Hydaelyn Role-Players
[Discussion] Canon lore & you? - Printable Version

+- Hydaelyn Role-Players (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18)
+-- Forum: Community (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: RP Discussion (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: [Discussion] Canon lore & you? (/showthread.php?tid=15993)

Pages: 1 2

Canon lore & you? - Maril - 04-28-2016

I have been wondering about how people's relations to the canon lore is, and specifically how far outside of it you go with your characters. Are you fine with bending it a little, do you just do as you please no matter what, and how do you go about it? What drives you or could drive you to go outside of the canon?

Feel free to mention examples if you want to, I am genuinely curious on what people have done/are doing that might be considered dubious/sketchy/grey-zone like.

RE: Canon lore & you? - GhostlyMaiden - 04-28-2016

I bend the lore, because it allows more creative freedom. However, i'm not a fan of complete lore breaking. What's the point of having lore if you're just going to ignore it?

Nanagi can sense the Aether around her and use it to find taints, or figure out how much Aether someone has flowing through them.

Kanako came to Eorzea really early. Instead of coming around with all the refugees, she was in Eorzea couple years after the trade routes between Othard and Eorzea were opened. She was with a traveling caravan and never stayed in one place for too long.

That's the only major things I can think of.

RE: Canon lore & you? - Askier - 04-28-2016

With Askier and Hojo, I try to keep it within lore. Neither character deals with magic at all, and I've found that character whom don't deal with aether are easier to make lore friendly.

Jin'li on the other hand...AHAHAHAHAH.

Oh yeah, I stretched with that guy. 

I think a little stretch is okay, especially when it involves things that we have very little or almost no detail on. Its going to happen during these situations.  But so long as its fun for the people involved and doesn't break the lore or setting(cause if you break the setting, why bother rping in this game), I think bending is okay.

RE: Canon lore & you? - Verad - 04-28-2016

(04-28-2016, 05:00 PM)Nailah Wrote: Feel free to mention examples if you want to, I am genuinely curious on what people have done/are doing that might be considered dubious/sketchy/grey-zone like.

Quite a lot, but most of it has little to do with the character and more to do with plots I've run. Some of that has been more severe than others, but has included:
  • Ala Mhigan guerilla fighters trying to level Quarrymill
  • Dravanian relics getting distributed in Ul'dah.
  • Dragons resulting from aformentioned relics getting distributed in Ul'dah
  • A materia-like object that can be found in dragons and has an effect similar to what happened with Estinien and Nidhogg's eyes (this was pre-HW so I was largely pulling ideas out of my ass here).
  • Padjal going rogue and actively resisting the authority of the Elementals.
  • Expanding the scope of Toto-Rak such that there are abandoned wings people haven't explored yet.
  • Rewriting the Pact of Gelmorra in a way that will matter to absolutely no other player ever.
  • Taking a cynical interpretation of the political influence the Senna family has on the Seedseer Council and Gridanian governance in general.
  • Giving voidsent the ability to grow and spread as a memetic virus.
I'm sure I'm missing some stuff in that list. Suffice it to say that I have broken it and will probably continue to break it, but in ways that people have found, if not plausible, at least entertaining.

RE: Canon lore & you? - Valence - 04-28-2016

I usually don't even bend it (or at least not consciously). I am a player that puts the emphasis on the lore a lot (in most settings I roleplay, I love lore stuff, I love discussing it, making theories, etc). I have a good respect for it and find that building upon the existing lore to be way more interesting that making up my own stuff, even if it's more or less lore compliant or inspired by it. I find that unless you get a spark of genius, most player created stuff is usually a lot less appealing to me overall or just doesn't mesh that well within the existing universe.

RE: Canon lore & you? - U'roh Tia - 04-28-2016

I'm in a bit of a middle ground, I like writing along with the lore and then bending it just a smidgen sometimes when it's needed to make something work. But like most I am against breaking, what's the point of Rping in a world if you ignore it's lore?

RE: Canon lore & you? - Teadrinker - 04-28-2016

(04-28-2016, 05:00 PM)Nailah Wrote: I have been wondering about how people's relations to the canon lore is, and specifically how far outside of it you go with your characters. Are you fine with bending it a little, do you just do as you please no matter what, and how do you go about it? What drives you or could drive you to go outside of the canon?

Feel free to mention examples if you want to, I am genuinely curious on what people have done/are doing that might be considered dubious/sketchy/grey-zone like.

The only time I will bend established lore is when creating NPC's or villains to be tackled by a large group of people. The bending, if even necessary, is done in such a way as to provide the necessary tension to make the person actually threatening to a large group.

I will not do this with my PC's ever. The lore regarding my PC's is about as airtight as my knowledge of it will allow and I correct it if I find something is off.

RE: Canon lore & you? - Flynn Rosenberg - 04-28-2016

(04-28-2016, 06:20 PM)Valence Wrote: I usually don't even bend it (or at least not consciously). I am a player that puts the emphasis on the lore a lot (in most settings I roleplay, I love lore stuff, I love discussing it, making theories, etc). I have a good respect for it and find that building upon the existing lore to be way more interesting that making up my own stuff, even if it's more or less lore compliant or inspired by it. I find that unless you get a spark of genius, most player created stuff is usually a lot less appealing to me overall or just doesn't mesh that well within the existing universe.

Pretty much this. I accept the lore and universe as it is and try to fit my character in where it makes sense. I'm open to everything the game has to offer, with a few exceptions like game mechanics (I don't think queueing for expert roulette and disappearing, "Be right back, I have to do my daily", counts as canon :p). If something is said in RP that completely goes against lore, I just retcon my character's memory of that day. With that said I'm not a complete lore nerd, there are some things I try to bend around like how characters talk compared to NPCs. I know what *not* to say at least, the dos and donts, but I'm no excellent Shakespeare writer.

When it comes down to items and objects, like the orchestrion and fantasia, I'm open to an extent. With the orchestrion, I acknowledge it in lore and in RP. As for the music playing, somewhere in this goes into a bit more detail. If I hear Titan's theme on it, my character will hear a piano/music box version of that theme, because that's what it is, a music box, not a jukebox. Fantasia? Pff, I'm not gonna bother with that.

RE: Canon lore & you? - ExAtomos - 04-28-2016

I'll bend it if the situation calls for it. Game lore doesn't cover every eventuality and sometimes you just get put on the spot with a question or something and have to pull an idea out your ass. >.>; I really try to go with 'plausible' and steer clear of anything too OP.

RE: Canon lore & you? - Cato - 04-28-2016

FFXIV is FFXIV. I detest the idea of completely breaking the game's lore even if I dislike certain elements of it. Bending, however? That's a different story - but even then I only do it if it's plausible and a means to add some depth to an element of the lore that may not yet have been expanded on. I feel like there's more than enough interesting material to work with in this setting without having to defile what exists. Especially when there's countless interesting niches that go without any love or attention.

Ultimately I hold the firm belief that if someone is just going to ignore the established lore in a setting and do whatever they like instead then that's probably a solid sign that they'd be better off elsewhere...or just limiting their role-play to something like Skype or a setting they create themselves.

I can only assume they'd be happier doing that if they show no actual love or passion for FFXIV itself. When I fell out with Blizzard's storytelling I took my leave of WoW because the game's lore no longer interested me. I could probably go off and pretend the stuff I disliked didn't happen but...that's only a way to exclude a great many people. Even if people buy into it then it's just replacing canon with fanon. Which, to me, comes across as rather obnoxious.

That's my personal stance on it anyway.

RE: Canon lore & you? - Caspar - 04-28-2016

(04-28-2016, 09:15 PM)Graeham Wrote: FFXIV is FFXIV. I detest the idea of completely breaking the game's lore even if I dislike certain elements of it. Bending, however? That's a different story - but even then I only do it if it's plausible and a means to add some depth to an element of the lore that may not yet have been expanded on. I feel like there's more than enough interesting material to work with in this setting without having to defile what exists. Especially when there's countless interesting niches that go without any love or attention.

Ultimately I hold the firm belief that if someone is just going to ignore the established lore in a setting and do whatever they like instead then that's probably a solid sign that they'd be better off elsewhere...or just limiting their role-play to something like Skype or a setting they create themselves.

I can only assume they'd be happier doing that if they show no actual love or passion for FFXIV itself. When I fell out with Blizzard's storytelling I took my leave of WoW because the game's lore no longer interested me. I could probably go off and pretend the stuff I disliked didn't happen but...that's only a way to exclude a great many people. Even if people buy into it then it's just replacing canon with fanon. Which, to me, comes across as rather obnoxious.

That's my personal stance on it anyway.
Defile? That's strong language. But although a great deal of lore is very much set in stone, other elements are vague. We don't know much about the climate in Othard, for example, or the type of food Garleans eat. In those cases, how do you address things the lore *doesn't* cover, or not in enough detail? I guess how much bending is "permissible," is my question.

RE: Canon lore & you? - Cato - 04-28-2016

(04-28-2016, 09:19 PM)Caspar Wrote:
(04-28-2016, 09:15 PM)Graeham Wrote: FFXIV is FFXIV. I detest the idea of completely breaking the game's lore even if I dislike certain elements of it. Bending, however? That's a different story - but even then I only do it if it's plausible and a means to add some depth to an element of the lore that may not yet have been expanded on. I feel like there's more than enough interesting material to work with in this setting without having to defile what exists. Especially when there's countless interesting niches that go without any love or attention.

Ultimately I hold the firm belief that if someone is just going to ignore the established lore in a setting and do whatever they like instead then that's probably a solid sign that they'd be better off elsewhere...or just limiting their role-play to something like Skype or a setting they create themselves.

I can only assume they'd be happier doing that if they show no actual love or passion for FFXIV itself. When I fell out with Blizzard's storytelling I took my leave of WoW because the game's lore no longer interested me. I could probably go off and pretend the stuff I disliked didn't happen but...that's only a way to exclude a great many people. Even if people buy into it then it's just replacing canon with fanon. Which, to me, comes across as rather obnoxious.

That's my personal stance on it anyway.
Defile? That's strong language. But although a great deal of lore is very much set in stone, other elements are vague. We don't know much about the climate in Othard, for example, or the type of food Garleans eat. In those cases, how do you address things the lore *doesn't* cover, or not in enough detail? I guess how much bending is "permissible," is my question.

If something is left vague - such as what, exactly, Othard is like - then it's fine to make an effort to fill in the gaps, especially if it's done by expanding upon what we do know about a particular vague aspect of the lore.

I do feel as though people risk writing themselves into a corner if they embrace too many aspects of the setting that are left without much lore though. 

In short? I'm willing to turn a blind eye to 'bending' but not to 'breaking'. The former is something I've done myself whilst the latter, to me, just makes me lose interest altogether.

RE: Canon lore & you? - Chompie - 04-29-2016

The XIV lore is interesting to me because there's a whole lot of really cool possibilities, mysteries we don't understand, and crazy implications to adapt to.

Every bit of lore-bending I do is because of the implications and grey areas of the lore, not in spite of them. The lore really does not cover everything we'd like it to. Hell, having any details at all about your miqo'tribe is probably considered lore-bending by the strictest definition. I mean, it's not IN the lore.
But maybe it's plausible.

Aether is a giant mess of things that don't quite all fit together right, but goddamnit I'm gonna write as if it's a thing that DOES make sense and pull from several spread out sources and just desperately hope that I'm getting the right idea that could possibly be extrapolated from those few disparate npc quotes somewhere.

If I break the lore, it's out of perfectly understandable hubris.

RE: Canon lore & you? - Yssen - 04-29-2016

Very very excellent question/topic. Kudos.

The elephant in the room issue is that we all essentially knowing nothing (like so much Jon Snow) unless we are a dev or involved some other way in the game's production. This means that specific lore interpretation must be firmly placed in the category of "things that are subjective," at least until we have a great big tome/document that tells us how all Hydaelyn's bits, bobs, and boops work. The lore currently provides only a loose frame work of things that we sorta understand by interpreting the tid bits we find in game. The exception to this is when devs talk about lore bits in interviews. That stuff is basically "Word of God" and even it is subject to interpretation because most devs are smart enough to leave stuff open ended so as to not have junk written into a corner like so much "Lost." Long and short, not everyone necessarily agrees 100% with one particular interpretation of the game's lore, and that is okay because that is the nature of the beast we live under. It is also worth mentioning that no to characters are necessarily going to believe 100% in the same interpretation of the game's lore. No one is right, they only have the belief that they are right. 

With that said, there is a collective understanding of the loose framework/guidelines that the lore provides. Ideally everyone is pulling story ideas from that framework to form the foundation of their concepts for stories and characters. All things in the lore are effectively "bent" the second any of us start creating our own stuff in that framework. So yeah, go nuts and be creative with that framework. No one here has any authority to tell you that you are wrong from a lore stand point (for the most part), and no one here has the right to tell anyone that you have to cleave to their own (completely subjective) interpretation of the lore bits we have access to. Nothing is true, everything is permitted. 

With that note, here is some of the stuff that I have come up with and within the happy dancing framework for story bits.

- A Thuggee like order of Assassin's that hold a unique belief in their worship of Nald'Thal. They believe that they are given holy mandate to serve the Twins as merchants of death, accepting proper payment to kill anyone, and believing that by doing so they are engaging in a holy sacrament to Nald'Thal.

- Use of training similar to Monks to draw forth mass amounts of aether from places of conflict and apply to some later large scale end.

- Applying different martial arts styles other than the one Coeurl fist style employed by Monks in hand to hand combat. Example - Yssen fights like zee snake, not so much like punchy macgee.

- Adaptation of a "One is all, All is one" philosophy/approach when it comes to magic and aether manipulation.

- Various mystic ritual hoobjazzery designed to cure spiritual and psychological afflictions.

- Introduction of a corrupting tincture/potion that slowly but surely affects an individual spiritually, psychologically, and physically in exchange for power. It is also now been made somewhat infectious and weaponized. <.<

- Processes and junk to bind and enslave Elementals for later use as an aether source.

- Other blood contracts created by the use of Thaumaturgy with various terms and usages beyond the known Vengeance Order employed by the THM Guild.

- The notion that one can train in one of the magical arts (Thaumaturgy, Conjury, Arcanistry) with out joining/serving one of the established guilds.  

There are others, but they to list them would be a wee bit spoilery for some of the stuff I have going on. Thus I have declined to list them at this time. I hope this has been helpful. Yar. ^ ^

RE: Canon lore & you? - Valence - 04-29-2016

I don't consider personal headcanon on one's own miqotribe or school of aether control or whatever to be lore bending, but rather world building (with all the pros and cons it implies), which means expanding logical conclusions based purely and solely upon lore. It can be dangerous on the long run of course, like every kind of RP, but I believe that as long as you keep it 'regional' (vs 'universal') and pretty situational/lore friendly itself, the risk is rather low.

Of course if you don't base it on lore, or take liberties with it, then it's lore bending or even lore breaking. I define bending the lore as a willingness to introduce something that doesn't quite fit with the lore, but doesn't break it outright either. With the caveat of super vague lore that you somehow want to use neverthless, of course.

I don't find lore bending to be very spread, it's rather specific in my opinion. Either you break it most of the time (consciously or unconsciously), or either you don't.