Guild Wars 2

Where is the Soldiers “broken and running” info coming from.

And yes, the whole thing was written in to give a snowflake race a home. Even if Jeff Grubb had a part doing it.

For me, since we have no human accounts of the last moments of Ascalon, I choose to accept anything claimed by animals as suspect.

From the Wiki: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Foefire

He shouted at the soldiers below as they fled before the Flame Legion’s forces, some of them escaping through the holes the charr had made in the walls.

“Retreat?”, the Sorceror-King shouted. “Retreat is not an option!”

With the Flame Legion flooding through the city’s defences, Ascalon City had already been lost. The human soldiers ignored their king’s complaints as their retreat transformed into a rout.

The insane king raised his sword—a relic from the ancient land of Orr—over his head and bellowed down at his men, “We will never surrender! Never!”

I believe that the introductory cutscene to AC story also refers to the fleeing forces, but I can’t remember offhand.

BrunoBRS.5178:

actually, the people that decided the foefire are the same people that helmed GW1’s plot. so you can stop pretending these “new people” that don’t know better are ruining your ascalonian pride.

LOL, no they aren’t.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

And yes, the whole thing was written in to give a snowflake race a home.

I can see calling the Sylvari a snowflake race but the Charr…. Is this for real? They weren’t near as shoehorned into the game as the Sylvari were.

Obsidian.1328:

BrunoBRS.5178:

actually, the people that decided the foefire are the same people that helmed GW1’s plot. so you can stop pretending these “new people” that don’t know better are ruining your ascalonian pride.

LOL, no they aren’t.

funny, they even wrote a whole novel about it. guess it’s all a lie.

dude, there comes a point where you need to admit you’re wrong. saying the GW1 loremasters (which are the same as the GW2 loremasters, coincidentally) didn’t sign the foefire when they are the ones that wrote it god knows how many years ago and later wrote a whole freaking novel just about the foefire, is just plain silly.

Yeah, far as I know, the writers are still the same, at least up top, depending on how many writers there are. Jeff Grubb and Ree Soesbee are still in charge of lore. Who exactly do you think is missing from the team, Obsidian?

BrunoBRS.5178:

Obsidian.1328:

BrunoBRS.5178:

actually, the people that decided the foefire are the same people that helmed GW1’s plot. so you can stop pretending these “new people” that don’t know better are ruining your ascalonian pride.

LOL, no they aren’t.

funny, they even wrote a whole novel about it. guess it’s all a lie.

dude, there comes a point where you need to admit you’re wrong. saying the GW1 loremasters (which are the same as the GW2 loremasters, coincidentally) didn’t sign the foefire when they are the ones that wrote it god knows how many years ago and later wrote a whole freaking novel just about the foefire, is just plain silly.

You need to do your research then.

Jeff and Ree, both GW2 novelists, weren’t brought on-board until Nightfall. They are both known for being the gatekeepers of GW2 lore, yet they had zero to do with both Proph and Factions.

Would it surprise you to know it was only 1 single guy that wrote all of the Proph storyline? And that he helmed the Factions storyline as well?

Not that it matters now of course, the storyline is set. And that’s fine, I get that. But don’t claim narrative legitimacy when it’s clear there are gaping holes in that claim.

Obsidian.1328:

BrunoBRS.5178:

Obsidian.1328:

BrunoBRS.5178:

actually, the people that decided the foefire are the same people that helmed GW1’s plot. so you can stop pretending these “new people” that don’t know better are ruining your ascalonian pride.

LOL, no they aren’t.

funny, they even wrote a whole novel about it. guess it’s all a lie.

dude, there comes a point where you need to admit you’re wrong. saying the GW1 loremasters (which are the same as the GW2 loremasters, coincidentally) didn’t sign the foefire when they are the ones that wrote it god knows how many years ago and later wrote a whole freaking novel just about the foefire, is just plain silly.

You need to do your research then.

Jeff and Ree, both GW2 novelists, weren’t brought on-board until Nightfall. They are both known for being the gatekeepers of GW2 lore, yet they had zero to do with both Proph and Factions.

Would it surprise you to know it was only 1 single guy that wrote all of the Proph storyline? And that he helmed the Factions storyline as well?

Not that it matters now of course, the storyline is set. And that’s fine, I get that. But don’t claim narrative legitimacy when it’s clear there are gaping holes in that claim.

well, that explains the gigantic leap in quality after factions.

seriously, factions’ campaign is horrid. love cantha, my first and main character is canthan, but good god, that story. i actually gave up on it halfway through, to recover from its badness.

DraconicDak.9340:

Yeah, far as I know, the writers are still the same, at least up top, depending on how many writers there are. Jeff Grubb and Ree Soesbee are still in charge of lore. Who exactly do you think is missing from the team, Obsidian?

Mhh http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Jeff_Grubb says that Jeff Grubb started with the lore in gw1 nightfall for Ree Soesbee i dont know (but i recall somewhere that she was hired because of Jeff Grubb, meaning her contribution to the lore can only be after nightfall if Jeff started with nightfall), so i am not sure if they were in charge of the lore at the beginning.

BrunoBRS.5178:

well, that explains the gigantic leap in quality after factions.

seriously, factions’ campaign is horrid. love cantha, my first and main character is canthan, but good god, that story. i actually gave up on it halfway through, to recover from its badness.

Yeah, it’s sort of a judgement call. I actually thought the Nightfall campaign was great(sans Kormir). Factions was slanted towards pvp, and Proph’s story was kind of all over the place.

All I’m saying is that they(GW1 & 2) are not a continuous whole. They are different narratives written by different people, and should be treated as such.

So who exactly was the writer for Prophecies? I’m genuinely asking; I can’t find a source online, and I’m not spending the time re-installing it on my new computer.

Plus, from what I understand, the grand majority of lore regarding the Charr and their war with Ascalon is told in Eye of the North… which sets things up for GW2, and the same writers were involved.

If that’s incorrect, I’d love a source on where the GW1-era lore about the war actually comes from. It’s been years since I played any portion of GW1.

Go to Aurora’s Remains in Brisban Wildlands. The main npc there that leads the dynamic event is named after him.

Jess LeBow, there it is.

So, what information concerning the war actually comes from Prophecies itself? I remember the Searing well enough, and Khilbron’s stuff with Orr, but after that…

There simply wasn’t that much lore to begin with. The main issue seems to be that when it was filled in later, it just wasn’t what some of the fans wanted. They wanted Ascalonian leadership to be the bright and shining alliance against the demon corrupted horde of chorcs. the problem with that is that the GW1 manuescripts painted humanity as warlike conquerors from the beginning. The very name Guild Wars comes from the wars the humans had with each other.

Dust is right in that the information was patchy. And that humans were warlike and not the noble fancypants some would paint them. I can’t speak on whether or not fans wanted Ascalon to be some sort of shining beacon or not, I certainly didn’t. Jess’s writing made it clear when he wrote the words, “The last day dawns for the Kingdom of Ascalon.”

Ascalon was always meant to diminish and fade, it’s the nature of that diminishing that I had a problem with. It was the birthplace of tons of GW PC’s. Just let it go quietly into the night and end it nobly. Instead GW2 ANet practically erased that heritage and built a new one on top of it. A little insulting to Ascalonphiles in my opinion, and perhaps to Jess, but what do I know.

Tyria is a big place, there’s plenty of room for everyone’s home.

Obsidian.1328:

Show us all that evidence please.

Play GW1.
It is made rather clear there during the duration of the Campaign.

I love how the discussion changed from what Rylock was doing with the sword in Barringtons tomb, to whether or not King Adelbern was insane, to who the Lore writers were/are. :P

DraconicDak.9340:

From the Wiki: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Foefire

He shouted at the soldiers below as they fled before the Flame Legion’s forces, some of them escaping through the holes the charr had made in the walls.

“Retreat?”, the Sorceror-King shouted. “Retreat is not an option!”

With the Flame Legion flooding through the city’s defences, Ascalon City had already been lost. The human soldiers ignored their king’s complaints as their retreat transformed into a rout.

The insane king raised his sword—a relic from the ancient land of Orr—over his head and bellowed down at his men, “We will never surrender! Never!”

I believe that the introductory cutscene to AC story also refers to the fleeing forces, but I can’t remember offhand.

Yes, the Charr account.

I had forgot those few lines.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

Yes, the Charr account.

Doesn’t that also fit rather well with the story of the HUMAN that was murdered by Adelbern around that time?

So much Charr Master Race hate in here that makes me laugh. Delicious tears.

As it stands now, Charr have most interesting in-story, are the most different race from other MMOs, don’t rely on “super tech magic” flowing everywhere, doing everything with their brains, discipline and strenght.

More Charr and less “super magic” can be only better for this game.

Ronin.7381:

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

And yes, the whole thing was written in to give a snowflake race a home.

I can see calling the Sylvari a snowflake race but the Charr…. Is this for real? They weren’t near as shoehorned into the game as the Sylvari were.

Charr were gifted the most amazing and unexplainable industrial revolution ever known.

lordkrall.7241:

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

Yes, the Charr account.

Doesn’t that also fit rather well with the story of the HUMAN that was murdered by Adelbern around that time?

The human in the Charr account. Why yes, he fits in the Charr account. As much to discredit the Flame Legion and plot Charr survivors as anything else.

I still don’t get how this servant knew exactly what Foefire was.

Nothing about the story leaves no room for a Human Centric view, and I shall remain of that view.

I will never finish the PS or LS on my Human Characters because of Charr. Norn, eh. I deleted the single Norn I mistakenly chose the Charr Warband path for and barely tolerate the rest of the forced interaction with them.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

The human in the Charr account. Why yes, he fits in the Charr account.

So I guess his entire role in the GoA book is a Charr account now?

Erukk.1408:

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

The human in the Charr account. Why yes, he fits in the Charr account.

So I guess his entire role in the GoA book is a Charr account now?

Unless he is repeating, verbatim, the final account, and is written in a place my Ascalonian can read it and even remotely accept it. I have not seen the Ascalon population at large depicting Adelbern as an insane monster, and so feel no need to accept the popular Charr viewpoint. I accept the Human account.

I did not purchase Ghosts of Ascalon, I did not like the premise. Others can believe what they wish.

Last I checked, the Treaty is not signed, and there are Human Separatists and others barely accepting of the Charr. The idea tossed out that some Charr can somehow be “rightful heir” isn’t going to set well, no matter how much you demonize Adelbern.

We don’t call him the Sorcerer King. Wiki admits two divergent views of the final Hours of Adelbern. I had meant to paste this earlier but had forum convulsions.

“His efforts proved futile and Ascalon City eventually fell to the encroaching charr army in 1090 AE. Accounts of this conflict differ between human and charr records. In human accounts, his forces fell to the charr and Adelbern was left to fight the charr alone. He eventually fought his way to the Imperator of the Flame Legion, wielder of the Claw of the Khan-Ur. The Claw clashed with Magdaer, Adelbern’s sword, and caused a spark of power that engulfed the land for leagues around. This event became known as the Foefire. The charr accounts offer an alternate version of the events. Rather than fighting to the death, his forces retreated from the city, leaving their king behind. In his rage and despair, Adelbern struck the ground with Magdaer, producing the immense burst of energy now referred to as the Foefire.” http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/King_Adelbern

DraconicDak.9340:

Please source your population numbers from GW1, relating to the Searing. Because from what I played, it seems like the Searing was mostly environmental damage, and didn’t do a very good job of killing Ascalonian Humans.

Simon the Scribe, Quest “Counting the Fallen”: “You found the census! Oh, I’m most…grateful to you. I almost said I was delighted, but one look at this list…so many lost. If we took a census today, the list wouldn’t be half this long.”

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Counting_the_Fallen

Also: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Ascalon_census

DraconicDak.9340:

Just because Ascalon was under Charr control doesn’t mean that it was completely devoid of humans. Indeed, the presence of Foefire ghosts indicates plenty of scout patrols and hiding civilians were outside the physical city walls.

Sure, just step outside of Ascalon City in GW1 and you can see lotsa hiding civilians there, right? Sheperds and peasants, whose ghosts we see in GW2. Plenty of peasant ghosts especially.

What you actually find in Ascalon Post-Searing is a few human collectors. Closer to Ascalon City you find a few soldiers outside (during quests). There are a few merchant caravans trying to travel between human-held outposts (http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Caravan_in_Trouble). And that’s all.

DraconicDak.9340:

As for sparing Ebonhawke:

If Adelbern turned his people into ghosts on purpose, to fight the Charr forever, why would he leave out his strongest forces at Ebonhawke?

If Adelbern didn’t really intend to curse Ascalon’s humans, then he wasn’t aware of the capacity to spare anything.

There is the possibility that Adelbern wanted civilians to survive at a far away place. It is more likely that he just sent “unwanted” people away, which means he didn’t spare Ebonhawke a thought when unleashing the Foefire.

DraconicDak.9340:

If you had to choose between slavery and death, what would you choose?

I would chose to be left alone and live my life in peace. Now who is responsible for that choice being impossible? Let me give you a hint, it’s not Adelbern.

Speaking of slavery: Duke Gaban, “The Flight North”: “Finally awake, girl? Trust me, the nightmare of this world is far worse than any you could dream up in your fitful sleep. Today, the Charr plan to feed us to a siege devourer simply for their amusement.”

If i had to chose between instant death and getting killed by the Charr in a way chosen by them my choice would be clear, even if that means being forced to be bound to the land as a ghost.

Simon the Scribe, Quest “Counting the Fallen”: “You found the census! Oh, I’m most…grateful to you. I almost said I was delighted, but one look at this list…so many lost. If we took a census today, the list wouldn’t be half this long.”

Fascinating. And worth noting, despite his words, which can be taken as anecdotal, of the named persons on the census list, only 10 are confirmed dead, and not all of them died by the Searing. So if we take those 7 confirmed deaths, and then assume every missing person is dead, and every single death was directly caused by the Searing, you get 36, which translates to a 33% kill rate for the Searing. At best.

Sure, just step outside of Ascalon City in GW1 and you can see lotsa hiding civilians there, right? Sheperds and peasants, whose ghosts we see in GW2. Plenty of peasant ghosts especially.

What you actually find in Ascalon Post-Searing is a few human collectors. Closer to Ascalon City you find a few soldiers outside during quests. There are a few merchant caravans trying to travel between human-held outposts. And that’s all.

Remember, the Foefire occurs in 1290, 18 years after Prophecies. There’s no way to determine that the population outside Ascalon City remained the same for near two decades, but based simply on the Foefire ghosts present across Ascalon in GW2, we can only infer from the data that yes, there was some sort of human presence outside the walls, be they soldiers or peasants.

There is the possibility that Adelbern wanted civilians to survive at a far away place. It is more likely that he just sent “unwanted” people away, which means he didn’t spare Ebonhawke a thought when unleashing the Foefire.

If Adelbern intended for civilians to survive, why are there Foefire ghosts of Ascalonian Peasants? It presents the same question I asked before: If Adelbern was in control, why spare the Vanguard when they arguably have the most experience dealing with Charr forces? I’m not saying it’s impossible that he intentionally spared Ebonhawke; it’s the reasons given for why that don’t make sense.

I would chose to be left alone and live my life in peace. Now who is responsible for that choice being impossible? Let me give you a hint, it’s not Adelbern.

Please don’t misquote me.

If i had to chose between instant death and getting killed by the Charr in a way chosen by them my choice would be clear, even if that means being forced to be bound to the land as a ghost.

But it’s not an instant death. Every Ascalonian cursed by the Foefire has been living out one last day of horror, over and over again, and dying repeatedly as they attack everything they see, in perpetuity, for 237 years since.

EDIT: Whew, that was a formatting nightmare! The forum didn’t like something about it. Fixed now.

We have dev confirmation that Ebonhawke was spared only because it’s status as a distant outpost happened to mean that it was outside the effects of the foefire.

I’d be curious to know where this dev confirmation comes from.

Interview. I’ll look for it and edit in in here.

edit 1: While looking I did come across this. also, still looking: (wrong forum)

edit 2: can’t find it. :/ either the link is no longer available or I just skipped over it. If I run across it I’ll bump this thread back up and PM you when I do.

edit 3: got something

King Adelbern unleashed the Foefire from Ascalon City, turning all humans within its reach into undying ghosts who sees all living beings as threats that must be eliminated. http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guild_Wars_2

DraconicDak.9340:

Please don’t misquote me.

I did not misquote you, i merely used your quote out of its context for a controversial and probably rhetorical reply. There’s a difference there. Back on topic…

Information given by the Charr is heavily biased towards the Charr’s point of view. Plenty information given in GW2 is subjective, as the devs themselves say.

But there is no reason to doubt Simon’s words about the death toll of the Searing. He is a Scribe, not a teller of anecdotes. The Ascalon Census list is merely supportive. But to not leave it out, those two sources name the death toll of the Searing to be at 50+% and 33%. The Ascalon Census is a secondary source though.

You are assuming that the ghosts we see outside of Ascalon City are all direct victims of the Foefire, but there are plenty of ghosts that show that that is not the case. All evidence points towards many of them, and in my opinion all outside of Ascalon City, to have been dead at the time of the Foefire.

The Charr had surrounded Ascalon City in 1090, there is no way to assume that they would have left any human alive. You may not like to see the Charr for what they were, and mostly still are today. It is your right to do so. It doesn’t change what the nature of the Charr is and what they have to bear responsibility for. I am biased against the Charr, yet i think i try to look at evidence in a subjective way.

There is no reason for peasants to be outside of the city walls as there is no arable land at that time. Neither is there any vegetation left for sheeps or any other aninmal. Everything that is still alive in Ascalon after the Searing preys on other wildlife.

Since the Searing humanity was reduced to enclaves like Rin, Nolani and Ascalon City. In 1090 only Ascalon City was left. There was no human presence outside of Ascalon City left. All ghosts we see outside of Ascalon City rose from where they had been slain by the Charr, all evidence points to it.

The Foefire is not logical, if given a choice i would have burned every Charr in Ascalon and not only those inside of Ascalon City, and spared humans, but that didn’t happen. What the evidence suggests is that the Foefire burned every living creature within Ascalon City to ash, be it Charr or human, and then made all dead humans in Ascalon rise as ghosts. Therefore the Charr account is flawed. How much of the Foefire’s effects had been exactly wished for by Adelbern is impossible to tell.

The account as presented in the AC cinematics is not only told by a Charr, it is told by Rytlock Brimstone, a guy full of prejudice and almost as much hatred as Adelbern. I partially blame Logan leaving DE for Rytlock’s attitude in the AC, but the rest is upbringing/cultural and the nature of the Charr. Rytlock was raised that way and was told all kind of funny things, like the Charr having killed their gods. Same goes for Ember’s account in GoA.

The Charr account is most likely closer to the truth than the human account, but it is still not an objective account, but one told by one of the parties involved. To me it feels like the need to justify some deeds of the past – that can’t be justified imo.

Ebonhawke was not on Adelbern’s mind at all. Even if it was, it was outside of the curses’ reach.

On who was effected and the death toll:

the dead and defeated Ascalonian guard arose once more, their spirits animated by the power of Adelbern’s sword

Their spirits are only memories, the lingering presence of a past that cannot let go of the present

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Movement_of_the_World

So it seems both the living and the redently defeated dead were risen in the forfire.

Frosch.7809:

I did not misquote you, i merely used your quote out of its context for a controversial and probably rhetorical reply. There’s a difference there. Back on topic…

I went back to check, and yes, you quoted Obsidian and attributed the words to me.

But there is no reason to doubt Simon’s words about the death toll of the Searing. He is a Scribe, not a teller of anecdotes. The Ascalon Census list is merely supportive. But to not leave it out, those two sources name the death toll of the Searing to be at 50+% and 33%. The Ascalon Census is a secondary source though.

I would consider the actual census to be the primary source, and a sorrow-filled line from Simon to be secondary. He was emotional, and not necessarily in a state to deliver precise numbers, nor was that the point. “Not half as long as it was” adequately communicates his sadness at the people killed by the Flame Legion.

You are assuming that the ghosts we see outside of Ascalon City are all direct victims of the Foefire, but there are plenty of ghosts that show that that is not the case. All evidence points towards many of them, and in my opinion all outside of Ascalon City, to have been dead at the time of the Foefire.

We’ll simply have to disagree on that point. I don’t see you being swayed.

I am biased against the Charr, yet i think i try to look at evidence in a subjective way.

We do agree on that point.

There is no reason for peasants to be outside of the city walls as there is no arable land at that time. Neither is there any vegetation left for sheeps or any other aninmal. Everything that is still alive in Ascalon after the Searing preys on other wildlife.

Nearly two decades of 100% barren lands? Where does Ascalon City’s food come from? The mere logistical issue of acquiring food stock, not to mention raw material for clothes, begs for supplies, which begs for supply caravans, guarded, of course, by the Vanguard.

Meaning that, even if we accept that Ascalon was completely devoid of workable land for two decades, a small but extant portion of humans must have been trailing supplies in from outside sources. Which means by extension, the likely presence of a small but extant portion of humans outside the city at the time of the Foefire.

The account as presented in the AC cinematics is not only told by a Charr, it is told by Rytlock Brimstone, a guy full of prejudice and almost as much hatred as Adelbern. I partially blame Logan leaving DE for Rytlock’s attitude in the AC, but the rest is upbringing/cultural and the nature of the Charr. Rytlock was raised that way and was told all kind of funny things, like the Charr having killed their gods. Same goes for Ember’s account in GoA.

You’re welcome to assume that all three accounts – GoA, the game itself, and the wiki – are irredeemably tainted by racial bias, but that is all that is, an assumption. And if that is the case, I really have to ask, why bother discussing lore at all? If the sources aren’t credible, you can’t say anything for sure.

Dustfinger.9510:

On who was effected and the death toll:

the dead and defeated Ascalonian guard arose once more, their spirits animated by the power of Adelbern’s sword

Their spirits are only memories, the lingering presence of a past that cannot let go of the present

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Movement_of_the_World

So it seems both the living and the redently defeated dead were risen in the forfire.

I want to note here as well, the Movement claims there were surviving humans in the ruins, while other sources say that all human life within the city and around was eradicated.

And the Movement is an in-universe document that “is continually being challenged and researched and revised by the scholars there [at the Priory].” So even within the game, its veracity is fluid.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

Ronin.7381:

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

And yes, the whole thing was written in to give a snowflake race a home.

I can see calling the Sylvari a snowflake race but the Charr…. Is this for real? They weren’t near as shoehorned into the game as the Sylvari were.

Charr were gifted the most amazing and unexplainable industrial revolution ever known.

That’s just them becoming industrialized, we did so too going from horses to trains. Still can’t see them being anymore snowflakey than talking salads that consider themselves Tyria’s gift with their, “All things deserve a right to grow.” :P

DraconicDak.9340:

I would consider the actual census to be the primary source, and a sorrow-filled line from Simon to be secondary. He was emotional, and not necessarily in a state to deliver precise numbers, nor was that the point. “Not half as long as it was” adequately communicates his sadness at the people killed by the Flame Legion.

http://www.princeton.edu/~refdesk/primary2.html

This is for your information. The game itself is a primary source, in this case, Simon. There is no indication that Simon wasn’t speaking the truth. That is not even an assumption but an opinion.

DraconicDak.9340:

Nearly two decades of 100% barren lands? Where does Ascalon City’s food come from? The mere logistical issue of acquiring food stock, not to mention raw material for clothes, begs for supplies, which begs for supply caravans, guarded, of course, by the Vanguard.

Meaning that, even if we accept that Ascalon was completely devoid of workable land for two decades, a small but extant portion of humans must have been trailing supplies in from outside sources. Which means by extension, the likely presence of a small but extant portion of humans outside the city at the time of the Foefire.

We need not “accept” that Ascalon was a wasteland, because all you need to do is enter GW and have a look yourself. Do not question the primary source. But feel free to not accept it. I have accepted the impossibility to feed the survivors as an obvious ingame-mistake from the first moment i stepped into Post-Searing. It does not mean there is an area of land in Ascalon untouched by the Searing and serving as a food source. The only possible source are merchant caravans, but from where?

And once more, the Charr army had completely surrounded Ascalon City by 1090, there was no way for humans to get out, and why should they? Trying to escape maybe, but where to? The last safe place was Ascalon City.

DraconicDak.9340:

You’re welcome to assume that all three accounts – GoA, the game itself, and the wiki – are irredeemably tainted by racial bias, but that is all that is, an assumption. And if that is the case, I really have to ask, why bother discussing lore at all? If the sources aren’t credible, you can’t say anything for sure.

The Wiki is not a primary source for lore itself. The accounts in GoA and the AC cinematics are told by Charr and therefore subjective.

DraconicDak.9340:

I want to note here as well, the Movement claims there were surviving humans in the ruins, while other sources say that all human life within the city and around was eradicated.

And the Movement is an in-universe document that “is continually being challenged and researched and revised by the scholars there [at the Priory].” So even within the game, its veracity is fluid.

You say so yourself, the Movement is an in-universe document that falls under the same rule as anything else in GW2. Allow me to quote someone far more knowledgeable about lore overall than me.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Like HoboSiege said, the game’s typically best for lore – though do keep in mind that Guild Wars 2 heavily plays on the concept of “subjective truths” – so what NPCs in GW2 say tends to just be their view on the matter, rather than the truth.

The concept of “subjective truths” is nothing Konig or me came up with, but the game devs. Feel free to not accept it. But then there is really no need to discuss lore at all.

Frosch.7809:

http://www.princeton.edu/~refdesk/primary2.html

This is for your information. The game itself is a primary source, in this case, Simon. There is no indication that Simon wasn’t speaking the truth. That is not even an assumption but an opinion.

Actually, I believe what said link shows is that the census, the literal object, would be the primary source, and Simon’s comment, in interpreting the data therein, is secondary.

We need not “accept” that Ascalon was a wasteland, because all you need to do is enter GW and have a look yourself. Do not question the primary source. But feel free to not accept it. I have accepted the impossibility to feed the survivors as an obvious ingame-mistake from the first moment i stepped into Post-Searing. It does not mean there is an area of land in Ascalon untouched by the Searing and serving as a food source. The only possible source are merchant caravans, but from where?

And once more, the Charr army had completely surrounded Ascalon City by 1090, there was no way for humans to get out, and why should they? Trying to escape maybe, but where to? The last safe place was Ascalon City.

If you’re content to build your interpretation on an acknowledged impossibility, instead of using logic to determine a method by which the situation becomes possible, there’s really not much I can say.

For my part, I would say that careful, small groups of humans, between patrols and under cover of night, could evade Charr notice to bring supplies into the besieged city. And if they are caught, again, that is why they would be escorted by Vanguard.

You say so yourself, the Movement is an in-universe document that falls under the same rule as anything else in GW2. Allow me to quote someone far more knowledgeable about lore overall than me.

Like HoboSiege said, the game’s typically best for lore – though do keep in mind that Guild Wars 2 heavily plays on the concept of “subjective truths” – so what NPCs in GW2 say tends to just be their view on the matter, rather than the truth.

The concept of “subjective truths” is nothing Konig or me came up with, but the game devs. Feel free to not accept it. But then there is really no need to discuss lore at all.

Quite true, and I respect Konig’s efforts. He comes by his arguments in a logical manner, though from what I’ve seen on these forums he seems to have rather wearied of them.

I fully accept that subjective truths lie within the world of Tyria. But logically speaking, one must take the media in whole into account, and where myriad sources agree, they are likely to be closer to full objective truth. And mechanically speaking, the devs have that objective truth in mind when they place potentially-subjective accounts in the game, with the intent of communicating them, or else said accounts would not likely be present.

In that capacity, if the account of the Foefire is meant, by the developers, to be questioned, I would think that the Priory, or some book in Ebonhawke, would hold an account that challenges the Charr viewpoint. As there is no such item in the game, to my knowledge, I have to believe that the agreeing accounts are, by and large, correct.

DraconicDak.9340:

I want to note here as well, the Movement claims there were surviving humans in the ruins, while other sources say that all human life within the city and around was eradicated.

And the Movement is an in-universe document that “is continually being challenged and researched and revised by the scholars there [at the Priory].” So even within the game, its veracity is fluid.

Let’s apply that to the information in topic. Either the dead guard rose or they didn’t. In universe, that would be a hard mistake to make.

DraconicDak.9340:

In that capacity, if the account of the Foefire is meant, by the developers, to be questioned, I would think that the Priory, or some book in Ebonhawke, would hold an account that challenges the Charr viewpoint. As there is no such item in the game, to my knowledge, I have to believe that the agreeing accounts are, by and large, correct.

I just want to say that you touched on a very key element with ANet: intention. My instinct is to agree with you in that it’s the intention of the writers that should be taken into account on narrative issues. After all, their minds are really the ultimate lore source, are they not?

What bothers me so much with ANet lore interviews is their tendency to speak in 3rd-person about their own game. For instance, if you asked them in real-life about the Jotun they might say something like:

“The Jotun are a mysterious race. Some say they once had power that nearly rivaled the 6 gods, and that because of that The 6 took away magic from them. But Priory research has showed that extensive civil war most likely was the reason for their race diminishing.”

Answers like that make me want to wring their skinny little necks. We aren’t asking what the Priory thinks about it, we’re asking what you, <RL ANet writer>, thinks about it. It’s almost like they think the lore is too precious a thing to talk about in an out-of-verse way.

And when they do that, we are left with about zero useful information when it comes to “intention”.

Obsidian.1328:

Answers like that make me want to wring their skinny little necks. We aren’t asking what the Priory thinks about it, we’re asking what you, <RL ANet writer>, thinks about it. It’s almost like they think the lore is too precious a thing to talk about in an out-of-verse way.

And when they do that, we are left with about zero useful information when it comes to “intention”.

Mostly because their own words would probably be used against them at some point, or some people will mistakenly take the writer’s opinion as canon on the matter.

If some writer says their favorite race is [blank], and that writer goes onto write a story that centers around a character of said race, some people will say that the writer is playing favorites. The same can be said in reverse. Writer says he/she hates the Jotun, and they go onto write a negative Jotun story, people might say that their opinions on the race is effecting the story.

Or worse. What a Writer might say…
“I think the Elder Dragons might have a bit more emotional depth than what the players see. I hope we get around to exploring the subject more!”

What some players might see…
Breaking News! Writers say Elder Dragons are big ol’ softies, and they are just out to give everyone a hug!"

They have to leave a little squeeze room for the races/beliefs. We humans on earth still argue passionately, endlessly and throw books at one another over evolution.

This could be as simple as the notation I linked on Adelbern, as small as a nod to say “the charr account is disputed by Ascalonians, who have a very different tale” http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/King_Adelbern

Those disputes should be recognized. That also makes a “living” world.

No race in this game should ever get a blunt and blanket “they were mistaken” dismissal again as humans already have.

It’s coming anyway.

I am curious, though, Teofa, where is that account of the Foefire in the game? I am all for that interpretation existing, but what’s the source on the Ascalonian account?

Erukk.1408:

Obsidian.1328:

Answers like that make me want to wring their skinny little necks. We aren’t asking what the Priory thinks about it, we’re asking what you, <RL ANet writer>, thinks about it. It’s almost like they think the lore is too precious a thing to talk about in an out-of-verse way.

And when they do that, we are left with about zero useful information when it comes to “intention”.

Mostly because their own words would probably be used against them at some point, or some people will mistakenly take the writer’s opinion as canon on the matter.

If some writer says their favorite race is [blank], and that writer goes onto write a story that centers around a character of said race, some people will say that the writer is playing favorites. The same can be said in reverse. Writer says he/she hates the Jotun, and they go onto write a negative Jotun story, people might say that their opinions on the race is effecting the story.

Or worse. What a Writer might say…
“I think the Elder Dragons might have a bit more emotional depth than what the players see. I hope we get around to exploring the subject more!”

What some players might see…
Breaking News! Writers say Elder Dragons are big ol’ softies, and they are just out to give everyone a hug!"

Ugh…are players really that obtuse?

DraconicDak.9340:

I am curious, though, Teofa, where is that account of the Foefire in the game? I am all for that interpretation existing, but what’s the source on the Ascalonian account?

It’s not in the game at all as far as I know.

In my experience, there’s always someone, Obsidian…

And that’s not even going into the game media outlets who will twist such statements into insane “rumors” to get more clicks, and then readers take that at face value…

Taken altogether, it’s not surprising that ANet wants to be vague and in-universe with their info drops. Otherwise they could be pigeonholed into stories they didn’t intend to tell.

I could see that for future content perhaps, but why the same thing on Tyrian past? Why not just have a source for written word like a game manual or narration? This endless vagueness just lends itself to “nothing is for certain, everything is possible.”

It is rather frustrating when trying to discuss the finer points of the past…

I would really like something like… a physical Tyrian history book. That would be extremely helpful for knowing this stuff.

DraconicDak.9340:

If you’re content to build your interpretation on an acknowledged impossibility, instead of using logic to determine a method by which the situation becomes possible, there’s really not much I can say.

For my part, I would say that careful, small groups of humans, between patrols and under cover of night, could evade Charr notice to bring supplies into the besieged city. And if they are caught, again, that is why they would be escorted by Vanguard.

I am building my interpretation on an impossibility, that’s almost funny. The amount of ghosts outside of Ascalon City can be perfectly explained by the Foefire raising all dead. The Foefire had the effect of killing every living being inside of Ascalon City and not further, it raised all human dead in Ascalon.

That the humans in Ascalon survived without a food source is the “impossibility” as presented in GW1, which simply arises because the game designers did not think about an explanation. It does not make your theory of arable land or human presence outside of enclaves the logical explanation.

Some humans did survive till 1090. First, the renewal of the Charr offensive in 1072 started to eliminate all human presence outside of enclaves like the cities and outposts till 1090. How many had survived till then is not clear, but i assume that many had starved to death. It means that the number of ghosts we see is most likely larger than the number of humans still alive in 1090.

Second, the only possibility for food to get into Ascalon during that time were merchant caravans, which also does not explain the number of ghosts we see outside of Ascalon City in GW2.

Small numbers of humans slipping out, as you say, does not explain a considerable number of humans still being alive in 1090. Not enough for the number of ghosts we see. During 1090 Ascalon City most likely had to rely on what was stockpiled, and that can’t have been much.

Now, concerning where merchant caravans could have gotten any supplies from, the only possibilities are Yak’s Bend, or an unknown port at the far southwest, otside of Ascalon. But even the otherwise abandoned south of Ascalon, as shown during Gwen’s travel to found Ebonhawke, is under Charr control in 1080 already. Merchant caravans as a food supply most likely became impossible at some point between 1072 and 1090, the more outposts were lost.

DraconicDak.9340:

In that capacity, if the account of the Foefire is meant, by the developers, to be questioned, I would think that the Priory, or some book in Ebonhawke, would hold an account that challenges the Charr viewpoint. As there is no such item in the game, to my knowledge, I have to believe that the agreeing accounts are, by and large, correct.

A historian or scientist looks at the evidence presented and draws conclusions, he does not back up his personal preference with selective pieces of evidence. Same can be applied to a lore discussion.

By and large the accounts of the Charr may be correct, that doesn’t mean every detail is. It does not back up your theory of a sizable human presence outside of Ascalon City in 1090.
Accepting what the Charr were and, to the most degree, still are today, seems to be hard for some people. They did not let any human in Ascalon alive.

If we assume that the truth is more likely to be what the majority of evidence points to, and look at the number of ghosts that had obviously already been dead by 1090, or ghosts that could not have been around outside of Ascalon City, like the large amount of peasants, then it means that the most likely explanation is that the Foefire rose those.

Frosch.7809:

That the humans in Ascalon survived without a food source is the “impossibility” as presented in GW1, which simply arises because the game designers did not think about an explanation. It does not make your theory of arable land or human presence outside of enclaves the logical explanation.

Hmm…I always made the assumption that what we get to physically traverse in the game world =/= intended representations of a town/city/kingdom. For instance, there was tons of Kaineng City we never got to see just because they didn’t have the resources to implement all of that. The same could be said for Elona, Kryta, and yes…even Ascalon. I hardly think the various areas we get to be explore in-game is all there is to a place.

That being said, I always assumed Ascalon had other parts to it somewhere where we never got to go. West, east, south, who knows. If game kingdoms like in Guild Wars are only restricted to what we actually get to walk around in, that really wouldn’t make much sense to me from a world-designer point of view. Especially given the limitations to mid-2000 era game engines.

That’s exactly what I’m saying, though. You acknowledge the impossibility of Ascalon City surviving for 18 years without food, but then brush it off with a “the game designers didn’t think about it” excuse, which, I’m sorry, but to me invalidates your entire line of reasoning.

When I discuss games and series that I enjoy, which in most respects follow logical progression, I discuss them under the context that these worlds do exist, and therefore that they follow basic laws of logic, in this case, if there is a demand being filled, there must therefore be a supply filling it.

If Ascalon City’s people are surviving for two decades,
then they must be getting raw supplies and materials.

If the surrounding land is not safe/fruitful to tend,
then supplies must be brought in from an outside source.

If magical portals are not yet installed,
then these supplies must be traveling by caravan.

Now, consider that after the Searing, there is only a relatively small breach in the Wall. And south of the Wall, in GW1, there is very little Charr presence. Consider that Ebonhawke is at the southern edge of the country, and that the Crystal Desert is directly south, with Elona beyond that.

For the game to have internal logic, I’m not saying that supply caravans had to fight through the Charr from Yak’s Bend to the Breach. I am proposing that supply caravans from Elona (say, through Amnoon Oasis, along the water, up to the mountains south of Ebonhawke) could theoretically travel north to safety in Ebonhawke, then travel northwest to Ascalon City in relative safety. That seems easiest to me, though I can also easily see supplies coming through the Shiverpeaks from the southwest, still in relative safety as they are south of the Wall and the ruins of Rin.

This is logical. It does not write off a plothole that is inescapable otherwise, but incorporates it in believable fashion. And in fact, if you look at the GW1 entry for Gwen:

In 1080 AE, King Adelbern recalls Gwen Thackeray and the Ebon Vanguard to fortify Ebonhawke, a town alongside the Blazeridge Mountains, in order to solidify supply lines to Ascalon City.

Which supports my theory.

As the literal purpose of fortifying Ebonhawke was to solidify the supply lines you are claiming can’t exist (which, neatly, also defies your claim that the developers didn’t think about the supply problem), and as Gwen did, in fact, survive, I contend that there were supplies flowing into Ascalon City from the south, in safety, up until the final siege and the Foefire.

Numbers, food sources, are leap of faith content. I’ve never seen a game model full ally “armies”, I’ve always accepted there have to be hidden numbers.

Same with agriculture/infrastructure. We don’t see much of either. The crop production area shown in most games is a pittance compared to the need. Same with transport.

Foes have to be numerous to simply cater to game needs. In Ascalon there simply needs to be enough ghosts for many players to finish missions without causing a “waiting for respawn” stack of players.

Some things need to be just accepted. Counting the numbers of NPCs on each side in game will never give a realistic number of combatants in the historical events of armies vs armies.

I crossed the north wall and killed all the charr in pre many many times. There weren’t that many. Ascalon City was defended by even less. No visible armies in game.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

Some things need to be just accepted. Counting the numbers of NPCs on each side in game will never give a realistic number of combatants in the historical events of armies vs armies.

Exactly. Players need to make intelligent judgements on which things in-game should be taken literally, and which should be taken as limitations on the game engine. The game company can’t be expected, with existing technology, to present a world that is 100% accurate and viable.