Theory for becoming a Warrior of Darkness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dualblade

I need to get back on that alt I created a while ago so I can see these things again. A nice refresher course.

...or wait for NG+, either or.

---

If you have alts, and unless the NG+ rewards are specifically going to benefit your main, it makes more sense to level an alt if you're going to replay the story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gumas

To be honest i really hope our char just "snapped" and goes wod in super saiyan style storywise, considering all the buildup we've seen so far kind of goes that way...
- our friend "lost" one by one
- people rely our wol waaay too much now (i know we meant well but stil storywise the wol is just your char right? So technicaly one person. Cant imagine all the stress and preasure building inside all this time)
- we are not exactly super op now, latest fight with "zenos" seems to show that way, and sadu dotharl fight... she literally just laugh on our wol

I doubt it going that way but i love to see the "enter the darkness" scene done in goku first ssj style, i would grin like an idiot if every npc just went "wtf" when it happen lol

---

this please thus. all classes gets a super form where we slaughter innocence for at least one instance. At least give us a really cool purple and black (flames) aura that make us actually look like darkness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dualblade

I need to get back on that alt I created a while ago so I can see these things again. A nice refresher course.

---

You can view those particular scenes in the Unending Journey in an inn. It's in the Seventh Astral Era Main Scenario Quests section. I think the quest it's in is "Levin an Impression"...

I don't know this SMT thing, but your chaos/law good/evil thing is a lot like D&D alignments (thought note I'm fussing with 3.5 edition rules, my last known set from DMing; I actually have no experience with later rulesets at this point; I believe later alignment rules may have been simplified, but that's about all I know).

Back when I was a younger person, I was naturally inclined toward chaotic good, with occasional hiccupping forays into true nuetral, chaotic neutral or lawful neutral, for my characters, but that CG is a lot like who I am anyway. I have also been called "Nice Evil", but that's not a thing and I'm not evil per se. Anyhoo, chaos isn't necessarily a bad thing (it's a LADDAH), it really is what you do with it that counts. Same with lawful stuff. You can have someone so lawful, playing it so by the book - we used to call these sort of paladin types "awful good" or "lawful boring" - but their rigid adherance to written law may not be fairly applicable to some circumstances (their reading of law may not necessarily be "just", if you will), and they can really hurt people even if it's still technically "the law". You can skirt lawful behaviour and doctrine and still bring about good things for others, because you know life isn't black and white (or all dark and light), but you can still keep the peace, and have things relatively nice and balanced... just not so fussed with the fine print of a contract, say. Or you can skirt lawful behaviour and doctrine, be an arse and ruin everyone's day whilst being absolutely evil about it because you're not doing it for the betterment of everyone and you're possibly a bit dumb if you think it's a sustainable way of life.

This may or may not be relevant to this particular game in this particular way however; I'm just wanting to add those D&D alignments to the pool for extra stuff to chew on when debating the differences between this particular game's own alignments. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ceridwenae

I don't know this SMT thing, but your chaos/law good/evil thing is a lot like D&D alignments (thought note I'm fussing with 3.5 edition rules, my last known set from DMing; I actually have no experience with later rulesets at this point; I believe later alignment rules may have been simplified, but that's about all I know).

---

SMT is short for Shin Megami Tensei, a JRPG series famous for brutal difficulty, having God as a final boss, and unironically featuring Dante from the Devil May Cry series. Persona started off as a spinoff of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ObsidianFire

You can view those particular scenes in the Unending Journey in an inn. It's in the Seventh Astral Era Main Scenario Quests section. I think the quest it's in is "Levin an Impression"...

---

True enough for that scene but the stuff inbetween whats in the Journey I would need to do on an alt to see.

For Ceridwenae, I just find using Shin Megami Tensei gets the point across more here since enough people seem to atleast know its Law/Chaos/that one third path type. Though I actually did start playing DnD about a month and a half ago. More so since up until recently XIV has had Light simply be Lawful Good and Darkness Chaotic Evil when it comes to the grand scheme and is only visibly changing that stance to show both can go beyond those two alignments.

Long story short, we're transitioning from Lawful Good to Chaotic Good.

The First's problems are very different to those of the Source, and Lawful Good just ain't gonna cut it over there!

I dont think its about good or evil. Its about aligned aether imbalance. I could be mistaken but the first was always closely aligned to light just as the thirteenth was always closely aligned with darkness. Hence why one fell already and the other is teetering on the edge. Its all about Aether, not so much about good or evil. There may even be a shard closely aligned with fire and someday we may need to go there and put out the fire. We´ll be called the Warrior of Water then. Or maybe the Warrior of Wetness. Or maybe even the Warrior of Moistness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ceridwenae

I don't know this SMT thing, but your chaos/law good/evil thing is a lot like D&D alignments (thought note I'm fussing with 3.5 edition rules, my last known set from DMing; I actually have no experience with later rulesets at this point; I believe later alignment rules may have been simplified, but that's about all I know).

---

They simplified the Alignment chart somewhat in 4.0 (Lawful Good - Good - Neutral - Evil - Chaotic Evil, treating the categories at either end more like "super good" and "super evil" than the nuanced definitions old-school D&D-ers were accustomed to), but like many things about that edition it was not very popular. While I haven't played much of it, I know that 5.0 returned to the nine-alignment model.

Regardless, for discussions regarding Light and Darkness, the two-axis model of the D&D alignment system doesn't really make sense, except possibly for providing one of the two axes. So are Light and Darkness Good and Evil? Or are they Chaos and Law? Given that the storyline seems to suggest that the Warrior of Light is Good, and we're soon to transition from Light to Darkness, and being Evilgood doesn't make much sense, the latter seems to be suggested. Either that, or Dark/Light doesn't correspond to EITHER axis, and is something completely independent.

In your discussion about lawful characters taking it too far and causing harm by their actions, it's important to note that if a Lawful Good player is playing that way, it is not proper representation of their alignment. That kind of behavior is FAR more in line for a Lawful Neutral character - for them, the Law is everything, whether it causes harm or not. That's where the Neutral part comes into play; they are equally on board with evil laws as good laws. The hallmark of an excellent Lawful Good player is that running into instances where obeying the law causes evil things to happen is a CONFLICT for them. They might resolve the conflict by siding with Good, or with Law, but it's not an easy decision to make either way. It should also go without saying that a DM who insists that his Lawful Good players toe the line for blatantly evil laws, like those that might be established by a wicked sorcerer king, is just being a jerkass. A Lawful Good character is completely justified in crusading against unjust laws, but tends to work within the system to do so whenever possible. A Lawful Neutral character wouldn't even bother trying to overturn unjust laws. And a Lawful Evil character? They're the ones who wrote them in the first place! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tanker4444

I dont think its about good or evil. Its about aligned aether imbalance. I could be mistaken but the first was always closely aligned to light just as the thirteenth was always closely aligned with darkness. Hence why one fell already and the other is teetering on the edge. Its all about Aether, not so much about good or evil. There may even be a shard closely aligned with fire and someday we may need to go there and put out the fire. We´ll be called the Warrior of Water then. Or maybe the Warrior of Wetness. Or maybe even the Warrior of Moistness.

---

Not to be pedantic, but Light and Darkness are not elements in this Final Fantasy game. All the elements we do have (Fire, Ice, Water, Thunder, Earth, Wind) have both Light (Astral) and Dark (Umbral) aspects to them. You can have Umbral Thunder, Astral Wind, and so on and so forth. While the Shards may have varying levels of overall Darkness or Light, chances are good that the mix of elements they have are pretty similar to what is found on the Source.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LineageRazor

They...

---

It was more because earlier in this thread, it was commented that light in FFXIV was presented thus far as good and darkness was chaos and evil, and I'm just bouncing off that as D&D alignments immediately came to mind, particularly as the other potential analogy brought up was unknown to me. I thought to bring something extra by showing chaos doesn't necessarily mean evil using the D&D rules (which extends to lawful not necessarily being good and vice versa). It's how you behave, what things you do, that dictates who you are - but what that means as far as FFXIV is concerned? Following the analogy: that by going with darkness doesn't have to mean you are doing horrible things - like being chaotic doesn't mean you're automatically evil, even if that's all we've been shown in the game so far. D&D rules won't be exactly the same, no, but it's analogy not a carbon copy.

But yes, you're quite right, my examples sucked! :D- I even initially had a sentence saying this much and that some others of you would come up with much better examples, but removed it for word count and it didn't feel necessary to include! - but I wrote that post at 1 in the morning and should've been sleeping instead. My excuse and I'm sticking to it. :D

Though in D&D, regardless of alignment, anyone can have "off-days" for better or worse, where they don't hold 100% true to character, and even if they don't, there's a lot of room to move even in those rigid-seeming alignments, as the guide I linked to (which is from the 3.5 edition rulebook) points out, so I've always gone with allowing players to have more grey areas than not. Learning experiences, and whatnot. And no-o, I've never tried to get LGs to have those selfsame learning experiences for my own amusement... Okay, there were a few times. Such fun times! Anyhoo. My dice are back in their box these days, and it's really for the best. :cool:

I now look forward to being Batman in this upcoming expansion.

Big post edit needed.

I think coming at it from the D&D alignment chart is mistaken from the outset because this isn't a matter of personal or societal outlook but of cosmogony. Light and Dark aren't good and evil, they also aren't law or chaos, they are Order and Chaos or Genesis and Entropy under an entirely separate definition.

The core breakdown comes because Darkness and Chaos have been bundled together, but Zodiark's endgoal is what in that D&D dichotomy would be a pure Lawful existence. All things are returned to it in a stagnant sterile existence. It is not a world of pure D&D style chaos where the capability to see your desires becomes truth, but one where Zodiark is singularity of creation.

"So indomitable is his strength that all things are by him twisted and pressed into oblivion. He alone fashions the laws governing all things, and administers punishment in place of the gods. So is he Keeper of Precepts, and his authority is absolute."

The name Zodiark was chosen for a reason, and Zodiark as 'Keeper of Precepts' is the very essence of lawfulness, but not necessarily Order.


Zodiark's Chaos is the whirling blender of pure energy that is the Aetherial Sea from which all things came and to which all things return. And for whatever reason, He wants all of it and for nothing to develop into any manner of being outside of that state.

Hydaelyn's demonstrable power, as when we separate Lahabrea and Igeyohrm and he responds "How dare you bring Her barriers back upon me!" is to create distinctions, not an enforcement of societal laws but the creation of natural ones like how fire and water are different things, how we are different people. To make a comparison back to SMT, a god of lawfulness would not so cherish free will as to give up Minfillia as Word of the Mother because an automaton would more directly communicate Her will.

According to the Gerun Oracle - which Word of the Mother paraphrases in her explanation of the cosmos to WoL and Elidibus gives to Urianger as the truth of creation - mortal life is Her creation and the very bulwark which prevents the return of Zodiark, and Zodiark hates us. She created, and by that creation we with our free will achieve D&D's chaotic nature because of individuality, but that's incidental.

Some have stated we've been an instrument of lawfulness thus far but that is absolutely incorrect. Garlemald was built to spread strife but it does so as an entity of rigid lawfulness, Ishgard as a society was dogmatically lawful in its extreme until we came along. All of our major enemies have been agents for lawful organizations with the exception of Zenos who does what he does to try to feel anything.

Light and Dark are not Astral and Umbral, either, according to Koji Fox.

Quote:

---

So, you have the elements—and it’s still six elements, there are no newly-discovered ones. Those elements have charges—umbral and astral. If something has “umbral energy”, it is one or more of those elements, individual or combined. So if elements have an umbral charge, it can be said that they are “umbral energies”. That’s where those terms come from, “astral energies” and “umbral energies” are not individual things, it’s a blanket term. Light and Dark are not elements, but they are energies…in a different sense. They are not elements, they are not of the elements, and they are not astral or umbral. It’s a different type of energy. You might see a Light and Dark sprite and think, oh, they must be elemetals, but those are made of an entirely different form of energy.

---

I would note we shouldn't use the XII/Ivalice version of Zodiark in discussion for the XIV Zodiark. We don't really know what the XIV version wants beyond a little bit of what Elidibus and Hydaelyn have spoken of him, and we don't have any actual evidence that he speaks/is able to speak to Elidibus like Hydaelyn does to us. As well as that Zodiark is not Darkness itself just like Hydaelyn is not Light, otherwise we most likely wouldn't have the Sin Eater/Flood of Light problem.

Plus atleast in XII Zodiark was essentially a child that the Occuria created and then sealed away before it could even fully come into it's power. And we know even less of the Tactics version since it was just part of a bonus boss there if I remember right.

I am not saying He is 1:1 translation but that like all references, it is chosen with reason and is likely to hold some degree of similarity to its source material. The Ascians at least certainly hold Him to be a being of similar ineffable quality as the Keeper of Precepts. Nor that He is Darkness or Hydaelyn Light, but that they are given relation to them and agents in their names appears to spread Dark and Light, somehow. There's some kind of unexplained relation between how they function and these energies even if they are not the direct will of them.

Not sure what the speaking to Elidibus thing is about, that point was more that these two corroborate the same creation story. Those two and more - Louisoix and 4th wall leaning Yoshi P have quoted the Oracle - hold this source of information to be truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cybylt

Big post edit needed.

I think coming at it from the D&D alignment chart is mistaken from the outset because this isn't a matter of personal or societal outlook but of cosmogony. Light and Dark aren't good and evil, they also aren't law or chaos, they are Order and Chaos or Genesis and Entropy under an entirely separate definition.

---

I didn't bring it up to say it's exactly the same, only that it was reminiscent, and other posts reminded me of it, and thus I am using it as analogy, for the purpose of illustrating that, in response to some of the posts in this thread, chaos doesn't automatically equal bad, plus included a nice link for it to be read about how that works in a different setting. I already said it may well not be like that here (and nor should it, being a different property altogether), but it's a simple analogous example of there being potential for a broader definition than seems currently presented; meaning it is not a given than being a WoD means you have to go around torturing small animals*, nor that WoL always equals best. That is all. Analogy only, not an absolute, and certainly no deeper than that. My apologies if it read differently from my intent, or that I was saying this is definitely a thing and that FFXIV is clearly exactly the same as D&D when it comes to this sort of stuff.

* I am being flippant here.

Oh it wasn't meant to specifically target your take, just that the D&D alignment was a good shorthand to encompassing the overall discussion of the change to Warrior of Darkness being a matter of character alignment when what we know about Light and Dark doesn't quite back that.

You're right that on that dichotomy that chaos doesn't equal bad and lawful doesn't equal good. Ishgard and Garlemald both are extremely lawful cultures that were and are nonetheless acting in service of Chaos and inflicting evils. Through Heavensward and Stormblood, WoL's actions track more as chaotic good on that scale as we crumble centuries of tradition and lead political upheaval yet we're told that those actions engender Light.

To be fair, the Warrior of Light (and Scions in general) are more Neutral Good than Lawful or Chaotic; everything they do is for what most would consider the greater good, to alleviate suffering, etc. They work with the authorities when possible, but absolutely won't hesitate to go against the law if it's for the common good. Even in the case of Heavensward and Stormblood, they end up working with authority figures (Aymeric, Count Edmont, Conrad, Hien, Lyse, etc.) as they go against the Lawful Evil systems constructed by antagonists. (Though Ishgard was more Lawful Neutral helmed by a Lawful Evil ruler. The Garlean Empire is, undoubtedly, 100% pure Lawful Evil.)

That said yeah, character alignment isn't really that great for determining the shift from Warrior of Light to Darkness. It has more to do with the specific problems facing the First (overabundance of Light to Flood levels) vs. the problems facing the Source (efforts by the Ascians to spread Dark). In a land drowning in Light, Darkness is comfort...

Going to post this again because I think it's a good thing to keep in mind when talking about concepts like Chaos and Order (or Chaotic and Lawful) in the FFXIV world.

This post has a good summation of the different types of Order vs. Chaos dichotomies that can happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cybylt

SMT is philosophical Order and Chaos. XIV deals with metaphysical Order and Chaos derived from greek ideologies.

A big difference is metaphysical Order creates many things with individual distinctions following underlying patterns or rules (eg. the behavior of elements) where philosophical Order reduces things into components of one entity.

Metaphysical Order creating a bunch of distinct entities can create philosophical chaos, while metaphysical Chaos reduces things into nothing creating the extreme of philosophical order. They're paradoxical waypoints to try to navigate, so it's best not to get those wires crossed.

---

On the one hand, this is separate from the discussion of Light vs. Dark. On the other hand it isn't. While the Flood of Light is based on too much light, I don't see the WoL's (or Hydaelyn's for that matter) objective of maintaining individual distinctions changing at all when we become a Warrior of Darkness.

It's almost like the two different types of "Order" are warring with each other on the 1st Shard. There's the "Order" that comes from everything being simplified into the same thing and the "Order" that comes from individual distinctions being maintained. For whatever reason, the kind of "Order" that comes from simplifying everything is either a result of or leads to there being to much light. The kind of "Order" that comes from maintaining individual distinction seems to be more flexible. On the Source, that seem to be a power of Light, but on the 1st Shard, that doesn't seem to be something Light is doing. So I can see us still being able to do that with Darkness.

my guild was thinking is that later your char will fall into "downstate" of sort (powerless, depression, etc) and at one point Fray from DRK quest will make a comeback and offer our MC to "switch" just as he promised. which is interesting because if you finish level 50 DRK quest, he did said that he will be waiting for us when our wol is tire of all of this.

"you need only ask.."

I don't want to see the DRK questline crossing over into MSQ. I dislike how it portrays our character and I don't want to see it become non-optional.

The thing is it's something only dark knight can experience, content relative to job can't properly be used for something outside of the job. Furthermore if it could be used like you said, there something we shouln't forget that will prevent that switch: in your darkest hour, in the blackest night... think of me, and I will be with you. Always. For where else could I go? Who else could I love but you? .
Right now i think the dark knight character is like diamond: unbreakable.

If you played DRK to 70, you'd know the Warrior of Light made peace with Fray... I don't expect any further appearances from them.

I wouldn't go as far as to say Fray won't show up again in the DRK questlines, but he won't show up in the MSQ. There isn't really as good an introduction for him into SHB as Estinien had for HW outside of the DRG questline.

they could just make it like estinien introduction right? if you never play/finish drg class quest, estinien will give you a brief self introduction and what drg is. if you already drg he will say something like "oh its you" or something like that, i forgot.

i can see its working on fray case too, if you finish drk 50 quest he will go like "we meet again" something like that, if our avatar never touch drk fray just need to do brief introduction like estinien case, our avatar transported to "black screen" dimension and fray appear saying stuff like iam your opposite or whatsnot and the story continue.

it just a theory that my guild talk about, but i think its good enough to put it in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

If you played DRK to 70, you'd know the Warrior of Light made peace with Fray... I don't expect any further appearances from them.

---

I'm pretty sure that happened at lvl 50. Their lvl 70 appearance was more like 'Hey I know we agreed that I'd take a backseat and let you do your thing, but these are extenuating circumstances'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dualblade

I wouldn't go as far as to say Fray won't show up again in the DRK questlines, but he won't show up in the MSQ. There isn't really as good an introduction for him into SHB as Estinien had for HW outside of the DRG questline.

---

Fray worked well in the 30 - 50 line because their true nature was kept a secret until the very end and has heavy implications, and in the 70 quest because their appearance was pretty unexpected.

I'm not against them appearing again, and I do appreciate the philosophical / psychological spin Fray brought to the DRK questlines... but if they're used too much it becomes expected, and by extension less interesting. I don't want to see Fray in every DRK questline purely because of how popular they are, and the 70 quest kind of implied (to me) they might probably not show up again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrThinker

I'm pretty sure that happened at lvl 50. Their lvl 70 appearance was more like 'Hey I know we agreed that I'd take a backseat and let you do your thing, but these are extenuating circumstances'.

---

The 50 quest was more like an armistice. The 70 quest felt more like a true mutual understanding and acceptance of one another (so to speak).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gumas

they could just make it like estinien introduction right? if you never play/finish drg class quest, estinien will give you a brief self introduction and what drg is. if you already drg he will say something like "oh its you" or something like that, i forgot.

---

There an important difference here: What happened to Estinien, happened to.... Estinien, not us. Fray is a part of "us" and a little more from the past, there a relationship between "us" that evolve between the 30 -50 questline and the final 70.

The implications are too different and we actually have the same "problem" with an other character in Shadowbringer, if he is who we think he is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sakizama

The implications are too different and we actually have the same "problem" with an other character in Shadowbringer, if he is who we think he is.

---

I've been saying for a while now (sorry for those who keep seeing me repeat it) that I think that issue can be worked around with time travel.

In the trailer narration he indicates that he's been waiting "many years" for us; he seems to have knowledge of future events; and more recently the Fanfest information about the Crystal Tower being present on the First - apparently 'appearing' there rather than being built - gives the possibility of the tower itself being relocated across time and space. (There's also this curious bit of trivia from the lorebook.)

If it is a future version of the character, that would mean his interactions with us have definitely already happened for him, regardless of whether they have happened to our character yet. So there would be some variable dialogue depending on whether the player knows him or not, but it shouldn't actually affect the situation.

We are moving away from the topic but yeah that could work but i don't hide my worries about how the thing will be explained, if they are explained.

Right now the event look too... peaceful for the character to resort to darkness and become the WoD. I don't really know what i expect to trigger such change but it had to be huge not for the world but for the WoL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sakizama

Right now the event look too... peaceful for the character to resort to darkness and become the WoD. I don't really know what i expect to trigger such change but it had to be huge not for the world but for the WoL.

---

That all comes back to the same issue that they're being so vague, at this point, about what Darkness actually is and what becoming the Warrior of Darkness is going to entail. But I doubt that it will involve us "snapping" and turning evil. I certainly hope it won't.

But Matoy'Sthola turn black mage and burn a forest... she keep all the fun for her like always.

Quote:

---

Right now the event look too... peaceful for the character to resort to darkness and become the WoD.

---

i was hoping in the recent event (or later in shadowbringer) someone is going to pull "haurchefant maneuver" or "papalymo last stand" but ff14 seems pretty shy from killing key character on the good side.

Quote:

---

But Matoy'Sthola turn black mage and burn a forest... she keep all the fun for her like always.

---

or you know what? maybe that trailer when sthola burn a forest (it could be gridania? or that whm holy tree? lots of tree over there lol) is actually her try to make us become wod? seeing your most trusted friend become evil is quite an impact i say. maybe sthola (and others) awake at some point and she need to become "evil" to help us while other scion has role of their own.

I really don't understand why Warrior of Darkness is associated with Dark Knight Class, is it something from DK questline? Never played DK before.

Dark Knights use darkness. Best way to show we are the Warrior of Darkness, change to a job that uses darkness. For most people, that association is all they need.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SubtleGraces

I really don't understand why Warrior of Darkness is associated with Dark Knight Class, is it something from DK questline? Never played DK before.

---

It's a martial class(in other words, a warrior) that uses darkness. That's about it. DRK being the poster child also gives SE an excuse to use elements of Cecil's design, like how DRG being the poster child for HW gave them an excuse to use elements of Kain's.

I'm always happy with FF4 fanservice.

Dark Knights are fueled by the Power of Love!!!

That was the Moogles' lesson, anyway. What it really seemed to be indicating is that Dark Knights' abilities are fueled by powerful emotions, with the desire to protect those that need protecting (loved ones, especially) being the strongest fuel of all.

The fact that the people these loved ones need protection FROM are often "untouchables", nobility or clergy in positions of power is where the Dark Knights' reputation for "darkness" comes from, both in the deep-seated cynicism that arises as they witness these corrupt individuals escaping justice, and in the fact that they tend to be vigilantes, working outside the law in order to punish those the law can't touch.

It's nonetheless possible that this method really does evoke big-D Darkness, as well. If the Dark Knight stands in defiance of the law, and the law represents order, and if Darkness is opposed to order, then perhaps their power DOES come from the same place as the Ascians'. That's a lot of "ifs", though.

I cant help but feel that WOD will just be a title. We wont actually do anything different. The people we fight will look different is all. I was hoping we'd truly become bad guys but thats not happening. The only difference is that Light is now "evil" and darkness is now "good".
Unless im missing something

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IkaraGreydancer

I cant help but feel that WOD will just be a title. We wont actually do anything different. The people we fight will look different is all. I was hoping we'd truly become bad guys but thats not happening. The only difference is that Light is now "evil" and darkness is now "good".
Unless im missing something

---

III and XIV are the only numbered games that the Warriors of Darkness have shown up in, and they haven't been villains in either(though Arbert's group came closer thanks to Ascian interference). In III the WoLs and WoDs were just counterparts, defending the World of Light from Darkness and the World of Darkness from Light respectively. Restoring balance was never going to be a matter of going to the First and burning down orphanages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daralii

III and XIV are the only numbered games that the Warriors of Darkness have shown up in, and they haven't been villains in either(though Arbert's group came closer thanks to Ascian interference). In III the WoLs and WoDs were just counterparts, defending the World of Light from Darkness and the World of Darkness from Light respectively. Restoring balance was never going to be a matter of going to the First and burning down orphanages.

---

Yep. I imagine for our part things won't change much except we'll have some light aligned antagonists (ie, sin eaters and Innocence) to fight. Maybe another set of 'unlocking crystals' similar to ARR but I don't think our character will act all that different.

Quote:

---

DRK being the poster child also gives SE an excuse to use elements of Cecil's design

---

eh iam not surprised if our char will play exactly like cecil from ff4, become wod, do stuff, back to wol, end stuff. i mean, its pretty given, i doubt we are gong to end up as permanent wod (at the end of story that is)

There is actually a darkness growing inside of us. This is confirmed by the old lady of the Mol tribe. Go speak with her since that battle with possessed Zenos and she makes a comment to the extent of, "remember that darkness that was growing inside of you that I warned you about.... yeah it's there still and growing. I thought it was due to zenos but I was wrong *shrugs* that's prophetic seeing for you" (I know that's not the exact wording... but I'm not at home right now and that's almost what I got from it... though she tells him/her to be careful too I think).