Let's play a game: Save the Ancients!

[Cleretic]

But you're merely assuming here that most Ancients could single-handedly end the world in a way their superiors could not contain,

One of them did, though.

Even if you think Hermes has some kind of elite status that makes him uniquely capable that few shared (which I don't, nothing in the game actually says it, we only get notably underpowered people singled out), we're still looking at a world where one of those few people can just cause an apocalypse by themselves, accidentally. And their 'superiors' only solved it by sacrificing half the planet, which I would at best call a pyrrhic victory. So yes, I think it's valid to see the Ancients as very dangerous people; they themselves know that, it's why creation magic has so many checks and balances.


Also, 'the loporrits eventually made the Ragnarok' doesn't actually mean 'the Ancients could've made the Ragnarok no problem'. I read them as like Deep Thought from Hitchhiker's Guide: Venat and Co knew this was needed, but couldn't do it themselves, so they made people to run those numbers and do that work.

[Lunaxia]

One of them did, though.

He almost did. And the argument was that most could. Hermes was a mad scientist trifling with a force he oughtn't have messed with at best, and in the context of the game that's not even an Ancient-specific phenomenon.

Even if you think Hermes has some kind of elite status that makes him uniquely capable that few shared (which I don't)

Actually, we are given explicit proof that...

...what? Multiple NPCs comment on the extent of Hermes' ability. He's actively called a genius at points, his knowledge and talent are remarked upon by his compeers as being unmatched, and he's considered the foremost expert and leading authority within his field. He is the only Ancient thus far to not only be able to make use of Dynamis, a form of energy supposedly beyond their powers to manipulate, but to actively utilise it in developing the first functional entelechy, and one possessing of free will and intelligence at that. Moreover, he's said to be more or less the only one with the know-how required to properly identify and halt the phenomena directly behind the Final Days. He might be crazy, but he's absolutely a prodigy even by Ancient standards and you have to give him credit where it's due. Likewise, the Convocation are referred to as being the most formidable and talented figures in their respective domains by NPCs on several occasions and are recruited for that very reason. We've already effectively lost to three of them purely on our own merit, and trying to prop up the notion that simply anyone can be elected purely because Hythlodaeus is ridiculously self-deprecating is hilariously off-base and smacks more than a little of bad faith. This is literally why I will never take any of you seriously when you purport to come here in the guise of neutrality or objectivity, because your supposed knowledge and interest in basic lore manages to drop off a cliff the moment it steps beyond the boundaries of takes or opinions you're comfortable with.

And their 'superiors' only solved it by sacrificing half the planet, which I would at best call a pyrrhic victory.

And yet it was a victory nonetheless. Were it a war with a litany of casualties, what would you say then? Were it... dare I say, a form of pandemic created by a malevolent entity, what would you say then? The Ancients have Ancient-specific crises, for sure, but again I'm still seeing no argument that justifies why they're inherently more dangerous or at risk than mortals, who are more far more vulnerable and lack the same resources they had to address problems facing the planet in the case of a mass emergency.

ETA: After having time to glance through the thread, I will say I do agree with the point that the portrayal of the Ancients suffers for the writers attempting to show them both as a distant, biblical fall-from-grace allegory and a bunch of extremely powerful albeit fundamentally human characters scarcely any different from Bill from Accounting that we should be sympathising and feeling for. And that feeling of dissonance is, ironically, where the bulk of the game's criticism comes from. The story tries to tell you one thing but then shows another, all while handholding you towards the "correct" perspective the writers intended you to take away from all of this. And while some people are perfectly content to go along with that and take things as they find them, for those accustomed to forming their own opinion and FFXIV *usually* managing to follow through on putting together a coherent and nuanced narrative that allows you to do so, it made the whole experience... well, jarring, to say the least.

[Cleretic]

And yet it was a victory nonetheless. Were it a war with a litany of casualties, what would you say then? Were it... dare I say, a form of pandemic created by a malevolent entity, what would you say then?

I would call ANY situation where victory requires sacrificing half your population, on top of the people who died anyway, pyrrhic at best, no matter what you were going up against. I think that's especially true of Zodiark; both what we saw and heard about in the aftermath shows that it was an absolutely miserable victory. They won, but at terrible cost. (Also, I feel like you're trying to imply something without saying it with your examples, so maybe you should try saying what you mean.)

And again, to bring back the original point: all of this was caused, by one man, by accident, while trying to answer a pretty worthwhile question. I don't think Hermes being some unparalleled genius actually matters here, because he didn't even mean to do it. If you want to get an idea a similar situation is in the sundered world, I can immediately think of three people who 'caused problems by accident':
-Alphinaud with the Crystal Braves... which was a vastly different situation and still had almost all of its consequences mitigated with little cost (RIP Minfilia and Raubahn's arm),
-Ga Bu, who created an overly emotional Titan... in a context where Titan was going to be summoned anyway
-And Gilgamesh, who created a primal so minor that a lot of people forget that it actually was one

While those are hardly nothing, they are microscopic compared to the impact of Hermes' whoopsie. So yes, I think it's an absolutely fair argument to say that most of the Ancients were stupidly, absurdly powerful.

[LilimoLimomo]

...what? Multiple NPCs comment on the extent of Hermes' ability. He's actively called a genius at points, his knowledge and talent are remarked upon by his compeers as being unmatched, and he's considered the foremost expert and leading authority within his field.

I get the impression you're misunderstanding me, because I explicitly called out that that Hermes was renowned in his field of study. Where I think we are failing to communicate properly is that being a world-class biologist isn't the same thing as being a world-class mage. If my memory serves, there is no time when anyone comments on Hermes' having impressive magical or creation-based abilities. I am committed to the truth above all else, so if you can provide solid evidence that proves the contrary, I will change my position.

trying to prop up the notion that simply anyone can be elected purely because Hythlodaeus is ridiculously self-deprecating is hilariously off-base and smacks more than a little of bad faith

Again, you are misunderstanding me. I'm not saying that just anyone can be elected. I'm saying that if Hythlodaeus was qualified to be in Convocation, then that makes it clear that things like magical ability are in no way expected of Convocation members. Hythlodaeus is incredibly knowledgeable and his gift of sight is greater than even Hades', but he's a sub-par mage. We see evidence of this in Hyperboreia when he takes action in order to thwart a serious problem, and concedes that the best way he can be helpful in combat is to shoot arrows because he can see target's weak points. In this moment, we are given evidence that Hythlodaeus is not merely being self-deprecating, but that he is being honest about his limitations. All of which leads up to the singular conclusion that we cannot make the assumption that being on the Convocation requires strength, because if it did then Hythlodaeus would not have been offered a seat.

If you disagree with the conclusions I'm coming to, that's fair. However, I'd appreciate it if you didn't aim accusations at me. If I'm wrong, I want to know how so I can correct my position and not be wrong. That's the whole reason I read your counterarguments, so that I can test the stability of my own understanding. So if you disagree, I hope you'll focus all your energies on providing accessible counterarguments. I get the impression that we may have interpreted the text in different ways, so it might help to provide some citations with sources if there are specific examples that would demonstrate ways in which I'm wrong. No pressure, though, I do understand that that takes a non-trivial amount of time and effort and that it may not be worth it to clear up a disagreement on a message board about a fictional society. But at the very least, hopefully we can keep our blows aimed at the arguments and not each other.

[fulminating]

Again, you are misunderstanding me. I'm not saying that just anyone can be elected. I'm saying that if Hythlodaeus was qualified to be in Convocation, then that makes it clear that things like magical ability are in no way expected of Convocation members. Hythlodaeus is incredibly knowledgeable and his gift of sight is greater than even Hades', but he's a sub-par mage. We see evidence of this in Hyperboreia when he takes action in order to thwart a serious problem, and concedes that the best way he can be helpful in combat is to shoot arrows because he can see target's weak points. This is not a man being self-deprecating, this is a man who is honest about his limitations. All of which leads up to the singular conclusion that we cannot make the assumption that being on the Convocation requires strength, because if it did then Hythlodaeus would not have been offered a seat..

We know two things:
1) hyth is pretty self deprecating
2) all of his known peers are incredibly powerful - hades and the “just pull it out the underworld lmao” aetherpool, venat and azem who are both significantly more traveled and experienced with combat given their roles, and probably lahabrea who is pyromania incarnate.

If we compare his talent and Eric, the other ancient with purportedly subpar magical ability, we can still say very little. Eric being a product of Athena’s meddling doesn’t help the fair comparison either as you can’t really assume he’s typical. I don’t think it’s particularly fair to use Addidas, Herbert lions or hegemony as points of comparison either given the whole demigod thing.

[LilimoLimomo]

We know two things:
1) hyth is pretty self deprecating
2) all of his known peers are incredibly powerful - hades and the “just pull it out the underworld lmao” aetherpool, venat and azem who are both significantly more traveled and experienced with combat given their roles, and probably lahabrea who is pyromania incarnate.

If we compare his talent and Eric, the other ancient with purportedly subpar magical ability, we can still say very little. Eric being a product of Athena’s meddling doesn’t help the fair comparison either as you can’t really assume he’s typical. I don’t think it’s particularly fair to use Addidas, Herbert lions or hegemony as points of comparison either given the whole demigod thing.

I hear the facts that you are laying out, but I don't understand what argument or point they are intended to support. Would you be willing to clarify?

[fulminating]

I hear the facts that you are laying out, but I don't understand what argument or point they are intended to support. Would you be willing to clarify?

That there’s insufficient evidence to accurately gauge hyth’s strength.
We know a bit about roughly a quarter of the convocation and those that we do know of are pretty strong (emet selch, azem, elidibus, lahabrea). This is not to say that the convocation members have to be strong, just that the ones we do know tend to be on the stronger side.
This is also insufficient evidence to extrapolate much about fandaniel’s strength.

They are as strong as the story requires and nothing more.

[Lunaxia]

I would call ANY situation

And? My point is, why is the fact that it was a high-cost or bittersweet victory being used as a factor against them, when the same can easily be true for mortals for any of the crises they may face? As I said, they may weather Ancient-specific phenomenona, but so too do mortals have their own dangers that the Ancients would not be prone to that can easily result in a similar outcome.

And again, to bring back the original point: all of this was caused, by one man, by accident,

Aha, now let's be real, what happened was not by accident. Meteion returned with an answer he was not prepared for and she reacted unpredictably, threatening to go out of control, yes - because, as Emet-Selch remarked, his method was fundamentally flawed in a way he would not or could not hope to recognise because of his state of mind (however you might interpret it) and he chose to fly his little experiment under the radar to escape the review they might otherwise have had that might otherwise have prevented such an outcome. But the fact remains Hermes one hundred percent chose violence and permitted her to cause the chaos she did - had he not resisted, she likely would have been contained and at the very least caused considerably less damage than she did wind up doing, but he ultimately turned out to be another madman with his finger on the button and bears all responsibility for what ensued.

While those are hardly nothing, they are microscopic compared to the impact of Hermes' whoopsie. So yes, I think it's an absolutely fair argument to say that most of the Ancients were stupidly, absurdly powerful.

The average Ancient was creating blob monsters for the fascination of children on the street. Equating one genius rogue amidst millions over thousands of years tinkering with a force beyond his comprehension that few could ever hope to wield and unleashing hell - also known as another Tuesday in Eorzea - with the Ancients being dangerously powerful to the point they deserve to die is pretty yikes, to be honest. Do mortals deserve to be wiped out because of the likes of Xande? Zenos? Thordan? Nael? Amon? Pre-heel-face-turn-Gaius, with a rather sizeable "oopsie" of his own before we intervened? Ilberd? The mages of Mhach? Why is a bottom line of infallibility required for their survival, but not ours?

No, it was not a victory.

Zodiark was a temporary solution, yes - though the guy holding up for twelve thousand years makes me believe that he deserves a little more credit than he gets as a mitigation tactic at the very least, but let's say having him hold out indefinitely wasn't dealing directly with the problem - however, it's very hard to come up with a more permanent solution to an issue when the true cause behind your problems is withheld from you and your entire race is brutally murdered not long after.

I get the impression you're misunderstanding me

They remark on his creation abilities in the quests where you try to dig up the dirt on him in Elpis. I also think you're underestimating the connection between intelligence, knowledge and creativity and the power the Ancients had. Those factors are inextricably linked to the ability to create, which is the sole source of their power; not their ability to brute-force hit things super hard.

Again, you are misunderstanding me.

We don't actually know any of that, though. Hythlodaeus is worryingly down on himself in general, and as has already been said, he's comparing himself to the likes of Emet-Selch here - so-called one of the greatest mages the Ancients had ever known, and from there, it is safe to say, that has ever lived - on the basis of manipulating aether for transforming. We know he's been offered two of the highest positions in Ancient society; we know he is regularly sent for to consult on extremely sensitive matters seemingly beyond the likes even of Lahabrea to sort out, as seen in the Tales story; and we know he is capable in battle, but considers himself inferior to his fellows. We know nothing of his ability to create, the extent of his limits in combat, or really, anything else about him. Unfortunately.

[Yuella]

Zodiark was a temporary solution, yes - though the guy holding up for twelve thousand years makes me believe that he deserves a little more credit than he gets as a mitigation tactic at the very least, but let's say having him hold out indefinitely wasn't dealing directly with the problem - however, it's very hard to come up with a more permanent solution to an issue when the true cause behind your problems is withheld from you and your entire race is brutally murdered not long after.

The sundering was absolutely necessary after Zodiark was summoned. Any change to the timeline had to be done before the Zodiark summoning. It's possible that they could've figured out how to kill Endsinger directly if Venat had told them but with the only person who had Dynamis expertise being mentally unstable, she decided to trust that the ancients would be able to rise above the sadness and depression. After they showed that they can overcome depression, then she would be comfortable enough to reveal Endsinger and send them to fight it (just like she did with us) but unfortunately they failed.

So the best way to prevent all this would be to prevent Hermes from sending out the Meteia in the first place

[Cilia]

And? My point is, why is the fact that it was a high-cost or bittersweet victory being used as a factor against them, when the same can easily be true for mortals for any of the crises they may face?

It's not that the cost of victory (if you want to call it that; I wouldn't) was high, it's that it was too high. The summoning of Zodiark to nullify the effects of Meteion's Song of Oblivion and revitalize the planet came at so high a price the Ancients may as well have lost anyway; it was a "won the battle lost the war" situation, 'specially since we know more of them than not refused to live in a world without the easy life they were accustomed to (with many outright killing themselves in Zodiark's name even when it wasn't necessary, if Venat's Final Days / Sundering post-Elpis scene is to be believed).

The closest we have in contemporary times is Quintus van Cinna killing himself when he realizes any hope of bringing back the Garlean Empire is long gone. On the other hand most (if not all) of the troops under his command choose to live, even if it means facing an uncertain future where they've been humbled. (Contrast Amaurot - this is deliberate.)

Aha, now let's be real, what happened was not by accident.

Yes and no. It's 100% true that Hermes allowed Meteion (or at least, the Meteion he kept with him on Etheirys) to escape after she delivered her report and made the Meteia's intent known, but how in control of things he was at that point is... highly questionable. It's also 100% true that he didn't think things through before starting. And it's also 100% true that Meteion was designed, tested, peer reviewed, and submitted for approval before he started.

Meaning, even if we'd detained and unmade Etheirys' Meteion, there's a nonzero chance the Endsinger's Song of Oblivion would still hit and bring Amaurot to its nadir.

And the question still remains: even if we'd stopped Meteion's Song of Oblivion from hitting Etheirys, even if we went back further in time and stopped Hermes from scattering the Meteia across the cosmos in their ill-fated quest, how long would it be until some other Ancient grew dissatisfied enough with Amaurotine civilization to shake it to its foundations? Hermes isn't even the first one to try (Athena, and plausibly others before her), he's just the one that succeeded.

Zodiark was a temporary solution, yes - though the guy holding up for twelve thousand years makes me believe that he deserves a little more credit than he gets as a mitigation tactic at the very least, but let's say having him hold out indefinitely wasn't dealing directly with the problem - however, it's very hard to come up with a more permanent solution to an issue when the true cause behind your problems is withheld from you and your entire race is brutally murdered not long after.

Zodiark did nothing but nullify the Song of Oblivion's effects, and on Etheirys alone. That's not refusing to give credit where credit's due, that's just the reality of it.

It's true the source of the Terminus phenomenon (Song of Oblivion) wasn't made known to the Ancients, but few to none of them seemed to actually care; their primary concern was restoring the status quo prior to the Final Days, not learning what said cause was, much less dealing with it.

They remark on [Hermes'] creation abilities in the quests where you try to dig up the dirt on him in Elpis. I also think you're underestimating the connection between intelligence, knowledge and creativity and the power the Ancients had. Those factors are inextricably linked to the ability to create, which is the sole source of their power; not their ability to brute-force hit things super hard.

Approximate power ranking: Hermes is above average, not on the level of Hades (who is constantly touted as one of if not the single most powerful mage ever produced by the Ancients) but certainly no pushover. That said, his primary strength is his intelligence; case and point, he created a hive mind of self-aware beings composed primarily of a form of energy virtually nobody else had even heard of, much less knew anything about.

Convocation Seat nominations (and by extension seat holders) aren't determined primarily or exclusively by magical aptitude, but by their effectiveness in a given field.

The point is that one Ancient with the best of intentions almost ended all creation by accident. An entire civilization of people that powerful sits on a knife's edge at all times; it's only a matter of time until someone casts the die, whether they know it, intend to, or otherwise.