Iluvrien wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

Iluvrien wrote: »

And if this was a single-player game then this would indeed be an excellent point. The fact that this is a multiplayer game means that you have, in evidence, hundreds or thousands of the same case. The game recognises each one as the Vestige. For one person to be able to choose their racials means that thousands of people will. At which point it stops having anything to do with being special, or the vestige. The fact that all players would be able to do it is what makes it impossible.

That means nothing. Why do you care what racial passives other players have/use? If they don't set their helmet to be off - you won't even know their race, unless they have a tail. What are you talking about - are you just one of those who don't care themselves but like that other players are "suffering"? I don't get it.

Playing with set racials is "suffering"? We have very different definitions of that word, I suspect.

If this game is going to continue to have the words "Elder Scrolls" in the title then there are some aspects of Lore/tropes that it needs to maintain. My own opinion is that this is one of them. That has nothing to do with other players suffering, that has to do with the nature of the game itself.

If they change the title of the game to "Generic Fantasy Online"? Excellent, all well and good. Change whatever you like and do whatever you wish.

You didn't answer the question. And yes it DOES have to do with players suffering in the sense of being limited for no good reason. TES crowd doesn't want looks to define how efficient your character can be. Again, answer. How exactly those racials define the nature of the game? You won't even know or feel what other players are using. So what is your problem here?

Also, how come you are so selective? What about other lore parts ignored, changed or added just to justify what the game has? Like dragon break and jungle.

And ONCE AGAIN. The lore wouldn't NOT be broken. There are at least two plausible explanations IN LORE ALREADY of why such thing is possible. Do you only read the middle paragraph of a post? In the very post that you replied to everything is explained just above the part that you quoted.

Artis wrote: »

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

And realize that racial traits can change while adapting to the environment, so we can play, say, a redguard whose family moved to Vvardenfel where it lived for generations (maybe even breeding with dunmer, too) and our redguard looks like a redguard but has dunmeri racial traits.

...until we re-read this:

Generally the offspring bear the racial traits of the mother, though some traces of the father's race may also be present.

...and realize our crossbred character would -still- be the race of thjeir mothers, just with some -traces- as in cosmetic features, as in looks, orf their father present, and it wouldn't be a redguard with dunmer passives, but a dunmer with -some- redguardish looks, or a redguard with -some- dunmeri looks.

1. No we don't realize that, nowhere does it say about the traits being purely cosmetic.

It does however say "bear the racial traits of the mother " and "traces of the father may be present"; -traces- not -traits-. And since the elder scrolls have no DNA analysis, I'd say the only way "traces but not traits" can be present is... cosmetic.

Artis wrote: »

2. Even if that's the case - good enough. It works for me. Ok then, we'll have a dunmer with dunmer passives but redguard looks. That's exactly the same principle and is what I meant.

No, we would have a dunmer with "mixed heritage" looks including some redguard -traces-
Possibly instead of grey dunmer skin a blend of grey and brown. Possibly redguard eyes instead of dunmer eyes. Et cetera. But still "mostly dunmer, with some redguard -traces- mixed in"
But not "looks like redguard, passives like dunmer"
Get it?

Artis wrote: »

3. You need to stop pushing your own idea. No one cares.

You need to stop telling other people what to post!
Who cares if others care? (though I would suspect some may, and many may perhaps not, since you do -not- speak for -everyone-)
I care about making suggestions on even the slightest chance that maaaybe sometime someone among the developers might notice, get inspired and think up their own stuff in that direction.
That's what many people on the forums do after all.
I happen to think my ideas are not that bad in comparison, but then, I would. Some may agree, others may disagree. Way of the world. Won't make me not share my ideas though when I feel they could be a good addition to ESO...

Artis wrote: »

That being said, your idea is good enough for me. All I want is either all races to be able to play all builds (maybe with some racial flavor, I dont' care, as long as things are more or less balanced like stamina races with each other, for example) or for racials to not matter in combat at the level cap OR even racials being active so players have an option to use that skill on their skill bar.

Here we can agree to agree!
I totally would like to see racial passives become more "fluff flavor" then "min/maxxer FotM", or as mentioned, have a large impact in the beginning, and little in the endgame... because I believe that players should not be forced to chase the super-effectiveness, but instead be able to play for fun, and make every combination work for them (and as I know from personal experience, there are some combinations that... are a bit iffy if you want to be PvP competetive. Or be accepted by random PUG strangers)

Artis wrote: »

The first paragraph is absolutely unrelated to what I said. And what's the problem with people who want that? As I said, if they have their helmets on you won't know their races anyway. Why do you care what others play? Play what you like and let them play what they like. Not to mention, that's it's "some strange reason" - there are two plausible explanations of why it could be possible. In your particular example it's even easier. Swimming speed is something a breton could train to increase.

Please, go ahead and train to outswim a creature adapted to amphibeous life. Or similar, like training to outrun a horse...
Sure, training is worth much. But when it comes to structural advantages... like gills and webbed toes... training can do only so much.

Although, I do think that it would have been nice to have an "athleticism" skill line where people can "train to increase swimming speed", among other things, just for character options...

Artis wrote: »

Why can't I play what I like and not gimp myself?

Again, I agree with you on that one. I just think throwing the TES lore about racial advantages overboard is the wrong way to fix this issie.
Sure, fixing it -right- would be more effort then just forgetting the whole issue and for example remove all racial passives altogether. But that would not be as "Elder Scrolly" as what lured people like me here...

Artis wrote: »

Wow that post was THAT long that you already forgot the beginning of it? No, it's not throwing TES lore away. There are 2 explanations already. There are multiple examples of people who showed that Nords can be great mages and argonians - great warriors.

Those are NOT exceptions to the racial traits.
Those are exceptional individuals achieving exceptional things through exceptional effort. They still have their non-optimal racial backgrounds, they just rose above them.

Which is what I'd like to see for our player characters as well. Some way to rise above the racial traits.

But not a way to cherry pick your racial traits unrelated to the actual race you selected to play.

Iluvrien wrote: »

If this game is going to continue to have the words "Elder Scrolls" in the title then there are some aspects of Lore/tropes that it needs to maintain. My own opinion is that this is one of them. That has nothing to do with other players suffering, that has to do with the nature of the game itself.

If they change the title of the game to "Generic Fantasy Online"? Excellent, all well and good. Change whatever you like and do whatever you wish.

THIS! Exactly this.
And people have been whining about the racial passives on these forums for as liong as i remember, and trying to argue that the bits of elder scrolls lore behind them should be forgotten so they can game as they like.
And other people have been arguing against it.
What else is new?

(BtW, I would never have given "Generic Fantasy Online" as much as a glance. I play my games for the lore, not for the game mechanics, and there likely are some around which are really great, and I will never bother with them, because for me to have fun, I need a background around me to bolster my immersion... and world with all those small fluff details that spark imaginations, all those stories and settings that feed the illusion. I doubt I'd ever be satisfied with anything else for my online gaming)

Artis wrote: »

notimetocare wrote: »

Different kind of special. Shalidor doesn't have specific traits like racials that make him special. He has skill

Skill is something that can be trained. Yet no matter how your Nord player will train, he won't outperform many other mages...

Oh?
Let's see... CP 15 altmer mage againsat CP 630 nord mage... that is what Champion points are after all, merely training. If one listens to the whining about such encounters from the times before there were no-CP campaigns, it would seem pretty clear the high CP mage has the edge, wouldn't you agree?
So I'd question your statement... if the level of training is different, your nord archmage WILL outperform that altmer journeyman wizard.

So maybe Shalidor (and all other super powerful very important NPCs) just had a special "V.I.NPC" unlock that let him use CP beyond normal cap... that cerainly would explain any specialness, right?
(prolly got access to special skill lines as well, those bast... uhm... overly favored NPCs. Always making us players envious by throwing spells we cannot cast... Curses! )

TheShadowScout wrote: »

It does however say "bear the racial traits of the mother " and "traces of the father may be present"; -traces- not -traits-. And since the elder scrolls have no DNA analysis, I'd say the only way "traces but not traits" can be present is... cosmetic.

You need to stop projecting your wet dreams here. That's what you want to be. It doesn't matter what "you'd say". And I'd say the game has magic and alchemy including changing the race (or just looks?) already present in game right now! So your DNA analysis has nothing on that.

Or didn't you play the game? Sounds like you aren't as good in lore as you want to believe you are. There are quests about race change in ESO...

TheShadowScout wrote: »

No, we would have a dunmer with "mixed heritage" looks including some redguard -traces-
Possibly instead of grey dunmer skin a blend of grey and brown. Possibly redguard eyes instead of dunmer eyes. Et cetera. But still "mostly dunmer, with some redguard -traces- mixed in"
But not "looks like redguard, passives like dunmer"
Get it?

I don't think you get it. That's not how evolution works. No one said anything about first-generation dunmer with redguard traces mixed in. You can have a dunmer that moved there and got a child, then that child got a child with another redguard etc. Each new child will have more and more redguard traces in appearance. Rinse repeat until we have a combination of looks and racial passives that you like.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

You need to stop telling other people what to post!

Who cares if others care? (though I would suspect some may, and many may perhaps not, since you do -not- speak for -everyone-)
I care about making suggestions on even the slightest chance that maaaybe sometime someone among the developers might notice, get inspired and think up their own stuff in that direction.
That's what many people on the forums do after all.
I happen to think my ideas are not that bad in comparison, but then, I would. Some may agree, others may disagree. Way of the world. Won't make me not share my ideas though when I feel they could be a good addition to ESO...

Ahah coming from creators of "reread my post, I disagree with that, but I agree with what I wrote in my post". Developers will do their job if they are ordered to by their boss. What you suggest is not less lore-breaking than what other suggest especially since I showed at least 2 places in lore where it's plausibly explained + ESO has race change quests.

Your suggestion, on the other hand, is lore-breaking and has no explanation except for "you'd say" and that "you feel it would be good". Or go ahead and explain where it's not lore-breaking compared to other suggestions.

And again, a more general question - in which cases it is allowed to invent new lore or change old lore? Because it happened to nirn multiple times and there's no reason why it can't happen again. It's as easy as saying that Molag Bal changed it with his magic when you were imprisoned. Or add a quest where you change your appearance (like you change the race of NPC now). Or add a skin/polymorph unlocked by an achievement. Or could you link a thread where you were objecting that players can choose to look like a draugr (polymorph) or have other skins AND be able to turn them on and off at will. Because at this point it's starting to sound like you're a hypocrite.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Please, go ahead and train to outswim a creature adapted to amphibeous life. Or similar, like training to outrun a horse...
Sure, training is worth much. But when it comes to structural advantages... like gills and webbed toes... training can do only so much.

Although, I do think that it would have been nice to have an "athleticism" skill line where people can "train to increase swimming speed", among other things, just for character options...

There is absolutely no reason a breton who trained can't outswim an argonian who hasn't trained. Once again, Shalidor outmaged all elves of his time.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Again, I agree with you on that one. I just think throwing the TES lore about racial advantages overboard is the wrong way to fix this issie.
Sure, fixing it -right- would be more effort then just forgetting the whole issue and for example remove all racial passives altogether. But that would not be as "Elder Scrolly" as what lured people like me here...

Sure, then don't touch them and just give us skins or polymorphs that make us look like other races. It was okay to do that with multiple skins and polymorphs, right?

Not even that. Right now I can change the appearance of my character in the crown store. Not even talking about race. Yesterday you saw me short with brown eyes and today I can be tall with blue eyes AND change the age. No one is talking about throwing the lore overboard. And again, they did do it many times already - dragon break, jungle, polymorphs etc. No, you just come up with the new lore or do everything within the lore. Where is the line? The line is where it still makes sense in this universe. And if changing DNA to change the eye color, changing bone structure to change height and other parameters, changing the age make sense, then changing the appearance to match looks and racial passives makes even more sense.

You didn't leave the game when those things were implemented and won't leave it if they do what we're talking about here.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Those are NOT exceptions to the racial traits.
Those are exceptional individuals achieving exceptional things through exceptional effort. They still have their non-optimal racial backgrounds, they just rose above them.

Which is what I'd like to see for our player characters as well. Some way to rise above the racial traits.

But not a way to cherry pick your racial traits unrelated to the actual race you selected to play.

What? How come? I thought you can't outswim a creature adapted to amphibious life? You're contradicting yourself.

Yeah no, if changing the age at will is fine, cherry-picking is fine, too. And I don't recall your threads asking to remove the ability to change age etc. Again, your motives are very questionable at best.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Oh?
Let's see... CP 15 altmer mage againsat CP 630 nord mage... that is what Champion points are after all, merely training. If one listens to the whining about such encounters from the times before there were no-CP campaigns, it would seem pretty clear the high CP mage has the edge, wouldn't you agree?
So I'd question your statement... if the level of training is different, your nord archmage WILL outperform that altmer journeyman wizard.

So maybe Shalidor (and all other super powerful very important NPCs) just had a special "V.I.NPC" unlock that let him use CP beyond normal cap... that cerainly would explain any specialness, right?
(prolly got access to special skill lines as well, those bast... uhm... overly favored NPCs. Always making us players envious by throwing spells we cannot cast... Curses! )

[/quote]
No one is talking about altmer journeymen. Best altmer couldn't match Shalidor. And it's not about training either. Altmer live - and consequently can train - longer than Nords.

Again, I don't care how. Let us have that unlock too then and not be worst than the next guy. Or give us polymorphs. Use existing lore and quests (showed them above) to justify any kind of making races perform equally in the end-game content or write new lore if that's not enough. Whatever it takes for equal skill to grant equal result. Because right now racial passives ARE NOT what they should be. They don't give you initial advantages that let you reach the ceiling easier but it's still the skill that decides everything. Right now Nord mages can't have the same skill as altmer mages, for example. And now THAT IS lore breaking and that has to be changed.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

What matters is that the lore mentioned "traits of the mother" and "traces of the father". Traces, not traits. Which indicates something other then the racial passives. Logically that leaves... cosmetic features, right?
Or what would you say might be something that isn't a trait, but still present detectable enough with medieval methods to be called "trace" by the people of tamriel?

Maybe you need to stop trying to lawyer the lore to fit your game mechanics wet dreams?

Nonsense. No, it doesn't leave that logically. Never does it say that they aren't traces of DNA. Moreover, accepting your "logic" contradicts the fact that bosmer exist. How could they change their racial passives if they always were forced to keep their mother's passives?

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Yes. Quests about race chance.
Not quests about "free passive selection"
Show me the part where that dunmer turning argonian in greenshade rertains dunmer passives, or those hired hands in rivenspire turning gobbo keep their original passives. Go on.
No?
Then why talk about this here? The "race change" feature is already in the game, yes?

Nope. That's not how it works. We don't know that the race actually changed. What we know is that he now looks argonian. All we can state after completing the quest is "dunmer is now looking argonian". Period. Full stop. Now if you add a new affirmative claim "his racial passives changed as well", then the burden of proof is on you and it's up to you to show me the part where it says that he didn't keep his original passives. Go on. No?

Pfft. Didn't think so. pathetic.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

...which is -exactly- the kind of thing the powers that be prevented with their magical "child is mothers race" ruling for their elder scrolls universe.
Doesn't matter if evolution works differently in non-magical worlds like ours because Nirn -is- a magical world where some things may be governed by magical rules that do not exist hereabouts.
Doesn't matter if there are instances of races changing by power of lore-plot or deus-ex-oblivion in the distant past, since we know all too well no such change will occur in the times between ESO and the other TES games.

The writers of the background decreed that all children would generally follow their mothers race and racial traits - for the exact reason to forestall any calls for "custom racial selection" or "halfbreed characters" just because they didn't want to program such things into their elder scrolls.

Accept it.

No. Accepting it contradict the fact that bosmers are there. The ONLY WAY it makes sense is that it's traces of DNA. Heck, how would "just the appearance" change at all, if no father's DNA was inherited by a child?

And not it's you who are trying to invent new laws that don't exist and reinterpret what's written in the lore. Nowhere does it say that "it's just the appearance". So quit this nonsense.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Oh?
It is lore breaking to consider that the cultural background and birthplace people grew up in may have some effect on them in addition to racial passives you say? That people who grew up with parents able to afford magical tutors might later have an edge in magic? That people who grew up doing hard work may end up with some physical development from it? That people who grew up in the icy snows of skyrim may be better at dealing with cold?

Go on then, show me the lore that says so! Show me the lore it breaks.
I'll wait...

Yes it is. If it's lore breaking to consider that parents and where a character grew up (and his family lived for generations) is lore-breaking, then cultural background is even more lore-breaking. I found 2 different places in lore showing how my assumption is not lore breaking.

Now where is your argument? Anything except for "I feel" and "I think that's how it should be"? Because if there's none, then I feel that dwemer could've invented plasma guns.

Also, YOU are the one making the affirmative claim, so YOU show how it doesn't break the lore. You really need to read a bit on logic and how debates go. Nowhere in the lore it says that cultural background affects anything. As you said - maybe in other worlds yes, but not in Nirn.

I'll wait.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

I have no problem with illusions - which is in effect what the draugr and other skins are, just a prank by some mage to scare people. A breton with a draugr illusion is still a breton. Nothing lorebreaking here...

Great. Let us buy an "illusion token" so we can customize our illusion.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Now you are starting to contradict yourself.
First you say...

Artis wrote: »

Yet no matter how your Nord player will train, he won't outperform many other mages...

...now you say the opposite?

No I don't. Because, read what I said completely, not just a few words here and there. Your reading comprehension is awful. And you don't know who gets the burden of proof... Are you sure you should be arguing with people at all?..

Anyway, no. What I said about argonians - logic how things should be. What I said about Nord and other mages - reality of what we have in game right now because of dumb racial passives. No matter what your Nord does, my altmer's spells will hit harder period.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Though generally I agree. An nord sorceror trained in magic will certainly outmage an altmer archer trained in archery and not magic. Or an altmer civilian not trained in any kind of combat at all. Or dozends of other examples.

Just like a trained swimmer will outswim an amphibeous creature that never learned how to make use of their webbed toes because they were raised in captivity and under non-species-specific conditions, thus never got to learn how to swim.
But the trained swimmer will fare quite differently against an amphibeous creature that has spent their life swimming to catch their dinner, right?

So, what I meant was, a racial advantage is always an extra bonus in addition to all the training. And no amout of training can make someone "acquire" a structural advantage like webbed toes, cat eyes, or generations of cold adaptation - though I agree that it -should- be possible to get to the same point with more effort in most cases, which it currently isn't.

I am just saying, allowing bretons to magically trade in their elven-inherited magic affinity for argonian gills and webbed digits is not the right way to fix this...

You would need to be really alternatively gifted not to agree with this.

In the end, it doesn't matter if something is fixed the right way or not. First - fix it. Then see if you can improve the fix.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Actually I wouldn't mind that, since as I mentioned, I see those as "illusions". If they make a "generic redguard warrior polymorph" (though I can't really see much reason for them to spend effort on it when people can make redguard characters... but still...), I would not mind a "dunmer spy using this illusion to infiltrate the covenant", or similar fluff explainations. Might be a bit awkward when we see a group fo them though, in an "attack of the clones" sort of way... (anyone remember the early days when we had that with gobbo hordes in cyrodil?)

Oh you see those as illusions? Perfect. Then no need rethink anything. ZOS, let us customize the races, and he can see that as illusions.

Nothing awkward. There's no reason for all those illusions to be the same, ZOS can let us customize them by paying for it in the crown store, for example.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Isn't plastic sorcery wonderful?
Ever since that face changer wizard in skyrim, that is part of the TES lore. Never was any lore against it either. So why would people say something about it?

And how you handle it in your characters personal story is up to you and your roleplaying. In-character magical makeover? Out of character appearence retconning? Out of character complete character redesign including name and backstory change to a "completely different person" (I once experienced a very well done roleplay chain leading up to just that, it was wicked fun!)?
Up to you.

Sure is. Then there's no reason plastic sorcery can't let us look like any other race.

LOL it wasn't a part of TES lore until it became a part of TES lore. Do you not get it? Similarly, anything else can be added to justify ANYTHING else.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

...unless there is some bit in the lore saying, oh, I dunno, something like how racial traits do not generally change through gene-mix like happens in real life, but are 'magically' inherited from the mother?

Sure, there will be. They'll add a book somewhere about the opposite and it's done. Not a problem whatsoever.
I see it's hard for you think, but even you should understand that that bit in the lore was written by a character living in the universe. There are bits in our Universe's lore saying that the Earth is flat and that Force is proportional to velocity squared. Science discovers new stuff all the time.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Check again the meaning of the word "exceptional".
Doing something that most people cannot is what makes it so special.

I don't need to. You made a general statement that "one can't do X". Next time watch your words then.

Exceptional? Perfect. I want to play exceptional. If you don't want to - sure, I don't mind. ZOS can give you that option too where you can use a race as it comes without customizing it.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

(though come to think of it... there might be a deadric prince who makes such trades... though almost certainly with unfortunate side effects, which is why we are not likely to see such options for our characters. besides, Shalidor made his trading mistake with a different prince...)

Duh.. Facepalm. I mentioned that before. Clavicus Vile could make that deal. Or Molag Bal could've experimented with us in Coldharbor. It's SO easy to explain stuff like that. Just like your appearance change was added at some point, not being justified by any lore written prior to that. Not to mention cyrodiil's jungle , etc.

Lore can be changed or added any time.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

In your mind, perhaps. In mine, not. Because the latter has lore against it, and the former... hell, everyones age changes, day per day. And with magic in the mix, changing the other direction is a classic as well (see a certain ESO-Morrowind quest involving running errants in preperation for a deadric deal).

Nonsense again. Age changes, yes. Not to the younger side, though. But I can change it like that now. And what lore is there because of that, huh? Go ahead and link some lore books explaining that. Didn't see any mentions of that in ESO.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

...which may be where that mysterious "secret of life" Shalidor reportedly "stole from akatosh" comes in - giving him more life to train, perhaps? Certainly him being around still in the times of eso in whatever mystical fashion indicated by his purple glow seems to indicate something more then a nord lifespan worth of experience, right?

Do.not.give.a.task.

And I'm a vestige and defeated molag bal. Let me do whatever I want, and let fan boys like you to justify it later, just like you are rationalizing it right now with Shalidor. How cool, ZOS didn't even need to explain anything - you will rationalize everything for them.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Also, I don't recall anything to support that "the best altmer couldn't match Shalidor"... was there a wizard contest we are unaware of? Oh, he certainly -did- more legend-worthy things then many an altmer sorceror, not that you'd get an altmer to admit that... but all those "the greatest" claims require actually winning top spot in some kind of competition I would think...
(also, humans in fantasy lore generally tend to be way more focussed on training then elves, because those arrogant elf sorcerors think they arer so high and mighty that they will win by racial advantage alone and thus need not put much effort into it, whereas humans would be more inclined to be driven to accomplish something worthwhile in their usually much shorter lifespan)

Absolutely. No altmer of that time has done anything as cool. And there's no reason stuff that was cooler suddenly became forgotten. So until there's a proof of the opposite - yes, Shalidor was cooler.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

But my point remains. Racial advantage plus some training won't beat no racial advantage and lots of training, even in the current system.

No. Why would that be? There's no lore justification for that. In fact- there are only examples of the opposite. And the previous games only prove it. The ceiling is the same. Gifted races just have easier time getting there. (and yes, if your "lore" about the age change is that you could do it in skyrim, then this point is even more true).

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Then let's agree on that and not talk about the rest anymore.
Because I agree with that.

You say a lot of nonsensical things, that my scientific mind simply can't let slide.

Iluvrien wrote: »

You are speaking for the TES crowd? Interesting, I consider myself far more TES crowd than MMO crowd and I certainly didn't get the ballot paper to elect you as our spokesman.

The sample was representative without you.

Iluvrien wrote: »

I have already said in this thread that I consider "dragon break" to be symptomatic of lazy storytelling. A device that was specifically created to allow multiple game endings to become canon should not be employed to explain every last inconvenience retcon in a game world. I have argued against the ones I have already seen, but even if I hadn't (which I did) saying that I have to either stand against everything that is already in the game, or I could stand against no single thing under discussion for introduction is a false dilemma.

Yep, yet you are still playing.

Iluvrien wrote: »

This text is possibly the least definitive statement I have seen. It does not define what kind of traces these "may" be in terms of ability or appearance, it does not quantify in what proportions the mother/father traits have been observed ("generally" vs. "some traces" is no use at all), and it specifically mentions that certain pairings (Argonians and Khajiit vs Humans and Elves, Orc vs Bosmer and Elves) have not been observed... and so interfertility cannot be established.
It is a text that is vague to the point of uselessness and even admits within itself that it is far from comprehensive. As such I consider it inadmissible on either side of the argument.

Can easily be expanded and improved to justify what OP is asking for. The fact that it's vague is not making it any worse - you can build on that easily.

Iluvrien wrote: »

"As the Aldmer began to change their ways to match their new environment, adapting to the forest in body and mind, they became known as the Bosmer."

This is a superb point and may well open the door to the things you wish if one condition can be met: Can you establish that there was an interfertile community, of sufficient size to account for every cross-racial player, of each race living in each of the racial homelands for long enough for what is, in effect, evolution to have occurred?

Sure, why not? Add a book by some archaeologist who found the trace of such community. It's as easy as adding one lore book or quest.

Also, the ONLY other possible outcome is that the whole race just suddenly turned into a new race. If you're claiming that - can you prove that? Not really. And that's the thing. It might as well have been what I said - and then we can have our thing.

Then again, there are TONS of other possible ways to justify it.

I wouldn't mind different races if that meant different game play (balanced of course). But now it's simply choosing how you look and how you perform. Choosing some races is simply gimping yourself. This needs to be fixed. Whatever it takes.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Then show me where "traces of DNA" are mentioned in ESO lore.
Go on.
I am waiting...

Or we realize that in the framework of the universe, "DNA" is not exactly something that would be known to exist.
Thus, using the classic occams razor method of reasoning... the most likely explaination is cosmetic features, yes?

I definitely will, right after you show me the mention of cultural differences affecting racial properties.

And Occam's razor is all good but doesn't prevent us from adding new stuff in the game. The lore was changed or updated multiple times already. In this case - maybe DNA is not known in the way we know it? But Nirn's mages definitely know something - thus changing race is already in the game. But yeah, remember Occam's razor - I'll refer you to it later.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Good question. Could be the will of Y'ffre. Could be -gasp- magic. Or it could even be that things were different in past eras.

We -do- know from playing other TES games that none of these races will change in the future throughout the third and fourth era, despite all the interbreeding that may or may not be going on during those centuries, so that kinda indicates that whatever happened to establish the current races is somehow NOT still going on... thus making your point about bosmer (or bretons for that matter) kinda moot.

Perfect. Then let us change our passives by the will of some deity too. Or make a deal with Clavicus Vile or whatever. The point is - THERE is a precedent already.

And nope. That's false. Compare racial passives of races in ESO and in other game for yourself. Say, argonians by the time of Skyrim get sneak/thieving passives and lose their survivability passive (max hp) as well as their ability to swim fast. Y'

btw, regarding "could be the will of Y'ffre argument... entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem (entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity).

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Now, in absence of proof, we who are able to do so -could- try and use logic... and agree that the most likely explaination is that the passives did indeed change - just like if a character used a racechange token! Which IS the closest current game mechanic equivalent for permanent racechange.

(if it was just a temporary polymorph, like turning monkey in coldharbour, it would be a different thing)

NOPE. That's not how it works, again. And here I refer you to Occam's razor. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem (entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity). All WE OBSERVE is that the appearance changed period. Assuming it was actually the race change like "racechange token" is contradicting the occam's razor. Multiplying entities, assuming effects that you don't see happening. Not to mention, that there was no race change token in the game at the time that quest was released.

And if you're okay with comparing that to the race change token that was added LATER, then there's no reason not to be okay with something else added later.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

No, it doesn't. ESO is full of races changing in eras past, usually through magical intervention of some sort. Yet somehow that doesn't seem to happen anymore, as evidenced by the races we have in ESO now are not changing in any significant-enough-to-be-mentioned-in-lore way from 2nd era times until the last TES installment in the 4th era.

So, it is entirely possible that something changed in some magical way between the times when races still changed, and the times ESO is set in. Because in all the times we have games set, the rule is "Traits of the mother, traces of the father"
No matter how much you dislike that as it forestalls your "gimme cherry picking" arguments.

Racial passives in the 4th era are different from what we have now, so they did change. How?

Second paragraph - Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem (entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity). Occam's razor. Or rephrasing you - show me where it's mentioned that something changed.

You need to stop being inconsistent, borderline hypocrite. You bring up occam's razor when common sense disagrees with your fantasies, yet you don't when it permits your fantasies. Pick one.

Also, "Traits of mother, traces of farther" rule could've changed somewhere in the past of future, just like you say about "something changed in some magical way". Two can play this game. Choose if you're gonna be wannabe logical - and then apply logic to all arguments, or if you'll fantasize - and then your imagination is not better than mine. After all the "Notes on racial phylogeny" was written before ESO starts - we find it in ESO. And we find the same book later in other games. It doesn't mean there are no newer books to begin with. But also it doesn't mean that those rules still work even if they were correct.

Btw, that rule that you said is demonstrably false and it's shown in ESO (maybe something changed just a few decades before ESO, since the book was written earlier?). In stonefalls there's a Nord father and a dunmer mother whose kids you're saving from spiders. Their kids are Nord. Either the rule is wrong or there are exceptions - i.e. there can be different ratios of mother and father traits. Either of them is fine - let us play one of those exceptions.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Wrong. Becuase "traces of DNA" are not a part of the TES lore, a lore depicting a magical, medieval-tech world. Show me where people in medieval times discovered DNA, and we can talk about it.

True, the writings say "traits of the mother, traces of the father", yes?
So, go on then. What medieval-understanding percievable feature could be a "trace" but not enough to be a "trait"?
I say the most logical explaination is stuff like fair hair on a redguard, dark skin on a nord, blue eyes on a dunmer, dark hair on a altmer, etc.
You just keep arguing for any sliver of justification to rule-lawyer your cherry picking desires.

ESO has nothing to do with medieval times or medieval understanding. It's simply different because of magic and all. The universe is different. The laws of physics are different.

And no, logical is not what you think it means. This is not logical, this is just your fantasies and what you want it to be justifying your desire to not let people have fun playing the character whose appearance they like and at the same time perform well.

Fair hair on redguard? There is a dunmer mother with Nord kids in the game right now. I can take you there and show it to you if you don't believe me. Also, even the things you listed aren't available in the game right now - it already would be a step in the right direction.

And now look, I'll show you logic. So you have a fair-haired redguard (99% redguard 1% altmer, let's say) who's no longer a pure redgurad. How will his/her kids look like now? If his bloodline keeps mating with altmer for many generations - the redguard appearance will have more and more altmer traits and less and less redguard traits resulting in a kid with mostly altmer appearance with redguard traits at some point (when the ratio passes 50% 50%).

TheShadowScout wrote: »

You do realize that I also suggested an additional "where a character grew up" passive for further character diversification, yes? So obviosuly I do not consider that lore-breaking at all...

Yup, and you said it was lore-breaking. And if you don't consider it's lore-breaking - then it's etymology and won't be reflected in the gameplay at all, so who cares? I was talking about a redguard mating with dunmer, for example, so we can have one appearance and other racials. You were against it. If not - then what are you arguing with?

TheShadowScout wrote: »

And the only lore we have for "parents passing on of racial traits" in general is the one that says the father for some magical reason does not pass on his racial traits to the offspring.
THAT is the only lore there that can have any effect in derailing such ideas as "lore-breaking".
(even though it obviously was just added to the lore to prevent people arguing for "halfbreed" characters to they could cherry-pick racial traits, because the developers did not want to have to bother with that)
Arguing against that is arguing against the lore, everything else... If it is not mentioned as "lore-forbidden", it thus could be expanded upon, as -addition- to the current system.

Remember, "lore breaking" only means going against some established lore.
When there is no lore established... it cannot be lore breaking.
(and yeah, dwemer plasma guns would not be lore breaking in that frame. After all, they already have electrical weapons, and flame weapons... Though its'd be highly unlikely to be implemented in any way that broke game balance... so what would be the point unless one wanted some really impressive raid boss attack?)

Just in this comment, above, you were saying that stuff like that can't pass because of occam's razor... As I said - pick one.

Also, yep, your definition of lore-breaking fails, because it permits things like dwemer plasma guns which obviously don't fit the universe. Oh they don't have to break the balance. It could just be a type of bow - a weapon you use with the bow skill line and numbers. So it wouldn't be any different from a bow mechanically or in performance. It would just look like a plasma gun. Would that be okay to you?

I also think that we could have a DLC where aliens and predators invade and are fighting each other and a player and the trial in black marsh where the main boss is a marshmallow man. Would that be fine because official lore doesn't say those things don't or can't exist? No it wouldn't be.

The lore is there to say what exist. Things that aren't in the lore can't be assumed to exist or take place UNTIL they are mentioned in the lore/implemented. Here - what's implemented in the game is considered lore as well, and even stronger than lore from books. AND even the fact something is in the lore books doesn't mean that's how it is E.g.1 We now know that Nord father and dunmer mother can have kids that look like Nords with no traces of dunmer. E.g.2 The earth is mentioned to be flat in our lore when it was later proven to not be flat.

That's why your cultural background is no better than any other suggestion. There is no mention in the lore that Molag Bal didn't change my racials while keeping my appearance the same when I was in coldharbor, for example. So let me cherry pick. Then again, I don't care about that. I care about performance. Give all races both stamina and magicka passives that are worded differently and work differently but perform about the same overall - and I'm good.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

I disagree. But then, I come from a land where people voted to let a guy named Adolph Hilter "fix" things, and we saw how that turned out. So I am more of a mind to fix things the right way and not the wrong way...

And I come from a land that kicked his arse. But that's not relevant to this discussion whatsoever. It's a computer game, any change or fix can always be rolled back.
p.s. and it didn't turn out that bad in the beginning - the economy was fixed, wasn't it? He just went beyond fixing things.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

If you were satisfied with them selling "generic redguard warrior polymorph" and "generic dunmer thief polymorph"... I'd have no issue with people using such.

There is no reason to make them generic. As long as cry babies like you can rationalize it away that it's an illusion, then it's fine.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Then you can make a thread asking for a polymorph customization feature.
And likely get laughed at.
I mean, sure the idea is not that bad, but... in no relation to the coding effort for a second set of appearance data attached to every single polymorph I would think, and too specialized for them to see much profit in it...
(Polymorph colorings on the other hand might be easy enough, just like for costumes I would think...)

There is no need to write any special code. Implement the choice of racial passives for existing races - just add it to the character creation and let people like you think it's an illusion. There is no reason for different mages to use the same illusions.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

...unless there is an established bit of lore against it.

Oh, sure, things could be retconned, like cyrodil jungles for example, but that always leaves a grating bit of vexation among fans... so it should only be done if neccessary for some reason, only if the result is worth it.
And pleasing cherry picking enthusiasts is not a worthy cause.

There is NEVER an established bit of lore against anything. Just like the jungle you mentioned. And guess what? TES only became more popular after Morrowind. No one cares that some people didn't like it and it makes no sense. Again, the Earth turned out to be spherical even though it was flat in the lore.

Yes it is, because they will pay for it and will be happy and will attract more players. While other will swallow it just like they did with the jungle. Or like you , they will say it's an illusion. Problem solved.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

...you are not all that well versed in stories about magical worlds, are you? From fountain of youth to dozends of other magical means, rejuvneration is a classic in such tales.
And as mentioned, there is even a quest in Vvardenfell where you help a telvanni sorceress to regain her youth...

Other worlds are irrelevant. Oh yeah but that quest takes place AFTER the time of ESO. And as you said before - it's plausible to assume that "something changed in magical ways" so we can't change race looks-passives combination anymore, didn't you?

Ah nvm, occam's razor. It always was and always is possible, then. Age change is fine, changing looks keeping passives is fine too.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

No.
Play a single player game where you can mod whatever you want if that's your desire.
But if its a multiplayer game, the thoughts anf feelings of others have to be taken into account.
And if its a Elder Scrolls game, the elder scrolls lore has to be taken into account.

Yes, as long as it's not hurting anyone. And IT DOESN'T. Because for all YOU know I AM a khajit even if my passives are those of altmer.

And no, freedom of one person doesn't end where someone's FEELINGS begin. If there is no harm to the game and other people - then it's all good.

You are the one who refuses to take feelings of others into account, not I. I'm saying again - no harm will be done. You will NEVER know what my passives are - if they are changed or classic, and I won't be feeling bad because I had to pick a race I don't like not to gimp myself or pick a race that I like but can't perform as well as others.

THIS IS a win-win situation.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

I think you need to read my comment again. Because I said "advantage and a little training won't beat no advantage and lots of training"

Ah you keep walking in circles. Sure , it SHOULDN'T beat it, but in this game the way it's implemented right now IT DOES. That's the point.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

That after saying a nonsensical thing does not make your mind seem something to brag about, really...
I think I make a lot of sense. So maybe I stometimes don't convey it too well into english... and my sense certainly is not some you would want to accept, seeing how it opposes your cherry picking desires, but that's besides the point. Not like we will ever agree on this one. Which makes me wonder why you seem so intent on focussing on the points we disagree on, instead of talking about the points were we do...

Trying to insult me won't help your cause. I know what I'm talking about, just happen to be educated in that field.

Your English is fine, not worse and maybe better than mine. Your logical constructions while trying to attack my points is what I can't agree with. Namely, trying to make me prove the reasonable doubt, when it's you who have to prove an affirmative claim to begin with.

Your suggestion is ok, too. But it's not better than cherry-picking or they could even be combined = cherry-picking justified by cultural background (because that's what it is, in the end). I'm focusing on those points because you're insulting my opinion/suggestion and opinion/suggestion of OP which I agree with. And what's more insulting - your attempts to make it seem that I'm illogical/don't know science, when you're committing multiple logical fallacies yourself, while I"m actually trying to follow logic and would expect mutual respect and the same from whoever I'm debating with.

Iluvrien wrote: »

You have said that there are things that TheShadowScout posts that your scientific mind won't let slide? Mine won't let this slide. Either your argument will stand without this unsupported appeal to anonymous authority, or it won't. I am far more interested in considering it light of the evidence, rather than seeing you resorting to rhetological fallacies like this one.

Not a fallacy at all. You make a BS argument, you get the same back.

Iluvrien wrote: »

Thus highlighting that it is a false dilemma. The idea that a player should be happy with every aspect of the game or quit it is specious and unrealistic. I will stop playing when I find that either there is no further entertainment for me to be had here, or the weight of things I dislike about the game exceeds those that I do.

Am I then required to accept, without argument, an addition to the game that might impact on both of those conditions? Not even vaguely. So here we are.

You don't get it. YET you are still playing. And many others. The goal is NOT to please every single player - you or anyone else. The goal is to create a world that can attract and keep the maximum amount of players possible. Being able to play a character whose looks a player likes and at the same time perform well and not worse than players of the same or lower skill IS a step in the right direction here.

Iluvrien wrote: »

ZOS could. Should they choose to. However citing it as evidence for or against (as you did) as it stands is singularly unhelpful. It has little weight as it does, in effect, assert very little indeed.

And they should. And it wasn't used as any evidence of anything. It's used to show that there are ways to do what OP suggested. This text is something that can easily be expanded. For example, see above in more detail - but if there are traces of father, what happens if a kid with those traces keeps mating with that race...

And for the record, no text in lore can be used as evidence of anything. It's just text written by people. Can be wrong. Can be lost in translation. Can be written in another phase of dragon break. There's tons of wrong facts and science in the old books.

Iluvrien wrote: »

I doubt it is as easy to explain away as added a single book or quest. Not even addressing the required scale of such a book or quest that would establish the bloodlines of all of the possible combinations, which would have to be grandiose indeed, the issue is that ESO is in the past as far as the rest of the franchise is concerned.

The direct effect of this is, as I mentioned in my previous post about Shalidor-level characters, that there isn't just a burden on ZOS to explain how they came to be in this time period, but also in how all of these various communities came to disappear in such a fashion as to leave little or no evidence of their existence for us to encounter in the later games. Or do you have sources that provide evidence that those communities did exist at this time?

The book or quest wouldn't need to describe all possible combinations. It would only need to describe/explain the mechanism. And they don't have to be separate communities, btw, it's just a step in evolution, they could evolve into what we have now in ESO. Or there could be all kinda of mixed people living among pure races. After all, no NPC knows racial passives of another NPC. There is no way to measure them and if there was - they wouldn't measure every single NPC. Again - there are multiple ways to implement it.

No, I don't have sources that they existed. But I also don't have sources that they didn't exist. They can always be added.

Hoping for the Chapter where we can go to an expedition to Akavir