3.5/4.0 Speculation & Discussion (Spoilers)

[Belhi]

I don't expect liberating Ala Mhigo to be a mistake but I think it will have consequences and that those consequences will be what eventually leads us into the heart of Garlemald. If 5.0 doesn't lead us to Garlemald proper I will be very surprised.

Plus after 2 war expansions it would be pretty cool to have an expansion where we are dealing with political infighting and a power struggle in the heart of Garlemald. For all their conquest and dangerous hubris, Garlemald collapsing would potentially be disastrous for the greater Hydealyn. That would lead to all types of chaos and conflict which would be ripe ground for the Ascians to sow calamities.

[FinalWolf]

I wonder if Baelsar's Wall will have an Imperial Juggernaut as a boss.

[Fenral]

From the Famitsu interview with Yoshida at 2016 Fan Fest:

In 2.x, the invasion of Garlemald was stopped and afterwards the dragons were suppressed. This scenario continues until the restoration of the Eorzean Alliance. The next step is to do something about Garlemald ruled lands[...]. Garlemald’s ideology will also be introduced a little at a time, and during the scenario, some players might think that the ideology isn’t that different from the ideology of the Allagan Empire. We thought that maybe we should tell the story from a perspective of comparison of the two empires. I was asked during the Fan Festival if we have started thinking about 5.0. We have the rough idea of the story line up until the end. If we don’t have anything thought up, it is very hard to make a story. At the current state, we will need up to 6.0 to finish everything.

Sounds like Garlemald will be the next step after Ala Mhigo. I can't help but wonder if he's going ahead with my dream of the Nero and G'raha show, what with that comment about comparing the two empires. Something like that is coming, anyway.

[Alacran]

I find it a bit funny so many sympathize with Garlemald when by and far their idea of protection degrades simply in to oppression and exploitation.



Spin it however you can/ want, to say the acts of a few shouldn't condemn all just shows how ineffective their leaders are/ were. Gaius for all his talk of control and rule, either allowed it to happen or couldn't stop it. There's a reason why so many Ala Mhigans are so desperate to take back their homeland.

[Belhi]

I find it a bit funny so many sympathize with Garlemald when by and far their idea of protection degrades simply in to oppression and exploitation.

Spin it however you can/ want, to say the acts of a few shouldn't condemn all just shows how ineffective their leaders are/ were. Gaius for all his talk of control and rule, either allowed it to happen or couldn't stop it. There's a reason why so many Ala Mhigans are so desperate to take back their homeland.

This is true and a point I have argued, but I would also point out the same can be applied to the Ishgardians. Entire groups of Au Ra slaughtered because they look like dragons, draconian treatment of anyone continently slapped with the label heretic, Clergy guilty of molestation of children protected by the Holy See because they were Clergy. That's a drop in the ocean of injustices that haunt just Ishgard.

None of the City States are untarnished. Limsa is a nation of former Pirates. Gridania has had a undercurrent of bigotry that, while not highly obvious, has bubbled up to the surface in a few quests throughout the game. Ul'dah is a very nest of corruption, exploitation and has a VERY dark history (enslavement and then burying alive of giants, turning an entire nation into the undead...).

We have seen much of the worst of Garlean culture and at least part of our viewpoint has been derived as enemies. It would be pretty presumptive to say we have seen all there is to Garlemald though. Just look at the Beast Tribes. Sahagin and Amal'jaa seem like one sided monsters till you get to know a few and see another side to their people and culture. Its probably safe to assume the same is true for Garlemald.

Of course that doesn't mean we are going to give Garlemald a free pass with how they act and the way they treat people. However it would be hypocritical to say that Garlemald is a whole is evil if we are willing to protect Eorzea even with the flaws and ethical struggles its people even now deal with.

[Hinoto-no-Ryuji]

The other thing is, most of our experience with Garlemald has been with its military culture, typically not the nicest aspect of any given nation. Now, Garlemald is a military dictatorship, so certain things can probably be safely extrapolated to apply to the broader culture beyond that. What we DON'T know is how things are for the average Garlean citizen.

Typically, dictatorships like Garlemald subsist on nationalistic sentiment in its people fueled by perceived greatness relative to the rest of the world. Conquest and military power is one aspect of gaining that, but people at home also need to be living good lives. Now, tellingly, a LOT of the Garlean military seems to consist of conscripts from conquered territories. This sucks for those living under Garlean control, but is likely paying off big time for Garlemald on the home front; the war economy keeps rolling, the cost of life that feeds it isn't felt in any especially acute way by people living in Garlemald proper, and a tight hold is maintained on propaganda, likely keeping what Garlemald is doing to the people of other nations completely hidden from any would-be rights activists at home.

As such, while I sincerely doubt that Garlemald-as-an-Imperial-power is something we'll ever be expected to sympathize with, the actual people living within it are likely to be fairly normal and average and probably living pretty good lives as the primary citizens of a world power that owns a solid third of the planet; with that in mind, it would be plenty easy to portray a war on and dismantling of Garlemald as something that's not all sunshine and rainbows for everybody involved. Those peoples' happiness is at the expense of conquered territories, of course - and like you mention, Alacran, we haven't been given much (if any) reason to believe that life within those territories is anything but awful - but it's still a stable and safe society for them. Do they deserve the suffering that would likely come from the total destruction of their home?

And while much of the above applies more to a 5.0-6.0 scenario, when it comes to Ala Mhigo, there have already been hints that the generation living there now may not view a liberation as a good thing. It's that aspect that intrigues me most. The refugees have had their own children, after all, and we've seen what the fervor surrounding the retaking of their home has wrought in them; thus, we have a split generation of those who grew up wholly under Imperial occupation and those who grew up in poverty hearing of the life stolen from them and theirs. There's also been a lot of emphasis put on Zenos and how bad a dude he is, which throws him into direct contrast with Gaius; perhaps a major point of contention with those within Ala Mhigo will be what to do once he's deposed.

Now, knowing this game, we'll likely get something pretty straightforward in the end (and even in the case of war with Garlemald, we'll probably endeavour to Find A Better Way). But shades of grey have certainly been hinted at and it's not difficult to see how they may be generated, or the game might generate sympathy even when a mostly unequivocally Bad News Bears power like Garlemald is involved.

[Alacran]

I would concede to the fact there are no city states completely innocent in their histories or even in their current dealings, however i can't help but see the actions seen by Garlemald (up to this point) as by and far inexcusable. Should any have lore of war crimes comparable to these committed by the Ala Mhigans during the Autumn War or the it's fall feel free to educate (it's damn hard to find anything about Ala Mhigan lore, no lore book atm).

In looking back at what we were shown in 1.0 a few old adage's, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely", "A society will be judged by how it treats its weakest members."

One could argue that the conqured would be in the position of thery least of any given society.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uK2...F31pe&index=10

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A0_...BI7lP1xgvF31pe

[Theodric]

A lot of people sympathise with Garlemald because Garlemald is interesting and far more morally complicated than many assume. Yes, there's rotten elements that will need to be dealt with but Garlemald as a whole is very unlikely to be without redeeming qualities. Final Fantasy games in particular have a long history of creating antagonists that many people either sympathise with or come to respect for other reasons.

Thankfully the lore book outright confirms that there's shades of grey to Garlemald - and it's certainly not incompetent either. It has accomplished much - with Eorzea being one of the few real thorns in its side so far and even then that's largely due to major plot points such as Midgardsormr intervening in their plans as well as a hero blessed by Hydaelyn herself. Then there's Ascian manipulation too, of course, but then that's something that has plagued Eorzea too.

[Alacran]

And while much of the above applies more to a 5.0-6.0 scenario, when it comes to Ala Mhigo, there have already been hints that the generation living there now may not view a liberation as a good thing. It's that aspect that intrigues me most. The refugees have had their own children, after all, and we've seen what the fervor surrounding the retaking of their home has wrought in them; thus, we have a split generation of those who grew up wholly under Imperial occupation and those who grew up in poverty hearing of the life stolen from them and theirs. There's also been a lot of emphasis put on Zenos and how bad a dude he is, which throws him into direct contrast with Gaius; perhaps a major point of contention with those within Ala Mhigo will be what to do once he's deposed.

Aye it will be interesting to see where some of those children came from...

Glaumunt: "Like most folk, I used to have a mother. She was a sweet, carin' woman with a smile never far from her face. There was a sister too. Pretty little thing-gentle as a lamb, but tough as nails. We were poor folk livin' simple lives, but we knew happiness just the same."
Glaumunt: "An' then the Imperials came an' took it all away. When Ala Mhigo fell, they put my family in a camp. Bein' a lad, I was made to do hard labour, while my mother an' sister were made to do far worse.... They hid their sufferin' from me as best they could, but I knew, an' the thought of it drove me mad. We had to escape. An' so I hatched a plan to get us out o' the city."
Glaumunt: "We were pickin' our way around a gorge not far outside the walls when they caught up with us... An' rather than allow themselves to be taken again, my mother an' sister leaped over the edge before my very eyes. Heartbroken as I was, I didn't put up a fight when the Imperials clapped me in chains an' dragged me back."

[Theodric]

FFXIV is a setting that doesn't shy away from touching upon dark and upsetting themes. It's also not a theme limited to Garlemald given that similar scenarios play out in Limsa and Ishgard assuming I am not misremembering. Chances are we'll be eliminating the rotten/misguided elements of Garlemald in the same way as we did with Ishgard.