Guild Wars 2

It’s always weird and interesting for me to see how the whole Char-Human Ascalon conflict becomes so personal for so many people.
It makes sense for players to hate Charr after watching the Searing turning Ascalon into a Wasteland.

But what about players who started with Factions or Nightfall? They really have no connection to Ascalon at first and only see it in its ruined state.

For me personaly, my first campaign was Nightfall, so I never really cared about what happened in Ascalon (even after i played pre-searing). So when i read all the discussion about it here, it’s just weird for me.
So the whole conflict appears to me like one morally grey clusterkitten that mirrors the Israel-Palastine conflict way too much.

*Edit: I guess i would like the answers for 2 questions:

What is your opinion about the Ascalon discussion?

and

How do you think do these discussion sometimes become this bizarre almost-roleplay where people take the whole discussion to an almost real life seriousness.

Personally, I don’t see many strong parallels to the mess over Israel, beyond that it’s the only high-profile revanchist conflict in the world today. But I digress. Having riden out a few of these threads, it seems to me to boil down not to identifying strongly with the Ascalonians (I played Prophecies first, but I don’t feel like taking either side), but more to a couple other factors.

First, and I believe primarily, it’s an issue where different individual definitions of guilt and justice can lead to different conclusions. These are principles that can be very deep-rooted, and I think it’s easier to take things personally, and by result argue vociferously, when one feels their values are being slighted or outright attacked by proxy. If you can put yourself through reading the arguments, the bulk aren’t fighting about their sides (although there are a few), but about the rationale of who deserves what, often forgetting the Ascalonians and charr altogether to drag in real world illustrations. It seems to stop being about a fantasy and start being made very real.

The second thread that usually comes up a bit later is the schism between the tone of GW1 and GW2. The first game, especially early on, was very black-and-white, human civilizations on one side and nonhumans largely on another as monsters to be put down like animals. GW2 largely treats non-human races as people. There are several other bones to be picked, but proponents of GW1’s way of looking at things find this to be one of the most jarring changes, and the already heated debate ostensibly over the charr’s moral standing (the most monstrous race in GW1 made into ‘good guys’ in GW2) gives them an opening to air their grievances. The undercurrent of which game had the more valid stance intertwines with the moral debate, the fanbases jeering down their opposition continue to provide a cover obscuring the real conflicts, and a perennial clusterkitten reaches the apex of its cycle.

Anyway, that’s just my outsider’s way of interpreting the matter. I’ve seen several of these, but I rarely participate, and I’ve never tried to sit down someone who does to see what’s making them tick. Maybe they’d have a different way of seeing it.

Aaron Ansari.1604:

Anyway, that’s just my outsider’s way of interpreting the matter. I’ve seen several of these, but I rarely participate, and I’ve never tried to sit down someone who does to see what’s making them tick. Maybe they’d have a different way of seeing it.

Actually, it would be fascinating to see what is making them tick. It’s this weird mix of in and out of character thoughts that make real people argue like people in game.
I mean, they say stuff that Ascalonians in game would say on that matter.

Derom.1205:

Aaron Ansari.1604:

Anyway, that’s just my outsider’s way of interpreting the matter. I’ve seen several of these, but I rarely participate, and I’ve never tried to sit down someone who does to see what’s making them tick. Maybe they’d have a different way of seeing it.

Actually, it would be fascinating to see what is making them tick. It’s this weird mix of in and out of character thoughts that make real people argue like people in game.
I mean, they say stuff that Ascalonians in game would say on that matter.

Well if you do want to talk to one of them, I’ve been in those discussions and I’ve got some time to kill.

Pyro.4765:

Well if you do want to talk to one of them, I’ve been in those discussions and I’ve got some time to kill.

1st Question: What’s your opinion on the whole Ascalon discussion?

2nd Question: How do you think do these discussion become this bizarre almost-roleplay where people take the whole discussion so seriously?

Actually i would like to ask these questions to everyone to reads this and has an idea about it.

Derom.1205:

Pyro.4765:

Well if you do want to talk to one of them, I’ve been in those discussions and I’ve got some time to kill.

1st Question: What’s your opinion on the whole Ascalon discussion?

2nd Question: How do you think do these discussion become this bizarre almost-roleplay where people take the whole discussion so seriously?

Actually i would like to ask these questions to everyone to reads this and has an idea about it.

1. Think Ascalonians wanting to reclaim their homeland are in the right, but that Separatists are in the wrong.

2. Like Aaron said, I think people view it as a challenge to their real life sense of justice through proxy. To elaborate on this, it really kittenes me off when people talk like the Ascalonians in any way deserved the Searing. I feel like the main divide here is between people who think you can be held responsible for the actions of your ancestors or your nation and those who don’t.

Pyro.4765:

Derom.1205:

Pyro.4765:

Well if you do want to talk to one of them, I’ve been in those discussions and I’ve got some time to kill.

1st Question: What’s your opinion on the whole Ascalon discussion?

2nd Question: How do you think do these discussion become this bizarre almost-roleplay where people take the whole discussion so seriously?

Actually i would like to ask these questions to everyone to reads this and has an idea about it.

1. Think Ascalonians wanting to reclaim their homeland are in the right, but that Separatists are in the wrong.

2. Like Aaron said, I think people view it as a challenge to their real life sense of justice through proxy. To elaborate on this, it really kittenes me off when people talk like the Ascalonians in any way deserved the Searing. I feel like the main divide here is between people who think you can be held responsible for the actions of your ancestors or your nation and those who don’t.

Makes sense. I think what I find so weird about it, is the fact that these people become like characters in Tyria.

Well, I guess I should kinda applaude A-Net for creating a lore that makes people think that way (even if it was unintended).

I started with Prophecies, but I never really cared for Ascalon. Kryta always seemed much more interesting. I also never understood the Charr vs. Ascalon thing, and why people are still so upset about something that happened almost 250 years ago. Might be because I’m historian, so I know about enough conflicts and wars over some plot of land that atleast two parties claim to be their “ancestral right”. After a while it just looks silly.

BuddhaKeks.4857:

I started with Prophecies, but I never really cared for Ascalon. Kryta always seemed much more interesting. I also never understood the Charr vs. Ascalon thing, and why people are still so upset about something that happened almost 250 years ago. Might be because I’m historian, so I know about enough conflicts and wars over some plot of land that atleast two parties claim to be their “ancestral right”. After a while it just looks silly.

Eh, the only thing that was really 250 years ago was the searing. The war went right on going up to just before the start of the game. Rather than it being weird that there is still animosity in the game, it would be absolutely bizarre if there was little or no animosity. I mean really, the 250 year thing is a big copout. You say it like the Charr took over overnight and bam, that was it, we jumped right to the situation we had a decade ago in lore with hostilities being occasional raids. There wasn’t just bad blood and then a bunch of dead space, it kept going. If you really are a historian, you would understand that it easily stops being about “who owns what” and “who wronged who?”.

The thing with the searing if how everybody keeps blaming ALL charr for it. Iron Legion, Blood Legion, Ash legion, all charr everywhere.

They ignore the stranglehold of control the Flame legion held over the Charr back then. They ignore how different Charr today are compared to back then (You can find charr who openly hate what the Flame Legion did back then IIRC).

I think they have some legit issues that in universe should be aired. But oftentimes whenever I see Adelbern Ascalonians (I personally seperate them between Adelbern and Rurik, aka their mindset.) I shake my head. These guys demand the Charr just give up everything and move North of the wall (Or more commonly, think humanity can and should PUSH the Charr that far).

My viewpoint is more of a realist. Humanity CANNOT reclaim Ascalon. The treaty they have forming gives them the entire fields of ruin area (not a small section of land frankly for the population of Ebonhawke). Clinging to the hatred will only cause them to try to get wiped out faster. They cannot reclaim it or afford to waste the resources and manpower to do so… Peace is the only way to survive for Ebonhawke in the long run.

Kalavier.1097:

They ignore the stranglehold of control the Flame legion held over the Charr back then. They ignore how different Charr today are compared to back then (You can find charr who openly hate what the Flame Legion did back then IIRC).

The Searing happened over 200 years ago. But for GW1 players it’s just a few years ago. So it’s understandable that for them Charr kinda did a 180° and became he good guys compared to the first game.
Personaly I kinda like Charr and Ascalon is truly their country now. But they are a bunch of kittens (how fitting.)

For me, it’s because the whole thing evokes negative feelings I associate with the whole GW1>GW2 transition in general. Where Anet kinda dumped their existing fanbase, along with their game and it’s unique premise, just 2 years out of the gate, to make something new with better mass appeal. Without much care for all that the aforementioned had invested.

It’s probably difficult to understand now how the two are connected, but consider it from the perspective of a veteran GW1 player at the time that GW2 is announced. You’re playing a thing you love, in a universe you enjoy, and everything seems great as you await the next addition, of which you’ve been promised many over the course of years.

Then suddenly you’re told their won’t be a next addition, (despite it still going strong,) and instead support is about to totally stop in favour of this new thing.

Naturally, you’re a little upset. But at the same time, all the ideas you associated with the old thing you loved are being thrown out as well. It might seem ridiculous considering it’s a video game, but for many people, Ascalon and pre-searing, and the tragedy of them being destroyed, were the earliest memories they had of the game, and the firmest sense of a “home” within it’s context. The beta events were all there. All the earliest missions, as well as some of the hardest endgame quests, were there. Sure, MMO patriotism is extremely silly and dumb when you’re an adult, but I – And probably a lot of other people – was a kid when GW1 launched, and feelings you get as a kid are hard to get rid of.

So there had been an attachment to Ascalon for a lot of people, and to it’s cause and it’s conflict with the Charr. But now these new people – New writers, in your mind the same people taking your game for something you might not even see for years and years and might not even like – Came along and told you that you were dumb to feel that way. That the generic monsters were actually the good guys, and you were jerks for fighting them, and they would be the stars now.

It was such a blatant retcon, made for such obvious, shallow reasons (the desire to be able to incorporate a cool sounding race into their new project which, as was popular, required multiple races) that came about at the worst time, and got bundled in with a big ball of anti-anet resenment; At their laziness, fickleness, in regard to lore and game design both. The feeling that everything you had come to enjoy was being replaced for arbitrary reasons. That it could easily happen again, at any time.

That probably all sounds very melodramatic, and I certainly don’t feel that strongly now. But again. Try to think of it from the perspective of a tween.

Lurinna.4306:

For me, it’s because the whole thing evokes negative feelings I associate with the whole GW1>GW2 transition in general. Where Anet kinda dumped their existing fanbase, along with their game and it’s unique premise, just 2 years out of the gate, to make something new with better mass appeal. Without much care for all that the aforementioned had invested.

It’s probably difficult to understand now how the two are connected, but consider it from the perspective of a veteran GW1 player at the time that GW2 is announced. You’re playing a thing you love, in a universe you enjoy, and everything seems great as you await the next addition, of which you’ve been promised many over the course of years. Then suddenly you’re told their won’t be a next addition, (despite it still going strong,) and instead support is about to totally stop in favour of this new thing.

Naturally, you’re a little upset. But at the same time, all the ideas you associated with the old thing you loved are being thrown out as well. It might seem ridiculous considering it’s a video game, but for many people, Ascalon and pre-searing, and the tragedy of them being destroyed, were the earliest memories they had of the game, and the firmest sense of a “home” within it’s context. The beta events were all there. All the earliest missions, as well as some of the hardest endgame quests, were there. Sure, MMO patriotism is extremely silly and dumb when you’re an adult, but I – And probably a lot of other people – was a kid when GW1 launched, and feelings you get as a kid are hard to get rid of.

So there had been an attachment to Ascalon for a lot of people, and to it’s cause and it’s conflict with the Charr. But now these new people – New writers, in your mind the same people taking your game for something you might not even see for years and years and might not even like – Came along and told you that you were dumb to feel that way. That the generic monsters were actually the good guys, and you were jerks for fighting them, and they would be the stars now.

It was such a blatant retcon, made for such obvious reasons (the desire to be able to incorporate a cool sounding race into their new project which, as was popular, required multiple races) that came about at the worst time, and got bundled in with a big ball of anti-anet resenment; At their laziness, fickleness, in regard to lore and game design both. The feeling that everything you had come to enjoy was being replaced for arbitrary reasons. That it could easily happen again, at any time.

That probably all sounds very melodramatic, and I certainly don’t feel that strongly now. But again. Try to think of it from the perspective of a tween.

Thank you, that was interesting. It makes sense and i dont’t know if i wouldn’t say similair things if A-Net did something like that to Cantha or Elona.
Also I think I am starting to understand why players out of the game and people inside of the game say similar things. Both lost something important to them.

Now I am wondering about the whole retcon thing. While it probably was a retcon, i never saw it as an obvious one. For me, no side in a war can be 100% evil, so seeing some (for a lack of better term) “good” Charr in EOTN seemed logical.

Derom.1205:

Now I am wondering about the whole retcon thing. While it probably was a retcon, i never saw it as an obvious one. For me, no side in a war can be 100% evil, so seeing some (for a lack of better term) “good” Charr in EOTN seemed logical.

Of course, there’s no way to know for sure what Anets plans for the Charr were in those days before plans changed, but I can atleast tell you that there wasn’t even a hint of them being anything other than monsters in the original release. And that stands out because, with most of the sentient monster races, they made at least a token effort to humanize them – Ventari and his followers for the Centaurs, tons of stuff in Factions for the Tengu, etc. But the Charr never spoke a word. The first time you even learn they’re capable of speech is right at the end of nightfall, and even that’s not a paticularly positive impression.

But yeah, I’m glad you get it and I didn’t just sound crazy.

Lostwingman.5034:

Eh, the only thing that was really 250 years ago was the searing. The war went right on going up to just before the start of the game. Rather than it being weird that there is still animosity in the game, it would be absolutely bizarre if there was little or no animosity. I mean really, the 250 year thing is a big copout. You say it like the Charr took over overnight and bam, that was it, we jumped right to the situation we had a decade ago in lore with hostilities being occasional raids. There wasn’t just bad blood and then a bunch of dead space, it kept going. If you really are a historian, you would understand that it easily stops being about “who owns what” and “who wronged who?”.

I phrased it badly, I was talking about the players that still hold grudges, not the NPCs in the game. I should have put the 250 years in quotation marks to make it clearer.
That said, I still think such things are petty, even the “who wronged who”, because it happens a lot in history. And if we can learn one thing from history, especially European history, is that holding grudges is a pointless excercise (see the french-german relations 150 years ago and now as an example).

Purely for me, my lingering dislike for the Charr is a certain hypocrisy they seem to have.

They take credit for victory over the humans while ignoring that it was the magics of the Flame Legion, who they hold in contempt, which enabled their victory by crippling Ascalon with the Searing.

They see no real issue with the use of the Searing on the humans but get upset over the humans use of the Foefire on them.

They claim to have killed their gods when it was again humans who did that.

Hell, one of the key figures in the start of the Charr throwing off the yoke of the Flame Legion was infact saved by humans, as was his warband, from Flame Legion cages.

It is ironic that the Charr actually owe a lot of their success to others they look at with contempt.

This isn’t to say I hate Charr, but they do come across as a little full of it.

Lurinna.4306:

Derom.1205:

Now I am wondering about the whole retcon thing. While it probably was a retcon, i never saw it as an obvious one. For me, no side in a war can be 100% evil, so seeing some (for a lack of better term) “good” Charr in EOTN seemed logical.

Of course, there’s no way to know for sure what Anets plans for the Charr were in those days before plans changed, but I can atleast tell you that there wasn’t even a hint of them being anything other than monsters in the original release. And that stands out because, with most of the sentient monster races, they made at least a token effort to humanize them – Ventari and his followers for the Centaurs, tons of stuff in Factions for the Tengu, etc. But the Charr never spoke a word. The first time you even learn they’re capable of speech is right at the end of nightfall, and even that’s not a paticularly positive impression.

But yeah, I’m glad you get it and I didn’t just sound crazy.

In my experience it’s always a good thing to at least try to understand people.
I guess my problem is more or less that it is hard for me just accept a whole race as evil (i really don’t like the implication). Even Tolkien regretted making the Orcs simply evil.

Lutinz.6915:

Purely for me, my lingering dislike for the Charr is a certain hypocrisy they seem to have.

They take credit for victory over the humans while ignoring that it was the magics of the Flame Legion, who they hold in contempt, which enabled their victory by crippling Ascalon with the Searing.

They see no real issue with the use of the Searing on the humans but get upset over the humans use of the Foefire on them.

They claim to have killed their gods when it was again humans who did that.

Hell, one of the key figures in the start of the Charr throwing off the yoke of the Flame Legion was infact saved by humans, as was his warband, from Flame Legion cages.

It is ironic that the Charr actually owe a lot of their success to others they look at with contempt.

This isn’t to say I hate Charr, but they do come across as a little full of it.

Who likes to admit his own failings? It would be strange for such a warlike and proud nation to admit its own weaknesses, losses. They are kinda like Norn in that regard, they like to see themselves as biggest kittenes (I like this function) in Tyria and humility is something they definitely lack.
I always thought that was done on purpose by A-Net. Some NPC in the citadel even says that they still drill hatred of humans in their cubs although it doesn’t make much sense now.

Ive never liked the Ascalonians, even in the first game, they always seemed to deserve getting pushed out of “their” land. they invaded and pushed the tribal charr out, thats fine, but the charr came back, better than before and took back their original land(With the help of flame legion magic, NPC in the black citadel near the stormcaller horn has a dialogue speech about it) I see nothing wrong with that.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Bonfaaz_Burntfur

^ Bonfaaz Burntfur, Flame legion Shaman and at the time leader of the charr forces as they invaded Rin. So they do give credit to the flame legion, and even say they are heroes, see the screenshot

“Using the Cauldron of Cataclysm and the power of their Titan gods, the Charr shaman Bonfaaz Burntfur summoned forth a devastating magic that rained down burning crystals on Ascalon.”
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/The_Searing
my problem, comes from both sides for continuing this stupid conflict. Its over. The Ascalonians are all but gone, let them have Ebonhawk(Which thanks to the treaty is going to happen). The Charr have taken their land back, all but that little corner, they dont need to be so mindless when it comes to humankitten

inz.6915:

Purely for me, my lingering dislike for the Charr is a certain hypocrisy they seem to have.

They take credit for victory over the humans while ignoring that it was the magics of the Flame Legion, who they hold in contempt, which enabled their victory by crippling Ascalon with the Searing.

They see no real issue with the use of the Searing on the humans but get upset over the humans use of the Foefire on them.

They claim to have killed their gods when it was again humans who did that.

Hell, one of the key figures in the start of the Charr throwing off the yoke of the Flame Legion was infact saved by humans, as was his warband, from Flame Legion cages.

It is ironic that the Charr actually owe a lot of their success to others they look at with contempt.

This isn’t to say I hate Charr, but they do come across as a little full of it.

See above and see my screenshot

BuddhaKeks.4857:

Lostwingman.5034:

Eh, the only thing that was really 250 years ago was the searing. The war went right on going up to just before the start of the game. Rather than it being weird that there is still animosity in the game, it would be absolutely bizarre if there was little or no animosity. I mean really, the 250 year thing is a big copout. You say it like the Charr took over overnight and bam, that was it, we jumped right to the situation we had a decade ago in lore with hostilities being occasional raids. There wasn’t just bad blood and then a bunch of dead space, it kept going. If you really are a historian, you would understand that it easily stops being about “who owns what” and “who wronged who?”.

I phrased it badly, I was talking about the players that still hold grudges, not the NPCs in the game. I should have put the 250 years in quotation marks to make it clearer.
That said, I still think such things are petty, even the “who wronged who”, because it happens a lot in history. And if we can learn one thing from history, especially European history, is that holding grudges is a pointless excercise (see the french-german relations 150 years ago and now as an example).

Again, it only “looks silly” to the uninvolved. I’m sure the Native Americans and the Armenians think of many things in their past as objectively as you would.

Derom.1205:

Who likes to admit his own failings? It would be strange for such a warlike and proud nation to admit its own weaknesses, losses. They are kinda like Norn in that regard, they like to see themselves as biggest kittenes (I like this function) in Tyria and humility is something they definitely lack.
I always thought that was done on purpose by A-Net. Some NPC in the citadel even says that they still drill hatred of humans in their cubs although it doesn’t make much sense now.

Except where in the game is there any self-awareness of this matter? I guess I’d really have to dig around in the Priory in the hope that some ambient dialogue or something hints at that but we don’t get that. Which just further seems to “wipe away” any of the accomplishments of players in the previous game, let alone the historical revisionism that just gets under my skin on principle.

Dante.1763:

Ive never liked the Ascalonians, even in the first game, they always seemed to deserve getting pushed out of “their” land. they invaded and pushed the tribal charr out, thats fine, but the charr came back, better than before and took back their original land(With the help of flame legion magic, NPC in the black citadel near the stormcaller horn has a dialogue speech about it) I see nothing wrong with that.

Just to give fair context, it would be like the native Americans creating their own nation, dropping WMDs all over America and driving the Americans out with a genocidal war full of brutal atrocities. Just look at Gwen’s story. Modern Charr might see her as a monster but if she was one, it was one of their own creation.

That’s going to leave major hatreds. Ascalon had been their for 900 years and it was land the Charr had conquered originally from the Grawl anyway. Claim to that land was purely by strength of arms.

Again, its mainly about the Charr taking credit for things they didn’t do. Its not about admitting weakness as much as false claims to strength.

Lostwingman.5034:

Again, it only “looks silly” to the uninvolved.

Which is exactly what I’m talking about, as GW2 players are uninvolved. My statement had nothing to do with how the NPCs must feel in-universe. To make it clear: I think players being upset about the Searing or the aftermath are acting a bit silly.

BuddhaKeks.4857:

Lostwingman.5034:

Again, it only “looks silly” to the uninvolved.

Which is exactly what I’m talking about, as GW2 players are uninvolved. My statement had nothing to do with how the NPCs must feel in-universe. To make it clear: I think players being upset about the Searing or the aftermath are acting a bit silly.

Players, particularly human fans, get constant reminders in game on how far humanity has fallen and lost and how much the Charr played a part in that. Its kind of compounded by the fact that humanity hasn’t just lost ground but in modern Tyria feels like its taken a back seat.

Orr is a fine example. All Orr showed of humanity is how much it had lost. Human involvement in the story tended to rely on the expertise of other races. Hell, even the PS step involving a Priestess of Grenth required a Asura to show her how to do the proper ritual.

Humanity feels kind of stuck in the past with the ghosts of its past, or at best, past its prime and looking to moving into an old folks home. Humanities theme at launch was supposed to be perseverance against adversity but it really feels like being dragged down by the ghosts of the past and taking boots to the face.

Ascalon is a focus point for that sense of loss.

Lutinz.6915:

Again, its mainly about the Charr taking credit for things they didn’t do. Its not about admitting weakness as much as false claims to strength.

What false claims are those? The ones about taking the land back? They admit in game that one of their heroes was Bonfaaz Burntfur. Id say thats giving credit to the flame legion, the ones responsible for it.

Edit: And it was that strength of arms that helped to take the land back. Ill give this to the Ascalnions, they always inspire my characters. Every. Single. One. of my charr share the same sense of praise for what the managed to do. Holding off the Charr for so long, by themselves. They also share the same hatred of one single person. King Adelbern, they all think he is a coward, they do not say the same about his Son Prince Rurik. They also do not hate the foefire ghosts, because honestly, they didnt do anything, it was their king who made them that way.(Yes i RP them that way. with all the knowledge the priory has the truth about what really happened 250 years ago should be known by now.) Neither races are terrible creatures. They both did horrible things to each other, its up to them if they want to move past it or not. Humanity in game could benefit greatly if they allied with the charr, im glad Queen Jennah sees that too. ^^

Lostwingman.5034:

Derom.1205:

Who likes to admit his own failings? It would be strange for such a warlike and proud nation to admit its own weaknesses, losses. They are kinda like Norn in that regard, they like to see themselves as biggest kittenes (I like this function) in Tyria and humility is something they definitely lack.
I always thought that was done on purpose by A-Net. Some NPC in the citadel even says that they still drill hatred of humans in their cubs although it doesn’t make much sense now.

Except where in the game is there any self-awareness of this matter? I guess I’d really have to dig around in the Priory in the hope that some ambient dialogue or something hints at that but we don’t get that. Which just further seems to “wipe away” any of the accomplishments of players in the previous game, let alone the historical revisionism that just gets under my skin on principle.

It’s probably true that the storywriters decided for a different fate for the Charr after prophecies. Also I cannot really remember any dialog that refenrences that part specificly (although it would be interesting to find one).
But on the over hand, isn’t the Fields of Ruin map one big evidence? I mean most Charr hate the treaty. Still Ebonhawk stands and the Ascalonians even gained some land out of it. So it’s not just “Charr won everything, game over”, the way i see it.
Also the accomplishments of the GW1 Hero lies mostly in the Fact that Tyria still exists more or less. Although you could say that in the end due to Ebonhawk Gwen saved part of Ascalon, not the player.

1st Question: What’s your opinion on the whole Ascalon discussion?

• The past is the past, and history is so muddled one cannot objectively declare one side the better person.

2nd Question: How do you think do these discussion become this bizarre almost-roleplay where people take the whole discussion so seriously?

• Whenever I hear people talk about how anet retconned the concept of the charr it perturbs me. Because pure evil does not exist in my actual reality, I find it hard for it to exist in fantastic realities. Even the most primitive mammal can be happy or sad. I think it is easier to kill and destroy things you dehumanize, so people see things as retcons. Its as if the reality that anet painted in Gw2 could not have existed in Gw1. People cant be secretly good.

For my part, I think the main reason most human players who feel a deep connection to Ascalon are quickly angered by what GW did is because the game isn’t human-centric anymore (which is a good thing, because the fact that GW first of its name was human-only weakened the whole thing, and is the main reason I’ve never truly played it, even if I have Prophecies and GWEN)

With GW, we’ve got the other side of the story And while the Charrs were barbaric, violent and not a very great civilization at the origin, we know see how they evolved into the brutal monsters of Prophecies, and how they reclaimed a more balanced social organization afterward (with the lies, half-lies and denial that came with the fall of the Flame Legion’s “gods” and others but hey, I’m French and I know that my country hasn’t ended in Civil War after WWII because of this kind of lies, so…).

I really liked Ascalon Pre-Searing, and if you ask me, I think the side of Ebonhawke and Ascalon is more “in the right” but I’m also conscious that they can’t hope to reclaim Ascalon, not without a war among the Legions which would devastate even more the land. And in a sense, with the treaty, the humans have won. The Charrs won’t ever control all of Ascalon. Despite their numbers, despite their technology, they haven’t prevailed over Ebonhawke, they haven’t destroyed the humans of Ascalon.

I must also say that my stance my come from the fact that’ I’m an European, and that I find the way the humans are tied to their past and almost stuck in it a lot reminiscent of what I see in my country, and more largely in Europe. Here, we have old demons and ideologies rearing their ugly heads once more, and I know that for some (most?) Americans, Europeans seems far too tied to the past, not enough adventurous, etc.

But this characters stem from the weigh of History, especially the World Wars. And in a sense, when I see the Guild Wars, I see a mirror image of WWI, when the Europeans nations committed a suicide trough the monstrous battles that engulfed the continent. In a sense, the Charr Invasion is WWII, and what we are seeing ingame, the treaty between Charrs and Humans is somewhat the beginning of the French-German friendship after the war.

So, in this light, I find hard to side with any camp in those discussions.

Dante.1763:

What false claims are those? The ones about taking the land back? They admit in game that one of their heroes was Bonfaaz Burntfur. Id say thats giving credit to the flame legion, the ones responsible for it.

I mentioned them above but:

1. Identifying with a member of a group they at the same time hold with contempt and hatred. Its kind of taking it both ways. They ridicule and despise the flame legion but hold claim one of their historic members and someone who was one of these oppressors as a hero.

2. Killing their gods. That was the humans who did that. Humans took down the ones who came through the gate of Kormali. Humans who shut down the place where they were being created. The humans killed the Charr gods.

3. The start of their revolution to throw of the shackles of Flame Legion Oppression was enabled by humans killing many leading shamans at the time and humans freeing Pyre and his Warband. This was the very starting point of the revolution. Its ironic that Gwen Goremonger who is hated and feared by the Charr was also instrumental in freeing them from Flame Legion chains.

False strength by claiming achievement from individuals they either distanced themselves from in any other circumstances or taking credit for things they didn’t do, at least on their own.

Dante.1763:

And it was that strength of arms that helped to take the land back. Ill give this to the Ascalnions, they always inspire my characters. Every. Single. One. of my charr share the same sense of praise for what the managed to do. Holding off the Charr for so long, by themselves. They also share the same hatred of one single person. King Adelbern, they all think he is a coward, they do not say the same about his Son Prince Rurik. They also do not hate the foefire ghosts, because honestly, they didnt do anything, it was their king who made them that way.(Yes i RP them that way. with all the knowledge the priory has the truth about what really happened 250 years ago should be known by now.)

The charr invaded Ascalon in force after a WMD magic had been dropped on it. Without that its very likely the war would have gone a very different way. While strength of arms was used it was at a greatly weakened enemy. Even then the humans held out for years.

And while your character holds some regards for humans, most Charr NPCs in game, particularly those living in Charr territory, hold humans in contempt. What respect is shown is often grudging. There is a reason humans are so often referred to as mice. Many charr also see the foe fire as robing them of their total victory rather than what it did to the humans.

Valmir.4590:

For my part, I think the main reason most human players who feel a deep connection to Ascalon are quickly angered by what GW did is because the game isn’t human-centric anymore (which is a good thing, because the fact that GW first of its name was human-only weakened the whole thing, and is the main reason I’ve never truly played it, even if I have Prophecies and GWEN)

I think part of the problem is how humans are portrayed in GW2. While the game shouldn’t be human centric, it feels very much like they overcompensated to the point that lore wise humans really are at the bottom of the pile.

Human lore in GW2 shows mainly what they have lost, and how they are struggling. Humanity spends most of its story time getting kicked in the face. While a human theme was supposed to be tenacity in the face of adversity, its come more across as humans being like the guy who is past his prime and struggling to hold his own. While the other races are growing in strength and looking to the future.

The one major work of human ingenuity, the watch knights, turned out to be reverse engineered Sylvari technology and blew up in the Humans faces spectacularly. If your not playing a human the solution to the crisis didn’t even evolve human help unless you count Faren in his underwear.

Worse, the themes humans did have, have been made redundant or severely watered down. Charr have three easy to identify and distinct Legions. Divinity’s Reach is supposed to be a melting pot of Ascalonian, Krytan, Elonian and Canthan cultures but save for a bit of architecture and a couple of lines from NPCs we see nothing for Elonian or Canthan culture.

Human religion is also pretty much a joke. Once billed as a core part of their character, human devotion to Six seems more like a bunch of people clinging to a set of gods who have abandoned them. Humanity’s theme of being the ‘chosen’ of the six holds no relevance. When we have seen such things come up in game human involvement has been seemingly unnecessary.

Ascalon represents a better time. Humanity in GW2 seems so watered down and weak its no wonder people would obsess over a more glorious past. Hell, if we end up befriending the Mursaat next expac that’s just going to make it worse.

Humanity needs a future in the game, either by bringing back some semblance of past glory or giving some sense of hope for the future.

I’d also point out to people who argue it was 200 year prior and humans should get over it, the Charr were first driven out 900 years prior to the Searing.

Lutinz.6915:

Humanity feels kind of stuck in the past with the ghosts of its past, or at best, past its prime and looking to moving into an old folks home. Humanities theme at launch was supposed to be perseverance against adversity but it really feels like being dragged down by the ghosts of the past and taking boots to the face.

Ascalon is a focus point for that sense of loss.

To be honest, that sounds like those old british people that keep lamenting that the Empire is gone. That’s just the way it is. I don’t like new Kryta all that much either, but it’s still better than being dominated by a cult like they used to be. Similarly Ascalon is better off under Charr rule (Ebonhawke notwithstanding) than being torn to shreds by constant war.
Besides there is still a whole other continent entirely under human rule, we just have no contact right now (Cantha in case you aren’t sure, what I’m refering to). So no not all hope is lost, there is no need to clinch to the past. Humanity came back from worse, kinda like roaches always surviving. I mean technically the Charr never kicked them entirely out of Ascalon, there is still the Ebonhawke-Asterix-village situation going on. That’s an accomplishment!
Other than that I’m on board with Anets philosophy that is better to look at how even a weakend humanity can still contribute to the fight against the elder dragons, instead of focusing on a conflict with other races and how much better it used to be (pro-tip: it wasn’t!).

Derom.1205:

It’s always weird and interesting for me to see how the whole Char-Human Ascalon conflict becomes so personal for so many people.
It makes sense for players to hate Charr after watching the Searing turning Ascalon into a Wasteland.

But what about players who started with Factions or Nightfall? They really have no connection to Ascalon at first and only see it in its ruined state.

For me personaly, my first campaign was Nightfall, so I never really cared about what happened in Ascalon (even after i played pre-searing). So when i read all the discussion about it here, it’s just weird for me.
So the whole conflict appears to me like one morally grey clusterkitten that mirrors the Israel-Palastine conflict way too much.

*Edit: I guess i would like the answers for 2 questions:

What is your opinion about the Ascalon discussion?

and

How do you think do these discussion sometimes become this bizarre almost-roleplay where people take the whole discussion to an almost real life seriousness.

You’re right about players who didn’t start with Proph having a different attitude. There are even a lot of players who did start with Proph who viewed Ascalon as a “lost cause.” It is what it is.

Personally, my biggest beef is not so much that ANet turned human Ascalon into Charr Ascalon, but rather the reasons behind it. I view the Ascalon fiasco as one of the starkest examples of a huge thematic shift in the narrative between the two games. I also view this shift was done for largely popularity reasons in gamer culture…something I find abhorrent.

For instance, I believe ANet melted all of humanity down to one culture in GW2 for “racial balance” reasons, like they wanted racial parity to make sure all players feel equal no matter which race they chose. They essentially replaced human cultural diversity with racial cultural diversity overnight.

Or how they gave each race popular “gamer themes”: Norn are drunk vikings, Asura are mad scientist gnomes, Sylvari are English(no idea why) wood-elves, Charr are steam-punk orcs, and humans are…well humans are standard vanilla medieval humans. It’s like they took 5 popular fantasy themes which had nothing to do with GW2, and forcefully superimposed them into the narrative. Even GW2 Krytans don’t accurately reflect GW1 Krytans…they weren’t even white.

Ascalon is just one of the most over-the-top thematic and narrative shifts in the game, which one major reason why it gets called out on so much. I also have a rather intense(some would say unhealthy) belief in honest continuity. Meaning, I believe if you’re going to add on to a pre-existing narrative, do so in a way that honestly reflects that narrative. GW2 ANet used every lore trick in the book to transform Tyria into an almost completely different world. And why?? Mainly for marketing reasons…they wanted to appeal to a wider audience.

I find that cheap, dishonest, and just plain wrong.

BuddhaKeks.4857:

Lutinz.6915:

Humanity feels kind of stuck in the past with the ghosts of its past, or at best, past its prime and looking to moving into an old folks home. Humanities theme at launch was supposed to be perseverance against adversity but it really feels like being dragged down by the ghosts of the past and taking boots to the face.

Ascalon is a focus point for that sense of loss.

To be honest, that sounds like those old british people that keep lamenting that the Empire is gone. That’s just the way it is. I don’t like new Kryta all that much either, but it’s still better than being dominated by a cult like they used to be. Similarly Ascalon is better off under Charr rule (Ebonhawke notwithstanding) than being torn to shreds by constant war.
Besides there is still a whole other continent entirely under human rule, we just have no contact right now (Cantha in case you aren’t sure, what I’m refering to). So no not all hope is lost, there is no need to clinch to the past. Humanity came back from worse, kinda like roaches always surviving. I mean technically the Charr never kicked them entirely out of Ascalon, there is still the Ebonhawke-Asterix-village situation going on. That’s an accomplishment!
Other than that I’m on board with Anets philosophy that is better to look at how even a weakend humanity can still contribute to the fight against the elder dragons, instead of focusing on a conflict with other races and how much better it used to be (pro-tip: it wasn’t!).

I don’t want to see humanity focusing on a conflict with other races or dwelling on the past. Im actually arguing that humanity is so dumbed down in GW2 that it makes that past look more attractive than what they have in modern day.

While I agree that the survival of Ebonhawke is pretty epic and think tenacity is a great attribute, it kind of comes off as humanity just constantly getting beaten up. Human tenacity really isn’t a trait that makes it stand out. Charr, Asura and Norn all have examples of survival against brutal odds.

The difference is that while the other races seem to actually be effectively fighting back, humanity seems to be in a defensive huddle just surviving taking hits. It hasn’t really successfully made any solid inroads into any of the threats applied to it.

My key point is fans of the humans in GW2 dwell on the past because humanity these days seems to be diminishing and the themes that once defined it have become empty. Player aren’t going to move on because most of what we have been shown of humanity is its losses rather than how it is growing and adapting to a new world. The writers have effectively left humans thematically stuck in a past that no longer seems to hold any relevance.

On the point of Cantha, I would argue that firstly we have no idea of what state it is in and secondly, last we heard it was under an oppressive tyranny. Hardly an inspiring place to look for signs of human endurance in the modern GW2 world.

I have been in Proph since day one, I have been with GW for this whole ride. I have had zero problem with understanding the Charr are no longer the issue at hand. There is a larger threat consuming EVERY race. The dragons have to be viewed as alien in nature, all these racial squabbles have to be squashed for the respective races to survive.

Besides I have played out the personal stories for every race. The Charr storyline IMO are easily the best written.

Lutinz.6915:

I don’t want to see humanity focusing on a conflict with other races or dwelling on the past. Im actually arguing that humanity is so dumbed down in GW2 that it makes that past look more attractive than what they have in modern day.

While I agree that the survival of Ebonhawke is pretty epic and think tenacity is a great attribute, it kind of comes off as humanity just constantly getting beaten up. Human tenacity really isn’t a trait that makes it stand out. Charr, Asura and Norn all have examples of survival against brutal odds.

The difference is that while the other races seem to actually be effectively fighting back, humanity seems to be in a defensive huddle just surviving taking hits. It hasn’t really successfully made any solid inroads into any of the threats applied to it.

My key point is fans of the humans in GW2 dwell on the past because humanity these days seems to be diminishing and the themes that once defined it have become empty. Player aren’t going to move on because most of what we have been shown of humanity is its losses rather than how it is growing and adapting to a new world. The writers have effectively left humans thematically stuck in a past that no longer seems to hold any relevance.

On the point of Cantha, I would argue that firstly we have no idea of what state it is in and secondly, last we heard it was under an oppressive tyranny. Hardly an inspiring place to look for signs of human endurance in the modern GW2 world.

You have some good points, but those are mostly issues with how Anet writes humanity, the Charr conquest of Ascalon is not part of that problem. You could argue that humanity suffered from the Worf Effect. It grew weaker in order to balance it to the new additions, especially the young Sylvari and the disjointed Norn.
Still if you have ever watched the first Rocky movie, you know that there can be somethign heroic in defeat. Humanities time at the top is simply over, it’s comparable to the elves in Tolkiens work, they are past their prime. That doesn’t mean they can’t still pack a nasty punch and they sure don’t go down without a fight. That actually gives them an interesting new character in my opinion. After all, weren’t so many people glued to the television watching Walter White struggle in Breaking Bad? They sure weren’t watching the underdog winning at the end.

What I meant with the Cantha comment: There is potential to show a powerful, unrelenting portion of humanity in the future. I’m pretty sure if we ever go there, the story will be about defeating the quasi-dictatorical regime and basically give atleast one happy end to humanity.

Lutinz.6915:

I mentioned them above but:

1. Identifying with a member of a group they at the same time hold with contempt and hatred. Its kind of taking it both ways. They ridicule and despise the flame legion but hold claim one of their historic members and someone who was one of these oppressors as a hero.

2. Killing their gods. That was the humans who did that. Humans took down the ones who came through the gate of Kormali. Humans who shut down the place where they were being created. The humans killed the Charr gods.

3. The start of their revolution to throw of the shackles of Flame Legion Oppression was enabled by humans killing many leading shamans at the time and humans freeing Pyre and his Warband. This was the very starting point of the revolution. Its ironic that Gwen Goremonger who is hated and feared by the Charr was also instrumental in freeing them from Flame Legion chains.

1.) I can understand that one, feel the same way when it comes to that. But i think the difference is, at the time the Charr gods where real, and hadnt yet been destroyed. It was only when they started deceiving the charr that they started hating and wanting to eliminate the flame legion(Not counting all the female charr who got tired of being locked up and used for nothing more than breeding slaves…).

Prince Rurik should not be seen how he is by the Charr, im sorry, but he shouldnt(Towards ANET). I would have thought that the charr would have respected him slightly..every so slightly for managing to eliminate so many Charr in one swoop, with nobody but himself and a small group of mages. I know i would.

2.)Those where just regular titans.
“Two hundred years before the Searing, the Burnt Warband found Titans in the volcano Hrangmer; these Charr brought them back home to worship as gods. The Shaman caste led others to worship the Titans, who, in turn, provided them with the Cauldron of Cataclysm.” http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Titan

The titans we kill in GW1 at the gate are not the same titans the Charr where worshiping as gods, those titans had been around before the gate was open, and as such probably existed after the gate was gone. So the Charr are indeed very responsible for killing their gods(at least it seems so to me). Not Humans.

3.) Gwen was not there to rescue Pyre in my characters GW1 story, and even in the lore she was not there. she was an optional character that was not required to bring http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Warband_of_Brothers

She was however here(In the lore at least) http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Assault_on_the_Stronghold At the fall of Burntsoul, and as such should probably be seen as a hero to the charr or at the very least not the horrible villian she is now.

However, Pyre Fierceshot had indeed started the revolution before we showed up
“Pyre Fierceshot is an outcast, persecuted by the Charr Shamans for daring to speak out against their ways. After his warband killed a Shaman and destroyed a temple, Pyre and his companions fled the ruling shaman caste. Pyre hates them with a fury that only one raised to worship false gods can understand; he has been betrayed, tricked, and deceived, and he has sworn never to fall under the spell of the Shamans again. "

Id say that seems like the start of a revolution to me, or at the very least revolutionary. Course, it wouldnt have continued and grown stronger without our human character freeing Pyres warband, with or without Gwen being there. But, most of the charr NPCs ive talked to dont hate the humans(They look upon them as weak, and i guess rightfully so, compared to a charr a human is weak), they just hate the Ascalonians for being so stubborn(Ebonhawk) and for the curse of the Foefire.

I honestly have to wonder…how would the charr view the humans if the Foefire had never happened? Would we be so much closer to a peace treaty, or what would have happened?

@Lutinz

The one major work of human ingenuity, the watch knights, turned out to be reverse engineered Sylvari technology and blew up in the Humans faces spectacularly. If your not playing a human the solution to the crisis didn’t even evolve human help unless you count Faren in his underwear.

Actually it’s reverse engineered human technology. Sylvari technology uses plant magic and very little metal.

@Obsidian

Or how they gave each race popular “gamer themes”: Norn are drunk vikings, Asura are mad scientist gnomes, Sylvari are English(no idea why) wood-elves, Charr are steam-punk orcs, and humans are…well humans are standard vanilla medieval humans. It’s like they took 5 popular fantasy themes which had nothing to do with GW2, and forcefully superimposed them into the narrative. Even GW2 Krytans don’t accurately reflect GW1 Krytans…they weren’t even white.

This comment makes me kinda sad. I work in a library, and many books have derivations of earlier stories. Example, The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making, has derivations from Alice in Wonderland. However that does not make the work less unique. It’s endlessly pessimistic of writing in general to assume that if someone uses a popular theme that appeals to the masses their writing has no merit. Buffy used Dracula; get over yourself.

Lutinz.6915:

The difference is that while the other races seem to actually be effectively fighting back, humanity seems to be in a defensive huddle just surviving taking hits. It hasn’t really successfully made any solid inroads into any of the threats applied to it.

My key point is fans of the humans in GW2 dwell on the past because humanity these days seems to be diminishing and the themes that once defined it have become empty. Player aren’t going to move on because most of what we have been shown of humanity is its losses rather than how it is growing and adapting to a new world. The writers have effectively left humans thematically stuck in a past that no longer seems to hold any relevance.

I have to thank you, I think I finally understood why the Fields of Ruin are one of my favourite maps in the game.
At least for me, it actually shows developement.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Halkor_Meadows

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Summit_Peak

Humans and Charr working together and even a new human settlement in Ascalon. It seems to me that things have changed for humans and Charr.

But I guess it does highlight how different GW1 and GW2 are even more.

Dante.1763:

~snip~

Actually, humans did kill the Charr Titans.

Daniel Handler.4816:

@Lutinz

The one major work of human ingenuity, the watch knights, turned out to be reverse engineered Sylvari technology and blew up in the Humans faces spectacularly. If your not playing a human the solution to the crisis didn’t even evolve human help unless you count Faren in his underwear.

Actually it’s reverse engineered human technology. Sylvari technology uses plant magic and very little metal.

@Obsidian

Or how they gave each race popular “gamer themes”: Norn are drunk vikings, Asura are mad scientist gnomes, Sylvari are English(no idea why) wood-elves, Charr are steam-punk orcs, and humans are…well humans are standard vanilla medieval humans. It’s like they took 5 popular fantasy themes which had nothing to do with GW2, and forcefully superimposed them into the narrative. Even GW2 Krytans don’t accurately reflect GW1 Krytans…they weren’t even white.

This comment makes me kinda sad. I work in a library, and many books have derivations of earlier stories. Example, The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making, has derivations from Alice in Wonderland. However that does not make the work less unique. It’s endlessly pessimistic of writing in general to assume that if someone uses a popular theme that appeals to the masses their writing has no merit. Buffy used Dracula; get over yourself.

For Buffy: “During the first year of the series, Whedon described the show as My So-Called Life meets The X-Files.”

The difference is Buffy is meant to be all sitcom-y with a small helping of high school fright. Is GW2 supposed to be a mix between LOTR and Archie Bunker?

I work in a library too. I don’t think anyone takes something like Animal Farm as the definitive treatise on the 1917 Russian Revolution. It’s political satire for juveniles or young adults. Different versions and genres of well-known stories doesn’t mean they are a continuation of the story itself, but rather a subjective reflection of it.

I’d argue GW2 was envisioned for an even younger audience than GW1.

Daniel Handler.4816:

Actually it’s reverse engineered human technology. Sylvari technology uses plant magic and very little metal.

Actually Watchknights were reverse engineered from the Steam creatures such as the Steam Minotaurs which where originally created by Scarlet, a Sylvari. Thus reverse engineered Sylvari technology. That was how she was able to so easily subvert the Watchknights.

BuddhaKeks.4857:

You have some good points, but those are mostly issues with how Anet writes humanity, the Charr conquest of Ascalon is not part of that problem. You could argue that humanity suffered from the Worf Effect. It grew weaker in order to balance it to the new additions, especially the young Sylvari and the disjointed Norn.
Still if you have ever watched the first Rocky movie, you know that there can be somethign heroic in defeat. Humanities time at the top is simply over, it’s comparable to the elves in Tolkiens work, they are past their prime. That doesn’t mean they can’t still pack a nasty punch and they sure don’t go down without a fight. That actually gives them an interesting new character in my opinion. After all, weren’t so many people glued to the television watching Walter White struggle in Breaking Bad? They sure weren’t watching the underdog winning at the end.

What I meant with the Cantha comment: There is potential to show a powerful, unrelenting portion of humanity in the future. I’m pretty sure if we ever go there, the story will be about defeating the quasi-dictatorical regime and basically give atleast one happy end to humanity.

As I stated, my core problem isn’t with the Charr conquest of Ascalon. I’m merely suggesting that it is a focal point for discontent with fans for GW humans who have a rather disappointing humanity today. Most human lore is about what they lost so naturally that loss is going to be a focus for human players. Outside of that humanity is mainly on the receiving end of a beating, including by its own people.

While there can be heroism in defeat, humanity isn’t written like that. It’s more written as the worn out burnt out race that is struggling to hold any significance on the world stage with the rising races. They were described as GW2’s elves but they lack the legacy and power the elves in Tolkien had. Humanity doesn’t kick kitten . It just survives taking a beating.

Technically I’ve gone off topic with this from the question of the thread. The only thing that puts me off with Charr is their rather arrogant hypocrisy when it comes to historical truths and their attitudes. Im not even saying humans are better, just that that is a Charr trait that I see as a negative.

What Ive gotten into here, is an underlying reason Ascalon would be a focus for fans of humans. Humanity basically won GW1 and save the world but at the cost of so much and they don’t even really get a nod for it. Of course human fans are going to be lamenting for the lost glories of humanity’s past, because the future humans seem to have is being a punching bag while being overshadowed by the new stars. And all the while we keep getting shown how great humanity once was but isn’t any more.

Consider this. The Six are supposed to be a core human theme, however does that theme mean anything positive? Its clear that to use the power of the Six you don’t need humans. Divine Fire? Nope. Using a relic of Balthazzar? Nope. Hell two of the ritualists in that scene were norn. The end result is, as I said before, the appearance of a race clinging to gods that have long since abandoned them. It actually comes off as a little pathetic.

The writers have written a humanity stuck in its past clinging to fragments of past glories.

Obsidian.1328:

Dante.1763:

~snip~

Actually, humans did kill the Charr Titans.

Oh! Good catch! I never did those missions so i always forgot about that!!! Nice catch though and thanks for not being mean spirited about correcting me either!

the rest of what i said though is still pretty accurate, i think? i still stand by what i said earlier. Both races just need to move on, its been so long. Let the Priory find out the truth of what happened, but for crying out loud move on…The history that both the Charr and the Humans have is skewed and mostly wrong anyway, at least in game.

I simply never understood how Gw2 clashed heavily in lore with Gw1. And I always saw it as people being upset over a shift in mood. Take the movie Moonraker, it was a horrible shift in mood but not in lore. No rules of the universe created in prophecies have been broken. In the guild wars universe bad can be good. Else I would just criticize the writers as using cheap tricks like forgotten magics to deus ex machina cleanse Glint. Or that the concept of dual professions seems counter intuitive to the bloodstones. The concept of switching professions in ascension is equally suspect. The fact that Kormir and not the player character becomes a God. The fact Kormir does not seek to right the wrongs of her predecessor in the searing.

Edit: the fact charr are bipedal felines. The fact that the negative affects of the searing could not be fixed easily with magic. The fact that the humans are defeated by a primitive race with overwhelming numbers (I mean we are so smart). The fact the gods could not sense the machinations of one of their own (is this Greek mythology?)

Lutinz.6915:

Purely for me, my lingering dislike for the Charr is a certain hypocrisy they seem to have.

They take credit for victory over the humans while ignoring that it was the magics of the Flame Legion, who they hold in contempt, which enabled their victory by crippling Ascalon with the Searing.

They see no real issue with the use of the Searing on the humans but get upset over the humans use of the Foefire on them.

They claim to have killed their gods when it was again humans who did that.

Hell, one of the key figures in the start of the Charr throwing off the yoke of the Flame Legion was infact saved by humans, as was his warband, from Flame Legion cages.

It is ironic that the Charr actually owe a lot of their success to others they look at with contempt.

This isn’t to say I hate Charr, but they do come across as a little full of it.

Actually, I’d say it’s hard to tell if they mean the titans/destroyers, or if they mean an earlier thing. For all we know, it could be pointing more toward the Flame Legion’s rule since they mention machines of war as I recall.

Daniel Handler.4816:

2nd Question: How do you think do these discussion become this bizarre almost-roleplay where people take the whole discussion so seriously?

• Whenever I hear people talk about how anet retconned the concept of the charr it perturbs me. Because pure evil does not exist in my actual reality, I find it hard for it to exist in fantastic realities. Even the most primitive mammal can be happy or sad. I think it is easier to kill and destroy things you dehumanize, so people see things as retcons. Its as if the reality that anet painted in Gw2 could not have existed in Gw1. People cant be secretly good.

What I hate is how people seem to avoid the idea that the leadership change means a lot.

I mean, does everybody think Germany is all evil now? No. They got new leadership and direction. The Charr overthrew their old leadership, and started a new path. Why people continue to hold ALL CHARR EVERYWHERE TODAY accountable for actions made by/ordered by FLAME LEGION LEADERSHIP is what confuses me.

We are 250 years later, after a culture restructured itself and replaced it’s government. People act as if the Charr have a clean slate, but they don’t. There are references (praising and condemning) the flame legion actions during prophecies. There are LITERALLY some charr who outright state the popular charr view of the battle of Rin (where the stormcaller horn was used) isn’t accurate.

Honestly, even in GW1 it was shown as a purely pro human world. Centaurs in Elona? ENSLAVED. Centaurs in Kryta? rare. Tengu in Cantha? somewhat out of their usual land.

Also, in reply to the topic about “Human advances are not there.” Did that person miss the fact one of the KEY ELEMENTS to getting airships off the ground and working was HUMANITY? It was joint between Asura, Human, and Charr tech.

Lutinz.6915:

What Ive gotten into here, is an underlying reason Ascalon would be a focus for fans of humans. Humanity basically won GW1 and save the world but at the cost of so much and they don’t even really get a nod for it. Of course human fans are going to be lamenting for the lost glories of humanity’s past, because the future humans seem to have is being a punching bag while being overshadowed by the new stars. And all the while we keep getting shown how great humanity once was but isn’t any more.

That actually irks me a lot too. Not for humanity as a whole though, more for the legacy of my own PC from GW1. All things considered the player character from the original game is the single greatest hero of humanity. No one else comes even remotely close to the feats of him/her.

Yet lore utterly ignores the very existence of this person, all we get is a vague, some heroes met with Glint a long time ago. Instead Gwen is treated as the big shining light of humanity. You can not believe how much I hate Gwen for that, with her constant nagging, whining and how badly she treated poor Kieran.

And that is supposed to be humanities best? A girl that managed to escape from the Charr (impressive, but not that heroic) and later she tagged along when a much better human being went on the altruistic journey to safe the world from a much bigger threat, yet she did nothing but cry about how bad the Charr are, while even an Ascalonian PC had no problem inviting Pyre into his party. The only somewhat heroic thing Gwen ever did was found Ebonhawke, but we never get to see that and also it’s nothing compared to almost single-handedly stopping Abaddon. That is poor writing at it’s finest!

To be fair to Gwen, the charr were really, really bad to her and she was a child. If I remember it right, she only escaped cause they threw her into a pit to get torn apart by a beast for their entertainment of the watching charr and she managed to get past the beast and escape into the tunnels the beast came from.

I think anyone who had been through what she had would be understandable in her hate of charr. Hell, even Pyre thought her hatred was justified. It was her fear of charr he saw as her weakness.

I also wouldn’t really wouldn’t say Gwen is painted as a big shining light, at least any more than say Salma is. Gwen is really only big in Ebonhawke and most players who hadn’t played GW1 or read up on it probably wouldn’t really know who Gwen was.

Kalavier.1097:

Actually, I’d say it’s hard to tell if they mean the titans/destroyers, or if they mean an earlier thing. For all we know, it could be pointing more toward the Flame Legion’s rule since they mention machines of war as I recall.

Its vague but judging by general charr attitudes towards humans I doubt the idea of giving humans credit for their role in freeing the charr from their gods would be popular. Further, its worth pointing out that it was the loss of the titans that first started weakening the Flame Legions power. Humans also killed of a good portion of the Flame Legion’s leadership during Pyre’s time.

Kalavier.1097:

I mean, does everybody think Germany is all evil now? No. They got new leadership and direction. The Charr overthrew their old leadership, and started a new path. Why people continue to hold ALL CHARR EVERYWHERE TODAY accountable for actions made by/ordered by FLAME LEGION LEADERSHIP is what confuses me.

We are 250 years later, after a culture restructured itself and replaced it’s government. People act as if the Charr have a clean slate, but they don’t. There are references (praising and condemning) the flame legion actions during prophecies. There are LITERALLY some charr who outright state the popular charr view of the battle of Rin (where the stormcaller horn was used) isn’t accurate.

Germany doesn’t revere any of hitler’s generals for successful conquests during WW2. Germany actually has as a culture show a deal of remorse for the actions of their nation at the time. The charr do revere at least one Flame Legion general as a hero and show no remorse for what was done to the humans.

I have only ever found one charr who actually stated the popular charr view of the battle of Rin was possibly in accurate and that was born out of a pragmatism and belief in the value of truth over rhetoric rather than any respect for humans.

Kalavier.1097:

Also, in reply to the topic about “Human advances are not there.” Did that person miss the fact one of the KEY ELEMENTS to getting airships off the ground and working was HUMANITY? It was joint between Asura, Human, and Charr tech.

And what actual technology did they contribute? We have actually had this discussion in the Lore forums before. We are told humans contribute but can you point at any of the tech the Pact has and say ‘that was Human contribution’? You can certainly point out Sylvari, Asura and Charr contributions. They are kitten obvious. As for the norn, they at least bring their raw power and spiritual connections since the Norn’s supernatural patrons are actually still talking to them.

If there are human advances we aren’t shown them. The only advancement we have seen is the watchknights and they backfired dramatically and were reengineered tech invented by Scarlet in the first place.

Lutinz.6915:

To be fair to Gwen, the charr were really, really bad to her and she was a child. If I remember it right, she only escaped cause they threw her into a pit to get torn apart by a beast for their entertainment of the watching charr and she managed to get past the beast and escape into the tunnels the beast came from.

I think anyone who had been through what she had would be understandable in her hate of charr. Hell, even Pyre thought her hatred was justified. It was her fear of charr he saw as her weakness.

I also wouldn’t really wouldn’t say Gwen is painted as a big shining light, at least any more than say Salma is. Gwen is really only big in Ebonhawke and most players who hadn’t played GW1 or read up on it probably wouldn’t really know who Gwen was.

Oh believe me when I say I was jsut scratching the surface, there is a whole lot more wrong with Gwen, she is in my opinion the epitomization of everything that’s wrong with humanity in GW2. And we even got our first glimpse of that in GW1 to boot!

Yes I can understand why she hates Charr, that doesn’t make her in anyway sympathetic to me. She just a hateful husk of a woman. Her very existence is saddening and not something at all fitted as a role model. She barely manages to stay in racist grumbler territory, instead of going over into full-blown terrorist activities like the Separatists. Though if the Charr are to believed she actually crossed that line.

Still she is painted in a very positive way. The books Ghosts of Ascalon and Edge of Destiny both call her one of humanities greatest heroes, IIRC. I think it was Rytlock who gave away the Charr nickname for her; Goremonger. That’s pretty much the only negative thing ever said about her and that comes naturally from a Charr’s mouth. It’s just weird that humans blindly hero worship her, while there are so many greater heroes, like for example Salma or Rurik (who only have a few places named after them), but more importantly the player character from GW1, who as I mentioned before, get’s only very passing mentions and even those are extremely cryptic.

I just think as long as Gwen is treated by humans as some sort of saint, peace between them and the Charr will always be full of tensions. After all, your freedom fighters are another peoples terrorists. It’s just a matter of perspective. Not that the Charr are without fault, they too cling to the past in an unhealthy way. I think humanities obsession with Gwen is worse though.

BuddhaKeks.4857:

Oh believe me when I say I was jsut scratching the surface, there is a whole lot more wrong with Gwen, she is in my opinion the epitomization of everything that’s wrong with humanity in GW2. And we even got our first glimpse of that in GW1 to boot!

Yes I can understand why she hates Charr, that doesn’t make her in anyway sympathetic to me. She just a hateful husk of a woman. Her very existence is saddening and not something at all fitted as a role model. She barely manages to stay in racist grumbler territory, instead of going over into full-blown terrorist activities like the Separatists. Though if the Charr are to believed she actually crossed that line.

Still she is painted in a very positive way. The books Ghosts of Ascalon and Edge of Destiny both call her one of humanities greatest heroes, IIRC. I think it was Rytlock who gave away the Charr nickname for her; Goremonger. That’s pretty much the only negative thing ever said about her and that comes naturally from a Charr’s mouth. It’s just weird that humans blindly hero worship her, while there are so many greater heroes, like for example Salma or Rurik (who only have a few places named after them), but more importantly the player character from GW1, who as I mentioned before, get’s only very passing mentions and even those are extremely cryptic.

I just think as long as Gwen is treated by humans as some sort of saint, peace between them and the Charr will always be full of tensions. After all, your freedom fighters are another peoples terrorists. It’s just a matter of perspective. Not that the Charr are without fault, they too cling to the past in an unhealthy way. I think humanities obsession with Gwen is worse though.

Yeah, Gwen was whiny.
But I just don’t see any obsession humanity has with her. I mean yeah sure, Ascalonians see her as a hero. But Canthans, Elonians or even Krytans? They probably don’t even know her. Most of the stuff you can find about her is in Ebonhawk which she helped to found, but apart from that I didn’t seem to find much. You can see Salma und Rurik pretty often because of Divinities Reach’s quarters.
So for the Charr a flame shaman can be a hero and for the humans the founding mother of Ebonhawk was called the Goremonger. Maybe its just a way to say that nothing was as black and white as some people in Tyria think about that time.

Lutinz.6915:

Kalavier.1097:

I mean, does everybody think Germany is all evil now? No. They got new leadership and direction. The Charr overthrew their old leadership, and started a new path. Why people continue to hold ALL CHARR EVERYWHERE TODAY accountable for actions made by/ordered by FLAME LEGION LEADERSHIP is what confuses me.

We are 250 years later, after a culture restructured itself and replaced it’s government. People act as if the Charr have a clean slate, but they don’t. There are references (praising and condemning) the flame legion actions during prophecies. There are LITERALLY some charr who outright state the popular charr view of the battle of Rin (where the stormcaller horn was used) isn’t accurate.

Germany doesn’t revere any of hitler’s generals for successful conquests during WW2. Germany actually has as a culture show a deal of remorse for the actions of their nation at the time. The charr do revere at least one Flame Legion general as a hero and show no remorse for what was done to the humans.

I have only ever found one charr who actually stated the popular charr view of the battle of Rin was possibly in accurate and that was born out of a pragmatism and belief in the value of truth over rhetoric rather than any respect for humans.

Actually there is a charr in the area north of the BC who calls the Flame Legions butchers for what they did to the people in the ruins just a little bit north of him. (The oldgate ruins). Honestly, outside that Stormcaller monument, I don’t recall any heaping praise or revering of Flame Legion leaders of that era.

Lutinz.6915:

What Ive gotten into here, is an underlying reason Ascalon would be a focus for fans of humans. Humanity basically won GW1 and save the world but at the cost of so much and they don’t even really get a nod for it. Of course human fans are going to be lamenting for the lost glories of humanity’s past, because the future humans seem to have is being a punching bag while being overshadowed by the new stars. And all the while we keep getting shown how great humanity once was but isn’t any more.

You know, I never took the ending of prophecies as “The world is saved, Ascalon is not threatened anymore!”

Honestly, Ascalon wasn’t a focus the moment you entered the Shiverpeaks. You go back to kill the Titans at Glint’s request, but it’s a tattered, ruined Kingdom filled with people who didn’t leave even with the Charr Threat.

BuddhaKeks.4857:

And that is supposed to be humanities best? A girl that managed to escape from the Charr (impressive, but not that heroic) and later she tagged along when a much better human being went on the altruistic journey to safe the world from a much bigger threat, yet she did nothing but cry about how bad the Charr are, while even an Ascalonian PC had no problem inviting Pyre into his party. The only somewhat heroic thing Gwen ever did was found Ebonhawke, but we never get to see that and also it’s nothing compared to almost single-handedly stopping Abaddon. That is poor writing at it’s finest!

Gwen’s ascendancy in EotN was one of the ways ANet was changing the narrative back then to prepare for GW2. This is painfully obvious in the whole Hearts of the North episode where you get to witness Kieran start to wear his big boy pants. ANet was trying to change its target audience to a younger demographic by changing the mood of the writing. I don’t see how watching two teens’ awkward and overlong courtship and marriage in a video game can be seen any other way. :-/

It’s no coincidence that Gwen, Jora, Vekk, Ogden, and Pyre are brought to center stage while at the same time Devona, Mhenlo, Cynn, Eve, and Aidan all quietly bow out. By EotN, humanity was already old news.

Kalavier.1097:

What I hate is how people seem to avoid the idea that the leadership change means a lot.

I mean, does everybody think Germany is all evil now? No. They got new leadership and direction. The Charr overthrew their old leadership, and started a new path. Why people continue to hold ALL CHARR EVERYWHERE TODAY accountable for actions made by/ordered by FLAME LEGION LEADERSHIP is what confuses me.

Well what I hate is when GW2 players think that the whole “the Flame Legion did it” mantra even existed in Prophecies. There was zero indication of this. In fact, the Flame Legion itself wasn’t even written into the narrative until Eye of the North.

And as EotN is first and foremost a prequel to GW2, as ANet has stated, it shouldn’t be a surprise that there is a little disconnect there.