[SPOILERS] Minfillia' Fate in 3.2

[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.