Tale of Emet [FF14 x Nier Reincarnation event story]

[Theodric]

I believe it's been pointed out many times over the years around these parts that the player character and their allies have been directly or indirectly complicit in the deaths of many individuals who could have been dealt with through non-lethal methods instead. Especially in such cases where they were slain based on mere ideological differences or due to not being given a fair chance to digest what was going on at the time.

The 'bias' accusation can be trotted out as many times as some here see fit though that hardly changes the trend of excuses being made to excuse everything the protagonists are complicit in as well as a push for no consequences whatsoever when they do something shady. I'm sure many here are well aware that they're akin to comfort characters in certain cases.

Personally I like it when the protagonists do something shady. It makes them more interesting and realistic. Hien's one of my favourite characters for that very reason - not only was he fairly cold and callous towards Yotsuyu's plight, he strong armed the Xaela into being fodder for a war that did not concern them and sent many of the occupants of Doma Castle to a horrific watery grave. Somehow I doubt it would be as readily dismissed if it were Yotsuyu drowning a bunch of resistance fighters...

Though I suppose this is the same board with a strange fondness for finding excuses to blame any antagonist, no matter how sympathetic, for every little thing only to excuse genocide so long as a pretty self proclaimed deity declares it to be a 'necessity'.

I'd personally like to see consistency within the story where such acts are concerned instead of this silly double standard of 'it's okay when we do it'.

[KizuyaKatogami]

If you can't tell "growing taller" was a joke, maybe I should have been more blunt. Maybe, "Murdering people in the hopes that stapling there soul back on will give me a bigger dick" (Absurdity aside, there literally nothing that says it couldn't be canon that one of the unseen Ascians has that as his major motivation)

Regardless, trying to undo it involves murdering innocent people. Claiming that can't or shouldn't be portrayed negatively is your own wildly subjective bias. And its especially funny to here you claim others are trying to "simplify" motivations when thats literally all you do with Venat because you don't like her and that's your interpretation. Which is fine, opinions, but don't try to dress it up as something deeper or objective.

And trying to undo it without the Unsundered or Zodiark is even less justified than it was before. Now the Ascians left don't even fully remember what the world they lost was like. And if the Unsundered/Hyth are reborn on the Source there going to have there own new lives they probably wouldn't be thrilled with people claiming to be there allies trying to severely damage and kill people in there world

It doesn’t matter if it’s a joke or whatever, with your absurdities i never know. Also, how funny you bring up undoing it involves murdering innocent people. You mean like how undoing the 8UC timeline involved murdering trillions of innocent people? Or how Minfilia on the First murdered innocent children by forcing them to fight against sin eaters? Seems like you agree with the “rules for thee but not for me” precedence.

I’ve never simplified motivations with Venat. I’ve stated her entire viewpoint time and time again, i just find it incredibly flawed and stupid, and apparently many people do as well with how much the devs had to bend over backwards for her in a QnA and answer questions and explicitly stated “she isn’t a bad guy.” I’m just confused on where the relevance is with bringing her up though. It seems to me whenever you’re losing an argument you either run away and stay quiet or move goalposts.

[Slatersev]

It doesn’t matter if it’s a joke or whatever, with your absurdities i never know. Also, how funny you bring up undoing it involves murdering innocent people. You mean like how undoing the 8UC timeline involved murdering trillions of innocent people? Or how Minfilia on the First murdered innocent children by forcing them to fight against sin eaters? Seems like you agree with the “rules for thee but not for me” precedence.

I’ve never simplified motivations with Venat. I’ve stated her entire viewpoint time and time again, i just find it incredibly flawed and stupid, and apparently many people do as well with how much the devs had to bend over backwards for her in a QnA and answer questions and explicitly stated “she isn’t a bad guy.” I’m just confused on where the relevance is with bringing her up though. It seems to me whenever you’re losing an argument you either run away and stay quiet or move goalposts.

Minfillia isnt a gotcha when she was literally the first person who first brought up the morality of her actions. Its why she purposely lets herself die for good. She quite literally says it wasn't fair and she doesn't deserve to live anymore. So if you want to compare it to Ascians still trying to staple themselves back together, thats fine. Shit she would agree with you. But she also already acknowledged any justifications she had doesnt make it right and that would still apply to the Ascians as well. Which is back to the point.

Getting huffy at the idea that murder of innocent people being depicted as not ideal is just silly. Especially when the story did already already took that stance with Minfillia's actions and had her die for it. Why would it be any different for the Ascians? Why does there sympathetic backstory mean bad things they do now shouldn't or can't be depicted as bad?

Because you like them more? Shit I like them more, Minfillia is boring as fuck, the best thing she ever did was make room for Ryne. But getting more enjoyment out of the Ascians doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't be depicted as doing something seen by characters in the story as bad.

I don't want the last Ascians to die, I hope they get to play a part in the story going forward. I just find the idea that they can't be depicted as villainous because they have or had sympathetic goals or motivations to be widely subjective and silly.

[Tehmon]

On and on and on it goes...

[Alleluia]

On and on and on it goes...

Until death takes you into its gentle embrace.

Or the new patch comes out and people find other points to argue about.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Minfillia isnt a gotcha when she was literally the first person who first brought up the morality of her actions. Its why she purposely lets herself die for good. She quite literally says it wasn't fair and she doesn't deserve to live anymore. So if you want to compare it to Ascians still trying to staple themselves back together, thats fine. Shit she would agree with you. But she also already acknowledged any justifications she had doesnt make it right and that would still apply to the Ascians as well. Which is back to the point.

Getting huffy at the idea that murder of innocent people being depicted as not ideal is just silly. Especially when the story did already already took that stance with Minfillia's actions and had her die for it. Why would it be any different for the Ascians? Why does there sympathetic backstory mean bad things they do now shouldn't or can't be depicted as bad?

Because you like them more? Shit I like them more, Minfillia is boring as fuck, the best thing she ever did was make room for Ryne. But getting more enjoyment out of the Ascians doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't be depicted as doing something seen by characters in the story as bad.

I don't want the last Ascians to die, I hope they get to play a part in the story going forward. I just find the idea that they can't be depicted as villainous because they have or had sympathetic goals or motivations to be widely subjective and silly.

You’re avoiding the elephant in the room. What’s your excuse for Ironworks then? You’re exact words were, “Trying to undo it involves murdering people.” You’re saying that regardless of circumstance, trying to undo something that involves killing people is negative and wrong and villainous. Well that’s exactly what Ironworks was prepared or do and were praised for it. So if we’re going to praise them for that, and praise Venat as a hero for doing what she did(who btw, consumed the souls of 12 people to summon Hydaelyn, i guess she’s wrong for that and we should all petition to have her minion of being named a hero renamed), then we shouldn’t be framing an ascian as wrong or villainous for doing the same as them except on a much smaller scale.

[Slatersev]

You’re avoiding the elephant in the room. What’s your excuse for Ironworks then? You’re exact words were, “Trying to undo it involves murdering people.” You’re saying that regardless of circumstance, trying to undo something that involves killing people is negative and wrong and villainous. Well that’s exactly what Ironworks was prepared or do and were praised for it. So if we’re going to praise them for that, and praise Venat as a hero for doing what she did(who btw, consumed the souls of 12 people to summon Hydaelyn, i guess she’s wrong for that and we should all petition to have her minion of being named a hero renamed), then we shouldn’t be framing an ascian as wrong or villainous for doing the same as them except on a much smaller scale.

I'm not avoiding anything, I have stated that the Ironworks planning to put themselves among the sacrifice, to not reap any of the theoretical rewards changes the calculus on how to judge them, to you it doesn't to me it does.

I have also never called Venat a hero. Liking the direction they took her and thinking some of the arguments against her and pro Convocation are silly (Arguing she secretly isnt popular using antidotes from a popularity poll she came in third in, people treating the Supreme Deity line as some gleeful boast and not a call to prove that normal mortals have surpassed her, etc)

And the main point is your claim that it would be bad to depict Ascians still trying to rejoin as villainous. I think thats silly, not because its never okay to kill, or make morally "bad" decisions, but because "This character maybe doing something similar means it can never be depicted as a bad thing ever even if context changes" Especially in the context of where XIV's story is right now where the Sundered beings right to exist has been stressed so heavily in SHB. It would be incongruous to suddenly have somebody trying to use them as essentially a power up but have the story be like "Can't judge him though, he had a tough life"

[KageTokage]

Ran'jit is a better example of someone who was able to be a constant thorn in our sides despite being 1/14, though it seems implied that like Zenos the main reason he was able to threaten us initially was simply because of unfamiliarity, not because we actually got that much stronger in between battles.

[Rulakir]

Ran'jit also had that spirit bond with the serpent I never saw explained. A lot of the power levels in the game never are likely due to gameplay reasons.

[Cleretic]

Ran'jit and his bond with the dragon are a known technique from his people--his father had one, too, although it didn't end up saving him. (Ran'jit's father's dragon is Huracan, one of the Shadowbringers Rank A hunts.) He's basically a full-fledged job we just don't have access to, somewhere between a Monk, Summoner, and Reaper. So yeah, the fact he can go toe-to-toe with us even after we've learned all his tricks is evidence that being further fragmented doesn't actually make someone weaker.

Also evidence to the same conclusion is literally every single enemy we fought over the entirety of Shadowbringers. We found a whole bunch of enemies that were just regular animals with perfectly reasonable analogues in things we've fought before, and never once did we ever find them easier fights. Similarly, never at any point did the story say 'yeah, you're just objectively more of a being than everything in this world so you'll have an easy time fighting it', so we can reason that it's not just a gameplay conceit, and that the First's denizens are not just objectively weaker. Not one piece of the game's story or lore ever states that they are, so I have no idea why people think that.