I have never said not to respect the settings Zanzibar. That is you attemting to put words in my mouth in order to support your own argument. (And before you say I'm just saying that to discredit you I have actualy posted several times that we must respect the settings)
"You know we've already moved well away from what the main site history says. Besides interatial conflicts are the kinds of things that can start from one person haveing a distaste for dwarves, an enki holding all humans responsible for the ones/s that raped it's mother, or an elf feeling that the diaboli should be destroyed because they are the "spawn of the devil". Realy all natural things for certain types of people."
"What are the settings Zanzibar? Just because they say that there is no record of inter racial conflict does not mean that it has not, or can not happen. As I said sometimes certain people will have an experiance that causes them to dislike or have an affinity for someone of another race. That, belive it or not, is how racial conflicts start."
"Nor should you. However in a game with both feline Enikidkai and Humans you can easily play a character that thinks it's disgusting that Enkidukai shed all over the place. You would even be able to pass this dislike on to others (IC) and create a ratial tension between Enkidukai and Humans."
"Zanzibar the settings are a guide not the world."
"I'm saying that the setting is a guide nothing more. If you limit yourself to exactly what it says you will be severly limiting your own ability to roleplay not to mention seting yourself up for conflicts of interpitation."
"I never said it was just a bunch of suggestions; I said it was a guide. It says what things should be what the general populace belives the world to be not what that world truely is. Also just because you don't feel it's limitimg does not give you the right to force it's limitations on others. You may have no interest in playing a character that stands out from the norm; I on the other hand have no interest in playing a charecter that conforms to the norm. In short Zanzibar the setting is not the world; it is a guide to the world. WE are the world."
"Besides I never said that I didn't accept the setting, or that I was trying to change the game. Only that nothing you put in the setting can 100% reflect the reality of the world."
"The Devs have every right to make the world unrealistic. Just not when they are trying to make "A realistic world"."
"Zanzibar you seem to see the Setting as an absolute set in stone. It is not and can never be so. Further more just as you claim others are useing the fact that it is a guid and nothing more as an excuse to Rp however they want. You are useing your claim that it is absolute to justify your attempts to tell others how to play."
"O and the bigest reason I say that the setting is not set in stone is not individuality (though that is a big one), but that all things change over time."
Hatchnet, to me it seems pretty clear that you think that the settings are not rules so much as they are suggestions. You use different words, and you deny that you think they're merely suggestions, but functionally there's no difference between them being suggestions and how you see them. You see them as rules that can be bent, broken, changed for convenience or creativity or intuition, or ignored completely. That means that you see them as suggestions.
Part of the problem with your argument, Zanzibar, is that you uphold a part of the setting never intended as anything more than general as being the be all and end all of all of Yliakum. You do this despite the fact that other areas of the settings which affect things on a much more personal level show this to be otherwise and to in truth only to be a generality.
Which part? This discussion has been pretty general.
