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?

[Lyth]

Happiness is separate from the cycle of pleasure and pain. The final civilization in the Dead Ends managed to eliminate strife, along with both suffering and joy in the process, but they still didn't find it. The dragons withdrew from the world, and yet they still didn't find it. The Ea are my favorite case. They come to Y'shtola with the entirety of knowledge mapped out in their libraries and ask 'What's the point?' And Y'shtola turns to them and essentially says 'But I really enjoy learning!' I mean, you really can't argue with that. Nerd. But still, point taken.

A checkbox mentality will only take you so far. I think that that self-same joy of learning, of discovery, is what makes the travel/journey analogy resonate so well.

'As you know, I was once a scholar. And among other things, I sought to understand the workings of the world.
What exactly is Aether? How formed the laws of nature? Whence spung mankind?
Riddles and mysteries beyond counting. Over the the years, I have managed to find answers to some few of them...
Yet rather than attain a sense of mastery, the more I understood, the more I came to hold the world and its miracles in awe.'

'I was overcome with an irrepressible urge to know the world more intimately. To hear its voice, feel its breath...
I ventured forth on a journey that very day. So very long ago now.
Freed from presumption and prejudice, I saw the world through a newborn's eyes. Everything fresh and so, so beautiful.'

And it's interesting, the instant you learn the label for something, you learn to dismiss it. "The day you teach the child the name of the bird, the child will never see that bird again." It's tough to preserve your love of discovery and learning when experiences and formal training build up so many biases over the years.

Or put more simply:
'You can live here your entire life and hardly learn a thing.
That's why... it's too soon for this to end.'

[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.”

[Raikai]

One thing that's bothered me since beating the story is the whole we need to suffer to learn and live angle.

Or how the last dungeon and meteon pushed that things got too good and people just gave up.

Our whole deal is fighting to solve issues and make things better, we've traveled through time, space and reality to make things better, to win, to keep marching toward a world where things are better and we're not needed, one where no one needs to fight.

So doesn't that mean our endgame would lead to annihilation?

Just irks me that's what they came up with, the whole point is to fight, even now in pandemonium we're battling away and everything we do leads to people prospering in some way, just look at the world itself since arr, its much better since we stepped off the cart. Like, at this point if the wol just said eff it, wouldn't that be fine? And honestly preferred.

Fighting will never stop for a meta reason... without strife there wouldn't be a narrative for the RPG. At least not the one XIV is meant to be.

Fighting will only stop when XIV "dies" (for either a new game or just of old age). The moment when they no longer create new content for it, they will steer the plot in a way that either fight is no longer needed or the WoL becomes unable to fight.

[Lyth]

This is also a property of the storytelling medium itself. The way that you learn about characters is by going to the '!' icon and solving their problems. Sure, that means that you play the 'hero' front and centre, but you're also there to witness their lives and their civilization.

Is Azem truly needed in any of this? Perhaps, but as the Eighth Umbral Calamity timeline showed, the main point of these tales is primarily to inspire. Someday, when Azem is long gone, various societies will offer up their own stories about the wandering trickster rabbit figure. How much is truth, and how much fiction? Who knows?

[KariTheFox]

I mean, the answer to when we should stop fighting is "right now, in between patches", there's often references to the WoL resting or taking a break between different patch cycles, you kind of just get to use your imagination when it comes to what your WoL does in their off time.

[TaleraRistain]

So how do the dragons fit into this? They're the only ones who did not achieve 'perfection'. In fact, they had basically been driven into extinction by another group attacking them, and the battle had been so terrible it had essentially made their home a toxic wasteland that either sterilized them or mutated their offspring into short lived monstrosities. If anything it seems like they are being punished for falling into despair, which doesn't feel entirely fair to them. It's not like they attacked the Omnicrons.

None of it was fair to them. But the argument could be made they mourned for what they lost instead of looking forward. Only Middy looked at things and said "This will not be where I end" and had the courage to take to the stars to find a new home.

[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.

[Vyrerus]

I mean, the answer to when we should stop fighting is "right now, in between patches", there's often references to the WoL resting or taking a break between different patch cycles, you kind of just get to use your imagination when it comes to what your WoL does in their off time.

The answer for mine is usually... trains until his hands bleed while stuffing copious amounts of the same food into his mouth with no regards for his waistline.

Also twice weekly musical/crystal/fight simulator hallucinations/simulations of combat.

Once those have been accomplished... a spot of mining. Mining has always really jived with me, and it seems right to see my Highlander WoL with a pickaxe in hand.

Also getting drunk with Sidurgu at the Forgotten Knight, much to Rielle's chagrin. Vicious is a bad influence.

[redheadturk]

Something else important to take into account is that Venat wasn't objecting to 'rebuilding but doing it wrong', but that the crowd didn't want to rebuild from disaster, they wanted to undo disaster.

Speaking literally, you can read this as just a semantic difference; they're standing in a ruined city, they want the city to not be ruined. But that's very much the wrong reading, it's very clear in the scene that they're coming from a fundamental angle of 'we want to go back to when this never happened'. They don't want to move on from suffering, they want to move backwards to the world where it hadn't reached them.

Which, I again point out, these people were traumatized. It is utterly natural during the time a person is within that traumatized state to want to go back to before the trauma occurred. It doesn't prove anything but that they were human, acting as all human beings do. It is not until much later, when the pain of the trauma has begun to pass and healing has begun that we realize the trauma has made us stronger. It would quite likely have been the same for them, had Venat given them that time.