Guild Wars 2

I am actually surprised how much sense the Exalted make from a lore perspective. They are much less shoehorned in than i thought at first.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Enchanted_armor

They are pretty much just a very advanced version of these guys.

I think Guardians aren’t pure Spellcasters, they can’t use magic directly like real magic users. The spells mostly just enhance their physical abilitys (sword, voice) or are really simple and unsophisticated (still effective though). So if he wants to run at you, he may be able to teleport to you instead or if he wants to block projectiles, he cunjures a simple magic wall against them.

Mara.6782:

They are almost like these http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Enchanted_armor

Yep pretty much. Just a very advanced version.
Not simple constructs but human souls encased in armor.
I am actually surprised how not bullkittenty the whole idea is lorewise.

Kalavier.1097:

Derom.1205:

Not counting the technical problems that you cannot say anything specific about the GW1 PC, the non-existing information about him/her can be explained by the story.
In Winds of Change we find out that he/she see himself/herself less as hero and more as a killer. So it kinda makes sense that he/she wanted to be forgotten.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Ministry_of_Oppression#Intermediate_dialogue
this mission shows its kinda nice

And from that dialogue, it sounds more like the Player character would rather be forgotten then remembered. They don’t see themselves as a hero, and regret the amount of death they’ve caused simply “because a good cause”. Even if a chunk of those cases WERE good causes, it still weighs on them.

And as others said, lack of witnesses. If you didn’t go back to LA at end up prophecies and boast, who would know you killed the lich? That’s why the scholar’s reference makes perfect sense. Some firsthand (or secondhand) account of the events. Back then everything would have to be hand-written to be copied.

Exactly.
I wonder if it was planed by devs, so there is a lore reasons for the missing information about the PC. Or maybe it was just something of a meta-commentary about the story of GW1.
Anyway, WoC FTW!

BuddhaKeks.4857:

@Derom: We shouldn’t forget that the context here is WoC. The PC (from now on refered to as “he” for ease of reading) was used to commit atrocities, which caused him to start to question his decision making. That however doesn’t mean that he thought everything he did before was highly questionable too. But even if that was the case, just because you want to disappear from collective memory, doesn’t mean you can just do it. J. Robert Oppenheimer probably wasn’t too happy with his involvment of developing the atomic bomb, but he is still remembered as it’s “father”. So again, the PC was much to prominent in many important history shaping events all across the continents to be easily forgotten.

Yeah it is weird, sure, but it is still possible. I mean yes, the PC was involved in pretty much everything that happened at the time, but prominent? Mhenlo, Evennia, Salma, Livia, Kormir, dunkoru, koss, togo. They drove the plot forward most of the time. The PC was just killing any obstacle in their they.
Also in contrast to the GW2 PC, the GW1 counterpart never fought alone. There was always a team.
I think WoC was the first story where the PC was the main character (together with miku).

Not counting the technical problems that you cannot say anything specific about the GW1 PC, the non-existing information about him/her can be explained by the story.
In Winds of Change we find out that he/she see himself/herself less as hero and more as a killer. So it kinda makes sense that he/she wanted to be forgotten.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Ministry_of_Oppression#Intermediate_dialogue
this mission shows its kinda nice

Frosch.7809:

About forgiveness: There is a fundamental difference between humanity and Charr.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Anya_Fairmind

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Lightbringer_Tybalt_Leftpaw

Char born outside the Legion

No. No, there isn’t. A difference, yes but not fundamental.
I think it’s just the question if you can let go of the past. The Ghosts of Ascalon certainly can’t.

Lutinz.6915:

Kalavier.1097:

I never, ever suggested the Charr instantly made nice. I simply pointed out that in the case of Ebonhawke, the charr made the first gestures of Peace and the Krytan prince ruined everything. Honestly, the way it all was described, the sieges were less of a focus of the legions and more of just something they did. Hell, we know for a fact at the cease fire being signed a human walked out of the gates with some beer, went up to the Charr, and both sides just sat down and had a kittening drink. Some mortal enemies they are if they literally can have a drink and become friends after that.

They have a statue in the BC of the first charr to ever reach the top of Ebonhawke’s walls. The siege wasn’t a joke, particularly for those inside. Again Ghost’s of Ascalon made that pretty kitten clear. Hell, even visiting the Fields of Ruin and talking to the NPCs shows how deep those hatreds run and how hard it is for them to be buried. There is a Vanguard veteran who states she doesn’t think she will ever be able to completely abandon her hate of Charr but her hope is that that hate can die with her generation.

The great irony of the acts of the Separatists and the Renagades are they give the Ebon Vanguard and the Charr as shared enemy which actually pulls the two sides closer together. Funnily enough that’s how Ryltock and Logan first started off. It was others trying to kill them that got them to stop trying to kill each other.

Kalavier.1097:

The Searing also is being healed and doesn’t plague the land with endless issues trying to MURDER EVERYTHING, human or Charr.

Honestly, the effects of the searing have long passed, the land is fertile and growing plants and the rivers are water, not tar. Ascalon is capable of supporting life. Meanwhile, the foefire is on the minds of everybody in Ascalon, EVERY SINGLE DAY because the ghosts are ALL OVER and CONSTANTLY ATTACKING.

And it was ironically the Ghosts that Smolder used as the core of his argument to end the war with humans. The charr didn’t need more enemies at the time.

Again, I think the Foefire was an atrocity. However considering it was a similar type of magic (ie. forbidden) that handed the Charr Ascalon in the first place, its kind of rich for them to play moral superiority.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t hate the Charr, I don’t think they should be ‘bad guys’ and I don’t think humans should be reclaiming Ascalon. I actually want to see humanity move beyond clinging to the past save maybe for the Six to have some relevance to them again. I infact LIKE the charr, warts and all. The question in this thread was what we don’t like about the charr. Ive been talking about there warts.

Yes, the charr, like every other race has those warts and a good part of them are shown in how they acted in their conquest of Ascalon. Don’t try to whitewash them. Let them wear their warts like the Asura, the Norn, and most definitely, the humans do. Hell even the Sylvari now have their warts.

I think an other problem is the fact that some players just don’t like the Charr, just like some people don’t like Sylvary or Asura. So maybe that gets mixed up with the whole conquering Ascalon affair.

Obsidian.1328:

Derom.1205:

Obsidian.1328:

ANet was trying to change its target audience to a younger demographic by changing the mood of the writing.

It isn’t the first time someone said that. I cannot really wrap my head around that statement. I mean the statement implies that before EOTN the game was targeting an older demographic, right?

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Enadiz_the_Hardheaded

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Drakes_on_the_Plain

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/File:Banana_Scythe.jpg

wat.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Herta —-> hilarious (seriously!)

If anything (and I wouldn’t say GW1 was for an older audience ever), the shift to a less serious tone started with Nightfall and from then on it balanced funny and tragic pretty well for the most part, at least for me.
In my opinion the most mature storyline was Winds of Change. Which was the last story released.

Oh you missed a good one!: Oink

Given that a lot of the popular references in GW1 were from the 90’s or even 80’s, I’d say that GW2’s target audience was Gen X-ers and their kids. Someone should have told them X-ers and millennials are very different. :-/

Interesting how your references there are from Nightfall. That’s exactly when the new writers took over.

Like i said, there was a shift in style beginning with Nightfall. I just like it.
For me, Prophecies was just standart fantasy and Factions was just one long Hong Kong movie (which i liked, though). But i really like how Nightfall started to incorporate humor without losing the serious parts. The Realm of Torment was just kittened up.
Maybe it’s because the jokes start to reference more modern things, so it feels like it’s for a younger audience. Or that i personally grew up with Final Fantasy so I was never really used to the normal western fantasy setting. I am 24 so maybe thats the reason.
It is just hard to argue for me that Nightfall or EOTN was for kids or something.

BuddhaKeks.4857:

Derom.1205:

Yeah, Gwen was whiny.
But I just don’t see any obsession humanity has with her. I mean yeah sure, Ascalonians see her as a hero. But Canthans, Elonians or even Krytans? They probably don’t even know her. Most of the stuff you can find about her is in Ebonhawk which she helped to found, but apart from that I didn’t seem to find much. You can see Salma und Rurik pretty often because of Divinities Reach’s quarters.
So for the Charr a flame shaman can be a hero and for the humans the founding mother of Ebonhawk was called the Goremonger. Maybe its just a way to say that nothing was as black and white as some people in Tyria think about that time.

Well a lot of humans that talk history, are from Ascalonian heritage, as she get’s mentioned quite often. Compare how little other important characters like Turai Ossa or Master Togo are mentioned. I mean Ossa, like Rurik and Salma has a district named after him, but that’s it (the encounter in the Priory does not count obviously). For Master Togo, I can’t think of a single reference to him, aside from one or two name drops in books that sit around in the Priory.
Granted obsession is maybe a strong word, but Gwen still get’s more credit than she deserves. Again though, the problem I have with that is foremost that she get’s more credit than the PC from GW1. That makes her my White Whale.

Most Ascalonians come from Ebonhawk now. This was quiet some time after the actions of the GW1 hero. S/he never played a (direct) role in the founding of Ebonhawk. Gwen and Keiran did.
Also a funny little thing. Have you played Winds of Change? They kinda gave the GW1 hero a canon personality. Seems like s/he was a humble and friendly person who didn’t even saw him/herself as a hero. Maybe s/he just didn’t want to be remembered by history?

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Ministry_of_Oppression#Intermediate_dialogue

“Everyone thinks their cause is just.”

Kalavier.1097:

Obsidian.1328:

Kalavier.1097:

What I hate is how people seem to avoid the idea that the leadership change means a lot.

I mean, does everybody think Germany is all evil now? No. They got new leadership and direction. The Charr overthrew their old leadership, and started a new path. Why people continue to hold ALL CHARR EVERYWHERE TODAY accountable for actions made by/ordered by FLAME LEGION LEADERSHIP is what confuses me.

Well what I hate is when GW2 players think that the whole “the Flame Legion did it” mantra even existed in Prophecies. There was zero indication of this. In fact, the Flame Legion itself wasn’t even written into the narrative until Eye of the North.

And as EotN is first and foremost a prequel to GW2, as ANet has stated, it shouldn’t be a surprise that there is a little disconnect there.

And I hate how some people seem to think that we should take the development of Charr from Prophecies (Note, THERE IS NONE. There is no charr development besides they worship fire effigies) as hardcore evidence of All charr were utterly willing in all actions.

In Nightfall you come across one who, IIRC, hates his fellows.

In EOTN, they left “Generic monster enemy race number 13” and entered “Actually developed race.”

I’m not saying Flame Legion did everything (And I’ve played all of GW1), I’m saying lore provided outside of the pro human centered viewpoint of GW1, has shown that Flame Legion held the lead for a long time, during and before GW1 even.

I guess the question is: Were the Charr better as mindless evil beasts?

Obsidian.1328:

ANet was trying to change its target audience to a younger demographic by changing the mood of the writing.

It isn’t the first time someone said that. I cannot really wrap my head around that statement. I mean the statement implies that before EOTN the game was targeting an older demographic, right?

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Enadiz_the_Hardheaded

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Drakes_on_the_Plain

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/File:Banana_Scythe.jpg

wat.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Herta —-> hilarious (seriously!)

If anything (and I wouldn’t say GW1 was for an older audience ever), the shift to a less serious tone started with Nightfall and from then on it balanced funny and tragic pretty well for the most part, at least for me.
In my opinion the most mature storyline was Winds of Change. Which was the last story released.

BuddhaKeks.4857:

Oh believe me when I say I was jsut scratching the surface, there is a whole lot more wrong with Gwen, she is in my opinion the epitomization of everything that’s wrong with humanity in GW2. And we even got our first glimpse of that in GW1 to boot!

Yes I can understand why she hates Charr, that doesn’t make her in anyway sympathetic to me. She just a hateful husk of a woman. Her very existence is saddening and not something at all fitted as a role model. She barely manages to stay in racist grumbler territory, instead of going over into full-blown terrorist activities like the Separatists. Though if the Charr are to believed she actually crossed that line.

Still she is painted in a very positive way. The books Ghosts of Ascalon and Edge of Destiny both call her one of humanities greatest heroes, IIRC. I think it was Rytlock who gave away the Charr nickname for her; Goremonger. That’s pretty much the only negative thing ever said about her and that comes naturally from a Charr’s mouth. It’s just weird that humans blindly hero worship her, while there are so many greater heroes, like for example Salma or Rurik (who only have a few places named after them), but more importantly the player character from GW1, who as I mentioned before, get’s only very passing mentions and even those are extremely cryptic.

I just think as long as Gwen is treated by humans as some sort of saint, peace between them and the Charr will always be full of tensions. After all, your freedom fighters are another peoples terrorists. It’s just a matter of perspective. Not that the Charr are without fault, they too cling to the past in an unhealthy way. I think humanities obsession with Gwen is worse though.

Yeah, Gwen was whiny.
But I just don’t see any obsession humanity has with her. I mean yeah sure, Ascalonians see her as a hero. But Canthans, Elonians or even Krytans? They probably don’t even know her. Most of the stuff you can find about her is in Ebonhawk which she helped to found, but apart from that I didn’t seem to find much. You can see Salma und Rurik pretty often because of Divinities Reach’s quarters.
So for the Charr a flame shaman can be a hero and for the humans the founding mother of Ebonhawk was called the Goremonger. Maybe its just a way to say that nothing was as black and white as some people in Tyria think about that time.

Lutinz.6915:

The difference is that while the other races seem to actually be effectively fighting back, humanity seems to be in a defensive huddle just surviving taking hits. It hasn’t really successfully made any solid inroads into any of the threats applied to it.

My key point is fans of the humans in GW2 dwell on the past because humanity these days seems to be diminishing and the themes that once defined it have become empty. Player aren’t going to move on because most of what we have been shown of humanity is its losses rather than how it is growing and adapting to a new world. The writers have effectively left humans thematically stuck in a past that no longer seems to hold any relevance.

I have to thank you, I think I finally understood why the Fields of Ruin are one of my favourite maps in the game.
At least for me, it actually shows developement.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Halkor_Meadows

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Summit_Peak

Humans and Charr working together and even a new human settlement in Ascalon. It seems to me that things have changed for humans and Charr.

But I guess it does highlight how different GW1 and GW2 are even more.

Lostwingman.5034:

Derom.1205:

Who likes to admit his own failings? It would be strange for such a warlike and proud nation to admit its own weaknesses, losses. They are kinda like Norn in that regard, they like to see themselves as biggest kittenes (I like this function) in Tyria and humility is something they definitely lack.
I always thought that was done on purpose by A-Net. Some NPC in the citadel even says that they still drill hatred of humans in their cubs although it doesn’t make much sense now.

Except where in the game is there any self-awareness of this matter? I guess I’d really have to dig around in the Priory in the hope that some ambient dialogue or something hints at that but we don’t get that. Which just further seems to “wipe away” any of the accomplishments of players in the previous game, let alone the historical revisionism that just gets under my skin on principle.

It’s probably true that the storywriters decided for a different fate for the Charr after prophecies. Also I cannot really remember any dialog that refenrences that part specificly (although it would be interesting to find one).
But on the over hand, isn’t the Fields of Ruin map one big evidence? I mean most Charr hate the treaty. Still Ebonhawk stands and the Ascalonians even gained some land out of it. So it’s not just “Charr won everything, game over”, the way i see it.
Also the accomplishments of the GW1 Hero lies mostly in the Fact that Tyria still exists more or less. Although you could say that in the end due to Ebonhawk Gwen saved part of Ascalon, not the player.

Lurinna.4306:

Derom.1205:

Now I am wondering about the whole retcon thing. While it probably was a retcon, i never saw it as an obvious one. For me, no side in a war can be 100% evil, so seeing some (for a lack of better term) “good” Charr in EOTN seemed logical.

Of course, there’s no way to know for sure what Anets plans for the Charr were in those days before plans changed, but I can atleast tell you that there wasn’t even a hint of them being anything other than monsters in the original release. And that stands out because, with most of the sentient monster races, they made at least a token effort to humanize them – Ventari and his followers for the Centaurs, tons of stuff in Factions for the Tengu, etc. But the Charr never spoke a word. The first time you even learn they’re capable of speech is right at the end of nightfall, and even that’s not a paticularly positive impression.

But yeah, I’m glad you get it and I didn’t just sound crazy.

In my experience it’s always a good thing to at least try to understand people.
I guess my problem is more or less that it is hard for me just accept a whole race as evil (i really don’t like the implication). Even Tolkien regretted making the Orcs simply evil.

Lutinz.6915:

Purely for me, my lingering dislike for the Charr is a certain hypocrisy they seem to have.

They take credit for victory over the humans while ignoring that it was the magics of the Flame Legion, who they hold in contempt, which enabled their victory by crippling Ascalon with the Searing.

They see no real issue with the use of the Searing on the humans but get upset over the humans use of the Foefire on them.

They claim to have killed their gods when it was again humans who did that.

Hell, one of the key figures in the start of the Charr throwing off the yoke of the Flame Legion was infact saved by humans, as was his warband, from Flame Legion cages.

It is ironic that the Charr actually owe a lot of their success to others they look at with contempt.

This isn’t to say I hate Charr, but they do come across as a little full of it.

Who likes to admit his own failings? It would be strange for such a warlike and proud nation to admit its own weaknesses, losses. They are kinda like Norn in that regard, they like to see themselves as biggest kittenes (I like this function) in Tyria and humility is something they definitely lack.
I always thought that was done on purpose by A-Net. Some NPC in the citadel even says that they still drill hatred of humans in their cubs although it doesn’t make much sense now.

Lurinna.4306:

For me, it’s because the whole thing evokes negative feelings I associate with the whole GW1>GW2 transition in general. Where Anet kinda dumped their existing fanbase, along with their game and it’s unique premise, just 2 years out of the gate, to make something new with better mass appeal. Without much care for all that the aforementioned had invested.

It’s probably difficult to understand now how the two are connected, but consider it from the perspective of a veteran GW1 player at the time that GW2 is announced. You’re playing a thing you love, in a universe you enjoy, and everything seems great as you await the next addition, of which you’ve been promised many over the course of years. Then suddenly you’re told their won’t be a next addition, (despite it still going strong,) and instead support is about to totally stop in favour of this new thing.

Naturally, you’re a little upset. But at the same time, all the ideas you associated with the old thing you loved are being thrown out as well. It might seem ridiculous considering it’s a video game, but for many people, Ascalon and pre-searing, and the tragedy of them being destroyed, were the earliest memories they had of the game, and the firmest sense of a “home” within it’s context. The beta events were all there. All the earliest missions, as well as some of the hardest endgame quests, were there. Sure, MMO patriotism is extremely silly and dumb when you’re an adult, but I – And probably a lot of other people – was a kid when GW1 launched, and feelings you get as a kid are hard to get rid of.

So there had been an attachment to Ascalon for a lot of people, and to it’s cause and it’s conflict with the Charr. But now these new people – New writers, in your mind the same people taking your game for something you might not even see for years and years and might not even like – Came along and told you that you were dumb to feel that way. That the generic monsters were actually the good guys, and you were jerks for fighting them, and they would be the stars now.

It was such a blatant retcon, made for such obvious reasons (the desire to be able to incorporate a cool sounding race into their new project which, as was popular, required multiple races) that came about at the worst time, and got bundled in with a big ball of anti-anet resenment; At their laziness, fickleness, in regard to lore and game design both. The feeling that everything you had come to enjoy was being replaced for arbitrary reasons. That it could easily happen again, at any time.

That probably all sounds very melodramatic, and I certainly don’t feel that strongly now. But again. Try to think of it from the perspective of a tween.

Thank you, that was interesting. It makes sense and i dont’t know if i wouldn’t say similair things if A-Net did something like that to Cantha or Elona.
Also I think I am starting to understand why players out of the game and people inside of the game say similar things. Both lost something important to them.

Now I am wondering about the whole retcon thing. While it probably was a retcon, i never saw it as an obvious one. For me, no side in a war can be 100% evil, so seeing some (for a lack of better term) “good” Charr in EOTN seemed logical.

Kalavier.1097:

They ignore the stranglehold of control the Flame legion held over the Charr back then. They ignore how different Charr today are compared to back then (You can find charr who openly hate what the Flame Legion did back then IIRC).

The Searing happened over 200 years ago. But for GW1 players it’s just a few years ago. So it’s understandable that for them Charr kinda did a 180° and became he good guys compared to the first game.
Personaly I kinda like Charr and Ascalon is truly their country now. But they are a bunch of kittens (how fitting.)

Pyro.4765:

Derom.1205:

Pyro.4765:

Well if you do want to talk to one of them, I’ve been in those discussions and I’ve got some time to kill.

1st Question: What’s your opinion on the whole Ascalon discussion?

2nd Question: How do you think do these discussion become this bizarre almost-roleplay where people take the whole discussion so seriously?

Actually i would like to ask these questions to everyone to reads this and has an idea about it.

1. Think Ascalonians wanting to reclaim their homeland are in the right, but that Separatists are in the wrong.

2. Like Aaron said, I think people view it as a challenge to their real life sense of justice through proxy. To elaborate on this, it really kittenes me off when people talk like the Ascalonians in any way deserved the Searing. I feel like the main divide here is between people who think you can be held responsible for the actions of your ancestors or your nation and those who don’t.

Makes sense. I think what I find so weird about it, is the fact that these people become like characters in Tyria.

Well, I guess I should kinda applaude A-Net for creating a lore that makes people think that way (even if it was unintended).

Pyro.4765:

Well if you do want to talk to one of them, I’ve been in those discussions and I’ve got some time to kill.

1st Question: What’s your opinion on the whole Ascalon discussion?

2nd Question: How do you think do these discussion become this bizarre almost-roleplay where people take the whole discussion so seriously?

Actually i would like to ask these questions to everyone to reads this and has an idea about it.

Aaron Ansari.1604:

Anyway, that’s just my outsider’s way of interpreting the matter. I’ve seen several of these, but I rarely participate, and I’ve never tried to sit down someone who does to see what’s making them tick. Maybe they’d have a different way of seeing it.

Actually, it would be fascinating to see what is making them tick. It’s this weird mix of in and out of character thoughts that make real people argue like people in game.
I mean, they say stuff that Ascalonians in game would say on that matter.

It’s always weird and interesting for me to see how the whole Char-Human Ascalon conflict becomes so personal for so many people.
It makes sense for players to hate Charr after watching the Searing turning Ascalon into a Wasteland.

But what about players who started with Factions or Nightfall? They really have no connection to Ascalon at first and only see it in its ruined state.

For me personaly, my first campaign was Nightfall, so I never really cared about what happened in Ascalon (even after i played pre-searing). So when i read all the discussion about it here, it’s just weird for me.
So the whole conflict appears to me like one morally grey clusterkitten that mirrors the Israel-Palastine conflict way too much.

*Edit: I guess i would like the answers for 2 questions:

What is your opinion about the Ascalon discussion?

and

How do you think do these discussion sometimes become this bizarre almost-roleplay where people take the whole discussion to an almost real life seriousness.

Iason Evan.3806:

More fights should be added where interrupting is a key mechanic. The way it is now, control classes are only really viable in Player vs. Player fights. It’s disappointing.

This is something which should be especially easy in this game because every profession has skills for interuption; so that even if you make interuption mandatory, you wouldn’t exclude any profession (like for example with reflection being mendatory, which only a few classes have).

AnthonyOrdon.3926:

Personally (by which I mean not representing the entire development team) I’d like to see at least one boss with a sort of reverse defiance. Generally immune to CC except in windows during one or two keys attacks with a long warmup. I think the theory behind Defiance would work well if everyone knew exactly when to interrupt. This is a troublesome prospect for the ad-hoc groups that GW2 promotes in various settings, so maybe shifting the responsibility to the boss (which everyone is already paying attention to) would work out a little better. “He’s winding up for super-mega-attack, everyone stun now!”

Discuss?

Not a perfect solution but better than what we have now. Although it means that all the different forms of hard-cc (knockdown, knockback, stun) will turn into a simple stun.

I don’t know if anyone said that already but how about soft-cc (cripple, chilled) would also reduce defiant (and only reduce, new stacks still come only after hard-cc is used). This way all forms off cc would be more effective and you still couldnt cc a boss to death.

Excuse me, but i tried to read the whole thread but i can someone explain to me about what retcon the discussion is about? That they made Scarlet a few years jounger?

Konig Des Todes.2086:

A poor writer does retroactive continuities. A good writer works in a way to explain why old ‘facts’ became ‘lies’ and uses that to boost the story. A great writer puts in what they want while not destroying the established pillars of the story.

Ok i have to admit, while i am interessested in the lore i cannot say i know it very well, so i want to understand where Anet retconed anything (exept maybe Scarlet’s age).

When GW2 got released it was very different from GW1. But after about a year Anet started to implement gameplay mechanics from GW1 into the game again. Stuff like free retraiting, normal cutscenes and skill (trait) capturing.
And now they brought back the lockpick system and the missions are replayable and have bonus objectives like in Prophecies (espcially the bonus where you need to defeat the Inquest during the Aerin fight reminded me of that).

So i find it interesting how the devs were experimenting a year long just to come back to where they started.
Did you have similair thoughts about that?
(Also it would be fascinating to hear a response from Anet about it.)

I know its kinda stupid but i would be so disappointed if they dont make a “Holy kitten, since when are you the Pact commander?” joke with the biconics.

Carlin Sanders.3587:

In the end, all they wanted was to put all of that hero business behind them and go back to as normal a life as they can.

this is just all my two cents.

Just as a sidenote: the above was more or less confirmed during the winds of change campaign.

Especially in this dialog with a woman named Xin Ji.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Ministry_of_Oppression

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

That sounds like a good reason to me. And it could also be specialization. Because if you think about it, assembling a meat-puppet out of many corpses in the soil, is really not that different from assembling one corpse just as it was. And as Derom also pointed out, a minion is a very specific type of undead servant, equipped with specific attributes that the necromancer needs. A minion is more than a normal zombie.

The Flesh Golem is a good example of a minion that has all the right attributes to be more than just a zombie. Necromancers seem to have refined the art of weaving dead flesh into these fearsome fighting undead soldiers. Where as a normal zombie might easily fall apart, minions are tough and much stronger. They can take more of a beating, and have claws so they do more damage.

That’s disgusting, logical and slightly amoral. Yeah, sounds like something a necromancer would do.

Aidan.4602:

This one for me:

https://soundcloud.com/arenanet/guild-wars-2-battle-on-the

Although mechanic-wise the Marionette was more interesting, the Hologram fight was better due to a almost perfect atmosphere for a boss fight. Especially because of that song and Scarlet’s voice-overs.
So, chapeau for Leif Chapelle and Tara Strong.

Well this reason may be cheap, but how about practicality?
I mean the minions in the game are all very specialized so it kinda makes sense to just use bodyparts to make a undead in the shape exactly you need.
Flesh Golem? He needs to be sturdy, have a powerful weapon to fight and and big horn for his ramming attack. So you use parts from diffents bodies and arrange them the way you want.

FlamingFoxx.1305:

I think one of the biggest problems I have with the humans is that they have American accents. It detracts from the immersion. But I guess most Americans, who comprise most of the player base, don’t have a problem with it?

I am not american but i kinda like the fact that Human have a american accent and Sylvary a british one. Makes it more distinct.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

For those interested:

Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Blitz.

Kitten! There goes my theory of Suriel and Liadri being sisters. I kinda thought the black and white patches on the ground during their fights were made by them to annoy each other.

Damash.1074:

Why should we chooce weapons over using magic?

I think its best to imagine that while magic is powerful, all “non-magic” classes are pretty much bad-kitten (i like this word) action heros. Think Aragorn for Rangers or Conan for Warriors, both have killed magic users in their stories.

Jimmy JimBob.2801:

I think it’s Scholar Ela Makkay.

She’s been there in the background since Theo Ashford…

EDIT: actually apparently she was in Hoelbrak during Flame and Frost too

That would actually be very cool. I mean she was always there, just under the Radar of most people.
Also if you speak to her, she is very interested in Scarlet whereabouts.

bullyrook.2165:

Derom.1205:

Just some questions i have in mind after reading this thread.
Is the story bad because there are 4 women and 1 man? Thusly, would the story be improved if a-net adds a male to the biconics?
But, does that mean that the story would not as well improve if they add an additional female to the biconics?

And as a sidenote, i think that Marjory is pretty much male, there isn’t much feminine on her. I mean she is a typical hard boiled film noir detective. Although she is female (as a guy) i can easly relate to that kind of person.
I mean, she is Humphrey Bogart from Casablanca (with breasts).

sigh seriously? We already said that there being so many females in the group is not a bad thing, some of us were just wondering if the males in Tyria actually possess spines to fight along side them or if they are actually some sub-species of invertebrate.

You are right, men are underrepresented in the story.
It is just interesting for me because if you swap the words “males” and “females” it becomes similar to an argument that many Feminists use who are critizising the representation of women in media (example: Can women be more than powerless Damsels to be rescued by men?).

I guess no-one wants to see his gender/religion/race represented badly.

Just some questions i have in mind after reading this thread.
Is the story bad because there are 4 women and 1 man? Thusly, would the story be improved if a-net adds a male to the biconics?
But, does that mean that the story would not as well improve if they add an additional female to the biconics?

And as a sidenote, i think that Marjory is pretty much male, there isn’t much feminine on her. I mean she is a typical hard boiled film noir detective. Although she is female (as a guy) i can easly relate to that kind of person.
I mean, she is Humphrey Bogart from Casablanca (with breasts).

When i see the artwork for this game, i see the industry of the charr, the mystic of the Sylvari, the renaissance world of the Humans.
And i see everything of that in game.

Maybe your problem could be that the current story is pretty much science-fiction and not classical fantasy. (Something I think is very interesting.)

Of all the stuff in that Fractal, that thing got me completly lost. I mean i cannot even imagine to think of something that makes sense.

All we know is that the meltdown of all that Chaosmagic created an at least semi-sentient humanoid being of pure energy.

Is there any information about what that thing is?

I actually had the same idea in my head. But now that i thinking more about it there are some deeper implications if this is true.
This leads to two possible scenarios: a sad one and weird one.

Sad:
If all Fractals are simply figments of past events that means Dessa is one, too. That means that there was a Dessa who opened camp in this mistlock observatory but not anymore.
The observatory was destroyed and Dessa is dead and they became just an other fractal.

Weird:
Dessa came there just like us and created that observatory. But somehow the observetory became a Fractal itself. Dessa (and her crew) was LITERALLY TURNED INTO HISTORY.

I know that this was probably said before but how about soft CCs (cripple, freeze, maybe immobilize) decreasing defiant stacks on bosses? Of course without activating unshakable to generate more stacks.

This would allow players to decrease the stacks safer and faster but without pretty much stunlocking the boss; and almost every class has easy access to these conditions. Also it would make control/condition skills more usefull in pve.

In my opinion the only mistake Anet made is the failure to show that Scarlet acknowledges the player (techniclly her arch-nemesis) as a serious threat.
I mean for her there is this guy/gal who just doesn’t give a skritt about everything and “spoils” her fun.

At least they tried to do something like that when Scarlet says that she will make a special project out of you after the event with the spider eggs.

And one more thing: while “everyone” says she is a Sue, most people haven’t noticed that she is actually a pretty weak fighter, very reliant on her various gadgets to do anything. A straight fight with her would be just boring.

There is something i don’t understand about you guys. So the only reason why people think that Scarlet is some kind of Sue is because she never admits defeat?
That’s what people call a pokerface.

I mean you can’t think she is overpowered because she gets defeated every single time.

For myself, let her have all the fun stuff. I mean she should throw everything she has at us. Molten Alliance, Watchwork, Aetherblades, Toxic Nightmare; everything.
It will make the final showdown even more awesome.

I still think that the reason Scarlet is called a Mary Sue is because she is supposed to be the personel nemesis of the Player. An equal in power. And storywise the Player is a person who destroyed almost every evil/criminal organisation in Tyria in a few months and created the biggest and most powerful alliance in all of Tyria (the Pact).
So she has to be powerful or this whole fight just wouldn’t be fair.

@Konig
I am very happy that some else understood the fact that Scarlets biggest strength is her ability to create alliances but that also every plan of her failed despite being called a Mary Sue so often.

…. sound like old cheesy movies from the 50s.

You know, like these old horror movies:
“They called her mad, but they didn’t understand. And now the whole world will tremble in fear before her CLOCKWORK CHAOS!”
dramatic music and a histerical laughter

Maybe it’s because the release pages always look a bit over the top.

ThiBash.5634:

Derom.1205:

Again nothing about her is overpowered if she is beaten every time.

But that’s the thing, we’re not beating her. Anything we do to her is either part of her plans, or inconsequential. It’s like we’re not even there. That’s what makes her a mary sue most of all. She never suffers any meaningful setback.

Do you mean the part where she captures Caith in Twilight Arbor? Well, she is a Genius so she has to do something right.
We also saved Divinitys Reach, Lions Arch, part of the Shiverpeaks and part of Ascalon from her. Nothing of that was part of some plan of hers, at least she never said that.

It isn’t always suppose to be about a clear winner oder looser. It would be boring if the villain went down after the first or second fight. It’s like saying that Darth Vader is a mery sue because he survived the explosion of the first Death Star.

(And before anyone counter by saying they at least destroyed the Death Star: We did that, too. Twice. Molten Facility and Aetherblade retreat went boom.)

ThiBash.5634:

…she just toyed a bit with us and then ran off, like a thief in WvW that you can never catch because of stealth.

Yep exatly. Like a thief that attacks and then notices that he is fighting a stronger opponent. He just runs away. No-one would call that thief a winner.

Also i just noticed, due to the setting of the game its obvious that Scarlet will loose again when she fights against us.
It’s kinda sad, she is doomed to failure. It’s just a matter of time.

Again nothing about her is overpowered if she is beaten every time.

ThiBash.5634:

Funny. To me she came across as not even trying, just mocking us for our weak attempt at fighting us.

She tried to kill us 3 times with different gadgets and was easly beaten every time.
She even pretty much said that we ruined her “fun”.

ThiBash.5634:

Lorewise, our characters aren’t mary sues. They didn’t beat the undead when Claw Island was invaded. They didn’t go toe-to-toe with an Elder Dragon on their own.

Exatly, and Scarlet is doing something similair. She didn’t attack Lions Arch or Devinitys Reach all alone. She too has allies. And like the player, she is making alliances between different factions (player = the orders, Scarlet = evil factions)

It’s just the more i think about it the more it becomes obvious that she is the evil version of the player.

ThiBash.5634:

Scarlet is all three at once, outclassing everyone in everything.

Thats actually not true. If her Playhouse is any indication, she is just a Genius with almost unlimited Resources but no fighting skills. The player is the expert fighter.

I mean I don’t want to say Scarlet is a good it’s just that i don’t think generalisation is the way to go to critize her.

ThiBash.5634:

My character isn’t a half-god. She has her strengths and her weaknesses. I’m guessing it must feel differently when you play a warrior though

Nope, my main is a Necro and still i feel like godmode in the open world most of the time

Maybe her Motivation isn’t clear but we definitly know what she wants to do. Starting with Flame and Frost all she was doing is gathering different kinds of technology from all around Tyria.
Looks to me like she is planning something big with that stuff.

And to those who say that Scarlet is an ineffectiv villain because all her plans failed.
Well, first it didn’t fail completly because like i said above she now has a truckload of very dangerous technology under her command.
Second, there was this other “Mery Sue” running around ,called The Player, who was working against her.
All of Scarlet’s plan would have succeded if not for the player.

I think the problem for some people comes from the fact that Guild Wars 2 is actually very optimistic in its storytelling. the setting itself is serious but not grimdark, there aren’t any supervillain who are impossible to defeat. The bad guys aren’t more powerful than the good guys.