The Dark Divinity 3.0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Februs

It would seem that the Allagans just used the word Eikons, and that that spawn is using the same term to refer to Allagan related Primals that we have yet to meet.

---

That's the thing...were he meaning to say that it's a different group of beings that are primals and just go by a different name because of their location of origin, he wouldn't be treating them as separate beings. When he says "the term 'eikon' and the beings to which it refers" he's at that point appearing to treat them like they are something different, rather than simply something with a different name. In fact, it seems to suggest, according to the little brat, that the term eikon belongs exclusively to those godlike beings the Allagans encountered...

Which comes back around to the idea posited earlier that eikons and primals are subtypes in a more general class of being, but are not the same thing (the way ahriman and succubi are both voidsent, but you wouldn't consider them to be the same).

Unless he's actually being pedantic, and the comment was supposed to be a "just so you know that I know the original meaning and origin of the word" style grandstanding, which would mean that your conclusion would be pretty much spot on and the little white-robed punk is just being a little pain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Berethos

That's the thing...were he meaning to say that it's a different group of beings that are primals and just go by a different name because of their location of origin, he wouldn't be treating them as separate beings. When he says "the term 'eikon' and the beings to which it refers" he's at that point appearing to treat them like they are something different, rather than simply something with a different name. In fact, it seems to suggest, according to the little brat, that the term eikon belongs exclusively to those godlike beings the Allagans encountered...

---

Actually, treating them as separate beings is exactly what he, and we, would do. Consider in our world's terms.

European settlers originally called this continent "The Americas," but we don't all share the same moniker. "America" encompasses North America and South America, and within those are distinct countries that would probably be insulted to be simply lumped into the same moniker as one another (Ie: Canadians and Americans would never consider each other to be the "same," despite both, technically, being on the American continent). When we travel to foreign countries, the people we meet do not simply call us all "American," or even just "human." They identify us from our country of origin and the name we gave our people in our own language (with varied degrees of pronunciation butchery). They treat us as separate beings.

Normally, I would consider this to be the same in the case of Primals vs. Eikons. There is only one little detail that makes me question it at all.

In the notes, they explicitly state that the Allagans did not have the word "Primal," but instead used the word "Toshin" (God of fighting) which they later relate to another term that seems to link Odin, in particular, to the Warring Triad in some way that we are not yet aware of. As of yet (at least not to my knowledge), we have yet to see the word "Toshin" actually be used in any in game dialogue at all; however, the notes seem to imply that it would be the word used in place of "Primal." Therefore, if the Allagans ran into Titan, they would refer to him as a "Toshin," instead of "Primal."

Here's the catch: The dev's also explicitly stated that the word "Eikon" referred to "Powerful Summons." Given that both the terms "Toshin" and "Primal" refer to "God-like" beings that have been summoned, it is pretty clear that the term simply refers to powerful "Primals" or "Toshins." Which means that Primals and Eikons are the same thing. They're not fundamentally different in any way at all. The only difference (that the dev's have currently made us aware of) is their level of strength.

Therefore:

1. Primal = Toshin

2. Elder Primal = Eikon.


They're the same. He only specifies them as different because of their country of origin, the term used in their resident language, the fact that we have not met any of these Primals yet, and, as you said, that little spawn is a pedantic prick who likes to rub his superior intellect in our faces.

Very interesting theory. The Allagan Warrior that could've imprisoned Odin could have been the Phlegethon (the final boss of Crystal Tower: Labyrinth of the Ancients) before he was experimented upon. NOAH Reports detail this: "Imperial annals paint him as a murderous villain, but the writings of the commonfolk reveal Phlegethon's status as a hero of the people."

The CT dates back a few thousands years, we know this because the Allagan Empire was destroyed thousands of years prior, before the order of Magi (those responsible for the Void Ark). So even though he was a part of the Empire before turning against Xande's corrupt rule before being experimented on he could've 'stopped' Odin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matthew0320

Very interesting theory. The Allagan Warrior that could've imprisoned Odin could have been the Phlegethon (the final boss of Crystal Tower: Labyrinth of the Ancients) before he was experimented upon. NOAH Reports detail this: "Imperial annals paint him as a murderous villain, but the writings of the commonfolk reveal Phlegethon's status as a hero of the people."

The CT dates back a few thousands years, we know this because the Allagan Empire was destroyed thousands of years prior, before the order of Magi (those responsible for the Void Ark). So even though he was a part of the Empire before turning against Xande's corrupt rule before being experimented on he could've 'stopped' Odin.

---

It's been stated that the Summoner Wiyu was the one to defeat and seal Odin. The original Summoner relic quest covers the event in a little detail.

This thread has perplexed me though. It was seemingly created post 3.0 yet is debating things we've known for quite some time. I don't get why there is a debate here about if eikon = primal when the very text that sparked the discussion is very clear that they're NOT the same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alberel

It's been stated that the Summoner Wiyu was the one to defeat and seal Odin. The original Summoner relic quest covers the event in a little detail.

This thread has perplexed me though. It was seemingly created post 3.0 yet is debating things we've known for quite some time. I don't get why there is a debate here about if eikon = primal when the very text that sparked the discussion is very clear that they're NOT the same thing.

---

Because like all things in game it came from an NPC and NPCs can either be wrong or only half right. Primals and Eikons share a lot of properties so the question is what actually makes them different and are Eikons completely different to primals or are they just a special type of primal?

Not to get too philosophical, but there are shades of different when it comes to what things get distinct names. There is a differentiation between what the English client calls Primals (banshin) and what the English client calls Eikons (tonshin), but are we talking Rock vs. Truck (not even close) or Truck vs. SUV (not all that different)?

To explain my theory on the matter, I'd like to use language as a parallel. English changes bit by bit, day by day, year by year. How far back do you go to start noticing nuances? How long until certain turns of phrase change? Until certain words appear or disappear? Letters? Until sightless becomes ſightleſs?

Now, stop taking hops. Take a skip!

Quote:

---

And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes,
to ferne halwes, kowthe in sondry londes

---

Aaand a jump!

Quote:

---

HWÆT, WE GAR-DEna in geardagum,
þeodcyninga þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon!

---

We give distinct names to the languages in these examples... but they're all English.

If you teach seven cycles of the eras worth of people the basic art of summoning, I would imagine that a juxtaposition of something summoned today versus something summoned five thousand years ago would yield some differences. I think the Primals and Eikons are quite different ... just Game of Thrones to Beowulf different ... not Harry Potter to the freakin' Mahabarata different. Hells, just going from 1562 to 1572(+5) you go from Ifrit to King Thordan.

You put Ifrit and Odin in a room together, sure, they're different. Put Ifrit and Odin in a room with Atomos and a Paissa? Ehhh...

That's my 2 gil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alberel

I don't get why there is a debate here about if eikon = primal when the very text that sparked the discussion is very clear that they're NOT the same thing.

---

There's still room for interpretation in the original text though, so I wouldn't describe it as very clear. The lore Q&A regarding the word usage is also a catalyst for the debate, as it seems to contradict the game text a little and casts eikon and primal as the same thing.

wait... has being not already being cleared that primals and eikons are the very same thing?

The allagans called eikons to the primals that were really powerfull but were still primals ( being that consume aether and need sustain from a group of supporters ).
The garleans use this word with misunderstood and called eikon to all primals?

Why we are still debating this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frederick22

wait... has being not already being cleared that primals and eikons are the very same thing?

The allagans called eikons to the primals that were really powerfull but were still primals ( being that consume aether and need sustain from a group of supporters ).
The garleans use this word with misunderstood and called eikon to all primals?

Why we are still debating this?

---

Because Primals need worship to maintain their physical form while True Eikons seems to be able to sustain their form without followers. Thus implying an as yet unknown diffrence.

Personally I think The True Eikons like the Triad are the actual Old Gods that Allag battled and that Bahamut was the first True Primal that being a false God based on thought/memory.

Whoa! I haven't seen this thread in a while. Kinda makes me wonder when this questline will be continued. It has been a while ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Belhi

Because like all things in game it came from an NPC and NPCs can either be wrong or only half right. Primals and Eikons share a lot of properties so the question is what actually makes them different and are Eikons completely different to primals or are they just a special type of primal?

---

This.

Also, at the time, there was an untrustworthy and unfamiliar in-game character saying one thing and game developers in the Q&A saying another, and neither of them were completely clear on the matter. It caused a lot of polarization in the thread.