Maintenance for the week of March 25:
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – March 26, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – March 26, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – March 28, 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)

The Concept of Seperating Race from Racials.

  • trackdemon5512
    trackdemon5512
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I want my character's race to to have exactly the same level of impact on combat effectiveness that her gender has.

    Shalador (a Nord) was a gifted mage. Why can't my Bosmer be one as well. After all, according to the game she is unique and The Chosen One. Play how you want? What difference do your racials make to anyone but you?

    Except while sexual dimorphism isn’t significant among the playable races, racial/cultural attribute differences are significant.

    Bosmer passives reflect that accurately with focus being on archery, stealth, and physical endurance. Thousands of years of physiologically enduring the forests of Valenwood and hunting for food due to the Green Pact. That history has an effect. That’s just evolution and every living organism we know of is subject to physiologically adapting to the their environment in order to best survive.

    Now can a Bosmer be a mage? Sure. Will they be a great mage? Possibly. It’s not like you can’t be a mage because you’re a Bosmer. But physically your body has been conditioned over millennia to make traditional Bosmer life and customs easier on it.

    Racial Identity is really Racial/Cultural identity in ESO. To ignore such is to ignore the rich and storied history that exists.
    Edited by trackdemon5512 on October 25, 2021 12:24AM
  • VaranisArano
    VaranisArano
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    No, and none of your counterarguments are particularly convincing.

    Race and the racial tendencies to certain archetypes are a consistent part of the lore of The Elder Scrolls, even if the gameplay representations of that have changed from game to game. That's true over and above whatever special talents the player character have. Consider how distinct the naturally high magic skills of the Altmer make them from the warriors of Hammerfell throughout the TES series, or how the Khajiit propensity for stealth leads to a cultural stigma as Thieves that isn't shared by other races, even though we know that NPCs of every race can be gifted Thieves.

    This is a roleplaying game. Part of TES roleplaying is playing as a member of a certain race, even if the racial bonuses aren't completely consistent from game to game. I don't know if you've ever played D&D, but this is basically the equivalent of telling the DM, "Hey, I want to play an Elf, but can I not take the stat plus/minuses that elves get, but instead take the extra feats humans get because I want them?"

    It's also worth noting the impact of racial bonuses on roleplay. When ESO took away the stealth passive from Bosmer, who've traditionally been stealthy in the lore and past games, a number of players complained they felt there weren't playing a real bosmer anymore. That's a testament to the identity that these racial bonuses give to the roleplaying experience. Sure, one could say "Oh, well, now you can just steal the Khajiit stealth passive!" That's, ah, not really the point.

    And "ends racism" is ridiculous in ESO when two alliances are literally based on their three races overcoming their cultural antipathy for each other. TES racism strongly informs the plot and worldbuilding of Daggerfall, Morrowind, and Skyrim. It's very much a part of the setting, worldbuilding, and the lore. Ironically, if you do away with the substantive racial differences entirely, you render TES racism solely about appearance, when it never has been before.

    So while I can understand the gripes about how ESO races are implemented such that there's inevitably a BIS racial choice for certain builds and roles...the lore of The Elder Scrolls is such that there are substantive differences between the races that drive many of the conflicts shown in the games.


    Finally, it's a surefire way to bias your poll when you preemptively tell the people who disagree with your counterarguments to "stop talking & be quiet for several days."
  • Ippokrates
    Ippokrates
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well, the current racial system seems fine, differences in performance are minimal, but having 4 skills to represent a race is kinda a waste of potential and in some cases (Redguards and Argonians) looks like a joke -_-

    That being said, we should remember that ESO is not a single player game someone can pass as many time on as many builds they want in their parents' basement, but MMO RPG and as such it is highly competitive game. Therefore playing just for fun is not so fun anymore, especially when you want to get into leaderbord and get some stuff.

    Furthermore, previous TES game were introducing a single hero on his journey, equipped with vast set of attributes & skills that were highly customizable and in some way were depending on race (and yes, there were differences in gender) BUT Skyrim basically burried this concept making these differences smaller than ever (difference between 15-25 skillpoints you can compensate in few minutes) and only a single racial skill is unique for each race. Bah, the most important thing (at least for magicka toons) - Sign of birth, was replaced by Mundus you can switch at any moment. Just like in ESO...

    But in ESO we are not roleplaying a hero on its quest, but we can meet, interact and roleplay with whole societies, fulled of not only warriors, thieves and mages but also craftsmen, merchants, workers, sailors, etc.

    Therefore I would consider some sort of redevelopment of racial passives, especially in area of specialization for particular paths, because sure, Bretons or Altmers might have an predisposition towards magic (purist should remember that in case of Altmers there were a massive penalties involved ;p ,) but assumption that every Nord or Imperial is crude brute is rather silly, and it stands in contrast even with ESO lore - look at the Shalidor or Abnur. And it is a shame.
    Edited by Ippokrates on October 25, 2021 12:42AM
  • newtinmpls
    newtinmpls
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    I came here to play ESO, not to play a generisized bland min-max fest.

    I like that race matters.... I also appreciate that the higher my skill as a player, the less it matters.
    Tenesi Faryon of Telvanni - Dunmer Sorceress who deliberately sought sacrifice into Cold Harbor to rescue her beloved.
    Hisa Ni Caemaire - Altmer Sorceress, member of the Order Draconis and Adept of the House of Dibella.
    Broken Branch Toothmaul - goblin (for my goblin characters, I use either orsimer or bosmer templates) Templar, member of the Order Draconis and persistently unskilled pickpocket
    Mol gro Durga - Orsimer Socerer/Battlemage who died the first time when the Nibenay Valley chapterhouse of the Order Draconis was destroyed, then went back to Cold Harbor to rescue his second/partner who was still captive. He overestimated his resistance to the hopelessness of Oblivion, about to give up, and looked up to see the golden glow of atherius surrounding a beautiful young woman who extended her hand to him and said "I can help you". He carried Fianna Kingsley out of Cold Harbor on his shoulder. He carried Alvard Stower under one arm. He also irritated the Prophet who had intended the portal for only Mol and Lyris.
    ***
    Order Draconis - well c'mon there has to be some explanation for all those dragon tattoos.
    House of Dibella - If you have ever seen or read "Memoirs of a Geisha" that's just the beginning...
    Nibenay Valley Chapterhouse - Where now stands only desolate ground and a dolmen there once was a thriving community supporting one of the major chapterhouses of the Order Draconis
  • BretonMage
    BretonMage
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I have to admit I'm somewhat conflicted about this. On one hand, I personally believe that people should be able to achieve what they want to despite their origins. And I hate racism. On the other hand, the Elder Scrolls, both SP and MMO, being games, need to describe racial/cultural heritage in a way that we players can experience meaningfully. And I guess in games that is usually through one's stats.

    I'm fully aware that this is the "we've always done it this way" argument, which is why I voted yes in the poll. I think it's something interesting to think about, especially if there are players who enjoy a particular race but not their racial stats. I do agree it should probably be a purchasable token, because I think it should be an exception rather than having races losing all their unique qualities.
  • thorwyn
    thorwyn
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Hymzir wrote: »
    You will not sway the traditionalists. They are far too set in their ways. It's kinda like on of those "MMOs require grind" things. People think it's true, and therfore act like it's true. I'm not trying to belittle anyone's beliefs here, merely pointing out that it is a belief, not a fact. Racials on themselves, as purely game mechanical constructs, do serve a valid function in offering build diversity. However, tying such mechanical attributes to a purely cosmetic factor, is a rather old fashioned way of doing it. Better ways have been devised in the game industry to offer such mechanics, while also fostering greater creativity and ways to express that within the fiction of the game world.

    Changing the racials to be irrelevant and purely fluff, and offering selection of natural talents, would not harm the game in anyway, and would make it better for many. But many people will resist the idea simply because of ingrained beliefs that having racials matters.

    You will also see lot of people touting past games as proof that they are integral, that they are part of Elder Scroll lore. And that ZOS is simply respecting that. Heh, like lore ever stopped ZOS from doing what they wanted. They retcon stuff left and right to suit their needs.

    Besides, racial passive of the Elder Scroll universe have always been a racial bias, not a racial imperative. That is to say, that it is more likely for a member of a specific race to have leanings towards martial or magical learning. Or be more swift and agile than one from another race. But at the same time, those racial aptitudes have never prevented exceptional persons from rising to the very top of their chosen trade thru study and dedicated training, or by the benefits of being unusually gifted in said activities. Those racial tendencies have made certain paths easier than others for a member of a given race, but they have never stood as an absolute barrier in their way. In ESO though, an Altmer is always going to be better an magic than a Nord. The mechanics of the game prevent the Nord from ever achieving the same level of power as an Altmer. No matter what the player does.

    In pretty much every Elder Scroll game, except ESO, you can master all trades just as well, regardless of what race you chose at the beginning. In ESO the racials are a dominant feature that explicitly make you better at certain things. You can go across the grain if you want, but the loss of actual ingame power is perceivable. Now some will say it doesn't mater, that you can finish 99% percent of the games content even when playing against your racial stereotypes. Which is true, but doesn't' change the fact, that at the very top of the chart, chasing leadeboard scores, or trying to master PVP, it pays to go toady up to the party line as far as racials go. Which is a shame.

    Wanna be like Shalidor? A true master wizard of the arcane arts, who also happened to be a Nord? Well, "No soup for you!", says ESO. Nords are dumb big brutes, best left to take hits for others, and not much else.

    But enough already, this wont change. Its a relic of an archaic game design philosophy, but one that is still deeply entrenched into the psyche of gaming population. Heck, I used to subscribe to it like most of everyone else. It took me years and years of convincing by others to finally see the light. Racials do not add anything tangible to the game, and only end up limiting the players creativity.

    I admit it, I am coming from the traditionalist side. For me, MMO's do indeed require a certain element of grinding, I hate the sticker book and all the attempts at fiddling around with RNG. I also think that choices you make in a game need to come with consequences, both positive and negative ones, because choices are the essence of any game from chosing the right piece to move in chess to picking the right weapon in shooters. And yes, I am fully aware that my opinion is not en vogue anymore these days. Things have changed, the player base is not interested in that kind of stuff anymore. Their focus is entirely on game play with as little preparation as possible. That's ok, I get where they are coming from and I think the market is large enough to cater both opinions.

     

    What I refuse to understand is the urge to change long existing games, tweaking them into something that might fit into a modern gamer's world. If a game does not meet my expectations or seems too time consuming for my life situation, I go and look for another game. What I don't do is spend endless hours arguing and discussing with the developers and demanding the game to be stream lined to my needs. There is a whole universe of potential games out there, so leave the established ones alone.

    And if the dam breaks open many years too soon
    And if there is no room upon the hill
    And if your head explodes with dark forebodings too
    I'll see you on the dark side of the moon
  • trackdemon5512
    trackdemon5512
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    BretonMage wrote: »
    I have to admit I'm somewhat conflicted about this. On one hand, I personally believe that people should be able to achieve what they want to despite their origins. And I hate racism. On the other hand, the Elder Scrolls, both SP and MMO, being games, need to describe racial/cultural heritage in a way that we players can experience meaningfully. And I guess in games that is usually through one's stats.

    I'm fully aware that this is the "we've always done it this way" argument, which is why I voted yes in the poll. I think it's something interesting to think about, especially if there are players who enjoy a particular race but not their racial stats. I do agree it should probably be a purchasable token, because I think it should be an exception rather than having races losing all their unique qualities.

    Racism is prejudice or discrimination against someone solely because of their race. ESO experiences “ableism”, not racism. If the passives changed and you didn’t play as a high elf because they’re a high elf then that’s racism.

    If you’re not playing as a high elf because you don’t think they can do content it’s the very definition of ableism.

    And let’s be perfectly clear, every race in this game can complete all content. A high elf can be a stam warden and get everything done. Or they can play as a tank and complete vet hard mode trials. If anyone doesn’t think they can because of a race well that’s on them.
  • BlueRaven
    BlueRaven
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    No, and none of your counterarguments are particularly convincing.

    Race and the racial tendencies to certain archetypes are a consistent part of the lore of The Elder Scrolls, even if the gameplay representations of that have changed from game to game. That's true over and above whatever special talents the player character have. Consider how distinct the naturally high magic skills of the Altmer make them from the warriors of Hammerfell throughout the TES series, or how the Khajiit propensity for stealth leads to a cultural stigma as Thieves that isn't shared by other races, even though we know that NPCs of every race can be gifted Thieves.

    This is a roleplaying game. Part of TES roleplaying is playing as a member of a certain race, even if the racial bonuses aren't completely consistent from game to game. I don't know if you've ever played D&D, but this is basically the equivalent of telling the DM, "Hey, I want to play an Elf, but can I not take the stat plus/minuses that elves get, but instead take the extra feats humans get because I want them?"

    It's also worth noting the impact of racial bonuses on roleplay. When ESO took away the stealth passive from Bosmer, who've traditionally been stealthy in the lore and past games, a number of players complained they felt there weren't playing a real bosmer anymore. That's a testament to the identity that these racial bonuses give to the roleplaying experience. Sure, one could say "Oh, well, now you can just steal the Khajiit stealth passive!" That's, ah, not really the point.

    And "ends racism" is ridiculous in ESO when two alliances are literally based on their three races overcoming their cultural antipathy for each other. TES racism strongly informs the plot and worldbuilding of Daggerfall, Morrowind, and Skyrim. It's very much a part of the setting, worldbuilding, and the lore. Ironically, if you do away with the substantive racial differences entirely, you render TES racism solely about appearance, when it never has been before.

    So while I can understand the gripes about how ESO races are implemented such that there's inevitably a BIS racial choice for certain builds and roles...the lore of The Elder Scrolls is such that there are substantive differences between the races that drive many of the conflicts shown in the games.


    Finally, it's a surefire way to bias your poll when you preemptively tell the people who disagree with your counterarguments to "stop talking & be quiet for several days."

    Your arguments about lore don’t sway me when the eso combat team gets the lore so wrong.

    -Which race is supposed to be tanks? (Hint: Its not nords nor argonians.)

    -Which race is supposed to be leather armor berserkers? (Hint: Its not orcs.)

    -And which is the stealthiest race? (Hint: Its not kahjiit.) in fact in eso imperials have better stealth passives then Bosmers do.

    Justify that in lore, in eso why are imperials better at stealth than Bosmers?

    The weird part is the narrative half of the game gets it more or less right. But it’s like the combat team works on a different game with much different lore.

    So it’s hard for me to sit here and support traditional hard coded racial traits when zos themselves appears to care so little about the lore behind them. Is getting the lore wrong solely the combat teams purview?
    Make the racials more pliable if we are just playing fast and loose with the lore anyway, at least in will possibly break the race meta and make players a bit more happy.
  • emilyhyoyeon
    emilyhyoyeon
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Funnily enough argonians should be a ''DPS race'' in ESO if their ESO racials were more accurate to how they are in the other TES games. In my signature I compiled all their racials from previous TES titles.
    In ESO, it's obvious ZOS just took their histskin ability from Skyrim and called it a day despite them obviously being a rogue/assassin type
    Zirasia Firemaker, imperial fire mage & sunbather _ Deebaba Soul-Weaver, argonian spirit minder & soul gem collector
    Tullanisse Starborne, altmer battlemage noble & ayleid researcher _ Qa'Rirra, khajiit assassin & dancer
  • jm42
    jm42
    ✭✭✭✭
    Race is not a "cosmetics" simple as that. [snip]

    [edited for rude/insulting comment]
    Edited by ZOS_Icy on October 25, 2021 12:54PM
  • VaranisArano
    VaranisArano
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    No, and none of your counterarguments are particularly convincing.

    Race and the racial tendencies to certain archetypes are a consistent part of the lore of The Elder Scrolls, even if the gameplay representations of that have changed from game to game. That's true over and above whatever special talents the player character have. Consider how distinct the naturally high magic skills of the Altmer make them from the warriors of Hammerfell throughout the TES series, or how the Khajiit propensity for stealth leads to a cultural stigma as Thieves that isn't shared by other races, even though we know that NPCs of every race can be gifted Thieves.

    This is a roleplaying game. Part of TES roleplaying is playing as a member of a certain race, even if the racial bonuses aren't completely consistent from game to game. I don't know if you've ever played D&D, but this is basically the equivalent of telling the DM, "Hey, I want to play an Elf, but can I not take the stat plus/minuses that elves get, but instead take the extra feats humans get because I want them?"

    It's also worth noting the impact of racial bonuses on roleplay. When ESO took away the stealth passive from Bosmer, who've traditionally been stealthy in the lore and past games, a number of players complained they felt there weren't playing a real bosmer anymore. That's a testament to the identity that these racial bonuses give to the roleplaying experience. Sure, one could say "Oh, well, now you can just steal the Khajiit stealth passive!" That's, ah, not really the point.

    And "ends racism" is ridiculous in ESO when two alliances are literally based on their three races overcoming their cultural antipathy for each other. TES racism strongly informs the plot and worldbuilding of Daggerfall, Morrowind, and Skyrim. It's very much a part of the setting, worldbuilding, and the lore. Ironically, if you do away with the substantive racial differences entirely, you render TES racism solely about appearance, when it never has been before.

    So while I can understand the gripes about how ESO races are implemented such that there's inevitably a BIS racial choice for certain builds and roles...the lore of The Elder Scrolls is such that there are substantive differences between the races that drive many of the conflicts shown in the games.


    Finally, it's a surefire way to bias your poll when you preemptively tell the people who disagree with your counterarguments to "stop talking & be quiet for several days."

    Your arguments about lore don’t sway me when the eso combat team gets the lore so wrong.

    -Which race is supposed to be tanks? (Hint: Its not nords nor argonians.)

    -Which race is supposed to be leather armor berserkers? (Hint: Its not orcs.)

    -And which is the stealthiest race? (Hint: Its not kahjiit.) in fact in eso imperials have better stealth passives then Bosmers do.

    Justify that in lore, in eso why are imperials better at stealth than Bosmers?

    The weird part is the narrative half of the game gets it more or less right. But it’s like the combat team works on a different game with much different lore.

    So it’s hard for me to sit here and support traditional hard coded racial traits when zos themselves appears to care so little about the lore behind them. Is getting the lore wrong solely the combat teams purview?
    Make the racials more pliable if we are just playing fast and loose with the lore anyway, at least in will possibly break the race meta and make players a bit more happy.

    I'm afraid my answer to that is to say that the combat team should pay more attention to the lore.

    It's not to say "Whelp, since the combat team doesn't, we shouldn't either, and throw the baby out with the bathwater."

    Your suggestion might make some players a bit more happy. I'm well aware this is not a matter where everyone will be satisfied. But at least my answer strengthens roleplaying identity and series lore, rather than removing race-based gameplay from a series known for racial conflicts.
  • BlueRaven
    BlueRaven
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    No, and none of your counterarguments are particularly convincing.

    Race and the racial tendencies to certain archetypes are a consistent part of the lore of The Elder Scrolls, even if the gameplay representations of that have changed from game to game. That's true over and above whatever special talents the player character have. Consider how distinct the naturally high magic skills of the Altmer make them from the warriors of Hammerfell throughout the TES series, or how the Khajiit propensity for stealth leads to a cultural stigma as Thieves that isn't shared by other races, even though we know that NPCs of every race can be gifted Thieves.

    This is a roleplaying game. Part of TES roleplaying is playing as a member of a certain race, even if the racial bonuses aren't completely consistent from game to game. I don't know if you've ever played D&D, but this is basically the equivalent of telling the DM, "Hey, I want to play an Elf, but can I not take the stat plus/minuses that elves get, but instead take the extra feats humans get because I want them?"

    It's also worth noting the impact of racial bonuses on roleplay. When ESO took away the stealth passive from Bosmer, who've traditionally been stealthy in the lore and past games, a number of players complained they felt there weren't playing a real bosmer anymore. That's a testament to the identity that these racial bonuses give to the roleplaying experience. Sure, one could say "Oh, well, now you can just steal the Khajiit stealth passive!" That's, ah, not really the point.

    And "ends racism" is ridiculous in ESO when two alliances are literally based on their three races overcoming their cultural antipathy for each other. TES racism strongly informs the plot and worldbuilding of Daggerfall, Morrowind, and Skyrim. It's very much a part of the setting, worldbuilding, and the lore. Ironically, if you do away with the substantive racial differences entirely, you render TES racism solely about appearance, when it never has been before.

    So while I can understand the gripes about how ESO races are implemented such that there's inevitably a BIS racial choice for certain builds and roles...the lore of The Elder Scrolls is such that there are substantive differences between the races that drive many of the conflicts shown in the games.


    Finally, it's a surefire way to bias your poll when you preemptively tell the people who disagree with your counterarguments to "stop talking & be quiet for several days."

    Your arguments about lore don’t sway me when the eso combat team gets the lore so wrong.

    -Which race is supposed to be tanks? (Hint: Its not nords nor argonians.)

    -Which race is supposed to be leather armor berserkers? (Hint: Its not orcs.)

    -And which is the stealthiest race? (Hint: Its not kahjiit.) in fact in eso imperials have better stealth passives then Bosmers do.

    Justify that in lore, in eso why are imperials better at stealth than Bosmers?

    The weird part is the narrative half of the game gets it more or less right. But it’s like the combat team works on a different game with much different lore.

    So it’s hard for me to sit here and support traditional hard coded racial traits when zos themselves appears to care so little about the lore behind them. Is getting the lore wrong solely the combat teams purview?
    Make the racials more pliable if we are just playing fast and loose with the lore anyway, at least in will possibly break the race meta and make players a bit more happy.

    I'm afraid my answer to that is to say that the combat team should pay more attention to the lore.

    It's not to say "Whelp, since the combat team doesn't, we shouldn't either, and throw the baby out with the bathwater."

    Your suggestion might make some players a bit more happy. I'm well aware this is not a matter where everyone will be satisfied. But at least my answer strengthens roleplaying identity and series lore, rather than removing race-based gameplay from a series known for racial conflicts.

    The problem with that argument is that it’s defending lore that the combat team itself appears to care little about. THEY are the ones that created this mess, and relying on them to fix it feels like a lost cause.

    I don’t want to be stuck with race passives that feel like they were picked at random rather then following the established lore. Lore attributes doled out like casino results is not worth defending. And if we are going to have racial passives that don’t follow the lore anyway, then let us pick them.

    At least for me, I will be closer to the lore then the combat team will dare ever go.
  • Elsonso
    Elsonso
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    Justify that in lore, in eso why are imperials better at stealth than Bosmers?

    The weird part is the narrative half of the game gets it more or less right. But it’s like the combat team works on a different game with much different lore.

    Have you been in Cyrodiil? Only two alliances want to kill Bosmers. Everyone wants to kill the Imperials that camp out. :smile:

    But... yes... I do think that the combat team favors combat mechanics over lore. I glibly chalk this up to "spreadsheet driven game design". If a race moves out of the standard deviation, then it has to be changed, and the easiest way to do that is just to make the necessary changes. Lore can get in the way of that. :neutral:
    PC NA/EU: @Elsonso
    XBox EU/NA: @ElsonsoJannus
    X/Twitter: ElsonsoJannus
  • Aznarb
    Aznarb
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    hafgood wrote: »
    You could just create a new character using a race you feel is more appropriate?

    TBH it look more like the OP is bad and try to blame something else.
    Race doesn't matter in teso, even for vtrifeca trial it's not needed to get high enough number.
    I've play a Khajiit Tank and another Healer, My warden heal was Nord, My stam DD NB was Argonian and so one. Never have trouble doing anything the game have to offer.

    I can't care less about racial passive, they won't change number enough to made you "good".
    Just play the class and race combo you like.
    [ PC EU ]

    [ Khuram-dar ]
    [ Khajiit ]
    [ Templar - Healer ]
    [Crazy Gatherer & Compulsive Thief]

  • Cillion3117
    Cillion3117
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    If it's not broken, don't fix it.
  • BlueRaven
    BlueRaven
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Elsonso wrote: »
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    Justify that in lore, in eso why are imperials better at stealth than Bosmers?

    The weird part is the narrative half of the game gets it more or less right. But it’s like the combat team works on a different game with much different lore.

    Have you been in Cyrodiil? Only two alliances want to kill Bosmers. Everyone wants to kill the Imperials that camp out. :smile:

    But... yes... I do think that the combat team favors combat mechanics over lore. I glibly chalk this up to "spreadsheet driven game design". If a race moves out of the standard deviation, then it has to be changed, and the easiest way to do that is just to make the necessary changes. Lore can get in the way of that. :neutral:

    I would love to see this spreadsheet because clearly there are winners and losers in the way the numbers played out.
  • SydneyGrey
    SydneyGrey
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    There are so many examples of races not being stereotypical, for example, Shalidor (a Nord) being a master of magic. There are plenty of examples of Redguards doing magic as well.

  • leetacakesb16_ESO
    leetacakesb16_ESO
    ✭✭✭
    [snip]

    What makes the game unique is that everyone is unique. Take that away and we're all the same. If you want to play a stamina character as a magicka character, or vice versa, then do it.

    I play a pro-stamina character as a magicka character and I use this particular character in Veteren maelstrom to farm. I also use it for the other solo arena.

    If someone laughs at you because of that, who cares. They are immature and are taking the slight differences in the game too seriously.

    [edited for baiting]
    Edited by ZOS_Icy on October 25, 2021 1:51PM
    Pc EU- Lady_Hania
  • BXR_Lonestar
    BXR_Lonestar
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Every Elder Scrolls game I have ever played has racial passives (and often a unique active skill as well), so it would be very weird if ESO decided to eliminate that. I love my lizards too, but it has always been true of every game where different races gravitated towards certain skills, and it wouldn't feel like an Elder Scrolls game if they suddenly changed that.
  • Ei8htba11
    Ei8htba11
    ✭✭✭✭
    You've got it wrong, it's not racism. These are different species. As species with different physiology, I'm sure there would be actual documented differences.

    For people picking on you for playing argonian? Why do you care? Are other peoples opinions of what you do more important than your own? You do you, [snip] the rest.

    [edited for profanity bypass]
    Edited by ZOS_Icy on October 26, 2021 10:06AM
  • magnusthorek
    magnusthorek
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    While this makes no sense at all, after all, racial passives are nothing more than innate abilities developed by people, be it because of their ethnics or the place they live (era after era), this *could* be interesting because some passives are ridiculous and make it hard to get into the competitive environment without simply discarding your "main", the character - and perhaps the name - you created and love because of the FoTC (Flavour of the Chapter :lol:)

    I know I'd like to have Khajiiti — ending with an "i" makes it a plural form or refers to the people as a whole ;) — extra Critical Damage or perhaps a High Elf without being a snob piece of meat with hepatitis (sorry, I couldn't resist :lol:)
    I am the very model of a scientist Salarian, I've studied species Turian, Asari, and Batarian.
    I'm quite good at genetics (as a subset of biology) because I am an expert (which I know is a tautology).
    My xenoscience studies range from urban to agrarian, I am the very model of a Scientist Salarian.
  • Eshkerigal
    Eshkerigal
    ✭✭✭
    Or at least, give us few more race changes for almost useless races as Nord.

    Altmer is better choice for tank than nord for mag dd.
    Breton is better choice for tank than nord for mag dd
    Everything is better choice for tank than nord for mag dd.

    Give nords some love. Give them passive magicka (with stamina) or change ult passive to gain ultimate when player hit enemy, and not when player get damage. It should help a bit...

    Also. Bretons.
    They have many knights. Yes, those guys with swords and/or shields. Giving breton bonus for stam dps would not be "lore breaking".

    Variety is good but races other than khajits and dunmers should have small reworks to make them viable for any role too.
  • Iluvrien
    Iluvrien
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    No, and none of your counterarguments are particularly convincing.

    Race and the racial tendencies to certain archetypes are a consistent part of the lore of The Elder Scrolls, even if the gameplay representations of that have changed from game to game. That's true over and above whatever special talents the player character have. Consider how distinct the naturally high magic skills of the Altmer make them from the warriors of Hammerfell throughout the TES series, or how the Khajiit propensity for stealth leads to a cultural stigma as Thieves that isn't shared by other races, even though we know that NPCs of every race can be gifted Thieves.

    This is a roleplaying game. Part of TES roleplaying is playing as a member of a certain race, even if the racial bonuses aren't completely consistent from game to game. I don't know if you've ever played D&D, but this is basically the equivalent of telling the DM, "Hey, I want to play an Elf, but can I not take the stat plus/minuses that elves get, but instead take the extra feats humans get because I want them?"

    It's also worth noting the impact of racial bonuses on roleplay. When ESO took away the stealth passive from Bosmer, who've traditionally been stealthy in the lore and past games, a number of players complained they felt there weren't playing a real bosmer anymore. That's a testament to the identity that these racial bonuses give to the roleplaying experience. Sure, one could say "Oh, well, now you can just steal the Khajiit stealth passive!" That's, ah, not really the point.

    And "ends racism" is ridiculous in ESO when two alliances are literally based on their three races overcoming their cultural antipathy for each other. TES racism strongly informs the plot and worldbuilding of Daggerfall, Morrowind, and Skyrim. It's very much a part of the setting, worldbuilding, and the lore. Ironically, if you do away with the substantive racial differences entirely, you render TES racism solely about appearance, when it never has been before.

    So while I can understand the gripes about how ESO races are implemented such that there's inevitably a BIS racial choice for certain builds and roles...the lore of The Elder Scrolls is such that there are substantive differences between the races that drive many of the conflicts shown in the games.


    Finally, it's a surefire way to bias your poll when you preemptively tell the people who disagree with your counterarguments to "stop talking & be quiet for several days."

    Your arguments about lore don’t sway me when the eso combat team gets the lore so wrong.

    -Which race is supposed to be tanks? (Hint: Its not nords nor argonians.)

    -Which race is supposed to be leather armor berserkers? (Hint: Its not orcs.)

    -And which is the stealthiest race? (Hint: Its not kahjiit.) in fact in eso imperials have better stealth passives then Bosmers do.

    Justify that in lore, in eso why are imperials better at stealth than Bosmers?

    The weird part is the narrative half of the game gets it more or less right. But it’s like the combat team works on a different game with much different lore.

    So it’s hard for me to sit here and support traditional hard coded racial traits when zos themselves appears to care so little about the lore behind them. Is getting the lore wrong solely the combat teams purview?
    Make the racials more pliable if we are just playing fast and loose with the lore anyway, at least in will possibly break the race meta and make players a bit more happy.

    I'm afraid my answer to that is to say that the combat team should pay more attention to the lore.

    It's not to say "Whelp, since the combat team doesn't, we shouldn't either, and throw the baby out with the bathwater."

    Your suggestion might make some players a bit more happy. I'm well aware this is not a matter where everyone will be satisfied. But at least my answer strengthens roleplaying identity and series lore, rather than removing race-based gameplay from a series known for racial conflicts.

    The problem with that argument is that it’s defending lore that the combat team itself appears to care little about. THEY are the ones that created this mess, and relying on them to fix it feels like a lost cause.

    I don’t want to be stuck with race passives that feel like they were picked at random rather then following the established lore. Lore attributes doled out like casino results is not worth defending. And if we are going to have racial passives that don’t follow the lore anyway, then let us pick them.

    At least for me, I will be closer to the lore then the combat team will dare ever go.

    Where are the worst lore vs. combat offenders for you, @BlueRaven ? I would be interested in your analysis.

    I only ask because I looked into thinks for the Dunmer in a post in one of the previous incarnations of this discussion and found that soon after release, the Dunmeri traits that had existed in previous games were reasonably well represented. However, things had seemed to drift over time. I wouldn't be surprised if that drift occurred/accelerated after the people who had made the original choices about the game's design moved on to other projects/companies.

    However, my analysis was based on mechanical traits rather than in-game text descriptions. Ever since completing it I have made a bit of a study of what the texts in each game have to say about nature of the Dunmeri people. Sadly, due to the amount of material (and my limited time) I have yet to draw conclusions on that score yet.

    I have not considered the other races in such detail. That is why I am asking.


    Either way, and as I said in my previous post, I'd only ever be interested in expanding the impact of the races in this game through embodying cultural structures and organisations rather than decreasing it in the way that has been described in the OP.
  • WreckfulAbandon
    WreckfulAbandon
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    We have Dark Elves marrying Argonians in this game. So why couldn't an Altmer be part Bosmer and get a line of Stamina?

    1 stat line dependent on selected race and 1 chosen by the player would be fine imo. Not that the system needs changing.
    PC NA

    All my comments are regarding PvP
  • Slyclone
    Slyclone
    ✭✭✭✭
    There is absolutely no need to standardize fairness in every possible aspect of life. The game is my moment away from that.

    Let's keep what little there is left of organized chaos intact.

    Or kill me now.

    That's it, that's all.
  • BlueRaven
    BlueRaven
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Iluvrien wrote: »
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    No, and none of your counterarguments are particularly convincing.

    Race and the racial tendencies to certain archetypes are a consistent part of the lore of The Elder Scrolls, even if the gameplay representations of that have changed from game to game. That's true over and above whatever special talents the player character have. Consider how distinct the naturally high magic skills of the Altmer make them from the warriors of Hammerfell throughout the TES series, or how the Khajiit propensity for stealth leads to a cultural stigma as Thieves that isn't shared by other races, even though we know that NPCs of every race can be gifted Thieves.

    This is a roleplaying game. Part of TES roleplaying is playing as a member of a certain race, even if the racial bonuses aren't completely consistent from game to game. I don't know if you've ever played D&D, but this is basically the equivalent of telling the DM, "Hey, I want to play an Elf, but can I not take the stat plus/minuses that elves get, but instead take the extra feats humans get because I want them?"

    It's also worth noting the impact of racial bonuses on roleplay. When ESO took away the stealth passive from Bosmer, who've traditionally been stealthy in the lore and past games, a number of players complained they felt there weren't playing a real bosmer anymore. That's a testament to the identity that these racial bonuses give to the roleplaying experience. Sure, one could say "Oh, well, now you can just steal the Khajiit stealth passive!" That's, ah, not really the point.

    And "ends racism" is ridiculous in ESO when two alliances are literally based on their three races overcoming their cultural antipathy for each other. TES racism strongly informs the plot and worldbuilding of Daggerfall, Morrowind, and Skyrim. It's very much a part of the setting, worldbuilding, and the lore. Ironically, if you do away with the substantive racial differences entirely, you render TES racism solely about appearance, when it never has been before.

    So while I can understand the gripes about how ESO races are implemented such that there's inevitably a BIS racial choice for certain builds and roles...the lore of The Elder Scrolls is such that there are substantive differences between the races that drive many of the conflicts shown in the games.


    Finally, it's a surefire way to bias your poll when you preemptively tell the people who disagree with your counterarguments to "stop talking & be quiet for several days."

    Your arguments about lore don’t sway me when the eso combat team gets the lore so wrong.

    -Which race is supposed to be tanks? (Hint: Its not nords nor argonians.)

    -Which race is supposed to be leather armor berserkers? (Hint: Its not orcs.)

    -And which is the stealthiest race? (Hint: Its not kahjiit.) in fact in eso imperials have better stealth passives then Bosmers do.

    Justify that in lore, in eso why are imperials better at stealth than Bosmers?

    The weird part is the narrative half of the game gets it more or less right. But it’s like the combat team works on a different game with much different lore.

    So it’s hard for me to sit here and support traditional hard coded racial traits when zos themselves appears to care so little about the lore behind them. Is getting the lore wrong solely the combat teams purview?
    Make the racials more pliable if we are just playing fast and loose with the lore anyway, at least in will possibly break the race meta and make players a bit more happy.

    I'm afraid my answer to that is to say that the combat team should pay more attention to the lore.

    It's not to say "Whelp, since the combat team doesn't, we shouldn't either, and throw the baby out with the bathwater."

    Your suggestion might make some players a bit more happy. I'm well aware this is not a matter where everyone will be satisfied. But at least my answer strengthens roleplaying identity and series lore, rather than removing race-based gameplay from a series known for racial conflicts.

    The problem with that argument is that it’s defending lore that the combat team itself appears to care little about. THEY are the ones that created this mess, and relying on them to fix it feels like a lost cause.

    I don’t want to be stuck with race passives that feel like they were picked at random rather then following the established lore. Lore attributes doled out like casino results is not worth defending. And if we are going to have racial passives that don’t follow the lore anyway, then let us pick them.

    At least for me, I will be closer to the lore then the combat team will dare ever go.

    Where are the worst lore vs. combat offenders for you, @BlueRaven ? I would be interested in your analysis.

    I only ask because I looked into thinks for the Dunmer in a post in one of the previous incarnations of this discussion and found that soon after release, the Dunmeri traits that had existed in previous games were reasonably well represented. However, things had seemed to drift over time. I wouldn't be surprised if that drift occurred/accelerated after the people who had made the original choices about the game's design moved on to other projects/companies.

    However, my analysis was based on mechanical traits rather than in-game text descriptions. Ever since completing it I have made a bit of a study of what the texts in each game have to say about nature of the Dunmeri people. Sadly, due to the amount of material (and my limited time) I have yet to draw conclusions on that score yet.

    I have not considered the other races in such detail. That is why I am asking.


    Either way, and as I said in my previous post, I'd only ever be interested in expanding the impact of the races in this game through embodying cultural structures and organisations rather than decreasing it in the way that has been described in the OP.

    @Iluvrien Oh boy. This is a BIG answer so buckle up. This will be a long post and I brought receipts...

    Let's begin with wood elves, not the biggest divergence but one that bugs me the most.

    Here is how they are described in ES 1:

    32306341437_ec7542e397_o.png

    Notice "thieves".

    ES 2:

    32306341037_c33471a676_o.png

    Again their defining descriptive trait is thieves and archers.

    ES 3:

    47168547902_6d95121629_o.png

    Again "scouts, agents and thieves" and archers.

    ES 4:

    32306341307_5e668de030_o.png

    Once again scouts and thieves with archery.

    And finally ES 5:

    47207195632_c3947870cf_o.jpg

    It is not listed here in the pic, but the skill bonuses are;

    +10 Archery (25)
    +5 Alchemy (20)
    +5 Light Armor (20)
    +5 Lockpicking (20)
    +5 Pickpocket (20)
    +5 Sneak (20)


    Sneak and archery are defining characteristics of Bosmers. It is emphasized again and again. What do we have in ESO?

    Just a nod to archery as they learn it faster, which is not that big of a deal. No bonuses towards archery other then that, in ESO. Orcs (Which I will discuss later) are better at archery in combat than bosmers in eso. And imperials, with their cost reduction bonus, are better at stealth. In fact that improved eyesight mechanic bosmers have in eso (a pvp only mechanic btw) makes them even WORSE at stealth in Cyrodiil as enemy players can see the sneak detection of a bosmer player BEFORE the bosmer player detects them. Basically, to those in stealth, it becomes a form of early detection which is just embarrassing.

    Notice that the improved eyesight mechanic was never an attribute connected with them. Who had improved eyesight? Kahjiits.

    https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Khajiit_(Skyrim)

    Night Eye – See in the dark for 60 seconds for an unlimited number of times per day.

    (Not that I would inflict this awful passive on anyone else in eso.)

    •••

    Now Orcs, I am not going to go through the history of the passives in all the games they were playable, as like Wood elves they are fairly consistent. Instead let me just list what they had in oblivion and skyrim.

    Oblivion;

    https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Orsimer_(Oblivion)

    Skill bonuses
    Armorer +10
    Block +10
    Blunt +10

    Hand-to-Hand +5
    Heavy Armor +10

    And skyrim;

    https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Orsimer_(Skyrim)

    Skill bonuses
    +10 Heavy Armor (25)
    +5 Block (20)

    +5 Enchanting (20)
    +5 One-Handed (20)
    +5 Smithing (20)
    +5 Two-Handed (20)

    Special abilities
    Berserker Rage – Take half damage and do double damage for 60 seconds. This does not apply to damage dealt by spells; however, it does stack with other physical damage buffs. While Berserker Rage is active, the screen turns red and a little blurry while sound dulls a bit.


    Yeah orcs CAN be crazed warriors, but they are warriors that rely on heavy armor their clans create (blacksmithing) and also have histories with one handed and block as bonuses. Doesn't this sound like tank material? In ESO they are medium armor wearing berserkers.

    •••

    And who should have been the medium armor berserkers in eso?

    Morrowind;

    33345021398_9e6856a77e_o.png

    "Violence is an accepted and comfortable aspect of Nord culture; they cheerfully face battle with an ecstatic ferocity that shocks and appalls their enemies."


    Nords in Skyrim;

    https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Nords_(Skyrim)

    +10 Two-Handed (25)
    +5 Block (20)
    +5 Light Armor (20)
    +5 One-Handed (20)
    +5 Smithing (20)
    +5 Speech (20)

    Special abilities
    Battle Cry: Target flees for 30 seconds.
    Resist Frost: Your Nord blood gives you 50% resistance to frost.


    "Popular usage

    In past games, Nords typically fared well as warrior, barbarian, or scout characters. They retain this advantage because of their specialization in both one-handed and two-handed weapons as well as light armor."


    There was no "medium" armor in skyrim, that function was called "light" there. So instead of a heavy bonus, they get the light one which is closer to their lore. And they are the best at two handed weapons, that should be the tip off at what their play style should be like.

    In eso they are now a favored tank race which is not really what they are like.

    •••

    Who is also commonly regulated to tank (and healer) status in eso?

    Argonians in Skyrim;

    https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Argonians_(Skyrim)

    Lockpicking +10
    Light Armor +5

    Alteration +5
    Pickpocket +5
    Restoration +5
    Sneak +5

    Special abilities
    Histskin: Invoke the power of the Hist to recover health ten times faster for 60 seconds. Can only be used once per day.
    Resist Disease: Your Argonian blood is 50% resistant to disease.
    Waterbreathing: Your Argonian Lungs can breathe underwater.


    Look at these bonuses,. I mean look at them!

    Sneak, lockpicking, light armor (Which translates to medium armor in eso), pickpocketing... They are a race that is infamous with their connection to deadly assassins after all.

    What is NOT there? Anything to do with potions! (Where did the ESO combat team pull that from? Can anyone answer me that?) And yes they have a restoration skill bonus, but it's not a defining trait for them. Their restoration bonus is the same as Altmer and Bretons.
    Who had the best restoration skill bonus in skyrim? Imperials! So why did Argonians suddenly get the healing nod?

    •••

    Do you see where I am going here? It happens again and again in eso. Racial traits are mixed up or created whole cloth out of thin air. Bosmers are supposed to be thieves, but they get zero bonuses towards that. They are also supposed to be the best archers, where is the bonuses for that? Instead they are given a improved vision trait that seems more in line with guards, and is inspired from another races ability.
    Orcs should be heavy armor clad warriors.
    Nords should be medium armor wearing barbarians.
    Argonians are assassins.
    Imperials are healers...

    It's like the eso combat team just put racials out there without a thought to the lore or the previous game mechanics.

    (I also want to point out here that the actual in game (questing) lore is more or less correct, certainly within acceptable levels I feel. But the combat team is just completely in left field with many of the racial traits.)

    So why should we as players treat the eso race passives as sacrosanct? In many ways they are just wrong to the lore (and are unbalanced in gameplay as well). So why defend what we have? Sure we can HOPE that someone in the dev team sits back and figures this out, and we get ACTUAL racial passives that are based on the ES franchise and that are also balanced. But how realistic is that?

    So what does it matter if someone at zos chooses them or we do? If they are going to be wrong, let them be wrong but at least something we like.
  • RisenEclipse
    RisenEclipse
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Although I can see the gameplay argument here, I have to say no due to the fact the I would like this to feel as close to a TES game as possible. But there is some really weird arguments happening here...

    Why are you talking like somehow not liking a race somehow contributes or is anything like rl racism? In fact "racism" is way too strong of a word here to use. Let's take a look at this for a sec... I don't like argonians. They're weird looking. I hate the way they sound and just bleh. I don't like their race. And I can say that. Why? Because they're not real... I am giving my opinion on a fantasy species and am more critiquing the subject matter of the fantasy world then anything to do with racism. That's ridiculous to assume it's racist. In rl I hate the idea of racism. I respect my fellow human beings because racism causes harm to REAL people. It causes horrible things to ACTUALLY happen.

    I don't know, maybe it's easier for me to separate fantasy from the real world and not meld the two together. But just because you don't like a part of a fantasy world, doesn't make you racist. Kinda insulting to the people dealing with real racism and are effected by it in the real world. Now I won't pm someone and bully them for choosing an argonian. That's just being a bully and an ass. But if I were to give my opinion on argonians and someone accused me of "racism" I'd laugh in their face. So maybe tone it down in the weird language... although if I were in a trial and someone got butthurt over the race I played (not for mechanic reasons) then I wouldn't get triggered by them, but would probably laugh at them too. It's a game, not meant to be taken so seriously.
  • Ippokrates
    Ippokrates
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    Iluvrien wrote: »
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    No, and none of your counterarguments are particularly convincing.

    Race and the racial tendencies to certain archetypes are a consistent part of the lore of The Elder Scrolls, even if the gameplay representations of that have changed from game to game. That's true over and above whatever special talents the player character have. Consider how distinct the naturally high magic skills of the Altmer make them from the warriors of Hammerfell throughout the TES series, or how the Khajiit propensity for stealth leads to a cultural stigma as Thieves that isn't shared by other races, even though we know that NPCs of every race can be gifted Thieves.

    This is a roleplaying game. Part of TES roleplaying is playing as a member of a certain race, even if the racial bonuses aren't completely consistent from game to game. I don't know if you've ever played D&D, but this is basically the equivalent of telling the DM, "Hey, I want to play an Elf, but can I not take the stat plus/minuses that elves get, but instead take the extra feats humans get because I want them?"

    It's also worth noting the impact of racial bonuses on roleplay. When ESO took away the stealth passive from Bosmer, who've traditionally been stealthy in the lore and past games, a number of players complained they felt there weren't playing a real bosmer anymore. That's a testament to the identity that these racial bonuses give to the roleplaying experience. Sure, one could say "Oh, well, now you can just steal the Khajiit stealth passive!" That's, ah, not really the point.

    And "ends racism" is ridiculous in ESO when two alliances are literally based on their three races overcoming their cultural antipathy for each other. TES racism strongly informs the plot and worldbuilding of Daggerfall, Morrowind, and Skyrim. It's very much a part of the setting, worldbuilding, and the lore. Ironically, if you do away with the substantive racial differences entirely, you render TES racism solely about appearance, when it never has been before.

    So while I can understand the gripes about how ESO races are implemented such that there's inevitably a BIS racial choice for certain builds and roles...the lore of The Elder Scrolls is such that there are substantive differences between the races that drive many of the conflicts shown in the games.


    Finally, it's a surefire way to bias your poll when you preemptively tell the people who disagree with your counterarguments to "stop talking & be quiet for several days."

    Your arguments about lore don’t sway me when the eso combat team gets the lore so wrong.

    -Which race is supposed to be tanks? (Hint: Its not nords nor argonians.)

    -Which race is supposed to be leather armor berserkers? (Hint: Its not orcs.)

    -And which is the stealthiest race? (Hint: Its not kahjiit.) in fact in eso imperials have better stealth passives then Bosmers do.

    Justify that in lore, in eso why are imperials better at stealth than Bosmers?

    The weird part is the narrative half of the game gets it more or less right. But it’s like the combat team works on a different game with much different lore.

    So it’s hard for me to sit here and support traditional hard coded racial traits when zos themselves appears to care so little about the lore behind them. Is getting the lore wrong solely the combat teams purview?
    Make the racials more pliable if we are just playing fast and loose with the lore anyway, at least in will possibly break the race meta and make players a bit more happy.

    I'm afraid my answer to that is to say that the combat team should pay more attention to the lore.

    It's not to say "Whelp, since the combat team doesn't, we shouldn't either, and throw the baby out with the bathwater."

    Your suggestion might make some players a bit more happy. I'm well aware this is not a matter where everyone will be satisfied. But at least my answer strengthens roleplaying identity and series lore, rather than removing race-based gameplay from a series known for racial conflicts.

    The problem with that argument is that it’s defending lore that the combat team itself appears to care little about. THEY are the ones that created this mess, and relying on them to fix it feels like a lost cause.

    I don’t want to be stuck with race passives that feel like they were picked at random rather then following the established lore. Lore attributes doled out like casino results is not worth defending. And if we are going to have racial passives that don’t follow the lore anyway, then let us pick them.

    At least for me, I will be closer to the lore then the combat team will dare ever go.

    Where are the worst lore vs. combat offenders for you, @BlueRaven ? I would be interested in your analysis.

    I only ask because I looked into thinks for the Dunmer in a post in one of the previous incarnations of this discussion and found that soon after release, the Dunmeri traits that had existed in previous games were reasonably well represented. However, things had seemed to drift over time. I wouldn't be surprised if that drift occurred/accelerated after the people who had made the original choices about the game's design moved on to other projects/companies.

    However, my analysis was based on mechanical traits rather than in-game text descriptions. Ever since completing it I have made a bit of a study of what the texts in each game have to say about nature of the Dunmeri people. Sadly, due to the amount of material (and my limited time) I have yet to draw conclusions on that score yet.

    I have not considered the other races in such detail. That is why I am asking.


    Either way, and as I said in my previous post, I'd only ever be interested in expanding the impact of the races in this game through embodying cultural structures and organisations rather than decreasing it in the way that has been described in the OP.

    @Iluvrien Oh boy. This is a BIG answer so buckle up. This will be a long post and I brought receipts...

    Let's begin with wood elves, not the biggest divergence but one that bugs me the most.

    Here is how they are described in ES 1:

    32306341437_ec7542e397_o.png

    Notice "thieves".

    ES 2:

    32306341037_c33471a676_o.png

    Again their defining descriptive trait is thieves and archers.

    ES 3:

    47168547902_6d95121629_o.png

    Again "scouts, agents and thieves" and archers.

    ES 4:

    32306341307_5e668de030_o.png

    Once again scouts and thieves with archery.

    And finally ES 5:

    47207195632_c3947870cf_o.jpg

    It is not listed here in the pic, but the skill bonuses are;

    +10 Archery (25)
    +5 Alchemy (20)
    +5 Light Armor (20)
    +5 Lockpicking (20)
    +5 Pickpocket (20)
    +5 Sneak (20)


    Sneak and archery are defining characteristics of Bosmers. It is emphasized again and again. What do we have in ESO?

    Just a nod to archery as they learn it faster, which is not that big of a deal. No bonuses towards archery other then that, in ESO. Orcs (Which I will discuss later) are better at archery in combat than bosmers in eso. And imperials, with their cost reduction bonus, are better at stealth. In fact that improved eyesight mechanic bosmers have in eso (a pvp only mechanic btw) makes them even WORSE at stealth in Cyrodiil as enemy players can see the sneak detection of a bosmer player BEFORE the bosmer player detects them. Basically, to those in stealth, it becomes a form of early detection which is just embarrassing.

    Notice that the improved eyesight mechanic was never an attribute connected with them. Who had improved eyesight? Kahjiits.

    https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Khajiit_(Skyrim)

    Night Eye – See in the dark for 60 seconds for an unlimited number of times per day.

    (Not that I would inflict this awful passive on anyone else in eso.)

    •••

    Now Orcs, I am not going to go through the history of the passives in all the games they were playable, as like Wood elves they are fairly consistent. Instead let me just list what they had in oblivion and skyrim.

    Oblivion;

    https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Orsimer_(Oblivion)

    Skill bonuses
    Armorer +10
    Block +10
    Blunt +10

    Hand-to-Hand +5
    Heavy Armor +10

    And skyrim;

    https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Orsimer_(Skyrim)

    Skill bonuses
    +10 Heavy Armor (25)
    +5 Block (20)

    +5 Enchanting (20)
    +5 One-Handed (20)
    +5 Smithing (20)
    +5 Two-Handed (20)

    Special abilities
    Berserker Rage – Take half damage and do double damage for 60 seconds. This does not apply to damage dealt by spells; however, it does stack with other physical damage buffs. While Berserker Rage is active, the screen turns red and a little blurry while sound dulls a bit.


    Yeah orcs CAN be crazed warriors, but they are warriors that rely on heavy armor their clans create (blacksmithing) and also have histories with one handed and block as bonuses. Doesn't this sound like tank material? In ESO they are medium armor wearing berserkers.

    •••

    And who should have been the medium armor berserkers in eso?

    Morrowind;

    33345021398_9e6856a77e_o.png

    "Violence is an accepted and comfortable aspect of Nord culture; they cheerfully face battle with an ecstatic ferocity that shocks and appalls their enemies."


    Nords in Skyrim;

    https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Nords_(Skyrim)

    +10 Two-Handed (25)
    +5 Block (20)
    +5 Light Armor (20)
    +5 One-Handed (20)
    +5 Smithing (20)
    +5 Speech (20)

    Special abilities
    Battle Cry: Target flees for 30 seconds.
    Resist Frost: Your Nord blood gives you 50% resistance to frost.


    "Popular usage

    In past games, Nords typically fared well as warrior, barbarian, or scout characters. They retain this advantage because of their specialization in both one-handed and two-handed weapons as well as light armor."


    There was no "medium" armor in skyrim, that function was called "light" there. So instead of a heavy bonus, they get the light one which is closer to their lore. And they are the best at two handed weapons, that should be the tip off at what their play style should be like.

    In eso they are now a favored tank race which is not really what they are like.

    •••

    Who is also commonly regulated to tank (and healer) status in eso?

    Argonians in Skyrim;

    https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Argonians_(Skyrim)

    Lockpicking +10
    Light Armor +5

    Alteration +5
    Pickpocket +5
    Restoration +5
    Sneak +5

    Special abilities
    Histskin: Invoke the power of the Hist to recover health ten times faster for 60 seconds. Can only be used once per day.
    Resist Disease: Your Argonian blood is 50% resistant to disease.
    Waterbreathing: Your Argonian Lungs can breathe underwater.


    Look at these bonuses,. I mean look at them!

    Sneak, lockpicking, light armor (Which translates to medium armor in eso), pickpocketing... They are a race that is infamous with their connection to deadly assassins after all.

    What is NOT there? Anything to do with potions! (Where did the ESO combat team pull that from? Can anyone answer me that?) And yes they have a restoration skill bonus, but it's not a defining trait for them. Their restoration bonus is the same as Altmer and Bretons.
    Who had the best restoration skill bonus in skyrim? Imperials! So why did Argonians suddenly get the healing nod?

    •••

    Do you see where I am going here? It happens again and again in eso. Racial traits are mixed up or created whole cloth out of thin air. Bosmers are supposed to be thieves, but they get zero bonuses towards that. They are also supposed to be the best archers, where is the bonuses for that? Instead they are given a improved vision trait that seems more in line with guards, and is inspired from another races ability.
    Orcs should be heavy armor clad warriors.
    Nords should be medium armor wearing barbarians.
    Argonians are assassins.
    Imperials are healers...

    It's like the eso combat team just put racials out there without a thought to the lore or the previous game mechanics.

    (I also want to point out here that the actual in game (questing) lore is more or less correct, certainly within acceptable levels I feel. But the combat team is just completely in left field with many of the racial traits.)

    So why should we as players treat the eso race passives as sacrosanct? In many ways they are just wrong to the lore (and are unbalanced in gameplay as well). So why defend what we have? Sure we can HOPE that someone in the dev team sits back and figures this out, and we get ACTUAL racial passives that are based on the ES franchise and that are also balanced. But how realistic is that?

    So what does it matter if someone at zos chooses them or we do? If they are going to be wrong, let them be wrong but at least something we like.

    Sure, Bosmers are natural born thieves. You know who also has similar description through all TES games? Khajiits. Plus the fact they are great acrobats. And nobody have an issue that in ESO Khajiits are versatile race with bonuses to all stats: stamina, magicka and even health.

    Now, in previous TES games we had rather one dimentional perception of Bosmers, mainly as a scouts and thieves. But tell me, honestly, did you completed Valenwood zones stories? And if yes, once you learn about Bosmers everyday life, the Green Pact and Bosmer almost mystical relation to the nature, you still think that they are pure and simple stamina toons?
  • KalyanLazair
    KalyanLazair
    ✭✭✭✭
    BlueRaven wrote: »
    So why should we as players treat the eso race passives as sacrosanct? In many ways they are just wrong to the lore (and are unbalanced in gameplay as well). So why defend what we have? Sure we can HOPE that someone in the dev team sits back and figures this out, and we get ACTUAL racial passives that are based on the ES franchise and that are also balanced. But how realistic is that?

    So what does it matter if someone at zos chooses them or we do? If they are going to be wrong, let them be wrong but at least something we like.

    Your analysis is good, but what you're getting fundamentally wrong is that those of us against the OP's idea are not against it because we're defending those passives. We're against it because we're against diluting all races into a blob of purely cosmetic Sims like characters. We're defending the concept of races having different traits, not the traits themselves.

    OP wants racial traits to be completely optional so he can boost his argonian with whatever traits would make his build good in trials. I say no because traditional RPGs (not ES specifically, but RPGs themselves) have a tactical element in build creation which implies racial strengths and weaknesses, and while your analysis is superb, it is not really an argument in favor of OP's idea, nor does it invalidate the arguments of those against it. It's, how to put it, a completely different topic.
    Edited by KalyanLazair on October 26, 2021 9:32AM
  • MreeBiPolar
    MreeBiPolar
    ✭✭✭✭
    If you are worried about racism, you should consider that TES is likely THE single most racist franchise out there.

    And I am not talking the overt stuff included in the game like dunmer slavery or altmer Thalmor, etc.

    I am talking more the not-so-on-the-surface thing. That none of the races living alongside the 9 playable ones, essentially in the same places, ever change for literally thousands of years, whatever goes on. Goblins are dumb weak scavenger "wa-wa-wa-wa-wa" brutes. Giants are dumb huge mammoth shepherd "uh-uh-mamayoba" brutes. Maormer are evil living nowhere raider/pirate brutes. Reachmen are (even after we were given the Markarth expansion, which was unfortunately totally failed to use the opportunity to showcase them -- what we are shown and interact with are just the "civilised" "nords-in-funny-suits" slice of reachmen, whereas literally nothing about the "typical" ones is covered at all) evil destroy-everything witchy brutes.

    The list goes on...

    Again, for THOUSANDS of years.
Sign In or Register to comment.