About that smirk...(spoilers)

[Cilia]

... it seemed to me that there was a lot of emphasis put on that scene and her "goodbye" there, as well as some comments that other npcs have made about her as has been mentioned already. I mean for instance, from a design standpoint, why waste even as much as a text box or two to emphasize in that npc's script that Tataru shouldn't even be capable of getting the mats for that outfit if there's no real reason for that information to be revealed to us?

It's a literary device called foreshadowing.

As for why they pointed out the materials she got for Y'shtola's new clothes were really rare and expensive... a little mystery here and there is nice. It does not mean Tataru is up to something sinister; that's reading waaaaaaaaay too much into it.

[Amiaze]

-snip-

I think we're all familiar with foreshadowing; but we have to remember that it can also work more than one way. As I mentioned earlier, I personally wouldn't have thought much of Tataru's smile had it happened at any other time. All the quests leading up to the Scion's downfall put special emphasis on small matters that would make the impact that much harder, such as exploring Yda's character a little bit more since you wouldn't be seeing her again. As others have mentioned, what she did was a rather typical anime trope suggesting betrayal. It's not really a matter of reading too much into it; the first time I watched the scene, that's what I automatically thought it was. I'd nearly forgotten what a Tataru was before then, honestly.

And given some of the revelations that we are left to piece together from the final area in the game concerning some pretty major plot elements, I wouldn't say that theorizing on certain aspects of the lore or characters -- which is all we're doing here -- is uncalled for. The devs left subtle hints in for major plot elements far earlier in ARR than I'd thought because I didn't start in Ul'dah.

Kaiser-Ace: I wasn't suggesting that she didn't have help. Quite frankly, I think she did have help. I just wonder who helped her, since the Warrior of Light is called upon whenever someone has a mild case of the sniffles.

As for what motive Tataru could have, that could be anyone guess, if the theory turns out to be correct. We weren't really sure what Lolorito's involvement in all this was until well through Heavensward.

[Cilia]

snip.

The problem with this line of thinking is that it runs on confirmation bias, a certain psychological fallacy where you interpret things so they line up with your hypothesis.

Tataru smiles and says "Well, I guess this is goodbye. ... wait, that feels too final. "See you later," I guess?" and goes on her way. That's all it meant. The trope wasn't suggesting betrayal, it was suggesting Tataru was a true friend you could trust and who was sad to part ways with you, and who chose her words poorly and corrected herself. You're twisting that to line it up with your "Tataru is a scheming, backstabbing rat" theory, which there is no concrete evidence for. Without evidence, your theory has no ground and can thus be disregarded.

As for how she got the materials for Y'shtola's new outfit... I don't think it's that big of a deal. She works odd jobs, and is stated to be pretty good at them, so having some spare change (plus whatever was left in the Scions' bank account after 2.5.5) makes it plausible she'd have the funds. There are chimeras outsize Azys Lla, they're just extremely rare and dangerous to fight (see: Cutter's Cry, A Relic Reborn, Go Go Gorgimera), so having the hide is possible (if a little improbable). I forget what her staff was made out of, if it was even explained beyond "it's rare and expensive."

You're just throwing out a wild hypothesis with no real evidence to back it up, which makes it very easy to shoot down. Honestly, I think all these "Tataru is evil" threads are coming up because we don't have much to speculate on after 3.0 except the Warrior of Darkness and people can't accept that there's a cheerful character when 3.0 is all doom and gloom. (Hint: we need Tataru to lighten the mood, lest we drown in our sorrow and despair.)

TL;DR ver.
What you're doing is this:

... which is an extremely, extremely poor argument.

[Amiaze]

The problem with this line of thinking is that it runs on confirmation bias, a certain psychological fallacy where you interpret things so they line up with your hypothesis.

Not only have you not actually addressed my point that I did not have this theory before (I blatantly said I'd forgotten about Tataru), but you seem more interested in arguing a point and attempting to insult me rather than discussing a theory. So I'll just leave you with a reiteration of my earlier statement:

All we're doing is theorizing. Not bashing people, which you seem set on doing. Coming from an English major who took their psych courses, I'm intimately familiar with foreshadowing as a literary device and confirmation bias. Italicizing terms that you assume I don't know does not make you seem smarter, but it does make you seem rather condescending. Anyway, thank you for your two cents, I did appreciate the conversation.

[Frederick22]

Not only have you not actually addressed my point that I did not have this theory before (I blatantly said I'd forgotten about Tataru), but you seem more interested in arguing a point and attempting to insult me rather than discussing a theory. So I'll just leave you with a reiteration of my earlier statement:

All we're doing is theorizing. Not bashing people, which you seem set on doing. Coming from an English major who took their psych courses, I'm intimately familiar with foreshadowing as a literary device and confirmation bias. Italicizing terms that you assume I don't know does not make you seem smarter, but it does make you seem rather condescending. Anyway, thank you for your two cents, I did appreciate the conversation.

She never insulted you or tryed to bashing you.

[Cilia]

Not only have you not actually addressed my point that I did not have this theory before (I blatantly said I'd forgotten about Tataru), but you seem more interested in arguing a point and attempting to insult me rather than discussing a theory. So I'll just leave you with a reiteration of my earlier statement:

All we're doing is theorizing. Not bashing people, which you seem set on doing. Coming from an English major who took their psych courses, I'm intimately familiar with foreshadowing as a literary device and confirmation bias. Italicizing terms that you assume I don't know does not make you seem smarter, but it does make you seem rather condescending. Anyway, thank you for your two cents, I did appreciate the conversation.

Apologies if you feel I'm being condescending and arrogant, and that I'm trying to insult you. Never my intention. If I see holes in your theory I will attack them, though. (It's in my nature, for better or worse.)

So you forgot about Tataru's lines and smile until something on Azys Lla reminded you of them(?). What's your point there? She could have only gotten the hides though Monetarist financing or Ascian assistance? Not necessarily - while rare, chimeras do exist off the isle. Gameplay aside, there's no reason to believe chimerical hides can only be obtained on Azys Lla. We fight several during 2.0 (Cutter's Cry, Dhorme Chimera, Gorgimera, Garm in the World of Darkness, and the ones that occasionally pop up from Peisteskin Treasure Maps) so their habitat is not exclusively on Azys Lla.

How she got the money for them, well, that's another question entirely. Aside from her waitressing job in the Forgotten Knight Tataru probably had exclusive access to the Scions' funds post-2.5.5, and I doubt she'd mind splurging a little to outfit her returned friend with spiffy duds. Without knowing how much was in the Scions' bank account, how much she was making as a waitress, and how much chimerical hides go for on in-game markets it's impossible to say for sure she could afford it, but well... she did. Somehow.

What evidence do you have to support Tataru's lines and smile near the end of 2.5.5 being fishy? (Personal feelings and interpretations don't count. See above for the chimerical hides.)

I'm all for theorizing, but if you're going to bring up a theory defend it with evidence.