Emet-Selch Is Not That Tragic

[Puksi]

If this conversation has become frustrating and upsetting for you, I definitely won't blame you if you want to take a breather, though.

Again, thanks for the concern, but I'm still fine.

This is at an impasse because first, the parts of the conversation that are not circular involve you moving the goalposts. For example, on the subject of Emet-Selch's corruption of Vauthry: "Emet-Selch gave a choice to refuse" (Not to Vauthry)>"The corruption wouldn't affect Vauthry" (Gives many examples of how Sin Eater corruption, let alone corruption by a Lightwarden, terribly affects literally every other character in the game who has been afflicted by it, including Yoshi-P's hint of "was someone controlling him")>"That's not accurate, the Cardinal Virtues were reliving helping people" (Brendan's Virtue massacred Wright)>"Lightwardens don't talk" (Hello, Titania, no I will not guess which one)>"Vauthry doesn't change people into Eaters he can't really be affected by the Lightwarden" (this one honestly made me laugh)>"Okay, Vauthry changes people into Eaters, but at his discretion" (this one made me laugh too, actually)>to now, "Titania acts on instinct" (As though Vauthry's instinct is not to carry out the scheme the Ascians made him for, and would somehow render him unable to speak in those terms).

Second, and related, is that you continue to ignore points I bring up, such as Brendan's massacre of Wright, or that Emet-Selch would freely offer that child of his up to Zodiark if whatever that "hope" he had failed, or that the doomed Black Rose timeline was not only dying of unnatural causes, but would not be given the unlikely chance to recover by--you guessed it--the Ascians. They still have a bunch of Calamities left to deliver, and now they are behind schedule, and the survivors were barely able to survive, let alone try to stop them.

There isn't nearly enough insight on Emet-Selch's Tempering, unlike the effects of Sin Eater corruption, to hazard any reasonable guess as to what may be really happening there. I do recall him saying he would do it whether he was Tempered or not, so there's that, but he is an unreliable narrator at best.

Lastly, there's this:

Without the implying they are some how fascist or assault apologists along the way.

Stating the atrocities Emet-Selch committed are bad, and countering replies that insist they are not (under certain circumstances that, again, no one wants to clarify), is not calling anyone either of those things. I'm not the only one who finds his deeds offputting by far. I mean, I'm glad you're enjoying challenging "misconceptions" about his actions, but you haven't convinced me, and you're not going to this way. But I'm glad my posts got you started posting on the forums, so again, have fun!

[tokinokanatae]

I understand that it's frustrating when you're a fan of one character and think people are being unfair to them because of the actions of another character. I definitely don't think you're a bad person for wanting to defend Vauthry, but if we can't even agree that he has has a degree of intelligence and volition beyond Titania, then we must have played very different games.

To me, Emet-Selch's horrific sin against Vauthry's personhood when he grafted the Lightwarden to him was not making him into a mindless puppet, it was making it so that Vauthry's end would have been the same no matter what sort of person he chose to be. Even if Vauthry had been a good leader and sought to do no harm to anyone, upon his death, he would have doomed his world. That Vauthry's existence meant his world's doom doesn't mean that Vauthry himself had to be corrupt and cruel, any more than the game makes clear that Emet-Selch needing to kill billions to bring about the Ardor means he finds pleasure in doing it. The factors that made Vauthry corrupt and cruel are the circumstances in which he was raised, not the circumstance in which he was born.

I thought my responses were clarifying points in a mutual debate, so I'm sorry--it seems that I was being hard to follow and confusing instead. I hope the above simplifies my perspective enough.

Emet-Selch would freely offer that child of his up to Zodiark if whatever that "hope" he had failed, or that the doomed Black Rose timeline was not only dying of unnatural causes, but would not be given the slim chance to recover by--you guessed it--the Ascians. They still have a bunch of Calamities left to deliver, and now they are behind schedule, and the survivors were barely able to survive, let alone try to stop them.

All of this is inference without textual support. I mean, I can tell you what I think of your headcanons, but I can't place them on the same level as canon without clear evidence that what you're surmising is true.

Emet-Selch was never put in the position of offering his son to Zodiark, just in the position of giving into the temptation of seeing "new life" as something other but a lesser mirror, only to have that feeling snatched away when his son died. Would he offer up his son? Probably. He wouldn't be the first hero in the game to sacrifice innocent lives.

The "doomed Black Rose" timeline lasted for hundreds of years after Black Rose originally spread, like every other Calamity. There has to be life to sacrifice for the Ascians' plan to work in the first place, unless you agree with the theory they were going to sacrifice trees and plants?

I mean, I'm glad you're enjoying challenging "misconceptions" about his actions, but you haven't convinced me, and you're not going to.

Yes, you're absolutely right. I guess I'll just have to console myself with the game agreeing with me RE: Emet-Selch's heroism instead, LOL.

[Elladie]

It will be very interesting to see where we go from here.

I was NOT expecting the turnaround in the presentation of the Ascians - specifically Hades who does seem to have something of a different trajectory from Elidibus and definitely from Lahabrea - although I enjoyed it very much. Hades dragged me kicking and screaming from loathing to fascination, and I very much salute his writer; she did a fantastic job. I do hope we get more of pre-terminus Amaurot as we move through ShB. And my head is spinning from trying to focus on our true antagonist now because I really don't know which way to look.

Will we end up making some kind of alliance with Elidibus? Not going to lie, I dislike Elidibus (think he's a snake) as much as I dislike Lahabrea, but they have both been presented in a very two-dimensional way up to this point. There hasn't been any hook to hang the possibility of sympathy/understanding/redemption upon with either of them, Lahabrea particularly was just a cackling villain from a melodrama. So I'm interested to see where things go with Elidibus. Also to learn more about Zodiark/Hydaelyn: I have a pet theory that the two of them should never have been divided (based on what Ramuh says about Light and Dark) so maybe our solution will be finding away to merge the two. I can imagine the Ascians won't like that at all. Be interesting if we find a way to untemper Elidibus so we can work with him to find a solution.

As others have said I do hope the story doesn't end up being Bad god v Good god: hopefully the 'fact' - allegedly - that they're both primals throws that ending out of the window

[Lersayil]

It will be very interesting to see where we go from here.

I was NOT expecting the turnaround in the presentation of the Ascians - specifically Hades who does seem to have something of a different trajectory from Elidibus and definitely from Lahabrea - although I enjoyed it very much. Hades dragged me kicking and screaming from loathing to fascination, and I very much salute his writer; she did a fantastic job. I do hope we get more of pre-terminus Amaurot as we move through ShB. And my head is spinning from trying to focus on our true antagonist now because I really don't know which way to look.

Will we end up making some kind of alliance with Elidibus? Not going to lie, I dislike Elidibus (think he's a snake) as much as I dislike Lahabrea, but they have both been presented in a very two-dimensional way up to this point. There hasn't been any hook to hang the possibility of sympathy/understanding/redemption upon with either of them, Lahabrea particularly was just a cackling villain from a melodrama. So I'm interested to see where things go with Elidibus. Also to learn more about Zodiark/Hydaelyn: I have a pet theory that the two of them should never have been divided (based on what Ramuh says about Light and Dark) so maybe our solution will be finding away to merge the two. I can imagine the Ascians won't like that at all. Be interesting if we find a way to untemper Elidibus so we can work with him to find a solution.

As others have said I do hope the story doesn't end up being Bad god v Good god: hopefully the 'fact' - allegedly - that they're both primals throws that ending out of the window

Elidibus was always rather... nebulous in his goals and character. He had this Emet esque policy of talking over fighting up to heavensward, and up until the warriors of darkness arc, he was pushing a balance theme.

Seems very much opposed to us since, and I think the last time he mentioned balance between light and dark was pre SB. Not even sure he will be our (final?) antagonist in the ascian arc. Anways, hope they continue with the Emet level writing in their villains.

My personal theory is that we get rid of both Zodiark and Hydaelyn, and then somewhere down the line, come face to face with whatever caused the original cataclysm.

[Alleo]

What other solutions were there that the Ascians could have proposed, exactly? The one miracle that Urianger painstakingly orchestrates involves summoning Hydaelyn and begging her to save the First. You really think that would have worked out for Emet and the Ascian's situation? Hey, god who destroyed our world, give it back, please!

No, the game did not spin their actions as good, but neither did they spin them as pure evil, or black, or unforgivable, once their circumstances were laid out. The strongest statement the game gives after the situation is laid out is Alphinaud lamenting that the WoD are struggling with "an impossible choice." Ardbert's resolution has him declaring that he can finally be proud of what they had done to try to save their people. There is no indication that they ever regretted their actions. When challenged, they REAFFIRM their actions, that they are dead-set determined to carry it out, and Ardbert's character arc in Shadowbringers is about "being proud of himself" regarding it.

I think it's a little presumptive to argue on the part of dead people, whose deaths we are benefiting from, as far as what they would have wanted. Furthermore, the Ancients who were destroyed via Sundering were certainly not willing. In either case, it's not absolute, but every indication we get from the game so far indicates that the Ancients also want to live, they want a future, they want their world restored. They say as much when their Shades are summoned, Emet draws power from their wishes, hopes, and prayers to live, and he's connected directly to the Underworld. And no, as far as we understand, the plan was not actually to sacrifice Ancients, but the "new life", whatever that means - we don't know yet.

And if it turns out the Ancients do truly wish to live, and are in anguish over their fate, what then? Does that make Emet's actions more acceptable to you?

I'm a little baffled at the implication that "we don't know if it would have worked to fully restore them" (when we've SEEN people successfully returned from the dead in both the Allag story and in the Alchemist quests) is used to argue moral superiority over "yeah, they'd still be dead, but at least they'd be dead but a part of them would EXIST kinda-sorta" I'm honestly not sure how to reconcile that, since it seems blatantly obvious to me that the latter is more questionable than the former, whereas to you it seems the opposite. Different perspectives, I guess!



Uh, yeah, that's literally putting forth that the WoD's mass slaughter of innocents is more acceptable than Emet's because to save their world they were required to commit less numerical slaughter. This seems. A very strange basis to argue a morality case around, to me. Like. The footnote of (that wouldn't be that much) after "the millions of people Ardbert would kill" is kinda. Strange.

Wait I did not say that the Ascians had other solutions I said that the Ascians gave the WoDs only one solution even thoughth other solutions would be possible (but that would go beyond their goals) Also theoretically the Ascians with their problems could have simply accepted the sacrifice and live on. Just like our characters and the scions move on after death. Even some of the old Amaurotines were for this and I wonder how much of that wish to even save those they lost came from being tempered and Zodiark needing more aether.

About their actions: That was my point. The WoD count as morally grey. Their actions were not good but also not done out of pure evil intentions. And when another path was shown to them they took it. Afterwards Ardbert has done anything after suffering for lots of years to save his world without destroying another. They are morally grey.

The Ascians only care about their lost people. They dont care about us, they even look down on us. They have already destroyed billions of lifeforms and made on shard into the void. They are ready to sacrifice the souls of ancient ones even those from Amaurot only to get the sacrifices back. And you say that people came back from the death but were did one ever came back with the help of a primal? We have not a single case of primals bringing them back completely to live. (And how would that even happen if the souls are in the primal and used as fuel) The twins grandfather was still just a "ghost" and never really alive, the daugther of the queen was brought back by Lakshmi as an empty shell. Which death do you mean that came back from the death by a primal and was completely normal and stayed alive?

No I dont think their actions would be better if they would be in anguish over it because I doubt that they are even alive. And they knew what they were doing. The Amaurotines who survived it all and choose to side with the Ascians may not have liked it but ironically they too will be killed of as a sacrifice when the source is complete. Wonder if they like that? (And yes the original plan was to sacrifice the new life, but now they said that they plan to sacrifice the whole source when everyone is complete again. This inlcudes people like us that does have the souls of ancient ones. Its nearly 100% confirmed that those are also reborn)

And no I am saying that in the whole view of things the WoDs are better than Emet because they choose to no go through that slaughter when they saw a different path. They were also fighting for people that are still alive and for the souls that still can be saved. Its their redemption, especially with Ardbert in Shadowbringers that changes them from our villians to tragic heroes with a moral grey nuance.

Edit: Man some of those ad hominem attacks in some posts.

[Brinne]

About their actions: That was my point. The WoD count as morally grey. Their actions were not good but also not done out of pure evil intentions. And when another path was shown to them they took it. Afterwards Ardbert has done anything after suffering for lots of years to save his world without destroying another. They are morally grey.

This is what it comes down to: yes. Ardbert took another path to save his people because he was lucky enough to have another path become available to him. Emet was NOT lucky enough to have another path open up to him, even though, unlike Ardbert, he was actively looking for one that would require less bloodshed. If Ardbert had been in Emet's position, where there was no Crystal Mom there to save his world, Ardbert would have continued being destructive and killing others without hesitation. That is no moral difference. That is a difference of circumstance. If either were in the others' situation, they would have made the same choice. They are both people who would PREFER to not have to harm others to save their people, but absolutely will if they see no other way.

Really, you talk about how the Ascians only cared about their lost people, unlike the WoD, but when do we ever see Ardbert and his company crying and feeling guilty and caring about all the people whose lives they ruined, like Ga Bu? I didn't see any of that. I saw a lot of smirking and gloating and reaffirming to themselves when the pressure was on that they WERE certain they were doing the right thing for those they loved. Because we're meant to see their traditionally heroic lines - "we will never give up the fight for the sake of those we left behind!" - to understand that they are the same as us, simply put in an awful, impossible situation we have not. Hm, considering some of Hades's final lines as he's fighting us - about how he's empowered by the hopes and dreams of his people, about how he cannot abandon them, how he won't let it be for nothing, about how he's determined to not let their tragedy be repeated - I wonder if something similar is going on there?

It's a bit strange that you would put forth "gee, the Ascians could have just gotten over their entire world and everyone they ever loved being destroyed, ripped apart, and the fact that they ever existed being erased" should have been 'another path' to dealing with their problems - but Ardbert just accepting what happened to his world isn't? I mean, he could have done that. He could have just accepted the fact that his world had ended, "their time had ended", as people love to say about Amaurot, and not taken it out on unrelated people and unrelated worlds in a desperate attempt to save it. Ga Bu sure would be a lot happier if he had done so!

Also, uh, Ardbert didn't endure that century of suffering knowingly "to save his world without destroying another." Most of his angst throughout Shadowbringers is how he was FORCED to endure that suffering for reasons he didn't understand, because Minfilia wouldn't let him rest. I feel like there's some projection of traditionally heroic qualities and a heroic/atonement arc onto Ardbert's story because it's easier to readily accept him as fitting into the hero role - again, because he winds up our ally because his goal to save his world ends up aligning with ours, whereas Emet's doesn't. And that goes back to Shadowbringers' repeated thesis about the hero/villain dichotomy often becoming a matter of illusory comfort to justify what we do against our opposition without having to feel bad about it.

[MrThinker]

Really, you talk about how the Ascians only cared about their lost people, unlike the WoD, but when do we ever see Ardbert and his company crying and feeling guilty and caring about all the people whose lives they ruined, like Ga Bu?

Hmm, correct me if I'm wrong, but Ga Bu's life being ruined was not the WoDs fault right? Sure, the Ascians manipulated Roaille's former spy network to get crystals delivered to the Kobolds, but the Kobolds trying to summon Titan again, and thus the sacrifices of Ga Bu's parents, is because of their feud with Limsa Lominsa.

[Brinne]

Hmm, correct me if I'm wrong, but Ga Bu's life being ruined was not the WoDs fault right? Sure, the Ascians manipulated Roaille's former spy network to get crystals delivered to the Kobolds, but the Kobolds trying to summon Titan again, and thus the sacrifices of Ga Bu's parents, is because of their feud with Limsa Lominsa.

The WoD were working directly with the Ascians with the explicit goal of tormenting the beast tribes into summoning more and more Primals, for the WoD to hunt down and kill (along with lots of beastmen), to drive them deeper and deeper into despair and desperation, until they turned to, implicitly, Zodiark. The entire strategy was basically to torture the Beast Tribes until they set off a Calamity which would, obviously, kill millions of people. No, obviously, Ardbert and crew did not directly march in and kill Ga Bu's parents before him, but they were knowingly participating and aiding in the scheme that set the scene for that - and who knows how many other incidents like it - to happen. Ga Bu was meant to be the humanized, individualized face of the result of that suffering and horror.

Saying the WoD are innocent of what happened to Ga Bu would be like saying Emet is innocent of destroying most of the other Shards since he probably wasn't directly involved, as the Ascians worked mostly independently on various Shards and Emet seemed to mostly operate on the Source. That would be an absurd argument to make.

[MrThinker]

The WoD were working directly with the Ascians with the explicit goal of tormenting the beast tribes into summoning more and more Primals, for the WoD to hunt down and kill (along with lots of beastmen), to drive them deeper and deeper into despair and desperation, until they turned to, implicitly, Zodiark. The entire strategy was basically to torture the Beast Tribes until they set off a Calamity which would, obviously, kill millions of people. No, obviously, Ardbert and crew did not directly march in and kill Ga Bu's parents before him, but they were knowingly participating and aiding in the scheme that set the scene for that - and who knows how many other incidents like it - to happen. Ga Bu was meant to be the humanized, individualized face of the result of that suffering and horror.

Saying the WoD are innocent of what happened to Ga Bu would be like saying Emet is innocent of destroying most of the other Shards since he probably wasn't directly involved, as the Ascians worked mostly independently on various Shards and Emet seemed to mostly operate on the Source. That would be an absurd argument to make.

Hmm, I was more saying that the WoDs didnt do the whole 'torture' thing to the Kobolds themselves, but then I realised the only reason we knew Garuda was being summoned at Xelphatol was because Alisaie listened in, otherwise the WoD would have killed her silently, and may have indeed done this multiple times to the the other tribes w/o getting the Eorzean Alliance to notice, so I can concede the Ga Bu point to you.

[Elladie]

Hmm, correct me if I'm wrong, but Ga Bu's life being ruined was not the WoDs fault right? Sure, the Ascians manipulated Roaille's former spy network to get crystals delivered to the Kobolds, but the Kobolds trying to summon Titan again, and thus the sacrifices of Ga Bu's parents, is because of their feud with Limsa Lominsa.

I mean, if that's an acceptable argument, the Ascians are responsible for literally very little.

I reiterate my main point again. Much though I enjoyed Emet Selch, I'm not pro-Ascian. What I am against is this outrageous double standard some people are spouting.