Quote Originally Posted by Lyth View Post
I don't follow what your lore-related complaint is. Primarily because you haven't actually stated what it is.

If you're referring to Dark Knights as they exist in Eorzea, they unsurprisingly exist in contrast to Paladins. Paladins swear oaths to protect people. Sometimes, as is the case with the Sultansworn, their oaths are to protect people in power, or institutions. Sometimes, as we saw in Ishgard, those institutions can be corrupt. That's where Dark Knights come in. They have no oaths, and no allegiances. Their only job is to be true to their hearts, and mete out justice as they see fit. They tear down the corrupt. But in so doing, they live as outcasts.

Opposite sides of the same coin. In a way, it's a reversal of FFIV's take on the Paladin/Dark Knight duality.

Speaking of Runic, I think this was a bit of a missed opportunity with Dark Missionary. If we're going to have a magic-only raidwide defense, I'd rather it be a sparkly absorb with a better ability name.
The major lore complaint most people seem to have about DRK is that it isn't evil. The vast majority of Dark Knight's appearances throughout the Final Fantasy franchise have had it either downright evil or immensely corruptive. Even Cecil wasn't able to use its power without it eating away at his soul.

As for Runic? Yeah, you ain't wrong. Dark Missionary truly was a missed opportunity.