[quote name="metaldragon66" date="2022-12-14 17:20:09" ]
[quote name="Larimoor" date="2022-12-14 17:10:32" ]
[quote name="sardines" date="2022-12-14 17:01:39" ]
[quote name="Larimoor" date="2022-12-14 16:57:23" ]
[quote name="sardines" date="2022-12-14 16:49:32" ]
i will say, while i'm very glad for this update and happy to see how it's been handled overall... i'm not sure how to feel about the new familiars?
maybe i'm just misunderstanding what the familiars are meant to be seen as, but i've always avoided using any of the beastclan familiars because of how weird it made me feel. it feels like i'm having my dragons keep them as pets, which is ... really, REALLY uncomfortable. but maybe i've just misunderstood what familiars are meant to be seen as...?
i suppose since new familiars have been added with this update, that indicates there wasn't anything seen wrong with them when going back over things for this update, so maybe i'm just not on the same page as far as what familiars are meant to represent? i still probably won't use them mysel
don't get me wrong, though--i am still really glad for this update and these changes, and it's really nice to see the team addressing this and handling it well aside form that imo!
[/quote]
You bring up a good point, especially considering Fiona's whole deal and some of her dialogue... "fantastical creatures" "beasties" etc. I'm assuming beastclans familiars are in her rotation too which does seem a biiiiiit uncomfortable..!
[/quote]
oh, that is a really fair point to consider that i hadn't even consciously thought of (though i think Fiona's whole deal is part of why i perceived them more as pets)... i do hope maybe they look at Fiona's dialogue following this update to hopefully eliminate some of that potential weirdness!
[/quote]
yeah i agree! I'm sure staff is keeping a close eye on this thread but just in case - @/Aequorin some food for thought!
[/quote]
I always thought of them (outside the context of my own lore) as companions or partners! Like a friend, or maybe a coworker. Fiona’s phrasing is a little weird in this situation, but Fiona is also a site function, not so much a lore facet (like the baldwin worries posted earlier in the thread- the problem proposed in which was already resolved long ago multiple times through different admin posts) and that likely wasn’t considered/wasn’t written with that intention during her development. If it was, we would see Beastclan members in her menagerie art.
Edit: Also some of the familiars are objects, so I would assume that “familiar” is just an all-encompassing term (that does not need changing!). Also, to me, familiar insinuates an at least semi-sapient friend- like a witches familiar (like Salem from Sabrina maybe lol). While some of the familiars are obviously animals (like Hainu) some are objects (Deity statues/Sornieth globe) or sapient creatures who more so accompany the dragons as friends and companions, or conversational partners, or something or other.
[/quote]
this is prolly me conflating things, but iirc something being a Familiar with a dragon means sharing in the dragon's magical influence/aura/etc; beastclans generally have trouble doing anything with magic save for a few individuals but they have their BEST magical potential if they are linked to a dragon, I thiiiink somewhere on the site says by tutelage? But to me since a dragon may only have One Familiar at a time (idk if that's canon. maybe just gameplay), I always thought it was something that shared the dragon's magic by means of a bond put in place by the dragon. So a Beastclan member might become a dragon's familiar to increase their magical capability and be more of a pupil than a bestie, something like that. Also why certain creatures are considered "better" familiars, such as unicorns who have their own ability to manipulate elemental magic so the Pooled Magic between a dragon and unicorn would be high.
As for Fiona, yes still weird wrt to what I just wrote but I'm also going to say gameplay and then turn off my computer and take a nap
metaldragon66 wrote on 2022-12-14 17:20:09:
Larimoor wrote on 2022-12-14 17:10:32:
sardines wrote on 2022-12-14 17:01:39:
Larimoor wrote on 2022-12-14 16:57:23:
sardines wrote on 2022-12-14 16:49:32:
i will say, while i'm very glad for this update and happy to see how it's been handled overall... i'm not sure how to feel about the new familiars?
maybe i'm just misunderstanding what the familiars are meant to be seen as, but i've always avoided using any of the beastclan familiars because of how weird it made me feel. it feels like i'm having my dragons keep them as pets, which is ... really, REALLY uncomfortable. but maybe i've just misunderstood what familiars are meant to be seen as...?
i suppose since new familiars have been added with this update, that indicates there wasn't anything seen wrong with them when going back over things for this update, so maybe i'm just not on the same page as far as what familiars are meant to represent? i still probably won't use them mysel
don't get me wrong, though--i am still really glad for this update and these changes, and it's really nice to see the team addressing this and handling it well aside form that imo!
You bring up a good point, especially considering Fiona's whole deal and some of her dialogue... "fantastical creatures" "beasties" etc. I'm assuming beastclans familiars are in her rotation too which does seem a biiiiiit uncomfortable..!
oh, that is a really fair point to consider that i hadn't even consciously thought of (though i think Fiona's whole deal is part of why i perceived them more as pets)... i do hope maybe they look at Fiona's dialogue following this update to hopefully eliminate some of that potential weirdness!
yeah i agree! I'm sure staff is keeping a close eye on this thread but just in case - @/Aequorin some food for thought!
I always thought of them (outside the context of my own lore) as companions or partners! Like a friend, or maybe a coworker. Fiona’s phrasing is a little weird in this situation, but Fiona is also a site function, not so much a lore facet (like the baldwin worries posted earlier in the thread- the problem proposed in which was already resolved long ago multiple times through different admin posts) and that likely wasn’t considered/wasn’t written with that intention during her development. If it was, we would see Beastclan members in her menagerie art.
Edit: Also some of the familiars are objects, so I would assume that “familiar” is just an all-encompassing term (that does not need changing!). Also, to me, familiar insinuates an at least semi-sapient friend- like a witches familiar (like Salem from Sabrina maybe lol). While some of the familiars are obviously animals (like Hainu) some are objects (Deity statues/Sornieth globe) or sapient creatures who more so accompany the dragons as friends and companions, or conversational partners, or something or other.
this is prolly me conflating things, but iirc something being a Familiar with a dragon means sharing in the dragon's magical influence/aura/etc; beastclans generally have trouble doing anything with magic save for a few individuals but they have their BEST magical potential if they are linked to a dragon, I thiiiink somewhere on the site says by tutelage? But to me since a dragon may only have One Familiar at a time (idk if that's canon. maybe just gameplay), I always thought it was something that shared the dragon's magic by means of a bond put in place by the dragon. So a Beastclan member might become a dragon's familiar to increase their magical capability and be more of a pupil than a bestie, something like that. Also why certain creatures are considered "better" familiars, such as unicorns who have their own ability to manipulate elemental magic so the Pooled Magic between a dragon and unicorn would be high.
As for Fiona, yes still weird wrt to what I just wrote but I'm also going to say gameplay and then turn off my computer and take a nap
[quote name="MissleDuck" date="2022-12-14 17:25:35" ]
I'm glad we could snip out a lot of the implications and parallels of colonialism here, but what about the saboteur familiars? Now that the majority of dragons and beastclans are pretty much chill with each other, what's their issue? Is it just an oversight?
[center][item= eye of talona][item=mistyhollow agent][item=dapplemane deceiver][/center]
[/quote]
I wonder about this myself. Individual or small groups that work to take advantage of dragons for various personal reasons are one thing (like the Dapplemane Deceiver), but the Eye of Talona especially shows itself as a product of when beastclans and dragons were assumed to be at odds by default. "Defectors" who are actually agents for the harpies' leader made more sense then, but really doesn't anymore with this change. I'm going to guess that further cleanup to align things with the new lore will happen as this (very welcome) effort continues, but it would be nice to hear confirmation!
EDIT: I see after digging through more pages of this thread that staff have already stated the intention to clean up more of the descriptions and tooltips on harpy-related game items by the end of the week, so I'll take that as confirmation that the Eye of Talona and other false ambassadors will be altered to better fit the new lore!
MissleDuck wrote on 2022-12-14 17:25:35:
I'm glad we could snip out a lot of the implications and parallels of colonialism here, but what about the saboteur familiars? Now that the majority of dragons and beastclans are pretty much chill with each other, what's their issue? Is it just an oversight?
I wonder about this myself. Individual or small groups that work to take advantage of dragons for various personal reasons are one thing (like the Dapplemane Deceiver), but the Eye of Talona especially shows itself as a product of when beastclans and dragons were assumed to be at odds by default. "Defectors" who are actually agents for the harpies' leader made more sense then, but really doesn't anymore with this change. I'm going to guess that further cleanup to align things with the new lore will happen as this (very welcome) effort continues, but it would be nice to hear confirmation!
EDIT: I see after digging through more pages of this thread that staff have already stated the intention to clean up more of the descriptions and tooltips on harpy-related game items by the end of the week, so I'll take that as confirmation that the Eye of Talona and other false ambassadors will be altered to better fit the new lore!
@ahuvi, [b][url=https://www1.flightrising.com/forums/ann/3193191/38#post_52948297]please read Undel's post[/url][/b]. Territory disputes between relatively equal groups and colonialism are not the same. Please do not conflate them on our website. Thank you.
[quote name="Undel" date="2022-12-14 14:15:01" ]
[quote name="FleetingFancy" date="2022-12-14 13:45:06" ]
There is a difference between fiction that mirrors reality in an actually harmful way (like glorifying abuse, normalizing toxic relationships, just to name a few smaller ones), and fiction that mirrors real life for a point. Both can still hurt you, but one should not, in my opinion, be changed.
If we cannot have dark themes in our stories in case it hurts someone because it mirrors real life, how will any stories ever be told? There's a line to be drawn, yes - again, some media do take bad/toxic/horrible situations and portray them terribly - but by retconning the story here entirely, it feels like the message being told is that fiction CAN NEVER mirror real life, because if it hurts then it HAS to be bad.
[/quote]
We did not feel that the genocide, cultural erasure (in the original harpy articles the war was causing them to lose their culture), and loss of territory to an overwhelming force were something we wanted in a game when the creatures this was happening to looked so much like humans. This does not mean that harpies and dragons are always buddies. Though the harpies have a close alliance with the majority of wind clans, other flights treat them with a more cautious approach and may have their own alliances with different Beastclans. And those big shapes harassing even the harpies in the Windswept Plateau? Those aren't ancients.
[b]In other words, we simply chose what we did and did not want in our game, and we decided that the colonialism parallels were something we did not want to have in our story.[/b] And we especially did not like the fact our unresolved story placed our players in the parallel position of destructive aggressors.
There is still conflict and dark themes in the world of Sornieth. The dragon flights remain antagonistic towards one another. Dragons follow primal elemental forces as their guiding principles. There's a worker's revolution in Fire, a catastrophic proliferation of magic vs technology in Arcane and Lightning, a wartime standstill between Plague and Nature, things from deep in the stone being dug up in Earth, otherworldly threats forever jailed except maybe...not?, missing prophetic deities, an energy-sucking otherworldly force infesting Sornieth, and an overwhelming surge of elemental energy to name a few. Plus the fact that dragons—like people—aren't always going to get along with each other.
[/quote]
@
ahuvi,
please read Undel's post. Territory disputes between relatively equal groups and colonialism are not the same. Please do not conflate them on our website. Thank you.
Undel wrote on 2022-12-14 14:15:01:
FleetingFancy wrote on 2022-12-14 13:45:06:
There is a difference between fiction that mirrors reality in an actually harmful way (like glorifying abuse, normalizing toxic relationships, just to name a few smaller ones), and fiction that mirrors real life for a point. Both can still hurt you, but one should not, in my opinion, be changed.
If we cannot have dark themes in our stories in case it hurts someone because it mirrors real life, how will any stories ever be told? There's a line to be drawn, yes - again, some media do take bad/toxic/horrible situations and portray them terribly - but by retconning the story here entirely, it feels like the message being told is that fiction CAN NEVER mirror real life, because if it hurts then it HAS to be bad.
We did not feel that the genocide, cultural erasure (in the original harpy articles the war was causing them to lose their culture), and loss of territory to an overwhelming force were something we wanted in a game when the creatures this was happening to looked so much like humans. This does not mean that harpies and dragons are always buddies. Though the harpies have a close alliance with the majority of wind clans, other flights treat them with a more cautious approach and may have their own alliances with different Beastclans. And those big shapes harassing even the harpies in the Windswept Plateau? Those aren't ancients.
In other words, we simply chose what we did and did not want in our game, and we decided that the colonialism parallels were something we did not want to have in our story. And we especially did not like the fact our unresolved story placed our players in the parallel position of destructive aggressors.
There is still conflict and dark themes in the world of Sornieth. The dragon flights remain antagonistic towards one another. Dragons follow primal elemental forces as their guiding principles. There's a worker's revolution in Fire, a catastrophic proliferation of magic vs technology in Arcane and Lightning, a wartime standstill between Plague and Nature, things from deep in the stone being dug up in Earth, otherworldly threats forever jailed except maybe...not?, missing prophetic deities, an energy-sucking otherworldly force infesting Sornieth, and an overwhelming surge of elemental energy to name a few. Plus the fact that dragons—like people—aren't always going to get along with each other.
Thank you so much for changing the beastclans lore! Personally I've always disliked the original one. Even without the huge colonization implications which I don't really mind, introducing new sentient species just to turn then into enemies of dragons feels like a wasted potential in terms or writing. There are also many details in the old lore that I have problems with, such as the dragons' treatments for beastclans in Warrior's Way's lore, or beastclans stealing dragons' eggs and actively try to eradicate dragonkind... For a family friendly browser game where players raise virtual dragon pets, the lore of Sornieth's societies was so much darker and dare I say, edgier than it should be, and through its stories it also indirectly gives away messages that I think is unrealistic and problematic
Thank you so much for changing the beastclans lore! Personally I've always disliked the original one. Even without the huge colonization implications which I don't really mind, introducing new sentient species just to turn then into enemies of dragons feels like a wasted potential in terms or writing. There are also many details in the old lore that I have problems with, such as the dragons' treatments for beastclans in Warrior's Way's lore, or beastclans stealing dragons' eggs and actively try to eradicate dragonkind... For a family friendly browser game where players raise virtual dragon pets, the lore of Sornieth's societies was so much darker and dare I say, edgier than it should be, and through its stories it also indirectly gives away messages that I think is unrealistic and problematic
Congrats to the development team and thank you for your thoughtful updates!
Congrats to the development team and thank you for your thoughtful updates!
I'm excited to see what lore possibilities this opens up! I've always been a sucker for Beastclan lore in general, so I'm excited to see more. Particularly curious as to how this change will effect Serthis, with their more brutal lore prior.
I'm excited to see what lore possibilities this opens up! I've always been a sucker for Beastclan lore in general, so I'm excited to see more. Particularly curious as to how this change will effect Serthis, with their more brutal lore prior.
Excited for most beastclan lore. Especially Serthis!
+1 on what other people have been saying about familiars though, even if beastclans and animals have to be in the same category for gameplay reasons, Fiona should have some seperation? iirc she never mentions that they are sentient, just groups em in with the animals. Kinda gives creepy 'freak show' implications. Maybe a line about making sure her assistants/visitors are well taken care of too?
Excited for most beastclan lore. Especially Serthis!
+1 on what other people have been saying about familiars though, even if beastclans and animals have to be in the same category for gameplay reasons, Fiona should have some seperation? iirc she never mentions that they are sentient, just groups em in with the animals. Kinda gives creepy 'freak show' implications. Maybe a line about making sure her assistants/visitors are well taken care of too?
Hopefully this makes way for for expansive lore in general, but especially shade lore. It's hard to focus on the actually cool dark stuff in the site's lore, like cosmic horror and magic mayhem, with the weird implications of the main conflict hanging over everything.
Hopefully this makes way for for expansive lore in general, but especially shade lore. It's hard to focus on the actually cool dark stuff in the site's lore, like cosmic horror and magic mayhem, with the weird implications of the main conflict hanging over everything.
[quote name="vihuff" date="2022-12-14 17:29:39" ]
[quote name="Larimoor" date="2022-12-14 17:10:32" ]
[quote name="sardines" date="2022-12-14 17:01:39" ]
[quote name="Larimoor" date="2022-12-14 16:57:23" ]
[quote name="sardines" date="2022-12-14 16:49:32" ]
i will say, while i'm very glad for this update and happy to see how it's been handled overall... i'm not sure how to feel about the new familiars?
maybe i'm just misunderstanding what the familiars are meant to be seen as, but i've always avoided using any of the beastclan familiars because of how weird it made me feel. it feels like i'm having my dragons keep them as pets, which is ... really, REALLY uncomfortable. but maybe i've just misunderstood what familiars are meant to be seen as...?
i suppose since new familiars have been added with this update, that indicates there wasn't anything seen wrong with them when going back over things for this update, so maybe i'm just not on the same page as far as what familiars are meant to represent? i still probably won't use them mysel
don't get me wrong, though--i am still really glad for this update and these changes, and it's really nice to see the team addressing this and handling it well aside form that imo!
[/quote]
You bring up a good point, especially considering Fiona's whole deal and some of her dialogue... "fantastical creatures" "beasties" etc. I'm assuming beastclans familiars are in her rotation too which does seem a biiiiiit uncomfortable..!
[/quote]
oh, that is a really fair point to consider that i hadn't even consciously thought of (though i think Fiona's whole deal is part of why i perceived them more as pets)... i do hope maybe they look at Fiona's dialogue following this update to hopefully eliminate some of that potential weirdness!
[/quote]
yeah i agree! I'm sure staff is keeping a close eye on this thread but just in case - @/Aequorin some food for thought!
[/quote]
Familiars are meant to be the dragon's closest companion. The one you bond and do everything with, not necessarily a pet. So that could be your dog, or your best friend.
[/quote]
@vihuff Took the words right out of my beak! Thank you for putting it in a simple and clear way I wanted to say it in~ (but was too afraid to speak up as I didn't want to ruffle any feathers.) [emoji=raven size=1]
vihuff wrote on 2022-12-14 17:29:39:
Larimoor wrote on 2022-12-14 17:10:32:
sardines wrote on 2022-12-14 17:01:39:
Larimoor wrote on 2022-12-14 16:57:23:
sardines wrote on 2022-12-14 16:49:32:
i will say, while i'm very glad for this update and happy to see how it's been handled overall... i'm not sure how to feel about the new familiars?
maybe i'm just misunderstanding what the familiars are meant to be seen as, but i've always avoided using any of the beastclan familiars because of how weird it made me feel. it feels like i'm having my dragons keep them as pets, which is ... really, REALLY uncomfortable. but maybe i've just misunderstood what familiars are meant to be seen as...?
i suppose since new familiars have been added with this update, that indicates there wasn't anything seen wrong with them when going back over things for this update, so maybe i'm just not on the same page as far as what familiars are meant to represent? i still probably won't use them mysel
don't get me wrong, though--i am still really glad for this update and these changes, and it's really nice to see the team addressing this and handling it well aside form that imo!
You bring up a good point, especially considering Fiona's whole deal and some of her dialogue... "fantastical creatures" "beasties" etc. I'm assuming beastclans familiars are in her rotation too which does seem a biiiiiit uncomfortable..!
oh, that is a really fair point to consider that i hadn't even consciously thought of (though i think Fiona's whole deal is part of why i perceived them more as pets)... i do hope maybe they look at Fiona's dialogue following this update to hopefully eliminate some of that potential weirdness!
yeah i agree! I'm sure staff is keeping a close eye on this thread but just in case - @/Aequorin some food for thought!
Familiars are meant to be the dragon's closest companion. The one you bond and do everything with, not necessarily a pet. So that could be your dog, or your best friend.
@
vihuff Took the words right out of my beak! Thank you for putting it in a simple and clear way I wanted to say it in~ (but was too afraid to speak up as I didn't want to ruffle any feathers.)
