Oli!

You have sparked the beginning of a monaulith to Pun-Kind.

Technaulogy has granted us the ignore list for this very purpose, it's true. Bad puns are still criminaul though.

So what you're saying is, it's Nault Nault? No, I think what he's saying is it's Nault clever.

Updated Jana's job. I take it you want to bring your Monk, but I'll need her full name to do so. Right, I forgot. Adalhaid Rask is the character I'll be bringing.

Jana is a Cool Person for doing the good thing.

I don't have an FC, but there's any help that you need (outreach, organization, brainstorming, H Y P E M A N), I'd be more than willing to help people get houses.

Christ, seriously. It's like a poll would have killed them. Isn't it theoretically possible to like every post on the page anyway?

This sounds like a beginning; tell me more about this angle for your character. We're gonna workshop the hell outta this.

Not really a fan of any of them. TIME TO GRUMP. I guess the wavy-looking lalafell one at the top of the Male section was okay though. The last one in the Females section has some pretty art too, even if I don't like the hairstyle.

Personalities are malleable based on experience. People from certain places act in certain ways because that's the most common experience that that place provides. However, anything that can happen within a range of possibility also has the ability to affect a character accordingly. Think about what sort of character you want, first and foremost. Then think, "okay, now that I have them, and I know that they're from place, how can reasonable happenings in place mold them into the person that I have created?" Common experiences may create threads that tie people together, but they don't carbon-copy them.

Xenophobia does not preclude socialization, integration, or immigration. It is simply a general term to describe the negative attitude one holds toward the "other". Logically, this attitude can be overcome by the "other", in whole or in part, by assimilating into the xenophobic entity. Perhaps I was not clear in earlier examples: Ishgardians deeply resent "adventurers" and sellswords. If you present an Ishgardian with an outsider who just wants to do some work for some pay before moving on, and an outsider who deeply reveres the wisdom and power of Halone the Fury and who wishes to be a part of the great nation She created, the reaction to each shall likely be different. The Garlean Lucia is one example of this. You're also never made a knight or recognized as a servant of Ishgard. The WoL is consistently recognized as an outsider assisting the nation. From post #80 That last quote still seems to be an assumption. "Our knights," whose knights? House Knights? Temple Knights? Aetheryte Protection Knights (are they they're own thing? Do we know if they were or weren't their own force? This thought just occurred to me and I'm not sure)? It seems a little vague to definitively point. Lucia was not known to be a Garlean when she arrived. In fact, the only person that knows that is the Warrior of Light and Aymeric, who kept her under him as a personal decision. Seeing as he is also demonstrated to be progressive, this paints itself as the rarest of rare scenarios, as do most things within the MSQ. It's also worth noting that she merely looks like a tall hyur, and likely would not have raised any eyebrows if she were merely seen out on the street. It seems we agree regarding the WoL's place in Ishgard. Despite all you do for them, including basically saving their entire nation, you're never really given any rights other than the right to exist within the city. That's a pretty high bar to set. Where does the line between Adventurers and Working Wanderers stand? Is this a hard and fast rule? Would a Working Wanderer with no knowledge or respect for Halone be given work? What about an Adventurer or sell-sword that's completely pious? At this point, I'm really just trying to show that neither side is definite, and we can assume in circles forever. That's really all that's left to do, since we're missing vast swaths of information. As far as I can rationalize, my conclusion is this: Impossible? Never. I didn't even think that form the start. Provable as definitively true or false, given what we have? Not at all. Are there roadblocks? Absolutely, there are roadblocks to almost any concept. Are they solid, impenetrable blocks? Not at all. But I'm repeating myself at this point, so I guess I'll phone it in here.

If they go as a summoner, I'd like the Monk spot!

I'm a simple scrub so I'm gonna be lame and go with a city theme. Limsa's is pretty.

Fresh blood??? pHU6K47qgc8 Hello hi, try not to die (you'll be fine)

ADA GOES WHERE SAGA GOES I SEE YOU YOU CAN'T ESCAPE (she's a Monk, please add her to damage) Wait nevermind we have a monk already and I'm too slow.

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. We have nothing that states fact in either direction, hence this argument. We could in fact view the point you made in its opposite light, because of a lack of evidence. If Ishgard is reluctant to rely on outside help for anything, why allow someone to become a subject, and then a knight, in the first place? We wind up with a paradox; Ishgard is Xenophobic, so they won't simply grant citizenship for nothing. If they're self-reliant, would they accept someone's offer to do work for them? If not, then what? Interestingly, our arguments intertwine here. Unless people can become citizens for nothing (which isn't very xenophobic), then Ishgard must accept help with certain things. Where would this lead us? If it leads us to Knights, it also leads us to hires. If we were to pull the Main Story Quest into this (which is supposed to be a rare occurrence in the first place), it's worth noting that despite all the good you do for the nation, you're never given citizenship. Only a permit to be there. As for the first bit, I haven't come across that specific wording; do you know where it was so I can look for it? That doesn't mean I don't trust it, I just want to see.

I'd say it's What It Looks Like. We can shoot magic bullets out of guns. Roiding up your arrows with magic or using pure magic arrows doesn't seem all that out of place. There's no evidence for it or against it. Go for gold, I'd say.

This gal's got it, really. The short and sweet of it is that certain characters just don't fare well in public settings. Not because they're bad characters or anything like that, just that, at least from the outside looking in, the amount of time spent getting invested in that sort of character doesn't seem to be worth the return. Sometimes this might be because other people don't want to spend their time being put down, and sometimes it might just be that anti-social or otherwise impolite characters are hard to hold a long conversation with; both tend to get to a point where it's easier to just call off the encounter before things get even more awkward. Either that, or one side has to put forth all the things to talk about, and eventually, they're going to run dry. One-sided conversations, both in Roleplay and in Real Life, tend not go on for very long. Especially since we humans are very good at picking up social cues; this includes cues that we're not wanted around at the moment. No one is saying that you have to change your character in order to be accepted, just that opening them up a little more, even if it's only for the sake of interaction, might net you a little more. From the character you described, it might not even be all that hard. "Hi, I'm a knight of Ishgard here for diplomacy. Tell me about your people," might be all you ever need, and changing the character might not even be necessary at all.

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!

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. -- 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.

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.

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. -- -- 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 did 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 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 and 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 not to hire outsiders? 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 belong 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 anyone 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 other concepts. 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

Even this is speculation, however, that's the thing. Without knowing, anything 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.

Neither does Ul'dah or Limsa. Brass Blades are not military, they are privatized guards in the employ of wealthy nobles. Likewise, the Knights of the Barracuda were part of a specific order/crew of pirates/privateers under the direct command of the Admiral of Limsa. Every other state save for Gridania and Ala Mhigo were as decentralized as Ishgard, if not moreso. The Brass Blades are privately funded, but they are still the major entity with policing functions, making them distinct and solidified in function, unlike the scattered nature of the House Knights. Anywhere in Ul'dah or Thanalan you look that needs a guard and isn't a mine or a railway, you'll find a Brass Blade. Compare and Contrast the situation of the House Knights, which vary in allegiance based on the claim of the area. The Sultansworn are the Sultan / Sultana's guard force, while the Stone Torches are specifically guards for railways and mines overseen by the Mineral Concern (making them a much more specific and potentially privately-funded police force). The Immortal Flames is a Grand Company, and seemingly partakes only in things that require more manpower. The House Knights, meanwhile, are fragmented into at least four parts for each High House, and potentially more depending on how minor houses work (I'm not versed in that area). Discounting the Sultansworn (which are analogous to the secret service), we are left with 3 law-handling factions in Ul'dah: The Brass Blades, the Stone Torches, and the Immortal Flames. Even if we count the Sultansworn, we are still left with 4 factions to Ishgard's minimum of 5; Knights for each High House, and the Temple Knights to boot. I would go on to argue that the Stone Torches wouldn't count either, because whereas the Blades are a private force that polices public property (or at the very least, property that is not strictly owned by their financiers) the Stone Torches patrol private property entirely. For Limsa Lominsa, the Knights of the Barracuda, the Yellowjackets, and the Maelstrom brings us to three, unless I'm forgetting something. "Unofficial Pirate Sanctions" might make things a bit messy, but that refers more to the freedom of the open sea, and not the city and its surrounding areas. So I would still say that Ishgard is the most decentralized nation in terms of lawgiving. Either way, we are still left with the idea that these are Knights hired by Houses that are staking these claims, which could potentially be anyone that they wish to hire.

As an interesting aside, Google found me this guy. He's also a gatewarden in Coerthas.