What's the point with that quite lackluster story in Endwalker?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyborne

Here's my dumb "theory": the Twelve are just toy puppet-constructs made by Hydaelyn based off the memories of the 12 who became her magical skinsuit in order to teach the cavemen sundered how to human. They were placed back into their toybox soon after, but something went wrong and they are awake, I guess. There will probably be nothing about the Convocation's early attempts to work with humanity, as Emet said in 5.0. The 'epilogue of the Hydaelyn and Hydaelyn and Hydaelyn and also guest starring Zodiark from Devil May Cry I guess saga' part has me pessismistic, though I'm sure I will be wrong and I will consume my shortpants.

Anyway, while Nald'Thal's design looks super cool and I love how the god of crafting's halo is made of nails, I'm not a fan of the idea of just running through a gauntlet of the Eorzean pantheon that has been in the background of the lore for a decade and casually just slaughtering them one-by-one before heading back home for burgers and coffee.

---

I'm still clinging to my headcanon that they're an approximation of the Convocation surviving in mortal memory, until it gets proven wrong. :p I had thought that the way the 1UE is described could potentially fit the Convocation trying to measure man, and it'd fit as well if they were gradually "ascended" into their roles to mirror the gradual emergence of the gods, but not sure if that's more "wow I didn't know people noticed all that..."

Nald'thal's statues at least looked like they resembled Hades's transformed form and the deity shared some aspects with him, and Azeyma is reminiscent of Venat seeing as she used fans as a DPS, so we'll see if anything comes of it. But I could see your theory panning out as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

Another friend and I were just discussing this yesterday, but she brought up what I thought was a really insightful point: the writers' perspective probably identified, correctly, that there would be a disconnect between the players and their worldview, and the Ancients' worldview. However, the assumption would be that the players' instinct would be to defend their world in the face of this gap and this discomfort, rather than confront the discomfort, consider it, and come to the conclusion: hey, you know what? The Ancients make sense. Their way is better. I'd rather live in this world than my own. So basically, we were, uh, less xenophobic than they anticipated?

---

This is actually a pretty interesting take. But, unfortunately, it seems that the writers were mostly correct.

"Okay sure, our history may have done those X people dirty, but doing justice for them would hurt us, soooo....sucks to be them but I got mine." is definitely the default audience reaction. Far more people are praising Endwalker's story and accepting its morality at face value, even if they loved and felt bad for the Ancients, than those with incendiary hot takes like those in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

The "we went wrong" decision for me wasn't refusing to make the Ancients Very Very Bad, but refusing to adjust their conception of Hydaelyn As Good as would fit the story in a more organic way as it played out.

---

Again, I am so sick to death of that cliche that I'm admittedly biased enough to be glad they didn't use it. I mean, yeah, Hydaelyn is still pretty heinous when you analyze the story, but I'm ironically glad that wasn't the theme.

EDITING for below:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

Was it meant to be a Chrono series reference, though? Dare I hope we may take on Lavos and/or Schala after all.

---

Please don't give me false hope like that.

I'm a Chrono Trigger fan that has been waiting 27 years for a proper sequel. (No, not that one. I said a proper sequel.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

I'm still clinging to my headcanon that they're an approximation of the Convocation surviving in mortal memory, until it gets proven wrong. :p I had thought that the way the 1UE is described could potentially fit the Convocation trying to measure man, and it'd fit as well if they were gradually "ascended" into their roles to mirror the gradual emergence of the gods, but not sure if that's more "wow I didn't know people noticed all that..."

Nald'thal's statues at least looked like they resembled Hades's transformed form and the deity shared some aspects with him, and Azeyma is reminiscent of Venat seeing as she used fans as a DPS, so we'll see if anything comes of it. But I could see your theory panning out as well.

---

Azeyma has been my character's deity since her first day of life but if Azeyma turns out to be some venerated version of Venat, then it's off to the Fantasia store I go. Immediately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

I'm still clinging to my headcanon that they're an approximation of the Convocation surviving in mortal memory, until it gets proven wrong. :p I had thought that the way the 1UE is described could potentially fit the Convocation trying to measure man, and it'd fit as well if they were gradually "ascended" into their roles to mirror the gradual emergence of the gods, but not sure if that's more "wow I didn't know people noticed all that..."

---

We still have time to throw in a callback to "Venat is a heretic!" from FFXII! Don't give up! Hold onto hope! Ohhh, hope, finding hope!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

In the end, I was just disappointed that you couldn't tell Venat, "No. What you're saying sounds like a terrible idea. I don't care if Fandaniel played a crucial role in forestalling the Final Days on my timeline. In this timeline, you have a chance to do something about it. Tell the damn Convocation.

"As a friend of mine once said, 'This tragedy, greater than even the Seventh Umbral Calamity, must be undone. If history must be unwritten, let it be unwritten.'"

---

Sorry to drone on and on, but my brain also pinged when reading this part of your post, but apparently could only handle processing one topic at a time.

Ahahaha, that quote. Between that one and the one someone posted early about Alphinaud protesting the Rejoining because it would erase "their culture, their history", the googly eyes are real. Was it meant to be a Chrono series reference, though? Dare I hope we may take on Lavos and/or Schala after all?

The part where Venat kicks you out is so weird, though. After giving you a fliimsy reason about why you shouldn't immeditely run to Emet-Selch and tell him exactly what just happened, she gives you this long speech after getting you on board about how, just like you, she'll try hard and hey, who knows what will happen (where, reading between the lines carefully, you can tell she's already made up her mind to let Hermes's test play out) and also whoa look I bet your time travel juice is running out you better leave now! Right now.

It goes without saying at this point that of course the intent wasn't to have anything malicious about Venat basically saying "Yeah, uh, I'll try hard too. Just like you! Anyway leave. NOW." But in context of everything else, again, in the text as it exists now, uh, hm. Hm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

If, after the nuanced tragedy of Shadowbringers, it was retconned into "actually yes, they were terrible people and this wasn't a horrific competition of resources between two deserving groups where only one can win, we were truly righteous and better", I still would have been angry. Like, it's probably overwrought, but especially in this day and age, Shadowbringers's approach was important to me. The "we went wrong" decision for me wasn't refusing to make the Ancients Very Very Bad, but refusing to adjust their conception of Hydaelyn As Good as would fit the story in a more organic way as it played out. So they very doggedly are going to hammer that square peg into the round hole, and you will like it, dammit!

---

Exactly this. I'm resistant to the idea that they had to be dragged down or exposed to be some dystopia, because it's a common trope in a lot of fantasy games with (higher) beings, and it's not an approach I favour.

Quote:

---

So basically, we were, uh, less xenophobic than they anticipated?

---

Well, for me it's less to do with anything relating to xenophobia and more that I can conceptualise that optimal social structures for species with entirely different innate traits to ours in some ways (longer lifespans, very potent innate magical abilities etc.) will differ to what works for us. Also, at the end of the day, it's a fantasy game, so the point to me is escapism rather than just earth 2.0.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawPaw

Azeyma has been my character's deity since her first day of life but if Azeyma turns out to be some venerated version of Venat, then it's off to the Fantasia store I go. Immediately.

---

I already made the switch to Nald'thal. :p I think I only ever picked Azeyma because I played a sun cat the first time round...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

This is actually a pretty interesting take. But, unfortunately, it seems that the writers were mostly correct.

"Okay sure, our history may have done those X people dirty, but doing justice for them would hurt us, soooo....sucks to be them but I got mine." is definitely the default audience reaction. Far more people are praising Endwalker's story and accepting its morality at face value, even if they loved and felt bad for the Ancients, than those with incendiary hot takes like those in this thread.

---

I think people can simultaneously be vulnerable to (speaking of SCORCHING HOT TAKES) emotion-fueled apologism propaganda, the basic desire to want to enjoy the story and just enjoy the ride, alongside an instinctual "hey, these Ancients seem like good people and their society is neat." Most people were happily accepting of Venat and EW's take on her, yes, but most people also liked the Ancients and thought they were "good people," as Yoshida acknowledged himself. I think for a lot of people, it either doesn't occur to them, or they flat out don't think it's worth the trouble, to cross those streams in their minds.

EDIT WARS:

Quote:

---

Again, I am so sick to death of that cliche that I'm admittedly biased enough to be glad they didn't use it. I mean, yeah, Hydaelyn is still pretty heinous when you analyze the story, but I'm ironically glad that wasn't the theme.

---

I get that, but personally, I was way too psyched about the way Shadowbringers seemed to reject an equally tired cliche (oh no, the advanced Ancient society was doomed and fell to their own hubris and brought on their own destruction!) in favor of humanization that I would take that one, over destroying Shadowbringers, in a heartbeat. In my ideal world, Hydaelyn at least wouldn't be mustache-twirling evil, just a deeply ruthless figure approximately equal to Emet-Selch - if we can't directly oppose her, I think there are artistic ways to handle a "lack of catharsis" in that regard, if it's at least acknowledged and explored.

Quote:

---

I'm a Chrono Trigger fan that has been waiting 27 years for a proper sequel. (No, not that one. I said a proper sequel.)

---

Oh, god, I feel your pain, hard. I think "that one" had some interesting and even promising concepts behind its premise, but in execution, I... oh boy. Well. Maybe a talk for another topic, someday!

It's worth bearing in mind that there's a lot of people who weren't too bothered about the third batch of sacrifices but thought that she was right in her assessment that her people wouldn't change, plus given the time loop, think there's little she could've done otherwise, so it's less about them seeing the ancients as somehow bad, as it is that they think her actions were necessary to avoid the Plenty. I strongly disagree on that point, because she never shared the truth of the situation with her people, which I think given their love for the star would condition a change in stance, but putting that aside, I believe that's why one can both roll with the story as was written while also view the ancients as undeserving victims of necessity. I am glad though that they were moved to address the issue and concede that the audience reception to the ancients was different to what they (or more specifically, Yoshi) had envisioned it might be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

It's worth bearing in mind that there's a lot of people who weren't too bothered about the third batch of sacrifices but thought that she was right in her assessment that her people wouldn't change, plus given the time loop, think there's little she could've done otherwise, so it's less about them seeing the ancients as somehow bad, as it is that they think her actions were necessary to avoid the Plenty. I strongly disagree on that point, because she never shared the truth of the situation with her people, which I think given their love for the star would condition a change in stance, but putting that aside, I believe that's why one can both roll with the story as was written while also view the ancients as undeserving victims of necessity.

---

Yeah, again, that common and well-worn rhetorical technique of "ah, it's so sad and awful, but unfortunately, we have no choice. Trust me bro. Single teardrop."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

I'm a Chrono Trigger fan that has been waiting 27 years for a proper sequel. (No, not that one. I said a proper sequel.)

---

I almost played Chrono Cross but my PS3 decided it didn't like the disc for some reason, so I had to just give up early on. With that said, I also read up on CT's story (spoilered myself intentionally, but I still intend to play the Steam version), and it did get me pretty pumped to see something based off Lavos at the root of the Final Days.

The majority of players just don't think about it. I've come across a lot of people, including streamers, who took the post-Elpis cutscene at face value and believed that's how events unfolded. Hell, yesterday on another forum someone essentially told me I didn't understand/had it wrong, that Venat had stopped the sacrifice to restore the world because she thought their people should learn to rebuild rather than wish everything back to the way it was. I didn't even know where to start. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

If the sundered were forcefully subjected to this fate, I doubt they’d somehow just roll with it because it isn’t “really” genocide – yes, it is. It would wipe them out as species in their current form and result in something quite unrecognisable to them if done in the same way as it was done to the ancients.

---

Not that the Scions are any strangers to hypocrisy, but Alphinaud already made this statement in ShB:

https://i.imgur.com/zIOeuPv.jpg

So, no, they would not be okay with being sundered 'for their own good', they would've fought tooth and nail against it, which is (again) why it's so galling that not a one of them have any criticisms for Hydaelyn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anhaato

Until we see how things actually happen, WITHOUT us being present, maybe then they'll be able to justify the sundering, but I highly doubt we'll ever get now that they're keen to move on from this storyline entirely. And you know what? I'm actually ok with that. I hope they never again approach this level of moral dilemma and this many lives hanging in the balance of whatever is going on. They've proven extensively that they can't handle it.

---

I'm so torn on this because on one hand I want the fate of the Ancients 'fixed' somehow, but on the other I don't want them to touch it any further if they're just going to make it worse. All I wanted was an AU. -_-

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyborne

Here's my dumb "theory": the Twelve are just toy puppet-constructs made by Hydaelyn based off the memories of the 12 who became her magical skinsuit in order to teach the cavemen sundered how to human.

---

I will be irritated beyond measure if they have anything to do with Venat. Enough is enough, the entirety of EW was practically one big Hydaelyn worshiping session. Like, seriously, who in corporate is sleeping with her body pillow and calling these shots? It reminds me of the burning of Teldrassil in WoW, that's what one person (Afrasiabi) wanted, the rest of the writing team didn't want to do it, but he got his way due to his seniority.

Fortunately, my main's deity is Halone due to Ishgard, so in that respect it doesn't matter what the 'truth' is about her as she's still the patron deity of what I consider my character's home. My alt's deity is Azeyma though, which I picked before I found out Venat was the former Azem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

Another friend and I were just discussing this yesterday, but she brought up what I thought was a really insightful point: the writers' perspective probably identified, correctly, that there would be a disconnect between the players and their worldview, and the Ancients' worldview. However, the assumption would be that the players' instinct would be to defend their world in the face of this gap and this discomfort, rather than confront the discomfort, consider it, and come to the conclusion: hey, you know what? The Ancients make sense. Their way is better. I'd rather live in this world than my own. So basically, we were, uh, less xenophobic than they anticipated?

---

My opinion is I think they underestimated how appealing the Ancient civilization appears compared to our own, especially since the pandemic. Maybe we're supposed to compare it to Eorzea (which I still don't think is that great), but after the divisiveness of the past couple of years seeing a society where everyone is kind, considerate, and respectful of one another and, as Emet said in ShB (paraphrased) where their differences paled in comparison to what they had in common, it felt like a dream. It was a nice escape and I think that's what most people want, especially from their entertainment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

that Venat had stopped the sacrifice to restore the world because she thought their people should learn to rebuild rather than wish everything back to the way it was. I didn't even know where to start. :P

---

Er...well, that is basically what she said.

Venat: "Let us not seek to forget this tragedy. Let us carry it in our hearts, that we may grow stronger and know true happiness."

Venat: "In spite of...or perhaps because of this, I choose to believe. In [mankind's] ability to find a way forward."

Venat's frustration with the post-FD Ancients was that they wanted to outright pretend that the Final Days never happened to go back to days when they "knew aught but bliss". She, however, wanted people to learn to grow strong and "know true happiness".

Basically, both Venat and those random Ancient sound like crazy people.

The argument that Etheirys was a "perfect paradise" where they knew nothing but happiness and bliss is stupid. We are literally told that a volcano exploded and people would have died if not for Azem. (In fact, hell, Azem's entire purpose was to be a wandering troubleshooter.) People lamented the deaths of family and friends when they happened prematurely. People disagreed and debated all the time. Those Ancients (whom we're meant to believe represent most of the non-Convocation populace) were crazy strawmen who wanted to...I dunno, live in The Matrix or some'ish...to make Venat's actions justified.

Because words can't describe how much I despise the "you can only know true happiness after you've suffered" argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

Okay, so listen. If I break your kneecaps right now and you lose the ability to walk, it's okay because it's not fundamental "to your being". After all, you were born crawling, so if I remove the use of your legs, you should be able to get by just fine crawling under your own again.

---

Lol for some reason all these talks about whether the sundering is genocide or not somehow reminds me of "First Aid" episode of The Office.

"No arms or legs, do we bother resuscitating them? What kind of quality life do we have there?"

*obviously, this is just a joke. Pls don't take it seriously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DevonEllwood

And then there's Hades's stone mentioning "malformed" creatures, which everyone thought was the player races. The life that Zodiark brought before the sundering. Which contradicts Yoshida saying the races developed after the sundering.

---

I used to think the same. That's why I once asked (not sure if in this thread or at lore forum) if the "new life seeded by zodiark" plays a role in why they wanted to do the third sacrifice.

That aside, I guess my biggest disappointment with sundering is I don't get to truly see the events shortly after it happened. I'm more curious about history and world building rather than seeing venat preaching the players again. I want to see if they lost all their memories or was it just a select few (and the rest were gone simply due to time and mortality). Supposedly they didn't loose all their memories, would they still recognize elidibus, emet, and lahabrea? I want to see how the first generation of the sundered rebuilt their life and society. Were they truly gone back to cavemen level of society and technology? How does 100% hyur like people evolve into different races (honestly though, it's hard to believe a hyur evolve into, say, lalafell)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

Er...well, that is basically what she said.

---

No, I mean the actual restoration of the world, i.e. the second sacrifice. The person was arguing despite what Hythlodaeus said in ShB (and apparently despite us seeing the world ablaze in the Amaurot dungeon) that the world wasn't beyond salvaging, saying that since we've overcome calamities they could overcome the destruction brought by the Final Days. They were taking the post-Elpis cutscene literally, with the Final Days still occurring in the background, that Venat had stopped them from returning the world to the way it was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kozh

How does 100% hyur like people evolve into different races (honestly though, it's hard to believe a hyur evolve into, say, lalafell)?

---

If you think that's difficult, try imagining the Ancients evolving into Sylphs, Ananta, Vanu Vanu and other beast tribes.

Remember, it's been established that the only real difference between beast tribes and the main races is prejudice based on physical beauty. They were kicked out because the "spoken races" considered them aesthetically unattractive or otherwise revolting. Most members of so-called "beast races", if they are raised or socialize with, the regular cityfolk, are basically indistinguishable. So that basically means, they're likely descendants of Ancients as well.

Imagine being an Ancient and waking up one day in a Namazu's body. (Granted, it's unknown if this actually happens. Every Ascian or reincarnated Ascian we've seen thus far have been Hyur, with the one exception being Amon, who was Elezen.)

EDIT: Although, EW also seemed to be hinting that the Allagans may have created some beast tribes. One of their scientists was hysterical about the fact that Amon had given some random test subject the head of an elephant (possible origin of the Matanga).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

No, I mean the actual restoration of the world, i.e. the second sacrifice. The person was arguing despite what Hythlodaeus said in ShB (and apparently despite us seeing the world ablaze in the Amaurot dungeon) that the world wasn't beyond salvaging, saying that since we've overcome calamities they could overcome the destruction brought by the Final Days. They were taking the post-Elpis cutscene literally, with the Final Days still occurring in the background, that Venat had stopped them from returning the world to the way it was.

---

Oh okay. Your confusion makes a lot more sense with that clarification.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

EDIT: Although, EW also seemed to be hinting that the Allagans may have created some beast tribes. One of their scientists was hysterical about the fact that Amon had given some random test subject the head of an elephant (possible origin of the Matanga).

---

It is confirmed canon that the Allagans created the Ixal, at least! Meanwhile, the Sahagin are apparently Echo-capable, so ???????

EDIT: Thinking about this further (for some reason), I think it's safe to say that at least generally, races/tribes that exist across the Shards are probably Sundered Ancients. Ones that are unique to a Shard, such as how the First had no Ixal, or the Source has no Amaro, probably have different origins, such as being familiars. Namazu were confirmed as existing in the First before the Flood, though, which would mean that it is likely that at least a few of the Elpis NPCs did, indeed, become delicious sushi.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brinne

It is confirmed canon that the Allagans created the Ixal, at least! Meanwhile, the Sahagin are apparently Echo-capable, so ???????

EDIT: Thinking about this further (for some reason), I think it's safe to say that at least generally, races/tribes that exist across the Shards are probably Sundered Ancients. Ones that are unique to a Shard, such as how the First had no Ixal, or the Source has no Amaro, probably have different origins, such as being familiars. Namazu were confirmed as existing in the First before the Flood, though, which would mean that it is likely that at least a few of the Elpis NPCs did, indeed, become delicious sushi.

---

How do we know they’re sundered ancients and not say, some of the sundered new life that sprouted after Zodiark restored life to the planet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

How do we know they’re sundered ancients and not say, some of the sundered new life that sprouted after Zodiark restored life to the planet?

---

That's possible too! That's why I said "at least generally" since, again, the Sahagin are shown able to carry the ability explained as a sign of being a former Ancient soul.

I will certainly also take Emet-Selch being so conflicted over feeding the Namazu to Zodiark he misconstrued that as being the source of the Hydaelyn-Zodiark war. Either way is hilarious.

Until otherwise stated, I head canon that the more human-looking races are direct descendants of the Ancients, while the less human races (Including Hrothgar) were either created by the Ancients, Zodiark, or more recent post-sundering civilizations like the Allagans.

The Matanga and Lupin in particular are not so subtly hinted at being creations in a sidequest in Elpis and a note in Ktsis Hyperboreia respectively.

I was honestly half-expecting that the whole reason the sacrifices of the "new life" became such a point of contention was because it included the latter crowd between the implication that their gods like Ifrit were inspired by creations of the Ancients and the pro-Hydaelyn crowd desiring to "entrust the future to them" which wouldn't sound proper in reference to mere beasts. If that ends up actually being the case courtesy of some new lore from Myths of the Realm, that's about one of the only things that might make me feel a little better about the circumstances of the Sundering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KageTokage

Until otherwise stated, I head canon that the more human-looking races are direct descendants of the Ancients, while the less human races (Including Hrothgar) were either created by the Ancients, Zodiark, or more recent post-sundering civilizations like the Allagans.

The Matanga and Lupin in particular are not so subtly hinted at being creations in a sidequest in Elpis and a note in Ktsis Hyperboreia respectively.

I was honestly half-expecting that the whole reason the sacrifices of the "new life" became such a point of contention was because it included the latter crowd between the implication that their gods like Ifrit were inspired by creations of the Ancients and the pro-Hydaelyn crowd desiring to "entrust the future to them" which wouldn't sound proper in reference to mere beasts. If that ends up actually being the case courtesy of some new lore from Myths of the Realm, that's about one of the only things that might make me feel a little better about the circumstances of the Sundering.

---

It reminds me of the Aquaman movie. Where there was once one mighty civilization that after it's collapse split into the scattered civilizations of which some of their forms changed drastically. The Atlantis and Xebal stayed very human-like, while the residents of the Trench and Brine morphed into more beastlike creatures over time. Weird comparison, I know, but makes sense to me.

I don't like the way souls are handled. I don't like that they can be split apart, I don't like that they can be permanently destroyed, and I don't like that there's a question as to whether or not all humanoids have one.

Regardless, the third sacrifice being of theoretically soulless humanoids wouldn't make me think any differently of the sundering since that wasn't her reason for doing it. The issue with the third sacrifice seems to be more that it confirmed her belief that the Ancients wouldn't change, less so any moral dilemma with what they were planning to do. It makes me wonder if her 'opposition' was an attempt to force people onto a different path, which might've worked had they not written that the souls were trapped within Zodiark.

Hrothgar throw a wrench into everything, don't they? :P I preferred Varis' explanation of the sundering causing the creation of the different races over the evolution of them proposed by Yoshi-P in the LL, especially given the comparatively short time in which that evolution would've had to occur.

The writers probably avoided making the Sundering about the third round of sacrifices on the basis that it wouldn't make Venat look particularly good. The third round of sacrifices was only ever meant to be a portion of whatever the 'new life' happened to be and even if that involved sentient beings it's still the lesser of two perceived evils given that Venat decided to inflict genocide upon every man, woman and child amongst the Ancients.

The only thing that would allow me to respect Venat's point of view would be if she were at least consistent and sought to engage in a second Sundering after seeing the Sundered fail her test. I think that would have been inherently more interesting than seeing her stand aside and grant infinite second chances and easy 'I WIN' buttons when that is exactly what she sought to criticise her own people for.

At which point the alphirant can fire on all cylinders:

https://i.imgur.com/zIOeuPv.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

I don't like the way souls are handled. I don't like that they can be split apart, I don't like that they can be permanently destroyed, and I don't like that there's a question as to whether or not all humanoids have one.

---

All of these are basically standard beliefs of East Asian religion. Japanese, in particular, revolve their entire belief system around the idea that literally everything has a soul (literally everything -- from plants and animals to toilets to computer software), that the soul has multiple independent parts with their own natures and functions, and that souls can be further split, created, corrupted, purified or merged. Divine or godly souls can become r demoted to mortal, and mortal souls can be come promoted to divine.

And, remember: the philosophy of Mono no Aware means that ALL things end. That includes souls.

Even if a story tells you that something "doesn't have a soul", they usually mean a specific TYPE of soul. Whatever makes that being feel "strange" or "wrong" in context. For example, we're specifically told that Nobodies in Kingdom Hearts don't have "hearts", but then it's revealed that some do if they build strong feelings or some crap like that.

Same thing happens in EW. We're specifically told that Blasphemies have no souls to return to the aethereal plane, but Fordola clearly sees the soul of her dead friend being reunited with their other buddies after he's destroyed as a blasphemy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

Hrothgar throw a wrench into everything, don't they? :P I preferred Varis' explanation of the sundering causing the creation of the different races over the evolution of them proposed by Yoshi-P in the LL, especially given the comparatively short time in which that evolution would've had to occur.

---

When popular media talks about "evolution", you have to remember that they mean it like Pokemon "evolution", whereas some sort of extreme transformation happens over a relatively short period of time or it happens because of some magical energy or power influencing a species directly. Either way, it usually isn't meant to refer to changes over the course of millions of years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrownySuccubus

All of these are basically standard beliefs of East Asian religion.

---

I have little knowledge of Asian beliefs in general. Outside of having grown up in a Christian family, I could win at Greek mythology trivia and that's about it. :P As far as the beliefs I was raised upon (which, incidentally, I no longer hold, I'm agnostic at best), souls don't work like that. The thought of an immortal soul being split apart or permanently destroyed is horrifying to me, which is possibly why I view the sundering as a far more gruesome act than perhaps someone from Asian cultures would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

I have little knowledge of Asian beliefs in general. Outside of having grown up in a Christian family, I could win at Greek mythology trivia and that's about it. :P As far as the beliefs I was raised upon (which, incidentally, I no longer hold, I'm agnostic at best), souls don't work like that. The thought of an immortal soul being split apart or permanently destroyed is horrifying to me, which is possibly why I view the sundering as a far more gruesome act than perhaps someone from Asian cultures would.

---

Partly why i don’t think video game stories should really deal in morality much. The fact that the devs clearly see Venat as right and benevolent for committing mass genocide will never sit well with me, and while we clearly have a different idea of morality, it’s just backwards to me to condemn Emet for wanting to rejoin but it’s okay for Venat to basically help destroy souls outright? Just makes the devs seem a bit…idk how to say it politely lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

I have little knowledge of Asian beliefs in general. Outside of having grown up in a Christian family, I could win at Greek mythology trivia and that's about it. :P As far as the beliefs I was raised upon (which, incidentally, I no longer hold, I'm agnostic at best), souls don't work like that. The thought of an immortal soul being split apart or permanently destroyed is horrifying to me, which is possibly why I view the sundering as a far more gruesome act than perhaps someone from Asian cultures would.

---

Yeah, that's not how Asian beliefs view the concept of a "soul". For example, a common belief held in Chinese-influenced countries (which includes Japan) is the "family spirit". Eventually, the soul of every person that dies within a family or clan is slowly absorbed into a collective "family spirit" which watches over and protects their living relatives. Individual souls slowly lose their individuality and personal consciousness, their identities being subsumed into the family entity.

This is not considered to be a bad thing. Individuals being slowly absorbed into a greater (typically stronger or wiser) whole is a common theme in both East and Near East religions.

They probably should've called it something else then or elaborated more on the soul system they have in mind for the game's lore. Beliefs aside, I'm still bothered by the fact that people aren't 'whole' and I felt that way before ShB. One of my many disappointments with EW (that was overshadowed by everything else) is that they doubled down on being sundered being a good thing when I had hoped the WoL's journey would eventually lead to becoming complete again, especially as Azem is the only major character among the Ancients who ended up sundered. Well, except for Hermes, but screw that guy. :P

I'm hoping the 13th will be rejoined because unless there's a way to reverse being voidsent there's no purpose in restoring it so that, what, Unukalhai and Cylva can return and become Adam & Eve?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

Partly why i don’t think video game stories should really deal in morality much.

---

They burned all the good will of ShB, didn't they? I thought we'd be getting a 'no right side/matter of perspective' approach in EW and instead we get Venat was right, the sundering was justified, and the Ascians were wrong with the cherry on top of even Emet praising her at the end. Give me a break. No, I do not want to see them tackle conflicts of values in the future, especially when EW was a painful display that the writers and I do not share the same ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

They probably should've called it something else then or elaborated more on the soul system they have in mind for the game's lore. Beliefs aside, I'm still bothered by the fact that people aren't 'whole' and I felt that way before ShB. One of my many disappointments with EW (that was overshadowed by everything else) is that they doubled down on being sundered being a good thing when I had hoped the WoL's journey would eventually lead to becoming complete again, especially as Azem is the only major character among the Ancients who ended up sundered. Well, except for Hermes, but screw that guy. :P

---

Venat was sundered as well according to the watcher, but also (especially) screw her :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fiel_Tana

Venat was sundered as well according to the watcher, but also (especially) screw her :p

---

This is something i’m curious about tbh. If she and Hydaelyn were sundered, why does she still have her “beautiful” godly form, whereas Zodiark is all just broken and fractured.

It also makes me curious why Hydaelyn claimed each rejoining made her weaker.

What I liked about the Ancients in Shadowbringers was that they were basically just a better form of humanity. More long-lived, more powerful and more compassionate for their fellow man. There really was no argument as to whether or not humanity as it stood was better than them, because they weren't. I feel like it severely detracts from the effectiveness of Emet-selch as a villain if he were just wearing heavy rose-tinted glasses and everything we saw about them was an overly idealized lie. He'd been living among the Sundered for centuries and bore witness to every one of their flaws. I really liked it when for once there is a scenario in which life as we, the protagonist knows it, loses out. A moment where we sit back and consider that maybe this man has a point. Of course Emet-selch is still a villain at that point and I'm certainly not saying he was right, but antagonists having real valid points against the protagonists is what adds that much-needed depth to conflict. I'm trying not to let Endwalker spitting in the face of that get to me.

That being the case, desiring a fully rejoined Azem seems to be counterintuitive to this idea. Ardbert rejoined the WoL because a soul of that density was needed for the WoL to fend off the light of the Flood. I don't think, were he given the chance to be himself again, that he would choose to stay with us. The same goes for any Azem counterparts in other shards. Why should they surrender their lives so that they can join some greater whole that may not even resemble themselves anymore? They should be free to live their own existences. The circumstances are actually rather similar in nature to the Nobodies in Kingdom Hearts, which I can't help but mention.

As an aside, I think it would be cool to have a future antagonist be the Voidsent of Azem, their 13th reflection. No particular reason for saying that aside from it being a personal wish of mine with a lot of potential, but I'm very curious about Azem's other fragments.

FWIW, the game does double down on the souls being persistent entities. The idea of souls breaking down and re-combining in the Aetherial Sea is a theory that holds equal sway in Sharlayan, but the story very strongly pushes towards the former theory being correct, right down to G'raha theorising that Fandaniel's soul always had a propensity to existential angst, and we of course know now that the sundered are remnants of the ancients. Even the method of "destroying" Ascian souls is laid out more clearly in the FR version as banishing the soul to the Aetherial Sea, rather than erasing it. Venat's soul being destroyed that way is exceptional in the context of the story. So division (and repair) of a soul is possible, but wholesale destruction is very rare and the sort of thing that Meteion was aiming to, but was thwarted from achieving. Personally, I also don't like the idea of leaving the souls or world broken and hope it repairs over time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fiel_Tana

It also makes me curious why Hydaelyn claimed each rejoining made her weaker.

---

Presumably Zodiark would gain strength and she'd have to work harder to restrain him. With that said, she's a primal and can tap into other power sources, and she mentions her strength fluctuating, and it's also worth noting that the way they premised it in the Q&A is that if the primal's heart is destroyed, so are the rest of its fragments on the other Reflections.

But it seems to make sense that Hydaelyn and Zodiark would both be gaining the same amount of strength with each rejoining? So the struggle would remain balanced, unless perhaps she had less external sources to tap into. Though those sources would also expand with each rejoining, yeah?

A minor point really, so I'm not overly focused on it, but it always seemed to be another of her "gross embellishments" as the watcher put it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

They probably should've called it something else then or elaborated more on the soul system they have in mind for the game's lore.

---

That's still kind of a "monotheistic" perspective, though. One of the major things about non-Abrahamic belief systems is uncertainty. I'm pretty sure the devs didn't feel it was necessary to "explain" how souls work and things like that because, in most cultures outside of the Judeo-Christian (and Muslim) sphere, things like souls are inherently unexplainable. In most forms of folklore, souls have basically no rules and pretty much do whatever the specific myth or legend needs them to do.

That's one of the reasons I keep bringing up cultural differences in this thread. Things that are bugging some of the people here are things that are just "common sense" to other audiences. It'd be like if you made a story in which a character says, "God is our Lord and savior" and then someone else asked, "Uh...which god is he talking about?". Most people within our specific culture would consider the answer common sense and never even think they'd need to elaborate on that question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fiel_Tana

But it seems to make sense that Hydaelyn and Zodiark would both be gaining the same amount of strength with each rejoining? So the struggle would remain balanced, unless perhaps she had less external sources to tap into. Though those sources would also expand with each rejoining, yeah?

A minor point really, so I'm not overly focused on it, but it always seemed to be another of her "gross embellishments" as the watcher put it.

---

I think the idea they're going with is that his power is disproportionately greater, so he gains relatively more than she does, but yes there is the possibility it was also exaggerated somewhat and I agree that it sits somewhat weirdly with the Source being reinforced with each rejoining. They're vague about her power waxing and waning, in all honesty, beyond her stipulating that it is the case.

We wouldn't want Venat to risk breaking a nail. Sitting in the middle of the aetherial sea and sending out 'hear, feel, think' on autopilot and refusing to elaborate on anything is taxing work for a supreme deity.

I'm still not convinced Hydaelyn was sundered. Aside from one line from the Watcher there's nothing else supporting it. Even during her trial the power she draws upon is the aether of her own soul, shouldn't she be able to use dynamis if she's sundered? Plus, given her difficulty containing Zodiark and inability (or disinterest) in protecting the shards it doesn't make sense for her to have split her power that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpectrePhantasia

Ardbert rejoined the WoL because a soul of that density was needed for the WoL to fend off the light of the Flood. I don't think, were he given the chance to be himself again, that he would choose to stay with us. The same goes for any Azem counterparts in other shards. Why should they surrender their lives so that they can join some greater whole that may not even resemble themselves anymore? They should be free to live their own existences.

---

Ardbert didn't exactly have a lot of options. He was seemingly incapable of returning to the aetherial sea, doomed to wander the First indefinitely, and if the WoL had failed he would've ended up rejoined with them anyway.

I'm not saying people should suicide themselves into the WoL but, like Ardbert, I'd assume the merger with the 13th shard would be mutually beneficial.

Although LBs aren't confirmed to be a dynamis thing, it's worth noting Elidibus can utilise them as a primal, and go over and above that by blocking them. If they do confirm that to relate to dynamis manipulation, the sheer amount of prayer which resides in a primal and the changes it causes to the individual may have something to do with it (and it'd further raise questions as to the logic of sundering mankind to manipulate dynamis... which in reality, as noted by others, seems ancillary to her real aim, i.e. ensuring suffering wasn't absent, to avoid the supposed trajectory of the Plenty.) I suspect it'd be difficult to tell even if she could, because on some level it is ultimately just a fuel source, albeit affected by emotions.

Also, she confirms she's sundered in the Word of the Mother scene as well. My guess is that because she's still inside the primal but acting as its heart, the exact mechanism of it is different to how it affects a "regular" ancient and instead parts of the primal are segmented while the heart remains on the Source.

Shouldn't she have surviving soul shards then? Her being sundered is just messy. Like, why didn't she suffer any of the same consequences of it that everyone else did? Zodiark becoming increasingly more powerful with rejoinings while she's at a fixed (whole) power level would also make more sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

Although LBs aren't confirmed to be a dynamis thing, it's worth noting Elidibus can utilise them as a primal, and go over and above that by blocking them. If they do confirm that to relate to dynamis manipulation, the sheer amount of prayer which resides in a primal and the changes it causes to the individual may have something to do with it (and it'd further raise questions as to the logic of sundering mankind to manipulate dynamis... which in reality, as noted by others, seems ancillary to her real aim, i.e. ensuring suffering wasn't absent, to avoid the supposed trajectory of the Plenty.) I suspect it'd be difficult to tell even if she could, because on some level it is ultimately just a fuel source, albeit affected by emotions.

Also, she confirms she's sundered in the Word of the Mother scene as well. My guess is that because she's still inside the primal but acting as its heart, the exact mechanism of it is different to how it affects a "regular" ancient and instead parts of the primal are segmented while the heart remains on the Source.

---

As far as limit breaks being dynamis, I'd say for players that's pretty clear cut. Enemies or NPC's however is still suspect. You mentioned Elidibus, but don't forget that as a trust Emet also uses limit break and quite frequently too.