[Coil raid spoilers] 3.4 T9 Triple Triad card

Why is the Triple Triad card for Nael van Darnus an image of Nael deus Darnus?

They are not the same thing, in fact the name split is specifically used to separate them:

• Nael van Darnus was a Garlean man in raven-themed magitek armor. (Edit: Or... not? See discussion below)
• Nael deus Darnus, as depicted on the card, was Bahamut's (highly) imperfect recreation of the deceased individual's memory.

When Nael deus Darnus (draconic-servant version) 'dies' again at our hands, and Bahamut finally loses all interest and releases control of Nael's mind/soul, the name explicitly changes back to 'Nael van Darnus' in dialogue boxes to make clear we're talking to the Garlean man (edit: ?) again, not the primal thrall, not Bahamut's aether-woven recreation.

Every time we interact with the warped draconic-servant creature depicted on the card, it is referred to as 'Nael deus Darnus', specifically to identify it as something separate and different than the 'Nael van Darnus' that once lived.

I think it is appropriate for this card to drop from T9, but it should be properly titled 'Nael deus Darnus', and 'Nael van Darnus' — in his(?) white magitek armor — should be a separate card.

By the current logic on this card, the 'Louisoix Leveilleur' card should be using an image of the T12 boss, Phoenix. It's like — yes, it's kind-of referring to the same individual? But it's also really not.

That logic kinda falls flat when there is no Phoenix card and likely no reason to make one.

That said certain Lorebook tidbits make another Nael card possible but given that the tidbits in question meant we never actually met the man, its a moot point.

Plus from what I gathered Bahamut just tempered Darnus, never did the Primal recreate "him" in his image.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morningstar1337

...

---

There not being a Phoenix card named Louisoix, or there being one and it being named Phoenix, is evidence that the Nael and Louisoix cards do not share the same convention.

I'm pretty sure I met him in 1.x, unless the Lorebook says otherwise.

The Warriors of Light (including myself) killed him at Rivenroad, at which time he dissipated into aether (https://youtu.be/9CYNZk3Zgks?t=27m34). Thus, for us to encounter him, he MUST have been recreated. Since he was still Bahamut's thrall, Bahamut was thus able to recreate Nael (https://youtu.be/_YXNNSFi3No?t=1m4s). This is the Nael that we encounter in the Coil.

Edit: found out some of what the Lorebook said.

Alright, apparently the newest Lorebook info makes this even more confusing, yet also less confusing, yet the card is still wrong. *stubborn foot stomp*


MASSIVE SPOILERS about Nael:

• There's Nael van Darnus, the man, who died from war wounds sustained in the service of the Empire, a long time before Project Meteor.
• There's Eula van Darnus, Nael's sister, who went mad over her brother's death, took his armor, took over his identity, and killed everyone that might know the truth (including her father and all his closest commanders). This is the 'Nael van Darnus' that was tempered by Bahamut, fought at Rivenroad, and recreated/preserved by Bahamut.
• There's Nael deus Darnus, which is actually Eula deus Darnus (I guess?), and is the thrall of Bahamut (Eula posing as Nael) whose spiritual remnants became aetherially-supercharged when she was defeated as a mortal at Rivenroad, and then further 'deified' while trapped with Bahamut inside the ruins of the Binding Coil.

So I guess we need three or four cards (only half-serious, but really, this is loopy):

• Nael van Darnus, the Imperial male soldier that was the White Raven, and players never met.
• The White Raven, or "Nael van Darnus" quote-unquoting intensifies, the gender-unknown Imperial soldier that took over the identity of the White Raven, and players fought in 1.x.
• Eula van Darnus, the clearly(?) female Imperial soldier that was revealed inside T9.
• Nael deus Darnus, the Phoenix-analogous 'primalized' manifestation of Eula-as-Nael's lingering essence.

:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eorzean_username

Alright, apparently the newest Lorebook info makes this even more confusing, yet also less confusing, yet the card is still wrong. *stubborn foot stomp*


MASSIVE SPOILERS about Nael:

• There's Eula van Darnus, Nael's sister, who went mad over her brother's death, took his armor, took over his identity, and killed everyone that might know the truth (including her father and all his closest commanders). This is the 'Nael van Darnus' that was tempered by Bahamut, fought at Rivenroad, and recreated/preserved by Bahamut.
  

:confused:

---

Oddly enough Eula was simply called Eula Darnus, withouth the "van". It makes sense as van is a military title for legatuses. What does not make sense is Eula not having one, despite being the eldest daughter of a noble house and a chirurgeon. Koji? Little help?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Balipu

Oddly enough Eula was simply called Eula Darnus, withouth the "van". It makes sense as van is a military title for legatuses. What does not make sense is Eula not having one, despite being the eldest daughter of a noble house and a chirurgeon. Koji? Little help?

---

That does seem strange consider it seems all the Gareans have some sort of honorific used between the first and last names

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morningstar1337

That does seem strange consider it seems all the Gareans have some sort of honorific used between the first and last names

---

That's the point. She has none. The lorebook scan that I saw calls her Eula Darnus. Not van darnus, not yae Darnus, not nan Darnus, not sas Darnus or goe Darnus. Just simply Darnus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Balipu

Oddly enough Eula was simply called Eula Darnus, withouth the "van". It makes sense as van is a military title for legatuses. What does not make sense is Eula not having one, despite being the eldest daughter of a noble house and a chirurgeon. Koji? Little help?

---

Thanks for the lore clarification (I'm still getting my head around all of FFXIV's details).

Would it be inappropriate to refer to her as 'Eula van Darnus' once revealed in T9? I'm unsure because technically she was fighting as an Imperial legatus, but then technically she may never have had 'van' actually bestowed on her (Eula), but only served in that capacity while impersonating Nael (who apparently did become a legatus before dying?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Balipu

Koji? Little help?

---

While we're at it, the Reddit post about this is currently going in circles about why the EN T9 dialogue (and after-commentary from Urianger and Alisaie) adds all kinds of additional commentary and hand-waving about Nael being mysteriously female and Bahamut botching the resurrection — while the JP dialogue makes no big deal about it, none of the characters seem overtly surprised, and no one claims that Nael isn't supposed to be female.

Plus lines like "I was a frail little girl" turning into "I was a frail child", and Nael(?)'s own line of "This body is not mine own" being completely-absent from the JP dialogue.

Nice catch, I would like the card to be name nael deus darnus, thus given us a chance to win another card nael van darnus whenever SE feels like adding that card to later patch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eorzean_username

snip

---

Well technically the true Nael was never van Darnus. It was Naeula who earned the rank of Legatus. He was still Nael something Darnus, but we don't know what. While Eula earned the rank of Legatus she did so in the diguise of her brother, so carrying the title publicly was not possible.

It went something like this:

Pre-game

• Nael something Darnus died
• Eula something Darnus took the identity of Nael something Darnus
• "Nael" something Darnus gained the rank of Legatus and became Nael van Darnus

1.0 Era

• Nael van Darnus got completely mindraped by Bahamut and became a deranged Demigod called Nael deus Darnus
• Nael deus Darnus got vaporized

2.0 Era

• Bahamut trapped the soul of Eula something Darnus in an artificial body (hence the "This body is not mine own" comment in english.) recreating Nael deus Darnus
• Nael deus Darnus gets her, probably very nice, ass handed to her by the WoL and Alisae
• Eula something Darnus does the impossible and breaks free of tempering, by the city sized Bahamut no less, and turns back into Eula something Darnus, although for all present she is known as Nael van Darnus and is believed that her female form is the result of Bahamut making an error by copying the looks of a woman Nael was thinking about at the time of "his" vaporization at the end of 1.0
• Louisouix kills Eula something Darnus, the last living person who knows about the switch and thus Nael van Darnus also dies a final death.

3.0

• Balipu is sad cause a cool villain's story has ended and we are stuck with Regula the Pokemon rival, Nidhogg the boring dragon, and Elidibus who refuses to directly involve himself in the story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Balipu

Eula something Darnus does the impossible and breaks free of tempering, by the city sized Bahamut no less, and turns back into Eula something Darnus, although for all present she is known as Nael van Darnus and is believed that her female form is the result of Bahamut making an error by copying the looks of a woman Nael was thinking about at the time of "his" vaporization at the end of 1.0

---

This is the part I'm getting really confused about, because according to this link that someone shared on Reddit, the JP dialogues don't have any of this in-character confusion about Nael's gender.

"Nael" doesn't mention her body feeling strange, refers to herself as "the fragile little girl that I once was", none of the characters comment on anything warped or confusing about her form, and Urianger/Alisaie seem to be completely missing their EN lines where they make overt statements about how Nael was resurrected wrongly.

Especially, these lines seem to have been tacked-on to the EN version:

• (Urianger) "If thou hast heard tales of the 'White Raven,' then it is he of whom they speak. Aye, 'he,' I say, for Nael was for a certainty no maid."
• (Alisaie) "Though we may accuse him of bungling van Darnus’s resurrection, I daresay Bahamut was as content to have a handmaiden as a manservant."

I've seen arguments that neither Urianger or Alisaie would have cause to know the truth about Eula, thus their reactions are plausible. But the JP version didn't feel the need to misdirect like that, so I'm not sure if it was the JP writers' intention to leave that kind of legacy in the characters' minds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eorzean_username

"Nael" doesn't mention her body feeling strange, refers to herself as "the fragile little girl that I once was", none of the characters comment on anything warped or confusing about her form, and Urianger/Alisaie seem to be completely missing their EN lines where they make overt statements about how Nael was resurrected wrongly.


I've seen arguments that neither Urianger or Alisaie would have cause to know the truth about Eula, thus their reactions are plausible. But the JP version didn't feel the need to misdirect like that, so I'm not sure if it was the JP writers' intention to leave that kind of legacy in the characters' minds.

---

I don't know enough to verify this but it is possible that this difference exists only in the english version. Luckily for Koji and co this still works with the information we know.