"Viggora, for all his poor decisions, was no idiot. This "preconception" led him to participate in the single most devastating coup in Gielinor's history. It becomes difficult for me to believe that his convictions were misplaced, given his position within the empire. "
Perhaps. But we do know that the belief that humans had no power is also BS. So, whatever Viggora's reason, it wasn't 100% noble, it would seem.
"Perjour - Aren't you overlooking his enchanted journal? The one that, lest we forget, Zaros required him to carry?"
I forget the contents of Perjour's journal, but is it a stretch to use Jagex's love of puns here as evidence? Zaros suspected him of treachery, and his name is "Perjour." Perjury is the act of lying under oath, and someone who commits perjury is a perjur. So, given context, isn't it possible that he /was/ a treacherous *******?
"I don't entirely understand your rationale here. Are you suggesting that the opinion of a god's enemy be written off simply because he or she lacks an insider's perspective? You do understand, I hope, that that would invalidate half the lore among the factions"
It doesn't write it off completely, but one should take the statements of an opposing party with a grain of salt. In campaigns, I always question anything the parties say about the other party. It is not an auto dismissal, but given that there is mounds of evidence in favor of Zaros, versus the opinion of a few extremists, and one good ruler, It is worth questioning.
And, while we're at it, let's not fail to mention Senntisten's secret police force, headed by none other than Sliske himself. Surely a free and just nation would have no need of such an insidious necromaniac to maintain order, right?"
Zaros admits that he should have paid more attention to what was going on /within/ his empire. He would not have allowed Sliske's continued activity if he knew its full extent.
Finally, are there any lore hounds who aren't extremists for or against Zaros?pls?
26-Mar-2015 05:18:47
