Guild Wars 2

Obsidian.1328:

No, Charr were always the one’s that humans took it from. The contention is the homeland. Even in Proph, Ascalon was considered the Charr’s “southern borders”. EotN outright states the Charr homeland is north of there. Saying that was simply the humans’ point-of-view on the issue is a huge cop-out, for which there is no evidence of at all until some dude just up and “decides” it’s the case now. Using that old b.s. technique of in-game bias to enact a cultural paradigm shift is not new, and quite frankly I’m surprised people accept it so readily. I suppose you think Glint was always an ED champion, and not a separate and unique individual whose presence had nothing to do with them?

At least try to view the history without GW2 blinders on.

Oh, I think out of the two of us, Im the one seeing clearly. you’ve already acknowleged the double standard exists.

Charr did have their homelands at the southern borders but their “ancestral homeland” included Ascalon. That’s the homeland of their ………ancestors. But we already knew that humans took somebodies homeland and made it into their own homeland. Blinders is refusing to factor in that it was always someone elses land before it was humanities.

Without GW2 to answer the question, I’d be asking just who’s homeland it was before humanity took it.

ya. being able to anticipate is necessary for the GK.

Vodyara.4608:

Then why does it work just fine underwater?

It doesn’t. I works fine under water when the mob is swimming right at you. You will find that you will have to chase down a lot of mobs that swim perpendicular to you. And there is no arch under water.

Vodyara.4608:

I don’t mean it as an absolute replacement for the current system, I meant to have it as an option.

That would be asking a-net to spend resources creating something that is already broken. The arch and distance of Grenade kit would make it more broken than guardian scepter.

It is broken under water. In a lot of instances, the grenades are just too slow to catch the target. add the arch that happen above water and auto attack would destroy the grenade kit.

edit: a good idea that I have read though is for the targeting reticle to follow the mouse and pressing the mouse button would launch the attack.

Obsidian.1328:

Dustfinger.9510:

Obsidian.1328:

Dustfinger.9510:

Obsidian.1328:

That humanity took it from someone doesn’t have anything to do with my point. And yes, the Charr currently own it. But, every Ascalonian alive can claim it was taken from them. You seem to think cultural identity only matters to the time in which you are alive. All those npc’s kitten ily shouting “For Ascalon” aren’t shouting it for their own, small time-frame of existence. They are shouting it because the writer was trying to tap into the basic, timeless, tribal roots we all share as human beings and using that to evoke a sentimentality about a piece of land in the game. The writer was trying to endear Ascalon to the PC. And not just the peeps, but the kingdom as well. If a player doesn’t give two farts about it, then fine, carry on. But don’t try and say it’s not there…it is.

Your second line, I have no idea what that means. There’s plenty of space to add new races and such. Wth are you talking about?

that’s no problem. it can be there. It is still a double standard. Now if we can agree that it is based on a double standard and that it is still there, then we really have no disagreement.

The second line was directly referencing the claim that my arguement left no room for other races. But my logic doesn’t hinge on that reasoning.

How is that a double standard?

replace “ascalonians” and “humans” with “charr” and it makes the same point in charr favor and is no less true. The double standard comes when one is championed over the other using the same measurments.

double standard

noun

1.

any code or set of principles containing different provisions for one group of people than for another,

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/double+standard?s=t

You’re forgetting the Charr weren’t from Ascalon until last year. Until then, my statements aren’t a double standard because you can’t replace one name with another and still have it hold true. Now of course you can. But that’s not my fault. ANet created the double standard with this when they changed the “homeland” thing, not me. The double standard now is ANet trying present any human as wrong or evil who thinks Ascalon should be fought for by Ascalons. It’s rather silly you don’t see that.

I’m not forgetting that. I fully acknowlege that that is when the charr became the ones that humanity took it from. But we knew humanity took it from somebody since the beginning. So why champion humanity over anybody that humanity took it from? A-net didn’t create that double standard. They told us from the beginning that humanity took it.

So even without knowing that it was the charr, it is still a double standard since we can replace “Ascalonian” and “humanity” with “the ones humanity took it from”. feel free to ignore that it ended up being the charr. Championing humanity is a double standard if you don’t equally champion “the ones humanity took it from”. But then you wouldn’t be able to ‘champion’ humanity.

edit: and even still, blaming a-net for creating the double standard doesn’t eliminate it. It only confirms it’s existence.

Ah, that does make sense that he hesitated about multiple forms in lore. I’d appreciate if he kept the lore answers neatly packaged with the rest of the lore and the mechanics with the mechanics. :p

Why would he have compleltey ignored the lore question?

edit: he actually clarifies that the undecided element is about the play, not the lore.

“This is from the play standpoint as opposed to lore, we are still in discussions about this.”

Idk. In audio, the question is lore. he says “whithin game terms you choose a particular Spirit that you venerate and that has an effect on your story.” he then goes on to say “The ability to become the bear, become the wolf is something that is grown over time.” So it seems to me that he is clarifying the difference between the mechanics (choosing a Spirit for the story) and the lore (grown over time).

Going by the interpretation that all of that answer is concerning the mechanics, it seems odd that Jeff would completely abandon answering the lore in order to only go off on a mechanics tangent. just to get back into the lore with the rest of the questions. That doesn’t seem to mesh with the rest of the interview.

I think at the end there, he was referencing the descision they still had to make about the mechanics. The questions however, are geared toward the lore. So the beginning of that answer would also be on the lore.

Wartower: “I understand there might be a process to getting close to a spirit or choosing a spirit? Does that mean there is a ritual to connect to the spirit to be able to transform into it’s form?”

Jeff: “At the start of the game you choose a particular spirit that you venerate and that has an effect on your story. The ability to become the bear, to become the wolf, is something that is grown over time. This is in the game mechanics so I’m walking on thin ice at the moment. We are not saying if you venerate the bear you may only become the bear. You may have the ability to become the wolf or snow leopard as well. This is from the play standpoint as opposed to lore, we are still in discussions about this.”

The shape change of a norn does seem to be a skill that is developed rather than something that is just given.

Jeff: “The ability to become the bear, to become the wolf, is something that is grown over time.” http://www.guildwarsinsider.com/towertalk-norn-interview-jeff-grubb-transcription/

Norn guardian can have elements of all. It’s up to you to decide what quality your norn guardian relies the most on.

Obsidian.1328:

Dustfinger.9510:

Obsidian.1328:

That humanity took it from someone doesn’t have anything to do with my point. And yes, the Charr currently own it. But, every Ascalonian alive can claim it was taken from them. You seem to think cultural identity only matters to the time in which you are alive. All those npc’s kitten ily shouting “For Ascalon” aren’t shouting it for their own, small time-frame of existence. They are shouting it because the writer was trying to tap into the basic, timeless, tribal roots we all share as human beings and using that to evoke a sentimentality about a piece of land in the game. The writer was trying to endear Ascalon to the PC. And not just the peeps, but the kingdom as well. If a player doesn’t give two farts about it, then fine, carry on. But don’t try and say it’s not there…it is.

Your second line, I have no idea what that means. There’s plenty of space to add new races and such. Wth are you talking about?

that’s no problem. it can be there. It is still a double standard. Now if we can agree that it is based on a double standard and that it is still there, then we really have no disagreement.

The second line was directly referencing the claim that my arguement left no room for other races. But my logic doesn’t hinge on that reasoning.

How is that a double standard?

replace “ascalonians” and “humans” with “charr” and it makes the same point in charr favor and is no less true. The double standard comes when one is championed over the other using the same measurments.

double standard

noun

1.

any code or set of principles containing different provisions for one group of people than for another,

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/double+standard?s=t

That^.

Though there is no official term it does seem clear to me that demon is the wrong term. It seems pretty evident that there are non-demon mist beings. and equally evident that part of the qualification of being a demon is the drive to cause suffering and despair.

“Demonic” is an umbrella term that encompasses anything to do with a demon including being one. So “not demonic” can only mean Razah isn’t a demon. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/demonic

Basing Razah’s “demon-ness” on where and how he is created without all the qualifiers (evil) is like basing a charrs “norn-ness” based on a charr being copulated in tyria.

Demons are “made from the Mists themselves, bits of etheric matter that have gained malignant sentience and power.”

defined as …… malignant sentience

That means no “good demons”.

There is a lot of mental gymnastics you are doing to try and make it happen. Razah is confirmed “not demonic”. that means he is not a demon and not related to a demon. That means there are creatures of the mist that simply aren’t demons.

Demonic means “of, relating to or suggesting of a demon”. if razah isn’t demonic then he really has nothing to do with demons at all. Much less being one.

There are no good demons from hell in GW. Demons are defined as corrupted shards of existence that have gained a malignant sentience. And that they share the same aspirations. To feast on suffering, despair, and the vital energy of intelligent creatures. the strong consume or dominate the weak, reveling in their feasts and victimization.

So if it is a creature of the mists who is not evil, it is not a demon. it is simply a creature of the mists. The demon page also says that demons are corrupted shards of reality in the mists. Without the corruption of that shard, it isn’t a demon. it is simply a mist creature.

if the stated canon definition is a corrupted and evil mist creature then a non evil mist creature isn’t a demon. It is simply a mist creature because there is no infernal place with which to define that all creatures from that place are demons.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

If the stated canon definition of demon is “born from the Mists” then that’s what a demon is, regardless of what Christianity or ancient Greece calls them.

I think part of the issue is that the stated canon definition of demon is more than simply being born from the mists. They are mists creatures born of corrupted shards of reality in the mists. That means that not all mist creatures are demons. Razah, for instance is specifically stated to not be a demon.

Since the mists are the building blocks of reality, we just might find out that all creatures have their origins in the mists.

Obsidian.1328:

That humanity took it from someone doesn’t have anything to do with my point. And yes, the Charr currently own it. But, every Ascalonian alive can claim it was taken from them. You seem to think cultural identity only matters to the time in which you are alive. All those npc’s kitten ily shouting “For Ascalon” aren’t shouting it for their own, small time-frame of existence. They are shouting it because the writer was trying to tap into the basic, timeless, tribal roots we all share as human beings and using that to evoke a sentimentality about a piece of land in the game. The writer was trying to endear Ascalon to the PC. And not just the peeps, but the kingdom as well. If a player doesn’t give two farts about it, then fine, carry on. But don’t try and say it’s not there…it is.

Your second line, I have no idea what that means. There’s plenty of space to add new races and such. Wth are you talking about?

that’s no problem. it can be there. It is still a double standard. Now if we can agree that it is based on a double standard and that it is still there, then we really have no disagreement.

The second line was directly referencing the claim that my arguement left no room for other races. But my logic doesn’t hinge on that reasoning.

Rainbow Sprint.3215:

Dustfinger.9510:

Now they are the same height with the horns making the charr taller.

That must be a small norn. While Charr are taller than humans, Norn are still taller.

That pic was taken with both norn and charr at max height. But keep in mind that norn have been down scaled a couple times for game mechanics. Standing straight up in game, both are the same height but lorewise, norn will tend to be bigger since 9 feet is their average.

On whether the norn have made a real change since they have moved south, a-net seems to imply that they are still the same old norn. And that humans and char have trouble grasping the concept.

“Ordinarily, they just live in individualistic homesteads, coming together in small trading communities. Now they’re in a new region, living in these great halls, on this much larger and more organized scale. But even those who feel this is a setback to the people don’t view it that way; they’re positive and live in the moment. Humans, for example, look at the loss of Ascalon and the sinking of Orr as “the golden age that has now passed”. The Norn, however, simply view this as a passing obstacle, and someday they will return to the north to retake what’s theirs.”

“The idea that the Charr or Humans have trouble grasping is that, despite the immense size, these great halls are not a city to the Norn. Sure, they have the same amenities as a city, and are operating as a community, but this is essentially just a tactic to enable the Norn to last through their current situation. In the end, this is just a large camp,and eventually things will change and they will move on.”

“Jeff: I believe the norn burn their dead as apposed to bury them. There are ways they treat the dead, invoking the spirits. As far as a set instructions in a book, no. More importantly, this goes back to the way of change that the Norn embrace so well. Just as there would be a party for a wedding, like we saw when Kieren and Gwen got marries in Guild Wars Beyond, the passing of a hero would kick of a wake. The Norn would celebrate his life, not mourn his loss.”

“They are in a target rich environment. They have a lot of things to match their merit with, lots of challenges, and that’s the kind of stuff the Norn thrive on. You establish your legend fighting back the various dangers to the world, so they’re ironically happy with all of these opportunities.”

“I think the Norn will interest players who are more interested in a solo experience, pulling off incredible feats on their own, and bragging about their heroics.”
http://www.guildwarsinsider.com/towertalk-norn-interview-jeff-grubb-transcription/

So a-net seems to be saying that they are generally the same positive, adaptable norn that we have always known.

Now they are the same height with the horns making the charr taller.

Lol. Might as well have said “GG. Kill me some more noob!”

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

I’m not replying on the attributes “rebutal”. It’s entirety is rediculous save for the possible historical content about the greater numbers.

On the drunkness, you mean the few skirmishes that are in lore….. in the past…. If you’re gonna dismiss Norn drunkness, dismiss it, but you’re going to have to dismiss that it is quite prevalent in current lore history.

Agreed. It is absolutely ridiculous to spend so much time and energy on something that doesn’t actually come into play in the conversation. Since, it appears that there isn’t actually any other factors that would swing the odds in charr favor. Apparentlly.

Is this implying that norn have recently just started to drink?

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

Fair enough on the strength topic, but you are also dismissing the advantages of other important attributes. Yes, strength is an advantage, I wouldn’t say its more important or a larger advantage over the others however. If you feel that way, that’s your opinion.

If you’re going to dismiss Norn’s often being drunk as nonsense, you’d be dismissing lore. If you want to do that, you’re going to be invalidating a large part of your lore backing.

Also, when it comes to fighting, Charr sober up, unless it’s just a simple Meatober brawl.

Disclaimer: I haven’t read the posts after your reply to me.

I would ask what advantages I’m dismissing. So far, all the other “advantages” that you think are being dismissed aren’t being discussed in depth because there’s nothing in lore to say that they actually exist. What advantages do we know that charr have that would overtly swing the outcome in their favor? because whatever they have has historically not swung the odds in charr favor. The only thing that is confirmed that would have swung the odds in charr favor is even greater numbers. But that doesn’t play into a one on one encounter.

Let’s discuss norn being drunk. If their drunkness is as prevalent as you say, how come the norn still won against the charr?

Obsidian.1328:

They took it from the Charr, and whoever else lived there. I’m sure there were all sorts of creatures that used to roam the land. The difference is no other group, that we know of, has any heritage tied to the place. ANet never bothered to add that in the GW1 ‘verse. You’re basically saying a group can’t claim a spot because there might have been some other civilization there in the past that called it home. That’s silly, by that rationale you couldn’t add any new races anywhere. The only know group with any significant cultural ties to Ascalon prior to GW2…is Ascalons. Why even bother erasing that? What possible reason could there be to do that?

I’m not saying that at all. You’re the only one hung up on ancestral claims. You’re trying to apply your flawed logic to me. But your logic only rests on a double standard.

It doesn’t matter that we didn’t know who they took it from. It doesn’t matter that they eventually decided it was charr. Your logic is flawed simply because humanity took it from somebody. You don’t have a rational argument. That’s why it continually jumps in and out of the game. What I’m saying is that anybody who currently owns it ….. owns it. No human alive can claim that it was taken from them. Anybody who could have said that died hundreds of years ago.

edit: by reasoning that land shouldn’t be taken due to past cultural identity, you are the one actually saying you can’t add new races anywhere.

Obsidian.1328:

Uhh…Ascalon was Ascalonian’s identity. Are you grouping all of humanity into the same cultural group or something? You bring up a great point though. Humanity, as far as we knew, only lived in a very small part of the Tyria(the world). They had leagues upon leagues of space with which to develop alternate races and cultures in this game. Instead, they chose to disembowel the known map, combine all of the humans into one single culture, and redistribute the land out to the new guys. GG

How in the blazes did GW1 Charr have their cultural identity linked to Ascalon?

Read carefully. I didn’t say the charr had their cultural identity linked to Ascalon. I said that humanity took it from somebody.

You are the only one focused on cultural identity based on where someone used to live. My point is that that can only be a double standard because humanity took it from somebody.

Rouven.7409:

Talking about size difference, since Norn would naturally look for larger prey/opponents, would they be as practiced fighting smaller opponents?

Well, we do know that norn look for challenges from any size opponent. As long as it is a challenge.

Apparition.1576:

I have provided plenty of counter examples in regards to how important strength is in a one on one fight. I see no rebutes, only contradiction.

Kimbo vs Matt Mitrione UFC 113
ken shamrock vs royce gracie UFC 1
Muhammad Ali vs George Foreman
sugar ray leonard vs roberto duran

In all these fights, the evidence of stregnth was clear. But had absolutely zero factor in the fights. I find it hard to believe as a Martial Arts instructor you think that strength is more of a factor than skill, speed, knowledge, timing.

Very hard to believe…

The fact that you say strength provided zero factor in those fights is a clear indication that you don’t know what you are talking about. It’s clear that in your mind, a factor is only existent with a win.

Furthermore, I’ve addressed both skill and speed. Charr don’t seem to have any large speed advantage that we’ve ever seen and norn are the ones that hone their skills for one on one combat. I’ve acknowleged the other factors while you continue to try to convince (yourself?) that strength plays no part in a fight.

What I have actually said is that strength is a huge factor. Supernatural strength can only be a bigger factor than normal. You continually taking that message to the illogical extreme of “strength is the only factor” is ridiculous and makes no sense.

If that was my message, then I couldn’t have acknowledged the possibility that a charr would ever win because they don’t have supernatural strength. But I did acknowledge the possibility that a charr can win. Go figure.

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

Like I said, that’s what I “got” from you contribution in this particular part of the debate, and you seem quite concentrated on it, even with the reply to me. Whether or not you stated it directly matters not. The main idea in your point is that Norn super-strength wins the fight.

What you “got” directly contradicts what I have said. I concentrate on it because posters try to minimize strength as any sort of advantage when it is actually quite a large advantage. And as I have said, pointing out how super natural strength is a very real factor is very different than even implying that strength is the sole deciding factor of a fight.

“So even minimizing the importance of strength, if their individual ability (all told, strength included) is enough to beat a larger organized force of charr, it doesn’t make sense that a lone charr would tend to fair better against a norn who have already tended to be capable of doing so much damage to multiple charr. So the topic of this thread has really already been addressed by a-net and the answer confirmed.” (page 2)

Dustfinger.9510:

Current lore history also points that in general, a Norn is quite often drunk, even to the point of being passed out. And since we have lore history that states what happens to a Norn that’s drunk vs a Charr, we can say that now, in general a Norn vs a Charr will lose…… generally speaking.

Charr are also often drunk. But neither are always drunk. And if norn drinking is a general problem, then it would have been a problem when the norn and charr did fight. if we assume that the norn were definitely drunk and since the norn won then we have to come to the conclusion that alchohol almost never affects the norn fighting ability. Or…. we could just ignore the whole drunk nonsense and dismiss it for what it is.

That’s a good point.

On one hand charr rely on their wb to watch their back but that is so they can focus on their own job at hand. So with a single opponent, the charr needs only focus on that one adversary. Possibly being able to also focus on the surrounding environment to use to it’s advantage the same way they would also be watching their wb members back.

Where as a norn would just be used to focusing on their singular foe. they may get caught unawares by the environment but they would also be more used to improvising a way out an unexpected situation since they are so used to only having themselves to rely on.

Of course, a norn may also learn to improvise with it’s environment in order to beat larger or more powerful foes while a good charr would learn how to adapt an overcome unexpected situations. As the saying goes, “every plan is full proof until the first bullet is fired”.

In that case, I’d say that factor would really just depend on the individuals. How good are the individual charr and norn at using their environment and improvising their way out of unexpected situations.

Ah, in that case I don’t think we really know the origins of any of the current classes beyond engineer and guardian. Though im sure classes like thief and warrior would have developed independently in multiple societies.

The charr did have mesmers in gw1 though. They were called chaots.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Charr_Chaot

edit: Any of the classes that depend on the 6 gods would have developed from humanity. Dervish and priest.

Obsidian.1328:

No, I meant “no” there.

It isn’t ok to do that with any race really, but keeping Ascalon wouldn’t be random at all. It wasn’t some piece of land on their frontier, it was their identity. The same couldn’t be said for the Charr at all…until last year of course.

Ascalon was who’s identity? Certainly not all of humanities. And certainly not Kryta’s. But since humanity owned the world 250 years ago, then making sure humanity loses no land would mean they would still need to own it today. The problem I see here is that people can’t separate their Gw1 characters from their gw2 characters.

And we see how the double standard endures because we know that humanity took that land from someone else who had their cultural identity linked to it. That was established at the very beginning. So basing an argument off of keeping some land in human hands because they used to have it can only ever be a double standard. They took it from someone else.

Apparition.1576:

I could reference more of your post regarding strength as deciding factor if you like.. but I would not want to be banned by moderators for something so trivial…

But that is beside the point, my posts have all been pretty consistent. As a martial arts instructor you should already know what has been pointed out. There are other factors in skilled combat much more than strength alone, that play more of a role in a deciding factor.

I’m pretty sure my post have been pretty consistent but you seem to be going back and fourth a bit.

I see the problem. You seem to be confusing my statements of how super natural strength is a real factor in a one on one fight between charr and norn with the flawed idea that strength alone is the deciding factor in any fight. those are two very different ideas.

In fact, that very post of mine that you just quoted also mentioned the skills that charr and norn train for. Organized vs individual combat. You may have missed it but it is there. beginning on the third line down.

Obsidian.1328:

Still no to your argument, that’s what.
The only justification for asura being driven back underground rests on randomly championing a favorite species and arbitrarily giving them …land. because they …had it at some point in time.
Funny, they did that exact same thing with the Charr. Almost word for word.

Your point about petty wars is rather irrelevant. Inserting some “united we stand” theme into a pre-existing world where species almost never get along should be done(if it has to be done at all) over a long stretch of time. And especially in a way in which the players get to experience it. No wonder this is an issue, ANet kinda wants you to feel like an ignorant neanderthal for bringing up game-race rivalry. Really? Furthermore, GW2 also strives to bestow upon us grateful players some moral high-ground agenda that has little to do with Tyria and a lot to do with them trying to “teach” us how to be good people in real life. GW2 isn’t Star Trek, and ANet isn’t Gene Roddenberry. Save the life lessons for another game.

If your response is “No!” ….. then “yes” can only be the oppropriate rebuttle.

You seem to b saying that it isn’t okay to do that with charr but it is okay to do that with humanity. That’s a double standard.

Apparition.1576:

Good points..

Also to back that statement with an actual fight. Not exactly comparable, considering Charr are a little more dangerous but the point is that…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJWjo3dGcyA

bigger is bigger…
faster is faster…

but skill is SKILL…

Skill and technique cannot be overlooked when it comes to the art of fighting.

(Edit tried to eliminate all that white space to no avail)

Charr hone their skills to fight in warbands. Norn hone their skills to fight one on one. Which way would the skill factor swing in a one on one combat?

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

Let me also take this debate a couple posts back where someone was talking about how strength doesn’t win martial arts/street fighting fights, and a couple posters, including you Dustfinger, were saying it does and that it makes the only difference in a fight (at least that’s what I got from the post). I am a martial artist and I can tell you that strength is definately not the winning factor in a fight.

The 2 most important attributes you can have in a fight are agility and knowledge. Agility far outweights strength in the fact that not only will you land more blows but also avoid them than an opponent who is less agile. Knowledge comes in several flavors, but off the top of my head, knowing combat and countercombat strategies, and knowing your opponent.

Those 2 factors alone win the fight. You could have half the strength of your opponent and and still easily win the fight armed with these 2 alone. I’ve seen hulking, muscle bound guys get taken down by chubby or even skinny guys simply because the muscle bound guy couldn’t land a hit on them.

Off the track, yet still on topic, game mechanic wise, I think Norn combat movements feel clumsy compared to Charr. Now, I’ve only played a Norn ranger, so I can only comment from that perspective. I ended up deleting him because of it. I always felt like an oaf that might accidently stab myself. Maybe it was the disportionate body features or the droopy man-boobs. /shrug.

Allow me to clear something up for you. As a hand to hand combat instructor in the Marine corps, I would never say that strength alone is the deciding factor in a fight. I’m not sure how you could have gotten that from anything I posted.

What I did say is that the strength advantage is undeniable. The problem with relying on agility to outweigh a strength advantage is that the agility disparity needs to be so great that the stronger opponent should barely be able to touch the one that tholds the agility advantage. But we have no evidence in lore that charr have this kind of large generalized agility advantage. So even if they have some kind of agility advantage, lore history has shown that it simply wasn’t enough to compete with a less organized, stronger opponent. That means that any agility advanatage the charr may have isn’t big enough to make a great difference. Is strength the only factor in a fight? Not at all. But all factors included, we have been shown who would generally win and the huge strength disparity that norn hold was no doubt a factor. Especially considering the large disadvantages that norn inherently share. Namely their disorganization.

Apparition.1576:

Dustfinger.9510:

Apparition.1576:

Unless he was Norn.. then I’m pretty sure the entire Charr would grovel at his feet, due to his superhuman strength. There would be no Charr able to stand up to the Norn.. and he would eventually become the next Khan-Ur.

Aint that right dusfinger?

Fanboi-ism only sees fanboi-ism.

First of all I like how you always like your own posts. That’s cute…

But seriously, all I did was agree and maybe slightly over-exaggerate everything you preach while proving a point.

I only have one account. I can’t like my own posts. it’s cute that you think my interaction with you is worth that kind of effort. Though, it’s kind of sad how you abandon lore points in favor of “proving a point” in other threads like this. It reeks of bitterness on your part. And it demonstrates that your lore points can’t stand on their own.

I on the other hand readily list charr advantages over norn when the conversation calls for it. And I do it without confusing charr qualities with grawl qualities.

Apparition.1576:

Unless he was Norn.. then I’m pretty sure the entire Charr would grovel at his feet, due to his superhuman strength. There would be no Charr able to stand up to the Norn.. and he would eventually become the next Khan-Ur.

Aint that right dusfinger?

Fanboi-ism only sees fanboi-ism.

I like you

It seems to me that a-net works real hard not to really make the classes a hard archtype. The into descriptions are pretty generalized and when a-net goes into depth, the class lore is pretty open.

If we look at the guardian, we see a-net really made it all inclusive. So humans can be the protective paladin while charr can still be aggressive warmongers. While a sylvari or asura can be a battlemage.

“Jeff Grubb: With the turmoil in Elona and the spread of the Order of Whispers into other lands, more Paragon teaching showed elsewhere in Tyria. These teachings melded with other traditions, and over time, the Guardians and their abilities can be found throughout the world and among all the races. They are not tied to a particular race, philosophy, or group of gods but rather to a larger concept of proactive defense, of taking the fight to a foe and protecting those you fight alongside while appealing equally to humanity’s defensive nature and the Charr’s desire to rule the battlefield.

I think the Guardian is much more of a pragmatic and tactical user of a magic as opposed to an Elementalist, who is a pure student of magic. The Elementalist casts discrete spells, and you have the feeling that there is a heritage and body of knowledge behind those spells. Guardians seem to use magical energy in the heat of combat, from the front line. That sense of immediacy sets the Guardian apart from more traditional spell-casters and allows for a heavily armored magical character."

http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/01/31/behind-the-scenes-with-the-guild-wars-2-guardian-massivelys-in/

A warband may do it. But I think they would be hard pressed for the legion to accept that member as an equal. Much less multiple legions who don’t answer to anybody in the first legion.

Say Smodur makes a human an honorary member. Charr society deems that he has to constantly establish himself as “Alpha” in order to lead. Any challenge to his authority may target that human as a weakness. Anybody with a lower rank that makes a human an honorary member wouldn’t be able to save that human from a higher ranked charr. And a higher ranked charr may hold that human to higher charr standards. So a careless word or sideways glance could be a death sentence. And that honorary member would only be protected by the strength of the member or members that made them part of the wb. But the limits of that protection would be limited by the strength of the charr. With the highest possible protection being the unlikely event that the entire WB is in favor of the appointment. But that protection would be limited by the strength of the WB.

So, to answer your question, I have no idea if it has ever happened :P But if it did that individual would be expected to pull their own weight to the standards of a charr that has grown up in a very Spartan, very militant society.

Obsidian.1328:

Still no. With divine help, they did take the land from the Charr. Where have I not said that? Technically, being from another world would mean them merely setting foot on Tyria itself makes them foreign invaders, no? Besides, this is more about cultural identity and heritage. Perhaps we should force all the Asura to go back underground where they are from. Or tell all the Sylvari to merge back with the Pale Tree. -__-

Still no, what?

You acknowledge that humanity has taken land. And we know it has been taken from them. The only justification for asura being driven back underground rests on randomly championing a favorite species and arbitrarily giving them …land. because they …had it at some point in time. As you are trying to do with humanity. Only your own logic leads to that extreme.

That’s not my point at all. it doesn’t matter that charr had it first. Only that they have it now. My point is that the petty wars over land have been fought but now there are real problems in Tyria.

Hmmm, I think I can appreciate this thread a bit more.

I think it’s a bit harder to pin down the “feel” of each profession because each profession doesn’t have the same “feel” when it’s applied to each race or even each individual. For example, A thief could be an assassin, a street rat, etc. A ranger is the perfect example. A beast trainer for the charr could be a huntsman for the humans and an animal behaviorist (insert any imaginary scientific field of study involving animals) for the asura. And it would fit the feel of each race to a T.

Lonewolf Kai.3682:

It says that your point isn’t always true.

Any general rule already allows for the possibility. pointing out an incident where a 10 year old severly hurts an adult doesn’t disqualify the general rule that an adult will tend to be able to beat a10 year old.

I don’t think there really is an inherent race for each class. yes, the charr started the engineer proffession but it has proven so effective that all the other races have taken it up. Same with the guardian. A-net says that it is equaly appealing to both humanity and charr for diffrent reasons.

Who would get warriors? The warrior norn? The war like charr? The humans who basically conquered most of the world? i’d say every one would since there really is no inherency in the classes. Only history. And every society would have a need of some type of warrior to fight their enemies.

Take it as a complimant OP. Anybody that beat certain people is going to be becasue they play an OP class. Funny enough, those type of people choose their class based on what they thought was going to be an OP class.

Horst Hortensie.5420:

And the charr are elder than humans? How does this fit with common lore? Even the Jotun mention some gods which doesn’t fit the span around exodus. Are there older gods mentioned anywhere by name?

None mentioned by name but humanity acknowleges that melandru is the oldest. So that info coupled with the knowlege that the power of the gods transfers makes it possibile that melandru belonged to an entirely diffrent pantheon that didn’t include dwayna or balthazaar. The two of the old 6 that seem the most closely tied to humanity.

In addition to what Kalavier stated, the asura view the 6 as bigger cogs in the eternal Alchemy. The EA being a sort of “Theory of Everything” that encompasses how gods are part of the system that is reality.

Aside from that, we have dev interview that say the gods have decided not to interfere.

Obsidian.1328:

Not in Proph there isn’t. What’s that absence of evidence quote you like to use?

The quote is “Absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence”

How does that apply? because it only supports my arguement.

No contradiction. My argument lies entirely on the meaning of the word homeland. Ascalon isn’t humanity’s homeland, but it is Ascalonian homeland. I could care less if they lost it in a way that made sense, and did the narrative justice. But to try and turn it around and make Ascalons out to be the devil, on top of hastily inserting the area as Charr homeland too, is almost vindictive.

The narrative said that humanity took land. that encompasses Ascalonians, Canthans, etc. All of humanity. You somehow think that Ascalonians can be free from the taint of humanity. Ascalonians are human too. So your entire argumnt rests on a double standard.

We actually do find a ghost in world and ask her how she died. she isn’t clear on the details.

Your going to have so much karma, it’ll be coming out of your ears. if you want that weapon for your toon, go for it.