[SPOILERS] Minfillia' Fate in 3.2

[Berethos]

I'll mention it again, because I keep seeing it brought up like it's a foregone conclusion already, that we don't actually know that Hydaelyn asked Minfilia to sacrifice herself.

[Fenral]

I'll mention it again, because I keep seeing it brought up like it's a foregone conclusion already, that we don't actually know that Hydaelyn asked Minfilia to sacrifice herself.

"I'd do anything to save Hydaelyn!"
"Oh, really? Well as it happens...."

She was stuck in the Aetherial Sea and thinking all her friends had gone off and died. What else was she going to do? Sure, it was Minfilia's choice in the most literal sense, but it happened in circumstances contrived by Hydaelyn to provoke that specific response. Sort of a free will loophole.

[Theodric]

Yeah. So it was either a deliberate act on Hydaelyn's part or she's just incompetent and didn't plan ahead. In either case it isn't particularly great.

[Berethos]

Or a third option, that she intended for Minfilia to carry a message and had to get her to the aetherial sea to give her the full message and then couldn't do that due to being so weak, much less send her back. Or a fourth, where the being guided/called is actually Minfilia's interpretation of something as simple and short as a call for help.

The point is there are ways it could have played out that didn't require the kind of manipulation or coercion to sacrifice oneself, yet that seems to be the only conclusion anyone uses and treats it like it's the truth. I'd rather see more discussion about other possibilities.

I also have thoughts related to the idea of free will, agency, and duty, but typing that out on a phone isn't something I feel like doing right now so I'll come back to the thread later with it.

[CyrilLucifer]

I have thoughts on agency that are no doubt going to disagree with yours; I don't think I need to repeat them.

Really though, as said a few pages back, this is essentially a moral dilemma. Most people, myself included, aren't going to suddenly change their moral stance based on an argument relating to a fictional character on the Internet. All we can do is spout our opinions back and forth and hopefully respect each other in the process.

(I'm not expecting any solution to this Minfilia debate any time soon. 6 months, minimum, and that's being generous and assuming we'll see her in 3.4, which I find doubtful. SE's writers did their job well with this one, teasing us with just enough information to keep us debating - I have to wonder if that was even their intention at all. I'm not sure if I can handle 6 more months of Minfilia debates on individuality and sacrifice, though, so I might have to step out.)

[Berethos]

Most people, myself included, aren't going to suddenly change their moral stance based on an argument relating to a fictional character on the Internet. All we can do is spout our opinions back and forth and hopefully respect each other in the process.

My point is that it's a discussion about a moral dilemma that is based on just one interpretation of events. I'm not expecting any one to change their moral stance on that situation, just to remember that it's not the only one and maybe discuss things based on those other interpretations.

And not just brush the idea aside because it doesn't fit their narrative, as we all are occasionally guilty of doing.

[Fenral]

Just going to leave on of my favorite game quotes here and move on:

I do not believe that seeking one's own death is ever the proper course. 'Tis only effort and the unbending will to press on that sees ill circumstance improved. In death we can change nothing.

[Berethos]

Just going to leave on of my favorite game quotes here and move on:

That would be a lot more relevant if we had a frequent occurrence of characters seeking death. Willing to die for a cause or friends is not the same as seeking death.

The Wheel of Time had, I think, a good example of the concept - "Duty is heavier than a mountain, death is lighter than a feather." Those that followed that creed didn't actively seek death, but they didn't shy away from it either when they felt it was the best way they could help the current situation.

And I think that's at the heart of that quote, as it specifically mentions "seeking one's own death" as not being the proper course. That's a different mentality, a rather fatalistic one, where death is the preferable end result...even with other equally viable options available.

That being said...I looked up that quote. Dragon's Dogma, from among Olra's lines, right?

Here is the very next line: Yet there are rare times, I believe, when the destruction of the body IS the path to further progress.

For full context: “That monstrous thing yet lives? The Arisen who brought this place into being is gone, but perhaps some other force yet remains which fueled his long grudge…”
“You know of them, do you not? The wyrm. The Seneschal. The roles they play, and the bargain they offer. It is not a choice to be made lightly, and either path holds its own pain. But what if both paths in equal part meant betraying that which you held dearest, and forsaking all you’d believed? A man can pick the lesser of two evils, but ‘tis an impossible dilemma when those evils are one and the same. Yet pick he must, for indecision and escape invite evils far worse…”
“I do not believe that seeking one’s own death is ever the proper course. ‘Tis only effort and the unbending will to press on that see ill circumstances improved. In death, we can change nothing. Yet there are rare times, I believe, when the destruction of the body IS the path to further progress. I do not make light of your decision, nor mean to imply it was one easily or painless made. But through it, you have come to live anew. To meet me here, a denizen of another world. It was because your will shone brighter, proved stronger than any other that you reached your end, and for that same cause you stand here now.”
“Why do you fight, ser? To ward the ones you love from evil? To claim authority o’er the land as conqueror? ‘Tis a question all warriors, Arisen or nay, must ever ask themselves. …Lest somewhere in the sea of blood and the seductions of strength we come to find fighting has become the end and not the means. Even for one with will enough to earn the dragon’s mark, that siren’s song is fearsome strong.”
“I…I died once. Here, in this place. It was scarce a fortnight after I was first lured in. Each day brought new losses. My pawn was slain, then gradually my store of curatives dwindled. I was surrounded, body battered and broken by dark and powerful magicks. As death approached, I lifted my gaze to see the stars one final time. Yet it was not death that engulfed me then, but a strange light, far brighter than any fire of the empyrean. …past that, my memory fails.”
"The meaning of the Arisen's charge, of the quest to reclaim one's heart... The more I think upon it all, the murkier it grows."

Also interesting that it's a quote that comes from a game where (spoilers for Dragon's Dogma) you have to choose to kill yourself to give your pawn life and break the cycle.

Swinging back around to XIV...the destruction of the body bit gets me thinking about the power of the Echo as exhibited by the Sahagin priest, and if that will tie into Minfilia's actions or fate at all.

[CyrilLucifer]

Devoting one's life to a cause does not imply that one is willing (or ready) to give their life for it. It just means they wish to spend their life pursuing a cause.

That devotion to furthering a cause implies willingness to die for it pretty big assumption to make of anyone. I think that's the point Fenral is trying to make, it's glamorizing the death as the utmost one can do to fulfill their purpose. That's really the problem I have with the arguments in this thread. Death shouldn't be glamorized, even if the individual believes they're fulfilling their ultimate purpose. If they feel that way, I have to ask why they feel that way in the first place; why do they can feel they can do more by dying than they can through living? Death is the end. Full stop. No more dreams, no more helping others.

I think one of my biggest questions now is: For that small moment of discussion, barely even the smallest revelation - was it worth it? Was the merging what she was intended to be used for all along, or was there a different purpose?

While I'm of the belief that Minfilia's lifeforce is what strengthened our Blessing during the ARF, did it do more than that? Or was she simply used as life support, an energy battery to keep Hydaelyn going for just a little longer?

If so, why was it Minfilia? Could it have been any Echo user Hydaelyn chose that was willing to listen?
What will be asked of us, then?

I'm not trying to start the argument that Hydaelyn is evil here again, but I just have to question why and for what purpose? I think it's fair we question - after all, Hear, feel, think.

Edit: I fully, absolutely agree that the destruction of her body and the Echo has something to do with breaking mortal limitations. That was foreshadowed all the way back in 2.2 with Minfilia angsting about it being her (and your) final fate.

Edit 2: FFS Middy, after that nonsense you put us through you owe us answers. Lots of them.

[Fenral]

That would be a lot more relevant if we had a frequent occurrence of characters seeking death. Willing to die for a cause or friends is not the same as seeking death.

Too often, though, they can get confused. Believing that the presence of an option that demands your death (either literally or symbolically, like a certain Allagan mancat) makes that choice the only viable option is not the same as exhausting every alternative and fighting on. It's a distinction that I believe Alphinaud is going to make in the coming storyline.

Also interesting that it's a quote that comes from a game where (spoilers for Dragon's Dogma) you have to choose to kill yourself to give your pawn life and break the cycle.

Considering it's from Dark Arisen, and the trigger for that dialogue is clearing the game twice and defeating True Daimon, I always thought of it as a metafictional saving throw, meant to clean up any potential misunderstandings about the suicide required to trigger the true ending.

In that story, the Dragon represents the impossible, an obstacle that cannot be overcome, and must instead be avoided through sacrifice. You can either accept that your Beloved's life will be the price for 50 years of piece, or you can choose to fight against impossible odds, knowing that your death will likely get your Beloved killed as well as free the Dragon to cause more death and destruction in the name of finding a new Arisen. It's a selfish and risky gamble, and pretty much the opposite of a heroic sacrifice.

Of course, the entire plot of Dragon's Dogma is a free will loophole, as while you are frequently assured that this is all your choice, and not destiny, you eventually find out the contrary. The entire thing has been structured to guide you to becoming the solitary will in charge of the universe, locking it in a causal loop. In that very specific context, choosing death was the only way to free the world from the cycle, allowing the world to shape itself independently of any singular will. The underlying message is one of accepting the world as something more complex than the product of the choices of just one person, as well as acknowledging the end of your role as the player of the game.

Aside from that one moment, Dragon's Dogma is actually an amazing game for challenging notions of the "necessity" of death, giving you the option to save a number of people who would be expected to die for one reason or another. There's even some extra rewards for saving the generic soldiers who would normally die to teach you about bosses' insta-kill mechanics, not to mention an NPC romance path that involves using a cheat item to save them from their plotline death.

How does this tie to FFXIV? My current crazy theory (well, one of many) is that history is a loop. Minfilia is being groomed to replace Hydaelyn as the mother crystal (with either Eldibus or Lahanbrea as the new Zodiark), and we're fighting to re-banish the darkness and restart the cycle of Eras from the beginning, becoming the new Twelve. Our eventual final choice will be between allowing the cycle of eras to restart or forging on ahead with neither Hydaelyn nor Zodiark calling the shots.

EDIT:

That devotion to furthering a cause implies willingness to die for it pretty big assumption to make of anyone. I think that's the point Fenral is trying to make, it's glamorizing the death as the utmost one can do to fulfill their purpose. That's really the problem I have with the arguments in this thread. Death shouldn't be glamorized, even if the individual believes they're fulfilling their ultimate purpose. If they feel that way, I have to ask why they feel that way in the first place; why do they can feel they can do more by dying than they can through living? Death is the end. Full stop. No more dreams, no more helping others.

Yes, this exactly. Thank you for being here to translate my Angryfenralese. It helps a lot.