Thread: Revelations from Patch 5.4

Those little rascals

Originally Posted by Fenral

Leaving this here for later, but what if 6.0 has us finish off the Zodi-arc on the moon, and 7.0 ends up as our "coming home from Mordor" arc where we have to step in and sort out Garlemald?

At this point, the moon-thing has become so close to a joke that I can see it become something accessible in game (like an end-game zone, or a max level smallish hub like Doma or Gangos). I don't see a lot remaining on the Zodiark ark, while Garlemald is an urging issue currently.

I've posted on the forums back before 5.0 or just after the release about how we don't need to go to Garlemald without a proper reason. The focus of 1.0 MSQ through now has been resisting the Empire invasions, and liberating occupied nations. But no real need for us to go there, we don't have to become the invader. And I remember thinking that the only reason we would go there would be if some cretin villain would bait us in, which is exactly what the end of 5.4 was. We are dealing with Warlyt and Bozja currentlu which is once again peripheral consequences because they have an impact on other people, rather than a direct strike to the Empire. But the whole Fandaniel scheme kind of called that we will need to go there and face Zenos, again.

My take on Lunar Bahamut and the towers: this is the perfect setting for a FFX Black Aeons-themed storyline, although I would not be crazy about yet another version of primals we already know. Fandaniel could summon "d4rk" versions of primals and wreak havoc on most Beast Tribes. And while I think it isn't fit for a whole expansion, it could be great as some last patch event where we would have to kick some dark aeons summoned here and there in Eorzea and Othard, waiting for the expansion...

Originally Posted by Fenral

I actually wonder if Nerva is going to be our Larsa. He is Legatus of the IIIrd, and the "young prince takes the throne" arc was something the series first did with Alus in FF3.

Not sure about "young prince" though - he's Varis's cousin so it's more likely (although not necessary) that he's around that age.

Originally Posted by Fenral

I actually wonder if Nerva is going to be our Larsa. He is Legatus of the IIIrd, and the "young prince takes the throne" arc was something the series first did with Alus in FF3.

This is what I'm thinking as well. My memory of FF3's plot is more than a little hazy, but I distinctly recall Alus being something of a weakling and a coward, with his brief character arc having him and Arc (heh) bonding over their similar personalities and experiences. Oh, and he's ten years old. Being that young, or even about the same age as Alphinaud, would definitely explain why Nerva wasn't considered a ready heir circa Kaien's rebellion.

Originally Posted by Iscah

What's this? Is there additional information somewhere I'm not aware of? As far as I'm aware we've just had two contextless name-drops and the fact that he's Varis's cousin.

It's from Tales from the Storm: In Darkness Blooms the Lily. The particular excerpt is here:

With Emperor Solus on his deathbed, a clandestine war of succession was already being waged in Garlemald. Solus's eldest being dead, his grandson Varis was next in line to the throne, but the Emperor’s second son Titus had other ideas, and no shortage of support. What he did not have, however, was Varis’s standing with the military, nor less a ready heir─this Zenos.

Now, I would not be surprised if Nerva straight up didn't exist as a concept at the time this was written. Titus had no son, so of course he didn't have someone to succeed him in the event that he took the throne. But whether that's true or not, Nerva definitely exists now (and retroactively always has). So if Nerva's existence and his leadership of the IIIrd Legion is to be reconciled with this statement, the question that has to be asked is "What made Nerva unfit for heirdom?". Him being an actual child, or at least significantly younger than Zenos, could fit the bill.