Who knew the 6.15 Omega Quests… (Spoilers)

[redheadturk]

When they are simply able to use creation magic to begin to slowly restore the ecosystem? Yes, that is something that should not be objected to.

[KariTheFox]

It's hard not to read that line of thought as amounting to, essentially:

"So what do you think was the third sacrifice?"
"Whatever makes Venat justified."

It's less the thing that makes Venat justified, and more what fits in with the pattern of themes and messages lut forth by the writers, and doesn't make every character involved look like an idiot for no good reason.

[Brinne]

Not quite. Again: for the story to work, all the third sacrifice needs to be is 'objectionably big', and I'm trying to get across that that is possible even if the sacrifices are not sentient lives.

Apparently we've hit the theoretical maximum quite quickly; is the baseline sustainability of the ecosystem still a minor price to pay?

It is not needed for the story to work, because the fundamental problem Venat had was not with the nature or 'size' of the sacrifices. Again, she was not acting to protect or defend the sacrifices. The Sundering killed all of them too. From her perspective, she was acting to protect the Ancients, from "causing their own doom." She is shooting someone pre-emptively before they can, in her view, "stain themselves" and "condemn themselves" to a worse end because she thinks their path will lead them to destroying themselves in a uniquely terrible way.

The crux of Venat's actions and Endwalker thematically is "how do we, and should we, accept suffering," not the question of "what level of ecosystem do we sacrifice to protect humans, and their comparative value." Completely different questions and completely different ballgame.

[Cleretic]

When they are simply able to use creation magic to begin to slowly restore the ecosystem? Yes, that is something that should not be objected to.

They could have done this with the second sacrifice, and instead chose to sacrifice lives to Zodiark. So they probably aren't gonna do that.

...in fact, it's possible they didn't even have to do that, and still chose not to. Again, Thavnair got hit by the exact same phenomena that hit Amaurot, and Thavnair seems to be recovering quite well.

It is not needed for the story to work, because the fundamental problem Venat had was not with the nature or 'size' of the sacrifices. Again, she was not acting to protect or defend the sacrifices. The Sundering killed all of them too. From her perspective, she was acting to protect the Ancients, from "causing their own doom." She is shooting someone pre-emptively before they can, in her view, "stain themselves" and "condemn themselves" to a worse end because she thinks their path will lead them to destroying themselves in a uniquely terrible way.

The crux of Venat's actions and Endwalker thematically is "how do we, and should we, accept suffering," not the question of "what level of ecosystem do we sacrifice to protect humans, and their comparative value." Completely different questions and completely different ballgame.

I am once again asking you to remember THERE WERE PEOPLE OTHER THAN VENAT IN THAT GROUP. Consider those other eleven people; they didn't have knowledge of the future, they were not told, and they still agreed with the result.

If you think 'what level of sacrifice was too much for Venat' is an invalid question, instead ask 'what level of sacrifice was too much for The Watcher'. Not a single one of you has actually remembered that he's there and he had ten other people with him.

[Brinne]

I am once again asking you to remember THERE WERE PEOPLE OTHER THAN VENAT IN THAT GROUP. Consider those other eleven people; they didn't have knowledge of the future, they were not told, and they still agreed with the result.

If you think 'what level of sacrifice was too much for Venat' is an invalid question, ask yourself 'what level of sacrifice was too much for The Watcher'. Not a single one of you has actually remembered that he's there and he had ten other people with him.

I'm not calling Venat's faction a cult or a conspiracy theory group, per se, but look: enough cults and conspiracy theory groups exist that it's bizarre to me for you to put forth that Venat being able to bring together a very small group of people who shared her viewpoint and concerns as they existed, and agreed with her reasons, is just unfathomable. The recording in Anyder, if anything, lends itself to that the faction as a whole was not concerned about "protecting the sacrifices" but far more caught up in "if we keep down this path, we'll cause our own doom!"

[Lauront]

It's less the thing that makes Venat justified, and more what fits in with the pattern of themes and messages lut forth by the writers, and doesn't make every character involved look like an idiot for no good reason.

I mean you're quite happy for them to throw the ancients on the altar of muh themes if it makes Venat justified, and have Emet-Selch's nostalgia for them come across as idiotic (something I see often pushed as a point here and elsewhere), all to justify one singular character, for whom the writers have not, at any point, characterised the sacrifices as a focal point, and have provided differing rationales, such that it's not required that the sacrifices even involved ancients for her/her faction to consider themselves in the right. So I'm afraid this logic just doesn't stack up for me.

[redheadturk]

They could have done this with the second sacrifice, and instead chose to sacrifice lives to Zodiark. So they probably aren't gonna do that.

...in fact, it's possible they didn't even have to do that, and still chose not to. Again, Thavnair got hit by the exact same phenomena that hit Amaurot, and Thavnair seems to be recovering quite well.



I am once again asking you to remember THERE WERE PEOPLE OTHER THAN VENAT IN THAT GROUP. Consider those other eleven people; they didn't have knowledge of the future, they were not told, and they still agreed with the result.

If you think 'what level of sacrifice was too much for Venat' is an invalid question, instead ask 'what level of sacrifice was too much for The Watcher'. Not a single one of you has actually remembered that he's there and he had ten other people with him.

I very much doubt they knew the entire truth, aka that Meiteion was the cause of the final days. They knew what she chose to tell them and I doubt that was much. What knowledge they might have held died with them.

[Cleretic]

but far more caught up in "if we keep down this path, we'll cause our own doom!"

And judging by the answer over the last page or so of 'there is literally no non-human sacrifice too great for this', I feel like y'all are proving that to have been a completely valid concern to be 'caught up in'.

[Brinne]

And judging by the answer over the last page or so of 'there is literally no non-human sacrifice too great for this', I feel like y'all are proving that to have been a completely valid concern to be 'caught up in'.

The concern in isolation, much like Hermes's concerns, might be - and probably are - valid. The response to it being "so let's pre-emptively execute all humans because humans are willing to sacrifice the wildlife! (all wildlife will also be executed in the crossfire)" is a bit more contentious.

If you think this seems unreasonable and a reflection of very shaky writing, then hey, welcome aboard.

[tokinokanatae]

I don’t think you’re understanding the objections to your premise. The point is that as a society, we are not in the habit of placing the lives of animals as equal to our own, so it’s impossible to think of a hypothetical where we as a whole, decide to sacrifice ourselves when there are other options available that we’re already used to thoughtlessly killing.