Guild Wars 2

broken forums again?

to me the norn would win.
the edge that the charr has for being more ferocious and possibly skilled in battle is nulled by the norn transformation which also grants him claws and more power in general (speed/strenght and so on)
the both of them barechested with similar weapons and expertise,1vs1 the norn takes it 8 out of 10 times,of course theres details like the terrain,the mind set,their warrior background regarding experience but those details we cant control or quantify,in general the norn wins

Brutalistik.6473:

Guys I don’t think we need to go into depths about a simple discussion about a norn fighting a charr. It all depends how the fight goes and from what I remember norn has more brute strength than a charr, but charr has the advantages due to claws. It will be a close fight and one will come out victor while both will be incredibly injured or dead due to too much damage intake/ loss of blood. Pretty much a double K.O

The problem is that the initial argument over Norn v Charr is just ridiculous. There isn’t an answer that anyone will accept.

The conversation about how Charr walk is much more interesting, except Leo has no idea how anatomy actually works. He’s picking a fight on a topic I know quite well, have experimented with (I cosplay, thank you very much), and I know a lot more about digitgrade stances than he does. If I really want to know how a cat walks, I’ll just watch Tiger, the American Shorthair my housemate has. He walks all over my computer while I’m typing. I’m well versed in how he walks, where he puts his weight (because he walks on us when he’s looking for attention), and I can feel exactly what part of his paw he’s putting his weight on, and it’s the big fat pad on the bottom of his paw, NOT his toes. In fact, the only time he puts his weight to his toes is when he’s taking a swipe at my dog, who also walks on the pads of his feet, not his toes (though you wouldn’t know it from how much they clack on the floor when he walks because they’re getting a bit long).

Because of his lack of understanding, I don’t even want to begin tying this back into the initial discussion by adding into the anatomy lesson the concepts of muscle insertion points, fast-reflex vs slow-reflex muscles, and basic joint leverage mechanical advantages. Anyway, I’m mostly just monitoring the conversation at this point for glaring inaccuracies or horrible logic.

I’m well versed in how he walks, where he puts his weight (because he walks on us when he’s looking for attention), and I can feel exactly what part of his paw he’s putting his weight on, and it’s the big fat pad on the bottom of his paw, NOT his toes.

~rubs temples~

The pads ARE the toes. Both the small pads and the ‘big fat pad’.

Leo G.4501:

~rubs temples~

The pads ARE the toes. Both the small pads and the ‘big fat pad’.

Right you are. The link you provided clearly shows it. by limiting the definition of the word “toe” to what actually sticks out, then elephants have no toes. But we know that elephants walk on their tippy toes because those toe bones are what is being walked on. Now cats don’t walk on their tippy toes but they clearly do walk on their toes. In fact, the big pad runs directly along the first phalange that connects to their metatarsal. So unless cats don’t actually walk on their pads, there is no argument to support that cats don’t walk on their toes.

And it really goes back to the initial response about the ‘ball of the foot’ not actually existing as an anatomical structure but instead a set of structures only loosely defined.

I’m not some kind of expert, I just happened to study some anatomy and the locomotion of the body for art. I do know a bit extra about feet because I developed flat feet when I was 14 and ended up visiting a few doctors about it. Because of my feet, I tend to (about 70% of the time) walk on the ‘balls of my feet’, a gait I developed over years and now it’s a bit of a habit. But it’s not walking so much on the toe as it is not putting any weight on the heel. My heel isn’t elevated when I walk or anything but my weight when at rest is forward instead of centered.

Trying to compare a plantigrade ‘ball of foot’ and digitigrade ‘ball of foot’ actually requires defining what a ‘ball of foot’ is to a digitigrade since, as mentioned, the joint between the phalanges and the metatarsal is actually behind that big pad, not at it. If we’re defining ‘ball of foot’ as the section of the foot where the weight of the body rolls off of, then we’re changing the whole naming convention of their paws. The big pad would then be the ‘heel’ and the area between the small and large pads would become the ‘ball’.

If we’re going by skeletal/ligament structure, digitigrade do not walk on the ball of their feet at all because their metatarsal bone never touches the ground like when we walk on the balls of our feet.

To further elaborate on the differences, Drakkon can be considered correct. The fat pad he mentions is notated as the ‘Metatarsal/Metacarpal pad’ on this wiki page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paw

(also mentions this quote: “The paw consists of the large, heart-shaped metacarpal or palmar pad (forelimb) or metatarsal or plantar pad (rear limb), and generally four load-bearing digital pads….”)

So technically, they walk on a metacarpal pad which could be considered the ball of their foot. Only problem is, like illustrated, the metacarpal pad is connected to the phalanges so that their paw can bend at a 90degree angle and have the full traction of the metacarpal pad. Our metacarpals/metatarsals don’t have pads…in fact, our phalanges are fully separated where digitigrade animals have flesh between them.

Look at this linked pic. Notice how the joint linking the metacarpal and phalanges is touching the ground in the skeleton? When you add flesh and the pads, the pads wouldn’t be at the joint or else it would curve with the joint like flesh is suppose to do.

Edit: No, actually that pic is of a dog skeleton and according to it, the metacarpal bones don’t even touch the ground…yeah, dogs walk on their toes and that’s for certain :P

As you are going to go at length to misrepresent the facts, I don’t think we can discuss more, Leo. You’re saying that the palm of your hand is actually your fingers. I refuse to accept your definition of toes because you are both anatomically and logically faulty, wrong, ignorant and just not right. Since we can’t even agree on the basic definitions of what we’re talking about, we’ve left the building as far as rational conversation is concerned. Have fun with your self-reinforcing delusions and poor grasp of physiology. I’m completely done with this.

Drakkon.4782:

You’re saying that the palm of your hand is actually your fingers.

No, the palm of your hand is the metacarpal and carpal. The arch of your foot is made by metatarsal and tarsal bones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metacarpal

Toes are phalanges. Phalanges are the middle and proximal phalanges/phalanx.

The ball, as per the wiki, is where the toes join the rest of the foot which is the joint between the phalanges and metatarsal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_%28anatomy%29

Digitigrade animals do not walk on the joint which joins their toes with the rest of their foot. They walk on a pad called the metatarsal/metacarpal pad in which they balance on with their toes or phalanges. Said joint that forms the ball of the foot is elevated on digitigrade feet and said pad shifts the weight of their body forward, off that joint and onto their toes which the pad is attached under.

…aaaand we are back to the feet stuff..

You know what norn don’t have? Tanks.

/thread

lol sure cus in a 1vs1 duel tanks play such a huge role ^^

Drakenvold.9761:

lol sure cus in a 1vs1 duel tanks play such a huge role ^^

Wrong kind of tank.

Go Norn or go home.
The answer is simple. Norn are masters of the hunt, and Charr are beasts to be hunted.

CorvusRex.8349:

Go Norn or go home.
The answer is simple. Norn are masters of the hunt, and Charr are beasts to be hunted.

You are in the wrong place for that sort of attitude…

Drakkon.4782:

CorvusRex.8349:

Go Norn or go home.
The answer is simple. Norn are masters of the hunt, and Charr are beasts to be hunted.

You are in the wrong place for that sort of attitude…

Yes, only furries allowed :-P

Charr board. You want to be all Norn, you have your own board. Go there.

CorvusRex.8349:

Go Norn or go home.
The answer is simple. Norn are masters of the hunt, and Charr are beasts to be hunted.

WRONG!

Norn are hunters, Charr are soldiers. Get it right.

Come on, where are all you lore throat-ramming, Norn-biased junkies at? You shoulda been all over that one with your lore correcting. Ooooh, I get it. If it’s lore that favors a Charr and is incorrect, you fix it. If it’s lore that favors a Norn and is incorrect, you allow it. Whatever.

/eyeroll.

As Drakkon suggested. *Norn board is that way —>
/sarcasm: Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

*Wouldn’t have pointed out the exit, but Norn are too stupid and drunk to figure it out on their own.

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

As Drakkon suggested. *Norn board is that way —>
/sarcasm: Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

*Wouldn’t have pointed out the exit, but Norn are too stupid and drunk to figure it out on their own.

highfive

Now that’s how it’s done.

Drakkon.4782:

Charr board. You want to be all Norn, you have your own board. Go there.

Well, Norn are Furries too, even without Become the [insert sparkle dog or some such]. Might as well combine the boards.

I’m a big believer that the race forums are for more people than just the fanbois.

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

Come on, where are all you lore throat-ramming, Norn-biased junkies at? You shoulda been all over that one with your lore correcting. Ooooh, I get it. If it’s lore that favors a Charr and is incorrect, you fix it. If it’s lore that favors a Norn and is incorrect, you allow it. Whatever.

Perhaps the lore-ramming junkies were waiting for some semblance of lore to correct. That was clear fanboi-ism. Not even disguised as actual lore. So the only thing to correct is when people state wrong lore or try to disguise their fanboi-ism as actual lore…….. or state wrong lore, and then try to disguise it as fanboi-ism becsue they’re scared someone will know that they’ve been wrong about something atleast once in their life.

Dustfinger.9510:

I’m a big believer that the race forums are for more people than just the fanbois.

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

Come on, where are all you lore throat-ramming, Norn-biased junkies at? You shoulda been all over that one with your lore correcting. Ooooh, I get it. If it’s lore that favors a Charr and is incorrect, you fix it. If it’s lore that favors a Norn and is incorrect, you allow it. Whatever.

Perhaps the lore-ramming junkies were waiting for some semblance of lore to correct. That was clear fanboi-ism. Not even disguised as actual lore. So the only thing to correct is when people state wrong lore or try to disguise their fanboi-ism as actual lore…….. or state wrong lore, and then try to disguise it as fanboi-ism becsue they’re scared someone will know that they’ve been wrong about something atleast once in their life.

Fine, alright, I’ll go with that, partially. It was “fanboi” lore. It’s still incorrect lore.

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

Fine, alright, I’ll go with that, partially. It was “fanboi” lore. It’s still incorrect lore.

In the interest of a middle ground and as a representative of us lore-cramming junkies, i’ll go ahead and chime in that there is nothing in lore to suggest that a charr’s purpose is to be hunted. Nothing at all. Norn are hunters and charr can accurately be described as beastial but that is where the actual lore ends.

Firstly, I would like to start off and say that I am really enjoying this debate. However, I believe too much emphasis is placed on strength and strength alone. The art of fighting is much more by strength.

eg. Remember when Battista tried to fight in the UFC? LOL

I am not saying that strength isn’t important because I personally believe that it is. But there is much more of a science to fighting than any individual statistics. Especially, when it comes to something like Charr vs Norn where their strengths are not exactly directly comparable.

1. Charr were bred to fight and endure. Let us take both a Norn and charr.. and beat them both down to where they are so tired and beat up that they could barely walk. Who would be able to endure and have enough stamina to get up and continue fighting?

My vote would definitely be for the Charr, they were basically bred for this.

2. Aggression in my opinion is much more important than strength in a fight. Who can deny that the Norn warrior is an absolute kitten… but these norns are not fighting bears or gorilla’s. These are Charr.. possibly the most savage race in the World of Tyria..

My vote would be that the Charr would possess the most aggression solely based on the fact that not only is this a natural characterstic of the species.. but once again.. they were also bred this way.

I don’t personally believe that a Norn would be that much (if at all) stronger than a Charr warrior. However, assuming a slight advantage in strength given to the Norn. I don’t think that would impact the battle at all.

These are not little kittens, cubs, or even tigers. These are Charr, more comparable to the old werewolves from the 90’s movies (back before vampires walked in the sun and sparkled), the ones with walked with 2 legs, full of rage, huge fangs. claws, and just straight savage beasts.

Apparition.1576:

Firstly, I would like to start off and say that I am really enjoying this debate. However, I believe too much emphasis is placed on strength and strength alone. The art of fighting is much more by strength.

eg. Remember when Battista tried to fight in the UFC? LOL

I am not saying that strength isn’t important because I personally believe that it is. But there is much more of a science to fighting than any individual statistics. Especially, when it comes to something like Charr vs Norn where their strengths are not exactly directly comparable.

1. Charr were bred to fight and endure. Let us take both a Norn and charr.. and beat them both down to where they are so tired and beat up that they could barely walk. Who would be able to endure and have enough stamina to get up and continue fighting?

My vote would definitely be for the Charr, they were basically bred for this.

2. Aggression in my opinion is much more important than strength in a fight. Who can deny that the Norn warrior is an absolute kitten… but these norns are not fighting bears or gorilla’s. These are Charr.. possibly the most savage race in the World of Tyria..

My vote would be that the Charr would possess the most aggression solely based on the fact that not only is this a natural characterstic of the species.. but once again.. they were also bred this way.

I don’t personally believe that a Norn would be that much (if at all) stronger than a Charr warrior. However, assuming a slight advantage in strength given to the Norn. I don’t think that would impact the battle at all.

These are not little kittens, cubs, or even tigers. These are Charr, more comparable to the old werewolves from the 90’s movies (back before vampires walked in the sun and sparkled), the ones with walked with 2 legs, full of rage, huge fangs. claws, and just straight savage beasts.

That’s actually a pretty good point, take for example a honey badger or a wolverine. Although much smaller in size and not nearly as strong (though still formidable for their size), they can both hold their own against bears, lions, swarms of bees, etc.

This is because they possess extreme ferocity, stamina and refuse to back down during a fight.

If Micheal Jordan can single handedly dribble through an entire defense and still score a basket what are the odds of any other player guarding him 1-1?

Same Logic.

Get it?

Apparition.1576:

If Micheal Jordan can single handedly dribble through an entire defense and still score a basket what are the odds of any other player guarding him 1-1?

Same Logic.

Get it?

Bad example. MJ could be defined as a hero from his team. And his record shows that the odds of the average pro basket ball player keeping him from scoring were in MJ’s favor.

It’s a great example and that is my point… how many other Norn have you heard of are able to single handedly push back an entire Warband?

Exceptions are exceptions and prove absolutely nothing.

What indication is there that these are all exceptions? The very first Norn we encounter is known for being able to kill an entire band of heroes. Nothing indicates that these are just “exceptions” beyond the wishful thinking of charr fans. We then see that a norn is able to throw a charr across the room, one handed. We can chalk these all up to “exceptions” but there seems to be an awful of “exceptions” when it comes to norn capabilities. But this has all already been discussed earlier in the thread. All counters to your arguemets points have alrady been provided.

edit: The fact that Norn are so prone to exceptional status and capabilities indicates that the norn would still tend to win.

You sure love to dodge around the questions. Prove that this is no exception and tell me of other Norn who have achieves this feat.

Furthermore, the capability of the norn is equal to the capability of anything else or anyone else. You cannot argue about the potential of a Norn to do anything vs anyone else. There are billions of athletes with the potential to play professional sports yet not even 1 percent of the population have accomplished this feat.

What is the portential of one Sylvari (Scarlet Rose) to build a crap ton of robots and invade Tyria?

Point is that if you want to stregnthen your argument then you need to incorporate a plethora of scenario’s reguarding the races stregnths and weaknesses. Of course it all comes down to how good each opponent fights on that particular day. But in my arguement I have included just a few reasons and explanations of my examples and why I feel the way that I do. One fight one time won’t prove much of anything. Give facts, scenario’s and you also need to look at both the strengths and weaknesses of the race.

Umm, YOU make the unsupported claim that they are exceptions. Therefor it is your burden to demonstrate that. My evidence that they are not exceptions have been listed multiple times in this same thread. That plethora of scenarios has been listed over and over though out this thread. But you’ve decided that they are all somehow “exceptions”. While basing your opinion of charr abilities on an idea that contradicts lore that has been listed in this thread. The rediculous idea that Norn aren’t that much stronger than charr if they are at all.

So to address your question: How many other norn? The general majority that were actually involved in conflicts with the charr warbands. Other than all of tose, the general lore of norn capabilities listed time and time again.

edit: and in a thread about who would win in a fight between a norn and a charr, you’ve arbitrarily dismissed the event where they actually fought. Chalking up that entire scenario as the charr having a possible “off day” :eye roll:

You posted an entire paragraph without making one valid point.. lol

Weak

Okay. I can see you are choosing to ignore actual lore in favor of your fanfic. Unless you have a real point addressing the actual lore, we’re probably done here, no?

Dustfinger.9510:

Okay. I can see you are choosing to ignore actual lore in favor of your fanfic. Unless you have a real point addressing the actual lore, we’re probably done here, no?

I can make suggestions, but I’m not going to pretend like I know the lore haha. I did play the original Guild Wars, but I honestly don’t remember much about the norn. Lore aside, I’d probably be more afraid of the charr, but I guess if the norn were weaker, they wouldn’t be living solitary lives would they?

DrDivine.5378:

I can make suggestions, but I’m not going to pretend like I know the lore haha. I did play the original Guild Wars, but I honestly don’t remember much about the norn. Lore aside, I’d probably be more afraid of the charr, but I guess if the norn were weaker, they wouldn’t be living solitary lives would they?

Bingo!

Every playable race has something they bring to the table. I didn’t realize just how strong norn were until I started perusing these forums and looking up the references that other more knowledgeable people were providing.

That said, charr are no slouches. But they excel at group warfare in their warbands, while norn are known to be able to take on great odds just to test themselves against. And they are known to win. Jora was the first norn we encountered. When we ran into her, Ogden Stonehealer was extremely worried about her killing himself, Vekk, the PC, and their 3-7 allies in short order. And that was simply because she was a norn. One charr has nothing one norn doesn’t. They both have claws and teeth, but norn also has superhero strength.

Dustfinger.9510:

DrDivine.5378:

I can make suggestions, but I’m not going to pretend like I know the lore haha. I did play the original Guild Wars, but I honestly don’t remember much about the norn. Lore aside, I’d probably be more afraid of the charr, but I guess if the norn were weaker, they wouldn’t be living solitary lives would they?

Bingo!

Every playable race has something they bring to the table. I didn’t realize just how strong norn were until I started perusing these forums and looking up the references that other more knowledgeable people were providing.

That said, charr are no slouches. But they excel at group warfare in their warbands, while norn are known to be able to take on great odds just to test themselves against. And they are known to win. Jora was the first norn we encountered. When we ran into her, Ogden Stonehealer was extremely worried about her killing himself, Vekk, the PC, and their 3-7 allies in short order. And that was simply because she was a norn. One charr has nothing one norn doesn’t. They both have claws and teeth, but norn also has superhero strength.

I think the only thing that threw me off was how exaggerated their strength is. Yes, the norn are extremely strong, but at certain points it seemed almost godly (haha). Someone showed me a written part of the story once where all the races sent in about 100 of their own soldiers, while the norn only had to send 10 because that’s all it took.

The norn are also known for boasting about their heroic tales, I can believe they’re stronger than the charr, but how come the norn haven’t taken over yet? Their strength seems really unmatched haha.

Apparition.1576:

Firstly, I would like to start off and say that I am really enjoying this debate. However, I believe too much emphasis is placed on strength and strength alone. The art of fighting is much more by strength.

eg. Remember when Battista tried to fight in the UFC? LOL

I am not saying that strength isn’t important because I personally believe that it is. But there is much more of a science to fighting than any individual statistics. Especially, when it comes to something like Charr vs Norn where their strengths are not exactly directly comparable.

1. Charr were bred to fight and endure. Let us take both a Norn and charr.. and beat them both down to where they are so tired and beat up that they could barely walk. Who would be able to endure and have enough stamina to get up and continue fighting?

My vote would definitely be for the Charr, they were basically bred for this.

2. Aggression in my opinion is much more important than strength in a fight. Who can deny that the Norn warrior is an absolute kitten… but these norns are not fighting bears or gorilla’s. These are Charr.. possibly the most savage race in the World of Tyria..

My vote would be that the Charr would possess the most aggression solely based on the fact that not only is this a natural characterstic of the species.. but once again.. they were also bred this way.

I don’t personally believe that a Norn would be that much (if at all) stronger than a Charr warrior. However, assuming a slight advantage in strength given to the Norn. I don’t think that would impact the battle at all.

These are not little kittens, cubs, or even tigers. These are Charr, more comparable to the old werewolves from the 90’s movies (back before vampires walked in the sun and sparkled), the ones with walked with 2 legs, full of rage, huge fangs. claws, and just straight savage beasts.

Well, I’d say all those features you attribute to the nature of the Charr race can be transitioned over to the Norn and their Animal Spirit transformations…

…unless you’re saying my Human or Asura can somehow train to Become the Snow Leopard or Become the Wolf, Norn can be said to be ‘bred’ into such things as savageness, aggression, cunning, endurance and intimidation.

What Charr have going for them is not solely their appearance, size and nature, but their sophistication to go to go against nature to accomplish their means to an end. And that means tech, military might and stubbornness to throw as many Charr at something as needed…

…but when it comes to a one-on-one fight, I still don’t see why the Charr would have some sort of edge. Everything a Charr’s physiology and attitude offers, a Norn can gain the same or better with their spirits.

Leo G.4501:

Apparition.1576:

Firstly, I would like to start off and say that I am really enjoying this debate. However, I believe too much emphasis is placed on strength and strength alone. The art of fighting is much more by strength.

eg. Remember when Battista tried to fight in the UFC? LOL

I am not saying that strength isn’t important because I personally believe that it is. But there is much more of a science to fighting than any individual statistics. Especially, when it comes to something like Charr vs Norn where their strengths are not exactly directly comparable.

1. Charr were bred to fight and endure. Let us take both a Norn and charr.. and beat them both down to where they are so tired and beat up that they could barely walk. Who would be able to endure and have enough stamina to get up and continue fighting?

My vote would definitely be for the Charr, they were basically bred for this.

2. Aggression in my opinion is much more important than strength in a fight. Who can deny that the Norn warrior is an absolute kitten… but these norns are not fighting bears or gorilla’s. These are Charr.. possibly the most savage race in the World of Tyria..

My vote would be that the Charr would possess the most aggression solely based on the fact that not only is this a natural characterstic of the species.. but once again.. they were also bred this way.

I don’t personally believe that a Norn would be that much (if at all) stronger than a Charr warrior. However, assuming a slight advantage in strength given to the Norn. I don’t think that would impact the battle at all.

These are not little kittens, cubs, or even tigers. These are Charr, more comparable to the old werewolves from the 90’s movies (back before vampires walked in the sun and sparkled), the ones with walked with 2 legs, full of rage, huge fangs. claws, and just straight savage beasts.

Well, I’d say all those features you attribute to the nature of the Charr race can be transitioned over to the Norn and their Animal Spirit transformations…

…unless you’re saying my Human or Asura can somehow train to Become the Snow Leopard or Become the Wolf, Norn can be said to be ‘bred’ into such things as savageness, aggression, cunning, endurance and intimidation.

What Charr have going for them is not solely their appearance, size and nature, but their sophistication to go to go against nature to accomplish their means to an end. And that means tech, military might and stubbornness to throw as many Charr at something as needed…

…but when it comes to a one-on-one fight, I still don’t see why the Charr would have some sort of edge. Everything a Charr’s physiology and attitude offers, a Norn can gain the same or better with their spirits.

Even though I like the charr more, it does seem like there’s more evidence pointing towards the norn being superior in physical strength, with charr coming in close second.

Really what the charr have going for them is they know how to utilize the skills they do have, which is organization and strategy. On a one on one fight, yeah a born would probably win, but in a war, I think the charr would be more united and find a way to pick them out one by one, taking their solitary behavior as a weakness.

What I just said above isn’t really supported by anything official, it’s just my personal perspective.

1. Norn are really good at two things: boasting and drinking.
2. The burden of proof lies in your court Dustfinger since you were the first one to point out norn legend as truth.
3. Apparition makes some excellent points.
4. RNG states either can potentially win.
5. I like making lists lately….. /shrug.

DrDivine.5378:

I think the only thing that threw me off was how exaggerated their strength is. Yes, the norn are extremely strong, but at certain points it seemed almost godly (haha). Someone showed me a written part of the story once where all the races sent in about 100 of their own soldiers, while the norn only had to send 10 because that’s all it took.

The norn are also known for boasting about their heroic tales, I can believe they’re stronger than the charr, but how come the norn haven’t taken over yet? Their strength seems really unmatched haha.

they do have some very big disadvantages that keep them from taking over. Their huge individuality and their lack of organization. They have no common goal beyond fighting the Elder Dragons. and while a-net confirmed that they drove back the charr and that norn strength was enough to take on entire warbands, they also confirmed that an entire legion would have won against the norn. And I would infer that it had a large part to do with the advantages that the charr are known to have. organization, organized combat, ferocity, etc. So while they do have superhero strength, it is not limitless.

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

2. The burden of proof lies in your court Dustfinger since you were the first one to point out norn legend as truth.

What are you referring to?

In a debate you address the rebuttal of your opponents. In an arguement, you just kind of say whatever comes out of your mouth.

You should learn to address the valid points if you would really want to be relevant instead of just replying to every post with whatever.

@Dustfinger: I’m not doing the work for you. You’re a big boy/girl. You can handle it.

Apparition.1576:

In a debate you address the rebuttal of your opponents. In an arguement, you just kind of say whatever comes out of your mouth.

You should learn to address the valid points if you would really want to be relevant instead of just replying to every post with whatever.

If this was to me, I addressed your question…… and you failed to address my points.

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

@Dustfinger: I’m not doing the work for you. You’re a big boy/girl. You can handle it.

Your list seems very lazy. I won’t be putting more in than I get back.

Apparition.1576:

Firstly, I would like to start off and say that I am really enjoying this debate. However, I believe too much emphasis is placed on strength and strength alone. The art of fighting is much more by strength.

eg. Remember when Battista tried to fight in the UFC? LOL

I am not saying that strength isn’t important because I personally believe that it is. But there is much more of a science to fighting than any individual statistics. Especially, when it comes to something like Charr vs Norn where their strengths are not exactly directly comparable.

1. Charr were bred to fight and endure. Let us take both a Norn and charr.. and beat them both down to where they are so tired and beat up that they could barely walk. Who would be able to endure and have enough stamina to get up and continue fighting?

My vote would definitely be for the Charr, they were basically bred for this.

2. Aggression in my opinion is much more important than strength in a fight. Who can deny that the Norn warrior is an absolute kitten… but these norns are not fighting bears or gorilla’s. These are Charr.. possibly the most savage race in the World of Tyria..

My vote would be that the Charr would possess the most aggression solely based on the fact that not only is this a natural characterstic of the species.. but once again.. they were also bred this way.

I don’t personally believe that a Norn would be that much (if at all) stronger than a Charr warrior. However, assuming a slight advantage in strength given to the Norn. I don’t think that would impact the battle at all.

These are not little kittens, cubs, or even tigers. These are Charr, more comparable to the old werewolves from the 90’s movies (back before vampires walked in the sun and sparkled), the ones with walked with 2 legs, full of rage, huge fangs. claws, and just straight savage beasts.

I made clear and distinct points with this post. You addressed absolutely nothing that I have said. Hell, I did half the work for you.. its numbered. Instead you deflect and do what you have quite a history of doing throughout this post, either ignore any validity and basically say that you are right because of something you already said or proven by some unknown source.

The merry-go-round goes in a small circle at a very low speed. The first ride is the same exact ride as the thousandth time. That is why most adults tend to find this kind of ride to be a very boring one. Point for the second time..
Address the rebuttal, deflecting just makes any post you type to be like that of a merry-go-round. This would actually be a great debate if you stop just killing this post by not addressing any of the points people make. You can agree or disagree but explain why.

FYI – rebut (r??b?t)
— vb , -buts , -butting , -butted
( tr ) to refute or disprove, esp by offering a contrary contention or argument

As I said before. Most of your points have already been rebutted earlier in the thread. You brought nothing new to the thread. You said you read the thread. Show that you read the thread not by dragging it back into time but by continuing the growth of the conversation. And include the previous info into your new points. Don’t ignore it in favor of invented fanfic about what you wish were true.

1. it takes a lot more to beat a norn down to that level. So charr have to work twice as hard for them to be measured on this “equal ground”. Advantage remains with the norn

2. Aggression is a factor. But strength is a huge factor in one on one martial competitions. And norn excel at one on one combat where charr excel at group combat. Norn need to be aggressive in their daily lives just as charr do.

This fanfic about how Norn aren’t that much stronger, if at all. There’s not too much more to discuss if you’re going to ignore basic info already discussed at great length.

it’s only three pages but it is three pages of info I and others have already discussed. Multiplies by the number of past threads on similar topics. if you are going to expect me or anyone in this thread to rebut your points, at least bring yourself up to speed of the topic. otherwise it is only tedious and if we all follow your example, there is no progress in the thread topic. So there is no deflection here. the info has already been addressed at great length and energy.

that said, I’m a fan of lore. I like discussing it. Your intro post into this thread, I thought, was polite, with a display that showed an eagerness to discuss points. So I would love to discuss new points with you. If you feel the need to rehash an already gone over pointwith new information or even a new point of view, feel free to quote the relevant posts that address that point so we can at least make progress in the discussion. That’s all I ask. I spend time in these discussions for recreation. Not to waste time retyping what everyone has already said. That’s too much like a pointless job.

Im waiting what Rytlock have to say about a single norn beating his legion….

I’ve read most of this thread, I don’t recall the counter to Norn legend “lore” being an case of extraordinary individuals, like the atheletes of today, and not the norm for the entire race. That’s a new, and quite valid point. *Where are you seeing this in the thread? Where in lore does it state otherwise? The lore in game even indicates that there are extraordinary individuals that are a rare occurance. Hint, hint: the tooth of Jor in the great hall.

(*I reserve the right to claim memory loss since I’ve dismissed a lot of the dribble here as simple stubbornness and obvious fanboism.)

After playing the game as a Norn, my opinion of them has been greatly diminished. I see them as a lot of braggarts with “legends” that are well boasted beyond their truth, making proverbial mountains out of molehills. It is quite possible that this has also come to play in the case of the single norn beating a legion. Afterall history is written by the victor of a war, and we all know it gets changed to favor said victor.

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

I don’t recall the counter to Norn legend “lore” being an case of extraordinary individuals, like the atheletes of today, and not the norm for the entire race. That’s a new, and quite valid point. *Where are you seeing this in the thread? Where in lore does it state otherwise? The lore in game even indicates that there are extraordinary individuals that are a rare occurance. Hint, hint: the tooth of Jor in the great hall.

Lamefox mentioned it on page 2 when we were talking about what actually happened when the charr fought. he said something like How do we know all norn involved weren’t all extraordinary heroes? (So norn bragging isn’t even a factor here)

My response: It doesn’t seem to me that a-net was indicating that only exceptional Norn heroes were involved. Like I said a few times, no matter how much we like to play devils advocate, a-nets intentions seem pretty clear. On the same note, how do we know the charr weren’t the best of the best against the weakest average norn? It doesn’t make sense to assume any of this.

about the norn writing the history (really?): So even minimizing the importance of strength, if their individual ability (all told, strength included) is enough to beat a larger organized force of charr, it doesn’t make sense that a lone charr would tend to fair better against a norn who have already tended to be capable of doing so much damage to multiple charr. So the topic of this thread has really already been addressed by a-net and the answer confirmed.

Dustfinger.9510:

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

I don’t recall the counter to Norn legend “lore” being an case of extraordinary individuals, like the atheletes of today, and not the norm for the entire race. That’s a new, and quite valid point. *Where are you seeing this in the thread? Where in lore does it state otherwise? The lore in game even indicates that there are extraordinary individuals that are a rare occurance. Hint, hint: the tooth of Jor in the great hall.

Lamefox mentioned it on page 2 when we were talking about what actually happened when the charr fought. he said something like How do we know all norn involved weren’t all extraordinary heroes? (So norn bragging isn’t even a factor here)

My response: It doesn’t seem to me that a-net was indicating that only exceptional Norn heroes were involved. Like I said a few times, no matter how much we like to play devils advocate, a-nets intentions seem pretty clear. On the same note, how do we know the charr weren’t the best of the best against the weakest average norn? It doesn’t make sense to assume any of this.

about the norn writing the history (really?): So even minimizing the importance of strength, if their individual ability (all told, strength included) is enough to beat a larger organized force of charr, it doesn’t make sense that a lone charr would tend to fair better against a norn who have already tended to be capable of doing so much damage to multiple charr. So the topic of this thread has really already been addressed by a-net and the answer confirmed.

So you’re going to deny that history is written by those who control it? Not even the notion that this might be the case? Hmm, as I said. Stubborness and fanboism. Quite an ugly couple, but not uncommon.

Let me address some keyword problems in your statement(s), at the risk of repetitiveness. “…Doesn’t SEEM to me..” and “…INTENTIONS…” are all speculation and personal interpretation. Intentions is like trying to reading minds. I’m no lore-jockey, but I don’t recall seeing anywhere that Anet has specifically stated “An individual Norn as a standard race and not just as an extraordinary individual is far more stronger than an individual Charr” or anything similar that isn’t open to interpretation.

So I ask again, point out where in lore it is stated that the few incidents involved with Charr are not declared extraordinary accounts.

If you want to go the route of “INTENTIONS” than it would seem to me that the current Norn in GW2 time is intended to be a much lesser than that of GW1 lore. Otherwise, that tooth in the hall would have been cracked a long time ago (btw, love how you skirted around that in the previous post).

Also, when did the Charr channel become the Lore channel? This debate belongs there now imo.

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

So you’re going to deny that history is written by those who control it? Not even the notion that this might be the case? Hmm, as I said. Stubborness and fanboism. Quite an ugly couple, but not uncommon.

Let me address some keyword problems in your statement(s), at the risk of repetitiveness. “…Doesn’t SEEM to me..” and “…INTENTIONS…” are all speculation and personal interpretation. Intentions is like trying to reading minds. I’m no lore-jockey, but I don’t recall seeing anywhere that Anet has specifically stated “An individual Norn as a standard race and not just as an extraordinary individual is far more stronger than an individual Charr” or anything similar that isn’t open to interpretation.

So I ask again, point out where in lore it is stated that the few incidents involved with Charr are not declared extraordinary accounts.

If you want to go the route of “INTENTIONS” than it would seem to me that the current Norn in GW2 time is intended to be a much lesser than that of GW1 lore. Otherwise, that tooth in the hall would have been cracked a long time ago (btw, love how you skirted around that in the previous post).

Also, when did the Charr channel become the Lore channel? This debate belongs there now imo.

Lol. meanwhile, I’m accused of being a charr fanboi in other threads. Go figure. Show me how the norn controle history? I’m going to acknowledge that the “history” is a creation of the devs. So where is there any indication that the norn have gotten together to write “The movement of the world”? Anywhere?

So you can feel free to hang on the ridiculous extreme possibilitie that the only norn we ever see do anything is the ones that are “exceptions”. And that the exceptions are so far beyond all other norn that they might as well not even be norn. Even when a-net talks about them in general terms like “the charr warbands couldn’t overcome the individual might of the norn”. That’s your right. I’ll go with what a-net has given us . because that seems to be the route of less stubbornness and fanboi-ism. But I will state that there seems to be an awful lot of exceptions among the norn. Which is still an advantage leaning in norn favor.

So, that’s my evidence, taken from lore. Where’s your evidence? Because all I see is a wish and a prayer coming from your end. The wish that the norn mentioned are exceptions, and the prayer that no one will call you on your complete lack of evidence. Talk about stuborness and fanboi-ism.

edit: Charr lore is fine right here in the charr forum. If you disagree, feel free to notify the mods. Or feel free not to participate. No one is forcing you.

edit: “The Movement of the World” is written by a human in the Durmand priory. We see no connection to some tinfoil hat, secret organization of norn historians altering fairly recent world history.