Guild Wars 2

Since you seem to only want to nitpick my post I will bow out since this isn’t a constructive conversation anymore. Clearly you didn’t want to find a more accurate comparison so you chose to nitpick.

Dustfinger.9510:

Mist.6217:

Your stated comparison is NOT accurate to the situation at hand. The phrase “only way to make it accurate” is the ONLY way to make your salvage claim remotely comparable. But then your comparison goes from private group and country to dragon, Pact, race wanting Orr so even then it isn’t accurate.

You stated the parameters to make the comparison equal. I went with those parameters to make my point and you descided that they weren’t comparable any more. keep moving the goal post.

The goal post never moved. I stated the only way to make it equal still doesn’t make it fully equal due to going from two groups with a ‘claim’ to three groups with a ‘claim’. Keep avoiding the flaw in your point and I will gladly keep pointing it out for you.

Dustfinger.9510:

Mist.6217:

The only way to make said comparison equal would be to state that the Dragon salvaged it from the ocean floor,

Mist.6217:

Again the comparison isn’t accurate.

O.o

Your stated comparison is NOT accurate to the situation at hand. The phrase “only way to make it accurate” is the ONLY way to make your salvage claim remotely comparable. But then your comparison goes from private group and country to dragon, Pact, race wanting Orr so even then it isn’t accurate.

Drakkon.4782:

If Kryta thinks that they are going to just move in and take over without remuneration, kitten skippy I’m putting a price tag on it. NO group in the world, this one or Tyria, is going to lay out manpower, materials, and lives for free. Never going to happen. Trahearne may be a tree-hugging leaf, but he’s got people under him with expenses, a need to be paid. Reality is that he’s going to have to either foot the bill or get a government to do so. It’s all well and good to save the world from an Undead plague, but when the dust settles, everyone is going to want to be paid back for their contribution. Practicality says that he either takes over administration of Orr, or he “sells” it to Kryta or whatever government is willing to foot the bill themselves.

Unless I have missed some bit of lore on the subject nothing says Kryta wants it for free, for that matter actually wants it with the current political issues the Queen has as well as the on going fighting they are dealing with. If Trahearne decides to have the Pact formally turn over Orr to Kryta that would be his choice, likely a very controversial and possibly damage the Pact’s cohesiveness. If he puts it to a vote between the Orders or even asks them plus a rep from each race for input (best solution in my opinion) and they all decide to give it back to Humans but at a cost or with certain stipulations again their choice.

Not to be rude but just because you feel it should come with a cost (monetary) doesn’t mean that is what the ‘cost’ will be. There is no telling in what Anet will decide to do with Orr or if they will even make it livable again within so many years, who knows maybe GW3 will have Orr inhabitable.

Dustfinger.9510:

In which case, Spain still wouldn’t get the gold. And neither would random Mexicans and Puerto Ricans. No matter how you slice it, it belongs to those who took the risks to get it back. Not to those who can make some long-past, distant ancestral ties to it.

Again the comparison isn’t accurate. You are trying to compare private group and country to an alliance of races and county. A private group doing the salvage wouldn’t really care about the history of the item except for the value that history gives them vs the country that values the history over the item. With Orr the Pact doesn’t necessarily value the land compared to how the Humans would value it since the main goal of the Pact was to rid Orr of Zhitan.

@Drakkon- You are assuming that the Pact would put a price tag on Orr. The benefits gained from forming the Pact and in turn developing all those new techs is that those techs can be moved out of a wartime position and into a civilian position offering more versatility and more over time value.

You compared the defeat of an Elder Dragon and conquering of it’s claimed territory to salvaging a gold coin in the ocean. Not really equal. The only way to make said comparison equal would be to state that the Dragon salvaged it from the ocean floor, which it did, and the Pact was reclaiming/rescuing/conquering/whatever term you want from the Dragon.

Dustfinger.9510:

I think it works pretty well since even though a heritage is established, it is in a free for all zone. Which mirrors Orr. So the international law that not everyone has actually agreed upon is mirrors the fact that there is no higher law to say that any one nation has more right than another. Or that just because someone can claim some distant heritage, they have any more entitlement.

edit: and the ones that have agreed upon international law have really just come to terms with the fact that no one has any real jurisdiction beyond the ones that actually possess the items. Which is an issue that bears strong ties to this thread.

What your thinking of is maritime law that has crimes (like piracy) that can be prosecuted by the members of the international maritime commission. But that tends to cover things that would be categorized as criminal acts. And only really covers things that would be classified as civil disputes, when it deals with immediate ownership. Not distant ownership.

I’m sorry but comparing salvaging a sunken ship to returning the original home lands of an entire race aren’t equal. Salvaging laws have, for the most part, been agreed upon but the worlds governments to settle disputes before they happened. With countries in our world an agreed 12 mile radius or so into the waters is where their borders end making anything past that point, salvage-wise, fair game to those individuals that do that.

Orr is not being salvaged, in a sense it was salvaged by Zhitan and is being rescued/reclaimed by the Pact. Regardless of what Anet has the Pact decide to do the ‘morally right’ choice would be return it to the Humans, again those that can verify Orrian decent > Kytan’s even though they all came from Orr to start with. Yes it would be the ‘right’ thing to do by giving it back to Humans. Would it be the best thing to do? Who knows other than Anet.

@Dustfinger that example doesn’t really work since that is due to international laws that countries have agreed on.

Orr is a different beast when it comes time to decide if an individual nation gets it, it gets split up for all nations to have a little bit of, or the Pact retains control of it. In my opinion giving it to an individual nation or Pact control would be the best options, splitting it up may hurt feelings which ‘could’ lead to war between the nations for control over all of the land. As has been said before the Humans, particularly the ones that can actually prove Orrian heritage, and Sylvari have the best claims since one is the prior major race living there and it is their literal home land. The other because they will most likely be the ones to cleanse the land bringing it back to life.

The other three races I don’t see having much interest in it other than a deep water port for the Charr, things to study for the Asuran, and I don’t see the Norn wanting it at all but that’s me.

Dustfinger.9510:

Wow. Lot’s happened. Good job everybody

Mist.6217:

Dustfinger – Our definition =/= Tyrian definitions so what you quoted is moot. Charr claim rights to Ascalon because it use to be their hunting ground but the Humans won the war to take over Ascalon, which per your own definition and this Charr ‘law’ means they have no claim to it any longer. Now they did take it back but they can’t claim it as ancestral lands since their ‘laws’ say once they lost the fight for it they no longer could claim it.

Now on the flip side Human’s don’t have a ‘law’ that states “If I’m bigger and want it all I need to do is beat you for it.” Their law states that if you can prove you are a decedent you have rightful claim to the property.

The Charr ‘law’ holds no sway over Orr since they never won the war to claim it as their territory, Kilborne blew them and everyone else up completely defeating their army.

So by those standards the Human ‘law’ would take precedence since the Charr ‘law’ has no jurisdiction, if you will.

What I quoted is the definition of “Law”. I’d say that it is very relevant in this discussion of human and charr laws. So feel free to quote the tyrian definition of “law” but I’m willing to bet that whatever it is, it falls under the actual definition.

We see in Ascalon that any land the charr lost through battle is still considered worthy of reclamation. Your assumptions about the specifics of charr law are what is really “moot”. We also don’t know the specifics of the human law beyond some vague idea. What are the limits? Why did the ruler of one kingdom not also rule the other kingdoms? Possibly, the citizenship of another kingdom made your own claim to the throne ineligible. We really have no idea.

So my entire point isn’t to randomly invent specifics to the laws of each people that we really have no idea about. As you are doing in an attempt to minimize supposed charr law. But it is to measure each people with the same ruler. One races self-made law to claim the land is as good as anothers. Fanfic specifics that contradict what we see in actual lore are moot. e.g.: The fanfic idea that the charr acknowledge they have no right to ascalon because they lost the land in battle. Or the idea that there is any concept of jurisdiction in a fallen kingdom. So far, there is no higher law than each individual nations. So there is nothing to invalidate any nations law. Even the charr, no matter how low you think of their laws.

Agreed a lot has happened in the thread and had I thought of it I would have gone back to correct that statement. But it is what it is now.

The Charr did lose their claim to Ascalon when they lost it in battle to the Humans. Does that mean they didn’t want it back? No, of course not and with help they took it back and now have every right to claim it. The difference with Orr however was that it was never their land to begin with, or at least that has been stated in lore so far. They also have no claim to it under their law of ‘if I conquer it it is mine’ because they never conquered it due to Kilborne’s actions.

As for your last sentence. I don’t think lowly of Charr law. I don’t agree with the “I’m bigger and can beat you up so it’s mine” aspect but that is all opinion and is valued as such.

As I said in my last post either the Humans, who have a better claim than the Charr, nor the Charr should get the land unless they are the ones that can cleanse it and make it inhabitable again.

You have zero ways to prove that Orrians would have lost, just opinions. Second Individuals within a nation do not always represent a nation, just a historical PoV Albert Einstein was German but the Allies didn’t treat him as a prisoner of war correct? To claim the actions of one represent the actions of the nation, unless Kilborne was fully approved and completely unaware that his action may wipe out the nation, is ignorant.

As far as a claim goes. You haven’t provided anything as to why the Charr have a valid claim. You mentioned a law that if they conquer it it is their but they failed to conquer it, regardless of their view on the matter the lore shows they failed because of Kilborne’s actions.

Please stop with the name calling it really degrades your argument, the whole racist thing is highly inappropriate.

They didn’t ‘earn’ their prize in my opinion. You said “To the Charr, he acknowledged defeat, but attempted to deny the Charr their prize.” Oh and again Kilborne COULDN"T acknowledge defeat for the Orrians since he was just an adviser and not the King, so again the Charr are interrupting something that isn’t there. They weren’t denied a prize because they never conquered Orr. So how were they denied something they didn’t earn in the first place?

I don’t see either side as being better but the Human claim has more substance than the Charr claim in my eyes, since I haven’t been shown anything as to whether the Charr managed to conquer Orr before being wiped out. If they had I would agree with you but they didn’t.

The war between Humans and Charr, yes the Charr would most likely win. A war between the Pact minus the Charr and the Charr, the Charr would most likely lose due to shear numbers against them. They couldn’t move their equipment easily if the Asurans removed their access to the gates. They wouldn’t be able to move easily through the shiverpeaks if the Norn were a constant harassment.

As for your last paragraph, I would see that as the best option unless the Humans could prove that their claim out weighted what the Pact and other major races decided, which would be difficult for the Humans.

By Charr law currently the Pact has the BEST claim to Orr since they are the ones, and only ones at that, the managed to conquer it.

Drakkon.4782:

The Charr didn’t lose. Kilborne kicked the board over. It isn’t the same thing. To the Charr, he acknowledged defeat, but attempted to deny the Charr their prize. Now that it’s back, it’s theirs.

The Charr didn’t win either. Kilborne couldn’t have surrendered, since that is what you think he did, since he wasn’t the king. If he had deceived the king into thinking his attack would have only killed the Charr knowing it would wipe out Orr his action would be deemed a third party attacking both sides. If he did it unknowingly that it would do what it did, then he was ignorant and STILL it couldn’t be claimed to be a surrender.

The Charr didn’t earn their ‘prize’ of Orr since they never conquered it so they have no claim to something they didn’t ‘earn’.

Now if they did decide to go back to attempt it, since you put that IF the devs decided to send them back they would take it easy. Who is to say the other race, besides Human, wouldn’t intervene? Since you like ‘IF’ what if the Pact decided to keep it? The Pact is stronger than the Charr even if the Charr left it so they could attack Orr, the whole 4 races vs 1 race kinda works against the Charr.

Since this debate isn’t going anywhere I would like to say thanks it was fun but, in my eyes, you haven’t presented and viable reason that the Charr have any claim to Orr, and I’m sure I haven’t done the same for the Humans in your eyes.

Drakkon.4782:

Gandarel.5091:

Leave this guy alone. He is incapable of thinking.

I do believe you’re trying to insult me. That was rude.

And real world example: if you visit another country, you have to keep to both country’s laws.
There’s Orr. A former human land.

Key word: FORMER. Orr has no government. No people. No laws. Nothing but history and an abandoned culture that no longer exists in any meaningful way.

According to human laws, that’s human land.

Homogenize the race when it suits you, separate the nations when it suits you. Either they’re HUMANS, and Kryta, Ebonhawke, Orr, Cantha and Elona are all one big culture with no separate nations, or they aren’t. Stop artificially blending them together when it suits you.

According to charrs laws, if they conquer it, it’s theirs. Did they conquer it? Nope.

Not yet. But their laws say that if they conquer it, it belongs to them. Therefore, IF they conquer it, it will be Charr land.

According to overall laws, humans can claim Orr and charrs can’t.

Charr can do anything they set their mind to. IF the devs say that they are taking over Orr, then they are. What you think their motivations or lackthereof might be don’t matter. Neither do mine. What matters is if they can do it, and they can. The possibility exists.

And charrs are busy enough to keep their ground in Ascalon, they won’t risk total collapse mostly because they WANT THAT kittenING TREATY. And aside from “YEAH CHARRS DOMINATE THE WORLD GUYS GET ORR WHY NOT”, there’s totally 0 motive to make this step.

The Charr are NOT too busy, particularly now that they have a peace treaty with Ebonhawke, a human nation that has NOT claim AT ALL on Orr, and wouldn’t care if the Charr claimed it because no one (but possible refuges and stragglers) is actually living there, and they COMPLETELY lack the ability to do anything about it anyway.
And while I am pro-Charr, I’m also pro-Asura, and not particularly anti-anyone. It’s just, under the established laws of humanity, the only one’s left to ‘claim’ Orr are peasants and refuges, and if they can’t form an effective government, there’s no point in them doing so. So while “Human” (I’m going to homogenize them because you don’t seem to care about the distinctions between races and nations) laws given them the right to claim Orr, they simply don’t have the will or the means. I doubt, given how Jennah is fighting a campaign not to be seen as a weak Queen, that she would have the resources to expend on propping up a shell government of Orr for the refuges who decide to claim it for their own.

You’ve given great thought to talking about the logistical nightmare that would be the Charr Campaign, but have you given even a moment’s thought to the Human Campaign for Orr? Who, exactly, is going to fight for the Orrians so that they can form their own government? Who is going to collect the scattered members of that failed nation and spread the word that it’s time to “go home”? How many will actually respond? Who will be the new nobility? Who will still be a peasant? Why would anyone be a peasant when the very CROWN is up for grabs? You accused me of being unable to think, but I don’t think you’ve given this part of the argument ANY thought.

Your whole argument against the Charr is a racist house of cards. You don’t like them, so you rail against them, but you don’t have any plans for the other side of the argument. When you, or any “pro-Human” wants to answer those questions, with specifics and in detail, you can continue making the anti-Charr argument. Until then, you can keep the racist kitten in its bag.

I’m out here.

You’ve allowed yourself to get a little too personally involved in this discussion. Go enjoy your time out. You need to back off before you say something that’s going to get you a short enforced forum vacation.

So your whole argument is based on ’IF the devs do this or that? Sorry but that is just flat weak.

With what the person said above your post, my stance is mine and no one else. You seem to want to ignore facts in lore that, unless retconned, would allow Orr to be returned to the Humans and once again become a Human nation.

Drakkon.4782:

Now on the flip side Human’s don’t have a ‘law’ that states “If I’m bigger and want it all I need to do is beat you for it.” Their law states that if you can prove you are a decedent you have rightful claim to the property. The Charr ‘law’ holds no sway over Orr since they never won the war to claim it as their territory, Kilborne blew them and everyone else up completely defeating their army.
So by those standards the Human ‘law’ would take precedence since the Charr ‘law’ has no jurisdiction, if you will.

I can’t even begin to state how RACIST this is. Charr laws are stupid so we’ll just ignore them. Human laws are better so we’ll let them hold sway over all of the world.

How exactly is it racist? The Charr don’t have ANY claim to Orr. They NEVER conquered it. They lost the fight when Kilborne blew everything up. From GW1 Wiki “The resulting explosion felled the invading army where it stood.” That means, while the Humans of Orr didn’t win the fight because they died as well, the Charr were wiped off the face of Orr and didn’t conquer anything, hence their law doesn’t apply.

I in no way said “Human laws are so we’ll let them hold sway over all the world.” Don’t put words in my text that aren’t there. I stated since the Charr LOST their law holds no jurisdiction over Orr and since Orr is the ancient lands of Humans their laws hold more jurisdiction.

Dustfinger – Our definition =/= Tyrian definitions so what you quoted is moot. Charr claim rights to Ascalon because it use to be their hunting ground but the Humans won the war to take over Ascalon, which per your own definition and this Charr ‘law’ means they have no claim to it any longer. Now they did take it back but they can’t claim it as ancestral lands since their ‘laws’ say once they lost the fight for it they no longer could claim it.

Now on the flip side Human’s don’t have a ‘law’ that states “If I’m bigger and want it all I need to do is beat you for it.” Their law states that if you can prove you are a decedent you have rightful claim to the property.

The Charr ‘law’ holds no sway over Orr since they never won the war to claim it as their territory, Kilborne blew them and everyone else up completely defeating their army.

So by those standards the Human ‘law’ would take precedence since the Charr ‘law’ has no jurisdiction, if you will.

@Dustfinger Taking what you want isn’t a law, regardless of what the Charr say. That law would trump the Charr claim to Ascalon since the Humans beat them for it.

Would love to see Cantha come back. It is where I met some very good friends and also where I was introduced to my now wife. Please bring it back!

It might have more to do with your connect because I have a i7-970 and a Nvidia 580Ti and have yet to get disconnected during an event even when the lag goes through the roof.

@The Boz – Not sure if you missed my previous post, where I state that the idea is good. It also looks like you missed the ’ ’ I put around ‘force’ because I wasn’t saying it forces anyone but that “it forces me to buy characters” would be a likely excuse from those that don’t like it.

Fringilla Vigo.8594:

Those “others” may complain about anything really. For instance time limited achievements. Or not AP rewarding enough (like legendaries). Or too much rewarding (like bumped GW1 retro achievements). So that’s Irrelevant.
As for the cost? At the moment around 90 gold. As I said before – Wardrobe achievements costs way more, if you are completionist. And that isn’t a problem but 3 extra slots would be? I really don’t see any issue here.
And I think we should apply same rules for all of the achievements.

You seem to have misunderstood that I am not saying it shouldn’t happen. Again it would be nice.

I am not arguing against the idea, it is a good one, I am simply showing the other side of the coin also complaints are only irrelevant if they hold no merit which someone claiming this would ‘force’ them to buy something they didn’t really want just to get AP does have a touch of merit to it.

Being a completionist the person A would most likely already have the character slots BUT if person B only cared to get the AP without worrying about everything they most likely would not, and more so probably focused solely on one character to do everything minus the personal story achievements.

Fringilla Vigo.8594:

Based on that you may complain at leveling crafting that you dont want for AP, buying unwanted minis and cultural gear, spending karma on futile drinks etc, etc…
If someone don’t care about AP at all, he wouldn’t do any of unwanted things.
If someone is desperate about AP, he would do all of the things, no matter how silly, pointless or stupid.

So why have some of these things (maxing craft) and some not (maxing professions)?

There is no point in not having them other than some would see it as they were’ forced’ to buy gems, be it with cash or gold. Some people are completionist and would do all that just to get it done and some are achievement completionist that would only do it if there was an achievement for doing.

As I said in my last post it would be nice to have but I can see where others might complain about it being added.

To your question maxing every craft does not cost as much as buying three extra character slots and maxing all eight professions.

raynemaker.2731:

I understand where you are coming from Mist, however, it is not forced upon you to do this achievement or get that title (if it were to exist). It’s not like the achievement points would be so monumental that you had to have them… and the title is mainly for the people who want to go for that anyway. Also, you would not have to spend a dime of real money for a character slot anyway because gems can be purchased solely from in game gold.

I see this addition as an opportunity for people to have that extra push to get their last characters to 80 after the long roads of leveling all of the others, it gets quite tedious going through the same deal 8 times and have no proof to show in game. I believe it is an achievement to get to this point, just as any other achievement that takes less time/effort to accomplish.

Because I didn’t state it in my first post, sorry bout that, I think it would be nice if there were something for maxing every class. I think however that those that didn’t want that many characters would complain, similar to those that prefer one character vs multiple characters for completing anything because people will complain solely for complaining sometimes.

The only issue with that is it would ‘force’ people to buy character slots they might not really want to get just to get those extra points.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Elder Dragons don’t seem to view the races as something on par to them.

Yet they use their champions to communicate with us, and tempt us to join them. Those two ideas directly contradict each other. If we’re not viewed on par with them, then they shouldn’t be trying to recruit us for their army.

No, I think they realize that we ARE on par with them (or we wouldn’t have defeated Zhaitan), but they do not care for our fate. I think that is blatantly obvious. And it would seem a bit silly to me, that you’d try and defend something that is pretty clearly indefensible.

Just to point out one thing about this one. If you were a king and there was a war starting would you want those you felt were at your level, other royalty, or would you want people you felt were beneath you to do the fighting? Because kings of old used, for the large majority, peons who they felt were beneath them, hence why they were the king and the peons were just peons.

So just because the Elder Dragons use their champions to ‘recruit’ new members into their armies. It has little to nothing to do with them thinking we are on par with them and more than likely because they do think we are beneath them.

Malafide- One last one from me, got to say over all interesting conversation throughout the thread from you and others.

Technically we don’t know why the Elder Dragons are doing what they are doing other than they doing what they doing other than their “need” to consume magical items to feed. Like Korsbaek said if they are preemptively attacking us because they know we would attack them are they really committing murder? At that point it is all a matter of perspective because to them we the bad and they are defending themselves while to us they are bad and we are the ones defending.

Again very interesting points of view in this thread, thanks for sharing.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

Mist.6217:

The bold part goes against your stance on the Elder Dragons. If there is NO excuse for genocide why are you willing to commit it by killing off all the Elder Dragons?

Killing evil creatures to stop their evil deeds is not an evil act in itself. I refer to you back to the definition of murder a few pages back, as given in the Book of Vile Darkness. Heroes killing an evil creature is not genocide.

Wiping out a species is genocide regardless of it they are good or bad, the definition doesn’t change because they are perceived to be the “bad guy”.

Mist.6217:

Murder is also subjective like was said earlier if person A kills person B without a known reason it is an evil act but if the reason was self defense or defense of a family member or child is it still an evil act?

No. Again, please read the definition of murder from a few pages back.

It is only “murder” if the person committing didn’t start out as the person being attacked. Hypothetical example- You attack me with a knife. I pull a gun and shot you. I did NOT murder you since I was defending myself. Now if you came at me with bare hands and pull my gun then shot you rather than deescalating the situation by having you leave then I did indeed “murder” you. (you and I were just examples I wish no harm on anyone.

Mist.6217:

I’ll use your example of a woman killing her abusive husband after years of abuse. Would the family of the husband not feel that what she did was evil?

I already said that it was an evil act. Murder is murder.

Technically you called the act from your example a “wrongful act” not an “evil act”. You called it “wrongful” because those outside the issue could “understand her reasoning.”

Mist.6217:

If a tribe willingly sacrifices a member every six months and everyone agrees that this practice needs to happen is the act evil? It is not to those within the tribe but it would be to anyone outside the tribe. Now which opinion is more important to the members of the tribe?

If a person willingly sacrifices his own life, that is his choice. If someone is being killed against his/her will, it’s murder.

It’s technically only “murder” if person A fully intended to end person B’s life. An accidental death or a death in the process of defending one’s self is not murder.

My answers are all in italic.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

The problem here is that you haven’t actually provided good arguments for your point of view.

• You’ve outright stated that genocide can be okay with the right reasons.
• You’ve outright stated that murder can be okay, if society agrees on it.
• You’ve said that raising an army of zombies is perfectly fine, even in real life.

And I’ve pointed out the mistakes in your reasoning. There is no excuse for genocide. Not even self defense can be an excuse to wipe out an entire race/civilization. Murder is also never okay, because under the definition that I gave of murder, it is always without a doubt a wrong act.

Now that doesn’t mean people can’t commit murder for understandable reasons. A woman may murder her husband after years of abuse. We can understand her reasoning, but it is still a wrongful act. That’s common sense. And fortunately our laws are mostly based on common sense, and less so on just what feels nice.

No matter how you twist your reasoning, the fact remains that these Elder Dragons willingly commit genocide against creatures that initially did them no harm, and were defenseless against them.

Evil doesn’t often come so clear cut.

The bold part goes against your stance on the Elder Dragons. If there is NO excuse for genocide why are you willing to commit it by killing off all the Elder Dragons?

Murder is also subjective like was said earlier if person A kills person B without a known reason it is an evil act but if the reason was self defense or defense of a family member or child is it still an evil act?

I’ll use your example of a woman killing her abusive husband after years of abuse. Would the family of the husband not feel that what she did was evil? Regardless of if she could prove he was abusive his family would still see it as evil, she could have fled, if she could prove it why not fill charges and have him arrested first, or any other option available to her before turning to taking a life.

If a tribe willingly sacrifices a member every six months and everyone agrees that this practice needs to happen is the act evil? It is not to those within the tribe but it would be to anyone outside the tribe. Now which opinion is more important to the members of the tribe?

Star Ace.5207:

Except that being a member of a large Guild doesn’t make you a “more worthy” player other than you are willing to put up with what being a member of a large Guild means. There’s no difference between you and a member of a two-man Guild, quite honestly-people are being rewarded just for the fact that they prefer being in a large Guild, whereas those who don’t get punished-be honest with yourself and tell me how is that a fair implementation of the Guild Mission system (I know the arguments about how it is “fair”, and they are all invalid, BTW.)

How is the player in the small guild ‘punished’ for playing how they want?

Compare the situation to two companies, one large making millions a year and the other small making a few thousand. If I were a manufacturer and just produced a device in two models, low end and high end, that was an in demand item. I charge a million dollars for the high end and 30 thousand for the low end. Now if the large company bought the high end device and paid to over night it but the small company bought the low end and choose standard shipping. Why is it ‘unfair’ that the large company got it first?

You as the player choose to be in a large or small guild. Anet isn’t forcing you to be in a large one to get this done but a large one will get it done faster because it has more people providing influence.

Patience is a virtue lost in today’s society.
Grats on the completion OP.

If I can help let me know. tecuth.2547 I know someone that use to play on one of the EU servers and is still in the guild over there. I will find out which one and pass along the name, no idea if they would be interested or not though.

This is a great idea Loosifah and hopefully small guilds will be able to ban together to see guild missions.

Ants are builders too. If that helps.

Kietay.2345:

When do armor sets start to look… like anything at all! I am level 30 and have only see three variants of armor so far in total. Only two of them ever usable. The most usable one looks exactly the same as the starting armor T_T what is going on? Is it only at high levels that armor starts to look different?

You should look into the crafted or karma sets as some of them also have different skins then those that drop. The first armor skin as the Tailor has a top that shows the character stomach and pants

My ele with a fresh new armor skin, crafted Winged armor set which imo is better than the exotic skin.