Lore Misconception: Souls CANNOT be Perma-Destroyed

[Kozh]

I don't remember exactly about the blasphemies/ultima thule so I won't comment on it, but for hydaelyn it is dead set that she burn her soul so there's nothing left. It's different than when we kill an acian using white aurcite (which only serves to prevent them from escaping to the rift).

Idk why you had to bring up buddhism for this as reincarnation in ffxiv doesn't exactly work like that. Soul in ffxiv is still aether, you can still destroy or burn it up. Look, the writing and lore about souls has become convoluted so I understand thinking it was contradictory to the lore, but as per God's Word (yoshi-p words), venat is Gone gone. Her soul is perma erased.

[Cryoson]

I don't remember exactly about the blasphemies/ultima thule so I won't comment on it, but for hydaelyn it is dead set that she burn her soul so there's nothing left.

"The Loporrits have told me of your victory over Meteion. It is a relief to know Hydaelyn's wish for Etheirys and Her people was granted. She is not here to revel in your victory, but so long as there is life on Etheirys, Her spirit shall live on. In the soothing summer rains, the gentle spring breezes, She will be with you always." -The Watcher

Vague and nonspecific as this is, it's coming from someone whom we have every reason to take completely literally. Whether you want to call it nirvana or something else, Hydaelyn somehow exists throughout the entire star.

Idk why you had to bring up buddhism for this as reincarnation in ffxiv doesn't exactly work like that.

I brought up Buddhism (and similar religions) as an example of translation difficulties, since it's a notoriously difficult religion to describe in English. Words like "soul" and "nonexistence" are rough approximations for eastern linguistics that lack direct counterparts in English. This increases the risk of misleading translations, such as stating a soul is gone when what they mean is that it's passed on.

but as per God's Word (yoshi-p words), venat is Gone gone. Her soul is perma erased.

And stuff like this is exactly why I brought up translation difficulties. That said, even if someone who spoke Japanese assured me that this is indeed what he meant, I would still take in-game dialogue over a dev Q&A. In-game dialogue has to be written, checked, approved, and then survive years without anyone correcting it, whereas a dev Q&A is a quick and dirty answer that needs to clearly and quickly communicate that Venat's role in the story is over in a way that will be understood. The dev might misspeak, misremember, or have nuance lost in translation.

Consider the context in which this was said. The prompt was "I like Venat, and I want to see her again" Venat's role in the story is over, so the dev said "she's gone, her soul was used up" which is the clearest way to communicate that. But what does "used up" even mean in the context of a soul? He didn't say she ceases to exist, he said she's gone. The Watcher's dialogue clarifies what "gone" means.

This is why Death of the Author is an important principle; if something in the story and something outside the story seemingly contradict, the thing in the story always wins.

[freshavocado]

Venat cant reincarnate because she is the every living thing on etherys. Maybe she is in the life stream but shes too small to form a reincarnated body because the rest of her dispersed ? The auracite issue i interpreted it as: the ascian is like a ghost, the soul with no body but tied to the worldly plane so to release them to the lifestream theyd have to release them from the worldly plane or their duty. So youd give them a faux body, the stone, and kill it to release them. Emet was dealt with the same way. The auracite was fragmented to reach his whole body but its still auracite to bind him. Then we expent light to destroy him. And they were released to the life stream because emet was there once again. Fandaniels spiel was he wants the world to know his pain so hes taking everyone out theatrical style lol

[SkankyRoe]

Wasn't it mentioned somewhere that it's specifically the aether making up a soul that can't be destroyed?

[Cryoson]

Wasn't it mentioned somewhere that it's specifically the aether making up a soul that can't be destroyed?

Oh man, I'd love to find the quotation for that. I could just replace my entire argument with that one line lmao

[Kozh]

Vague and nonspecific as this is, it's coming from someone whom we have every reason to take completely literally. Whether you want to call it nirvana or something else, Hydaelyn somehow exists throughout the entire star.

What reason?? The Watcher is a shade with limited memory. His only abilities we've seen so far is repairing the zodiark seals. You're reading too much into this. He's saying it metaphorically, it's basically just another "people are not truly dead so long someone still remember them".

Venat: I will use my own soul and there won't be anything left of me

Yoshi-p: venat is completely gone

That's both how it was inside the game and outside

Anyway, believe what you want to believe I guess. /shrug

[Jeeqbit]

I still don't think the White Auracite affected Emet-Selch any differently though.

https://youtu.be/fxCZW8Q20tI?t=6255

Now, this explanation of an Ascian is later clarified to only apply to the sundered Ascians. This is because, while Emet-Selch is a fully living person with ancient abilities to travel around, the sundered Ascians gave their life and shed their flesh, to be able to travel between shards. They're all dead, and their soul is meant to go to the aetherial sea, but they have prevented this from happening by residing in the world between the Source and the void.

So what we are doing is taking advantage of the fact they already died, trapping their soul as they escape to the void and preventing them from escaping to this place, and destroying them with a sufficient blast of aether.

https://youtu.be/9u8tR12bMRU?t=950

However, Emet-Selch isn't dead and his unsundered, living aetherial density is far stronger than that of the Ascian soul we killed with White Auracite; we can't trap a huge person like Emet-Selch in a small container and we barely just killed the lesser Ascian with all the aether we had available. The White Auracite itself used on Emet-Selch was destroyed as opposed to trapping him inside it and it was instead the hole that remained that we took advantage of. In Emet-Selch's case, they were used more like growing ice crystals to create a big wound. He also wasn't actively escaping to a void, so he wasn't defenseless like the other Ascian.

it doesn't explain Shiva. Ysayle "becomes" Shiva when she summons her, and died fighting as her, but later appeared in the aetherial sea as any normal spirit would.

You may remember there is a distinction between the soul's aether and corporeal aether. She is manipulating the corporeal aether, as opposed to her soul's aether. She has some unique advantages given she has The Echo and thus her soul doesn't get corrupted by Primal influence.

What is different about Venat, aside from Hydaelyn being the sum of multiple people and not being specifically designed to preserve the individuals, is that she burned all her aether away to the point she couldn't call out to us beyond the aetherial sea, used her remaining aether to fight us, and then gave what remained of that to create a crystal for the loporrits and instill the Azem crystal with the rest. Primals feast on Aether, but since she was being piloted by Hydaelyn's heart (Venat), she chose not to feast on the mothercrystal or the aether that surrounds her. So she had nothing to replenish the aether except the soul energy.

As for what the Watcher says, Hydaelyn says it in a similar way herself, but obviously with the clarification that she won't actually be there.

Arguably, despite its design, Zodiark could have reached a similar stage eventually where it would run out of the sheer amount of corporeal aether and turn to all those souls. And because its primal influence was getting everyone to loyally sacrifice themselves, there would have been nobody to stop it, if it wasn't for Hydaelyn.

[Cryoson]

Venat: I will use my own soul and there won't be anything left of me

When did she say this? If you're referring to her speech before dispersing, she says "long after I am gone, when not even my soul remaineth" which is an ambiguous line many people interpreted as a fancy way of saying "when I've passed on" Even if you don't see it that way, this is a massive exaggeration of what she actually said.

You're reading too much into this. He's saying it metaphorically

This is argument can be used on literally anything. You're reading into what Hydaelyn said too much, she was saying she'll be gone metaphorically! See? Rather than playing the game of "which npc is less metaphorical?" I much prefer to compare the explicitness of both lines and see which one has clearer meaning.

Now, this explanation of an Ascian is later clarified to only apply to the sundered Ascians. This is because, while Emet-Selch is a fully living person with ancient abilities to travel around, the sundered Ascians gave their life and shed their flesh, to be able to travel between shards. They're all dead, and their soul is meant to go to the aetherial sea, but they have prevented this from happening by residing in the world between the Source and the void.

I would need to see this later clarification, because both videos you linked don't make this distinction (nor do they suggest the Ascian's soul is destroyed in the process)

What is different about Venat, aside from Hydaelyn being the sum of multiple people and not being specifically designed to preserve the individuals, is that she burned all her aether away to the point she couldn't call out to us beyond the aetherial sea, used her remaining aether to fight us, and then gave what remained of that to create a crystal for the loporrits and instill the Azem crystal with the rest. Primals feast on Aether, but since she was being piloted by Hydaelyn's heart (Venat), she chose not to feast on the mothercrystal or the aether that surrounds her. So she had nothing to replenish the aether except the soul energy.

I'm not disputing that Hydaelyn fed on Venat's soul, I'm disputing that the act of doing so destroys it. Again, I will bring up Ryne doing the same to Minfilia's soul. Heck, even Reapers use harvested souls for aether; why would the WoL do that if they view breaking the natural cycle as a bad thing?

[Fawkes]

The mistaken belief begins in the cutscene after Vanaspati:

Y'shtola: "As I feared . . . I saw nothing. Not the Blasphemy that perished here, nor the other men turned beasts. And because of this I now see all too well. There is no aether. Where the creatures should be, I saw naught but emptiness . . . The instant these people are seized by the transformation, their aether begins to rot and crumble away like dried mud. Until from their corporeal forms to their very souls, nothing remains.

Alisaie: "Gods be good, you're saying they cannot be saved?"

Y'shtola: "Not by any means known to me. Or by any means at all, like as not. For there is naught left to save."

This seemed pretty cut and dry that turning into a blasphemy deleted your soul, so I thought it was pretty weird that it was immediately contradicted by the role quests.

[Jeeqbit]

I would need to see this later clarification, because both videos you linked don't make this distinction

I shouldn't need to. Did you even do the MSQ at all? It's unforgettable. It's the difference between the sundered Ascians and the unsundered Ascians.

Whether it's Ardbert and co, or the sundered Ascians, they die and give up their flesh in order to travel beyond the rift and behave as they do.

There's nowhere saying that this applies to Emet-Selch. He wasn't born on a specific shard, because he was born before the sundering, so he can travel freely and doesn't need to die. His soul isn't being pulled to the aetherial sea like the other Ascians are and he has far more aetherial density.

(nor do they suggest the Ascian's soul is destroyed in the process)

They constantly talk about "permanently destroying an Ascian" in that video. Moreover, it shows the Ascian in question shedding the mortal they were possessing, leaving only their soul. It is clarified in ARR that the robed Ascians we see like that are just how we "interpret" them and that not everyone can even see them. It's how we interpret their souls.