Lore Forum Decorum - Just What is Meant by Good/Bad Faith?

[Vyrerus]

So this may be in poor taste, and apologies to Theodric if I overstep in doing this, but I felt compelled to share the details I asked for, in some manner.

I had a very cordial discord conversation with Theodric about the issues he's had when discussing FFXIV lore. The death threats he received were from a Redditor going by the handle, "Lance." I wouldn't know him or anyone from Reddit, as I do not use Reddit, but Theodric is certain that this, "Lance" posts here, but he does not know his character or OF profile at all.

The other person's name for the homophobia is someone on the forum, but it's no one that I've seen post in Lore in a long time, granted I am neither omniscient or omnipresent. But suffice to say, anyone who's had a problem with Theodric in this thread is not who he is worried about or rather, dislikes(unless, of course, they are "Lance").


So anyone who thought they were the major beef with Theodric, if you don't fit these criterion, then you can rest easy.

With that heavy portion written out, I again apologize for overstepping, but I felt strongly that it needed to be said.

I'm glad to see yet more people responding and sharing their insights and feelings. Let's settle up and put all the old tension to bed, perceived or otherwise.

[Kozh]

Speaking of lore (or general) discussion, while reddit and Twitter are the famously bad one, I think ffxiv discord is on the way to reach their level in toxicity. I guess part of it is due to the chat moving fast and anyone can join the conversation suddenly, sometimes without the full context of the discussion. Because my god, the dogpiling there is the worst.

One time, back in ShB, I asked some clarification regarding our minfilia and it kinda went into discussion about how the story treated her. I voiced my displeasure with it, someone else ask (out of pettiness I guess) about how *I* would have write it. I said, "on top of my head, I would write x, y, z. This is just ideas I spent 5 minutes thinking of though". After that it was just chaos as more and more people critized it, saying hurtful things like "thank God you're not a writer" etc, and even things that doesn't relate to the original point at all. So yeah, I'm done with them.

Back to lore forum, I think I have to agree with several others here that this platform is probably the best to discuss things, given the other choices. It's not perfect, but nothing is after all. And I'm glad I didn't listen to reddit/Twitter when they said ffxiv forum is the toxic-est place, because otherwise I wouldn't be here.

Sorry it turned into big rant :/

[Alleo]

Honestly Cilia wrote it up perfectly. Her post is how I basically feel about the forum. Discussion has become a bit tiresome, especially regarding factions like Garlemald or the Ascians. There is nothing wrong with liking them but I really just dont like it when information is spun in a way to make the factions look different then what they are.

This thread shows how just mentioning them can turn the discussion away from the topic at hand. I remember so many discussions where I just mentioned them as one example of many and the answers fixiated on them...sadly I still had to learn my lesson to ignore such posts in the past and answered them because I could not let them stand that way. I try to do better and not be caught up in such posts again because I know that they will just end in utter frustration.

I just hope that in the future we will finally be able to break away from these topics. I am glad that the Zodiark/Hydaelyn/Ascian arc is over and that we may go back to smaller stories. Maybe there will be less explosive potential there...at least if people truly want to discuss in good faith and not just to rile others up. I had enough of my share of being called a sheep, tempered, bascially an idiot and not knowing the story because I did not remember certain details.

Of course both sides can be harsh there. How often have I read that people who may not like EW just skipped the story or did not understand it. At the same time I also read the argument that others may enjoy compley stories thus dont like EW but its fine to like EW if you like simpler easy stories. Basically both sides attacked the others for their taste...instead of focusing on arguments about the story its about the person behind the post itself...and that is imo a no go. I noticed that over Shadowbringer it has become harder for me to not fall into that myself, simply because the frustration was going through the roof with certain topics.

In the end I try to get better with that, try to just ignore certain points instead of answering them and hopefully argue in good faith when I post. (Also sorry for any bad grammar and stuff like that, I am from germany and its a bit hard for me to articulate what I think...)

[Rulakir]

I think when it comes to the discussions on the Ascians, tbqh I tend to take their side quite heavily, considering WoLidibus is my primary ship thanks to a friend of mine that writes him. I take issue with Venat's actions not because I think she is a bad/evil person, but because I think she acted rashly. She said "Oop, they aren't willing to give up Zodiark, sunder!" not taking into account that they were traumatized, grieving, and still in the aftermath of a disaster.

I've ended up on their side because their side has more interesting characters and complex dilemmas. I also think that prior to ShB the villains weren't emotionally compelling and I did not care about them at all. The Ascians are 'all or nothing' with sympathetic motivations. When one of them fails it's another nail in the coffin of bringing back everything and everyone they ever loved.

Meanwhile, EW particularly drove home how privileged and plot-armored the Scions are. They step off screen for about 5 minutes and then, surprise (not), they all get to be brought back to life, repeatedly in some cases, but when Ancients die it's forever. It's just ridiculous at this point, not to mention the hypocrisy of it. I need an Endwalker death counter because for all of the Final Days the only 'deaths' of meaningful characters I can recall were all Ancients, more than half of whom were already dead in the current timeline.

I think this is why HW as a whole worked the best for me. The tragedy of the dragons was understandable, but Nidhogg was only about seeking revenge which wasn't going to be of any benefit to anyone, not even him. Plus, Estinien, Ysayle, Aymeric, etc., all had complicated backgrounds both socially and of having endured a lifetime of being in a 1,000 year war without end. HW also didn't spare the protagonists death. Let me be clear, I'm not a fan of the GoT type of writing where numerous characters die, my issue is when all the deaths only ever happen on the opposition. It's simply not realistic and it's less satisfying when the protagonists always win without incurring much in the way of loss.

[KizuyaKatogami]

I am a diehard and devout villianshipper. I do not and have never denied such. lol. I think when it comes to the discussions on the Ascians, tbqh I tend to take their side quite heavily, considering WoLidibus is my primary ship thanks to a friend of mine that writes him. I take issue with Venat's actions not because I think she is a bad/evil person, but because I think she acted rashly. She said "Oop, they aren't willing to give up Zodiark, sunder!" not taking into account that they were traumatized, grieving, and still in the aftermath of a disaster. If you tell someone after a hurricane that your god could restore their home and you had *proof* of that, how many of them would not take that chance? I bet you it'd be near 100%. So yeah, basically genociding an entire world but for three people by sundering the world is kinda crap.

I have gotten called out for my views multiple times by Team Hydaelyn on this forum. lmao.

I feel this lol. Both on here and on the 14 reddit discord whenever i’d give info and try to share my views(which ended up being supported both in shb and ew mind you), if get told how i’m bending absolutely backwards for the zodiark faction, how i’m wrong in the head for believing hydaelyn could be in the wrong, the scions have plot armor or that a story like this does need death and stakes, and basically just end up getting death threats because of my views lol. I’d say these forums are much better in turn because at the most you just get some snark, but typically that happens when people are either insecure with their views or they know you’re right and have no comeback hehe, which tbh i think banter can be a bit fun as long as it isnt taken too seriously on either side and people arent overly sensitive about it.

[Anonymoose]

I don't even know where that issue is half the time because both sides of the "let people stan villains" schtick can be so ridiculous, lol.

1) Everyone is entitled to interpret and enjoy the story however they like.

2) No one is entitled to the lore forum ... willfully misinterpreting established data ... to preserve their headcanon.

Ambiguity zone? Just agree to disagree. Just walk out. You can leave.

You'd think this would be easy. You'd be wrong, but you'd think it.

[redheadturk]

I don't even know where that issue is half the time because both sides of the "let people stan villains" schtick can be so ridiculous, lol.

1) Everyone is entitled to interpret and enjoy the story however they like.

2) No one is entitled to the lore forum ... willfully misinterpreting established data ... to preserve their headcanon.

Ambiguity zone? Just agree to disagree. Just walk out. You can leave.

You'd think this would be easy. You'd be wrong, but you'd think it.

IMHO Venat got off far too lightly in the narrative. Was what the Ascians doing wrong? Of course, I never claimed differently. But neither is she squeaky clean here. What she did to the Amaurotine and Ancient civilization in general was wrong, dead wrong. You do not try to convince traumatized people to embrace the fact that suffering exists. You allow them their crutches and comforts until the trauma has passed and then you deal with them like reasonable human beings.

[Lauront]

I've ended up on their side because their side has more interesting characters and complex dilemmas. I also think that prior to ShB the villains weren't emotionally compelling and I did not care about them at all. The Ascians are 'all or nothing' with sympathetic motivations. When one of them fails it's another nail in the coffin of bringing back everything and everyone they ever loved.

Meanwhile, EW particularly drove home how privileged and plot-armored the Scions are. They step off screen for about 5 minutes and then, surprise (not), they all get to be brought back to life, repeatedly in some cases, but when Ancients die it's forever. It's just ridiculous at this point, not to mention the hypocrisy of it. I need an Endwalker death counter because for all of the Final Days the only 'deaths' of meaningful characters I can recall were all Ancients, more than half of whom were already dead in the current timeline.

I think this is why HW as a whole worked the best for me. The tragedy of the dragons was understandable, but Nidhogg was only about seeking revenge which wasn't going to be of any benefit to anyone, not even him. Plus, Estinien, Ysayle, Aymeric, etc., all had complicated backgrounds both socially and of having endured a lifetime of being in a 1,000 year war without end. HW also didn't spare the protagonists death. Let me be clear, I'm not a fan of the GoT type of writing where numerous characters die, my issue is when all the deaths only ever happen on the opposition. It's simply not realistic and it's less satisfying when the protagonists always win without incurring much in the way of loss.

^This. I moved from liking the Ascians and their god, because I am drawn to such things in fantasy settings to simply liking their story that much more, especially when it began taking on similar aspects to those of the blood elves in WoW. Most disagreements here stem from differences in philosophical stances, even if they relate to hypothetical situations, and/or preferences in story-telling, so for me once any disagreements over lore "facts" (to the degree such are clear) are cleared up, and only hypotheticals or ambiguities are left, the scope for further reconciliation becomes minimal and "agree to disagree" seems like a good stance to default to.

[EaraGrace]

If I can be frank, there’s general trend that occurs in particularly divisive discussions. Someone takes one position using evidence from the story, another chimes in with their own evidence that could contradict it, a back and forth occurs with someone inevitably saying that the others evidence is stupid and bad writing and shouldn’t exist, which in turn leads to more back and forth and then on and on until the topic comes up again in another thread.

It doesn’t make for good discussion.

[YianKutku]

I stand by what I said and by what Theodric said there. After seeing several lore discord meltdowns over minor character disagreements (or worse yet, when it devolves into constant moralising and then bringing in highly contentious RL politics while just expecting everyone to suffer in silence), and friends being stalked or harassed for their views on characters or factions in the game over reddit or twitter, as well as people avoiding this forum because they did not enjoy the way discussions are conducted, I have little inclination to alter my views. I for one do not bother very much with this subsection of the forum anymore, so whether you accept my words or not, it matters little to me.

This does read as you encountering negative drama over lore discussions in other venues, and then importing that negativity here to the Official Forums lore discussions. (The comparisons to Meteion do come to mind, but I assume everyone else can also see it, so no need to elaborate, and it's tangential anyway.)