The Reasoning behind The Sundering? (*6.0 Endwalker Spoilers*)

Suffering was always a part of life because even the Amaurotians had emotions. It was never 'introduced'. It was always there. It will always be there as long as you're writing about a human society.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Suffering was always a part of life because even the Amaurotians had emotions. It was never 'introduced'. It was always there. It will always be there as long as you're writing about a human society.

---

You seem to be misinterpreting my point. Again, please pay attention to the bolded statement:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I'd also note that suffering wasn't a natural part of life in the way in which it was introduced, either.

---

I'm not suggesting that suffering wasn't present in the Ancient world. We've seen that it was. I'm explicitly pointing out that both the Final Days and the Sundering were not natural events. They were sprung upon the Ancients entirely out of the blue and they had no obligation to just go along with it. Much in the same way as how if our world was reduced to ruin by a zombie apocalypse or a nuclear war, it wouldn't be reasonable to stop people from trying to rebuild what was lost.

Your designation of events as 'not natural' is artificial in itself. Bad things happen. There doesn't have to be some higher meaning behind them. That's life. We pick up the pieces and we move on. People rebuilt, in their own way.

I'm not sure if anyone can come to agreement with what exactly is natural. I'd argue nuclear war, Final Days and Sundering are all natural reactions to the perceived realities of the world that stems from the nature of mankind and ancientkind, and their free will to cause atrocities if they deem it worthwhile. I'd also argue that some of these might also be completely inevitable after a certain chain of events has occurred.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Your designation of events as 'not natural' is artificial in itself. Bad things happen. There doesn't have to be some higher meaning behind them. That's life. We pick up the pieces and we move on. People rebuilt, in their own way.

---

You're free to believe that if you so wish. I'm simply a firm believer in the concepts of consent and agency so I'm not inclined to believe that anyone has an obligation to simply go along with whatever atrocities are deliberately inflicted upon a civilisation at the hands of subversive individuals.

It's entirely possible for Venat to be a 'herois' in the eyes of some and an abhorrent, unhinged ideologue in the eyes of others. Both interpretations of the character are valid since nobody is obligated to walk away from the game agreeing with what any given character sets out to do.

Sure. Except that Amaurot wasn't governed that way. They were ruled by a council of 14 self-selected and powerful individuals who made hard decisions on the basis of what they personally felt was right for the rest of their society. They did not poll the audience, and they did not phone a friend. Neither Emet nor Venat would have cared one whit what your personal opinion on their governance was. It just so happened that the Azems won the long game, and our current society is the end result. You're free to be salty about that if you like.

To rebuild after catastrophe is as much in human nature as laying down to die. Different people will have different reactions to the same stimuli. If we use the real world as an example; I've no doubt a large portion of the population would, given the ability to do so, go to almost any length to turn back the clock after an event so cataclysmic as to leave the very planet itself teetering on the edge of oblivion. The suddenness of such a catastrophe would make it far more difficult to make informed decisions, as people would be far too discombobulated by their emotional states to form cogent thoughts.

One could easily (and at this point demonstrably) say the same of Ancient society, save that they were far more willing (and capable) to make choices that would affect the whole. The Convocation routinely made these big decisions for everyone. Venat did something similar when opting for omnicide. The key difference here is the ability to think straight. The Convocation, or at least most of it, managed to stay centered enough to think things through. Venat, meanwhile, remained fully in control of her mental faculties the entire time.

OK, let me sum up this that I've been saying here in this topic for MONTHS now and that Yoshi-P 100% confirmed, in as few words as I possibly can:

Venat's plan was the only way SHE SAW that could do those 2 things simultaneously:
1-) Diminish the Aether in Etheirys' population, allowing them to manipulate dynamis and standing a chance against Meteion
2-) Keeping Etheirys civilization from ever attaining perfection, since she realized this would lead to mass suicide after there was nothing more to attain in life.
As seen with, as an example, the civilization from the 17th end (The "Ra-La" one).

This is all there is to it. It's no more complicated than that. There is no "hidden truth" behind this. This was the clear motive, bright as day, out in the open. AND confirmed by the devs. There you go. End of discussion.

Now, we can yes argue "was that the best idea?", "Did Venat had another, better option?", "Is Venat also flawed?". And yes, those are very interesting and valid topics to discuss. But her motives and the reasons she had for doing what she did are NOT up for theorizing anymore. They just gave us a blunt, clear answer for that.

Alternative solutions and 'what ifs' are entirely academic at this point. Amaurot is long gone and the last remnants of the Ascian faction are being hunted down by a Garlean. Unfortunate for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexionSkyllark

OK, let me sum up this that I've been saying here in this topic for MONTHS now and that Yoshi-P 100% confirmed, in as few words as I possibly can:

Venat's plan was the only way SHE SAW that could do those 2 things simultaneously:
1-) Diminish the Aether in Etheirys' population, allowing them to manipulate dynamis and standing a chance against Meteion
2-) Keeping Etheirys civilization from ever attaining perfection, since she realized this would lead to mass suicide after there was nothing more to attain in life.
As seen with, as an example, the civilization from the 17th end (The "Ra-La" one).

This is all there is to it. It's no more complicated than that. There is no "hidden truth" behind this. This was the clear motive, bright as day, out in the open. AND confirmed by the devs. There you go. End of discussion.

Now, we can yes argue "was that the best idea?", "Did Venat had another, better option?", "Is Venat also flawed?". And yes, those are very interesting and valid topics to discuss. But her motives and the reasons she had for doing what she did are NOT up for theorizing anymore. They just gave us a blunt, clear answer for that.

---

No no no. The second one just isn’t true. The point isn’t to prevent perfection, but to recognize it doesn’t exist. The Plenty, the Ea, the Omicron, all reached “perfection” and realized that they could never escape from the suffering they worked so hard to leave behind. That is the point. That’s why when you do the quests in Ultima you’re given example after example of these societies finding new ways forward, and in so doing, slowly coming to accept the reality of what they face. The example with the Plenty is not a parable to stop yourself from attaining perfection, but to demonstrate that even a society that had removed all sources of strife and pain still suffered and thus was not perfect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

Again, considering the amount of blasphemies we see, it’s pretty clear a not-insignificant amount gave in to despair. We only see 2 small settlements survive, and one of them only had a few survivors remaining. The Ancients didn’t despair or give in like the sundered did, they let their hope give rise to Zodiark. My point is, as i’ve stated numerous times now had you actually read my posts, is that without the WoL or Vrtra both places we see the final days hit would be entirely doomed. Their survival depended on 1-2 people, one of which is unsundered and the other is 9/14th. The sundered didn’t do it on their own, they had help from higher up entities.

---

So the consistent depictions of the Amaurotines huddling in fear, the statements from those on the moon about how facing sudden and unexpected death made them cry out for salvation, and everything else the game shows the Ancients struggling with their own morality, we’re not to draw direct comparisons with what we see of the Sundered?

But lets say I agree that the Sundered did not weather despair any better than the Ancients (I don’t), I fail to see the difference in the relying on the guidance of the Fourteen and relying on the Scions.

Venat herself and members of the group that she recruited went directly to the Convocation to try to convince them that what they were planning to do was not the correct choice. We got an extremely distilled essence of Venat's message in the Post-Elpis cutscene, and we got the brief recording in Anamnesis Anyder showing us what some of the group she associated with were thinking and doing. That isn't the sum total of every discussion they ever had with the Convocation, with the remainder of society, or amongst themselves. There is no place where that could ever be shown, it is outside the scope of the narrative. She would have clearly spoken to the Convocation and society in terms that are more in-depth than the handful of sentences describing her philosophy and goals, in a manner far more persuasive.

I don't agree that it is confirmed that she simply went along the timeline assuming that if she followed the extremely vague broad strokes recap of what we've been through on a personal level that it would mean success. We have no idea what happened at all in multiple eras, we don't know what caused the majority of calamities or what befell the people involved. We have no clue what really prompted Wind, Fire, Lightning, or Ice. She can't use that to plan anything, she doesn't know any aspect of the future that we can't have time to tell her or don't know ourselves. Moreover, Venat told us explicitly that she would never take anything for granted. What Venat seemed to truly endeavor to do was to allow for possibility and respond accordingly. What we did was give her hope for the future.

TLDR; They tried. She tried. But it was no use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Sure. Except that Amaurot wasn't governed that way. They were ruled by a council of 14 self-selected and powerful individuals who made hard decisions on the basis of what they personally felt was right for the rest of their society. They did not poll the audience, and they did not phone a friend. Neither Emet nor Venat would have cared one whit what your personal opinion on their governance was. It just so happened that the Azems won the long game, and our current society is the end result. You're free to be salty about that if you like.

---

I don’t think it’s salt so much as people simply pointing out the flaws and contradictions of the expansions themes and writing. Something it seems many many people agree with based on this thread alone. Don’t understand the passive aggressiveness here, it seems you’re letting your bias against the ancients cloud your judgement. Especially based on your previous post of you calling the ancients out for summoning zodiark and getting angry at people for critiquing venat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veloran

Sure is lucky they were bailed out by a godlike hero before 75+% of their people were dead and their civilization along with the entire rest of the world was reduced to a smoking ruin.

---

Yes, it was incredibly fortunate. Life is full of good fortune and happiness as much as it is full of despair. Good thing the message was never "in order to endure suffering, you must pull yourself up by your boostraps, never relying on anyone or anything else to help you through your pain."

The story of Endwalker is full of examples of people helping each other to face despair, from acts of amazing heroism to simple acts of kindness. This doesn't undermine the fact Matysa's recitation of the words of thier ancestors helped to calm an entire village. (And this was as the Final Days were still raging around them, when they believed thier leader was dead and before Vrta had revealed himself.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

...

---

Just because events didn't work out the way that you wanted them to doesn't make the writing 'flawed'. You're welcome to whatever opinion you like, and you certainly don't need to justify it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

Just because events didn't work out the way that you wanted them to doesn't make the writing 'flawed'. You're welcome to whatever opinion you like, and you certainly don't need to justify it.

---

It’s not about what i wanted. In the end i technically got what i wanted. Venat as a mentally ill psychopath. However, there are objective flaws with the story. Whether you see them or not is your decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

It’s not about what i wanted. In the end i technically got what i wanted. Venat as a mentally ill psychopath. However, there are objective flaws with the story. Whether you see them or not is your decision.

---

You're really out there calling people biased while you yourself are using radical, harsh terms like mentally ill psychopath to describe Venat.
Pot. calling. the. kettle. black. Come on now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tehmon

You're really out there calling people biased while you yourself are using radical, harsh terms like mentally ill psychopath to describe Venat.
Pot. calling. the. kettle. black. Come on now...

---

First of all, she isn’t real, she’s a fictional character, let’s remember that. Secondly, there have been far worse terms used to describe certain characters, even in this very thread alone. Either way it’s my opinion of her character, i’m entitled to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

It's always interesting seeing the forums' take on characters.

Amaurotians: 'You sacrificed 75% of our population to a supreme deity, and now you want to sacrifice the rest of life on the planet to it? My life is a chip in your pile, ante up!'
Forums: 'Aww. Can we not save them, though?'

Emet: 'Let's trigger extinction level events in each of the star's reflections to free a supreme deity that we can sacrifice the remainder of these inferior beings to!'
Forums: 'Aww. Did he really have to die, though?'

Venat: 'I'll hold off this idiotic creation for a few millennia to buy time for the buns to invent space travel and for you to stop the Final Days (or run away and start a new life on another Aether dense planet, if you so choose). Good luck!'
Forums:
'Mary Sue!'
'Villain!'
'Why do you believe some random person who claims to be from the future anyways?'
'Why didn't you tell those geniuses on the Convocation the information you got from said random person who claims to be from the future?'
'Why did you have to be mean to Zodiark? Couldn't he save us from bird girl after he was fed the souls of all life on the planet?'
'Why did you have to take away everyone's god powers?'

Honestly, if I'd encountered opinions like that I would have sundered everything as well. Half of an INT score of zero is still zero, so they're honestly not losing out on that much.

---

This is the bias im talking about.

Ah, I see we're back to ad hominem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

First of all, she isn’t real, she’s a fictional character, let’s remember that. Secondly, there have been far worse terms used to describe certain characters, even in this very thread alone. Either way it’s my opinion of her character, i’m entitled to it.

---

Except it's not an opinion, it is specific claim about Venat as a character and her motivations (that she was motivated by mentally ill psychopathy) given that there is no indication of that being the case in the text, it becomes an innaccurate claim.

You can dislike or disagree with a character all you like, but it's important to describe them and thier motivations accurately. Venat's motivation for the sundering was explicitly laid out in the Q&A too, and at no point did Yoshida say "she did it because she was just so mentally ill".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KariTheFox

Except it's not an opinion, it is specific claim about Venat as a character and her motivations (that she was motivated by mentally ill psychopathy) given that there is no indication of that being the case in the text, it becomes an innaccurate claim.

You can dislike or disagree with a character all you like, but it's important to describe them and thier motivations accurately. Venat's motivation for the sundering was explicitly laid out in the Q&A too, and at no point did Yoshida say "she did it because she was just so mentally ill".

---

She did so because she saw something and assumed it would end up that way. She then took playing god into her own hands. She’s either mentally ill or incredibly stupid(imo).It is an opinion. I’m sticking to it. You don’t have to like it, but i’ll continue to say it as much as i please. This isn’t any different from when people called the Garleans Nazi’s. That’s a specific claim that’s inaccurate, but no one said anything then. I’d rather we not play the favorites game here: I’m just going based off of what we know. Lied,kept secrets, then contradicts her own speeches. That’s what makes her a psychopath to me. She commits mass genocide and calls the remaining fragments her children, children whom she was going to have be left to rot had the WoL not succeeded and the moon ship plan needed to spring into action.

Ah, yes, that was a fantastic post. Thank you for reminding me about it.

It's not really worth engaging with people's rage towards certain characters. Personal preferences are irrational by nature, although we invariably come up with ways to rationalize our judgements to ourselves after the fact. Nobody is obliged like a given person, and you'll never convince people that they're wrong, let alone by arguing with them. Nor is it relevant whether they do or not.

I rather like Yoshi-P's take on the Amaurotians, although I do think that their level of decisiveness is very much a human trait, especially for anyone used to wielding authority. It's actually a bit of a fine line for the Scions to walk, given how entangled we've become with world politics. We have the power to make changes, and so we do. Sometimes the people that we 'liberate' are less than pleased with the result. It's much less a question of what was 'right' as it is about what 'happened.' Using that framework, it's interesting to see how the contest of wills inside of Amaurot played out.

We're not discussing the Garleans right now, but if someone were to say "the Garleans are Nazis" to mean their society is just like 1930s-40s Germany - I would also disagree with that. Though if they just meant it as shorthand "they are a bunch of goosestepping bad guys" I wouldn't really care. Why do you feel the need to constantly bring up discussions I was not even a part of in your responses to me?

The issue is that Venat is very clearly described now as 'being just like an ancient' - she makes unilateral decisions about the fate of the world and the future in it because she thinks she knows best. If that is mental illness, then the entire society of ancients is mentally ill, because they all do that. At least Venat planned to actually step aside for future generations.

(Also if you just mean "Venat is mentally ill" as shorthand for "she is a bad person that I don't like" then that's kind of offensive to actually mentally ill people.)

I saw a thread on Reddit I found interesting regarding the second Final Days:

Quote:

---

The thing about it is those that felt absolute hopelessness didn't overcome it, they died. And their souls were destroyed. The ones who overcame were those already strong, healthy.

---

Quote:

---

As someone with depression the "have a bad episode? You could die AND have your soul destroyed AND turn into a monster that kills your friends and family" really hurt the message for me as it's exactly like the societal stigmatization of depression.

---

Quote:

---

I firmly believe that the story was written by people with very little experience of depression/mental health as a whole. Thematically the expansion was incredibly shallow.

---

I honestly hadn't thought about it but, yeah, the second Final Days would've just ended up being a filter for everyone with mental illnesses. I'm sure that wasn't their intention, but still not a great message.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rulakir

I honestly hadn't thought about it but, yeah, the second Final Days would've just ended up being a filter for everyone with mental illnesses. I'm sure that wasn't their intention, but still not a great message.

---

I think indeed it wasn't their intention, although I can see why the intention may not have landed for everyone. While it's true that the Final Days were making victims of some of society's most vulnerable, the story always portrayed this as a tragedy and generally as being a fault in society for not doing more to care about them sooner. The victims were never blamed, even though they had to be stopped. This is partly what the Role quests got into. The story has been pretty consistent in its admonishment against society for not protecting the vulnerable, as this is often the root cause of so much unneeded tragedy (which was always what the Ascians were counting on). The story also showed (with the first Final Days) that while it may start with the most vulnerable, it reaches everyone, so the second Final Days would not have ended up as only a filter.

After doing all of the role quests, I'd agree that really was not the vibe that they were shooting for at all and it seems like a stretch to even correlate the two.

They all draw attention to the fact that in each city state there were people quietly suffering from despair induced by various underlying issues; either as fallout from conflicts they faced earlier in the MSQ or more fundamental problems (In Gridania's case), and it's only when they started turning that the leaders became aware of it and took stronger measures to address their plight.

Though I will say that Gridania's storyline did absolutely nothing to improve my view of the elementals considering it was them being fickle and unforgiving that caused the blasphemy issues there in the first place. While the seventh calamity may have weakened them to an extent that they can no longer physically govern the lives of the Gridanians, other quests stress that they still have an unhealthy level of influence over their society and at times force people into situations that give them grief simply because they say so.

It ties rather readily into a post I made on the subject a while back:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

At the end of the day, it's just a video game. One many of us are varying degrees of passionate about, certainly, though I personally don't care for rivalries to form over something that is entirely fictional. As such, my stance has ever been to agree to disagree where common ground cannot be found. I don't care for endless arguments over morality and I'd like to think I've made it perfectly clear that if anyone has a problem with me, then they're very welcome to come and talk it out in a civil manner.

I like working out and discussing the 'how' and 'why' things happen in the way that they do in any given story or historical event, though my personal preferences drift towards characters and factions that have lofty stakes over those that have everything work out to their benefit most of the time.

One thing I noticed, however, was that some pretty spiteful and nasty accusations were aimed at anyone who ever dared to speak up in favour of the antagonists. This included death threats, homophobic comments and other unpleasant elements. Given that the offending posts were deleted, however, then such will have to be taken with a pinch of salt - though I'd like to think those who are being genuine and who have been around for a while will be aware of what I'm speaking of. Especially since some of the offending comments leaked into Reddit, Twitter and certain Discord servers.

The most fascinating thing I observed was that certain posters would repeatedly launch thinly veiled attacks and sometimes direct personal attacks at fans of the antagonists, implying all manner of horrible things about their person and real world morality. When finally those being assaulted had enough, even a minor quip in response would be treated as some deeply horrific crime and personal attack.

I will say that things have improved somewhat since then. Right around the same time that the game itself revealed that, yes, actually there was more to the Ascians and Garleans all along.

Ultimately any given individual is going to have their personal preferences and interests. I've never suggested that anyone has to like specific characters or factions. I only ask that the same courtesy is extended to others in turn.

In closing, I'd also note that the game attracts players from many different countries, cultures, backgrounds and belief systems. We all have different life experiences, so that is going to influence what we like and we don't like.

---

I think it's telling that there's so much concern being expressed over Venat being called a 'psychopath' when that's simply the opinion of an individual poster and more importantly...Venat isn't real.

It should go without saying that death threats, harassment and gatekeeping of opinions are far graver a problem than that.

How interesting that the trend of raising concern only arises when someone decides to push back against unsettling threats and personal attacks that they receive over something as trivial as their personal tastes in fictional characters.

I think I know what happened during the convocation meetings with Venat... I'm currently watching it play out on the forums /facepalm

Edit: ohhh hey my banishment from the forums (daily post limit) has been lifted yaaaay!

Edit 2: if one of you decides to sunder us could you try to put me or one of my clones some where nice? Hawaii maybe or Japan?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KageTokage

After doing all of the role quests, I'd agree that really was not the vibe that they were shooting for at all and it seems like a stretch to even correlate the two.

They all draw attention to the fact that in each city state there were people quietly suffering from despair induced by various underlying issues; either as fallout from conflicts they faced earlier in the MSQ or more fundamental problems (In Gridania's case), and it's only when they started turning that the leaders became aware of it and took stronger measures to address their plight.

Though I will say that Gridania's storyline did absolutely nothing to improve my view of the elementals considering it was them being fickle and unforgiving that caused the blasphemy issues there in the first place. While the seventh calamity may have weakened them to an extent that they can no longer physically govern the lives of the Gridanians, other quests stress that they still have an unhealthy level of influence over their society and at times force people into situations that give them grief simply because they say so.

---

This is slightly off topic, but I do think its a shame we dont have a role quests for EW thread specifically, I don't think there writing was as strong as Shb. But I do appreciate how they actually used basically every major issue the countries had as a jumping off point to examine them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I think it's telling that there's so much concern being expressed over Venat being called a 'psychopath' when that's simply the opinion of an individual poster and more importantly...Venat isn't real.

---

Okay, for the last time. I do not care if someone dislike Venat or disapproves of her actions. Insult her all you want, call her a bitch, a miserable little worm, or a horrible person - I do not care.

What I objecting to is the specific claim about her as a character and her motivations that comes with calling her a "mentally ill psychopath". That isn't an 'opinion' - it is a claim about Venat as a character, and the text. It is a claim that is inaccurate because there is zero indication that Venat is mentally ill, or motivated by psychopathy. The reasons cited for her being a mentally ill psychopath "She told lies, she contradicted herself, she thinks she knows what is best for everyone" are not only not signs of mental illness - but also things that apply to all the ancients, and to sundered people as well. The fact of the matter is that Venat was perfectly sane, and acting in good faith doing what she thought was the best course of action. You are free to disagree that her chosen course was the best possible one, but we can't even start to have a discussion about that if we cannot agree on basic points of fact about the text.

If I were to say, "Emet-Selch is a mentally ill sadist, he causes rejoinings because he enjoys watching the sundered peoples suffer and die," you would rightfully object, because it is an inaccurate claim about his character and motivations, it does not suddenly become better if I say "In my opinion, Emet-Selch is a mentally ill sadist, he causes rejoinings because he enjoys watching the sundered people suffer and die." instead.

I also fail to see how it is relevant that other, unrelated people acted in bad faith regarding Garleans and the Ascians. So what if some people on twitter insulted you for liking Gauis and Emet-Selch or whatever? - that has nothing to do with my point. Nor do I think it's terribly mature to say 'well in some other discussions in the past, people I associate with being on 'your side' acted in bad faith, so there's nothing wrong 'my side' doing it now.'

I really don't care if people insult fictional characters. What I'm specifically calling out is the personal attacks - some of which are present within this very thread. Nor was my post even aimed at you, hence why I didn't quote you.

Yes, also this concern/'outrage' was notably absent when characters like Varis, Gaius or Emet-Selch were brought up, also often (as claimed) derailing topics. So one might be forgiven for thinking it's more than a trifle selective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rannie

I think I know what happened during the convocation meetings with Venat... I'm currently watching it play out on the forums /facepalm

Edit: ohhh hey my banishment from the forums (daily post limit) has been lifted yaaaay!

Edit 2: if one of you decides to sunder us could you try to put me or one of my clones some where nice? Hawaii maybe or Japan?

---

Yes, although unfortunately for some they can't just do what she did when disagreement got in her way, no matter what caricature they set up of their opposition, so they may have to limit their ambitions to using the ignore function. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

Yes, although unfortunately for some they can't just do what she did when disagreement got in her way, no matter what caricature they set up of their opposition, so they may have to limit their ambitions to using the ignore function. ;)

---

Well damn there goes my dreams of Hawaii or Japan living ... =P

I think the main problem is that it's quite difficult to have any sort of a discussion in here. Someone could simply want to share an interesting little lore tidbit that they'd encountered while fishing, and then one of the usual six player accounts invariably jumps in with 'A fish you say? Well, the fish didn't consent to being genocided.' I think that most people have tuned out the noise, but there are so many offensive and socially inappropriate terms thrown around that it can be difficult to ignore. It's like trying to have a meaningful conversation with someone randomly swearing in the background. And when people invariably take the bait to get rid of the noise, as is human nature, then they get the same copypasted post on how nobody is obliged to like a fictional character. Such low effort trolling. It's unfortunate because I think that it drives a lot of people away from posting in here.

This largely comes down to a lack of moderation on this forum. I think that Ryu made the best suggestion here in the interim that it's best to just ignore such people and move on. Twitch had a beautiful response to the disruption during the Live Letter where the trolls were laughed out of chat and then promptly spammed off the screen without missing a beat. They can get mad at you for suggesting that you ignore them, but they really can't do anything about it.

I think Yoshi-p offered the most elegant solution. The Ancients are dead and they don't wanna come back. It really doesn't matter which 'side' you're on. The story moves on. As do we, three months later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

then one of the usual six player accounts invariably jumps

---

If you're going to toss blame around, then at least don't be disingenuous with it. There are far more than six, and they come from both sides of the debate.

Though, I do agree on much of what goes on here being due to a lack of moderation.

There isn't a debate happening here. The discussion has been done to death a month ago and people have moved on. There's just a few trolls throwing out offensive phrases in the background in the hopes that they'll get a rise out of someone. They're only relevant if you let them be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KageTokage

Though I will say that Gridania's storyline did absolutely nothing to improve my view of the elementals considering it was them being fickle and unforgiving that caused the blasphemy issues there in the first place. While the seventh calamity may have weakened them to an extent that they can no longer physically govern the lives of the Gridanians, other quests stress that they still have an unhealthy level of influence over their society and at times force people into situations that give them grief simply because they say so.

---

God yeah that particular storyline gave me a headache. The rest of the role quests have a pretty hopeful message but all I got from Gridania was “man the elementals aren’t really a good influence are they.” This plus the WHM quests don’t exactly leave a good impression.

The elementals come off more as petulant children than any sort of proper guardians. They are fickle to a point that it seems like it makes them impossible to please. All it takes is one minor misstep for them to decide to ruin your life -- or, as we see from a few different quests, simply decide to kill you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

There isn't a debate happening here. The discussion has been done to death a month ago and people have moved on. There's just a few trolls throwing out offensive phrases in the background in the hopes that they'll get a rise out of someone. They're only relevant if you let them be.

---

You’re trying to mark off people who disagree with your opinions as trolls, which is completely against the point of the forums. If you disagree with someone’s phrases or terms, just say i disagree. Don’t name call(against the rules), don’t be passive aggressive(also against the rules). If we’re going to call out people for halting discussion so to speak, then i think we need to stop acting holier than thou and acknowledge our own faults. Because most people in this debate on both sides have argued in bad faith time and time again, so trying to see people try and act like they havent stoked the flames is a bit ironic.

Not really. You have your opinions on the Ancients, as you said, and nothing is going to change that. I'm happy for you. It's not worth being roped into the same discussion endlessly simply because you like throwing out inflammatory statements. There is no debate. Only bait.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

There isn't a debate happening here. The discussion has been done to death a month ago and people have moved on. There's just a few trolls throwing out offensive phrases in the background in the hopes that they'll get a rise out of someone. They're only relevant if you let them be.

---

Don't you think it's a little self-contradictory to regularly post in EW discourse threads about how pointless and unworthy of attention the discourse is?