Indeed, and his shift in perspective nevertheless does not move him to see the sundered as the same as his people, so much as a fragmented offshoot of mankind which has now proven itself in his eyes. With Emet, the fleeting mortality of his Garlean "son" is hinted at having taken its toll. I suspect he wanted to try relate to the sundered but kept realising they were not his people - the marked difference in lifespans alone would suffice for this - and eventually, having tired of all the bloodshed and struggle, and seeing an opportunity in Azem's sundered remnant, decided to put them to a test to settle it, which he ultimately honoured.
Point being? They only refer to "mankind" at various points because there is the same shared origin, but from the ancients'/Ascians' perspective (i.e. the original position) this is fragmented, i.e. sundered, i.e. something different, with some vestigial remains. Her constant reference to the sundered as children is similar to that of a higher being addressing its creations, from a vantage point where she has witnessed their actions for long enough to grasp that their nature differs from that of her own people, and IMO it is no accident she thus refers to herself as "last of my kind". I believe the reason Emet doesn't vocalise this is because he bore no such relation to them, but nonetheless his evaluation of their mentality and traits is of child-like beings to him, so they seem to share that viewpoint. It's all well and good for the ancients in Elpis to see some shared traits in you at a snapshot in time that put you above a regular familiar (but not quite the same as an ancient either), but it'd be quite another thing to 1) see their people transform this way and 2) observe these differences play out in practice over time. I believe this is also why you can choose in one of the sidequests to remark on them as either deities, not too different, or completely incomprehensible. To a mortal mind, the ancients are all of that at once because they share some traits with mortal humans but also possess others which distinguish them and result in quite a different type of being. Their views on death, for example, stem in part from their longevity and their relation to the star as a quasi-living organism which they revered, much like a dragon's perspective on time is affected by its immortality.
I suspect people insist on reading more in the lore at certain points than there is, is because if he was not strictly necessary, as that entire Watcher sequence very strongly suggests, her plan also no longer becomes the only available option. My own take is that it wasn't and that she simply committed to that path because of the vagaries of time travel to which she bound herself; at least, in the sense that they're keen on narrowing her available actions in that way to avoid an outcome such as creating an AU where things ended differently while also not making her come across as totally unreasonable... but IMO that comes at the expense of having to invoke time travel yet again in a very muddled way and constricting her agency.It often seems like they threw every reason and the kitchen sink into why Venat sundered the world without notice or care of the elements that were contradictory. People are quick to point out that she made an effort to reason with her people in the post-Elpis cutscene, but if she was always going to sunder the world to make the Ancients able to interact with dynamis that means her outreach efforts were insincere. Otherwise, we have to accept that she believed the Ancients could have overcome Meteion without being sundered and thus it was not necessary.
As for Hermes, there's nothing to support him having brought dynamis to the table of the Convocation, so even if he were the only expert (which is also not supported) it wouldn't matter if that expertise wasn't a factor in the Final Days. The Watcher makes no mention of dynamis (and he should know), but he does the celestial currents. Elidibus later credits Fandaniel only with discovering the stagnation in said currents, noting that what we know at that point (before traveling to Elpis) is consistent with what the Convocation knew. He's not even remotely implied to be the architect of Zodiark so I don't know where people are getting that from, it's much more likely that was Lahabrea being the most specialized in complex creation magicks. What we do learn of Zodiark's construction is he was purposely aspected towards dark to encourage activity in those stagnant areas, nothing about dynamis.




Reply With Quote




