Building a better Alphinaud

[Theodric]

Uh what? He has always been righteous. In ARR his righteous were obscured a bit by his naiveté so he came across a bit as a snot, but the dude has always been a walking embodiment of righteousness. Probably the most out of all the scions. Always was, always has been. His idea never changed, even before he set foot on Eozea. In fact, we ARE realizing his vision for Eozea from his original thesis that he wrote when Loiusoux was still alive.

A shame such a vision isn't limited to Eorzea and is being projected onto Etheirys as a whole.

It strips away a lot of what makes each race and nation within the setting unique.

[CrownySuccubus]

A shame such a vision isn't limited to Eorzea and is being projected onto Etheirys as a whole.

It strips away a lot of what makes each race and nation within the setting unique.

If you're talking about democratization, then that usually doesn't have anything to do with the Scions or what views they might have. Usually, all the Scions do is eliminate the local dictator and then, the people themselves are the ones who decide how they want to rebuild.

I'd also argue that such a change doesn't really have anything to do with the settings' uniqueness, either. Because if the complaint is that monarchies are all being turned into democracies and that makes them less unique, then that kind of implies that it's gone form one commonality to a different one.

[Slatersev]

If you're talking about democratization, then that usually doesn't have anything to do with the Scions or what views they might have. Usually, all the Scions do is eliminate the local dictator and then, the people themselves are the ones who decide how they want to rebuild.

I'd also argue that such a change doesn't really have anything to do with the settings' uniqueness, either. Because if the complaint is that monarchies are all being turned into democracies and that makes them less unique, then that kind of implies that it's gone form one commonality to a different one.

It's also not even really true. When it comes to nations in FFXIV that have been liberated from oppressor's, only some of them have chosen to become Democracies.

Ishgard ditched Theocracy for a Parliament system where the nobles still make up half the government. Ala Mihgo hated being a monarchy even before Garlemald invaded because there king was an insane asshole. Bozja ditched a corrupt Monarchy for a Democracy.

But on the other hand Doma was restored back to the Monarchy it had been before it was invaded. Same with Dalmasca.

So when it comes to ex Garlemald provinces involved in the story, half decided to try something new, half went back to there original system because they were happy with it.

And in all 5 cases the Scions didn't really force any form of government on them. They were chosen by there respective peoples.

The idea that all the "good" nations are being democratized/homogenized is patently untrue. The vast majority of Nations in either Alliance are some form of Non Democracy with no real intention or push to change.

[KariTheFox]

Alphinaud's "ideas" don't really have anything to do with democracy or how governments are structured either. The problems Alphinaud has with the various societies we've met have more to do with how they treat people they have power over, and how much they use thier power and influence to help those in need (or rather, don't use that power.)

Alphinaud believes that nations should help each other and the downtrodden in thier societies, that isolationism is a bad policy, and that negotiation and diplomacy are preferable to violence and conflict.

[Raven2014]

The idea that all the "good" nations are being democratized/homogenized is patently untrue. The vast majority of Nations in either Alliance are some form of Non Democracy with no real intention or push to change.

Not to mention the 3 core members are not Democracy either. U'lduar is a monarchy, Galandia is basically a pagan theocracy, while Limsa is ... technically a dictatorship with the leadership elected through a might make right process.

...which in the eyes of some of us, detracts from the setting as we'd rather not see every nation follow a similar trajectory. It's also completely viable for some people and nations to simply want to be left alone to do their own thing. For as much as the game has various characters screech to the high heavens about how a policy of isolation is supposedly a bad thing, I think the game would benefit from a greater range of potential ideals and world views being showcased.

It gets a bit boring when everything is pushed from the perspective of overly idealistic city dwellers and when everything is written in such a way as to mysteriously tie everything to the result that the Scions and their allies are gunning for.

I'm not sure what you're talking about here, since most of the thing you said here doesn't match with what in the game or would make the leadership super stupid. For the most part, every nations we came across were under crisis and had to beg for outside help, it makes no sense what's so ever for them to go back. Not to mention, prior to the conclusion to the 6.0 story the Garlean Empire is a threat. Going solo right after gaining independent seem to be a terrible idea.

- Isghard: they just lost the head of government, with the whole doctrine turned out to be a 1000 years lie. Without fresh respective coming in, the millenia distrust between the classes would come to full blow, and this time there is no longer an external enemy with an existential threat to keep them from killing each others ... not to mention the left over heratic population. An isolated Isghard would go up in flame in a civil war.

- Ala Mihgo: considered Albert triggered the war to drag the alliance in, and thus have them liberated. Even if they kicked the Alliance out and become an isolanist again, they would have a broken country with no resource to rebuild, and still gonna be on the front line against Garmelean.

- Doma: going solo mean they'll be by themselves holding the Eastern against the 12th legion, a battle they already fought and lost. At the very least, Doma would still have to unite with Dalmascans and Borza. At that point combining the Eastern Alliance with the Eorza Alliance make no different from an isolation pov.


You seem to want variety simply for the shake of variety at the cost of logic. The geo-political situation in Eozea make perfect sense. The new leaders may be portrayed as idealists, but it doesn't change the fact their action is exactly the same what the most pragmatic leaders would do assuming said leaders are not stupid.

[DPZ2]

It strips away a lot of what makes each race and nation within the setting unique.

I'm pretty sure that, aside from a decidedly Libertarian city-state, all of the major political options are covered, including Rule by Dragon.

As for Garlemald, there are factions of native Garleans who do not desire a return to the monarchy (leaving aside the point that all of the Royals are dead).

[Dikatis]

I'm pretty sure that, aside from a decidedly Libertarian city-state

Idyllshire has you covered. There are no rules except one: be nice to your friends. Other than that, you're free to do whatever as long as you don't do anything that would harm the happiness of the other homesteaders. It's not a full-on political entity per-say, but it has significant financial and political clout thanks to the goblins' engineering and connections to Rowena.