The lore and society of each race is based around a DnD attribute.
Sylvari-Wisdom
Asura- Intelligence
Norn – Constitution
Charr- Strength
Human- Charisma/Luck
?Tengu- Dexterity
I wrote them in the order of the easiest to justify. The Sylvari are purely devoted to wisdom, their entire existence is based around it, act with wisdom but act.
The Asura were the next easiest and I think there devotion to intelligence is undeniable, the only reason they weren’t as easy as the Sylvari was because they don’t have a Ventari tablet espousing intelligence.
Various actions of Norn society are based around Constitution aka stamina. The drinking (Moots), living in cold environments, the big bulky characters. They devote themselves with their spirits of the wild to other ideals but I would still lump their society more around the aspect of constitution.
The Charr live in a feudalistic society where might is right.
Humans are usually the racial jack of all trades in most rpgs. And their charisma and luck is usually based around how widespread they are in the societies of the other races. The fact that they survive extinction so much. This game is no exception.
Tengu were a bird race that they never put in, but meant to and built a starting area for. I think given that most tengus in the game use bows, and that birds are a dextrous species, that would be this race’s attribute.
All of this is headcannon.
Although I can see your reasoning to this, I doubt it is just that. Anet is definitely inspired by various different sources, this especially goes for the races.
So where there may be some truth to your theory, there is way more to it than that.
Aside of that one part of the Ventari tablet I would actually not find wisdom as the best attribute for sylvari, they seek wisdom sure. But what defines them more imo is youth, curiousity, exploration and adventure. But that might just be me.
Adding to the list:
Centaurs – Ego
Just because you can reason a connection on to something doesn’t mean said connection exists – and I’m sorry to say that I honestly don’t see the connection. You’re basically forcing limited terms onto races that are far more complex than that.
Norn for example value strength highly in their society, but they also value wisdom which is why they have such a strong connection to the Spirits of the wild.
Sure the Sylvari value wisdom, but they also value a lot of other things just as much – just look at what the Ventari tablet teaches and you will see that it isn’t just about wisdom “Act with wisdom, but act!”
I certainly wouldn’t say the Charr simplistically value strength considering they’ve built a successful society and city, which certainly wouldn’t be manageable the majority of said society put strength first. That’s not to say that they don’t value strength and a good fight, but just look at what each of the different Legions values and how this changes the way they fight and carry out missions etc.
Regarding humans and charisma/luck, I don’t see it at all, it seems like you’ve ended up with a term that didn’t really fit so humans got it xD.
I rolled an imaginary conglomerate DnD character based on your theory:
So basically you got a beautiful, roflstomping Einstein who always loses his initiative roll and keeps rolling a 1 on his 20-sided attack die. =D
Interesting theory, but I’d say the races simply represent different fantasy tropes more than anything else:
(edited by Obsidian.1328)
Tengu are most likely going to resemble samurai. That’s what they were closest to in GW1.
Also, I’m pretty sure this whole thing is just coincidence – but yeah, it does seem to line up nicely. Although the strength thing could apply to norn just as well as charr, and there are a few other not-quite-parallels.
Sylvari and Humans both fit certain Elf types. The Sylvari definitely fit the nature involved side of elves, but they are young. Humanity has much more of the Tolkien-esque feel of the dying elder race. As to tengu, they always seemed more like Samurai to me, due to their code of honor.
Ah yeah, probably samurai for Tengu. They did have a large role in the lore of Cantha after all.
Tengu were a bird race that they never put in, but meant to and built a starting area for. I think given that most tengus in the game use bows, and that birds are a dextrous species, that would be this race’s attribute.
The Tengu are a race that appeared in Guild Wars 1 as well, and they had quite a bit of lore before Guild Wars 2 came out. To dismiss them as ‘something that was supposed to be in the game but didn’t make it’ doesn’t do them justice. There’s more to them than just being a cool birdlike race and they have a proper place in lore.
I’m not too sure if the Sylvari can represent wisdom, especially compared to a people like the Norn. I do remember reading an argument that the Norn were the wisest people of Tyria, because while they might outwardly appear brash and reckless and overly willing to engage in feats that risk their lives quite a lot, this results more from their individualistic and egalitarian society than anything; in fact, since they routinely go up against danger and come out on top because of their wisdom in knowing just how far they can go, they should be considered the wisest race in Tyria. In contrast, the Sylvari have a code, but they do not have the experience of working with other races and being able to use that code. And I think the game shows that just because the Sylvari have the Tablet of Ventari doesn’t mean an individual possesses all of its teachings and abides by them. The sheer number of Sylvari that have strayed from Ventari’s teachings should show this.
Regardless, I think the races are based off of certain historical mythologies and fantasies more than anything.
The Sylvari are almost blatantly the faeries from Scottish legend and Arthurian folklore. They have Arthurian names. They’re split into two factions, just like the Seelie and Unseelie. The first faction (the playable Sylvari), just like the Seelie (which is derived from the old Scottish for “happy”), is willing to deal with outsiders and plays light tricks, often without realizing their larger effect. The second faction (the Nightmare Court) are akin to the Unseelie (whose name means “unhappy”), which is the group that often preys on travelers without provocation. They even share the same earthly appearance.
The Norn share a lot with Viking culture, but for my money, there are too many things that are off about the comparison, notably animal worship and individualism as opposed to the Viking’s deities and group-oriented culture. I think one of the better hints, actually, is the ridiculous height of the Norn, which reminds me of popular perception on Neanderthals. I think they could easily be a pre-viking culture, from around 3,000-2,000 BCE.
The Charr are inspired full blown by Roman culture. The Latin names and naming system (gladium, really?), the statues of prior heroes, the legion system. All we’re missing is a senate or a central head, really. I would say it represents the late Roman Republic quite well.
The Asura are named after a group of deities in Hindu mythology that are characterized by naturalism, excessive pride and great knowledge. But I’m not entirely sure about this connection, something just seems off. The Hindi asura were originally thought of as good, but with changing politics in India, the mythology was changed so that asuras were demonic and hated almost everything that was good in the Hindu mythos. I think this game’s Asura are based on a transition point in that mythology. I originally thought that naturalism went against GW2’s Asura, but then it actually makes a lot of sense that the game’s Asura, if based off of Hindu mythology, would focus on magiteck and not the raw industrialism the Charr are based off of. Still, this is iffy for me.
The Humans are ironically the hardest to pin down for me. I’m really not sure what their culture or society is based off of. I never played GW1, I have no clue what larger human culture is like, but it’s possible that the Humans are just a new culture created for this game, with their own gods and stuff. If I had to round it down to one culture, I would at least say it was an Indo-European one, perhaps an offshoot. You’ve got names like Seraph and Balthazar, which are Judeo-Christian, but you’ve also got polytheism and Asian influence. I wouldn’t be surprised to find they’re not based on anyone in particular, though.
And those are my two cents. Or five, or six cents.
Not affiliated with ArenaNet or NCSOFT. No support is provided.
All assets, page layout, visual style belong to ArenaNet and are used solely to replicate the original design and preserve the original look and feel.
Contact /u/e-scrape-artist on reddit if you encounter a bug.