About the Emperor [Major Spoilers for 4.4]

[Lauront]

All I am going to say is that anyone expecting the developers, at this point, to cast the Empire into the role of an irredeemable villain, when it is so clearly being used by the Ascians for purposes contrary to what it thought it was serving, is probably going to be in for some major disappointment. Although it may be some time before we actually head to Garlemald, as I am still sceptical as to whether it will be in 5.0, as opposed to 6.0.

That's incorrect. There's a vocal little band of posters who add nothing but snark to a thread as they scream about Garlemald and how evil it is at every possible turn. As I've said in the past, you and the other posters involved are more than welcome to contact me in-game or arrange to chat over Discord to smooth out any issues with me. Yet that has been repeatedly declined.

Morality is largely irrelevant to the discussion and is often little more than a method that certain posters use to virtue signal/derail threads.

Particularly when said "morality" amounts to little more than a very peculiar set of moral sensibilities distilled into rather nebulous buzzwords.

[ObsidianFire]

I rechecked and yes, it is impossible for someone of non-Garlean ancestry to reach tol / van, natural-born Imperial citizen or no. Regardless, how easy or difficult it is to reach those positions is irrelevant - it's literally impossible for non-Garleans to attain those ranks, even if they are deserving of them.

I'm failing to see the issue with it, but then I am not an SJW or a believer in blank slate fantasies.

The issue is that it is impossible for anyone who is not racially a Garlean to advance past a certain rank in the Garlean Hierarchy. No matter if they have the skill-set for it, no matter if their ancestors have been culturally Garlean going back to the founding of the Garlean nation. That's... messed up to say the least. Especially if the Garlean Hierarchy wasn't just introduced when the Garlean Empire was established but has been a part of Garlean culture long before that.

[Theodric]

Discrimination is present across the board and deeply ingrained in pretty much every nation. Even where reforms have been made, it's still present to some degree. I don't see it suddenly vanishing overnight - nor should it, since whilst discrimination is loathsome in the real world it makes for a fascinating plot element in a fictional setting. A lot of people, however, insist on arguing from the benefit of modern day morality. There's nuances to consider. Why do the poor hate the rich? Is there merit to it? Why do the rich look down on the poor? Is there merit to it...and on and so forth. Usually there's more to it than those individuals simply being irredeemable. Obviously some nations are more discriminatory than others, though given how hostile a place Hydaelyn is in general it's understandable why many would look down on those that are not 'like them' - especially if they're in a situation where they lack a Warrior of Light to swoop in and solve all their issues.

Garlemald will likely undergo reform once it is freed of the Ascians. Though hopefully it won't go in the same direction as Ishgard and Ala Mhigo as both nations ended up having a lot of their 'grit' eroded away - which caused many role-players that I know who were invested in both nations to lose interest. Hingashi not succumbing to the revolution attempted during the SAM quest chain was a refreshing change of pace - keeping the established charm wholly intact as a consequence.

[YianKutku]

If memory serves right the "sas" limitation only applies to naturalized citizens - those born into the Empire can (theoretically) go as far as their merit takes them (up to "van," but "wir / yae / zos" is still reserved for the royal family), but integrated peoples can't advance further. My memory might not be right, though, and if it's wrong that is literally institutionalized racism.

Exact wording from the lorebook for the position of Praefectus Castrorum, one of the examples for the rank of "sas":

Commander of a castrum stationed in or near enemy territory, and the highest rank attainable by a citizen not of Garlean ancestry

It's absolutely institutionalized racism.

[Cilia]

Made a closing argument and meant it. I don't like fallacies, though.

I'm failing to see the issue with it, but then I am not an SJW or a believer in blank slate fantasies.

Several things:

• I am not an SJW and consider calling me such an ad hominem attack. Please do not mischaracterize me as such just because I used a term common in that community when it is factually true. (Would you prefer "legal discrimination," since that's free of the SJW trappings?)
• It's a disservice to the rare individuals who do make it that far and deserve to be promoted.
• It's a disservice to the country as it can prevent people from utilizing their talent and/or skill in service to the country to the fullest.
• It contradicts the Empire's claim to meritocracy.

Or any state in the game.

Was intended to be a generalized statement; would be a tu quoque (fallacious) counterargument anyway.

[Anonymoose]

Remember when the lore forum being a place where we aspired to be free from this General Discussion nonsense and held one another to that meager standard of civil debate was something people didn't need to be reminded about?

Summerford Farms remembers.

[Theodric]

I can't claim to have had any issues over on the General Discussion board, personally. As I've been saying for years, when it comes to the age old debate of morality it is best to simply agree to disagree. That would solve most of the issues. There's no reason for people to hold grudges over something as trivial as a fictional setting.

I come here to discuss the lore. I'm heavily invested in FFXIV - as are most of us, I assume - and dabble in every aspect of it be it PvP, PvE or RP. Whenever there's a new content patch I'm eager to soak up all the new story stuff. Almost immediately I want to debate it...and yet it's disheartening that whilst I can have in-depth discussions with friends in-game and over Discord it's outright impossible to do so here without people being at each other's throats and trying to one up each other just because they happen to dislike specific characters and factions.

I care very little for the likes of Lyse. Yet you don't see me rushing to bad mouth her at every possible turn and downplay her positive elements. I prefer to look at the bigger picture and see how the pieces fit together. I look for hints - subtle though they may be - that show hidden depths. The 'tumblr' style blogging about how particular characters are 'problematic' doesn't interest me at all. Especially in a setting that isn't afraid to embrace mature themes and frequently shows that situations are not so so black or white in terms of their morality. Outside of a handful of characters, of course.

There's others factors to consider as well. Many of us posting here are from completely different countries and backgrounds. Our experiences are going to differ as well as our world views and political stances. I'd humbly suggest that some posters are a little too invested in pushing their world views on others - despite this being a fictional setting with a completely different set of rules to the real world. Some of those rules are similar - but others aren't. Magic doesn't exist in our planet. Primals don't, either.

I won't name any names for obvious reasons but for the sake of clarity I want to point out that Lauront and I have endured death threats outside of the game at the hands of a poster who no longer comes here who had a bizarre obsession with painting anyone who liked Garlemald as a 'bigot'. So if we seem a tad defensive at times, please bear that in mind. We're tired of the snarky commentary and constant arguing. Hence the push to agree to disagree.

So I'm going to extend the olive branch once more. We're a fairly small community to begin with. Let's band together instead of being divisive and make a conscious effort to acknowledge that things are often not as absolute as some imply. To me, that's the biggest draw of the setting - that both the protagonists and many of antagonists have good and bad elements to them.

[Iscah]

A thought that struck me last night is that Garlemald, right now, is a country-scale equivalent of a person possessed by an Ascian.

Think about the period where Thancred was possessed by Lahabrea. He used to be "just another person", he still looks (and seems to act) like just another person, but actually is utterly taken over and controlled by an Ascian. His actions are no longer his. His personal struggles are no longer the reasons behind his behaviour.

Though unfortunately, while we can talk about Thancred and Lahabrea, here we have Garlemald and... Garlemald. And I think some of us are speaking against Garlemald-the-Ascian-possessed-government-entity, while others are trying to defend Garlemald-the-country-and-people. Or just not seeing a distinction.

Rescuing Thancred from Lahabrea just took a one-on-one fight and some divine intervention, but getting the Ascian corruption out of Garlemald is going to be a whole different challenge.

(And yes maybe the Ascians aren't as irredeemably evil as claimed and maybe Hydaelyn isn't a perfect goddess of light... but I will cross that story bridge if and when we actually come to it. For now, and certainly in the characters' eyes, they are an absolute and dangerous evil force that needs to be fought.)

---

For seeing parallels to other stories.... we'll all see what we're familiar with. I haven't played FFXII to see similarities there.

What I do keep thinking back to is the manga series Fullmetal Alchemist. In that story, the primary setting (spoiler!) is the Garlemald-equivalent, and we eventually learn it was founded to fulfill the villain's decades-long scheme. And yet many of the major characters are part of the military government - well-intentioned people aspiring to do good and change their country for the better, with no idea what actually lies at the heart of it.

That doesn't change the fact that the country itself is founded and controlled by people who once seemed to be simply acting on a human scale, waging a war for human reasons, but now are clearly up to something far more sinister.

The country can be redeemed, but the government cannot.

---

As I've said in the past, you and the other posters involved are more than welcome to contact me in-game or arrange to chat over Discord to smooth out any issues with me. Yet that has been repeatedly declined.

I've seen you make this offer to a few people - and I fail to see why they would take it up. How would a private conversation over Discord go any differently to the public conversations we have here? If nothing that anyone has ever said here convinced you of a different position, why would someone want to engage in a one-on-one version of the same argument?

I also just get really tired of being told at every turn "Look! Garlemald has redeeming features! Look! Eorzea did horrible things!" like nobody has noticed and I* must hate everything about Garlemald because I don't agree they are moral equals with Eorzea.

* perhaps not directed at me. But written as if directed at every person who disagrees with your stance.

Whether that's what you mean, it's how a lot of your posts come off. Lecturing us from your enlightened position while we're clearly just looking for reasons to hate everything about Garlemald - when actually that isn't the case.

---

On some particular points over the last few pages...

I concur that there's probably more to Elidibus than what we know. They're certainly risking a bit by playing the long game in terms of fleshing out his character, if this is indeed the case. I also believe that Solus is undeniably evil, but he seems different from the other similarly-ranked Ascians we've already dealt with. I get the feeling he's more dangerous and clever than they were by a good measure. Solus seems to hold Elidibus in high regard for his judgement too, despite being frustrated by his worrisome nature. Despite being evil and a trusted follower of Elidibus, I suspect Solus might also have some agency of his own, and could shake things up.

Critical question: do we know for sure that Solus is working with Elidibus?

Solus says he is, of course - as he steps out from his hiding place shortly after Elidibus leaves.

Until we get further information, I'm not convinced.

Not all of the reports regarding brutality will be false, either. When Hien ordered Doma Castle to be flooded it goes without saying that a number of Garlean soldiers - and non-combatants - were drowned and/or crushed by debris. I'd say that counts as a cruel and unusual death. I'd consider it to the equivalent of a chemical weapon - because the cause of death, much like poison, is prolonged and traumatic.

Thanks so much for the gruesome detail (after the part I quoted). :/

I'll admit - having gone back to check the cutscenes, the journal description does indicate that Garleans were drowned when the castle flooded. But at the time, playing the game? I took the plan to be cutting off access to the castle keep. The dialogue never mentions any intent to drown people, just remove them from the battle. There's another cutscene later where a soldier reports to Yotsuyu about the flooding - without a single mention of casualties.

(I'm not totally sure where the major damage to the castle came from - possibly the Xaela-vs-juggernaut air battle. Hien's plan was just breaking a section of the wall to let the water in.)

From what I saw in game, I could interpret it as a bloodless victory, or intended to be one - a tactical breach in the walls causing a slow but unstoppable flood, with soldiers trapped in the upper floors of the barracks (there are a number of towers rising well above the floodwaters, and all the roofs of the lower buildings are visible) and unable to retaliate while we storm the keep... ideally with a great deal more binding-spells and less killing than portrayed in-game. That much might be just my taste, but also a difference I would expect to see between a battle portrayed in gameplay and the same story told as a film or other non-interactive version. So I tend to substitute that in mind.

By chance, I got Doma Castle for leveling roulette while pondering this reply. There is a great deal of wreckage floating in the floodwater, but no bodies as far as I could see. Perhaps something to do with game ratings, like they couldn't go all-out on the Rathalos fight design without affecting the classification, but still.

Am I choosing to "think better" of Hien's plan than I would of the same plan carried out by a Garlean? I hope not. But would it be portrayed the same way? Would we have the same opportunity to perceive it playing out 'without casualties'? I would certainly appreciate seeing a similar plan being carried out by a Garlean character.

Speaking to the NPC's hanging around the Prima Vista reveals that Livia sas Junius responded with force in Dalmasca as a consequence of Garlean settlers - aka civilians - being slain by Dalmascan insurgents.

That could be true. But it's also worth considering that this information is the story as it was told to the Garlean public, and the game has highlighted in other places (and real-world history of war propaganda would suggest) that the information they get is not necessarily the whole truth. And "unwelcome foreign citizens settling on another country's lands" are still going to be perceived as invaders to be fought.

That was Thancred Idea, he can't come up with new ideas for the time moment, next time someone wants to take action we'll play in their hand.

"Can't come up with new ideas" maybe, but his current one is being put into action. If you talk to Yugiri at the Doman Enclave, she mentions she already has spies at work spreading those rumours-that-are-actually-the-truth about Zenos.

Again, shaky memory, but I believe it was mentioned that van Hydrus came from common birth [...]

Already discussed, but I checked the lorebook quote.

Regula is "eldest son of the influential Hydrus family", and friends with Varis "since both were but boys playing in the imperial palace". So almost certainly considered a noble, or the equivalent.

In my opinion it does the writers a disservice to view their creation through such a narrow window...especially when there's a very long track record of antagonists and situations turning out to be much more in-depth and sympathetic than initially assumed.

The "window" we've been shown in game is narrow but opening slowly. When we are shown reasons to be sympathetic towards the Garleans (and yes we already have), we can be sympathetic to them. But it's not the same thing as having to be sympathetic to the actions of the nation as an whole.

It could be compared to Yotsuyu, I suppose. If her story had ended at Doma Castle, she would have been a villain. I might have pitied her past, but she was at that point a villain to be hated. But the patch stories changed that, and the character I'd previously been shown to hate turned out to be more complex and sympathetic - and that was a surprise to see my feelings turn around.

Would it have been any better to spend the whole lead-up saying "oh, maybe she's not so awful, maybe she'll be redeemed in the end"? I don't think so.

Remember when the lore forum being a place where we aspired to be free from this General Discussion nonsense and held one another to that meager standard of civil debate was something people didn't need to be reminded about?

Summerford Farms remembers.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...Summerford.png

Top quality Photoshopping there. :P

[Anonymoose]

Top quality Photoshopping there. :P

I put an embarrassing amount of time and care into making sure my shoops look bad in all the right ways.

[Dualgunner]

I put an embarrassing amount of time and care into making sure my shoops look bad in all the right ways.

Been stalking this thread cuz I love the lore forum, but rarely have anything substantial to add...

But Moose, I love those photoshops. XD