+- Hydaelyn Role-Players (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18)
+-- Forum: Community (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: RP Discussion (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations (/showthread.php?tid=11112)
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Domri Blackblade - 04-15-2015
(04-15-2015, 06:03 PM)Chris Ganale Wrote: He's saying that there's the possibility that we're thinking about lore three or four times harder than SE did, and that they just set races to groups because they thought it looked good at the time.
Isn't that the nature of most fandoms? Star Wars is a big one? The fanbase is a HUGE proponent on a giant mass of that lore. I guarantee you Georgy didn't put in all that thought.
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Val - 04-15-2015
(04-15-2015, 06:04 PM)Domri Blackblade Wrote:(04-15-2015, 06:03 PM)Chris Ganale Wrote: He's saying that there's the possibility that we're thinking about lore three or four times harder than SE did, and that they just set races to groups because they thought it looked good at the time.
Isn't that the nature of most fandoms? Star Wars is a big one? The fanbase is a HUGE proponent on a giant mass of that lore. I guarantee you Georgy didn't put in all that thought.
Definitely. But without any definite truths, as Faye quoted just a moment ago, there's no reason to jump down each other's throats/be annoyed/snipe at people based on things that may or may not be true.
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Chris Ganale - 04-15-2015
It is true, and like Star Wars, I typically take the judgment of "I look at the universe my way, and other people can look at the universe their way, and if things line up, great. If not, oh well. But I will get violently defensive when I feel slighted."
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Domri Blackblade - 04-15-2015
(04-15-2015, 06:06 PM)Val Wrote: Definitely. But without any definite truths, as Faye quoted just a moment ago, there's no reason to jump down each other's throats/be annoyed/snipe at people based on things that may or may not be true.
No one is jumping down anyone's throat. People are debating.
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Val - 04-15-2015
(04-15-2015, 06:11 PM)Domri Blackblade Wrote:(04-15-2015, 06:06 PM)Val Wrote: Definitely. But without any definite truths, as Faye quoted just a moment ago, there's no reason to jump down each other's throats/be annoyed/snipe at people based on things that may or may not be true.
No one is jumping down anyone's throat. People are debating.
...Huh. Well, maybe I've been reading a different thread.
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Chris Ganale - 04-15-2015
Yeah, it's veered a bit vicious in here at times. I'm as guilty of that as anyone else, but still.
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Domri Blackblade - 04-15-2015
(04-15-2015, 06:14 PM)Val Wrote: ...Huh. Well, maybe I've been reading a different thread.
Lol.
From what I've seen of the particular sniping is when someone strolls up to the thread with some secret enlightenment on why someone RPs something to the exception that generally comes off as hugely condescending. Then when they are called out, backpedaling happens.
On the actual topic at hand? No, I haven't seen that from the people who are actually debating the point.
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Hyakki - 04-15-2015
(04-15-2015, 05:06 PM)Meena Wrote: Well, we know that Doma is a SMALL island nation.Doma is not an island nation and we do not know how large it is. All that was said is that it was a a coastal nation on the continent of Othard.
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Flashhelix - 04-15-2015
(04-15-2015, 06:04 PM)Intaki Wrote:(04-15-2015, 05:43 PM)Flashhelix Wrote: I'm pretty sure that how Faye put it is quite possibly the most polite way anybody could. It's not believable. How is somebody supposed to put it? Because looking at a character concept that isn't very believable and going "That's not very believable" doesn't exactly constitute a personal attack or passive-aggressive jab at any group.Qualify "believable". Not "likely". Not "normal". "Believable". Define exactly what that term means in the context of roleplay in a fantasy setting.
Believable as in something that could plausibly occur. If I said my character was a lancer with two extra arms he'd grown with black magic and used them to fly by flapping them really hard, that's not believable. People assume, often in fantasy and sci-fi settings, that because the world differs from our own in many aspects that the concept of the setting actually having any sort of in-lore restrictions on anything whatsoever is just out the window. "Oh, we live in a world with dragons, elves, and sentient cacti! Why is X so implausible?" With X being something that is usually lore-breaking. "What do you mean my character can't chew and eat rocks with no negative repercussions? We live in a world with evil physical nature-gods! Who says teeth aren't harder than rocks in this universe?" Etc etc.
"Not very believable" is not synonymous with "Impossible". A Miqo'te dragoon is not very believable. A Miqo'te Azure Dragoon is impossible, at least until Heavensward retroactively makes me look like a huge asshole here by revealing that every one before Alberic and Estinien have been catboys for the last 300 years. If you write a character that's part of what is easily the most ridiculously xenophobic culture in a setting already filled with stupidly xenophobic cultures, then say that they are part of the class of knights that this xenophobic nation holds up as a symbol of national pride, then say that this knight is one of the many that said nation is prejudiced against, well... I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that that character is not very believable, not impossible, just not that believable.
And, while I'm at it, I might as well say that "Not very believable" isn't synonymous with "Total shit character get the fuck off my final fuccbois". It was made clear in the OP that the point was to discuss the reasoning behind such a thing, not the characters themselves. I assumed that would be the end of it, but then again that's probably naive of me considering how much easier it is to just take an expression of distaste towards any kind of concept that matches a character you play as a malicious personal attack.
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Tiergan - 04-15-2015
(04-15-2015, 05:54 PM)Faye Wrote:(04-15-2015, 05:40 PM)Tiergan Wrote:(04-15-2015, 05:26 PM)Faye Wrote: <snip because super long>
Faye, I heart you, but I have to admit that when I read "Ultimately it's just folks choosing self-gratification over believability which as the OP stated isn't inherently bad and doesn't mean I won't RP with anyone, I just may not always think it's the best decision, so I try to shy away from it myself." it was a little off-putting.
You may not have meant it that way, but for those of us that are being labeled as 'inauthentic' because we're not playing Isghardian Elezen or Ala Mhigan Highlanders, it sort of reads like:
"Ultimately, these people want to make characters that please themselves over making characters that are believable and lore-abiding. I'm not saying this is inherently bad or anything and I'll still RP with someone whose character is more about satisfying the player's wants over being a realistic character -- I just don't think it's a good idea."
If that's how you actually feel, that's okay. But I also don't think it's unreasonable to expect people might be sore about how they were labeled.
Maybe it's worthwhile to say I don't think self-gratification is a bad thing. In the end that's why we all RP, even why we all chat and debate here on the RPC. This is how we spend our time, it's for our own enjoyment. "Self-gratification" was probably not the best term in retrospect given the negative connotation. But I don't believe there's anything wrong with choosing a character you want to play over the lore or anything else. I'm certainly no lore nazi myself--while I try to never "break" it I do frequently "bend," and while it may not be my own practice, if someone wants to RP even something as extreme as a Garlean Miqo'te princess who can shoot lazer beams, screw the lore and let 'em if that's what they have fun with! We're here to have fun, and how lore fits into that "fun" is different for every individual.
I also don't believe playing an exception, say a Miqo'te dragoon, is "inauthentic"--it just can be a bit harder to accept and need some extra reasoning behind it to explain it away if it's going to make sense given the game's lore. It's certainly not lore-breaking or "wrong," just harder to believe at face value without full context given.
Thank you for elaborating.
I will admit that while I'd accept an Elezen Ishgardian pretty instantly, I would probably want to hear more about the Miqo'te Ishgardian's backstory to learn about how they got there and why - considering the racial diversity with Ishgardians is pretty stacked in one direction.
I suppose feel that people place a lot of emphasis and frustration with "What the hell is with all of these miqo'te players and why do they play as [x]?!" It was the core example the OP brought up and "why is it always Miqo'te?" was a question that the OP asked. To me it's pretty clear it's because there's a metric buttton of miqo'te players. The higher the population, the more likely you're going to run into a whole lot of different concepts. Some will be right up people's alley and some won't -- but it's the same with pretty much anything we RP.
I've endured a lot of random aggression or unpleasant assumptions made about me purely because I'm roleplaying a cat (though weirdly, most of that aggression comes from male players who hate my mancat, but are totally willing to hit on my ladycat :V) I've had people tell me to my face that a certain group likely won't take my RP seriously because I'm RPing a miqo'te. I've had some RPers warn me that I'd have to work twice as hard to prove that I was a decent roleplayer. I've had people straight up ask me, openly in a linkshell, whether I was ERPing with someone just for standing in place with another cat somewhere public RPing things that had nothing to do with sex in /say.
I understand this happens because there's a larger pool of unpleasant miqo'te roleplayers to sift through due to the larger pool of players, but it still really sucks. I don't enjoy playing as one of the most popular races in the game. I'm honestly hoping that when the Au Ra will come out, half the miqo'te will become dragon people just so that it'll be less of a problem - especially when some folks will fixate on miqo'te for months. There have been multiple times where I've considered just rerolling and fantasia'ing my characters into something else because of it, but I've spent way too much time on Tiergan and have built up too many different relationships with him now to do it.
At the end of the day, people will like what they like and hate what they hate, but man does it bum me out dealing with it so often.
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - McBeefâ„¢ - 04-15-2015
Let me give a TLDR to anyone just coming into this thread:
"I'm mad because other people's characters are not as boring and unimaginative as mine"
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Flickering Ember - 04-15-2015
(04-15-2015, 06:40 AM)Meena Wrote:(04-15-2015, 06:06 AM)Lekka Meyren Wrote: As others have stated almost perfectly with memes... Here we go again.I don't see how being a minority IRL plays into this - I mean, this is not a realistic setting. Its a setting with dragons and thousands of years of racial tensions and legitimate reasons for exclusion.
I'm going to simply ask: Do they need a reason, really? I mean as long as they're not making up their own lore wildly and deciding to be a vampire tribe of Mi'qote Ishgardians who secretly run the place.. Why should they need to justify themselves.
I agree with all exceptions obviously, if you're just out to completely break lore to play your own thing; then expect people to take issue simply because they don't want their character influenced by things that seem inherently "wrong" in their character arcs.
...But as a minority in real life I have a little bit of a hard time not having some cynicism around this line of thinking. Gods know we have enough of an IRL problem of the majority experience being expected and all minority experiences being doubted or pushed into neat little boxes to fit the narrative.
Tl;DR: If it's not ruining your character arc in some way and it's not completely cross with the lore - It's highly likely you're overthinking it from the perspective of a majority experience.
It's not that freaking unlikely that some mi'qote walked up north at some stage.
I understand there are issues with people who begin to play the game without any knowledge, my questioning is why don't those players or peoples go about correcting their lore or characters to fit the setting. Especially those who have been playing for a while now.
Sure you aren't harming anyone - but why disregard the work the lore devs and such have put into the game by working in to be a special snowflake?
Unfortunately, IRL does play into this, especially if you pay attention to OP's examples that allude to real life. This is the same kind of logic that would say you can't cosplay as a black Link or be a black samurai. This is the same kind of logic that supposes that medieval fantasy universes should have sexism in their worlds because it "makes more sense." OP may not be able to realize it, but when you are saying that certain races should be certain things because it would be too "extraordinary" it does imply something.
But anyway, if the issue is only with miqo'te being certain things that they would be "unlikely" to be, then there isn't any spectacular answer. The answer is simply that miqo'te are the most popular race, or the second most popular race if we go by the census. You can't really help what people like. I chose to make a roegadyn who doesn't really know anything about her culture.Â
Technically, I fit your bill of "characters who go against the grain." I suppose a miqo'te would have been more "fitting" for a character who grew up wild and feral. But I didn't choose that race because I like roegadyn better. The only difference between a miqo'te role player and myself is that I just so happen to like something that is not as popular. But I can guarantee you that I didn't choose roegadyn as a race for any other reason decides: "That race looks cool. I want to be it."
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Flashhelix - 04-15-2015
(04-15-2015, 06:33 PM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: I'm mad
FTFY
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - McBeefâ„¢ - 04-15-2015
(04-15-2015, 06:33 PM)Flashhelix Wrote:(04-15-2015, 06:33 PM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: I'm mad
FTFY
I'm furious.
RE: Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations - Parvacake - 04-15-2015
Skimmed over quite a bit of the thread but didn't linger too much on any one thing.
To keep myself from going on a tangent, I'll condense my own response to all of this by saying: if it can be explained with valid reasons for why a character is such and such race or nationality...does it matter? I get to some it can be bothersome but RP is all about creativity and working with the boundaries and lore you're given to add your character to the story.
Like Tiergan mentioned just a few posts ago, it's not completely unbelievable like in the miqogoon's case except that a little extra reasoning might have to come forth to make it tie in and be more believable. Same with a Doman mix of, well, whatever else. It may not be the most normal thing in the world but it doesn't have to be completely odd either if explanation is given.