RuneScape Forum Archive | Armadyl Is Not Ready

Raleirosen

Posts: 5,069 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Ancient Drew said :
Mediating with three gods who will not listen to anything except what they themselves believe? Armadyl knew they wouldn't listen to pleas of harmony after what was said there, and after living in a harsh area like Abbinah where the aviansie were killing each other for basic commodities, there really was no way he would have sided with Zamorak. I'm not saying it would've been the smart thing to do, I'm just pointing out that it would've been consistent with his ideology.

Note that this happened before Armadyl's "rebirth" (I'M A PHOENIX) during WE3; if he didn't have the resolve to kill back then, one can infer that the only reason he was going along with Saradomin and Bandos was a lack of conviction in his own ideals; that's both cowardly and hypocritical. Patrolling Lore FC almost makes you wish for a Great Revision.

14-Jan-2017 23:23:12 - Last edited on 14-Jan-2017 23:24:52 by Raleirosen

Hazeel

Posts: 6,735 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Kinda funny that Zamorak tries to convince Armadyl to see things his way while Armadyl screams "Die! Die! Die!" Runescape doesn't need a hero...it needs a villain. An all encompassing force of evil that will remain ever-threatening and use chaos to make the peoples of Gielinor tolerate each other, grow strong together, and fight side by side against this evil. I am that villain.

15-Jan-2017 01:19:09

Feb

2020

Questcaping

Posts: 565 Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

I may be Godless, but I gotta say, I'd prefer a god who's flexible enough in their own beliefs to recognise when they're not gonna work, rather than sticking to them pointlessly and sending everything down in flames. I will admit, I'm pretty sympathetic with Zamorak as well as Armadyl, but the destruction of Forinthry is a major sticking point for me. He doesn't achieve anything by refusing to back down, he's just being a sore loser -- with Forinthry and the Aviansie paying the price of that.

And besides, "that Armadyl died in the God Wars" -- this encounter is pretty much consistent with when he realised negotiation with stubbornly disharmonic gods wouldn't work. Who's to say this isn't the point where that change in worldview took place? Almost certainly a defining moment for that.

Hazeel said :
Kinda funny that Zamorak tries to convince Armadyl to see things his way while Armadyl screams "Die! Die! Die!"

Not sure where you're getting that from. Let's take another look at that dialogue:

Original message details are unavailable.
Bandos: They are just words. Empty promises and idle chatter. You are a blight that must be eradicated.

That's "die, die, die".

Original message details are unavailable.
Saradomin: Do you see now? This is what you truly stand for: the destruction of life. You are nothing but a villain.
[...]
Saradomin: The time has come for you to meet your end, usurper.

That's "die, die, die".

Original message details are unavailable.
Armadyl: Saradomin, does he speak the truth?
[...]
Armadyl: I am sorry, Zamorak. I cannot allow chaos to engulf this world.

That's a consideration of Zamorak's views -- more than Saradomin or Bandos ever give him -- followed by a regretful, apologetic agreement with the others. He isn't determined from the start that Zamorak should die. He's the only one here to give him a chance. But eventually, he chooses the lesser of two evils.

Questcaping the Finally Questcaped

Runefest attendee 2017-2019

15-Jan-2017 10:18:26 - Last edited on 15-Jan-2017 10:20:29 by Questcaping

Feb

2020

Questcaping

Posts: 565 Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

If you want Armadyl being succesfully convinced to see Zamorak's point of view on something, just look at their interaction in Sliske's Labyrinth. This time, with Zamorak responding not just with provocation, they actually manage to have a reasonable conversation. Largely inimical, of course, but reasonable. This is pretty safely one of Zamorak's most civil encounters in the maze.

Original message details are unavailable.
*Sigh* You might be right. I do blame myself and rightly so. But I am never going to forgive you Zamorak. I won't strike you down today, but I will not mourn if another does it for me.

That's Armadyl having considered and accepted what Zamorak had to say, not lashing out any further. And this is after his species-slaughter, his husband-killing -- so Armadyl has every reason to not forgive Zamorak. But crucially, he does so while walking on the right side of the line between vengeance and justice.

Questcaping the Finally Questcaped

Runefest attendee 2017-2019

15-Jan-2017 10:18:56

Jan

2018

Quael

Posts: 3,628 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Questscaping, my fellow Godless, I gotta disagree in one part, Armadyl did commit a crime also by accusing Bandos. Seren is right, Armadyl built his tower first and called war against Bandos, killing him way before Bandos had done anything as of yet It's all about what people think really. It's like the saying; "If you're a cop, and a man walks up to you and tells you that the person in line has a gun and is going to shoot up the place, would you wait to see if the man is telling the truth, or investigate it?" In this Point Armadyl investigated in a manner of attack first before Bandos had done anything. Over all Armadyl means good, but his method, as Vorago said;

Vorago: I do not need your help, nor would I accept it. I do not trust your methods.
Armadyl : My methods? I don't understand what your concern might be. I would consider my goals noble, and my past a reflection of that.
Vorago: Your contest with Bandos was an affront to the anima, one I should never have allowed to continue. The damage you caused was my failing. My only intention here is to prevent any further wounding.

Armadyl did give a speech of apologies, but Vorago states, and I agree.

Vorago: The damage is done, Armadyl. I do not care for your words or morals, only your actions. You need not fear me now, but I will not allow you to endanger the anima again.
Armadyl: I assure you I would have no intention of doing so. I do not wish any undue pain on another.
Vorago: I am 'the Everlasting', 'the Enduring'. The anima is not, so I cannot allow these mistakes. I make no alliances or enemies. I will do only what must be done.
Armadyl: That is all that we can do. I wish that no further action I ever have to make should pose such a risk. I am sorry Vorago.

Duke of Fort Forinthry

Interested in role-play? check out: The Quest Collective

15-Jan-2017 15:55:57

Feb

2020

Questcaping

Posts: 565 Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Ahh, I'm not quite agreed with you on that. To address what you say, the WE2 cutscene shows Bandos' tower turning up before it show's Armadyl's -- we can't really tell who provoked what, just that one started building a weapon and that the other started building theirs in response, but I think (given their respective demeanours) it's relatively safe to assume which was which...!

But the point I was making in the post I presume you're responding to is that Bandos had already demonstrated himself as a warmonger, a direct and unabashed threat to the stability of the world. He'd already committed crimes, and shown a clear intent not to repent. That in itself is reason enough for some kind of reprisal -- the whole Scarecrow deal is simply extra. And when he's clearly preparing for a renewed assault...

Someone building a tower isn't a crime, no. Big High War God building a tower, filling it with warriors, building a war machine? It doesn't take a genius, or even an investigation, to figure that one out. And there's really nothing less than a hundred-percent certainty of what he's about to do. So yes, I think some kind of response was justified.

I don't necessarily think he should have responded in kind , though. Something more subtle, less endangering, would have worked far better -- a low-key operation to dethrone him somehow. But then, extra-canonically, there's the nature of this being a World Event, in a game. World Events have been established as "do X for Y god/faction", so in that sense, the response has to be equal and opposite. When there's a god's life in the balance, you want people choosing their side to support the god they prefer, not a specific style of gameplay. Still, we're talking in-universe here -- what's happened has happened, regardless of the real-world reason for it happening, and it's now part of Armadyl's character.

Questcaping the Finally Questcaped

Runefest attendee 2017-2019

15-Jan-2017 16:45:33 - Last edited on 15-Jan-2017 16:57:55 by Questcaping

Feb

2020

Questcaping

Posts: 565 Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

So in that sense, I can't help but agree with our good pal Vorago. Armadyl did do damage. He wasn't aware of a lot of it, but it's not as if that stops it existing. He's expressed regret, though, and I hope he can keep to his apology. He committed world-scarring deeds while not realising the magnitude of his actions -- the true test of character now is whether he'll ever do so again knowingly , or whether he'll keep his promise to Vorago.

(Even then, that's situational. He might at some point see it as the lesser of two evils, but now the World Events have pretty much been ditched, I think the choices will become far less binary. So I think he's somewhat likely to keep his promise. Besides, he's got other priorities now -- like bringing the Aviansie to Tarddiad! I'd love to see how that plays out.)

And I think he's already learnt, to a degree. I've mentioned elsewhere in his thread about his dialogue pre-Sliske's Endgame, that he's made sure to keep his entourage to the tiniest handful in order to endanger as few as possible. He's quite deliberately putting less risk on his followers, and with this as a track record, it seems at least somewhat safer to assume that he'll put less risk on Gielinor.

Questcaping the Finally Questcaped

Runefest attendee 2017-2019

15-Jan-2017 16:45:46 - Last edited on 15-Jan-2017 16:56:43 by Questcaping

Hazeel

Posts: 6,735 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

@Questcaping

Actually, I was refering to Sliske's Endgame where Armadyl was crying for murder while Zamorak actually took the time to talk to him about the reality and harshness of war, what his choices meant, and to come to terms with his own mistakes and accept them. Runescape doesn't need a hero...it needs a villain. An all encompassing force of evil that will remain ever-threatening and use chaos to make the peoples of Gielinor tolerate each other, grow strong together, and fight side by side against this evil. I am that villain.

15-Jan-2017 17:40:30 - Last edited on 15-Jan-2017 17:41:59 by Hazeel

Raleirosen

Posts: 5,069 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Questcaping said :
I may be Godless, but I gotta say, I'd prefer a god who's flexible enough in their own beliefs to recognise when they're not gonna work, rather than sticking to them pointlessly and sending everything down in flames. Do I need to point out the irony in that statement? lol

Questcaping said :
And besides, "that Armadyl died in the God Wars" -- this encounter is pretty much consistent with when he realised negotiation with stubbornly disharmonic gods wouldn't work. Who's to say this isn't the point where that change in worldview took place? Almost certainly a defining moment for that. I think the intervening time between Forinthry and MPD (where Armadyl basically did nothing but mope around) speaks to why the confrontation with Zamorak was not the point where his worldview changed. If anything it was his exchanges with Bandos/Zamzims in MPD. Patrolling Lore FC almost makes you wish for a Great Revision.

15-Jan-2017 20:22:49 - Last edited on 15-Jan-2017 20:31:33 by Raleirosen

Feb

2020

Questcaping

Posts: 565 Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Raleirosen said :
Do I need to point out the irony in that statement? lol

Phrased that way for a reason, I was implying Zammy to be the stubborn type there (hence going on to talk about him directly afterwards).

Regarding the rest of what you're saying... eh, he did say "that Armadyl died during the God Wars". I think the God Wars changed Armadyl -- fighting all that time, after all, and just wanting it to be over by the time they've got Zam cornered. Yes, he's still prone to arguing things out in MPD, but it ain't like he's just gone "murder all who disagree", he's still prone to arguing. Especially in a volatile room like that where he's trying to keep the peace.

Hazeel -- gotcha, my bad, honestly wasn't quite sure what in particular you were talking about in the first place, so good to have it cleared up.

Low on time and mostly covered that confrontation anyway, but wanna say a few things -- sure, it starts off with the whole "murderer!"/"godslayer!" exchange, but neither are actually calling for each other's death at this point; as well as that, I honestly like Zammy but disagree with what he's saying here. Asking soldiers to fight and die in your name -- if it had been that specifically, I'd take it as a valid point. But Armadyl didn't bring the Aviansie there just as soldiers (perhaps Zammy's projecting a little as a Stern Judge). Armadyl just wanted a better place to perch his birds. Some soldiers, yes, but others decidedly not. It was made very clear, for instance, that Obi'Sooth was just a simple farmer. Not someone who pledged himself to die in Armadyl's name. But someone who got caught in the blast anyway.

Questcaping the Finally Questcaped

Runefest attendee 2017-2019

15-Jan-2017 20:53:42 - Last edited on 15-Jan-2017 20:54:44 by Questcaping

Forums

Armadyl Is Not Ready