Thread: 3.5/4.0 Speculation & Discussion (Spoilers)

Originally Posted by Belhi

Garlemald are the aggressors. The people of Garlemald itself aren't necessarily evil people but the people in control are instituting a policy that is. Now maybe there is some unseen sudden twist that makes Garlemald's intentions far more noble but this looks very much like just a grab for power and control by a group that wants to emulate the Allagans.

But who are the people in control? We have never met Solus and Varis has like a grand total of five minutes worth of screen time. We do not know what they are like. But like I said, Eula was under the control of a Primal (at least. We really do not know how she exactly learned of Meteor) and Gaius was manipulated by Lahabrea. Of course their efforts are making things worse. They are helped/manipulated by a groupe that wants things to be as bad as possible. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the whole idea of Allagan emulation came from either Lahabrea or Elidibus.

The key is to somehow reveal the Ascian shenanigans to Varis. They seem to hate primals enough not to solve the Ascian problem the same way Thordan tried.

At the very least we can say that Garleans truly believe that they are making things better. They aren't doing this for the evulz. They are fanatical and misguided, but not truly malevolent. At least not in the way Nidhogg or the Ascians are.

Most villians don't do what they do for the sake of being evil. Nor am I saying that Garlemald's current policies are universally approved of or the impacts of them fully understood by the citizenry. However, the reality of Garlemald is that it is an aggressively expansive power, with ruthless scorched earth policies, a ridged and oppressive caste system, and a habit of messing with high risk technology they don't fully understand. Garlemald has all the hallmarks of a empire obsessed with power. Even if its done from the view point of achieving a Greater Good, that can quickly change from being a legitimate reason to just an excuse to justify any and all actions.

I think we will eventually make peace with and probably ally with Garlemald or at least elements of it. I also think destroying the empire would likely cause more harm than good at this point as it would throw half the world into chaos. However I think Garlemald needs to face some pretty major reforms before we reach that point. Garlemald however isn't a hive mind. It has groups with independent opinions and viewpoints and its quite likely we will find groups that have outlooks and opinions that make alliance more feasible.

I think we will end up pulling an Ishgard on Garlemald. It won't change Garlemald completely but adjust it to a point where we can work with them without selling out our existing allies or the Scion's core values.

Eula also killed everyone even remotely related to House Darnus. Murder seems to be quite fashionable in Garlemald.

Ah, the ever-burning Garlemald argument.

Enough digital ink has been spilled on this, so all I'll say is: "we can't apply modern morality to a fantasy setting" is missing the fact that this is a modern story, written by modern authors, for a modern audience. Modern morality is going to exist in the subtext, and sure enough, the game is FAR less forgiving in its portrayal of Garlemald than...well, pretty much anywhere else. You can go on about how the crimes of the various Eorzean city-states are "just as bad" as the Garlean conquest of the planet, but the former absolutely get more of a pass by the narrative than Garlemald does. That might be a matter of viewpoint, in that we simply haven't been in the position to see how Garlemald's actions have reaped benefits for anyone other than themselves; it might also be the generally negative view that the modern world holds towards unchecked Imperial conquest seeping into the presentation of the story. Cultural attitudes tend to permeate fiction - in fact, it's one of fiction's greatest values, outside of immediate entertainment - and the general modern consensus is decidedly anti-Imperialist.

I'm not saying there's no room for grey morality, just that anybody hoping for a story that portrays world conquest for the benefit of one group over all others as something laudable or good is likely to be very disappointed in the end.

Originally Posted by Balipu

But like I said, Eula was under the control of a Primal (at least. We really do not know how she exactly learned of Meteor) and Gaius was manipulated by Lahabrea. Of course their efforts are making things worse. They are helped/manipulated by a groupe that wants things to be as bad as possible. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the whole idea of Allagan emulation came from either Lahabrea or Elidibus.

We actually DO know how she learned of Meteor - her family had a large collection of Allagan artifacts, and it was through those that the idea to use it as a weapon emerged. Also of note: Eula wasn't tempered until after she came to Eorzea, and the Meteor Project was started well before that. Everything she did up until then was completely of her own resolve (and even if she were tempered, she wasn't acting rogue; Meteor had the Emperor's blessing, at least after the failure of Silvertear).

And then there's Gaius. Ascian involvement with him can't really be taken as evidence as Ascian involvement with Garlemald as a whole, since Gaius was effectively rogue during ARR (in fact, the loss of homeland support is what made him desperate enough to side with Lahabrea in the first place). While Ascian hands in Garlean affairs certainly wouldn't be surprising, there's been no evidence of it so far.

But even if there were, I think you're placing too much onus on Ascian manipulation. Ascians don't control the actions of people; they simply take advantage of existing kernels of strife and offer "solutions" that have the potential to snowball into something that could force a Rejoining. What people do with those solutions is entirely out of the Ascians' hands. This is something I'm really rather grateful for; antagonists whose actions are entirely the result of an omnipotent outside evil like the Ascians feels cheap and is ultimately a boring and simplistic take on the nuances of human nature. People do bad and misguided things without the need for literal devils on their shoulders all the time.

I think there is a middle ground here. Garlemald is a group we aren't going to ally with its current policies. That doesn't mean that Garlemald as a empire isn't a group we may ally with in the future if there is a change in policy. If we are realistic is highly unlikely we would completely bring down Garlemald. Doing so would create a power vacuum which would probably lead to wide spread war. Infact it wouldn't surprise me in the least if that turns out to be a future Ascian plan. Build up Garlemald and then pull the rug out leading to total anarchy over much of the world.

However, in its current state and with it's current policies, I don't see us working with Garlemald proper except in the most extreme circumstances and then only under a temporary truce. I do think though whatever we do in 4.X is going to have massive repercussions in Garlemald which is why I think we will be going their in 5.0, not as an force to destroy Garlemald but as one trying to keep the conflicting factions within Garlemald from causing everything to go to hell. I think its very likely we will meet a Garlean in 4.X that we end up working closely with in 5.X to try and keep Garlemald from exploding.

In this way we take down the bad guy but still have to deal with the consequences of our choices. In a great sense of irony one of Garlemald's greatest enemies ends up having to be one of the ones saving it.

Originally Posted by Hinoto-no-Ryuji

We actually DO know how she learned of Meteor - her family had a large collection of Allagan artifacts, and it was through those that the idea to use it as a weapon emerged.

And then there's Gaius.

But even if there were, I think you're placing too much onus on Ascian manipulation. Ascians don't control the actions of people; they simply take advantage of existing kernels of strife and offer "solutions" that have the potential to snowball into something that could force a Rejoining. People do bad and misguided things without the need for literal devils on their shoulders all the time.

Sure, we know she learned from the artifacts, but we really don't know how she learned. I'm hardly an expert, but interacting with Allagan artifacts might not be easy. She may have had help.

True, Gaius was rogue. But like you said, it wouldn't be surprising if it turned out Ascians are influencing Garlemald.

At this point I think you are just arguing semantics. I hav a degree in linguistics by the way, so believe me when I say it is too much. If their suggestions can lead to Ultima Weapon being unleashed on Eorzea it doesn't really matter how much of it was Gaius' idea and how much was Lahabrea. Any Garlean solution with Ascian input will fail, and it will fail because of the Ascian input.

I also prefer villains like Thordan, who wanted to screw over Ascians even while they were around him, but we won't be sure if Varis is like that, till we get to Garlemald. At the very least Zenos will be there in 4.0 to evaluate.