Death unto Dawn page up

[Kesey]

It just makes things so boring/full imo. Like i’m not even really asking for people to die, but just for there to be some long lasting consequences. There’s no reason for there to not be any consequences whatsoever in the expansion advertised to be the grittiest and darkest of them yet, where we face off against the strongest almost godlike foes yet, but it ends up being the safest expansion. Like what sense does that make?

But to play devil's advocate, let's think of this way: If we don't loose a member of the main cast so they can all face the grittiest and darkest expansion together against a godlike foe, then they all can experience it differently and create many avenues of storytelling instead of pigeon-holing some of the cast and limit their ability to tell the story.

I would argue that keeping them alive will present the best option for the storytelling to not be boring.

[Vyrerus]

But to play devil's advocate, let's think of this way: If we don't loose a member of the main cast so they can all face the grittiest and darkest expansion together against a godlike foe, then they all can experience it differently and create many avenues of storytelling instead of pigeon-holing some of the cast and limit their ability to tell the story.

I would argue that keeping them alive will present the best option for the storytelling to not be boring.

To play devil's advocate's advocate, what if they kill someone old to make room for someone new, while also presenting us with better fleshed out shows of grieving from those we know will feel it most? No story is really diminished by character death, only by the writer's ability to tell around and beyond it with who remain.

When you write in death, it's to show that there are consequences for the heroes. Lasting ones. You get to write things like trauma, heartbreak, sorrow, recurring dreams, and the like. You also get to show the death, honorable or otherwise. Sudden or sacrifice. With your boots on, or quietly in the middle of the night.

I suspect we're in for a couple, because it will allow them to write the protégé style characters as the mentors come 6.1. If none of the characters we have now ever die, then how are we going to take whatever new threat that comes our way seriously, at all? Because they exposit that we should? Because they blow up towns that we've seen blown up by lesser threats? Make us feel the threat.

[RyuDragnier]

I suspect we're in for a couple, because it will allow them to write the protégé style characters as the mentors come 6.1. If none of the characters we have now ever die, then how are we going to take whatever new threat that comes our way seriously, at all? Because they exposit that we should? Because they blow up towns that we've seen blown up by lesser threats? Make us feel the threat.

The characters don't have to die. Death is one predictable avenue. There are plenty of ways to write characters off without it.

Example, look at Thancred. He lost his aether controlling abilities. Now what happens if he loses a leg or ends up badly hurt in a fight that leaves him near crippled and almost dead? He's effectively written out of the story. He can no longer spy for us, he can no longer fight by our side. His entire role as a Scion is no longer possible, and he has to leave the main story and be replaced by another.

Another example, Y'shtola and Urianger. They're our resident expert mages and lore experts. Imagine if you will that the actions occurring in EW effect the First and we need somebody there who can hold the aether together, and whichever goes would be able to make the trip body and all, but wouldn't return? One of them would be removed from the main squad permanently without death.

We don't need there to be death to remove characters, we have other avenues to create believable circumstances that rob us of our team members permanently and make it threatening. If any Scion were to be removed from the equation permanently in any of these circumstances, we've felt the threat, they're not coming back, they can't help us anymore. I wouldn't be surprised if the last dungeon of EW has only the Trusts of G'raha, Alphinaud, Alisaie, and Estinien left due to the other members getting permanently removed due to circumstances, with G'raha being permanently removed after the final dungeon is complete. Leaving us with the only members able to continue into 6.1 being Alphinaud and Alisaie, and maybe Estinien if he officially joins the Scions.

[Vyrerus]

The characters don't have to die.

Yes, they do. I actually love your post. I'd love if the screenwriters could come up with some sort of long term handicap that keeps our heroes out of the storyline. Yet, since it's a magical world, and since we already have an amputee fighting at comparable battle strength to the rest of the cast, the requests for magitek prosthetics and the like would just be incessant. The playerbase wouldn't buy it. "Oh, Thancred lost a leg? Why don't the Sharlayans give him a prosthetic. I mean, we have psychic funnels that shoot lasers, why not a robotic leg?"

As for sending a Scion back to the First, well, I'm sure that's what Y'shtola's hoping to achieve, since she wants to get with her Manther Daddy, but they have to make the mode of travel believable, after the entire hassle they just spent eons driving into us. I could only like that if it was done well, and I'm of the mind that if they take that approach, they'll just take the road of, "Don't think too hard, it's a fantasy." Like, bish, you just spent an entire expansion showing me how painstaking it is to cross the rift both body and soul. Even had an original soul comment that it was something beyond them. You really just gonna let this blind chick cross, who is dead three times over? UGH!

I think people in this thread are sort of somewhat making up what the other side thinks. Perhaps that's the only way they can perceive it, but the need for character death isn't something we're asking for lightly. I know it seems that way, but the fact of the matter is, is that they have never had the guts to truly kill off any of the main cast. Yes, I know Papalymo is a 1.0 character, but until I see some fact about him having more screen time than any of the other scions, then he might as well have been second string(Obviously more screen time from 1.0 up until his death).

Haurchefant's truth is that he was the one hospitable Ishgardian, pretty much until Heavensward. I knew he had scriptwriter's doom from the time I completed the quests involving him the first time around in Coerthas. He wasn't a main character though, just an easy to like one.

In my opinion, none of the cast have strong tells for scriptwriter's doom currently, but that's because we've gone for so long without being shown any real danger. When I say real danger, I mean danger for the main cast. We've seen them knocked off their feet a few times. We've seen them argue against a man who created god. We've seen them on the lam from a poison arrow or what have you. They come about every time, bright eyed and bushy tailed. Ready to exposit information and tell the WoL to get some rest(take a break player, your NPC parasocial commands!).

We've even seen the villains bring them back from their doom. It might as well be a slice of life anime at this point. What is FFXIV? Love Hina with some swords? We need stakes! (Steak Liara, so much steak....)

[Theodric]

I think people in this thread are sort of somewhat making up what the other side thinks.

That is, unfortunately, an issue that has been common around these parts for years. It's why I generally only post here before and after a new patch or expansion is due to go live.

I suspect there's a considerable amount of over investment in specific characters, too. I'm personally more interested in a compelling story in a similar vein to ARR and HW where the stakes felt high and consequences existed. If the finale marks the end of the main plot threads that began way back in ARR then it just makes sense to me to embrace that particular style of storytelling once more. Especially if we're supposedly dealing with a potential world wide apocalyptic threat far beyond any other that we've seen thus far.

I've yet to see anybody ask for death for the sake of death. Yet Final Fantasy games never really shy away from killing off major characters. With such a large cast and plenty of room for it to expand and refresh itself in the future...I really don't see it as the worst thing ever for one or two major deaths to occur amongst the main cast.

Traditionally, the single player Final Fantasy games worked with a much smaller number of characters after all. It happened there, so it stands to reason that it can happen here too.

[ICountFrom0]

I think people in this thread are sort of somewhat making up what the other side thinks.

Tis gotten quite off topic from what I tried to start, I do have to admit. Hopefully as long as I keep updating the front page as things are updated the topic will eventually come around. We'll actually have something to specialate from instead of just speculate on.

[Lauront]

It might as well be a slice of life anime at this point.

You'd certainly be forgiven for that given some of what was in the final parts of Eden...

This one made me chuckle:

[Kesey]

I think people in this thread are sort of somewhat making up what the other side thinks. Perhaps that's the only way they can perceive it, but the need for character death isn't something we're asking for lightly. I know it seems that way, but the fact of the matter is, is that they have never had the guts to truly kill off any of the main cast. Yes, I know Papalymo is a 1.0 character, but until I see some fact about him having more screen time than any of the other scions, then he might as well have been second string(Obviously more screen time from 1.0 up until his death).

It's pretty easy to dismiss the other side of the argument when you've convinced yourself they're making it up...

Again, if you kill anyone you lose the potential to keep telling stories with them, so death has to be super impactful (Haurchefant), move the plot (Moenbrydia), cutoff future scenarios of their storytelling (Nidhoggs attack would play out differently if Lady Iceheart was around, plus create a more complicated relationship with all primals going forward). Papalymo's death accomplished all of these points by stalling Shinryu, loosing a Scion who had been there from the beginning with Gridania players, and gave Lyse the freedom to go to Doma. Papalymo most importantly would be in the way of Lyse expanding as a character and in Stormblood, so his potential story telling going forward with the plot was diminished, and though heartbreaking, was necessary.

Currently, beyond the argument that "Death is necessary" do I hear any kill the scion supporters saying more than death is a great motivator. How does Y'shotla biting the bullet before going to Thavnairia advance the plot? Or Thancred or Urianger dyeing before Endwalker takes us to the Empire? Or if the big city is Sharalayan killing one of the twins or G'hara before we go there? If you are going to support the death of beloved characters justify it in context of the story, stop espousing philosophy and anime tropes at us.

And if I'm still not clear and seem to be making this up to you, I'm specifically asking you for evidence on how killing anyone will advance the story (plot) significantly and you can't use the excuse that the death will affect the remaining characters emotionally and force them to act because that is a given any time a character dies.

[Vyrerus]

stop espousing philosophy and anime tropes at us.

No, I don't think I will.

Again, when you kill characters it removes them from the story permanently. As you just pointed out, it gives more room for other characters to take the stage and grow. Since all of the Scions are from Sharlayan, having one of them get killed by the bad guys as the world is set to end would probably be the impetus to have us journey to Sharlayan and start bringing out the big guns. The forbidden/secret knowledge and technology of Sharlayan to match the stakes that were just raised by the character death. Why not just go there, because the world is at stake? Oh, I don't know, because the world is always at stake in FFXIV. In the original timeline before G'raha and future Ironworks did their thing, the Scions and most of the world got to experience Black Rose, and we hear nothing of Sharlayan being moved to not be neutral.

Also I find it funny that to you, one of the prime reasons for character death is just an, "excuse." You've already assumed the position that my talking points, or anyone with them, do not have merit. If you get to decide how much worth my words have before I write them, then why should I try to fulfill your checklist of what you think is important? All I meant by, "I think people are making up the other side's thoughts" is that people are basically building, "Strawmen." In this case the strawman is the idea that everyone who wants characters to die just wants death for death's sake as many people keep insisting in this thread.

[Kesey]

No, I don't think I will.

Again, when you kill characters it removes them from the story permanently. As you just pointed out, it gives more room for other characters to take the stage and grow. Since all of the Scions are from Sharlayan, having one of them get killed by the bad guys as the world is set to end would probably be the impetus to have us journey to Sharlayan and start bringing out the big guns. The forbidden/secret knowledge and technology of Sharlayan to match the stakes that were just raised by the character death. Why not just go there, because the world is at stake? Oh, I don't know, because the world is always at stake in FFXIV. In the original timeline before G'raha and future Ironworks did their thing, the Scions and most of the world got to experience Black Rose, and we hear nothing of Sharlayan being moved to not be neutral.

Also I find it funny that to you, one of the prime reasons for character death is just an, "excuse." You've already assumed the position that my talking points, or anyone with them, do not have merit. If you get to decide how much worth my words have before I write them, then why should I try to fulfill your checklist of what you think is important? All I meant by, "I think people are making up the other side's thoughts" is that people are basically building, "Strawmen." In this case the strawman is the idea that everyone who wants characters to die just wants death for death's sake as many people keep insisting in this thread.

Asking you for evidence is challenging you to participate in the conversation, instead of taking the obstinate path of "No, I don't think I will."