So the devs said that the Dragonsong War...

...will be resolved within the time span of 3.x, right?

If so, then...

http://i.imgur.com/4brEWU7.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/HgSrHFR.gif

Hopefully Midgardsormr didn't bet any money on this stuff taking generations to fix. :p

Just because the war as far as we are concerned (the fighting, taking the fanatics and blind followers out of power, stopping Nidhogg...) is over, doesn't mean its over for the Dravanians and Ishgard.

Racism between man and dragon will continue for ages, as will the classism between highborn and lowborn, and the fanatics on both sides will still work to get back into power and defeat the enemies they see.

THAT is the war that will take generations to end. I mean, look at the real world for examples of this...

We'll likely stop Nidhogg but I suspect that something will happen to ensure that we don't get anything more than a bittersweet to the storyline. The expansion was, after all, marketed as being 'darker' than ARR. I imagine that the wedge between Ishgard's 'haves' and 'have nots' will persist as well. The High Houses are unlikely to throw away their position. I imagine it's the same for many of the minor nobles as well. Besides, now that they're part of the Eorzean Alliance, why would they? The other nations have exceptionally wealthy individuals too and they're not about to give up their power and status. Nor should they, as far as I'm concerned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

We'll likely stop Nidhogg but I suspect that something will happen to ensure that we don't get anything more than a bittersweet to the storyline. The expansion was, after all, marketed as being 'darker' than ARR. I imagine that the wedge between Ishgard's 'haves' and 'have nots' will persist as well. The High Houses are unlikely to throw away their position. I imagine it's the same for many of the minor nobles as well. Besides, now that they're part of the Eorzean Alliance, why would they? The other nations have exceptionally wealthy individuals too and they're not about to give up their power and status. Nor should they, as far as I'm concerned.

---

saying that the expansion is going to be darker than ARR isn't saying much... considering that we aren't even half way done with the expansion yet and its already been darker than ARR...

Funny, Moenbryda's death was the darkest pert of 2.xx (people were calling BS on Nanamo:s death from the start) and Lord H's death was part of 3.0's MSQ and already WAY more heart wrenching than Moen's death since we knew her for like 2 days but Lord H had fought beside us, stuck his neck out for use, and actually took that kill shot that was aimed AT US.

So it wasn't even the end of the story quests and we got way darker than 2.xx right out of the gate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

So it wasn't even the end of the story quests and we got way darker than 2.xx right out of the gate.

---

That dosen't mean it will suddenly be all sunshine and rainbows and Ishgard becomes the Land of Milk and Honey though, especially with all the Game of Thrones references

The war could end next patch, but the aftermath won't go away for generations to come.

I think for me the darkest part of HW has been just how messed up a situation we walked into in the Dragonsong war. Its full of awful betrayals and a senseless cycle of pain, lose and hatred that has gone on for a thousand years. Ending the war was less about bring an evil to justice as it was about having to break the cycle by force, even if that means putting down one of those who was a victim of the crime that started it all.

Even compared to the corruption in Ul'dah, Ishgard is full of terrible and horrendous stories of lose and death, from spouses being murdered under the guise of 'heresy' in Ishgard's messed up political manoeuvring, to the carnage on the field's of battle against the Horde, to a young orphan girl freezing to death in the Brume, Ishgard is a dark place in a lot of ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morningstar1337

That dosen't mean it will suddenly be all sunshine and rainbows and Ishgard becomes the Land of Milk and Honey though, especially with all the Game of Thrones references

---

Didn't say it was.. Matter of fact, that's not at all what I was suggesting I said that the opening arc of 3.0 was darker than the entire 2.xx plotline.
It is very possible that things are really close to going very wrong extreemly fast. And there may not be anything we can do this time
We've, in the span of a few weeks, compleatly eradicated a thousand year old status quo and now the rising of the peasents may end with a bloody reaconing that even The WoL won't be able to stop.

I don't think all fighting will end against villainous dragons for as long as we play the game, otherwise we would have no lore excuse for killing the dragon monsters we find in Heavensward zones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

Didn't say it was.. Matter of fact, that's not at all what I was suggesting I said that the opening arc of 3.0 was darker than the entire 2.xx plotline.
It is very possible that things are really close to going very wrong extreemly fast. And there may not be anything we can do this time
We've, in the span of a few weeks, compleatly eradicated a thousand year old status quo and now the rising of the peasents may end with a bloody reaconing that even The WoL won't be able to stop.

---

I don't actually think the WoL will though they will help. I think the ones to make the difference will be likes of Hilda, those guys in the Scholisticate quests and very much Aymeric. Even as authority figure, Aymeric is enough of a self made man that he will be respected for his own talents, distinguished enough that the nobility will respect him and charismatic enough to convince people to trust him. I'd add to that we just had Aymeric, only just recovering from an attempted assassination, fight his way through the Vault himself to save refugees from the Brume.

While we have deep seated grudges between the commoners and the nobles we also see quite a few cases of groups from both sides reaching across the divide.

Honestly I don't think we will have a tragedy ending to this patch cycle. I don't think everything will just be ok but I think we will walk away from Ishgard with at least it set on a road that can lead to a better future. 2.55 was, regardless of who it turned out, a tragedy ending and I don't think they will repeat it. I think this time we will see Ishgard's story rap up as we build to a larger confrontation with Garlemald that has been brewing since 2.2.

But no we won't wipe out the Brood who even without Nidhogg are so brainwashed with his hatred that I don't see them changing their minds even if they start to be driven back. We won't wipe out all class imbalance in ishgard or all its social issues. Honestly I don't think that's the WoL's job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Belhi

Honestly I don't think we will have a tragedy ending to this patch cycle.

---

We wont. At least, not as far as Ishgard goes. That simply wouldn't move the plot on, and unless 4.0 is going to be more Ishgard, they kind of need to... I would imagine we'll simply get a bittersweet conclusion to Ishgards story, where they sacrifice a bit more, have an unstable peace, but nevertheless are ready to move on. I suspect most of the remaining drama in Ishgard will revolve around saving Estinien, or attempting to.

2.0 gave us Alphinaud and Alisaie, the former being mature, while the later was emotional and still torn up over their grandfather. 3.0 on the other hand, has gone to great lengths to break down Alphinaud, and frequently display is immaturity. To the point now, where the many sacrifices along the way have clearly taken their toll on him, and we "have to save Estinien". I almost wonder if we'll have a reversal of their introduction, seeing as Alisaie seems to be coming back into the plot, in which Alphinaud is emotional and unwilling to let Estinien go, while Alisaie will remind him that it would be for the greater good, and that Estinien would likely gladly sacrifice himself to end Nidhogg.

If we do get a major tragedy at the end of 3.0, similar to how we did at the end of 2.0, I find it much more likely that it would be related to something other than Ishgard. Either the Scions (again), or something related to Garlemald. I'm half-expecting Minfilia to kick the bucket though, Hydaelyn told her something shocking, and it certainly wasn't everyone else dying, given absolutely nobody died in Ul'dah (except Raubahns girlfriend! zing!), "You're going to die" would be quite shocking, and it would be thematically appropriate to have her struggle to come to terms with that, but ultimately accept it, when pretty much every major villain has been unable to do just that. Xandes didn't, Nidhogg failed and game back from the grave twice, and the Ascians are pretty much the text book example of people clinging to life and failing to accept their death. Could even throw Bahamut into that lot, I suppose, though that was more Tiamat not accepting his death. Either way, most of the threats in this game stem from someone failing to accept their time was up and bitterly fighting back. I suspect the big bad truth Elidibus alluded to is somehow related to the nature of life and death, and if he starts tempting us over with his "solution", it would be interesting to have Minfilia sacrifice herself to convince us not to fall for it (and if the Dragonsong trailer really is meant to explain what happened and hint at what might happen, "Sacrifice, a final plea to her kin", which is obviously relating to Saint Shiva, is sung while Minfilia shows up on screen...), more so given his apparent interest in her (based on what Nabriales said).

That said, they could always just repeat 2.55 and give us a dire situation in Ishgard that has pretty much no impact on the rest of the story going forward, and gets concluded in a fairly lackluster manner...

I find the overarching theme of "knowing when to accept your time has come" to be a little odd, and suggests something is off with our characters, who always succeed, or from the player's perspective die until we succeed. We succeed by defying this lesson as much as the monsters and bad guys we face.

Its not a problem,(certainly not asking for a hardcore mode of this game), so much as a broken aesop so far, unless my suspicions are confirmed and there is something fundamentally "wrong" with us.

Well, it's a fairly difficult thing for the player character to do, since it is fairly difficult to kill our character while allowing us to play... As such it seems like more of a message for our NPC allies to drill home; Louisoix, Moenbryda, Ysayle, and potentially any future characters, such as Estinien or Minfilia. As far as lore goes I imagine we breeze through each encounter, rather than Dark Souling them, we always succeed because we've got the backing of Hydaelyn. We don't really defy the lesson because there has never really been a point where we bitterly fight against our death, because our death has yet to come, and simply cannot come as far as lore/gameplay goes, because this is a game. Xandes, Nidhogg and the Ascians, however, have all died, all come back, and all cause plenty of grief because of it. Meanwhile, of our allies who have died, all have done so quite willingly, and done so with good cause. Haurchefant didn't go "Nope, I don't want to die, I have a vendetta to settle and I'll burn the world before I see it unfinished", he was just glad to have helped save us. Same for Ysayle, same for Moen, same for Lou. Quite the contrast to most of the villains. Pretty much the only "good" character who had an "ugly" death would be Nanamo, but well... Yeah...

Even had Nanamos death stuck, I can't imagine the story would be endorsing Raubahns rampage all that much... Much more likely we'd have him coming to terms with it and moving on to forge a better Ul'dah, than having him let Ul'dah burn in a quest for vengeance... Kind of a shame they didn't really kill off Nanamo, now that I think on it more... It would have gone so perfectly with Ishgards story; Raubahn effectively learning from Nidhoggs mistakes... What (could have) happened in Ul'dah actually mirrors Dravanian history fairly well... I almost wonder if they made a last minute change to the plot now... It just seems to perfect to have had Raubahn going down the same path Nidhogg walks... No idea how you'd fit that alongside Ishgards story (probably why it didn't happen), but damn would that have been more interesting than the conclusion to 2.55 that we got...

I think The Eorzean Allience, The Citizen's Republic of Idlyshire, and The Neo-Dravanian Hord (Led by Tiamat and Hraysvelgr this time) joining into a single collective to kick Garlemauld out of Eorzea would be an excellent way to end 3.xx and build up for 4.0 - 5.0's inevitable move from the Eorzean Contenent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

I think The Eorzean Allience, The Citizen's Republic of Idlyshire, and The Neo-Dravanian Hord (Led by Tiamat and Hraysvelgr this time) joining into a single collective to kick Garlemauld out of Eorzea would be an excellent way to end 3.xx and build up for 4.0 - 5.0's inevitable move from the Eorzean Contenent.

---

I wish i didnt read that. It feels almost spoilery knowing we know exactly how this story and game will go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

I think The Eorzean Allience, The Citizen's Republic of Idlyshire, and The Neo-Dravanian Hord (Led by Tiamat and Hraysvelgr this time) joining into a single collective to kick Garlemauld out of Eorzea would be an excellent way to end 3.xx and build up for 4.0 - 5.0's inevitable move from the Eorzean Contenent.

---

Please no. Is it so wrong that I hope we're going to step away from these tropes?

Am I asking too much? Yes?

Surprising absolutely no one, I want to go to the moon.

I'd rather work alongside Garlemald than constantly oppose it. I've said this before but Garlemald deserves much, much more than to be treated like a generic evil empire. The likes of Rufus Shinra and Gabranth proved to be exceptionally popular characters in earlier titles. We really, really need more characters like them that are fiercely loyal to their homeland/cause but we don't end up killing them off.

I'll probably take my leave of the game if we just get another expansion where the Warrior of Light conveniently overcomes every obstacle put in their path. Especially if they have another 'Nanamo' bait and switch.

I love the game, I really do - but plot armour and questionable story decisions turned me away from WoW and I do not want to see that happen in FFXIV as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I'll probably take my leave of the game if we just get another expansion where the Warrior of Light conveniently overcomes every obstacle put in their path. Especially if they have another 'Nanamo' bait and switch.

---

The plot armor is really the most annoying part for me. I understand that this game is Japanese and targeted towards a younger crowd than the one I fall into, and SE adores its mascot characters, so we're to expect some armor, but I feel XIV overdoes it. A lot.

I actually feel like it's a symptom of the storytelling method rather than the story, though. It tries to be a bit overly dramatic, badass, and tragic, without being willing to fully commit to any one of them. It goes in half-measures, basically. For example, much of the team that works on XIV worked on TO in the past, but TO is an absolutely brutal game. Definitely very few half-measures there (besides Chapter 4 clearly lacking the funding 1-3 had, I'm mostly talking about the storytelling method), so they're capable of telling a richly complex story with grey areas and rather unpleasant actions perpetuated by the MC, they just choose not to. Yoshi has even said he's spoken with Matsuno in order to work on a questline!

HW will really make or break the lore for me, because I don't find the Dragonsong War particularly interesting, so how they handle it determines my future interest.

All my opinions being said, I don't see how the WoL can come out of this unscathed. We're basically walking Gods at this point, and walking Gods aren't very appealing to have a story centered around. They seem to want to have your character involved, so I do believe that, plot-wise you will somehow end up more permanently weakened, or there's going to be some interesting revelation that changes your status, either of which would be the far more interesting outcome than being hailed as the purest of pure purity savior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I'd rather work alongside Garlemald than constantly oppose it. I've said this before but Garlemald deserves much, much more than to be treated like a generic evil empire. The likes of Rufus Shinra and Gabranth proved to be exceptionally popular characters in earlier titles. We really, really need more characters like them that are fiercely loyal to their homeland/cause but we don't end up killing them off.

I'll probably take my leave of the game if we just get another expansion where the Warrior of Light conveniently overcomes every obstacle put in their path. Especially if they have another 'Nanamo' bait and switch.

I love the game, I really do - but plot armour and questionable story decisions turned me away from WoW and I do not want to see that happen in FFXIV as well.

---

Honestly, it seems to me almost like you want Garlemald to be something it was never shown to be. Garlemald, from the very start, has been a nation focused on the conquest and subjection of all other nations. They have never really had any benevolent qualities and while they bring order, its order born from tyranny. Garlemald itself might not be intrinsically evil but its actions are. Its not conquering the world because it needs to but because it feels it has a right to rule over the world.

On the second point you mention Rufus Shinra. Its true that Rufus was a developing character who wasn't generic evil. He, like Garlemald, did what he did because he believed in his course of action. However he was still an antagonist right through FF7. The one time he works with the main characters he turns on them to use them as scapegoats for a mess that in many ways was Shinra's fault in the first place.

We might work with Garlemald eventually but I don't think it will before Garlemald takes a fall or has something blow up in their faces in a big way.

Personally one of the issues I had with WoW was its consistency with its lore. While you might not like Garlemald's treatment, at least it has been consistent.

The story is always going to show Garlemade as a nation of conquerors with a few deserters that disagree with them. Most video game stories are as simple as that and I don't expect us (player or in character) to suddenly start sympathizing with a nation that wanted to conquer everything and use forbidden ancient technology that seems to get everyone screwed. Heck, 3.0 even showed the empire willing to slaughter beastmen in general just on the off chance that the good ones would turn bad and summon primals and that is just wrong to me (plus I love the Vanu Vaanu)


As for the potential on how 3.0 could end, I would say yes and no to the theories provided. It sounds simply too big to wrap up in the remainder of 3.0's life. It's more plausible for it to be stretched out to later expansions.

I'm actually wondering how we will see them develop. I honestly suspect we will see Garleans we can be more sympathetic towards that are still part of the empire eventually, however I don't think the Garlean leadership will end up ever in that role. I'm very curious how the Garleans might react if they learn anyone can summon a primal. I could see on one hand them looking for a technical solution from the Allag which could get into some dangerous stuff or I could the current administration start to go anti religious in the hopes that removing peoples beliefs in gods would remove their ability to summon them.

I had one funny though that it would be weird twist if we ended up running into a ranking Garlean at some point who turned out to have the echo and who could hear Hydaelyn. I wonder if Garleans can even have the echo or their Aetheric handicap stops them from getting it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Belhi

I I wonder if Garleans can even have the echo or their Aetheric handicap stops them from getting it.

---

I've actually been wondering this same thing. My personal belief is that they wouldn't be able to, since aether is what empowers crystals (hence ceruleum), and I'm assuming Hydaelyn is essentially an embodiment of massive amounts of aether.

If the plot does go into that direction, I'd rather not see the plot turn us into the boring invincible hero that unites Eorzea and conquers Garlemald without so much as our reputation getting dirty. Never been in it, but I'm pretty sure that's not how war works.

But tbh I'd rather be surprised with something else entirely. Given the...limitations, i don't see 4.0 in the same light i once viewed 3.0, it needs a shake up, not formulaic stuff we all see coming as clear as their update schedule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kallera

If the plot does go into that direction, I'd rather not see the plot turn us into the boring invincible hero that unites Eorzea and conquers Garlemald without so much as our reputation getting dirty. Never been in it, but I'm pretty sure that's not how war works.

But tbh I'd rather be surprised with something else entirely. Given the...limitations, i don't see 4.0 in the same light i once viewed 3.0, it needs a shake up, not formulaic stuff we all see coming as clear as their update schedule.

---

Though I rather not see a "hah I beat you cause the plot said so, despite everything you did before that" scene either.

Honestly, it'd be easily solved if they just went ahead and didn't cave into fan pressure. I'm almost certain that's what happened with Nanamo and Aymeric. Having both of them perish for being too idealistic would have reinforced the message that we can't save everybody and that sometimes our actions, whilst just, will have major consequences.

Final Fantasy Tactics, Final Fantasy IX and Final Fantasy XII are amongst my favourite games. Why? Because the heroes one in the end but it was a very bittersweet victory with important characters dying along the way and entire cities falling into complete chaos. Even the 'enemy' factions had characters who were redeemed or boasted redeeming qualities.

I'm mostly hoping that Midgar sticks around by the end of all of this ('-')
Would be nice for him to do more exposition about stuff that don't have to do with the Dragonsong War.

To be honest, I don't think the WoL is invincible. The Blessing of Light, the echo and a big helping of skill allow us to go toe to toe with some serious enemies but it doesn't make us invincible. Primals are such difficult foes because they basically have I-WIN buttons against most foes. The Blessing and the Echo remove that, effectively stripping gods down to the power of very strong monsters. Lets not ignore the fact that other heroes have killed Primals before now. Its just there is usually a lot of collateral damage due to those I-WIN buttons.

We aren't superheroes or vastly more physically powerful than many other mortals in Eorzea. Our echo hasn't displayed a fraction of the stuff the Ascians can do with theirs. Hell, we can barely control our own and our use of it is random or passive. When they say we impose on the realm of gods, I read it as not that we are god like but that we are able to negate the power of the divine and force them into mortal confrontation. If we were God like we wouldn't be taking having to worry much about the threat of a Kobold even if they were from one of the Kobold's higher Orders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Honestly, it'd be easily solved if they just went ahead and didn't cave into fan pressure. I'm almost certain that's what happened with Nanamo and Aymeric. Having both of them perish for being too idealistic would have reinforced the message that we can't save everybody and that sometimes our actions, whilst just, will have major consequences.

Final Fantasy Tactics, Final Fantasy IX and Final Fantasy XII are amongst my favourite games. Why? Because the heroes one in the end but it was a very bittersweet victory with important characters dying along the way and entire cities falling into complete chaos. Even the 'enemy' factions had characters who were redeemed or boasted redeeming qualities.

---

Nanamo I don't think they should have kept alive. I like the character but bringing her back really undermined the drama of 2.55 and for me shot down any of the potential really interesting development that Ul'dah, Raubahn and the Sultansworn could have had. It was very anticlimactic.

Aymeric on the other hand I think is important to the narrative to survive, simply cause I think if they killed him off Ishgard would fall into being a complete mess. He really is the only figure we have in Ishgard that can effectively act as a unifying force for the different groups. While such a story would be interesting and dramatic, it wouldn't be one that would end anytime soon, particularly with the Dragonsong war going on and frankly I feel that walking away leaving Ishgard as a complete wreck rob any real sense of victory from the expansion. The whole point of the expansion has been pretty much saving Ishgard and ending a thousand years of conflict. I don't mind a bittersweet victory as long as their is still a sense of victory.

Plus to be honest, by 4.0 I suspect I'm going to be kind of tired of Ishgard, it's politics and Alpine landscapes in general. Collapsing societies aren't a story that is going to get any resolution, even minor, in 4 patches.

Also I think you sell the villains in Heavensward short. Nidhogg, however lost in his rage, is pretty justified in it. We aren't simply killing him because he is the villain but because the only way to end the cycle of hatred and death is to kill the ones perpetrating it. If we add what the Allag did to the Dragons, Nidhogg's hatred of mortals is very understandable. The Garleans plans regarding the Primals (not the invasion which I think is purely arrogance and hubris) is to save the planet, whatever the cost. Its just their plans for it are either flawed or extremely questionable at best. Even Thordan was doing what he was doing for what he thought was the right cause, to bring peace and order to the world, even though it was a terrible and misguided plan. Infact the only evil for evil sake villians in HW really were the Gnath, the Illuminati and Vundu tribe who were all 'Power, Power, Power!".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Honestly, it'd be easily solved if they just went ahead and didn't cave into fan pressure. I'm almost certain that's what happened with Nanamo and Aymeric. Having both of them perish for being too idealistic would have reinforced the message that we can't save everybody and that sometimes our actions, whilst just, will have major consequences.

---

Did we kinda have the latter with Before the Fall and the aftermath? Yes, Nanamo didn't stay dead, but its being made clear that none of the Scions came out of that mess unscathed. The events of As Goes Light, As Goes Darkness are another example, what with the Brothers of True Faith, and people accusing us of being complict in a coups d'état. Which, let's face it, is exactly what that was.

You can have consequences for being idealistic without people dying Game of Thrones style. And I'd frankly rather not have FFXIV fall into 'anyone can die' syndrome. That's a very fast way to get me to stop caring about the characters. And excessive cyniscim can be just as unrealistic as excessive idealism. IMHO, compared to other stories I've seen, FFXIV does a good job of balancing out its overall optimism with doses of realism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MilesSaintboroguh

The story is always going to show Garlemade as a nation of conquerors with a few deserters that disagree with them. Most video game stories are as simple as that and I don't expect us (player or in character) to suddenly start sympathizing with a nation that wanted to conquer everything and use forbidden ancient technology that seems to get everyone screwed.

---

I would imagine that we might end up sympathizing with Garlemald, the nation, but not Garlemald, the leadership. Similar to how we don't go "Thordan VII was a jerk, we should destroy Ishgard", I'd guess we go to Garlemald (perhaps invited in a similar manner to VI), meet the people and see that they are fine, perhaps with the leadership arguing that the ends justify the means. If the Garlean people are essentially good, and not cutthroat pirates or people who'd sell their own mother (hinthint), then that would make for a compelling development. Obviously we'd see no beastmen, and that would probably be a sticking point for our continued disagreement with them, but there is no reason for them to display the entire nation as warmongering maniacs.

I'd actually quite like to see Garlemald handled similarly to Aht Urhgan in XI. A more antagonizing leadership (actually, save one princess, Aht Urhgan had a pretty horrible leadership... Heck, they were at war with the Far East and thus Tenzen, which made visiting there a bit awkward at first), but we work with the people there regardless, because they've not really done anything wrong. While Aht Urhgan had a beastmen problem that we just dealt with in combat and nothing more, it would be nice to have a situation similar to Whitegate and various tribes, but that we deal with similarly to the Dravanians as well. We fight the "bad" ones and try to reason with the "good" ones, all the while attempting to stop the leadership making some big mistake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nalien

...and not cutthroat pirates or people who'd sell their own mother (hinthint)...

---

You forgot the tree-hugging xenophobes :P. If you;re gonna trash the city-states, then don't leave anyone out.

On-topic, I can see something like this happening, They did it once with the Archadaen Empire in XII. Of course the differnce thus far lies in motivations. Vayne did what he did in a bid to free man from the shackles of gods in control of history, but he himself had a sympathise from within that group. While Garlemald's relationship with the supernatural is the reverse. A supernaturual force manipulating them wither than working with them to break them from this cycle (and ended relatively soon regardless)

On a side note, XII seems to be about what happened if the heroes were manipulated almost to the point of being villains, but ultimately reject that path. XIV seems a little black-and-white (So far, and yes I amid that there had been some greys in Heavensward, and that there were some greying aspects as far back as Copperbell)

In the end, I think that Ishgard would be a proof of concept. A test to see if the WoL is able to help solve the political issues of a state (Key-word being help), with sucess in Ishgard likely leading to similar results in Ala Mhigo and potentiality Garlemald.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morningstar1337

You forgot the tree-hugging xenophobes :P. If you;re gonna trash the city-states, then don't leave anyone out.

---

I've never really seen Gridania as that bad. The worst I can probably say about them is they're an entire nation suffering from Stockholm Syndrome... That they keep most outsiders away is more for their own safety, since the Elementals are fairly temperamental... Better to come off as potentially xenophobic than let innocent people get spirited away for an honest mistake, and better to come off as a tree-hugger than to be spirited away yourself... As a whole though, the nation has fairly friendly people and is the only one of the three (now four) to actually have a stable leadership.

The Elementals have been a lot less antagonistic than in 1.0 though, heck they even helped us save Y'shtola, so I'm incline to even forget about the whole "worship or die" mentality that Gridania seems to have...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PArcher

Just because the war as far as we are concerned (the fighting, taking the fanatics and blind followers out of power, stopping Nidhogg...) is over, doesn't mean its over for the Dravanians and Ishgard.

Racism between man and dragon will continue for ages, as will the classism between highborn and lowborn, and the fanatics on both sides will still work to get back into power and defeat the enemies they see.

THAT is the war that will take generations to end. I mean, look at the real world for examples of this...

---

Or, Midgardsormr could be serious, basing his predictions off the results of past heroes. He specifically mentioned war, and not the scars of war or repairing relations in his statement.

He hasn't accounted for the fact that our WoL is probably one of the most effective ones yet, though. (e.g. We're the first to ever destroy Ascians, for example)
Plot armor is a strong power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CGMidlander

(e.g. We're the first to ever destroy Ascians, for example)

---

Except we aren't...the Warrior of Darkness got there before us, remember?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PArcher

Except we aren't...the Warrior of Darkness got there before us, remember?

---

Do we actually have a time frame on that cutscene? Heck, is there even confirmation that they finished the job? That could literally be the same as our "Sword of Light" cutscene with Lahabrea, in which we didn't kill Lahabrea, only their version of Lahabrea got back up and told them The Truth™ and bought them some Soot Black dye for their initiation.

Given how Lahabrea and Elidibus talk about us putting down Nabriales, I don't think the Warriors of Darkness did so successfully/before us.

I felt faintly disgusted when I finished the 3.0 story and saw that image in the OP. 1000 years of utterly needless cruelty and there is Ser Aymeric groveling before a member of the race that has tortured his people since time out of mind. Had the game allowed me I would have put my lance point against his throat and told him that he could get down on his knees and beg forgiveness when the dragons did the same and until then he would stay on his damned feet.
In fact as the Warrior of Light I was fed up with pretty much everyone by the end. If I could I would have installed myself as provisional ruler of Ishgard until such a time as a new government could be formed and let it be known that anyone who tried to make trouble would get a spear through the face. Meanwhile I would make it very clear to the dragons that if they put so much as a claw into Ishgardian territory I would go to Dravania and kill them all, down to the last egg.

So we are going to make peace with the dragons...while still killing them for their skins and still dealing with their horde in FATEs.

This seems uneven.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nalien

That could literally be the same as our "Sword of Light" cutscene with Lahabrea, in which we didn't kill Lahabrea, only their version of Lahabrea got back up and told them The Truth™ and bought them some Soot Black dye for their initiation.

---

I find this hard to believe because that Sword of Light cutscene is you using the Echo to banish Lahabrea from Thancred, unless you're assuming that they weren't able to banish him at all, in which case Elidibus probably wouldn't have been interested in them as much in the first place.

My evidence:
1. The background changes to the blue crystalline once your character opens their eyes, which is exactly how your echo scenes with Hydaelyn look. We're just using the Echo differently than when we view memories, more directly entering Thancred's soulspace. This actually reminded me of the more subtle use of the Echo in-story from 1.0 rather than the really blurry, blatant use we usually get in 2.0.
2. Elidibus says straight out that it was the Echo that banished Lahabrea, not the Blessing in 2.1. Hence why he's excited, if you can call it that, about powerful Echo users, rather than powerful Blessing users.

That being said, I don't believe it's Lahabrea because the journal makes a comparison to Lahabrea, but pretty specifically implies it's not him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CyrilLucifer

That being said, I don't believe it's Lahabrea because the journal makes a comparison to Lahabrea, but pretty specifically implies it's not him.

---

Oh I wasn't saying it was Lahabrea, I was saying it was their parties version of him; The Ascian who antagonized them on whatever adventurer they were off on while we were off on ours. We had Lahabrea, they had nameless dude, but nameless dude is their version of Lahabrea in a sense.

All we saw in 3.1 was Darklanders group essentially doing exactly what we did to Lahabrea in Praetorium, or whatever metaphysical plane it was where we excised Lahabrea from Flancred before attempting to swat him with a Sword of Light. We don't know if they actually killed that Ascian, because indeed we didn't kill Lahabrea, we don't even know when that occurred. It was an Echo cutscene, but that doesn't mean they killed their Ascian before we killed ours. Given how Lahabrea and Elidibus comment on us taking out Nabriales, I find it doubtful that Darklander succeeded at killing an Ascian at all.

Basically, all we see is that they had an encounter with an Ascian, and attempted to defeat him in much the same way we tried to defeat Lahabrea. All the cutscene told us was that they were once just like us, not that they killed an Ascian.

Yeah, I somehow doubt the WoL killed that Ascien (unless it was the low-tiered type) namely because they need to be imprisoned (to prevent them from teleporting) within a __ 1st before they blasting them with a lot of aether.

If an Ascien was killed in the past then they'd be more careful when dealing with Hydaelyn's own Champion