*Spoilers* Anyone feel joining Emet would have been better

[EaraGrace]

It occurs as a stylised fast-forward presentation of all that would take place. There are many details which it omits, which you can easily determine by going through the compilation of sources on this topic from SHB.

It reveals as much as it simplifies, we can’t ignore it.

But a single statement in the EN version from him that is even vaguer is sufficient for you to arrive at the view that he thought his people couldn’t’ve found a way to drive back Meteion? I see.

Certainly requires less acrobatics. But let’s play out the tape. If Emet is only referring to the being physically at the point on the path, does that not also mean they would fail at defeating Meteion? That’s literally the only path there, if you don’t get there you don’t defeat Meteion.

Mayhap there is. It’s still a narrower statement than the EN version and it is still him wishing to grant her a compliment. But I’m certainly not convinced that that statement suffices to make the point some of you are trying to extrapolate from it.

I think the fact he is even willing to grant her a compliment should be indicative of his thoughts. He suffered a thousand thousand lives because of her, compliments aren’t exactly easily given afterward.

I’m afraid this is where you lose me. We know why she sundered the world. We also know that this plan was a plan that’d accomplish defeating Meteion. Emet had made his peace with his loss. He also does not abdicate his principles, and as ever, his primary interest is the star’s continuation. Agreeing to leave matters at this rather than continue to prosecute a fight he’s already lost would be futile and he was intent to honour his word following his test. What this statement does not suffice to confirm is, had things played out differently, that the sundering might’ve been avoided altogether.

As Venat notes, the Final Days would mean the end of all the things he holds dear. She had friends, comrades, loves, hopes and desires in that Ancient world. Why do you believe she wouldn’t exhaust all options to see them protected, as the creation of Hydaelyn and Sundering the world would mean losing all of that and more? I’m to believe she made the decision without exhausting all reasonable alternatives?

I agree that many =/= all. Much like I’d say not all sundered need to be in a position to drive Meteion back, when a vastly smaller squad sufficed to protect all those at home. Though for someone who says nothing is impossible, I’d like to see her attempt a full explanation of all the facts concerned with all the methods at her disposal and the ancients to be given a chance to see how they might adapt to deal with the situation and not with mere platitudes thrown at them at a time of intense suffering, with their world dying beneath them and the majority of their people gone to prevent this. By the point she sundered them she'd given up on them. So why oh why not try reasoning with them before it got to that point? The story introduced barriers to this and I understand why, but it is also why I don't think they were given a proper opportunity to deal with the facts of what confronted them.

On that we can find an understanding on. My perspective is that she had every reason to exhaust the alternatives and seems to have done so going by both the Anyder scene and the cutscene post Elpis. You obviously disagree. Perhaps that will just remain a disagreement then.

However, neither with Emet-Selch nor Hythlodaeus exactly wilting away like lilies at the revelation of the truth, and with a civilisation already divided on the matter of the third stage of sacrifices (until they eventually became convinced it was the way forward), and demonstrably capable of adapting to new observations as per Elpis sidequests, I am not convinced that they wouldn’t’ve undertaken the necessary measures to deal with Meteion and continue as a civilisation if they received the full story. The unsundered Ascians fought to restore their civilisation for almost 12k years, with Elidibus willing to even go beyond this. They did not lack a fighting spirit. You are free to disagree on these points. However, we’re not going to see eye to eye on it unless the writers introduce something that comes closer to confirming it.

I think this is relative. As Alisaie points out, what breaks one person may not break another and that has nothing to do with strength. The Ancients handled long life spans much more easily than we would. Yet they didn’t handle sudden, unexpected death as well.

That is what it will take, yes. And until such time, if it ever comes, we're probably going to remain at an impasse on this.

If only Elidibus was here to yell at us.

And I made the point that we do not know #1 whether the life was sentient or not and #2 whether they would have consented or not. And I can not side with Venat's group until I have that information. I side fully with the Ancients sundered because their consent was not sought or given prior to Venat's actions and that is utterly morally repugnant in my eyes.

I’m asking for your opinion on Venats group. Let me try this again.

Do you believe that it was argued that a group of non-sentient life should be given control of the star? That this was an important part of the moral conflict that divided Amaurot society?

[Veloran]

That this was an important part of the moral conflict that divided Amaurot society?

I believe the issue of the third sacrifice was an entirely dropped plot point that was replaced with the conflict of "deny suffering" versus "accept suffering".

[redheadturk]

It reveals as much as it simplifies, we can’t ignore it.
I’m asking for your opinion on Venats group. Let me try this again.

Do you believe that it was argued that a group of non-sentient life should be given control of the star? That this was an important part of the moral conflict that divided Amaurot society?

And I am saying we do not have enough information for me to have a firm opinion. I find Venat's actions morally objectionable for the reasons stated. Necessary as the other poster stated or not. they are still morally awful in my eyes. But I do not have enough information about what kind of lives would have comprised the third sacrifice nor whether those lives would have consented if they were sentient for me to take their side.