Guild Wars 2

In most fantasy and sci-if works, the singular trump card of the human race is usually its supposed diversity. While the other outlandish species we define may excel in a few select traits and crafts, the assumption is generally that humanities tendency to explore any path, break any rule, plagiarise any concept and align with anything with at least one leg means we, as a species, tend to figure something out.

It is thus with some dismay that the humans of Tyria seem to have been overtaken by Quaggan.

Since the fall of the human empires in the pre-GW2 era, humanity seems to have stagnated. A single throne, locked in petty human politics, continually locked inwards as the other races of Tyria engage in achieving military might, technological edges and even spiritual exploration. And then there are the Quaggan.

Having just recently been booted from the abyssal depths by the water dragon, the walking meat sacks known as Quaggan have not only spread across every surface region of Tyria but have actively adapted to each of those cultures as well.

We’ve seen pirate Quaggan, pact Quaggan, a neophyte of the map king and even two Quaggan who seem to trail political occurrences quite often. We’ve seen quaggan settling in new grounds in every region besides deserts and the maguuma falls – and now the Quaggan seem posed to inherit the lore and guardianship upheld by the last of the Kodan sentinels.

The most surprising of all the Quaggan developments being the speed of this dispersal. While the human race seems to be making progress in the pursuit of reverting from a corrupt democracy (with British flavouring) back to a solely crown based dictatorship, the Quaggan have shifted to their current pursuits in just 3-4 years above the water line.

Leaves a man wondering if the next age wont just be the age of the Quaggan -.-

Nah. They’ll all be eaten by the krait the moment we stop holding their hands. (fins?)

/barbequaggan

Gerrand.3085:

solely crown based dictatorship,

Monarchies are not a dictatorship. They may seem similar at the surface but they are hugely different. Monarchies tend to be built around codes of tradition and royal responsibility, while dictatorships are just absolute power unrestrained by traditions or responsibilities. That difference is also why some real world monarchies have lasted for centuries while dictatorships rarely last longer than a generation.

Also the quaggans are changing fast because they are under threat. Humans do the same, but in the current gw2 timeline there is no immediate species-level threat to humans outside of the Elder Dragons, and none of the Elder dragons operate in Kryta.

Crinn.7864:

Gerrand.3085:

solely crown based dictatorship,

Monarchies are not a dictatorship. They may seem similar at the surface but they are hugely different. Monarchies tend to be built around codes of tradition and royal responsibility, while dictatorships are just absolute power unrestrained by traditions or responsibilities. That difference is also why some real world monarchies have lasted for centuries while dictatorships rarely last longer than a generation.

Also the quaggans are changing fast because they are under threat. Humans do the same, but in the current gw2 timeline there is no immediate species-level threat to humans outside of the Elder Dragons, and none of the Elder dragons operate in Kryta.

Um, a monarchy is, by definition, a dictatorship:
Dictatorship:
" a country, government, or the form of government in which absolute power is exercised by a dictator."

Monarchy:
“a state or nation in which the supreme power is actually or nominally lodged in a monarch.”

In the UK (as well as other nations), the monarch is only nominally in charge; the laws are made by the popularly-elected government (if by “popularly-elected” we include the House of Lords). In a traditional monarchy, the monarch holds absolute power.

You might be thinking of a benevolent monarchy, in which the monarch chooses to act in the interests of the people. However, even then, they can change their mind at any time or relinquish the throne (due to death or personal choice) to someone who is not benevolent. Either way, it’s a dictatorship.

I find this amusing because oftentimes non-humans in fantasy tend to much more diverse because creators can afford to go in many directions with them while humans tend to be rather typical.

You can explore many more aspects of nonhuman society, because I guess there’s a moral panic if people do such a thing. Even if they’re really not earthling humans but just resemble them.

In this game, humans are alright, but the asura and charr tend to get all the cool stuff so they seem more interesting.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Um, a monarchy is, by definition, a dictatorship:
Dictatorship:
" a country, government, or the form of government in which absolute power is exercised by a dictator."

Monarchy:
“a state or nation in which the supreme power is actually or nominally lodged in a monarch.”

In the UK (as well as other nations), the monarch is only nominally in charge; the laws are made by the popularly-elected government (if by “popularly-elected” we include the House of Lords). In a traditional monarchy, the monarch holds absolute power.

You might be thinking of a benevolent monarchy, in which the monarch chooses to act in the interests of the people. However, even then, they can change their mind at any time or relinquish the throne (due to death or personal choice) to someone who is not benevolent. Either way, it’s a dictatorship.

But it’s highly misleading to refer to a monarchy as a dictatorship. When you use the word “dictatorship” in a conversation it invokes images of Stalin, Mussolini, Castro, etc.

The OP use of the term “crown based dictatorship” is nothing but misleading rhetoric attempting to paint Krytan government as bad, when the Krytan government is certainly a benevolent monarchy.

The world domination is held by another species.

Dont worry, the Quaggan expansion will be stopped when our noble Grand High Sovereign swoops in and rescue us with valiant steam creatures.

Lyp Sao.1375:

The world domination is held by another species.

you mean the rat’s cousin?

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Crinn.7864:

Gerrand.3085:

solely crown based dictatorship,

Monarchies are not a dictatorship. They may seem similar at the surface but they are hugely different. Monarchies tend to be built around codes of tradition and royal responsibility, while dictatorships are just absolute power unrestrained by traditions or responsibilities. That difference is also why some real world monarchies have lasted for centuries while dictatorships rarely last longer than a generation.

Also the quaggans are changing fast because they are under threat. Humans do the same, but in the current gw2 timeline there is no immediate species-level threat to humans outside of the Elder Dragons, and none of the Elder dragons operate in Kryta.

Um, a monarchy is, by definition, a dictatorship:
Dictatorship:
" a country, government, or the form of government in which absolute power is exercised by a dictator."

Monarchy:
“a state or nation in which the supreme power is actually or nominally lodged in a monarch.”

In the UK (as well as other nations), the monarch is only nominally in charge; the laws are made by the popularly-elected government (if by “popularly-elected” we include the House of Lords). In a traditional monarchy, the monarch holds absolute power.

You might be thinking of a benevolent monarchy, in which the monarch chooses to act in the interests of the people. However, even then, they can change their mind at any time or relinquish the throne (due to death or personal choice) to someone who is not benevolent. Either way, it’s a dictatorship.

How are those the same thing? It’s easy to see where they CAN be the same thing, but it clearly states in the definition you provided that a monarchy can exist if only NOMINAL power is given to the monarch. A dictatorship, by the definition provided requires ABSOLUTE power.
So, you have a monarch, if it has absolute power, then you’re right. It’s a monarchy AND a dictatorship. If you have a monarch that has decision making power but does not have absolute control (i.e. requires support from a counsel) it is not a dictatorship any more than the United States is a dictatorship. And as much as people like to say mean things about the US. and its president (current elect or otherwise) he is not a dictator. It is absolutely impossible for him to be one given his lack of power and reliance on bodies like Congress.

And to clarify, the Queen of Kryta does require a consenting counsel. So, she’s not a dictator. If the entire counsel disagrees with her legislation, it probably won’t pass no matter how much she complains about it.

Next expansion we’ll have a new playable race : Quaggan :p

Crinn.7864:

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Um, a monarchy is, by definition, a dictatorship:
Dictatorship:
" a country, government, or the form of government in which absolute power is exercised by a dictator."

Monarchy:
“a state or nation in which the supreme power is actually or nominally lodged in a monarch.”

In the UK (as well as other nations), the monarch is only nominally in charge; the laws are made by the popularly-elected government (if by “popularly-elected” we include the House of Lords). In a traditional monarchy, the monarch holds absolute power.

You might be thinking of a benevolent monarchy, in which the monarch chooses to act in the interests of the people. However, even then, they can change their mind at any time or relinquish the throne (due to death or personal choice) to someone who is not benevolent. Either way, it’s a dictatorship.

But it’s highly misleading to refer to a monarchy as a dictatorship. When you use the word “dictatorship” in a conversation it invokes images of Stalin, Mussolini, Castro, etc.

The OP use of the term “crown based dictatorship” is nothing but misleading rhetoric attempting to paint Krytan government as bad, when the Krytan government is certainly a benevolent monarchy.

It’s not “highly misleading” unless you misunderstand the terms. The OP is correct that Queen Jennah is a dictator — what happens if she was assassinated during one of the many “recent” attempts and Caudecus took power?

Sure, she’s a benevolent dictator, but she still has absolute control; her word is law.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Crinn.7864:

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Um, a monarchy is, by definition, a dictatorship:
Dictatorship:
" a country, government, or the form of government in which absolute power is exercised by a dictator."

Monarchy:
“a state or nation in which the supreme power is actually or nominally lodged in a monarch.”

In the UK (as well as other nations), the monarch is only nominally in charge; the laws are made by the popularly-elected government (if by “popularly-elected” we include the House of Lords). In a traditional monarchy, the monarch holds absolute power.

You might be thinking of a benevolent monarchy, in which the monarch chooses to act in the interests of the people. However, even then, they can change their mind at any time or relinquish the throne (due to death or personal choice) to someone who is not benevolent. Either way, it’s a dictatorship.

But it’s highly misleading to refer to a monarchy as a dictatorship. When you use the word “dictatorship” in a conversation it invokes images of Stalin, Mussolini, Castro, etc.

The OP use of the term “crown based dictatorship” is nothing but misleading rhetoric attempting to paint Krytan government as bad, when the Krytan government is certainly a benevolent monarchy.

It’s not “highly misleading” unless you misunderstand the terms. The OP is correct that Queen Jennah is a dictator — what happens if she was assassinated during one of the many “recent” attempts and Caudecus took power?

Sure, she’s a benevolent dictator, but she still has absolute control; her word is law.

We have no real idea of the Krytan system of government beyond knowing that there is an Minstry consisting of elected representatives who draw up the laws, those laws are approved by the King or Queen.

I don’t know if this is an Absolute Monarchy but I’d be surprised if Jenna herself was not also subject to the laws of the land (otherwise I think the Ministry would have been purged long ago and Caudacus’s head would have been on a spike by now).

State we being outpaced by Quaggans due to focus on deadlocked feudal politics. Crowd starts arguing the semantic differences of different feudal political systems -.-

Gerrand.3085:

State we being outpaced by Quaggans due to focus on deadlocked feudal politics. Crowd starts arguing the semantic differences of different feudal political systems -.-

Kryta isn’t feudalism. As far as we know the nobles do not have vassals. Also the commoners are not peasants bound to a lord either.

Besides Krytan politics is so much more interesting than amphibious meat sacks.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

It’s not “highly misleading” unless you misunderstand the terms. The OP is correct that Queen Jennah is a dictator — what happens if she was assassinated during one of the many “recent” attempts and Caudecus took power?

Caduceus staging a coup is irrelevant to defining a dictatorship. You don’t define governments by what would happen if they are overthrown.

Also absolute monarchies can only be considered a dictatorship by dictionary definitions. It’s still misleading by conversational definitions. Please note that misleading does not require lying, it just requires misrepresenting.

You could technically call a aircraft slamming into the ground and exploding into a fireball a “successful landing” in the sense that the aircraft is now on the ground. But calling it that in a conversation is misleading your audience, since no native English speaker is going to equate “successful landing” with “exploding into fireball”

It’s the same here. No native English speaker is going to associate “dictatorship” with “benevolent monarchy” and that without even going into the fact that Kryta has a democratically elected counsel.

Well I would hope a species native to Tyria like the Quaggan would be more diverse than an alien Species brought to the world from who knows where.

An absolute ruler is no less a dictator for the fact that his or her dictates are currently, have been historically, or may be in the future, benevolent (to some or even many). Even so, it is pretty clear that the Krytan Monarchy is not a dictatorship as it requires, to some degree, the consent of the ruled.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

It’s not “highly misleading” unless you misunderstand the terms. The OP is correct that Queen Jennah is a dictator — what happens if she was assassinated during one of the many “recent” attempts and Caudecus took power?

Crinn.7864:

Caduceus staging a coup is irrelevant to defining a dictatorship. You don’t define governments by what would happen if they are overthrown.

I define governments by where the authority is. You’re defining it by how Jennah behaves. If you don’t like the idea of Minister Caudecus taking over if Jennah was gone, then consider one of her relatives taking over upon her death due to anything you like. Unless you’re saying that the people elect her replacement, in which case she wouldn’t be a monarch.

Crinn.7864:

Also absolute monarchies can only be considered a dictatorship by dictionary definitions. It’s still misleading by conversational definitions. Please note that misleading does not require lying, it just requires misrepresenting.

No, it’s still a fundamental misunderstanding of dictatorship. You don’t have to be a horrid person to be a dictator; you just have to wield power without checks or balances.

Crinn.7864:

You could technically call a aircraft slamming into the ground and exploding into a fireball a “successful landing” in the sense that the aircraft is now on the ground.

I think that works both ways: calling a monarch anything other than a benevolent dictatorship is sugar-coating their relationship with the people.

Crinn.7864:

But calling it that in a conversation is misleading your audience, since no native English speaker is going to equate “successful landing” with “exploding into fireball”

I’m a native speaker and I think you’re narrowing the definition of dictator. I’ve got nothing against Jennah — she seems nice, genuinely interested in the welfare of her people, and the sort of ruler anyone would like to see in charge. That doesn’t have anything to do with how she came to power, how she retains power, how she wields power, who takes over if she dies, or whether there are checks and balances on her power.

Crinn.7864:

It’s the same here. No native English speaker is going to associate “dictatorship” with “benevolent monarchy” and that without even going into the fact that Kryta has a democratically elected counsel.

Let’s go into that “democratically elected council” — who elected them? What sort of power do they hold? Can the queen overrule them? Does she choose not to? Who chooses whether the country goes to war? Who controls the tax collectors? And importantly, can this council remove her from office for high crimes?

I think the lore is ambiguous on the above.

All that said, if I were writing, I wouldn’t generally call her a dictator except if I worked for the rebels and was writing their propaganda. Neither, however, would I admit that she was a dictator if I wrote for her Ministry of Information — it wouldn’t do, would it? The point is that the words have particular meanings and connotations and we shouldn’t confuse the two just because we like some monarchs and hate some dictators.

Better to be clear about what we’re talking about by using different words or, you know, some adjectives. Like “benevolent dictator” or “repressive dictator” or “despot,” which only has one connotation.

Once again, we’re far afield from the OP’s concern that (to them) Quaggans seem more diverse.

Aside from the colors, it’s a bit ironic to worry about government — quaggans have been able to survive all over and yet don’t seem to have much in the way of rulers. Humans have been pushed back to their old homelands and ended up with one government to survive. That doesn’t include the rebels, though, nor the human pirates. Similarly, we don’t see all that much variety of governments among asura, charr, sylvari, or norn.

I think the evidence shows only that the game’s writers don’t have enough space to cover that much diversity.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

All that said, if I were writing, I wouldn’t generally call her a dictator except if I worked for the rebels and was writing their propaganda. Neither, however, would I admit that she was a dictator if I wrote for her Ministry of Information — it wouldn’t do, would it? The point is that the words have particular meanings and connotations and we shouldn’t confuse the two just because we like some monarchs and hate some dictators.

But that’s exactly what I’m arguing.

The Krytan throne is a monarchy. This is undisputable. I objected to the use of “crown based dictatorship” because dictatorship is not the correct noun to be using.

No monarchy in the history of the world has been referred to as a dictatorship. Historians, academics, teachers, etc do not use the term dictatorship when talking about monarchies. The word dictator and dictatorship are used exclusive to refer to regimes of the past two century’s where one individual has seized absolute power via either force or political maneuvering.

I object OP’s use of the word “dictatorship” because the OP is trying to downplay gw2 humans, but the OP failed to come up with any real arguments and instead resorted to rhetoric and wordplay. Heck the entire OP is nothing but subjective rhetoric combined with sparse bits of cherry picked lore.

Humans have been pushed back to their old homelands and ended up with one government to survive.

Human characters are in almost every map instance, and are easily the most populous of the major races. Many humans operate outside of Kryta, taking up as Pact soldiers, as pirates, as bandits, as traders, as traveling carnies, and as merchants.

I think the evidence shows only that the game’s writers don’t have enough space to cover that much diversity.

GW2 is Tolkien fantasy. The facets of real world human diversity are spread among the races.
Think of each race as a different facet of humanity. Norn embody the traits of self-reliance, and outdoorsmanship. Humans embody the traits of honor and duty, with the vice of political intrigue. Asura embody intellectualism and the spirit of inquiry, with the vice of academic elitism. Charr embody industrialism and nationalism, with the vice of warmongering. Sylvari embody curiosity and connection to nature with the shortfall of naiveté.

Boiling each races down to a set of characteristics allows the devs to cover a wide range of the human experience without needing excessive exposition. When you see some asuran gizmo while questing you automatically know that it’s some sort of scientific equipment – the game doesn’t have to explain it.

On the OP…

The conceit that “humans are the most adaptable race” typically comes up in fantasy because the other races typically have their personalities defined by exaggerating some human trait. Humans are the baseline, so when the question is asked as to what makes humans special, the general response is a shrug and a “well, they’re the most adaptable and can do anything/survive anywhere if they put their mind to it”. When all your races are radiating outwards from the human center point, it’s hard to give them any other distinguishing feature.

This gets exaggerated by the tendency to have humans mirroring a variety of real-world cultures, while nonhumans tend to be monocultural.

ArenaNet appears to have taken a different approach and given humans their own distinguishing characteristics that genuinely make them unique among the races, rather than handwaving a lack of such distinction with a “jack of all trades” explanation.

Pifil.5193:

I don’t know if this is an Absolute Monarchy but I’d be surprised if Jenna herself was not also subject to the laws of the land (otherwise I think the Ministry would have been purged long ago and Caudacus’s head would have been on a spike by now).

In fact, it was a plot point in Season 2 that Jennah was potentially going to go on trial (the exact term used is “hearing”, but a hearing is essentially a pre-trial to determine if there’s enough evidence for a full trial) for conspiring with Scarlet. If that’s being mooted without it being the outcome of a successful revolution, it’s pretty clear she doesn’t have dictatorial powers.

The Ministry has checks and balances on her power in a similar way to how Parliament has had checks and balances on the power of the English monarch since the Magna Carta. Exactly where her powers fall on the continuum from “just signed the Magna Carta” to “powers roughly equivalent to the US President*” is unclear, but her power is at least limited enough that legal actions can be taken against her, and she can’t shift the date because it’s inconvenient.

*The powers of the US President were largely modeled on those of the British king at the time.

@draxynnic: All mythical races are exaggerated humans. It makes them more relatable to the human experience -.-

Where I disagree is the idea that Tyrian humans have their own distinguishing characteristics. Tyrian humans are literally blank slates looking longingly into the past, failing to achieve anything while waiting for passing events to role over them.

There has been no innovation or racial contribution to the story from humanity throughout the entire plot. We’ve continually run with and afoul of Charr and norn blacksmithing, Asuran technology and the Sylvari dropped the elder dragon surprise party. The most fascinating thing to be provided by the human faction is Canach – who, I’ll remind you, is a Sylvari.

The sum of human contributions to the lore and plot of GW2 (written on a charr manufactured typewriter by the way) is failing to showup at an Elder Dragon roast, making the flagship of the Pact submersible (which failed to engage when the fleet went for a swim in the Maguuma falls), reverse engineering the clockworks knights (and then failing to deploy them despite some prime opportunities and personnel shortages) and finally, appearing to have some sort of secret service who occasionally parachute into craters which will takes weeks of climbing to get out of.

There is no racial identity. Just the continual attempts by society at large to hem in the disasters caused by Lord Faren. A sideshow of comic relief which is like most things human, easily outdone by passing Quaggans.

Gerrand.3085:

State we being outpaced by Quaggans due to focus on deadlocked feudal politics. Crowd starts arguing the semantic differences of different feudal political systems -.-

At least this lends accuracy to the in-game representation!
:D

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

It’s not “highly misleading” unless you misunderstand the terms. The OP is correct that Queen Jennah is a dictator — what happens if she was assassinated during one of the many “recent” attempts and Caudecus took power?

Crinn.7864:

Caduceus staging a coup is irrelevant to defining a dictatorship. You don’t define governments by what would happen if they are overthrown.

I define governments by where the authority is. You’re defining it by how Jennah behaves. If you don’t like the idea of Minister Caudecus taking over if Jennah was gone, then consider one of her relatives taking over upon her death due to anything you like. Unless you’re saying that the people elect her replacement, in which case she wouldn’t be a monarch.

Never heard of elective monarchies? The scandinavian monarchies(though this changed during the colonial era when several monarchies transitioned into absolute ones), the Holy Roman Empire, Rome(it was one before it became a republic) and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth are historical examples of elective ones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elective_monarchy