Who knew the 6.15 Omega Quests… (Spoilers)

[Brinne]

Also where does it come from now they were “locked in a fate worse than death?” Hyth certainly seemed to be ok, all things considered.

If we're interpreting Hythlodaeus himself describing their situation as a "purgatory," and a people whose culture puts a premium on their connection to the star and returning to it in death, being cut off from the cycle of the star not therefore equating to "a fate worse than death" might also have to go into the "that is incomprehensibly mind-boggling to me but I mean uh if you say so" category.

But the constant citation of "Hythlodaeus seemed ok" is... extremely Something. Meanwhile, the other souls are known as "Anguished Spirit," "Forlorn Spirit," and other such cheerful monikers in this zone literally named "The Sea of Sorrow."

"I... I...
Return... I must...return...
Why... Why... Why!?"

The vision's grief takes form and lashes out!

"Home... I want... I need..."

Uh, yeah, definitely seems perfectly all right to me! But yes, Hythlodaeus, a remarkable individual, is relatively coherent. So if I find one person who seems relatively okay in objectively terrible conditions, it means everyone involved is definitely okay in those same conditions, right? We don't have to worry about any of them! (This is not how that works, for what it's worth.)

So there were no crystals? No other sources of aether at all? And the Ascians, when sacrificing those on the Source, are just doing it out of spite?

Yeah, I'd say that's what "the planet was completely dead to the point that nature did not function and the wind ceased to blow" would indicate. You do remember how even a mostly-forestalled Calamity like Bahamut caused massive corruption in massive amounts of aether, right?

As people have indicated, it only makes sense that if the Ancients had alternatives to sacrificing their loved ones, they would have done it - and their actions and intentions follow coherently from that. Finding an alternative was what they were planning to do when they had breathing room with the world not literally ending around them, and they could harness other resources. Venat's actions, however, were fundamentally driven by an ideology of "let there be no turning back" and a primary concern with the actions and mindset of the sacrificers, so the precise content of the sacrifices used as the means to do so aren't necessarily as relevant to her.

[EaraGrace]

If we're interpreting Hythlodaeus himself describing their situation as a "purgatory," and a people whose culture puts a premium on their connection to the star and returning to it in death, being cut off from the cycle of the star not therefore equating to "a fate worse than death" might also have to go into the "that is incomprehensibly mind-boggling to me but I mean uh if you say so" category.

The souls in Zodiark returned to the star as part of their “cycle.” Unlike the ones who gave themselves to Hydaelyn, a consequence they were forced to accept due to the actions of Amaurotine society.

But the constant citation of "Hythlodaeus seemed ok" is... extremely Something. Meanwhile, the other souls are known as "Anguished Spirit," "Forlorn Spirit," and other such cheerful monikers in this zone literally named "The Sea of Sorrow."

Yes the “hazy fog” they were in was certainly terrible. You seem to desperately want to strawman into the position that I believe that being in Zodiark was some sort of party, it wasn’t. But it also wasn’t “hell.” If it was as terrible as you say, then why did they say:



Kind of an odd statement if you were in unending torment.

Uh, yeah, definitely seems perfectly all right to me! But yes, Hythlodaeus, a remarkable individual, is relatively coherent. So if I find one person who seems relatively okay in objectively terrible conditions, it means everyone involved is definitely okay in those same conditions, right? We don't have to worry about any of them! (This is not how that works, for what it's worth.)

Am I in a cornfield because I see nothing but strawmen. But sure, let’s play this out. If I went to hell do you think I’d find anyone who’s doing alright? I doubt even the most exceptional of people would be ok with things.

Yeah, I'd say that's what "the planet was completely dead to the point that nature did not function and the wind ceased to blow" would indicate. You do remember how even a mostly-forestalled Calamity like Bahamut caused massive corruption in massive amounts of aether, right?

As people have indicated, it only makes sense that if the Ancients had alternatives to sacrificing their loved ones, they would have done it - and their actions and intentions follow coherently from that. Finding an alternative was what they were planning to do when they had breathing room with the world not literally ending around them, and they could harness other resources. Venat's actions, however, were fundamentally driven by an ideology of "let there be no turning back" and a primary concern with the actions and mindset of the sacrificers, so the precise content of the sacrifices used as the means to do so aren't necessarily as relevant to her.

Dynamis doesn’t corrupt aether, it smothers it. They are anathema to one another. And even a corrupted crystal can be used, as they’re just overaspected.

And they are relevant. If her last attempt to convince them that they need to accept suffering is not actually a dilemma, and is instead a simple question of logistics, then the whole premise falls apart (how convenient for those who dislike her). Not to mention the whole conflict becomes nonsense. Why didn’t Elidibus suggest using non-sentient aether when he came to “mediate.” After all, by that point life would be flourishing in all forms. I’m sure they could gradually sacrifice some trees here and there and avoid the conflict? Pretty odd that wasn’t brought up, like, anywhere no?

[Lyth]

There's always a difference between theory and practice. Did the Convocation actually anticipate that the sacrificed souls would be trapped and slowly aetherically digested by Zodiark? Was that communicated to the general public? If it was an unexpected complication, were the second set of sacrifices informed about the consequences that the first set ran into? It seems strange that three-quarters of their society voluntarily elected to experience a 'fate worse than death' that they were culturally opposed to, and it also seems strange that the Convocation did not simply destroy Zodiark and free the souls immediately after they were done with him to spare them rather than doing more soul microtransactions for benefits. After all, in their mind, they had averted the Final Days.

It's also worth noting that the Convocation could also have destroyed Zodiark and freed the souls back to the lifestream at any point in time over the past 12000 years by simply physically destroying the wards and then Zodiark like Fandaniel did. They just wouldn't be able to do soul microtransactions with him.

[Iscah]

But the constant citation of "Hythlodaeus seemed ok" is... extremely Something. Meanwhile, the other souls are known as "Anguished Spirit," "Forlorn Spirit," and other such cheerful monikers in this zone literally named "The Sea of Sorrow."

Yes the “hazy fog” they were in was certainly terrible. You seem to desperately want to strawman into the position that I believe that being in Zodiark was some sort of party, it wasn’t. But it also wasn’t “hell.” If it was as terrible as you say, then why did they say:

["We are the will of the star, now and forever!"]

Kind of an odd statement if you were in unending torment.

Between these two apparently conflicting examples, I would like to make a suggestion, in line with my previous thoughts on the individuals becoming a single amalgamated primal will but also able to be individually plucked out again – it seems like they might act one way while they are within Zodiark but if individuals split out from the pack somehow, that's when they become self-aware and confused.

Maybe that happens naturally all the time that one or two drift off briefly and then they merge back in and resume being part of Zodiark, or maybe it's a consequence of the attack on Zodiark's bindings causing him to "fray" a bit. I'd have to go over the segment again and see exactly what is said about them.

[Rannie]

Between these two apparently conflicting examples, I would like to make a suggestion, in line with my previous thoughts on the individuals becoming a single amalgamated primal will but also able to be individually plucked out again – it seems like they might act one way while they are within Zodiark but if individuals split out from the pack somehow, that's when they become self-aware and confused.

Maybe that happens naturally all the time that one or two drift off briefly and then they merge back in and resume being part of Zodiark, or maybe it's a consequence of the attack on Zodiark's bindings causing him to "fray" a bit. I'd have to go over the segment again and see exactly what is said about them.

I'm wondering if it may not be because Elidibus left as the heart of Zodiark all those years. While yes the sundering and imprisonment put then into a lull and the rejoinings caused them to wake up with out the "glue" that really held them together.

I mean once fanny Danny took over look how quickly he told the souls to STFU and such and made them leave. *shrugs*

[Rulakir]

And they are relevant. If her last attempt to convince them that they need to accept suffering is not actually a dilemma, and is instead a simple question of logistics, then the whole premise falls apart (how convenient for those who dislike her). Not to mention the whole conflict becomes nonsense.

It's somewhat comforting to read both you and Cleretic realize why people dislike the story even if you won't accept it. ("We can't accept it! We won't accept it!")

This is exactly the reason why people don't like Venat. She had the opportunity for a 'do over' and didn't take it. Her reasons for not doing so simply don't hold up under scrutiny. The debate will never end because while you believe she did the best/only thing she could, others do not.

[Veloran]

To what end? Venat is directly or indirectly relevant to many of the current storylines and so she is often brought up on that basis. If the next storyline involves, for example, a bunch of slavers prowling the seas between the three great continents and Meracydia then I don't really see what relevance Venat would have in such a discussion.

No, the idea is correct. When we're dealing with a moral quandary which entails the destruction of one world for the sake of creating another one, inevitably everything that happens in that latter world is relevant to the question. For an example related to your hypothetical, look at Yotsuyu, someone who resorted to countless horrible deeds after being abused by the people and circumstances she was born to. Obviously, the conditions that made her who she was never would have happened in the ancient world. Similarly, anytime in the future there's some evil done by mankind against itself, there will always be the lingering sentiment that something else was destroyed specifically to enable this to happen. So whenever we look back and judge the ancient conflict, we're weighing it against the consequences of the world we have now.

the whole premise falls apart

The whole premise has been doing nothing but falling apart like a jenga tower with every new piece of information related to it released since 6.0. Since the Omega quests just come out and say that the resistance to the Dynamis transformation is almost totally random and not strongly correlated to one's life conditions or strength of character, the entire idea that the sundering was necessary to create a world of people that could withstand despair and existential oblivion through their inurement to suffering basically becomes moot.



On the topic of the sacrifices - Frankly, I think that this was an idea that was a holdover from the original H&Z storyline, or some iteration of it, that doesn't actually have much relevance to the conflict they developed later. Clearly, a big underlaying idea with Hydaelyn and Zodiark are the notions of multiplicity and regression. Hydaelyn splits things into more things, Zodiark substracts things into less things. Obviously that didn't really turn out to be what either of them were about, particularly Zodiark where the half-sacrifices were really only incidental to how he functioned, but with all the talk about "reflections" and "dimensional compression" earlier in the story there was definitely a stronger focus on expansion vs contraction, with the calamities being part of this. In the earlier version of the plot, I'd guess that the Ascian's goal was the literal rejoining of all reality and all lives back into a single primordial god-being, with the current leftovers of that story being the rejoinings and the sacrifices that brought about his creation.

[EaraGrace]

It's somewhat comforting to read both you and Cleretic realize why people dislike the story even if you won't accept it. ("We can't accept it! We won't accept it!")

See I would say something similar. Given this entire discussion requires dismissing that whole cutscene you’re quoting. Maybe not wise to bring that up as an example of “accepting reality.”

Given I don’t believe the evidence supports the “there just plants and animals” hypothesis, no I don’t really think this is a valid criticism of Endwalker.

This is exactly the reason why people don't like Venat. She had the opportunity for a 'do over' and didn't take it. Her reasons for not doing so simply don't hold up under scrutiny. The debate will never end because while you believe she did the best/only thing she could, others do not.

So I have to ask, not just you but also everyone else that’s been involved in this discussion for the past several months. Do you think it’s objectively true that Venat is in the wrong, that her reasons “don’t hold up to scrutiny?”

The whole premise has been doing nothing but falling apart like a jenga tower with every new piece of information related to it released since 6.0. Since the Omega quests just come out and say that the resistance to the Dynamis transformation is almost totally random and not strongly correlated to one's life conditions or strength of character, the entire idea that the sundering was necessary to create a world of people that could withstand despair and existential oblivion through their inurement to suffering basically becomes moot.

Or as said by Omega it’s a combination of random environmental and emotional factors like friends, family, support systems, personal beliefs, hopes, experiences etc. We suggest this to Omega when we leave Thavnair for Garlemald. Those happen to also be the things mentioned by Venat. It’s the same irl, life experiences, financial situation, genetics, belief systems, support networks, all impact the chance one has of experiencing mental health problems. The point isn’t to say that there isn’t ways to improve ones ability handle these horrific occurrences, but that what ultimately will do the trick is entirely specific to the person. That randomness is exactly why She left humanity alone. Endwalker almost screamed at the player that one’s meaning and purpose has to be fine by oneself. Omegas conclusion that the heart is “the phenomenon that influences ones interpretation of reality” is exactly the kind of “life is what you make of it” statement that many criticized Endwalker for.

[Alleo]

I'm not sure why I keep seeing claims that sentient lives would be involved with the third round of sacrifices when there's nothing to indicate such aside from a desire to "entrust the future of the star" to them on the part of Venat's faction.

I was expecting to get more context behind that situation, but instead they focused on the ideology behind the action, not the morality.

If you dont need that why sacrifice the Ancients in the first place? They could have then just summoned countless of soulless concepts and sacrifice those right? They did not do that in the first round of sacrifices nor in the second one.

I would find it completely ironic if they managed to exchange the souls of the Ancients with mindless beasts only to have Zodiark going out of control.

[redheadturk]

So I have to ask, not just you but also everyone else that’s been involved in this discussion for the past month. Do you think it’s objectively true that Venat is in the wrong, that her reasons “don’t hold up to scrutiny?”.

Short answer: Yes. Long answer: The Ancient world was an objectively better place than the one that Venat left us with. As I see it as a moral imperative to lessen suffering for your fellow man, yes, she was objectively wrong for not helping them prevent the Final days and for the sundering.