Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Apparition.1576

Apparition.1576

Oh boy, here we go again.

Here’s one: Norn aren’t what they used to be just like Charr are different from the past.

Where’s the lore that states Norn haven’t gotten weaker since the days of GW1? Where’s the lore that states Charr are weaker than Norn in current GW2 times?

Going off of a combo of what arthurobenzi and Gieniusz Krab are stating: is it possible that the GW1 Charr were just as powerful as GW1 Norn but were considered weaker because of their savagery?

Where is the lore that says Norn these days are weaker then they were before?

Gameplay doesn’t count. There is nothing in the Movement of the World that’d suggest a total racial decline of strength and other areas in individuals. Infact, you could say there is stuff to imply they’d work at becoming STRONGER, Faster, etc in response to the forced exile.

Go the the Norn Town Hall.. there you will find your answer.

One day.. all of you shall submit to the Flame Legion…. to me… I AM BLADABOS

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Kalavier.1097

Kalavier.1097

Go the the Norn Town Hall.. there you will find your answer.

I see nothing there that says they have grown weaker as individuals or a race.

Care to point it out?

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: arthurobenzi.2619

arthurobenzi.2619

Go the the Norn Town Hall.. there you will find your answer.

I see nothing there that says they have grown weaker as individuals or a race.

Care to point it out?

I think it refers to the dialogue of the Jotun in the Great Lodge .

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Kalavier.1097

Kalavier.1097

Meaning the Jotun who IIRC, purely talked about HIS people? At best mentioning Norn back in the days of the Jotun being an awesome empire were better?

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

“The Age of Giants ended when magic was stolen from us. You norn turned to your Spirits of the Wild to redeem your strength and self-respect. We jotun have had no one and nothing to pull us from the quicksand.” Thruln The Lost
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Thruln_the_Lost

He is clearly talking about social strength as a race. Besides which, that was long before the events of GW1 and he says they were redeemed before GW1. The only evidence that supports the norn getting individually weaker since GW1 can also be used to show that a naked asura is just as strong as a naked norn. Because in all likelyhood it is just a game mechanic.

(edited by Dustfinger.9510)

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Drakenvold.9761

Drakenvold.9761

1 vs 1 norn wins

full scale war charr wins…simple

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Apparition.1576

Apparition.1576

The evidence is clear, their feats are much smaller and a lot more normal. As a matter of fact, all these individual feats that you praise only happened once and they were all a very long time ago. In real life we like to refer to them as exaggerations.

FYI..The hint I was referring to was The Fang of the Serpeant. Look at the Size of it… stories does not tell of this as an individual feat or combined effort. But if this was an individual feat none of the Norns in the GW2 Generation would be able to accomplish anything even remotely possible.

Norns are not the Norns of old. Charr are still the trained killers they have always been, and they bred that way.

One day.. all of you shall submit to the Flame Legion…. to me… I AM BLADABOS

(edited by Apparition.1576)

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Apparition.1576

Apparition.1576

“The Age of Giants ended when magic was stolen from us. You norn turned to your Spirits of the Wild to redeem your strength and self-respect. We jotun have had no one and nothing to pull us from the quicksand.” Thruln The Lost
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Thruln_the_Lost

He is clearly talking about social strength as a race. Besides which, that was long before the events of GW1 and he says they were redeemed before GW1. The only evidence that supports the norn getting individually weaker since GW1 can also be used to show that a naked asura is just as strong as a naked norn. Because in all likelyhood it is just a game mechanic.

Didn’t even notice but that explains and refute everything you have talked about regarding your “evidence.” Theis evidence goes much deeper than “social strength” this also explains the reduction in both size and stregnth of your race. The Jotun could not have been any clearer in this explanation.

Appears ANET did something right in the lore after all. This is the first time I have heard of it but everything the Jotun says makes perfect sense.

One day.. all of you shall submit to the Flame Legion…. to me… I AM BLADABOS

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

Where in there does it mention a reduction of size of the norn race? Please point out the exact bits that make it so “clear”. Saying it’s there and showing how it’s there are very different things. Feel free to dissect his dialog.

The evidence is clear, their feats are much smaller and a lot more normal. As a matter of fact, all these individual feats that you praise only happened once and they were all a very long time ago. In real life we like to refer to them as exaggerations.

FYI..The hint I was referring to was The Fang of the Serpeant. Look at the Size of it… stories does not tell of this as an individual feat or combined effort. But if this was an individual feat none of the Norns in the GW2 Generation would be able to accomplish anything even remotely possible.

Norns are not the Norns of old. Charr are still the trained killers they have always been, and they bred that way.

You know the norn are just waiting for the prophesy to be fulfilled of the norn that does break that tooth right? Hmm, that could be an indication that the norn are only getting stronger.

edit: if you skim through this very thread you will see some of the very recent feats from norn in the lore.

(edited by Dustfinger.9510)

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: FenrirSlakt.3692

FenrirSlakt.3692

Where in there does it mention a reduction of size of the norn race? Please point out the exact bits that make it so “clear”. Saying it’s there and showing how it’s there are very different things. Feel free to dissect his dialog.

The evidence is clear, their feats are much smaller and a lot more normal. As a matter of fact, all these individual feats that you praise only happened once and they were all a very long time ago. In real life we like to refer to them as exaggerations.

FYI..The hint I was referring to was The Fang of the Serpeant. Look at the Size of it… stories does not tell of this as an individual feat or combined effort. But if this was an individual feat none of the Norns in the GW2 Generation would be able to accomplish anything even remotely possible.

Norns are not the Norns of old. Charr are still the trained killers they have always been, and they bred that way.

You know the norn are just waiting for the prophesy to be fulfilled of the norn that does break that tooth right? Hmm, that could be an indication that the norn are only getting stronger.

edit: if you skim through this very thread you will see some of the very recent feats from norn in the lore.

I’m calling it now. It’ll be Braham.

(edited by FenrirSlakt.3692)

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: bullyrook.2165

bullyrook.2165

1 vs 1 norn wins

full scale war charr wins…simple

Yeah… no. The Charr were unable to conquer the Norn, that is why they get along so well nowadays.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: arthurobenzi.2619

arthurobenzi.2619

1 vs 1 norn wins

full scale war charr wins…simple

Yeah… no. The Charr were unable to conquer the Norn, that is why they get along so well nowadays.

Seriously ? -_- you should read the topic …

“Although it is certain the Charr could have destroyed the Norn resistance if they but turned their entire army—or even one full legion—to the cause, warbands and smaller raiding parties could not overcome the individual strength of the Norn. These initial skirmishes taught both sides to respect the strength of the other.” (http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Movement_of_the_World)

Stated by lore :
-1 full legion = norns lose,
-small warband = norn win .

The question for a real war is already answered : Charrs win with 1/3 ( 1/4 in reality, but yeah flame is banned ) of their military force .

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

I’m calling it now. It’ll be Braham.

Braham Toothbreaker. Has nice ring to it.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Dragonic Elemental.2674

Dragonic Elemental.2674

It depends on if they are armed or unarmed. Norn were known in Guild Wars 1 to slay entire warbands of Charr. However, if they are both unarmed, the Charr have their razor sharp claws, their horns and teeth to give them a big advantage. So;
-Armed: Norn.
-Unarmed: Charr.

May the Six watch over us. And come back to Tyria soon.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: bullyrook.2165

bullyrook.2165

1 vs 1 norn wins

full scale war charr wins…simple

Yeah… no. The Charr were unable to conquer the Norn, that is why they get along so well nowadays.

Seriously ? -_- you should read the topic …

“Although it is certain the Charr could have destroyed the Norn resistance if they but turned their entire army—or even one full legion—to the cause, warbands and smaller raiding parties could not overcome the individual strength of the Norn. These initial skirmishes taught both sides to respect the strength of the other.” (http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Movement_of_the_World)

Stated by lore :
-1 full legion = norns lose,
-small warband = norn win .

The question for a real war is already answered : Charrs win with 1/3 ( 1/4 in reality, but yeah flame is banned ) of their military force .

“Many expected the initial Charr expansion through northern Tyria to become a tide of blood that would crash upon the Shiverpeaks, drowning Charr and Norn alike. The reality proved different. When the Charr reached the foothills, the Norn drove them back with a single crushing blow, completely decimating every warband sent against them. "

Just the first wave, friend. The Norn are not exactly organized. If push came to shove and the Norn became united against the Charr, it would have been quite a different story. It was best that the Charr back down before they took on more than they could bear.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: arthurobenzi.2619

arthurobenzi.2619

1 vs 1 norn wins

full scale war charr wins…simple

Yeah… no. The Charr were unable to conquer the Norn, that is why they get along so well nowadays.

Seriously ? -_- you should read the topic …

“Although it is certain the Charr could have destroyed the Norn resistance if they but turned their entire army—or even one full legion—to the cause, warbands and smaller raiding parties could not overcome the individual strength of the Norn. These initial skirmishes taught both sides to respect the strength of the other.” (http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Movement_of_the_World)

Stated by lore :
-1 full legion = norns lose,
-small warband = norn win .

The question for a real war is already answered : Charrs win with 1/3 ( 1/4 in reality, but yeah flame is banned ) of their military force .

“Many expected the initial Charr expansion through northern Tyria to become a tide of blood that would crash upon the Shiverpeaks, drowning Charr and Norn alike. The reality proved different. When the Charr reached the foothills, the Norn drove them back with a single crushing blow, completely decimating every warband sent against them. "

Just the first wave, friend. The Norn are not exactly organized. If push came to shove and the Norn became united against the Charr, it would have been quite a different story. It was best that the Charr back down before they took on more than they could bear.

And ? that change absolutely nothing -_-
“Although it is certain the Charr could have destroyed the Norn resistance if they but turned their entire army—or even one full legion”
1/3 of military power = win
I don’t know why you want not accept the lore.
“Just the first wave, friend.” yeah charr only send a few warband, it’s also called reconnaissance in war.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: bullyrook.2165

bullyrook.2165

1 vs 1 norn wins

full scale war charr wins…simple

Yeah… no. The Charr were unable to conquer the Norn, that is why they get along so well nowadays.

Seriously ? -_- you should read the topic …

“Although it is certain the Charr could have destroyed the Norn resistance if they but turned their entire army—or even one full legion—to the cause, warbands and smaller raiding parties could not overcome the individual strength of the Norn. These initial skirmishes taught both sides to respect the strength of the other.” (http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Movement_of_the_World)

Stated by lore :
-1 full legion = norns lose,
-small warband = norn win .

The question for a real war is already answered : Charrs win with 1/3 ( 1/4 in reality, but yeah flame is banned ) of their military force .

“Many expected the initial Charr expansion through northern Tyria to become a tide of blood that would crash upon the Shiverpeaks, drowning Charr and Norn alike. The reality proved different. When the Charr reached the foothills, the Norn drove them back with a single crushing blow, completely decimating every warband sent against them. "

Just the first wave, friend. The Norn are not exactly organized. If push came to shove and the Norn became united against the Charr, it would have been quite a different story. It was best that the Charr back down before they took on more than they could bear.

And ? that change absolutely nothing -_-
“Although it is certain the Charr could have destroyed the Norn resistance if they but turned their entire army—or even one full legion”
1/3 of military power = win
I don’t know why you want not accept the lore.
“Just the first wave, friend.” yeah charr only send a few warband, it’s also called reconnaissance in war.

Reconnaissance is usually followed by some manner of assault.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: arthurobenzi.2619

arthurobenzi.2619

Reconnaissance is usually followed by some manner of assault.

Yes but here they don’t, because charr saw than send a few warband is not sufficient to invade the norn . They stopped the invasion because they knew that norn was not going to be invaded by a few warband, because norn have their surnatural strenght.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: bullyrook.2165

bullyrook.2165

Reconnaissance is usually followed by some manner of assault.

Yes but here they don’t, because charr saw than send a few warband is not sufficient to invade the norn . They stopped the invasion because they knew that norn was not going to be invaded by a few warband, because norn have their surnatural strenght.

A tactical and ruthless race like the Charr would admit defeat because they are scared of a little brawn?

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Zaxares.5419

Zaxares.5419

It should also be noted that this was back during the time of GW1. Modern Charr armies now have guns, tanks and airships. (Granted, those steam devices may not work very well in bitter, high-altitude cold that can make iron brittle enough to shatter by hand.)

Although on the other hand, the Norn have also learned the benefit of banding together and working in groups. We have the Wolfborn, for example; back in GW1 it was almost unheard of to have a police force at all. A Norn enforced the rules of his homestead via his own strength of arm.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Ehecatl.9172

Ehecatl.9172

Reconnaissance is usually followed by some manner of assault.

Yes but here they don’t, because charr saw than send a few warband is not sufficient to invade the norn . They stopped the invasion because they knew that norn was not going to be invaded by a few warband, because norn have their surnatural strenght.

A tactical and ruthless race like the Charr would admit defeat because they are scared of a little brawn?

The charr were still in a state of civil war against the Flame Legion, and had to deal with the forces of Ebonhawke on the side. The tactical and ruthless race decided to use the tactical half and, rather than send a third of their forces to take some frozen mountain range with no strategic value to their efforts elsewhere, call off a full scale invasion of the norn in favor on focusing on domestic threats.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: FenrirSlakt.3692

FenrirSlakt.3692

Reconnaissance is usually followed by some manner of assault.

Yes but here they don’t, because charr saw than send a few warband is not sufficient to invade the norn . They stopped the invasion because they knew that norn was not going to be invaded by a few warband, because norn have their surnatural strenght.

A tactical and ruthless race like the Charr would admit defeat because they are scared of a little brawn?

You’re just spewing words randomly, aren’t you?

Tactical means that they strive to use their resources in the most efficient manner possible. If the Charr saw that it would take one third of their total strength to wipe out the Norn, and still at heavy losses while having internal issues with the Flame Legion and an open front at Ebonhawke, I would say that backing off was the smartest and most logical choice the could’ve taken (and they did).

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Kalavier.1097

Kalavier.1097

“The Age of Giants ended when magic was stolen from us. You norn turned to your Spirits of the Wild to redeem your strength and self-respect. We jotun have had no one and nothing to pull us from the quicksand.” Thruln The Lost
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Thruln_the_Lost

He is clearly talking about social strength as a race. Besides which, that was long before the events of GW1 and he says they were redeemed before GW1. The only evidence that supports the norn getting individually weaker since GW1 can also be used to show that a naked asura is just as strong as a naked norn. Because in all likelyhood it is just a game mechanic.

Didn’t even notice but that explains and refute everything you have talked about regarding your “evidence.” Theis evidence goes much deeper than “social strength” this also explains the reduction in both size and stregnth of your race. The Jotun could not have been any clearer in this explanation.

Appears ANET did something right in the lore after all. This is the first time I have heard of it but everything the Jotun says makes perfect sense.

Talking about Ancient, ANCIENT Norn does not = GW2 norn are weaker then GW1.

Do note the whole “Eir (IIRC, is considered kinda old by either Norn or human standards) carried a 500 pound statue on her back from her house, to the Asura gate (A hefty distance, almost the entire width of Hoelbrek), through the gate to LA and then Rata Sum, and then all the way to Snaffs lab”

IIRc, she actually did that TWICE, as she carved one statue for Snaff, one for Zojja.

I don’t recall which scene had a Norn fling a charr across a room one-handed, but that’s there apparently.

Norn are built off great feats. ingame mechanics do not represent this at all. (One Norn in Hoelbrek got his ‘title’ from taking on two grown bears as a kid and winning).

OH, also since I just noticed it on my Norn. Eir actually sends you a letter post Claw Island stating people are saying “You alone wrestled plaguebringer to the ground.” Obvious an exaggeration due to rumor, but at the same time, it’s the type of stuff Norn do. They go, they find some huge, nasty beast, beat it, come back boasting.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Wyvern.5329

Wyvern.5329

“Even if the norn were already aware of the extent of the charr and were concerned merely about being washed away by a tsunami of clawed furry things, it wouldn’t make sense then to say that it was the skirmishes which ‘taught both sides to respect the strength of the other’.”

this part of Lamefox’s post made my day.

Though, if game mechanics reflected the lore, everyone (except me) would be playing as norn since their raw strength would likely boost damage far more then any other race by far… but they would not be able to get into many places in the human area’s :P

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Kalavier.1097

Kalavier.1097

“Even if the norn were already aware of the extent of the charr and were concerned merely about being washed away by a tsunami of clawed furry things, it wouldn’t make sense then to say that it was the skirmishes which ‘taught both sides to respect the strength of the other’.”

this part of Lamefox’s post made my day.

Though, if game mechanics reflected the lore, everyone (except me) would be playing as norn since their raw strength would likely boost damage far more then any other race by far… but they would not be able to get into many places in the human area’s :P

They’d also be the toughest with highest natural health and armor pool regardless of class :P.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Lonewolf Kai.3682

Lonewolf Kai.3682

Where’s the lore that states Norn haven’t gotten weaker since the days of GW1? Where’s the lore that states Charr are weaker than Norn in current GW2 times?

Where’s the lore that states that Rytlock is not an Elder Dragon in disguise undermining DE from the inside?
Where’s the lore that states that Zojja isn’t really a 47 year old chubby man named Ralph?
Where’s the lore that states that Zhaitan doesn’t work half-time as a babysitter from saturday to tuesday to help Kralk and Jormag with the rent of their apartment?

I’m… awaiting your “rebuttle”.

Uuuuhhhh, okay. I didn’t realize I was debating you specifically. Lol?

Anyways, my point was that there is always room for open possibilities unless lore dictates that those possibilities aren’t there.

If you want to take your debate to the point of unnecessary ridiculousness, we can go there. However, it’d be just like we can’t get bows that shoot out little rainbowy ponies……. Oh wait. Nevermind.

“Be like water” – Bruce Lee

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: bullyrook.2165

bullyrook.2165

Reconnaissance is usually followed by some manner of assault.

Yes but here they don’t, because charr saw than send a few warband is not sufficient to invade the norn . They stopped the invasion because they knew that norn was not going to be invaded by a few warband, because norn have their surnatural strenght.

A tactical and ruthless race like the Charr would admit defeat because they are scared of a little brawn?

The charr were still in a state of civil war against the Flame Legion, and had to deal with the forces of Ebonhawke on the side. The tactical and ruthless race decided to use the tactical half and, rather than send a third of their forces to take some frozen mountain range with no strategic value to their efforts elsewhere, call off a full scale invasion of the norn in favor on focusing on domestic threats.

I believe that this happened before the charr civil war. "In fact, during the Searing, the Norn allowed the Charr armies passage through the northern pass from Ascalon into Kryta, setting the stage for the Charr invasion of the central human lands. Although this was not a sign of any alliance, it set the stage for the two races to live within a watchful peace. "

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Ehecatl.9172

Ehecatl.9172

Reconnaissance is usually followed by some manner of assault.

Yes but here they don’t, because charr saw than send a few warband is not sufficient to invade the norn . They stopped the invasion because they knew that norn was not going to be invaded by a few warband, because norn have their surnatural strenght.

A tactical and ruthless race like the Charr would admit defeat because they are scared of a little brawn?

The charr were still in a state of civil war against the Flame Legion, and had to deal with the forces of Ebonhawke on the side. The tactical and ruthless race decided to use the tactical half and, rather than send a third of their forces to take some frozen mountain range with no strategic value to their efforts elsewhere, call off a full scale invasion of the norn in favor on focusing on domestic threats.

I believe that this happened before the charr civil war. "In fact, during the Searing, the Norn allowed the Charr armies passage through the northern pass from Ascalon into Kryta, setting the stage for the Charr invasion of the central human lands. Although this was not a sign of any alliance, it set the stage for the two races to live within a watchful peace. "

If what you’re describing did happen before the charr civil war against the Flame Legion then they were in a full scale war against the might of Ascalon and at their weakest point in history.

Either way, the charr had pressing issues that required their resources far more than a full scale invasion of the norn. It was a tactical choice to focus their attention on Ascalon, who at the time had control of the charr’s ancestral lands that they desperately wanted back.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: bullyrook.2165

bullyrook.2165

A want of ancestral land is hardly a tactical excuse. From a military standpoint, they would have been well served to crush the Norn, use the resources, and encompass their enemy. Instead they chose to back-down and keep fighting a war they were making zero progress with until the Searing – and that required the aid of a human god to pull off.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

I think they found out that crushing the norn was going to be more trouble than it was worth. remember, they were expecting “a tide of blood”. When they lost, they found out that something like conquering the norn was going to take a lot more resources than they may have been willing to spend.

The dominance by the FL and the war was built upon religious ferver. So the shaman caste wouldn’t have been able to be responsible for huge losses. Not with the claim that these new gods power is what gives them the right to rule. And not the way the charr society constantly needs strength demonstrated in order to rule. Also, there were still political delicacies going on. The shaman caste of each legion ruled each legion with the FL ruling over all. No shaman of any high legion is going to volunteer to be the legion to break upon the norn borders. That would weaken any legion to the point that they could no longer compete with the other legions.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Ehecatl.9172

Ehecatl.9172

A want of ancestral land is hardly a tactical excuse. From a military standpoint, they would have been well served to crush the Norn, use the resources, and encompass their enemy. Instead they chose to back-down and keep fighting a war they were making zero progress with until the Searing – and that required the aid of a human god to pull off.

What new resources? It’s a frozen mountain range that even the norn themselves struggle to thrive in. There was no value in wasting a fourth of their military power and taking on massive losses in pursuit of land they can’t even effectively farm on.

Instead they continued to marshal their forces in preparation for their assault on Ascalon and in defense of the territories they did have. Given their entire culture of war was built around the pursuit of their ancient home land, yes, that took priority. This is also back when they were rules by religious fanatics, and a far cry from the tactically focused charr we know of today.

Also, the Searing was not caused by a human god. It was caused by the power of a Titan. Abeddon might have been pulling the strings, but it was not Abeddon’s power that created the Searing.

A final point. I am pretty sure there were skirmishes between the norn and the charr after the Searing as well. I know this because I saw it in Eye of the North when a Flame Legion warband invaded a norn homestead and the heroes had to drive the charr off.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: WildFang.7190

WildFang.7190

Just wanted to post this. I sized my charr up to my friend’s Norn here, both of us at max height and bulk.

Attachments:

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: bullyrook.2165

bullyrook.2165

Looks equally matched to me. Norn is a bit heavier. Charr is a bit taller.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

Super strength and a culture of one on one training doesn’t factor in?

saying equal height is the main variable when superstrength is involved is like saying I can arm wrestle spiderman evenly because our arms are the same size.

(edited by Dustfinger.9510)

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Kalavier.1097

Kalavier.1097

A final point. I am pretty sure there were skirmishes between the norn and the charr after the Searing as well. I know this because I saw it in Eye of the North when a Flame Legion warband invaded a norn homestead and the heroes had to drive the charr off.

Technically, they took over an abandoned homestead (Jora’s family one). :P

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

We do have confirmation that : “the two races allowed one another passage and trade, while keeping their borders secure. Occasionally, a warband (or a Norn hunter) might cross the line into the other’s land, only to be cut down without prejudice…but these skirmishes do not disrupt the accord reached by mutual consent between these nations.”

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Jenstone.6891

Jenstone.6891

1 on 1 Norn wins, but not easily.

Norn are breed with the singularity of the hunt. It is what they do, by themselves.
They rarely ask for help, but will join a hunt if it meets their criteria of difficulty.

Charr belong to a warband, where each member has a role in the fight.
If there is a warband of 5, take away 4, the warband is not as effective.

This is not to say that the fight would not be a good one, to the contrary. I think the fight would be long, hard fought and extremely difficult. It would be fun to watch.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Rouven.7409

Rouven.7409

It depends on if they are armed or unarmed. Norn were known in Guild Wars 1 to slay entire warbands of Charr. However, if they are both unarmed, the Charr have their razor sharp claws, their horns and teeth to give them a big advantage. So;
-Armed: Norn.
-Unarmed: Charr.

I tend to think like this as well. But we should not get too technical and compare the armour, weapons, magical and racial abilities.

However, we seriously have to take this into consideration:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fG1TK6PdeVM

“Whose Kitten is this?” – “It’s a Charr baby.”
“Whose Charr is this?”- “Ted’s.”
“Who’s Ted?”- “Ted’s dead, baby. Ted’s dead.”

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Apparition.1576

Apparition.1576

I can respect any opinion that takes all variables into account to make a informed decision. But any fighter can tell you exactly that.

There are a multitude of variables that come to play when you are talking about a full on fight. This aint no kitten arm wrestling contest.

This is a battle of strength, wit, agility, tenacity, and lastly the invidual. Shaq vs Jordan in their primes who wins? On paper you would think it would be Shaq.. but we all know better. Jordan’s heart, determination, and history of banging on bigger opponents…

Not the best analogy, but I have used several through these posts. Yet, here we are. Still talking the same facts with the fanboy’s refusing to consider the alternative. That the same probability that they are right, is also the same probability of being wrong.

One day.. all of you shall submit to the Flame Legion…. to me… I AM BLADABOS

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Ehecatl.9172

Ehecatl.9172

I can respect any opinion that takes all variables into account to make a informed decision. But any fighter can tell you exactly that.

There are a multitude of variables that come to play when you are talking about a full on fight. This aint no kitten arm wrestling contest.

This is a battle of strength, wit, agility, tenacity, and lastly the invidual. Shaq vs Jordan in their primes who wins? On paper you would think it would be Shaq.. but we all know better. Jordan’s heart, determination, and history of banging on bigger opponents…

Not the best analogy, but I have used several through these posts. Yet, here we are. Still talking the same facts with the fanboy’s refusing to consider the alternative. That the same probability that they are right, is also the same probability of being wrong.

Any fighter will tell you that size and strength are very large factors in who wins a fight. The larger and stronger your opponent is than you are the more skilled you have to be to overcome him. In this scenario we’re assuming two average members of either race, which would imply they have about the same degree of skill and experience fighting. What is the difference between the two? The norn has a tremendous advantage in physical strength, while the charr’s advantage is in the claws, teeth, and horns. The deciding factor here is that the norn can ALSO obtain claws and teeth, and become much larger when they transform. Where does that leave the charr? Fighting a larger, stronger creature with greater natural bulk. A mountain lion is not killing a grizzly bear in a direct encounter. It’s not much different than this.

What variables do you think people aren’t taking into consideration, exactly?

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Rouven.7409

Rouven.7409

Fights are very often determined by willpower. I would assume for this scenario that both combatants are skilled. Apart from reach (physical size) speed would be a major factor. The rest is skill (technique) and instinct, some natural, some trained (closing the gap, reading your enemy and reacting to it).

Honestly, considering charr part feline – go ahead and corner a regular housecat and see what happens. The cat will jump in your face in the blink of an eye. Since the size difference here is vastly different the cat is unlikely to kill you (and does not have the desire either) – but change the scale accordingly, give the cat a humanoid brain and you will have a hard time.

One of your blows might kill it, but you will have to be fast enough.

As soon as you don protective gear or weapons everything is different again, those would be the variables I’m personally talking about.

I would not go into the shapeshifting, huge ravens or what happens if the charr calls the warband.

My verdict would be – in a cage fight the charr would most often win. In a scenario of a one-on-one at the edge of a battlefield – norn most often.

“Whose Kitten is this?” – “It’s a Charr baby.”
“Whose Charr is this?”- “Ted’s.”
“Who’s Ted?”- “Ted’s dead, baby. Ted’s dead.”

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

Norn have quite a bit of will power. If the Spirits of the Wild had not interviened, the norn would have keep throwing themselves at Jormag until they were extinct. And the general description of the norn is thus:

“They live each day as if it were their last, for there is glory in danger, and the norn attain immortality when their great feats are celebrated by their descendents and sung by skaalds around the lodge fires.” https://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/races/norn/

Those other variables you are talking about are even across the board. One on one, a charr and a norn have access to the same weapons. Including access to fangs and claws. The only real difference is the enormous strength advantage of the norn.

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Rouven.7409

Rouven.7409

A norn does not have access to fangs and claws.

In general my post was towards the previous one (strength and size), but again here my bet would be that a charr is faster.

“Whose Kitten is this?” – “It’s a Charr baby.”
“Whose Charr is this?”- “Ted’s.”
“Who’s Ted?”- “Ted’s dead, baby. Ted’s dead.”

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

A norn does not have access to fangs and claws.

In general my post was towards the previous one (strength and size), but again here my bet would be that a charr is faster.

A norn doesn’t have access to fangs and claws? Their official description states “The norn are a valiant race of huge, shape-shifting barbarians”. That means the ability to grow fangs and claws is part of who they are. How can you justify ignoring it?

Charr may actually be a little faster. Do we have any evidence that this speed is enough to be a game changer? That it is enough to generally sway favor into charr advantage? When the charr and norn did actually fight, it wasn’t enough.

This tells me that any slight speed advantage only delays the inevitable of the charr eventually getting hit with a killing blow because the norn strength advantage makes every strike a potential killing blow.

(edited by Dustfinger.9510)

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Rouven.7409

Rouven.7409

Yes, in terms of establishing the conditions I said above I would take that out, otherwise it ends in “but the charr blows the norn up from half a mile away with his charrzooka” or “but we are fighting on a sandy beach and the charr just threw sand into the norns face”.

Strength alone does not make killing blows and it does not take much to kill. If that wasn’t so mankind would have never invented martial arts, only gyms for weightlifting.

The premise that size and strength determine a fight might be correct in a ring with rules such as don’t hit the groin.

Just for the fun let me throw in my unshakeable proof that this is exactly the point of many action movies where the small little asian fellow overcomes the big brute two heads taller (who often are adapt in martial art skills as well).

“Whose Kitten is this?” – “It’s a Charr baby.”
“Whose Charr is this?”- “Ted’s.”
“Who’s Ted?”- “Ted’s dead, baby. Ted’s dead.”

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

I didn’t think we were talking about game mechanics here. I was under the impression that this was a lore conversation. In lore, the SotW live within the norn. It is part of who they are. Part of what drives them. So your scenario of a charr having a gun or using sand is equally possible that a norn can do the same thing. So no advantage as far as having a gun or having sand is concerned because they both have guns and access to sand.

Strength alone absolutely does not make a killing blow but you miss the point entirely. Every advantage a charr hads access to in a one on one encounter, a norn also potentially has access to. The only difference is that in addintion to all the advanatges that both the charr and the norn share, the norn has immense strength to supplement all it’s advanatges. That puts the charr at a severe disadvantage because strength is such a versatile and effective tool.

edit: many martial arts rely on greater strength and no rules street fights are often determined by strength. The modern military emphasizes strength as an important tool. the benefit is undeniable.

The message the movie of the little martial artist beating big guys who also know how to fight is is that they are so far beyond those people in skill that they can overcome the strength advantage. That’s what makes them heroic. and that’s what makes it so impressive when smaller fighters beat bigger fighters.

(edited by Dustfinger.9510)

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Kalavier.1097

Kalavier.1097

Charr have horns and claws… true.

But most horns are swept backwards, not front (At least for females. I’ve not looked at the male ones lately). I know a chunk of male horns are swept backwards or to the sides.

So really, they just provide REALLY, REALLY good hand holds for the Norn to grab and use to fling the Charr about.

(edited by Kalavier.1097)

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Rouven.7409

Rouven.7409

The benefit of strength is undeniable, as is the benefit of speed. Strength does very little to you if the fight is over in ten seconds.

If my memory serves me correct there is no description on how the changing of shapes works for norn. They could be very vulnerable for attack at that point.

I don’t agree that martial arts “rely” on strength, but it is certainly a byproduct of training and core strength in particular is very important. The modern military certainly has very different demands of “strength” than in our example. Even a race car driver has to be fit, but not for the same purpose.

Well, I’m sticking to my verdict of potential outcomes as above, speed and agility wins over size and strength in certain scenarios and loses in others in addition to willpower becoming an ever more deciding factor in longer fights.

On the other hand … of course if the norn just stomps the outgoing shockwave kills everyone … maybe the charr can avoid that by jumping really high and landing directly on his head … I need more data.

“Whose Kitten is this?” – “It’s a Charr baby.”
“Whose Charr is this?”- “Ted’s.”
“Who’s Ted?”- “Ted’s dead, baby. Ted’s dead.”

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Dustfinger.9510

Dustfinger.9510

Absolutely, my purpose isn’t to state that norn have no weakness or that charr have no chance. Norn may be more vulnerable during shapechange. Charr may be able to take advantage of that moment depending on how the fight goes. maybe the norn tries to knock the charr away before changing and maybe the charr recovers quicker than the norn expected. the details of the fight could go a million ways. That’s why Im only speaking to what the tendancies would be.

side note: Sumo wrestling does a lot of strength training in order to man handle your opponent. Both eastern and western wrestling rely on strength as well as technique. And tiger kung foo relies on strength of hand and forarm in order to reach in and rip tendon and muscle from bone.

edit: can’t put the “f” and the “u” together :P

(edited by Dustfinger.9510)

Who would win in a fight, a Charr or Norn?

in Charr

Posted by: Rouven.7409

Rouven.7409

to the side note:
Yeah, hehe. But the sumo example falls into the category of being used in a controlled environment with a code of conduct.

“Whose Kitten is this?” – “It’s a Charr baby.”
“Whose Charr is this?”- “Ted’s.”
“Who’s Ted?”- “Ted’s dead, baby. Ted’s dead.”