Suggestion: Lore/Tradition-defying features

[Puddor]

During the graphics update announcement/livestream, YoshiP put a long theorized and debated theory to rest-- whether the markings on Miqo'te are genetic, or warpaint.

Well, they're war paint, as per their lore descriptions.

But that's neither here nor there. The markings are part of the base texture and since it would take an enormous amount of work to make them a facial feature instead of a core detail, I propose the opposite.

Give us a facial feature that covers them.

And while we're at it, Highlanders deserve eyebrows, too.

The problem with these features is that they're rooted in a lore structure-- that your Miqo'te was born to clan, grew up in a clan, and chose to adopt that clan's traditions. (Same with Highlander)

This is FF! When has a WoL ever subscribed to tradition? Especially when we've been offered drastic variation between tribes. Our stories almost always have us balking the status quo, if not initially then eventually, or choosing to embrace it after reconsidering at least once.

There's a lot of Highlanders and in fact Eorzeans in general who were displaced or captured by Garlemald who wouldn't have been able to keep their traditions as a result. And that's just one possible example of why.

From a design standpoint, adding a facial feature that covers the markings or adds eyebrows effectively doubles the amount of faces. I think that leaving it that they're default will still encourage players to use them and keep them, but having all players lore-locked when they're innumerable reasons that your character wouldn't follow that pathway doesn't feel right.

On top of that, even if people wish to argue 'well then they're genetic', there's plenty of reasons those who have them genetically would want to cover them.

Keep in mind I'm proposing its entirely playerside and optional-- no changes to NPCs, no changes to those who want to keep the marks or shaved brows. You already have players using the dark smudgy makeup to give themselves eyebrows on Highlander. Please let them have a bit of dignity, and just broaden the range of choice.

[Iscah]

From a design standpoint, adding a facial feature that covers the markings or adds eyebrows effectively doubles the amount of faces.

On the contrary, it would likely require actual doubling of the number of faces to achieve this under the current system, similar to the addition of the "beard option for WoL Midlander" face requiring a new and otherwise identical version of the original face.

[Puddor]

On the contrary, it would likely require actual doubling of the number of faces to achieve this under the current system, similar to the addition of the "beard option for WoL Midlander" face requiring a new and otherwise identical version of the original face.

The system not being able to handle an additional beard is questionable ( as in, the system being like this isn't great), but that beard face isn't just a texture, it's also 3D elements. As a facial feature, this proposal is just an overlay that pulls from the skintone. I'd suggest having makeup match skin tones, but we all know people can't be trusted with that.

[Rueby]

Hmmm...clan marks being moved to tattoos is something I'd like to see happen in the future. Just like how I wish male highlanders should have a dedicated eyebrow option that's not the sharpie marker. I hope this would happen but I have low 'hopes'.

[LordMcMutton]

similar to the addition of the "beard option for WoL Midlander" face requiring a new and otherwise identical version of the original face.

I never saw that- That's incredibly strange

[Aco505]

Pretty sure the markings below the eyes for males are not paint. There's in-game lore about them darkening with age iirc.

Any other marking is paint though.

[Doopliss]

Pretty sure the markings below the eyes for males are not paint. There's in-game lore about them darkening with age iirc.

Any other marking is paint though.

Sorry for randomly butting in, but do you recall at all where you might have seen this? I've been looking for it again for years! From what I recall, the unremoveable marks on all Miqo'te are birthmarks that darken with age, which is why the children we see don't have them, and possibly why only one female Seeker face doesn't have noticeable ones(?).

From my (admittedly very foggy now) memory, this was some random descriptive 1.0 lore that was on the forums, rather than character creation descriptions. It was easier to find when the FFXIV RPC was still alive... I also recall details about how like, Wildwood have extremely advanced eyesight, which is why they make great archers, while Duskwight, on the other hand, excel in hearing, and they use this to their advantage in melee combat.

Sorry to derail like that, it just feels like so many of the scarce racial details we've gotten is lost to time, so I was immediately excited to see someone else remember this! I've convinced myself for a while I must have just imagined it haha.

[Iscah]

Pretty sure the markings below the eyes for males are not paint. There's in-game lore about them darkening with age iirc.

Any other marking is paint though.

Sorry for randomly butting in, but do you recall at all where you might have seen this? I've been looking for it again for years! From what I recall, the unremoveable marks on all Miqo'te are birthmarks that darken with age, which is why the children we see don't have them, and possibly why only one female Seeker face doesn't have noticeable ones(?).

I don't recall seeing it stated in game at all, but I think it's a conclusion that can be drawn if you assume they're natural markings and then look at the different faces. The youngest-looking faces generally have less inbuilt markings, so it's possible that they develop over time.

My impression is that the spots outside the eyes are also natural as they are inbuilt on the older faces but optional on the younger faces.

[Doopliss]

I don't recall seeing it stated in game at all, but I think it's a conclusion that can be drawn if you assume they're natural markings and then look at the different faces. The youngest-looking faces generally have less inbuilt markings, so it's possible that they develop over time.

My impression is that the spots outside the eyes are also natural as they are inbuilt on the older faces but optional on the younger faces.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it never was stated in game unfortunately. I remember seeing it on...some forum-like thing. But, god, that was like...9? years ago, when I was making my Seeker guy. It is a fair assumption though, I just always think it's a shame that it's difficult to find the original confirmation (should it be genuine).

I get kind of miffed with how the lorebooks relay only the most basic aspects of racial lore we can find in-game. Like, it's nuts to me that this relatively important information that Koji shared straight up 11 years ago isn't actually in it, and there's only like, a super general, tiny tidbit of passing reference to it remarked by Y'shtola.

In 2014 you'd actually see people RP tribes like this! But it's so buried now you never see it anymore (I know they're supposed to be rare and contentious, but still)...

Oh well, though. I'll stop talking about this here 'cause I don't wanna derail the thread further. I just got overeager haha.

[Aco505]

Sorry for randomly butting in, but do you recall at all where you might have seen this? I've been looking for it again for years! From what I recall, the unremoveable marks on all Miqo'te are birthmarks that darken with age, which is why the children we see don't have them, and possibly why only one female Seeker face doesn't have noticeable ones(?).

From my (admittedly very foggy now) memory, this was some random descriptive 1.0 lore that was on the forums, rather than character creation descriptions. It was easier to find when the FFXIV RPC was still alive... I also recall details about how like, Wildwood have extremely advanced eyesight, which is why they make great archers, while Duskwight, on the other hand, excel in hearing, and they use this to their advantage in melee combat.

Sorry to derail like that, it just feels like so many of the scarce racial details we've gotten is lost to time, so I was immediately excited to see someone else remember this! I've convinced myself for a while I must have just imagined it haha.

Sorry for the late response!

To be honest, I do not know where I read that but it's firmly in my mind since I instantly recalled it when replying to this post. A quick Google search leads me to this Reddit thread but I doubt I got the piece of information from there.

Some of the arguments in that thread are insightful though, since for instance the mystel could be used as confirmation that the markings are natural. We could also just assume that the developers didn't think of changing it, of course.

Perhaps the information came from the FF wiki? But I just went there and didn't find anything. It may be that I got it from old forum posts, as you say, when the developers and community managers provided more insight on lore matters.

If I somehow end up finding the source, I'll be sure to let you know!

As a side note, when I first created my character, I didn't like the fact that you could not remove the markings but they eventually grew up on me. Thinking of them like the markings cheetahs have below their eyes made me realize that they make a lot of sense.