Creating a Dragoon...

[Unnamed Mercenary]

Wow...I wake up to all these pages. :dazed:  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]

Wow...I wake up to all these pages. :dazed:  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!]

-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]

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".

 

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".  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]

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:

 

 

-I personally view "knights" to be a step below "Temple Knights". Could just be a headcanon-y thing however. Mar is often said to be a 'Temple Knight' by others and has, among non-Ishgardians at least, given up correcting it. But if anyone has any lore on the difference or even how one gets promoted to Temple Knight, let me know! I'd like to have that be a thing, eventually.

 

-I actually wasn't a fan of Miqo'te dragoons initially, even the lancer I'd rolled way back when was going to JUST be a guy who used a spear/staff and that's it. However, I RP'd with V'aleera and stalked her wiki afterwards and that actually changed my mind on the matter. I could go on about the player (yay V'al!) but I definitely am on the side of sell me your character along with live and let live. If the story's good and plausible, hey sign me up. My mind is changeable with enough fun story stuff involved.

 

[V'aleera]

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!]

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.

 

 

I'm not actually sure where the idea of other races being there for a thousand years comes from; part of the reason why the peace between elezen and dragon was so profound was because of how protective the Dravanian Horde was of their territory. And it was more than just peace, too; they built a city up there.

 

 

-- 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]

I guess my question at this point becomes, how so?

 

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!]

I guess my question at this point becomes, how so?

 

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]

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.

[Oli!]

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.

 

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.

[V'aleera]

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?

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.

 

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.

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.

 

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

It seems we have been assigned the area near Camp Riversmeet, Sounsyy. Lest you are unaware, the camp was one of many our knights were forced to abandon when we withdrew from the Coerthas western highlands—one of many sacrifices made in the wake of the Calamity.

From post #80

[Oli!]

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?

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.

 

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.

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.

 

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

It seems we have been assigned the area near Camp Riversmeet, Sounsyy. Lest you are unaware, the camp was one of many our knights were forced to abandon when we withdrew from the Coerthas western highlands—one of many sacrifices made in the wake of the Calamity.

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.

[V'aleera]

That last quote still seems to be an assumption. "Our knights," whose knights?

 

The speaker is Artoirel, and given that the context is his giving a summary to the WoL about the history of the Western Highlands he is likely referring to Ishgardian knights in general.

 

Lucia was not known to be a Garlean when she arrived.

So you concede that Ishgard has an established history of allowing outsiders a path to citizenship? Even if they believed she was just a Hyur, she was not born in Ishgard.

 

 

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?

Ishgardians, particularly those in Coerthas, demonstrate an extreme distaste for adventurers meddling in Ishgardian affairs. How an adventurer may get into their better graces is subjective, but adherence to the Ishgardian belief system is likely one such avenue, as they use the term "unbeliever" to refer to outsiders as well.

 

 

At this point, I'm really just trying to show that neither side is definite.

We don't know anything and we never will. Something something David Hume something something billiards.

 

This doesn't change the fact that there are several compelling reasons to believe those gatewardens are Ishgardian, and no compelling reasons not to.

[Zelmanov]

Oh, in terms of last names: 

 

This really depends on what you wish your origin to be.  Elezen are known for their HUGE emphasis on family lineage and heritage, if you have a traceable family, take a lore accurate last name.

 

Same with Hyur, you have an established family line (not necessarily noble) take a lore accurate last name (try to avoid doman last names, IE anything japanese.)

 

HOWEVER, if you wish to be an orphan of unknown origin.(instantly puts you in the baseborn category), your last name can be more of a title than anything.

 

Estinien, Azure Dragoon, is an orphan of Ferndale and for either reasons of him not knowing his parents or choosing to shirk his heritage entirely, he is now known as Estinien Wyrmblood (Edgy, to the max) 

 

My ASSUMPTION is that since that last name is not at all honh honh honh frenchy french name, it is a title/nom de guerre/moniker born from being the Azure Dragoon and not indeed his last name

 

This is MUCH in the same fashion as others such as Joye of the 9 faces in the MCH class or Haurchefant of the Silver Fuller (since he is a bastard son)

 

This is not at all uncommon and falls in line with classic Medieval naming conventions, last names as we know them are VERY VERY recent. Only go 500 years back and you have Leonardo da Vinci, his last name isn't Da Vinci, that's where he is from. He is "That specific Leonardo that comes from Vinci, don't confuse him with Leonardo da Firenze or Leonardo da Venezia). There is a reason why Aragorn introduces himself as Aragorn son of Arathorn. 

 

Last names really only belonged to nobility and when last names became mandatory for the sake of government, most took on the name of their occupation or lineage, which is why we have last names like Baker, Smith, Johnson and also why we can have many people named smith and not be related at all until far enough back.

 

 

So last names in Ishgard can be pretty free form, especially for baseborn/orphans. Just stay away from the big names, such as the noble houses.

 

We do NOT know the last names of any of the previous Azure Dragoons, or notable dragoons, except for maybe possibly Kain Highwind, who is only a dragoon of legend (may not exist) and the minion makes no mention of Highwind being his last name (it is just assumed because well, its freaking Kain Highwind)