What's the point with that quite lackluster story in Endwalker?

[NanaWiloh]

The robbing of the ability to choose when you die, plus the introduction of brief lifespans, disease, war and strife is what=more death. Even if there were 14 worlds full of Ancients with the ability to decide when they wished to return to the star you still wouldn't have the numbers incurred by the wanton destruction and forced aftermath of the Sundering.

Yes the anceints embraced...ya wont go there.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Completely agree with you. I told a friend of mine while playing Endwalker that my biggest criticism of the Elpis storyline was that "It felt like everything that happens for the next 12,000 years would have been preventable if the characters were competent."



Was this always the case, or did they simply learn how to eliminate disease through science?

Venat's "mankind was spared suffering for a short time" statement makes me believe that the Ancients might have been more mortal and vulnerable once.

I don’t think it’s outright stated but, given Emet-Selch’s reaction to his son dying of illness, it seems like it was something completely unknown to him. So either it was eradicated a long time ago or they’re just completely immune to such things. May be just a side effect of their dense aether.

[NanaWiloh]

I don't know, dude. Kizuya's making sense to me.

Just because death is inevitable doesn't mean it isn't delayable. Personally, I rather enjoy that humans have a life expectancy higher than 30 these days.

It makes sense to me as well. Delaying death is fine, saying its not needed is igornace.

[KizuyaKatogami]

It makes sense to me as well. Delaying death is fine, saying its not needed is igornace.

I think most people agree with that though. It’s why a few people here were confused when someone saw the ancients as choosing when to die and returning to the lifestream as something bad, when in reality they were basically immortal and if they didn’t do that overpopulation would be a major problem.

[NanaWiloh]

I think most people agree with that though. It’s why a few people here were confused when someone saw the ancients as choosing when to die and returning to the lifestream as something bad, when in reality they were basically immortal and if they didn’t do that overpopulation would be a major problem.

Exactly over population, death is natures way of controling a species population. Thats why I said death is needed..life and death keep each other in check.

[Caurcas]

Self termination is the height of decadence. Also, I bet they'd wished they'd had all those that did when the end days started.

[CrownySuccubus]

Exactly over population, death is natures way of controling a species population. Thats why I said death is needed..life and death keep each other in check.

The issue I have with this statement is that nature is not some sentient force which always find an equilibrium. Personally, I don't believe in destiny nor some form of cosmic balance. Death does not always balance life -- there have been numerous mass extinction events to prove that.

[NanaWiloh]

The issue I have with this statement is that nature is not some sentient force which always find an equilibrium. Personally, I don't believe in destiny nor some form of cosmic balance. Death does not always balance life -- there have been numerous mass extinction events to prove that.

And life replaces what was lost even if its not the same.

[CrownySuccubus]

And life replaces what was lost even if its not the same.

That doesn't make the deaths that happened necessary.

If I stab you to death right now and over the next year, your corpse becomes food for maggots and fertilizes a bed of flowers, that doesn't make your death necessary or good.

Yes, life goes on after death. That doesn't prove it's part of a grand plan.

EDIT: Replying to below, since I've apparently hit my daily limit again.

What deaths?

I mentioned mass extinction and you said: "And life replaces what was lost even if its not the same."

So, the deaths of mass extinction, since we apparently need a refresher.

What grand plan? What are you even talking about?

You have been saying things like "life and death keep each other in check" and "life replaces what was lost" as if life is some fine-tuned system or grand plan.

As I said, just because life moves on after death doesn't mean that there's some sort of natural check and balance in place.

Also do you have some issue with death? Do you hate that things die and dont magically live forever in happy go lucky world?

Let me turn this question around on you, so you realize how silly it sounds.

Do you love death? Do you hate things don't drop dead everywhere we go and feel sad that we aren't living in a nuclear zombie wasteland?

It's not about "loving" or "hating" death. But personally, I refuse to be nonchalant about it or treat it like no big deal. Eventually, it'll come for all of us, if not all life on this planet, but if (hypothetically speaking) some future generation managed to achieve the impossible and live forever, I would be happy for them.

[NanaWiloh]

That doesn't make the deaths that happened necessary.

If I stab you to death right now and over the next year, your corpse becomes food for maggots and fertilizes a bed of flowers, that doesn't make your death necessary or good.

Yes, life goes on after death. That doesn't prove it's part of a grand plan.

What deaths? What grand plan? What are you even talking about? The sundering cause I never mentioned it once. Also do you have some issue with death? Do you hate that things die and dont magically live forever in happy go lucky world?