Guild Wars 2

I see that on the forum atm.

Guys… What is more nature than planets and astral bodies ? I mean nature isn’t only trees and leaf, you know, it’s all the particles that surround us. Including astral bodies like the moon, sun, planets, etc… All of that is nature.

Nature is just stuffs that are not manmade.

So yes, the celestial avatar is still nature based.

I prefere the celestial theme to a more typical nature theme but claiming celestial is a nature theme because planets are natural is the same as saying Engie is nature themed becuase he uses wood and metal he dug up from the ground to make his guns.

yeah our star is yellow, but some are blue :p

Also, when you enter celestial form, you see an animation of planets orbiting around your character. Also, you are made of stars.

Also, I misspelled (sorry I’m not english native) it’s not astral body, but celestial body.

I guess it depends on how you look at nature.

Personally, I agree with you that the planets, sun, and moon are perfectly suited to being classified as “nature”. Heck, I don’t really know that much about them so I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure most religions that have a high nature focus like Wiccans and real life Druids the like are in large part focused on celestial bodies as well as plantlife. But to others it seems like nature = plants, plants, plants. And those people likely aren’t going to change their mind and continue to view this incarnation of Druid as unfitting.

Real life druids actually studied the stars. Even the celtic religion (that does look a lot like the viking one) use the celestial bodies, and the rest of the universe in their religion. (I’m from Brittania, and love the lore of my region so I studied it a lot)

The fact that this changed is because of monotheist religion. Christianism to be precise. They tried to include the pagans’ customs into their own religion to ease the conversion. They used it, and deformed it into their own point of view to accustom the pagans and make them good christians without having to slaughter them.

So I agree with you, Electro, but this is (unfortunately ? not even sure that’s a bad thing tbh) the original sense of the word celestial, and it fits perfectly to the druid.

celestial is more on the spiritual side of the druid thats all druid is about nature and spiritual things in general i think

Electro.4173:

I guess it depends on how you look at nature.

Personally, I agree with you that the planets, sun, and moon are perfectly suited to being classified as “nature”. Heck, I don’t really know that much about them so I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure most religions that have a high nature focus like Wiccans and real life Druids the like are in large part focuses on celestial bodies as well as plantlife. But to others it seems like nature = plants, plants, plants. And those people likely aren’t going to change their mind and continue to view this incarnation of Druid as unfitting.

When i think of druid, i think of plants and animals because the base class is a homage to DnD Rangers. When they announced druid, people expected a DnD druid, at one with nature and plants and animals.

What they got was someone at one with the cosmos, basically a Moonkin from WoW when we thought we were getting Feral or Resto. Sure, the universe is “nature” in a very zen everything-is-nothing-and-nothing-is-everything kind of way, but its not what people typically associate with a druid archetype. Its also a pretty blatant rip off of guardian tomes and the guardians core role.

Halan.7931:

Also, why SOLAR beam (staff one) is white-blue? It should be golden yellow.

Kehlian.4380:

yeah our star is yellow, but some are blue :p

Umm, what color is our sun again?

I agree with the guardian’s tome, the poor guys are fuming about that right now.

Now the ranger doesn’t really look like the D&D one, it looks more like a mashup of a Warrior and a Ranger from GW1 (just like the guardian is a monk/paragon, etc…).

I mean, it depends on the ruleset you take, but before 2.5 D&D, the ranger didn’t even have a pet, he could only temporarly charm a wild animal.
Here, they got a magic bond with a pet.

Now if you want to go deep in it, even in D&D, the druid has a celestial aspect, with the moon and tides.

felixdacat.3804:

Halan.7931:

Also, why SOLAR beam (staff one) is white-blue? It should be golden yellow.

Kehlian.4380:

yeah our star is yellow, but some are blue :p

Umm, what color is our sun again?

Oh right, I heard it before, but have forgotten it ! Good call, I’ll try to remember it next time.

Doesn’t affect the fact that some stars are blue !

(basically a repost from two seconds ago in another thread….)

Its not that its wierd that Guildwars 2’s Druid has a lot of skills that are Sun, Moon and Celestial themed (these Celestial bodies are part of ‘Nature’…Heavenly or Celestial nature I guess….) but its a little out of place that there are two skills that are plant based, and almost all of the traits are plant/earthly nature based, only like two or three of the traits are really named the same way as the weapon/glyph skills.

There could be more cohesion in the naming at least.

Chrispy.5641:

(basically a repost….)

Its not that its wierd that Guildwars 2’s Druid has a lot of skills that are Sun, Moon and Celestial themed (these Celestial bodies are part of ‘Nature’…Heavenly or Celestial nature I guess….) but its a little out of place that there are two skills that are plant based, and almost all of the traits are plant/earthly nature based, only like two or three of the traits are really named the same way as the weapon/glyph skills.

There could be more cohesion in the naming at least.

I… actually have to agree with that.

What bother me the most is the confusion with the armor set that has the same name.

Levetty.1279:

I prefere the celestial theme to a more typical nature theme but claiming celestial is a nature theme because planets are natural is the same as saying Engie is nature themed becuase he uses wood and metal he dug up from the ground to make his guns.

And we use that very nature on a molecular level in order to toss poison grenades, napalm, blow stuff up and throw elixirs that have questionable effects on the environment.

Levetty.1279:

I prefere the celestial theme to a more typical nature theme but claiming celestial is a nature theme because planets are natural is the same as saying Engie is nature themed becuase he uses wood and metal he dug up from the ground to make his guns.

I’m going to quote myself on that:

Kehlian.4380:

Nature is just stuffs that are not manmade.

Engi creates stuff from nature, but he doesn’t use it, he uses manmade stuffs and tools.

Kehlian.4380:

Chrispy.5641:

(basically a repost….)

Its not that its wierd that Guildwars 2’s Druid has a lot of skills that are Sun, Moon and Celestial themed (these Celestial bodies are part of ‘Nature’…Heavenly or Celestial nature I guess….) but its a little out of place that there are two skills that are plant based, and almost all of the traits are plant/earthly nature based, only like two or three of the traits are really named the same way as the weapon/glyph skills.

There could be more cohesion in the naming at least.

I… actually have to agree with that.

What bother me the most is the confusion with the armor set that has the same name.

so is Berserker….They’re kind of running out of names here.

Raven.9603:

Electro.4173:

I guess it depends on how you look at nature.

Personally, I agree with you that the planets, sun, and moon are perfectly suited to being classified as “nature”. Heck, I don’t really know that much about them so I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure most religions that have a high nature focus like Wiccans and real life Druids the like are in large part focuses on celestial bodies as well as plantlife. But to others it seems like nature = plants, plants, plants. And those people likely aren’t going to change their mind and continue to view this incarnation of Druid as unfitting.

When i think of druid, i think of plants and animals because the base class is a homage to DnD Rangers. When they announced druid, people expected a DnD druid, at one with nature and plants and animals.

What they got was someone at one with the cosmos, basically a Moonkin from WoW when we thought we were getting Feral or Resto. Sure, the universe is “nature” in a very zen everything-is-nothing-and-nothing-is-everything kind of way, but its not what people typically associate with a druid archetype. Its also a pretty blatant rip off of guardian tomes and the guardians core role.

Agreed.

The Celestial Transform borrowed concept from WOW Druid’s Astral Form (Moonkin Form with Glyph of Starts) and functionality from Guardian’s Tome of Courage. However I do not think it is a bad thing, the concept and skills will work well together, if “Zerg Meta” is gone in HoT raids as the designers said.

I suspect that the original Druid concept is indeed based on “plant and animal” but was deprecated for some reason and replaced by the current “celestial theme”, with a few plant-y skills (Staff #4 and a Glyph skill) survived.

Chrispy.5641:

Kehlian.4380:

Chrispy.5641:

(basically a repost….)

Its not that its wierd that Guildwars 2’s Druid has a lot of skills that are Sun, Moon and Celestial themed (these Celestial bodies are part of ‘Nature’…Heavenly or Celestial nature I guess….) but its a little out of place that there are two skills that are plant based, and almost all of the traits are plant/earthly nature based, only like two or three of the traits are really named the same way as the weapon/glyph skills.

There could be more cohesion in the naming at least.

I… actually have to agree with that.

What bother me the most is the confusion with the armor set that has the same name.

so is Berserker….They’re kind of running out of names here.

Especially when the class is more about condi damage than the armor lol

Our skill effects should be made golden to differentiate from Guardians. Right now the Druid colour scheme is all over the place.

I don’t mind the celestial theme, but I only see 4 skills that have plant effects. More vines and leaves please!

Kehlian.4380:

Chrispy.5641:

(basically a repost….)

Its not that its wierd that Guildwars 2’s Druid has a lot of skills that are Sun, Moon and Celestial themed (these Celestial bodies are part of ‘Nature’…Heavenly or Celestial nature I guess….) but its a little out of place that there are two skills that are plant based, and almost all of the traits are plant/earthly nature based, only like two or three of the traits are really named the same way as the weapon/glyph skills.

There could be more cohesion in the naming at least.

I… actually have to agree with that.

What bother me the most is the confusion with the armor set that has the same name.

what bothers me is all the very green nature-y preview stuff with druids wearing those awesome Bark/Root shoulder pads on, but now we’re going to be wearing them while shooting space-blue laser-beams and summoning cosmic black-holes.

bad marketing. a preview picture of a magic astronaut wouldve been more accurate.

Knox.8462:

Our skill effects should be made golden to differentiate from Guardians. Right now the Druid colour scheme is all over the place.

I don’t mind the celestial theme, but I only see 4 skills that have plant effects. More vines and leaves please!

This is so true.

I’d argue that

celestial = stars = space = no life = no nature

But I have no problem with it.

Maybe I’ll use gas mask and glorius armor and make my ranger a space marine.

In fact that is definitely what I’m doing

I’m not enjoying the Celestial avatar. I was expecting Merlin but we got Ziggy Stardust fan-fiction. The circling planets would look o.t.t. on skyforge where people play essentially as gods. It’s completely out of place here. Most of the staff skills look and sound like pokemon attacks, rather than nature based magic. Calling planets and stars natural, therefor nature magic, is quite the stretch. It’s like saying that Elementalists should be able to use nuclear weapons, because uranium is an element.

Aesthetically it just looks wrong. Instead of (incorrectly) orbiting planets, swirling leaves or petals would have looked so much better. The odd spark of lightening perhaps. Solar-beam would haev looked fine if it looked like sunlight, but again, even that’s stretching it a bit.

I’ve no idea what they based this elite on, but it sure aint druids. I think one of the devs spent too much time in the Mind, body, spirit section of a particularly bad, woo-shop.

What’s really disappointing tho is the existance of celestial avatar. We needed change to the pet mechanics. I don’t remember a single thread over the last three years where anyone ever asked to get Ranger Death Shroud. Aspects would have been so much better for the class. If HoT is going to be the AoE heavy, tactical position monster that idenio describes, then pets which have no capacity for either, will be worse off than ever. Removing the pet from play, even temporarily for a an increase in power, would have been so much better.

Aesthetically celestial is wrong, lore-wise celestial is wrong, for the established idea of druids in fantasy celestial is wrong and mechanically for ranger, celestial is wrong.

wolfyrik.2017:

I’m not enjoying the Celestial avatar. I was expecting Merlin but we got Ziggy Stardust fan-fiction. The circling planets would look o.t.t. on skyforge where people play essentially as gods. It’s completely out of place here. Most of the staff skills look and sound like pokemon attacks, rather than nature based magic. Calling planets and stars natural, therefor nature magic, is quite the stretch. It’s like saying that Elementalists should be able to use nuclear weapons, because uranium is an element.

Aesthetically it just looks wrong. Instead of (incorrectly) orbiting planets, swirling leaves or petals would have looked so much better. The odd spark of lightening perhaps. Solar-beam would haev looked fine if it looked like sunlight, but again, even that’s stretching it a bit.

I’ve no idea what they based this elite on, but it sure aint druids. I think one of the devs spent too much time in the Mind, body, spirit section of a particularly bad, woo-shop.

What’s really disappointing tho is the existance of celestial avatar. We needed change to the pet mechanics. I don’t remember a single thread over the last three years where anyone ever asked to get Ranger Death Shroud. Aspects would have been so much better for the class. If HoT is going to be the AoE heavy, tactical position monster that idenio describes, then pets which have no capacity for either, will be worse off than ever. Removing the pet from play, even temporarily for a an increase in power, would have been so much better.

Aesthetically celestial is wrong, lore-wise celestial is wrong, for the established idea of druids in fantasy celestial is wrong and mechanically for ranger, celestial is wrong.

Celestial theme is not wrong. you may not like it, but it is not wrong. Druids historically are very tied to celestial rituals and belief.

there is very little lore about druids from guild wars 1. There just isn’t enough to justify creating a class based off “lore”

Most games ignore this celestial theme for druids, and that is wrong. I am glad anet has highlighted it.

I wished people would stop making these topics, if anet believes this is natured themed then they do they have seen the complaints by now if they wish to change it in the future then im sure they will.

I think its natural enough, I didnt play guild wars 1 so I do not know much on druid lore within the game but your not going to make it change with thread after thread.

Raven.9603:

When i think of druid, i think of plants and animals because the base class is a homage to DnD Rangers. When they announced druid, people expected a DnD druid, at one with nature and plants and animals.

What they got was someone at one with the cosmos, basically a Moonkin from WoW when we thought we were getting Feral or Resto. Sure, the universe is “nature” in a very zen everything-is-nothing-and-nothing-is-everything kind of way, but its not what people typically associate with a druid archetype. Its also a pretty blatant rip off of guardian tomes and the guardians core role.

Allow me to introduce you to the druids of Tyria.

“It is not often that we allow mortals to witness our rituals, but we see in you the seeds of the divine. To be divine is to realize that we are all one. That the self is an illusion. Through this do you understand your own immortality. Through this are you freed from the illusions of the flesh.”

So… Yah. Tyrian druids were very much “zen everything-is-nothing-and-nothing-is-everything” kind of people. Viewing the cosmos as a part of nature is very much in line with what little we know about their views.

wolfyrik.2017:

I’m not enjoying the Celestial avatar. I was expecting Merlin but we got Ziggy Stardust fan-fiction. The circling planets would look o.t.t. on skyforge where people play essentially as gods. It’s completely out of place here. Most of the staff skills look and sound like pokemon attacks, rather than nature based magic. Calling planets and stars natural, therefor nature magic, is quite the stretch. It’s like saying that Elementalists should be able to use nuclear weapons, because uranium is an element.

Aesthetically it just looks wrong. Instead of (incorrectly) orbiting planets, swirling leaves or petals would have looked so much better. The odd spark of lightening perhaps. Solar-beam would haev looked fine if it looked like sunlight, but again, even that’s stretching it a bit.

I’ve no idea what they based this elite on, but it sure aint druids. I think one of the devs spent too much time in the Mind, body, spirit section of a particularly bad, woo-shop.

What’s really disappointing tho is the existance of celestial avatar. We needed change to the pet mechanics. I don’t remember a single thread over the last three years where anyone ever asked to get Ranger Death Shroud. Aspects would have been so much better for the class. If HoT is going to be the AoE heavy, tactical position monster that idenio describes, then pets which have no capacity for either, will be worse off than ever. Removing the pet from play, even temporarily for a an increase in power, would have been so much better.

Aesthetically celestial is wrong, lore-wise celestial is wrong, for the established idea of druids in fantasy celestial is wrong and mechanically for ranger, celestial is wrong.

I felt obliged to log in just to say how much I laugh at your uranium example. You really nailed it lol… and yes, if this elite is called “The Celestial”, it would have been much more appropriate. They took the name druid then wrecked the opportunity with something totally irrelevant.

the celestial avatar is a cool mechanic that buffs the profession all around, and goes great with the theme of the druid.

am i disappointed we didn’t get aspects, and various pet buffs? yes. but in all fairness, aspects should go under the Beastmaster specialization, and a few condi pets will be useful.

wolfyrik.2017:

I’ve no idea what they based this elite on, but it sure aint druids. I think one of the devs spent too much time in the Mind, body, spirit section of a particularly bad, woo-shop.

i don’t agree. depending on what lore/history youre drawing from, druids aren’t just connected to the physical nature lol. they are also connected to the universe, and various natural energies and rhythms. the moon, tides and celestial bodies being a part of this.

it was unexpected, i love it and it makes sense to me. pets still need work, and aspects would still be amazing under BM, perhaps as a GM.

mistsim.2748:

the celestial avatar is a cool mechanic that buffs the profession all around, and goes great with the theme of the druid.

am i disappointed we didn’t get aspects, and various pet buffs? yes. but in all fairness, aspects should go under the Beastmaster specialization, and a few condi pets will be useful.

wolfyrik.2017:

I’ve no idea what they based this elite on, but it sure aint druids. I think one of the devs spent too much time in the Mind, body, spirit section of a particularly bad, woo-shop.

i don’t agree. depending on what lore/history youre drawing from, druids aren’t just connected to the physical nature lol. they are also connected to the universe, and various natural energies and rhythms. the moon, tides and celestial bodies being a part of this.

it was unexpected, i love it and it makes sense to me. pets still need work, and aspects would still be amazing under BM, perhaps as a GM.

+1

Also I’d like to add that the staff skills and glyphs have connections to natural energies (Nature Magic, drawing power from the jungle) more than ’’celestial’’, and there are few plant based spells too. I find it fitting too that the Druid uses these natural energies for basic spells, and entering Celestial form gives access to the cosmic spells as the Druid is channeling the natural energies on a higher scale. Atleast that’s the way I see it.

I think the problem is the wording and also the overuse of blue themed light effects, a white/yellow/golden attack would feel more like a solar attack compared to blue. The problem is it feels much too much like Guardian themed stuff.

What they should have done is changed the effects based on if you were in the form or not, meaning out of form it looks like sunshine, in form it looks like moonlight. That way it goes from day ot night, “Nocturnal Form” if you will. Celestial sounds much like some hocus pocus healin crystal crap you’d hear about from some new age healers.

I think it would have been neat if the normal attacks etc where green/planty/sunshine and the nocturnal form abilities were blue/white looking like glowing plant stuff that only grows at night.

Knox.8462:

I don’t mind the celestial theme, but I only see 4 skills that have plant effects. More vines and leaves please!

I am picturing Mordremoth behind a computer typing on the forums.

Halan.7931:

When I hear word “Celestial” I’m thinking about angels, not sky and stars… so in my mind it would fit the guardian’s theme, not ranger’s.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Gallery_of_Celestial_weapons

Celestial sounds much like some hocus pocus healin crystal crap you’d hear about from some new age healers

That’s unsurprising, since Druidic imagery heavily influenced new age stuff.

WoW druids have ability names like “Starfire”, and “Moonfire”, and the word “celestial” is even in their official class description. EQ druids similarly had abilities named after celestial occurrences. This is pretty standard for druid classes, really; there’s nothing scandalous or surprising here.

Shoe.5821:

Celestial sounds much like some hocus pocus healin crystal crap you’d hear about from some new age healers

That’s unsurprising, since Druidic imagery heavily influenced new age stuff.

Of course but when I think of Druid i think of someone wise, communicates with nature and has a bond that goes beyond the unseen eye, not someone having a shop who speeds most of their time eating magic mushrooms and speaking of things with no substance.

well to be fair the real druids probably were more like the latter than the former

Shoe.5821:

well to be fair the real druids probably were more like the latter than the former

That’s quite possibly true. This form reminds me of being in the Store Spencers with the black light posters, tons of random crystals and incense to cover up the “herb” smell, way psychedelic and was expecting a more shamanistic/chief type deal. The form doesn’t bug me much, just thought they missed an opportunity to showcase Day/Night within the nature theme.

Okay guys, no matter how much assumptions, deductions, approximations or sophisms you can make, those things following will stay facts :

• GW druids are NOT the druis of the real life ! You should stop drawing too many parallels between them because in GW they already had their own lore ! And that’s the whole problem of this question : even Arenanet ignored what they had previously designed for the druids.

• Saying that the stars are part of nature is not a good argument in the context of Maguuma druids (the only druids GW ever had, and the ones who inspired this spec). They were humans who retired in the jungle to be closer to nature, they’re suspected to be worshipers of Melandru.
  First the jungle is clearly not the best habitat to observe the stars and become astrologists. It’s also completely stupid to implement references to the moon and the tides. Tides in the jungle ? Really ? LOL
  Secondly when you hear about humans retiring in an hostile environment to be closer to nature, you don’t think about people watching the stars, you think about people adopting a more natural way of life, closer to the earth and other living beings. That’s what the druids were about !
  And last but not least; Melandru is the human goddess of earth, nature, plants, animals, not sky and celestial objects.

• The druid “civilisation” disappeared even before the events of GW1. But some of them stayed in the jungle as spirits of nature, becoming one with the jungle. That’s what should have been chosen instead of the celestial avatar ! It carries the same idea of transcending yourself but most importantly, it was already implemented in the lore unlike the celestial avatar coming out of nowhere !
  We interacted with them in the first game, they’re one of the most interesting mysteries of the jungle and it seems they have completely been ignored.
  The link between them and the Maguuma jungle, its fauna and flora is very strong. A great choice for an expansion that takes place in this jungle. But this link is completely broken with the celestial theme !

• Rangers have always had a strong link with nature. They create special connections with wild animals, summon spirits of nature, use nature magic etc. All of this made a great link between the Ranger and the Druid (not to mention that Melandru is the goddess of the rangers in GW1). A Ranger that choses to become an expert in those aspects of the nature could totally become a Druid. Isn’t that how a specialization is supposed to work by definition ? But now this link is so tenuous !
  Remember when Druid was announced, a lot of people didn’t understand why a Ranger would become a Druid. So we had to tell them about all the lore, the presence of nature magic in the Ranger’s core spec, his special connection with nature… And now all of this have been put aside ! Most of the obvious reasons that made the Druid a very good extension of the Ranger are completely
  invisible now !

• The celestial theme was already a big part of Canthan lore. It feels very unappropriate to reuse it in this context. Not to mention that a future spec actually based on stars, astonomy or astromancy would have been really great ! But now we can forget about it…

• The first presentation of the Druid plus the lore that we knew about gave us a very untruthful image of what the spec actually is. It was a very legitimate expectation to have believed that the Druid would look like what I described above. So it is pretty normal to have bad reactions to the actual Druid we have now.

I’m not saying that there shouldn’t be any space for the sky and stars, but they should be a minority. Not 80% of what makes the Druid ! The celestial theme completely overshadows all the rest. The Druids we will play are completely ignoring their legacy.
All this is nothing more than bad design. The only reasons we ended up with the Druid we have now are disrespect of the lore and chosing superficial image over true meaningful sense. It’s not the first time I feel like Arenanet is sabotaging their own lore.
What’s a shame particularly is that they had the perfect plan ready to be completed, but instead of following it they went arbitrarily for something else without having any convincing explanation.
Most people who like the Druid as it is today are probably ignoring most of what I just said, just like Arenanet did, and I can’t consider their arguments valid. But that’s just my opinion.

I love when Druids mix the celestial theme with the nature theme, much like how Druids IRL did/do. I don’t want to only focus on the growing of plants and that for nature, but the elements (glyphs), animals, and celestial things too, I want ALL of nature, not just part of it. That’s one reason i’m so happy that Anet actually gave it all to us with druid!

I feel like the celestial avatar thing was originally going to be the elementalist’s shtick. For whatever reason, anet scrapped the idea for the elementalist and haphazardly tacked it onto the ranger.

@Ojyh

Did you ever actually speak to those druids? Their dialogue in GW1 very heavily emphasizes that they weren’t solely manipulators of plants and animals. Their main chant is “All that exists is all that must be”.

“Time moves neither forward or back. Time is the lens of perception.”
This doesn’t sound like it relates purely to animals. Time is a complex concept to grasp, and the druids speak as if they understand it quite well. They do not believe in a linear interpretation of time that someone that views the universe from the perspective of one planet might.

“It is not often that we allow mortals to witness our rituals, but we see in you the seeds of the divine. To be divine is to realize that we are all one. That the self is an illusion. Through this do you understand your own immortality. Through this are you freed from the illusions of the flesh.”

Remember that druids are ultimately people who removed themselves from their earthly bodies. If you look at the druid’s words it’s clear they use a very esoteric view of the universe. There is a lack of separation between individuals and places. All things are one. In similar philosophies the planet is similarly not detached from the greater cosmos, which lines up perfectly with druids being attuned to the celestial bodies in addition to plants and animals.

You keep talking as if the elite spec is breaking the lore, but it isn’t. There is no lore about what kind of magic the druids used before they separated from their bodies. However the very act of removing themselves from their bodies, removing their earthly tether, to transcend mortality and become beings of spirit is very much compatible with the astral themes we see in the specialization.

Filthy dualists!

Celestial =/= nature, and saying nature is about planets and stars doesnt make any sense to me either.
Someone tells you they are into nature and natural stuff and asks for your suggestion on something to watch or read, do you tell them “yeah go watch Start Trek or The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”?? I hope not!

Here’s wikipedia’s definition on nature
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature
(notice how the “celestial” part is such a minor mention, more of a “you might also be interested in” section)

I am curious how you suppose nature would exist without the Sun. The celestial bodies are as much a part of nature as water, which is similarly not alive but vital to the existence of life.

Ehecatl.9172:

I am curious how you suppose nature would exist without the Sun. The celestial bodies are as much a part of nature as water, which is similarly not alive but vital to the existence of life.

There’s the sun – source of light that is essencial to life (arguable)
And there’s the sun – the astral body, center of our solar system

One belongs to the realm of nature, the other belongs in the realm of space.

And what you’re saying is since the sun is essential to life, celestial bodies are part of nature? That logic

I… What? Are you saying that the Sun isn’t the center of our solar system? I’m very confused.

The Sun is a star in the center of our solar system that provides light, warmth, and energy that is absolutely vital to the survival of all life on Earth. It is doubtful that Tyria operates differently somehow, especially since we know photosynthesis exists in the world.

Not just the Sun however. The Moon is important too. It has an effect on the tides and illuminates the night so that living creatures can see and hunt. Last I checked the ocean was considered a part of nature.

Stars are too far away to have a direct effect on life on our planet, but they may effect life on others. Nature isn’t limited to one planet but rather exists wherever life does.

Even then rock and soil are considered parts of nature. Earth isn’t the only planet that is composed of mineral materials. It’s not even the only planet that has water on it.

To consider ONLY plants and animals as a part of nature is pretty narrow minded.

And I don’t know about you, but I consider laying under the night sky watching the stars or watching the sun rise or set to be nature oriented activities.

Bringing in an example of evil stars from another work of fantasy is irrelevant. Especially when we were discussing space objects in our universe and their relation to the term “nature”.

In Tyria the stars are associated with spirits and the divine, which are both things the Tyrian druids talk about when you speak to them in GW1. The Celestials, mortals who ascended beyond mortality upon death, became animals composed of stars similar to living constellations, and were involved in Weh no Su which was the Canthan rite of Ascension. Weh no Su translating to Closer to the Stars.

The druids similarly transcended their mortal bodies and became spiritual beings. They spoke about the passage of time not being linear but a matter of perspective and about seeing things with the spirit that eyes could not. This all lines up very well with the druids having a connection to the celestial aspects of the world and not being strictly tied to plants and animals.

Ehecatl.9172:

I… What? Are you saying that the Sun isn’t the center of our solar system? I’m very confused.

The Sun is a star in the center of our solar system that provides light, warmth, and energy that is absolutely vital to the survival of all life on Earth. It is doubtful that Tyria operates differently somehow, especially since we know photosynthesis exists in the world.

I clearly said in my post the sun is the center of our solar system, what you didnt get was the point that I was trying to make, which is about the semantics

Ehecatl.9172:

Not just the Sun however. The Moon is important too. It has an effect on the tides and illuminates the night so that living creatures can see and hunt. Last I checked the ocean was considered a part of nature.

Again just because something is important to life doesnt make it part of nature, and the flaw in your previous argument is that you said celestial bodies are part of nature yet you only describe why the sun and the moon in specific are essential to life(and thus part of nature, according to you)

Ehecatl.9172:

Stars are too far away to have a direct effect on life on our planet, but they may effect life on others. Nature isn’t limited to one planet but rather exists wherever life does.

So nature exists where life does, I totaly agree with that. Then why would celestial bodies be considered part of nature if they haven’t been proven to contain any life?

Ehecatl.9172:

Even then rock and soil are considered parts of nature. Earth isn’t the only planet that is composed of mineral materials. It’s not even the only planet that has water on it.
To consider ONLY plants and animals as a part of nature is pretty narrow minded.

Where in any of my posts did I say only plants and animals are nature? A planet having nature in it doesnt make it nature. Earth isnt nature, it HAS nature in it. And saying other planets are nature because they have nature in it doesnt make sense, nature is a part of the planet.

Ehecatl.9172:

And I don’t know about you, but I consider laying under the night sky watching the stars or watching the sun rise or set to be nature oriented activities.

It certainly is, however, what you would be doing in this case would be appreciating the beauty of the night sky, the bright moon and starts opposed to the blank dark vast space, appreciating its natural beauty (at least its what I assume you would be doing)
You re probably not thinking “what an awesome celestial body the moon is, with it’s rotational speed and effect over ocean tides”

Its about the semantics, you can call the sun (and the moon) part of nature, when you are talking about the effect they have on our environment, but you cant say they are part of nature just because they have elements similar to our own nature.

Doomslay.3504:

I clearly said in my post the sun is the center of our solar system, what you didnt get was the point that I was trying to make, which is about the semantics

I don’t really see a semantics argument either. The sun is both the things you listed, not two separate concepts. But I feel we should avoid semantics entirely.

Again just because something is important to life doesnt make it part of nature, and the flaw in your previous argument is that you said celestial bodies are part of nature yet you only describe why the sun and the moon in specific are essential to life(and thus part of nature, according to you)

The definition of nature is, as per your own wiki link, "The natural, physical, or material world or universe. “Nature” can refer to the phenomena of the physical world, and also to life in general."

The sun, stars, planets, and other forces in space are absolutely a part of the physical universe.

So nature exists where life does, I totaly agree with that. Then why would celestial bodies be considered part of nature if they haven’t been proven to contain any life?

It is a very narrow definition to only include life itself as nature. The link you left clearly shows that the ocean, weather, and geology are all a part of nature. Water and geological and atmospheric phenomena are not unique to Earth. Most works of fantasy include weather control under the domain of “nature magic” because the weather is considered a force of nature.

Where in any of my posts did I say only plants and animals are nature? A planet having nature in it doesnt make it nature? Earth isnt nature, it HAS nature in it. And saying other planets are nature because they have nature in it doesnt make sense, nature is a part of the planet.

I don’t understand where you’re going with this. I’m not trying to be offensive or anything but I legitimately can’t understand what you’re trying to say.

It certainly is, however, what you would be doing in this case would be appreciating the beauty of the night sky, the bright moon and starts opposed to the blank dark vast space, appreciating its natural beauty (at least its what I assume you would be doing)
You re probably not thinking “what an awesome celestial body the moon is, with it’s rotational speed and effect over ocean tides”

Its about the semantics, you can call the sun (and the moon) part of nature, when you are talking about the effect they have on our environment, but you cant say they are part of nature just because they have elements similar to our own nature.

Actually when I’m looking at the stars I’m usually boggling my mind at the idea that I’m actually looking back tens of thousands if not millions or billions of years into the past due to the time it takes for light to traverse the distance between us and the stars and how light makes up our entire visual range. But then again I’m kind of a weird guy.

But you said it in your own post. The natural beauty of the sky. Natural. The stars, sun, moon, and planets are not man made. They exist independent of us and have been a natural part of the universe since long before we existed. Like a mountain overlooking a vast forest can be considered nature, so to can the stars that will one day come to their own end and thus release the star dust needed to form new planets that may one day accumulate it’s own life.

The universe is ultimately just a larger ecosystem of mostly non-organic substances. It has natural events that recycle matter and energy endlessly in a cycle very similar to our own circle of life.

Ehecatl.9172:

I… What? Are you saying that the Sun isn’t the center of our solar system? I’m very confused.

The Sun is a star in the center of our solar system that provides light, warmth, and energy that is absolutely vital to the survival of all life on Earth. It is doubtful that Tyria operates differently somehow, especially since we know photosynthesis exists in the world.

Not just the Sun however. The Moon is important too. It has an effect on the tides and illuminates the night so that living creatures can see and hunt. Last I checked the ocean was considered a part of nature.

Stars are too far away to have a direct effect on life on our planet, but they may effect life on others. Nature isn’t limited to one planet but rather exists wherever life does.

Even then rock and soil are considered parts of nature. Earth isn’t the only planet that is composed of mineral materials. It’s not even the only planet that has water on it.

To consider ONLY plants and animals as a part of nature is pretty narrow minded.

And I don’t know about you, but I consider laying under the night sky watching the stars or watching the sun rise or set to be nature oriented activities.

No, he’s saying you’re being specious and obtuse for the sake of winning an internet argument.

Ehecatl.9172:

The definition of nature is, as per your own wiki link, "The natural, physical, or material world or universe. “Nature” can refer to the phenomena of the physical world, and also to life in general."

The sun, stars, planets, and other forces in space are absolutely a part of the physical universe.

Your are taking that definition a bit too literally as it said in the page “in the broadest sense”, if we were to take it that literally then any physical thing could be considered as part of nature, including the things we currently consider the complete opposite of nature: the artificial

Ehecatl.9172:

It is a very narrow definition to only include life itself as nature. The link you left clearly shows that the ocean, weather, and geology are all a part of nature. Water and geological and atmospheric phenomena are not unique to Earth. Most works of fantasy include weather control under the domain of “nature magic” because the weather is considered a force of nature.

I did not say only life was nature, in fact I was quoting you when you said Nature is where life exists, which like I said I completely agree. I’ll also add to it that life is part of nature, life cannot exist without nature and nature is not truly nature without life involved.

I don’t understand where you’re going with this. I’m not trying to be offensive or anything but I legitimately can’t understand what you’re trying to say.

I edited my post, it had a small typo, hope its more clear

Actually when I’m looking at the stars I’m usually boggling my mind at the idea that I’m actually looking back tens of thousands if not millions or billions of years into the past due to the time it takes for light to traverse the distance between us and the stars and how light makes up our entire visual range. But then again I’m kind of a weird guy.

But you said it in your own post. The natural beauty of the sky. Natural. The stars, sun, moon, and planets are not man made. They exist independent of us and have been a natural part of the universe since long before we existed. Like a mountain overlooking a vast forest can be considered nature, so to can the stars that will one day come to their own end and thus release the star dust needed to form new planets that may one day accumulate it’s own life.

That last paragraph only enforces the fact tha this is indeed about semantics. When I said natural I meant its raw beauty unadulterted by our action, natural beauty as opposed to man-made beauty (art and whatnot)