Adding "Backgrounds" -- Passive Customization + New Appearance Options

TheShadowScout

The way I see this, the lore-iffy part of this would be the "racial passive costomization" part of it, which does indeed sound like a thinly disguised way to cater to the min/maxxers by crying "subrace" as pretext to adjust passives for super-effectiveness.

Remove that... and what remains is merely cosmetic, and thus no big deal.

Though it would -not- be equal... where khajiit and argonians might have a wider selection of "subraces", many others would have mere subcultures (as in, with no structural cosmetic difference at all, same body types, just some alternate makeup options and cultural background - dunmer ashlanders, breton wyress, etc.) while others still would have no subcategories at all.

Like mentioned, best way I see for something along the "subrace" line would be appereance packs once the recustomization features go live...

tinythinker

TheShadowScout wrote: »

The way I see this, the lore-iffy part of this would be the "racial passive costomization" part of it, which does indeed sound like a thinly disguised way to cater to the min/maxxers by crying "subrace" as pretext to adjust passives for super-effectiveness.

Except that I've given examples that aren't about being super-effective.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Like mentioned, best way I see for something along the "subrace" line would be appereance packs once the recustomization features go live...

Definitely one of the ways to do it for cosmetic only. Could always add it to that list of polymorphs requested for the Crown Store

Gidorick

twogirls_onebenny wrote: »

the only non lorebreaking addition like this would be subCLASSES, such as shadowscale for argonians, shadow legion or blades for imperials, etc.

Explain that to me please. how would sub-races be lore breaking. I'm fine with people think they are lore breaking but you need to explain HOW it's lore breaking and not just claim that it is.

That being said, I do think sub-CULTURES makes more sense than sub-races... mostly because there are more choices than races. I'm kind of loving the idea of a race-specific class like Shadowscale.

tinythinker wrote: »

Definitely one of the ways to do it for cosmetic only. Could always add it to that list of polymorphs requested for the Crown Store

Ugh... I really hope not. But the kinds of things I would buy from the crown store seem to be the LAST thing on ZOS' mind. So what do I know?

Spacemonkey

Gidorick wrote: »

The Senche-Mounts are NOT Khajiit @Spacemonkey.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/151606/senche-mount-khajiit-or-not-khajiit-with-the-response-from-lawrence-schick/p1

@Gidorick I stand corrected : ) , allthough that looks more like hand-waving on ZOS' part to make it fine to have tiger mounts because from the only actual in game reference I know, senche ARE one of the forms of the khajiit - and that form is the one ridden, but they aren't supposed to look as much like tigers. So I guess with this broader usage of the term 'senche', everything works out : /

"Senche-raht: At the size of a large horse, the Senche-raht is twice as tall as a Senche and can weigh as much as fifty Altmer. Has straighter legs and shorter body (relative to size) than a Senche, the Senche's other characteristics apply to the Senche-raht as well. Ridden, especially in battle. Known as "Battlecats" to Imperials."

"Senche: A smaller version of the Senche-raht, similar to the Pahmar-raht. Its forelimbs are thick and 1.5 times longer than their hindlimbs, giving them an ape-like appearence. The Senche's coat is tawny and stripped in red-brown. Stand as tall as an Altmer and weigh as much as twenty. They are sprinters, not long distance runners, and are often used as mounts for by other Khajiit."

ref: Khajiit physiology, phases and forms

Gidorick

oh I'm aware @Spacemonkey.

Back in February I suggested Race Specific Mounts (http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/153031/mount-specific-racial-riding-bonuses-concept/p1) and in that thread I made this image:



I do think the ONLY race that should be able to ride actual Senche are Khajiit. If they are ever introduced I hope they look like the image above.

I also made a thread about an eventual Khajiit update (http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/141710/suggestions-for-an-eventual-khajiit-centric-update/p1) that is appropriate for the thread we are in now. In my thread I posted this size comparison chart that I made:



I also have a suggestion for multiple-person War Mounts. In this way we could get to ride the Senche-raht in ESO. (http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/152462/siege-weapon-concept-war-mounts/p1)

As you can tell... I kind of love the Khajiit. ZOS does the race a great disservice by not exploring how the different Furstocks could enhance their game.

tinythinker

Phew...

OK, updated the original post with some clarification/elaboration. Hope that helps.

tinythinker

Gidorick wrote: »

oh I'm aware @Spacemonkey.

Back in February I suggested Race Specific Mounts (http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/153031/mount-specific-racial-riding-bonuses-concept/p1) and in that thread I made this image:



I do think the ONLY race that should be able to ride actual Senche are Khajiit. If they are ever introduced I hope they look like the image above.

I also made a thread about an eventual Khajiit update (http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/141710/suggestions-for-an-eventual-khajiit-centric-update/p1) that is appropriate for the thread we are in now. In my thread I posted this size comparison chart that I made:



I also have a suggestion for multiple-person War Mounts. In this way we could get to ride the Senche-raht in ESO. (http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/152462/siege-weapon-concept-war-mounts/p1)

As you can tell... I kind of love the Khajiit. ZOS does the race a great disservice by not exploring how the different Furstocks could enhance their game.

Yeah, the beast races need some from the devs.

BennyButton

With the dark brotherhood/thieves guild expansions (ive only heard rumors, not sure if this is actually a thing) they should add the race specific skill trees.

Shadowscales - Argonians

Morag tong - Dunmer

Something to do with Rajhin - Khajiit

Right of theft - Bosmer

Espionage (their charm) - Imperial

Espionage - Breton

Alik'r assassin/mercenary - Redguard

I'm sure there is SOME lore for the ones i'm missing (Orc, High elf, Nord)

tinythinker

twogirls_onebenny wrote: »

With the dark brotherhood/thieves guild expansions (ive only heard rumors, not sure if this is actually a thing) they should add the race specific skill trees.

Shadowscales - Argonians

Morag tong - Dunmer

Something to do with Rajhin - Khajiit

Right of theft - Bosmer

Espionage (their charm) - Imperial

Espionage - Breton

Alik'r assassin/mercenary - Redguard

I'm sure there is SOME lore for the ones i'm missing (Orc, High elf, Nord)

Would be great!

Miszou

Rather than create a whole new subrace system, why not just revisit the racial passive skills and add morphs to the passives instead?

A basic Argonian passive might be 50% faster swimming, but you can morph it into 2 (or possibly more) choices, to give yourself the appropriate background.

The morphs could be named according to the different backgrounds (Agaceph, Paatru, Sarpa etc.), with a single appropriate (and minor) boost.

dodgehopper_ESO

AngryNord wrote: »

Only if they remove Elder Scrolls from the game's title, and all references to TES lore in-game first.

I can't help but say 'Why so Angry, AngryNord'?

In all seriousness I think its an interesting idea, I just don't envision them doing this. Pretty sure Gidorick posted something like this a year or so back.

dodgehopper_ESO

Gidorick wrote: »

I do NOT like the idea of morphing your current race into a sub race as the standard practice. I would be totally ok with unlocking the ABILITY to create a sub-race.

I had a similar idea @tinythinker that would introduce sub-cultures to ESO (http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/223174/race-sub-culture-concept).

While I wouldn't be opposed to different types of playable Argonians, the Agacephs, Paatru, and Sarpa are pretty fiercely xenomorphic. I don't know if it would makes sense for them to be playable factions. The Nagas are just too wild and bestial I think. In my linked concept I suggest we be allowed to join one of 3 tribes of Murkmire, but ZOS could add more. I chose 3 because I wanted to have the same number of sub-cultures for each race but there is no reason one race can't have 5 subcultures and one only 3.

Now, this doesn't mean that ZOS couldn't write some lore about WHY these tribes are reclusive and make it so that the REASON they're untrusting of outsiders is because of their eventual betrayal at the end of the three banners war.

My above concept considers the lore "Tribes of Murkmire" (http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Tribes_of_Murkmire) to suggest three tribes that players could align themselves with. The tribes in that lore are:

• Bright-Throats
• Ghost People
• Black-Tongues
• Root-House People
• Miredancers

The choices I made in the linked post are really arbitrary. I would love if we could join any of the tribes.

Also, I do think Argonians need a wider variety of creation choices. It is my belief that ALL playable Argonians in all TES games have been one tribe, Archeins. This is the tribe that sold the Argonians into slavery. Even though all the player characters are (likely) the same tribe, we could still have quite a bit of variation in their appearance. I don't see why we can't have sliders that would give us options such as these:



I speak more about this in my Argonian Centric update (http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/147221/concept-for-a-future-argonian-centric-update/p1) and Monetization of Character Creation threads (http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/155307/monetization-of-character-creation-concept/p1).

Overall though I really support the core concept of adding sub-races/cultures... no matter how they're added.

@AngryNord , what about sub-races is against the lore?

Looks like you did post about this in your phylogenetics discussion. I like the idea of being able to convert a character to the sub-race if they did add it, simply because that sub-race could have been the culture-style you were shooting for. Example: You play a breton with wild unkept hair and beard, facial and body tattoos: He's a Reachman. It would be a shame if they allowed people to make Reachmen going forward but you were stuck as a stock Breton. The same goes with other types: Crowns, Forebears for Redguards, Colovians etc for Imperials and so on.

BabeestorGor

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

AngryNord wrote: »

Only if they remove Elder Scrolls from the game's title, and all references to TES lore in-game first.

I can't help but say 'Why so Angry, AngryNord'?

In all seriousness I think its an interesting idea, I just don't envision them doing this. Pretty sure Gidorick posted something like this a year or so back.

Its a great idea and if done right needn't be lorebreaking or unbalanced but like you I can't see ZoS (or Bethesda who have been simplifying character creation with each game since Daggerfall) ever doing it. Still one can hope.

tinythinker

Miszou wrote: »

Rather than create a whole new subrace system, why not just revisit the racial passive skills and add morphs to the passives instead?

A basic Argonian passive might be 50% faster swimming, but you can morph it into 2 (or possibly more) choices, to give yourself the appropriate background.

The morphs could be named according to the different backgrounds (Agaceph, Paatru, Sarpa etc.), with a single appropriate (and minor) boost.

I've suggested morphing racial passives somewhere else. Or was it class passives? Not sure where.

In this case, it isn't about subraces per se but about backgrounds that may include subraces. Basically all this system does is 1) add a few cosmetic options 2) let you choose a new passive like the ones you already have and 3) add in a few NPC interface options.

Even if you drop #3 and (and #1 too), #2 is pretty simple compared to morphing existing passives. Either way is an option. (At least on the forums.)

tinythinker

BabeestorGor wrote: »

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

AngryNord wrote: »

Only if they remove Elder Scrolls from the game's title, and all references to TES lore in-game first.

I can't help but say 'Why so Angry, AngryNord'?

In all seriousness I think its an interesting idea, I just don't envision them doing this. Pretty sure Gidorick posted something like this a year or so back.

Its a great idea and if done right needn't be lorebreaking or unbalanced but like you I can't see ZoS (or Bethesda who have been simplifying character creation with each game since Daggerfall) ever doing it. Still one can hope.

Well, that is the issue. But I still vote for reversing the trend!

dodgehopper_ESO

Spacemonkey wrote: »

And those are only the least bestial of the Khajit because technically Senche-Raht are also Khajiit. Right now half the population of Eso is riding them, so go for lore breaking - In the lore they would be more likely to EAT anyone that tries to ride them. (Other than some other Khajiit)

There was a famous Nord that stormed Red Mountain on a Senche, if I remember correctly. I don't recollect the name though, was it Jurgen? (don't think so), I'm thinking it was actually Ysmir Wulfhearth, but I can't recollect. In order to be fair I should state that both of these figures were as important as the likes of Talos, Nerevar, Pelinal, Morihaus, Alessia, Vivec etc so the fact that one of them rode a Senche is not so incredible.

dodgehopper_ESO

I'd actually rather the Champion System (along with a form of softcap) would help balance the racials as they exist, and open up those kinds of bonuses to all races. It really is a shame that the Champion system did not fill this function, because it really would have conveyed the old any Race any Class element of prior TES games. In Morrowind for instance you could very easily start out as an Altmer Knight, and you would not have been playing to your racial bonuses. In time and after great development though, along with the right enchantments it was easy enough to do whatever you wanted, or even be all things. I hate beating a dead horse, but I've said for some time they ought to look at how Secret World handled this 'do all be all system'. Secret World balances it by forcing you to pick (or slot) X # of Actives and X # of Passives as well as slotting role appropriate gear. In TSW you can learn every skill and know it at all times, but your build that you have actively set up NOW determines how your character performs. If that's how it worked in ESO, along with the Cp/Soft Cap systems I just glossed over, I think this game would really achieve its potential and have much better balance.

TheShadowScout

tinythinker wrote: »

I've suggested morphing racial passives somewhere else. Or was it class passives? Not sure where.

In this case, it isn't about subraces per se but about backgrounds that may include subraces. Basically all this system does is 1) add a few cosmetic options 2) let you choose a new passive like the ones you already have and 3) add in a few NPC interface options.

Skills should morph. Passives should not. That'y my opinion anyhow!

In any case, maybe you should have made a new thread with those changes into "Background"...

Now, I have been thinking a bit about the whole idea since...


The cosmetic options I can agree with wholeheartedly. A "subrace/subculture/background appereance pack" in the crown store I'd cheer for any day.


Subraces with -different- passives I could never warm to, but backgrounds... cultural or whatever... that are not different, but instead just adding a -very minor- flavor to the basic racial template... I have to agree, there might be something in that.

The main quibe I have with messing with passives is how it may open the door for people wanting to offset the lore about racial differences. "New racial passive tree" is a bit of a danger in this regard... especially considering the examples presented... but thinking about it... as long as it was so minor that is -didn't- do that... just a small extra bonus only along the already lore-conform racial distinctions, so it would only serve to diversify along already established guidelines, instead of throwing things out and replacing them with a cherry-picked bonus set... that might work well enough.

In that spirit, any such passives should not be "general" like most racial passives, but "specific" like for example guildline passives. If a bonus is given at all, it should be a very narrow focus.
And also not "structural" as in the racial "inborn talent", but more along the lines of "social" as in, background knowledge/skills/training. Yes, I am talking about that "useless" passive a la "Gain EXP in -skill line- faster", but there could be others then armor/weapon lines... bonus mages guild XP gain for some mage-happy altmer or breton background? Bonus legerdemain advancement for some extra light fingered Khajiiti background? Things like that? Because while this was an advantage throughout the game, at some point it will stop to be one as the skill/guild/whatever gets maxed, and not give any player an unreasonable edge in the end... AND focus on something more specific is very much "background/culture", thus it might fit here...

Another thing that might be married with "background passives" would be disadvantages, cultural taboos or other drawbacks. Who says it has to be all beneficial??? A "green pact" bosmer may not be allowed to cook or comsume foodstuffs made with any sort of plant matter (check those recipes and weep! ) A "ashlander" dunmer may be under suspiscion by the tribunal guard and have double justice effects in tribunal lands - double fine, and much quicker "kill on sight" reaction. There might be "taboo" weapon skill lines some subculture earns XP for slower (the code of mauloch says "no stealing" so maybe mauloch orcs have a harder time with legerdemain, or thieves guild, or whatever). Stuff like that...

One other consideration with this would be balance of choice over all the races. If you give argonians, say, four sub-culture/subrace/background options, all the other races need four as well to maintain balance between races. And I don't think we can find that many distinctions in some races... with some, we'd be hard pressed to find any, even! That would make the passive notion shakey again...
Might be more resonable to go with less, but... less fun. Three might be a good number if we can find three distinct groups with every race... I could think of dunmer, (noble house - commoner - ashlander) because for those I know the lore best. Khajiit and Argonian likely have more then enough, I could see orsimer (mauloch clans, trinimac clans, wood orcs), and redguards (forebears, crowns, ash'aba?) but then it may start to get a bit more difficult... I may have to read up a bit, but I had always considered some races like, say nords and imperials to be somewhat homogenous in background... still, something may be findable...


Finally, NPC interface options. Those would be sooooooo great... I would love it if the game paid more attention to our characters distinctiveness. Different reactions based on race, gender, class, background... that would make me happy!

tinythinker

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Subraces with -different- passives I could never warm to, but backgrounds... cultural or whatever... that are not different, but instead just adding a -very minor- flavor to the basic racial template... I have to agree, there might be something in that.

The main quibe I have with messing with passives is how it may open the door for people wanting to offset the lore about racial differences. "New racial passive tree" is a bit of a danger in this regard... especially considering the examples presented... but thinking about it... as long as it was so minor that is -didn't- do that... just a small extra bonus only along the already lore-conform racial distinctions, so it would only serve to diversify along already established guidelines, instead of throwing things out and replacing them with a cherry-picked bonus set... that might work well enough.

In that spirit, any such passives should not be "general" like most racial passives, but "specific" like for example guildline passives. If a bonus is given at all, it should be a very narrow focus.

And also not "structural" as in the racial "inborn talent", but more along the lines of "social" as in, background knowledge/skills/training. Yes, I am talking about that "useless" passive a la "Gain EXP in -skill line- faster", but there could be others then armor/weapon lines... bonus mages guild XP gain for some mage-happy altmer or breton background? Bonus legerdemain advancement for some extra light fingered Khajiiti background? Things like that? Because while this was an advantage throughout the game, at some point it will stop to be one as the skill/guild/whatever gets maxed, and not give any player an unreasonable edge in the end... AND focus on something more specific is very much "background/culture", thus it might fit here...

As mentioned in my revised first post, there were reasons why I originally just called the basic concept "subrace", but I realized the word was throwing people off. If you saw some of my suggestions for Redguard, Orc, and Breton, there are Backgrounds that aren't combat oriented. I don't think those that are combat oriented are a big deal so long as they are minor. My suggestions have always been lore-faithful, so, really, it's just a matter of digging into that lore for inspiration to adding new backgrounds.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Another thing that might be married with "background passives" would be disadvantages, cultural taboos or other drawbacks. Who says it has to be all beneficial??? A "green pact" bosmer may not be allowed to cook or comsume foodstuffs made with any sort of plant matter (check those recipes and weep! ) A "ashlander" dunmer may be under suspiscion by the tribunal guard and have double justice effects in tribunal lands - double fine, and much quicker "kill on sight" reaction. There might be "taboo" weapon skill lines some subculture earns XP for slower (the code of mauloch says "no stealing" so maybe mauloch orcs have a harder time with legerdemain, or thieves guild, or whatever). Stuff like that...

I did that with the Altmer on a separate post on adding more customization to racial passives. Nothing about subraces or what not, just "add another tree but make players only choose some of the total number of options, not all." They received a lore-friendly weakness to magic and elemental damage. For Background I was thinking of this being something that shows up in NPC interactions.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

One other consideration with this would be balance of choice over all the races. If you give argonians, say, four sub-culture/subrace/background options, all the other races need four as well to maintain balance between races. And I don't think we can find that many distinctions in some races... with some, we'd be hard pressed to find any, even! That would make the passive notion shakey again...
Might be more resonable to go with less, but... less fun. Three might be a good number if we can find three distinct groups with every race... I could think of dunmer, (noble house - commoner - ashlander) because for those I know the lore best. Khajiit and Argonian likely have more then enough, I could see orsimer (mauloch clans, trinimac clans, wood orcs), and redguards (forebears, crowns, ash'aba?) but then it may start to get a bit more difficult... I may have to read up a bit, but I had always considered some races like, say nords and imperials to be somewhat homogenous in background... still, something may be findable...

No problem here. In five minutes I came up with 4 Background for Redguards, 3 for Bretons, and 2 for Orcs. Getting to four for all playable races wouldn't be a issue.

Other Races

I haven't fleshed out the Backgrounds for other races. I think three or four options would be good. My Argonian example uses four options, so if I were going to work on Backgrounds for other playable races I would likely stick with that.

Here are a few initial sketches of early thoughts on a few other races. If I took the time I could get four for each, but here are the first glimmers of small number of potential Backgrounds:

Redguard: (1) a Background focused on bringing back sword-singing, cosmetics include uniquely cool beards, passive focus on a chance to ignore dodging; (2) a Background focused on devotion to the Yokudan gods, cosmetics include unique and divinely inspired tattoos and/or jewelry, passive focus on a bonus to generating ultimate points; (3) a Background for the Ash'aba (don't just be an honorary member/outsider ), cosmetics include some fierce new scars, scowls and tats, passive focus on combating undead (such as damage reduction from undead attacks, or dodge chance versus undead attacks, or something along those lines that isn't redundant with regard to the Figher's Guild skill line); (4) a Background focused on the smithing traditions of the Redguard, cosmetics add appropriate adornments, passive focus on learning traits quicker, needing fewer tempers, perhaps some special/unique bonus to equipment crafted, or something along those lines.

Breton: (1) a Background focused on having a more distinctly Merish (a.k.a. Elven) pedigree, cosmetics include more Ayleid/Altmer-ish facial angles and slightly pointed ears, passive focus on a chance to absorb spell projectiles to gain a small amount of magicka; (2) a Background focused on the Alessian heritage, cosmetics include features for a more stalwart appearance, passive focus on spell/physical/elemental resistance; (3) a Background focused on mercantile proficiency, cosmetics include appropriate adornments, passive focus on cost of goods and services (equipment and repair costs much lower, sell items to merchants for much more, this one would be boosted since it is a non-combat oriented focus).

Orsimer: (1) a Background in a cult or ritual of Malacath associated with rage and "berserking", cosmetics include appropriately disfigured and violent looking adornments, passive focus on increasing weapon power at low health; (2) a Background similar to the smithing one for Redguards mentioned above but with a different unique trait.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Finally, NPC interface options. Those would be sooooooo great... I would love it if the game paid more attention to our characters distinctiveness. Different reactions based on race, gender, class, background... that would make me happy!

And add more in for Vamps and Werewolves, too.

TheShadowScout

tinythinker wrote: »

As mentioned in my revised first post, there were reasons why I originally just called the basic concept "subrace", but I realized the word was throwing people off. If you saw some of my suggestions for Redguard, Orc, and Breton, there are Backgrounds that aren't combat oriented. I don't think those that are combat oriented are a big deal so long as they are minor. My suggestions have always been lore-faithful, so, really, it's just a matter of digging into that lore for inspiration to adding new backgrounds.

The problem with that is - the backgrounds need be equal, or guess what all the people will be picking? If you have one combat-oriented background, and some more, say, crafting or mercantile, the people will be far too likely to pick the combat background for the extra edge in combat.
But I wholly approve of non-combat boni from backgrounds!
Maybe a mix of the two for each? Each background having one combat-oriented bonus, and two non-combat boni? So that the backgrounds don't collect all the combat power in one choice?

tinythinker wrote: »

I did that with the Altmer on a separate post on adding more customization to racial passives. Nothing about subraces or what not, just "add another tree but make players only choose some of the total number of options, not all." They received a lore-friendly weakness to magic and elemental damage. For Background I was thinking of this being something that shows up in NPC interactions.

Altmer are more difficult from where I was thinking. I mean, sure there are the Thalmor as cultural sub-group... but then what? Veiled alliance? (not applicable, since we fight them througout the AD story) Psijic order? (may have started altmer, but IIRC went beyond racial ties...)

tinythinker wrote: »

No problem here. In five minutes I came up with 4 Background for Redguards, 3 for Bretons, and 2 for Orcs.

Yeah, for some its easy enough. We may want to start collecting though... since for some its not that easy. I suppose many could go with the "high social status - low social status - outsider" (dunmer: Noble-commoner-ashlander, Breton: Noble-commoner-Wyress) split, or a "traditionalist - reformer - other" (Redguard: Forebear-Crown-Ash'aba, Orc: Mauloch-Trinimac- wood orc).
Those don't worry me as much.
But other races have far less divisions in their background, lore wise... Altmer? Bosmer? Nords? Imperials?
Still something might be found.

tinythinker wrote: »

And add more in for Vamps and Werewolves, too.

Indeed, but those are an entirely different discussion...
(make them darn monsters in the eyes of tamriel as they should be, lore-wise, not "normal characters with an extra skill line"... give them reason to hide their nature, and consequences for failing to do so... etc.)

Although, their skill lines are a -very- good example for the kind of "specific" passives I would like to see in any "background" selection...

Volkodav

Khaos_Bane wrote: »

UltimaJoe777 wrote: »

The only people that would choose a race for the passives alone are metagamers and anyone else chooses the race they actually like regardless of passives.

I don't believe this is true at all. I think race is highly considered and why race change was a HUGE demand. If you know it's true please point to facts. Thanks.

I dont play a race for it's passives at all. I play the ones I prefer.Mostly for looks,and now that I have played them all,their actives.I pay more attention to them than passives.
(Hmm,perhaps I should be paying more attention to those passives after all.)

roigseguib16_ESO

This is super interesting. Loving to see people excited to dig so deep for the game to become more lore-friendly!

Abeille

I opened this thread thinking it was new and now I'm missing @Gidorick again