Okay, so! Forgive me for being a silly grognard and beating a dead horse here, but despite this forum now being flooded Venat takes, I feel like I want to get something technical about the narrative off my chest.
So, in Elpis, we travel to the past and tell Venat, in broad strokes, what happens to the Ancient world and everything she does up until the present day. Then, after we go back to the present, she ends up following the scenario we gave her to the letter, creating a closed time loop. After this, three explicit suggestions are given for her motivations in performing the Sundering over the course of the rest of the expansion.
1. She felt that humanity at the time was unable to cope with suffering and loss, and this was going to lead to Ancient culture down a path of immorality and self-destructive behavior which had to be stopped. (The story is not specific about whether this was just preventing the sacrifices, or whether it was about something more fundamental like leading their civilization down the path of the Ra-la and other dead civilizations; regardless, that isn't important for this post.) This is suggested in the monologue she gives at the end of Elpis.
2. From a purely pragmatic perspective, she realized that humanity would only be able to defeat Meteion and prevent the Final Days if they were better at controlling Dynamis. This is suggested in her death scene.
3. She wanted to close rather than branch the timeline, giving you a chance to save your future specifically, which required her to not deviate from the story you told her. This is suggested tangentially in the death scene and again in the final Emet Scene in Ultima Thule.
Now, 1 and 2 are already a little contradictory - if it was always a necessity to Sunder the Ancients no matter what to save the world, why bother trying to convince them to change their ways? Why lecture them in the way she did? - but if we interpret the plot point symbolically as a lack of control over Dynamis just being a literalized representation of the Ancient's emotional immaturity, we can sort of overlook it.
The real thing I'm still hung up on is the contradiction between 1+2 and 3.
There are two ways you can interpret the "Venat creates a closed time loop" plot point. The first is that she did it incidentally (what she thought was wise at any given time merely happened to line up with the story you'd told her, until she eventually just decided to go with it) and the second is that she did it intentionally (from the beginning, she gave up her own agency and just carried out the script you gave her, with the intention of ultimately saving your world).
Right?
(continued in first post.)
[Spoilers] Venat's motive
Printable View
-
12-30-2021, 01:48 PMLurina[Spoilers] Venat's motive
-
12-30-2021, 01:48 PMLurina
...but, like. Neither of these work. In the former case, it makes her look like a doofus - if she's not explicitly trying to create a time loop but just the best possible world, why continue not to tell Emet and the rest of the Unsundered what's really going on after the Sundering, and Hermes is out of the picture? Why, despite knowing about the Rejoinings and the modus operandi of the Ascians, did she do nothing to stop them and save all those people at the height of her power? And what was the story even trying to suggest in her death scene when it implied she'd been planning for our reunion from the start?
And in the latter case, it's a far more extreme version of the contradiction between 1 and 2. If she was only acting from a script from the beginning, she is essentially a character bereft of any other motives; a slave to causality who by the very nature of her goal could never make any broad-strokes decisions at all. Why, in that case, is it suggested her actions were informed by any deeper feelings whatsoever? What was the point of her monologue?
And like, while we're on this point, where did the idea of the Sundering even come from? I know this is a time travel plot which are always a bit of a mess, but it's kinda egregious in this case. We know she gets the idea of Sundering the world from us - once someone hears a thought from an external source, they can't then develop it independently. But the only reason we had that information because she'd done it already in our past. So we have a situation where this setting-defining event basically originates from a writing futz that's like something out of a Rick and Morty episode.
I know this is being very picky, and normally I wouldn't normally be so fussy about a game story, but the problem is that this whole 8+ year plot relies on selling the idea of Hydaelyn having a justified reason for the Sundering, yet the writers feel anxious and contradictory about what that even is. I can't picture what was going through her head at all. I'm sure this doesn't bother people who weren't attached to the ancient world and the characters in it, but if you are, it makes its destruction and the consequence of human life becoming permanently much worse feel arbitrary and meaningless.
Like we're supposed to smile and accept it was necessary for all these people to die because the scenario team said so, but them "saying so" is a fuzzy mess of contradictory ideas. -
12-30-2021, 01:56 PMVeloran
I get the sense that the writers just threw everything they could think of at the wall for Venat's motive and hoped one of them would stick. I mean creating Dynamis-capable beings is something Y'shtola postulates after the fact.
-
12-30-2021, 02:09 PMCleretic
First of all: nix number three. Nothing Venat did was actually influenced by us time travelling, she was always going to do this whole plan. This is clear from the very first time we tell her anything; it's Emet-Selch that grapples with 'I would never do such a thing', Venat's challenge is more 'I trust that I would do such a thing if I had to, but will I truly have to'.
Her angle is more about 1 and 2, with an additional third of 'get Zodiark out of the picture'--he needs to remain alive because he's protecting the planet, but he can't stick around as an 'Undo Problems By Sacrificing Lives Here' button. Basically we can't be trusted not to use the thing, and fair enough. Something to also remember is that Zodiark did temper the Convocation--sure, it was light in comparison to what something like Ifrit would go on to do, but it was clear, and they'd become completely unwilling to consider alternatives even as far as with the intended third sacrifice. They're DEFINITELY not gonna listen after the Sundering, when the Ascians now have a very direct thing to point to and say 'screw you, we don't trust you'.
The question of where the Sundering plan came about is an interesting one, because we don't get an answer to that, but we know that by the time Hydaelyn is summoned, Venat has some allies and a fair amount of time. So it's reasonable to me that the Sundering was probably actively thought of rather than found as a magical solution; they considered their options, and for whatever reason, they landed on that. -
12-30-2021, 02:09 PMtokinokanatae
It's honestly bewildering to me.
Going into this expac, I had some basic assumptions about how Hydaelyn's "arc" would play out. Since it was clear--based on the fan reaction to the Ancients--that making them completely complicit in their own undoing was a no go, my basic idea of what would be Venat's motivation was this:
1. There was something more deeply wrong with the Final Days than Zodiark addressed. Whether this was something more intrinsically wrong with the planet that He couldn't fix, or something had awoken from within the depths that needed to be addressed. Either way, it's a barbed wire and duct tape solution instead of dealing with the source of the problem.
2.Venat figured out what this issue was and brought it up the Convocation. However, at this point they had all been tempered to some degree. I even remember talking with friends about how horrifying it would be to be Venat, to go to your highest authority that you're used to being reasonable and transparent and they just completely shut you down. In a world where open debate is lauded, there can suddenly be no debate where Zodiark is concerned.
3. Desperate, Venat comes up with a plan to weaken whatever caused the Final Days through Sundering. Maybe she knew what would happen to the remaining Ancients and maybe she didn't, but ultimately she knows that even with Zodiark there, the entire planet is doomed unless she does something to make sure the Final Days can't happen again.
So then, it becomes almost very amusing to me how it ended up literally the opposite of what I assumed. In trying to make both sides sympathetic, Venat comes out wishy-washy at best or nearly psychotic at worst. Instead of the Ancients being unwilling to deal with a solution to the Final Days--they have no clue! Instead of Venat trying to work with the Convocation and being rebuffed, she doesn't even bother to try! Instead of the Sundering being a necessary evil (or mistake) to preserve life, Venat decides that she is the final judge, jury, and executioner of her own people because they didn't handle the literal apocalypse with as much pluck as she would have liked. -
12-30-2021, 02:16 PMLurinaYeah, it was. That's alluded to in both your final discussion with her, and especially in Emet's final scene, where he compliments her on resolving the time loop so elegantly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleretic
And my point regarding the Sundering idea is that it's impossible for Venat and her followers to have developed the idea themselves. You already gave it to her by telling her it happens. Once someone has an idea in their head, they can't originate it, because it's already there.
So the idea of the Sundering comes from the Warrior of Light who then tells it to Venat who enacts it which then leads to the Warrior of Light learning about it, who then tells it to Venat who enacts it, which then leads to the Warrior of Light learning about it... -
12-30-2021, 02:16 PMClereticSee, thinking about it... I think you've hit on something, but from the wrong direction. Remember that the writers did want to make this a bit of a debatable notion; in the time of the Ancients, neither side is explicitly in the right. Now, consider that we already had the opposing side to Hydaelyn: The Ascians, and specifically Emet-Selch. Who may have been sympathetic, but are extremely terrible people to us, just utter monsters.Quote:
Originally Posted by tokinokanatae
So they want to make Hydaelyn an equal but opposing side to the Ascians and Zodiark. ...but you can't just make her a good, kind, loving and perfect person, because then it's not even a question; do you side with the horrible monsters, or the kindly motherly goddess figure?
It's not that they had to talk her up (although that was a separate need; justifying the Sundering was both needed and difficult), it's that they actually had to scuff her up and make her a clearly imperfect person on or near the Ascians' level. -
12-30-2021, 02:20 PMVeloranShe was always going to not tell anybody about Meteion, specifically sunder the world into fourteen pieces, and create the Mothercrystal while preserving a portion of power for the purposes of testing WoL in the future and providing a way to go challenge Meteion? When Emet says "So me being here now was all part of your 5D master plan huh Venat?" she was going to do that regardless of WoL never showing up in Elpis?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleretic
-
12-30-2021, 02:40 PMh-alphaTime travel hurts my brain. Others have probably explained this better elsewhere, but...Quote:
Originally Posted by Veloran
We are the Warrior of Light, Hydaelyn's chosen champion. For that to happen, we needed Venat to know who we were, awaken the Echo in us, and give us her Blessing of Light, alongside creating a race of rabbits with a spaceship that could eventually take us to Meteion. In order for Venat to know to do that, we needed to go back in time and tell her these things - the idea being that the events that led us to travel back in time to Elpis were only ever possible because we did go back in time. So nothing that we did in the past could have changed what Venat did - she was always going to do what she did, because it needed to be done so that the exact circumstances that allowed for us to go back in time to tell her could happen.
A similar causal loop theory of time travel was used in the Alexander raids as well, I believe. -
12-30-2021, 02:47 PMClereticYes. Yes, exactly, all of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Veloran
In fact, you stated the biggest piece of evidence we have: the Mothercrystal. She can't have created the Mothercrystal as part of just following a script we gave her, because we didn't know she did that until later. -
12-30-2021, 02:48 PMLurinaThis is the "venat as causality slave" interpretation I was talking about, to be clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by h-alpha
-
12-30-2021, 03:03 PMVyrerusWhat do you mean? We told her eveerything. All of our visions with her, were of her as the Mothercrystal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleretic
-
12-30-2021, 03:22 PMVeloranShe made it as part of her promise to you. There's no point in even having it without WoL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleretic
-
12-30-2021, 03:24 PMClereticAnd then we learned she wasn't, because she had a whole other level of plan about the Mothercrystal that we weren't privvy to until several levels later.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vyrerus
Again, she can't be completely robbed of agency by claiming 'predestination paradox', because even if you do that (and you shouldn't), she still had tricks up her sleeve. -
12-30-2021, 03:36 PMVyrerusYeah, but we still told her, "You gifted me the blessing, but you were a giant crystal." In our silent, up to some interpretation, recounting of our adventure. We later learn she was hiding behind it or something, but it's still part of what she was told. So it still falls into a predestination paradox claim under the guise of, "The WoL told me that I was a giant crystal... wonder what that was about?" I mean we could still attribute her plan for it to a tinge of agency, but the idea of a giant crystal is still the starting point for giving her ideas what to do with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleretic
And I never robbed her of agency. The scriptwriters did. :P They wrote the paradox in, and the paradox gets to give a lot of character agency the middle finger. -
12-30-2021, 03:37 PMh-alphaThe thing with causal loops is that there are generally two ways it can happen:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurina
1. All actions are set and characters have no free will. Following a script, like you said (Novikov’s self-consistency principle)
2. Characters are not necessarily following a script, they can act against it, but the universe will protect the timeline in any way it can by adjusting to those new actions so that they ultimately result in the same outcome regardless (timeline-protection hypothesis)
There's a chance that she did try to change things - maybe her monologue is one of those attempts, maybe she did try to warn the Convocation. But because of the nature of that second one, it wouldn't matter. She'd give a speech and nobody would listen to her. She'd warn Emet-selch and he'd think she was hallucinating under the stress of the world falling apart around them, or happen to be unavailable at the exact moments that she tries to speak with him about it, or whatever. The universe would find a way, however improbable the event, to keep the timeline on the correct course. -
12-30-2021, 03:37 PMKariTheFox
I do not think a closed time loop necessarily turns Venat into an agency-less slave to causality. Armed with foreknowledge, she could at any time, choose to act in a way that would change the future. We know she could have done that, because the entire plot of Shadowbringers involved taking action to change a known future. That she chooses not to is something she has agency over, she goes with her plan in order to give our future a fighting chance.
In that sense, she is choosing to value an uncertain and imperfect future known to have suffering and pain - over the seemingly perfect world of the ancients.
(if anyone are slaves to causality it's Emet-selch and the rest of the ascians. Whose actions were known by Venat, and acted exactly how the WoL told them they would, and had no ability to alter that course. But even then, I think their choices were still their own.) -
12-30-2021, 04:17 PMCleretic'Hiding behind it' was basically just a joke explanation for what happened, which was some amount more elaborate. She wasn't literally doing that, she more just actually pulled off the Wizard of Oz deceit. But remember that the Mothercrystal factors into the whole plan rather than just being a 'well actually'; it's the overall reason we can get to Ultima Thule in the first place. Which, in turn, we also knew we had to go to because of Venat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vyrerus
Please, just push the idea of the predestination paradox out of your mind for a while. Ask the question of 'what would Venat have done if she didn't have the guide', and realize that nothing actually needs to change. Everything she does is internally consistent without the need to add in 'but stable time loop'. Sure, not all of it is necessarily what you might think of as 'Plan A Material', but once you concede that what we saw was probably around Plan E, with A-D proving various forms of unfeasible (basically proven by the 5.2 Anamnesis scene, where they're still trying to find an alternative), it all checks out. -
12-30-2021, 04:41 PMVeloranWithout knowledge of the future she has no reason to hide the truth from anyone else in Elpis. Assuming WoL never shows up and Venat never even gets involved, then Hermes should have just heard Meteion's report and turned traitor the whole way. If Venat knows nothing she has no reason to even design a concept capable of sundering souls to begin with, nor does she have reason to oppose anyone else because she wouldn't know the true cause of the Final Days, thus Meteion wouldn't be tracked by her, and so she has no reason to create the Mothercrystal to provide energy for a flight to the edge of the universe nor would she have a reason to conserve energy for a theoretical battle to test anyone going to confront Meteion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleretic
None of Venat's actions even begin to make sense in a world where WoL doesn't go back and give her spoilers. -
12-30-2021, 04:53 PMLurinaSure. I talked about this in the OP, though. If that were the case, why did the other reasons even come up? If her motive was always to make the one choice to close the loop, then nothing else is applicable. Her moral judgement of the ancients, emphasized considerably by the narrative, becomes weird and hollow because there was never an alternative.Quote:
Originally Posted by KariTheFox
If you don't mind me saying so, this is giving the writers a lot of credit for what is a pretty contrived scenario - in an interview, the scenario team expressed that they hadn't planned any of the later parts of the ancient plot in advance until Shadowbringers, so from the top down the situation needs to be seen as them trying to construct this new logic for Hydaelyn's actions on top of the already established events.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleretic
With that in mind, if we're operating on the assumption that Hydaelyn wasn't trying to close the time loop intentionally, then the idea that she would have this foreknowledge and no compunctions against putting it to her her advantage, only to end up creating the exact same circumstances she heard about to begin with, is inherently very silly to me. She knew about everything the Convocation would ultimately do with Zodiark, and how the sacrifices would happen. She knew about how Emet would respond to her actions, about the Rejoinings. She knew that she herself would goof in the First and contribute to causing the Flood of Light in her guidance of Ardbert. The idea that she would not be able to exercise any agency in changing these events whatsoever from the course described to her despite this is, if it was what the writers meant to do, an incredibly janky contrivance. -
12-30-2021, 05:23 PMEaraGraceI do believe the writers, subtly, confirm that She did try to change those events. When we speak after the fight in the Sea, She mentions how, despite her “failures”, She remembered the stories we shared and it kept Her going. Perhaps this is wrong, but my read was that She was referring to the rejoinings in that statement. Given by this point all present know about what happened in Elpis, to describe these events as “failures,” despite knowing they would have to occur for a Conjunction to form, says to me that She did try to change the future, but was unable to. Her efforts to convince the Ancients to change course also proves that. If the She was simply ensuring the events She was told of occurred, why try to change arguably the most important event? Why not just Sunder the planet as soon as Zodiark finished repairing the star? It only makes sense if She was trying to create a new future.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurina
-
12-30-2021, 05:43 PMClereticOkay, I have to refute this on a point-by-point basis, because pretty much all of them are wrong in different but interconnected ways and I kinda have to take it slow to really dissect this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Veloran
"Without knowledge of the future she has no reason to hide the truth from anyone else in Elpis." She gives exactly the reason she has to keep things secret, and it's because the truth is so crushingly depressing that she has to make sure she only tells people who can take it (and we see soon after, the general Ancient population can't take it). She also has to make sure Hermes remains oblivious, which means being selective about who might tell him.
"Assuming WoL never shows up and Venat never even gets involved, then Hermes should have just heard Meteion's report and turned traitor the whole way." Actually, Venat probably sticks around Hythlodaeus and Emet-Selch, who she crosses paths with as part of their official duties; she's nosy, and doesn't seem to have anything better to do. It's also actually neither Venat nor our fault that things go so sour about Meteion's report; it's Emet-Selch's, and so that won't actually change.
"If Venat knows nothing she has no reason to even design a concept capable of sundering souls to begin with[...]" Venat's actions in Ktisis are not influenced by us, she's off tagging Meteion while we're down with Emet and Hythlodaeus. Her nosiness was always going to put her there.
Really, Emet is the more active ingredient here; without him being around she wouldn't have had reason to follow (indeed, we wouldn't be following either), and Hermes wouldn't have been set so far off that he went to Ktisis. -
12-30-2021, 06:03 PMVyrerusWell, I can't really, because it's central to the plot we were given.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleretic
But to humor you, this is what I think would occur without our trip to Elpis.
Emet-selch and Hythlodaeus would not have been delayed entering into Elpis, and would have met with Hermes and Meteion sooner. With no one to keep Meteion company, Hermes would have had to take her outside on his own to calm her down, and find another researcher to hold her hand while he talked with Hyth and Emet. Things would proceed the same, but with Emet-selch shouldering more work in regards to the concepts that had to be put down (the red Fenrirs). Hermes would overall be sadder.
Emet-selch and Hythlodaeus would stick around closer to him, to continue the interview process, while Venat would maybe bump into them, maybe not. Without our Traveler's Ward to draw her, I don't see her taking a vested interest in Emet's or Hermes's business. At some point during the interview process, since we weren't there to draw them away from Hermes and their business, Meteion would start receiving her report. Then the Dynamis discussion would follow, in order for Hermes to explain how Meteion is hiding.
After that I am uncertain about how they find her. Perhaps have every researcher present in Elpis start emitting aetherial fields around their bodies potent enough to shock her out of hiding, and then search over the entire facility. This would include Venat, whose interest would then be piqued. Events would proceed as before, minus the WoL.
But given the nature of the secrecy Hermes desires, I think it'd be more likely that he reluctantly retrieves a tool he's made to interact with Dynamis, which he can force her out of hiding with. Or merely waits until Meteion can no longer resist the hivemind and has to deliver the report. Once that happens, her report starts to be delivered, and events transpire similarly to before, minus Venat. I think it'd make a lot of sense for Emet-selch to draft other Ktsis Hyperboreia researchers into helping him and Hyth, given they shouldn't be enfeebled by the facility (and even if they are, still familiar with creatures kept there, so of use).
Everything proceeds without Venat, and it's essentially a doomed timeline where the Sundering can still happen, but Venat is hoarding aether to try to prevent final Rejoinings/Zoidark's release entirely, rather than combat Meteion at all.
Take #2 with the WoL still visiting Elpis, but maybe not triggering a paradox(or at least triggering a different one) is pretty simple.
Venat falls off the dog before making it out, or channels all of the energy into one Argos to get the WoL out and has her memory erased. She still has the link to Meteion, but doesn't know exactly what to make of it. She does everything the same, for different/actual personal belief reasons. Chooses us as WoL due to seeing her protege's soul. Maybe even hoards more energy/crystal because she doesn't know the full gravity about what her tracker spell is giving to her. This has the benefit of making her more tragic, by placing the full weight of killing her own people firmly on her shoulders without a proper justification UNTIL we kill Venat in the trial and she remembers then. It also makes opting for plan B at all make sense. -
12-30-2021, 06:05 PMLurinaThe word "failures" could really mean anything there, but even assuming that was what they meant, it doesn't make it any less silly. The Flood of Light in particular is a tragedy she could have very easily prevented by giving slightly different guidance. And if she was trying to change the future, why not behave in ways contrary to what we'd already told her? She knows that she's going to found an organization opposed to Zodiark to summon Hydaelyn after the Convocation refuses to back down from the sacrifice plan, and how this all ends in tragedy, but plays into it directly, point by point. That's not how someone trying to change the future would act.Quote:
Originally Posted by EaraGrace
Like, I'm not saying you can't be charitable towards the script, and use incidental dialogue like you're doing to interpret it in a way where her actions as a character loosely make sense one way or another. But it's obviously a little ambiguous - the people defending the clarity of her motive in this thread don't even seem to have the same interpretation among themselves, with some arguing she was trying to change the future and some not. I think the writers were probably "subtle" about this stuff because they realized that the scenario they'd crafted for her in Endwalker (which we know was a bit of a troubled project compared to earlier expansions because of covid and so on) didn't quite fit with the stuff they'd already established. So they kept a lot of points vague in the hopes that people wouldn't worry about it and just go along with the general themes.
So instead of a clearly written and objective Venat, we end up with a sorta build-your-own-Venat kit, where everyone can focus on different suggestive moments and lines to create their own motivation for her. The result is that most people like her, but barely anyone has the same interpretation of what was actually going through her head when she did the stuff she did. -
12-30-2021, 06:16 PMVeloranNeither of these things are necessary. Of the group that originally learn the truth 75% of them can take it, and in fact Emet and Hythlodaeus are two people that Venat chooses not to tell despite them proving that they would deal with it. The general Ancient population? They can panic or not panic as much as they damn well please, because in the final version of events 99.999% of them end up dying anyway. And Hermes? He is not needed. Venat already knew what to do to safeguard the planet, they could have chucked Hermes to the bottom of Pandemonium for all that he brought to the table.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleretic
Do I really even need to begin to tell you all the ways in which this idea is flawed? Countless events on Elpis, from big to very very small only transpire because WoL is there. WoL holds Emet and Hythlodaeus up at multiple points, leading to them crossing paths with Venat, and WoL's presence is the reason Venat takes an interest in the party and joins them because a rogue time traveler is kind of a big deal. They only investigate Meteion in the first place because of WoL and are only there as Meteion is delivering her report because they've gone to track down Hermes for that purpose. They then only find Meteion after she disappears because of WoL, as none of the others can detect her. From there WoL battles into Ktisis with the others, and aids in the ruse that even allows Venat to escape. And Emet-Selch made things go sour? In what regard?Quote:
"Assuming WoL never shows up and Venat never even gets involved, then Hermes should have just heard Meteion's report and turned traitor the whole way." Actually, Venat probably sticks around Hythlodaeus and Emet-Selch, who she crosses paths with as part of their official duties; she's nosy, and doesn't seem to have anything better to do. It's also actually neither Venat nor our fault that things go so sour about Meteion's report; it's Emet-Selch's, and so that won't actually change.
As I just said, the notion that she's just so nosy that somehow everything would occur exactly as it did with WoL there is an absurdism. For goodness sakes' Dynamis only even comes up because WoL is there asking about it.Quote:
"If Venat knows nothing she has no reason to even design a concept capable of sundering souls to begin with[...]" Venat's actions in Ktisis are not influenced by us, she's off tagging Meteion while we're down with Emet and Hythlodaeus. Her nosiness was always going to put her there.
What reason does Venat even have to follow Emet? And in what way did he "set off" Hermes? All he said to Hermes was to take Meteion with them back to Amaurot so they could recall her sisters - A scene that only even happens because of WoL - And which is hardly something intrinsically antagonistic.Quote:
Really, Emet is the active ingredient here; without him being around she wouldn't have had reason to follow (indeed, we wouldn't be following either), and Hermes wouldn't have been set so far off that he went to Ktisis.
-
12-30-2021, 06:24 PMClereticI should say, the way I read the 'failures' line isn't necessarily that she was driven by a desire to Change The Timeline, but that she tried many times to right the ship both pre- and post-Sundering and just never could. Not exactly informed by predestination so much as just general human foresight; she could see where things were going about the whole Zodiark thing (indeed, you don't really need to know the rest of the book to see things were going sour), but just never managed to force things elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by EaraGrace
And of course, post-Sundering she was hamstrung in a different way; being essentially starved of aether and conscious of not becoming a second Zodiark, she had to be very choosey about what she expended her energy on. Which inevitably meant both a lot of effective forfeits, and a lot of times where she just wasn't quite strong enough. -
12-30-2021, 06:53 PMClereticHermes is 100% absolutely needed, because remember that this allegedly all-knowing report of the future came from us, and we didn't know what the hell Zodiark was actually doing. We know the result, but not the reasoning. You need the dynamis expert to deal with the dynamis problem. Because as I've compared it before, Zodiark is a little like a nuclear reactor; even if we generally know the science around what it's doing, you really want an actual nuclear physicist drawing up the plans. Venat knowing 'so he turned up and the Final Days stopped' doesn't really tell her how Zodiark did it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Veloran
Emet-Selch made things go sour because when Meteion had the mother of all freakouts, he's the one that sticks to the unpopular call of 'we need to take her into Amaurot literally right now, no you cannot listen to her report'. That pisses Hermes right the hell off, puts him in a really bad headspace for what's going to be the worst news ever, and sends him off to Ktisis--and ergo both the dampening field and Kairos. Just because we helped catch her in the sequence we saw, doesn't mean all that wasn't gonna happen anyway.Quote:
And Emet-Selch made things go sour?
I mean, what else is she gonna do? Even outside of us, she does seem genuinely interested in what's going on, and I don't think she has anything better to do than to tag along and make her own assessment of Hermes. She never mentions having to reschedule anything. I genuinely think she'd hang around for it all; hell, I can imagine Hythlodaeus extending that invitation to her. And as for Dynamis... sure, the subject comes up because of us in what we saw, but an explanation was coming sooner or later given Meteion's freakout. And Hermes is, for all his many faults, not the type to hide that kinda thing; he's rather proud of that side of things.Quote:
As I just said, the notion that she's just so nosy that somehow everything would occur exactly as it did with WoL there is an absurdism. For goodness sakes' Dynamis only even comes up because WoL is there asking about it.
-
12-30-2021, 07:53 PMEaraGraceYou’re right that it would be odd that She didn’t give different advice if She knew exactly how the events played out. Allow me to try to give an explanation, some is speculation I admit, but I think there’s good reason to think this way. First, it’s not clear exactly how much detail we went into about the Flood and the events that led us there. We obviously discussed Emet and the fact that we killed him, but beyond that? Uncertain. Second, if we assume She knew a a Flood of Light would happen at some point, fmy understanding of the time dilation between the source and the first, the Flood and it’s events happened after Hydaelyn had intervened in our fight against Ultima, and thus had lost Her ability to communicate. After all, the period between when Minfilia left and we arrived was over a century on the First. With that in mind, it seems logical to conclude She couldn’t communicate at that moment. Those are my explanations as we don’t have a canon reason of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurina
While Endwalker obviously was hampered by Covid, I don’t think we have evidence the writing or the characters were impacted. And yeah I think people are gonna have different interpretations, of course. I’d say the same would be true for any character we could discuss. Also the vague piece, I don’t think they’re vague at all. I think the information and lore points are clear, their implications and interpretations however, have impacts that go beyond the word for word reading. I don’t think that’s the writers intentions or fault.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurina
Actually, I think the question of what was motivating her and driving her is perhaps the thing most clearly shown. The story makes it clear why she did what she did, what’s up for debate is the how of it. The actions, steps taken and the overarching plan have spots where we just don’t know what was going on. The same is true for other characters, like Emet. People still discuss how exactly the 13th was to be recovered, whether Zodiark could’ve been freed before then, or whether Emet wanted to die when we faced him in Amaurot. That’s just the consequence of having a lot of story to cover.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurina
-
12-30-2021, 07:59 PMKariTheFoxI'm not seeing a contradiction personally. Venat chose to close the time loop because she judged the actions of the ancients and their attempts to revert to their past through blood sacrifice to be unacceptable AND because she wanted to give our future a chance to survive. The time loop closing is simply a means to her ends.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurina
-
12-30-2021, 08:20 PMLurinaI mean, I don't agree with this at all. This thread is about how the narrative offers differing and semi-contradictory explanations of her actions, and if you read any conversation about her here or elsewhere, people both positive and negative on the character have wildly different understandings of what fundamentally motivated her. Even putting the time loop stuff aside, I can't even count how many times I've seen people insisting how the Sundering was singularly about protecting the sacrifices and not about how suffering is actually good, while other people in the same thread are arguing the exact opposite. It makes it kind of exhausting to even try and talk about the character.Quote:
Originally Posted by EaraGrace
It's the distinction between "Venat Sunders based on a belief that it will save mankind on some moral or intrinsic sense" and "Venat Sunders out of a pragmatic desire to recreate this future she already knows exists". One is a ideological choice, and the other is a strictly utilitarian one.Quote:
Originally Posted by KariTheFox
Maybe that distinction doesn't make sense to you or doesn't feel important, but the ambiguity and mixed messaging makes her character feel very indecipherable to me. -
12-30-2021, 08:29 PMVeloranAnd yet this notion that Hermes was responsible for Zodiark's conception has no weight behind it. Venat doesn't even give him any credit for anything, only saying that he is a "brilliant mind". As it happens Amaurot has countless brilliant minds, and at the time Elpis is taking place Hermes' own mentor hasn't even stepped down yet. Given this I have to reject the idea that with knowledge of the solution being Zodiark and the aetherial currents shielding the planet, Venat had no choice but to keep Hermes around. I mean at a base level she could have just told the Convocation about the currents as soon as it all started, that alone could have saved countless lives. Not to mention, in this nonexistent scenario Venat wouldn't even know Meteion is about to cause some kind of calamity or that Hermes will be "needed" for anything, so she would be choosing not to tell Emet and Hythlodaeus what had just happened for no reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleretic
"Unpopular call"? He doesn't even tell Hermes that she can't finish the report, just that they need to return to Amaurot in preparation for recalling her sisters - Hermes wasn't even upset by it, he just goes rogue and takes her away upon remembering his promise to Meteion. Let's be real, at this point the answer has already been given, he's accepted it, and the rest of the report is just window dressing. And yes, without WoL none of this was going to happen, WoL is the only one who could catch her.Quote:
Emet-Selch made things go sour because when Meteion had the mother of all freakouts, he's the one that sticks to the unpopular call of 'we need to take her into Amaurot literally right now, no you cannot listen to her report'. That pisses Hermes right the hell off, puts him in a really bad headspace for what's going to be the worst news ever, and sends him off to Ktisis--and ergo both the dampening field and Kairos. Just because we helped catch her in the sequence we saw, doesn't mean all that wasn't gonna happen anyway.
Whatever she was doing there already? Probably a bunch of the chores that ended up relegated to the party, given how she dealt with the shark. There is absolutely no reason why she would just decide to tag along instead of saying her hellos and being on her way. There isn't any reason for them to cross paths to begin with, in fact, it was just random chance precipitated by WoL stalling the party.Quote:
I mean, what else is she gonna do?
Why exactly would Hermes suddenly give a lengthy explanation of the nature of Dynamis just because of that? The point is she vanished because her aetherial density could be regulated to go that low, it's not even strictly a Dynamis thing, Hermes gives the explanation for it right then and Dynamis doesn't come up.Quote:
And as for Dynamis... sure, the subject comes up because of us in what we saw, but an explanation was coming sooner or later given Meteion's freakout. And Hermes is, for all his many faults, not the type to hide that kinda thing; he's rather proud of that side of things.
-
12-30-2021, 08:40 PMCleretic
I suppose the other question if people are insistent on the time loop being important is: did she stick to what she was told because it was what she was told, or did she stick to that outline because she tried or looked into other plans and they all sucked? Would she have come up with something different if she were left to her own devices?
This is more what I'm talking about with claiming predestination to take away agency. That because she had this information she stuck to it religiously, not bothering to think about it or act differently. Essentially, making Venat nothing but someone following a predefined series of instructions and never deviating. This is the thing I object to, not just because it cheapens the character immensely, but because it ignores the actual text showing that yeah, she was significantly more than just that. She desperately hoped that things wouldn't come to what they did, and we saw her try to ease people away from that, but a woman who knew immediately when that battle was lost and who, with a heavy heart, did what she saw as needed. A woman with the quick thinking to tag Meteion, knowing that whatever came next, that would be needed. A woman who realized, without anyone else having any idea, what the Mothercrystal would be needed for enough to start making it ten thousand years before it was called for.
Do people really just... dismiss all of that, to instead treat her as just 'someone following the manual'? -
12-30-2021, 08:50 PMKariTheFoxIt's also worth pointing out that as the WoL, we gave the party incomplete information. We told Venat about the sundering and the moon and all - and her response was to say basically, "well, I can see how and why I'd do a lot of that, but I don't see my overall plan to just run away. I would want to stay and fight for the star." and a little later, we learn that was the case. Escaping on the moon was always the backup plan, only to be enacted if nobody could ever prove to be strong enough to defeat her.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleretic
What information we gave her was basically all regarding her backup plan, the one that we would do if all else failed and there was no hope to save Ethyris. She came up with the A plan pretty much all by herself, so saying she was just following the predestination script seems very off. It's more like she was hedging her bets. -
12-30-2021, 10:35 PMh-alphaJust to point out, it is actually correct that we are told that Hermes would go on to come up with the idea of summoning Zodiark. To quote the journal from the quest where we learn that, "To your surprise, it was none other than Fandaniel who shed light upon the phenomenon of the Final Days, and thence dedicated himself to devising a countermeasure."Quote:
Originally Posted by Veloran
It wasn't Venat who told us this though, it was Elidibus when we spoke to him prior to going to Elpis. -
12-31-2021, 12:00 AMRulakirThe interesting part about this is Venat should've known that the WoL dies in a timeline to the 8th Umbral Calamity that occurred when the First was rejoined. It calls into question if she was not intervening on purpose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurina
Hermes being necessary is accepted headcanon here, good luck arguing it. At most, he is credited with discovering the Final Days were occurring where currents were weak, something we already knew. There's no evidence whatsoever that his knowledge of dynamis played any part or that he was as an architect of Zodiark. Determining that stagnant areas should be infused with dark aether to promote activity =/= designing an elder primal. I have asked to be presented sources stating otherwise and, so far, nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Veloran
Based on what we're presented with in game, Hermes brought nothing to the table that Venat didn't already know (and then some). However, given that this is 1 of only 3 defenses she had I understand why people cling to it fervently because her justifications are already flimsy. Dynamis gets dicey because it implies she never had any intention of helping her people and sundering was always the plan. Everything else is basically filed under the Minority Report defense and doesn't hold up to scrutiny. -
12-31-2021, 12:36 AMEaraGraceOk, and I would point out that just because someone believes that doesn’t mean that’s actually the case or that the narrative contradicts itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurina
On the issue at hand we have the quotes from when we meet Venat in Elpis and she asks about our story. When we tell her that our past can’t be changed, but their future can, Venat says:
This quote makes it clear how she views future events and ultimately how foreknowledge is inconsequential to their outcome. We can argue she’s wrong, or that she changed her mind, but this is word for word her views on the matter when we meet her. On whether she may have adjusted her view since, there’s not much to off of. The only things I can find are her quotes when we leave Elpis and when we meet her on the boat to Sharlayan, which are directly tied together.Quote:
Venat: How very exciting. I’m quite fond of delving into the unknown-and there’s naught more unknown than the future. Until a moment finally arrives, we cannot know for certain what will come to pass-regardless of our supposed foreknowledge. So you needn’t worry for us.
My interpretation of this, given the previous quote, is she’s is saying that while it’s possible our times will converge, we can’t know for sure, so I will do my best to respond to what happens, never assuming it is assured it will be resolved.Quote:
Venat: You may find your world to be very different. Or perhaps the erasure of our friends’ memories has sown the seeds of a conjunction between us. We cannot know until the moment is at hand. So shall I strive to do my best, taking naught for granted as I walk my path.
Now she does say:
which could be interpreted as her saying she expects our times to converge. But like she said, even if she thinks it likely, the fact that there is uncertainty means that acting as if it’s certain to occur is unwise. Thus I don’t think it would play into her decision making preconjunction.Quote:
Venat: Fare you well, my light of the future. Till we meet again.
When she appears to us on the boat, she says
Stating the conjunction has begun to form, as well as her earlier statement that the seeds for the conjunction have been sown, lead me to believe that in Venats eyes, the timeline connection can only be truly said to have begun with the events of Endwalker. This echoes the uncertainty that she spoke about previously, as well as (to me) saying that she didn’t conceive of the events preceding this being for the purpose of maintaining this conjunction.Quote:
A conjunction has begun to form; an intertwining of your time and mine. Wheels shudder and turn. Conflict looms-monumental-which will decide the fate of the world and all life upon it.
Others can interpret differently, but I think we can say that Venat did not believe solely the timeline and the events that she became privy to were set in stone.