Gender locked race?

[TaiyoShikasu]

The lore isn't there as an excuse to exclude male Viera, it's there as an explanation as why we won't see any. There's a nuance there people can't seem to grasp. If male viera aren't happening, their decisions for doing such are certainly not just the "lore" even if they try to say that, there's certainly a different reason behind the decision. If it happens, we'll see what they have to say about why they went that direction (if they do).

When has lore applied to the player? Canonically there's like three white mages in existence, but there's nothing stopping anyone from becoming one.

Dark knights? Lore-wise there's even fewer of them.

Male Miqo'te are supposed to be rare af, but no one in-game pats an eye to seeing dozens of them in any city-state. And the gay Nuhns. So many gay Nuhns.

Or going back to the Au Ra example, Sidguru's people were fired on by Ishgardian's, but a player who's an Au Ra isn't even touched upon.

It's almost like the players race and job doesn't have any effect on Lore and vice versa.

[Iscah]

Or going back to the Au Ra example, Sidguru's people were fired on by Ishgardian's, but a player who's an Au Ra isn't even touched upon.

Although oddly enough, Sidurgu himself is able to stay in the city, and even have a confrontation with a Halonic priestess without being slain on sight.

Unless it's explained at some point in the 60-70 quests, it seems at odds with the rest of his story. Not saying there's something suspicious about it, just maybe an oversight by the writers.


Generally though, I would have to imagine an Auri Warrior of Light having a harder time fitting into Ishgard than the others. (But then nobody in Gridania showed their usual prejudice regarding Duskwights towards my alt character, either.)

The joys of generic script writing....

[Alesone]

When has lore applied to the player? Canonically there's like three white mages in existence, but there's nothing stopping anyone from becoming one.

Dark knights? Lore-wise there's even fewer of them.

Male Miqo'te are supposed to be rare af, but no one in-game pats an eye to seeing dozens of them in any city-state. And the gay Nuhns. So many gay Nuhns.

Or going back to the Au Ra example, Sidguru's people were fired on by Ishgardian's, but a player who's an Au Ra isn't even touched upon.

It's almost like the players race and job doesn't have any effect on Lore and vice versa.

You aren't grasping the nuance. The lore doesn't dictate anything, the developers do. They use the lore as a tool to explain what we see/experience in the game and provide a more natural sense of cohesion with the setting and story. The Viera lore isn't there to be used as an excuse to say players can't be male Viera, it's there to explain when we're running around why we don't see any.

The lore didn't decide that players couldn't be male Viera, the developers did, they just put in lore that will bridge the gap to explaining in setting why we don't see any.

Your argument is like saying why can't we play as beast tribe characters then, they're capable of all the things we are as player characters. Or how about Garleans? Why can't we play as them?

[Iscah]

Your argument is like saying why can't we play as beast tribe characters then, they're capable of all the things we are as player characters. Or how about Garleans? Why can't we play as them?

I think that's a different issue. Male Viera are made (potentially) unplayable because of their individual race-lore that states they don't go out of the forest.

Garleans and beastmen aren't playable for world-lore issues. Both would make for particularly awkward storywriting when the Warrior of Light is "generic" and the script is the same regardless of race (except for the occasional nod) as their races are in direct conflict with the protagonists.

Either people completely ignore your 'interesting' race choice, or the script gets derailed every few levels as you try to explain (yet again) why you're not a Garlean spy or a marauding beastman who, at very least, needs to be driven out of the city immediately.


Even with the races we already have, you already get these awkward moments where the writers ignore your race. Buscarron explains the idea of Duskwights... to my Duskwight. Wildwood archers would bear the brunt of Silvairre's snobbery that only Wildwoods are true archers. Yugiri will insist she needs to hide her face, even to another Au Ra.

[Alesone]

I think that's a different issue. Male Viera are made (potentially) unplayable because of their individual race-lore that states they don't go out of the forest.

No, Male Viera are potentially made unplayable because of the decision of the director of the game. Whether it's his personal hangups in finding them unappealing, or his desire to put in a male player race that he thinks people would like more, or that he likes more. The lore has little to do with it because the lore can always be written to accommodate their development decisions.

Garleans and beastmen aren't playable for world-lore issues. Both would make for particularly awkward storywriting when the Warrior of Light is "generic" and the script is the same regardless of race (except for the occasional nod) as their races are in direct conflict with the protagonists.

Except for all the ones we actively work with? All the Garleans we've now associated with, some of which were direct enemies before. All the Beast tribe quests we undertake that deals with members of those races who are in no way in direct conflict with us. There's absolutely avenues the devs could take to make these things playable, but the reality is they can't or won't. Those decisions come first, and the lore is made to adapt to those decisions. Same thing with male viera.

[Iscah]

No, Male Viera are potentially made unplayable because of the decision of the director of the game. Whether it's his personal hangups in finding them unappealing, or his desire to put in a male player race that he thinks people would like more, or that he likes more. The lore has little to do with it because the lore can always be written to accommodate their development decisions.

I know that's the *actual* reason why they're (probably) not playable, but that decision still needs to be "excused" within the story to explain why we don't see them, even though they do exist.

The "excuse" for not being able to play as a male Viera would be the race's individual lore, brought into the story alongside the race itself.

The "excuse" for not being able to play as a Garlean or beastman is the overarching story, pre-established in ARR as being "us against them", so the script would be strange if the generic player-character is in fact one of "them".

Except for all the ones we actively work with? All the Garleans we've now associated with, some of which were direct enemies before. All the Beast tribe quests we undertake that deals with members of those races who are in no way in direct conflict with us. There's absolutely avenues the devs could take to make these things playable, but the reality is they can't or won't. Those decisions come first, and the lore is made to adapt to those decisions. Same thing with male viera.

There's a difference between having individual characters who are Garleans or beastman, and letting the player be one.

The other characters are "unchanging" - Cid is always Cid, he's always a Garlean and the script reflects that.

But if the Warrior of Light might be a Garlean or might not, that's different. There would either need to be a separate version of dialogue to acknowledge it, or something that should affect how people respond to you goes entirely ignored.


As I said, it's already an issue in minor ways with the currently playable races - but for Garleans or beastmen, it would be a lot worse.