What lore do you ignore?

[Lyth]

Even if you want to go the 'What if' route, you have an obligation to follow the restrictions placed by previous story telling.

For example, Emet makes it clear that was relatively easy for Amaurotines to identify deception. Not only did they have the power to read others' memories, but Venat gave a demonstration of how the land itself could serve as witness to a conversation that nobody else was privy to (Lv. 87, A Flower upon Your Return). We saw how quickly the Amaurotine trio on Elpis arrived at the secret behind our arrival once Venat started asking the right questions. Even revealing partial knowledge of an event effectively renders it public domain, which is quite dangerous.

We also know that any branch histories in which Hermes regains his memories prematurely are bad endings, as are any branches in which he does not join the Convocation or is ousted from it. According to Elidibus, Fandaniel was critical to the Amaurotine defense against the Final Days. As assayer of extant phenomenon, he was the first to identify that the transformations first took root at places where the celestial currents were weakest. He also dedicated himself to developing the countermeasure. This, in conjunction with Lahabrea's experiments on Archaeotania and the subsequent development of primal summoning, gave rise to Zodiark as the 'Will of the Star' (EE(3), p.10). Without his contributions, Amaurot would have perished then and there (Lv.86, Return to the Crystarium). Accidentally refreshing Hermes' memory would have been a relatively easy trap to fall into, given the nature of their society.

In the Lv. 86 quest Lives Apart, Hermes reveals that not only was Dynamis a relatively unstudied phenomenon, but that the rest of Amaurotine society had not sufficiently advanced their technological development to the point of creating space travel. This creates a catch-22. Hermes is the only person from that time period with the knowledge to create either an entelechy or a being capable of traversing space. But the very act of unlocking those memories would have rendered him uncooperative, resulting in a bad end. In effect, the only solution was to forestall the Final Days until society had developed the technology to mount a counteroffensive.

Change was inevitable for Amaurotine society. Azem's departure from the Convocation was unprecedented and challenged the foundation of their leadership. The act was so egregious that the Convocation refused to fill Azem's seat, refused to commemorate them, and henceforth referred to them as 'the defector' (Hythlodaeus, Lv.80, Etched in the Stars). We also now know that society's views were also changing in parallel to this challenge. People lost faith in the Convocation's leadership. They began to question whether Amaurot could afford to be so reliant on Creation magic, seeing how spectacularly it had backfired on them (EE(3), p.11). Times were changing, and the Convocation failed to acknowledge this and change with it. A coup would be inevitable under such an impasse, although under any other leadership it would have likely have ended in a complete massacre in the Convocation's favour.

The final potential branch point is an unexpected one. Emet, Lahabrea, and Elidibus had to be unsundered. Emet Selch needed to be present in the lifestream with his memories intact to create a way forward in Ultima Thule. Lahabrea and Elidibus also needed to have their memories be intact within the lifestream for the resolution of Pandaemonium in the present. Deviating from this would have resulted in failure of the corresponding plotline and the destruction of humanity.

When you look at it from this standpoint, it becomes obvious that you can't just meta-game your way through the various branches. A lot of seemingly 'sensible' solutions to try to deliberately alter the future would have resulted in tragedy. This is likely also why Alexander didn't meddle in the timelines, despite having the power to do so. The fact that we reached an ending where humanity survived at all was, in all likelihood, a lot of blind luck in dodging the multitude of bad ends along the way.

[Anonymoose]

People lost faith in the Convocation's leadership. They began to question whether Amaurot could afford to be so reliant on Creation magic, seeing how spectacularly it had backfired on them (EE(3), p.11). Times were changing, and the Convocation failed to acknowledge this and change with it. A coup would be inevitable under such an impasse, although under any other leadership it would have likely have ended in a complete massacre in the Convocation's favour.

No disagreements - eloquently stated - just wanted to throw into the mix for the sake of it rarely coming up that Emet-Selch said that the act of summoning Zodiark brought the Convocation members into symbiosis with the psychospiritual gravity well his emerging essence, inadvertently tempering them. One of Venat's companions later states that one of the reasons things are so dire is that the Convocation will no longer hear anyone out, and I imagine this was especially true once Zodiark re-manifested Primal Elidibus to ensure everyone stayed on the "proper course". Personally I tend to connect these two claims in my interpretations of the scenes.

Combined with the restrictions you've outlined it's hard to imagine any course of action that does not play directly into Meteion's hands, especially under the contextual constraints of time and the actions of others already in motion. It can be imagined, of course, but virtually all of the quest content, developer statements, and Encyclopaedia text supports that we're supposed to assume futility by the time the first two waves of sacrifices were made, the plan to sacrifice new life was decided, and civil war was at its climax.

I'm not saying the execution of the storytelling was clean, but I am saying that, when one knows where the developer's heads are at, rooting for one's counter-interpretation to pan out is - generally speaking - setting oneself up for disappointment.

CITATIONS

We summoned Him, as your kind might summon a primal─albeit an infinitely more powerful one. And like one of your primals, He tempered us. It was only natural. There is no resisting such power. And so we Ascians came to exist solely to bring about the rule of darkness. His darkness.
Ça te revient en mémoire, maintenant? Tu n'aurais tout de même pas également oublié que lorsque les hommes-bêtes invoquent leurs Primordiaux des temps modernes, ils entrent en symbiose avec leur énergie et deviennent des “subjugués”, hein? Rassure-moi, tu commences à me faire peur! Eh bien, figure-toi que le processus est exactement le même pour nous. Pour faire simple, celui qui croit pouvoir résister à l'influence psychique d'un être aussi démesurément puissant ne peut qu'être lourdement déçu. C'est ainsi que les Asciens sont devenus les courroies de transmission de l'énergie de Zordiarche, mon jeune ami! Notre existence n'a qu'un seul but: amplifier et étendre la part de Ténèbres dans l'univers tout entier."
Wir riefen ihn mit unseren Wünschen und Gebeten, so wie die niederen Völker es heute mit den Primae machen-obwohl der Vergleich angesichts Zodiarks Stärke ein Frevel ist. Und wie die Primae es mit ihren Anbetern tun, ergriff er von uns Besitz. Ein natürlicher Vorgang. Nichts kann seiner geistigen Kraft widerstehen. So kam es, dass die Ascians sein Werk taten und zu Boten der Dunkelheit wurden. Seiner Dunkelheit.
現代の人は、神降ろしをしたり、蛮神のエネルギーを身に受けることで、強制的な同調……テンパード状態になるだろう？実のところ、私たちにも、同じことは起きている。精神への干渉こそ、いくらかは防げるが、あれほどの存在を顕現させれば、どうしても引っ張られるのさ。結果、アシエンはゾディアークの有する力……「闇」とも呼ばれる、活性と激化の力に寄った存在に、ならざるを得なかったわけだ。

Nay. Should we continue down this path, our fate will be the same. said as much to the Convocation, of course, but the stubborn fools turned a deaf ear to my warnings.
Malheureusement, nous courons plus que jamais à notre perte. Cet artifice n'a fait que retarder l'inéluctable. J'ai bien tenté d'en faire part au Concile des Quatorze, mais mon avis n'a pas été pris en compte.
Einspruch. Wenn wir weitermachen wie bisher, werden wir das Ende bestenfalls hinauszögern. Alle Versuche der Kontrolle sind zwecklos. Das haben wir dem Konvent der Vierzehn bereits nahegelegt, aber unsere Einwände wurden in den Wind geschlagen.
いいや、我々が今のままで在り続けるかぎり、どれほど制御を試みたとて、終末を先延ばしにしているにすぎん…。 十四人委員会にも、そう進言したが、残念ながら、取り合ってはもらえなんだ…。

[ZavosEsperian]

Even if you want to go the 'What if' route, you have an obligation to follow the restrictions placed by previous story telling.

To this point here, it would appear you are creating the restrictions pertaining to events related to Elpis and their consequences as the writers themselves leave anything involving how the timestream flows as open-ended, where the player/reader is the one free to interpret this however they like, be these converging or diverging timestreams:

Q: I don’t really understand why the Warrior of Light messing around in Elpis didn’t create any alternate timelines. Can you explain what happened?

A: First of all, we’ve left that part up to interpretation.

With that said, my personal interpretation is that the past and present were always the part of the same timeline. Although there was still a possibility for the timelines to diverge, the Warrior of Light was unwittingly acting in accordance with Venat’s plans, which unified the past and present. Another interpretation might be that Venat worked really hard behind the scenes to ensure that the timeline wouldn’t go awry.

Seeing how Argos took to us on our first meeting, I’d say that proves that the past and present were already unified. -Yoshi-P

Link to video with timestamp at（03:18:39)

Link to Forum Post

-Letter from the Producer LIVE Part LXVIII (03/03/2022)

Your interpretation appears to be more in-line with Yoshi-P's which is one of convergence. With that said, Yoshi-P and the writers are not dismissive of the idea of divergent timestreams, which would allow for more potential outcomes overall. So as far as 'What ifs' are concerned, under divergence they would be allowed to manifest should this be the approach taken. Generally, convergence would have to reconcile with various paradoxes (such as the bootstrap paradox and Ex Nihilo Paradox) in order to properly function unless we are still inside of the loop itself, however that is just an opinion in terms of my thoughts on converging timestreams.

For example, Emet makes it clear that was relatively easy for Amaurotines to identify deception. Not only did they have the power to read others' memories, but Venat gave a demonstration of how the land itself could serve as witness to a conversation that nobody else was privy to (Lv. 87, A Flower upon Your Return). We saw how quickly the Amaurotine trio on Elpis arrived at the secret behind our arrival once Venat started asking the right questions. Even revealing partial knowledge of an event effectively renders it public domain, which is quite dangerous.

We also know that any branch histories in which Hermes regains his memories prematurely are bad endings, as are any branches in which he does not join the Convocation or is ousted from it. According to Elidibus, Fandaniel was critical to the Amaurotine defense against the Final Days. As assayer of extant phenomenon, he was the first to identify that the transformations first took root at places where the celestial currents were weakest. He also dedicated himself to developing the countermeasure. This, in conjunction with Lahabrea's experiments on Archaeotania and the subsequent development of primal summoning, gave rise to Zodiark as the 'Will of the Star' (EE(3), p.10). Without his contributions, Amaurot would have perished then and there (Lv.86, Return to the Crystarium). Accidentally refreshing Hermes' memory would have been a relatively easy trap to fall into, given the nature of their society.

In the Lv. 86 quest Lives Apart, Hermes reveals that not only was Dynamis a relatively unstudied phenomenon, but that the rest of Amaurotine society had not sufficiently advanced their technological development to the point of creating space travel. This creates a catch-22. Hermes is the only person from that time period with the knowledge to create either an entelechy or a being capable of traversing space. But the very act of unlocking those memories would have rendered him uncooperative, resulting in a bad end. In effect, the only solution was to forestall the Final Days until society had developed the technology to mount a counteroffensive.

Everything bolded here subjected to the Catch 22 argument is a false argument. Per the MSQ quest Caging the Messenger, the only memories subjected to Kairos' memory alteration are those from the point Emet-Selch arrives to Elpis (and subsequently the WoL) up to the point where he is invoking Kairos. Kairos does not affect Hermes'/Fandaniel's prior knowledge/wisdom on Dynamis or space travel, as Meteion, along with her sisters, were all created prior to Emet-Selch's arrival.:

Transcript for Caging the Messenger

Transcript of events in question:
Kairos:
Memory reconfiguration system Kairos activated. Awaiting instruction.

Hermes:
Command: universal memory alteration. Target area: Ktisis Hyperboreia.

Starting point: arrival of Emet-Selch of the Convocation at Propylaion. End point: the present.

Erase the memories of all events, and replace with a vague recollection of the following:

I was here, preparing to demonstrate the functionality of Kairos to Emet-Selch and Hythlodaeus.

Meteion's shared consciousness became unstable. She and her sisters could not sustain their existence, and all dissipated with a burst.

The resultant shockwave accidentally triggered Kairos, which erased several days of memories from all present. Execute.
Kairos:
Command acknowledged. Initializing... Three processes remaining to execution

YT video with timestamp 8:25

-MSQ Caging the Messenger

With the timespan set, it would be impossible for him to wipe out his knowledge of both Dynamis and space travel unless all of these things occurred while Emet-Selch was present, which is contradicted by the fact Meteion has already been in existence prior to Emet-Selch's arrival. This based on her constitution paired with her ability to traverse space, and solidifies Hermes' knowledge of these fields prior to the events in Elpis. And given the timeframe Kairos affects, the claim memories/knowledge pertaining to those two fields was affected by the invocation of Kairos cannot be substantiated outside of someone inventing/headcanoning those effects.

As such, I am unable to view things from the standpoint you have presented them as they are contradictory to how the story portrays events. You have directly contradicted yourself with your argument via inventing/headcanoning information and presenting it as fact while maintaining a stance where people have an obligation to follow restrictions based on previous storytelling. In addition, to enforce rules on individuals for how people interpret events in the story while, at the same time, failing to abide by that selfsame standard is extremely hypocritical. I am relatively lax on many things, particularly if they involve sections of story the writers openly state to be able to be subjected to interpretation on behalf of the player, but I do not tolerate misrepresentation of events that are clearly depicted in ways that leave no room for any other interpretation.

The fact that we reached an ending where humanity survived at all was, in all likelihood, a lot of blind luck in dodging the multitude of bad ends along the way.

To peddle back a bit to the whole timestream thing, in a convergence scenario, this would be a correct interpretation of events. In the instance of Divergence, particularly if the idea of Infinite Alternate Timelines/Universes is invoked, this is just one of many permutations of the timestreams that, based on invoking infinity, would allow for this to happen, it just so happens we are in that timestream, which is also a bit of luck just like how it would work in terms of convergence.

[Lyth]

...

No. We know that a divergent timeline did not occur. This is a thought experiment to determine if a divergent timeline was viable (i.e. one that does not result in the destruction of humanity).

I'm treating the timeline like a black box. Imagine a Radiant Historia style timeline map of the decision nodes. I don't know where all the individual decision nodes are or what choices were made at those nodes. I can't brute force a solution like Alexander can because I can't run tests of every possible outcome. All I can do is identify any constraints that would limit the 'form' of a viable solution. There may be additional constraints that I haven't identified that may restrict the range of viable solutions even further beyond what I've stated. These are entirely at the discretion of the writing team, should they ever elaborate further.

On the subject of space travel, Hermes cannot be directly used in any solution against Meteion. Hermes believes that the activation of Kairos was triggered by Meteion's shared consciousness becoming unstable, resulting in her destruction (Lv.87, Thou Must Live Die and Know). Venat elaborates further:

'As for Hermes... I think it unlikely he will create more entelechies. He poured much of himself into Meteion, and now that she and her sisters are gone - dissipated, in his mind - the grief must be unbearable. He will blame himself. He will believe that, had he never acknowledged his dissatisfaction with the world, then the Meteia would have never been born to suffer and die. The offer to join the Fourteen will be a welcome distraction, and one day hence, he will face the advent of the Final Days in the role of Fandaniel...' (Lv. 87, Caging the Messenger).

If you want Hermes to develop either space travel or entelechies further for you, you'd need to take him into your confidence and tell him what actually happened. We already know that leads to a bad end. As a result, any solutions which depend on Hermes developing these technologies further are non-viable. We also know that Hermes was miles ahead of his peers in his development in these fields, as I had established previously. As a result, you can't pin your bets on anyone else spontaneously developing those solutions in parallel. A means to forestall the Final Days is necessary. And we know the outcome of that.

Combined with the restrictions you've outlined it's hard to imagine any course of action that does not play directly into Meteion's hands, especially under the contextual constraints of time and the actions of others already in motion. It can be imagined, of course, but virtually all of the quest content, developer statements, and Encyclopaedia text supports that we're supposed to assume futility by the time the first two waves of sacrifices were made, the plan to sacrifice new life was decided, and civil war was at its climax.

I'm not saying the execution of the storytelling was clean, but I am saying that, when one knows where the developer's heads are at, rooting for one's counter-interpretation to pan out is - generally speaking - setting oneself up for disappointment.

Your final statement here is succinct and spot on. It's a bit like arguing with a DM/GM/storyteller in a pen and paper roleplaying game. They control the entire decision tree. We can propose whatever solutions that we like, but the downstream consequences of those decisions can render the proposed solutions non-viable.

[Iscah]

No. We know that a divergent timeline did not occur.

More exactly (and speculatively), if the timeline split in some way due to the information we gave Venat at Elpis, we are not part of that timeline and have no way to detect it, just like we have no direct evidence of G'raha's original timeline even though it must now be playing out parallel to ours. So for functional purposes, even if an alternate timeline did exist, it does not exist in any way that we need to consider it.

We can confirm that we are living in the same timeline that we visited in Elpis even before we go there because the after-effects of what happened there can be seen in the present day. Argos trusts us because he already met us; Hydaelyn is already aware that we are approaching the "confluence" where the time loop will be completed.

[ZavosEsperian]

No. We know that a divergent timeline did not occur.

see

These are entirely at the discretion of the writing team, should they ever elaborate further.

You have contradicted yourself again, which renders everything stated in between those two points in your argument moot. Due to how the writers are allowing people to take either approach in terms of timelines, it causes there to be a Schrödinger's cat-like paradox, where both states are able to be accepted as true from the outside observer's perspective. You cannot declaratively state one is true over the other without going against the writers’ intent at the moment. I am not inherently dismissive of converging timeline interpretations, the problem is that without clear clarification of the paradoxes that have to exist for a converging timeline to be true, it is extremely difficult to accept this interpretation in its current state. Divergence allows for the events to all play out as they have in the way they have been depicted without the need to deal with these paradoxes as they would not exist. That being said, I do not want to give myself carpal tunnel discussing something where the writers have clearly indicated it is up to your own interpretation, thus I will agree to disagree with your overall position.

Venat elaborates further: 'As for Hermes... I think it unlikely he will create more entelechies.

This statement does nothing to enhance your previous argument and arguably makes it worse. The quote used is based on Venat's opinion and, on top of that, uses language that is not entirely dismissive of the possibility of Hermes creating more entelechies as the term 'unlikely' is not 'never'. In addition, you have failed to refute any of the points in my former post in regards to negating your argument, thus I find the continuance of your argument with the points you are currently making otherwise to be strictly headcanon/personal opinion, as none of these things are directly stated inside of the story or any other source material. Do understand, this is not me arguing Hermes will ever end up doing what is deemed unlikely above, it is refuting the complete dismissal of that possibility as something that can still be viable.

More exactly (and speculatively), if the timeline split in some way due to the information we gave Venat at Elpis, we are not part of that timeline and have no way to detect it, just like we have no direct evidence of G'raha's original timeline even though it must now be playing out parallel to ours. So for functional purposes, even if an alternate timeline did exist, it does not exist in any way that we need to consider it.

From the perspective of the WoL, this is an accurate interpretation. Any viewpoint related to how the WoL interprets events will seem to them as being convergent, as there is no way for them to have an omniscient view where they can see how time streams twist and turn and potentially branch and parallel each other. In the case of G'Raha (Crystal Exarch) in particular, he did not cease to exist upon averting the 8th Umbral Calamity, which suggests his actions did not remove/overwrite the conditions required for him to exist, which is proof his original time stream is still intact and running parallel to our own, where our own time stream is diverged from his original time stream.

We can confirm that we are living in the same timeline that we visited in Elpis even before we go there because the after-effects of what happened there can be seen in the present day. Argos trusts us because he already met us; Hydaelyn is already aware that we are approaching the "confluence" where the time loop will be completed.

This reads like Yoshi-P's interpretation, which he has described as his own opinion/interpretation. This above statement can exist in all time stream types, and much like I argued above, due to how the writers intended to leave this open to interpretation, it creates a Schrödinger's cat-like paradox where both interpretations of how time travel works and how time streams work both exist at the same time, which causes a whole assortment of issues when discussing anything related to the time travel portions of EW. As I have indicated to Lyth above, I don't feel like developing carpal tunnel over this so I will agree to disagree with any approach that is dismissive of either of the two time stream types.

[Iscah]

In the case of G'Raha (Crystal Exarch) in particular, he did not cease to exist upon averting the 8th Umbral Calamity, which suggests his actions did not remove/overwrite the conditions required for him to exist, which is proof his original time stream is still intact and running parallel to our own, where our own time stream is diverged from his original time stream.

I know that, but that would be indirect proof – we can logically reason that because G'raha still exists, the timeline he came from is likely to still exist.

I specifically wrote "direct proof" to mean confirmable evidence that the timeline exists: some way to look across the high-degree dimensional split and actually observe the existence of the other timeline. To our knowledge we have no device that could do so and assure G'raha that his friends' reality continues.

On a pedantic sidenote, "G'raha" (as for all Seeker names) doesn't have a capital on the start of the given name when the tribe letter is used. I assume it might be a limitation of forcing player names to start with a capital and then lower case for the rest.

[Lady_Silvermoon]

I know that, but that would be indirect proof – we can logically reason that because G'raha still exists, the timeline he came from is likely to still exist.

I specifically wrote "direct proof" to mean confirmable evidence that the timeline exists: some way to look across the high-degree dimensional split and actually observe the existence of the other timeline. To our knowledge we have no device that could do so and assure G'raha that his friends' reality continues.

On a pedantic sidenote, "G'raha" (as for all Seeker names) doesn't have a capital on the start of the given name when the tribe letter is used. I assume it might be a limitation of forcing player names to start with a capital and then lower case for the rest.

But we're talking about allowing millions of people to be murdered and an entire civilization to be destroyed on the grounds we only have circumstantial proof that divergent timelines are possible. To me, that level of selfishness is not the trait of a hero. G'raha risked it with no proof at all. We have proof and we're just standing there taking quests from these people knowing they are all about to die and doing nothing to help them.

And as ZavosEsperian has pointed out, attempting to lock us into a loop where nothing can possibly be done causes a paradox because if we always went back in time and caused the Sundering which causes our creation which leads to us going back in time, how/why did the first Sundering happen? And if nothing can be done or changed, why are we actively, and shamefully not helping? We look down in sadness and shame like we know we're doing wrong every time these people ask us about their future and we condemn them to their deaths with our inaction. It seems to me that is a choice. If nothing can be done to change their fate, then we should be able to shout from the rafters what's coming their way and our actions simply won't change things.

Earlier I explained there are two kinds of "can't be helped." Situations where there is no action that could be taken at the time to change things, like most of the deaths that happen in the story. And situations where things could be changed, but doing so goes against your self-interest, so you do nothing no matter how much pain and suffering it will cause someone else. What we're doing in Elpis is the latter "can't be changed." We are purposely condemning a people for the (possible) benefit of our own which was something the game was against when Emet-Selch, the Warriors of Darkness and Golbez attempted to do it. And the only argument I've seen that makes us the exemption is we're the sacred timeline with the only "chance of survival" while all other timelines are "dead ends" which means it's only wrong to sacrifice us because our lives are simply worth more due to some terrifying Darwinist ideal.