*Spoilers* The Past and After the Endwalker MSQ End

[Lurina]

Yeah, this is absolutely the angle. Tactically, Venat's plan was ironclad (or at least, as ironclad as it could get). Ethically, it was questionable.

To a point on an 'ironclad plan' though, you have to be willing to take the authors' word on it. Actually showing to exact lengths that a plan will be successful--and more successful than any alternatives--would just get tedious and boring, as well as lessening the impact of the actual characters enacting said plan, not to mention being basically catnip to people who value being smarter than the story over enjoying it. You kinda have to accept whatever groundwork the story goes through to confirm 'this is a good plan'.

Emet-Selch specifically saying that Venat's plan worked when his wouldn't have is part of that. Emet-Selch is a trustworthy adjudicator of Plan Goodness here, both as someone who initially opposed it and someone with a uniquely wide amount of knowledge of the situation, so if he says that it's the only one that would've worked then we can safely assume that is indeed true.

This sort of narrative economy argument only really works when the narrative is, well, economic - when there aren't unaddressed threads that seem to contradict what it's trying to tell you is self evident.

The writers didn't have to put the line from Emet where he suggests the convocation had special means of telling truth from lies. They didn't have to leave the implication that Venat's plan evidently is not ironclad by making the plot of Shadowbringers predicated on it having gone wrong in another timeline. The issue is not merely an absence of facts supporting the premise, but the presence of facts counter to it that require the audience to find their own justifications for dismissing.

The more controversial a plot element, the tighter the plot has to be to get people to accept it in good faith, and "cultural genocide was the right call to save the world" is about as close to maximum controversy as you can get. I think the fact that these forums, the comments on Venat's entry in the JP character poll, and pretty much everywhere else the story is being discussed are filled with people expressing discomfort or irritation with it self-evident proof that the writers didn't quite make it.

That might change with the post-MSQ content, mind. But it's at least true for the time being.

[Lauront]

the comments on Venat's entry in the JP character poll

Do you mean on Reddit or the JP site itself? If the latter, I'm intrigued as to what they were.

[Lurina]

Do you mean on Reddit or the JP site itself? If the latter, I'm intrigued as to what they were.

I mean the JP poll comments, here. http://blog.livedoor.jp/umadori0726/.../58861145.html

It's basically the same discourse as here. I'll roughly translate one for you as a sample as best I can. 216:

Venat has become a character that I hate so much it makes me sick. Even if I knew she would be popular because of the way the story depicts her, it's true.

I liked her in Elpis. But seeing the confusion and despair of her people afraid in the face of death for the first time, she neither tried to care for them nor act in her role as an advisor.

Instead she said, "You guys are useless at life, so I'm just gonna create new life that'll be more adaptable."

What prevented Meteion's despair from destroying the world was Zodiark, who continued to supplement the Heavenly Veins (JP term for Aether Currents). And the ones who suffered the most were those she sundered and destroyed by her own judgement without notice or permission.

So why does she get a self-indulgent scene about her own suffering?

[Veloran]

Yeah, this is absolutely the angle. Tactically, Venat's plan was ironclad (or at least, as ironclad as it could get). Ethically, it was questionable.

To a point on an 'ironclad plan' though, you have to be willing to take the authors' word on it. Actually showing to exact lengths that a plan will be successful--and more successful than any alternatives--would just get tedious and boring, as well as lessening the impact of the actual characters enacting said plan, not to mention being basically catnip to people who value being smarter than the story over enjoying it. You kinda have to accept whatever groundwork the story goes through to confirm 'this is a good plan'.

Emet-Selch specifically saying that Venat's plan worked when his wouldn't have is part of that. Emet-Selch is a trustworthy adjudicator of Plan Goodness here, both as someone who initially opposed it and someone with a uniquely wide amount of knowledge of the situation, so if he says that it's the only one that would've worked then we can safely assume that is indeed true.

This appears quite contradictory. You're suggesting that introducing an Azem plan would inherently undermine the two others so that the Azem plan would appear valid while the Hydaelyn plan and Zodiark plan would appear invalid, thereby disrupting the narrative balance of the conflict, but at the same moment you also say that the Hydaelyn plan was "ironclad" and point out that the face of the Zodiark plan, Emet, seems to admit to it being better. And I know that you've argued that it wasn't just tactically better, but that it was morally and ethically superior as well. So the scales here clearly are not balanced, we have one plan that you believe is superior in every way, and which I would say the game goes out of it's way to prop up through presentation and sympathy at every turn, and another that is basically thrown to the dust without even the recognition of how it's aided us in the present.

In other words, when you're arguing for not introducing an Azem third path, it more just sounds like arguing for a status quo where the plan you prefer is in a better light.

[Rulakir]

The more controversial a plot element, the tighter the plot has to be to get people to accept it in good faith, and "cultural genocide was the right call to save the world" is about as close to maximum controversy as you can get. I think the fact that these forums, the comments on Venat's entry in the JP character poll, and pretty much everywhere else the story is being discussed are filled with people expressing discomfort or irritation with it self-evident proof that the writers didn't quite make it.

I have nothing to add anymore between you and Veloran, y'all always nail everything much better than I could!

Instead she said, "You guys are useless at life, so I'm just gonna create new life that'll be more adaptable.

I laughed far too much at "you guys are useless at life". Thanks for translating that. I hadn't looked at the original site and according to others the only thing the Japanese players have been complaining about has been the SAM job. :P

[Slatersev]

This sort of narrative economy argument only really works when the narrative is, well, economic - when there aren't unaddressed threads that seem to contradict what it's trying to tell you is self evident.

The writers didn't have to put the line from Emet where he suggests the convocation had special means of telling truth from lies. They didn't have to leave the implication that Venat's plan evidently is not ironclad by making the plot of Shadowbringers predicated on it having gone wrong in another timeline. The issue is not merely an absence of facts supporting the premise, but the presence of facts counter to it that require the audience to find their own justifications for dismissing.

The more controversial a plot element, the tighter the plot has to be to get people to accept it in good faith, and "cultural genocide was the right call to save the world" is about as close to maximum controversy as you can get. I think the fact that these forums, the comments on Venat's entry in the JP character poll, and pretty much everywhere else the story is being discussed are filled with people expressing discomfort or irritation with it self-evident proof that the writers didn't quite make it.

That might change with the post-MSQ content, mind. But it's at least true for the time being.

Using a handful of unhappy comments on a popularity poll where she placed Third easily doesn't really work.

Its effectively the same thing that happened with Emet. Immediately became one of the most popular characters in the series, still incredibly easy to find comments from people who didn't like him.

Shit the discourse about Venat know is so similar to the discourse about Emet after ShB it gives me Deja vu.

But regardless, that poll gets to the real meat of EW, just how insanely popular Puddingway is.

What a hero

[Lurina]

Using a handful of unhappy comments on a popularity poll where she placed Third easily doesn't really work.

Its effectively the same thing that happened with Emet. Immediately became one of the most popular characters in the series, still incredibly easy to find comments from people who didn't like him.

Shit the discourse about Venat know is so similar to the discourse about Emet after ShB it gives me Deja vu.

But regardless, that poll gets to the real meat of EW, just how insanely popular Puddingway is.

What a hero

I think the tone of the conversation around Venat is a little different to the one about Emet, even if there are some similarities. Though a lot of people thought of Emet as an evil and unsympathetic character, it was rare to see confusion about why he acted the way he did, or conversations about the quality of the writing surrounding him - it mostly focused on how he was a hypocritical selfish asshole and how people who liked him and were willing to overlook that were just horny or stupid.

In contrast, despite the segment I quoted, most conversations about Venat here and there are more about the time loop plot and her behavior in it not really making much sense, or making her come across unintentionally as a really bad person with unclear motives that we're nevertheless obviously intended to support. One is dislike of a character from an in-universe perspective, while the other is more about the story itself.

There's also a lot more of it this time around. I was around this forum after ShB came out (I don't post very much, so you can go in my history and see, if you like) and there was comparatively just a few threads about Emet. Most of it was people gushing about how much they loved the story, with no deeper controversy.

[Lersayil]

...people who liked him and were willing to overlook that were just horny or stupid.

Using a handful of unhappy comments on a popularity poll where she placed Third easily doesn't really work.

Something I would like to point out is that you can like a character as a character and absolutely not agree with their views or even hate them. Love to hate and all that jazz.

Really, I could argue against Venats logic all day long, but I actually think third place is a relatively good fit for her.

If we weren't on the internet, I would argue that people can unironically like a good villain without forgiving their failings... but who am I kidding, in polls like these thats rarely the majority of the votes.

snip

I did not expect Zenos of all people to drop such a good chain of relevant lines but I love being proven wrong:

[Cleretic]

I did not expect Zenos of all people to drop such a good chain of relevant lines but I love being proven wrong:

God, I forgot about that line, and it resonates so hard with the central debate they put forward; they saw this coming.

In truth, very few people were swayed by Venat's reasons or motivations. That's not to say that those aren't compelling, but by the time she said them, we'd already decided how we feel about it. It's no longer persuasive, it's just evidence for where we'd already landed.

Just like how, ultimately, no reason of Zenos' ever could have swayed Jullus. He wasn't looking for a good reason, he was looking for another avenue of attack.

[Veloran]

My use of the hypotheticals was to demonstrate that knowing of something, and knowing a basic form of its workings, does not equal being an expert. If you read my post, you'd know I brought those up to discuss whether Venats understanding of aether currents was enough to do what Hermes did. It isn't.

Why are you so certain of that, when all we're actually told he did was make the connection between the stagnating currents and the outbreaks of the Final Days? We are never given a technical reason for his import beyond that, yet it is also a connection that was already known to Venat. At no point is it said that nobody else's understanding was insufficient, rather it is simply that Hermes ended up being the one because he was positioned to do so.

Given neither were widely understood, and his particular interests led him to experiment with them, yes. His desire to find extraterrestrial life and his emotions led him to experiment with Dynamis, his interest in flight and high altitude concepts led him to study celestial currents, and his position at Elpis clearly shows that he's an exceptional scholar even before rising to the seat of Fandaniel.

Hermes motives are one thing, it is his supposed sole authority that beggars belief. In reality even unparalleled experts in certain fields are not literally the only authority in their field, let alone in multiple. Meanwhile Hermes is supposed to be the head researcher not just in the study and creation of life - Something that like half the Convocation are supposed to be the preeminent experts on - but also the only one anywhere to have adept knowledge on two other phenomenon? To put it into perspective, this is like the head of the World Health Organization being the only person in the world to have researched both the workings of Earth's magnetic fields and discovered Dark Energy.

It should not be surprising that a narrative asking us to believe that a single person was simply so unique and indispensable that it was better to allow billions to die rather than risk upsetting him is an extremely questionable decision, both ethically and logistically.

then why did Hythlo and Emet agree that Venats plan was the right one in the end?

Because everything was already done and set on that path by virtue of the game needing to exist, and the writers wanted to comfortably wrap everything into a happy bow where everyone's favorite characters don't detest each other. You'll notice that despite being the cause of everything and killing trillions of people respectively, Hermes and Meteion are almost always given eminent sympathy and are presented in happiness with the others in the closing art.

She and her followers warned them that what they were doing was not solving the issue, and in fact, was leading humanity down the path of destruction. They ignored her,

What exactly were they supposed to do when Venat was withholding the reasoning behind her position? If somebody were to tell you to destroy your computer because having it would ruin you, would you do it despite not knowing that it was infected with malware that was in the process of stealing all of your personal information?

they have their ability to be objective on matters pertaining to the god they were tempered by compromised.

We do not know to what degree they were influenced, if at all. The Loporrits and Emet in ShB would suggest very little.

He wasn't looking for a good reason, he was looking for another avenue of attack.

Put another way, genocide becomes justifiable if you have a "good reason", even if it was once considered so abhorrent that it must have been an accident.