(11-26-2016, 05:17 AM)Rahferu Wrote: I personally would be surprised that the potential or underlying ability for a dark knight's existence in some form didn't at all exist BEFORE people figured out how to control it and name it and such. (To me, that's kind of like Christoper Columbus "discovering" the americas...he didn't really. there were already people living there and doing their thing, etc etc.)I'm going to repeat what Valence said, it is just inheritely flawed the way you think about it. The fact more people did it doesn't make it any less flawed, it just makes people share your sentiment about how they see lore, and their degree of seriousness of it.
The Dark Knights combated the church with their abilities, yes. BUT WHERE did those abilities COME FROM? How did they get these abilities? There had to have been some kind of source, one would think. That kind of knowledge doesn't just grow on trees, after all.
Maybe I just think outside the box too much, idk. The lore doesn't cover enough imo.
Also, I am trying to explain WHY I think that could've been a possibility, given other things we do know for sure about the world of FFXIV.Â
I am not claiming that I am correct per se--rather, I am stating that the lorebook doesn't seem to say YES or NO to my theory definitively. I'm merely using evidence to support my views.
The lorebook is also a supplemental guide as I understand it, and it has SOME information to fill in some of the blanks and answer some of the questions. It's not the entire list of answers to the test, so to speak. There's plenty of stuff the lorebook alone doesn't tell us.
I completely understand the desire to adhere to the book, but when the book doesn't say NO THAT DIDN'T (OR COULDN'T POSSIBLY) HAPPEN, many people are going to interpret it either way.
(Also to come back on that little Lore thing you did link, still doesn't state anything about dragons knowing it before the Ishgardians did! The energies they are speaking? Literally her lifeforce, what has to do with the GIRL by his side, not the Dark Knight himself. Please read the quests completely, not just the log blurb! It will help you immensely no doubt.)
You are a person who just like to take lore as something what is there, and vaguely based onto it, what is once more completely fine. Then there's folk who don't do that. When we see 'Ishgard was the place for the Dark Arts', until we get lore that disproves it, that is a fact. That is not up for speculation no more.
And I think that is were your speculation/theory/argument is inherently flawed to the core. You're not speculating grey areas, your directly trying to disprove a fact at this point.
Why? Forgive me, but it sounds as if you're trying to justify your own character at this point, more then trying to actually speculate lore. I love speculating lore. But once more, you're trying to disprove a fact at this point. And that doesn't fly well with people who are 'serious' about their theory crafting. We all need a base to work with, one you try to disprove with no evidence so far. Unless we get new lore come Stormblood, this is what we have, and this is what we need to work with.
But at the end of the day? It simply shows the diveristy between roleplayers on the RPC. We have people like myself who don't like breaking or bending overly much (unless you flat out admit you do it. I will respect you so much more then people trying to twist things so their characters look acceptable in their eyes. Hint, they still don't), or folk like yourself who bend and break, and vaguely base their characters onto ingame stuff.
And both stances are okay. It is not like we are going to roleplay with one another to begin with.
Anyhow what I'm trying to say is that at the end, you're arguing facts here. You can't disprove these facts, not unlike we get more lore down the line, because you have nothing to back your argument up with at this point. Discussion is fine, as long you provide material with it, and so far? You, and those others, have provided none to make the facts we know less credible.