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

[AziraSyuren]

Only the Convocation was tempered, as a side-effect of the summoning due to the power that went into it, and even then, Emet-Selch could deviate from his original plan, where he deemed this to be appropriate. Elidibus was controlling the primal and emerged from him to mediate the dispute, so we can reasonably infer he knew what was happening with the souls inside of Zodiark, and may have even brought this into discussions between the ancients on that topic.

As for exchanging the problem? I don't think that'd necessarily be the case. The setting doesn't outright say it, but there does seem to be a differentiation in the souls it sticks in sapient races, like the ancients (to the point that even after thousands of years, we can reliably say the sundered are fragmented ancient souls), and those that go into animals and non-sapient monstrosities, which wouldn't have cultivated the notion of returning to the star as a yearning. So as an exchange of power so that the primal remains at full functionality, to liberate the souls of their brethren, it makes sense.

We need to recall Venat did not share the specifics of her concerns with them.

No offense but that's about as much of a reach as the excuses people make to defend Venat. It was equally implied that the newly sown life could've inherited the star too, if I'm remembering right, which is something that probably wouldn't have been said of non-sapient beings. Some might've thought that they were non-sapient, but I think the fact that there was such a division in Ancient society over whether or not the third sacrifice was justified points to the opposite. The people who had problems with how they dealt with normal Creations were in the vast, vast, vast minority, and that was because Hermes thought they were sapient to some degree.

Also, I don't think deviating from the plan would've included doing away with Zodiark, and the only people who reasonably had the power to stop him were the Convocation (and ex-members, i.e. Venat, but then we'd be right back where we started). But it's definitely possible that that's not the case and they would've been both willing and able to unsummon Zodiark after dealing with the source of the Final Days.

Upon further consideration, I do think that Elidibus knew about the nature of the souls inside Zodiark, though, as it was heavily hinted if not outright stated by him before we went to Elpis. Which makes it interesting that he detached himself from Zodiark to mediate the division rather than convince people to go ahead with it.

Are you talking about the 3rd sacrifice? Where are you getting half? Afaik the only reference we get to that is Hythlodaeus saying they’d sacrifice a portion of the new life. Not half.

It might not be half, but the specific amount doesn't matter and it's just splitting hairs at this point.

[Brinne]

No offense but that's about as much of a reach as the excuses people make to defend Venat. It was equally implied that the newly sown life could've inherited the star too, if I'm remembering right, which is something that probably wouldn't have been said of non-sapient beings. Some might've thought that they were non-sapient, but I think the fact that there was such a division in Ancient society over whether or not the third sacrifice was justified points to the opposite. The people who had problems with how they dealt with normal Creations were in the vast, vast, vast minority, and that was because Hermes thought they were sapient to some degree.

I would have fully agreed with you based on 5.0, and that this paints a really tragic and deeply gray situation - could we fully blame the Ancients for wanting to save their loved ones from eternal purgatory even if the cost was switching in other people? - but the Q&A clarified that the sapient races that exist now are in fact the direct result of Sundered Ancients, and I would say considering the Tribes have members that are Echo-bearing, probably them as well, so we are in fact left with the implication that Zodiark's "creations" would be much like the standard creations we saw from the Ancients on Elpis: vastly majority flora and fauna.

It is bewildering, but as I've mentioned before, the information that the conflict revolved around the sacrifices essentially came from Emet-Selch. Nothing we saw from Venat herself or her faction, directly, indicates any concern about the sacrifices - if anything it contradicts it, given that Venat still thinks opposing the Convocation makes no sense to her once we relay our full understanding of events, including the sacrifices - but putting aside the very muddled and confused intent of the writers, and whatever may have changed between 5.0 and 6.0, what emerges from the text as is now is that... Emet-Selch probably misunderstood the source of the conflict. Maybe he was projecting!

[Lauront]

No offense but that's about as much of a reach as the excuses people make to defend Venat.

None taken but I strongly disagree that it is. You cannot in any source point to me what these beings are beyond very vague traits, and in the original JP dialogue of Hythlodaeus's shade, they are very strongly implied to be creations. In SHB this was murky but what EW taught us about creations more or less fills in the gaps on that point.

It was equally implied that the newly sown life could've inherited the star too, if I'm remembering right

That was Venat's faction's belief, and something they managed to convince others of. Here's the problem, though: virtually all the life forms in Elpis are animal or monstrous fauna and flora. The only beings shown to have some degree of intelligence are familiars, which the star largely does not deem fit to grant a soul since they don't meet its requirements, such that the likes of Meteion are very rare exceptions.

which is something that probably wouldn't have been said of non-sapient beings.

What of potentially sapient ones? Consider this: she had been exposed to the WoL in Elpis, as had several other ancients there, and they were introduced to them under the pretence of them being a familiar (those who later became more intimately acquainted realised this was a bit odd.) We also know some of the creations were forebears of the beast tribes, about which I am sure the WOL could fill her in the details when they blabbered about their "story". What if she drew on that experience to claim that some creations along those lines could become sapient?

Some might've thought that they were non-sapient, but I think the fact that there was such a division in Ancient society over whether or not the third sacrifice was justified points to the opposite. The people who had problems with how they dealt with normal Creations were in the vast, vast, vast minority, and that was because Hermes thought they were sapient to some degree.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. Hermes even believed non-living creations (i.e. arcane entities with no souls) had some urge to survival. That may be so - but it's a huge "so what?"

The division may have been partly influenced by that but there's other factors, such as whether the plan would work, whether the souls in Zodiark would approve etc., all of which are questions Elidibus could answer. Even Venat herself is not particularly vexed over the sacrifices themselves; only their intended purpose, which is to get their civilisation back onto track, which she believes would lead to the Plenty. So given all the above, I am unconvinced that these sacrifices constituted beings by and large which were sapient, nevermind even nearing the ancients on that front.

I have a suspicion that they did intend this conflict to be more of the focal point initially, and to have her take on Hermes's position and role (possibly tweaked after they gauged audience reception to the ancients and Emet with 5.0), but either way by EW it's not really front and centre anymore.

I would have fully agreed with you based on 5.0, and that this paints a really tragic and deeply gray situation - could we fully blame the Ancients for wanting to save their loved ones from eternal purgatory even if the cost was switching in other people? - but the Q&A clarified that the sapient races that exist now are in fact the direct result of Sundered Ancients, and I would say considering the Tribes have members that are Echo-bearing, probably them as well, so we are in fact left with the implication that Zodiark's "creations" would be much like the standard creations we saw from the Ancients on Elpis: vastly majority flora and fauna.

Indeed, it further reduces the chances of it. For whatever reason, the star now sees it fit to endow the beast tribes (some of which are hinted to be creations) with souls bearing the echo, thus implied to be those of ancients, but part of me wonders if as a result of being sundered, the star somehow reduced its criteria for what it sticks ancient souls into, especially with their original form gone. It's all rather nebulous.

It is bewildering, but as I've mentioned before, the information that the conflict revolved around the sacrifices essentially came from Emet-Selch. Nothing we saw from Venat herself or her faction, directly, indicates any concern about the sacrifices - if anything it contradicts it, given that Venat still thinks opposing the Convocation makes no sense to her once we relay our full understanding of events, including the sacrifices - but putting aside the very muddled and confused intent of the writers, and whatever may have changed between 5.0 and 6.0, what emerges from the text as is now is that... Emet-Selch probably misunderstood the source of the conflict. Maybe he was projecting!

Quite so. There is that possibility as well. If I had to guess, I think she was making use of that conflict to try stall and buy time and using a little bit of creative embellishment from her time with the WoL in Elpis as I mentioned, because based on everything we know, creations of the sort which are at least somewhat intelligent don't tend to be candidates for souls. When we see the scene in Anamnesis, it is almost exclusively focused on practical concerns, which line up with her belief that they were en route to end like the Plenty if they did not change.

*snip*

Thanks. The French version on it is a little better in that it more clearly identifies tempering as an aetheric alignment to the primal's aether. I think what they subtly did by the end of SHB is distinguish it from the usual beast tribe sort by focusing on that, and then through Tiamat, showing that the primal's nature could also affect it. Then with EW they basically confirm Zodiark's tempering is solely down to his sheer power and that an alteration in the summoning rites taught by the Ascians is attributable for the zeal in the summoners' of beast tribe primals to spread their fervour. Meanwhile, tempering is stated to have potentially corruptive effects on the summoner's identity and memory - lo and behold, those Ascians who didn't preserve these, were affected more; Emet-Selch by contrast preserves both. But the overarching conclusion from all that is that it only becomes an issue if one fails to preserve memory and identity, and only through the passage of (considerable) time.

[AziraSyuren]

That was Venat's faction's belief, and something they managed to convince others of. Here's the problem, though: virtually all the life forms in Elpis are animal or monstrous fauna and flora. The only beings shown to have some degree of intelligence are familiars, which the star largely does not deem fit to grant a soul since they don't meet its requirements, such that the likes of Meteion are very rare exceptions.

I would say that "I don't think that Venat would've thought that non-Sapient beings could've inherited the star," but she drew a conclusion that was vastly more irrational shortly after, so I don't know anymore.

It's vague enough either way that it's hard to definitively say one way or another. And if Brinne's post is any indication, we're probably gonna get directly told that they weren't sapient in a later Q&A, adding yet another confusing (yet possibly interesting) layer of characterization to her that wasn't at all present in the main story.