Guild Wars 2

Whenever I look at this forum I see at least 3-4 threads titled “Sylvari must die” etc. WHY?? You wouldn’t see stuff like that on the other race forums and they all have their bad counter parts e.g Char~Flame Legion and Norn~Sons of Svanir. Just because the main anarchist of the game is Sylvari why should the whole race be condemned to “Evil killer plant people”? Do you think that if the main anarchist was a different race, would people hate that race instead? I just think its a shame to hate such an amazing people on the basis that one was mad……… Gimme opinions on this pelase

No if Scarlet was any of the other races there will still be hatred for the Sylvari. Where does it stem from, hard to say. Some individuals hate the Sylvari simply due to the central focus they seem to have in the story of Guild Wars 2. Others are convinced the Sylvari origins lay with the Jungle Dragon, despite current evidence debunking this.

It is because they have not been assimilated
:p

Well, I love sylvari and I wish all humans would die. Can’t stand all of those baby faces and plastic dolls running around thinking they’re beautiful. xD Makes me laugh.

I like the Sylvari. They brought a lot of balance to the game.

They are just jealous of our fabulously good looks.

We should cut down the pale tree to expedite the rebuilding of Lion’s Arch.

I think people would dislike the race that was the main antagonist – but not so much as Sylvari. Why?

Humans are normal antagonists.
Asura can fall under evil genius.
Norn would be a bit odd, honestly, due to their joviality.
Charr were antagonists in GW1, so it’s normal.

People want to dislike Sylvari because they see Trahearne as stealing their thunder like Kormir did in GW1. I’m surprised they made the same mistake. Unfortunately, on top of this, Scarlet was the antagonist and Sylvari, but not necessarily nightmare court. Why did they not make her Nightmare Court? I could have dealt with that.

It really saddened me when Marjory said she wouldn’t trust another Sylvari

Did any of you meet the NPC in the cemetery that hates Sylvari now? Shes not the only one…

Lorelei.7809:

It really saddened me when Marjory said she wouldn’t trust another Sylvari

When did she say that? I must have missed it.

At the end of the latest update’s discussion if you talk to her (I just pressed F on any possible NPC whenever possible to all of them, not just the ones you’re supposed to click on, you get some interesting hints that way, also, of what’s coming up). She said, effectively, that she was so angry with Scarlet she is tempted to stomp any flower she sees. You say Scarlet’s more like a weed. Then she says something along the lines of she thought at first that Sylvari were innocent, but after Scarlet she doesn’t think she can trust another Sylvari again.

Lorelei.7809:

At the end of the latest update’s discussion if you talk to her (I just pressed F on any possible NPC whenever possible to all of them, not just the ones you’re supposed to click on, you get some interesting hints that way, also, of what’s coming up). She said, effectively, that she was so angry with Scarlet she is tempted to stomp any flower she sees. You say Scarlet’s more like a weed. Then she says something along the lines of she thought at first that Sylvari were innocent, but after Scarlet she doesn’t think she can trust another Sylvari again.

It must be race dependent dialogue again. This is the exchange as a Sylvari:

Marjory: I personally reported your victory over Scarlet to Logan Thackeray. He sends his regards.
PC: That was kind of you.
Marjory: It was purely selfish. For the first time in my life, I actually feel sincere when I brag about the people I fight beside. I never felt that in the Ministry Guard.
PC: Why did you quit the Guard anyway?
Marjory: That’s a long story, perhaps for another day. I’ll just say that I overstayed my welcome.
PC: Did they kick you out?
Marjory: No, I quit of my own accord. I guess I couldn’t take the political games anymore. I’m a simple woman. Right and wrong. Truth and lies. I’m not a fan of gray.
PC: Their loss is our gain.

Equating sylvari with trees and salad is like equating humans and charr to pigs and birds. Sure, they’re made of similar stuff (sylvari – plant matter | humans/charr – meat) but they are not the same. Hating flowers because of sylvari is just like hating pigs because of humans. It makes zero sense.

On the topic of hating sylvari, it seems a bit silly. After all, it was a single sylvari’s doing. Perhaps people are angry that there’s a prevalence of sylvari but I don’t see it that way. There’s just as many if not fewer sylvari in the world itself and one can see that easily. It just seems forced to some extent, and people are jumping on the train of saying anti-sylvari things because it’s cool to do it now. A thread about anything sylvari appears, and at least one person talks about using them as kindling or killing them or chopping the pale tree. Happens all the time. It’s cool to hate on sylvari on the forums, merely a trend. People will grow out of it, hopefully.

Personally, since sylvari were announced in 2007 I’ve wanted to play as one. Never disliked them, never will. The actions of one sylvari does not equate to the actions of all.

Wow, did they really give Marjory a dark side? I’ll have to see that before I believe it. Here I thought the devs were going to turn her into another pet project.

Canach – poisonous gas enrages wildlife – giant crab smashes up lions arch.

Scarlet – poisonous gas kills everyone – giant drill smashes up lions arch.

Personally, I can sympathise with the negative view of sylvari that lions arch citizens are expressing. It’s only going to get worse with the next story part, mark my words.

Them twigs be bad news.

Well then I guess another sylvari has do worst then Scarlet
Any sylvari up for helping me genocide the krytan meat sacks and turning divinity’s reach into a smoldering pile of ash?

TheReaperTheFourthHorsemen.7894:

Well then I guess another sylvari has do worst then Scarlet
Any sylvari up for helping me genocide the krytan meat sacks and turning divinity’s reach into a smoldering pile of ash?

I totally called it.

Sera.6539:

Lorelei.7809:

At the end of the latest update’s discussion if you talk to her (I just pressed F on any possible NPC whenever possible to all of them, not just the ones you’re supposed to click on, you get some interesting hints that way, also, of what’s coming up). She said, effectively, that she was so angry with Scarlet she is tempted to stomp any flower she sees. You say Scarlet’s more like a weed. Then she says something along the lines of she thought at first that Sylvari were innocent, but after Scarlet she doesn’t think she can trust another Sylvari again.

It must be race dependent dialogue again. This is the exchange as a Sylvari:

Marjory: I personally reported your victory over Scarlet to Logan Thackeray. He sends his regards.
PC: That was kind of you.
Marjory: It was purely selfish. For the first time in my life, I actually feel sincere when I brag about the people I fight beside. I never felt that in the Ministry Guard.
PC: Why did you quit the Guard anyway?
Marjory: That’s a long story, perhaps for another day. I’ll just say that I overstayed my welcome.
PC: Did they kick you out?
Marjory: No, I quit of my own accord. I guess I couldn’t take the political games anymore. I’m a simple woman. Right and wrong. Truth and lies. I’m not a fan of gray.
PC: Their loss is our gain.

Yah, my Asura and Charr got the same dialogue with Marjory about her reporting your success personally to Logan and the ministry guard, nothing about Sylvari hate. My Charr did get a different dialogue with Rox though, so I know racial dialogues do exist in the story instance (asura got nothing special sadly).

Perhaps the sylvari-hatred dialogue is human-specific.

Either way that’s sad. I would think Marjory would be someone to realize that one bad individual doesn’t make a whole race untrustworthy, especially given her experiences with the corrupt individuals within Krytan society.

Well, i just did it, and got the same dialogue as Electro, and Sera. I saw no Sylvari hatred dialogue, and that was on a human character.

huh,maybe it was just a rumor.

I did skim the dialogue a bit because I never have a ton of time on Tuesdays. I was on a human, didn’t see anything about Marjory dissing on ’varis, at least not to stick in my head.

I thought the telling Logan was because I was human, though. Guess not! I hopped up to Seraph HQ to chat with him and he stared coldly at me and said he had too much to do to talk. I don’t think he gave too much credence to Marjory’s praise

I believe that scarlet might have been the one who destroyed Lions arch, but the drill part after you kill her was very… fascinating.. I don’t think she did all this on her own will, but was controlled by the thing that comes next. I can’t wait for it tho

I don’t understand it either.
Before Scarlet Briar, I was ambivalent about the Sylvari. They were fine, and they looked cool, but I didn’t really care one way or the other.
After Scarlet Briar, I adore Sylvari. They’ve become my second favorite race after charr.

The dialogue in question is what you get if you did not personally kill Scarlet, and if you are a sylvari you can object to it and she apologizes.

As someone who plays a Sylvari main, I think it’s fascinating to see how one of the most adored races in Tyria suddenly receive a not-so-friendly welcome to the world. I’m not sure what the in-game or out-of-game consequences are, but it’s interesting to see the development!

Riot Inducer.8964:

The dialogue in question is what you get if you did not personally kill Scarlet, and if you are a sylvari you can object to it and she apologizes.

Huh. That’s interesting, I certainly wouldn’t have expected them to have different dialogue choices based on something like killing or not killing her, but thinking about it, it does make sense since her other dialogue is directly related to you killing her. Thanks for clearing it up.

I still don’t like that she’d feel that way, though. I don’t think it makes much sense from her own experiences.

Darkbattlemage.9612:

Others are convinced the Sylvari origins lay with the Jungle Dragon, despite current evidence debunking this.

What evidence? Frankly, I play mostly sylvari and everything I’ve seen indicates the opposite.

I got the dialogue on my Asura… I’m not sure why. But it really stuck with me.

Feycat.4370:

What evidence? Frankly, I play mostly sylvari and everything I’ve seen indicates the opposite.

Is this actually solid, meaning without a shadow of a doubt, evidence or is this things that has been used previous in speculation threads and have been debunked? For the time being, to my knowledge, there is no actual evidence stating without a shadow of a doubt that Sylvari are Elder Dragon minions just things that individuals have taken as fact in other speculation threads which have been thoroughly debunked by others.

If there is information that you believed is being overlooked or not focused on, by all means share it with us.

Darkbattlemage.9612:

Feycat.4370:

What evidence? Frankly, I play mostly sylvari and everything I’ve seen indicates the opposite.

Is this actually solid, meaning without a shadow of a doubt, evidence or is this things that has been used previous in speculation threads and have been debunked? For the time being, to my knowledge, there is no actual evidence stating without a shadow of a doubt that Sylvari are Elder Dragon minions just things that individuals have taken as fact in other speculation threads which have been thoroughly debunked by others.

If there is information that you believed is being overlooked or not focused on, by all means share it with us.

Um, you are the one who stated categorically that it is not true and has been debunked. I’m not stating anything – I ‘m asking for YOU to elaborate on your assertions as fact. I have never seen any categorical proof of it being debunked, nor any evidence of it. As far as I’m aware, BOTH sides are speculative at this point, though I personally find much more evidence in favor than against. Since you’re the one stating it’s been thoroughly debunked, I’d like you to elaborate.

Feycat.4370:

Um, you are the one who stated categorically that it is not true and has been debunked. I’m not stating anything – I ‘m asking for YOU to elaborate on your assertions as fact. I have never seen any categorical proof of it being debunked, nor any evidence of it. As far as I’m aware, BOTH sides are speculative at this point, though I personally find much more evidence in favor than against. Since you’re the one stating it’s been thoroughly debunked, I’d like you to elaborate.

Clearly you haven’t been paying attention to the various arguments over the matter. Also it is not my assertions that I’m presenting as fact but rather the fact it has been debunked by several other posters. All information I have seen those in favor of Sylvari being dragon minions either use Wooden’s Potatoes information, which as I mentioned several other posters have debunked with actual evidence in game, or Scarlet’s insanity. My participation in these debates have been minor, and even then have been mostly presenting alternative hypotheses that have been debunked by Konig and other posters.

I would look up the information but it seems you would only waver it as “speculation”. Also the fact you didn’t provide any information suggests it the usual information those in favor use to try and prove their hypothesis.

People don’t realize that there has been racial tension all along among all the races.

Asuras barely tolerate Humans and call most non-Asuran races Bookahs (from the wiki: Bookah – “Bookah” is a large, loud, bellowing, and dumb imaginary creature that the Asura used to frighten their children. Since their surfacing, they use the term to refer to those they view as inferior beings, which to them is almost everyone who is not an Asura. Bookah is also one of the few known words of the old spoken Asuran language known to outsiders.)

Norn are friendly with Charr (same outlook on life and all that) but only tolerate humans because they have to.

Humans hate Charr for obvious GW1 reasons, but are warming up to them, although a lot of Charr still refer to a Human as a “mouse” or in some cases, “lunch.”

Although prior to Scarlet nobody outright hated the Sylvari, the races in general are doing the exact same thing as we real humans do when there is a specific individual responsible for horrific actions. We tend to distrust the whole nationality until one generation gives way to the next. (and yes, I am referencing “That Guy” from WW2.)

So, I do think that the tension will get better, but for now, the end result has made me create a Sylvari so I can experience the world from their point of view. I do think they will play a large part in the next LS season.

Darkbattlemage.9612:

Clearly you haven’t been paying attention to the various arguments over the matter. Also it is not my assertions that I’m presenting as fact but rather the fact it has been debunked by several other posters. All information I have seen those in favor of Sylvari being dragon minions either use Wooden’s Potatoes information, which as I mentioned several other posters have debunked with actual evidence in game, or Scarlet’s insanity. My participation in these debates have been minor, and even then have been mostly presenting alternative hypotheses that have been debunked by Konig and other posters.

I would look up the information but it seems you would only waver it as “speculation”. Also the fact you didn’t provide any information suggests it the usual information those in favor use to try and prove their hypothesis.

I’m not the one who said you factually know that it’s been debunked, so I’m not the one who needs to explain my “hypothesis,” as I don’t have one. I’m saying what I’ve observed leads me to believe it is true, you stated factually that all evidence has been debunked.

If you don’t even know what has been debunked and how, then I don’t think you can make that claim. But by all means, carry on.

Feycat.4370:

Darkbattlemage.9612:

Clearly you haven’t been paying attention to the various arguments over the matter. Also it is not my assertions that I’m presenting as fact but rather the fact it has been debunked by several other posters. All information I have seen those in favor of Sylvari being dragon minions either use Wooden’s Potatoes information, which as I mentioned several other posters have debunked with actual evidence in game, or Scarlet’s insanity. My participation in these debates have been minor, and even then have been mostly presenting alternative hypotheses that have been debunked by Konig and other posters.

I would look up the information but it seems you would only waver it as “speculation”. Also the fact you didn’t provide any information suggests it the usual information those in favor use to try and prove their hypothesis.

I’m not the one who said you factually know that it’s been debunked, so I’m not the one who needs to explain my “hypothesis,” as I don’t have one. I’m saying what I’ve observed leads me to believe it is true, you stated factually that all evidence has been debunked.

If you don’t even know what has been debunked and how, then I don’t think you can make that claim. But by all means, carry on.

but what have you observed?
I am really curious because you say that you play mostly Sylvari.

So do I , I have 5.

I have never ever seen anything in the game that would suggest that Sylvari are dragon minions

I follow the forums of course so I am fairly aware of the various arguments- but I tend to take all the speculation with a sack of salt and only go by what I have seen for myself in the game.

Feycat.4370:

I’m not the one who said you factually know that it’s been debunked, so I’m not the one who needs to explain my “hypothesis,” as I don’t have one. I’m saying what I’ve observed leads me to believe it is true, you stated factually that all evidence has been debunked.

If you don’t even know what has been debunked and how, then I don’t think you can make that claim. But by all means, carry on.

Actually factually all evidence currently presented in support of the hypothesis has been debunked, this is why I asked you to state your evidence as the manner you posts come off to me seem to indicate you think you have evidence that may have been overlooked. As for not being able to tell you what has been debunked, no offense but how many of threads about this topic has been made? You expect me to keep track of this ridiculous hypothesis in great detail? Especially when I’m not even one of the posters actively debunking this.

Feycat.4370:

I’m not the one who said you factually know that it’s been debunked, so I’m not the one who needs to explain my “hypothesis,” as I don’t have one. I’m saying what I’ve observed leads me to believe it is true, you stated factually that all evidence has been debunked.

If you don’t even know what has been debunked and how, then I don’t think you can make that claim. But by all means, carry on.

The main pillars of the theory which, it is important to point out, grew before the game was released, are the following:

1) Sylvari are immune to dragon corruption. One explanation for why they might be immune to dragon corruption would be because they are already corrupted (ie are dragon minions).

2) In Edge of Destiny, Glint claims that she broke free of Kralkatorrik’s control through a personal epiphany. Thus, the reason why the sylvari might be good despite the Pale Tree having been intended as a dragon champion is that Ventari’s philosophies and the Tablet brought about a similar epiphany in the Pale Tree.

3) The Nightmare claims that they are closer to the true nature of sylvari, and the Tablet has fundamentally altered sylvari nature – further reinforcing point 2, while providing evidence that the sylvari, like dragon minions, are by nature nasty, omnicidal pieces of work.

4) I think at this time it was known that there was a plant dragon in the sylvari tutorial, and theorised that this did not represent Zhaitan as believed by the characters, but something darker inherent in sylvari nature.

At the time the theory was presented, this was a solid chain of logic. Now, plenty of theories have been proposed that had solid chains of logic that later proved to be false, but one could see, sensationalist as it was, how it could have been true.

However, discoveries since the game released have torpedoed each of these pillars:

1) We see in CoE that being corrupted by one dragon provides no protection against being corrupted by draconic energy from another. Thus, sylvari resistance to corruption is not due to already being corrupted, but some other cause (for one possibility, see below) is needed to explain this.

2) We learned in Arah that Glint did not simply ‘choose’ to shift loyalties. She may or may not have been aware that there was more involved in her change of heart (although given her powers and role, I’m pretty certain she did). Dragon minions, even the most important champions, simply do not have enough free will to contemplate betraying their dragon. Powerful forgotten magic was employed to return that free will to her, magic that was almost certainly not included in a stone tablet carved by a centaur, however enlightened. However, going back to pillar 1, this also shows that while being a dragon minion already does not prevent dragon corruption, there are magics in the world independent of the dragons that do.

3) In one of the sylvari personal story possibilities, we meet a sylvari (Malyck) who turns out to have been born from a different Tree and thus has no connection to the Tablet whatsoever. His overall behaviour and moral structure is… well, pretty close to human, actually. He’s a bit more ruthless than most Dream sylvari, but he shows loyalty to those who befriend him and compassion to the weak and vulnerable.

4) This one has not been debunked per se, but there are plenty of other explanations – the canonical in-game explanation is that it represents Zhaitan (whom sylvari PCs have a Wyld Hunt to slay), and while that may be false, it could simply represent that there is some influence from Mordremoth in the Nightmare without meaning that the sylvari race and the Dream as a whole are spawn of Mordremoth that were somehow (mostly) cleansed.

So there’s your debunking. Mostly, the theory has maintained momentum because people want it to be true, and are either ignorant of or deliberately ignoring the flaws.

Now, it has gained a bit more reinforcement recently on pillar 4 with the implication that Scarlet has been manipulated by Mordremoth through the Nightmare – however, that is following a convoluted path of logic that can diverge off to other conclusions at multiple points. Pillars 1 through 3, though, are all but completely demolished.

EDIT: Seriously, I’m saving this. Seems that whenever I’m active in the forum, I find myself repeating this once a week at minimum. Until and unless more evidence comes to light either way, I can save time by making use of copypasta.

How about this one: the devs have retconned junk before. If they say the Sylvari are Dragon minions, then they are dragon minions. And Scarlet is heavily implied to have a connection to the dragons that stems from herself and no outside source.

ArenaNet hasn’t retconned anything our characters saw with their own eyes, it’s just that things that we learned from second- or third-hand sources turned out to be wrong. Whether that’s truly retconning or not is up to the peanut gallery. Either way, though, if we play the “Arenanet might retcon” card, then there’s no point theorising about anything because no evidence can be trusted.

Regarding Scarlet – all we really know is that something was already inside her mind when she went into Omadd’s device. That does not mean that that ‘something’ is an inherent part of sylvari nature. It may be something that was pushed into the Dream by a source independent of the sylvari that Caera happened to have come into contact with. It could be that the dragon or its champion had been specifically targeting Caera, and Omadd’s device sabotaged her defenses. The ‘sylvari are descended from dragon minions and Omadd’s device unlocked that nature in Scarlet’ interpretation is only one, and as I’ve described above, all of the other evidence for the dragon minion hypothesis has been debunked.

TheReaperTheFourthHorsemen.7894:

Well then I guess another sylvari has do worst then Scarlet
Any sylvari up for helping me genocide the krytan meat sacks and turning divinity’s reach into a smoldering pile of ash?

Will a norn do? I agree to being used as a siege engine

draxynnic.3719:

ArenaNet hasn’t retconned anything our characters saw with their own eyes, it’s just that things that we learned from second- or third-hand sources turned out to be wrong. Whether that’s truly retconning or not is up to the peanut gallery. Either way, though, if we play the “Arenanet might retcon” card, then there’s no point theorising about anything because no evidence can be trusted.

Regarding Scarlet – all we really know is that something was already inside her mind when she went into Omadd’s device. That does not mean that that ‘something’ is an inherent part of sylvari nature. It may be something that was pushed into the Dream by a source independent of the sylvari that Caera happened to have come into contact with. It could be that the dragon or its champion had been specifically targeting Caera, and Omadd’s device sabotaged her defenses. The ‘sylvari are descended from dragon minions and Omadd’s device unlocked that nature in Scarlet’ interpretation is only one, and as I’ve described above, all of the other evidence for the dragon minion hypothesis has been debunked.

Not really, all you’ve debunked is a PoV of those theories. I could easily modify them in manners that are difficult for you to disprove :P.

The usual statement of “you can never prove a negative” applies.

However, the reasoning that originally lead to the theory being proposed is gone. You can modify it, but then we get to something like Carl Sagan’s invisible dragon – you’re reaching further and further to make it disprovable, and instead of letting the evidence lead you to a theory, you’re trying to force the theory just because you happen to like it.

Why they must die? Because their eats/hairs/whetever else may feed people. And the rest of their bodies may warm up some houses for orphans. That’s why.

And most of all: YOU MUST THROW SOMETHING TO THE FORGE, AIN’T THAT RIGHT? THE LEGION CALLS!

Before I begin, I want to state that I think that the Sylvari being dragon minions theory is very unlikely. However, much of the evidence used against it either pushes it toward toward unlikely or doesn’t really impact the theory at all. Thus, people should be free to continue to explore the theory as a potentiality.

draxynnic.3719:

However, discoveries since the game released have torpedoed each of these pillars:

1) We see in CoE that being corrupted by one dragon provides no protection against being corrupted by draconic energy from another. Thus, sylvari resistance to corruption is not due to already being corrupted, but some other cause (for one possibility, see below) is needed to explain this.

Actually, CoE doesn’t prove that Sylvari aren’t protected from dragon corruption because they are already minions. CoE demonstrates that multiple corrupts are possible under certain conditions (i.e. whatever Kudu’s experiments did to them). Thus, the Sylvari are minions theory is just as good as any other to explain their resistance.

2) We learned in Arah that Glint did not simply ‘choose’ to shift loyalties. She may or may not have been aware that there was more involved in her change of heart (although given her powers and role, I’m pretty certain she did). Dragon minions, even the most important champions, simply do not have enough free will to contemplate betraying their dragon. Powerful forgotten magic was employed to return that free will to her, magic that was almost certainly not included in a stone tablet carved by a centaur, however enlightened. However, going back to pillar 1, this also shows that while being a dragon minion already does not prevent dragon corruption, there are magics in the world independent of the dragons that do.

This also doesn’t “torpedo” the theory that the Pale Tree Sylvari are minions who somehow are free of their dragon’s control. All it really tells us is that dragon minions can be freed of their masters. It is not likely that there is only one way to free them. Currently, if the Sylvari are dragon minions, we don’t know why they are free. Ventari’s teachings don’t seem likely because the Nightmare Court doesn’t appear to be filled with dragon worshipers.

3) In one of the sylvari personal story possibilities, we meet a sylvari (Malyck) who turns out to have been born from a different Tree and thus has no connection to the Tablet whatsoever. His overall behaviour and moral structure is… well, pretty close to human, actually. He’s a bit more ruthless than most Dream sylvari, but he shows loyalty to those who befriend him and compassion to the weak and vulnerable.

There’s a lot of mystery around Malyck. This was probably done deliberately. However, that he’s not spewing pro-dragon propaganda makes all Sylvari look less likely to be minions. This is a good argument against it, but not enough to destroy the theory.

4) This one has not been debunked per se, but there are plenty of other explanations – the canonical in-game explanation is that it represents Zhaitan (whom sylvari PCs have a Wyld Hunt to slay), and while that may be false, it could simply represent that there is some influence from Mordremoth in the Nightmare without meaning that the sylvari race and the Dream as a whole are spawn of Mordremoth that were somehow (mostly) cleansed.

So there’s your debunking. Mostly, the theory has maintained momentum because people want it to be true, and are either ignorant of or deliberately ignoring the flaws.

Hardly. The bigger issue is those that simply don’t want it to be true and will take any bit of evidence no matter how tenuous as conclusive proof that the theory has been “torpedoed”

Now, it has gained a bit more reinforcement recently on pillar 4 with the implication that Scarlet has been manipulated by Mordremoth through the Nightmare – however, that is following a convoluted path of logic that can diverge off to other conclusions at multiple points. Pillars 1 through 3, though, are all but completely demolished.

EDIT: Seriously, I’m saving this. Seems that whenever I’m active in the forum, I find myself repeating this once a week at minimum. Until and unless more evidence comes to light either way, I can save time by making use of copypasta.

You shouldn’t repeat this. It is wrong and rude to dismiss people’s arguments with forced interpretations of events not supported by logic or facts. I suggest rather you retract your statements and join in the fun of theory building than being a wet blanket.

draxynnic.3719:

The usual statement of “you can never prove a negative” applies.

However, the reasoning that originally lead to the theory being proposed is gone. You can modify it, but then we get to something like Carl Sagan’s invisible dragon – you’re reaching further and further to make it disprovable, and instead of letting the evidence lead you to a theory, you’re trying to force the theory just because you happen to like it.

I am fully familiar with the “invisible dragon” debate. It is without a doubt the most demeaning and cliche of all straw-man arguments. I have wasted far too much of my life combating this line of thought with limited success, mainly because those who use it also have “invisible dragons” of their own. I could go round and round with your circular reasoning, allowing you to lead me by the nose as you take me on a magical theme-park ride of lore “facts” sewn together with unicorn dreams and the tears of leprechauns, but instead I am going to wait it out. And when the Sylvari are revealed to be creations of the dragon – and trust me, they will – I shall turn to you with a hardy “Told ya!”

Good day, sir or madam.

DaShi.1368:

Actually, CoE doesn’t prove that Sylvari aren’t protected from dragon corruption because they are already minions. CoE demonstrates that multiple corrupts are possible under certain conditions (i.e. whatever Kudu’s experiments did to them). Thus, the Sylvari are minions theory is just as good as any other to explain their resistance.

This is one of those ’can’t prove a negative’ situations. Does CoE represent a special case where the Inquest are able to force multiple corruptions where the dragons normally can’t corrupt another dragon’s minions?

Until the point where we see one dragon corrupting another dragon’s minions, we can never be sure they can’t.

The litmus test here is that if sylvari resistance to corruption comes from already being minions, then sylvari should be vulnerable to being further corrupted by the Inquest just like any other minion. However, we don’t see this AFAIK – we do see other prisoners transformed, but not sylvari. So the question is… is this because they haven’t tried, or because they haven’t succeeded?

The followup question is… do you really believe the Inquest wouldn’t have tried at some point? They in fact have more incentive to try on sylvari than other races, in order to try to discover how the sylvari resistance works.

Thus, I think the most likely explanation is that the Inquest have tried, and have so far failed. Thus, the sylvari resistance is stronger than any resistance that might come from already being a minion. Thus, sylvari resistance cannot be explained by minionhood alone – there has to be something stronger in play. As a result, sylvari resistance is not evidence for sylvari minionhood.

This also doesn’t “torpedo” the theory that the Pale Tree Sylvari are minions who somehow are free of their dragon’s control. All it really tells us is that dragon minions can be freed of their masters. It is not likely that there is only one way to free them. Currently, if the Sylvari are dragon minions, we don’t know why they are free. Ventari’s teachings don’t seem likely because the Nightmare Court doesn’t appear to be filled with dragon worshipers.

Again, we’re looking at the original thought process that lead to the formation of the theory here. At the time, we believed that Glint achieved freedom through a force of will inspired by a moment of spiritual and moral revelation – and the Tablet, which brought a similar revelation to the Pale Tree (particularly if the Nightmare Court are to be believed) would represent the same for the Pale Tree, explaining how she broke loose. We now know that such a measure is insufficient, and the theory is left with a torpedo hole in it where once it had a simple and compelling explanation.

In fact, the only means we currently know of to cleanse dragon magic is through Forgotten magic… of that of the Pale Tree through Caladbolg. A possible explanation for both of these points could be that the two are actually the same, and that an ancestor Pale Tree was at some point cleansed by the forgotten the same way Glint was. However, it’s also possible that the forgotten created the sylvari race themselves and infused them with their corruption-warding magic as part of the process – invoking forgotten magic as a reason for the sylvari corruption immunity does not require them to be descended from former minions.

You shouldn’t repeat this. It is wrong and rude to dismiss people’s arguments with forced interpretations of events not supported by logic or facts. I suggest rather you retract your statements and join in the fun of theory building than being a wet blanket.

I do… when people start from a basis of logic rather than starting from a conclusion and trying to justify it. See, for instance, Tamias’ thread where (s)he makes a logical case that doesn’t focus just on the sensationalism of SYLVARI ARE MINIONS, but makes a case for an expanding trend of the elder races having employed what makes dragon minions minions against the dragons (try saying that three times fast) in which sylvari are just one part. (Up until the point HHR started trying to insist that if there was a connection between the Nightmare and dragon corruption then sylvari must be minions. No, that is not the case at all – there are plenty of ways in which the Nightmare may have attributes similar to dragon corruption .)

In fact, if you’ll look back, I actually participated in the original theory – however, the logical basis of that original theory is gone. Without a new logical basis, it should be recognised as being, well, baseless. Otherwise, people are supporting it because they’re convinced by the ‘cool factor’, not because of any sense of logic.

draxynnic.3719:

This is one of those ’can’t prove a negative’ situations. Does CoE represent a special case where the Inquest are able to force multiple corruptions where the dragons normally can’t corrupt another dragon’s minions?
Until the point where we see one dragon corrupting another dragon’s minions, we can never be sure they can’t.

No, this is not one of those “can’t prove a negative” situation. This is jumping to conclusions.

The litmus test here is that if sylvari resistance to corruption comes from already being minions, then sylvari should be vulnerable to being further corrupted by the Inquest just like any other minion. However, we don’t see this AFAIK – we do see other prisoners transformed, but not sylvari. So the question is… is this because they haven’t tried, or because they haven’t succeeded?

And this is begging the question.

The followup question is… do you really believe the Inquest wouldn’t have tried at some point? They in fact have more incentive to try on sylvari than other races, in order to try to discover how the sylvari resistance works.

Thus, I think the most likely explanation is that the Inquest have tried, and have so far failed. Thus, the sylvari resistance is stronger than any resistance that might come from already being a minion. Thus, sylvari resistance cannot be explained by minionhood alone – there has to be something stronger in play. As a result, sylvari resistance is not evidence for sylvari minionhood.

So is this.

Sylvari resistance remains evidence for minionhood. However, not conclusive evidence. I do agree that saying “Sylvari are resistant therefore they are minions.” is wrong, but that shouldn’t be warped to “Sylvari resistance is not evidence for sylvari minionhood.”

Again, we’re looking at the original thought process that lead to the formation of the theory here. At the time, we believed that Glint achieved freedom through a force of will inspired by a moment of spiritual and moral revelation – and the Tablet, which brought a similar revelation to the Pale Tree (particularly if the Nightmare Court are to be believed) would represent the same for the Pale Tree, explaining how she broke loose. We now know that such a measure is insufficient, and the theory is left with a torpedo hole in it where once it had a simple and compelling explanation.

I agree that the Tablet evidence is now very weak in light of new evidence.

In fact, the only means we currently know of to cleanse dragon magic is through Forgotten magic… of that of the Pale Tree through Caladbolg. A possible explanation for both of these points could be that the two are actually the same, and that an ancestor Pale Tree was at some point cleansed by the forgotten the same way Glint was. However, it’s also possible that the forgotten created the sylvari race themselves and infused them with their corruption-warding magic as part of the process – invoking forgotten magic as a reason for the sylvari corruption immunity does not require them to be descended from former minions.

Great alternative explanations. I like them. They don’t torpedo the Sylvari are minions theory, though.

I do… when people start from a basis of logic rather than starting from a conclusion and trying to justify it.

You do realize that the only person who brought up the four pillars arguments was you. Someone stated that he believed the Sylvari to be dragon minions. You then provided his arguments for him and tried to prove those arguments wrong.

So no, don’t copy and paste this every time people say they think the Sylvari might be dragon minions. It’s filled with logical holes and often doesn’t even address the point people are making anymore.

If you want prepare an argument that states why you think it is unlikely that Sylvari are dragon minions. Preferably something that starts along the lines: “That’s a very interesting theory. However, I’m not convinced that Sylvari are dragon minions because of X, Y, and Z.”

In fact, if you’ll look back, I actually participated in the original theory – however, the logical basis of that original theory is gone. Without a new logical basis, it should be recognised as being, well, baseless. Otherwise, people are supporting it because they’re convinced by the ‘cool factor’, not because of any sense of logic.

And this is ad hominen.

I say, if someone presents a theory and provides factually incorrect evidence, then feel free to correct them. If it’s an interpretation based on factual evidence or lack of, provide alternative interpretations, without disrespecting theirs. I would have loved to hear Feycat’s ideas, but he was shot down before he could even share them.

Actually, having been around at the time the theory was presented… I provided the arguments that originally lead to the theory being presented, and showed why they have since been proven flawed.

There was a logical basis behind it back then, now that logical basis is gone. What the theory purported to explain – the sylvari immunity to draconic corruption – has been countered by evidence that dragon minions can be further corrupted by energy from another dragon. One could argue that that was special circumstances, but that’s making excuses for the theory – the Inquest would surely have experimented with trying to infuse sylvari with dragon energy as much as anything else (more so, in fact, since the Inquest would surely be interested in trying to figure out how that resistance works and thus will put it to the test whenever they get the opportunity).

We don’t see any dragon-corrupted sylvari from Inquest experimentation. This can be explained in three ways:
1) The Inquest have tried, but have failed – demonstrating that corrupting sylvari is harder than further corrupting minions. Thus, sylvari resistance is something different (and stronger than) any resistance gained by already being a minion of another dragon.
2) The Inquest never tried.
3) The Inquest tried and succeeded, but we never saw it.

For reasons already given, 1 seems much, much more likely than 2. 3 is possible, but is inarguably one of those ‘you can’t know for surrrre scenarios – in other words, a case of not being able to prove a negative. Given that we didn’t see it in the main center of Inquest research into dragon energy, though, it seems reasonable to say that 3 is also highly unlikely.

At the moment, though, there is no evidence that already being a minion prevents corruption at all. Minions of dragons rarely interact – outside of Inquest experiments – so I don’t think there are any times during the game where ‘natural’ cross-corruption could have occurred. The conjecture that being a dragon minion grants resistance to corruption is a conjecture without evidence – a conjecture that makes logical sense, granted, but a conjecture. The theory that sylvari have resistance to dragon corruption and that this resistance comes from having been minions in the past, then, is a conjecture with weak evidence based on a conjecture without evidence at all (and with evidence that now points to it being false, in fact). That makes for a very weak argument for a theory that many people say are convinced by, and in some cases are even claiming as proven fact.

Can I prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the sylvari are definitely not minions? No, I can’t. Nor can I prove beyond reasonable doubt that sylvari are not descended from rutabagas. But I can demonstrate flaws in the arguments for it. This is why it’s a case of not being able to prove a negative.

As for my method: The “someone” in question actually asked for it. If you go through the thread as a whole, this sidetracking came about from the following:

1) DBM observed the existence of the theory, but also that it’s been debunked.

2) Feycat said that what (s)he had seen pointed to the sylvari being minions.

3) DBM asked on what basis, pointing out that the reasoning behind the original theory has not held up to developments since release.

4) Feycat refuses to, claiming that DBM should present first.

5) DBM responds indicating that he’s not familiar with the details.

6) Feycat responds to the effect that “well, if you can’t back up you’re claim, it’s worthless”

7) DBM posts back expressing that he was asking because he had seen the theory debunked before, and asks if Feycat has any new information that has already been addressed.

8) At this point, I came in to provide the explanation of how the logical reasoning behind the theory has not held up to new evidence since. As Feycat has yet to present his own position, I used the arguments that were given at the time the theory was presented before demonstrating how they’ve been shown to be flawed.

9) Feycat has yet to provide any evidence of his own, while to my eye, bullyrook has only presented bluster.

If someone does not present their own evidence and reasoning, then I have no choice but to fall back on my knowledge of the evidence and reasoning behind the theory from elsewhere.

Anyone who presents their own evidence and reasoning, I am entirely willing to engage on their own merits. In my experience, though, most people who support the theory cannot or will not do so, and if they do so, they do so with simplistic reasoning (if X, then this MUST mean Y… when a little critical reasoning reveals that A, B and C are all possibilities that are at least as valid and that lead to a different conclusion altogether). There are exceptions who do bring in additional pieces of evidence (the observation that dwarves post-Ritual show minion-like behaviour, for instance, and thus the hypothesis that there may be a trend of using draconic energy to make corruption-immune soldiers against the dragons of which the sylvari would be only the latest), but this does lead me to the conclusion that most people who subscribe to this theory do so because they think it’s a cool theory, not because they’ve objectively studied the evidence.

If anyone wants to demonstrate otherwise: Please, lay out your arguments. Show me the evidence. Maybe you’ll persuade me. Or maybe I’ll find something you didn’t think of.

But don’t throw out platitudes like “maybe everything you’re using as counterevidence has been retconned!” or “I’ll just keep changing the details until you can’t answer them!”

(Seriously: if you think you can do so, bring it on! Maybe we’ll both learn something. However, while I probably could have enunciated it better earlier, the general consensus among the scientific community is that if a theory needs to be adjusted regularly to avoid being debunked by new evidence, it’s a bad one. Theories should predict new observations rather than having to be changed with every new one.)

i lerve sylvari personally, favorite race in the game i think (mostly cause they don’t really fall in with most races in MMO games…sept maybe elves?)

People just like making salad jokes.