Oli!

Still here, still doing the thing!

Plenty of Stormblood roleplay rolling, with plenty more to come!

Still here! Gearing up for some new things quite soon.

How have you gone this long without knowing about the best part of the boards?

I'm going to sidestep 99% of this conversation and present an untouched and often overlooked way of getting roleplay and breaking the Clique Lockout. Making a Linkshell with a reasonably unique RP hook that addresses something you want to do! If you make a network with the promise of engagement of a specific / interesting facet of the world, provide people with a reasonably easy way into it, and regularly deliver on the network's stated promises and content, you will have all the RP you could ever want (and probably more). Alternatively, you could always join one of these networks, because there are many. Adventuring, training, crafting, Voidsent-slaying, yeah, lots. One or the other will likely work for you, I'm nearly certain of such. Something something "if you build it, they will come."

Keeping an eye out! Also, remember to take a look at the Discord link! If we have trouble finding you, that's a great way to ping someone to get you added.

Things are ticking, and plots are rolling! Check out what's been happening in the Plots tab!

Invites are going around! We started off our first big set of plots today! Murder, secret letters, potential Mhigan betrayal, GOOD STUFF. We also have a discord now! Please do not abuse the link.

Oliwat believes he's a nice guy with decent opinions.

I mentioned your intent at the bottom of my post. It is possible to recognize both intent and diction, and the way that one may not serve the other readily. Please note that argumentation is not synonymous with aggression. I never said that I was implicated in them. I will nonetheless argue this points because I do not find them to be rational or conductive, and will therefore point out the damage that they do in hopes that you may think differently when it comes to dealing with the other side of the debate. I have engaged the other side on this topic as well (and have even done so about a page back). Lore is not subjective. If lore says the sky is blue, then the sky is blue. The only way that this becomes subjective is if one delves incredibly far into skeptical philosophy, at which point any sort of definition becomes meaningless in the first place. Lore can be ambiguous, at which point it becomes interpretative, but the words that are present on a page still have objective meaning. Some lore, meanwhile, is not within the realm of an "unreliable narrator" at all. We have things that have been told to us by the developers, whether through talking to us, or through what happens during the game itself; these things are called Word of God, and stand as they are until changed or retconned later on down the road. We are all aware of the premise. It is impossible not to be aware of the premise through the act of doing the activity, unless one's perception of their actions is extremely lacking, and I highly doubt that anyone on this board is that unaware. Not everyone has a personal stake in this matter; my stake, for instance, is mostly academic. Cross-examination is not necessarily a bad thing on its own; there are those that use it for improper purposes, of course, but to disregard the entire idea of cross-examination as something negative is improper. I acknowledged it in my post. I merely pointed out that it can, and has, been pointed in the opposite direction, even within this very thread. This unfortunately does not change the generalized statement in which one side of the debate is implicated for the poor view that the greater community has of this website. As I said at the bottom of my prior post, I don't think that your attempt was very successful in communicating this thought. Who in this thread on the opposite side of the argument have you asked in regards to their opinions on lore compliance, and what about them makes you sure that they are taking roleplay "too seriously"? As for whether or not I think that building a bridge is possible, I do not think it is. I have stated such before; both opinions are diametrically opposed, and arguments in this vein have been going on for literal years.

Literally false In the one true version of the movie he is definitely a Replicant I love Harrison Ford with all my heart but he is freakin' wrong on this one

That's an extremely flimsy connection, not gonna lie. Not saying it's wrong, because anything can be right in the realm of things we don't know, but I wouldn't consider a shared title to be befitting of the position of "major evidence." At best, it's supplementary.

Here we have our main point of evidence that the Au Ra are not only draconian but are in fact direct decedents of Bahamut and Tiamat, based on the matching titles/genders. It is also not a stretch to think that when Azim and Nhaama “returned to the heavens,” they were in fact dragons that flew off into the sky. There are, however, still a number of issues with this theory that need to be cleared up. Your main point of evidence doesn't make sense to me. This is the story of how Bahamut became a primal, there's no connection to the rest of the argument here.

Only some people here are saying they won't acknowledge it. Some of us haven't offered any personal takes on this at all. This is a projection of an opinion onto people under the assumption that they should have it because they enjoy lore compliance, which is inaccurate. All that some people wish of others in this thread is the acknowledgement of the fact that Inferrence does not equal Lore, which is another recurring train of thought in this thread. Lore Compliance is not a perception. It is a sliding scale of objective relevancy that is decided upon by how many times one's character concept falls outside of defined lore guidelines, as well as how important said guidelines are compared to others. The only subjective portions of it are how many times a character must break the lore in order to lose compliant status, and how important the broken lore is. If your character breaks the lore less times than mine does, you may objectively state that your character is more compliant than mine, plain and simple. "We're all writing fanon" and "your character's existence is a lore-break" are meaningless statements and arguments, because they are a required premise in order for any arguments on compliance to take place. It does not follow to turn a premise against an argument that requires it, especially when both arguments do. It does not make a difference within the context of the debate, because it is a starting point without any alternative. As for "peer pressure," you are once again assuming that pressuring is appearing in this thread just because it happens in other places. I could just as easily say that going outside of the lore brings with it a communal pressure to get anyone to accept anything, because that sort of mentality appears often among people with this mindset. Honestly, this whole paragraph is madlib-able. This is another projection. No one even brought this up until you did. This assumes the worst about people that do not follow your own mindset. Alternatively, what's causing a perceived hostile environment is the blaming of one portion of a community for all of said community's problems, regardless of what that portion is. Another projection. People are not necessarily taking roleplay "seriously" by being lore compliant and asking for lore compliance. Many people that are lore compliant spend their time pissing around and playing comedic relief characters. This entire post has been filled with random assumptions of people whose mindset you haven't even asked about or gathered enough information on to even make these assumptions. It is entirely possible to see "an opportunity, rather than a wall" when it comes to working within lore guidelines. I could even make the argument that this passage implies a believed lack of creativity among people who enjoy compliance, and that it, again, implies that said people are not welcoming or open minded, or even care about whether or not the other person writes well. I honestly don't think your words are doing a good job of building the bridge between people you're advocating for, here.

This is an ongoing issue with this discussion. There is a repeating thread of mentality that says that people that follow the lore very tightly are not "welcoming," are not "flexible," live to "tear others down," or do not have "fun." Why must this be brought up almost every single time someone says that something is not definite, and is instead a player interpretation, regardless of whether or not they actually state what their level of lore compliancy actually is?

Again, we have no idea who they're supposedly teaching, as myself and like two other people have pointed out. Are they teaching themselves? The 1.0 and 2.0 WHMs? Or whomever they want? We have no way of knowing which is the right answer. SE is still keeping us in the dark, and we have no way of knowing the right answer to this question.

We'll keep an eye out for you! If there's a time when you're usually on, knowing that would be super helpful!

I disagree with this on the premise that there are certain kinds of plots / storylines that make more sense if one is capable of being one of those jobs. One example would be going out into the world to search for dangerous BLM artifacts in the pursuit of knowledge as a fireball-slinging Indiana Jones. Could you do that as a THM? Probably, but there's not much point if you can't actually use those things without exploding.

WHERE'S MY CLOUDBIKE SQUEENIX WHERE IS IT

This is still crazy vague and unclear. The "chosen few" could refer to either normal people or the Padjal, and who are they instructing? Each other? The 1.0 and 2.0 WHMs? Anybody they want? I seriously don't understand what SE's aversion to clarity is all about.

There is absolutely nothing present to suggest that the only way that these things would become new to the world is through adventurer circles. Considering the reputation that Black Magic has (that is, the reputation of something dangerous and highly illegal that can get you arrested if practiced), I am inclined to think that this statement is in fact entirely wrong when it comes to certain jobs. This is not a logically consistent statement, because what is being asked is for SE to confirm a positive (that is, make an additive statement) about their lore (as opposed to a subtracting statement, which would limit options). This not a situation in which additive lore would be "damaging" to the lore and roleplay (which is honestly a vague idea which, without any clarification, doesn't really have much weight in this context anyway). Solid confirmation can be anything from them just coming out and saying, "oh yeah, tons of adventurers are Job now, by the way," to something less direct like stumbling across a Secret Black Mage Cabal of untold numbers, all the members of which of which have soul crystals or something. This is the opening of avenues, not the closing of them. It automatically provides more options by its very nature, instead of somehow limiting them. You have given a single confirming method which suited your point, when there are in fact many others that do not fall in line with it at all. Refer to my above dissection. Even if it became the only way to become a BLM it's still better than what we get from the lore at present: "there may or may not be only one soul crystal, and if you don't have it / one, you explode." And that's without getting into WHM. Even if there were only one option to becoming a WHM, it's still better than the implications of what the game itself gives us presently, which seems to be no way at all. Again, see above. The idea of confirmation being "limiting" is even disproved by this very passage, and your opinion on the way that BRD and WAR are presented. With this section, you have more or less disagreed with everything that you have offered above.

We've been over this current topic elsewhere. It also has less to do with RPing as a Dragoon Knight of Ishgard than it does with RPing as the job itself.

Jeez, it's the Pip-Boy Edition all over again.

The issue is that there is no objective statement of this. The book as it is now provides information which does not offer any statements as to the rarity or accessibility of most of the more exclusive lines of jobs. We have solid confirmation of BRD and WAR, which is absolutely fantastic. Many of the others already have solid confirmations in-game. But we don't have anything about the others. The only information we are objectively given about WHM and BLM in this passage, for instance, is "people know about them now and they also use soul stones." Nothing on practice, nothing on widespread reclamation, nothing on whether or not the Elementals and Padjal are going to kick your ass for defying their wishes. From an objective standpoint, this gives us nothing new. And it's a shame, because I was expecting more from SE as far as this topic goes. It gives us something that we can make inferences on, sure, but those inferences are still only that. You even said yourself that players will have to write their way around things, same as before, and the fact that things are being "rediscovered" are self-evident through job plotlines anyway. We are given no new specifics. TL;DR, I want SE to hurry up and give me BLM back, and it still hasn't. This isn't definitive at all, and even though it presents a case for argument, it's still not clear and absolute, and certainly won't stop arguments.

To be honest, I don't think that this really introduces anything new. If anything, it just raises more questions, and will likely lead to more arguments. The wording is confusing, but the "New Disciplines" section doesn't really seem to refer to anything that's not MCH, which would imply that the only soul crystals being "made" are MCH ones, which we knew already. If they were making new crystals for Old Jobs (which doesn't seem to be the wording here), that would raise the question of who is making them, how, and how rare are they in the first place? We have mention of BRD and WAR, which I don't think all that many people objected to playing in the first place, and then a bit about Jobs using soul stones, which, again, was already known and rather obvious. Many Jobs are left unaccounted for, and the entire entry is exceedingly vague. The bit on how soul stones actually work is pretty neat, though. Maybe this clears up BLM, depending on interpretation and whether or not one believes the Gem to be the only soul crystal, which was an ongoing debate back when 3.0 still launched, and likely has not been resolved. WHM lore would still clash with this, given the class story. I honestly don't think this is the bombshell that people want it to be. If anything, it's more fuel for the fire. As for whether it will change the way I go about things? No. I've already been complacent enough to let people do Whatever, and I already play Job characters anyway. A MNK and a (retconned until further clarification as of 3.0) BLM are my primary characters.