Disappointed in one Endwalker Aspect [SPOILERS]

[KariTheFox]

Yes, there were a lot of variables that Venat did not and could not have accounted for. But that's because her "plan" was not a intricate rube goldberg machine she set up for us to follow. Her plan only went as far as making sure there was someone stronger than her, who could travel to Ultima Thule and confront Meteion.

After that point, she's placing her hopes and trust into us to finish what she started. This is consistent with Venat having faith in the future, in our ability to move forward even without her guidance.

Edit: This imo is what Emet-Selch meant when he said Venat's plan was the right one. Having hope for the future and faith in those who come after you will succeed whereas trying to return to the past will end in failure.

[Cleretic]

Yes, there were a lot of variables that Venat did not and could not have accounted for. But that's because her "plan" was not a intricate rube goldberg machine she set up for us to follow. Her plan only went as far as making sure there was someone stronger than her, who could travel to Ultima Thule and confront Meteion.

After that point, she's placing her hopes and trust into us to finish what she started. This is consistent with Venat having faith in the future, in our ability to move forward even without her guidance.

Edit: This imo is what Emet-Selch meant when he said Venat's plan was the right one. Having hope for the future and faith in those who come after you will succeed whereas trying to return to the past will end in failure.

All of this, exactly. On top of that, while yes her plan did hinge a lot on essentially the roll of the dice, they're dice that the Ancients would have been unable to roll. Yeah, we got lucky that Zenos turned up when he did, but in any other plan he wouldn't have turned up at all.

I remember a similar argument about the MCU's 'twenty-eight million possible futures, and we win in one of them'. In that case Dr. Strange literally did have infallible vision of the future (as opposed to Venat, who got a single testimony told by someone who we later discovered definitely didn't have the whole picture), so I saw people arguing 'it's absurd that he planned all of this when so much relies on luck', and... well, he didn't. A lot of that success really did come down to luck. But what they really did with that information wasn't 'set up for a random animal to free Ant-Man five years in the future', it was 'do everything in our power to set things up right, and then cross our fingers and hope fate turns our way'.

Venat's plan had a chance of working, even if it was only a chance. Nobody else's did.

...and then you have to add in that this is the end of a fairly long story. The culmination of multiple heroes' journeys (and a few villains'). Of course that's going to read like the plan was luck-reliant, that's not a bad thing, because it means the characters mattered. Is Lord of the Rings a bad story because the plan to get Frodo all the way to Mt. Doom seemed pretty unlikely?

[Rulakir]

Venat's plan had a chance of working, even if it was only a chance. Nobody else's did.

There is nothing in game that supports this.

[QT_Melon]

There is nothing in game that supports this.

Uhh, the ENDING of the story? As far a no one else...true....I suppose


Though I do feel her plan also had to be contingent on letting certain people be villains. Which probably makes it more interesting in her not speaking ill of Elidibus, as he had to play his part in order for the plan to work :P

[Cleretic]

There is nothing in game that supports this.

Emet-Selch says this, directly.

[Veloran]

Yes, there were a lot of variables that Venat did not and could not have accounted for. But that's because her "plan" was not a intricate rube goldberg machine she set up for us to follow. Her plan only went as far as making sure there was someone stronger than her, who could travel to Ultima Thule and confront Meteion.

Why didn't her plan account for someone being faster than her? You know, since Meteion could easily just... Run away and never be caught?

Emet-Selch says this, directly.

Emet-Selch also says that his ideals were inviolably correct, that the Ancients did have the will to live, and that Venat's plan had him showing up at the very end as a lynchpin. And a lot of arguments at play in this thread rely on ignoring all of these things.

[KariTheFox]

Why didn't her plan account for someone being faster than her? You know, since Meteion could easily just... Run away and never be caught?

Well, first of all. The Ragnorak and presuambly the moon ship were both pretty fast. The WoL could just walk back to the Ragnorak and ask the bunnies to chase that bird if it came to that.

And Meteion running away from her nest means running away from all the dynamis and siphoned souls that were powering the final days.

Edit: Also, frankly. I think you're picking nits to sidestep my point that Venat ultimately, is putting her faith and trust in us to do what she couldn't.

[Veloran]

Well, first of all. The Ragnorak and presuambly the moon ship were both pretty fast. The WoL could just walk back to the Ragnorak and ask the bunnies to chase that bird if it came to that.

The ship doesn't have infinite fuel. Even if Meteion ran, she could just gather the Dynamis back to her and restart the Final Days at a later date.

Edit: Also, frankly. I think you're picking nits to sidestep my point that Venat ultimately, is putting her faith and trust in us to do what she couldn't.

She's very selectively faithful.

[Cleretic]

Emet-Selch also says that his ideals were inviolably correct, that the Ancients did have the will to live, and that Venat's plan had him showing up at the very end as a lynchpin. And a lot of arguments at play in this thread rely on ignoring all of these things.

Yeah, his whole thing there was basically 'I admit your plan worked, and that I'm probably here right now as part of it, but that doesn't mean I have to like it'. Emet-Selch was also a man of his principles, even if his principles caused genocides, and even in death (and rebirth, and death again) refused to betray them.

Neither side capitulated on their morals. Nor should they have; neither side was cleanly and definitively morally right, even if one side happened to be strategically right. That's the whole idea of that conflict, and why it is intentionally left an open question: even though her plan worked, it may not have been the morally right thing to do.

[Veloran]

Neither side capitulated on their morals. Nor should they have; neither side was cleanly and definitively morally right, even if one side happened to be strategically right. That's the whole idea of that conflict, and why it is intentionally left an open question: even though her plan worked, it may not have been the morally right thing to do.

Yeah, not so sure that's how it's presented. I'm also not so sure that an argument of strategy can even be made when one side didn't even know they were in a war while the other was given a roadmap.