Revelations from Patch 6.2: Buried Memories

[Cilia]

PANDAEMONIUM

Something I need to check - did Lahabrea definitely kill Athena? He's accused of it and doesn't deny it, but I don't think he ever outright states that he did.

Did he actually mean to kill her, or was it really an accident in terms of intent, and (once the "blanket denial" path is no longer an option) simply easier to take the blame for that specific mis-accusation than to tell the full truth of what happened?

Is Hephaistos all of Athena and half of Lahabrea? Did she "die" by being absorbed into him rather than being killed, as such?

Did Athena already split off some part of her soul, and Hephaistos is the rest of it plus half of Lahabrea?

How much *does* Lahabrea remember of the incident? It would have be enough that he doesn't want to go poking around and re-awakening the knowledge and desire to do whatever he tried to stop himself from doing.

Or does he still have the knowledge while only having removed the desire to carry it out?

I still need to do the post-MSQ sidequest and Tataru's quest. (Actually, I didn't do the previous chapters of Tataru's quests either.)

Pandaemonium

While we're never shown Lahabrea actually doing the deed, the fact Athena was said to have met with an untimely death in the Asphodelos story and what we're shown here heavily implies that he did kill his wife. He intended to do so, as during / after their soul fusion he was so horrified by her sociopathy and lack of concern for the Star™ he split the part of himself that had been "infected" by her during the soul merge into Hephaistos.

Agdistis suggests he still knows everything that happened, and he's just so ashamed about it and trying so earnestly to protect Erichthonios from the truth about Athena (whom he loved dearly since her sociopathy wasn't clear to him) he's kept the memory to himself. Hephaistos is, for all intents and purposes, who he could have become had he not removed that merged part of his soul from himself. He still knows everything, he's just not moved to act on Athena's infectious (for want of a better term) desires.

'course, this is only the second tier, and the Lahabrea we knew was a lot closer to Hephaistos in personality than the austere man we met in Abyssos... and given the Mateus parallels I'll hardly be surprised if even "good" Lahabrea winds up being not so good in the end.

The Tataru stuff is nice, but it's really just fluff unless you're hankering to spend 20k gil on portraits of the Scions circa Endwalker. The post-MSQ stuff is cool though, it explains Scarmiglione and Barbariccia's backstories as both mortals and Voidsent. Nice way to include character detail without slowing down the pacing of the story.

[PawPaw]

I noticed something a little curious in one of the Pandaemonium cutscenes, namely that in the cutscene before P5 and before you turn in the quest "An Unwelcome Visitor", you're asked

whether or not Lahabrea would be capable of causing all the chaos, but there's a third option that does not appear for all players, suggesting there's some manner of optional quest/content that makes it show up.

However, the quest is not marked as having variables based on quest progression because said cutscene isn't in the Unending Journey.

I didn't pick said option so I'm at a loss as to what causes it to show up.

Was it this one?

[SentioftheHoukai]

Was it this one?

Honestly, it might be dependent upon how you've responded in dialogue choices regarding the Ancients before. Though, I have no proof of this it's the only theory/possibility I can think of off the top of my head.

To be specific, in nearly any dialogue option involving the Ancients or Ascians there is at least one option that can be read as positive whether the Ancient in question be Emet-Selch, Fandaniel and beyond. I do rather suspect that this is what those who erroneously claim that Shadowbringers "forced them to be kind" to Emet-Selch are objecting to. That they were given the OPTION to be tolerant of him, and they'd prefer it wasn't a possibility.

[KageTokage]

Must be some really huge case of the mandela effect because others were claiming have noticed a third option there, too, though it most likely is just a case of getting cutscenes confused.

[SannaR]

Could you be confusing it with the one where the 2nd answer and I'm paraphrasing it "Lahabreha once wore a friend's body" as an option? As there was three choices there.

[Cleretic]

My guess is that the Tataru stuff is going to lead to 'big but optional' things, even if right now it's fluff. I have a suspicion, but I'm not certain yet.

I think the story's going to end with them finally resolving a longstanding but rarely acknowledged loose thread: that Teledji Adeledji's Syndicate seat is still vacant. There was an interview around 2016 or so that confirmed this was basically because Nanamo and the Syndicate are in political deadlock on it; with no clear consensus over who should get it, and Nanamo still wanting to dissolve the Syndicate anyway, there's been no actual movement.

I think Tataru's story is going to end in her getting the seat. She's a rare gem among Ul'Dah money-havers; someone that Nanamo could appoint that would broadly be on her side when it counts, but is still exactly the sort of person that would support Monetarist interests on the day-to-day.

Plus, it'd piss off Rowena, who's wanted on the Syndicate since 1.0. And any plot development that makes Rowena mad is hardly a bad thing.

[Iscah]

...

Your quote and spoiler tags are broken.

Pandaemonium

While we're never shown Lahabrea actually doing the deed, the fact Athena was said to have met with an untimely death in the Asphodelos story and what we're shown here heavily implies that he did kill his wife. He intended to do so, as during / after their soul fusion he was so horrified by her sociopathy and lack of concern for the Star™ he split the part of himself that had been "infected" by her during the soul merge into Hephaistos.

My thinking – though I do need to go over the quest again to see what we were shown or not – is that

perhaps the sequence was that Lahabrea and Athena merge, he rejects her and tears away the infected part of his soul, and that along with Athena's soul is what coalesces into Hephaistos. (Lahabrea does describe him as the "dregs" of both him and Athena, not just his own soul.)

So if all of Athena (minus any hypothetical part stashed away elsewhere) ended up in Hephaistos, then she is simply "gone" and Lahabrea did not actively kill her, but has to explain why she is gone. His following actions would be on the level of covering up an accidental death that he caused, but not actual murder. And we still don't fully understand the details but taking the false blame for murder might be his preference over having to explain the truth.

[Eisi]

People seem to believe that

Hephaistos is part Athena for some reason - he isn't. Probably an English translation quirk.

Just because he agrees with and pursues her goals as if he were her doesn't mean there's literally a part of her soul which entered him at some point or anything like that.

[Iscah]

People seem to believe that

Hephaistos is part Athena for some reason - he isn't. Probably an English translation quirk.

Just because he agrees with and pursues her goals as if he were her doesn't mean there's literally a part of her soul which entered him at some point or anything like that.

People "seem to believe it" because Lahabrea outright says it, without elaborating, to the one other person who knows the full story.

LAHABREA
Athena cared naught for Erichthonios, beyond how he could serve her ends.
You claim to be acting in his interest, but 'tis plain you are no different.
As I ushered Athena to her end, I vowed that my sole mission in life would be to guide this star true.
In service to that vow, I silenced the whispers of my heart. I could not nurture a son whilst an entire world looked to me for guidance. For that choice, I bear the responsibility...
Yet he is still my son, and I'll not suffer you to seduce him with false hope. You, who are naught but the bitter dregs of Athena and I─the very worst of us!

Having tracked down that quote, I also see he alludes to having killed Athena, but that's still light on detail.

[Eisi]

People "seem to believe it" because Lahabrea outright says it, without elaborating, to the one other person who knows the full story.

Having tracked down that quote, I also see he alludes to having killed Athena, but that's still light on detail.

No he doesn't at all! You even posted the quote! Read it!

That's not proof for your point, that's a metaphor. Hephaistos held Athena's beliefs which grew in the part of Lahabrea's soul that was in agreement with her. Hephaistos was NOT (fully or in part) Athena's soul, he was Athena's emotions, memories, beliefs and experiences.

Now let me take your position for a second, I think I would interpret it like this:

After the merger, part of Athena's literal soul was still attached to Lahabrea and possibly vice versa as well. That's the part of Athena that he then rid himself of to create Hephaistos.

That's however mere conjecture based on what I consider to be a misinterpretation of metaphorical language.