Nael Van Darnus vs Shadow Lord

Shadow lord has one of the most cliche and overused back stories in fantasy gaming/literature, while final fantasy games very rarely stray from well trod ground and never push the envelope storywise, even his name is cliche and silly. Shadow Lord? Really? That sounds like a working name that would be changed prior to release.


Darnus, while really just as cliche ( again FF storytelling is built on them), is refreshingly a lesser used one in fantasy tropes. He also has a decent name.

edit: he's also coming off as "Mid-Boss" at best. Shadow Lord was a "Big-Bad" with a cliche story, Darnus is being implied as being a villian with a cliche story and "a pawn...OF A FAR GREATER EVIL!!(dun dun DUNNNNN! *dramatic re-verb, ominous crash of thunderrrr....*

Well if you consider Dynamis Lord to be Shadow Lord, the its obvious which fight was harder... although Dynamis Lord didn't come out until RotZ, according to the lore Dynamis Lord was the true form of Shawdow Lord or something along those lines I thought?

Nael van Darnus has a giant meteor and better battle music. My vote for van Darnus.

Darnus was a much better fight.

Shadowlord was a slightly better story.

I didn't like the shadowlord in FFXI, his motives were quite shallow as was his reasoning for doing the things he did, he was the typical "Heartbroken revenge" villain archetype. He didn't have much of a personality either. We all know of the Raogrimm sob story that turned him into the shadowlord and he was consumed by his hatred. He was just too cliche to me, and as far as villans go, all he did was sit on a throne, no actual means on motives, as he was more of a:
"I'll just sit here and do nothing" kind of character

Now Nael Van Darnus (What a man! lolz) even though he's rather cliche as well with the whole (Imma destroy za warudo!) He rules with an iron fist, he believes what he does is for the "GREATER GOOD" even if it is otherwise, the fact that he considers us guilty by association is what makes me think "WTF is up with this guy??" I loved the fact that he was able to fulfill his motives using others, and even in death, his motives were complete.
He also has manners... and he's an elezen so that's extra points with me.
(If only I could see what was under that helm)

http://static2.finalfantasyxiv.com/a...PUGaZUsAjA.jpg
SWAGGER!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagato

FFXI's level cap was level 50 when people first fought Shadow Lord. I'm sure FFXIV will have it's level cap raised eventually and I'm sure Darnus will become a joke character by then too.

Also, Shadow Lord has Dynamis Lord (And Hyper Dynamis Lord, one of the game's hardest bosses). Not to mention Shadow Lord from the past, who is far more powerful. So really, the Shadow Lord fought as the final boss for mission 6-2 was really just the weakest form of him.

---

Darnus won't be in the game at that point. I'm 99% certain, so it's not really a similar case.

In my personal opinion, I thought the shadow lord was a bit of a sissy. You see Darnus far more than SL, and he actually tries to kill you on several occasions (but never succeeds).

+1 for the ego-maniacal villain aka Darnus =D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AsterBarnivere

(If only I could see what was under that helm)

---

Another helmet.

I think more along the lines of Dynamis Lord, as compared to shadow lord.

Shadow lord was a cakewalk, but his castle zhval (spelled it wrong, sorry) was awesome.

However, Dynamis lord stomped level 75 alliances like they were ants. Not to mention he had an entire realm (dynamis), and required you to go through copious amounts of work to get to him.

I mean, when you are guarded by twin dragons named Ying and Yang, you have officially hit "Baller Status"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AsterBarnivere

I didn't like the shadowlord in FFXI, his motives were quite shallow as was his reasoning for doing the things he did, he was the typical "Heartbroken revenge" villain archetype. He didn't have much of a personality either. We all know of the Raogrimm sob story that turned him into the shadowlord and he was consumed by his hatred. He was just too cliche to me, and as far as villans go, all he did was sit on a throne, no actual means on motives, as he was more of a:
"I'll just sit here and do nothing" kind of character

Now Nael Van Darnus (What a man! lolz) even though he's rather cliche as well with the whole (Imma destroy za warudo!) He rules with an iron fist, he believes what he does is for the "GREATER GOOD" even if it is otherwise, the fact that he considers us guilty by association is what makes me think "WTF is up with this guy??" I loved the fact that he was able to fulfill his motives using others, and even in death, his motives were complete.
He also has manners... and he's an elezen so that's extra points with me.
(If only I could see what was under that helm)

http://static2.finalfantasyxiv.com/a...PUGaZUsAjA.jpg
SWAGGER!

---

I remember you. You're a racist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagato

I remember you. You're a racist.

---

D: Me? Racist? Naaaaaaaaaawwww I just have a "Strong dislike" of Hyur and Miqo'te (Stems from my FFXI roots.... damn Humes and Mithra >_>) ...for some strange reason I found your comment funny though, and thus, it shall be in my Sig! lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AsterBarnivere

he's an elezen so that's extra points with me.

---

Huh. You'd think that would be a huge drawback. I think when I found out he was an Elezen, I stopped caring for Darnus as a villain. He felt like a parody.

Now Gaius. That's an antagonist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruisu

Huh. You'd think that would be a huge drawback. I think when I found out he was an Elezen, I stopped caring for Darnus as a villain. He felt like a parody.

Now Gaius. That's an antagonist.

---

Psh Gaius is barely an antagonist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AsterBarnivere

Psh Gaius is barely an antagonist.

---

He doesn't agree with senseless continental destruction and mass murder, it doesn't mean he's not an antagonist.

Shadow lord had a very weak story, but was overall a much harder boss, Darnus has an extremely cliche story, and is just a mid-boss anyways there is nothing "Final Boss Worthy" off him :/

The answer is:

Kefka!

I have to say I enjoyed Shadow Lord. I can't say whether I like one more than the other but all the while you thought the Shadow Lord was just complete evil you end up finding out he was the result of a heart-broken tale of betrayal. I was all "QnQ" when I was killing him. It was sad. D:'

Shadow Lord, Because Not like Nael Van Darnus I have a "Lord of Vermillion II" card of the Shadow Lord from Tokyo.

Here is the card shown on the ff wiki page.

http://images.wikia.com/finalfantasy...hadow_Lord.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagato

Well, the first Storyline Final Boss of FFXIV has been out for about a week now. ...

...Which of these two villains had more of a lasting impact as the first major antagonist of the Final Fantasy MMO series?

---

i hope this properly highlights why this thread is completely ridiculous.

it's hard to make a lasting impact when THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY MORE STORY YET. ffxi tied the shadow lord back into story and lore long after his death, made a return as dynamis lord, blah blah blah. we have no idea what role van darnus will play in future story/lore, and the fight isn't even going to be available forever.

brb facepalming so hard it crushes my face into the back of my skull

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AsterBarnivere

He also has manners... and he's an elezen so that's extra points with me.

---

Where do they say that Nael is an Elezen? I can't remember that. x_x

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AsterBarnivere

I didn't like the shadowlord in FFXI, his motives were quite shallow as was his reasoning for doing the things he did, he was the typical "Heartbroken revenge" villain archetype. He didn't have much of a personality either. We all know of the Raogrimm sob story that turned him into the shadowlord and he was consumed by his hatred. He was just too cliche to me, and as far as villans go, all he did was sit on a throne, no actual means on motives, as he was more of a:
"I'll just sit here and do nothing" kind of character

Now Nael Van Darnus (What a man! lolz) even though he's rather cliche as well with the whole (Imma destroy za warudo!) He rules with an iron fist, he believes what he does is for the "GREATER GOOD" even if it is otherwise, the fact that he considers us guilty by association is what makes me think "WTF is up with this guy??" I loved the fact that he was able to fulfill his motives using others, and even in death, his motives were complete.
He also has manners... and he's an elezen so that's extra points with me.
(If only I could see what was under that helm)

http://static2.finalfantasyxiv.com/a...PUGaZUsAjA.jpg
SWAGGER!

---

I don't think Raogrimm did it just because he was heartbroken. That was just the tipping point. We witnessed his disgust with the Humes unwillingness to even try to understand those around them. He witnessed, first hand, the oppressive hands of racism. This is without mentioning the 200 years of oppressed memories he carried with him. The scars run significantly deeper than mere heartbreak.

Regarding his personality, I'd say his lack of personality is what was most striking. He became emotionally dead. Surprisingly calm despite the circumstances. Oddly focused. Possibly a metaphor for how a small moment in our lives could change the course of our psychological history if we just happen to not have our moral / emotional defenses bolstered. With a savage, ravenous, brute of a killer you might be able to take advantage of a lapse in his judgement. No such flaw was overtly present in Raogrimm / Shadow Lord. His hatred was calculated.

His motives were driven by a reasonable disgust and hatred for the sins of the "enlightened" peoples of Vana'diel. With his entire race being treated as just one step above the Beastmen horde. One thing I never really bought though was why he didn't make his first order of business the complete eradication of the Anticans. If racial motivations were any part of his psychological profile I'd think that would be the very first thing to occur. If not, they should've explained why.

While I'm for the Shadow Lord as the "better" villain. I don't think I can say that Van Darnus is not a good villain. He's well written (considering the dev's limitations) and certainly aesthetically well designed. I think he wins in that category. He's a villain I would love to see more fleshed out. I don't think we had enough time with him. Hopefully we'll get to see more of him.

You could blend out a lot of the details of the shadow lord because he's so dark but Van Darnus' armor is so ornate and intricate. A very interesting character indeed. As per motivations though I still feel Raogrimm trumps Darnus in that respect.

Gaius Van Baelsar on the other hand... He has the aesthetic appeal of Darnus but a cold and haunting rationality. He'll get your own nation to implode internally via subversion. He can explain why you are inferior without having to kill you. He'll use you to kill yourself, submit to him, or die in a futile struggle against him. He holds all the cards and he doesn't care about inheritance.

The only thorn in his side is his own unpredictable, overzealous, sprat of a peer Van Darnus (who was probably handed his position by bloodright). If Van Darnus isn't dead, I foresee Gaius fulfilling Heirsbane's namesake yet again.

If the empire were ruled by Van Baelsar, we'd be rolling out the red carpets for the Empire rather than causing needless casualties. In fact, Darnus' pet Meteor project may be all in vain. Without Meteor there'd be no reason for the Circle of Knowing to do what they're going to do. Our only chance against the empire would be small pockets of Ala Mighan refugees and other rebels against a military force the likes of which have never been seen. While meteor was supposed to be a deathblow, perhaps the slow poison and dread caused by an eventual occupation would have broken the spirits of the Eorzeans more thoroughly, and the people of Eorzea would've been much easier controlled rather than being galvanized to fight for their freedom as a unified force.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruisu

Well, which iconic FF entity uses Megaflare?

This is assuming SE didn't fuck up the translation of course.

It isn't the weapons.

---

Good point..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fusional

i hope this properly highlights why this thread is completely ridiculous.

it's hard to make a lasting impact when THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY MORE STORY YET. ffxi tied the shadow lord back into story and lore long after his death, made a return as dynamis lord, blah blah blah. we have no idea what role van darnus will play in future story/lore, and the fight isn't even going to be available forever.

brb facepalming so hard it crushes my face into the back of my skull

---

I'm actually not taking any post Vanilla XI into account when considering the Shadow Lord as a character vs. Van Darnus. Plot wise I'll admit I like the tying of his motivations to RotZ, but I'd even go as far as to say I'm more comparing Raogrimm to Van Darnus rather than the Shadow Lord.

I agree with your point though. I don't think we've gotten enough Van Darnus to feasibly "call it" and I'm hoping we get to see more of him. I think it would be better if we compared pre Zilart Shadow Lord to Van Darnus, but even then, I don't think we'll even be able to fight Darnus in his present iteration in ARR. Who knows how much of this Darnus will spill over to ARR. His character could completely change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhomagus

I'm actually not taking any post Vanilla XI into account when considering the Shadow Lord as a character vs. Van Darnus. Plot wise I'll admit I like the tying of his motivations to RotZ, but I'd even go as far as to say I'm more comparing Raogrimm to Van Darnus rather than the Shadow Lord.

I agree with your point though. I don't think we've gotten enough Van Darnus to feasibly "call it" and I'm hoping we get to see more of him. I think it would be better if we compared pre Zilart Shadow Lord to Van Darnus, but even then, I don't think we'll even be able to fight Darnus in his present iteration in ARR. Who knows how much of this Darnus will spill over to ARR. His character could completely change.

---

fair enough. good points. i just think it's silly when people base their arguments on outright bias, or a flawed premise right from the start. i understand it's human nature to feel the need to compare and contrast, but at least put them on some sort of equal footing- else the comparison is useless.

i have a lot of nostalgia for the shadow lord fight, and most of the FFXI storyline in general. it just seems ridiculous to me that after a week or so people are able to jump to such wild conclusions. it's like predicting who's gonna be the league MVP after week 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furukawa

Where do they say that Nael is an Elezen? I can't remember that. x_x

---

He's in the elezen DAT files... Gaius is in the Hyur dat files somewhere too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fusional

i hope this properly highlights why this thread is completely ridiculous.

it's hard to make a lasting impact when THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY MORE STORY YET. ffxi tied the shadow lord back into story and lore long after his death, made a return as dynamis lord, blah blah blah. we have no idea what role van darnus will play in future story/lore, and the fight isn't even going to be available forever.

brb facepalming so hard it crushes my face into the back of my skull

---

Behold, ladies and gentleman! A fool is among us!

It may sound like a hard thing to grasp, but it is possible to be impacted by something you only just experienced. I mean... what do you do? Ride a roller coaster and then wait until the following week to burst out with "HOLY CRAP THAT WAS AWESOME" or something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fusional

fair enough. good points. i just think it's silly when people base their arguments on outright bias, or a flawed premise right from the start. i understand it's human nature to feel the need to compare and contrast, but at least put them on some sort of equal footing- else the comparison is useless.

i have a lot of nostalgia for the shadow lord fight, and most of the FFXI storyline in general. it just seems ridiculous to me that after a week or so people are able to jump to such wild conclusions. it's like predicting who's gonna be the league MVP after week 3.

---

It's not some sort of important/life or death situation, where you need to make the utmost objective choice. Nothing is hanging in the balance. It's not like if you pick one of the two as your favorite right now, the other one will completely vanish from the face of existence.

Does it matter if a person's decision is biased/subjective, or based off of fallacious reasoning in regards to this specific topic? We're deciding which of the two are our favorite main villains (which is ultimately subjective), not which one was the most significant main villain of their respective stories or the most powerful main villain. In addition, are your decisions permanent? If you were to decide between the two characters right now, would you be incapable of changing your mind at a later point?

I feel like the people on these forums are too obsessed with turning every topic into a debate about who's reasoning is the most logical. Everything has to be objective, everything has to be logical, can't be subjective. Straw man fallacy this, red herring that. Have to be a robot and make calculated decisions about everything. Can't just make topics purely for entertainment purposes.

Ultimately it's up to you if you want to make a decision or not, but would it really kill you to choose between the two, despite the fact that Darnus has only been the final boss for about three weeks? Honestly, your "THIS THREAD IS RIDICUROUS!!" attitude is about as ridiculous as you claim this thread is. If you think this thread is ridiculous, then why post in it? Let everyone else have their fun, while you play the part of the cynic by your lonesome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagato

Behold, ladies and gentleman! A fool is among us!

It may sound like a hard thing to grasp, but it is possible to be impacted by something you only just experienced. I mean... what do you do? Ride a roller coaster and then wait until the following week to burst out with "HOLY CRAP THAT WAS AWESOME" or something?

---

again your point is irrational. i never said you can't be impacted by something you just experienced, i said it was silly to weigh the LASTING IMPACT of that thing a week later when compared against something you had the opportunity to marinate over for YEARS. understand?

and on one hand you imply something existing for the better part of a decade has more lasting impact than something only out for a week. on the other you make it sound like feeling something has lasting impact a week later is TOO LONG, and strange, and should never happen. but 7-10 years isn't?

make up your mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nekroturkey

Can't just make topics purely for entertainment purposes.

---

so you're the expert on what is and isn't entertaining, right? the entertainment police? i shouldn't swoop into a thread and say logical things because that's not entertaining... to you? what's entertaining to you should be entertaining to me and everyone else? so what's entertaining to me isn't entertaining to you or anyone else, nor should it be?

my point of view, while never professing to come from the position of a majority, is wrong- your point of view, implying majority rule, is right?

i see, i see. my apologies, great forum emperor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nekroturkey

It's not some sort of important/life or death situation, where you need to make the utmost objective choice. Nothing is hanging in the balance. It's not like if you pick one of the two as your favorite right now, the other one will completely vanish from the face of existence.

Does it matter if a person's decision is biased/subjective, or based off of fallacious reasoning in regards to this specific topic? We're deciding which of the two are our favorite main villains (which is ultimately subjective), not which one was the most significant main villain of their respective stories or the most powerful main villain. In addition, are your decisions permanent? If you were to decide between the two characters right now, would you be incapable of changing your mind at a later point?

I feel like the people on these forums are too obsessed with turning every topic into a debate about who's reasoning is the most logical. Everything has to be objective, everything has to be logical, can't be subjective. Straw man fallacy this, red herring that. Have to be a robot and make calculated decisions about everything. Can't just make topics purely for entertainment purposes.

Ultimately it's up to you if you want to make a decision or not, but would it really kill you to choose between the two, despite the fact that Darnus has only been the final boss for about three weeks? Honestly, your "THIS THREAD IS RIDICUROUS!!" attitude is about as ridiculous as you claim this thread is. If you think this thread is ridiculous, then why post in it? Let everyone else have their fun, while you play the part of the cynic by your lonesome.

---

http://healthtipsdiet.com/wp-content...-green-tea.jpg

Calm down good sir...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fusional

again your point is irrational. i never said you can't be impacted by something you just experienced, i said it was silly to weigh the LASTING IMPACT of that thing a week later when compared against something you had the opportunity to marinate over for YEARS. understand?

and on one hand you imply something existing for the better part of a decade has more lasting impact than something only out for a week. on the other you make it sound like feeling something has lasting impact a week later is TOO LONG, and strange, and should never happen. but 7-10 years isn't?

make up your mind.

---

I played Journey on the PS3 a week ago, it blew me away with it's symbolism, art direction and music and what little of it there was and only 1:30 long, it was the most beautiful and immersive game I've ever played. There were no words, no dialogue, nothing but beautiful visuals and music.

I also played FFXIII the week after, the graphics were beautiful, the game was long and the story was complex, it had action and violence, something Journey didn't need to have a lasting impact. and yet I find myself going back to journey again and again...

Are you saying that just because something is short and only has been released for a week that it doesn't have a lasting effect? Your logic is flawed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AsterBarnivere

Are you saying that just because something is short and only has been released for a week that it doesn't have a lasting effect? Your logic is flawed.

---

where have i ever said anything remotely similar? you're drawing your own conclusions. what i say is precisely what i mean. i use very specific denotative language. if you attempt to draw inference from my words outside of the actual words and their meanings, that's on your head, not mine.

all i've done is say that it's not a balanced comparison to weigh "lasting impact" of something one week old versus something nearly a decade old considering the latter had many more instances of involvement through later parts of its respective story- something the former hasn't had the opportunity to match.

how is this so difficult a concept to grasp? i don't understand how most of you think. at all.

but ommggg you said this thing and rather than take it for what it actually says i will attempt to interject my own meaning because that is far more convenient and better suits any point i have tried or will try to make rarrrrr

posting in these forums is a lesson in futility. you all just read what you want to read as a convenient device to carry on with whatever it was you were going to say anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fusional

again your point is irrational. i never said you can't be impacted by something you just experienced, i said it was silly to weigh the LASTING IMPACT of that thing a week later when compared against something you had the opportunity to marinate over for YEARS. understand?

and on one hand you imply something existing for the better part of a decade has more lasting impact than something only out for a week. on the other you make it sound like feeling something has lasting impact a week later is TOO LONG, and strange, and should never happen. but 7-10 years isn't?

make up your mind.

---

Yeah, I'm pretty convinced you're a troll now. You debate a point by being rude and mean-spirited as if it's some sort of personal insult. And you use logic that just doesn't make any sense.

By your logic, the age of something means everything when judging it's impact on something and it's impossible to compare old with new simply because the old is... older.

I am not responding to any more of your idiotic responses. I'd rather not go to 100 pages trying to convince you of something small that you're purposely trying to make a big deal out of for the sake of attention.

This was a topic comparing the Final Fantasy MMO's first storyline final bosses: Shadow Lord and Darnus. You somehow had to come and make it overly complicated for whatever retarded reason.

I like Nael van Darnus.

He's pure evil and you can tell. Very linear. He's the bad guy, kill him. I like that. I don't like sympathizing with my enemy unless I have the choice to not kill that enemy. He also has sweet armor. And I love that he think he knows better than us, and that we're just stupid idiots who are ignorant and can't see his way and he needs to "cleanse the world" to fix it.

As far as "OMG HE'S BAHAMUT!!!!"....

....I don't think so. I think Dalamud is an egg or something like a pokeball that Bahamut was sealed into by the 12 Mythos long ago so that he wouldn't wreak havoc on Hydaelyn, and that he is the primal that the Garleans worship (though they think he is higher than a primal and that other primals are just filth to be cleansed). Thinking about it, Nael kinda had to "charge" megaflare for a long time. I think he was really just summoning Bahamut's power and asking it to use Megaflare on us.

Or maybe the Primals are really like the "devils" of Hydaelyn while the mythos are like the "gods," and Nael happens to be the archon/whatever of Bahamut.

EDIT: He's also kind of right. He wouldn't kill us if we didn't refuse to go kill the Beastmen and all their Primals, and for good reason. We have yet to see a Primal that doesn't want to screw the world, and some of the beastmen (Sylphs mainly) know that the Primals aren't going to do anything but kill us when summoned. He offered us peace if we killed the Beastmen, but we refused and tried to reason with them, which didn't work, so now they're going off and destroying the world by summoning their Primals, and in the end we have to kill the Primals, which is what Nael wanted in the first place...so really we're doing what he wanted us to do anyways but spiting him while we do it for no reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagato

You somehow had to come and make it overly complicated for whatever retarded reason.

---

by my logic? that isn't my logic. that's what you're attempting to misconstrue my logic as. that's a straw man. so tell me again about whose logic makes sense. and if anything smacks of trollishness, it's the "no u" defense you so readily employ. so there's that.

furthermore, i'm not making it complicated. i'm making it very simple. your basis of comparison isn't equal, and you're attempting to equivocate to make it seem like it is.

period.

but as i said before, this is pointless. you guys want to turn some arbitrary videogame boss whatever thing into a big discussion, but you don't want to factor logic into the discussion. so what's the point of the discussion? just a bunch of people clamoring to be heard about something that doesn't matter? for what reason?

i mean, okay. have fun, then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fusional

i see, i see. my apologies, great forum emperor.

---

Forum emperor? Ironic, considering you're the only one here going around acting like queen bee trying to deem this thread as pointless and ridiculous just because you say that it is. So far, that's you're only contribution.

You don't see the point of this thread? You don't have to. Not every thread has to be relevant to your interests to serve a purpose. It doesn't give Your Majesty free rein to troll and derail the thread as you see fit either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nekroturkey

You don't see the point of this thread? You don't have to. Not every thread has to be relevant to your interests to serve a purpose.

---

nor does every reply need to be relevant to yours, einstein.

Stop derailing the thread please. I don't care who thinks who is a troll, just stop arguing about it because it's stupid and off-topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fusional

einstein

---

Einstein? I thought I was the forum emperor.

Make up your mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AsterBarnivere

He's in the elezen DAT files... Gaius is in the Hyur dat files somewhere too.

---

Ah ok. Cool, thanks for that info. Had no idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyrist

This is Sephiroth vs Kefka all over again.

Those that prefer the sob story fallen hero with 'a tale to tell' are always going to lean towards Shadow Lord.

Those who prefer a straight out down and crazy psyco that you love to hate will lean towards Darnus.


But here's something you should be aware of in Final Fantasy Lore.

The straight out crazy ones win - Keka succeeded in ripping the world apart. Guess what Dalamud going to do to Eorza thanks to Darnus?

Sephrioth and Shadow Lord - both were badda**es who were slain promptly after getting themselves revived.

---

I agree with this.

Oh and to which of the two I would choose... that's really hard. I think both are really good characters. The Shadow Lord ended up taking over the world in the "true Vana'diel" and judging from the ARR trailer i'm gonna go ahead and say that Nael isn't gone and he ends up getting his way.

But if I did have to pick one I'd go with Nael. There's just something about that character that I really like.