What lore do you ignore?

[valphyrian]

I am incredibly late to this, but it's not so much choosing to ignore a tidbit of lore so much as it is a head cannoned explanation for the use of offensive light magicks (ie; Glare and Dia) by the White Mage and a return to elemental conjurey for my character after the events of Shadowbringers come to a close.

To me, I've always loved the Conjurer aspects of White Mage, the art of conjurey is core to my OC's lore and "cannon". He draws his strength from nature and borrows from the Elementals, and in turn gives back to the lands from which he's borrowed aether through meditation.

So, I was a little disappointed when come Shadowbringers, I'd lost access to Stone and Aero... but it did make sense, lore-wise, for my Conjurer / White Mage to draw from the most potent of elements present in The First rather than relying on the strength of nature alone to overcome such powerful foes. So the use of Light Magic during the events of Shadowbringers made a lot of sense to me, and for the time being, felt "correct", especially with the gradual defeat of the Sin Eaters / Lightwardens and the light absorbed.

That being said, I feel like it makes sense for my character to have expunged this light during his final encounter with Emet-Selch. Having dealt the final blow to Emet with the Axe of Light, it makes sense to me that without the light of the wardens or the eternal Flood of Light looming over Norvrandt, that he would have lost the ability to or at the very least would not have a source powerful enough to draw from in order to cast light magic such as Dia or Glare with much effectiveness, and as such, would return to the nature of conjurey and drawing power from the elements upon returning to The Source.

The continued use of Glare / Dia don't make sense for me or my character thematically, so I just kind of pretend he is casting highly potent stone and aero spells in place of the upgraded versions of Glare/Dia/Holy that've come with Endwalker and onward.

[SeverianLyonesse]

I ignore dynamis. The story had been heavily monistic (everything is aether) for too long, and retconning dynamis into it really just kind of shat on what came before.

[Carin-Eri]

I ignore dynamis. The story had been heavily monistic (everything is aether) for too long, and retconning dynamis into it really just kind of shat on what came before.

Whilst I don't disagree with you per-se, I will say that I do think it makes more sense that our Limit Breaks are 'powered' by Dynamis rather than Aether.

[CornyCryolo]

Personally, i sorta ignore the "ARR-EW happened in 1 year" debacle. There's no way in my mind that the WoL went through all of that in...a year??? My personal thoughts are like, 2-ish years at minimum honestly.

[kaynide]

Personally, i sorta ignore the "ARR-EW happened in 1 year" debacle. There's no way in my mind that the WoL went through all of that in...a year??? My personal thoughts are like, 2-ish years at minimum honestly.

This…is a thing. Time is really done weird here. Like, just the boat trip from Limsa to Kugane was…2-3 months according to lore stuff?? So a quarter of our ARR-EW experience was on a boat.

[Iscah]

This…is a thing. Time is really done weird here. Like, just the boat trip from Limsa to Kugane was…2-3 months according to lore stuff?? So a quarter of our ARR-EW experience was on a boat.

Except it isn't, because the devs have been very clear that the plot is not in any way intended to fit within a year.

If anything, we we have a window of one year from ARR to base Stormblood only (as they slipped up on their "never mention dates" rule and said it's been a year since the Doman rebellion), but besides that, they're not trying to pretend it really fits into a year. They're just explicitly ignoring the real amount of time.

If you're counting the time between events, then the three months on the boat are part of the "nebulous time span from event to event" and not the calendar.

[kaynide]

Except it isn't, because the devs have been very clear that the plot is not in any way intended to fit within a year.

If anything, we we have a window of one year from ARR to base Stormblood only (as they slipped up on their "never mention dates" rule and said it's been a year since the Doman rebellion), but besides that, they're not trying to pretend it really fits into a year. They're just explicitly ignoring the real amount of time.

If you're counting the time between events, then the three months on the boat are part of the "nebulous time span from event to event" and not the calendar.

My understanding is that with one specific exception, the devs are trying to not mention time so you can interpret it however you want, including an extremely tight 1 year.

That exception being an in-game thing: 2020 rising event saying “7 years have passed since the moon dropped”, indicating 2 years had passed in-game (game starts at moonfall+5 years), and this was when your character could be at the very end of Shadowbringers, at most.

So, if we take that one event as canon, then 2 years by end of Shadowbringers.

However, if we take the age of the twins into account, they are 16 at the start of ARR. They are still 16 at the end of Stormblood. Heck, Shadowbringers I think only takes place over a week (source time, not the first..and I think that’s according to Tataru?)

They miiiiight be 17 now, but not sure. Not like we had birthdays. The latest Eorzea Encyclopedia still puts them at 16?


Who knows,man!

[Dikatis]

That exception being an in-game thing: 2020 rising event saying “7 years have passed since the moon dropped”, indicating 2 years had passed in-game (game starts at moonfall+5 years), and this was when your character could be at the very end of Shadowbringers, at most.

I'm pretty sure this is Yoshi-P referring to the context of the current build of the game being seven years old since its relaunch in 2013, not that seven years have passed in-story. The person speaking is explicitly meant to be a representation of Yoshi-P who is speaking to the player through WoL as thanks for their continued support. I don't think this level of fourth-wall breaking is meant to refer to time passage in-story.

[kaynide]

You know how the Ys franchise is pronounced, yes?

Ys being pronounced the way it does have absolutely nothing to do with Japanese and everything to do with a legendary French city that was supposedly swallowed up by the ocean.

Just to add from JP: her name is pronounced YAH'shtola.It's wrriten in the katakana, using the "ya" character.

Ya, the katakana character letter, is pronounced in Japanese as it is in English; "ya" being like a "Hi-yah!" in martial arts.

As far as my wife remembers all voiced Mi'quote names are not necessarily pronounced the same; (G'raha is Gu'raha Tia, as in "Good job"). I'm not (she's not) sure if there is consistency. That is to say, if Y'shtola's sister Y'mhitha is probably "Ya'mee'thra" but that's not necessarily fact.

She says "It's probably just whatever rolls of the tongue easier"

[Iscah]

As far as my wife remembers all voiced Mi'quote names are not necessarily pronounced the same; (G'raha is Gu'raha Tia, as in "Good job"). I'm not (she's not) sure if there is consistency. That is to say, if Y'shtola's sister Y'mhitha is probably "Ya'mee'thra" but that's not necessarily fact.

"Gu" for the G tribe is just part of how spelling foreign words in Japanese tends to work. Their syllable-based alphabet often requires extra vowels to end up in the middle of words, but then they tend to skim over "u" sound and not emphasise it. In any case it's not an indication of the true pronunciation; they just can't get any closer. (For another FFXIV example there's Grynewaht – in Japanese, グリーンワート "Guriinwaat" – but again that's just the closest they can get to the European-based Roegadyn language.)

Meanwhile, Y'mhitra is "Ya'mitora" which again is extra vowels sneaking in for necessity, but we can gather that "Meetra" is the intended pronunciation.

Also, "Mi'quote" is an incorrect spelling that implies an incorrect pronunciation. It's Miqo'te, or Mikotte in Japanese – the "qo" is a "ko" sound so it shouldn't have a U in there, and the apostrophe is there to indicate that the "te" is a separate syllable.