Talk: Clarent

Combine

Shouldn't Clarent and Clarent Blood Arthur be one and the same page, like Gordius Wheel and Via Expugnatio, and Ea and Enuma Elish? Zahadrin (talk) 23:15, May 30, 2014 (UTC)

I arranged it as separate pages so it follows the Servant status page. In Rider's or Gilgamesh servant status, neither Ea or Gordius Wheel were listed on them. (Nikonu (talk) 23:28, May 30, 2014 (UTC))

I think it should be in the same page. The sword alone doesn't have special abilities, like Excalibur without calling its name. Sandubadear (talk) 00:59, May 31, 2014 (UTC)

It would require having two infoboxes awkwardly stacked over each other, and they are listed separately in the first place. I also imagine that it will probably get its own ability later on, assuming she gets over her daddy issues. EGGS (talk) 01:04, May 31, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I can see it as two. Whatever properties it may hold, outside of being a Holy Sword ((before being transformed into a demon blade)) may be revealed at a later time. Zahadrin (talk) 02:13, May 31, 2014 (UTC)

Didn't we agree it being a separate article? Zahadrin (talk) 06:12, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

My mistake, I figured I'd merge them together like the Arondight article. Banksia (talk) 10:25, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

True Rank/Type?

The current description currently states that Clarent's worth as a weapon is either equal to, or at least not inferior to, Excalibur. This doesn't really make sense though. I mean, one, Excalibur is a Last Phantasm; it is not just a holy sword, it's the world's best holy sword, and even its sister blades are inferior either in rank, type, or both. Caliburn is a sword stated to to be inferior on the simple principle it is a sword of station, a decorative blade that signifies kingship before it is a weapon. Clarent, likewise, is a weapon for knighting and kingship; it wouldn't make very much sense if it was also an A++ Anti-Fortress Noble Phantasm. And despite the fact it is a weapon older than Excalibur, no matter how many times Gilgamesh claims older is better and Word of God tries to state that older legends are more powerful, Excalibur itself is a contradiction to that statement, being better than its predecessor blades. It is also significantly less famous than Excalibur.

The only thing that plays in Clarent's favor is that it appears to have Fairy writing on the blade, which at the very least identifies it as a divine weapon not made by man, just like Excalibur, Arondight and the other sister blades. But that alone should not be indicative of being equal to Excalibur, so...

What, exactly, is the deal here? I know not much information is available, but I'd really like some outside perspectives on this, because I myself can't really figure out how this works. I am a huge Mordred fan, and in fact prefer her to vanilla Saber very much, but I still can't see why her sword would equal Excalibur. It seems inconsistent with everything we've been presented so far about how Noble Phantasms work. 70.81.176.124 04:00, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

Actually the current article just says its worth exceeded or was at least equal to Excalibur. Which considering worth has many interpretations, it wouldn't actually be unusual for a ceremonial sword to be worth far more than one built for practicality, as things like jewels and engravings that wouldn't serve a combat sword any use are just fine on a ceremonial blade.

Much like you however, I find the whole Age = Superiority thing to be bollocks as a weapon that earned greater fame and recognition in the hands of a hero should surely be more powerful than a finely made, but still nameless tool in the armoury of everyone's favourite Golden Douchebag. In this case, the legend of Clarent provides the answer, having been Arthur's sword of peace while Excalibur was a sword of war and Mordred having stolen it to match against Excalibur on the field of battle. This would imply, by legend, that the blades match one another.

On to the more technical side of things, Clarent's rank is C, but is regarded as ranked down because it was stolen, so Clarent's true rank is probably B, which would still be inferior to Caliburn which, due to its ability to cut through Berserker's God Hand, must at least be a rank A phantasm. Now Caliburn is already considered inferior to Excalibur due to being a symbol of authority and not war, so Excalibur is even stronger still (Despite the blades pretty much being one in the same in myth) So in this way, Clarent is inferior.

Their special attacks, Excalibur's blade of light and Clarent Blood Arthur are also separated by a rank, A++ and A+ respectively. So once again Excalibur wins. I'd like to mention that these abilities too stem directly from these heroes' legends and not something from a further history, as the light of Excalibur is the crystalized light of Arthur, the aspiration of her knightly ways and the embodiment of the sword of promised victory. Meanwhile, Clarent Blood Arthur is a demonic tool made from a grudge with the intention of slaying the one who bears its name. So these abilities have nothing to do with a previous generation of the weapons and shouldn't be replicable by the likes of Gilgamesh, but that's getting off point.

In conclusion, nothing about the data we have actually puts Clarent on a pedestal equal to or above Excalibur except for the text in this article and that could refer to the monetary worth of Clarent which likely did vastly exceed Excalibur, or the legend in which the two did battle, but Mordred and his/her blade still faltered.--Hawkeye2701 (talk) 06:22, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

I had considered that interpretation, that it alluded solely to monetary worth as a treasure, but that doesn't seem like the sort of stuff that usually gets detailed in these entries. Most of the Noble Phantasm entries generally focus entirely on their legend and their power (with some having arbitrary RPG stats tossed in, mostly in the original F/SN material). I can't buy Clarent having more monetary value either way, because Excalibur's legend and fame is still greater, making it a more valuable treasure to have, especially since it doubles as a tacnuke.

That's why it makes more sense to me to interpret it as its worth as a weapon, since if it was a worthless weapon Mordred would have stolen something else to fight Arthur with. I could easily agree that Clarent might be able to fetch a rank as high as A or A+ as a holy blade with Fairy runes on it, but the idea of it being equal to Excalibur just seems odd, which is why I'm trying to make sense of that interpretation. I fully expect that we'll be getting a redemption arc and its restoration to its full rank by the end of Apocrypha, because you don't mention a weapon is depowered unless you intend to do something with it, but I'll be a bit disappointed if it's an A++ Anti-Fortress clone.

As for Gilgamesh and the rules surrounding the age and power of a legend, I find Nasu's universe to be extremely inconsistent with itself, and to constantly ignore its own stated rules, so I try not to take any of them seriously. There are tons of examples of newer weapons being superior to older ones, or newer heroes being superior to older ones, or even obscure heroes being more powerful than extremely famous ones, that trying to follow the rules to the letter is headache material. 70.81.176.124 07:30, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

Shirou did defeat Gil with his fake weapons, huh Sandubadear (talk) 16:58, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

More than defeat, he straight up BROKE Gilgamesh's older, fabled, supposedly all-powerful proto-weapons with fake replicas. Even accounting for the fact Shirou breaks the rules to start with this establishes the rules are bogus. That's a bit of a tangent for another discussion page though, not this one. 70.81.176.124 18:51, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

It was already broken by Cu Chulainn. Archer admitted that the Original Gungir, Gae Bolg's prototype, couldn't even crack the first petal of Rho Aias . Yet Gae Bolg shattered all seven, which not even Hector, a more famous and older spear-wielding herocan do.

Inconsistency between Garden of Avalon and Apocrypha

So according to Garden of Avalon, Artoria forgave Lancelot and was actually on an expedition to Rome when Mordred stole the throne. Should this be supplimented in the content?221.127.64.238 01:47, February 6, 2016 (UTC)