Human\charr hatred.

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: Saurrec.6402

Saurrec.6402

This is a bit lore and a bit player focused.

Ive seen Many players claiming to hate charr on the forums (I think it’s partly a gw1 thing)
While there are a number of players on the opposite side (much fewer)

While back I found threads talking about your player characters and the opinion they have on the treaty, I noticed that most human characters on those threads hated the charr and wanted all kinds of nasty things to happen to them.

Swap back to the charr, almost every one supported the treaty or didn’t wish Ill on humanity.

Also I noticed there are more humans (that you can’t attack) ingame that do not like the charr than there are charr that fit the same bill.

So this will be part opinion (post your character’s outlook)
And part discussion.

My troop of charr think the treaty is a good idea, they do believe that humans still good allies to have, even though many people want their heads on spikes.

The 1 human I have believes that the charr are no longer the savage beasts of yesteryear and will work with them happily.

A physical disability hasn’t stopped me from being a Polite, Helpful, & Badkitten player.

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: Castigator.3470

Castigator.3470

Well, as you probably already know, there is a lot of history between the humans and charr. Not that there isn’t history with the humans and everyone else, considering their own gods encouraged human expansion at every other races expense:

Volume 2—Balthazar: God of War.
Balthazar came in fire and wrath, carrying the head of his father and leading his fierce hounds, Temar and Tegon. He swept Orr with a cleansing flame.
It was he who claimed Tyria for humanity; he who said the other races would be easy to defeat. It would not be the only time that the Master of War was wrong.

Kryta has been at war with the centaurs for much of its history and the kingdom of Ascalon was built on land, that the charr claimed for themselves.

The kingdom was established in 100 BE, so one can assume that the charr were pushed back with divine help by the god of war, Balthazar.

And while much of early Ascalonian history isn’t written down, one thing is certain: The charr really hate losing territory.

During the 1100 years, the kingdom of ascalon never had any kind of peace treaty with the charr. It can be assumed that there were always border frictions, which prompted the humans to build the great wall.

From the perspective of the charr, this was the time of the Khan Ur. Whenever there was a Khan Ur, the charr were able to hold their ground or push back, but when their highest leader was taken out, the charr fell into disorder and the humans could abuse charr infighting to push them further towards north.
In time the ascalonians ventured past the wall, establishing settlements north of it.

The first game also suggests, that the humans didn’t view the charr as intelligent feeling beings, but instead as dangerous animals that were to be killed on sight.
For instance, you can acquire Charr Hide in pre searing Ascalon.
During the Ascalon campaign in the original Guildwars there is no interaction with the charr, exept killing them. Mind you, they are eager to return the favour, especially, if your character has managed to collect a full set of Charr Hide Armor.
Though it can be argued that Charr Hide Armor cannot be obtained in pre searing Ascalon, the armorer NPC just isn’t there.

Naturally, there are tales of charr eating humans and considering the state of post searing Ascalon, some of those claims may well be true, considering the conflict between charr and humans had devolved into all out war with no rules or standards adhered to by either side.

Add the Searing to the picture and you can see that many players of the original game don’t like that the charr successfully managed to take the land, while the humans from Ascalon had to resettle in Kryta.

But we’re not done, because the charr were guided by the Titans and their puppeteer Abaddon to go on a roaring rampage through the human kingdoms. Orr sunk and Kryta survived, because Saul d’Alessio brought an even bigger bad into Kryta. The Mursaat used spectral Agony on the Charr to easily win.

GW1 Wiki:The Unseen Ones appeared and decimated the Charr with their devastating magic. The Charr were defeated. Kryta was saved.

With the Shiverpeaks as a natural barrier between the remaining humans and charr, the latter of which were now in open rebellion against the shamans, we could be done, but there is another detail: Ebonhawke.

The place so far to the south that even the foefire’s magic didn’t affect it, but many charr saw this as another stain on what they felt was rightfully theirs.

So the war continued. Ebonhawke was the immovable object to the legion’s unstoppable force. Kryta stayed allied to this last remnant of old Ascalon.

Making no real progress, the Legions and Ebonhawke tried to negotiate a treaty, but the krytan Prince Edair was not in on that and instead reignited the conflict in the Fields of Ruin.

More bloodshed, but eventually the assault cooled off on the legion’s side. The Iron Legion was the last legion of the charr leading operations against the fortress, but at this point Blood and Ash legion didn’t participate beyond sending volunteers and Iron’s operations consisted mostly of half hearted shellings to test new ammo on the walls and to use their new fancy mortars shoot over the walls, leaving an embittered ebonhawke and keeping a lukewarm hatred of humans within the legions.

The second attempt to form a peace treaty has been made by Imperator Smodur the Unflinching and Queen Jennah. The latter sent the Claw of the Khan ur as a peace gift, which started the truce and the following negotiations in 1324.
The details are elaborated in Ghosts of Ascalon, which is generally considered to be the best of the current Guild Wars novels.

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: Castigator.3470

Castigator.3470

Message continues here because of 5000 character limit.

The campaign begins in 1325. At that point the negotiations for a peace treaty were underway, but the charr have been at war with the humans for 1400 years at this point. all the borders and diplomatic relations have to be fixiated for the first time in human/charr history.
While the defeat of Zhaitan certainly makes the formerly impossible seem achievable, the diplomats are working and trying their hardest not to let age old grudges get the better of them.

The present year being 1329, we have defeated another elder dragon, but humans and charr are still at the table working on the fine print of their treaties, making contingencies for all kinds of events. At this point the negotiations have been going on for four to five years.

While it isn’t 100% clear what the general populations think of each other, charr and humans may become uneasy allies in the face of the hardships, that still await us, including 4 elder dragons and a magical crisis event, that is caused by the absence of the aforementioned dragons. Hopefully Glint did plan ahead for that one.

(edited by Castigator.3470)

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: Saurrec.6402

Saurrec.6402

Hello fellow lore junkie! Very nice post. :-)
I must say it’s nice to find I’m not the only person who has read (a few too many) lore related articles.

A physical disability hasn’t stopped me from being a Polite, Helpful, & Badkitten player.

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: Aaron Ansari.1604

Aaron Ansari.1604

Speaking for the lore in general, I think there’s two compelling reasons that you see more hostile human NPCs than charr:

*The state of the war. Ascalon is the contested territory at stake here, with both sides defining victory as complete control (currently- historically the charr have also pushed for wiping humans out across the continent). While it’s gone back and forth a couple times, and while the charr have been generous in granting Ebonhawke quite a bit of land beyond their walls, as of this point in time the charr clearly control Ascalon. They’re being asked to accept a mostly complete victory; Ebonhawke is being asked to accept a mostly complete defeat.

*The structure of the societies. You’ll actually find nearly as many charr unhappy with the truce as the humans, but the difference is that those charr were raised to follow orders. They’re being told to stop fighting, and the discipline and loyalty that holds their society together demands they comply. The humans have no such obligation, and even the Ebon Vanguard doesn’t have the same extent of strict discipline going. They’re free to pursue their self-destructive grudges.

Speaking for my characters, both of the relevant ones are fine with moving forward. My human grew up in Kryta, and what’s more, the transplanted Ascalonian community largely rejected her. The way she sees it, the charr are someone else’s problem, and they’re welcome to it. My charr wants to see her race exercise cultural as well as military dominance, and she sees the peace treaty as the first step in that direction, the first proof that her people can force submission even without a sword.

I’m not going to try to speak for other players. People get really, really fired up about the races they choose to main, and I’ve found I’m happiest staying far away from the crossfire.

R.I.P., Old Man of Auld Red Wharf. Gone but never forgotten.

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: Saurrec.6402

Saurrec.6402

The charr are certainly more loyal to command and my statement is based around ambient dialogue and lore in articles but I do wonder, how many charr will talk about their dislike of the treaty behind closed doors.
Humans do get a greater degree of social freedom and could run their mouths more without worry.

A physical disability hasn’t stopped me from being a Polite, Helpful, & Badkitten player.

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: draxynnic.3719

draxynnic.3719

There certainly are a few non-fightable charr who express clear prejudices against humans – noting that while some NPCs are willing to broadcast their racism for all to hear, others may only reveal it to the target of their prejudice. So you’re often more likely to experience racism against a particular race if you’re playing that race yourself.

Another distinction is that charr interacting with humans often face anger, while humans interacting with charr often face a more subtle and insidious racism in the form of contempt. There are quite a few times where a charr is expressing contempt towards humans – whether to their face or otherwise – and the human, including a human PC, just has to grin and bear it. (See, for instance, the interaction between Lieutenant Fynn and Kor the Warcaller after killing the Champion Ogre Chieftain.)

So, the prejudice works differently towards the two. Humans either don’t feel the charr can be trusted are angry at the Searing or at the idea of giving up Ascalon to “the enemy” in general. Among charr, you get some who aren’t willing to accept anything but total victory and/or think that humans will be a threat in the future, but you also get plenty of charr where the prejudice manifests as being willing to accept the peace and even work alongside humans, but they’ll belittle them, gloat over the destruction of Ascalon and Orr, and call them weak prey animals at every opportunity.

With all that said, though, I think there is less dissent towards the truce among the charr than among humans.

However, this isn’t because the charr are inherently more rational. Remember that the Searing happened because the charr had held onto a grudge for over a thousand years, while humans are starting to come around after just a couple of centuries. It’s also a lot easier to accept letting bygones be bygones and form a peace that enshrines the status quo when you won the last war and the status quo is in your favour. For the charr, that’s the case. For humans, it wasn’t just a military loss, it was a war that was marked by charr atrocities.

It’s worth noting here, though, that Smodur does seem to be looking to cede more territory to Ebonhawke then he might otherwise need to, possibly including everything east of the Brand. While in-game the Brand isn’t much more dangerous than other regions within their zones, lorewise the Brand is a significant barrier to travel: it’s quite likely that Smodur recognises that it’s impractical to defend anything east of the Brand without Ebonhawke’s assistance, and there’s not much in that region that’s really important to the charr, so it might as well be Ebonhawke’s responsibility. One of the tragedies of the charr-human conflict is that the conflict has largely been driven by what the charr and humans have in common, and there’s a lot for them to respect each other for if they’re not hating one another – I have a theory that part of Smodur’s endgame might be to create a situation where Ebonhawke is effectively another legion, and where human magic can be levied to offset that of the Flame Legion.

Regarding my human characters – they tend to try not to blame the current generation for the sins of their forefathers. Forcing out charr that have lived in Ascalon for generations would be no more justified than what was done to Ascalon. However, they will certainly challenge the charr propaganda version of history. Ascalon is inherently charr land? The charr took it from someone else (the grawl), so they can’t claim the moral high ground after humans took it from them. The charr are stronger than humans because they won? No, the charr only “won” because they sold themselves to Abaddon, and because the best human fighters at the time were busy fighting against threats that would have destroyed everybody if not stopped (you’re welcome, by the way). The charr denote Rurik, Gwen, and Adelbern as villains? Excuse me, your own side brought down a rain of fire which caused massive civilian casualties and ruined the environment for decades, and you venerate those who did so as heroes: anything ‘villainous’ they did, even Adelbern, pales in comparison, bit of a double standard there don’t you think?

My charr characters… they tend to concern themselves with dealing with the present. They know charr are better than everyone else, but they don’t need to boast about it when they can demonstrate it. They’ll hit back if sufficiently provoked, but they won’t pick the fights themselves.

To those who think Scarlet hate means she’s succeeded as a villain:
People don’t hate Scarlet like Game of Thrones fans hate Joffrey.
They hate her the way Star Wars fans hate Jar Jar Binks.

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: Saurrec.6402

Saurrec.6402

Very interesting idea, that would be entertaining to say the least.

In the original wars it seemed like both sides were bent on genocide,
while one side was busy destroying everything of the other the humans were busy making charr into outfits. It seems that neither side will be letting it go anytime soon, and if humans do make total peace what do think they’ll think of the charr killing the ghosts of ascalonians and looting the crypts? (Then again every PC can do it) but lore wise think they would hate that undead reminder? And if the charr pulled out of the area would humans be willing to live with all the ghosts?

A physical disability hasn’t stopped me from being a Polite, Helpful, & Badkitten player.

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: azureai.9764

azureai.9764

Also I noticed there are more humans (that you can’t attack) ingame that do not like the charr than there are charr that fit the same bill.

Part of the reason why you can attack so many renegade or upset charr is because settling disputes with a physical fight is acceptable in charr society. Beating sense into (and life out of) your political adversary is a way of life among the charr. It’s why the Bane exists. Hell, it’s how Tribune Brimstone got his job. A beaten charr will rethink his/her ways.

That’s not acceptable in human society. Otherwise humans would have had one less Caudicus a long time ago.

Though I think it’s clear the charr are holding less of a grudge than the humans on the issue of the treaty. Minister Duran himself admits that a lot of the humans are being irrational in the face of reality. And in speaking with the charr, most of them (especially the members of the Iron Legion – who own this land) are just willing to follow orders. That’s pretty kitten impressive if you’re a cub who grew up in the fahrar taught to hate human monsters – to then shrug and say “point me at the new enemy, sir.” Yet, the vast majority of charr you meet in game will do just that. The Iron Legion seems impatient they can’t sign a piece of paper and get on with making sparkly new cannons that shoot deathcows.

My Ash Legion Guardian is actively supportive of the treaty. Ash Legion’s almost certainly got its hands squarely in the diplomacy aspects of the Legions – spies and diplomats are two sides of the same coin. (Note the Order of Whispers also has several agents at Warrior’s Crown.) Ash’s representatives are keen on facing reality – humans aren’t the threat to the charr now. My charr is keen to protect humans that will ultimately engender the interests of the Legions. And, after a few fun barfights in Ebonhawke, my charr has come to actually like the humans.

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: draxynnic.3719

draxynnic.3719

Very interesting idea, that would be entertaining to say the least.

In the original wars it seemed like both sides were bent on genocide,
while one side was busy destroying everything of the other the humans were busy making charr into outfits. It seems that neither side will be letting it go anytime soon, and if humans do make total peace what do think they’ll think of the charr killing the ghosts of ascalonians and looting the crypts? (Then again every PC can do it) but lore wise think they would hate that undead reminder? And if the charr pulled out of the area would humans be willing to live with all the ghosts?

It’s one of the ironies I’ve noted that charr and humans probably actually have more in common than any other pair of races, but it’s exactly the things that they have in common that have kept them fighting for so long. There the sort of pair that could be best of friends if fighting together against a common enemy, but will fight forever once they get started on each other unless something breaks them out of it.

To those who think Scarlet hate means she’s succeeded as a villain:
People don’t hate Scarlet like Game of Thrones fans hate Joffrey.
They hate her the way Star Wars fans hate Jar Jar Binks.

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: Saurrec.6402

Saurrec.6402

Yes, that is true, charr and humans are similar and keep getting hung up on what someones ancestor did to someone elses, now that they are trying to get over the past it would be a very unique way they could manage the relations.

A physical disability hasn’t stopped me from being a Polite, Helpful, & Badkitten player.

Human\charr hatred.

in Lore

Posted by: draxynnic.3719

draxynnic.3719

Pretty much. Both are militaristic (the charr more so, but both are more militaristic than any of the other playable races by a significant margin), have a desire to avenge the wrongs of the past, and a stubborn refusal to give up however hard they get beaten down. These are qualities that they’d respect in one another as allies: there’s real potential that a charr-human alliance could become the strongest among the five if given the chance to grow, and I think that leaders on both sides have been starting to see that potential. But they’re also qualities that guarantee that when a fight starts between two groups that share these qualities… it’s going to take a lot to get it to end.

To those who think Scarlet hate means she’s succeeded as a villain:
People don’t hate Scarlet like Game of Thrones fans hate Joffrey.
They hate her the way Star Wars fans hate Jar Jar Binks.