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

Oli! · **09-01-2015, 03:37 AM**

(09-01-2015, 03:17 AM)V Wrote: In the end, all I can do is applaud you're significant, if perplexing, enthusiasm for skepticism and tell you that I'm going to err on the side of the simplest answer with the least basis in speculation: Ishgardian knights were guarding Ishgardian territory and fulfilling their duties as Ishgardian citizens.

Even this is speculation, however, that's the thing. Without knowing, anythingÂ has a basis in speculation.

I will say, however, that if this interpretation is taken, it does leave open some interesting doors; that Lalafell Knight, for instance, could be the start of something that goes in an entirely different direction.

However, I'm not quite sure what you're referring to by my "significant, if perplexing, enthusiasm for skepticism." It seems a little bit on the aggressive side, and leaves me a little wary. I'm not trying to offend or anything, I'm just trying to discuss.

V'aleera · **09-01-2015, 03:45 AM**

(09-01-2015, 03:37 AM)Oli! Wrote: Even this is speculation, however, that's the thing. Without knowing, anythingÂ has a basis in speculation.

Here's my problem: you seem to be ignoring what we do know. That being that every single analogous NPC that ever existed in the position of Gatewarden was a member of their nation's military structure and that Ishgardians by and large absolutely hate having outsiders around to even perform basic chores. And yet you believe it's valid speculation that these same Ishgardians would put such a person in a position of command on their own territory in multiple instances?

Oli! · **09-01-2015, 04:28 AM**

(09-01-2015, 03:45 AM)V Wrote:
(09-01-2015, 03:37 AM)Oli! Wrote: Even this is speculation, however, that's the thing. Without knowing, anythingÂ has a basis in speculation.
Here's my problem: you seem to be ignoring what we do know. That being that every single analogous NPC that ever existed in the position of Gatewarden was a member of their nation's military structure and that Ishgardians by and large absolutely hate having outsiders around to even perform basic chores. And yet you believe it's valid speculation that these same Ishgardians would put such a person in a position of command on their own territory in multiple instances?

Well, let's look at the other things that we know:

-- There is no specific mention of any races besides Hyur and Elezen being a part of the nation of Ishgard before or during its closing.

-- The Brass Blades, a city-state military subset, hires thugs and questionable individuals into its ranks.

-- Vast chunks of Limsa Lominsa's various forces are made up of sailors and pirates.

--

Show Content

-- Ishgard is Xenophobic, Traditionalist, Religious, and highly intolerant of things that don't fit the country's views.

-- The Roegadyn previously mentioned was employed to House Dzmael; further societal ties were not mentioned.

-- Areas outside of Ishgard (the city) are claimed by houses.

-- Locations claimed by houses are owned by those Houses, and policed by their knights.

-- On an individual level, houses have some amount of autonomy; the hiring of outsiders, although perhaps frowned upon, is nonetheless a practice.

Some of these align rather neatly with one point of view. Others can play both sides. It is with these cues that we build interpretations and stances. Of particular importance to you is the fact that other nations use citizens as their guard force; of particular importance to myself is the fact that Houses can hire as they see fit, foreigners and otherwise, and use their own hires to police their property. These two things are at odds when inserted into the same context, but are still established elsewhere. They can also both be used to counter the other.

The problem is, we both have hints, but nothing solid; if we didÂ have something solid, chances are this thread would have stopped at about three pages or so. When it comes to speculation, the best we can do is assume neutral ground, and then pull in either direction. If we start the discussion with "well, let's assume <X> is / isn't possible," then we do a great disservice to either side of the argument.

To use one source to further an argument does not require the outright dismissal of other established points; the key is to use said points where they are appropriate. We have no guiding keys towards this facet of the process, which means that we are unable to decisively place what we have gathered in the areas in which they should be.

If I were to summarize what we have all these pages in, it would be, "there were people in these places once, and we have multiple ideas shown elsewhere to be true that may explain what they were doing there, but we have no way of knowing which of these ideas is right." Both of these arguments leave us with weird things as well. For example, if we go with your approach, does that mean that Lalafell could have been Knights, too? There's a Lalafell Gatewarden there, If we can get both Miqo'te andÂ Lalafell in there, who else can we find? What if those guard forces had Duskwights and Roegadyn and Highlanders too? Where did they all go? What would that mean for Ishgard's Xenophobia? Similarly, if we go with my approach, wouldn't that mean that houses that hire outsiders would end up being distrusted? Would others make political plays to disgrace that House? Would they lose their status due to trusting outsiders? Wouldn't that make it politically safer notÂ to hire outsiders?Â Part of the nature of speculation is that all arguments have flaws to them; none of what we have presented here today is impenetrable. They both have bits of truth and snippets of hints embedded in them that we can quote as much as we want, but without knowing whether they actually belongÂ in the circumstances we're putting them in, we're still stuck.

But as I said, none of this arguing really means that it's impossible in the first place. Absolute Certainty doesn't need to be achieved in order to Roleplay something, but it still does help to know that something may not be 100%. I don't think anyoneÂ on this board has a concept that's 100% Grounded and Proveable, Yoshi-P Stamp of Approval, Absolutely Authentic and Straight from the Lore Department Itself, and personally, I think that if we all realize that, we can have a better outlook and understanding when we look at otherÂ concepts.Â Recognition of difficulty does not lead to an impossibility. Although some in this thread took hardline stances on both sides, I still think that outlining the difficulties present in a concept can help make the concept better, because it gives us more to work with. For me, at the very least, this was never a Yes or No argument. I don't believe arguments should be used to snipe people out of the sky, I believe they should be used to troubleshoot.

A lot of people look at arguments and think they're only destructive, but they can be good, too. Plus, I don't mind being wrong. Give me super solid evidence of anything against me, and I'll be the first to shut my mouth. If I were to wake up tomorrow and see a Live Letter stating that those Gatewardens were Ishgardian citizens, I would be first in line to make my Lalafell Dragoon.

EDIT: Major spoiler didn't spoil correctly oh god that was close

V'aleera · **09-01-2015, 09:28 AM**

(09-01-2015, 04:28 AM)Oli! Wrote: -Both of these arguments leave us with weird things as well. For example, if we go with your approach, does that mean that Lalafell could have been Knights, too?

There's a Lalafell Gatewarden there, If we can get both Miqo'te andÂ Lalafell in there, who else can we find? What if those guard forces had Duskwights and Roegadyn and Highlanders too? Where did they all go?

What would that mean for Ishgard's Xenophobia?

Similarly, if we go with my approach, wouldn't that mean that houses that hire outsiders would end up being distrusted? Would others make political plays to disgrace that House? Would they lose their status due to trusting outsiders? Wouldn't that make it politically safer notÂ to hire outsiders?

Â Part of the nature of speculation is that all arguments have flaws to them.

On a phone and addressing a few points in as organized a way as I can:

-It absolutely does mean that lalafell can be citizens and knights.

-I would presume they went to the same place as the smattering of elezen and highlander pirates in 1.0 Limsa did: out of sight.

-It would mean that Ishgard's xenophobia is more in line with certain real world xenophobia, ie you won't be killed for crossing the border but if your kind wants any respect it's gonna take some time, blood, sweat, and tears.

-Not really sure what you're getting at here, as all of this already the case. For temp is stated many times to be under intense scrutiny for its attitude toward adventurers.

-I would argue that while neither position can be 100% confirmed, that does not mean both points of speculation rest on even ground. In my point of view there is significantly greater evidence in support of the position I and others have taken which requires fewer speculative assumptions to reach and which fits uniformly into pre-existing patterns of writing done within the setting.

Riven · **09-01-2015, 09:28 AM**

Wow...I wake up to all these pages. Dazed

Â That aside, anyone still know of any possible good last names for a Dragoon, or is it based on their family name?

**Unnamed Mercenary** · **09-01-2015, 09:41 AM**

(09-01-2015, 09:28 AM)Riven Wrote: Wow...I wake up to all these pages. Â That aside, anyone still know of any possible good last names for a Dragoon, or is it based on their family name?

Dragoons are people too. While a family might seem to produce a lot of Dragoons, the children could have grown up to have some other job. I'd stick to racial family names or so.

Sylastair · **09-01-2015, 09:51 AM**

(09-01-2015, 09:28 AM)Riven Wrote: Wow...I wake up to all these pages. Â That aside, anyone still know of any possible good last names for a Dragoon, or is it based on their family name?

http://fantasynamegenerators.com/elezen-names.php

This is a name generator for Elezen's that is a pretty good resource if you need some inspiration!

Oli! · **09-01-2015, 10:44 AM**

(09-01-2015, 09:28 AM)V Wrote: -I would argue that while neither position can be 100% confirmed, that does not mean both points of speculation rest on even ground. In my point of view there is significantly greater evidence in support of the position I and others have taken which requires fewer speculative assumptions to reach and which fits uniformly into pre-existing patterns of writing done within the setting.

I guess my question at this point becomes, how so? If neither can be proven, how are they not on equal ground? We both have evidence for and against at this point.

Sylastair · **09-01-2015, 11:02 AM**

(09-01-2015, 01:13 AM)Flashhelix Wrote: To just assume that Ratatoskr's blood, one of the biggest revelations in the HW MSQ, doesn't figure into the job class that are not only considered to be the symbol of Ishgard but also stated to have an "inner dragon" of sorts that is implied to be far more than metaphorical is pretty ridiculous.

I don't think this is ridiculous at all. This whole plot point is about the people of Ishgard and there susceptibility to the curse within their lineage. There is no lore, at all, in any way, shape, or form that supports Dragoons capabilities stemming from this curse. Your rationale that it is obvious is that since Dragoons represent Ishgard, therefore a curse on the entirety of Ishgardians is what gives them power. They do not fight like dragons, quite the opposite actually, they are the dragon meta game. Any tie between these two is an inference you are making between "dragon curse on people who seemed to then have evil powers" and "something very akin to aether manipulation of some sort".

(09-01-2015, 01:13 AM)Flashhelix Wrote: When we see a miqo'te dragoon somewhere, I'll believe it. Simple as that.

This is totally fine, just hypocritical. This is something you need to see, definitively in order to even accept it. It seems you are more than willing to use inductive reasoning on lore (with significantly less information) but when the same is done (with now literal pages of supporting lore to make the plausibility of this far less farfetched) you are demanding to see one in game or it is just someone "bending poor lore to have cat ears".Â It just seems to me that for whatever reason, a Miqo'te Dragoon is so much of a lore faux pas that people are willing to ignore pages of supporting lore, and actually try to rationalize 500 years of time to have had large amounts of interbreeding between Hyur and Elezen (which we know is scandalous ALL over, and is just as bad, if not worse in Ishgard) instead.

As mentioned countless times, it doesn't affect me or my RP in the slightest. I will drive on living the dream regardless, but when people shrug off facts by saying "I don't care and I won't stop you, it's just dumb." we just need to acknowledge that isn't a valid response or addition to the discussion. At the moment there is far more lore in support of the idea anyone with sufficient training can become a Dragoon, regardless of race than the opposite, since the latter hinges on lore we know even less about.

Martiallais · **09-01-2015, 11:09 AM**

To the OP, I think one thing you can take away from this thread is there's a lot (ha ha! understatement!) of debate around dragoons. Again, I'd say to keep your options open, you'll always find more (IMO at least) RP options by (as someone else pointed out) at least being open to a well done/well presented idea.

In the end go with what's fun. That's why we're all here playing pretendy fun times, even if we disagree on how it should be played sometimes LOL.

Off-topic/opinion bits beneath the cut:

Show Content

V'aleera · **09-01-2015, 11:16 AM**

(09-01-2015, 10:44 AM)Oli! Wrote: I guess my question at this point becomes, how so?

The crux of your argument appears to rely on absence of evidence (IE "We don't -know- anything. Maybe those are Ishgardians, maybe they're adventurers; maybe they're the Twelve hiding in bodies made of chocolate! We don't know!").

I (and others) on the other hand have presented numerous examples of evidence backing our claim:

-They are commanding presences protecting Ishgardian territory; Ishgardians have never shown a proclivity pre-ARR to rely on anyone's strength but their own.

-Ishgard has been demonstrated to have residents and subjects beyond Hyur/Elezen such as the Roe chef.

-Other races have existed in the region for a thousand years before Ishgard shut its gates.

-Other races have been present as citizens in every single Eorzean city-state (including Ala Mhigo).

-Ishgardian society is centered around xenophobia, classism, and religion; not racism (beyond the racism inherent in high nobility).

It is perfectly acceptable for that evidence not to satisfy you, and it is perfectly acceptable for you to demand more evidence. But you can not say that your argument, which has significantly less grounding in evidence, exists on an equal plane as the counter-argument which is possessed of a great deal more evidence.

And none of that even touches the practical argument: ignoring all evidence to the contrary, what distinct purpose is served by accepting that only Elezen and Hyur exist as citizens within Ishgard? Conversely, what harm is done by accepting that many races exist as citizens within Ishgard (if in significantly smaller numbers)?

Oli! · **09-01-2015, 11:46 AM**

(09-01-2015, 11:16 AM)V Wrote:
(09-01-2015, 10:44 AM)Oli! Wrote: I guess my question at this point becomes, how so?
The crux of your argument appears to rely on absence of evidence (IE "We don't -know- anything. Maybe those are Ishgardians, maybe they're adventurers; maybe they're the Twelve hiding in bodies made of chocolate! We don't know!").

I (and others) on the other hand have presented numerous examples of evidence backing our claim:

-They are commanding presences protecting Ishgardian territory; Ishgardians have never shown a proclivity pre-ARR to rely on anyone's strength but their own.

-Ishgard has been demonstrated to have residents and subjects beyond Hyur/Elezen such as the Roe chef.

-Other races have existed in the region for a thousand years before Ishgard shut its gates.

-Other races have been present as citizens in every single Eorzean city-state (including Ala Mhigo).

-Ishgardian society is centered around xenophobia, classism, and religion; not racism (beyond the racism inherent in high nobility).

It is perfectly acceptable for that evidence not to satisfy you, and it is perfectly acceptable for you to demand more evidence. But you can not say that your argument, which has significantly less grounding in evidence, exists on an equal plane as the counter-argument which is possessed of a great deal more evidence.

And none of that even touches the practical argument: ignoring all evidence to the contrary, what distinct purpose is served by accepting that only Elezen and Hyur exist as citizens within Ishgard? Conversely, what harm is done by accepting that many races exist as citizens within Ishgard (if in significantly smaller numbers)?

The idea that "we don't know" comes from the fact that just as we have evidence that can make your point, we also have evidence that makes a counterpoint:

-- Houses are the ones that stake territory outside of Ishgard.

-- They hire as they see fit, and also hire foreigners. A promise of citizenship for service is not mentioned.

-- In conjunction with this, Dzmael hired a Roegadyn. Whether or not he is a citizen or just a hire is not stated, making it a neutral piece of evidence.

Show Content

-- Other nations also have soupy enforcement agencies that are not comprised strictly of their citizens.

Not really a point but more of a question: Do we have a date for when Ishgard closed? I tried to look around for one because I can't remember, and the closest thing I found was on the Wiki where they declined to ally after the war with Ala Mhigo.

Either way, we both have points to use. We also both make assumptions off of those points. If how large an assumption is is a point of subjectivity, then we're both on the same footing because subjectivity cam be scaled infinitely in either direction. If there's a quantifiable way of judging the size of assumptions, what would it be?

I really don't think that either of us has a leg-up on the other, hence where "we don't know" stems from.

As far as the practical argument goes, like I said, I don't think it's about "harming" the assumption on either side. It's more about thinking and rationalizing with what we're given. Anyone could have walked into Ishgard and hid in a hole with their family before the gates closed, theoretically, just like anyone could have done with the Garleans, Sharlayans, or anyone else. "Practically," anyone can be anywhere, and doing anything that they want, that isn't explicitly stated as being impossible, like I said a few posts back. But just saying that is neither as exciting nor as convincing as it would be with all the roadblocks discussed, set out on the table, and worked around accordingly, in my opinion.

Yssen · **09-01-2015, 11:55 AM**

(09-01-2015, 11:46 AM)Oli! Wrote:
(09-01-2015, 11:16 AM)V Wrote:
(09-01-2015, 10:44 AM)Oli! Wrote: I guess my question at this point becomes, how so?
<snipped>
<note - snipped bits to get to the question I am helping to answer>

Not really a point but more of a question: Do we have a date for when Ishgard closed? I tried to look around for one because I can't remember, and the closest thing I found was on the Wiki where they declined to ally after the war with Ala Mhigo.

Either way, we both have points to use. We also both make assumptions off of those points. If how large an assumption is is a point of subjectivity, then we're both on the same footing because subjectivity cam be scaled infinitely in either direction. If there's a quantifiable way of judging the size of assumptions, what would it be?

Ishgard closed their doors around the same time as the fall of Ala Mhigo, though they withdrew from (or declined to participate in) the Eorzean Alliance following the Autumn War. I may be mistaken, but I do not believe there is an exact date. Given the touch stone of the Fall of Ala Mhigo it was about 20 years from the begin of ARR (15 years from the start of 1.0).

Edit: I completely forgot this, but remembered after I posted. It is also probable Ishgard closed their doors after the Battle of Silver Tear Falls. Y'know because tons of Dragons and Midgardsormr. I forget if that is actually stated anywhere as definitive though.

Oli! · **09-01-2015, 11:58 AM**

(09-01-2015, 11:55 AM)Yssen Wrote:
(09-01-2015, 11:46 AM)Oli! Wrote:
(09-01-2015, 11:16 AM)V Wrote:
(09-01-2015, 10:44 AM)Oli! Wrote: I guess my question at this point becomes, how so?
<snipped>
<note - snipped bits to get to the question I am helping to answer>

Not really a point but more of a question: Do we have a date for when Ishgard closed? I tried to look around for one because I can't remember, and the closest thing I found was on the Wiki where they declined to ally after the war with Ala Mhigo.

Either way, we both have points to use. We also both make assumptions off of those points. If how large an assumption is is a point of subjectivity, then we're both on the same footing because subjectivity cam be scaled infinitely in either direction. If there's a quantifiable way of judging the size of assumptions, what would it be?

Ishgard closed their doors around the same time as the fall of Ala Mhigo, though they withdrew from (or declined to participate in) the Eorzean Alliance following the Autumn War. I may be mistaken, but I do not believe there is an exact date. Given the touch stone of the Fall of Ala Mhigo it was about 20 years from the begin of ARR (15 years from the start of 1.0).

Just what I was looking for. Thanks!

V'aleera · **09-01-2015, 12:12 PM**

(09-01-2015, 11:46 AM)Oli! Wrote: The idea that "we don't know" comes from the fact that just as we have evidence that can make your point, we also have evidence that makes a counterpoint:

-- Houses are the ones that stake territory outside of Ishgard.

-- They hire as they see fit, and also hire foreigners. A promise of citizenship for service is not mentioned.

Ishgard defended the Western Highlands with its knights. That is explicitly stated. Not knights and adventurers, not knights and mercenaries. Just knights. This includes the gatewardens.

To my knowledge, no outsider has ever become an Ishgardian knight without first becoming a subject of Ishgard.

Are you in the possession of any evidence that Ishgard has knighted individuals outside the nation without requiring that individual's loyalty be sworn to the nation beforehand?

To answer your other question: Ishgard closed its doors fifteen years before the Calamity when Nidhogg returned and razed the hamlet of Ferndale to the ground. That equates to roughly 20 years before ARR/HW.

« Next Oldest \| Next Newest »
Pages (10): « Previous 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 Next » Jump to page:

Creating a Dragoon...

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