Warrior of Light: A Mindless Killer

[Belhi]

The Warrior of Light is a warrior and adventurer. By the nature of being a warrior, people are going to die. The world of FF14 is an extremely violent place.

There isn't an easy way to justify things in any violent setting in a moral way. We end up killing a lot of peoples only because they held a different viewpoint or goal to us and were unwilling or unable to see an alternative option. The Garlean soldiers are a perfect example. A lot of them are conscripts who never wanted to be there in the first place but there is no way around freeing Ala Mhigo than fighting them. Even is some were open to turning on Garlemald, the Garlean policy of taking retribution on family members of traitors would stop that from happening. So what does the WoL do? Just give up?

In FF14 there are often not truly villainous sides. Many of the enemies we fight, we do so out of a difference of ideologies or because the lengths they are willing to go to put the lives of innocents at risk. It is ironic that in the SAM quests you actually fight against revolutionaries seeking to bring down corruption in Hingashi because their method requires anarchy and war which would see thousands of innocent people die in power struggles. The cause is just but because of the method and the cost you are forced to cut these people down. If you didn't thousands would die.

That is the reality of morality. It is often not clear cut, particularly when things get complicated. The WoL can just try there best and keep fighting in a war that often seems impossible to win. The point is that the WoL tries anyway. I think in the end this is part of the reason why we will end up aiding Garlemald at some point. After all, they are Hydaelyn's children too.

[Alleo]

Back in WoW, it was common for some of the more vocal residents of the lore forum to pick and choose what they accepted as canon because it suited whatever agenda they sought to push at the time.

I am sorry but every time I saw a discussion about Garlemald you came into it and defended them and even told us that in the future this would change, even though none of us know what will happen. :/ So its kinda bad that you go around and say that people here are the worst just because we see some lore points differently, even though you yourself are doing it too. None of us are objectively.

I took my time and wrote down that even if we take everything as canon, that Derplander is still mostly a very good guy with some bad decisions along the way. Please tell me where it makes him a mindless killer, which was the point of the original topic. Because otherwise you are posting way off topic with all the accusing, while we just want to show that no they are not mindless killers.

And again if everything is canon then that means that Derplander knows that he is just a character of a game, the events are taking place over years even though the years dont change, Godbert and his wife are as strong as the Wol and much more.

There isn't an easy way to justify things in any violent setting in a moral way. We end up killing a lot of peoples only because they held a different viewpoint or goal to us and were unwilling or unable to see an alternative option. The Garlean soldiers are a perfect example. A lot of them are conscripts who never wanted to be there in the first place but there is no way around freeing Ala Mhigo than fighting them. Even is some were open to turning on Garlemald, the Garlean policy of taking retribution on family members of traitors would stop that from happening. So what does the WoL do? Just give up?

Well Garlemald is kinda the aggressor since they tried to conquer Eorzea thus they are our enemy. (Right now) If we go somewhere and we are attacked and they try to kill us, its kinda difficult to see an alternative option, yet we still choose them sometimes. But in the end before we get killed we sadly have to kill them. And lets not forget that we only go against Garlean soldiers after they merciless attacked the base of the scion and killed lots of our comrades. They never tried a peaceful solution and if we had not intervened the rest of the scions would have lost their lives too.

It is the sad truth that we have to kill in war and that maybe the opponent is not always bad but like you said we cant just simply give up. Anyway that still does not make the WoL a mindless killer.

(Just for the info, I am not really disagreeing with you, but most of the time its not really the WoLs fault)

[Theodric]

At no point have I suggested that Garlemald is perfect, fully justified or without a need for at least some reform. I - and certain other posters - have merely stepped in to ensure that these debates do not become a circle jerk that involve bashing Garlemald at every possible turn and bending over backwards to excuse the darker elements of both the Warrior of Light and the rest of the protagonists where applicable.

I've also repeatedly expressed a willingness to agree to disagree - so please stop trying to paint me as unreasonable. Thankfully I've identified the issue as specific to this particular sub-forum - because I have no problem engaging in thorough debates regarding the game's lore on the FF14 sub-reddit, the official site's general discussion board, the FF14 gamefaq's board and - surprisingly - even Youtube comment sections. More often than not, many debates here are doomed to fail simply because it's the same handful of posters discussing points they've brought up countless times already.

So either we agree to disagree or we continue in an endless cycle that is quite clearly ticking a lot of people off and pushing them away.

[Keever]

Hey Theodoric, I hope I don't start a fight here, but I believe this bears saying....

More often than not, many debates here are doomed to fail simply because it's the same handful of posters discussing points they've brought up countless times already.

Many people are guilty of this, but I believe you are certainly one of the most guilty. You redirect criticism and sit on your high horse rather than self-reflecting. Sometimes I agree with your actual arguments about the nature of Garlemald, sometimes I do not, but your manner of delivering them can often be passive-combative and far more likely to provoke annoyance than reasonable discussion. In threads only tangentially related to Garlean issues and morality you bring up this topic again, and then go out of your way to lambast "some people" for holding different viewpoints, and for using arguing techniques which you yourself use. It's hypocritical.
The fact that you (because more often than not you are the instigator of the discussion) repeatedly do this is one of the things which has really soured my enjoyment of reading this subforum, which I used to count as the best community discussion board for this game, official or otherwise. Now I don't want to just target and abuse you, because there are others who also contribute to the unpleasantness, but as you catalyse so much, I beg you to self-reflect a little on the way you approach this.

I do not bear you any personal ill-will, and I hope you don't bear me any, but these feelings have stirred in me for awhile as I've browsed these Lore forums.




I have no horse in this Garlean race. Obviously the Garlean people aren't an evil blight, they're people and have a right to dignity, self-determination, cultural tradition et cetera. Obviously the present Garlean policy is extremely problematic, and reasonable and thoughtful reform taking into consideration the well-being of all parties would be the ideal end goal. Obviously the Warrior of Light has much blood on his/her hands, but obviously they're also not a "mindless killer" - I mean, one can roleplay one's character as such, but it's not something that's supported by the vague guidelines of characterisation presented by the game.

As for killing birds defending their nests, well that's not pleasant, but aren't you the one who says we shouldn't always judge this fantasy world by our modern real-world values? Now each of us is entitled to our personal opinion on these things, but I do not find this utterly despicable - not enough to warrant such a thoroughly harsh condemnation of character.

The Zodiac Weapon soul-absorption is... well, it's ****ed up if taken at face value and not a game mechanic. It's always bugged me. I mean, I took the whole "collecting souls" thing to denote more the absorption of life energy, rather than the entrapment of some part of what we normally perceive the "soul" as - that is, a person's actual self or consciousness. So I saw it as more like just harvesting magic blood, but that's still remarkably dark, and the fact that we just go kill the beseiged Garleans to power up is pretty darn reprehensible. I don't ignore the fact that this was in the game. However I question it's level of "hard canonicity".

I'm not totally behind the whole "one hard, defined canon" thing. When something's made by collaboration of multiple creators, adjusted to suit gameplay considerations, patch release pacing and even different localisation tastes, and then also has ambiguity left in it to allow for future decisions and changes to fit a director's long-term game vision, not to mention player choice and agency, the result product's "canon" is not nearly as concrete and identifiable as that of a novel, a film, or even a linear single-player video game story.

Yoshida & co. have been careful never to refer to our boy Derplander as the "canon" Warrior of Light. He "could be anyone" - he could be any adventurer you meet in your travels. What you see happen to him is what happens in his game, but he's a poster boy, an advertisement, his canon needn't supersede player experience. The events of Heavensward didn't unfold exactly as in the cinematic trailer, nor must the Warrior of Light canonically play as the "featured job" during that expansion. The Warrior of Light isn't canonically in one certain Grand Company, nor did they start in one certain city or meet with a certain Scion first. The Warrior of Light didn't canonically make one particular dialogue choice in a given cutscene. The Warrior of Light needn't canonically be a crafter or gatherer. Dialogue exists in the game to reflect if the player has leveled a certain job or done a certain sidequest, but dialogue also exists if you haven't done these things. Is that dialogue "non-canon"? I most strongly think not.

So what I'm trying to say is that canon in FFXIV isn't hard like a metal girder, it's soft like a sofa cushion - it's a solid object with defined edges, but everyone makes a different imprint when they sit on it. (OK that's sort of a gross metaphor, but I kinda like it.) The canon we discuss is amalgamated from various sources in and out of game, and viewed through a variety of lenses for comparison - depending on what degree gameplay necessities have affected the product, etc. - until we can reach some kind of collective community consensus, which still leaves room for variety, player experience, and personal extrapolation based on knowable facts but also a certain degree of speculation and interpretation. Everyone here makes their own extrapolations and assumptions influenced by their own individual thought impulses. No exceptions. Not you, or you, or even you! And that's not a bad thing!

Just don't ignore each other's good points either! Don't just put up a wall of deflection.



Uh... what was I saying? Oh yeah, I think we should weigh the fact that Garlean enemies were part of the Animus soul collection books to... a certain degree, but not to "immutable, hard canon" levels. Hold it alongside FATE droprates, the fact that we're fighting already-defeated bosses to farm dungeon light, light window bonuses, level syncs, having to do a certain levequest and only that particular levequest will serve to emulate the heroic deeds of this ancient hero of the East, even though you already did it for the previous book... it's a video game interface with a numbers checklist on it. Does the Warrior of Light really canonically go and kill five hundred quickly-respawning dhalmels in the Sea of Clouds for their skins in one day? 'Cause I had a friend doing that for awhile during Heavensward. I think that's not that far off from the Animus books thing - how much "canon" weight do you give to the game mechanic? There's room for interpretation and discussion beyond just "this is the single hard canon, because I think it is."

This got long and a little tangential, sorry. I just kinda roll my eyes at the idea of the sacred importance of hard canon. It's probably because of my TES3: Morrowind lore background, lol.

[Shirolumi]

If it isnt flat out stated that we murdered someone, I always assume I just incapacitated the opponent. That bird woke up later.

[Mysterysword]

More often than not, many debates here are doomed to fail simply because it's the same handful of posters discussing points they've brought up countless times already.

That is just... kind of rich, coming from you, seeing as how most, if not all, the posts I've read from you seem to be about one of a few things:

- How this game needs to be a thousand times darker and grittier, because clearly we cannot have murder and moogles in the same game and Eorzea should be a dystopia. Because dark and gritty = good storytelling, and never, ever leads to Darkness Induced Audience Apathy.
- How the Garlean Empire is never as bad as they seem.
- How the Ascians are not as bad as they seem.
- How our protagonists are even worse than the previous two.

I have yet to see anyone claim the Garlean Empire is pure evil, as you seem to believe we think. I have also yet to see anyone claim our protagonists are squeaky-clean in their actions, even the characters themselves. And while you're certainly entitled to your opinion of what kind of game we should be playing, there's things about glass houses you should know and keep in mind, as you accuse us of cherry-picking our facts.

[Theodric]

I've made it no secret that I deliberately inject a bit of humour into my posts to liven things up a little. Do you really think I'm being wholly serious when I say stuff like 'we can take comfort in the righteousness of my cause'?

You're welcome to read through my posts because you'll quickly find that I post across multiple forum sections about all sorts of different subjects, be it lore related or otherwise. To pretend as if I only focus on one specific niche is simply dishonest - but it ties in with what I brought up earlier; that some people are so focused on trying to control a narrative and 'beat' their opponents that they do not pause to consider what, exactly, the people on the other side are even trying to put across.

Much like anything related to political discourse in in the modern day, really. Point out that maybe a particular situation is more complicated than it is painted at and people lose their minds.

If people want to pretend as if Hydaelyn isn't a dark and dangerous world then that's on them. The game does an excellent job at world building and making each of the nations we visit far from pure and righteous. They have their downsides and redeeming elements both and I think it does the game a major disservice to pretend as if it's dark and gritty for the sake of being dark and gritty. Nor have I ever suggested that things should be dark and gritty for the sake of it - merely that I'd like to see the fallout of certain events given more screen time.

I've also often suggested that I'm partly to blame for the dead horses being beaten. As it stands, though, I'm the only one proposing to agree to disagree. So, as ever, I shall continue to take comfort in the righteousness of my cause.

In regards to my posts, though, if people were truly paying attention then they'd know that my favourite games including FFXII and FFIX. I've simply pushed for more themes to be explored along the lines of those displayed in each game - and in FFIX's case in particular they're hardly the epitome of 'dark and gritty' on the surface. I like Moogles quite a lot, so much so that I've proposed adding more Moogle delivery quests multiple times on this very board - both for the sake of nostalgia for FFIX's sidequests and because it's a great way to revisit NPC's and flesh out the game world further. Though I guess that doesn't fit the narrative and thus hasn't been listed, eh? Along with anything else similar.

Oh well.

[Scremin]

Hey Theodoric, I hope I don't start a fight here, but I believe this bears saying....

Many people are guilty of this, but I believe you are certainly one of the most guilty. You redirect criticism and sit on your high horse rather than self-reflecting. Sometimes I agree with your actual arguments about the nature of Garlemald, sometimes I do not, but your manner of delivering them can often be passive-combative and far more likely to provoke annoyance than reasonable discussion. In threads only tangentially related to Garlean issues and morality you bring up this topic again, and then go out of your way to lambast "some people" for holding different viewpoints, and for using arguing techniques which you yourself use. It's hypocritical.
The fact that you (because more often than not you are the instigator of the discussion) repeatedly do this is one of the things which has really soured my enjoyment of reading this subforum, which I used to count as the best community discussion board for this game, official or otherwise. Now I don't want to just target and abuse you, because there are others who also contribute to the unpleasantness, but as you catalyse so much, I beg you to self-reflect a little on the way you approach this.

I do not bear you any personal ill-will, and I hope you don't bear me any, but these feelings have stirred in me for awhile as I've browsed these Lore forums.

This...

That is just... kind of rich, coming from you, seeing as how most, if not all, the posts I've read from you seem to be about one of a few things:

- How this game needs to be a thousand times darker and grittier, because clearly we cannot have murder and moogles in the same game and Eorzea should be a dystopia. Because dark and gritty = good storytelling, and never, ever leads to Darkness Induced Audience Apathy.
- How the Garlean Empire is never as bad as they seem.
- How the Ascians are not as bad as they seem.
- How our protagonists are even worse than the previous two.

And this are the reasons why I don't even read when i see a post reply with his name on it...

[Lauront]

And again if everything is canon then that means that Derplander knows that he is just a character of a game, the events are taking place over years even though the years dont change, Godbert and his wife are as strong as the Wol and much more.

I'm struggling to understand how this makes any logical sense. Other than things specifically branded as non-canon by SE, why would side quests etc. NOT be canon? Particularly since a good chunk of the lorebook is compiled from such sources. One does not need to commit to the extreme of "everything is canon" to allow for the majority of in-game quest material - particularly job quest material - to be canon.

This...



And this are the reasons why I don't even read when i see a post reply with his name on it...

His posts are better than the majority of tripe posted on this forum, I'll say that much.

[Theodric]

So, none of you are actually willing to agree to disagree and simply expect those with different interpretations of the lore to conform to a biased narrative. Which is precisely what I've been saying for quite some time, so I'm glad we've finally got it in writing once and for all.

Like I said, though, there's other places to discuss the game's lore that serve as much less of a biased echo chamber consisting of the same handful of individuals regurgitating the same points day in, day out. I'd strongly urge those interested to consider posting on lore threads on the FF14 sub-reddit - they're typically much more nuanced and engaging.