Let's play a game: Save the Ancients!

[Yuella]

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.

No, it was not a victory. Endsinger was still out there. Her song was still a danger to the Ancients. They kept wanting to sacrifice more and more lives to restore what they have lost. The biggest danger was the ancients could anytime commit mass suicide by deactivating Zodiark to let Endsinger's song through (just like Amon/Fandaniel did in our timeline). The Anamnesis Anyder cutscene confirmed that Zodiark was a temporary solution. In order to save the ancients, it had to be before Zodiark was summoned. Once Zodiark was summoned, the sundering was 100% necessary.

[Lyth]

Hm. Just trying to follow this comment chain.

I think the original comment in the string was making the point that Amaurotine society was always in a precarious position. You have a society filled with people who all individually have an enormous amount of personal power to reshape the world as they see fit on demand. It's a bit like giving everyone in society deadly weapons and expecting them to use them responsibly.

The story handwaves this to make it work. You have a society supposedly filled with upstanding citizens who amicably resolve all differences in opinion, voluntarily forgo their individualism in order to live peacefully without conflict, and who pay their dues to their non-elected leadership without question. The problem is that if you actually write stories about such a society on an individual, personal level, it would naturally all feel very dystopian.

So naturally, we instead get stories about charismatic individualists like Emet-Selch and Venat who act on their wills in ways that they feel are right. Which is relatable, but also contradicts the setup. A society filled with such strong wills coupled with enormous power would be anything but peaceful.

What we essentially have is an unstable equilibrium. The crux of the comment chain is about whether their leadership had the power to enforce that the populace always behaves responsibly, but we already know that isn't the case from Pandaemonium.

[SannaR]

Hm. Just trying to follow this comment chain.

I think the original comment in the string was making the point that Amaurotine society was always in a precarious position. You have a society filled with people who all individually have an enormous amount of personal power to reshape the world as they see fit on demand. It's a bit like giving everyone in society deadly weapons and expecting them to use them responsibly.

The story handwaves this to make it work. You have a society supposedly filled with upstanding citizens who amicably resolve all differences in opinion, voluntarily forgo their individualism in order to live peacefully without conflict, and who pay their dues to their non-elected leadership without question. The problem is that if you actually write stories about such a society on an individual, personal level, it would naturally all feel very dystopian.

So naturally, we instead get stories about charismatic individualists like Emet-Selch and Venat who act on their wills in ways that they feel are right. Which is relatable, but also contradicts the setup. A society filled with such strong wills coupled with enormous power would be anything but peaceful.

What we essentially have is an unstable equilibrium. The crux of the comment chain is about whether their leadership had the power to enforce that the populace always behaves responsibly, but we already know that isn't the case from Pandaemonium.

We see it even before we learn of Pandeamonium. We see it in Elpis. Meteion herself is an unregistered concept that most have no clue about her actual capabilities outside of being a walking and talking empath. That we the players are made to feel that Hermes has no intention of submitting her. Then there's the shoebill who doesn't show up in Elpis until after we need to go with Meteion during the meeting with Hermes. No one knows whose creation it is and tell us what we already knew as players that it just showed up outta the blue. Then we again get rule bending when we do the quest line that ends up with us giving the suggestions for the Behemoth's iconic look, spell and name. Normally they don't allow that level of changes to a concept while it's being reviewed at Elpis without its creator resubmiting it to the Bureau of the Architect first.

[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.