*Spoilers* Anyone feel joining Emet would have been better

[Kordarion]

Of course, it's also possible something is already planned that will solve a lot of these issues and has been since the start, and we'll all look like a bunch of over-reacting dorks in a few months. But that's just how it goes.

In that vein I've seen a few people theorise that what's going on with Pandaemonium will lead into an explanation of Lahabrea introducing our contemporary understanding of tempering into Zodiark, based on Hesperos' fanatic devotion to Lahabrea. If that is the case then it would at least explain why Venat would be unable to reason with the convocation post-Zodiark summoning. It could also explain why she didn't mention it earlier if she felt that Zodiark was an unavoidably necessary action to take. She would be damned if she stopped the summoning and damned if she didn't.

Of course we'll need to see how Pandaemonium plays out to see if that is the case.

Edit: It would also reconcile Emet claiming the convocation was tempered in Shb and Livingway, I think, claiming that Zodiark would only provided a small tug on the summoners souls, but not tempering them like the primals do.

[OhNooo]

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...

I've literally spoken with radical environmentalists online who genuinely believe that humans are destroying the planet right now. I read reports about some of these groups trying to "save" the world by blowing up dams and other infostructure, occupying places and getting arrested. For these people, they would love nothing more than to cut off all electricity and go back to the stone age. So pretty sure they'd sunder if it was a real thing. I mean they honestly believe that humans are horrible people destroying everything. The radical vegan environmentalists think meat eaters are murderers and that we don't deserve to live.

[KariTheFox]

I stated that both were genocide and both were wrong. I am much more inclined to excuse the Rejoinings to some extent because they were a reaction to Venat's initial genocide. Did the people still exist? Yeah, maybe, but with a much reduced aether capacity and lifespan. A slow murder is still a murder, and the destruction of a culture is still genocide even if some of the people survive.

It does not follow that just because the sundering happened, the only response had to be that of rejoining. There's been a lot of ink spilled about what Venat could have hypothetically done differently, so what about what the unsundered ascians could have done differently?

What if, instead of turning away from the sundered in horror and revulsion, the ascians had guided the sundered people out of thier confusion and disorientation, taught them the ways of the Amaurotine culture and helped thier civilizations thrive. With the ability to travel freely between the shards, and incredible magic at thier disposal, it would have been pretty easy for the unsundered to provide for all the people in the various shards.

Then, with the knowledge of minds of fourteen shards working together, they could have tried to devise means of communicating or travelling between shards. Figured out a way to consensually rejoin shards (after all, maybe people would be interested in making thier souls more whole, if the ascians had explained what that entailed). And as for the souls trapped in Zodiark, well if getting them back really required sacrificing non-sentient plants and animals, then the ascians and the sundered they were cooperating with could work on fixing that problem too.

I don't see how the rejoinings were the one and only choice they had in response to the sundering.

[YianKutku]

Yeah, were it not for the Sundering there would be no need for the Rejoinings.

Ultimately my view has always been that although it makes sense for the Sundered to do everything possible to ensure they are not wiped out without their consent, so too does it make sense for the Unsundered to take the same approach. The continued survival of one's self, one's loved ones and one's species is deeply ingrained into most beings in the form of the 'fight or flight' response and other similar instincts.

But that's not what the Unsundered did.

The Unsundered, as we've seen, included one who went on half-baked plans that backfired horribly on themselves despite being warned by their fellow Unsundered. All for "the one true god", which we know and they know is untrue.

Then one of the remaining Unsundered avoided contact with the other Unsundered as much as they could, working alone to conjure up arbitrary tests of worth for the people they outright state they see no value in.

Then the last Unsundered turned out to have been operating on poor memory and flawed starting premises, since they can't even remember why they're doing what they do, and so they continued on autopilot.

Meanwhile, their Sundered colleagues are grudgingly following the Unsundered for their own survival (Igeyorhm, Nabriales), operating on their own motivations (Mitron), or the moment they are free from Unsundered supervision, immediately go off and do their own thing (Fandaniel, Loghrif). This is because the Unsundered did not bother to retain the loyalty of the Sundered colleagues whose help they required, instead making it clear that the Sundered Ascians were all expendable.

I would argue the Unsundered Ascians did not do everything possible to ensure the survival of their loved ones. Instead, they did everything possible to ensure the satisfaction of their own selfishness and ego.

[OhNooo]

What if, instead of turning away from the sundered in horror and revulsion, the ascians had guided the sundered people out of thier confusion and disorientation, taught them the ways of the Amaurotine culture and helped thier civilizations thrive. With the ability to travel freely between the shards, and incredible magic at thier disposal, it would have been pretty easy for the unsundered to provide for all the people in the various shards.

Then, with the knowledge of minds of fourteen shards working together, they could have tried to devise means of communicating or travelling between shards. Figured out a way to consensually rejoin shards (after all, maybe people would be interested in making thier souls more whole, if the ascians had explained what that entailed). And as for the souls trapped in Zodiark, well if getting them back really required sacrificing non-sentient plants and animals, then the ascians and the sundered they were cooperating with could work on fixing that problem too.

I was actually hoping that we could enter into some type of alliance with an unsundered and done something like this...but instead we ended up having to kill all of them. Such a shame because I think that could've taken the story in a really cool direction.

[Veloran]

Because that’s what the planet does?

The planet reincarnates souls into naturally occurring life, or life that is at least approximate to naturally occurring. It does not birth entirely new species wholecloth out of nothing, much less fully formed sapient humanoids.

Because one’s meaning can have no bearing on the morals of said universe. If you believe morals aren’t relative, that they are capable of being reasoned and discovered much in the same way math is, then it exists without any input from us.

If morality can be reasoned and discovered from the universe itself, then it is also the case that life's meaning can be reasoned and discovered from the universe itself, as morality includes precepts of behavior, things that should and should not be done. However Endwalker rejects this entirely, and posits that meaning can only be individually determined, and if the meaning and value of life can only be determined by the individual, it then follows that morality is unique and relative to each individual.

but a waste of time as it was understood that doing so would have no impact on their situation.

The Ironworks were operating under the belief that the world would be erased. Obviously this would not aid in their survival.

I've literally spoken with radical environmentalists online who genuinely believe that humans are destroying the planet right now. I read reports about some of these groups trying to "save" the world by blowing up dams and other infostructure, occupying places and getting arrested. For these people, they would love nothing more than to cut off all electricity and go back to the stone age. So pretty sure they'd sunder if it was a real thing. I mean they honestly believe that humans are horrible people destroying everything. The radical vegan environmentalists think meat eaters are murderers and that we don't deserve to live.

This highlights an interesting contradiction in Venat's ideology. Namely that she was fiercely opposed to her people thinking to return to their ideal past, to the point of destroying them for the notion - Yet her solution was just that. She sacrificed the Ancients in order to force them into what was, to her, a more "ideal" state of being, free of the moral decay and unsustainable nature that she perceived was their future.

In essence Venat is an extremist Primitivist.

[Lelila38]

I was actually hoping that we could enter into some type of alliance with an unsundered and done something like this...but instead we ended up having to kill all of them. Such a shame because I think that could've taken the story in a really cool direction.

This! So much this.
The way they handled the Ascians at the end really leaves a sour taste.
And their glorification of Hydaelyn/Venat throughout EW kinda ruined it for me.

[Absimiliard]

This! So much this.
The way they handled the Ascians at the end really leaves a sour taste.
And their glorification of Hydaelyn/Venat throughout EW kinda ruined it for me.

That left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth as well. The least they could've done was maintain a moral grey area. I could live with the story embracing "Venat did the correct thing for the wrong reasons" just fine, but that whole sweeping omnicide under the rug thing is uh... not the best path they could've taken. There was no need for all the mental gymnastics used to attempt justification. They could simply have gone with "what is done is done, and this is just the way it is" and left it at that.

[Cleretic]

That left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth as well. The least they could've done was maintain a moral grey area. I could live with the story embracing "Venat did the correct thing for the wrong reasons" just fine, but that whole sweeping omnicide under the rug thing is uh... not the best path they could've taken. There was no need for all the mental gymnastics used to attempt justification. They could simply have gone with "what is done is done, and this is just the way it is" and left it at that.

They did go with that, though. Just with the extra sprinkiling of 'it turns out she was factually correct'. Not morally, but factually.

You're asking for the reverse of what they actually went with: Venat didn't do the right thing for the wrong reasons, because she did the wrong thing for the right reasons. The Sundering was bad, no bones about it, it was a horrible act that she wishes she didn't have to do, but it was the lesser evil (albeit on a scale of '7/10 is technically less than 9/10') and a decision she would stand by. It's just that's also mixing in with 'it turns out her math was right' and most of the characters being of a perspective of 'this is the world we've been given, let's make the most of it'.

Another thing worth taking into account, because I know it's coloring things for people: remember that the Scions' response of approval of Hydaelyn in Mare Lamentorum was less of a whole-hearted lift of ideals, and more of a return to their natural equilibrium after Shadowbringers shook their faith in her. Before Emet-Selch decided to do some monologues they were all pretty pro-Hydaelyn, but learning but learning what she is and what she did shook that, leaving them cautious to a level that you're actually essentially forced to say to Hydaelyn's face. Their reaction in Mare Lamentorum isn't so much joy as it is relief, as they learn that the figure they still on some level want to respect indeed did have the best intentions for what she did.

It's giving you exactly the complexity you want, just not in the direction you were expecting. And personally, I think that's interesting; I don't remember the last time I've seen a story that, essentially, stands by its justified extremist to the point where they stand on their own rather than flatly condemning them. Even FFVII backed away from giving that to Barrett.

[Absimiliard]

Except they didn't. Endwalker did a hard turn away from the moral ambiguity ShB did all that work to establish, in my opinion. Having completed every side-quest, role quest, FATE, raid, and everything in between, I saw absolutely nothing that indicated to me the writers wished to portray Venat as having committed an unforgivable sin. Quite the contrary. It very much appeared to myself and seemingly many others that an inordinate amount of whitewashing occurred. Even some of the previously established lore was disregarded in favor of this outcome.

Incidentally, there are indicators that she may not even have been entirely factually correct. Take the WoL, for example; 8/14 rejoined and still capable of wielding dynamis on a level even Meteion couldn't withstand. Also in possession of an amount of aether noted to be many times greater (at the current time) than even that of Midgardsormr's children. Seems pretty likely the world didn't need to be split into 14.