RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

Khadan · **04-17-2015, 04:56 PM**

(04-17-2015, 04:22 PM)Gegenji Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 03:54 PM)Kayllen Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 03:50 PM)Gegenji Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 03:42 PM)Kayllen Wrote: All in all, we just don't know. I simply state again that we shouldn't make assumptions.

Why can't we make assumptions, though? You seem to be more or less giving off an opinion of "if you can't prove it, you can't run with it." Yet, at the same time, you can't prove that it doesn't happen either.

Should I not make assumptions that there might be more Doman Lalafell off the fact there's just one? Should Aya not assume that there might be lingering tensions between Elezen and the Ala Mhigans they warred with in the past over land? Should anyone playing a Duskwight not assume they might (emphasis on might, not will) be treated with disdain when RPing with a Gridanian?

If you don't like the approach someone is taking, don't RP with them. Plain and simple. Telling them their character is wrong without providing the same proof you're demanding of them just... doesn't seem fair to me. And, even then, if you're not RPing with them - does the lack of complete and utter adherence to provided lore even matter?

Are you taking a discussion on lore to be a personal matter of whom and whom I do not wish to RP with?

I'm just saying your putting forth a statement that if there isn't complete, concrete proof on a matter, then you're not allowed to say it might for RP purposes. Which is dangerously close to telling people how they can RP.

I can see where your concern comes from, actually. There does seem to a few people that believe or alarmingly allude to "RP'ing things properly" here and there in these forums. In my post history, though, I've staunchly declared against such things and will obviously continue to do so.Â

My involvement in this part of the conversation stems from the notion that certain ideas can be uttered as fact without any real evidence or proof and others just sort of hit the ground running with it which, ironically, would then cause a sort of bandwagon mentality wherin someone who comes in and doesn't observe what has been asserted to be fact doesn't acknowledge it and is then questioned, derided, or even belittled for not being on said bandwagon. That's where I have umbrage.

Other than that, if people wish to RP that their characters were the victims of some overarching racism or oppression and somehow rise through the ranks regardless? I think that's pretty neat. My very Ishgardian character might find it odd that they experienced so much racism and wish to ask them why it happened or what the circumstances were as he had never witnessed or experienced such a thing in his homeland, but that really just makes for interesting character discourse. =)

Khadan · **04-17-2015, 05:00 PM**

(04-17-2015, 04:27 PM)Kage Wrote: For me, believing that a xenophobic place such as Ishgard currently is (as closed off from the rest of the Eorzean alliance as it may be) and how the answers indicate that the societal discrimination is not long gone...

I feel that it is an informed opinion to not be surprised to see Ishgard be xenophobic and discriminatory, especially racist. Are there ways against it? I think believing in Halone as fanatically as they appear and being a very good fighter will strengthen the "other" race character Standing with people.

I can't agree that it's an informed opinion since we've identified a lack of actual facts but I will agree that you have reasonable cause for suspicion. =)

I'd also like to expand on your second point and say that I'm -very- interested see how far being a staunch Halonist really reflects in Ishgardian society. Especially since, unlike the theocratic monarchies of IRL past, we have tangible evidence of the power of the Twelve in Eorzea.

Edda · **04-17-2015, 05:07 PM**

If there's gay sex in Ishgard, there's definitely racism.

Calling it now that there will be some side-quests in the city that involve some disenfranchised 1st/2nd generation lalafell/miqo'te being shit on by some holier-than-thou Elezen knights. Feel free to screencap this post for when it happens so you can be like "Wow Edda was right."

Khadan · **04-17-2015, 05:12 PM**

(04-17-2015, 05:07 PM)Edda Wrote: If there's gay sex in Ishgard, there's definitely racism.

Calling it now that there will be some side-quests in the city that involve some disenfranchised 1st/2nd generation lalafell/miqo'te being shit on by some holier-than-thou Elezen knights. Feel free to screencap this post for when it happens so you can be like "Wow Edda was right."

We just finished with this discussion, I think, wherein it was established that correlation != causation.Â

So may I screencap and post this for when it doesn't happen?

Iex · **04-17-2015, 05:12 PM**

Honestly, I never really have seen much /racism/ in Ishgard. (Though that could be because of racism meaning perspective.) I am not denying there may be some... I don't know every quest or NPC chatter.

They are Xenophobic in terms of they don't want outsiders to be to involved in their matters. Lots of pride of not wanting matters to be interfered. Having to rely on outsiders to solve their problems is a sign of weakness that would make other houses lose respect.

Most of the MSQs in the North, Pre 2.4ish, involve you actually being purely an errand boy except for literally annoying the leaders with things until they reluctantly agreed to listen to you. If they truly saw you as a lesser being, they would have kicked you out entirely. The matter of <Redacted> which caused folks to trust you seemed to be because folks were too prideful to admit to things. The Ishgardians never seem to consider folks 'lesser' people, just that outsiders should stick to their outside and leave Ishgardian matters to the natives.

They dislike folks trampling over their world of tradition and such in the name of "we know better than you." Which is why there was so much conflict about Garuda and the post 2.0 MSQ. They only asked for aid for Steps of Faith and such because the danger of massacre out weighed the cost of loss of pride.Â The fact the Ishgardians were extremely grateful for the aid (so far as to GO TO ANOTHER NATION FOR THE CELEBRATION)Â shows they never thought of adventurers and other nations as lesser just... over Zealous in their ideas of 'good for everyone.'

A lot of racism exists between the Elezen and the Moonkeepers, where the Elezen genuinely don't see the Moonkeepers as a civilized race. (Archer storyline and Lancer Storyline)

We, also, have to remember Racism in FFXIV is different than in real life. There are actual differences in the races and traits that define their ability. You don't get call racism for giving the heavy box to a RoegadynÂ rather than Lalafell. It is a fact of life.

((If anything a lot of folks are racist (or nationalist) against Ishgard because they are a bit colder than everyone else (/pun) ))

Edda · **04-17-2015, 05:13 PM**

(04-17-2015, 05:12 PM)Kayllen Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 05:07 PM)Edda Wrote: If there's gay sex in Ishgard, there's definitely racism.

Calling it now that there will be some side-quests in the city that involve some disenfranchised 1st/2nd generation lalafell/miqo'te being shit on by some holier-than-thou Elezen knights. Feel free to screencap this post for when it happens so you can be like "Wow Edda was right."

We just finished with this discussion, I think, wherein it was established that correlation != causation.Â

So may I screencap and post this for when it doesn't happen?

Yes, and so will I. I will be sure to necro this thread and PM you when it happens, because it will. If not in 3.0, then 3.1, and so on and so forth. If it doesn't happen by 4.0 I'll give you like a million gil or something.

Gegenji · **04-17-2015, 05:14 PM**

(04-17-2015, 04:56 PM)Kayllen Wrote: My involvement in this part of the conversation stems from the notion that certain ideas can be uttered as fact without any real evidence or proof and others just sort of hit the ground running with it which, ironically, would then cause a sort of bandwagon mentality wherin someone who comes in and doesn't observe what has been asserted to be fact doesn't acknowledge it and is then questioned, derided, or even belittled for not being on said bandwagon. That's where I have umbrage.

And herein lies the crux of my issue with your argument. In no way has anyone stated that these matters are the "truth." Feasible? Yes. Likely? Possibly. However, at no point have they said "this is the truth, that is how it is."

Your involvement, on the other hand, seems to consist entirely of saying "well, it doesn't SAY that anywhere, so it is not only not true, it's also unfeasible and unlikely." You're effectively denying any attempt to "bend" the lore for entertainment purposes. These are not concepts that are being toted as reality - just feasibilities that people thought could be interesting to play their character from. If it does not explicitly state it in the lore, you cannot have a character that runs with this idea without providing evidence that fits your criterion.

Meanwhile, you do not stand on the opposite point. You don't provide evidence to why it couldn't be, only demand evidence why it could. Your "we don't really know" platform does not hold water, because just as we don't know whether the possible idea is true... we also do not know if it's untrue. So, if you are going to shoot down someone's ideas for bending the lore, at the very least you need to provide your own evidence as to why it can't be that way.

What you do not do is lay the job of providing evidence solely in the hands of your opponent. That is not debate - your counterpoint should consist of evidence as to why their idea is wrong or unfeasible, not lay it on your opponent to provide evidence for every little nitpick you throw while you yourself remain unassailed. "We don't know" is not a valid counterpoint.

If an idea sounds feasible enough, other people might run with it. To the point that it becomes a sort of understood fan-rule, but it is just that - fan-created. It is not truth and can be destroyed with properly provided evidence in the game or from the creators otherwise. Of course, you are right in that people should not be shamed into thinking that this fan-ruling is the actual truth and derided for not agreeing with it. We are not the role-play ruling body, nor will we ever be.

However, I'm going to assume (and possibly wrongly so!) that you mention that point because that is how you feel you are being treated in this thread. However, I posit that it's not because you disagree with the fan-theory, but that you put forth the image that you outright deny it utterly and demand that those who follow it provide evidence as to exactly where it's stated in game this exists (which it doesn't, because it's fan theory). Meanwhile, as mentioned, you do not provide any similar in-game evidence as to why the fan theory couldn't be... because it's in the hands of your opponent to provide all the evidence while you have to don't have to do more than shake your head and say "no no no." I believe that's where the anger and irritation comes from.

Warren Castille · **04-17-2015, 05:14 PM**

(04-17-2015, 03:12 PM)Warren Castille Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 02:56 PM)Warren Castille Wrote: For the sake of making this not drag on for thirty pages, let's just all agree to autocorrect "racism" to "discrimination."

Hey, past!me. It's current/future!me. We tried, man. We tried.

GUYS. IT'S ME FROM THE FAR FUTURE. JUST GIVE IT UP, ALL IS LOST. IN THE FUTURE NOBODY CAN READ.

GloryRhodes · **04-17-2015, 05:16 PM**

Relax. Â I'm sure we all know all the details of unreleased content by now.

Kage · **04-17-2015, 05:18 PM**

(04-17-2015, 05:13 PM)Edda Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 05:12 PM)Kayllen Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 05:07 PM)Edda Wrote: If there's gay sex in Ishgard, there's definitely racism.

Calling it now that there will be some side-quests in the city that involve some disenfranchised 1st/2nd generation lalafell/miqo'te being shit on by some holier-than-thou Elezen knights. Feel free to screencap this post for when it happens so you can be like "Wow Edda was right."

We just finished with this discussion, I think, wherein it was established that correlation != causation.Â

So may I screencap and post this for when it doesn't happen?
Yes, and so will I. I will be sure to necro this thread and PM you when it happens, because it will. If not in 3.0, then 3.1, and so on and so forth. If it doesn't happen by 4.0 I'll give you like a million gil or something.

I've quoted two separate occasions from the official forums where Fern said that there is a quest in 3.0 dealing with a cross-race offspring/couple/something ( and the differences they experiences implied or so)

Edda · **04-17-2015, 05:23 PM**

(04-17-2015, 05:18 PM)Kage Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 05:13 PM)Edda Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 05:12 PM)Kayllen Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 05:07 PM)Edda Wrote: If there's gay sex in Ishgard, there's definitely racism.

Calling it now that there will be some side-quests in the city that involve some disenfranchised 1st/2nd generation lalafell/miqo'te being shit on by some holier-than-thou Elezen knights. Feel free to screencap this post for when it happens so you can be like "Wow Edda was right."

We just finished with this discussion, I think, wherein it was established that correlation != causation.Â

So may I screencap and post this for when it doesn't happen?
Yes, and so will I. I will be sure to necro this thread and PM you when it happens, because it will. If not in 3.0, then 3.1, and so on and so forth. If it doesn't happen by 4.0 I'll give you like a million gil or something.
I've quoted two separate occasions from the official forums where Fern said that there is a quest in 3.0 dealing with a cross-race offspring/couple/something ( and the differences they experiences implied or so)

Then I guess it's a good thing for Kayllen I'm not demanding any gil for this bet.

Wymsical · **04-17-2015, 05:25 PM**

(04-17-2015, 05:12 PM)Kayllen Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 05:07 PM)Edda Wrote: If there's gay sex in Ishgard, there's definitely racism.

Calling it now that there will be some side-quests in the city that involve some disenfranchised 1st/2nd generation lalafell/miqo'te being shit on by some holier-than-thou Elezen knights. Feel free to screencap this post for when it happens so you can be like "Wow Edda was right."

We just finished with this discussion, I think, wherein it was established that correlation != causation.Â

So may I screencap and post this for when it doesn't happen?

I'm curious, why are you so determined that Ishgard doesn't have any forms of racism present? Gridania is well-established as hella racist but people play as natives there all the time. Hailing from a place with significant interracial tensions doesn't have to reflect poorly on your own character. Given Ishgard's very prominent xenophobia, hating anyone who isn't native seems very likely, or at least with extreme suspicion and prejudice. Is a more cultural form of -ism really that different?

Kage · **04-17-2015, 05:25 PM**

Quote:Lore about conflicts between Hyur and Elezen?
-Tension between races because bloody history between them. They never made up but put aside their issues. They don't really like each. They just put up with each other because common enemy. In beginning of the 6AE the Elezen migrated back in, then hyur migrated and tried to take Elezen lands. Clashing and moving apart - gets ingrained in their society. Lalafell will rise on occasion and attack other races, for example. In 3.0 we will have half-races. But they are treated different. Quest will come to explain.

Quote:Cross-racial?
-adventurers come from different land. From places slightly more â€œprogressive.â€ Live together but separate. Hyur and elezen had wars. A lot of bad blood between races. Recently races to come together in single nations. Cross Racial is possible, but it doesnâ€™t happen a lot. Itâ€™s a cultural thing. 3.0 there will be a cross-racial union.

Aya · **04-17-2015, 05:26 PM**

(04-17-2015, 04:56 PM)Kayllen Wrote: My involvement in this part of the conversation stems from the notion that certain ideas can be uttered as fact without any real evidence or proof and others just sort of hit the ground running with it which, ironically, would then cause a sort of bandwagon mentality wherin someone who comes in and doesn't observe what has been asserted to be fact doesn't acknowledge it and is then questioned, derided, or even belittled for not being on said bandwagon. That's where I have umbrage.

Fact?Â Fact?.Â No, we were discussing an interesting matter of conjecture when you decided to insert yourself as the judge of what is fact where it did not belong, and to do so with considerable condescension (I did catch your reply to me before you edited it).

While happily ensconced in your highchair lobbing "That's just conjecture", "Where are the facts?"Â "Whats the proof?" you've missed the entire point, and utterly obscured what should have been interesting in this entire conversation.Â Nothing at this stage is provable (except perhaps by those with inside knowledge of Heavenward development) because no evidence is yet available.Â Your "point", as it were, is nothing but meaningless tautology combined with high-handed rhetoric and a poisonous way of delivering it.

Khadan · **04-17-2015, 05:27 PM**

(04-17-2015, 05:14 PM)Gegenji Wrote:
(04-17-2015, 04:56 PM)Kayllen Wrote: My involvement in this part of the conversation stems from the notion that certain ideas can be uttered as fact without any real evidence or proof and others just sort of hit the ground running with it which, ironically, would then cause a sort of bandwagon mentality wherin someone who comes in and doesn't observe what has been asserted to be fact doesn't acknowledge it and is then questioned, derided, or even belittled for not being on said bandwagon. That's where I have umbrage.

And herein lies the crux of my issue with your argument. In no way has anyone stated that these matters are the "truth." Feasible? Yes. Likely? Possibly. However, at no point have they said "this is the truth, that is how it is."

Your involvement, on the other hand, seems to consist entirely of saying "well, it doesn't SAY that anywhere, so it is not only not true, it's also unfeasible and unlikely." You're effectively denying any attempt to "bend" the lore for entertainment purposes. These are not concepts that are being toted as reality - just feasibilities that people thought could be interesting to play their character from. If it does not explicitly state it in the lore, you cannot have a character that runs with this idea without providing evidence that fits your criterion.

Meanwhile, you do not stand on the opposite point. You don't provide evidence to why it couldn't be, only demand evidence why it could. Your "we don't really know" platform does not hold water, because just as we don't know whether the possible idea is true... we also do not know if it's untrue. So, if you are going to shoot down someone's ideas for bending the lore, at the very least you need to provide your own evidence as to why it can't be that way.

What you do not do is lay the job of providing evidence solely in the hands of your opponent. That is not debate - your counterpoint should consist of evidence as to why their idea is wrong or unfeasible, not lay it on your opponent to provide evidence for every little nitpick you throw while you yourself remain unassailed. "We don't know" is not a valid counterpoint.

If an idea sounds feasible enough, other people might run with it. To the point that it becomes a sort of understood fan-rule, but it is just that - fan-created. It is not truth and can be destroyed with properly provided evidence in the game or from the creators otherwise. Of course, you are right in that people should not be shamed into thinking that this fan-ruling is the actual truth and derided for not agreeing with it. We are not the role-play ruling body, nor will we ever be.

However, I'm going to assume (and possibly wrongly so!) that you mention that point because that is how you feel you are being treated in this thread. However, I posit that it's not because you disagree with the fan-theory, but that you put forth the image that you outright deny it utterly and demand that those who follow it provide evidence as to exactly where it's stated in game this exists (which it doesn't, because it's fan theory). Meanwhile, as mentioned, you do not provide any similar in-game evidence as to why the fan theory couldn't be... because it's in the hands of your opponent to provide all the evidence while you have to don't have to do more than shake your head and say "no no no." I believe that's where the anger and irritation comes from.

You're incorrect. Making assumptions is what got you here, in the first place. I'll state again that when you make a claim of $thing the burden of proof is on you. That's just how discussion works. I'm not standing here, as you acerbically put it, saying 'nonono', I'm stating that categorically none of you have proven the existence of systemic cultural racism (or discrimination, for Warren) and until that changes no one has any real reason to just listen and believe when you say that it is so and that that is the canon truth, asserted or stated.

I don't need to stand on the opposite point because A: it would be ridiculous for me to argue a point with no proof, and B: knowing that said argument has no proof and that plenty of you seem to be arguing among the stance of devil's advocate' I therefore don't need to make the argument on behalf of the opposing side as that is already being done.

Quote:What you do not do is lay the job of providing evidence solely in the hands of your opponent. That is not debateÂ

Actually!

My counterpoint is the lack of evidence in your case. That's all I need to prove my point which as stated several times now, as there is no evidence of $thing we cannot assume $thing is factual. You assertion that this somehow is a reflection of me telling people what they can and cannot do with their pretendy fun times is an ignorant one, as well. But I already covered that in my previous post and don't need to rehash it again.

my 'treatment' in this thread is irrelevant, otherwise. If you're asking for my honest and personal opinion then I can give it but as it hasn't been asked I don't feel the need to divulge it.

« Next Oldest \| Next Newest »
Pages (25): « Previous 1 … 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next » Jump to page:

Reasoning for irregular race/nationality combinations

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes