[Ul'dah Spoilers, maybe? Probably not] WoL - Royalist or Monetarist?

[Lucke]

I know the WoL is a Scion and as such is supposed to be neutral in politics (I think), but according to canon, are we a Royalist? I mean we do ALOT for Nanamo and Raubahn, but hardly anything for the Syndicate. This is especially true for people who started in Ul'dah. And Paladins who even though players are Free Paladins, they still serve as protectors of the Sultana. With all the crap the WoL did for the world, one would think they would be super powerful politically, and the Monetarists would try to take advantage of that.

If you could join the Syndicate in game, would you? And which faction would you be? I wonder if SE would go that route and actually write a story involving joining the Syndicate.

[Cilia]

The Warrior of Light is, for what it's worth, likely a Royalist. The Sultana is nothing but gracious to them, while the Syndicate has proven itself to be untrustworthy. They might make an exception for Godbert, but other than that I wouldn't trust a Monetarist as far as I can throw them.

The Warrior of Light isn't a political player; rather, they're a political tool. Their interests lie mostly in dealing with whatever threat is threatening to destroy Eorzea and/or Hydaelyn at large, and other than that prefer to be left to their adventuring business. Due to their amazing strength, however, political players will use the Warrior of Light as a pawn - which was most of what happened over 2.1 - 2.55.

I could never join the Syndicate / Monetarist faction in good conscience. They're plutocrats, and as a working class man I'm not down with that.

[Theodric]

I do not believe that it would be proper for the Warrior of Light to pick a side. Both the Royalists and the Syndicate are necessary for Ul'dah's well being - and if the Warrior of Light were to show extreme bias where established political factions are concerned then they are not fit for purpose and should be put on trial for abusing their divine power and fame for the sake of biased political leanings. As far as politics are concerned, they should be a neutral entity - the only exception being if things like Ascians, Primals/Eikons or dangerous super weapons are involved.

[Lauront]

I do not believe that it would be proper for the Warrior of Light to pick a side. Both the Royalists and the Syndicate are necessary for Ul'dah's well being - and if the Warrior of Light were to show extreme bias where established political factions are concerned then they are not fit for purpose and should be put on trial for abusing their divine power and fame for the sake of biased political leanings. As far as politics are concerned, they should be a neutral entity - the only exception being if things like Ascians, Primals/Eikons or dangerous super weapons are involved.

Agreed. Besides, the Sultana has no real idea about how to create or sustain wealth; something she got a lesson in by Godbert of all people. I think Ul'dah is relatively well managed compared to the other city-states.

I could never join the Syndicate / Monetarist faction in good conscience. They're plutocrats, and as a working class man I'm not down with that.

I fail to see how that is even remotely relevant. As if money just springs on trees. Members of the Syndicate can clearly earn their way into it and have to maintain their wealth to remain in it, whereas the Sultana is born into her position. I don't think the nature of selection of the ruler is particularly relevant to whether a "working class man" benefits from it, or not. Besides, it's a lot more complicated than whether you, personally, can notionally enter a position of power, or cast an often meaningless vote.

Also notice you switch between the WoL and "I".

The WoL has never been specifically said to be a Royalist, other than to help the Sultana avoid being subverted by a member of the rival faction. That's not the same thing as openly proclaiming to be one, though, and there is no hint of it. As Theodric said, it is more about maintaining the existing balance of power, which is working in Ul'dah's favour.

[Cilia]

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I disagree with this sentiment. Just because it's functional doesn't mean it's optimal. As it stands Ul'dahn society benefits the very few, and that is not optimal for a successful society; the riots during the 2.x patch series should have illustrated that well. Knowing how to create and sustain wealth doesn't mean knowing how to govern. (To her credit, the Sultana doesn't really know how to govern either, but given she was raised as a puppet ruler this is unsurprising.)

The switch between "Warrior of Light" and "I" is deliberate and meant to differentiate between my own opinions and what I perceive to be canon. While the Warrior of Light has not committed to either side of Ul'dahn politics, that they are the Sultana's personal friend is hard to dispute, so they will likely support whatever she intends to do as long as it is to the benefit of a majority of the city-state's citizens (and given her populist philosophy, most if not all of it will likely be so). Meanwhile the Syndicate has used them as a pawn, so I highly doubt the Warrior of Light is sympathetic to their cause (exploitation of the poor to increase their personal wealth). Godbert has shown himself to be an exception, as he built the Gold Saucer both to profit from it and to provide Ul'dah's poor with gainful employment.

One of the questions in the original post was "If you could join the Syndicate / Monetarist faction in-game, would you?" to which I said that I would not because I'm not a plutocrat. I disagree with rule by the wealthy, for the wealthy. In this case the wealthy will pass only legislation that preserves or enhances their wealth; this creates massive economic inequality, nonexistent social mobility, and makes it nigh-impossible for workers to climb out of poverty.

... beyond that, I do not feel like arguing economics or politics with you two. That's not the purpose of this forum or the original question ("Is the Warrior of Light a Royalist or a Monetarist?", not "Is it proper for the Warrior of Light to choose a side?" or "Is Ul'dah's political and economic system efficient?").

Happy Holidays!

[Theodric]

Stop assuming the Warrior of Light's political leanings!

That aside, I wish everybody on the lore forum a very Merry Christmas!

[CYBEReris]

I'd think canonically, they would support Nanamo's end goal to disband both, but Lolorito has everyone's hands tied for the time being.

I feel like the Stormblood postgame is gonna go over the growing pains of establishing governance post-revolution and eventually bring us back full-circle to Ul'dah.

[Theodric]

Ugh, I hope not. I'm so done with Ul'dah. I'd much prefer to see more of Gridania and Limsa as they have been largely neglected outside of 1.0. We've only touched upon them very lightly compared to the amount of screen-time Ul'dah has received.

[Belhi]

I don't think we will be going back. If anything SB has painted Lolorito as more sympathetic from both his aid and from the fact we met a family member who clearly has a different view of him to us. Lolorito is an annoying character but he and the monetarists are a fixture that isn't going to be removed from Ul'dah without great upheaval and probably conflict. More to the point I think 4.1 showed both Nanamo learning to deal with them as well as realise many of her ideals were not well thought through. That and she was avoiding dealing with her political rivals rather than taking them head on and claiming her position at the bargaining table.

As much as I want to punch him in the face I think Lolorito will firmly hold his place as the jackass we wish we could beat up but who is always too important and adaptable to justify removing.

As for the WoL's attitude to the political situation, I suspect they are mostly neutral. The biggest tensions the WoL has had with Monetarists is due to corruption and the Monetarists habit of disliking an independent group with power having influence. For the most part, even when Nanamo was talking about dissolving the existing government, our role was to help support any transition and try to keep Ul'dah from devolving into anarchy rather than actually forcing the transition.

[uvuvwevwevweonyetenyevweugwemu]

Is it weird that I find Lolorito actually one of the good guys?

He has that 'Despicable Me' charisma, but that's mostly from his mask. He's ambitious when it comes to competition, I think that's all there was between royalist and monetarist. Each other see as competition instead of partners, and always met with suspicisions and presumptions. Lolorito is very proud to be an Ul'dahn and doesn't like being humbled by higher gesture, for example the banquet in CUL job quest. He's only annoying because he didn't want refugees in Ul'dah, so does Godbert (except he employed some in Gold Saucer). I don't think he's malicious or perhaps cared more than even Godbert.

Other than the main story for ala mhigo, his Esthaime Aesthetics also started a crafting school in Rhalgr's Reach using Nanamo's crown.