What lore do you ignore?

[Asetoni]

Yes, it is completely illogical. Because if tempering is something artifical then why did the ancients it to themself? Emet-Selch tells the player, that the summoners of Zodiark became tempered by him.


Cheers

I didn't really wanna bring up Zodiark because Livingway does lampshade it in the same scene by saying that he's powerful enough that it happens anyway. Honestly my annoyance with this part of the lore has less to do with it being illogical and moreso how hand-wavy it is and that seems to serve no meaningful purpose.

Hell, Asetoni pointed out that his own counterevidence is invalid: Phoenix, Susano, Enkidu, and other primals summoned completely without Ascian instruction didn't temper anybody. All of those scenarios happened in such freak accidents that I'm not terribly surprised that nobody managed to study that phenomena.

I was probably a little unclear in my original comment, but to be clear, I don't really dislike/ignore this part of the lore because it's nonsensical. It's very much possible to backwards-explain and handwave all the weird implications it has and come up with a cohesive whole ("Fandaniel simply rigged Anima after the fact", "Shiva/Ysayle never tried tempering so she didn't realize she couldn't do it", "the Bozja queen was somehow connected to the Ascians and we just never heard about it"). I wouldn't bring it up in a plotholes discussion.

My reason for choosing to ignore this part of the lore is because it's dropped so flippantly despite having insanely far-reaching implications, for what seems to so far just amount to a 1.0 reference. With how much effort there clearly is put into Primal lore and with how cohesive it is thematically, this just sticks out like a sore thumb. I of course don't have access to the writers' heads here, but it just feels like so little thought went into it, so I will also give it very little consideration myself.