Who else thought the man from the Ekko comic was wrongfully portrayed as a villain? He was being mugged but shot the mugger to protect himself and his valuables yet he is vilified. Apparently shooting Ekko's friends automatically make you bad even if they are mugging you. Makes sense
TzQGRUST397 votesAssuming Ajuna actually did mug him, how fast he shot at Ekko and how nonchalant he was whistling through the alleys after taking the life of a young boy tells us he wasn't the best of men. And that's assuming he was telling the truth about what Ajuna did. Could of easily been lying, but we don't have that much information. From the fact that the piltover man had a heavy coat hiding the weapon, I doubt Ajuna was trying to steal that specifically, most likely trying to simply pick pocket him, which isn't honorable either, but definitely wasn't deserving of a bullet to the gut.
Placentas3 votesAgreed. Both could be portrayed as being in the wrong, but an adult shooting a kid and then being perfectly fine with it is what labels the man as a villain. Anjuna is just some street kid who knows how to survive by pick pocketing, he didn't pose a real threat.
Oakleaf Ranger1 votesWell there was a scene where Ekko literally pasted the guy whiling bumping into him but he didn't try to shoot Ekko. So it's not like he would shoot anyone for small inconviences plus Ekko did say his friend wasn't the only who was gonna die tonight... even if it wasn't shown I'm pretty sure it was implied. TBH I also try to be an equalist, ready to put one in anyone who tries to mug me. Also characters can be whatever you want them to be, that's what's cool about fiction. Just be sure your not falsely presenting characters without a good reason, otherwise it sounds like poor storytelling.
Pyrodinium1 votesSince Riot has confirmed that the man was in fact a killer and not defending himself, I would say that the comic does a good job framing him as the villain.
Oakleaf Ranger1 votesOh they did? Can post the link since I didn't know that. In that case they did a poor job of showing that lol but then how would Ekko know he killed him in cold blood? Only thing tha comes to mind is the kid telling him in one of the rewinds but that wasn't a scene....
TzQGRUST393 votesJetting past someone is a different thing than trying to mug someone and there is also difference between trying to mug someone and trying to pickpocket someone. The piltover man probably isn't a complete lunatic, which you would have to be one to shoot at a person that sprinted past you.
The most likely and logical series of events in the comic is that Ajuna saw the piltover man and assumed he was rich or at least pretty well off, which is a safe assumption. He goes to pick pocket the man, maybe reaching for his gun side, maybe not. The man catches him and shoots him in the stomach. He seems to not have no remorse for what he has done because he looks outwardly relaxed as he whistles through the alleys. Ekko confronts him, questioning the piltover man aggressively. The piltover man responds with, "he deserved it", and while going into more detail, he pulls out his gun and fires at Ekko mid sentence.
From this we can see that he has little qualms about killing Ajuna and believes that he deserved it, most likely because he has some sort of prejudice towards people of Zaun. From a purely logical perspective, shooting at Ekko isn't too unreasonable seeing as Ekko had a weapon and you could even say that him shooting Ajuna was reactionary. If we were only showed one shot of the gone or the other, I would say that the Piltover guy wasn't that bad besides having an loose sense of morality and maybe being a little prejudice, but that isn't the case, one shot gives context to the other. Him making an un-reactionary decision to shoot Ekko, a fairly matured bodied male with a blunt weapon who aggressively approached him, makes the odds that the shot to Ajuna was reactionary much less likely. And if the shot against Ajuna wasn't reactionary, he made the sober decision that a young poor boy deserves to die for pick pocketing and had no remorse. This gives us the information to infer that he more than likely had other motives in his head behind shooting Ekko than, "Physically capable male with a blunt object is acting aggressive and frustrated towards me."
The piltover man at best is someone with lose morals, willing to kill young peoples when a small hint of danger comes his way and will have little remorse afterwards. At worst, he's an racist who believes that being from Zaun or being poor dis-values your life and is fine morally to kill those who fit those parameters, even a child. While Ekko isn't the most morally sound person in the world, the piltover man certainly isn't any better.
Oakleaf Ranger1 votesHmm.. might not kill someone for pickpocketing, probably would depend how I feel at the moment, but there would definitely be repercussions. Probably physical ones if it was me ;) also great analyze, struck me more of a guy with loose morals
Trolosaurus1 votesAnd here we enter another reason why I don't like Ekko His lore. He's a street thug. "You mess with my gang you die" kinda guy
GreenLore3 votesHe never killed the guy though.
He chose to stay at the side of his friend instead of taking revenge.