Results 1 to 10 of 283

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Player
    Denishia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Gridania
    Posts
    475
    Character
    Denishia Squirrel
    World
    Brynhildr
    Main Class
    Fisher Lv 100
    I think that is also comes down to what you interpret the "new life" that the Third Sacrifice was aiming to trade to Zodiark in order to swap out the souls from sacrifices one and two. For me it was obvious in the implications that the new life wasn't just constructs and plant/animal life (which even then, okay you've just environmentally devastated the planet back towards the state you had just made the original Zodiark sacrifices for) but that these new lives were beings that had inherited the souls from the Lifestream had had originally belonged to people who had died in the initial Final Days, including all the citizens of the other cities that weren't Amaurot, or souls of people who died long before it and thus didn't have the memories of the Final Days that could have triggered the Echo via the Star Showers. The Convocation and their followers, through tempering and the extremely potent survivor's guilt towards the sacrificed like Hythlodeaus are deciding to kill reborn-Azem. Those same souls on the chopping block once the Rejoinings are complete.
    (0)

  2. #2
    Player
    Brinne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    498
    Character
    Raelle Brinn
    World
    Ultros
    Main Class
    White Mage Lv 90
    Quote Originally Posted by Denishia View Post
    sacrifices
    Not to fully retread old arguments, but keeping this focused on "Venat's individual motivations and actions" themselves as a potential foil or parallel to Athena - as opposed to a wider argument on the Convocation - Endwalker pretty firmly established that at least for Venat herself, (you could make an argument for her faction, who were largely kept in the dark about what she knew and what she intended), the sacrifices were the least of her concerns, and she was primarily motivated by the question of the Endsinger and her fears that the Ancients would eventually submit to total societal stagnation and nihilism, ala the Nibirun. This is reflected both in her not understanding why she would ever do what she did when you first give her the Endsinger-less and Meteion's report-less understanding of the future scenario, and the fact that whatever the "new life" was, Hydaelyn also chopped it up and effectively killed it all in the Sundering along with the Ancients.

    For Venat herself, just like Athena (at least, the argument Athena put forth), the primary concern was indeed for her concept of "the greater good," and all forms of life around her were an acceptable sacrifice towards a future that would shape it.
    (7)
    Last edited by Brinne; 05-29-2023 at 03:20 AM.

  3. #3
    Player
    Denishia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Gridania
    Posts
    475
    Character
    Denishia Squirrel
    World
    Brynhildr
    Main Class
    Fisher Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by Brinne View Post
    Not to fully retread old arguments, but keeping this focused on "Venat's individual motivations and actions" themselves as a potential foil or parallel to Athena - as opposed to a wider argument on the Convocation - Endwalker pretty firmly established that at least for Venat herself, (you could make an argument for her faction, who were largely kept in the dark about what she knew and what she intended), the sacrifices were the least of her concerns, and she was primarily motivated by the question of the Endsinger and her fears that the Ancients would eventually submit to total societal stagnation and nihilism, ala the Nibirun. This is reflected both in her not understanding why she would ever do what she did when you first give her the Endsinger-less and Meteion's report-less understanding of the future scenario, and the fact that whatever the "new life" was, Hydaelyn also chopped it up and effectively killed it all in the Sundering along with the Ancients.

    For Venat herself, just like Athena (at least, the argument Athena put forth), the primary concern was indeed for her concept of "the greater good," and all forms of life around her were an acceptable sacrifice towards a future that would shape it.
    "To try and reclaim those lives we lost by sacrificing yet more isn't wisdom. It is weakness."
    To put in a parallel - the Convocation is acting like Hephatios in P8 - wanting to sacrifice Erichtonios to bring back Athena. Venat and her followers were trying to save Erichtonios but Venat realizes that she can't, her attempts at least in the timeline that we are on have no outcome where she succeeded in convincing Hephatios not to kill Athena in the first place and now her attempts at reasoning with Hephatios won't stop him from killing Erichtonios. He's solely focused on restoring Athena, who in this case was far more a victim of Ultima's auracite. Now the writers would have allowed the WoL in a similar situation to just kill Hephatios and save Erichtonios. Venat's followers think she might be able to. Thanks to time-travel shenanigans, Venat knows she won't be able to save Erichtonios, but her blow that stops Hephatios from killing him is also going to transform Erichtonios into Claudien. And Claudien, unlike Hephatios, is willing to go hunt down Ultima the High Seraph and unlike Hephatios or herself, actually has the best chance of defeating Ultima (and free Athena to be reborn too). I totally get the anger that Venat was still killing Erichtonios to get Claudien- but Hephaitios was also trying to kill Erichtonios, and as the story is written I disagree that Hephatios was ever going to kill Ultima.
    (1)

  4. #4
    Player
    Kozh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    888
    Character
    Corvo Aerden
    World
    Kujata
    Main Class
    Dark Knight Lv 90
    Quote Originally Posted by Denishia View Post
    To put in a parallel - the Convocation is acting like Hephatios in P8 - wanting to sacrifice Erichtonios to bring back Athena. Venat and her followers were trying to save Erichtonios but Venat realizes that she can't, her attempts at least in the timeline that we are on have no outcome where she succeeded in convincing Hephatios not to kill Athena in the first place and now her attempts at reasoning with Hephatios won't stop him from killing Erichtonios. He's solely focused on restoring Athena, who in this case was far more a victim of Ultima's auracite. Now the writers would have allowed the WoL in a similar situation to just kill Hephatios and save Erichtonios. Venat's followers think she might be able to. Thanks to time-travel shenanigans, Venat knows she won't be able to save Erichtonios, but her blow that stops Hephatios from killing him is also going to transform Erichtonios into Claudien. And Claudien, unlike Hephatios, is willing to go hunt down Ultima the High Seraph and unlike Hephatios or herself, actually has the best chance of defeating Ultima (and free Athena to be reborn too). I totally get the anger that Venat was still killing Erichtonios to get Claudien- but Hephaitios was also trying to kill Erichtonios, and as the story is written I disagree that Hephatios was ever going to kill Ultima.
    No offense, but this isn't really a good parallel imo (and very confusing). Venat's reasoning to sunder is no longer about saving "erichtonios". Because in EW there's new factors that influence her decision; meteion, dynamis and the Nibirun Dead End.

    Also

    her attempts at least in the timeline that we are on have no outcome where she succeeded in convincing Hephatios not to kill Athena in the first place
    are you implying that venat tried to prevent first and second sacrifice as well?
    (2)

  5. #5
    Player
    Denishia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Gridania
    Posts
    475
    Character
    Denishia Squirrel
    World
    Brynhildr
    Main Class
    Fisher Lv 100
    I think that Venat's statement that end "so I take nothing for granted as I walk my path" and the uncertainty that we were in a closed loop timeline or not until the Mothercrystal scene meant that Venat was trying to find solutions to the Final Days that wouldn't involve Zodiark or the Sundering, and by the nature of returning to our timeline we don't see if there are timelines where Venat was less cautious about not taking any steps that would butterfly away Zodiark's creation nor do we get to see the timeline where her pleading to the Zodiark worshiping survivors of the Final Days that focusing on trying to recreate their post-trauma memory of their past by offering up their present and future while not addressing what led to what had destroyed it and how to defeat its source which was still out there worked without having to Sunder. The game posits that the Endsinger wouldn't be defeated by the Ancients as they were without changing - until she pulls out the sword Venat is trying to debate that change of attitude without the change of the physical world. We also don't get to see the timeline where we arrive long before Hermes sent the Meteia into space and convince him via a life-changing road trip that there are answers to the doubts that plague him and other ways to find purpose and meaning in life than the only one he's been told - or no clear answers at all and that's okay.
    (2)

  6. #6
    Player
    Kozh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    888
    Character
    Corvo Aerden
    World
    Kujata
    Main Class
    Dark Knight Lv 90
    Quote Originally Posted by Denishia View Post
    I think that Venat's statement that end "so I take nothing for granted as I walk my path" and the uncertainty that we were in a closed loop timeline or not until the Mothercrystal scene meant that Venat was trying to find solutions to the Final Days that wouldn't involve Zodiark or the Sundering
    And yet we don't see any proof of this contigency/defense plan of her, not even in her walk scene.


    until she pulls out the sword Venat is trying to debate that change of attitude without the change of the physical world.
    If this is true, then she did a very bad job of trying to convince her people.

    But this is interesting, as you said, the game posits that the Ancient couldn't defeat meteion because of dynamis. So why did she even bother trying to change everyone's mind about 3rd sacrifice? Shouldn't she just sunder them regardless?
    (1)

  7. #7
    Player
    Yuella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    735
    Character
    Boulder Colorado
    World
    Cactuar
    Main Class
    Sage Lv 98
    Quote Originally Posted by Kozh View Post
    And yet we don't see any proof of this contigency/defense plan of her, not even in her walk scene.




    If this is true, then she did a very bad job of trying to convince her people.

    But this is interesting, as you said, the game posits that the Ancient couldn't defeat meteion because of dynamis. So why did she even bother trying to change everyone's mind about 3rd sacrifice? Shouldn't she just sunder them regardless?
    She let Elidibus, Lahabrea and Emet-Selch escaped the Sundering so they could bring the rejoining 7x which will result in US, the warrior of light who visited her in Elpis, to be born and have the proper aether/dynamis balance to be able to beat Meteion.

    Second question, if her people were willing to deal with their suffering, then she would not have to sunder the world because there's no danger of them becoming suicidal and deactivating Zodiark to let Meteion's attack through. Eventually they would find a way to confront Meteion via whatever method.
    (4)