Sundering stuff established in the Q&A

[EaraGrace]

If you actually paid attention to what I said, you'll now my answer for this since you already asked the same question before.

It’s a simple question, perhaps my feeble mind just can’t parse your nuanced answer. A simple yes or no would clear things up.

Only come to this because the writers want everything to workout for the good guys. Again, do you know the concept of debating a philosophical/"what if" argument?

The what if has to be based on some form of premise yes? You can’t just hand wave the parts you don’t like and then cast judgement on it.

It is selfish, but that's not my main point of the argument, ever since the few previous posts. But go on, keep moving the goalpost, will you?

My point if you actually tried to understand where I’m coming from is that the Ironworks weren’t being selfish and the Ancients were. Thus why one is morally acceptable and the other isn’t.

I was talking about their ability and having the means to dodge/defy their fate. Whether individual fate, or humankind's fate as a whole. They couldn't stand seeing their world being ravaged by calamity, they couldn't stand to see the Ascian wins. So by risking everyone who doesn't know or want to do the time travel plan, they keep on with their plan for hundreds of years harnessing out-of-world technologies which, frankly, could be used to save and rebuild their own civilization instead.

They desired a different future for others. “For those we can yet save” and all. While you do have a sliver of a truth in that turning away from present circumstances was wrong, the fact remains that they’re actions were done out of a desire to see others not suffer, not to alleviate their own.

I really don't want to use a real world example for this, so if you still can't understand my point... gg I guess. I would rather teach my dog calculus then attempting to re-explain it to you.

Given your responses so far, it’s clear you often try and fail to explain things you don’t understand. You have my sympathies.

I know she made stupid decision, but that would be the biggest idiotic plan she would have had. Before sundering, I sort of can see a Emet listen to her, even though this is still quite unbelievable. After sundering, after his home is destroyed and he lost two of his best friends? After Venat become his nemesis? Especially without any proof whatsoever (since the biggest proof would be Elpis's researchers testimony and Echo at Elpis location), there's no way he would listen.

Then there would be only one Unsundered vs Hydaelyn. Much better odds than facing three Unsundered, and when Emet falls he’ll remember the events of Elpis and change sides like he did in Endwalker.

How would that work if the WoL never went back in time? he wouldn't have those memories. And this is also assuming that hydaelyn have enough strength to kill him.

The world doesn’t retroactively change due to alterations to the timeline. Emet and Venats memories wouldn’t just disappear, Emet would still have memories of us in Elpis even though we technically would never exist. The 8UC proves that.

Prepare how? The only thing making them stronger is by rejoining, whether it's physical matter (dense soul) or mentally (despair from calamities).

The Sundering and it’s consequences alone we’re enough. Despair existed without the Rejoinings and the physical side of things isn’t insurmountable. Ardbert despite being only 1/14 of Azems souls still fought and won against primals, still held his own against us. It’s a slight disadvantage sure, but not one that couldn’t be overcome.

Except this is within the context that she's talking about meteion, as her previous dialogue says she looking for a way to safeguard the future of the star. What exactly the real threat for the future that she deemed it's necessary to do sundering? Yep, Meteion. If it's only the matter of preventing rejoining, she wouldn't gamble sparing emet selch in the first place for whatever reason.

Ok wait you’re explanation makes no sense in the context of the rest of your argument. If she’s looking for a solution to Meteion, and failing, then that necessarily means she’s not following the timeline we laid out as in that case we’d be the only option to fight Meteion. There’d be no need to search, no need for the Rejoinings, no need for Unsundered. If you’re arguing that the Rejoinings were useful for reasons other than resulting in our timeline, then Yoshi Ps statement wouldn’t actually support your claim, and you’d be arguing against the interpretations he made, as well as the lyrics to Flow.

Do you see the issue?

As I said before, she also need to prevent a complete rejoining. And considering she knew about the First and roughly how long till it took the WoL to exist; she had, albeit a wild, guess on how things will played out. For all we know, she might also monitor the WoL souls and reincarnations in every era, see if it match with the story she got. Hence why all her actions are considered a gamble.

See I don’t actually disagree with this.

Her complete inaction would mean she let rejoining happen a lot quicker, and her complete intervention would mean rejoining not happening/happen too late, both of them will cause the timeline to go awry.

Which creates the big problem. How do you know when to act and when not too? How do you decide when, where, and how to intervene? She doesn’t know what caused the first several Rejoinings, nor the role she played in acting against them, as we don’t. Hell, she likely doesn’t even know how Ardbert and co. got their crystals, as we only learn they got them through very specific circumstances through the role quests. It’s not just a a gamble in these cases, it’s insanity.

Speaking of her power, blessing a person actually doesn't take to much of her power (only a sliver), it's the rejoinings AND her directly shielding the WoL that caused her strength to diminished this much.

Even a tiny bit of power would be both invaluable and potentially timeline changing. By the end she was burning through her own soul just to talk with us, potentially putting the entire plan at risk. Why would she squander in a tiny amount of power knowing that they are doomed and not even being sure if intervening is the right call?

The crystal she bestowed upon people is still a bit unclear if it's her own power, or if it's the manifest of that big-ass crystal sitting behind her (aka the true mothercrystal) as we got several ones not from hydaelyn.

Midgard makes it clear that the crystals are draining her herself, as that’s why it strips us of the blessing. Not to mention if Hydaelyn was willing to use the Mothercrystal like that then her own refusal to use it for our fight makes no sense.

Because while it's his personal interpretation, the other possibility is also one he deemed "worthy" to give to us as explanation from the devs, because he's not the one/only one who write (or has input on) the story. And watching the interview again, just like veloran said, his first sentence refers to the question, which is about the "why no time branch", while sentence after that is a follow up. I would ask back, if he thinks that scenario is impossible, why brought it up in the first place.

I think he left it up to the players to discuss and debate, as he said he was going to. My point, as it was from the start, was that his own interpretation (which is not canon) did not have her maintaining the timeline, but another interpretation can be that she did. My issue with the initial argument was that it portrayed him as saying “I think she did maintain the timeline,” which is false.

No, that's not how it works, "explicitly" would be if he directly said "I disagree with that". Believing one scenario and not the other doesn't necessarily means he disagree that it's what happen in the story. Because we could say: "oh, my interpretation is character A died, but I could see otherwise".

He explicitly separates those interpretations, yes.

More like insult in a thinly veiled sarcasm.

Anyway, I know being patronising is your only mode, but can you at least try to keep it down a bit? And do me a favor by not using my name that much, because it feels patronising coming from you, and frankly, feels uncomfortable af.

Okay friend