When are we supposed to stop fighting?

[Vyrerus]

Some people go on journeys, wander, for its own sake.

And that makes journey into destination.

Re: Responsibility and The Collective. A lot of FFXIV falls back on the Great Man Theory. Harken back to ARR and Gaius van Baelsar's lift speech. Paraphrasing:

"Something something they lack the strength to do otherwise! Something something, the weak elevate the frail, and the frail lead the people astray!"

What's the real difference between Etheirys and all of those other stars? There was a great and mighty woman who used strength of arms to cow her own civilization, and transform them, causing them to take a "better" path.

Why do I bring this up? Well, the idea that the story flirts with is that the individual supersedes society. It loses its merit instantly though, because we're operating through the, "Great Man" framework constantly and consistently. In ARR and every expansion we have forced change and decision onto societies via getting in bed with their leadership, without the consent of the governed. The ordinary folks in the setting struggle to remain relevant at every turn, so much so that Alisaie even has a line in early Endwalker that goes something to the effect of, "Is that what the common person is destined for? An obscure, cold death?!"

In short, it's better to not be part of a society in FFXIV, because if you are, even if you're a leader, then you're a wimpy stripling playing second fiddle to the Scions and the WoL. You couldn't take responsibility for yourself or your people if you tried, because the Great Man already did.

The wholesome life is worthwhile no matter what message is not lost on me, but in its twisted skein Endwalker wound up highlighting that with far more negative means than positive ones. It made Venat operate along the same moral lines as Gaius pre-redemption Baelsar.

The Great Woman's argument boils down to, "You are weak, so you don't deserve your lives."

Some might think to say, "But she said she believed in mankind's ability to find a way forward no matter what happens to them." But sadly, she immediately contradicts that stated belief with her actions, otherwise why take them?

[EaraGrace]

We’ve entered the Venat is “literally the devil” phase of this argument.

And that makes journey into destination.

Then the word destination is meaningless.

What's the real difference between Etheirys and all of those other stars? There was a great and mighty woman who used strength of arms to cow her own civilization, and transform them, causing them to take a "better" path.

More accurately, a group of dissenters led by a woman argued against the path being taken by broader society, and when they didn’t listen sought to ensure the future wouldn’t be doomed by their decision. They then dedicated their lives to protecting and fostering this life.

Why do I bring this up? Well, the idea that the story flirts with is that the individual supersedes society. It loses its merit instantly though, because we're operating through the, "Great Man" framework constantly and consistently. In ARR and every expansion we have forced change and decision onto societies via getting in bed with their leadership, without the consent of the governed. The ordinary folks in the setting struggle to remain relevant at every turn, so much so that Alisaie even has a line in early Endwalker that goes something to the effect of, "Is that what the common person is destined for? An obscure, cold death?!"

And yet it’s those selfsame common people that we continuously fight beside at their own peril.

Who was it that we supported in Ishgard?

Who did we lend our strength too in Ala Mhigo and Doma?

And who was it robbing the free will of the survivors in Norvrandt? Wasn’t the Scions I don’t believe.

Say what will, but the Scions and WoL repeatedly respected the right of self governance, only intervening to prevent an imminent harm or to free a populace from a oppression. Even the Garleans came to recognize that.

In short, it's better to not be part of a society in FFXIV, because if you are, even if you're a leader, then you're a wimpy stripling playing second fiddle to the Scions and the WoL. You couldn't take responsibility for yourself or your people if you tried, because the Great Man already did.

If the moral of the story you got from playing 14 is to wait for a hero then I’m not sure we’re playing the same game.

The wholesome life is worthwhile no matter what message is not lost on me, but in its twisted skein Endwalker wound up highlighting that with far more negative means than positive ones. It made Venat operate along the same moral lines as Gaius pre-redemption Baelsar.

The Great Woman's argument boils down to, "You are weak, so you don't deserve your lives."

Some might think to say, "But she said she believed in mankind's ability to find a way forward no matter what happens to them." But sadly, she immediately contradicts that stated belief with her actions, otherwise why take them?

Believing humanity shouldn’t choose for all life to walk off a cliff doesn’t mean you don’t believe they should have a choice. If you want to say there’s conflict between respecting the individual and protecting the collective then sure, but that’s evidence that Venats human, not that she’s the “Great Woman.”

[Vyrerus]

We’ve entered the Venat is “literally the devil” phase of this argument.


Then the word destination is meaningless.

No, the word journey becomes meaningless, because you take from it, its purpose.

More accurately, a group of dissenters led by a woman argued against the path being taken by broader society, and when they didn’t listen sought to ensure the future wouldn’t be doomed by their decision. They then dedicated their lives to protecting and fostering this life.

That's a weird way to say formed a rebellion and lead a coup by creating a second god, which then destroyed their world and way of life, but whatever helps you remove all moral complexity from your crystal mommy.

And yet it’s those selfsame common people that we continuously fight beside at their own peril.

Who was it that we supported in Ishgard?

Who did we lend our strength too in Ala Mhigo and Doma?

And who was it robbing the free will of the survivors in Norvrandt? Wasn’t the Scions I don’t believe.

Say what will, but the Scions and WoL repeatedly respected the right of self governance, only intervening to prevent an imminent harm or to free a populace from a oppression. Even the Garleans came to recognize that.

Ishgard: Two of four aristocratic houses and the papacy at first, until we killed Nidhogg. Then the same aristocratic houses, one branch of the military, and the commoners with Hilda to dismantle the papacy. We fought beside largely the ruling class, and did not actually elevate commoners to equality or rulership posititions.

Ala Mhigo: The Ala Mhigan resistance movement comprised of any Ala Mhigans willing to fight. Which was a leadership movement going against Garlean rule. While comprised of anyone, it's what constituted formal rule for our purposes, and would later give leadership based on bloodline and prior importance ala Lyse and Raubahn. It is the best example you can provide against my PoV though. And my favorite nation, as such.

Doma: Lord Hien and the royalist freedom fighters awaiting his return. Yes, we roused bodies to serve him, but we served literal royalty there too, not first but foremost once he was found.

Norvrandt: I'll answer your question after I ask some. Who made the Crystarium? Who used strength of spell to change fate? What could any of the common people done for themselves without that great man?
Vauthry eventually robbed people of their free will through meol distribution implanting bits of Sin Eater in them, but until that point in the story, the common folk themselves flocked to Eulmore for want of a strong ruler with a safe place to live. Much as those who flocked to the Crystarium did.

If the moral of the story you got from playing 14 is to wait for a hero then I’m not sure we’re playing the same game.



Believing humanity shouldn’t choose for all life to walk off a cliff doesn’t mean you don’t believe they should have a choice. If you want to say there’s conflict between respecting the individual and protecting the collective then sure, but that’s evidence that Venats human, not that she’s the “Great Woman.”

We're not looking at it the same way. That's been abundantly clear for weeks. It is the same game. The difference between us is that I am willing to extend my perception to its fullest. You are not.

Funny, though, you know. Waiting for a hero is exactly what the savior goddess did. For 12,000 years.

There's a difference in fully informing people so they can make an actual choice, and them still making the wrong one than giving them vague platitudes in a time of crisis, and then literally conquering them through strength of arms to take their will from them. Because they literally couldn't give you the answer you wanted with the knowledge they had in their moment of weakness.

[Lyth]

The people of the Eighth Umbral Calamity timeline were saved by Azem. They have the strength and resilience to carry on despite being pushed to the brink, and they will continue to do so without us, as was laid down in 'An Unpromised Tomorrow.'

'The Warrior of Light's tale is one of unyielding bravery. To tell it was to feel courage; to hear it was to feel hope. It was a breath of inspiration in an age of suffocating shadow. In the history of a fallen nation was our hero hailed as its greatest ally. In the timeworn pages of a noble's memoires were their deeds joyously retold. For many years, these stories were the flame which warmed them through the coldest of nights. And so it should come as little surprise that the plan found no shortage of volunteers, concerning as it did the Warrior of Light. It was their chance to add their own verse to the hero's saga. He/she was the lodestar that brought them all together, to send their final message back through time and space... to him/her.'

"The light of your legacy was our torch in the darkness. Burn bright again... and live."

They didn't change their past. They changed our future.

[KizuyaKatogami]

The people of the Eighth Umbral Calamity timeline were saved by Azem. They have the strength and resilience to carry on despite being pushed to the brink, and they will continue to do so without us, as was laid down in 'An Unpromised Tomorrow.'

'The Warrior of Light's tale is one of unyielding bravery. To tell it was to feel courage; to hear it was to feel hope. It was a breath of inspiration in an age of suffocating shadow. In the history of a fallen nation was our hero hailed as its greatest ally. In the timeworn pages of a noble's memoires were their deeds joyously retold. For many years, these stories were the flame which warmed them through the coldest of nights. And so it should come as little surprise that the plan found no shortage of volunteers, concerning as it did the Warrior of Light. It was their chance to add their own verse to the hero's saga. He/she was the lodestar that brought them all together, to send their final message back through time and space... to him/her.'

"The light of your legacy was our torch in the darkness. Burn bright again... and live."

They didn't change their past. They changed our future.

Okay...but that literally doesnt change the fact they acknowledged the possible outcomes which was total erasure of their timeline. Did they get consent from everyone to do so? No, but they did so anyway. In a way they did change their past, it just resulted in an entire alternate timeline. They didnt just accept their fate, they chose to do something about it, which is no different than the ancients. We're shown this throughout expansions as well. People dont really just give in to garlean rule, theres a whole expansion like that. One of the themes has been defying whatever fate has been brought upon you. You keep striving for better. This is even the whole alphinaud speech. They will continue striving for betterment of their world and their kind, the same thing the ancients did as stewards of the star.

[Lyth]

...

I don't see where you're going with this. How does this contradict the themes that we were discussing?

[thegreatonemal]

Okay...but that literally doesnt change the fact they acknowledged the possible outcomes which was total erasure of their timeline. Did they get consent from everyone to do so? No, but they did so anyway. In a way they did change their past, it just resulted in an entire alternate timeline. They didnt just accept their fate, they chose to do something about it, which is no different than the ancients. We're shown this throughout expansions as well. People dont really just give in to garlean rule, theres a whole expansion like that. One of the themes has been defying whatever fate has been brought upon you. You keep striving for better. This is even the whole alphinaud speech. They will continue striving for betterment of their world and their kind, the same thing the ancients did as stewards of the star.

The ancients weren't trying to move on. They wanted what they had before the Final Days and nothing less. Given what we know now. This hiding would have doomed them all.

[KizuyaKatogami]

The ancients weren't trying to move on. They wanted what they had before the Final Days and nothing less. Given what we know now. This hiding would have doomed them all.

Except they were. The problem here with the theme is, they weren’t even giving a fighting chance. Venat kept the knowledge to herself instead of telling it to her people and giving them a chance. She then has the audacity to say they need to learn suffering when we know they did. They were trying to undo the calamity that was brought upon them. This is the very thing Ironworks did. They were willing to sacrifice a timeline to bring the WoL back and undo the calamity. Idk what’s hard to understand there.

[Lyth]

Except they were. The problem here with the theme is, they weren’t even giving a fighting chance.

I see that you substituted the word 'theme' in here when you really meant 'storyline'. You may think that gives your post the appearance of staying relevant to the thread, but it really doesn't. What I don't understand is why a few of you, +/- a few sub-level 80 sockpuppet accounts, feel the need to convert every thread here into an argument on why you hate Venat or on why the Convocation was right. When are we supposed to stop fighting? When people stop taking these bait posts seriously.

[Necrotica]

According to Venat we must all suffer. Cause being happy all the time is bad.

Now some people say, well why not minor suffering? If the little joys can help overcome great tragedy, than mild inconveniences can make us appreciate the great things we have. (See losing power or internet for an hour or so).

But NOPE. Venat is all like "You will die, have disease, be tortured in ENDLESS CONFLICT MUAHAHAHAHAHA! Also I'm the good guy!"