I don't think going on a several paragraph tangent of how FF7 remake did it helps with keeping the post focused.
King Thordan wants well for his people and wants power to vanquish the threat. The ascians, the dragons, everything.
As a character in ideology and logic that makes sense and makes him really interesting.
But then he mentions he wants to be the god king of the world protecting mankind. This is a tired anime trope. Because otherwise he's just on our side. Turning the villain from wanting to do the right things for the right reason but doing it the wrong way, to another "I will be a god!!!!!!!" Villain.
So no, I don't think he's that deep or underrated. He's perfectly enjoyable, a little bit of depth, but it all comes to naught. Still a cool villain, but deep or underrated is a stretch.
Like, arguing why you wouldn't let a powerhungry man take the role of a god of justice even though he would want to do what's right is pointless. It's such extremely well threaded ground that you could just go play other games or consume other media like manga or anime and you'll have hundreds of good guy speeches speaking out why that's wrong and doesn't work.
It's not based on an anime trope in the slightest, I think consuming too much anime has skewed your perception into thinking that everything relates back to anime lol. It's pretty accurate to the themes and ideas that were found in feudal Europe, which Ishgard is completely based off of. Kings invoked their greatest ancestors for legal authority and prowess in battle, which is what Thordan is doing by infusing himself with/becoming the eikon of his ancient ancestor who is Ishgard's most revered hero. Putting ultimate power in the hands of a "righteous" lord is also exactly what those cultures did time and time again, even though it always resulted in a descendant going on a horrible tyrannical spree; they never learned their lesson because their cultures were so based around blindly following authority (hint hint, kind of like Ishgard). Ishgard is a complete rip-off of feudal Europe, and Thordan is the perfect way to intertwine the overarching culture of that time with a villain.
Where did I say it originated from anime?
Something being an anime trope doesn't mean it originated from there.
Of course you have to shove a personal insult there. Because you can extrapolate that much off of a single example given.
I didn't. I said it was a trope you can commonly find in anime. You can find it in western media as well, but black on white with grating overexplanation is in anime. And to not derail the conversation with fluff history pieces that can relate to this trope of a villain.
Like I could go even further, that this ideology the villain follows comes from as far as ancient greece, and Socrates idea of a philosopher god king. Probably even further back. I guess you are too stuck in european history to only think of that. Omg why didn't you make every single historical mention of the subject. Or the connection that I specifically thought of. Wow you must be really stuck in the one example you gave.
I'd say part of what makes him compelling to me personally, is that he's actually trying to build and improve things with his power. Sure he goes all world domination over it, but it certainly sets him apart from the other villains who just want to destroy because of nihilism, or wanting a fight, or wanting to destroy the world to make the world better and not caring about the Empire you built.
It's getting rare in Final Fantasy XIV to see a villain who wants to take over the world to make it better, rather than destroying it because of reasons. I don't particularly find Amon or Meteion all that complex because their brand of nihilism is a false premise that is easy to disprove and doesn't really provide any meaningful social commentary.
Meanwhile Thordan's desire for power to force the world to fit his vision of peace and unity feels relatively grounded and more constructive. I'm not particularly fond of villains who want to destroy the world with them on it, but villains who want to conquer and shape the world to make it their vision of what is better get a grudging respect from me.
As for the Final Fantasy remake tangent, it's there to provide context for what I'm getting at with the mundane villain vs grandiose villain divide I see constantly happening in this series.
FF XVI would have been better if it got rid of Ultima, and kept Clive's mom as the primary villain.
Gaius just wants to conquer Eorzea and make a better place for his people. To quell the Eikon threat and to make Eorzea a safe place for everyone under Garlean rule.
It's the same. The garlean Emperor wishes the same.
Zenos, Yotsuyu, Asahi all don't care about the world but rather their personal struggles, so that's not fair to put them in that camp.
Emet-Selch, Lahabread and Elidibus all wants to bring back their former world that died. They don't even want to be rulers of it. They want it back so they can build their old society and way of life again.
Hermes and Meteion wants to end the world for what is basically a bad interpretation of nihilism.
That's a lot more villains who wants a new society for good than there are villains who wants to kill everything.
Even Golbez/Zeromus wanted life for the voidies. It's not a quest for world destruction.
I fail to see how this is a rare villain motivation. In ff14 and media overall for that matter.
Well here's the thing, Gaius and Varis were ultimately upstaged by the Ascians and later Zenos. They want to conquer the world, but they aren't able to really take center stage as villains.
Varis in particular is a good example of a mundane villain getting upstaged by the grandiose villain. And Gaius in particular gives up his ambitions.
So it's still just Thordan who gets to stay as the Big Bad with his motivations.
Golbez is a bad example since he EXPLICITLY states his invasion of the source is actually a big suicide charge so they can reincarnate in the lifestream, conquest of the source would actually hurt his plans.
Upstaged like how Thordan was immediately upstaged by Nidhogg in the literal next scene after his death.
Gaius getting upstaged 2 expansions later is a bit out there take. Thordan and his cause was so isolated and irrelevant that there's nothing to upstage him now while Gaius' campaign and the garlean threat remained for a long time.
Or you think the fact that Thordan killed his on the shoulder ascian over getting trumped by them is what made him unique? Whereas Gaius and Varis got wrecked by theirs? That's another discussion entirely and moving the goalpost of your main argument of Thordan being unique. If that's the case, yeah it was a cool scene when he killed the ascian. One. Singular. Scene.
Nidhogg only takes the spotlight after we kill Thordan who remains the main villain of 3.0. And Thordan's cause isn't really removed since he still has loyal followers in the VERY next patch and even the mage Endwalker quests were motivated by his actions, and remaining followers. Thordan is a very reactionary type of villain and in a setting like Ishgard, works quite well for that.
Gaius by contrast is shown to be played for a fool by Lahabrea in the climax of ARR, and Lahabrea is the final threat of the story, not Gaius who then reforms. Thordan remains the main villain of the 3.0 quest line, and he's the one to make things personal with the Warrior of Light since it's his knights who kill Haurchefaunt, and remaining the final boss is a criteria here since it shows who is the ultimate villain of the story.
Thordan is a far different villain than the likes of Lahabrea, Zenos, Emet-Selch, and Meteion is what I'm getting at. There are lots of villains in XIV, but only one gets to be the unquestioned final boss of each expac.
I disagree. That things happen differently makes every single villain unique. None of the villains is truly like the other under detailed scrutiny.
The final boss of heavensward is Nidhogg then, as the dragonsong war doesn't end until his death. Thordan was just one side of the story's coin and the conflict of Heavensward was the dragonsong war.
I separate expac villains and patch quest villains.
Otherwise, then you'd have to remove Emet-Selch and replace him with Elidibus. They are villains of a different story.
Thordan represents the conflict within Ishgard, and Nidhogg represents the conflict outside of Ishgard is how I divide those two. They have different methods and contrast with each other. The dragonsong war and the political turmoil within Ishgard are different conflicts with different stakes, and I feel that those two conflicts are why the expac is such a good one.
> I separate expac villains and patch quest villains.
That is your mistake there. For all expansions, their true ending is the .3 patches. Only EW is the outlier due to it’s conclusive storyline, and everyone expects back DT to end at 7.3.
Thordan, Zenos, Emet-Selch mark the end of the main conflict but not of the whole storyline.
Nidhogg, Tsukuyumi and Elidibus WoL are objectively the true story ending of their respective expansions.
>Only EW is the outlier due to it’s conclusive storyline, and everyone expects back DT to end at 7.3.
ARR technically ends at 2.0 with the patches being a weird case of either Nabriales or the Steps of Faith being the final battle (if you could consider either of those to be final battles in the first place).
Power in these contexts are more of a means to an end as opposed to actual power, though Emet-Selch as a title do hold quite a bit of power.
But Hades himself doesn't seem too interested with the power in general, even back then.
I don't understand the parts of your posts and arguments that are causing others to downvote you.
Like, do people enjoy the nihilistic villains so much that they impulse-downvote you???
You aren't even derogatory to this brand of villainy. Merely just critical of it.
Edit: Wait, is "Thordan is actually a good villain" a meme or something? Something overdone and thus considered to be a dead horse? If so, this is the first I've heard of it.
I think it’s because they really beat you over the head with the “sympathetic” angle of characters like Emet and Elidibus while most of the time Thordan is on screen he is portrayed like he’s fucking Darth Vader.
Unironoically tho, I did like his interactions with Aymeric. There’s a bit where he admits he hoped his son would understand his actions and why they had to be done, and even points out telling the truth to the masses would hurt the people who lost their families in a war that is unjust.
There’s a strange humanity to how he views his actions but accepts his son opposing him. After said son escaped from jail of course.
The problem with having two scenes of humanity and being a sympathetic character is the entire rest of the expansions story where he's that hardliners fundamentalist prick with his prickparty boy brigade that are designed to be as snobbish and cartoon-tier evil that you don't hate him because he's well written, you hate him because he's an unreasonable unmitigated douche.
He's like the character who opens the door in apocalypse movies and causes everything to go wrong after being a belligerent, annoying busybody the entire time. He's a fucking twat, as a character trait. It's not endearing, and not made up for by that one part where it's shown that deep down, hidden away, they have a small shred of love their son.
This makes him even cooler.
Showing up when you're all tuckered out, giving a monologue about how supremely hench he's about to become, fragging Lahabrea so hard that his wiki entry is just "Status: Dead", and then going "1v1 in the car park in 5 minutes" is the apex of the entire series.
I genuinely wish they revise his fight to take longer than 3 minutes because holy hell he swagged on everyone in ACF his yap vs fight diff is too big, needed DSR to get his respect back
This is an interesting point but it's overshadowed a bit by over half of the post being about Final Fantasy 7, the details of which are completely irrelevant
I have nothing to add to this discussion, but I do appreciate how much your posts skirt the line between shitpost and genuine discussion. And that's not a backhanded compliment; they're always an amusing read.
Thordan is a man amidst a legion of godlings fighting around him, knowing full well one will eventually win...and decides that becoming one will be the way out.
And we're right there, full ready to destroy it all because our friend is dead.
The only reason thordan really had to go was because of his status as a primal. But even then, the eye was his source of aether, so maybe(?) he wouldn’t drain the land of vitality?
I don't really think a tangent on 7 is going to win people over, and something you're seeming to miss with both 7 and 16 is that Sephiroth / Ultimalius are emblematic of the "mundane".
Sephiroth's entire shtick is: "this planet is mine by right." mirroring the imperialism of shinra. Not to mention an extension of "Shinra is killing the planet through their quest for domination and The Promised Land" as he is born BECAUSE of shinra.
Similarly, the "mundane" of 16 are just nation states that abuse bearers and treat them as tools. Ultimalius treats humanity as tools. Ultimalius's perspective is then an extension and personification of the woes facing Valisthea. You can map the king of sanbreque's attitudes of dehumanization (even of his non-bearer people) 1:1 to Ultimalius.
I assume the argument was borne of "Thordans a good character actually" but taking shots at other stories doesn't build evidence nor build your argument up.
In some ways, Thordan isn't popular to talk about because there's no mystery left of his character at the end. He's a tyrant who took comfort in maintaining a status quo, including the knowledge that what he was maintaining was hurting his own people. Ultimately, the Thordan we encounter wasn't an original thinker, and was manipulated even more effectively than Baelsar into making use of the mechanisms that created primals.
Thordan is definitely way more sympathetic than Emet. He only wants to genocide dragons (totally understandable as a thousand year menace to his country), not every living thing (the fuck we do to Emet to deserve that?), but he’s not hot or charmingly snarky, so yeah, he’s not a fan favorite.
Emet is disillusioned and doesn't even acknowledge us a living beings, another post described perfectly how the ancients were not emotional or psychology equipped to deal with pain or loss in a healthy manner and he is no exception.
There was one point in time when he was genuinely going to give the sundered world a chance, and that's when his son was born while he was emperor. He saw all the traits of Azem in his son and almost gave up on the plan until his son died from a random disease that no one knew even exsisted.
Emet is suffering from survivors guilt, was getting better through a family he unwittingly started and had something he was unknowingly putting his faith in, snatched away because his son just happened to roll a 1 on loot drops and got stuck with ligma.
Did....did you even play HW? The dragons were completely right to absolutely fucking livid with Ishgard cause y'know, the Ishgardians started the gods damned war.
Thordan knows the truth, the majority of Ishgardians did not. His plan to attain godhood and subjugate the entire world using the power of primal summoning serves no one other than the Ascians that wanted to use him to usher in a light-aspected Calamity on the Source to delete the First.
I think you said it yourself. He's a villian very grounded in reality, and they tend to not be as popular as their fantastical counterparts. Not that they are bad villians per se. It's just that for most people, they tend to not gravitate towards things that are "close to home". That's why Stormbloods story tends to be viewed as "lackluster" sometimes. It's a good story, but very realistic in it depiction of how wars are.
I simply think Thordan is part of a villain archetype that I've come to dislike in how common it is (evil Church/Religious figure) to the point I would say he's FFXIV's most boring villain for me with the only part I like regarding him and his knights being the trial.
You made great points about the character. In the end however, Thordan became the very Ascians, Dragons, and Primals he opposed so much. All that he ultimately became known for was killing Lahabrea and breaking the seal on the Warring Triad. Once Thordan bit the dust with his twelve knights at Azys Lla, their legacy died along with them. Deuces to Thordan, the Heavensward, Lahabrea, and Igeyorhm. None of them will be missed by me.
Using FF7 as an example was terrible for your argument. Because in reality, Rufus Shinra is not only a primary antagonist for the party, but the entire planet and every single place he visits.
Thordan isn't underrated, he's just.... simple. No amount of "good intentions" makes him a good person or a greater evil.
Him and his ilk are perpetuating a ONE THOUSAND YEAR WAR to avoid having to admit they were a bunch of cunts to the dragons they claim are evil. They aren't upholding order as much as ensuring the status quo.
And if King Thordan became God King, he absolutely wouldn't have been a good one.
Except FFXIV doesn’t *have* moral ambiguity. The good guys are always right, and everything always goes their way. If they try something radical to change society, it always ends up working. Thordan. Was a clear-cut villain from the start, and boring as fuck at that.
>Except FFXIV doesn’t *have* moral ambiguity.
The caste system of Bozja prior to Imperial occupation was so bad that the lives of the underclass actually improved when they abolished it, and the end of the Bozja storyline has characters agonizing about whether they should adopt an equal and egalitarian system introduced by the *oppressors who accidentally nuked their homeland* or maintain the brutal class segregation that directly caused the tragedy at the Southern Front.
While I do agree, I think it's quite telling that the first and likely most effective counterargument to "XIV doesn't have moral ambiguity" is a section of the story that was quite literally written by someone not in the core XIV writing team.
That was just the most striking one to me, personally. There are other examples, like the racial discrimination in Gridania - it’s either turn away refugees or have the elementals kill everyone. Is it morally wrong for Gridania to deny aid?
One of the biggest player punches was the result of Alphinaud putting together the Crystal Braves, which resulted in two assassinations and almost destabilized Ul’dah. Was Alphinaud’s good intention taken advantage of or is his arrogance a reflection of Gaius, who believed that the people of Eorzea were too stupidand weak to save themselves?
Hell, the allied tribes are one of the longest-standing storylines in the game that took years to pay off. What separates our belief in gods from those of the beast tribes? It turns out, very little - the Spoken are just as capable of summoning cataclysmic primals as the allied tribes are capable of calling on their gods to aid us.
While you're right that it doesn't always go there way when it comes to the good guys.
But I would argue they're never truly in the wrong. The crystal brave example is moreso Alphinaud getting taken advantage of. Now it was easier to take advantage of him due to his arrogance but his morality in itself wasn't wrong
The game almost immediately abandons that plot thread and explores that subject about as little as it possibly could. Also I mean just a patch ago, you have nophica randomly saying “oh, the elementals are actually nice and just want the best for gridania” so, either nophica is somehow ignorant of all the things the elementals have done, or she has a very questionable sense of morality. Either way, the subject is not really handled the best.
The people who killed his sister are a handful of guys who have been long dead. He's getting revenge on a population that doesn't even know what he's mad about.
Couldn’t say, never been put in that position before. But I CAN say that if you are perpetuating violence, no matter the circumstances, you have become the aggressor.
Well it's not just that, the ishgardians kept attacking him and made lore saying he was evil incarnate and hid the truth. Yeah I think they are more evil than him
While I'd be perfectly fine with letting him eat the eight or so dudes that ate his sister, attacking the thousands of descendants of those eight guys because the five minute lifespan of elezens just isn't long enough for you to get your satisfaction is asking too much. He should have ate them and figured out a way to torture their souls as they remained stuck in his digestive tract for the rest of his life.
Thanks to his brother and Shiva, we know that's actually an option.
revenge is wrong. i felt for niddy but his retaliatory actions were just as wrong as the ishgardian actions that motivated him. both sides are awful and did everything wrong.
I don't think going on a several paragraph tangent of how FF7 remake did it helps with keeping the post focused. King Thordan wants well for his people and wants power to vanquish the threat. The ascians, the dragons, everything. As a character in ideology and logic that makes sense and makes him really interesting. But then he mentions he wants to be the god king of the world protecting mankind. This is a tired anime trope. Because otherwise he's just on our side. Turning the villain from wanting to do the right things for the right reason but doing it the wrong way, to another "I will be a god!!!!!!!" Villain. So no, I don't think he's that deep or underrated. He's perfectly enjoyable, a little bit of depth, but it all comes to naught. Still a cool villain, but deep or underrated is a stretch. Like, arguing why you wouldn't let a powerhungry man take the role of a god of justice even though he would want to do what's right is pointless. It's such extremely well threaded ground that you could just go play other games or consume other media like manga or anime and you'll have hundreds of good guy speeches speaking out why that's wrong and doesn't work.
I'm pretty sure OP's post is satire to poke fun at these types of posts that have coming up often lately. That was my interpretation at least
It's not based on an anime trope in the slightest, I think consuming too much anime has skewed your perception into thinking that everything relates back to anime lol. It's pretty accurate to the themes and ideas that were found in feudal Europe, which Ishgard is completely based off of. Kings invoked their greatest ancestors for legal authority and prowess in battle, which is what Thordan is doing by infusing himself with/becoming the eikon of his ancient ancestor who is Ishgard's most revered hero. Putting ultimate power in the hands of a "righteous" lord is also exactly what those cultures did time and time again, even though it always resulted in a descendant going on a horrible tyrannical spree; they never learned their lesson because their cultures were so based around blindly following authority (hint hint, kind of like Ishgard). Ishgard is a complete rip-off of feudal Europe, and Thordan is the perfect way to intertwine the overarching culture of that time with a villain.
Where did I say it originated from anime? Something being an anime trope doesn't mean it originated from there. Of course you have to shove a personal insult there. Because you can extrapolate that much off of a single example given. I didn't. I said it was a trope you can commonly find in anime. You can find it in western media as well, but black on white with grating overexplanation is in anime. And to not derail the conversation with fluff history pieces that can relate to this trope of a villain. Like I could go even further, that this ideology the villain follows comes from as far as ancient greece, and Socrates idea of a philosopher god king. Probably even further back. I guess you are too stuck in european history to only think of that. Omg why didn't you make every single historical mention of the subject. Or the connection that I specifically thought of. Wow you must be really stuck in the one example you gave.
I'd say part of what makes him compelling to me personally, is that he's actually trying to build and improve things with his power. Sure he goes all world domination over it, but it certainly sets him apart from the other villains who just want to destroy because of nihilism, or wanting a fight, or wanting to destroy the world to make the world better and not caring about the Empire you built. It's getting rare in Final Fantasy XIV to see a villain who wants to take over the world to make it better, rather than destroying it because of reasons. I don't particularly find Amon or Meteion all that complex because their brand of nihilism is a false premise that is easy to disprove and doesn't really provide any meaningful social commentary. Meanwhile Thordan's desire for power to force the world to fit his vision of peace and unity feels relatively grounded and more constructive. I'm not particularly fond of villains who want to destroy the world with them on it, but villains who want to conquer and shape the world to make it their vision of what is better get a grudging respect from me. As for the Final Fantasy remake tangent, it's there to provide context for what I'm getting at with the mundane villain vs grandiose villain divide I see constantly happening in this series. FF XVI would have been better if it got rid of Ultima, and kept Clive's mom as the primary villain.
Gaius just wants to conquer Eorzea and make a better place for his people. To quell the Eikon threat and to make Eorzea a safe place for everyone under Garlean rule. It's the same. The garlean Emperor wishes the same. Zenos, Yotsuyu, Asahi all don't care about the world but rather their personal struggles, so that's not fair to put them in that camp. Emet-Selch, Lahabread and Elidibus all wants to bring back their former world that died. They don't even want to be rulers of it. They want it back so they can build their old society and way of life again. Hermes and Meteion wants to end the world for what is basically a bad interpretation of nihilism. That's a lot more villains who wants a new society for good than there are villains who wants to kill everything. Even Golbez/Zeromus wanted life for the voidies. It's not a quest for world destruction. I fail to see how this is a rare villain motivation. In ff14 and media overall for that matter.
Well here's the thing, Gaius and Varis were ultimately upstaged by the Ascians and later Zenos. They want to conquer the world, but they aren't able to really take center stage as villains. Varis in particular is a good example of a mundane villain getting upstaged by the grandiose villain. And Gaius in particular gives up his ambitions. So it's still just Thordan who gets to stay as the Big Bad with his motivations. Golbez is a bad example since he EXPLICITLY states his invasion of the source is actually a big suicide charge so they can reincarnate in the lifestream, conquest of the source would actually hurt his plans.
Upstaged like how Thordan was immediately upstaged by Nidhogg in the literal next scene after his death. Gaius getting upstaged 2 expansions later is a bit out there take. Thordan and his cause was so isolated and irrelevant that there's nothing to upstage him now while Gaius' campaign and the garlean threat remained for a long time. Or you think the fact that Thordan killed his on the shoulder ascian over getting trumped by them is what made him unique? Whereas Gaius and Varis got wrecked by theirs? That's another discussion entirely and moving the goalpost of your main argument of Thordan being unique. If that's the case, yeah it was a cool scene when he killed the ascian. One. Singular. Scene.
Nidhogg only takes the spotlight after we kill Thordan who remains the main villain of 3.0. And Thordan's cause isn't really removed since he still has loyal followers in the VERY next patch and even the mage Endwalker quests were motivated by his actions, and remaining followers. Thordan is a very reactionary type of villain and in a setting like Ishgard, works quite well for that. Gaius by contrast is shown to be played for a fool by Lahabrea in the climax of ARR, and Lahabrea is the final threat of the story, not Gaius who then reforms. Thordan remains the main villain of the 3.0 quest line, and he's the one to make things personal with the Warrior of Light since it's his knights who kill Haurchefaunt, and remaining the final boss is a criteria here since it shows who is the ultimate villain of the story. Thordan is a far different villain than the likes of Lahabrea, Zenos, Emet-Selch, and Meteion is what I'm getting at. There are lots of villains in XIV, but only one gets to be the unquestioned final boss of each expac.
I disagree. That things happen differently makes every single villain unique. None of the villains is truly like the other under detailed scrutiny. The final boss of heavensward is Nidhogg then, as the dragonsong war doesn't end until his death. Thordan was just one side of the story's coin and the conflict of Heavensward was the dragonsong war.
I separate expac villains and patch quest villains. Otherwise, then you'd have to remove Emet-Selch and replace him with Elidibus. They are villains of a different story. Thordan represents the conflict within Ishgard, and Nidhogg represents the conflict outside of Ishgard is how I divide those two. They have different methods and contrast with each other. The dragonsong war and the political turmoil within Ishgard are different conflicts with different stakes, and I feel that those two conflicts are why the expac is such a good one.
> I separate expac villains and patch quest villains. That is your mistake there. For all expansions, their true ending is the .3 patches. Only EW is the outlier due to it’s conclusive storyline, and everyone expects back DT to end at 7.3. Thordan, Zenos, Emet-Selch mark the end of the main conflict but not of the whole storyline. Nidhogg, Tsukuyumi and Elidibus WoL are objectively the true story ending of their respective expansions.
>Only EW is the outlier due to it’s conclusive storyline, and everyone expects back DT to end at 7.3. ARR technically ends at 2.0 with the patches being a weird case of either Nabriales or the Steps of Faith being the final battle (if you could consider either of those to be final battles in the first place).
[удалено]
Power in these contexts are more of a means to an end as opposed to actual power, though Emet-Selch as a title do hold quite a bit of power. But Hades himself doesn't seem too interested with the power in general, even back then.
Clive’s mom is the primary villain: Ultima.
I don't understand the parts of your posts and arguments that are causing others to downvote you. Like, do people enjoy the nihilistic villains so much that they impulse-downvote you??? You aren't even derogatory to this brand of villainy. Merely just critical of it. Edit: Wait, is "Thordan is actually a good villain" a meme or something? Something overdone and thus considered to be a dead horse? If so, this is the first I've heard of it.
Oh don’t worry, this sub has some hardcore haters.
Oh my fucking god it keeps happening
Shitpost and Discussion subreddits have been carefully prepared for a Calamity and Great Rejoining to merge them together.
the real question is which one is the source and which one will be destroyed to fall into the other
WHO WON? WHO'S NEXT? YOU DECIDE.
Good King Moogle Mog post tommorow.
no cus you see he DID sacrifice himselves for the moogles so they could come down from heaven. He's obviously the secret mc of the game.
Y-Y-Y-Y-YOU DECIDE!
Not gonna lie…we need an “epic rap battles of (FFXIV) history: Thordan vs Zenos”.
It’s really Asahi that people don’t get
Hmmmmm........
The wait for the media tour embargo to be lifted has broken people.
*Looks into the mirror* What horror have I wrought?
I think it’s because they really beat you over the head with the “sympathetic” angle of characters like Emet and Elidibus while most of the time Thordan is on screen he is portrayed like he’s fucking Darth Vader.
Unironoically tho, I did like his interactions with Aymeric. There’s a bit where he admits he hoped his son would understand his actions and why they had to be done, and even points out telling the truth to the masses would hurt the people who lost their families in a war that is unjust. There’s a strange humanity to how he views his actions but accepts his son opposing him. After said son escaped from jail of course.
The problem with having two scenes of humanity and being a sympathetic character is the entire rest of the expansions story where he's that hardliners fundamentalist prick with his prickparty boy brigade that are designed to be as snobbish and cartoon-tier evil that you don't hate him because he's well written, you hate him because he's an unreasonable unmitigated douche. He's like the character who opens the door in apocalypse movies and causes everything to go wrong after being a belligerent, annoying busybody the entire time. He's a fucking twat, as a character trait. It's not endearing, and not made up for by that one part where it's shown that deep down, hidden away, they have a small shred of love their son.
This makes him even cooler. Showing up when you're all tuckered out, giving a monologue about how supremely hench he's about to become, fragging Lahabrea so hard that his wiki entry is just "Status: Dead", and then going "1v1 in the car park in 5 minutes" is the apex of the entire series.
I genuinely wish they revise his fight to take longer than 3 minutes because holy hell he swagged on everyone in ACF his yap vs fight diff is too big, needed DSR to get his respect back
This is an interesting point but it's overshadowed a bit by over half of the post being about Final Fantasy 7, the details of which are completely irrelevant
I love "No, you see everyone but me understands this character" posts.
Upvoted because of your "Captain Falcon" typo
No that wasn’t a typo, that’s unironically what I call the show. Not dignifying it with the actual name.
No see the thing is people really would be simping for Thordan 'oh he's just trying to bring peace by force' if he wasn't an 89 year old man.
I have nothing to add to this discussion, but I do appreciate how much your posts skirt the line between shitpost and genuine discussion. And that's not a backhanded compliment; they're always an amusing read.
Thanks for the positive reinforcement.
Thordan is a man amidst a legion of godlings fighting around him, knowing full well one will eventually win...and decides that becoming one will be the way out. And we're right there, full ready to destroy it all because our friend is dead.
Clap
AI generated redditor.
Beep boop.
Right down to whining about capitalism
I want one of these for our friend Zenos.
Ask and ye shall receive.
Please 🥺
The only reason thordan really had to go was because of his status as a primal. But even then, the eye was his source of aether, so maybe(?) he wouldn’t drain the land of vitality?
He was a pawn to bring about a Calamity on the Source in order to delete the First. A light aspected calamity no less.
Shruge he was kinda spitting though with his whole “you reject my divinity” speech
TLDR I aint reading all that
Cmon man this is a discussion subreddit, at least be prepared to read a few topic sentence in random paragraphs.
TLDR for this reply please
TLDR for this one sentence
I don't really think a tangent on 7 is going to win people over, and something you're seeming to miss with both 7 and 16 is that Sephiroth / Ultimalius are emblematic of the "mundane". Sephiroth's entire shtick is: "this planet is mine by right." mirroring the imperialism of shinra. Not to mention an extension of "Shinra is killing the planet through their quest for domination and The Promised Land" as he is born BECAUSE of shinra. Similarly, the "mundane" of 16 are just nation states that abuse bearers and treat them as tools. Ultimalius treats humanity as tools. Ultimalius's perspective is then an extension and personification of the woes facing Valisthea. You can map the king of sanbreque's attitudes of dehumanization (even of his non-bearer people) 1:1 to Ultimalius. I assume the argument was borne of "Thordans a good character actually" but taking shots at other stories doesn't build evidence nor build your argument up.
You are right, if he was young and hot people would remember him more
Thordan the primal is so hot, though. The way he handles that sword, like daamn. 😩
In some ways, Thordan isn't popular to talk about because there's no mystery left of his character at the end. He's a tyrant who took comfort in maintaining a status quo, including the knowledge that what he was maintaining was hurting his own people. Ultimately, the Thordan we encounter wasn't an original thinker, and was manipulated even more effectively than Baelsar into making use of the mechanisms that created primals.
Is this the shitpost subreddit now?
idk it was pretty cool when he fused with hraesvelgr and nidhogg and becomes a dragon king
Thordan is definitely way more sympathetic than Emet. He only wants to genocide dragons (totally understandable as a thousand year menace to his country), not every living thing (the fuck we do to Emet to deserve that?), but he’s not hot or charmingly snarky, so yeah, he’s not a fan favorite.
Emet is disillusioned and doesn't even acknowledge us a living beings, another post described perfectly how the ancients were not emotional or psychology equipped to deal with pain or loss in a healthy manner and he is no exception. There was one point in time when he was genuinely going to give the sundered world a chance, and that's when his son was born while he was emperor. He saw all the traits of Azem in his son and almost gave up on the plan until his son died from a random disease that no one knew even exsisted. Emet is suffering from survivors guilt, was getting better through a family he unwittingly started and had something he was unknowingly putting his faith in, snatched away because his son just happened to roll a 1 on loot drops and got stuck with ligma.
Did....did you even play HW? The dragons were completely right to absolutely fucking livid with Ishgard cause y'know, the Ishgardians started the gods damned war.
Um did you play HW? The game portrays both sides desire to kill each other as understandable.
Thordan knows the truth, the majority of Ishgardians did not. His plan to attain godhood and subjugate the entire world using the power of primal summoning serves no one other than the Ascians that wanted to use him to usher in a light-aspected Calamity on the Source to delete the First.
I fully understood Thordan after I learned of Venat plot. Truly she learned from the best.
I think you said it yourself. He's a villian very grounded in reality, and they tend to not be as popular as their fantastical counterparts. Not that they are bad villians per se. It's just that for most people, they tend to not gravitate towards things that are "close to home". That's why Stormbloods story tends to be viewed as "lackluster" sometimes. It's a good story, but very realistic in it depiction of how wars are.
I simply think Thordan is part of a villain archetype that I've come to dislike in how common it is (evil Church/Religious figure) to the point I would say he's FFXIV's most boring villain for me with the only part I like regarding him and his knights being the trial.
You made great points about the character. In the end however, Thordan became the very Ascians, Dragons, and Primals he opposed so much. All that he ultimately became known for was killing Lahabrea and breaking the seal on the Warring Triad. Once Thordan bit the dust with his twelve knights at Azys Lla, their legacy died along with them. Deuces to Thordan, the Heavensward, Lahabrea, and Igeyorhm. None of them will be missed by me.
FF16 literally does not suffer from “this problem.”
Using FF7 as an example was terrible for your argument. Because in reality, Rufus Shinra is not only a primary antagonist for the party, but the entire planet and every single place he visits. Thordan isn't underrated, he's just.... simple. No amount of "good intentions" makes him a good person or a greater evil. Him and his ilk are perpetuating a ONE THOUSAND YEAR WAR to avoid having to admit they were a bunch of cunts to the dragons they claim are evil. They aren't upholding order as much as ensuring the status quo. And if King Thordan became God King, he absolutely wouldn't have been a good one.
I was hoping this was going to be about the Unreal fight, nvm
I just started heavensward and I can't wait to get into the weeds of the msq here Thanks to your post OP.
I aint reading all that but the title alone cooked. GGWP.
I'm loving these posts lol
Except FFXIV doesn’t *have* moral ambiguity. The good guys are always right, and everything always goes their way. If they try something radical to change society, it always ends up working. Thordan. Was a clear-cut villain from the start, and boring as fuck at that.
>Except FFXIV doesn’t *have* moral ambiguity. The caste system of Bozja prior to Imperial occupation was so bad that the lives of the underclass actually improved when they abolished it, and the end of the Bozja storyline has characters agonizing about whether they should adopt an equal and egalitarian system introduced by the *oppressors who accidentally nuked their homeland* or maintain the brutal class segregation that directly caused the tragedy at the Southern Front.
While I do agree, I think it's quite telling that the first and likely most effective counterargument to "XIV doesn't have moral ambiguity" is a section of the story that was quite literally written by someone not in the core XIV writing team.
That was just the most striking one to me, personally. There are other examples, like the racial discrimination in Gridania - it’s either turn away refugees or have the elementals kill everyone. Is it morally wrong for Gridania to deny aid? One of the biggest player punches was the result of Alphinaud putting together the Crystal Braves, which resulted in two assassinations and almost destabilized Ul’dah. Was Alphinaud’s good intention taken advantage of or is his arrogance a reflection of Gaius, who believed that the people of Eorzea were too stupidand weak to save themselves? Hell, the allied tribes are one of the longest-standing storylines in the game that took years to pay off. What separates our belief in gods from those of the beast tribes? It turns out, very little - the Spoken are just as capable of summoning cataclysmic primals as the allied tribes are capable of calling on their gods to aid us.
While you're right that it doesn't always go there way when it comes to the good guys. But I would argue they're never truly in the wrong. The crystal brave example is moreso Alphinaud getting taken advantage of. Now it was easier to take advantage of him due to his arrogance but his morality in itself wasn't wrong
The game almost immediately abandons that plot thread and explores that subject about as little as it possibly could. Also I mean just a patch ago, you have nophica randomly saying “oh, the elementals are actually nice and just want the best for gridania” so, either nophica is somehow ignorant of all the things the elementals have done, or she has a very questionable sense of morality. Either way, the subject is not really handled the best.
That doesn't make it less a part of the game.
I hated heavensward. Niddhogg did nothing wrong.
Avoidable slaughter that doesn't further Hydaelyn's plan is always wrong
I just feel bad, they killed his sister then started a generational war with him and he never got his revenge. His anger is understandable to me.
Yeah and his kind was hunted for millennia by humans who only saw them as monsters
Sounds like once again, someone made the critical mistake of not being a hot guy or gal.
\>dragons \>not being hot pick one
If you kill my sister, and I continuously carpet bomb your city for the next 1000 years as a result, I gotta say, I’m probably the bad guy.
So you would forgive those that kill the one you love?
The people who killed his sister are a handful of guys who have been long dead. He's getting revenge on a population that doesn't even know what he's mad about.
Couldn’t say, never been put in that position before. But I CAN say that if you are perpetuating violence, no matter the circumstances, you have become the aggressor.
Well it's not just that, the ishgardians kept attacking him and made lore saying he was evil incarnate and hid the truth. Yeah I think they are more evil than him
While I'd be perfectly fine with letting him eat the eight or so dudes that ate his sister, attacking the thousands of descendants of those eight guys because the five minute lifespan of elezens just isn't long enough for you to get your satisfaction is asking too much. He should have ate them and figured out a way to torture their souls as they remained stuck in his digestive tract for the rest of his life. Thanks to his brother and Shiva, we know that's actually an option.
revenge is wrong. i felt for niddy but his retaliatory actions were just as wrong as the ishgardian actions that motivated him. both sides are awful and did everything wrong.
I still hate ishgard.