Zodiark's Codex entry what do we think about it?

[TowaIsBestGirl]

Oddly my thoughts about it have precious little to with Zodiark himself. I find Light's association with peace and tranquility at odds, considering all we see of Light and refulgence in Shadowbringers. Feels like a bit of a double-back on the whole "Dark is not necessarily evil" established then, but then perhaps this is merely detailing what the commonfolk believe rather than empirical fact.

As I said in the 6.4 thread the wording of the sacrifice is ambiguous. It's worded as an order and we even have Erichtonios also calling it an order. Where it was written in a way before that most took it as voluntary.

Oh and I at least feel as though we have a clear picture of what the new life was. It uses the phrase next generation which I don't think many would call plants and animals imbued with souls as the next generation.

So, what precisely was your intentions in starting this thread? Because the tone comprised withing is coming across as oddly combative, is there anyone even still invested in starting this particular duel anew? Discuss Lore please, do not attempt to incite certain posters to come duke it out here. The exact nature of the sacrifices seem to do little but start embattled rows these days, and most here I say claim to be rather weary of that fight.

[SannaR]

Oddly my thoughts about it have precious little to with Zodiark himself. I find Light's association with peace and tranquility at odds, considering all we see of Light and refulgence in Shadowbringers. Feels like a bit of a double-back on the whole "Dark is not necessarily evil" established then, but then perhaps this is merely detailing what the commonfolk believe rather than empirical fact.





So, what precisely was your intentions in starting this thread? Because the tone comprised withing is coming across as oddly combative, is there anyone even still invested in starting this particular duel anew? Discuss Lore please, do not attempt to incite certain posters to come duke it out here. The exact nature of the sacrifices seem to do little but start embattled rows these days, and most here I say claim to be rather weary of that fight.

I'm not meaning to be combative. I was just wondering if the wording that we have now along with the most recent examples have muddled things more or if people think that it's more clear cut than it used to be. As until Erichtonios's message and what it says in the entry it was never labeled as some kind of order. That it was framed in a way that both the 1st and 2nd sacrifices were voluntary and everyone wanted to do so and that there was no social pressure in going along with it. Along with until now all we had about what made up the new life was that they had souls. Now we have been given the phrasing of Next Generation. For some the devs tend to go back and forth on how they want things viewed. The whole entry to me at least is reinforcing basically what we got from Emet back in ShB. Except for the cycle perpetuation part as I'm not sure how only two sacrifices count as a cycle. Unless they're counting the stopped before it could be done 3rd in that.

[Iscah]

Hydelean

Thanks for providing the codex quote, but it needs a spelling check.

I find Light's association with peace and tranquility at odds, considering all we see of Light and refulgence in Shadowbringers.

Light is primarily stasis – representing tranquility in contrast to the activity of Darkness, neither of those being a bad thing in moderation.

The First is an example of what happens when Light goes too far, past a pleasant degree of tranquility and into a destructive form.

So, what precisely was your intentions in starting this thread? Because the tone comprised withing is coming across as oddly combative, is there anyone even still invested in starting this particular duel anew? Discuss Lore please, do not attempt to incite certain posters to come duke it out here. The exact nature of the sacrifices seem to do little but start embattled rows these days, and most here I say claim to be rather weary of that fight.

This is further actual information (if still frustratingly vague) on the nature of the sacrifices. Just because people on both sides of the argument make it a misery to try to have the discussion doesn't stop it from being a lore question that those of us in the middle would like an answer to.

If you're going to accuse people of being "oddly combative" then your own post is coming across that way too.

How low does one have to be relegated to to think outright offing oneself is the best they can contribute to the greater good?

The maths gets rather altered by the fact that there is a literal world-destroying calamity looming and the only way to solve it is by people volunteering to sacrifice themselves.

In normal life he is quite happy to live and support his friends. In this situation he decided that the best way to support them is to be one of the sacrifices so that they can go on living.

[TowaIsBestGirl]

Light is primarily stasis – representing tranquility in contrast to the activity of Darkness, neither of those being a bad thing in moderation.

I was basically saying I do not consider an absence of a driving force inciting change to be tranquility be default. It's one interpretation to be sure, but it certainly isn't the only one. Absence of change can just as easily be a creepy, disquieting void of nothing as it can be a tranquil sea with no waves to disrupt equilibrium. When "Light" is brought to the fore in FFXIV, the most prominent example from what I can recall is a direct threat to both the Scions and the world of the First.

The instances before that, especially insofar as Hydaelyn are concerned, the element in question being Light was less of a prominent detail than it was during the events of Shadowbringers. Which is the expansion where the finally deigned to give us the true details of what comprised Umbral and Astral aether. That's why I find it odd to consider it tranquil by default, since when the specifics were explained we were dealing with a threat comprised of being whose aether had been stilled to violent effect.

This is further actual information (if still frustratingly vague) on the nature of the sacrifices. Just because people on both sides of the argument make it a misery to try to have the discussion doesn't stop it from being a lore question that those of us in the middle would like an answer to.

If you're going to accuse people of being "oddly combative" then your own post is coming across that way too.

Fair enough. Though, to be frank I never discounted myself from that. Either way, future escalation sadly cannot be forestalled by taking no action at all so I refused to do that. I'm wary as to future details we may or may not get, to be quite honest however. I can't help but get a sinking feeling it'll satisfy either only one party and enrage the other or satisfy nobody. Too early to tell, though. Even then, I don't imagine we'll be getting any future detail after Pandaemonium neither. This may well be the end of the Ancient clarifications. Which is weird, since imo Pandaemonium gave us more questions than answers.

Anyway, to Sanna I wasn't being fair to you 'twould seem and for that you have my apologies.

[Denishia]

I commented my feelings on the 'was this voluntary or ordered' in the main 6.4 thread, but while it wouldn't surprise me to have a retcon clarify that Emet was not accurate in his statement that the first two sacrifices to Zodiark were taken voluntarily (the third decidedly would not), I still don't think it was an outright draft conscription. I mean, you could say not dodging your draft is willing offering yourself up. But I'm not that cynical on Emet's Rose Tinted Glasses.

But societal peer pressure to not be selfish and offer yourself up to the star instead of clinging to life for a larger goal was already how their society functioned. What we don't have any answers to and what I think Erichtonios's statement hints at is that we aren't told if the Convocation's call for people to offer themselves up to Zodiark was a blanket request to everyone (well, except they were only going to allow one member of their ruling council to volunteer and not for any old position but that of the heart, and I would have to recheck the lines to know if the choice to go with Themis instead of Gaia was because she rescinded her nomination or was outvoted in favor of Themis) or there were people encouraged more strongly than others to sacrifice/not to.

That a Convocation's family member was supposed to be on the altar could suggest many things- that Lahabrea expected his son to be more nobly altruistic than other citizens, or the political optics that while he personally wasn't the one sacrificing himself for the plan he created, that Lahabrea was willing to do this with his son was an effective tool in convincing the average citizen of the validity of his theory and that they had no excuse to hold out. Hythlodeaus has high government bureau position in common with Erichtonios so maybe they were under more expectation than non-government employees- but we don't actually ever meet a regular Amaurotine citizen by name, just the nameless shades in fake Amaurot.

And it's Eleventh Hour Desperation because the rest of the planet is gone while the Convocation debated what if anything to do, so they're in panic mode and what else is there to do but die so might as well volunteer for the suicide mission that maybe has a chance of success.

[Cleretic]

I'd say that for this, I'd be happiest hearing from someone who knows how it was put in Japanese--and not just 'someone who can read Japanese/use Google Translate', because this is something that could VERY easily be subject to the subtleties of language.

Even in English, what better word would there be than 'order' for this even if it is a social expectation? They still need the sacrifices, even if they aren't drafting people or anything like that.

[Lunaxia]

So I threw Eric's lines from Pandaemonium into my favourite Japanese dictionary, as it's a modest step above Google Translate and I was curious. I'm not the guaranteed conveyor of nuance some of you are searching for, but for those also interested:

In English, he says "I must defy the directive (of the Convocation.)"

In Japanese, it's "(十四人委員会)の方針に従わない." 方針 is defined as a "course, line or policy", while 従う (which Eric uses in the negative) means generally "to obey" or "to follow", seemingly both in the loose and absolute sense of the word. xの方針に従う typically translates in most instances as "abide by, follow or comply with x's policy."

So on reflection, I actually think SE's original translation is quite accurate here, given that "directive" to my mind has a similar nuance of "instruction" or "direction" the original Japanese possesses, and makes more sense given the context than alternative translations. My own interpretation of the matter is, being the approximation of our government, they put out an official guideline on how they planned to deal with the Final Days that they expected the citizens would naturally comply with as a matter of course, given the general view of the Ancients was that they lived to better their star; I don't think the Convocation would even have thought to give direct orders, as it was beyond the bounds of consideration that they wouldn't, if that makes sense?

Japanese has other words for more concrete forms of command (the word I see most often used in that context is 命令, which means "order"), so while this is merely my take on it, I do believe that's more what they were trying to suggest with that wording. Anyone with more insight is free to correct me, of course.

I understand that generation can and is applied to many things. Yet, when one normally talks about leaving something to be inherited by the next generation the expected recipient is thought of as one's offspring and you know not their toy Furby. Not that there are some people who would actually go and do such a thing as leave all their worldly possessions to their pet African Grey.

You're being a little facetious. "A new generation" is more than capable of being applied to the world as it was then, filled with various new creatures and forms of life, which if left might have flourished and potentially set the stage for further ecological growth and even more new species to be developed. If we assume your view that she meant a form of mankind (?) - which is a bit of a shot in the dark - then I'm not sure how obliterating them back to the Stone Age is meant to enable them to inherit anything.

[Iscah]

I was basically saying I do not consider an absence of a driving force inciting change to be tranquility be default. It's one interpretation to be sure, but it certainly isn't the only one. Absence of change can just as easily be a creepy, disquieting void of nothing as it can be a tranquil sea with no waves to disrupt equilibrium.

Thus the description that Light represents tranquility and stasis. The threat to the First (and later to the Source in the other timeline) was one of utter stasis brought about by excessive Light. There is no discrepancy there.

[SannaR]

You're being a little facetious. "A new generation" is more than capable of being applied to the world as it was then, filled with various new creatures and forms of life, which if left might have flourished and potentially set the stage for further ecological growth and even more new species to be developed. If we assume your view that she meant a form of mankind (?) - which is a bit of a shot in the dark - then I'm not sure how obliterating them back to the Stone Age is meant to enable them to inherit anything.

Again I am fully aware what all generation can be applied to. What we know is that it was thinner in aetheric density and had souls. We also know that pre-sundereding thinness in aether didn't become a matter of contention and that souls shouldn't be trapped inside something. So, unless the Convocation and anyone else who worshipped Zodiark still felt the same they're wanting to swap out souls with souls. The more likely scenario is that the point of contention is how said new generation looked.

If we can assume that Venat was still trying to prevent the sundering from happening then she probably would have wanted to have those thinner imbued with a soul life to go and fix the real problem. Which wouldn't make sense if it wasn't people. Not that we have any evidence that scenario would have been another failed back up plan. To me you would obliterate said life if you felt that your opponent as the entry implies would just continue to swap out the souls in Zodiark for different souls. That they were going to probably have to repeatedly cultivate due to the thinness.

Where the most likely explanation as to why it was thinner is that's the only thing they knew how to make. As every creation and seemingly familiar were thinner in aether than the ancients themselves. And a far better theory than my full of holes one of Venat having made a deal somehow to have the new life be thinner in hopes that she as I said could try and avert from having to sunder everything. Only for the convocation to go no we don't like the look of this new life and we're going to create a cycle of soul replacement. What is an easier solution? Trying to squirrel away a small selection to try and fix the real problem in secret while ignoring a cycle of sacrific? Or to not allow said cycle to continue to perpetuate even if that means said new life is getting a crappy inheritance while still being able to aim to fix the real problem?

Edit: I also wasn't using the Furby or African Grey to be facetious. I meant them to be examples of at least in fiction as I don't make it a habit to look for a real person of when someone either out of spite for their family or due to that's how kooky they were to leave everything be hind to their 11yr old poodle. As it doesn't make much sense if the new soul filled life wasn't at least humanoid. Vs it being fauna and flora. Unless you're willing to speculate on if Venat and/or her group would be fine with the Reptites inherited the planet time line from Chrono Trigger where Dinopolis gets built being what does the inheriting. And that people tend to be the implied recipient when talking about the next generation inheriting something. Like when people build parks say stuff akin to its to be enjoyed by those who are currently alive and further generations.

[Lurina]

Where the most likely explanation as to why it was thinner is that's the only thing they knew how to make. As every creation and seemingly familiar were thinner in aether than the ancients themselves. And a far better theory than my full of holes one of Venat having made a deal somehow to have the new life be thinner in hopes that she as I said could try and avert from having to sunder everything. Only for the convocation to go no we don't like the look of this new life and we're going to create a cycle of soul replacement. What is an easier solution? Trying to squirrel away a small selection to try and fix the real problem in secret while ignoring a cycle of sacrific? Or to not allow said cycle to continue to perpetuate even if that means said new life is getting a crappy inheritance while still being able to aim to fix the real problem?

Regardless of what the new life was, it was never the plan to sacrifice all of it. Hythlodaeus's original explanation explicitly says that they'd "cultivate" it for a time and sacrifice a "portion" to bring back the Ancients within Zodiark.