Tales from the Dawn #4: "A Question of Death" (Jullus)

[Theodric]

Wasnt it also Drusilla who told us that her grandfather tried to take out Solus because they disagreed that just because they had a horrible past its fine to do the same to others?

What does that have to do with the point being raised? Putting aside the simple fact that we're not talking mutually exclusive elements...it's specifically being outlined that the Garleans have consistently been under attack both before and after forging themselves into an Empire.

Though as Kage pointed out:

The Lemures didn't take issue with reclaiming Corvos, but the excuse of "conquer or be conquered" that was used to justify taking over lands well outside scope of what they had owned originally was what turned them against the emperor.

It was the expansion beyond reclaiming lost territories that many defectors had an issue with.

That aside, these things are pretty nuanced and we're discussing this from the perspective of the Garleans themselves. As I've outlined many times in the past whenever these very same points were raised, I do not believe that anyone is under any obligation to just roll over and die for the sake of somebody else - however, that extends both ways and I think it's important to acknowledge that the protagonists are conveniently shielded from the need to get their hands as bloody as the antagonists because they are lucky enough to be specifically empowered.

It's easy to take the moral high ground when, upon death, you're revived (in cases such as Y'shtola, multiple times at that).

It's also easy to take the moral high ground when you're able to readily manipulate aether.

It's easy to take the moral high ground when you're not seeing your loved ones freeze to death in an inhospitable wasteland.

It's easy to take the moral high ground when you have a self proclaimed hero and living superweapon who conveniently dispatches any threat before measures can be taken.

Let's put it another way - if, for whatever reason, civilised society collapsed within the coming year in our world and we were all forced to fight - as Drusilla put it - 'tooth and nail' for resources in order to survive, we would no longer have the luxury of current laws and morals to protect us.

Again, it's easy to claim that you wouldn't do X, Y or Z. Yet when you're forced to do whatever is necessary to protect your loved ones and prevent them from being subject to genocide then if permitted to escalate then the situation is going to escalate.

[KariTheFox]

The quote "we fought tooth and nail for resources" sure is doing a lot of heavy lifting for the idea that Garleans were under constant, unrelenting attack for centuries to be extrapolated out of it.

The fact is that we simply do not have a detailed accounting of the Garlean Republic's military history, we know they were involved some kind of conflicts that Solus was able to skew in thr Garlean's favor through magitek, but that's about it.

[Theodric]

The quote "we fought tooth and nail for resources" sure is doing a lot of heavy lifting for the idea that Garleans were under constant, unrelenting attack for centuries to be extrapolated out of it.

The fact is that we simply do not have a detailed accounting of the Garlean Republic's military history, we know they were involved some kind of conflicts that Solus was able to skew in thr Garlean's favor through magitek, but that's about it.

There's side quests in Garlemald itself that also touch on the subject. Quintus remarks on it during the MSQ's. As does their entry in the lore book. It's not coming out of nowhere, nor is it 'heavy lifting'.

The phrase 'tooth and nail' is also commonly used to describe bitter, desperate struggles that are persistent and hard fought.

[KariTheFox]

Once again, it doesn't really make sense for resource poor and inhospitable Garlean Republic to be the target of constant aggression and taking of resources. It'd cost more in resources to send an army up there than could possibly be extracted (this is before the advent of the magitek revolution, so cerulean stores are not factor.)

Oppurtunistic raiders and bandits, attacking farmland and other small villages because the Republic can't secure its borders? Sure, but I just can't imagine them being under attack by other standing militaries, it's just not economical.

[MikkoAkure]

You don't need a WoL on your side to think that conquering and subjugating lands that wronged your people 800 years ago is itself wrong, let alone continuing that well outside the scope of your original casus belli. It was certainly tough, but the Garleans eventually carved out a new homeland centuries before the start of the game and weren't exactly freezing to death anymore. The writers added some nuance to what we had previously known as a faceless war machine to make the game more interesting, but it doesn't change the fact that you don't suddenly become right just because you have a sad background you use as a cudgel to hit people over the head with in the name of justice.

Kicking people out because they can't fight back as well is certainly a dick move, but I don't see how you can turn that around and say "look at it from their point of view" when they come around and do the same to those peoples' descendants many centuries later who probably didn't even know the Garleans were a thing. There's nothing there to suggest that the Garleans were in danger of being wiped out after their Republic was established and they had guns. For the 500 years after they finished their initial struggle, there's no mention of them struggling against their neighbors anymore in the lore book's timeline until Solus appears.

The Garleans weren't alone anyway, they had a supernatural being with 10,000 years of experience in empire building show up and uplift their technology much faster and greater than the traditional progress of innovation would have taken them. Then he weaponized their resentment towards the rest of the world with the sole purpose to cause chaos and conflict to create another calamity. Just before the end, Garlemald had the highest standard of living in the entire world, with 20th century cars, trains, skyscrapers, and even fantasy computers and AI. They didn't need a WoL or angry neighbors to take that all away from them either, they did it themselves.

[Theodric]

Once again, it doesn't really make sense for resource poor and inhospitable Garlean Republic to be the target of constant aggression and taking of resources. It'd cost more in resources to send an army up there than could possibly be extracted (this is before the advent of the magitek revolution, so cerulean stores are not factor.)

Oppurtunistic raiders and bandits, attacking farmland and other small villages because the Republic can't secure its borders? Sure, but I just can't imagine them being under attack by other standing militaries, it's just not economical.

Again, Quintus explains the Garlean plight at length during the MSQ's:



Combined with the lore book entry, which reveals that the Garleans were reduced to living in conditions that almost caused them to go extinct it's really not a stretch to believe they were continually persecuted.

Here's a snippet from the entry in question:



If not for the presence of ceruleum, they would have perished - and given how they were treated, they were never under any obligation to priortise the needs or wants of outsiders.

Add in the presence of Ascians manipulating them to further their own ends and the situation is even bleaker.

...and again, had they been able to lean on a 'Warrior of Light' to solve all their problems then their hands would never be bloodied in the same way. Equally, if the Eorzeans did not have a 'Warrior of Light' then they, too, would have resorted to ever increasingly drastic measures in order to perpetuate the continued survival of their loved ones.

Even Alphinaud in the screenshot above does not deny that such things are a 'necessity' at times.

[KariTheFox]

The quote from Quintus only makes my point for me, why would another nation send a military to Garlemald to extract "paltry scraps" from them. Armies need to eat and use a lot of resources travelling, and securing supply lines into Garlemald would be particuarly difficult without magitek.

It seems likely that Quintus is referring to small scale raiders from the north, stealing from villages and farmlands oppurtunistically over the years, and extrapolated this out to propagandized paranoia and mistrust of all foreigners.

And the lorebook entry says thier populatiom was low because of the harsh conditions and difficulty of food production - nothing about being continually persecuted.

[Theodric]

The quote from Quintus only makes my point for me, why would another nation send a military to Garlemald to extract "paltry scraps" from them. Armies need to eat and use a lot of resources travelling, and securing supply lines into Garlemald would be particuarly difficult without magitek.

It seems likely that Quintus is referring to small scale raiders from the north, stealing from villages and farmlands oppurtunistically over the years, and extrapolated this out to propagandized paranoia and mistrust of all foreigners.

...?

That isn't what the lore is stating at all, though I suppose this is a good point to simply agree to disagree. It's also not 'propaganda' if, for almost eight hundred years, one's people are at risk of freezing to death and nearly dying out due to low population numbers after being cast out of fertile territory where they could happily work the land and reap a bountiful harvest through honest means.

There's also this, again from the lore book, detailing raids on the capital from the north:

[KariTheFox]

You'll notice the last recorded raid on the capital was in 937 (by nomadic raiders, I might add, like I had been saying), and the magitech revolution in 1513.

That is a period of over 500 years where the Garleans were apparently constantly on the brink of death and starvation - but could also field a standing military and be involved in numerous conflicts. Something isn't adding up.

[Theodric]

You'll notice the last recorded raid on the capital was in 937 (by nomadic raiders, I might add, like I had been saying), and the magitech revolution in 1513.

That is a period of over 500 years where the Garleans were apparently constantly on the brink of death and starvation - but could also field a standing military and be involved in numerous conflicts. Something isn't adding up.

I'm really not sure what, exactly, you're struggling to grasp. Garlemald is repeatedly described as an inhospitable wasteland. It's cold. Even colder than Coerthas after freezing over in the aftermath of the Calamity. There are a great many references to the fact that the Garleans have been forced on the defensive at every turn both before and after becoming an Empire. They're not obligated to roll over and allow themselves to be wiped out - and their distrust of outsiders is completely understandable given all they've been through across multiple generations.



The Ishgardians were locked in a bitter war with the Dravanians over the course of a thousand years so I'm wondering why it's apparently such a stretch to accept that the displaced Garleans were locked in similar bitter struggles after already being actively persecuted...?