoL pondered and (probably against better judgement) decided to reveal the future anyway. But that's exactly lead to the whole Elpis shenanigan. By the end of the Elpis arc, I think both our WoL and Venat had deduced any further attempt to alter the future is futile. Whether it's due to writing inconsistency, or simply due to the travel method, our version of time travel is not the same of the one employed by G'raha. G'raha managed to split the time line, while our followed the law of casual paradox.

---

*causal (as in one thing causing another to happen), not casual. But anyway.

My long-running theory on this is that there is no contradiction between how time travel works in Shadowbringers versus Endwalker -- or rather, at the time I developed it, Shadowbringers versus Alexander, and then Endwalker seemed to follow the same rules I had figured for the earlier stories.

In short, as I figure it, time "prefers" to keep to a single timeline and will naturally incorporate any actions from a time traveller into the one and only version of events at the place-and-time they have journeyed to, so much as that is possible.

The only way to potentially overcome this is (1) for the time traveller to have come from the future with detailed knowledge of events at their destination, and (2) then cause changes which make the world incompatible with the future that they came from, at which point the timeline splits in two to prevent a "grandfather paradox" situation. The original timeline continues to exist because the time traveller's existence relies on it, while the second timeline carries the changed version of events.

G'raha's preventing of the Flood of Light is the only example we have which meets both of those criteria. He came prepared with very specific knowledge of what would happen -- "the Flood of Light will be triggered by the Garleans using Black Rose at the battle of Ghimlyt Dark, which causes the Light-soaked First to rejoin", probably with an exact date attached -- and he took actions that defused the situation in the First so that exact scenario could not happen.

All the time travel instances which resulted in stable time loops do not fill those two requirements:

• When we travelled to "three years ago" in Alexander, we had no opportunity to act and change things, or else our actions inadvertently made things happen as they always had; additionally, we were reliant on Mide's incomplete understanding of the situation. That doesn't rule out the possibility that we could have changed things if we took different actions.

• During the same incident, the Illuminati have the detailed knowledge they could hypothetically use to thwart the chain of events, but they are acting on the belief that they need to fulfil the events described by the book.

• When Alexander sends us back to "save ourselves" from its earlier attack, we of course succeed in doing so and thus help to create the same event we previously experienced.

• And finally, in Elpis, we have no knowledge at all about what happened to cause the Final Days, so there is nothing we can act on to prevent it. We know "something" happened, but you can't prevent "something"; if you try to prevent one something then it will just turn out that a different something was the actual cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xirean

Honestly if the story never had the WoL become solid and instead stay as a tiny time ghost through all of Elpis and it still played out the same way I would have been fine with that as well. Instead they become solid and say nothing until it's forced out of them which is probably the worst way to do it imo.

---

On the contrary, given that our purpose was to observe the situation as it was, and gain an understanding of what happened in the past, it should have been really important to observe things and not give the people of the past any future knowledge at all.

I take it as a necessity that we needed to be able to interact with people and the world for that part of the story, because delivering that much exposition through only observations would be difficult.

So, our choices are to tell everything and risk them altering their course because of that future knowledge, or to keep silent on the subject and observe until we see the unknown and undefined clue we are looking for that tells us why the Final Days happened.

It could have been handled tactfully, once Venat deduced we were from the future, by explaining to them that "I've come from a point in the future where we are facing a grave threat to the star, and we understand that at this point in the past you faced a similar threat and somehow overcame it, so I want to observe things here and see how it begins."

If it was handled like this, I could see the ancients being of the opinion that it seems fair to not risk altering events and causing a paradox, and so they will not ask you for information about what happens in their future. They could even proceed on the logic that it's fine for you to hang around and interact with people while you're here because your presence will just be part of the timeline as it always was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

My long-running theory on this is that there is no contradiction between how time travel works in Shadowbringers versus Endwalker -- or rather, at the time I developed it, Shadowbringers versus Alexander, and then Endwalker seemed to follow the same rules I had figured for the earlier stories.

---

That's why I said either or. Both version have been know to used before in other work, it's just usually a setting will pick and stick with one version instead of multiple. But hey it's fiction, there is no rule saying you have to stick with one. G'ahara didn't change the past, he "splits" it. In his original time line, the flood of light still happened, the WoL is still death, and Eorza is still messed up. It's just due to the effort of coming together and finish the tower project, people find new source of hope and inspiration to move forward. In both case, neither of us managed to change our past.

That's why I also said even if people argue that the WoL and Venat should have tried to done more to save the ancient, at best we can split another timeline where the Ancient survive, but that will do nothing for the Ancient of our time line. In this universe it seems the law of causal paradox is pretty much absolute, it's just the writers also allow the concept of multi-verse so we can explore different possibility, but so far no one have manage to circumvent the actual time paradox in the same universe.


Another of my theory (based on some other works) for the difference is that G'ahara time travel was more complete. He was sent back in a "literal" time machine as a whole package and able to insert himself as a proper entity in the new timeline, and thus granted permission to change it. Think about as if the time mechanism has an authentication process that will only allow entity it recognize as the "original" to impact change upon it, and G'ahara passed that authentication. Whether in our case, Elidiburg only hastily send a "mirage" of the WoL to the past meant to only be able to observe, that's how we arrived at Elpis. Only thanks to Emer-Setch that our mirage was solidified and thus give us some mean of interaction, but that's probably not enough to pass the time mechanism's authentication process. Thus we were never recognized as a proper original entity in the time line and do no possess the ability to dictate its course.

Well, at least that's how I see some other works where they allow both change and no change in the same universe depending on the method.

6
Point
Five
Five

For the timey-wimey crowd I offer the following: Everything is cool because the Fighting Monks of the Order of Wen ensured it would be so, as they do in nearly every work of fiction that ends more-or-less happily for some number of survivors after a time-travel event.

To the OPs first comments:

1. This is standard operating procedure for the Warrior of Light, who knows less about politics and more about the Power of Making Friends

2. As I previously posted, coercion does not play a part in the storyline. Accepting the request and the aftermath of such acceptance will be the storyline.

3. Knowing nothing of the petition or the petitioner, stating that this is a secret being "kept" from the Warrior of Light is a bit like saying "My boyfriend doesn't tell me everything about what he does when we are apart."

4. The individuals involved don't know much, if anything, about Tural. Both G'raha Tia and the Warrior of Light spend time reading some of the books available in the Noumenon. That's what people do when they don't know anything about a place they've never visited before. We are extremely spoiled in these times, because we have access to one of the Wonders of the Modern World: the Internet. How would players respond to having to read every last tome available about Tural before they can begin the next expansion? The four volumes are enough to provide flavor to possible storylines without overwhelming players with the sociopolitical/meteorological/geographical/religious/statistical information available for, say, South America.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xirean

The problem is, you don't actually know that. That is completely theoretical. The timeline G'raha came from may potentially still exist because he does. So regardless of what happens to the world, the WoL that travels to Elpis will very likely still exist when they go back through the portal. And even if it is simply a mono timeline fiction, so what? It's ok for G'raha to potentially delete a timeline to save a world and its people, but it's not ok for the WoL to do the same? I've long held the belief that if they game lets me shake hands with a memory it better not expect me to not try and save that memory.

"To ignore the plight of those one might conceivably save is not wisdom—it is indolence." - Louisoix




Honestly the Blessing of Light is extremely close to tempering, from my understanding. Ifrit even suggest that we are tempered when he tries to temper us in the beginning of ARR.

---

sure but the blessing is something she could do as venant on elpis. its a rather generic (for the time) protection spell

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4clubbedace

it was confirmed that hyda doesnt temper anyone, although they kinda forget about the echo much at all in favor of the blessing, which was a spell venat could always use anyways. Kinda strange considering krille and iceheart

---

They say that, but then there are multiple instances during ARR where primals say that we are either already claimed by another or tainted by the light which seems to indicate that we are tempered in some way. I think this is evidence of a plot that was greatly altered that would have made Hydaelyn either more of a morally ambiguous figure or just made her an opposing force to Zodiark with both of them being equals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raven2014

That's why I said either or. Both version have been know to used before in other work, it's just usually a setting will pick and stick with one version instead of multiple. But hey it's fiction, there is no rule saying you have to stick with one.

---

What I'm trying to say is that it is possible to have a single set of rules on how time travel works, and yet have some circumstances where a stable time loop forms and other times where it is possible for the traveller to alter events.

To be clear, I fully understand that there is no changing or erasing of the original timeline. G'raha did not save the timeline he came from. But he still managed to change events in the past, which caused a second branch of time to split off from the path that leads to where he came from, so that there can still be a timeline where the original version of events happened.


Edit to add: Basically, splitting the timeline is the last resort to prevent a causal paradox when a time traveller's actions stop their own past from happening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raven2014

That's why I said either or. Both version have been know to used before in other work, it's just usually a setting will pick and stick with one version instead of multiple. But hey it's fiction, there is no rule saying you have to stick with one. G'ahara didn't change the past, he "splits" it. In his original time line, the flood of light still happened, the WoL is still death, and Eorza is still messed up. It's just due to the effort of coming together and finish the tower project, people find new source of hope and inspiration to move forward. In both case, neither of us managed to change our past.

That's why I also said even if people argue that the WoL and Venat should have tried to done more to save the ancient, at best we can split another timeline where the Ancient survive, but that will do nothing for the Ancient of our time line. In this universe it seems the law of causal paradox is pretty much absolute, it's just the writers also allow the concept of multi-verse so we can explore different possibility, but so far no one have manage to circumvent the actual time paradox in the same universe.


Another of my theory (based on some other works) for the difference is that G'ahara time travel was more complete. He was sent back in a "literal" time machine as a whole package and able to insert himself as a proper entity in the new timeline, and thus granted permission to change it. Think about as if the time mechanism has an authentication process that will only allow entity it recognize as the "original" to impact change upon it, and G'ahara passed that authentication. Whether in our case, Elidiburg only hastily send a "mirage" of the WoL to the past meant to only be able to observe, that's how we arrived at Elpis. Only thanks to Emer-Setch that our mirage was solidified and thus give us some mean of interaction, but that's probably not enough to pass the time mechanism's authentication process. Thus we were never recognized as a proper original entity in the time line and do no possess the ability to dictate its course.

---

G'raha did not strictly time travel-- he cross Rift traveled to a point in time. I don't think it's so much permission as much as it is that all time in XIV is already written, and his traversal is a part of what was always meant to happen in that timeline. This is a general thing for all time in FFXIV. The "true timeline" is just whatever Yoshi P wants.

And the main reason I say this, is because SHB features an Echo where the Echo is used to see an immutable future. Plus, Elidibus alludes to this in EW. Although choices, divergences, etc can happen-- nothing is going to forestall the fate that is bound to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPZ2

For the timey-wimey crowd I offer the following: Everything is cool because the Fighting Monks of the Order of Wen ensured it would be so, as they do in nearly every work of fiction that ends more-or-less happily for some number of survivors after a time-travel event.

To the OPs first comments:

1. This is standard operating procedure for the Warrior of Light, who knows less about politics and more about the Power of Making Friends

2. As I previously posted, coercion does not play a part in the storyline. Accepting the request and the aftermath of such acceptance will be the storyline.

3. Knowing nothing of the petition or the petitioner, stating that this is a secret being "kept" from the Warrior of Light is a bit like saying "My boyfriend doesn't tell me everything about what he does when we are apart."

4. The individuals involved don't know much, if anything, about Tural. Both G'raha Tia and the Warrior of Light spend time reading some of the books available in the Noumenon. That's what people do when they don't know anything about a place they've never visited before. We are extremely spoiled in these times, because we have access to one of the Wonders of the Modern World: the Internet. How would players respond to having to read every last tome available about Tural before they can begin the next expansion? The four volumes are enough to provide flavor to possible storylines without overwhelming players with the sociopolitical/meteorological/geographical/religious/statistical information available for, say, South America.

---

We aren't talking about what our partner does when we are away, a partner that I am assuming you would know pretty well or at least much more so than we know Wuk or Tural and have established trust with. We also are not talking about visiting a foreign land we know nothing about, we are talking about supporting someone for rule of a nation we know nothing about, and nothing about the person we are supporting to have what I can only assume is complete dictatorial rule over this nation since there has been no mention of any other governing bodies. I mean how irresponsible is it for us to even entertain the idea of supporting a candidate when we don't even know the structure of government they will be ruling, will they in fact have complete control over every facet of life for their subjects or is there some kind of representative body to keep power from being absolute?

No. G'raha straight up time travelled. To suggest he rift traveled would suggest that his destination was still in existence which it wasn't. That was kinda the point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xirean

No. G'raha straight up time travelled. To suggest he rift traveled would suggest that his destination was still in existence which it wasn't. That was kinda the point.

---

Who is suggesting that he rift-travelled instead of time-travelling?

In any case, it was both. Backwards in time to "before the calamity"; sideways through the rift (which separates the shards within a single timeline) to reach the First.

Then forwards with the normal flow of time, initially along the same timeline he originally arrived from, but attempting and eventually succeeding in forging a new path that diverges from the original.

i personally skipped all the 6.55 story, i tried to read it like i normally do but i don't know if the story is bad or whether the stakes aren't there or whether i feel that there is no more story to tell after ew or maybe i'm negatively biased with the expansion in general but i honestly couldn't be bothered reading all that wafflefest of yapping. my controversial opinion about the story and the game in general is that they shouldn't have gona to another expac after endwalker but make a new game

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

Who is suggesting that he rift-travelled instead of time-travelling?

In any case, it was both. Backwards in time to "before the calamity"; sideways through the rift (which separates the shards within a single timeline) to reach the First.

Then forwards with the normal flow of time, initially along the same timeline he originally arrived from, but attempting and eventually succeeding in forging a new path that diverges from the original.

---

Yes, I thought my post indicated that it's both. It's not just that he time traveled, but rift traveled to a point in time (which necessitates time travel as well), which helps to resolve the contradiction that is occurring with his stopping of his own future.

Like, why exactly do all of his actions split causality in this way? There are other instances in the game where this cannot happen, at least not in the universe we are in with our Source and all its reflections.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

Who is suggesting that he rift-travelled instead of time-travelling?

In any case, it was both. Backwards in time to "before the calamity"; sideways through the rift (which separates the shards within a single timeline) to reach the First.

Then forwards with the normal flow of time, initially along the same timeline he originally arrived from, but attempting and eventually succeeding in forging a new path that diverges from the original.

---

My post didn't include the quote for some reason. It was Turtle though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swordsman

Yeah, you're right. We didn't oppress our enemies, we just killed them. Lmao.

---

what you guys are saying is similar to someone killing the nazis and then we call them oppressors because they killed the genocidal maniacs xD ironically enough irl america did take their place and became the global oppressors but still you can't call them oppressors for killing pure evil mofos that wanted to do nothing but evil. furthermore the wol never used their power other than to defeat the bad guys of the game, they didn't turn into modern day america. you guys are way off with the oppressor thing but you are right that this obviously doesn't feel like an adventure because we are extremely overpowered, that's a pretty bad direction to take the game but there really isn't another way to go, the game should have ended after ew tbh, with ff17 taking it's place and a new adventure starting from scratch.