When are we supposed to stop fighting?

[Lyth]

...

I'm glad that you're finally starting to notice that the lecture contradicts your viewpoint. Once again, Sanderson wasn't talking about the literary motifs in Aragorn's character development. He was talking about why that particular battle scene was unsatisfying. The same reasoning applies here. If Zodiark snaps His fingers and solves everything for no significant cost, it trivializes the Final Days. Deus Ex Machina. If you go back in time and undo the Final Days, you also trivialize the conflict. That's why big plot altering powers have limitations placed on them out of storytelling necessity.

Absolutely anything is possible if the writers decide it to be. Patch 6.1: You can now go back in time to kill Hermes before he creates Meteion and completely reverse the Final Days without consequence, because you're the only one smart enough to consider this 'rational' solution to a 12 000 year problem. Once you've completed your wish-fulfillment questline, you can romance Amaurotian NPCs of your choice using Mogstation purchased trinkets. Now that would be an all-too-real narrative. I just don't think that it would be a good one.

Bad things happen and on occasion we can't undo them. We live and we move on, unlike this thread.

[KizuyaKatogami]

I'm glad that you're finally starting to notice that the lecture contradicts your viewpoint. Once again, Sanderson wasn't talking about the literary motifs in Aragorn's character development. He was talking about why that particular battle scene was unsatisfying. The same reasoning applies here. If Zodiark snaps His fingers and solves everything for no significant cost, it trivializes the Final Days. Deus Ex Machina. If you go back in time and undo the Final Days, you also trivialize the conflict. That's why big plot altering powers have limitations placed on them out of storytelling necessity.

Absolutely anything is possible if the writers decide it to be. Patch 6.1: You can now go back in time to kill Hermes before he creates Meteion and completely reverse the Final Days without consequence, because you're the only one smart enough to consider this 'rational' solution to a 12 000 year problem. Once you've completed your wish-fulfillment questline, you can romance Amaurotian NPCs of your choice using Mogstation purchased trinkets. Now that would be an all-too-real narrative. I just don't think that it would be a good one.

Bad things happen and on occasion we can't undo them. We live and we move on, unlike this thread.

But we did solve the final days without any meaningful consequences. Only a bunch of nameless npc's died lol. We literally trivialized the entire threat whilst bringing people back from the dead.

Why do you feel a need for this thread to move on? We're doing what a thread is meant for, discussing. Is it because i countered your claims before and you dont want to respond to them?I really dont get your condescending attitude towards people who enjoy the ancients. Also a bit ironic when the game itself is constantly pushing the likes of graha and alisaie onto the wol. Im pretty sure almost eveyr bad thing in the game we've slowly undone. The 8uc got undone and branched into a new timeline, the first calamity is slowly recovering and being undone, the dragonsong war etc. Deus ex machina is literally the only reason the wol has lasted this long.

[redheadturk]

I'm glad that you're finally starting to notice that the lecture contradicts your viewpoint. Once again, Sanderson wasn't talking about the literary motifs in Aragorn's character development. He was talking about why that particular battle scene was unsatisfying. The same reasoning applies here. If Zodiark snaps His fingers and solves everything for no significant cost, it trivializes the Final Days. Deus Ex Machina. If you go back in time and undo the Final Days, you also trivialize the conflict. That's why big plot altering powers have limitations placed on them out of storytelling necessity.

Absolutely anything is possible if the writers decide it to be. Patch 6.1: You can now go back in time to kill Hermes before he creates Meteion and completely reverse the Final Days without consequence, because you're the only one smart enough to consider this 'rational' solution to a 12 000 year problem. Once you've completed your wish-fulfillment questline, you can romance Amaurotian NPCs of your choice using Mogstation purchased trinkets. Now that would be an all-too-real narrative. I just don't think that it would be a good one.

Bad things happen and on occasion we can't undo them. We live and we move on, unlike this thread.

Except what I want isn't "without cost". My desire the cost is yes, I can save them, but just because I can save them doesn't mean I can have them. And ya know what? I'm all right with paying the cost of never having them again because they are in a branched off timeline so long as they are alive

[Veloran]

It’s only a “lesser danger” from the perspective of the Ancients. To the Sundered, despite their resilience and improved ability to interact with dynamis, the Ascians were arguably just as great a threat. Life on Etheirys is rooted in aether, and thus beings with greater command of it will have an insurmountable advantage.

Again.

The entire core of her motivation is her belief that mankind can overcome a hopelessly overwhelming threat that the Ancients stood no chance against while being able to withstand loss, suffering, and despair. So yes, empowering and shieling her chosen few against much lesser dangers and suffering is very hypocritical.

The Ascians are vastly less of a threat to Etheirys than Meteion. 90% of the time they work through manipulation anyway, and aside from the three Unsundered (mostly just the two really) they're just high tier mages. The entire premise of everything Venat did was that the sundered would surpass the Ancients, so to use her godly powers to bail them out when things look too tough is far from a good showing.

And once more most people don’t think She existed, and theorized Her existence based on vague images of a crystal and random visions by a handful of heroes over the millennia. Meanwhile the Twelve have been around for several eras, Far East religions thrived and multiplied without any indication She’s there, and we don’t see anyone actually worship Her. If it’s so self evident, then you should be able to show evidence of Her being actively worshipped en masse right?

Hydaelyn's name is literally synonymous with the planet itself. The entire Encyclopedia Eorzea is framed with Hydaelyn being the source of all aether and life, and notes that reoccurring themes of "Hydaelyn's will" or the "will of Light" appear in the myths and folklore of seemingly unrelated civilizations the world over. The "true history" that Hydaelyn uses as her cover story is a direct derivative of the religion of the Twelve, where all existence propagated from a primordial essence which later divided into Light and Darkness - Venat characterizes herself as being this essence from which she split Zodiark, Darkness, from herself. In the conception of the faith of the Twelve Hydaelyn would then be the origin of all existence, which ties into her connection with Silvertear which is mythologized to be the source of all water and magic, and her existence as the Mothercrystal which begat all life. Basically every part of what she tells people leads them to believe in her as the "supreme goddess".

I did indeed acknowledge their were benefits to Sundering humanity, the point remains that Sunderign Zodiark would mean Sundering Etheirys.

The fact that Etheirys still exists disproves that idea.

If the Ancients were so blind as to believe that Zodiark was intrinsically tied to the star when he wasn’t, then there’s bigger problems afoot.

Where does that preclude being conceived as the will of the star though? The Ancients thought of their souls as the stars very lifeblood, so imbuing the star with a will using that selfsame “blood” seems perfectly connected.

You yourself just explained why they conceptualized Zodiark as the "will of the star", because they conceptualized themselves as the star, meaning that if they were the star's blood, and Zodiark was made of them, then Zodiark was the star itself.

So unless there was a second subsequent Sundering that nobody mentioned, then the “final blow” Emet mentioned that Sundered Zodiark Sundered Etheirys as well.

Or, Hydaelyn simply unleashed such a massive blow that it sundered not just Zodiark, but the star itself. Or, she actually did strike more than once - When this is visualized to the player multiple blows are shown. And keep in mind that Emet was saying that Hydaelyn and Zodiark "fought and fought and fought" before she unleashed her "final blow" - But we know this was not true.

Then why did he say “it was never seen before” and not “I’d never seen it before.”

If you aren't aware that something exists, obviously you can't know that it exists. If something completely new appears and you have no knowledge of it, obviously it follows to say that it was unknown, especially if you're considered a very knowledgeable person in general.

The misapprehensions were regarding Dynamis and Meteion. Nowhere is it ever stated that they didn’t understand what Zodiark was at a fundamental level, especially those who summoned him.

They understood his existence was needed as they never tried to break the seal themselves. They understood His destruction would mean the Final Days would return, unknown though the cause may be. If you know this, and you were aware the Sundering potentially weakened the barrier preventing the apocalypse, you wouldn’t act as if you weren’t in a precarious position no?

They were unaware of the cause or mechanism of the Final Days. For example you suggest that if they were aware the Sundering potentially weakened the "barrier preventing the apocalypse", they would have acted or said differently. However, they didn't know the currents were a barrier holding something out. To them the currents were a symptom of the laws of reality coming unraveled.

In fact this conception of their situation, and their belief that Hydaelyn's existence and actions were threatening to restart it all again, is completely consistent with what Lahabrea tells us in 2.0. He explicitly describes Hydaelyn as a parasite, the root of a corruption that will worsen the growing instability until the laws of existence, aetheric and physical, will be warped beyond all recognition. In other words when you ask "well surely they would have thought themselves in a precarious position", the answer is "they did".

That’s not the case actually. Zodiark was summoned with the express desire to answer the prays and desires of the Ancients for salvation, an overwhelming desire that remained with Elidibus for millennia.

Those desires were Elidibus' desires. That's exactly why he was chosen as Zodiark's heart, because it was his will to save everyone.

See we approach the analogy that I think would be best here.

The analogy didn't change at all, only how you think about it did. The point I was making is that it's possible to justify anything in your own mind if you really believe it's doom otherwise, this very perception is what has led to unmitigated death throughout history.

What would you do?

The better answer to the trolley problem is not to flip the switch. The point of the exercise is to illustrate the illegitimacy of making that choice for other people.

We live and we move on, unlike this thread.

I kind of get the sense that you're just completely ignoring any point I'm raising and everything I'm saying to you given that every idea you raise in this post is just a repeat of your previous one with no consideration of my response at all. I can see why you would avoid actually showing specific quotes given everything you're saying has already been addressed, but I guess for the sake of completeness -

the lecture contradicts your viewpoint

A story where the magic system is cleverly utilized to provide an option out of a seemingly-hopeless catch-22 can be very narratively satisfying.

It's very possible to agree with the idea behind Sanderson's argument but disagree with one example he raises or debate it's applicability across various contexts.

If Zodiark snaps His fingers and solves everything for no significant cost, it trivializes the Final Days. Deus Ex Machina. If you go back in time and undo the Final Days, you also trivialize the conflict. That's why big plot altering powers have limitations placed on them out of storytelling necessity.

The conversation wasn't, "Is the Ancients being able to undo their sacrifices narratively satisfying?", it was "Can they do it?"

Basically, I understand your line of thinking from the idealist perspective. "What is the point of the conflict and themes if it could all be undone?" But from the realist perspective the question is "Are these characters really making rational decisions according to what we know is possible by the rules of the setting?"

[EaraGrace]

Your logic is inherently flawed. You continue bashing the ancients for creating creations that were doomed to die when we do the exact same thing time and time again. Either acknowledge that both sides are in the wrong for this, or neither lol. You can’t choose one over the other. Rest in peace to all the sentient mochi we’ve battered over the years.

I literally said in my post that you can recognize both are wrong.

The Ascians are vastly less of a threat to Etheirys than Meteion.

Yes, the Ascians wouldn’t completely destroy Etheirys like Meteion. They are still a grave threat to the Sundered, especially to those on the shards, and arguably killed more in their efforts than Meteion did. Meteion may have a been a more dire threat to all life, but to the Sundered both were mortal threats and only for one of them could they use their inherent gifts to resist.

90% of the time they work through manipulation anyway, and aside from the three Unsundered (mostly just the two really) they're just high tier mages. The entire premise of everything Venat did was that the sundered would surpass the Ancients, so to use her godly powers to bail them out when things look too tough is far from a good showing.

If you think her goal was to have the Sundered surpass them in all aspects then you missed the point. It’s not a pissing contest, it’s an attempt to get humanity to a point where it wouldn’t make the mistakes or follow the same paths as those other civilizations that perished to suffering and despair.

Hydaelyn's name is literally synonymous with the planet itself. The entire Encyclopedia Eorzea is framed with Hydaelyn being the source of all aether and life, and notes that reoccurring themes of "Hydaelyn's will" or the "will of Light" appear in the myths and folklore of seemingly unrelated civilizations the world over.

I’m not aware of any of those statements being made “the world over.” The references that do occur either are simply using Hydaelyn as the name of the star, a being more like what the Ancients believed in and not as a physical goddess to be worshipped, or they’re borne from interactions between Hydaelyn and the Warriors She was aiding to counter the Ascians. Without them, many of those connections wouldn’t be made.

In both cases Her interactions were limited, and actual worship was nonexistent. No churches exist dedicated to Her, no holy texts or traditions, no evidence She acted to establish worship, nothing.

The "true history" that Hydaelyn uses as her cover story is a direct derivative of the religion of the Twelve, where all existence propagated from a primordial essence which later divided into Light and Darkness - Venat characterizes herself as being this essence from which she split Zodiark, Darkness, from herself. In the conception of the faith of the Twelve Hydaelyn would then be the origin of all existence…

Knowing the story of the Twelves creation, and knowing that the earliest reference to their worship is during the Third Astral Era, I’m going to argue this isn’t true. Perhaps the new 24 man changes things or gives context that will prove you right, we’ll see. No matter what, however, She wouldn’t be the source of creation.

That’d be the Whorl.

This is a stretch.

The fact that Etheirys still exists disproves that idea.

Why? Enervation doesn’t physically destroy or harm anything.

You yourself just explained why they conceptualized Zodiark as the "will of the star", because they conceptualized themselves as the star, meaning that if they were the star's blood, and Zodiark was made of them, then Zodiark was the star itself.

In that case there would be no need to specify they desired to “imbue the star with its own will,” as any primal born of their souls would be the stars “will.”

Or, Hydaelyn simply unleashed such a massive blow that it sundered not just Zodiark, but the star itself. Or, she actually did strike more than once - When this is visualized to the player multiple blows are shown. And keep in mind that Emet was saying that Hydaelyn and Zodiark "fought and fought and fought" before she unleashed her "final blow" - But we know this was not true.

Why would that not be true?

If you aren't aware that something exists, obviously you can't know that it exists. If something completely new appears and you have no knowledge of it, obviously it follows to say that it was unknown, especially if you're considered a very knowledgeable person in general.

So, to you it’s easier to believe that Enervation flew under the radar, and Emet/the Unsundered just mistakenly believe it to be a new magick that also just happened to be perfect for Hydaelyns purpose.

I’ll take him at his word.

They were unaware of the cause or mechanism of the Final Days. For example you suggest that if they were aware the Sundering potentially weakened the "barrier preventing the apocalypse", they would have acted or said differently. However, they didn't know the currents were a barrier holding something out. To them the currents were a symptom of the laws of reality coming unraveled.

They knew His magicks were what’s solving the issue, and they knew that his destruction would mean those magicks would dissipate and cause the return of the Final Days. If what you are saying is accurate, then they would recognize that weakening Zodiark means weakening their solution and thus they would worry right?

In fact this conception of their situation…

So which is it then?

Those desires were Elidibus' desires. That's exactly why he was chosen as Zodiark's heart, because it was his will to save everyone.

So when he blindly and in a stupor wandered over to us in the Crystarium that was all him?

The analogy didn't change at all, only how you think about it did. The point I was making is that it's possible to justify anything in your own mind if you really believe it's doom otherwise, this very perception is what has led to unmitigated death throughout history.

The better answer to the trolley problem is not to flip the switch. The point of the exercise is to illustrate the illegitimacy of making that choice for other people.

A lot of innocents have died due to those with the ability to intervene refusing to act. If you want to get into deontological ethics and how that applies to the Sundering then by all means we can. But this isn’t nearly open and shut like you believe.