A thing or two about Werlyt

[EliTheGunbreaker]

I am not sure if it is wise of me to write this in here... Nothing will change after all. Still... This is something that has been circulating through my head over the past few weeks, and I have already talked it over with my friends so many times they get annoyed at me. So... Imma vent here.

I am very disappointed with how the Werlyt arc was handled, as much as it pains me to say. Gaius is my absolute favourite character in this game, I have been rooting for him to get a redemption arc for a very long time. While seeing a lot of people disagree on him getting redemption saddened me, I was looking forward for them to be proven wrong. And considering that Werlyt came out not longer after the release of Shadowbringers, I felt very hopeful.

Alas, these hopes began to crack when the actual thing rolled out. The writing flaws were there and there( like Cid suddenly of all forgiving Gaius despite being snappy at the very mention of him in the past), but I still remained hopeful that maybe this is just the beginning, things may make sense in the end. The peak of my heartbreak and disappointment, however, came on patch 5.4, which is extremely jarring, since this patch had amazing stories like Eden, YoRHa and the Void quests( I have my own gripes with the MSQ of this patch that are an entirely different conversation), all of which I enjoyed. The writing was extremely shoddy, with even Gaius himself being written as oblivious to basically everything( contradicting everything written about him up to this point, where he was characterized as a cunning leader), and a unnecessarily graphic scenes that make the new villain so horrible Gaius looks innocent in comparison.

I wanted him to realize the error of his ways... I imagined it happening countless times in ways that would have made more sense. I did not want it to happen like this. It almost is as if they want to get him from some point A to an unknown point B, even if it costs his entire character. As if he is merely a plot device in the writing team's eyes to play into some bigger picture and be discarded afterwards. And it hurts me to see it like that. He may have some vocal haters as a character, but I do care for him. I do not want the story to move forward at his expense.

It is extremely sad to see as a huge fan of the character, since I genuinely think he as a character deserves a better writing than this. He deserves a proper redemption arc, not something hastily put together that basically makes everyone do a 180 characterization-wise while also putting up someone much worse in the scene to make him look better. As of now, I only hope that he makes it out alive through this storyline, without any of the "haha he's actually evil all along" moves pulled in the end for cheap shock value( which would be nonsensical because they broke so much to set the shock value up in the first place). Maybe then something can be done... But dear, is it painful to watch your favourite, of all the characters, get the short end of the writing stick.

[MikkoAkure]

The thing about Gaius, is that not only has he been raised to believe that his country is superior, like all Garleans, but he actively conquered multiple countries around the world and destroyed tens of thousands of lives. We only know of Ala Mhigo, Terncliff, and Werlyt, but he is said to have conquered other cities as well, and participated in the subjugation of Dalmasca during its rebellions prior to ARR.

Cid may be more forgiving since Gaius fostered Cid in his childhood. Cid himself has skeletons in his closet (creating warmachina for the Garlean Empire). Nero was our enemy as well, and constructed the Ultima Weapon, but Cid forgave him and they sort of work together. So all-in-all, I don't see Cid's behavior as out of the ordinary.

As far as the new guy goes, I agree that he's more than over-the-top cartoonishly evil to make Gaius look better in comparison since he's helping us now. But then again, there were people as bad as him or worse in our own real history and the Garlean Empire is the sort of environment that enables people like him to be like this.

I get that villains are more interesting, especially since as a rule of writing, they're more proactive and generally have more character since the plot is based on them doing something while the heroes react to it. But they're still villains and doing good doesn't erase the wrong they've done, nor does it always change their outlook. I'm sure Gaius still believes that everything he did was for the good of the Empire and even after finding out about the Ascians, he was still willing to conquer Eorzea with the Ultima Weapon. Instead of "The Rehabilitation of Gaius van Balsar" this plotline looks to me more like "The Tragedy of Gaius van Balsar". We're being shown his past and how it's coming back to haunt him and his adopted children are killing themselves one-by-one to fight both us and their former foster father.

I'm not exactly sure what you're looking for to happen. Characters are never going to do what you want them to do, and that's part of what makes fiction fun. It's OK to like characters, even villains. Delita Heiral is my favorite character in all of Final Fantasy despite the fact that he is not morally good. He is still interesting, and it was "enjoying", for lack of a better word, to watch as he decided to shape the world based on his tragedies, pull the wool over the eyes of his enemies as well as his friends, and then end up sorry for the pain he caused to the person he used as a tool, only to get stabbed in the end and then rule as a tyrant. But in the end, it feels like you need to disconnect yourself from the writing because not everything is going to end up cheery and it doesn't need to.

[EliTheGunbreaker]

(RE Mikko) I am not sure what are you trying to imply either. I did not say anything about "cheery". Only that I was open to possibility of change. If anything, "cheery" is a point of view, don't you think? Some would consider the perspective of a person changing and dying "cheery", while others consider the idea of a criminal getting away the bleakest thing. It's all down to the person.

You see... For all the good and bad they do, human nature is fluid, mutable. And the crimes one has committed in the past do not fix one's mind in a certain state. This is the problem I have with the common take about fictional characters "X is irredeemable because they have done too many crimes." Though others love to confuse these, redemption is about changing one's mind, not being forgiven by the others. And mind is never fixed, good and bad are merely two interchangeable things it can be. Besides... If we are talking crimes, I'd say that for a character to be narratively viable a redemption arc, they should be not a goos person by default, either grey or a bad person, because morally good characters do not need redemption arcs.

As for Gaius still being loyal to the Empire... I have considered that. There are, however, several lines in 5.4 Werlyt suggest genuine regret. Even if we presume he lied to everyone about that that and the writers are actually setting up a betrayal, it still wouldn't be good writing because for this to happen in the first place, they put multiple inconsistencies on the board and made several characters believe everything he said, when they have reasons not to. Having him betray everyone at this point would look like cheap shock value.

Yes, I want a redemption arc, and I see nothing wrong about that. Karma does not always work in this universe( if it did, Haurchefant would be alive, Zenos would have stayed dead, and the First's Warrior's of Light would have killed Cylva, with the latter's arc also insinuating that her death would not serve anyone purpose). Also, the game's recurring theme has very often been unity and change. We see the aforementioned Cylva trying to atone for her misdeeds, we see Emet-Selch( who has committed larger crimes than Gaius, on a larger scale, for a much larger period of time) eventually see the worth of modern humanity and help us against Elidibus even in death. I do not feel like with these setups, a Gaius redemption arc is such a stretch.

But the original post isn't about that. My original post referred to wanting good writing for my favourite. I feel like he deserves better than what is currently happening to him. I did read the interviews that the writing team brought him back to be "our guide in Garlemald", so I know the writing team may view him as a tool with a specific purpose. I just... Don't want him to be viewed as a tool whose characterization may be twisted so they can fullfill whatever setup they are planning. Like I said, there are people out there who love his character too.

[MikkoAkure]

But the original post isn't about that. My original post referred to wanting good writing for my favourite. I feel like he deserves better than what is currently happening to him. I did read the interviews that the writing team brought him back to be "our guide in Garlemald", so I know the writing team may view him as a tool with a specific purpose. I just... Don't want him to be viewed as a tool whose characterization may be twisted so they can fullfill whatever setup they are planning. Like I said, there are people out there who love his character too.

I mean, in the end, he's the writing team's character, not yours. All the characters are tools for the plot and what they decide for him is up to them regardless as to whether or not you believe he's worthy of redemption. Like I said, at least to me it doesn't feel like this is his redemption arc, but a parade of his tragedies and missteps and fleshing out of his character to help us connect to him. Every time he goes to correct anything, he fails, and he only has 2 au ra step-children left, at least one of which is probably going to be dead by the end. On top of that, this is side-content. Unless this questline will exist in a time bubble, I don't see Gaius having an impactful return to the MSQ. Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if by the end his elezen bodyguard shivs him in revenge for his family. It wouldn't be new either since at least 3 other villains who had varying degrees of redemption end up dead soon after.

Gaius has a long way to go for redemption, if he even wants it. The list of people he's wronged is long and such a thing wouldn't be able to be covered in what's left of this side content. According to the narrative, how do you see this happening? Even bad characters have loved ones so him showing affection for his last remaining daughter won't really equal redemption. If Gaius wants to turn over a new leaf and have something to prove, he needs to prove it to the characters in the story in a more meaningful way than "my bad" and begin to help us against Garlemald. So far it feels like it's more that our goals are aligned, but we're not allies.

[EliTheGunbreaker]

( RE Mikko because character limit won't let me quote) Just because it is the writing team's character does not make me wrong to criticize said writing team's decisions according to whatever criteria. I never stated he was my character, just that he deserves better writing. I dislike what they are doing to him because I don't think it's good enough in terms of writing quality, for reasons like sudden changes of characterization, lack of foreshadowing and straight up contradictions with established information. I may want redemption for him and I originally mentioned this as the reason for my excitement, but the original post was not about what I wanted in terms of my own preferences.

Offing him in a sidequest would be extremely unsatisfactory, considering the lengths they went to bring him back, instead of making a new character. He has been an instrumental figure to legacy and ARR, as well as with a lot of lore revolving around him after his presumed "death". Killing him in a side quest would be a waste. Besides... There must be a reason as to why they brought him back instead of making a new character from scratch.

I also do not know why did you get the implication that love equals goodness from anything I said. Like I said, redemption, at least how I define it, does not equal forgiveness, otherwise everyone in this world would be irredeemable. We people just have a tendency to wrong at least one person in life to the point they refuse to forgive us. Those two are separate. Instead, what I see as redemption is the realization of error in one's ways. I feel like Fordola's arc has good moments in this regard, in the sense that she can still do better even though there are people who will never forgive her. If only she got more screentime...

And also... I have my own beef with the "redemption equals death" trope, but that's not what this topic is about.

[Rosenstrauch]

The obliviousness of Gaius "my right hand man was a mad scientist" Baelsar is a pretty common point of contention with the Sorrow of Werlyt, from what I've seen here and there. But I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that Cid has forgiven him for anything. Cid and the WoL are working with Gaius not because they like or forgive him, but because they need him (for some reason) to stop the Weapons Project.

What that "some reason" is, I can't say for sure. Aside from informing us of what he knew at the start, I can't recall him doing anything to contribute beyond giving his opinion of things here and there. Garlond Ironworks and the WoL are the ones doing all the heavy lifting, so to speak.

[YianKutku]

The obliviousness of Gaius "my right hand man was a mad scientist" Baelsar is a pretty common point of contention with the Sorrow of Werlyt, from what I've seen here and there.

I admit to being rather alarmed at the sheer obliviousness Gaius was implied to have displayed when he apparently went "my right hand man is a mad scientist with a clear inferiority complex that he has not been shy about expressing. I shall therefore assign to him, as an assistant, a mad scientist with a clear inferiority complex towards me."

[EliTheGunbreaker]

I admit to being rather alarmed at the sheer obliviousness Gaius was implied to have displayed when he apparently went "my right hand man is a mad scientist with a clear inferiority complex that he has not been shy about expressing. I shall therefore assign to him, as an assistant, a mad scientist with a clear inferiority complex towards me."

Oh, this is puzzling to me too. If anything, I too was surprised that they had to connect Valens with the XIVth, twisting not only the past characterization of Gaius, but also Nero.

[Cilia]

The thing with a "redemption arc" is that redemption is highly subjective. A character is "redeemed" when forgiven for their sins, but whether or not said character has done enough to warrant that forgiveness depends on the beholder.

(Most famously Grom Hellscream from WoW: spent nearly his whole life indulging in battle lust for shiggles, then sacrifices himself to end the orcs' demonic blood curse. Does one act of sacrifice, no matter how noble, make up for a lifetime of wickedness?)

I don't think anyone's forgiven Gaius, per sé, but they are leaving the hatchet where it is because there are more pressing concerns.

[Veloran]

Does Gaius even need "redemption"? I struggle to think of anything he's actually done that even warrants that sort of arc. He's consistently been portrayed as a good man working in a flawed system, you can say his subordinates or colleagues have done things that are morally reprehensible but I've never really gotten the sense that he would condone their actions had he been there as witness. At most you can say his vaguely "might makes right" philosophy was wrong, but even then he was more in the vein of "the mighty have the responsibility to justly govern the weak."

If Gaius has any issues with his character it's only that he still has a sense of duty and patriotism towards his homeland, which has increasingly spawned a ton of psychos into the story for quite some time. On that front I'd blame the overall direction taken with Garlemald by the writers rather than Gaius. I mean when you have Zenos explicitly trying to make life in the provinces he governed as bad as humanly possible to incite rebellion, and the cursed VIIth legion which seems to only end up with complete psychopaths as legatus', it really overshadows any sympathy you might have for the nation. I mean there are tons of examples of individual Garleans being normal or good people, from people across the chain of command, but personalities like that really just leave you thinking that everybody at every level must be crazy to have let them anywhere near a position of power.