Tales from the Dawn #3: "A Question of Life" (Hermes)

[Lurina]

See I actually have to hard disagree. The example of the Lyssa in Ktisis suggests they played fast and loose with sentience.

Let me use an example because I'm playing through Mass Effect again atm. Long story short, a group called the Quarians created synthetic helpers to handle their labor needs and gave them a very limited level of intelligence that was nowhere near sentience. Unintentionally however, they eventually did develop sentience. The Quarians, realizing what happened, went "oh no, we basically have slaves now," and quickly panicked thinking the Geth would rise up. This led to them trying to destroy the Geth and losing their homeworld.

Now the game rightfully points out how badly the Quarians fucked up, but I think the initial reaction is interesting to compare. The Quarians overreact and believe their slaves would destroy them because of their sentience, the Ancients go "wow neat! we should remake it with vocal cords for more experiments!" It kind of highlights what makes me squick at the Ancients handling of these things. They have the knowledge to know what is sentient and what isn't, the power to protect and coexist with that sentience without much cost, and yet they don't seem to care. I compare that to the Sundered, who yes struggle with this as well and deserve to be called out when aren't in the right, but still have many who try their best like with city states and the Allied tribes. In the Ancient world its just really Hermes who seems to care.

We don't see any apparently-sapient creatures out and about in Elpis (although, again, we keep getting quests in the Sundered world that establish whatever random species we've been murdering to make hair regrowth tonic has actually been sapient all along, with the game not seeming to regard this as particularly weird, which suggests some awkward double standards on the part of the writers), just Meteion and the Lyssa, which we hear about second-hand. Meteion is a personal project of Hermes that only a handful of people know anything about, while the sapience of the Lyssa is clearly an accident - like you said, the note we find describes the Ancients as being delighted and surprised. Even when it comes to Familars, all the other ones we encounter in game are just animals. Even Venat's proto-Loporitt doesn't speak.

I don't think there's any basis to think they had some kind of broader servant class of sapient creations in the same way as the Quarians. Again, there's a whole quest chain where the researchers are fascinated (and occasionally a little worried) by your apparent intelligence as a special case, and seem a little taken aback when you do things like express discomfort with their creation-testing process; as soon as you speak to them 'on their level', they start questioning themselves. While the Ancients seem sort of flippant about the issue, it seems more like they're naive than exploitative. They haven't fully considered the implications of co-existing with other life capable of advanced thought because it's so uncommon.

You're not wrong about it being kinda irresponsible, but it's not institutional slavery.

In that sense, Venat and her followers were not only Walking Away From Omelas, but making the city uninhabitable on thier way out too.

I mean, Venat and her followers left Zodiark intact with all the Ancient souls inside who seemed to have been operating under the assumption they'd eventually be freed. You can wade through the tangled and messy writing of the Sundering scenario in general and say that it was necessary for Venat's plan to keep Zodiark alive regardless of the morals of the issue, but it's still less walking away from Omelas and more taking issue with which baby is being tortured.

[KariTheFox]

I mean, Venat and her followers left Zodiark intact with all the Ancient souls inside who seemed to have been operating under the assumption they'd eventually be freed. You can wade through the tangled and messy writing of the Sundering scenario in general and say that it was necessary for Venat's plan to keep Zodiark alive regardless of the morals of the issue, but it's still less walking away from Omelas and more taking issue with which baby is being tortured.

I mean, the ancients inside Zodiark volunteered to be there, which makes the moral consideration of whether it's "okay" to leave them there different compared to the targets of the third sacrifice, which would have no say in the matter or understanding of why they they were being sacrificed.

If the child in Omelas was instead an adult who had volunteered to be there, I think the moral considerations change a bit. Part of what makes it so horrible is that they have no capacity to understand why they are suffering.

Also, Venat was operating with future knowledge that Zodiark would eventually die and the souls inside him freed, too.

You'll notice I'm talking wholly about the Ancients/Amaurot, not the Ascians.

We commit even less violence against them, though. Limited only to Hermes and the people in Pandemonium.

[Brinne]

We commit even less violence against them, though. Limited only to Hermes and the people in Pandemonium.

And once again, you'll notice I said "justifying acts of violence" in general, not "our personal acts of violence." These discussions usually take place in context of arguing whether Hermes and Venat's actions in lashing out against Ancient culture and ultimately committing violence against them were justified, reasonable, or understandable, not necessarily anything specifically involving the Warrior of Light.

[Lurina]

I mean, the ancients inside Zodiark volunteered to be there, which makes the moral consideration of whether it's "okay" to leave them there different compared to the targets of the third sacrifice, which would have no say in the matter or understanding of why they they were being sacrificed.

They 'volunteered' under the imminent threat of everyone dying anyway. I'm pretty sure that counts as under duress. When you talk to someone of them on the moon, it's clear that at least a fair number are not at all happy about what happened.

And again, it's suggested that everyone went into the plan understanding the intent was to find a way to free their souls once the crisis had been resolved. The Ancients in Zodiark gave up their lives conditionally to protect their own civilization and loved ones in the medium term. They did not agree to their immortal souls becoming batteries for a shield to protect a completely different group of races and civilizations for 12,000 years. Hydaelyn's plan was predicated on their non-consensual exploitation just as much as the Convocation's plan was predicated on the non-consensual exploitation of the third wave of sacrifices.

...that is, assuming they were sapient, which as always is not really made clear for some reason.

Honestly, I feel like the Ancients who sacrificed themselves are never really centered enough in these conversations. They gave up everything to save the world, only for Hydaelyn to treat them as tools in her gambit (which wasn't even guaranteed to work, based on G'raha's timeline), deciding that they were to bare the burden for the safety of her 'children' indefinitely. But despite them being their perpetual protectors, taking 100% of the burden that would otherwise have destroyed the planet at a moment's notice, she literally erased them from history; swept them under the rug.

If that's not an Omelas situation, I don't know what is.

[RyuDragnier]

...that is, assuming they were sapient, which as always is not really made clear for some reason.

I assume the devs thought that if it was outright said that the 3rd sacrifices were sapient, there would be no morally grey area anymore and Venat would be easily declared the heroine and the Convocation the villains, I guess?

[KariTheFox]

And again, it's suggested that everyone went into the plan understanding the intent was to find a way to free their souls once the crisis had been resolved. The Ancients in Zodiark gave up their lives conditionally to protect their own civilization and loved ones in the medium term.

I dunno, Emet-Selch's line about whether half of the sundered would sacrifice their lives for the other kind of loses its weight if what he actually meant was "would half of you agree to be temporarily inconvienced until the other half figures out how to fix it?"

It kind of cheapens the first and second sacrifice if the ancients going into it always knew it was a temporary affair. I always figured that the third sacrifice was something that the remaining ancients came up with after being incapable of accepting the loss of the ones that died to bring about Zodiark.

[KariTheFox]

And once again, you'll notice I said "justifying acts of violence" in general, not "our personal acts of violence." These discussions usually take place in context of arguing whether Hermes and Venat's actions in lashing out against Ancient culture and ultimately committing violence against them were justified, reasonable, or understandable, not necessarily anything specifically involving the Warrior of Light.

It's arguable if Venat did commit acts of violence at all, in Venat's case, her "violence" can be seen as the same kind of violence that a surgeon commits when he has to amputate an infected limb.

And Hermes, I don't think anyone has ever said his actions are justifable. Understandable maybe, but you can understand someone without agreeing with them.

[tokinokanatae]

I dunno, Emet-Selch's line about whether half of the sundered would sacrifice their lives for the other kind of loses its weight if what he actually meant was "would half of you agree to be temporarily inconvienced until the other half figures out how to fix it?"

They died. It's like saying Papalymo didn't really sacrifice himself, he's just taking a temporary dip in the Aetherial Sea. Or what Ysayle did for us was no biggie because it's not like she gave up the possibility of reincarnation. Why bother getting upset over Haurchefant? Sure, his life was cut short, but his aether still exists, so no problem.

[KariTheFox]

They died. It's like saying Papalymo didn't really sacrifice himself, he's just taking a temporary dip in the Aetherial Sea. Or what Ysayle did for us was no biggie because it's not like she gave up the possibility of reincarnation. Why bother getting upset over Haurchefant? Sure, his life was cut short, but his aether still exists, so no problem.

The intention of the third sacrifice is to bring them back from the dead. Not reincarnate them or let them return to the aetheric sea, but fully and completely restore and revive them.

If that had been successful, then the finality of thier deaths would no longer have any sting. If they had sacrificed themselves assuming they would be brought back to life later, then thier sacrifices would be less meaningful than Ysayle or Papalymo's, who understood they were going to die and there was no coming back.

Edit: And just to be clear, I don't think the people of the first two sacrifices knew about any plans to try to revive them, because I do think those sacrifices are particularly meaningful and show the deep love and dedication the ancients had towards each other and thier star.

[Lurina]

I dunno, Emet-Selch's line about whether half of the sundered would sacrifice their lives for the other kind of loses its weight if what he actually meant was "would half of you agree to be temporarily inconvienced until the other half figures out how to fix it?"

It kind of cheapens the first and second sacrifice if the ancients going into it always knew it was a temporary affair. I always figured that the third sacrifice was something that the remaining ancients came up with after being incapable of accepting the loss of the ones that died to bring about Zodiark.

IIRC, the text is ambiguous as to whether they accepted being sacrificed under the premise they'd try to bring them back to life, or just that their souls would be freed to return to the star so they wouldn't spend forever in Zodiark purgatory - I'd personally lean towards the latter interpretation, since it does make Emet's speech less weird and generally vibes more akin to the writers intent. Some of the dialogue from the moon definitely makes it clear that being trapped within him for literally millenia was not the plan, at least.

Though, I think it bears mentioning that, even if they had gone into it with the assumption/hope that they'd be saved, giving up your body and staking your literal soul on a plan to save the world that may or may not even work is still a pretty heroic act. I really think people don't appreciate the magnitude of what the sacrifices to Zodiark actually did.

I edited my last post to kinda sharpen the point I was making a bit.