Is the Age of Duskborn Ending Bad? A Deep Dive into Elden Ring’s Mortality
The question of whether the Age of Duskborn ending in Elden Ring is “bad” is complex and depends heavily on one’s perspective and interpretation of the game’s themes. In short, the answer isn’t a straightforward yes or no. While it’s often touted as the most neutral ending, restoring mortality to the Lands Between doesn’t come without its own set of potential downsides and moral considerations. This article explores the nuances of this ending and delves into frequently asked questions to help you understand its implications.
The Age of Duskborn: More Than Just a Neutral Option
The Age of Duskborn ending is achieved by completing Fia’s questline and using the Mending Rune of the Death-Prince to repair the Elden Ring. This results in a pervasive mist descending upon the Lands Between and the restoration of true death. For eons, the people of the Lands Between have been under the influence of the Greater Will’s control, resulting in a form of undeath and rebirth through the Erdtree. This process, though seemingly benevolent, has also been a form of stagnation, preventing true closure and potentially causing suffering through endless cycles of resurrection.
The Age of Duskborn, on the other hand, allows those who die to move on, offering finality and a more natural progression. However, this shift is not entirely without concern. By introducing mortality back into the equation, the ending acknowledges the end of immortality in The Lands Between, and that could be seen as a bad thing.
Arguments Against the Age of Duskborn
Some might view the Age of Duskborn as a negative outcome for a number of reasons:
- Loss of Immortality: For beings that have long known resurrection, being faced with permanent death could be seen as a loss. For those who are afraid of the unknown, the finality of death may be a concept that they are not comfortable with.
- The Unknown Mist: The mist that accompanies this ending is shrouded in mystery. While the idea is that it allows souls to move on, it’s a significant change that could have unseen consequences.
- The Association with Death: Fia, associated with death and Godwyn the Prince of Death, adds a chilling undertone. She is called a Deathbed Companion, and this implies that what she brings with her is not solely a blessing, but also a reminder of death’s cold grip.
Arguments in Favor of the Age of Duskborn
Yet, there are strong arguments for why the Age of Duskborn could be seen as a positive or at least a neutral outcome:
- Restoration of the Natural Order: Many characters in the game, including Fia, argue that the constant cycle of rebirth is unnatural and leads to stagnation. The Age of Duskborn can be seen as restoring a natural order, where life ends, and souls can find peace.
- Breaking the Greater Will’s Grip: The Greater Will’s influence on the Lands Between is viewed by many as oppressive. Restoring death breaks free from this control, allowing individuals a more natural existence beyond its influence.
- Release from Suffering: For some characters trapped in undeath or the agony of endless rebirth, the gift of true death could be a release and potentially something more merciful.
The Neutrality Argument
The most compelling argument for the Age of Duskborn not being inherently “bad” is its neutrality. It doesn’t impose a grand vision for the future like some other endings, instead returning the world to a state where death is a natural part of life. This ending neither promises grand utopias nor does it doom the world to an inescapable curse; it just allows souls to move on. This resonates with many players seeking a more balanced conclusion to the game’s complex narrative. It’s neither a hopeful ending where the world is reformed into something better nor is it a chaotic ending where the world is destroyed. Instead, it is an ending where the natural cycle of life and death is restored.
Frequently Asked Questions
Here are 15 frequently asked questions about the Age of Duskborn ending and its implications:
1. What exactly does the Age of Duskborn ending mean?
The Age of Duskborn ending means the restoration of true death to the Lands Between. The immortality enforced by the Erdtree is removed, and individuals can now experience a final death. It also results in a mist that covers the landscape.
2. How do I get the Age of Duskborn ending?
To achieve this ending, you must complete Fia’s questline. This includes defeating various bosses and acquiring the Mending Rune of the Death-Prince by utilizing the Cursemark of Death.
3. Is the Age of Duskborn the most “morally right” ending?
Many players consider this to be the most neutral ending because it avoids imposing an extreme vision, but the concept of “morally right” is subjective. Some would argue it is right in that it restores the natural order.
4. Is the Age of Duskborn ending better than the Elden Lord ending?
Whether it is “better” depends on personal preference. The standard Elden Lord ending perpetuates the current system, while the Age of Duskborn changes the rules by introducing death back into the equation.
5. Is Fia evil in Elden Ring?
Fia is not inherently evil. Her actions stem from a desire to protect those she calls the “Those Who Live in Death” and to restore a more natural order. She seeks to protect those who are trapped in a state of undeath.
6. What is the mist in the Age of Duskborn ending?
The mist is generally interpreted as the manifestation of death returning to the Lands Between, allowing souls to finally find rest. It marks the end of the cycle of undeath and rebirth.
7. How does the Age of Duskborn affect the Erdtree?
The Erdtree’s influence is significantly diminished by the return of true death. While the tree isn’t destroyed, its power over life and death is severely curtailed.
8. Is the Age of Duskborn ending considered a good ending by the game’s lore?
The lore is open to interpretation. The Age of Duskborn is neither explicitly good nor bad within the lore; rather, it is presented as a significant shift in the world’s fundamental workings.
9. Does the Age of Duskborn make other beings weaker?
The impact of this ending on other beings is not definitively shown. However, the loss of forced immortality will likely affect the strength and influence of various factions.
10. Does the Age of Duskborn end the cycle of resurrection in The Lands Between?
Yes, this ending is meant to break the cycle of forced resurrection by reintroducing true, final death, ending the cycle of immortality.
11. Does this ending affect the demigods?
The specific impact on demigods isn’t fully detailed, but it is implied that they, too, would be subject to death and not the repeated rebirth.
12. Is it possible to get the Age of Duskborn and the Lord of the Frenzied Flame ending in the same playthrough?
No, you can only get one ending per playthrough. If you get one ending, you cannot get another in the same playthrough.
13. Can the Age of Duskborn be reversed?
There is no indication in the game that the Age of Duskborn can be reversed, and it would likely represent a permanent shift in the world’s mechanics.
14. Why is this ending considered “bittersweet”?
It’s bittersweet because while it restores a natural order, it also acknowledges the end of the known world’s cycle of resurrection and immortality.
15. Should I choose the Age of Duskborn for my first playthrough?
The choice is entirely up to you. It provides a balanced outcome and a shift in the world’s dynamics, and you can always see the other endings in later playthroughs.
Conclusion
The Age of Duskborn ending in Elden Ring is not inherently bad, but rather a complex, neutral option that introduces a significant shift in the world’s understanding of life and death. Its implications are far-reaching and encourage players to consider the nature of the world they inhabit. Whether it’s seen as a desirable or undesirable ending is ultimately a matter of personal perspective and your interpretation of the game’s lore and themes. It’s a testament to Elden Ring’s narrative richness that an ending centered on death can be considered anything but definitively “bad.”