Sundering stuff established in the Q&A

[Absimiliard]

It would certainly have been nice. Such an important event in the world's history, particularly now that we know the WoL is at least partially responsible for it, should have been made available to us in one form or another. Even presenting in book format would be acceptable.

[Lyth]

Primals/Creations can still have souls grafted on to them, as we know from Lahabrea's Phoinix. Elidibus seems to be at his most lucid state after we kill off his primal body, as well as in the moments before his soul fades into nothingness in Endwalker.

[EaraGrace]

You’re free to jump to any conclusions, as incorrect as they may be. From a comparison of Venat vs Emet’s PoV, i very much think Elidibus’ pov would be one in a fairly unbiased light, as his duty was the salvation of the star and it’s people. I never even mentioned anything about Zodiark being right, that’s not even what this conversation is abo it, it’s about the biased representations given to us of certain events. Elidibus at this point was essentially a 3rd party in the debate of Convocation vs Venat’s group. Based on his dialogue he would indeed serve as a mediator presumably for both groups hence hearing and seeing both sides. I’m not sure what else there is to argue when we have concrete evidence of this in his dying dialogue, unless we’re going to accuse him of lying on his deathbed.

The whole point of Elidibus’ storyline in 5.3 was to show that being Zodiarks heart changed him, that the voices of his brethren had long drowned out his own. When he speaks of “steering the star on its true course,” and we hear what Venats group says of the Convocations reaction to their disagreement, are we not to conclude that Elidibus mediated nothing? Venats group certainly didn’t feel like they’d been heard, and the decision to go ahead with the third sacrifice happened anyway. His intention may have been rooted in solving the dispute, but whether he was still capable of being a mediator is uncertain.

And let it be clear that Elidibus was an Ascian through and through. His loyalties were to Zodiark and to the resurrection of his brethren.

[KizuyaKatogami]

The whole point of Elidibus’ storyline in 5.3 was to show that being Zodiarks heart changed him, that the voices of his brethren had long drowned out his own. When he speaks of “steering the star on its true course,” and we hear what Venats group says of the Convocations reaction to their disagreement, are we not to conclude that Elidibus mediated nothing? Venats group certainly didn’t feel like they’d been heard, and the decision to go ahead with the third sacrifice happened anyway. His intention may have been rooted in solving the dispute, but whether he was still capable of being a mediator is uncertain.

And let it be clear that Elidibus was an Ascian through and through. His loyalties were to Zodiark and to the resurrection of his brethren.

The only thing supporting this is Yshtola's hypothesis, which as we've seen time and time again, is usually incorrect. We dont even know if Elidibus had the chance to mediate with either group is my point. Perhaps by the time he was able to the sundering was already happening.

We're talking pre-sundering here maam. He wasnt an ascian at that point lol. People really need to learn to differentiate the terms.

[Rulakir]

I never got the impression Elidibus was biased. We see in ShB flashbacks that he's told at times he'll stand against the Convocation, that was part of the responsibility of his seat. He also says before he sends us to Elpis that he's only doing his duty, as he has ever done.

The souls within Zodiark were 75% of the population that wasn't destroyed by the Final Days. Venat's group, however large you consider it to be, was still the minority among the remaining 25%. Fact of the matter is, her group was outnumbered by a lot.

[Jandor]

Going to throw my hat in the 'don't think Elidibus was genuinely trying to reconcile the various factions' ring.

I can believe he believed that was what he was trying to do though.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Going to throw my hat in the 'don't think Elidibus was genuinely trying to reconcile the various factions' ring.

I can believe he believed that was what he was trying to do though.

And what gives you this idea might i ask?Considering i believe quite literally the only thing even kind of supporting this idea is Yshtola's musings.

[Kordarion]

The only thing supporting this is Yshtola's hypothesis, which as we've seen time and time again, is usually incorrect. We dont even know if Elidibus had the chance to mediate with either group is my point. Perhaps by the time he was able to the sundering was already happening.

We're talking pre-sundering here maam. He wasnt an ascian at that point lol. People really need to learn to differentiate the terms.

The whole point of a mediating figure is that they are an objective third party, it does not take a genius to see that Elidibus cannot be an objective third party. He agreed with summoning Zodiark in the first place, not to mention the fact that he serves as Zodiark's heart which makes him the will/driving force behind Zodiark as far as I am aware, therefore how can he be a third party if he is so intertwined with one side of the debate, it doesn't make any sense for him to be so.

Sure it isn't sated as such in game but it isn't a leap of logic to see how Elidibus would fail to be an effective or unbiased mediator following his becoming Zodiark's heart.

[Cleretic]

I'm not so sure of that.

For what it's worth, when I say 'implicitly staked a claim' I mean that even the established Ancients that didn't explicitly involve themselves with either side at the time ended up on one of them. Specifically, most of the sundered Ascians never really staked a claim, but we can assume that they took Zodiark's side because they aligned with them later. Similarly, while Hythlodaeus didn't live to see this conflict, we can gather from his overall character and the fact he was part of the first sacrifice that he overall believed in Plan Zodiark.

The explicitly aligned named Ancients, for the record:

• Venat (duh)
• Elidibus, Emet-Selch, Lahabrea (involved in Zodiark summoning and survived the Sundering to clearly oppose it)
• Fandaniel (made Zodiark)
• Loghrif (the first volunteer to be Zodiark's heart, so clearly pretty all-in on the plan)
• Altima (the Ancient who first observed being tempered; that fact taints any Convocation argument, to be honest, but Altima themselves most of all)

Together, those two lists knock out pretty much every remotely prominent named Ancient that isn't Erich and Hesperos. And I don't really trust them to be a neutral account either just yet, because of their links to Lahabrea. And that's if both of them survive Pandaemonium, which is still inconclusive.

This is what I mean when I say that we can't trust any established Ancient to give a truly neutral account. It's a bit of a 'Prequel Problem'; because we know where they end up in the future, that colors any story we see of them in the past. We know Anakin Skywalker will go on to be Darth Vader, so we immediately know that any part of his story in the prequels that doesn't lead to that cannot hold. I should note, that's not inherently wrong; while the Star Wars prequels squandered it, there is value in seeing a fundamentally good man becoming Darth Vader. Similarly, it actually wouldn't be inherently worthless to see a story of Elidibus going from ostensible neutrality to being the agent of Zodiark we meet him as.

But we cannot call that a neutral account, because even if he was approaching it fairly, we as readers can't. No matter how sound a theoretical Venat argument to Elidibus would be, we know that it will either carry less weight or prove to be untrue because we know where Elidibus ultimately landed.

If you want that story, that's fine, although I don't think it's ultimately needed. But if you want a neutral account, it has to be from the eyes of someone whose future casts no shadow on it.

[Rannie]

It's a conflict of interest....