Background reading...
http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=25898.0Synopsis of the concerning part about it.
Unar should probably be incredibly suspicious of any Kllyros he meets, if not outright hostile when in a bad mood. In effect, a bad prejudice. It appears that the prejudice is established by background history, not events occuring in game, but then again, I am assuming. From a strictly single player point of view, this makes his character more interesting.
Take one powerful PC, and let his beliefs become widespread known to the playerbase, and people will probably meta-game when creating a new character to join a common cause. Noone wants to be on the losing side really, because most every time, it's not enjoyable. If one side appears more powerful (doesn't like kllyros) versus the weaker side (kllyros) people are generally going to pick don't like kllyros or disinterested.
Is this encouraged? Tolerated? Discouraged, or has the issue just not been brought up to rule against or for it? Most importantly... is this possible prejudice widespread?
The reason this is of interest to me is looking at a character concept I want to play, the race that fits most is Kllyros. Nomadic, and very much adaptable to any situation, but not very forward far thinking.
My character concept isn't going to be very much fun to play if theres a significant prejudice versus kllyros, and I can't really look at how kllyros as a race are percieved by the player base, or the npc base, especially without a timeline of events since the beginning of the game, and not with the general history of Kllyros given in society.
In effect, I can't tell the current state or race relation's unless I play a character, and other than their looks, I can't tell why Kllyros would probably get a widespread prejudice from a canon source.
So... are there a concerning number of people that don't like kllyros, and/or are there a concerning number of overreacter's that it would make a kllyros less enjoyable?
