Khadan

Hmm, without going too far down that rabbit hole I might posit that since it's a 'demon' wall and demons seem to be the purview of void magic that a demon wall is just more void magic since it follows what we know of void magic thus far. Though you might be able to make an argument for Arcanistry mixed with alchemy or some such? Though I think you bring up some interesting notions: Just how powerful is blood as a magical focus? Is it due to the nature of sacrifice? The emotions of pain and/or fear? Does it require the actual death of the bleeder for the same aforementioned pain/fear? Do Eorzeans as aether-rich beings thus make their blood even more substantial? and so on and so forth =P

I guess it's a good thing I mentioned that I know this is Final Fantasy at least three times isn't it? Besides, if we're not basing weapons and combat on the basis of reality, which we are and so does SE for that matter, then let's just all wield lightsabers and lock s-foils in attack positions? Or can we keep talking about weapons and realism and how that pertains to fantasy? No. Who asked you, DUSKIE?!

At the risk of sounding incredibly turbo-nerdy I'll go ahead and bite and say nah, that ain't how it's done, bruh. =) I don't want to derail the conversation too much by talking about Star Wars junk but here, have a link: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Lightsaber the tl;dr is that it's a 'blade' of pure plasma held inside a containment field to keep it from lighting you on fire for just being near it. It has a lot of tiny, highly technologically parts that are very miniaturized. The crystals themselves aren't just 'crystal', they're very specific and only come from one planet in that galaxy. In summary you can't really have a lightsaber in FF14* *until they introduce them through some handwaved Garlean BS that entirely negates the premise probably

I guess it's a good thing I mentioned that I know this is Final Fantasy at least three times isn't it? Besides, if we're not basing weapons and combat on the basis of reality, which we are and so does SE for that matter, then let's just all wield lightsabers and lock s-foils in attack positions? Or can we keep talking about weapons and realism and how that pertains to fantasy? In all seriousness, we're actually getting this. Please look forward to it. Oh I am looking forward to it. Tanking that beastie will likely be fun >=) Hm, I would argue that it would be relatively impossible since the only beam-style attacks we see are magical in nature or Allagan and never static, rather just a beam-style-weapon that is fired like a cannon. I could see a kind of deployable macro-sword though. More so than the Lightning one, even. Still, I should hit you for that. :evil:

I guess it's a good thing I mentioned that I know this is Final Fantasy at least three times isn't it? Besides, if we're not basing weapons and combat on the basis of reality, which we are and so does SE for that matter, then let's just all wield lightsabers and lock s-foils in attack positions? Or can we keep talking about weapons and realism and how that pertains to fantasy?

This is something that's come up in FC chatter/mumble for a while, now, especially with our FotM hype nerds. The general consensus seems to be that all tanks will be going for Dark Knight soon or something. I still don't personally see why. Mechanically Paladins are probably the strongest tank in the game between the abundance of cooldowns and passive block being so powerful. Where Paladins suffer the most is in solo play where their dps is abysmally low and the one ability they have, Sword Oath, is the longest running joke of 2.x If Dark Knight comes in and offers all the cooldown versatility and massive secondary mitigation of Paladin with the AoE threat and solo DPS of the Warrior? Then yes you will probably see a lot of people jumping ship to board the hype train. Of course this could easily be fixed by redoing sword oath to not be garbage and increasing the AoE threat of Paladin while also giving warrior something to compensate for their lack of a block passive. Overall where this really matters is in raiding. If Dark Knight doesn't have the passive mitigation and cooldown versatility of Paladin I'm going to put my money on Paladin staying the strongest tank with Warrior and Dark Knight being interchangeable as Off Tanks. On to the RP side of things! So here's the thing with greatswords: Fantasy games have played up their prominence and capability to an extreme degree. That is not to say that a great sword isn't good at what it's intended to do: cleaving a bloody swathe through unarmored foes and the legs of horses. Like all jobs it is good to remember that there is a tool for every job. You're not going to bring a pair of pliers to a decking job when you need a hammer and nails, instead. What does that mean for warfare and combat? Well it means that there is no "one tool fixes all" in melee warfare which is why there are so many different weapons throughout history. Some of them are good or even great, some of them are terrible and beg the question: -WHY?!-. Greatswords tend to be the marriage of a long cutting edge of a long sword or a messer sword, with the chopping force of a long axe. Some might argue that you could throw short spear in there but I disagree on the basis of how a spear is wielded and a greatsword is still shorter than a short spear; unless they mean javelins in which case you don't throw the damn greatsword gdi. With that in mind, if you're fighting a bunch of opponents that have light or no armor or cavalry then a greatsword is excellent. Greatsword blades don't cut through solid or well made metal armor, however, since the cutting edge is spread out over too much space to penetrate your opponent. CAN you defeat an armored foe with a greatsword? Of course, but you can also kill someone with a broken bottle, too, it doesn't make it the best tool for the job. On to swords and shields. The shield as a concept has been around in practice from some of the most ancient civilizations like the Egyptian wood and ox hide shields to the famous Roman Scutum and the Viking Linden board round shields then moving on to modern day riot shields. The idea of putting a solid barrier between yourself and direct harm is something I think all of us can get behind (see what I did there?). A shield wasn't just a defensive barrier that took up a spot on your arm and occasionally absorbed an arrow shot, rather it was a solid wall between your enemy's weapon and your body, a mobile and often maneuverable shell that could block, parry, and especially trap an opponents weapon, and an effective bashing weapon. One of the most effective shield combinations is a medium sized shield, usually round or rectangular, and a short sword (Like the gladius). Even more so if you can present a shield wall to your enemies and arm your soldiers with spears as well, i.e. the phalanx. Though I think we're supposedly focusing on one-on-one combat. I could probably present pages of scenarios to you about sword-and-shield vs. greatsword and what is better etc etc. I think someone mentioned HEMA earlier, too, and they'll know what I'm talking about in that regard. I will say that just 'off the cuff' in my opinion with two equally skilled and armored opponents you will likely see the person with the sword and shield overcoming the greatsword wielder more often just because that shield is a highly effective and adaptable tool while a greatsword only does one thing, maybe two if you count the occasional parry. On a somewhat personal peeve I will say that I very often see this idea touted about with characters wielding this massive greatswords with relative ease and the thing is wide enough that they claim they just plant it in the ground and it can block arrows and even BULLETS. I will grant that this is Final Fantasy so ridiculous and fantastical things can and do happen like Cloud for example. HOWEVER since we have 'normal' looking swords with most of them being proportional as the majority I'm going to say that a cloud sword is just sort of ridiculous as a notion. Hell even I find Raubahn's swords to be too big and heavy to be using effectively with one in each hand. But regardless, using a sword as a shield just seems ridiculous even for FF. Plus it sounds like a good way to get your sword broken and/or shattered since it's not designed to take those kinds of impacts (small high velocity shots) on the flat. Not to mention that it's heavy and unwieldy! There's a video of a guy who made a replica of Cloud's Buster Sword and then had some body builder try to swing it around and he just couldn't do it, it weight like 50-60 pounds (a normal greatsword weighs probably 4-5). Finally, with such a large weapon your range of strikes is rather limited to downwards chops and horizontal cuts. You might get a thrust in but remember, it's not a spear. A one handed sword just has a lot more flexibility, range of motion, penetrating power if you half-sword especially, and would be faster. I know it's Final Fantasy but I just dislike the anime greatsword trope e.e

Interesting historical side-note since the American Revolutionary war is brought up often: The actual total number of Americans that fought for independence never totaled more than three percent of the colonials. I guess the lesson there is apparently a small but dedicated group can do some crazy things. That or a small number of people can spoil the party for everyone. :dodgy:

All things being subjective and whatnot, I think most people have similar standards when it comes to 'great RP'. Enjoyment seems to be paramount which, honestly, should be the case. There seems to be a good emphasis on quality and the majority seem to value lore adherence (with a comfortable level of 'interpretation' etc. Seems legit. With so many people having vastly similar interpretations of what makes RP 'great' then you'd think we would all get along better and so on. Though I think by and large most people do get along or at least can be cordial as the need arises. For me, though, I think I agree with the majority opinion(s) about enjoyment, lore adherence, and so on. On the topic of Lore, I have a pretty hard and fast rule when it comes to lore: "Presentation is 90% of credibility". I used to be very finicky about post length where I really wished to be matched as it felt like a lack of effort on the other person's part to not do so. As my geriatric condition has advanced over time, though, I find that it's just as easy to 'scale back' my own post length to match those that I am RP'ing with to keep things fluid and comfy, etc. As for preference of RP types? I prefer action above all with some intrigue underlying that all. Writing combat is probably my favorite thing to do and it's usually always a challenge to paint those scenes with accuracy and in a way that people can visualize and still have fun with, etc. It's also, ironically, the kind of RP I get the least of LOL. I still have fun, though. Character development is also a must. There must be development; if my character begins to stagnate I'm liable to cut that thread of RP loose quickly or do something to fix it drastically, not GRRM drastic but still drastic. Though I should specify that it's not just 'my own character' that I like development on, alone. Their development with other characters and in their relationships is also key. I don't think I could get behind RP'ing a Norm character from Cheers, for example. That's all I really have, for now, though. Everyone else seems to be more or less on the same page which is pretty cool. With everyone having such similar ideals for good RP that we'll all be in good shape for the future. =)

That might be because of the whole "Empire" thing, in regards to the example of the British. I'm not sure, though. I do know that other places that you might consider "free ports" like Tortuga were literal melting pots where, even though racism was obviously a thing, it wasn't likely going to get anyone killed on principle; rather with all those pirates it's more likely that they'd kill you for your money or for touching their favorite prostitute or even because you looked at someone funny. Pretty crazy!

It's a good thing I don't disagree with you. You're still not making any reasonable points in relation to the actual conversation, though. To rephrase my point (on a smaller post because lolmobilepostingsucks), why are you very against the notion that much, if not nearly all, of Ishgard has considerable amounts of prejudice and could likely be considered a largely racist state? Of course allowing for individuals who aren't. While we might not have a statement outright saying 'we're totes the most racist, guys,' I honestly believe the evidence is stacked for this. Ul'dah is racist. Gridania is racist. Limsa Lominsa is... pirate-racist? Also probably actual racist but I haven't paid much attention to their quests. Eorzea is just a very prejudiced and judgmental place in general. Ishgard not being racist actually makes less sense in the context of the world. I actually agree with you on that. I never stated that there was zero racism in Eorzea/Ishgard. Just that the evidence of an systematic culture of racism wasn't extant. That's all, promise. @Kage, anecdotal evidence of half-breeds being treated 'differently' in Eorzea 'at large' is only evidence of a culture of discrimination towards half breeds. It isn't evidence that 'Ishgard singularly is a systematic culture of racism', which was the point made by another poster that I was refuting. In the interest to returning to the topic at hand, if it's even possible as the thread has quite soundly been derailed, I'd like to ask how people's experiences with IC race and culture differences have been experienced and how you might deal with any future occurrences of IC discrimination of any kind be it race, religion, sexuality, and otherwise. I.e. is your character the type to shrug it off and go their own way, do they become violent, or do they deal with it in another fashion altogether?

It's a good thing I don't disagree with you. You're still not making any reasonable points in relation to the actual conversation, though. Wait, I'm confused now... just what are you arguing then? That there is no racism in Ishgard, right? Or that... we can't assume there is because there's no proof, or whatever? I feel like you are backtracking somewhere... He's arguing that everyone is wrong and I guess that's it? End of discussion? Just the people that are wrong, actually. But please, do continue to keep on dog piling. It doesn't make me wrong, in fact it only serves to prove that the bandwagon fallacy I expressed concern about is all that more relevant.

It's a good thing I don't disagree with you. You're still not making any reasonable points in relation to the actual conversation, though. Wait, I'm confused now... just what are you arguing then? That there is no racism in Ishgard, right? Or that... we can't assume there is because there's no proof, or whatever? I feel like you are backtracking somewhere... You'd be incorrect. The assertion was made that "There is a systematic culture of racism in Ishgard". There is no evidence for this. If it was posed as "there's probably some racism in Ishgard" then obviously I'd have no ground to stand on.

And why, exactly do we need to categorically prove conjecture that is being made purely as an interesting "maybe" that someone wants to play off of for their own personal RP? It wasn't posited as "maybe". That's why it needs to be categorically proven. If it was just posited as 'maybe' we wouldn't be here, would we? Spoiler: no we wouldn't. I'd just be stating that since there's no evidence of it, my personal opinion is that I wouldn't be recognizing it within the bounds of my RP as it relates to my character. Which doesn't prohibit anyone else from doing so or me from interacting with them, obviously.

It's a good thing I don't disagree with you. You're still not making any reasonable points in relation to the actual conversation, though.

We just finished with this discussion, I think, wherein it was established that correlation != causation. 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? /sigh. Go reread the posts. No where have I stated that there is no racism. Apparently my implication of 'largely racist' didn't get through. Now that I've clarified, mind actually answering? I have answered, you still haven't read anything I've written before this, though. I'm not. Again.

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. Man, I feel like we should have just... gone with the idea that all of Eorzea is really prejudiced against each other for one reason or another or something. <_<:a On a slightly random note - I love that Eorzea's a pretty prejudiced lot. As horrible as it is in the real world when it happens, it can make for fascinating conflicts and stories in a fantasy setting. I rolled up a Duskwight alt BECAUSE i was fascinated by how much horrible shit they go through in Gridania (which is super well documented and I can point to folks who could write books on how poorly they get treated.) The key to any great story is conflict - and I liked exploring that conflict with the Duskwight. Tiergan and Lurial both have had to struggle with discrimination as well (ignoring the whole Ala Mhigan bit just so we don't go down that rabbit hole again) - because Lurial started off a penniless street child in a city where Coin = Status and Tiergan was pretty much the same but in a very different manner. Furious Storm was a Hellsguard Roegadyn in Limsa Lominsa with no sealegs for a bit, so I'm sure you can only imagine how well that went for him until he traveled to Ul'dah where Hellsguard were a lot more common place. This stuff makes for some really interesting stories. I'm not sure if the resistance to the idea that Ishgard might be racist comes at the heels of fear that somehow the city is less 'cool' if it's racist. I actually think that makes it twice as interesting because if they ARE super racist and xenophobic - that means Heavensward is going to be rife with plenty of juicy conflict for our characters to run into in the MSQ and for us as roleplayers to play with as storytellers. YMMV, I suppose - but I think it's awesome that there's so much simmering strife beneath the surface for racial, social, and religious reasons for us to write tales about. I agree. =)

Fact? Fact?. 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?" "Whats the proof?" you've missed the entire point, and utterly obscured what should have been interesting in this entire conversation. Nothing at this stage is provable (except perhaps by those with inside knowledge of Heavenward development) because no evidence is yet available. Your "point", as it were, is nothing but meaningless tautology combined with high-handed rhetoric and a poisonous way of delivering it. Calm down. Also apologies for the reply. I edited because it did come off as condescending which wasn't my intent. You're incorrect, still, though. You have consistently claimed directly "There is systematic racism in Ishgard". Please deny this. My point has been to stand between you and making fallacious assertions. You're engaging in projection at this point and I'm unsure why; because I disagreed with you, perhaps? I don't appreciate your use of the word 'poisonous' here. It's almost as ridiculous as tumbr's utterance of the word 'toxic' when someone disagrees with the many false assertions there, too. If disagreeing with you in a logical and provable manner is all it takes for you to whip out insults then I think we're done talking in this thread. Hopefully this ire will pass, though.

This is literally the last time I will say this to you: Please provide evidence that what you are saying pertains to Ishgard directly being a racist state. If you cannot do this then please stop persisting in repeating it.

A+ here. Also your pun game is frosty. cwidt?

We just finished with this discussion, I think, wherein it was established that correlation != causation. 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? /sigh. Go reread the posts. No where have I stated that there is no racism.

We just finished with this discussion, I think, wherein it was established that correlation != causation. 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. It's a good thing for you I wouldn't take that bet, anyway. I can make my own money just like I can make my own arguments.

We just finished with this discussion, I think, wherein it was established that correlation != causation. 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) Which you've deliberately seemed to fail to grasp is not relevant to the discussion.

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. 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.

We just finished with this discussion, I think, wherein it was established that correlation != causation. So may I screencap and post this for when it doesn't happen?