Lore Bending vs. Lore Breaking

[Vas]

I'm not too sure where to draw the line on this. How much support in the lore is needed for something to be lore bendy as opposed to breaky?

[Parth Makeo]

That really is on a case by case basis. I know there are plenty of people who would think one thing is bending or breaking lore when it is perfectly possible.

Lore Bending is like taking something established and implementing something not TOO insane but still kind of on the tip (Broadsword Paladin)
Lore Breaking is literally as it implies...you are breaking the Lore's rule or flow to make something happen. Like... Voidsent who does not need Aether when the whole point of a Voidsent is that they feed off of aether and cause issues for the world itself.

but someone around here might know more about it. What would be the thing you are inquiring about if i might ask about this topic?

[Unnamed Mercenary]

It'd honestly be a case by case basis, so much as to say what one group would call bending, another may call breaking, and another may think is perfectly find. There's no firm consensus on a lot of heavily debated topics.

 

The game's lore, however much is shrouded in mystery and purposeful misinformation, is pretty consistent. if there's an idea you're considering, I'd take it over to the Character Workshop forum and we can see if there are things to work with. Or if you're looking for clarification on a topic, Lore Discussion's a good place to start. Do note that many threads that had quoted material are a little...lacking in nice formatting after our forum conversion February 2018. The "classic" site is still up at this time on https://ffxiv-roleplayerscom/mybb/ and provides a good resource for older threads with lots of quotes.

 

 

But Franz is a good example of lore bending (and a lot of it) kinda becoming lore-backed. Ideas I had on how primals worked and how the Echo worked were mostly confirmed in later patches. (Like 2.4, and a LOT in 3.0/4.0).  So just because something seems a little far-fetched, I'd encourage more to see how things currently work, and then make observations and go from there. And who knows, it might actually be the case later on!

[Vas]

Well, what got me thinking about it was creative uses of aether. I've been interacting with a DRK who uses aether in ways I don't believe are justified by the lore. This has included being able to hear aether, and shape it into functional appendages that serve support roles when faced with issues that otherwise would involve teamwork or risk. It's such a frequent occurrence I'm debating how to address it with them, because in function, it seems that they have a solution to every problem, often at the expense of allowing other members their time to shine.

[Unnamed Mercenary]

Aether can be sensed, but that's typically something that is either a very trained ability, or an innate sense. In either of those cases, it's not something a common person could do, but then, you're likely not RPing with a common person. (And many RPers themselves, tend not to be common people, even if they don't fit the Adventurer label.) As far as I know, aether does not become a physical manifestation outside of summons or primals. And those typically have somewhat of a mind of their own.

 

But lore-things aside, this seems like more of an issue of someone powergaming or being the dreaded Mary Sue character more than their specific actions. I would advise you have a talk with them about it, especially if it's becoming unfun or if they're constantly grabbing the spotlight and not sharing it. Those conversations are rarely enjoyable, which means you'll need to be assertive, but not accusative to the best of your ability.

 

In the best case, they may be simply unaware that their actions are putting a damper on RP. Or it could also just be a case of there being a mismatch in high<->low fantasy/power intensity between you, them, and others. This is fairly common, in my experiences, but not all players have similar views on the topic. A single hero in a group of civilians can do that, if this is the type of thing you're encountering. Worst case, you all come to an agreement that the DRK's character/RP style doesn't mesh well with others and you go your separate ways or tone down involvement with each other.

[Teadrinker]

It's never easy discussing powergaming with people and in my experience, which differs from Franz's, they take offense almost every single time. More often than not they know they're doing it but get super embarrassed about being called out, no matter how delicate you are, so they tend to flip that embarrassment it into anger at you. Clearly you're the one at fault and just squashing their character even if you're just trying to get them to tone it down a little so other characters actually have something to do.

 

The following is just the "My Opinion/Suggestions" train with no brakes.

I'm not sure of the context here but if this is your FC then establish standards and enforce them. Not everyone will like it and not everyone will be a fit, that's just the nature of the game and RP. If it's not your FC then it might be time to find one that is more in tune with your preferences. If this is just a plot you're running then hey...it's your plot. There is a caveat here, if you're in a generally lore abiding FC and want to run a FC campaign that is bending lore all over the place then don't do that. You're asking for trouble. Play that out with folk who are on board and don't push headcanons on people.

I've DM'd things and had to tell people no for various reasons including the one you've cited. Like your character is a magitek engineer, why is he trying to roll for knowledge on black magic, stop it. Or sometimes someone who's shined a bunch messages me something and I'll just say "Let's give X a chance to try and figure this one out." I also actively message the quieter people, especially when I drop a clue that is of their flavor and urge them to try and speak up. Sometimes people just need a friendly nudge to get over the shyness.

Personally, I'd be massively disinclined to acquiesce the specifics of what you described if only for the reason it turns a group plot into a solo campaign and that's just...the very definition of powergaming. As far as the opinion train goes, if a character gets gutted with a sword and suddenly sprouts an arm with an CNJ staff in it or something I'd...well first I'd probably stare at my screen for a few minutes. And then I'd politely tell them no and perhaps this campaign isn't for them cause we're not jiving on the same wavelength. 

Figure out what tastes work for you though and stick with it. Eventually, you'll find a group of people who are on the same page and these problems will generally cease to be. It does take time though.

 

 

[Kieron Lohengrin]

5 hours ago, Vas said:

Well, what got me thinking about it was creative uses of aether. I've been interacting with a DRK who uses aether in ways I don't believe are justified by the lore. This has included being able to hear aether, and shape it into functional appendages that serve support roles when faced with issues that otherwise would involve teamwork or risk. It's such a frequent occurrence I'm debating how to address it with them, because in function, it seems that they have a solution to every problem, often at the expense of allowing other members their time to shine.

 

Precedent exists for DRKs being able to manifest and shape aether into moving physical forms, even martially powerful ones. That's what happens in the level 60-70 jobquests.

 

That being said, this is simply a case of DM fiat. Trying to pull off that sort of fine aetheric control - specifically limbs with motor function - is far outside of the usual dark knight remit of antimagic shielding like Dark Mind or shared barriers like The Blackest Night / Dark Force. Thus your DM could rule that doing so would leave the PC completely exhausted and unable to move afterward, for example.

 

On the other hand, classes like SCH / SMN would be well within their rights to have their fairies / egis try to pick something up and move it around as a support role - again with the DM ruling on what sort of weights they can manage. Fine aetheric motor control from class features that they practice regularly.

[Faye]

As everyone has said, it's subjective. For me, lore-bending is stuff we have not necessarily seen before in canon, but isn't impossible going off the limitations and examples we have been given even if it may be far-fetched. Lore-breaking is something that goes directly against established lore or has nothing at all in the lore hinting toward its possibility. Neither is inherently bad nor good, just depends on your preferences and is often a case-by-case basis of what exactly the person is trying to do with their character.

In the example you gave, though, I don't think the lore support is what matters. Someone shouldn't be stealing the spotlight all the time, whether it's with lore-supported abilities or not. Rather than telling the person they're breaking lore (something usually more touchy and that might involve them rewriting parts of their character should they choose to fix it, which could lend to some reluctance), I'd recommend asking them to step back and allow others' characters the chance to shine. That, or avoid RPing with them, or address it with your FC leader/DM/etc. if you two are sharing some sort of group like that.

[Valence]

To my eyes either you break the lore, or you don't. Bending would imply touching or affecting it in any way or form without breaking it, and I have a hard time finding concrete examples of that.

 

- Hard lore breaking: directly contradicts lore facts. Going against what the lorebook states, that kind of things. Example: saying that the Knights Dragoon have more than hundred members. No, they don't, they have a dozen.

 

- Soft lore breaking: directly contradicts lore facts, but only goes against what one or several characters say ingame. Example: saying that a character or someone else came back from the dead fully, with their soul and everything. Many characters and the story itself tells you it's impossible, however, it's said by characters that can be flawed in their thinking, reasoning, etc, or just don't know a way to actually do it. KojiFox himself said that everything told by characters isn't always totally accurate, even if the way it's said makes it often pretty obvious that a character is mistaken (like on the classifications of creatures, countless hard lore examples here). Either way, it's like the first point: most of the time it will go against the lore. 

 

- Unreasonable terra incognita: building your own RP out of the bonds of lore, or what is described by lore. Technically, you don't break the lore until SE decides to expand on the same playground you are trying to cover. That's what happened for example with dragoon roleplayers with the arrival of the lorebook as the most blatant recent example. Same with a lot of Red Mage roleplayers that decided to start playing one before the actual release of Stormblood (as you can guess it ended up pretty badly for most of them in terms of lore compliance). What makes it unreasonable is often when you try to build your own lore besides the existing lore by creating "grand statements" or very impactful rules. Example: we now have clues and examples that are more or less baking up that fact in lore actually, but before SB some people played with aetherial runes and runology, and I don't believe this existed until now (briefly glimpsed in the RDM questline). Or inventing a whole new type of Magi. Another example: coming from Meracydia and starting to explain how life there is while we don't have much in lore to confirm or deny it. Someday, it'll come back and bite you in the ass, and even today you'll have to deal with other roleplayers that may not accept your vision of it.

 

Reasonable terra incognita: same as above except you're mostly doing your little sandbox in your own corner and it's kept very local as an oddity that could perfectly fit in the world of ff14 (and the world of ff14 is very, very tolerant of a lot of things). Example: making your own little tribe of xaela living in Eorzea with a whole made up culture of your own that you think believable enough.

 

Either way you either break the lore or build out of the lore (which is maybe what people call lore bending). In both cases, this might still make sense or be believable, depending on who you ask. But in both cases, it's not within the lore per se. In the latter case, building outside the lore can amount to a lot of risk taking vs the lore, or very little. 

Edited May 17, 2018 by Valence

[Sounsyy]

I think the distinction is that "Lore Bending" utilizes a reasonably acceptable grey area between something lore never directly contradicts but also never directly supports. What's considered reasonably acceptable may vary between group, DM, or person, but generally, by definition, should not be something that shatters someone else's immersion. Making up unique tribal traditions for your Seeker tribal sect or Keeper family might be an example of this. What is true for the one canon sect of the Marmot tribe might not be true for Marmot Miqo'te elsewhere.

 

"Lore breaking" objectively goes against something that is directly established in lore, or, more subjectively, can also include lore bending that has been taken to such extremes it becomes immersion breaking to whatever audience. Some groups and people are totally fine with lore breaking, some aren't. Usually the less lore-breaking your character/story, the greater public audience it'll appeal to. 

 

Regardless of whether a character or concept is lore abiding, lore bending, or lore breaking, if something isn't working in an RP or plot story, the participants or DM need to figure out a way to make it an enjoyable experience for everyone involved. A Black Mage, per lore, could pull a meteor from the heavens and destroy all the villains in one blow, but that's not fun for anyone else. Even if it was 100% lore approved, this DRK is obviously making the RP not fun and a solution needs to be established, probably by negotiating the power level of this character to something that better fits the scene. Not an easy conversation, but probably a necessary one.

[Nebbs]

On way to consider this, is if you can't find an answer, alter the problem.

 

You are looking for "lore evidence" to enable you to judge what is  Lore abiding, bending & breaking. Yet there is no absolute scale of Lore information (maybe there is or someone could make one).

 

Anyhow, we are here to Role Play not Lore Play. What I tend to do is consider if things fit in with the nature and intent of the lore and game, that they don't break fundamental "mechanics/physics" of the world and they don't introduce things that are at odds with the world. Please bear in mind with magic & science and surprises always popping up then that is still a broad canvas of creativity to paint on without upsetting the balance.

 

I find if you just play within the Lore it is an imperfect picture and can lock you in to stereotypes. 

 

Another aspect is that what the Lore of the world is not what most people will think and believe. So actual characters should have views that are different and even counter to the Lore in the world.

 

So, I suppose I am saying.. RP first, but don't antagonise the lore, learn to live with it.

 

 

[Valence]

I'm probably getting away from the OP but I do strongly believe that archetypes are what give characters depth and an immediate, understandable personality. One, creating a whole new archetype sounds a bit silly to me. Everything has been done here and there, and if it hasn't, then you're a genius I guess? Two, not having an archetype behind means inherently that your character is bland and two dimensional in my opinion, because this is exactly what makes a character not memorable.

 

Lore established stereotypes are usually the strongest archetypes set within the lore you could find. This is not to say that you can't find as potent, or that you have to stick to the exact minutiae of said archetype (or else everyone would be the same), though.

Edited May 18, 2018 by Valence

[ScarletSamurai]

Simply ask the group you're roleplaying with what they do and don't like in terms of lore-bending. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Gegenji]

8 minutes ago, ScarletSamurai said:

Simply ask the group you're roleplaying with what they do and don't like in terms of lore-bending. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

That's a pretty straightforward way to go about it, yes...

 

But if you don't know who you're going to be RPing with - such as being a new player on the scene - you might not know who you'll be playing with and how stringent they are with lore. If you already have a character in mind though, then yeah, just finding out what the people you're playing with are comfortable with and subtly tweaking your character could help. Though, that can come with its own oddities and difficulties, depending on how important the more lore-bendy bits are to the character. Hopefully they're not, but it's always a possibility.

[Koti Nexus]

Most everyone has said everyone I would say on this subject. I will admit, as a fellow roleplayer, I don't have a problem with anyone lore-bending so long as they done their homework on the subject and get fairly close to remaining true to the world. I, however, can't stand lore-breakers. I typically will let bygones be bygones, but I will be squinting at them fairly hard going, "Why are you breaking my immersion?"

 

The rule of thumb for most people is about the same. Bending is fine, because we all bend the lore in some way in truth. Breaking however? Most people will have issues with that. Most-- not all-- but most.