Theory for becoming a Warrior of Darkness

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.