But why would one of them be possible while the other wouldn’t?
What is so unique with the Caladbolg’s aura that it could not be replicated with magic?
If you can get a sword that is constantly on fire I am quite certain that you can also get some little flowers or whatever to fly around a tree branch.
And yes, the FDS are actually lore-based. They are created as replicas of Magdaer and Sohothin.
What is so unique with the Caladbolg’s aura that it could not be replicated with magic?
The Pale Tree’s butterfly magic is what’s so unique about it. It’s a weapon that can only be created by a single character in lore. Fiery weapons and glowy weapons appear to be fair game, but butterfly auras imply a lady-tree’s touch.
If you can get a sword that is constantly on fire I am quite certain that you can also get some little flowers or whatever to fly around a tree branch.
And yes, the FDS are actually lore-based. They are created as replicas of Magdaer and Sohothin.
Just because blacksmiths are capable of making a weapon glow or appear fiery doesn’t mean that they are capable of absolutely any effect, though. I believe that ANet made the Caladbolg’s aura unique for a reason.
We should be advocating for consistency, not for making exceptions.
i can’t believe this argument is still going on, and i can’t believe koviko is so stubborn about how impossible in a world of magic to have a glowy wooden sword.
So you think my assertion that only the Pale Tree can create an exact Caladbolg is false? Do you have any evidence at all to back it up? My “stubbornness” is because I believe that I am correct and I am standing my ground.
Saying that nothing in this “world of magic” is impossible means that we shouldn’t even be having lore discussions or holding ANet accountable for mistakes. There have to be limitations for any respectable story/universe.
Potentially, yeah. If it was more powerful than the Pale Tree (and more enterprising), then it could mass-produce Caladbolgs. Since the Pale Tree never made a second Caladbolg after the first one was lost for decades, I assume that she simply can’t make a second. So it’s possible that Malyck’s tree is just as limited.
I recall her stating that making one did take a lot out of her, but she didn’t create a second simply because Caladbolg was too powerful – thus too dangerous in the wrong hands. More than one was “enough.”
Just because blacksmiths are capable of making a weapon glow or appear fiery doesn’t mean that they are capable of absolutely any effect, though. I believe that ANet made the Caladbolg’s aura unique for a reason.
Koviko, you seem to be stuck on the notion that a replica of Caladbolg would be just as powerful and made in the same way.
It’s not.
A cosplayer in reality can make a replica of Caladbolg. It can happen. Hell, I wouldn’t doubt it if it already had.
Replica of Caladbolg != made from the Pale Tree. Replica of Caladbolg != just as strong or unique as Caladbolg. Replica of Caladbolg = looks like Caladbolg.
Looks Like Caladbolg. But Is Not Caladbolg.
Dear ANet writers,
Stop treating GW2 as a single story. Each Season and expansion should be their own story.
That’s what we’ve been trying to explain for days..
Also: Do the personal story mission where you wield Caladbolg on a mesmer, create clone. Clone wields caladbolg with the same butterfly effect. And bam, you have proved it is possible to recreate the butterfly effect with magic. Sure the butterfly effect is just an illusion, a cheap copy, but that’s what a replica is. Looks the same, but is not the same.
Dear A-net: Please nerf rock. Paper is fine
~Sincerely, Scissors
Just because blacksmiths are capable of making a weapon glow or appear fiery doesn’t mean that they are capable of absolutely any effect, though. I believe that ANet made the Caladbolg’s aura unique for a reason.
We should be advocating for consistency, not for making exceptions.
They don’t appear Fiery, they are literally on fire. Thus why they do Fire damage rather than normal damage.
Aye, we should be advocating consistency. Thus we should agree that if a god-level created item can be replicated a champion-creating item could also be replicated.
I’m not just saying that ANet shouldn’t make Caladbolg a skin that we can use. I know I’d use it if they were to make it. But I seem to be the only one willing to accept that they will not make Caladbolg a skin that we can use, for all of the reasons that I’ve posed.
It’s not just that it’d be difficult for ANet to explain giving us replicas in the lore. It’s that I believe ANet very intentionally set up the lore and aura to make it a unique sword in the universe. Maybe I’m misjudging their intent, but considering we still don’t have the skin, I’m willing to bet I’m correct.
So you think my assertion that only the Pale Tree can create an exact Caladbolg is false? Do you have any evidence at all to back it up? My “stubbornness” is because I believe that I am correct and I am standing my ground.
Saying that nothing in this “world of magic” is impossible means that we shouldn’t even be having lore discussions or holding ANet accountable for mistakes. There have to be limitations for any respectable story/universe.
this thread is already packed with examples and explanations of why it would be possible, you just keep repeating yourself in an honestly quite childish way. i can’t tell if you’re honestly misunderstanding everything we’ve said or if you’re so hellbent on the idea that you refuse to read properly what was said to you, but really, when this many people are reasoning against you, maybe it’s time to revise your argument and see if you aren’t the one in the wrong.
also, whatever skins the player use are not canonical. you can walk around with seraph issued armor without ever serving, and even recolor the uniform to your heart’s content; you can carry the physical embodiment of the flameseeker prophecies and use it as a shield, and so can your friends. your “just came out of divinity’s reach for the first time in my life” human can wield twilight and orrian armor, with transmutation stones that they didn’t work for, and magical skins from a wardrobe they’ve never seen. every single player in the game is “THE COMMANDER AND FOUNDER OF THE PACT”.
we suspend enough disbelief that people walking around with a pretty plant sword is the least of ANet’s worries.
Just because my opinion is unpopular doesn’t mean that I should abandon it. I remain unconvinced that there’s any reason for the Caladbolg to end up in the player’s hands and you all remain unconvinced of my stance. I’ll agree to disagree. Feel free to link this thread if the skin is ever released.
It is not a matter of the opinion being unpopular. It is the matter that it outright contradict what we have already seen in-game and you refuse to accept any sort of argument that goes against your view of the matter.
So you think my assertion that only the Pale Tree can create an exact Caladbolg is false? Do you have any evidence at all to back it up? My “stubbornness” is because I believe that I am correct and I am standing my ground.
Saying that nothing in this “world of magic” is impossible means that we shouldn’t even be having lore discussions or holding ANet accountable for mistakes. There have to be limitations for any respectable story/universe.
As an outsider who was more interested in reading about the OP’s premise than a hijacked debate about Caladbolg, I can say that the matter is more of your frustrating inability to understand what the word “replica” means that makes you look foolish.
Will Hawkins (Human Guardian)
Feryl Grimsteel (Charr Engineer)
Tarnished Coast
I can say that the matter is more of your frustrating inability to understand what the word “replica” means that makes you look foolish.
Foolish? The primary definition of a replica is an exact duplicate. A secondary definition is a close approximation. I stated earlier that a close approximation is possible, just not an exact replica. There’s no confusion on the meaning of the word replica. I entertained both definitions in my posts.
Like you said, the topic has been derailed and I’d like to end the conversation here. No more name-calling, okay?
I can say that the matter is more of your frustrating inability to understand what the word “replica” means that makes you look foolish.
Foolish? The primary definition of a replica is an exact duplicate. A secondary definition is a close approximation. I stated earlier that a close approximation is possible, just not an exact replica. There’s no confusion on the meaning of the word replica. I entertained both definitions in my posts.
Like you said, the topic has been derailed and I’d like to end the conversation here. No more name-calling, okay?
sigh
rep·li·ca
noun
noun: replica; plural noun: replicas
an exact copy or model of something, especially one on a smaller scale.
“a replica of the Empire State Building”
synonyms: copy, carbon copy, model, duplicate, reproduction, replication;
You are giving the definition while quoting me already saying that’s the definition…
Once again: the part of it that can’t be an exact replica is the aura. I’ve already conceded that everything except the aura can be duplicated. I understand the meaning of the word replica.
You can recreate the wood. You can recreate the vines, You could even recreate the glow. But the aura is unique and there’s zero evidence that any being aside from the Pale Tree is capable of creating it. This is the point that no one has been able to refute and until anyone can, I have no reason to assume that I am incorrect.
As I said before: You can make a glowing viney wooden sword, but you can’t make the butterfly aura without the Pale Tree’s magic.
Foolish? The primary definition of a replica is an exact duplicate.
As in having the same look. Not the same function or origins.
The aura is visual and only the Pale Tree can create it.
I already said that a mesmer can recreate it with magic. You can do so in the story mission where you wield caladbolg if you play a mesmer by creating a clone. Thus proving it’s possible to recreate the particle effect through magic.
Dear A-net: Please nerf rock. Paper is fine
~Sincerely, Scissors
Clones don’t prove anything… Clones are temporary and require you to actually have something to clone. What you’re suggesting is that we literally take the Caladbolg from Trahearne’s hands, clone it, and somehow make that clone last an eternity.
Entertaining the idea of making an almost-Caladbolg, I think it’d be cool to replace the Pale Tree’s aura with an aura made by your class. I stand by the idea that the actual aura is unique to the Pale Tree, but maybe Mesmers have their pink butterflies, Necromancers have green moths, etc. I wouldn’t see any reason for that to be impossible, and I think it’d actually be a really neat touch to make the most legendary sword in Tyria even more legendary.
Guys, this argument is going around in circles. Koviko has admitted that he will not be changing his mind (despite almost everyone arguing to the contrary), and this thread is becoming completely toxic. If it wasn’t in such a low-traffic forum like the Lore one is, I’m sure it would have been locked by now. Can we all just agree to let this thread die, or go back to the original discussion about how much focus has been on the sylvari lately? Nothing productive will come from any more discussion unless one side or the other is willing to move.
