Dynamis in hindsight (Massive 6.0 spoilers)

[Vyrerus]

I think it's made hard to distinguish intentionally, but it's also easy to understand that it's hard to distinguish because both Aether and Dynamis are forms of energy. Fuel for techniques. Meteion is even said to manipulate it in the same way the Ancients manipulate aether.

Its main purpose in Endwalker's narrative was power escalation. Meteion has a lot of fuel, and perfect knowledge on how to command it.

It's a boring answer, I know, but that's the way I see it.

But to participate in the thread itself, what could I see as a possible, inadvertent command of Dynamis? Well, I loved that idea about the Vanu-Vanu dances.

Perhaps the Manderville hijinks. The family seems to believe that they are strong, and so they influence the Dynamis into making themselves that way without being able to perceive it?

Aether Sickness? Perhaps our Sundered selves being partially Dynamis is variable person to person, resulting in the variable intensity of the affliction?

[Pofruin]

Dynamis was way before DNC quests in Limit Break form though, so your points do not stand. Is it a retcon? Probably but here it is.

About the original question: most Loreheads are iffy about it. It's introduced for sole purpose of giving in universe validity of Literary dramatic rules. Power of Love, Hope, Friendship or Despair. And is mostly writers tool AGAINST this very forum. Its the ruler to hit them over the head when they are misbehaving:

"This cannot work like this!", "Plot Hole!", "This event cannot take place!". Writers answer: TWANG... "Dynamis!"

[Veloran]

Dynamis was way before DNC quests in Limit Break form though, so your points do not stand.

Which was previously just attributed to aether and the Echo. I mean the Echo can quite literally "break down the barriers of reality", and it's the buff you get in nearly all instanced content from solo duties to raids. It can even stack and grow in power based on how "dire" a situation is. It is a very nice tie between the lore and the mechanics of the game. Meanwhile, as you point out, Dynamis is nothing more than a writer's get-out-of-jail-free card. "The writing is incoherent or contrived? No it isn't, DYNAMIS!" is simply weak writing.

And frankly, I think they were forced to invent Dynamis because they had written themselves into a corner in the plot. The Ancients naturally needed to lose in the Final Days and we needed to win, so to justify that they took something of a lazy route and just invented a new universal force that does not abide by any rules or logic, and which the Ancients were (in)conveniently biologically unable to interact with. Narratively this is pretty much taking the easy way out.

[Pofruin]

It is painfully obvious Dynamis is crowbarred into story in EW. It is also obvious to me that central conflict Venat Vs. Ancients is well established and defined from at least ARR. Why they did it is anyone's guess. Your assertion that they wrote themselves into a corner is as valid as mine idea that General MMO audience can't get anything Subtle. And anything less then sledgehammering the point with Dynamis that "Feelings are important" would not carry the message that was intended.
But its here now and we go from here. It can still be swept under the rug with: unseen, esoteric and rare epitets. Or loads of old stuff can be retconned or developed further with Dynamis.

For retcon example: Blasphemies are Aetheric beings transformed by Despair "aspected" Dynamis. Then perhaps different "aspects" can make different biengs/have different effects? Hope Dynamis is defining factor of Hero for example. And entirety of Fairy on the First are different types of Dynamis beasts. The emotion element of their origin lends itself well methinks. And would explain weird ability and powerscaling. Also Feyfication of Amaro.

For development: Dancers and Bards. One does not need to retcon that it was always Dynamis, yet one can develop that now that they Know the power potential of feelings they can be more focused/deliberate with it. What I would love is to use Dynamis to distinguish War and DRK more among themselves. Both can go eitherway though so its a tough one. Perhaps both go Dynamis route and DRK is harnessing Resentment and WAR - Rage?

[Lauront]

I'm more inclined to agree with what Veloran is saying. The idea that the writers should treat the fans as "misbehaving" for bothering to familiarise themselves with what knowledge they themselves have provided - in some cases ambiguous and uncertain, yes - is backwards, IMO - a certain other developer used to do this. Especially when it serves to entrench the view that what they're doing is invoking gimmicky plot devices to make a story otherwise meant to span over 2 expansions work. I don't think dynamis is inherently a bad idea, particularly because there have been suggestions for a while now of some irreducible aspect to the soul (now whether dynamis is that or not is another question), but the way it was introduced was not great and lends itself to the interpretation Veloran is giving it.

[RyuDragnier]

Going to give my take on Dynamis even though it feels like I'm beating my head against a wall here (because a lot of people in these very forums seem to look in just black and white).

Dynamis being added changes everything and nothing at the same time. I say everything because it's a brand new concept that has a lot of potential and also makes us question what is and isn't dynamis in the story. It changes nothing because even with Dynamis added, it does not change the fact that aether is in play. You LB, you're still using Aether, Dynamis is just another force acting alongside it. Aether corruption is still a thing, Dynamis just acts as an outward force that can effect it. Monsters using aether is still a thing, dynamis just brings into question what their mindsets are using it (think Behemoths casting Meteor as they die).

But a lot of people in these very forums seem to think that it's all aether, and can't be anything more. The world and everything is made up of a mixture of things, from the ground itself, the air, to even water. So why can't aether also be mixed with dynamis?

[Ryaz]

Honestly, most of the community seems fine with Dynamis and review scores praising the story seem to support that. It's really only the forums here where some really vocal people seem to hate it. Some people hate anything that challenges their established view of lore (look at Fallout and the hatred of the FO3 Brotherhood of Steel by some for not being carbon copies of the original version, though it's thoroughly explained why they changed).

Personally, I don't feel like Dynamis is out of place. It adds to the lore and doesn't really retcon or take anything away from it. I also love the scientific correlations between aether/dynamis and real world forces/dark energy. We make new discoveries every day in the real world to explain things that were either unexplainable or we were just flat out wrong about. Why can't the same be done in a fictional world?

This should be an exciting time for lore nerds as there's an entirely new concept to explore. Personally, I'm excited to see where they take it next.

[Lyth]

Due to the nature of sundered shards, and the 13th possibly being the last split, it's possible the aetherial density is naturally so thin there that modern Eorzean aetheromiters cannot even detect it.

Regardless of whether the Void has no aether, has extremely low aetheric density to the point of being undetectable, or has no usable aether (i.e. entropy), it doesn't explain what power source the Voidsent use, unless they're literally Laplace's Demons. If they were dependent on Aether alone, they'd have to be a bunch of emaciated weaklings. You'd be better off powering Void Ark using the combined INT scores and spellcasting prowess of a group of Warriors.

It's actually kind of funny that the word Akasha is a Vedic equivalent of the Greco-Roman Aether. Thematically implicit in all this is an interplay between thought and feeling, western and eastern philosophic tradition, science and mysticism. Every viewpoint that you see presented, be it that of the Ancients, the dead civilizations at the edge of the universe, or even Hermes and Metieon's nihilism make logical sense on a purely intellectual level, yet they all turn out to be spiritually barren in the end. "After all these years, was this the answer that I was hoping for?" It's hardly surprising that our rejection of these 'utopias' at the story's climax is based in an appeal to the heart and spirit; an expression of Dynamis.

I'm not at all surprised that people struggle to reconcile the two, and it reflects our cultural values and prejudices.

[waifugenerator]

Since 5.0 I assumed the aether of the 13th is just so astrally charged (if aether is water, then consider astral to be boiling and umbral frozen) that it's inimical to life, and voidsent are only "aether starved" in that they seek out balanced aether because they have an instinctive urge to reach homeostasis. Paging @anonymoose

Also Dynamis is fine. I think loreheads are just alienated by EW in general because it's figurative/emotional storytelling where "because love" is a valid answer to essential questions. Thought versus feeling, Apollonian versus Dionysian (Dynamis?)

[Theozilla]

Yeah, like when a living organism is starving and needs food, that doesn't mean its body can't still be used for food and processed into metabolic for something else.

While Sin Eaters are Umbral and when they gorge and feast on aether they keep it in stasis and just desire more to accumulate, while Voidsent are constantly actively burning through the aether they feast upon. Both create a void of aether in different ways.