The Ascian Question: Have the Ascians ever lied?

[Dualblade]

He really seemed to say casting him out of Thancred would kill him; but again I guess, we didn't technically "kill" Lahabrea then—but he also shouldn't have been expecting us to have the power to do so?

I do think he was speaking the truth here, atleast as far as he was aware: He could be killed because he had taken on a mortal form, and killing him would therefor kill Thancred. What he wasn't expecting was that we would still be able to gain a Blade of Light to use against him which allowed us to only kill him, and even then it was still not the permanent death that he also thought we couldn't do to Ascians later on.

Topic itself, it doesn't matter if the Ascians don't outright lie to us because they just about everything else they say is anywhere inbetween outright lies and absolute truths. Including letting people make wrong assumptions by not saying anything at all as was pointed out with Elidibus and Asahi.

[SuperFlorinjin]

Another thing to keep in mind is that the best way to tell a really devastating lie is to have a reputation for honesty. Even if the Ascians have never lied to us, that doesn't mean they can't in the future.

A good example of this is in one of the later Dresden Files books. Fae are incapable of telling an out and out lie (but very good at lying by implication) so when one of his enemies who's a Fae tells him several things straight out with no prevarication or spin, he accepts them as true. Except it turns out she's infected by a magical virus that removes the no lies rule, so he nearly gets killed because of things he assumed MUST be true.

[RopeDrink]

You just have to put it into context. If you're going to argue what constitutes a 'lie', you'll never get a straight answer.

There's no major/noticeable instance of an Ascian - with cameras rolling for the sake of plot development, regardless of whether the WoL is in the scene or not - telling genuine porky pies. If you're going to undermine this by saying "Yeah, well, practically all of their antics are a showcase of misdirection and deceit in the name of chaos", then there's no point discussing further as that just makes them liars in that context anyway.

As such, just see it for what it is. They'll no doubt twist things to suit their ends for the most part, but when it comes to moments of dialogue, they typically have no real reason to lie and choose what they want to say.

In short, I don't see this as Solus just blowing smoke for the sake of some light chaos, bourne through having the WoL and squad question Hyde's intent/agenda. That is short lived. After all, if what he said is true, then making it more widely known would do more damage (in the context of 'chaos') than keeping it to himself, making it a truth that is beneficial. Having said that, you can be assured that he won't tell you EVERYTHING. Doesn't do well to take an ace from your sleeve and just hand it over with the rest of your deck as well.

[RopeDrink]

Solus had to lie and lie a lot to set up the Garlean Empire i assume.

This isn't the full truth, either. It's no different to Solus telling Varis that their goals are 'one and the same', when in fact the Ascian's are working almost exclusively for Zodiark's benefit and don't particularly give much of a damn about Varis' want of unifying the humans/empire and/or his perfect-master-race - that is just a side-effect of the same agenda. Varis couldn't even comprehend the concept that the Ascian's have no qualm with allowing the Empire itself be a victim of its own design - allowing it to be used for internal chaos, rather than just being a tool for spreading chaos externally.

As such, the Ascians will absolutely twist truths to serve their own ends. Solus certainly did proclaim that Eikon's were a blight on the star and had to be purged (and for the most part, that wasn't wrong) - with a lot of the lies following such a claim just stemming from an agreed agenda. You also have to take into account that any lying antics to mould the empire was being done to something he himself created, as opposed to something being done to external parties. Example being the Beastmen, who were quite literally handed all they needed to perform the summoning of their revered gods (primals). They just chose not to convey the small print while doing so.

[Genz]

Their name is a lie.

[Anonymoose]

Their name is a lie.

Underrated joke.

[Smiegle2]

Folks must be really passionate about this topic, I didn't expect to get this many replies in only 12 hours! My take on the Ascians' method of manipulation is that they tell the truth but not all of it and make sure that what they do tell people is told at the right time and in the right way to get their targets do what they (the Ascians) want. To their credit, it is a far more effective method that flat out lying would be and has worked out quite well for them so far.

With all that, it seems likely that Solus (or Emel-Secht if you prefer) is telling us the truth as he knows but not all of it and he could still be wrong.

[Hezzlocks]

The greatest lies have a little bit of truth in them. An outright lie typically has a much greater chance of being discovered. Take, for example, a certain Roegadyn and his exploits against the foul beasts Tidus and Leviabeetus. As clear fabrications it doesn't take you long to figure out he's telling tall tales.

However, the Ascian method of lying is to just straight up tell you the truth - though not necessarily the whole truth. Lahabrea is the perfect example of this. He tells you that to kill him would be to kill Thancred, then tells you to make your choice and live with the consequences. He did not lie. If you just straight up killed him, Thancred would die and Lahabrea would slip back into the Ascian realm. However, either he didn't know he could be cast out by Hydaelin, or he simply omitted telling you that option, because it would quite simply serve his purpose much more of you were led to believe the only options were to either kill Thancred or to let Lahabrea go or even let him kill you. Either way there was no lie, merely not the whole truth.

The same could be said now. Maybe Hydaelin and Zodiark ARE primals. But, knowing Ascians, there is more to it than just this. Maybe they started out as Primals but became something more? Maybe they're Primal in name only and function completely differently? We have no way of knowing for sure right now but one thing is for certain - believing in exactly what an Ascian says is foolish, but outright denying them is equally foolish. The greatest lies have a little bit of truth in them. The trick is determining what part is true, and what part is the deceit.

[Cilia]

On screen, the Ascians don't seem to lie. They give cryptic monologues, but to the best of my knowledge they have yet to tell an outright lie or even a half-truth; so little about what Lahabrea and Elidibus said has been explained that it's impossible to discern fact from fiction (or even see lies of omission).

Emet-Selch being honest about Hydaelyn / Zodiark should be considered truth... until we get the whole scene and dialogue, in which it may or may not change.

[Jennah]

Before the E3 trailer, I was half-convinced that Solus was even *lying about being an Ascian*.
I mean, we only have his word (to Varis) for it after all, and Solus isn't exactly a beacon of trustworthiness.
Him showing Zalera's sigil in the E3 trailer pretty much puts a stop to this theory (or any other claiming he's not Emet-Selch); but it's not completely impossible to put up an illusory sigil I'd imagine...