Mysterious monsters without much explanation?

[KageTokage]

It is kind of funny that the fire concept in P8S part 2 is represented by the modern day Ifrit instead of something more...mundane but still possessing an affinity for fire like a drake.

We also already know at least one of the primals likely has a mundane origin as Garuda was theorized to simply be a general of Allag who commanded the iksalions that would eventually become the ixal.

[Cleretic]

Correction, Ifrita. They are completely different beings, as primal summons are based on what the summoners believe. If we meet the original Ifrita, she likely will not look like the Ifrit the Amaljaa know.

You realize how thin a difference that is, right? That basically the only thing that changed between the Ancients and the Amal'jaa was the thing's gender?

[thegreatonemal]

You realize how thin a difference that is, right? That basically the only thing that changed between the Ancients and the Amal'jaa was the thing's gender?

I think that's more the devs didn't want to make a new model and just reused assets.

[RyuDragnier]

You realize how thin a difference that is, right? That basically the only thing that changed between the Ancients and the Amal'jaa was the thing's gender?

Ifrita in World of Final Fantasy (her first appearance) looked like this.



If they keep her true to her original appearance (but possibly more beastly looking like FF8/FF10 Ifrit), then she will look nothing like FF14 Ifrit.

[Zero-ELEC]

Ifrita in World of Final Fantasy (her first appearance) looked like this.



If they keep her true to her original appearance (but possibly more beastly looking like FF8/FF10 Ifrit), then she will look nothing like FF14 Ifrit.

That's actually not what she looked like in World of Final Fantasy, that's art commissioned specifically for the card game and it's the artist's own interpretation. (I remember reading a Final Fantasy Portal article on it)



Ifreeta looked like this in her original appearance. It's... slightly different.

[RyuDragnier]

That's actually not what she looked like in World of Final Fantasy, that's art commissioned specifically for the card game and it's the artist's own interpretation. (I remember reading a Final Fantasy Portal article on it)



Ifreeta looked like this in her original appearance. It's... slightly different.

I had actually looked for concept art for her, but sadly that card was all that popped up. Thanks for posting the sprite pictures.

[Lyth]

I wouldn't have automatically jumped to the conclusion that Ifrita represented a gendered concept in this game. The Amaurotines have their own names for a lot of familiar concepts from our own world, which is how I had personally interpreted this. And as was pointed out earlier, the fire concept that we can build with Hephaistos during High Concept is still the 'Ifrit' that we know. While there can be more than one possible manifestation of Ifrit, as we've seen from E6S, was there anything in this game that actually supports the claim that the two terms 'Ifrit' and 'Ifrita' are 'completely different'? Or is this just speculation based on a side game?

With regards to the earlier conversation in this thread, both the Church of Locus and the Sect of Germonique have their theories about Ultima's origins (as per Field Record 42), and the Sect in particular invoked that familiar ritual to use their bodies as vessels in Lucavi summoning (which is suspiciously reminiscent of Voidsent summoning). Now if only we knew which 'Locus' (place) such a Church could be based in...

[Cleretic]

I wouldn't have automatically jumped to the conclusion that Ifrita represented a gendered concept in this game.

Pronouns: Ifrita has 'em.

Ifrita. A manifestation of concentrated fire aether. I could see what Azem was planning: transform the volcano's aether into Ifrita, draw her away, and then destroy her elsewhere. This would safely disperse the excess. Of course, the plan required someone to procure the concept of Ifrita for Azem. But if that someone was not Lahabrea himself, who else could it be?

The Savage raid strongly implies that Ifrita and Ifrit were basically the same, but we do have to remember that the context of Pandaemonium Savage is 'present-day scientific paper drawing connections between Ancient times and modern day and taking some dramatic liberties', so take that with a grain of salt. But regardless of what Ifrita actually looked like, the intention of her addition was pretty clear: to declare that Ifrit was an Ancient construct that the Amal'jaans misinterpreted as a creator deity, and not a figure that the Amal'jaan society devised of their own accord or derived from their own experiences like the Ixal (although even the Ixal don't really consider Garuda their creator, which it turns out they were right not to). And I don't like that.

[Alpheus]

I'm curious as to what heck those umbrils in the Tower of Zot were supposed to be, given that all of the other enemies there are either tempered Garleans or magitek.

Even Estinien questions what they are if he's in your trust party.

An FFXI cameo (part of a number of XI cameos in EW via monsters and NPCs) , but yea I haven't found out what they might be in a XIV context anywhere in game either. Glad they're still bothersome for the most part, very on brand for them.

[thegreatonemal]

Pronouns: Ifrita has 'em.



The Savage raid strongly implies that Ifrita and Ifrit were basically the same, but we do have to remember that the context of Pandaemonium Savage is 'present-day scientific paper drawing connections between Ancient times and modern day and taking some dramatic liberties', so take that with a grain of salt. But regardless of what Ifrita actually looked like, the intention of her addition was pretty clear: to declare that Ifrit was an Ancient construct that the Amal'jaans misinterpreted as a creator deity, and not a figure that the Amal'jaan society devised of their own accord or derived from their own experiences like the Ixal (although even the Ixal don't really consider Garuda their creator, which it turns out they were right not to). And I don't like that.

The "dramatic liberties" being that entire phase, you're not meant to try and draw anything from it other than a lalafell with a wild imagination.