Nael Van Darnus vs Shadow Lord

The Shadow Lord's story and motivations are much more heartfelt and believable. There goes my vote.

Hmmm.
Am I the only one who does NOT see Nael Van Darnus as a simplistic villain, pure evil and a deranged and completely irrational psychopath? I saw something very Nietzschian in him. He's certainly a zealot but also clearly a man of great vision and great genius, though it remains to be seen if he's a misunderstanding or a misunderstood one. He's definitely a megalomaniac. But a `pure evil bad guy`? Perhaps the Eorzean masses are just too stupid and simple to understand the grand scope and magnificence of his plans. After all, apparently even the Garlean Emperor was too ignorant to see it, at least according to Darnus.

I would very much like to see a transcript of everything Darnus has said in this game.

I think people in this thread are greatly under appreciating him when he's dismissed as a generic and one dimensional (pure evil) villain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarthTaru

Hmmm.
Am I the only one who does NOT see Nael Van Darnus as a simplistic villain, pure evil and a deranged and completely irrational psychopath? I saw something very Nietzschian in him. He's certainly a zealot and certainly something of a genius, though it remains to be seen if he's a misunderstanding or a misunderstood one. He's definitely something of a megalomaniac. But a `pure evil bad guy`? Perhaps the Eorzean masses are just too stupid and simple to understand the grand scope and magnificence of his plans. After all, apparently even the Garlean Emperor was too ignorant to see it, at least according to Darnus.

I would very much like to see a transcript of everything Darnus has said in this game.

I think people in this thread are greatly under appreciating him when he's dismissed as a generic and one dimensional (pure evil) villain.

---

Sometimes I get the same vibe. Like the main villain of the "Watchmen" movie. Chaotic Good. He killed millions to save billions. Essentially, Darnus could be doing the same thing.

Gauis could be the man villain, he couldn't kill Nael directly in a fight. He could have planned for us to fight Darnus, kill him, then become probably the strongest Legatus. The Emperor is in bad health, or so we are to believe, and what a perfect chance for Gaus to assume control and take over the world. The only one who could have stopped him is dead, that and us.

Which is why I find Nael way cooler than Shadow lord. Wings of the Goddess didn't even make Shadow Lord any better, especially when you find out the whole 20 year war wasn't even his idea, it was Lady Lilith's. So he literally sat on his throne doing nothing but pouting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarthTaru

Hmmm.
Am I the only one who does NOT see Nael Van Darnus as a simplistic villain, pure evil and a deranged and completely irrational psychopath? I saw something very Nietzschian in him. He's certainly a zealot and certainly something of a genius, though it remains to be seen if he's a misunderstanding or a misunderstood one. He's definitely something of a megalomaniac. But a `pure evil bad guy`? Perhaps the Eorzean masses are just too stupid and simple to understand the grand scope and magnificence of his plans. After all, apparently even the Garlean Emperor was too ignorant to see it, at least according to Darnus.

I would very much like to see a transcript of everything Darnus has said in this game.

I think people in this thread are greatly under appreciating him when he's dismissed as a generic and one dimensional (pure evil) villain.

---

The problem is more on how he's presented than exactly what he is or want. He just kinda comes out of nowhere, wanting to "purify" eorzea or whatever and goes with it.

There's no explanation why (other than the implied "because that's what the Garleans believe must be done"), nothing about his past, nothing about how he even managed to do half the stuff he did (specially the last part, it's like he suddenly found ruins that must float because dramatic effect and bam, final battle. Also, I should add that I found extremely weird that not a single Ishgardian even had the idea to, you know...go see what was the fricking floating insland right in front of their city state. >_>).

Without any of that, he can have some ultimate master plan that makes perfect sense, but since we've never told even a small part of it other than Cid's one line remark about him wanting to absorb dalamud or something like that, don't remember the exact line (again, why?), it's no wonder not even the Emperor understood it.

My only problem with him is just that. Of course, sometimes not really knowing how or why makes a villain even more interesting, see the Joker from The Dark Knight movie, but it has to be well done.

you know what they should do. kill a major character in the game (GC commanders, Cid) THAT GUY will be the villain of ffxiv

I choose Dalamud. Cause Darnus was just being manipulated by It. I hope in 2.0 we'll use the Echo to reveal his past to see how he got to where he was and why. Plus, shadowlord is just mutated galka with issues while Dalamud is the freakin "Deathstar"!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarthTaru

Hmmm.
Am I the only one who does NOT see Nael Van Darnus as a simplistic villain, pure evil and a deranged and completely irrational psychopath? I saw something very Nietzschian in him. He's certainly a zealot but also clearly a man of great vision and great genius, though it remains to be seen if he's a misunderstanding or a misunderstood one. He's definitely a megalomaniac. But a `pure evil bad guy`? Perhaps the Eorzean masses are just too stupid and simple to understand the grand scope and magnificence of his plans. After all, apparently even the Garlean Emperor was too ignorant to see it, at least according to Darnus.

I would very much like to see a transcript of everything Darnus has said in this game.

I think people in this thread are greatly under appreciating him when he's dismissed as a generic and one dimensional (pure evil) villain.

---

I'm with you. It's a fanatic, but seems to have an highter purpose to believe on (if you read between lines you could see what he seek). Let's not forget, we still need to see the "him" he speak in united we stand. There, he don't speak of Dalamud, but a third person yet to see

First: lol at the person saying the Shadowlord was soloable as soon as the BCNM was out. The cap was 50 at that point. Only the best of the best of the best players could make it through Castle Z, much less make it to the throne room and actually defeat him. Keep in mind jobs like blue mage, dancer, whatevs didn't exist at that point either and Shadowlord at 50 is bloody hard even with a fully balanced party. Try doing it solo, at level 50, without the use of Sneak and Invisible and without Prism Powders / Silent Oil. (the spells weren't out at that point; much less sneak / invis items.) Getting through Xarc to stare at Castle Z was possible solo. Difficult to get past the Ahriman and Demon mobs congregating around, but not impossible. Going through Castle Z took alliances, not just parties. Hence why things like the teleporters not porting everyone at once / not having maps or cute little pointers saying where to go was a real pain.

As for the debate: Shadow Lord, any day of the week.

Storyline / Lore reasons for saying Shadowlord: The Shadow Lord wasn't an asshole for the sake of being one, didn't have the now the world will be cleansed of all the icky primals and filth!11 boring, redundant, cliché crap Darnus spews out at every opportunity. Whichever nation you were from, you understood how exactly Raogrimm had suffered. Admittedly, because of the Bastok storyline, Bastokans felt it a little more; but you know where I'm going with it. The Magicite missions gave you indication of what happened, and why the Shadowlord was so damn angry with everyone and everything - when with Darnus we've got nothing more than "Ah, well. He's like. Supposed to be here to shank us because the big bad empire said so but he got a little crazy along the way, lol. Blame the moon. Yeah. "

And, as most in this thread have missed, guess what happens when you complete Dynamis? You finally resolve the Shadowlord storyline which progresses through every single expansion barring ToAU. In Vanilla, you take out the Shadowlord's weak, brought back form. In Rise of the Zilart the Shadowlord turns back to Raogrimm after the events of Vanilla, and saves your life from the Ark Angels which Kam'lanaut and Eald'narche call to destroy you, Zeid, and Lion. Unfortunately, Raogrimm then dies. In Chains of Promathia, you work out that Diabolos sealed the Shadowlord within his realm of dreams, Dynamis, to prevent him and his rage from entering the Mothercrystals and adding to the Emptiness problem. But in saving Vana'diel, Diabolos has shanked Dynamis, and the Shadowlord takes it from him. and obviously, in Wings of the Goddess you work out the Shadowlord actually won the war but continued it and a girl, Lilisette, wanted the war to end that badly that she made a deal with XI's resident bad guy Odin (and the only XI NPC I'll ever say that was the bad guy, there's so many variations of good/evil in that game, it's confusing) to turn her into something capable of destroying the Shadowlord, hence Lady Lilith's birth within a parallel world and the five races turning their backs on the Goddess that abandoned them when they most needed it. When you complete Dynamis, you defeat the Dyanamislord, which is the Shadowlord having assumed the power of Dynamis, and Raogrimm tells you that he, the people which originally betrayed him, and Cornelia are thankful to you for enabling them to see the error of their ways, and they swear to stay in Dynamis together for eternity to keep watch over Vana'diel. Essentially, the Shadowlord storyline takes you from start to finish of the game. Darnus only appears in GC quests, was created to be GC quests, and something SE have said will be removed. The comparison between them is stupid. Shadowlord wins every time.

Yes, XI has had way more time with Shadowlord. But he was created as the pivotal point of the game, not something to keep people playing as they wait for 2.0.

Battle reasons why the Shadowlord wins:

Nation storyline mission 5 at 50.
Getting through Castle Z at 50.
Fiat Lux.
The fact to get Fiat Lux, your nation has to essentially control the world. and considering most of the playerbase at 75 had problems getting through Xarcabard [S], Castle Z[S] was impossible.
The fight after you completed Promathia / Zilart.
Dynamis lord.

...Sorry, but on both counts Shadowlord > Darnus.

I have to say, Darnus wins in the super cool fashion category. Props to all FFXII judge armor looking designs for that matter.
In all other respects Shadowlord is way deeper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarthTaru

Hmmm.
Am I the only one who does NOT see Nael Van Darnus as a simplistic villain, pure evil and a deranged and completely irrational psychopath? I saw something very Nietzschian in him. He's certainly a zealot but also clearly a man of great vision and great genius, though it remains to be seen if he's a misunderstanding or a misunderstood one. He's definitely a megalomaniac. But a `pure evil bad guy`? Perhaps the Eorzean masses are just too stupid and simple to understand the grand scope and magnificence of his plans. After all, apparently even the Garlean Emperor was too ignorant to see it, at least according to Darnus.

I would very much like to see a transcript of everything Darnus has said in this game.

I think people in this thread are greatly under appreciating him when he's dismissed as a generic and one dimensional (pure evil) villain.

---

I feel the same way. It seems like there was something about Darnus that we aren't yet seeing, and it may be revealed soon. I would especially like to see that "Him" person to which Darnus always referring to.

Excuse me, did everyone forget Gaius van Baelsar? Darnus was clearly added as an alternative to killing Baelsar when they can use him to finish the main scenario in 2.0. Has anyone seen Darnus in a cutscene added before the Ifrit content, because I haven't. I am sure Baelsar will play a HUGE role in 2.0, though I am really glad to have witnessed the White Raven in his glory.

I can't spoil WotG, but Shadow Lord was much stronger in the Crystal War. He's only just resurfaced in the original storyline, so he hasn't had time to regain his original strength. It depends on which version you're using: Crystal War or Present. There's also Dynamis Lord, but he doesn't fight alone.

I think there was a lot more one-sitting buildup for Shadow Lord because it takes SO LONG to get to the Throne Room, but ultimately Darnus had the cooler boss fight. Maybe if they add them both to Dissida we'll get an answer, but I heard they don't want to make the next Dissidia a fighting game.

My only regret is that by the time the level cap in this game is raised to 75, the fight will be removed and I will not be able to take my Paladin to face Darnus in single combat, where I have complete faith in my victory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by faris

First: lol at the person saying the Shadowlord was soloable as soon as the BCNM was out. The cap was 50 at that point. Only the best of the best of the best players could make it through Castle Z, much less make it to the throne room and actually defeat him. Keep in mind jobs like blue mage, dancer, whatevs didn't exist at that point either and Shadowlord at 50 is bloody hard even with a fully balanced party. Try doing it solo, at level 50, without the use of Sneak and Invisible and without Prism Powders / Silent Oil. (the spells weren't out at that point; much less sneak / invis items.) Getting through Xarc to stare at Castle Z was possible solo. Difficult to get past the Ahriman and Demon mobs congregating around, but not impossible. Going through Castle Z took alliances, not just parties. Hence why things like the teleporters not porting everyone at once / not having maps or cute little pointers saying where to go was a real pain.

As for the debate: Shadow Lord, any day of the week.

Storyline / Lore reasons for saying Shadowlord: The Shadow Lord wasn't an asshole for the sake of being one, didn't have the now the world will be cleansed of all the icky primals and filth!11 boring, redundant, cliché crap Darnus spews out at every opportunity. Whichever nation you were from, you understood how exactly Raogrimm had suffered. Admittedly, because of the Bastok storyline, Bastokans felt it a little more; but you know where I'm going with it. The Magicite missions gave you indication of what happened, and why the Shadowlord was so damn angry with everyone and everything - when with Darnus we've got nothing more than "Ah, well. He's like. Supposed to be here to shank us because the big bad empire said so but he got a little crazy along the way, lol. Blame the moon. Yeah. "

And, as most in this thread have missed, guess what happens when you complete Dynamis? You finally resolve the Shadowlord storyline which progresses through every single expansion barring ToAU. In Vanilla, you take out the Shadowlord's weak, brought back form. In Rise of the Zilart the Shadowlord turns back to Raogrimm after the events of Vanilla, and saves your life from the Ark Angels which Kam'lanaut and Eald'narche call to destroy you, Zeid, and Lion. Unfortunately, Raogrimm then dies. In Chains of Promathia, you work out that Diabolos sealed the Shadowlord within his realm of dreams, Dynamis, to prevent him and his rage from entering the Mothercrystals and adding to the Emptiness problem. But in saving Vana'diel, Diabolos has shanked Dynamis, and the Shadowlord takes it from him. and obviously, in Wings of the Goddess you work out the Shadowlord actually won the war but continued it and a girl, Lilisette, wanted the war to end that badly that she made a deal with XI's resident bad guy Odin (and the only XI NPC I'll ever say that was the bad guy, there's so many variations of good/evil in that game, it's confusing) to turn her into something capable of destroying the Shadowlord, hence Lady Lilith's birth within a parallel world and the five races turning their backs on the Goddess that abandoned them when they most needed it. When you complete Dynamis, you defeat the Dyanamislord, which is the Shadowlord having assumed the power of Dynamis, and Raogrimm tells you that he, the people which originally betrayed him, and Cornelia are thankful to you for enabling them to see the error of their ways, and they swear to stay in Dynamis together for eternity to keep watch over Vana'diel. Essentially, the Shadowlord storyline takes you from start to finish of the game. Darnus only appears in GC quests, was created to be GC quests, and something SE have said will be removed. The comparison between them is stupid. Shadowlord wins every time.

Yes, XI has had way more time with Shadowlord. But he was created as the pivotal point of the game, not something to keep people playing as they wait for 2.0.

Battle reasons why the Shadowlord wins:

Nation storyline mission 5 at 50.
Getting through Castle Z at 50.
Fiat Lux.
The fact to get Fiat Lux, your nation has to essentially control the world. and considering most of the playerbase at 75 had problems getting through Xarcabard [S], Castle Z[S] was impossible.
The fight after you completed Promathia / Zilart.
Dynamis lord.

...Sorry, but on both counts Shadowlord > Darnus.

---

This. 10/char

THis is relevant to this thread: http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/08...-bin-villains/

To be totally honest, this thread has a great debate going on... and brought up some interesting FFXI-relevant things that I've forgotten over time. I was actually leaning into the Van Darnus camp until i thought really hard about my experiences playing FFXI. It was then I realized that to be fair to both villains, one actually had to kinda sub-divide the two of them into various categories.

Motives for destroying everything:
Shadowlord wins hands down... and Faris' post is the best explanation why. I remember finally beating him back in 2004 and it was a spectacular head rush. BUT, one must also remember that it did take two more expansions for the Shadowlord's story to really unfold and once it did, you actually understood Roegrimm's anguish... I finished all the storylines of FFXI before I quit and I realised he actually deserved and had every right to be that angry; and like Faris rightly said, he eventually came full circle in his tale.

Nael on the other hand is the bad guy that I'm enjoying to hate because right now, he's uncomplicated in his vision, focused and determined down to his very soul, and ravels in being "evil". Sure, I felt a huge amount of satisfaction bringing him down... but there are still questions that needs to be answered and it may take 2.0 AND an expansion for us to really understand what really makes Nael's mind tick.

Style, Dialogue, Concept
Legatus Nael van Darnus wins hands down... speaks and carries himself like a true noble, he is charismatic, arrogant, dresses to impress (I still WANT that armour), very eloquent and knows how to be an exhibitionist...somehow, he vividly reminds me of Prince Maximillian of the PS3 game "Valkyria Chronicles" (one of my fav games on that console).

Nael's "bow" at the beginning of the battle is also an excellent touch and strangely reminiscent of "Emperor" Vayne Solidor's creepily polite greeting when you come to challenge him on his Bahamut sky fortress (in FFXII). Wickedly spiffy.

Also his long (friendship or acquaintanceship?) with Van Baelsar seems to go much deeper than just a rivalry for the Emperor's favour... watch the GC quests "Alive" and "Two vans are better than One" to understand what I mean. It is important to note that with us having "killed" Darnus, the Empire now has EVERY excuse to march on Eorzea. I totally reckon that the murder of an Imperial Legatus (even if he had gone rogue and however insane he may have been) will NOT go unpunished... the Emperor needs to make an example of us, and who else to send but Baelsar? I sense one hell of a story coming up for 2.0; so yes the long term concept of Nael as the bad guy holds some wicked potential.

Battle Dynamics
Both battles were difficult and fun in their own right when you consider the graphics and technological limitations available to both games (I personally prefer the Darnus battle because of the difficulty, his speed and the teleportations kinda amplified his emotions).

However, one must not forget the Shadowlord version in Dynamis Xacabard with his dragons... it was also off the charts in difficulty levels... at least until linkshells began using the kraken club method to zerk him down.

Shrugs... there are also several obvious things to examine when comparing them but I like both for various separate reasons. I'd say wait till Darnus' story is really fleshed out to give a fair comparison... as I said before in some other post, the fact that he's Elezen and comes from a family renown for their knowledge of Allagan artifacts speaks volumes about how much we don't yet know.