fate of emperor varis at the end

[Erendis]

The point was not who used it, but what were the consequences of its usage.

[Lauront]

Even if it was a small scale, it was used and my point still stands.

Right, I forgot about that if I'm honest.

Still, to me it's just pretty similar to its earlier, experimental uses, and it could well be that small scale use that makes all the difference - both cases of an isolated, small area on a small group. Use it in a war zone, or a large settled area, like Garlemald, and its spread may end up being much more rapid. That does explain why the Empire probably did not expect it to behave in such a manner (although Elidibus no doubt did, since it would be integral to his plans.) Destruction on such a scale would still be conducive to a Calamity, IMO, so if that's what you're getting at, we are in agreement.

For the time being, I am assuming there have been no changes to the state of the excess of Light on the Source.

[Cilia]

Oh boy, time for reality checks from YT! Again!

The Empire was not under assault from two fronts. It was under assault from one - the land bridge from Aldenard into Ilsabard, otherwise known as the Ghimlyt Dark. The entire point of building Seiryu's Wall was that Doma could deploy most (if not all) of its troops as part of the vanguard against the Empire, due to Doma being unreachable by the Imperial air force (thanks to Seiryu's Wall blocking the fastest route across the Burn and there being no refueling station available to use otherwise thanks to Dalmasca's razing). There was no attack from the Eastern front that we know of.

Stating that the Alliance was responsible for the Empire using Black Rose against them is victim blaming. (Again? Is anything reprehensible the Empire does ever its own fault? You might think I ask in sarcastic jest, and you'd be wrong at this point.) The Empire had other options. It could have surrendered, but instead with their backs to the wall they used chemical weapons. That is on nobody but the Empire, particularly Varis, who was likely the only one with the knowledge of and authority to use Black Rose. (Ascian "assuming direct control" is not confirmed, therefore we can only operate under the assumption it did not happen.)

The reason chemical weapons are so awful? They kill indiscriminately. That's what separates them from things like magic fireballs and flooding an enemy fortification. While the Imperials could not have known that the potency of Black Rose had been drastically enhanced thanks to the Light seeping in from the First, they did know exactly what it did and how it functions, and chose to use it anyway. (And for the last time, everyone who knows about the Ul'dahn's use of Traders' Spurn against Sil'dih finds both its use and the cover-up reprehensible!) While the exact consequences of using Omega to deal with Shinryu were unknown, those responsible for its use accepted the responsibility of dealing with the fallout instead of blaming others. ("It's the Empire's fault we had to use Omega, because if they had not conquered and occupied Ala Mhigo causing Ilberd to summon Shinryu in desperation, we wouldn't need it!" ... said no one ever.)

As shown above Black Rose was used in small-scale testing against insurgent encampments.

[Absimiliard]

I'm not entirely sure I believe there is even a problem with the Empire resorting to the use of Black Rose. They do not know that using it could lead to calamity as they lack our meta awareness. What they do know is that a hostile foreign power is trying to push its way into their lands. Conquered lands, I concede, but a land conquered is still legally the property of its conqueror. A conquered land is therefore part of the Garlean Empire and should be defended from intrusion as such. Chemical warfare is nasty business for everyone involved, but I can see logic in a given nation feeling that it is an appropriate measure to take when manpower and technology are no longer sufficient to keep their enemies at bay.

[Cilia]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using any means at hand to protect your people from a hostile foreign power. Whatever the justifications each side is using, the reality is that a hostile power is trying to push its way into imperial territory. Conquered lands are by right the property of their conquerors. The Empire is therefore will within its rights to do whatever has to do to keep its holdings from being seized. And if it comes to it? Yes, they should by all rights deploy Black Rose in whatever quantity they feel appropriate to deal with a given threat. I would even go so far as to say it would be perfectly acceptable for them to fly airships over Eorzea and just flood the place with it. As has been stated, they likely possess zero knowledge of its enhanced potency let alone the hand it might play in triggering the calamity the Ascians are wanting.

The issue is that in this case the Empire is the hostile foreign power, attacking Eorzea under the false pretense of it being retribution for the Domans summoning a primal.

[Lauront]

The reason chemical weapons are so awful? They kill indiscriminately. That's what separates them from things like magic fireballs and flooding an enemy fortification. While the Imperials could not have known that the potency of Black Rose had been drastically enhanced thanks to the Light seeping in from the First, they did know exactly what it did and how it functions, and chose to use it anyway. (And for the last time, everyone who knows about the Ul'dahn's use of Traders' Spurn against Sil'dih finds both its use and the cover-up reprehensible!) While the exact consequences of using Omega to deal with Shinryu were unknown, those responsible for its use accepted the responsibility of dealing with the fallout instead of blaming others. ("It's the Empire's fault we had to use Omega, because if they had not conquered and occupied Ala Mhigo causing Ilberd to summon Shinryu in desperation, we wouldn't need it!" ... said no one ever.)

Virtually any weapon can be used to kill indiscriminately and i really don't see how flooding and fireballs (depending on how they're used) differ in this respect - the flooding was certainly indiscriminate. If the spread of the weapon thanks to the Light was not predicted by Varis, and certainly not revealed through smaller scale testing (at best he had Emet-Selch's half finished thought to go on, and even he was just speculating as to its potency and not its spread at the time), it seems like a perfectly reasonable weapon to use in a battlefield and not one that would kill indiscriminately outside such boundaries.

What was reprehensible in Ul'dah's case was that it used it to slaughter non-combatants.

[Eyvind]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using any means at hand to protect your people from a hostile foreign power. Whatever the justifications each side is using, the reality is that a hostile power is trying to push its way into imperial territory. Conquered lands are by right the property of their conquerors. The Empire is therefore will within its rights to do whatever has to do to keep its holdings from being seized. And if it comes to it? Yes, they should by all rights deploy Black Rose in whatever quantity they feel appropriate to deal with a given threat. I would even go so far as to say large scale deployment over Eorzea would be perfectly acceptable if the Alliance becomes a severe enough threat. When manpower and technology are no longer sufficient to keep your people and way of life safe, then yes, do whatever you have to do. No matter how deplorable or destructive their methods, every nation is entitled to defend its borders.

We don't have a difference on lore questions here, just a fundamental difference in morality. I am not sure I could say anything to convince you that "conquered lands are the property of their conquerors" is fundamentally wrong, but I can't imagine a much more abhorrent philosophy for the game or for reality. And I would lay money that's not a moral belief system the writers subscribe to or one that's going to be vindicated by the story.

If I can't get to a world where people have transcended this kind of sociopathy in real life, let's at least have it in our fantasies. There's no doubt in my mind that Varis is meant to be read as a villain.

They could go for a redemption arc with him, but I think Gaius has kind of stolen his thunder on that point. Even as a villain, Gaius had redeeming qualities (like his refusal to exterminate existing populations, and his hatred of the Empire's prejudice against its female and non-Garlean soldiers) so the seeds of something redeemable were already there. Varis only thinks in terms of power and control, with a weird side of racist ideology. Even if he considers you a useful ally I have little doubt he'll betray us in the end, assuming he survives.

[Absimiliard]

The issue is that in this case the Empire is the hostile foreign power, attacking Eorzea under the false pretense of it being retribution for the Domans summoning a primal.

Ala Mhigo was an imperial territory that the Eorzeans chose to seize. They also liberated Doma, another imperial terrritory. Both of these things occurred before the primal incident. With or without the Tsukuyomi incident, I would contend that they are potentially still well within their rights to do whatever is necessary to both reclaim these territories and keep the Alliance out of their other ones. I should also add that the decision to try and stir up rebellion in other imperial territories was made prior to the Tsukuyomi incident. They'll do what they must. And if they can't handle it? Then the Empire probably deserves to fall. A nation that no longer has the strength to defend its lands and people probably won't survive for much longer.

We don't have a difference on lore questions here, just a fundamental difference in morality. I am not sure I could say anything to convince you that "conquered lands are the property of their conquerors" is fundamentally wrong, but I can't imagine a much more abhorrent philosophy for the game or for reality. And I would lay money that's not a moral belief system the writers subscribe to or one that's going to be vindicated by the story.

I'm just looking at it from the Empire's point of view. That moral belief system will most definitely not be vindicated by the story. The Empire will in all likelihood fall. That said, there is actually political precedent for that mindset in real life. For example, Great Britain would be less than a shadow of what it is now if it hadn't conquered so many lands during its more uppity days. Some of these conquered lands are still quite bitter about it to this day. Despite this, Britain would definitely take up arms to prevent intrusion into those lands. Conquest in and of itself is wrong by our current moral standards, but this was not always the case. We've had to make allowances for previous instances of conquest to remain unchallenged into the modern day. Even Rome, as great as it was, was largely a product of conquest. Again I'm not actually saying might makes right is a completely valid philosophy, but it isn't one that should be immediately dismissed. It's antiquated and different but perhaps not necessarily outright evil. A lot depends on context.

If I can't get to a world where people have transcended this kind of sociopathy in real life, let's at least have it in our fantasies. There's no doubt in my mind that Varis is meant to be read as a villain.

See, I'm not entirely sure Varis is quite as awful as people think he is. He hasn't decided to just suddenly carpet bomb an area with mass amounts of Black Rose, for example. He's definitely misguided - and off in the head, I'd wager - but not necessarily pure evil. Wanting to put the world in the hands of mankind is an admirable goal. What isn't so admirable is how he intends to go about it. That, and he's probably got a massive dose of that racist ideology a lot of the Garlean upper society seems to have.

They could go for a redemption arc with him, but I think Gaius has kind of stolen his thunder on that point. Even as a villain, Gaius had redeeming qualities (like his refusal to exterminate existing populations, and his hatred of the Empire's prejudice against its female and non-Garlean soldiers) so the seeds of something redeemable were already there. Varis only thinks in terms of power and control, with a weird side of racist ideology. Even if he considers you a useful ally I have little doubt he'll betray us in the end, assuming he survives.

It would make for an interesting story, but like you, I have my doubts. My guess is that the Empire will be destroyed by their own hubris just the way their original FFVI counterparts were.

[Theodric]

The issue is that in this case the Empire is the hostile foreign power, attacking Eorzea under the false pretense of it being retribution for the Domans summoning a primal.

That's false as of the events of Baelsar's Wall. At that point, Eorzea became the aggressor by pushing into territory that belonged to Garlemald at the time. I don't have much of an issue with the lands outside of Ilsabard being reclaimed, since I believe that the Garleans should never have pushed outside of their own continent in the first place to prevent overextending and weakening their existing claims as a consequence.

Yet for the Eorzean Alliance to reach the heartland is very much a case of extreme aggression on their part, cutting through any and all who stood in their path. That is, logically, a lot of bloodshed - and Garlemald only deployed Black Rose as a last resort. For it to be presented as 'unforgivable' isn't realistic at all, since the Eorzeans have resorted to similar extreme and dubious methods of their own when cornered with no other alternatives. That is why Hien's antics and Omega were brought up.

Given that Hien is one of my favourite characters, it isn't a case of bias. I simply find it disappointing that the story only portrays brutal weaponry as 'unforgivable' when it is embraced by the antagonists, but not the protagonists.

I wouldn't even attribute it to a problem on behalf of the writers, though - they've made it clear that they see every antagonist as having their own reasons to fight and that, from their perspective, they're justified. The only major exception to that is Zenos.

The Eorzeans have the luxury of being able to manipulate aether and they have a walking weapon of mass destruction to call upon in their time of need that conveniently saves them from having to resort to extreme measures. Other nations do not have that luxury and as such should realistically be viewed with that in mind.

[Theodric]

Varis was also never intended to be an outright 'villain'. There's a big difference between an antagonist and a villain. The former is someone opposed to the protagonists who has sympathetic qualities and solid reasons for what they are doing. The latter is someone like Zenos, who lacks any sympathetic qualities. The development team have gone into depth on the matter on a number of occasions, so I took the liberty of keeping a few handy quotes close by to help diffuse some of the bias around these parts.

JeuxOnline: In a previous interview, you said it was quite challenging to create realistic villains from one expansion to another. Ran’jit & Solus are great in that way: they look very strong, fearsome & crazy. How do you manage to keep getting inspired and make charismatic bad guys for the story not to be redundant?
Naoki Yoshida: That is a very difficult question to answer.

So when making the villain characters, what the dev team tries to keep in mind is that they have to stand out, either by being really hateful and the players really hate them or still kinda loveable in a way. So for example Zenos is some sort of entity of ultimate Evil. [spoiler]But for Emet-Selch, he just wants to restore his world, that he believes is the best world.[spoiler]. So each time we create a new villain, we try to put them on either end of the scale, either complete evil or with having their own belief, their own goal. Having someone in-between is quite half-baked and is something the dev team wants to avoid.

Source: https://ffxiv.jeuxonline.info/actual...os_app#english

So, in application to Varis...he was quite clearly designed to be a sympathetic antagonist - a man who wished only the best for his people and had an honourable streak but found his hands tied and his nation/people held hostage by the schemes of not one but two major Ascians.

In addition, his wife died in childbirth and his best friend of decades was slain in battle against an Eikon. Such served to isolate him further. His heir was a deranged psychopath who cared nothing for his own homeland and people. It's a pretty grim situation for anybody to be in - and yet despite all that, he only ordered the use of Black Rose as a last resort when his enemies were literally knocking down the gate of Garlemald's capital.