*Spoilers* Anyone feel joining Emet would have been better

[Cleretic]

....I mean, both sides went full on genocidal. It just took one side thousands of years to get there, while the other took the express lane to omnicide.

I've brought this up before, but Venat's actions are difficult to quantify as 'genocide', in large part because it's a philosophical question if the Sundering counts as 'killing'. But since she was going up against an act that was also similarly shady, it's not really right to cast shade over her and not the Convocation.

And as I mathed out last night... evidence suggests that the Ascians didn't take 'thousands of years' to get to genocide, because going with the math that it takes one thousand to one and a half thousand years to commit a Calamity under normal circumstances (the brief time to the planned eighth being a known outlier), and that there was a failed attempt before the successful first Calamity, actually suggests that the amount of time they took before going for the genocide plan wasn't 'thousands of years', but somewhere between 'hundreds of years' and 'literal minutes'.

[Vyrerus]

I've brought...

It's not hard to quantify what Venat did as genocide at all. To even deny that's what it was is to literally discount the Ancients' lives. Either all lives are precious, or some aren't. Can't have it both ways. There are similar philosophical branches we can travel down that paint the Rejoinings as not being Genocide, and in that same branch of thought lies the denial of Venat's deed too.

But there is one hard thing the Sundering did that Rejoinings could never do. That is, it damaged the soul which is the core of an Etheirysian's being. At first it seems not to matter, we could even be generous and suggest that it's the same sort of deal IRL where the spirits housed in Eastern shrines are split and taken to other shrines to impart a growing spirit across all the lands. However, FFXIV's account of Etheirysian souls is too detailed for that to really hold water. Especially when the combining of the sundered souls restores power and vitality, as the soul approaches wholeness.

This(Ye Olde Sundering) made Etheirysians susceptible to, "true death" via Dynamis, and has lead to the only true deaths for Etheirysians with no possibility of reincarnation for such individuals (At least as shown currently, though I suspect with the writers wanting to maintain Hydaelyn's "inexorable" integrity they will throw the baby out with the bathwater yet again at some point in the near future. This will create its own host of new problems, probably).

[EaraGrace]

It's not hard to quantify what Venat did as genocide at all. To even deny that's what it was is to literally discount the Ancients' lives. Either all lives are precious, or some aren't. Can't have it both ways. There are similar philosophical branches we can travel down that paint the Rejoinings as not being Genocide, and in that same branch of thought lies the denial of Venat's deed too.

The philosophical questions surrounding the Sundering might spawn another 75 pages

But there is one hard thing the Sundering did that Rejoinings could never do. That is, it damaged the soul which is the core of an Etheirysian's being. At first it seems not to matter, we could even be generous and suggest that it's the same sort of deal IRL where the spirits housed in Eastern shrines are split and taken to other shrines to impart a growing spirit across all the lands. However, FFXIV's account of Etheirysian souls is too detailed for that to really hold water. Especially when the combining of the sundered souls restores power and vitality, as the soul approaches wholeness.

This(Ye Olde Sundering) made Etheirysians susceptible to, "true death" via Dynamis, and has lead to the only true deaths for Etheirysians with no possibility of reincarnation for such individuals (At least as shown currently, though I suspect with the writers wanting to maintain Hydaelyn's "inexorable" integrity they will throw the baby out with the bathwater yet again at some point in the near future. This will create its own host of new problems, probably).

You’ll be disappointed to find out then the writers see to have already have done so. Thancred and the Scions survived despite their aether being overwhelmed with Dynamis (much to Meteions surprise), the souls held by Meteion returned to their bodies (the dragons, Ea and Omicrons) after we defeated Endsinger, and from the role quests there seems to be more to the Blasphemies than we thought.

Not to mention the question of what she was supposed to do. If you view the Sundering as an unneeded genocide, then I can understand that position. But, if you believe the Sundering necessary, plus the fact she acted to prevent Zodiarks destruction and gave us the clues needed to get to Elpis, it would be hard to criticize her for those deaths when she did all she could to prevent them. I think I’ve made clear where I fall on that, thus I don’t agree with the criticism.

[Vyrerus]

You'll be disappointed

The Scions weren't transformed. They were influencing Dynamis as well. That's how they and we combatted Meteion. They weren't overwhelmed on the soul level. Their bodies were dissipated, but their souls went on to alter Ultima Thule's environs in an active struggle until we broke Meteion's will by having Hyth and Hades create Elpis flowers. Once that was achieved, all that their souls had been struggling for was evinced into true being. Their bodies were then brought back, and their souls back into them by Hydaelyn's magic on the Azem stone calling. As far as all the other people in Ultima Thule, I'm not sure on that. I don't remember anything concrete about it, but it's been a minute, and I'm not even half way done with my second playthrough still. Even if they are though, it's a farcry from returning their entire civilization, planet, and population to their own cycles if they even have those.


As far as Blasphemies go, they merely seem to be influenced by the dominant personality in the being they're transformed from at the time Dynamis overwhelms them. This mostly goes into explain why they act the way they do as Blasphemies, as well as expound on the past of the characters intertwined with each Blasphemy. The most interesting bit of note is that a partial primal imparts the personality of one of the Heaven's Ward onto Profane Fafnir. The man underneath all of that doesn't seem to be part of the Blasphemy at all. The healer, tank, melee, and ranged physical all have regular(more or less) people transformed with differing scenarios that impart that the deep seated desires of the person transformed carry into the Blasphemy. There was nothing to suggest they return to live anew. Nothing to cast doubt on what was stated during the events of Thavnair and Palaka's Stand.

[Cleretic]

It's not hard to quantify what Venat did as genocide at all. To even deny that's what it was is to literally discount the Ancients' lives.

This argument is so cyclical that exactly the two of us have had exactly this same sub-argument once before.

Even if you do count the Sundering as a genocide, you have to count the Ascians as:
A: before the Sundering planning at least one act of mass extermination against the entire mission statement of their civilization (calling it 'genocide' is unclear without knowing their selection process for the third sacrifice, but bad either way)
B: going on to perform fourteen acts of confirmed genocide (all seven successful Calamities destroying a shard, all but one Calamity also decimating the Source, plus the Thirteenth)
C: planning to perform at least twenty-eight genocides in total, likely more (all Rejoinings counting both shard and Source, plus the sacrifice to fix the Thirteenth, plus the sacrifice to remake the Ancients)

Again, I reiterate my actual angle: At the time of the Sundering, both sides were making morally dubious decisions for high-minded reasons, to the point where, if I were an Ancient at the time, I don't know if I'd have sided with either. But afterwards, we learn that Venat was factually correct, and also that the Convocation would be completely okay with doing the same morally dubious thing Venat did over two dozen times, each one in a much less dubious context.

[Vyrerus]

This argument is so cyclical

I see you've doubled the numbers on the Rejoinings because you don't like how the Sundering math works out, but unfortunately for you, there were no genocides on the Source. Just large disasters that did kill many people, but no race wide devastation and no complete obliteration of life/death of all things living. Just like the exact details on the Sundering, there are no details provided as to just how bad each Rejoining was for the Source. We have a binary meter from the 7th and 8th to form a sort of range, but there's nothing concrete. And thousands upon thousands of survivors worldwide in every case. To include them as a doubling is to lessen the meaning of the word genocide. No doubling the deck just because you are desperate to return people's views of the Ascians to pre-SHB times.

As the prior premise, your reiterated angle has issues too. Venat wasn't merely correct. She was the only one capable of being correct, because she was the only one with all of the facts.

As far as the Convocation being OK with doing the, "same morally dubious thing..." On a surface level, sure. But the Rejoinings, which do not measure in the double digits for successes, restore what Hydaelyn broke, the souls of the planet and every living thing, and are also a direct consequence of her actions that she knew would occur. 100% necessary in line with the time traveler's prophecy. Which she has to follow whether she wants to or not. And she must want to, because there's no way any writer could ever convince me that her vague exposition prior to Endwalkers was her, "Doing her best to rally against her fate that she cannot be certain will play out as she was told."

But I digress. My angle is that there should be no hand waving for her. We cannot hand wave atrocities just because we agree with the guilty party's motive. *Points to Endwalker: Subsection Garlemald Article II: Zenos under the reddened sky, speaking to Jullus.*

What the Ascians did was bad. What Venat did was also bad. Out of all the high minded ends justify the means it was just a struggle for survival. Each side doing what they thought was truly right. And in the end the universe was saved by motives both selfless and selfish.

[Lauront]

I see you've doubled the numbers on the Rejoinings because you don't like how the Sundering math works out, but unfortunately for you, there were no genocides on the Source. Just large disasters that did kill many people, but no race wide devastation and no complete obliteration of life/death of all things living. Just like the exact details on the Sundering, there are no details provided as to just how bad each Rejoining was for the Source. We have a binary meter from the 7th and 8th to form a sort of range, but there's nothing concrete. And thousands upon thousands of survivors worldwide in every case. To include them as a doubling is to lessen the meaning of the word genocide. No doubling the deck just because you are desperate to return people's views of the Ascians to pre-SHB times.

As the prior premise, your reiterated angle has issues too. Venat wasn't merely correct. She was the only one capable of being correct, because she was the only one with all of the facts.

As far as the Convocation being OK with doing the, "same morally dubious thing..." On a surface level, sure. But the Rejoinings, which do not measure in the double digits for successes, restore what Hydaelyn broke, the souls of the planet and every living thing, and are also a direct consequence of her actions that she knew would occur. 100% necessary in line with the time traveler's prophecy. Which she has to follow whether she wants to or not. And she must want to, because there's no way any writer could ever convince me that her vague exposition prior to Endwalkers was her, "Doing her best to rally against her fate that she cannot be certain will play out as she was told."

But I digress. My angle is that there should be no hand waving for her. We cannot hand wave atrocities just because we agree with the guilty party's motive. *Points to Endwalker: Subsection Garlemald Article II: Zenos under the reddened sky, speaking to Jullus.*

What the Ascians did was bad. What Venat did was also bad. Out of all the high minded ends justify the means it was just a struggle for survival. Each side doing what they thought was truly right. And in the end the universe was saved by motives both selfless and selfish.

We just need a villain to come along offering to sunder the sundered a bit more, and we'll have a ready-set list of arguments as to why there's no problem with that, and why they should accept it for some purported "greater good".

[Jandor]

We just need a villain to come along offering to sunder the sundered a bit more, and we'll have a ready-set list of arguments as to why there's no problem with that, and why they should accept it for some purported "greater good".

So long as they have a good reason, I wouldn't really care.

The Source has way more than it needs anyway, with the Unsundered gone and the restoring Zodiark plan totally ruined, we're basically just hoarding aether for no reason at this point.

[Nilroreo]

We just need a villain to come along offering to sunder the sundered a bit more, and we'll have a ready-set list of arguments as to why there's no problem with that, and why they should accept it for some purported "greater good".

Except the writers will conveniently ommit the "To live is to suffer" message so the villain will actually be expected to be held accountable for his actions this time

[Cleretic]

I see you've doubled the numbers on the Rejoinings because you don't like how the Sundering math works out, but unfortunately for you, there were no genocides on the Source.

I was giving you the benefit of assuming that you also remembered that we've talked about this, and so I didn't have to re-state the actual definition of genocide as defined by the United Nations. Genocide doesn't mean 'total eradication'--and you know this even if you don't know the definition, because every genocide you can think of had survivors, and we still call them that. ...in fact, that is also true of the Sundering, which you do call a genocide.

Therefore, all the Calamities do count as two genocides (except the Seventh, which only counts as one but wasn't intended that way by the Ascians); the killing of the entirety of one people, and the near-killing of the entirety of another, while rendering the survivors in a condition hostile to continued life. That is why their rap sheet of both committed and intended crimes is so long; because crashing two planets together wrecks them both pretty badly.

...but I'm not sure why you're even deciding to re-argue this one, because you agreed on the main point: that at the time when it was an active, present decision to pick between them, both sides were pretty equally shady but fighting for what they thought was the best. It's just that afterwards, one side racked up a rather excessive K-D ratio.

We just need a villain to come along offering to sunder the sundered a bit more, and we'll have a ready-set list of arguments as to why there's no problem with that, and why they should accept it for some purported "greater good".

Well, why would they do it? Remember that the Sundering came from extreme circumstances; the only reason it was the right thing to do was because of what was coming if Venat didn't do it. Is there another legitimate planetary threat (actually, another two legitimate threats, remember that the Sundering was for both stopping the Zodiark sacrifices and an angle against Meteion) that can only be stopped by sundering the planet? Can we assume that this character is smart enough to have considered and maybe even pursued other options?

I mean, I know the answers you're going to give and want in return, because you jumped right out calling them a villain thereby immediately poisoning the well by declaring them wrong. But remember: The Sundering was not inherently good. The Sundering was inherently pretty awful, actually, it was just what Venat saw as the least awful option.