Universe Mechanics Conflict Often [Spoilers]

[Anonymoose]

what changes specifically do you mean

I think my go-to example for a time we got an obvious retcon* whereby the change was well-thought-out and made the world feel alive is the reinterpretation of the elemental wheel in Shadowbringers.

* Using the word "retcon" literally here, retroactive continuity. There's a sub-type we all hate - the "subtractive retcon" - where they basically say, "There's a contradiction, so pretend that other thing never happened." The XIV devs seem to take it as a personal challenge to avoid them in favor of "additive retcons" wherever possible (the ones that frame the change as a new revelation; the old lore still happened but is now considered an in-world misunderstanding / mistaken assumption). From a "Watsonian" perspective, addition retcons are easier to see as part of the story itself, or even to mistake for planned misdirection or foreshadowing.

• In 1.x, Light and Darkness weren't part of the game; we only had the elemental polarities astral and umbral, which were clearly themed after "brightness/life" and "shadow/death".
• In 1.x, it was said that the polarities were an elemental phenomenon.
• In 1.x, it was said that calamities were of the elements and it was expected that there would be six, but it turns out there would be a seventh (implying the potential for at least an 8th if it turned out the fact they went in order, one each, was not a coincidence).
• In ARR, it was said that the Seventh Umbral Era (Bahamut) was all the elements at once with an astral charge.
• In ARR, it was said that the introduction of Light and Darkness was a new type of energy; Light and Darkness were not of the elements.
• If we were NOT going to break pattern, the Eighth Umbral Calamity should itself be all the elements at once with an umbral charge.
• Where the story was at the time, the creative team wanted a "Light Calamity" story.
• Remember: Calamities are elemental, astral and umbral are of the elements, Light and Darkness are not, and astral has already been used.
• Shadowbringers then comes in and says, ACTUALLYYY, Eorzean aetherology has it all backwards. Astral and umbral charges come from the influence of Light and Darkness, but LIGHT causes we call the shadow one and DARKNESS causes what we call the bright one, thus making it possible for an umbral-aspected calamity to be Light-themed.
• In doing so, they also made it so that "umbral" (which was always themed as "low" or "nether" or "underground") ended up being "closer to Hydaelyn" (making that more thematically important than its association with shadow), while "astral" (which was always themed as "high" or "heavens" or "sky") ended up being "closer to Zodiark" (making that more thematically important than its association with "brightness"). It also set up the "Ice is the closest element to Light" passivity-association angle that rhymed well thematically with other story beats like Shiva and all that.

Note that, in such cases, nothing relies on the fans just making stuff up to make sense of it. It's not one of the cases where there's no citation and people bypass "theory" in favor of "it makes sense to me so it's as good as canon". The writers themselves came up with, explained, and wrote stories consistent with a change to what was previously established in such a way that it feels almost like it was true the whole time.

An example of change that feels more unstable / inconsistent (to me) might be, say, the lore related Echo - what it is, what it comprises, why it provides immunity from tempering, and the implications on the world-setting. That feels less than smooth (to me) 1.x to 6.0 (especially between 4.0 to 6.0).

[JepMZ]

snip

No, no. The "retcon" didn't change anything. It's only for those who payed attention to past lore panels outside of the game. Nothing literally changed. Originally, umbral/darkness was associated with stillness and astral/light is associated with activity and life, that's found in the lore book probably or from Koji Fox's mouth. None of those concepts are ever brought up or used in-game until shadowbringers. Without establishing or even incorporating the mechanics beforehand, it absolutely made no difference what the definition of astral or umbral were other than they were one of the sides of polarity of any element. There wasn't any real plot twist when they finally established the physics of light and darkness for the first time in shadowbringer. Hydaelyn is finally defined as the goddess of stasis, but that's still literally the Light theme. The one with the newly defined definition of darkness is activity, it's still the god of Darkness affinity. Light crystals and dark crystals enemies are present in Occult Crescent, the latest content and they don't have switched visual themes. Ice being stated to be the element closest to Light is from the raid in Shadowbringers , yeah, obviously the story beats from the expansion that introduces the definition of astral and umbral for the first time is going to be in sync with the new narrative information. But it doesn't mean ice element is astral only. All the elements can have astral polarity as umbral polarity. That hasn't been retconmed out. Black Mage still has Umbral Ice after all (with zero explanation as to what that means, of course). It's just stated by Ryne who grew up education less so she can cosplay as Hydaelyn. That whole raid is constructed from her imagination where anything can happen, so I wouldn't really use that a source for anything

And true, Koji Fox did say the 7th umbral was the calamity of all the elements. But I don't think he ever said it was astral, but that's probably what he meant and what we all assumed. But again. It's never stated in the game. In Shadowbringers, they clarify visually it's the calamity of darkness. In the Exarch's house, you can clearly see the seventh reflection to collapse has darkness color themes going on. But it never contradicted what Koji said. It's still all the elements but this time it's umbral polarity. But since no one said what polarity was the 7th umbral, and there's no visual guide in existence before Shadowbringers, there's nothing to contradict

[Anonymoose]

I don't think he ever said it was astral, but that's probably what he meant and what we all assumed. But again. It's never stated in the game. In Shadowbringers, they clarify visually it's the calamity of darkness. In the Exarch's house, you can clearly see the seventh reflection to collapse has darkness color themes going on.

Up until Dalamud's fall, many Sixth Astral Era scholars convinced themselves that the fact there had already been six Calamities – each representing one of the six elements – was proof that there could not be a seventh and that the Sixth Astral Era would last indefinitely. However, subsequent study of Garlean Empire legatus Nael van Darnus's Meteor project would eventually lead these scholars to the conclusion that the attack by Bahamut was indeed a Calamity, though one not represented by any one element, but rather consisting of all the elements charged astrally.

It's only for those who payed attention to past lore panels outside of the game. Nothing literally changed. Originally, umbral/darkness was associated with stillness and astral/light is associated with activity and life, that's found in the lore book probably or from Koji Fox's mouth. None of those concepts are ever brought up or used in-game until shadowbringers.

I wouldn't argue that the distinction was a terribly meaningful factor in the game 2.0 to 4.0, but in 1.x (before the introduction of Light and Darkness), it was a bigger deal. It was Thaumaturge's entire identity.

The NPCs themselves spend the Shadowbringers explanation highlighting the ways Eorzea has things backwards - why bother having them say that if it was never an established part of the lore?

But I do agree that the explanation was only for a small subset of people paying attention to the nitty gritty; plenty of people wouldn't have even noticed there was a change to be explained away in the first place.