Revenge of the Weapons (5.2 and Onwards)

[Melichoir]

For Ala Mhigo, who did they invade in the last century? If you're talking about the Autumn War, that was over 100 years ago, and since then ala mhigo had lived in peace with the rest of Eorzea until the mad king came along, who they deposed themselves only to be conquored by the empire while weakened.

For the empire, sure they have a sad story where they were wronged in the past. And if the empire had reclaimed its old lands with its technology and stopped there, maybe that would be one thing. Instead, they go after lands that never belonged to them expanding wherever they can. 'We'll only treat you badly if you rebel' hardly excuses anything, and treating the people you conqueror with cruelty only incites MORE rebellion anyway. We've seen three provinces with a history of rebelling, with more implied to have resistance forces evne if we haven't seen them rebel directly. (Gyr Abania, Doma, Dalmasca with the first two winning free and the third one being crushed. And we know other provinces have resistances like Nagxia .) Any examples of good garlean rule are vastly overshadowed by negative ones. And even if all of the provinces had been treated well. 'we'll be nice to you if you play ball after we took your lands and sent many of your able bodied youth off to war in other provinces as conscripts' doesn't exactly justify the invasions after the fact anyway.

Their tactics when dealing with conquered territories is actually a pretty age old one and is most likely a tactic that has played out in all places of the world (Including our own City States of Eorzea). It essentially breaks down to this - Citizenry of a conquered nation can fall into two camps broadly: Those that are in league with the conquerors, and those that reject the conquerors. For a conquering nation to ensure stability overtime and bring that territory into the fold (which is what Garlemald is seeking to do), they will have to rout any and all objectors while rewarding and uplifting supporters with the long term goal of replacing the resisting population with the supporting population. Garlemald seemed to be doing this in the case of Ala Mhigo, as well as Doma. People who fell in line behind the empire were rewarded broadly (if not left alone). Objectors to the new Garlemald rule were persecuted and treated terribly. This of course created a schism in Ala Mhigo, as people hated the supporters and saw them as traitors. But as the story points out - those supporters of the Garlemald empire did so because they viewed the mad king as so much god awfully worse and did not see any real leader to take his place. For them, The empire was a good thing and would bring stability to their nation. If it meant giving up a few traditions and practices, that was worth the price.

While I dont think the story does the best job at explaining this, the empire isnt super black and white where theyre nothing but evil slavers to all but the garlemald people. Even the reasoning behind Garlemalds expanse was predicated on (or atleast to the public it was) eradicating a practice which destabilizes the environment. It's literally an argument against WMDs as that is what a primal akin to. In any case, what theyre doing isnt anything new, nor are they an exception. the Garlemald people were victims of this same system, so its no suprise they would use it too. And our own citi states are no innocent actors. Theyre self interested actors. We may disagree with Garlemalds views, but those are ideological. Uldah, Limsa, and Gridania also have sketchy history of doing some pretty inhumane crap. Varis even points this out, and it isnt to much a stretch that Eorzea is defending itself from Garlemald out of self interest and preservation and not so much some greater need for the moral good.

TLDR - Its all a bit sketch. Garlemald is not a great empire, but we the player shouldnt be sitting here and being like "Oh theyre pure evil and were oh so good." The conflict is more about a difference in view point rather than morality.

[Lauront]

Their tactics when dealing with conquered territories is actually a pretty age old one and is most likely a tactic that has played out in all places of the world (Including our own City States of Eorzea). It essentially breaks down to this - Citizenry of a conquered nation can fall into two camps broadly: Those that are in league with the conquerors, and those that reject the conquerors. For a conquering nation to ensure stability overtime and bring that territory into the fold (which is what Garlemald is seeking to do), they will have to rout any and all objectors while rewarding and uplifting supporters with the long term goal of replacing the resisting population with the supporting population. Garlemald seemed to be doing this in the case of Ala Mhigo, as well as Doma. People who fell in line behind the empire were rewarded broadly (if not left alone). Objectors to the new Garlemald rule were persecuted and treated terribly. This of course created a schism in Ala Mhigo, as people hated the supporters and saw them as traitors. But as the story points out - those supporters of the Garlemald empire did so because they viewed the mad king as so much god awfully worse and did not see any real leader to take his place. For them, The empire was a good thing and would bring stability to their nation. If it meant giving up a few traditions and practices, that was worth the price.

While I dont think the story does the best job at explaining this, the empire isnt super black and white where theyre nothing but evil slavers to all but the garlemald people. Even the reasoning behind Garlemalds expanse was predicated on (or atleast to the public it was) eradicating a practice which destabilizes the environment. It's literally an argument against WMDs as that is what a primal akin to. In any case, what theyre doing isnt anything new, nor are they an exception. the Garlemald people were victims of this same system, so its no suprise they would use it too. And our own citi states are no innocent actors. Theyre self interested actors. We may disagree with Garlemalds views, but those are ideological. Uldah, Limsa, and Gridania also have sketchy history of doing some pretty inhumane crap. Varis even points this out, and it isnt to much a stretch that Eorzea is defending itself from Garlemald out of self interest and preservation and not so much some greater need for the moral good.

TLDR - Its all a bit sketch. Garlemald is not a great empire, but we the player shouldnt be sitting here and being like "Oh theyre pure evil and were oh so good." The conflict is more about a difference in view point rather than morality.

It is also worth noting Doma and Ala Mhigo got the short end of the stick for reasons, whereas other provinces saw life go on as before (and I'd imagine, improve in some cases.) In Doma's case for summoning a Primal, in Ala Mhigo's for its generally bellicose attitude, which meant the Empire would really need to crush any potential flames of revolt early on. Although the writers have made it so that the Empire was being led by its nose to serve the Ascian agenda (which in turn has its own underlying logic, also resolving, IMO, to a conflict in POV, i.e. between immortals and mortals who they view as existing at their world and people's expense), Garlemald is far from uniquely bad or oppressive... and a lot of the lead up in SB to ShB made me think they were perpetrating last minute changes on some characters, like Varis and Elidibus, as well as the Empire's raison d'etre, hence the rather forced writing. Like you said, the city-states have their shadier elements too and more often than not use the WoL to do what they can't really accomplish.

Varis, at least up until that parley, was interested in preserving his people above all else, and it does not seem illogical to me to surmise that he was in a situation where to turn on Emet-Selch or Elidibus would simply mean his death, whilst they ploughed on with their plan, since they could simply possess his body if need be. It's a pretty similar position to that which Thordan was in: he had inherited a conflict that had no easy resolutions, being waged under false pretenses but with stakes which were, nonetheless, very high. Only I think Varis was given the full truth in very recent terms, whereas Thordan was probably aware all along. Makes little difference, either way.

I'm just hoping Garlemald will still be salvaged as a city-state after all is said and done, rather than destroyed outright.

[Bright-Flower]

It is also worth noting Doma and Ala Mhigo got the short end of the stick for reasons, whereas other provinces saw life go on as before (and I'd imagine, improve in some cases.) In Doma's case for summoning a Primal, in Ala Mhigo's for its generally bellicose attitude, which meant the Empire would really need to crush any potential flames of revolt early on. Although the writers have made it so that the Empire was being led by its nose to serve the Ascian agenda (which in turn has its own underlying logic, also resolving, IMO, to a conflict in POV, i.e. between immortals and mortals who they view as existing at their world and people's expense), Garlemald is far from uniquely bad or oppressive... and a lot of the lead up in SB to ShB made me think they were perpetrating last minute changes on some characters, like Varis and Elidibus, as well as the Empire's raison d'etre, hence the rather forced writing. Like you said, the city-states have their shadier elements too and more often than not use the WoL to do what they can't really accomplish.

Varis, at least up until that parley, was interested in preserving his people above all else, and it does not seem illogical to me to surmise that he was in a situation where to turn on Emet-Selch or Elidibus would simply mean his death, whilst they ploughed on with their plan, since they could simply possess his body if need be. It's a pretty similar position to that which Thordan was in: he had inherited a conflict that had no easy resolutions, being waged under false pretenses but with stakes which were, nonetheless, very high. Only I think Varis was given the full truth in very recent terms, whereas Thordan was probably aware all along. Makes little difference, either way.

I'm just hoping Garlemald will still be salvaged as a city-state after all is said and done, rather than destroyed outright.

I'm hoping 6.0 will handle the empire well. Though part of me worries the msq will largely be us helping the 'good' garlean faction (populares etc) fight the 'warmongering' garleans and there will be as little gray morality as Stormblood. But Shadowbringers was better than I thought it'd be, the lore revelations made the empire less interesting and compelling but made the ascians more so than they had been before, maybe they can manage to pull off the empire plot well. But Zenos being back is not a good omen for me. Really wish he'd stayed dead.

[Lauront]

I'm hoping 6.0 will handle the empire well. Though part of me worries the msq will largely be us helping the 'good' garlean faction (populares etc) fight the 'warmongering' garleans and there will be as little gray morality as Stormblood. But Shadowbringers was better than I thought it'd be, the lore revelations made the empire less interesting and compelling but made the ascians more so than they had been before, maybe they can manage to pull off the empire plot well. But Zenos being back is not a good omen for me. Really wish he'd stayed dead.

My biggest concern was that they would simply destroy it off screen, but I'm not convinced they're going that route anymore. As to the Populares, and the Optimates, it may end up being just that, but given that there is a civil war unfolding, they do have the opportunity to wipe the board clean, as it were, and avoid it being some comical villain set up. Even something like Gaius ascending to the Garlean throne would help preserve some element of moral greyness to it, because he's got a pretty sketchy history but is nonetheless driven by devotion to his homeland. My ideal conclusion for the Empire will be for it to rein in its ambitions a bit (perhaps offering to lend its might in cleaning up the Primal mess in different ways), maybe cede a few provinces but ultimately remain some manner of monarchy with a few vassal provinces, that can act as a counterweight to Eorzean influence when necessary, much like Hingashi can.

On Zenos, I enjoyed him in Stormblood up to a point, especially with his more "philosophical" takes, e.g. on the nature of the Echo. He interested me as much at that point as Elidibus, who is my favourite of the antagonists. The issue is that the lore around him isn't really explained well in game, and in ShB he's just come across as a dark Mary Sue, showing virtually no real reaction to the rather astonishing new facets of the Resonance. It also looks to me like he's just a plot device in a sense - the Ascians aim to do much more than just revive Zodiark, so they want to first go ahead with all the Rejoinings, meaning we may never see him in the story unless they were to succeed at that, but Zenos is the sort who'll summon him earlier just so he can have a go at gorging on his power, so they can bring him in sooner. I think there's other, better ways they could have gone about it, but for now the best I can hope for is that they improve on his character portrayal.

I'm still waiting to see how they handle the Hydaelyn/Zodiark thing. Although the Ascian perspective is one I find sensible given what they are, and the sort of perspective I'd enjoy taking up in the context of a video game, if it just ends up being a case of tempering gone wrong, so that all their motivations reduce to that, like the usual tempering, I have to confess I'd find that a bit lame. I really want to see if we're going to have some reason to keep both the Primals around and whether it's more complex than Hydaelyn good, Zodiark bad - if it is just that, it'd suck IMO.

The weapon on paper is very pragmatic. It cant be effectively defended against, covers a wide area at low cost, easy to deploy (relatively) with (supposedly) low risk to the users, and was ultra effective and psychologically horrifying.

Problem ends up that yeah, it really is that horrifying and uncontrollable. Real world reference, its why Bio and Chem Weapons are considered violation of the Geneva Protocols and will land the leader of a country that employs them as a war criminal. Theyre that bad and caustic a weapon that most nations willingly agree to not employ them in conflicts.

It's also a case of its performance during the Calamity differing to what earlier test results showed, because of how it interacted with the light seeping into the world. I suspect that not even the Ascians realised it would be this effective, as even Emet-Selch's musings on it were speculative in nature - and confined to the First's predicament - but nonetheless, they were no doubt pleased with that.

Also, I didn't think Garlemald itself actually got invaded - unless I missed that? I thought they were just being pushed back - pushed back from their own invasion, no less.

He's referring to their history before they became an Empire. A lot of their neighbours attempted to conquer them, thinking that the general inability of Pureblood to use aether would make them an easier target, but Garlemald eventually bested them by using subterfuge, employing magi into its armies and eventually through warmachina, and later ceruleum and magitek. That's why they generally view most other nations with contempt and cynicism. Something also forced them out of what is now speculated to be their original homeland, Goug, but we don't have a complete picture of that aspect of their history just yet.

[Bright-Flower]

Snip.

I'm not saying it's not a realistic approach to reward those that support the new regime. Just that doing this doesn't actually justify said invasion on its own. Maybe down the road we'll get a look into provinces where the people are happy with the empire, but from what's been shown to us directly, the negative seems to greatly outweigh the positive.

I'm not saying the Eorzean Alliance and friends are perfect. There's certainly gray morality on their side. Corruption in Ul'dah, Limsa shooting itself in the foot with its local beastmen, etc. It's definitely not perfect. And pre SB, there was a certain level of gray morality with the empire.

Where it all falls apart for me is the revelation that Solus was an ascian, the reason for their conquests is all based on a lie, and that best case scenario for the empire if they won would be eventually having the survivors sacrificed to Zodiark along with the rest of sundered life. The conflict is no longer about the the empire enforcing its version of order to prevent primals and Eorzea saying 'no we'd like to keep our freedom and find our own way to handle it.'

There's some gray morality with the ascians themselves now. But that doesn't directly inovlve the empire, that's the question of 'is it worth it to sacrifice current life to bring back those long gone.' The conflict of the empire vs Eorzea, the empire's stance has been defanged. It's all a lie, and if they actually won they'd only be serving another power inadvertantly that's ready to sacrifice them to their god. It's not about politics anymore, but preserving life as we know it.

[Enkidoh]

Their tactics when dealing with conquered territories is actually a pretty age old one and is most likely a tactic that has played out in all places of the world (Including our own City States of Eorzea). It essentially breaks down to this - Citizenry of a conquered nation can fall into two camps broadly: Those that are in league with the conquerors, and those that reject the conquerors. For a conquering nation to ensure stability overtime and bring that territory into the fold (which is what Garlemald is seeking to do), they will have to rout any and all objectors while rewarding and uplifting supporters with the long term goal of replacing the resisting population with the supporting population. Garlemald seemed to be doing this in the case of Ala Mhigo, as well as Doma. People who fell in line behind the empire were rewarded broadly (if not left alone). Objectors to the new Garlemald rule were persecuted and treated terribly. This of course created a schism in Ala Mhigo, as people hated the supporters and saw them as traitors. But as the story points out - those supporters of the Garlemald empire did so because they viewed the mad king as so much god awfully worse and did not see any real leader to take his place. For them, The empire was a good thing and would bring stability to their nation. If it meant giving up a few traditions and practices, that was worth the price.

While I dont think the story does the best job at explaining this, the empire isnt super black and white where theyre nothing but evil slavers to all but the garlemald people. Even the reasoning behind Garlemalds expanse was predicated on (or atleast to the public it was) eradicating a practice which destabilizes the environment. It's literally an argument against WMDs as that is what a primal akin to. In any case, what theyre doing isnt anything new, nor are they an exception. the Garlemald people were victims of this same system, so its no suprise they would use it too. And our own citi states are no innocent actors. Theyre self interested actors. We may disagree with Garlemalds views, but those are ideological. Uldah, Limsa, and Gridania also have sketchy history of doing some pretty inhumane crap. Varis even points this out, and it isnt to much a stretch that Eorzea is defending itself from Garlemald out of self interest and preservation and not so much some greater need for the moral good.

TLDR - Its all a bit sketch. Garlemald is not a great empire, but we the player shouldnt be sitting here and being like "Oh theyre pure evil and were oh so good." The conflict is more about a difference in view point rather than morality.

Except what ever moral high-ground the Empire had went completely out the window when it was revealed their whole ideology was built as a lie - Zenos even lampshaded the Empire's hypocrisy about the Primals outright. It was pretty clear even early on that there was more to the Empire's zealous "kill all Primals" directive when they were antagonizing the beastmen who were summoning, and of course, surprise surprise, it turns out they were founded by the very forces teaching the beastmen to summon in the first place! Accordingly every other strong moral arguement they might have had disappeared into the smoke it was.

You are right though that the Garlean people were victims in a way - Emet set up the Empire as 'Solus' specifically for the sole reason to create a Calamity after all, as that was his MO: find a put-upon, oppressed people, possess some lowly but still well-placed individual close to said government, provide miraculous answers to the nation's problems, and then build up the nation carefully as a powerhouse, then proceed to go forth and conquer their neighbours, hammering them under the jackboot into a mighty yet oppressive empire. Then stoke unrest in said povinces, resulting in resistance and further bloodshed, thus allowing the perfect chaotic situtation to eventually result in a Calamity. He cared nothing for the nations he created and abandoned to their fate, they were just tools to be used in the Ascians' greater plan of allowing Zodiark's rebirth. He did this with Garlemald. He did it with the Allag. He was beginning to do so with Eulmore on the First. And "an assorted half-dozen other nations with Imperial ambitions besides", as he so gleefully admitted to the player and the Scions.

So although there is a lot of Garleans who are not evil warmongers, such as the Populares (who genuiely wish for peace), the Empire itself is still nothing but an Ascian tool that has always been fated to fall, it's creator designed it specifically to be so. Black Rose was specifically designed to further this goal (no surprises that in

the original timeline, it all blew up in the Empire's face when Black Rose wiped the Empire itself out as well!.)

And even SE mentioned it from the very beginning of FFXIV's history, 1.0's backstory blurb that used to be on the FFXIV website and in it's manual outright stated that the Empire was beligerent,for not other reason that they were the designated antagonists. Anyone familar with past FF games should have really expected no different.

[Theodric]

And even SE mentioned it from the very beginning of FFXIV's history, 1.0's backstory blurb that used to be on the FFXIV website and in it's manual outright stated that the Empire was beligerent,for not other reason that they were the designated antagonists. Anyone familar with past FF games should have really expected no different.

A lot of things have changed since the days of 1.0, though I think the more correct element would be to say that anyone familiar with past Final Fantasy games should expect intriguing antagonists with depth and complex morality. Final Fantasy XII and Final Fantasy Tactics have it in spades, especially given that Archades in FF12 was presented as a very complex and nuanced take on the typical 'Empire' trope. It wasn't destroyed at the end of the game or even dismantled, so hopefully FFXIV takes some cues on that front. Final Fantasy VII had elements of depth to Shinra (Rufus and Reeve), with the former being such a popular character he was given an expanded role in Advent Children. Final Fantasy VIII had Seifer. Final Fantasy IX had Beatrix and Kuja - both of whom did terrible things but had a change of heart/were granted mercy.

A lot of people playing this game also care nothing - or very little - for Eorzea itself. I'm very much in that boat, finding the likes of Sharlayan, Hingashi and Garlemald to be far more engaging due to having actual struggles that can't just be resolved instantly thanks to the Warrior of Light as a convenient plot device.

Furthermore, the lead writers are in record in official Q&A sessions as stating that the antagonists have their own reasons for doing things and much of the moral conflict is ideological. Garlemald has also turned out to be very popular, so no doubt the writing moving forward will take that into account as well.