Thread Closed
(10-22-2016, 01:34 PM)Hyrist Wrote: But the real argument being made here is that you accept others who are playing a method you do not. Take a moment to suspend disbelief when the retired Isghardian Knight Dragoon walks in the bar and hear their tale to see if it's written well enough to make a believable story premise, before writing them off as a lorebender and deciding not to play with them.
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.
Hyrist Wrote:'Being lore compliant' is a perception. We're all writing fanfiction. The fact that our characters exists at all, no matter what the premise, can be put into question. Making your character as close to what is known of the lore is possible can be fun, and I don't deny that. But it can and often does fall into the cycle of peers pressuring one another to fit within their individual perceptions of the lore -( even if their basis of that lore comes with innate flaws and contradictions.) It's at that point that I disagree. It's just not in me to try to justify if a character's perception exists one way or another. I want to see if it's well written.
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.
(10-22-2016, 01:34 PM)Hyrist Wrote: Even saying something as 'lore compliant' indicates that somehow your character is more valid that someone who falls within the margins of the written lore, or contrasts a claim made by an NPC character in the game somewhere that's being taken as fact by a circle of players.
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.
(10-22-2016, 01:34 PM)Hyrist Wrote: It's that level of microagression and the constant cross examining by certain other players that's causing what is being perceived as a hostile environment by those outside the regulars here looking in. Something that would bear dispelling, in my opinion, as there are really good people here.
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.
(10-22-2016, 01:34 PM)Hyrist Wrote: All I've asked of people is to not take role-playing so seriously. If you're having fun scouring through the lore and writing off sections of it where you feel is forbidden for you to play, do so. What I'm asking of the wider community is to be welcoming of other perspectives when someone sees the same segment of the lore and sees an opportunity, rather than a wall.
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.