Arenvald - Garlean half-breed?

[Theodric]

Sure, see the better side of the country that produced his father the rapist.

You must really loathe Limsa Lominsa, Ishgard, Doma and Ul'dah too, then, given that they've been shown to harbour individuals who engage in sexual assault and people smuggling. There's a Brass Blade shown to be doing just that in the early RDM quests. Ironically, he's a Highlander, if I recall correctly...so perhaps he originated from Ala Mhigo?

Though I suspect that you'll come up with some convenient excuse and refuse to hold the entirety of each nation's people accountable in the same way that a baffling number of posters (yourself included) do where Garlemald is concerned.

Thankfully we can take comfort in the simple fact that Garlemald as a whole is not rotten, so your point is...well, irrelevant.

[YianKutku]

Though I suspect that you'll come up with some convenient excuse and refuse to hold the entirety of each nation's people accountable in the same way that a baffling number of posters (yourself included) do where Garlemald is concerned.

If you want to discuss civilly and ask to "agree to disagree", it would behoove you to stop sniping at people.

Provocation is not an excuse.

[Theodric]

If you want to discuss civilly and ask to "agree to disagree", it would behoove you to stop sniping at people.

Provocation is not an excuse.

I'll be more inclined to bear that in mind when it's aimed at everybody who indulges in 'sniping' around these parts and not just one or two posters.

Furthermore, it wasn't intended to be 'sniping' so much as speculation as to the likely counter argument. Holding an entire nation responsible for the sins of a few is not a wise or fair decision at all. Garlemald needs to learn this yet so, too, does Eorzea and many of the posters around these parts.

[YianKutku]

I'll be more inclined to bear that in mind when it's aimed at everybody who indulges in 'sniping' around these parts and not just one or two posters.

Still not an excuse. You may not be able to control how others post, but you can certainly control how you post.

Furthermore, it wasn't intended to be 'sniping' so much as speculation as to the likely counter argument.

Whatever you call it, stop it. It's disruptive and unproductive.

[Theodric]

-snip-

Well, feel free to chat with me about it over Discord. We're both in the Mateus RP Discord server, I believe, so you should be able to send me a direct message. That'd certainly help keep this thread clear too and address any misunderstandings.

[NoblePigeon]

I'll be more inclined to bear that in mind when it's aimed at everybody who indulges in 'sniping' around these parts and not just one or two posters.

Furthermore, it wasn't intended to be 'sniping' so much as speculation as to the likely counter argument. Holding an entire nation responsible for the sins of a few is not a wise or fair decision at all. Garlemald needs to learn this yet so, too, does Eorzea and many of the posters around these parts.

You keep saying there's this large mass of people that must hate everything about Garlemald and think all of its people are rotten, but I'm not seeing them. Outside of one person a while back that thought it was somehow a good idea to wipe all Garleans from existence, which is...clearly not a good thing?

I keep saying this, but I'm unsure if you've made the distinction: addressing and talking about the long list of injustices caused by the Empire is not mutually exclusive with also wanting more non-evil depictions of Garlemald. We're not talking about the wealth inequality of Ul'dah, the xenophobic tendencies that still linger within Gridania and Ishgard, the resulting problems of "civilizing" pirates Limsa has to deal with, or the isolationist mindsets of Sharlayan or Hingashi.

Obviously Rosenoire was not insinuating that Arenvald's father was somehow the sole representative of what Garlemald's all about. The point being made was that Arenvald has no reason to try getting in touch with that part of his ancestry because he's already come to terms with it and he already considers himself firmly Ala Mhigan. Other posters have done a much better job at pointing out why that's the case.

[Theodric]

Eh, back when Regula first showed up many Garlean fans speculated that he would turn out to be a pretty decent guy and not the 'Kefka insert' that quite a few people were convinced that he would be. The theory that he would prove to be honourable ended up being the correct one, yet it was still downplayed at the time and some posters cannot help but paint Garlemald in the worst possible light at every possible turn.

I don't think anybody has ever suggested that everything Garlemald does is perfect, either. At the same time, though, they do have their justifications for their actions but discussing those reasons is pretty much impossible on this board at times simply due to the emotionally charged responses many have whenever nuances are involved. I prefer to discuss the lore through the eyes of cold, hard logic rather than through the eyes of modern day morality and biases. I like to understand why characters are doing what they are doing.

Which, of course, people are free to agree to disagree upon. I mean, at some point people need to admit that that really is the best route for us all to take. I'm exceptionally stubborn, on account of being British and ex-military.

I won't name any names, but certain posters have attempted to harass me in-game and even fake being me over on the FF14 sub-reddit in an effort to get me to stop posting here. So, if people find me to be overly defensive and 'snippy' then please at least bear that in mind. If people want to make a genuine effort to reach out to me and talk things over? They're free to do, preferably in-game or over Discord as such places are much better suited to doing so than this sub-forum.

I also role-play a Pureblood Garlean in-game. Someone who wants Garlemald to dial back the aggression in favour of focusing on prosperity instead. He's not the sort of guy to take pleasure in senseless violence and neither am I. Yet it is perfectly possible to criticise a faction's actions and understand where they're coming from at the same time. Numerous years of oppression and abuse forged Garlemald into what it is today. The lore book outright states that Pureblood Garleans were hardened by consequence of being forced to carve out for a living for themselves in a wasteland.

That doesn't excuse everything that they have done since, yet it's still not as black and white as many here like to portray.

TLDR: A lot of these back and forth disagreements simply appear to be down to misunderstandings. I'm happy to address that in-game. It seems like we're in agreement in regards to what we want out of Garlemald, anyway.

I don't care for Zenos. I want more characters along the lines of Regula.

[NoblePigeon]

Eh, back when Regula first showed up many Garlean fans speculated that he would turn out to be a pretty decent guy and not the 'Kefka insert' that quite a few people were convinced that he would be. The theory that he would prove to be honourable ended up being the correct one, yet it was still downplayed at the time and some posters cannot help but paint Garlemald in the worst possible light at every possible turn.

Honestly, I think it's a damn shame that they offed Regula as early as they did. He and Gaius rank among some of my favorite villains. Likeable, understandable individuals, and ones that I felt rather sorry for buying the farm, but villains nonetheless.

I don't think anybody has ever suggested that everything Garlemald does is perfect, either. At the same time, though, they do have their justifications for their actions but discussing those reasons is pretty much impossible on this board at times simply due to the emotionally charged responses many have whenever nuances are involved. I prefer to discuss the lore through the eyes of cold, hard logic rather than through the eyes of modern day morality and biases. I like to understand why characters are doing what they are doing.

Which, of course, people are free to agree to disagree upon. I mean, at some point people need to admit that that really is the best route for us all to take. I'm exceptionally stubborn, on account of being British and ex-military.

I also think that it's important to explore the more morally grey areas of the setting, but ultimately it is a final fantasy game, where forces of absolute good and evil unquestionably exist, and modern day sensibilities, while seeming a bit anachronistic in a seemingly fantasy setting, do exist in the setting. The Garlean Empire's military machine has been our enemy, but not quite the Garlean people themselves per se. And I'm hoping in the next expansion they make that distinction very prominent.

I won't name any names, but certain posters have attempted to harass me in-game and even fake being me over on the FF14 sub-reddit in an effort to get me to stop posting here. So, if people find me to be overly defensive and 'snippy' then please at least bear that in mind. If people want to make a genuine effort to reach out to me and talk things over? They're free to do, preferably in-game or over Discord as such places are much better suited to doing so than this sub-forum.

That's...creepy, on their part. And I'm sorry you have to deal with that overly excessive nonsense people will go to just because they have too much time on their hands.

I also role-play a Pureblood Garlean in-game. Someone who wants Garlemald to dial back the aggression in favour of focusing on prosperity instead. He's not the sort of guy to take pleasure in senseless violence and neither am I. Yet it is perfectly possible to criticise a faction's actions and understand where they're coming from at the same time. Numerous years of oppression and abuse forged Garlemald into what it is today. The lore book outright states that Pureblood Garleans were hardened by consequence of being forced to carve out for a living for themselves in a wasteland.

I also play as one, someone who fought on the losing side of the war of succession. Someone who isn't a defector and loves their country, but harbors an intense hatred of the "usurper" Varis. Loyalty to one's country versus loyalty to one's leaders are themes I like playing with that character.

TLDR: A lot of these back and forth disagreements simply appear to be down to misunderstandings. I'm happy to address that in-game. It seems like we're in agreement in regards to what we want out of Garlemald, anyway.

I am 100% ready for the Illsabard expansion and dive into the myriad politics, society and landscape of the nation that we as the WoL have been at odds with for so many years. If only so we can get our inevitable magitek knight tank job.

[Eloah]

Wow.

You really went there. That's some next-level victim blaming.

Wow.

I just reclicked on this thread and noticed your reply. Not sugar coating it, this post made you a Jackass. Way to take my words and twist them.

Also, thank you to the posters after the initial and prior to this post. While not exclusive, you appear to be defending individual posters and I appreciate that.

[dynus]

Back to the topic of Arenvald. I personally doubt that they'll kill him off. He's likely to become Lyse's replacement in the Scions. And if there's a time skip ala A Realm Reborn (doubtful as it is) he'll be the one hanging out in Gridania.