On Extreme Role-playing Within XIV

[Theodric]

Meanwhile, in my personal experience, what is considered to be an 'extremist' character changes in definition by the day. Often at the whims of role-players with a perpetual chip atop their shoulders who seek to exploit the art as a means of spreading certain ideologies.

I've also seen a mysterious trend where many role-players insist that it is perfectly fine to portray their character as racist or discriminatory towards Garlean characters (even those not aligned with Garlemald as a whole) but it is considered unacceptable for Garlean characters to do as much themselves.

[SturmChurro]

Meanwhile, in my personal experience, what is considered to be an 'extremist' character changes in definition by the day. Often at the whims of role-players with a perpetual chip atop their shoulders who seek to exploit the art as a means of spreading certain ideologies.

I've also seen a mysterious trend where many role-players insist that it is perfectly fine to portray their character as racist or discriminatory towards Garlean characters (even those not aligned with Garlemald as a whole) but it is considered unacceptable for Garlean characters to do as much themselves.

I'd say this is the concept of "punching up" and "punching down" in play. It's okay to "punch up", in this case being 'racist' towards a Garlean character, due to them having been in a position of power, while they cannot do the same as that is in turn "punching down". The same thing that happens in many real life interactions.

[Theodric]

I'd say this is the concept of "punching up", and "punching down" in play. It's okay to "punch up", or be 'racist' towards a Garlean character due to them having been in a position of power, while they cannot do the same as that is in turn "punching down". The same thing that happens in many real life interactions.

Perhaps. Though in my opinion such an approach doesn't quite fit within the established story as the Garleans were simply peaceful farmers who were largely incapable of manipulating aether which put them at a major disadvantage. As such, their neighbours forced them out of fertile territory and into the frigid wastes of Northern Ilsabard where they would have died out if not for the presence of ceruleum.

It was only later that they reversed their fortunes and sought to recover their lost lands and whilst a case can be made for not expanding beyond that reclaimed territory, I'd note that Eorzea and the various other nations have all benefitted immensely from the spoils of war themselves, particularly when it comes to staking claim to territory rich in aether.

[MikkoAkure]

Perhaps. Though in my opinion such an approach doesn't quite fit within the established story as the Garleans were simply peaceful farmers who were largely incapable of manipulating aether which put them at a major disadvantage. As such, their neighbours forced them out of fertile territory and into the frigid wastes of Northern Ilsabard where they would have died out if not for the presence of ceruleum.

It was only later that they reversed their fortunes and sought to recover their lost lands and whilst a case can be made for not expanding beyond that reclaimed territory, I'd note that Eorzea and the various other nations have all benefitted immensely from the spoils of war themselves, particularly when it comes to staking claim to territory rich in aether.

I don't have any skin in this game since I don't RP, but to be fair most Eorzeans aren't going to know the backstory of the Garleans and only know them as a conquering force. The Garleans were actively flying their ships over Eorzean cities and invaded with full force 5 years ago at the end of 1.0, sent another giant invasion force which (accidentally) exploded Silvertear Falls, ruining the most pristine land in the entire region and creating Mor Dhona 15 years ago, and conquered Ala Mhigo 20 years ago. 2 whole legions have actively threatened most of the inhabitants of Eorzea over the past 5 years and 1 of them is still present on the continent in bases that they've created right next to where people live. Then most notably, it was the Garleans who were responsible for the Meteor and the 7th Calamity, which killed countless people and completely devastated the land.

No Eorzeans have any contact whatsoever with Garlean civilians and only know the soldiers invading their countries, or stories from Ala Mhigan and Doman refugees. It's going to be hard relating to a people who have done nothing but provided hardships for literally everyone and have touched the lives of every single Eorzean for the worst.

Your history is also missing a note that they weren't native to the lands they were kicked out of either. They were native to Goug until they blew up their own city and came to the continent as refugees. The official entry for Reaper seems to be at odds with the lore from the Encyclopedia and the Ivalice quests. The lorebook doesn't say anything about "peaceful farmers" it says that they "suffered defeat in their territorial claims", which implies that they were the aggressor. We don't know how peaceful they may have been, why the natives didn't let them stay, and why they were kicked out, but I hope we find out more in Endwalker. Either way, their being kicked out of lands that weren't theirs 800 years ago isn't going to change anyone's mind and make them suddenly feel bad.

I'm sure that we'll learn more about the effects the war has had on Garlean civilians and learn more of their side of the story, but it's not like we're going to be reporting it all back to everyone back home and it won't erase feelings everyday people would have in Eorzea.


That all said, I'm sure it would be interesting to RP as or with a normal Garlean character, but you're going to be facing an uphill battle and it isn't entirely realistic to expect every player to be immediately warm to you without any existing prejudices.

[Lauront]

I'd say this is the concept of "punching up" and "punching down" in play. It's okay to "punch up", in this case being 'racist' towards a Garlean character, due to them having been in a position of power, while they cannot do the same as that is in turn "punching down". The same thing that happens in many real life interactions.

Yup, so it ends up being a case of "I'll wail 24/7 about 'bigotry', but I'm ok with it when it's used against people I ha-... who have 'power'." It is merely the outflow of a particular form of political view that I would say is fixated on perpetuating conflicts to exploit for political or financial gain.