New Revelations: The Elements

Part of what's been holding up my post in the 5.0 first impressions / feedback thread is that I like to understand things in the proper context before commenting. Clearly a lot of things have changed behind the scenes over this almost-decade to keep everything tied together, and especially to bring them all to the same point in Shadowbringers. So what was planned all along and what gave way to necessity?

One of the bigger thorns in my side this week has been this new understanding of the elements. Calamities are elemental in nature, so why is Light a calamity now? We "know" that Light and Darkness are "different forms of energy" than the elements. Moreover, Shadowbringers ties them into astral and umbral even though we "know" that they aren't related; astral and umbral are elemental.

Combining Oda-san, the lore book(s), Urianger, Emet-Selch, and the Exarch, the core revelation seems to be thus: astral and umbral may be elemental in nature, but they are the effect caused by the "pull" of Darkness or Light's presence upon the element until it gains a polarized "charge". Moreover, Eorzeans understand this backwards from its original meaning.

If this is the correct reading:

• The disaster on the First is all elements, but pulled by Light towards the PASSIVE pole (Eorzea would call it umbral).

• Because Eorzea called Bahamut's calamity "all elements charged astrally", we should assume that this was actually all elements pulled by Darkness towards the ACTIVE pole.

(Which would explain why it's dark magenta in the Exarch's diorama, I guess.)

It's convoluted, but it does keep all the plates spinning. Did anyone have a more parsimonious reading?

Okay, but doesn't that imply Water, Earth, and Ice are somehow more energetic than Wind, Fire, and Lightning? That sounds weird.

inb4, ""Let me tell you a tale - the tale of a brilliant but misguided scholar who not knowing about Hydaelyn and Zodiark, as indeed few in our world do, did not consider that Water, Ice, and Earth are elements closer to the planet, to Hydaelyn, and that Fire, Wind, and Lightning are closer to the moon, to Zodiark. One could see how in his hubris..." (What about the Umbral Nodule?) "Shhh... Shhhhhhhh..."

All traditional elements (water, earth, ice, wind, fire, lighting) can have both Astral and Umbral charges. For example, Fire when Astraly charged burns volatility. When Fire is Umbrally charged, it burns very dry (probably small flames, but steady).

This can be extended to all the other elements as well.

this new interpretation implies... well for one thing, that umbral and astral aren't elements or even polarities in and of themselves but behaviors that mortals ascribe to the elements. which i guess is fine. BUT ALSO! that bahamut's calamity was indeed an astral(Norv umbral) calamity... based on the fact that the abnormal phenomena in the Source around 4.4/4.5 were the result of an upsurge of umbral(Norv astral) energies.

Prior to the end of release FF14 we saw dramatic political upheaval as old military orders once again mobilized; ancient combat arts rediscovered and passed on to a new generation; a revolution in the accepted orthodoxy of crafting held by all the guilds on Eorzea; the arrival of mysterious strangers from across the sea following a terrible prophecy; the rise of doomsday cults and a mad, traitorous Legatus; the moon falling out of the sky... even mice got like... VERY big. In short, absolutely everything changed in every possible way all at once; the very opposite of stillness and stagnation. With the alternate explanation for what light and darkness "represent" presented by Urianger... the 7th umbral calamity being "light-based" checks out, i figure.

We cast Astral Fire, but Voidsent cast Dark Fire... which is the same exact animation. Coincidence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norondor

this new interpretation implies... well for one thing, that umbral and astral aren't elements or even polarities in and of themselves but behaviors that mortals ascribe to the elements. which i guess is fine. BUT ALSO! that bahamut's calamity was indeed an astral(Norv umbral) calamity... based on the fact that the abnormal phenomena in the Source around 4.4/4.5 were the result of an upsurge of umbral(Norv astral) energies.

---

I think you're overthinking or misunderstanding the astral/umbral thing because as explained, The First doesn't use Astral/Umbral at all. Instead they name their polarities through whether Light or Dark polarized the element. Remember, that scroll Urianger used to explain the differences was in Eorzean script, not Norvrandtian, presumably one he made himself in the years he's been there.

To the Norvrandtian labeling, it's more accurate to say that Bahamut's calamity was one of Darkness.

The simplified version, I guess, would be
Element + Light = Umbral
Element + Dark = Astral

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anonymoose

Okay, but doesn't that imply Water, Earth, and Ice are somehow more energetic than Wind, Fire, and Lightning? That sounds weird.

---

I don't actually know how you arrived there from your own deductions. Granted, I tend to focus on the broad strokes as a side effect of processing cutscenes in two languages at once, but what I got from Urianger was simply that "Light" on the First is stasis and rest (so, water, earth, ice); while "Dark" is energetic chaos (fire, wind, lightning) and under no circumstances to be confused with entropic chaos (i.e., the "umbral"), which loops back around to stasis.

That scene made me think back to the debates of yesteryear, and how hard it was to reconcile the Flood of Light within various different framings of Light and Darkness, but ultimately the answer appears to be that Light and Dark are matters of perspective even on the most fundamental, elemental level. Not to start any flame wars, but I'm beginning to wonder if the actual aspects of Zodiark and Hydaelyn might lie in a more Soul Sacrifice direction...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenral

I don't actually know how you arrived there from your own deductions. Granted, I tend to focus on the broad strokes as a side effect of processing cutscenes in two languages at once, but what I got from Urianger was simply that "Light" on the First is stasis and rest (so, water, earth, ice); while "Dark" is energetic chaos (fire, wind, lightning) and under no circumstances to be confused with entropic chaos (i.e., the "umbral"), which loops back around to stasis.

That scene made me think back to the debates of yesteryear, and how hard it was to reconcile the Flood of Light within various different framings of Light and Darkness, but ultimately the answer appears to be that Light and Dark are matters of perspective even on the most fundamental, elemental level. Not to start any flame wars, but I'm beginning to wonder if the actual aspects of Zodiark and Hydaelyn might lie in a more Soul Sacrifice direction...

---

They specifically say that what the Source defines as Astral is what the First describes as Darkness, and that Umbral is likewise Light. But yes, what you say holds Fenral.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ObsidianFire

All traditional elements (water, earth, ice, wind, fire, lighting) can have both Astral and Umbral charges. For example, Fire when Astraly charged burns volatility. When Fire is Umbrally charged, it burns very dry (probably small flames, but steady).

This can be extended to all the other elements as well.

---

So uhh...what are the Astral and Umbral aspects of the other 5 elements?

It's said that calamities occur when aether flows from a shard to source and the elements overload on the source causing an elemental themed deluge
But the 7th calamity was man-made (Dalamud) and it just came crashsing down due to Lunar transmitter. And Bahamut existed before the aether would have flowed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anonymoose

Okay, but doesn't that imply Water, Earth, and Ice are somehow more energetic than Wind, Fire, and Lightning? That sounds weird.

---

I think you're misreading the element chart by assuming that the the three elements on the "astral half" and "umbral half" of the diagram are thought of as aligned with that polarity. We know from the surrounding descriptions that all the elements can have either polarity.


There are two concepts being stacked on top of each other in the chart:

1. The outer part demonstrates that the elemental wheel, as a whole, is influenced by astral and umbral polarities.

2. The inner part shows the wheel itself, and the interactions between the individual elements.


As was discussed in another thread recently, the "elements and polarities" concept actually needs to be demonstrated in 3D - I think it was you that brought up a "crystal-shaped" diagram with astral/umbral points above and below the elemental wheel.

The chart is essentially a flattened version of that model, and stylised with representing astral/umbral as heavens and earth, rather than the abstract active/passive natures they actually represent. (Though it is a neat coincidence that there are three 'airy' and three 'earthly' elements in sequence to be arranged on the chart like that.)

Is this correct...?

Surely Astral is energetic and Umbral is passive?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphor

Is this correct...?

Surely Astral is energetic and Umbral is passive?

---

That is the crux here.
Astral (as the Source understands it) is the polarity of creation. But too much creation results in things overlaying atop of each other and like with colors this is known as 'Darkness' in the First
Umbral is the polarity of decay. But too much decay results in an empty 'white' space and such is known as 'Light' in the First.
Thancred then theorizes that this is a more ancient understanding, and since the Ascians think this way too it might be the 'correct' one (in paranthesis, because I understand it more like 'Too much of one thing loops into it's opposite' making both sets of terms correct depending on perspective.)

What I don't really get is, if this is true what exactly governs if Darkness loops into Light or Light into Darkness? Why had the 13th a Calamity of Darkness and the First a Calamity of Light, when Light and Darkness are just 2 Points on a sliding scale?

I don't see the point of flipping astral and umbral on their heads.
They literally mean light and dark, and we already call the 13th, overcome with darkness, the void.

I thought that conversation was about explaining hiw the people of the First revere the passivity of darkness over the activity of light.

It would make more sense that astral, light, activity, creation, is what results in an all encompassing brightness that 'bleaches' creation.

That's just it, though; Emet-Selch spends the rest of Shadowbringers affirming that the original word attached to the primordial force of stasis was Light, so the force acting on the elements to create an umbral charge was Light, not Darkness, all along. Eorzeans "misunderstood" the cause (Light/Darkness) of the effect (astral/umbral). The First just never paid any attention to the polarities as distinct things, but rather Element + Primordial Force.

So Light is still Light, but the source have arbitrarily named it Umbral (shadow)...
I don't get why this is a thing, it doesn't affect anything other than the semantics of the source.

What if we apply something similar to how primary colors work but to the elements?
With light sources, you have an additive system where red, green and blue are the primary colors. By adding them all together you get white, the Light
For printing (as we see light reflection), you have a subtractive system, where cyan, magenta and yellow are the primary colors. By adding them all together you get black, the Darkness.

The Shards are reflections of the Source after all....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MerleSirlos

What if we apply something similar to how primary colors work but to the elements?
With light sources, you have an additive system where red, green and blue are the primary colors. By adding them all together you get white, the Light
For printing (as we see light reflection), you have a subtractive system, where cyan, magenta and yellow are the primary colors. By adding them all together you get black, the Darkness.

The Shards are reflections of the Source after all....

---

Ok, I can see why they've done that from a thematic viewpoint then.
The first is exactly how I always imagined it, and the 'reflections' being 'opposite land' seems to be the direction they're taking, if only in naming conventions at least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MerleSirlos

What if we apply something similar to how primary colors work but to the elements?
With light sources, you have an additive system where red, green and blue are the primary colors. By adding them all together you get white, the Light
For printing (as we see light reflection), you have a subtractive system, where cyan, magenta and yellow are the primary colors. By adding them all together you get black, the Darkness.

The Shards are reflections of the Source after all....

---

I thought it was mentioned like that as well during the explanation (my color theory senses went off) when it happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphor

So Light is still Light, but the source have arbitrarily named it Umbral (shadow)...
I don't get why this is a thing, it doesn't affect anything other than the semantics of the source.

---

The mages on the source got it wrong is all. Think of how science and engineering have positive and negative electric charges flipped (because of an arbitrary decision about which was which before we knew about electrons) , or "well sorted" and "poorly graded" being synonyms in regards to a rock/sediment's grain size distribution (the former used by geologists and the latter by geological engineers).

Wondering how this applies to the two oldest primals.

Zodiark would be a being of Active energy which is dark.
Hydaelyn is a being of passive and stasis energy which is light.

Would that be correct?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QT_Melon

Wondering how this applies to the two oldest primals.

Zodiark would be a being of Active energy which is dark.
Hydaelyn is a being of passive and stasis energy which is light.

Would that be correct?

---

Makes sense when you consider Hydaelyn's original purpose.