Who knew the 6.15 Omega Quests… (Spoilers)

[KariTheFox]

I don't see what's so wrong with the conclusion being "everyone was wrong," - or at least, everyone's position had both merits and flaws, and they're all dead now and these decisions were made thousands of years removed from any living character. I have no idea why we have to come to a conclusion at all about who was right or wrong, or who the real victims are.

I might as well take a strong stance on whether Julius Ceaser was justified in crossing the rubicon.

[Lyth]

...

If you want to take a completely anti-Amaurotian stance on this, then that's perfectly sensible. I think that most of the lore forums are tired of hearing about them anyways.

[Brinne]

I don't see what's so wrong with the conclusion being "everyone was wrong," - or at least, everyone's position had both merits and flaws, and they're all dead now and these decisions were made thousands of years removed from any living character. I have no idea why we have to come to a conclusion at all about who was right or wrong, or who the real victims are.

I might as well take a strong stance on whether Julius Ceaser was justified in crossing the rubicon.

Because this particular thread of discussion started with the assertion being made that Venat was right, and that Amaurot was wrong. I have a feeling that most of the posters here would be broadly willing to accept at least a partial common ground of everyone was wrong, in terms of the major decision-makers of that era, so long as that equally includes Venat. Then it started getting stranger and stranger with the implicit argument that because Amaurot's system of government might not have been wholly perfect (but obviously, they would have been doomed it if it was, something something Endwalker themes), then it means they have no room to complain about Venat unilaterally deciding to massacre them all. And then further weird conflations with the Ancients as a people with the actions of three Ascians, and the Possibly Weirdest overtures that this meant it's for the best that they as a race of people were entirely wiped off the map.

[CrownySuccubus]

I don't see what's so wrong with the conclusion being "everyone was wrong," - or at least, everyone's position had both merits and flaws, and they're all dead now and these decisions were made thousands of years removed from any living character. I have no idea why we have to come to a conclusion at all about who was right or wrong, or who the real victims are.

Because people keep insisting that what Venat did was justified or correct. Sometimes, they'll concede that it was morally abhorrent, regardless of said justification or rectitude, but still couch that with an argument that she was still making the most sound, logical and merciful decision or that the Ancients had it coming.

^ What Ninja Brinne said.

[SannaR]

I don't think the sigils were restraints in the way you are implying them. What Yoshida says about them to me it comes off as a visible badge that can appear if their mask us lost. Since he gives an example of if someone were to pop out Ultima people wouldn't panic straight away and assume the use of high magics wasn't being used recklessly. Or like how some things were only accessible by the Royal Family of Allag. (Course that wasn't as secure once they started making clones. Just like the Vita Chambers of Rapture were only supposed to be usable by Andrew Ryan but also allowed DNA relatives.)

If they did actually restrain their power then I think it's in how strong of magics/abilities they can use. Which doesn't matter too much since the only time most convocation members quit is when they step down and take the retirement nap. It would be adjacent to any time a superhero with powers gets some kind of restraint placed on them or was given something that powers them down. Like the chip that was placed on Captain Marvel. She could still use her powers just not at full strength.

I don't think you'd have to try and convince most of the population to go with the Zodiark plan though. Ancient society to me at least comes off as a group that was highly conditioned for a long time to behave in a certain way. It doesn't come off as a place where you could go and take a vacation if you needed to. Sure you could step away from your work space for a day since that's technically what Hythlodaeus is doing. Yet it could be seen as him still working as he's playing the role of a guide to Emet. Even the WoL is seen as a slight deviation from the normal "familiar" due to being so "thin" of Aether and looking like the only convocation member that isn't a stick in the mud.

Not that I think Hermes was one. Just that after he thought he had lost Meteion his personality seemed to have shifted. We also know that the third time Azem disagreed with the rest of the convocation they ended up being branded a traitor and had a "You can't fire me because I quit!" type of moment.

Anyway this thread was made to talk about if people thought the top choice or a specific person was justified in what they did. Or if you viewed none of them being so. I'm not sure how anyone would have thought that we wouldn't land bad to having both sides run into the same wall again. Since you know we gave up on horse glue.

[Lauront]

If you mean restraints as in inhibits their magic, then no, there isn't a suggestion the sigils would necessarily do that mechanically; it may be symbolic. One can read it both ways due to that "almost as if" wording. That isn't why I am highlighting it, though; rather, it denotes an expectation that they exercise their power responsibly and thus is not consistent with this idea that they could just behave however they wanted, doing whatever they wanted, once in those positions. Particularly not, I'd imagine , if the "whatever" in question is ending their own people.

Q: In the cutscene after the level 87 dungeon we see a red sigil appear for Emet-Selch’s face. Does that mean such sigils are an Ascian thing but rather identify one as belonging to the Convocation of Fourteen? Please explain the lore.

A: So it’s not really just there for identification purposes and if you think about it every person who takes a seat in the Convocation of Fourteen has really intense magic power so basically it appears whenever they use grand magic almost as if it’s a limiter that constrains their magic. However each sigil does indicate the seats on the Convocation so even if someone who’s not on the Convocation went “Oh yeah, magic time! woaaaah!!!”, it’s not going to show up on their face. You can’t just simply name yourself the Fifteen Seat and then blast your magic hoping it’ll appear. I think it’s also connected to Convocation’s responsibility as these are the people that are acknowledged by the society as having those grand powers and taking up these seats. So you know you don’t want people just randomly wandering around blasting magic without knowing who it is or what purpose so it indicates that they’ve been chosen for this role and keeps them in line. For that reason I also think that when one leaves the seat like for example when Venat gave up her seat, she would also give up the sigil so it would no longer appear on her. (YoshiP smirks) So people talking about the seat of Yoshida but that kind of just makes me sad because I think there’s nobody who could take up the seat if I give it up. Also I don’t have a cool symbol on my face!

[CrownySuccubus]

If they did actually restrain their power then I think it's in how strong of magics/abilities they can use. Which doesn't matter too much since the only time most convocation members quit is when they step down and take the retirement nap. It would be adjacent to any time a superhero with powers gets some kind of restraint placed on them or was given something that powers them down. Like the chip that was placed on Captain Marvel. She could still use her powers just not at full strength.

...I'm struggling to understand the logic here. If someone's power is restrained so that they can't use their full strength, then isn't that, by definition...a RESTRAINT?

Likewise, if the only time they are released of said restraints comes just before they literally die (of which Venat is noteworthy because she's an exception), then does that not mean that MOST Convocation members basically remain restrained for the rest of their lives?

[AwesomeJr44]

The members of the Convocation who went on to become the Ascians single-handedly killed millions across the seven worlds that they destroyed, all out of a feeling of racial superiority.

That's not why they did the rejoinings, but I mean...

they kinda ARE superior to the sundered in every way.

[SannaR]

...I'm struggling to understand the logic here. If someone's power is restrained so that they can't use their full strength, then isn't that, by definition...a RESTRAINT?

Likewise, if the only time they are released of said restraints comes just before they literally die (of which Venat is noteworthy because she's an exception), then does that not mean that MOST Convocation members basically remain restrained for the rest of their lives?

It's like the difference between how Superman normally doesn't use his powers at full strength cause just punching someone like Lex Luther or the Riddler would most likely kill the person versus when punching Darkside. Or like the times Goku is being even more of an airhead and doesn't realize he used more force than needed. Like if he thought he was only lightly poking a car but instead of a light touch that doesn't do anything the poke makes the car get flung down the road a few feet. It would be like how in the original version of Freeza meeting Goku; Goku is thought of to be really slow and thus not a threat. Which he is. Until he realizes that he's still wearing his very heavy weighted training top and takes it off and shows how fast he really is. Just because Goku can fight someone with said shirt on doesn't mean he's able to fight as good as he can without it on. Hope that makes more sense.

[SannaR]

If you mean restraints as in inhibits their magic, then no, there isn't a suggestion the sigils would necessarily do that mechanically; it may be symbolic. One can read it both ways due to that "almost as if" wording. That isn't why I am highlighting it, though; rather, it denotes an expectation that they exercise their power responsibly and thus is not consistent with this idea that they could just behave however they wanted, doing whatever they wanted, once in those positions. Particularly not, I'd imagine , if the "whatever" in question is ending their own people.

Yes I mean as an inhibitor.