Guild Wars 2

I have made my case very carefully and always backed by the contextual lore – lore of its specific time period in Tyrian history. If read in full a reader would immediately understand that my entries have always been my interpretation of lore and what I believe should have happen based on the Lore.

At no time would a read be in any way confused or lost as to what the lore is as it has been written. Only those casually scan over my text would miss major sections of context. This is not news.

What many seem to forget is the most obvious fact. Humanity had rough 1000 years hold on the land they named Ascalon. This fact itself would suggest that they the army and the technology and organisational stability to hold the land to such an extent that not all of Ascalon was a war zone.

Magic and Science were able to be developed and progressively utilised by the war effort. It would also assume massive amounts of logistical and organisational synergy in the distribution of food and resources to keep the populace reasonably well fed and stable as well has feeding the army.

This societal stability would allow the observation and research of any evidence of ruins of structures that pre-date human settlement. The sum total of this research over time would have been collected in the national library and form part of the education of the ruling dynasty and that of the nobility of the day.

If the Charr had built structures where are the records that prove their existence?

Nicholas S Lin.6187:

What many seem to forget is the most obvious fact. Humanity had rough 1000 years hold on the land they named Ascalon. This fact itself would suggest that they the army and the technology and organisational stability to hold the land to such an extent that not all of Ascalon was a war zone.

Not technological, magical. But it could be argued “might as well be so” so hey, let’s go with that. Also worth noting it was a war zone from time to time – due to the Guild Wars, there was fighting on Ascalon soil. How much of it remains unsaid, except for the Battle of Khylo.

Magic and Science were able to be developed and progressively utilised by the war effort. It would also assume massive amounts of logistical and organisational synergy in the distribution of food and resources to keep the populace reasonably well fed and stable as well has feeding the army.

Be careful throwing around “science” – so far the biggest form of science which could be attributed to Ascalon by viewing pre-Searing lands were the aqueducts and city building. In other words, we’re looking at Roman-level civilization. (For us students of Western Civ.)

There was a lot of land in pre-Searing Ascalon near Ascalon City devoted to farming, orchards, or other sorts of gathering. Duke Barradin’s Estate seemed to be a lot of farmland in the Green Hills area.

This societal stability would allow the observation and research of any evidence of ruins of structures that pre-date human settlement. The sum total of this research over time would have been collected in the national library and form part of the education of the ruling dynasty and that of the nobility of the day.

Except we don’t have any evidence of one existing, or anything other than a few things saved from the Searing. What we do have is a vague awareness a lot of the northern part of Ascalon had become a war zone by that time and overrun by the charr. Not exactly held, because there was a definite back and forth going on even that “last day”.

The best we do have knowledge of is the Nolani Academy, but no idea exactly what was held there.

Conclusion: There is a shocking dearth of information, and without anything it is impossible to draw concrete conclusions disproving what is stated by lore having been established currently.

If the Charr had built structures where are the records that prove their existence?

If Ascalon hated the charr as much as they appeared to, they were probably erased, plowed under, or torn apart. Things of this nature have happened in the real world before, much of what I understand was known to have been done by some pharoahs of Egypt.

Not farfetched to believe the royal line of Doric who moved in did such.

History of Tyria:

The serpents were the protectors of the land, the keepers of knowledge, the teachers of all things, and during their time the world was in balance.

But then a new race of creatures was birthed upon the world. They were neither serpent nor beast. They were neither plant nor stone. These creatures had no chitinous hide to protect themselves. They had no claws to tear flesh. They arrived naked and defenseless, except for one thing: their desire for control.

This new race of creatures was none other than us humans, and in no time we began to take over. Cities bloomed across the continent. Walls were erected, and weapons forged. Those things that we humans lacked, we simply built. We didn’t need tough hides nor rending claws when we could make metal armor and sharpened spears. We discovered fire, wrote books of our own, passed knowledge to one another through song and verse. Soon humans had everything we required, and it was then that we began to prey upon the other creatures. We hunted animals for sport, chased the druids from the jungle, and took up residence in lands that did not belong to us. We became the masters of this world. We took all of the privilege and none of the responsibility.

Excerpt from The History of Tyria, Volume 1
Thadeus Lamount, Historian

@Nicholas S Lin:
Humans doesn’t have any historical claim on Tyria (the continent). In fact, the established lore tells us that we came to Tyria (the world) as aliens from another planet, so we wouldn’t have much historical claim to any land.
We are, by both Charr (ref. The Ecology of the Charr) and Human (ref. The History of Tyria) described as an intruding force.

We, “Humans drove the Charr out of Ascalon” in 100 BE (ref. the official GW2 timeline). Yes, it may be debatable how much of the land was settled by the Charr prior to our invasion. But does that matter?
Are you also debating whether or not the American Indians are the ones with the most historical claim to the U.S.? They did neither build any “permanent structures”.

I’m not saying we don’t have the right to be there. Not at all. I’m not saying that we should have a share of the land. On the contrary, I’ve previously said in this thread that “History is history”. But what you are debating is the subject of historical claim.
Charr were present in Ascalon before we were, it is as simple as that…

The question had always been based on recent history(the last 1250 years) who had better claim to Ascalon before the Lore was re-imagined to suit the introduction of GW2.

The novels that were written to describe the events between GW and GW2 where written with a GW2 bias and does not acknowledge the events as they were at the end of the first game.

Put simply at the end of GW the humans in Ascalon were holding the line and were in no way retreating. Claim on ownership is what it is. Who had the ability to hold ownership of the land by force of arms.

At the end of GW(1) the humans proved they had it.

So, your statements are regarding “who had better claim of Ascalon” is based upon:
*Before the lore was re-imagined to suit the introduction of GW2
*The events as they were in first game", not as they currently are.

Well, that might be the discussion you’re running, but I don’t think anyone else finds that even interesting. It is just too many “what if?’s”. Mainly the “what if Guild Wars 2 was never released?”. Which… it is.

And:

Put simply at the end of GW the humans in Ascalon were holding the line and were in no way retreating. Claim on ownership is what it is. Who had the ability to hold ownership of the land by force of arms.

At the end of GW(1) the humans proved they had it.

Except this isn’t true, at all. Most Ascalonians fled from their homes in 1070-1072 AE, after the Charr had invaded so-to-speak all of Ascalon. Only a very small bastion remained together with “mad king Adelbern”.

You do need to remember that what you see in GW1 post-searing is always the Ascalon anno 1072 AE. At the end of the game (1080 AE), the humans retreated even more, leaving only a small minority of human presence in Ascalon.

The Charr invasion of Ascalon (“by force of arms”) succeded. They invaded and destroyed the lands in 1070-1072 AE, and by 1080 AE they had a far larger presence there than the humans did. In fact, the Charr won in your terms of “force of arms”.

Titus.4285:

Except this isn’t true, at all. Most Ascalonians fled from their homes in 1070-1072 AE, after the Charr had invaded so-to-speak all of Ascalon. Only a very small bastion remained together with “mad king Adelbern”.

You do need to remember that what you see in GW1 post-searing is always the Ascalon anno 1072 AE. At the end of the game (1080 AE), the humans retreated even more, leaving only a small minority of human presence in Ascalon.

The Charr invasion of Ascalon (“by force of arms”) succeded. They invaded and destroyed the lands in 1070-1072 AE, and by 1080 AE they had a far larger presence there than the humans did. In fact, the Charr won in your terms of “force of arms”.

That’s not true. It could be just as easily be argued that a very small part of the Ascalonian population departed with Rurik. Do you have evidence that says different?

And your “at the end of the game” is not true. Guild Wars, the story, ended with Abaddon’s death. Guild Wars 2, the story, started with EotN onward. That it used the same game platform is irrelevant, the dye had already been cast. The retreat to Ebonhawke is not part of the original GW lore, just like Adelbern going nuts isn’t.

Obsidian.1328:

original GW lore

Why are we even discussing this? We have official GW lore, and we have not offical GW lore.
I can understand that you may wish that some things in lore would have been developed towards another direction. But the OP of this thread is asking the question based upon the current situation in Tyria, anno 1327 AE. So please, relate to that.

Right now, I feel that you are adding a lot of confusion to what’s true and what’s not in the current universe. ArenaNet manages this perfectly well on their own, so I really don’t think that the players should consciously add more confusion.

I would suggest that you instead create your own thread for these kind of discussions. Where the purpose is clearly explained in the subject: e.g. “If Guild Wars 2 never excisted; which alternative directions would you have liked to see for the GW1 lore?”.

Please please please move your discussion to a more appropriate thread.

Titus

The OP’s question relates directly to the past situation, so there’s little quandary in talking about…you know…past events.

As such, I’m adding what was true to the time it was written. ANet does not happen to manage this perfectly well on their own, which is why we have oodles of threads about lore questions in the first place. What I’m doing is adding contextual clarity, not confusion.

If that bothers you, I suggest you don’t read my posts.

Obsidian
I just realized that I’ve been causing this to go way off topic, instead of getting it more on topic – as was my intention.
For this, I apologize. And I will shut it from here on out. I don’t think there is much I can say that hasn’t already been said.

However, if you read my post again, I am sure you’ll notice that I meant to say that “ANet manages perfectly well on their own in adding confusion” (or open holes if you will). Not the other way around. At least it seems like you misunderstood me here.

Yes, I got confused, and I didn’t really understand the discussion. If this was my own fault, I humbly apologize once again.

:/

No need for all that. I see where I misread too.

I’ve got better things to do than skin Charr. I say, take Elona back from that Undead Lich instead of dealing with them and stretch the New Ascalon human kingdom southward and westward, away from the Charr. Besides, the Charr are handy in a fight.

My Human would fight for it, but my Charr would fight to keep Ascalon too.

i would instantly fight to reclaim, Ascalon city was absolutely beautiful in GW1 and the nostalgia would be great.

Let me say just one thing. Charr owned it first, humans conquered it.

Nuff sed

Yeah…. And who did the Charr take it from before it was theirs? Some say the grawl. It doesn’t matter anymore. It is in the past and Ascalonians have bigger fish to fry in the south.

Somehow I think that nomadiac hunter/gathering use of the land does not constitute actual ownership. Since as far as I can tell that is about the extent of Charr use of the land prior to Human conquest.

They did not see the land as a country. they saw the land that humans would later call Ascalon as a rich reliable source of food for their warbands.

I said I would shut it, and I won’t take part of the discussion. I just thought I’d share a few things Ree and Jeff said back in 2012:

Jeff Grubb:

“The Charr, as you mentioned previously, they were the bad guys. They were evil, they were mean, they were the horrible guys that were basically bringing about the Searing. As we get to Guild Wars 2 we are turning them heroic. Actually, just examining their virtues. Seeing, what is it about the Charr which is a good thing? They were retaking their homeland. They had been driven back, and now they were reclaiming land”.

Ree Soesbee:

“There’s not that many examples in fantasy where the evil race is holy converted by the narrator into its own persepective. Into a good race. Or to a race with heroic quality. (…) We’ve really gone a step farther in Guild Wars 2, and we’ve given you the Charr perspective, of why they did these things. And how, from their point of view: they were kicked out of Ascalon by the humans, and they are simply freedom fighters reclaiming what was taken from them.

Source: http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2/b/327657138

^ That’s old news.

Lol, of course those two say that now, the remade Charr are their grande coup for GW2. They are their darlings. They can write in anything they want for them, and they did just that by claiming Ascalon as some “ancestral homeland.” That’s something that was never a part of their history in GW1 proper.

Ree and Jeff are the two worst culprits of this mess. Jeff, in particular, gave us that first friendly Charr in Nightfall…think maybe he had big plans for them? Those two obviously didn’t think much of “plain ol’ euro” Ascalonians, and saw an opening to displace them with Charr hegemony. If you look at both of those writers’ past works, they favor non-humans in almost everything. Connecting the dots should be academic at this point…

Obsidian.1328:

^ That’s old news.

Lol, of course those two say that now, the remade Charr are their grande coup for GW2. They are their darlings. They can write in anything they want for them, and they did just that by claiming Ascalon as some “ancestral homeland.” That’s something that was never a part of their history in GW1 proper.

Ree and Jeff are the two worst culprits of this mess. Jeff, in particular, gave us that first friendly Charr in Nightfall…think maybe he had big plans for them? Those two obviously didn’t think much of “plain ol’ euro” Ascalonians, and saw an opening to displace them with Charr hegemony. If you look at both of those writers’ past works, they favor non-humans in almost everything. Connecting the dots should be academic at this point…

Indeed

The fact that there are only Humans playable, was one of the reasons why I liked GW1 so much. Not everyone wants 1000 different playable races, one looking more ridiculous then the other. GW1 had only humans with a huge variety of cultures.

There was a character for everyone! Stretching from regular Knights to Samurais & so on.

Now in GW2 they threw all humans in pot, minimizing their rich lore & cultural diversity into 1 boring, generic, weak looking medieval race.

Obsidian.1328:

They can write in anything they want for them, and they did just that by claiming Ascalon as some “ancestral homeland.” That’s something that was never a part of their history in GW1 proper.

I’m not saying it was part of their history in GW1 (before EOTN). In fact, the first official timeline released by ArenaNet back in April 2005 told us that “100BE: High-plains human settlements become known as Ascalon.”.
5 years later, when Ghosts of Ascalon was released: this sentence had changed to “100 BE: Humans drive charr out of Ascalon.”.

So if you’re saying that Charr were purely evil savage beasts in GW1, and didn’t have any claim on Ascalon, no one can argue with that. That was my point when I added the interview quotes. They’re saying straight forward that they rewrote (“turning them”, “holy converted”) the Charr. In specific: their heritage claim to Ascalon being their homeland.

So, I can’t argue with Charr being purely evil in GW1 (before EOTN, and that one friendly Charr in Nightfall).
And, you can’t really argue with them having a heritage claim to Ascalon in GW2 (otherwise known as the latest version of GW lore).

Obsidian.1328:

They can write in anything they want

Yes … and they did. It doesn’t really matter if you think “Ree and Jeff are the two worst culprits of this mess”.

The problem with the Charr “perspective” of “oh, it’s like our ancestral land, that we actually took from someone else first, but it’s totally ours!”, is that they came back in full genocide mode. I mean, why send armies to Kryta and Orr? They weren’t defending Ascalon, so it was just to drive their genocidal hate. You can try to defend the Searing with the old “all is fair in love and war” thing but it fails hard with the wider actions they took.

@Lostwingman: I can agree with that. But the humans aren’t much better tbh…
The History of Tyria (which is GW1 lore, dating back to game release) describes humans as a race with “desire for control”. “Taking up residence in lands that did not belong to us.”. “We took all of the privilege and none of the responsibility”.

When the Charr later said that the humans “spread like a plague across the continent”, that’s actually quite in line with the original GW1 lore.

Humans could have resided in other lands (or just stayed in Cantha). But we chose to invade Ascalon “for sports” and/or for power and control – even though the lands were already inhabited.
Did we have a better reason to push the Charr out, than they had to be pushing us out?

No one is truly innocent here. But finally Ascalon (at least Charr vs Humans) is in peace. As long as there’s peace, I don’t care who owns the lands. We have Kryta which is in a better state and just as big anyways. To even suggest that humans should seek revenge on the Charr just underlines the “desire for control” statement.

Nowhere there does it say we “invaded Ascalon for sport”. It says “we hunted animals for sport”. That history really doesn’t say anything except that humans spread across the land with little to stop them. We also don’t know why humans moved where or how humans got to various places clearly. I also get the feeling that the “privilege and responsibility” statement has more to do with continuing to war amongst themselves rather than settling for peace and prospering. The Guild Wars are something repeatedly pointed at for draining the resources of humanity and ultimately causing their fall. It’s a cautionary warning against making that same mistake. It also makes it more clear that that is written from an in world perspective Post-Searing. On the Charr, with the “kill or be killed” society the Charr were its in every likelihood that the very existence of the Charr were akin to a pack of wolves lurking a farm. It’s not like the humans kept chasing the Charr as far they could, they simply took what they could get and defended that. The Charr were no different, worse really in their conflict mongering. I can see nothing that gives the Charr moral high ground anywhere here.

“100 BE: Humans drive charr out of Ascalon.”

We didn’t need to settle in Ascalon. We could have stayed in Cantha. We could have stopped in Elona or even Orr.
In less than 500 years, we spread to the south, north, west and east reaches of Tyria (the continent). Clearly – in such a short time – it was not due to population issues.

My point is: Humans in Tyria are of the same nature as humans on Tellus. And when it comes to claiming land, it can seldom (if ever) be called a story of honor, valor or morality.

I don’t give anyone a moral high ground. The Charr didn’t need to “reclaim” Ascalon. I am sure they’ve could just as well have traveled further to the east.
What upsets me is that you, and many others, are apparently trying to give the humans a moral high ground, and that is just purely ignorant.

What makes you think the Canthans’ age of discovery was any other than our own?

Titus.4285:

I’m not saying it was part of their history in GW1 (before EOTN). In fact, the first official timeline released by ArenaNet back in April 2005 told us that “100BE: High-plains human settlements become known as Ascalon.”.
5 years later, when Ghosts of Ascalon was released: this sentence had changed to “100 BE: Humans drive charr out of Ascalon.”.

So if you’re saying that Charr were purely evil savage beasts in GW1, and didn’t have any claim on Ascalon, no one can argue with that. That was my point when I added the interview quotes. They’re saying straight forward that they rewrote (“turning them”, “holy converted”) the Charr. In specific: their heritage claim to Ascalon being their homeland.

So, I can’t argue with Charr being purely evil in GW1 (before EOTN, and that one friendly Charr in Nightfall).
And, you can’t really argue with them having a heritage claim to Ascalon in GW2 (otherwise known as the latest version of GW lore).

I can buy that.

It doesn’t really matter if you think “Ree and Jeff are the two worst culprits of this mess”.

I certainly does if we are to take their word as thematic canon.

Take what you quoted up there, that the Charr are merely freedom fighters. That what they are doing is right. Well that’s all well and good, but that flies in the face of how they portray similar patriotic actions of Ascalonians.

• There’s an achievement for tearing down all the Separatist propaganda in Ebonhawke. Why is what they are fighting for something to be condemned when the Charr did the same thing 250 years ago?
• There’s also a heart quest down there that includes throwing Separatists out of their homes and into the streets and beating them to death to finish it. WTF? So, if I want world completion, I have to take the side against them.
• Then there’s the obvious Adelbern. The dude was a d!@# to his son, but he refused to let his people and kingdom fall to the invading Charr. Is he heroic for never giving up his fight for Ascalon’s freedom? No. He’s completely vilified to the point of malevalent monster…a cautionary tale on what not to do.

ANet holds the Charr up in their right hand and tells you to “honor these bold and noble freedom fighters”, and with their left hand “revile these anarchists who only want to sow war and destruction!”

Yet they both are doing the exact same thing. It’s literary B.S.

Titus.4285:

“100 BE: Humans drive charr out of Ascalon.”

We didn’t need to settle in Ascalon. We could have stayed in Cantha. We could have stopped in Elona or even Orr.
In less than 500 years, we spread to the south, north, west and east reaches of Tyria (the continent). Clearly – in such a short time – it was not due to population issues.

Show Spoiler

hide spoiler

Not a spoiler, just a little bit on the sideline:

If you care to look at real history; you could draw some very powerful parallels between the internal conflicts in Tyria (the Guild Wars), and to the downfall of the Roman Empire. In about the same amount of time, the Roman Empire expanded with brutality and stacked buffs of quickness.
And as a direct consequence of the overwhelming expansion, it collapsed in internal conflict, much like the human world of Tyria.

My point is: Humans in Tyria are of the same nature as humans on Tellus. And when it comes to claiming land, it can seldom (if ever) be called a story of honor, valor or morality.

I don’t give anyone a moral high ground. The Charr didn’t need to “reclaim” Ascalon. I am sure they’ve could just as well have traveled further to the east.
What upsets me is that you, and many others, are apparently trying to give the humans a moral high ground, and that is just purely ignorant.

What makes you think the Canthans’ age of discovery was any other than our own?

“Before the Exodus of the Gods, the gods lived in Arah (nicknamed the City of the Gods) and aided humans in numerous tasks such as pushing the Charr north so that the settlements that would become known as Ascalon could be established.”

Obviously, the gods wanted them to expand for whatever reason. Next time I see Balthazar at the car wash, I’ll hit him up for an answer.

As far as the Roman analogy, over-extension was just one of many reasons, and not even the primary one. Corruption, severe economic instability, Christianity, European barbarians moving in…I would rate all those more important to Rome’s loss of control over its vast Empire.

Titus.4285:

My point is: Humans in Tyria are of the same nature as humans on Tellus.

This is a very important statement. Why would you think Tyrian humans are supposed to be the same as us?

Well, this is getting interesting!
Many great points you have here!

Obsidian.1328:

Take what you quoted up there, that the Charr are merely freedom fighters. That what they are doing is right. Well that’s all well and good, but that flies in the face of how they portray similar patriotic actions of Ascalonians.

I agree.
As I said, I don’t want to take sides. But if I had to: I’d go with the Charr. Still, I consider both races more or less “equal to blame” – so I can understand the other opinion.
And thus: I do understand that you feel a bit of bitterness when being forced to take sides with the Charr in-game.

Seems like ArenaNet is trying to (?over-?)compensate for how they portrayed them in GW1, and is now repeating the same mistake in how they portray the Separatists.
Since Separatists are threathening the truce between men and charr, I personally support the propaganda against them. But I do agree that this choice should have been left up to each individual player!

Obsidian.1328:

Obviously, the gods wanted them to expand for whatever reason. Next time I see Balthazar at the car wash, I’ll hit him up for an answer.

Seems to me like the Gods are the most war-mongering ‘species’. After all, they did not create Tyria (the world), but brought humans and conflict to it. If we’re talking about heritage right, we would surely be loosing by a looooong stretch against the Elder Dragons.
Then again, not in any religion are Gods portrayed as anything but selfsentric power-mongering children playing with ants. So it’s not really a surprise…

Exodus 22:20

He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed.

Obsidian.1328:

As far as the Roman analogy, over-extension was just one of many reasons, and not even the primary one. Corruption, severe economic instability, Christianity, European barbarians moving in…I would rate all those more important to Rome’s loss of control over its vast Empire.

What came first, the chicken or the egg?
- Christianity: well, I guess I’ve made my position quite clear already :P
- European barbarians “moving” in: or European barbarians being conquered in? The Empire fell apart from inside out, just as much as it ended up being too large to defend its vast front.

Obsidian.1328:

Titus.4285:

My point is: Humans in Tyria are of the same nature as humans on Tellus.

This is a very important statement. Why would you think Tyrian humans are supposed to be the same as us?

Ehm… well… I just do!, ohkey!? :P
Well, most of their attributes seems to be picked off from us somehow. With many historical references, hints, or parallels to our world. The Roman Empire as we’ve discussed, King Henry Oswald’s 7 wives (see what I did there?), jealousy, romance. Well, I guess almost all races in any fantasy story are built upon a base of human attributes and history.

In short: I’m just saying that they seem (from lore and what we see in-game) to have most of the same “flaws” that we have. And I don’t think I’ve seen anything that implies that they’re different in any way (except for magic and all that)…

Nicholas S Lin.6187:

Somehow I think that nomadiac hunter/gathering use of the land does not constitute actual ownership. Since as far as I can tell that is about the extent of Charr use of the land prior to Human conquest.

They did not see the land as a country. they saw the land that humans would later call Ascalon as a rich reliable source of food for their warbands.

Nothing indicates a nomadic lifestyle beyond the lack of stone structures that could have lasted 1000 years of weather and war. But structures made of non-permanent materials doesn’t necessarilty mean nomadic.

The Ecologyactually describes how the charr saw themselves as an empire. The ‘judisciously’ used the mountans as a border to be defended by ’ the unified charr’. And that they subjugated species within their borders. That strongly implies more than just loose tribes wandering around for food. It implies structure and organization.

Titus.4285:

Obsidian.1328:

Titus.4285:

My point is: Humans in Tyria are of the same nature as humans on Tellus.

This is a very important statement. Why would you think Tyrian humans are supposed to be the same as us?

Ehm… well… I just do!, ohkey!? :P
Well, most of their attributes seems to be picked off from us somehow. With many historical references, hints, or parallels to our world. The Roman Empire as we’ve discussed, King Henry Oswald’s 7 wives (see what I did there?), jealousy, romance. Well, I guess almost all races in any fantasy story are built upon a base of human attributes and history.

In short: I’m just saying that they seem (from lore and what we see in-game) to have most of the same “flaws” that we have. And I don’t think I’ve seen anything that implies that they’re different in any way (except for magic and all that)…

Well yes, every playable race in any game is going to be birthed out of our own human experience. What I mean is, applying our RL humanity to just game humans is a flawed concept. It applies to every game race equally since a human wrote them all into existence.

By the same token, game humans aren’t necessarily tied to the same histrionics as us. A player should treat them not as the truest pixilated manifestations of ourselves, but rather as just another random game race. They carry our physiological aspects, but their essence and identity are inherently tied to the world in which they exist, not our world. Don’t get me wrong, they are entirely idealized in our minds. It’s just that they are not bound by the same Earthen experience that we are, and are therefore foreign even to us.

So…we should imagine them as a non-human race if we are to see them as they really are: just another fantasy race like any other. Make sense? XD

Obsidian.1328:

Make sense? XD

Absolutely! My first statement was quite blunt to be hounest :P
Which initially made me go “Eeeeh… what the kitten am I going to answer to ‘this’!?” when you questioned it ;P (hence the opening line in my response)

Though: judging from my experience with them through now about 7 years, and what is written in lore, I find them remarkably similiar to us. They seem to share most of our flaws, both historical and in their daily lives.
However, there is a few particular differences I should mention (and which I really enjoy):
- It doesn’t seem that they have ever have differenciated between different skin colours (within their own race),
- Nor do they oppose to same-sex relationships.
- Nor do they wage war based upon their religion. Obviously, religion may have been in play when they first entered Tyria. But never have they had religious reasons to kill each other. And that is a huge difference compared to RL humans, where almost every war seem to have some sort of religious (or racist) argument at play!

So in thought of showing equal respect to their own kin, they seem to be entirely on a different planet.

Lostwingman.5034:

“oh, it’s like our ancestral land, that we actually took from someone else first, but it’s totally ours!”

There’s no proof that charr took the land from anyone so much as they’ve always been there. That they’re natives.

The forgotten were appointed by the gods as stewards and custodians of all of Tyria presumably some time after the awakening of the dragons in the distant past around probably right after the era of giants.

They were everywhere at one time (not just Ascalon) before they withdrew from the world at large.

Charr are notoriously warlike, especially this happening in the distant past even before GW1 where the charr weren’t exactly friendly or open to diplomacy.

They were more tribal, less civilized, and to hell with anyone telling them what for.

Even if it was for an altruistic purpose, the charr wouldn’t take to anyone showing up on the land to “guide” them. They’re intruders and they need to be gone.

Lostwingman.5034:

they came back in full genocide mode. I mean, why send armies to Kryta and Orr?

How do you suppose humanity came to own Ascalon without killing or driving out every last charr and erecting a massive wall to keep them out?

It wasn’t genocidal any more than any other expansionist war. Humans do that all the time.

Charr got a leg up and went “well shoot, let’s do the human thing and take moar land!”

It was an epic failure. They were nuked in Orr and repelled in spectacular fashion in Kryta. The entire invasion force was decimated.

There was no more Orr to try again there and charr thought it wise not to do the Kryta thing again given that they were struggling to hold the ground they gained in Ascalon and the fact that the trip alone was exceedingly treacherous.

Lostwingman.5034:

They weren’t defending Ascalon, so it was just to drive their genocidal hate. You can try to defend the Searing with the old “all is fair in love and war” thing but it fails hard with the wider actions they took.

Well not only were they defending their pyrrhic gains in Ascalon…

(Charr goal: Take out the northern wall. Unintended consequence: Oh kitten, we nuked Ascalon! Err… I mean, we meant to do that! Hahahahaha… kitten.)

They didn’t “take” the city proper until decades later in yet another epic pyrrhic victory, of which remains even to this day in contest with the spirits of the fallen.

The land is yet haunted by the ghosts of the Ascalonians. The humans ultimately matched the charr Searing with their Foefire in terms of casualties.

The entire charr invasion force was wiped. Incinerated. Not to mention the accumulated casualties the ghosts have inflicted since the Foefire.

CETheLucid.3964:

There’s no proof that charr took the land from anyone so much as they’ve always been there. That they’re natives.

The GW1 Charr originally came from east of the Blazeridge mountains, they were not natives of Ascalon. It’s been turned into their ancestral homeland in GW2.

CETheLucid.3964:

How do you suppose humanity came to own Ascalon without killing or driving out every last charr and erecting a massive wall to keep them out?

It wasn’t genocidal any more than any other expansionist war. Humans do that all the time.

The Great Northern Wall was erected centuries after humans had taken Ascalon, as a purely defensive measure.

There is no proof that humans behaved towards the Charr like the Charr did towards humanity for a thousand years afterwards.

If you want to ignore GW1 lore altogether then that’s your choice. It’s being ignored in GW2. Doesn’t change that there is a notable difference between the Charr and humans in GW1. Simply put, humans are good, Charr are evil. And that is still the case in GW1.

CETheLucid.3964:

There was no more Orr to try again there and charr thought it wise not to do the Kryta thing again given that they were struggling to hold the ground they gained in Ascalon and the fact that the trip alone was exceedingly treacherous.

The Charr planned an invasion of Lion’s Arch at the time of Zhaitan’s awakening, 1219 AE. They did not think that it was wise not to attack humanity any more.

CETheLucid.3964:

The land is yet haunted by the ghosts of the Ascalonians. The humans ultimately matched the charr Searing with their Foefire in terms of casualties.

The entire charr invasion force was wiped. Incinerated. Not to mention the accumulated casualties the ghosts have inflicted since the Foefire.

That’s what may happen if you try to take a city to kill every living being inside, you may die.
Half of the population of Ascalon died in the Searing, don’t compare the Foefire to it. For which, ultimatively, the Charr bear the responsibility, they started the conflict with a genocide. Don’t tell me their actions were justified. And yes, the Charr started the Ascalonian War with the Searing, not humanity a thousand years earlier.

Frosch.7809:

The GW1 Charr originally came from east of the Blazeridge mountains, they were not natives of Ascalon. It’s been turned into their ancestral homeland in GW2.

Which.. is Ascalon. lol

The Great Northern Wall was erected centuries after humans had taken Ascalon, as a purely defensive measure.

Well sure. Keeps the filthy natives out that you didn’t manage to erradicate.

Frosch.7809:

There is no proof that humans behaved towards the Charr like the Charr did towards humanity for a thousand years afterwards.

Actually, there is. Humans and charr are pretty tit for tat in regards to feuding with each other. If you want details, you can read through the thread.

Frosch.7809:

If you want to ignore GW1 lore altogether then that’s your choice. It’s being ignored in GW2.

Alrighty. Well, thanks for that totally factual insight that has no basis in the facts at all.

Frosch.7809:

The Charr planned an invasion of Lion’s Arch at the time of Zhaitan’s awakening, 1219 AE. They did not think that it was wise not to attack humanity any more.

Umm. No, I don’t think so. But hey, maybe I’m wrong. Can I get a source on that?

Frosch.7809:

Half of the population of Ascalon died in the Searing, don’t compare the Foefire to it. For which, ultimatively, the Charr bear the responsibility, they started the conflict with a genocide.

One genocide for another. Moral high ground. Neither humans nor charr have it.

Frosch.7809:

Don’t tell me their actions were justified.

Not anymore so than the King going batkitten crazy and killing everyone human and charr alike. I can see why both sides did what they did.

I don’t actually have a very negative opinion about King Adelbern. He did what he had to do in my mind, a Sampson Option kind of deal.

The charr were desperate to reclaim their lands from the humans and found ‘gods’ like the humans had that it might give them the victory against us.

It succeded in what they wanted to do, though in a vast overkill kind of way. Such is the way of banished magics and dead gods.

Genocide is genocide. It’s not good. It engenders negative feelings as can be seen here.

Frosch.7809:

And yes, the Charr started the Ascalonian War with the Searing, not humanity a thousand years earlier.

No, the humans got the ball rolling with their manifest destiny complex. They hit quite the obstacle in their foes, the charr.

CET

You’re twisting facts.

Ascalon was never Charr homeland until GW2 writers wrote it in last year…perhaps to quiet these forums, who knows.

Humans never tried to eradicate the Charr, the gods brought them to Ascalon to settle and humans stopped there. They could have cared less about them beyond Ascalon.

Humans never burned Charr prisoners alive for enjoyment…

The Foefire, and modern Adelbern for that matter, are not accurate representations of the Ascalon kingdom. It was written that way to give the Charr some moral footing in settling Ascalon for GW2.

Humans were never genocidal, Charr were.
________________________________________________________________

We all realize you like the Charr and that’s fine, they were well written for GW2 have the best personal story. But don’t try and convince yourself of things that don’t exist, that’s being delusional. Just be happy the devs like them and that you get to play them.

Obsidian.1328:

Ascalon was never Charr homeland until GW2 writers wrote it in last year…perhaps to quiet these forums, who knows.

Humans never tried to eradicate the Charr, the gods brought them to Ascalon to settle and humans stopped there. They could have cared less about them beyond Ascalon.

Humans never burned Charr prisoners alive for enjoyment…

The Foefire, and modern Adelbern for that matter, are not accurate representations of the Ascalon kingdom. It was written that way to give the Charr some moral footing in settling Ascalon for GW2.

Humans were never genocidal, Charr were.

No widely-known historical records =/= nothing happened, especially if previous inhabitants was defeated and exiled (or even more so if exterminated). Whole history of East European Plain is living conformation of that, where gigantic states like Western Turkic Khaganate, Khazar Khaganate, Old Great Bulgaria, Ulus of Jochi (aka Golden Horde), Nogai Horde, etc., was risen and vanquished from map, large wooden cities was burned and forgotten until last archaeological researches in XX century.
And zero charr inhabitants in Ascalon after 100 BE means same thing as it means in all other similar historical events with “disappearance of natives from local history” – invasion and slaughter.
Unless you have clear evidences of other scenario.

Obsidian.1328:

Humans were never genocidal, Charr were.

You should be careful with that “never”. The pilgrims of the Crystal Desert who build the ancient cities there under the leadership of the Ghostly Hero were quite aggressive towards the Forgotten. Then there’s the White Mantle’s rather uncaring push through the southern Shiverpeaks killing just about anything in the way.

And on the other side, it’s not charr in general – it was the Flame Legion leadership and coercion of the other groups. That much got made evident with Pyre – he could care less about killing humans. Derisive, sure, but he was much much more interested in killing the shamans. And if the charr were genocidal, they would have continued on after Ascalon (again). Which they didn’t.

Rednik.3809:

No widely-known historical records =/= nothing happened, especially if previous inhabitants was defeated and exiled (or even more so if exterminated). Whole history of East European Plain is living conformation of that, where gigantic states like Western Turkic Khaganate, Khazar Khaganate, Old Great Bulgaria, Ulus of Jochi (aka Golden Horde), Nogai Horde, etc., was risen and vanquished from map, large wooden cities was burned and forgotten until last archaeological researches in XX century.
And zero charr inhabitants in Ascalon after 100 BE means same thing as it means in all other similar historical events with “disappearance of natives from local history” – invasion and slaughter.
Unless you have clear evidences of other scenario.

Not widely-known =/= not known either. There isn’t anything at all on it, until ANet puts it in soon I suppose. Also, Earthen analogies don’t correspond accordingly. It’s a different world with different rules. Even Tyrian humans =/= Earth humans.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

You should be careful with that “never”. The pilgrims of the Crystal Desert who build the ancient cities there under the leadership of the Ghostly Hero were quite aggressive towards the Forgotten. Then there’s the White Mantle’s rather uncaring push through the southern Shiverpeaks killing just about anything in the way.

The Elonians in the Crystal Desert were there trying to Ascend. The Forgotten were in the way. A case of the ends justifying the means for them. The Mantle were under orders from the Mursaat. The Mursaat wanted Chosen for fodder on the Door of Komalie. Pretty simple really.

And on the other side, it’s not charr in general – it was the Flame Legion leadership and coercion of the other groups. That much got made evident with Pyre – he could care less about killing humans. Derisive, sure, but he was much much more interested in killing the shamans.

It was the Charr in general. The Flame Legion thing was a construct of the GW2 writers to shift the entirety of the blame on them, nothing more. Can’t have a whole playable race as genocidal in a game with no factions. So they create this artificial evil minority who’s really behind all the hate and voila…instant get-out-of-jail-free card for most Charr. I really don’t see how that’s hard to see.

And if the charr were genocidal, they would have continued on after Ascalon (again). Which they didn’t.

They didn’t because they were slated to be a playable race in GW2, how do you not see that?

Obsidian.1328:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

You should be careful with that “never”. The pilgrims of the Crystal Desert who build the ancient cities there under the leadership of the Ghostly Hero were quite aggressive towards the Forgotten. Then there’s the White Mantle’s rather uncaring push through the southern Shiverpeaks killing just about anything in the way.

The Elonians in the Crystal Desert were there trying to Ascend. The Forgotten were in the way. A case of the ends justifying the means for them. The Mantle were under orders from the Mursaat. The Mursaat wanted Chosen for fodder on the Door of Komalie. Pretty simple really.

And on the other side, it’s not charr in general – it was the Flame Legion leadership and coercion of the other groups. That much got made evident with Pyre – he could care less about killing humans. Derisive, sure, but he was much much more interested in killing the shamans.

It was the Charr in general. The Flame Legion thing was a construct of the GW2 writers to shift the entirety of the blame on them, nothing more. Can’t have a whole playable race as genocidal in a game with no factions. So they create this artificial evil minority who’s really behind all the hate and voila…instant get-out-of-jail-free card for most Charr. I really don’t see how that’s hard to see.

And if the charr were genocidal, they would have continued on after Ascalon (again). Which they didn’t.

They didn’t because they were slated to be a playable race in GW2, how do you not see that?

And people jump on me when I talk in meta or out of game rationalizations.

This is why I stopped before on this thread – if you start arguing out of game material then you have lore dug up to try to support it. (Or made up.) IF you try to handle it with lore then the out of game bits are thrown up at you as if to say “well of course, n00b, duh”.

Of course I can see they were intended to be a playable race. And of course I can see they tweaked things so we have something different. And they did it without murdering the lore, as early as Nightfall.

But you know what? The charr magically haven’t stopped hating on humans all the time, and it’s not just the Flame Legion. There’s the “renegades” which still want to keep on pushing Ebonhawke. They are derisive of others and even the Adamant Guard treat people with very controlled politeness.

The charr just stopped, realized they might win against Ebonhawke and still lose elsewhere. So that conflict had a ceasefire negotiated so they could win something else rather than keep a stalemate going.

I mean, or you can stick to the out of context argument of “they need to be a playable race and not at odds with the others so blatantly”. I’m cool with that too, mostly because I don’t care about trying to fight over whether to argue Out Of Game or In Game when the target keeps changing modes.

Obsidian.1328:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

You should be careful with that “never”. The pilgrims of the Crystal Desert who build the ancient cities there under the leadership of the Ghostly Hero were quite aggressive towards the Forgotten. Then there’s the White Mantle’s rather uncaring push through the southern Shiverpeaks killing just about anything in the way.

The Elonians in the Crystal Desert were there trying to Ascend. The Forgotten were in the way. A case of the ends justifying the means for them. The Mantle were under orders from the Mursaat. The Mursaat wanted Chosen for fodder on the Door of Komalie. Pretty simple really.

And on the other side, it’s not charr in general – it was the Flame Legion leadership and coercion of the other groups. That much got made evident with Pyre – he could care less about killing humans. Derisive, sure, but he was much much more interested in killing the shamans.

It was the Charr in general. The Flame Legion thing was a construct of the GW2 writers to shift the entirety of the blame on them, nothing more. Can’t have a whole playable race as genocidal in a game with no factions. So they create this artificial evil minority who’s really behind all the hate and voila…instant get-out-of-jail-free card for most Charr. I really don’t see how that’s hard to see.

And if the charr were genocidal, they would have continued on after Ascalon (again). Which they didn’t.

They didn’t because they were slated to be a playable race in GW2, how do you not see that?

So true. If anything the whole legion thing came about when GW2 was announced and EOTN came out. At least if I am recalling this correctly. What is now portrayed as just the Flame Legion, was how the Charr in general were portrayed in GW1 prior to EOTN.

Obsidian.1328:

CET

You’re twisting facts.

Ascalon was never Charr homeland until GW2 writers wrote it in last year…

I’m following the lore.

You’re denying the parts you don’t like because GW2 writing QQ.

But I’m twisting the facts?

Okay then.

Let’s ignore the AC dungeon story and the Ghosts of Ascalon timeline and pretend that Anet just wrote that in to troll you, Obsidian.

If we agree to ignore the bits of official lore you don’t like, you’re absolutely correct.

I’m twisting the ‘facts’ by using the official lore for my stance, instead of what should be… according to you.

Got it.

I find it funny you didn’t actually refute Obsidian’s complaint in the slightest. Obsidian’s complaint is that it was not canon in GW1, but only came about with GW2. You reinforce this by only referencing GW2 era material.

Lostwingman.5034:

I find it funny you didn’t actually refute Obsidian’s complaint in the slightest. Obsidian’s complaint is that it was not canon in GW1, but only came about with GW2. You reinforce this by only referencing GW2 era material.

So what if it wasn’t canon in GW1, but was added later? That’s how it works when you write sequels. Even good ones. (See: Lord of the Rings’ numerous retcons) You work with the lore which exists, not lore you don’t like because you hate the writer.

Obsidian, Lostwingman and myself have never been against post GW(1) writers at a personal level. What we are against is what they are paid to write. And that is Lore that white-wash GW(1) as it pertains to human strength especially Ascalon and to a much lesser degree the rest of Tyria and beyond.

We don’t hate anyone and least of all any writer of substance and skill.

We are not against “retcons” as long as its fair and balanced against all races. Its clear that humanity has suffered the most as a result of the numerous retcons done against them in comparison to their prime enemies, the Charr.

The Charr more than any other playable race has gain the most against humanity. It’s clear to all that most of that advantage is at the expense of Ascalonian humanity. Humanity has not gain any significant advantage in the 250 years since the events of the first game. Apart from Divinity’s Reach. This is of course not an actual advantage since all the other four playable races were also given this advantage.

And so I ask this. Are you Tobias and your peer group so blind to the truth that you are clearly anti-human in at least the world of Guild War (GW & GW2)? Its plainly obvious that you try to come across as fair and reasonable yet the truth remains.

You support the Lore as its written in GW2 pure because its what’s published despite the truth of what I and many others like Obsidian stated that its a white-wash of GW(1) and very unbalanced against humans in our opinion.

clear truths:

-Charr were one dimensional baddies in the beginning of GW1
-Humans ruled the world.

That means that anything less than humanity ruling the world is unbalanced against humans when using GW1 as the benchmark.

No one is disputing the evolution of how the idea of charr developed. But let’s not confuse that development with lore development. they are related but they aren’t the same. The writers have given the world depth by making the one dimensional charr into a one dimensional view of the charr. Everyone knows this. But I fail to see how that pertains to in-world lore discussions. Constantly breaking the 4th wall in order to dispute in-world lore is pretty nonsensical.

Nicholas S Lin.6187:

Obsidian, Lostwingman and myself have never been against post GW(1) writers at a personal level. What we are against is what they are paid to write. And that is Lore that white-wash GW(1) as it pertains to human strength especially Ascalon and to a much lesser degree the rest of Tyria and beyond.

We don’t hate anyone and least of all any writer of substance and skill.

That may be so, but a certain one has the blame squarely laid at their feet time and time again. It’s frustrating and grating, which has worn my patience down considerably trying to get around it when it comes to the GW2 writing team.

We are not against “retcons” as long as its fair and balanced against all races. Its clear that humanity has suffered the most as a result of the numerous retcons done against them in comparison to their prime enemies, the Charr.

. . . who were not the only enemy nor the prime enemy of humanity during Prophecies or other campaigns. They were perhaps the only one unique to the lore of Guild Wars, but there were centaurs, undead . . . undead centaurs . . . demons twice over, and what amounts to living magma constructs.

Also the tengu. But we don’t like to talk about that. And arguably the mursaat, but we kind of finished killing them off so hard they haven’t been seen in a long long time. We probably will not see them again, given what we know. (I’m ever hopeful we do though, with Agony.)

They are the prime enemy of Ascalon, and the only reason the rest of Tyria counts them as a problem is because there wasn’t much to stop them after they got through Ascalon. But Cantha could care less, and Elona had its own issues.

In short, the charr were what people remembered but they weren’t the only one nor were they the prime enemy of Prophecies. The primary enemy of Prophecies is the undead lich.

The Charr more than any other playable race has gain the most against humanity. It’s clear to all that most of that advantage is at the expense of Ascalonian humanity. Humanity has not gain any significant advantage in the 250 years since the events of the first game. Apart from Divinity’s Reach. This is of course not an actual advantage since all the other four playable races were also given this advantage.

Of course they haven’t, because humanity had almost nowhere to go but down before the Searing. And even after the Battle of Lion’s Arch where Princess Salma was properly crowned Queen of Kryta, humanity was still the dominant force in the regions they lived in.

So I fail to see why it’s surprising they found themselves getting weakened.

Also, if you want to be objective about the charr at all, just take a long look and realize they were a stand-in for orcs. You could Ctrl+R “Charr” for “Orc” in the first game and not really lose anything in transition. I mean, it’d look a lot like the lore of Warcraft . . . and about half the D&D campaigns run around the world.

So the corollary of the humans having nowhere to go but down, the charr had nothing but to become more fleshed out and three-dimensional at the cost of losing the two-dimensional evil they had before.

There, I said it. Again.

And so I ask this. Are you Tobias and your peer group so blind to the truth that you are clearly anti-human in at least the world of Guild War (GW & GW2)? Its plainly obvious that you try to come across as fair and reasonable yet the truth remains.

“Truth” is such an ugly word here for what you’re trying to sell me. It’s also, well, untrue. Demonstrably so. Here, let’s see what I mean:

Guild Wars 1 was not my character being anti-human, but there was a marked interest in preserving other races when it came down to it. Helping the Deldrimor loyalists retake Thunderhead Keep meant a stable ally and the end to the Stone Summit’s push through that arm of the Shiverpeaks. Helping out the tengu refugees helped stabilize some of Cantha’s problems. Helping out the veldt centaurs in Elona was about stopping the Margonites and corrupted Kournan army from getting any victories at all. Saving the asura . . .

. . . sigh . . .

. . . saving the asura and the surface world from the threat of the destroyers was because it was then considered the most important time to push back. Rather than wait until it was just humanity standing in the way. And it came at the cost of one staunch ally which we simply threw away – the Deldrimor dwarves.

If there’s been an anti-human tendency it’s because in the first game we were human characters and thus any attack on us or our friends . . . was generally an attack on humans. Though to be fair there was a fair share of human-on-human violence going around too. Shining Blade, Cult of Verata, White Mantle, Kurzicks, Luxons, Jade Brotherhood, Corsairs, Kournans . . .

You support the Lore as its written in GW2 pure because its what’s published despite the truth of what I and many others like Obsidian stated that its a white-wash of GW(1) and very unbalanced against humans in our opinion.

See, there’s where you take a wrong turn. Please try to follow me on this.

You can’t not support the lore as written, because it’s what is. We can sit here and debate all we want about whether it’s a white-wash (I hate that term), or the retcons were unnecessary, or whatever. It is, however, what is.

So, here’s what I point out, yet again.

First. If you want to argue any lore-based arguments then you must take all official lore into consideration. You cannot discard, ignore, or try to argue the lore isn’t what it is simply because you do not like it. I dislike the idea of swapping dwarves for asura, and think that race is incredible to have not destroyed themselves in a puff of badly-conceived experimental sorcery. It doesn’t mean I pretend they don’t exist. Beyond obvious roleplaying from time to time.

Second. If you want to throw lore out the window and discuss mechanics, then this discussion has been over since before GW2 was released and we had any actual hint at lore changes in any capacity. The instant they said there would be five races, it was doomed to happen humanity would wind up losing the center stage. You can’t have one race take over the story with their Six Gods, or continue to exist as the central power and not have it be a problem with how to balance it. (And don’t throw the sylvari at me even in jest to respond to that.)

CETheLucid.3964:

Obsidian.1328:

CET

You’re twisting facts.

Ascalon was never Charr homeland until GW2 writers wrote it in last year…

I’m following the lore.

You’re denying the parts you don’t like because GW2 writing QQ.

But I’m twisting the facts?

Okay then.

Let’s ignore the AC dungeon story and the Ghosts of Ascalon timeline and pretend that Anet just wrote that in to troll you, Obsidian.

If we agree to ignore the bits of official lore you don’t like, you’re absolutely correct.

I’m twisting the ‘facts’ by using the official lore for my stance, instead of what should be… according to you.

Got it.

Nah, I’m denying parts that are wrong. Just like I’ll never take Peter Jackson’s version of LotR as truth because of all random changes he made to it. And he had full rights to it too, just like this one. It’s called being a purist. Official doesn’t mean a kitten thing more than they are legally sanctioned to write b.s.

It’s not personal, I’m like this with Fox news too. Anything that tries to change history really…