I am somewhere between your two positions regarding adventure 8 and Elfaivar. Given that ZG follows a structure akin to a TV or book series, I can see why the lack of "progress" can be seen as a problem from a gaming narrative, where it isn't necessarily one from a character development perspective. In my opinion, book 8 is one of the most DM- and player-background dependent entries. For us, it was all about Kasvarina's development and our relationship with her. But our DM did bring her back and he let us influence Asrabey's story arc.
And I guess NPC story arcs is something that should definitely be looked into as a DM, and should there be another "definite" version of the AP somewhen in time. Nicodemus is a prime example as there should be a final word on whether he was a moral shades of grey from the beginning (as implied in his poisoning scene) or whether he was more of a kind heart turned to bitterness and utilitarianism (as implied in his crypta scenes and his interaction with Kasvarina).
Regarding your positions on Eladrin and Elfaivar, I agree that it wasn't really fleshed out enough from the beginning. RW himself said that he wish he'd be more sensitive and that they wrote in too many Eladrin women over the course of the campaign. The problem is that it is really hard to do it right as Elfaivar is a multi-faceted beast: First, you usually don't have that many non-fetishized matriarchies in fiction, even less in fantasy RPGs. So you (ideally) have to carefully avoid the obvious traps. This is one of the reasons why I personally hated the Lonely Companion, even if RW offered an explanation how and why it would work. Second, the elfaivaran society is based on a tragedy, but it is still something that happened after a previous society collapsed. So in order to see whether it makes sense, we need to understand how Eladrin culture and society worked before the Fall of Srasama. The problem here is that 1) we don't know as we only get a few hints and 2) with all this blank space, many players and DMs just fall back to the human societies (or their stereotypes) that we know. I can even see traces of this in your interpretations:
I also disagree that ZG fails to show the power of Eladrin women from Elfaivar, unless my DM really changed stuff for our campaign. Athryalla is a really powerful person, and so are Kasvarina and Latika. Even Gale is a very powerful person and possibly valuable ally.
And yes, Elfaivar shouldn't be depicted as a clear "morally superior" society. Are they now better than Crisillyir? Yes, most likely. Were they in the past? Not so sure (see slaves and racism).
That being said, I don't think the worldbuilding is weak. It was and is strong enough that I wanted to base my character in that society as it is a completely different scenario. It is based on a bold move, and it could benefit from a good polish. It could especially do a better job at setting a broad "norm" for Eladrin women and their place in their society: Make them rare, make them valuable, but show more, much more of the matriarch-led enclaves (especially when you have that perversion of Ushanti as the next best thing after Sentosa). Also, yes, please, let the characters save the Enclaves by warning them of the ritual. Beating those already on the ground doesn't feel too good, especially if you as a party are invested in them.
And I guess NPC story arcs is something that should definitely be looked into as a DM, and should there be another "definite" version of the AP somewhen in time. Nicodemus is a prime example as there should be a final word on whether he was a moral shades of grey from the beginning (as implied in his poisoning scene) or whether he was more of a kind heart turned to bitterness and utilitarianism (as implied in his crypta scenes and his interaction with Kasvarina).
Regarding your positions on Eladrin and Elfaivar, I agree that it wasn't really fleshed out enough from the beginning. RW himself said that he wish he'd be more sensitive and that they wrote in too many Eladrin women over the course of the campaign. The problem is that it is really hard to do it right as Elfaivar is a multi-faceted beast: First, you usually don't have that many non-fetishized matriarchies in fiction, even less in fantasy RPGs. So you (ideally) have to carefully avoid the obvious traps. This is one of the reasons why I personally hated the Lonely Companion, even if RW offered an explanation how and why it would work. Second, the elfaivaran society is based on a tragedy, but it is still something that happened after a previous society collapsed. So in order to see whether it makes sense, we need to understand how Eladrin culture and society worked before the Fall of Srasama. The problem here is that 1) we don't know as we only get a few hints and 2) with all this blank space, many players and DMs just fall back to the human societies (or their stereotypes) that we know. I can even see traces of this in your interpretations:
In order to find your own hidden biases, just flip the genders and see if you'd come to the same conclusions: Would rare males be fought over by "desperate or evil females"? Would Eladrin males be seen as pricey trophy husbands? Would females be "even more expendable"? Would the sexual dynamics be similarly out of whack and young women fear not being able to continue their lines? If not, then you are just inserting your own human (more or less patriarchy-based) assumptions into your line of thought (Well, you could add that you don't need that many men compared to women in order to have the same number of babies, but still...)As for the aftermath. Eladrin women are now extremely rare. That makes them valuable. As I understood it some Eladrin women were able to leverage that value for political power or to keep their existing power and became the matriarchy. Whereas in other areas they sadly became a commodity fought over by evil or just desperate males.
And remember historically Elfaivar basically collapses. We know some women flocked to conclaves and lived in hiding but others would have been caught by clergy forces and seeing they are a value a slave industry does sadly make sense that it could come about as the internal value on Eladrin women gets revealed to the continent at large. Scarcity is a value all its own.
Now if you look at the men of Elfaivar we can see a utter despair take over them. The sexual dynamics are completely out of wack now. Males are even more expendable in society as they vastly vastly outnumber the women, the older men lost their wives and families while the younger men have no hope of continuing their line.
I also disagree that ZG fails to show the power of Eladrin women from Elfaivar, unless my DM really changed stuff for our campaign. Athryalla is a really powerful person, and so are Kasvarina and Latika. Even Gale is a very powerful person and possibly valuable ally.
And yes, Elfaivar shouldn't be depicted as a clear "morally superior" society. Are they now better than Crisillyir? Yes, most likely. Were they in the past? Not so sure (see slaves and racism).
That being said, I don't think the worldbuilding is weak. It was and is strong enough that I wanted to base my character in that society as it is a completely different scenario. It is based on a bold move, and it could benefit from a good polish. It could especially do a better job at setting a broad "norm" for Eladrin women and their place in their society: Make them rare, make them valuable, but show more, much more of the matriarch-led enclaves (especially when you have that perversion of Ushanti as the next best thing after Sentosa). Also, yes, please, let the characters save the Enclaves by warning them of the ritual. Beating those already on the ground doesn't feel too good, especially if you as a party are invested in them.