About the Charr victim complex, and Anet's hatred for Ascalon - Page 2 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

About the Charr victim complex, and Anet's hatred for Ascalon

24

Comments

  • perilisk.1874perilisk.1874 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Julia Nardin.9824 said:
    Now the Pact appears to have their very own Elder Dragon at their command. Bangar's charr. He's military-minded to begin with. The folks who have compared this to an arms race are exactly right. If there's any way for him to subjugate and/or ally with an Elder Dragon, he's going to try so he can protect his people via mutually assured destruction. Primordus isn't really an option, and he knows nothing about the Deep Sea Dragon. So.

    Sounds suspiciously like the Charr trying to get their own gods for military advantage, which didn't go so well. Enough so that even historically-minded characters in-game should be able to make the connection.

  • @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Kalavier.1097 said:
    This prologue showed us loud and clear that the Charr are diverse, and in this area, the groups that hate humans are the loud ones. In Ascalon, it's more of the Charr who don't mind humanity/peace. Hell, in some cases in Grothmar are Charr who are neutral/okay with humans but are basically being bullied into agreement. Outside of the Ooze pit there are two charr who talk about finding a human inside and tossing him out. One talks about how he could've gotten seriously hurt. The other goes about how humans in general should be hurt/defeated/messed up. The first? "Um... yeah. Yes sir."

    But there's also an Ash superior chewing out her subordinate for being bigoted, so the pressure cuts both ways.

    Indeed, it's wonderful. You can even find three different charr (and a human) assumably talking about the same event. An Iron legion charr regretting not being with the human to defend him (and asking if he can identify his assaulter), and over at the brig two blood legion talking about reporting their warband. "You weren't forced to come, you could have stayed and gotten your punches in."

    That blood legion soldier said one thing I've said concerning the treaty for a long time. "Loyalty to Warband is important, but Legion comes before warband."

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    @Julia Nardin.9824 said:
    I love seeing these sorts of conversations pop up on the forums! :3

    Bangar is pretty divisive, even here in the writers' room. When we sat down and started the storybreaking process for Icebrood Saga, it was really important to us that our antagonist be the hero of his own narrative. A villain is only as good as their motivation--and if Bangar doesn't feel that heat, that fire, that conviction, then players aren't gonna buy it either.

    One of my favorite examples in film is Mayor Vaughn from Jaws. You guys know the story: Man-eating shark terrorizes a small town on Long Island during the height of summer. Local bureaucrats refuse to close the beach, so a trio of unlikely heroes decides to hunt the shark down before it can kill again.

    From the mayor's perspective, he is protecting the town. If the beaches close or people are afraid to swim, they're going to lose the "summer dollars" that sustain the community during the rest of the year when it isn't tourist season. He's a great antagonist -- really underrated, actually -- because every choice he makes is consistent with his internal compass. And it's infuriating.

    Bangar's similar in a lot of ways. He was raised on stories about humans skinning charr and using their fur and horns as armor, and has spent almost all his adult life in direct opposition to them. He's lost people he cares about -- members of his warband, good soldiers, friends -- to that conflict. When you live and breathe that narrative for fifty-odd years, it's very difficult to shake free of. The Ebonhawke Treaty is still a recent development, and not something he was ever on board with. As Smodur says, the only reason he agreed was to prevent additional conflict between the legions. He's been biding his time, playing along, waiting for the right moment to make his move.

    Now the Pact appears to have their very own Elder Dragon at their command. Bangar's charr. He's military-minded to begin with. The folks who have compared this to an arms race are exactly right. If there's any way for him to subjugate and/or ally with an Elder Dragon, he's going to try so he can protect his people via mutually assured destruction. Primordus isn't really an option, and he knows nothing about the Deep Sea Dragon. So.

    That leaves Jormag. And if the Sons of Svanir claim to have a positive relationship with Jormag, well...

    Some people have correctly surmised that Jormag is addressing Bangar (not the player) in the trailer. And it isn't a coincidence that one of the first images we see is a charr and her cub reduced to ash while Grothmar Valley burns around them.

    It's so, so wonderful to see everyone enjoying the prologue and picking up on all the little things we snuck in. We've been working hard to take a more nuanced approach to our world-building and character development with Icebrood Saga. Glad you're enjoying it so far!

    I certainly enjoyed it quite a bit as a Guild Wars 1 player. I'v always had my own hard stance on the Charr and how I disagree with how they operate, but I can kind of sympathize with Bangar even if by and large I think his, and the Blood Legions, estimation of history is incorrect. Like I said earlier in the thread he's an antagonist I pity, rather then hate, and i'm interested to see where he goes because that's a character quality that makes him more interesting then even Joko to me. That's partially because as horrific as Joko could be, he doesn't come off quite as real as Bangar Ruinbringer, he's very much a character who as a person who studied a lot of history in their free times lines up with several different historical examples. A comparison that only gets stronger wandering around the prologue in the second act and listening to different bits of dialogue.

    I'm semi-surprised that the trailer is talking to Bangar though. To me it was always talking to RYTLOCK given the focus he's had on his cubs, that reveals something rather interesting about Bangars personality...it also makes me wonder about Rytlock and Bangars past even more.

  • Eddbopkins.2630Eddbopkins.2630 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 25, 2019

    O man....I hope the charr don't align them self's with dark powers like the searing days and slaughter the humans again.

    If they do maybe the Norn will help us this time instead if being traitors and allowing charr free rain to walk there territory.

    The charr need to leave the lands they invaded/stole and return them to human control. They need to stop slaughtering the ansestral ghost of the ascalonian people and further destroying the once beautiful lands they ruined. There can be NO PEACE otherwise.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    @Kalavier.1097 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    I'm semi-surprised that the trailer is talking to Bangar though. To me it was always talking to RYTLOCK given the focus he's had on his cubs, that reveals something rather interesting about Bangars personality...it also makes me wonder about Rytlock and Bangars past even more.

    Well, if what was rumored is true (that Rytlock is Bangar's child, and thus Ryland is Bangar's grandson)...

    I like how Rytlock starts wondering about his cubs more during his requiem story, but then we learn from the Primus that plenty of Charr do stop by to check on their children's progress, even though few actually admit it.

    Certainly, but the way it was framed before was as a product of Rytlock being pulled out of his mental conditioning by his time with the other races. But if it's this common? well that says quite a bit about Charr society and how the winds of change are starting to alter peoples perceptions.

    Overall this story was a lot more nuanced and character driven then Path of Fire(Which in turn I thought was a significant upgrade from HoT, and that in turn the core story.), so i'm quite pleased with how it's shaping up.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    @VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618 said:
    victim complex
    talking about 'one blood' or 'one people'
    violent and militaristic

    Am I the only one who gets a strong national socialist at 33 vibe from all this?

    Don't forget radicalizing the youth. One of the interesting details I caught was that the teenage Charr you fight during the Lawn mini-game in Rusty Meadows? Also see him conspiring with the Renegades later on.

  • @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Julia Nardin.9824 said:
    Now the Pact appears to have their very own Elder Dragon at their command. Bangar's charr. He's military-minded to begin with. The folks who have compared this to an arms race are exactly right. If there's any way for him to subjugate and/or ally with an Elder Dragon, he's going to try so he can protect his people via mutually assured destruction. Primordus isn't really an option, and he knows nothing about the Deep Sea Dragon. So.

    Sounds suspiciously like the Charr trying to get their own gods for military advantage, which didn't go so well. Enough so that even historically-minded characters in-game should be able to make the connection.

    Missed this earlier, but there is a difference between worshipping the item/thing as a god, and treating it as a military asset. The line can blur really easily, but it is there.

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @Kalavier.1097 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    I'm semi-surprised that the trailer is talking to Bangar though. To me it was always talking to RYTLOCK given the focus he's had on his cubs, that reveals something rather interesting about Bangars personality...it also makes me wonder about Rytlock and Bangars past even more.

    Well, if what was rumored is true (that Rytlock is Bangar's child, and thus Ryland is Bangar's grandson)...

    I like how Rytlock starts wondering about his cubs more during his requiem story, but then we learn from the Primus that plenty of Charr do stop by to check on their children's progress, even though few actually admit it.

    Certainly, but the way it was framed before was as a product of Rytlock being pulled out of his mental conditioning by his time with the other races. But if it's this common? well that says quite a bit about Charr society and how the winds of change are starting to alter peoples perceptions.

    Overall this story was a lot more nuanced and character driven then Path of Fire(Which in turn I thought was a significant upgrade from HoT, and that in turn the core story.), so i'm quite pleased with how it's shaping up.

    I honestly wondered back during the requiem if Rytlock would end up kinda "changing" the way Charr look at their children. I'd say Rytlock's take may be framed more on a wanting to make the connection again, where most Charr never really connect to their children after they grow up IIRC.

    It's one thing I love about how Anet has treated the Charr. They have an intense, violent past, but we can see them growing and evolving as a culture toward something better, something new.

  • @Julia Nardin.9824 said:
    I love seeing these sorts of conversations pop up on the forums! :3

    Bangar is pretty divisive, even here in the writers' room. When we sat down and started the storybreaking process for Icebrood Saga, it was really important to us that our antagonist be the hero of his own narrative. A villain is only as good as their motivation--and if Bangar doesn't feel that heat, that fire, that conviction, then players aren't gonna buy it either.

    One of my favorite examples in film is Mayor Vaughn from Jaws. You guys know the story: Man-eating shark terrorizes a small town on Long Island during the height of summer. Local bureaucrats refuse to close the beach, so a trio of unlikely heroes decides to hunt the shark down before it can kill again.

    From the mayor's perspective, he is protecting the town. If the beaches close or people are afraid to swim, they're going to lose the "summer dollars" that sustain the community during the rest of the year when it isn't tourist season. He's a great antagonist -- really underrated, actually -- because every choice he makes is consistent with his internal compass. And it's infuriating.

    Bangar's similar in a lot of ways. He was raised on stories about humans skinning charr and using their fur and horns as armor, and has spent almost all his adult life in direct opposition to them. He's lost people he cares about -- members of his warband, good soldiers, friends -- to that conflict. When you live and breathe that narrative for fifty-odd years, it's very difficult to shake free of. The Ebonhawke Treaty is still a recent development, and not something he was ever on board with. As Smodur says, the only reason he agreed was to prevent additional conflict between the legions. He's been biding his time, playing along, waiting for the right moment to make his move.

    Now the Pact appears to have their very own Elder Dragon at their command. Bangar's charr. He's military-minded to begin with. The folks who have compared this to an arms race are exactly right. If there's any way for him to subjugate and/or ally with an Elder Dragon, he's going to try so he can protect his people via mutually assured destruction. Primordus isn't really an option, and he knows nothing about the Deep Sea Dragon. So.

    That leaves Jormag. And if the Sons of Svanir claim to have a positive relationship with Jormag, well...

    Some people have correctly surmised that Jormag is addressing Bangar (not the player) in the trailer. And it isn't a coincidence that one of the first images we see is a charr and her cub reduced to ash while Grothmar Valley burns around them.

    It's so, so wonderful to see everyone enjoying the prologue and picking up on all the little things we snuck in. We've been working hard to take a more nuanced approach to our world-building and character development with Icebrood Saga. Glad you're enjoying it so far!

    My point here doesn't really add anything, but I gotta say it's super interesting when members of the narrative team talk about the story with players. And the community over on reddit seems to think the same thing.

    Obviously there's an embargo on this for spoilers, but after a grace period... it's good to see.

  • @Julia Nardin.9824 said:
    Some people have correctly surmised that Jormag is addressing Bangar (not the player) in the trailer. And it isn't a coincidence that one of the first images we see is a charr and her cub reduced to ash while Grothmar Valley burns around them.

    I find this bit most interesting, especially since I never noticed a cub or recognized that as Grothmaw Valley burning.

    While we have your attention, do you mind clarifying the nature of the ruins for Cathedral of Flames and The Ooze Pits? In GW1, it was never truly clarified what those structures' origins were (CoF housed spoils from Ascalon, Ooze Pits had a Grenth mural, but all dungeons used a mixture of art assets, and only the Catacombs of Kathandrax was given origin lore: dwarven). When delving through, best guess I could gather was that Cathedral of Flames was charr-made (and, alongside Rragar's Menagerie, the only stone structures of theirs). For GW2, it seems you gave them Ascalonian ruins, but it's unclear if they were built there by humans (if so, why build underground?) or ruins taken by the charr (perhaps as part of the spoils of war), or it's just a case of "generic ruins" being used (wouldn't be the first time Ascalonian ruins got used as generic ruins)?

    Also, does Blood Keep = Blood Citadel?

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Julia Nardin.9824 said:
    Now the Pact appears to have their very own Elder Dragon at their command. Bangar's charr. He's military-minded to begin with. The folks who have compared this to an arms race are exactly right. If there's any way for him to subjugate and/or ally with an Elder Dragon, he's going to try so he can protect his people via mutually assured destruction. Primordus isn't really an option, and he knows nothing about the Deep Sea Dragon. So.

    Sounds suspiciously like the Charr trying to get their own gods for military advantage, which didn't go so well. Enough so that even historically-minded characters in-game should be able to make the connection.

    I think the main difference is that the Flame Legion followed the titans, while Bangar is intending to dominate or die trying. It may seem similar, but it actually is fairly different.

    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.

  • RyuDragnier.9476RyuDragnier.9476 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 25, 2019

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    While we have your attention, do you mind clarifying the nature of the ruins for Cathedral of Flames and The Ooze Pits? In GW1, it was never truly clarified what those structures' origins were (CoF housed spoils from Ascalon, Ooze Pits had a Grenth mural, but all dungeons used a mixture of art assets, and only the Catacombs of Kathandrax was given origin lore: dwarven). When delving through, best guess I could gather was that Cathedral of Flames was charr-made (and, alongside Rragar's Menagerie, the only stone structures of theirs). For GW2, it seems you gave them Ascalonian ruins, but it's unclear if they were built there by humans (if so, why build underground?) or ruins taken by the charr (perhaps as part of the spoils of war), or it's just a case of "generic ruins" being used (wouldn't be the first time Ascalonian ruins got used as generic ruins)?

    I actually asked about the lore on Cathedral of Flames just yesterday. Doesn't seem to be much of anything on it, and I really want to know why it's there, who made it, and what was it used for (outside of the weapon depository, I mean).

  • perilisk.1874perilisk.1874 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618 said:
    victim complex
    talking about 'one blood' or 'one people'
    violent and militaristic

    the concert could have been any extremist right concert, just replace 'charr' with 'white people' or 'aryans'.

    Am I the only one who gets a strong national socialist at 33 vibe from all this?

    I think you were probably supposed to. That said, One Charr isn't inherently hostile or charr supremacist. The idea that the Charr legions should work together instead of at cross purposes isn't really that different from the Pact, until you consider how Bangar intends to utilize that unity. In some regards, then, Bangar is positioning himself as an anti-Commander, especially if it is Bangar that Jormag is addressing as "Champion" in the trailer. Perhaps the season will see him assembling an anti-Dragon's Watch as well?

  • @Julia Nardin.9824 said:
    Primordus isn't really an option, and he knows nothing about the Deep Sea Dragon. So.

    I kinda wish he went after Primordus. The Charr once worshipped the Destroyers, now they mastered them.

    6x warrior/5xRanger/6x Revenant/6x Mesmer/5x Guardian/6x Thief/5x Engineer/5x Necromancer/5x Elementalist

  • Turin.6921Turin.6921 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 26, 2019

    The irony on the original post (and its title) is palpable....Kinda makes Bangar more relateble as a character.

  • perilisk.1874perilisk.1874 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @runeblade.7514 said:

    @Julia Nardin.9824 said:
    Primordus isn't really an option, and he knows nothing about the Deep Sea Dragon. So.

    I kinda wish he went after Primordus. The Charr once worshipped the Destroyers, now they mastered them.

    Well, that didn't really last very long, on account of the Destroyers being more interested in body count than having worshipers or servants. Ironically, Jormag would have been right up their alley. He seems to corrupt the will to corrupt the body, and does so through a vaguely worship-like connection (hence, the Svanir are corrupted through treating it as one of the Spirits of Nature and communing with it or whatever; humans could probably be corrupted if they treated it as they would a god).

  • @runeblade.7514 said:

    @Julia Nardin.9824 said:
    Primordus isn't really an option, and he knows nothing about the Deep Sea Dragon. So.

    I kinda wish he went after Primordus. The Charr once worshipped the Destroyers, now they mastered them.

    Doesn't really make sense for Bangar to traverse across Central Tyria when he's got an Elder Dragon right next proverbial door. Primordus is still at the Ring of Fire, and under lava. Ice is easier to get through than lava.

    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618 said:
    victim complex
    talking about 'one blood' or 'one people'
    violent and militaristic

    the concert could have been any extremist right concert, just replace 'charr' with 'white people' or 'aryans'.

    Am I the only one who gets a strong national socialist at 33 vibe from all this?

    I think you were probably supposed to. That said, One Charr isn't inherently hostile or charr supremacist. The idea that the Charr legions should work together instead of at cross purposes isn't really that different from the Pact, until you consider how Bangar intends to utilize that unity. In some regards, then, Bangar is positioning himself as an anti-Commander, especially if it is Bangar that Jormag is addressing as "Champion" in the trailer. Perhaps the season will see him assembling an anti-Dragon's Watch as well?

    I'm unsure how I feel about that. The notion of one charr, one blood, one nation. As well as warband above self, Legion above warband, and Charr above Legion as well as Charr above all seems awfully similar to Volk in concept. Volk isn't strictly bad at a glance, but when you pump up nationalism to the degree where you believe in this singular Charr above all, this abstract concept of Charrdom that you must fight and die for, it gets really scary really fast.

  • perilisk.1874perilisk.1874 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618 said:
    victim complex
    talking about 'one blood' or 'one people'
    violent and militaristic

    the concert could have been any extremist right concert, just replace 'charr' with 'white people' or 'aryans'.

    Am I the only one who gets a strong national socialist at 33 vibe from all this?

    I think you were probably supposed to. That said, One Charr isn't inherently hostile or charr supremacist. The idea that the Charr legions should work together instead of at cross purposes isn't really that different from the Pact, until you consider how Bangar intends to utilize that unity. In some regards, then, Bangar is positioning himself as an anti-Commander, especially if it is Bangar that Jormag is addressing as "Champion" in the trailer. Perhaps the season will see him assembling an anti-Dragon's Watch as well?

    I'm unsure how I feel about that. The notion of one charr, one blood, one nation. As well as warband above self, Legion above warband, and Charr above Legion as well as Charr above all seems awfully similar to Volk in concept. Volk isn't strictly bad at a glance, but when you pump up nationalism to the degree where you believe in this singular Charr above all, this abstract concept of Charrdom that you must fight and die for, it gets really scary really fast.

    But a warband isn't a family, and a legion isn't a tribe. Going from Spartan to fascist isn't really much of a leap, so it's hard to lay it all on the shoulders of Bangar or even to treat it as a new development. If anything, it's the relative openness of the Iron and Ash Legions and Pact Charr that is the new development for their society.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618 said:
    victim complex
    talking about 'one blood' or 'one people'
    violent and militaristic

    the concert could have been any extremist right concert, just replace 'charr' with 'white people' or 'aryans'.

    Am I the only one who gets a strong national socialist at 33 vibe from all this?

    I think you were probably supposed to. That said, One Charr isn't inherently hostile or charr supremacist. The idea that the Charr legions should work together instead of at cross purposes isn't really that different from the Pact, until you consider how Bangar intends to utilize that unity. In some regards, then, Bangar is positioning himself as an anti-Commander, especially if it is Bangar that Jormag is addressing as "Champion" in the trailer. Perhaps the season will see him assembling an anti-Dragon's Watch as well?

    I'm unsure how I feel about that. The notion of one charr, one blood, one nation. As well as warband above self, Legion above warband, and Charr above Legion as well as Charr above all seems awfully similar to Volk in concept. Volk isn't strictly bad at a glance, but when you pump up nationalism to the degree where you believe in this singular Charr above all, this abstract concept of Charrdom that you must fight and die for, it gets really scary really fast.

    But a warband isn't a family, and a legion isn't a tribe. Going from Spartan to fascist isn't really much of a leap, so it's hard to lay it all on the shoulders of Bangar or even to treat it as a new development. If anything, it's the relative openness of the Iron and Ash Legions and Pact Charr that is the new development for their society.

    I wouldn't disagree especially since the treatise on One Charr that Gorrik finds is implied to have been around before, and Volk had existed before the Fascists in question. Indeed if anything it's a combination of having a charismatic speaker like Bangar to push the narrative and Charr society suffering an extreme backlash under the treaty and mingling with other nations.

  • @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618 said:
    victim complex
    talking about 'one blood' or 'one people'
    violent and militaristic

    the concert could have been any extremist right concert, just replace 'charr' with 'white people' or 'aryans'.

    Am I the only one who gets a strong national socialist at 33 vibe from all this?

    I think you were probably supposed to. That said, One Charr isn't inherently hostile or charr supremacist. The idea that the Charr legions should work together instead of at cross purposes isn't really that different from the Pact, until you consider how Bangar intends to utilize that unity. In some regards, then, Bangar is positioning himself as an anti-Commander, especially if it is Bangar that Jormag is addressing as "Champion" in the trailer. Perhaps the season will see him assembling an anti-Dragon's Watch as well?

    I'm unsure how I feel about that. The notion of one charr, one blood, one nation. As well as warband above self, Legion above warband, and Charr above Legion as well as Charr above all seems awfully similar to Volk in concept. Volk isn't strictly bad at a glance, but when you pump up nationalism to the degree where you believe in this singular Charr above all, this abstract concept of Charrdom that you must fight and die for, it gets really scary really fast.

    But a warband isn't a family, and a legion isn't a tribe. Going from Spartan to fascist isn't really much of a leap, so it's hard to lay it all on the shoulders of Bangar or even to treat it as a new development. If anything, it's the relative openness of the Iron and Ash Legions and Pact Charr that is the new development for their society.

    Yeah. Like Smodur says in the story - "He's old. So's his thinking. For someone who talks big about the future, he sure clings to the past.". The Charr in GW2 have been in a state of trying to recover from an existance bound up in a forever war - they've gone from a war of feudal unification (The Khan-ur dragging all the disparate warbands together, setting up legions, one per cub) with no peaceful break at all before being thrown into a hellish thousand-year forever-war (Humans colonizing Ascalon, the Khan-Ur getting assassinated, the Wall going up), and then the Searing, Orr, the Titans, two centuries of civil war (Flame vs Everyone Else) AND the human resistance and the ghosts, and then an Elder Dragon or three.

    Charr society is a huge, nasty militaristic mess - the Olmakhan really do have a good point, and if they weren't so nice they'd probably be pointing at us right now and chanting "WE TOLD YOU SO.". Even progressive, technocratic Smodur's got a bit of the old thinking rattling around in his skull given how he insisted on the return of the Claw of the Khan-ur before he'd negotiate the Ebonhawk Treaty - well, unless he's secretly decided to smash the Claw of the Khan-ur instead of claiming it so he can set up elections and form a Charr Republic.

  • Concerning the original post, I'd like us all to consider how far up North Ascalonian settlers went, since they have a massive ruin in Grothmar Valley. This place is extremely far away from the Ascalonian Basin, and what is usually considered the heartland of Royal Ascalon. Meaning that even if the Charr held the later portion of territory only for 20 years, they also had their own land invaded long enough and deep enough for humans to be able to build fortifications near the Far Shiverpeaks, and have them still manned when Adelbern unleashed the Foefire (since we know ghosts of the Foefire don't wander far from their place of death). Grothamar Valley is North to the Eye of the North, after all.

    In that regard, the deep grudge and hatred of ancient Charr against humans is easier to understand. While their society is largely nasty and unable to sustain long lasting peace as it is, I also think it wouldn't take too much to keep some of those (the fahrars, the warbands, the cohesion inside each Legion) and use it as a template for a more progressive and cohesive society. I think it's more the ideology and war-like culture which needs to change, more so than the structures of the Charrs. They aren't so far from actual Socialism, in a way, so I would be sad to see them tear all of it down instead of acvtually improving what they already have.

  • Dredge and Charr society actually have a lot in common, both good (Strong social cohesion, advanced industry and technology) and bad (Xenophobia, the collective traumas that inspire it, and a bit of a problem with industrial pollution). If they went and nicked a bunch of ideas the Olmakhan have (democratic election of leaders instead of might-makes-right, better child-rearing, environmental respect), the progressive bits of the Four Legions could probably make a decent go at completely showing up the monarchist humans of Kryta when it comes to progressive governance (Given the awful stuff the Krytan Ministers got up to, that honestly wouldn't be hard).

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    @Valmir.4590 said:
    Concerning the original post, I'd like us all to consider how far up North Ascalonian settlers went, since they have a massive ruin in Grothmar Valley. This place is extremely far away from the Ascalonian Basin, and what is usually considered the heartland of Royal Ascalon. Meaning that even if the Charr held the later portion of territory only for 20 years, they also had their own land invaded long enough and deep enough for humans to be able to build fortifications near the Far Shiverpeaks, and have them still manned when Adelbern unleashed the Foefire (since we know ghosts of the Foefire don't wander far from their place of death). Grothamar Valley is North to the Eye of the North, after all.

    In that regard, the deep grudge and hatred of ancient Charr against humans is easier to understand. While their society is largely nasty and unable to sustain long lasting peace as it is, I also think it wouldn't take too much to keep some of those (the fahrars, the warbands, the cohesion inside each Legion) and use it as a template for a more progressive and cohesive society. I think it's more the ideology and war-like culture which needs to change, more so than the structures of the Charrs. They aren't so far from actual Socialism, in a way, so I would be sad to see them tear all of it down instead of acvtually improving what they already have.

    I don't think those are Ascalonian ruins, most likely they are dwarven in nature considering the Dwarves lived up there and repeatedly repelled the Charr. Not that i'd be that sympathetic to the Charr either way, but how I understand it is cities like Sumeria built north of the great wall relatively recent. Likewise those ghosts up there predate the Foefire, and it's blast didn't reach that far north anyway otherwise all of Charr society would of probably caved then and there. The ghosts in Doomlore Shrine were created when the Charr brought cursed Rin relics into the Cathedral of Flame.

  • ugrakarma.9416ugrakarma.9416 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 26, 2019

    @Julia Nardin.9824 said:
    I love seeing these sorts of conversations pop up on the forums! :3

    and we love your insights very much,.

    "It's a testament to the folly of the humans and their gods. They say Arah was sacred, but all I see is one big dragon nest."(Rytlock Brimstone)

  • arenta.2953arenta.2953 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 26, 2019

    @Julia Nardin.9824 said:
    I love seeing these sorts of conversations pop up on the forums! :3

    Bangar is pretty divisive, even here in the writers' room. When we sat down and started the storybreaking process for Icebrood Saga, it was really important to us that our antagonist be the hero of his own narrative. A villain is only as good as their motivation--and if Bangar doesn't feel that heat, that fire, that conviction, then players aren't gonna buy it either.

    me: "heat, fire" suuuuuurrreeeee. looks at the freezer

    honestly, it is a bit odd Primordus isn't an option. the Flame Legion seems a natural fit there with the similar veins of magic.

    don't get me wrong, i like where you guys are going with this. its just curious that they'd pick the ice dragon.

    coarse....maybe Jormag really is planning to team up to fight Primordus (guess he's admitting which of them is the stronger right now).

    would be an interesting vein as Norn would feel betrayed that so many Charr team up with THEIR enemy, potentially inviting some of them to seek Primordus? (after all, what has he done to the Norn? nothing, and he's the natural enemy of the Norn's enemy. enemy of my enemy).

    meanwhile the Pact can't side with either, and is stuck in the middle, now dealing with dissent and fighting not only in its own ranks, but between these 2 races who are facing choices to go to one side or the other, or remain in the middle(which to those who havent been fighting the dragons......really isnt a very appealing option).

    add in the Asura, who hate primordus for forcing them from their home, and they might see some.....opportunity to be with Jormag, at least for a time.

    wonder where the flame legion fits in all this....side with these char rebels (to fit in) and go against their natural magic. go primordus (who their magic fits) and be seen as traitors again by the charr. or remain neutral and get torn apart by both the rebels and their own ranks who view this as the weaker option.

    heck, Sylvari gotta be terrified right now, ice or fire. both lethal to plant life.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    @souldonkey.9534 said:

    @witcher.3197 said:
    Honetly saddened by the amount of Charr apologists in the GW2 community..

    Call it what you want, they commited the worst war crimes in the known lore.

    You're kidding right? Vizier Kilbron literally sank his own people's continent just to stop the Charr from taking it. King Adelburn completely destroyed his own kingdon and killed every single one of his subjects, again just to prevent the Charr from pushing them out of Ascalon. Humans have practically genocided centaurs just because they're "lesser beasts". The Charr have done some attrocious things, yes, but they have definitely not commited the worst war crimes in the known lore.

    Naw, even with those it's a no contest in my eyes. The Charr literally fed their own and other peoples souls to the functional equivalent of Lucifer and put other races through slavery as well as their own women in order to secure a victory against mankind. Meanwhile barring perhaps the Centaurs humanity's worst crimes are committed against itself rather then other people.

    Foefire I can kind of get given the eternal nature of Ascalonian ghosts. But saying the Cataclysm is on par with the Searing in terms of horribleness is being really generous to say the least.

  • souldonkey.9534souldonkey.9534 Member ✭✭
    edited September 26, 2019

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    Naw, even with those it's a no contest in my eyes. The Charr literally fed their own and other peoples souls to the functional equivalent of Lucifer and put other races through slavery as well as their own women in order to secure a victory against mankind. Meanwhile barring perhaps the Centaurs humanity's worst crimes are committed against itself rather then other people.

    Foefire I can kind of get given the eternal nature of Ascalonian ghosts. But saying the Cataclysm is on par with the Searing in terms of horribleness is being really generous to say the least.

    Uhm, forgetting the whole "sacrificing souls on the bloodstone for the Mursaat" thing, eh? Humans have sacrificed their own kind's souls too. They've also subjected other races to slavery, so I'm not really sure where you're going with that.

    How is the cataclysm not on par with the searing? In both cases the person/people responsible utilized Abaddon's magic (I'm assuming this is your "functional equivilant of Lucifer", which is inaccurate btw but that's another argument) to destroy an entire region of land. The difference is that there were survivors from Ascalon and the region STILL EXISTED afterwards, albeit very much ruined. After the Cataclysm the entire nation was literally gone and there were no survivors on either side of that conflict. In what way is that "better" than the Searing?

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 26, 2019

    @souldonkey.9534 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    Naw, even with those it's a no contest in my eyes. The Charr literally fed their own and other peoples souls to the functional equivalent of Lucifer and put other races through slavery as well as their own women in order to secure a victory against mankind. Meanwhile barring perhaps the Centaurs humanity's worst crimes are committed against itself rather then other people.

    Foefire I can kind of get given the eternal nature of Ascalonian ghosts. But saying the Cataclysm is on par with the Searing in terms of horribleness is being really generous to say the least.

    Uhm, forgetting the whole "sacrificing souls on the bloodstone for the Mursaat" thing, eh? Humans have sacrificed their own kind's souls too. They've also subjected other races to slavery, so I'm not really sure where you're going with that.

    How is the cataclysm not on par with the searing? In both cases the person/people responsible utilized Abaddon's magic (I'm assuming this is your "functional equivilant of Lucifer", which is inaccurate btw but that's another argument) to destroy an entire region of land. The difference is that there were survivors from Ascalon and the region STILL EXISTED afterwards, albeit very much ruined. After the Cataclysm the entire nation was literally gone and there were no survivors on either side of that conflict. In what way is that "better" than the Searing?

    Yeah I remember the Mursaat, but every Flame Shaman seemed to basically be Saul D'Alesssio and his inner circle minus the heel realization at the end. To the Flame they had no real faith in their upper caste as a whole(At least by the time they start worshiping Primordius anyway.), where the White Mantle seemed to be mixed fanatics and people who understood but kept it on the down low. Likewise for the Charr in general the horrific nature of the Titans didn't seem to phase them much where with the Mursaat and the Mantle they had to go out of their way to hide what happens. The comparison between the two is somewhat disingenuous as one organization was largely sacrificing it's own with limited knowledge for the purposes of defense in much the same way as the Foefire, where the other organization was using it's gods to kill and consume others for the purposes of domination over all life. By and large the nature of their faith and the goals it worked towards, as well as the scale of the people it sought to victimize, is quite different.

    And no I did not forget the slavery of the Veldrunner tribe, but that isn't really comparable to the Charrs enslavement of everything potentially since 100BE according to their own tribute records, the whole 'lesser races' ideology is also just way more common with the Charr Legions.

    As for the cataclysm, i'm kind of bewildered that you can't see several obvious differences. The Vizer did what he did without any public support, fully a result of his own actions where every member of Charr society from the top on down was in, and to an extent in the modern day, STILL IS in support of the Searing. The Cataclysm also didn't have all those people, and perhaps not even Khilbron himself at the time, pledge themselves to Abaddon and feed souls into the Cauldrons of Cataclysm to create that kind of magic. In addition the sinking of Orr was a defensive action meant to prevent an invasion rather then kickstart one, burning your house down to kill an invader is quite a bit different then going to someone elses house to burn it down.

    Also people likely survived the Cataclysm(Not that I would argue the Charr surviving that was real a GOOD thing per say.) in that the Orrian army and it's people were abroad during the war, which is why you have a Zealot of Shiverpeaks in Defenders Fields. Likewise it's theorized by Kimmes that the large amount of Charr they encounter during Ebonhawkes founding likely were survivors from Orr.

    Two RADICALLY different situations to say the least.

  • @arenta.2953 said:
    honestly, it is a bit odd Primordus isn't an option. the Flame Legion seems a natural fit there with the similar veins of magic.
    wonder where the flame legion fits in all this....side with these char rebels (to fit in) and go against their natural magic. go primordus (who their magic fits) and be seen as traitors again by the charr. or remain neutral and get torn apart by both the rebels and their own ranks who view this as the weaker option.
    heck, Sylvari gotta be terrified right now, ice or fire. both lethal to plant life.

    For these points. A: Primordus is under the ring of fire, on the other side of Tyria. in EOTN he was under the far shiverpeaks, but now he isn't.
    B: Flame legion is honoring the truce they signed, though there are elements who went with Bangar.
    C: Sylvari actually don't burn that well. It's brought up ingame in a few areas. Fire doesn't = massive danger to them anymore then it does to a human.

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    Naw, even with those it's a no contest in my eyes. The Charr literally fed their own and other peoples souls to the functional equivalent of Lucifer and put other races through slavery as well as their own women in order to secure a victory against mankind. Meanwhile barring perhaps the Centaurs humanity's worst crimes are committed against itself rather then other people.

    Foefire I can kind of get given the eternal nature of Ascalonian ghosts. But saying the Cataclysm is on par with the Searing in terms of horribleness is being really generous to say the least.

    Okay, I'd like to know the source of souls being fed to the titans. Ritual sacrifice doesn't mean souls got fed. Likewise, humanity has done just as much displacement and enslavement. Look at the Tengu, the Centaurs.

    The Cataclysm, in a sense, was actually far, far worse. You see, the searing ruined the land and killed a lot of people sure, but the Cataclysm caused a nation to be wiped out (Yes, there were survivors on both sides but the number of Orrians was so small it didn't matter. You don't see "Orrians" anymore, but you do see Ascalonians.), and then the vast majority of it's military to be raised as undead instantly because they died so quickly they didn't even know they were dead.

    The people or Orr were killed horrifically, their culture erased from the planet, and then forcibly raised into undeath not once, but twice.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 26, 2019

    @Kalavier.1097 said:

    @arenta.2953 said:
    honestly, it is a bit odd Primordus isn't an option. the Flame Legion seems a natural fit there with the similar veins of magic.
    wonder where the flame legion fits in all this....side with these char rebels (to fit in) and go against their natural magic. go primordus (who their magic fits) and be seen as traitors again by the charr. or remain neutral and get torn apart by both the rebels and their own ranks who view this as the weaker option.
    heck, Sylvari gotta be terrified right now, ice or fire. both lethal to plant life.

    For these points. A: Primordus is under the ring of fire, on the other side of Tyria. in EOTN he was under the far shiverpeaks, but now he isn't.
    B: Flame legion is honoring the truce they signed, though there are elements who went with Bangar.
    C: Sylvari actually don't burn that well. It's brought up ingame in a few areas. Fire doesn't = massive danger to them anymore then it does to a human.

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    Naw, even with those it's a no contest in my eyes. The Charr literally fed their own and other peoples souls to the functional equivalent of Lucifer and put other races through slavery as well as their own women in order to secure a victory against mankind. Meanwhile barring perhaps the Centaurs humanity's worst crimes are committed against itself rather then other people.

    Foefire I can kind of get given the eternal nature of Ascalonian ghosts. But saying the Cataclysm is on par with the Searing in terms of horribleness is being really generous to say the least.

    Okay, I'd like to know the source of souls being fed to the titans. Ritual sacrifice doesn't mean souls got fed. Likewise, humanity has done just as much displacement and enslavement. Look at the Tengu, the Centaurs.

    The Cataclysm, in a sense, was actually far, far worse. You see, the searing ruined the land and killed a lot of people sure, but the Cataclysm caused a nation to be wiped out (Yes, there were survivors on both sides but the number of Orrians was so small it didn't matter. You don't see "Orrians" anymore, but you do see Ascalonians.), and then the vast majority of it's military to be raised as undead instantly because they died so quickly they didn't even know they were dead.

    The people or Orr were killed horrifically, their culture erased from the planet, and then forcibly raised into undeath not once, but twice.

    The source is from Nightfall in the Realm or Torment, a portion of the fight to Abaddon is spent alongside the Oddbodies, a multi-racial group of soldiers tasked with fighting off Abaddons influence. One of them is Garfaz Steelfur who turned on the Titans when they consumed the souls of his companions. The Titans are, after all, demons and they share the capricious appetites of all of their ilk.

    Secondly, the notion that Orrians were 'wiped from the face of Tyria' by the Cataclysm is false. Again there's a Zealot of the Shiverpeaks in Defenders Field and the armies of Orr were over in Kryta, likewise they had people travelling abroad that for obvious reasons survived just due to not being in the blast when it happened. Also, what do we define as 'worse'? Do we mean in terms of intent or sheer body count? I would argue the Searing likely killed a comparable number of people either way, but the intent of it was far more widespread among the Charr. It's debatable if the Vizer even knew using the Forbidden Scrolls would result in a cataclysm, it's certainly argued about in universe by priory scholars.

    Edit: On rereading your post I caught the bit about the number of Orrians being so small it didn't matter. It's likely they were just incorporated into other nations since they don't own any land, where the Ascalonians still identify as a nation because of their Freeholds. That doesn't say how many Orrians did, or did not, survive as we simply don't know.

    As for land displace,ement, I think saying humans did 'just as much' is somewhat reductive. It ignores how humans went about expanding in favor of focusing on the raw amount of land taken. The Tengu Wars weren't a one sided affair where humans did all the killing. Tengu tribes killed and potentially cannibalized people for expanding away from the Jade Wind, as well as lead assaults on humans for the foreign diseases they brought during transition that were given to their young. Horrible yes, but how controllable that is is debatable. By contrast the Charr seemed to just kill and enslave every race they encountered with little distinction.

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 26, 2019

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @Kalavier.1097 said:
    Okay, I'd like to know the source of souls being fed to the titans. Ritual sacrifice doesn't mean souls got fed. Likewise, humanity has done just as much displacement and enslavement. Look at the Tengu, the Centaurs.

    The Cataclysm, in a sense, was actually far, far worse. You see, the searing ruined the land and killed a lot of people sure, but the Cataclysm caused a nation to be wiped out (Yes, there were survivors on both sides but the number of Orrians was so small it didn't matter. You don't see "Orrians" anymore, but you do see Ascalonians.), and then the vast majority of it's military to be raised as undead instantly because they died so quickly they didn't even know they were dead.

    The people or Orr were killed horrifically, their culture erased from the planet, and then forcibly raised into undeath not once, but twice.

    The source is from Nightfall in the Realm or Torment, a portion of the fight to Abaddon is spent alongside the Oddbodies, a multi-racial group of soldiers tasked with fighting off Abaddons influence. One of them is Garfaz Steelfur who turned on the Titans when they consumed the souls of his companions. The Titans are, after all, demons and they share the capricious appetites of all of their ilk.

    Secondly, the notion that Orrians were 'wiped from the face of Tyria' by the Cataclysm is false. Again there's a Zealot of the Shiverpeaks in Defenders Field and the armies of Orr were over in Kryta, likewise they had people travelling abroad that for obvious reasons survived just due to not being in the blast when it happened. Also, what do we define as 'worse'? Do we mean in terms of intent or sheer body count? I would argue the Searing likely killed a comparable number of people either way, but the intent of it was far more widespread among the Charr. It's debatable if the Vizer even knew using the Forbidden Scrolls would result in a cataclysm, it's certainly argued about in universe by priory scholars.

    Edit: On rereading your post I caught the bit about the number of Orrians being so small it didn't matter. It's likely they were just incorporated into other nations since they don't own any land, where the Ascalonians still identify as a nation because of their Freeholds. That doesn't say how many Orrians did, or did not, survive as we simply don't know.

    As for land displace,ement, I think saying humans did 'just as much' is somewhat reductive. It ignores how humans went about expanding in favor of focusing on the raw amount of land taken. The Tengu Wars weren't a one sided affair where humans did all the killing. Tengu tribes killed and potentially cannibalized people for expanding away from the Jade Wind, as well as lead assaults on humans for the foreign diseases they brought during transition that were given to their young. Horrible yes, but how controllable that is is debatable. By contrast the Charr seemed to just kill and enslave every race they encountered with little distinction.

    Regarding the soul thing, the titans consumed the souls of those who died and were sent to the Realm of Torment. The charr had no idea the titans were consuming the souls of the dead; the one who found out, Garfaaz, was dead when he found out (he doesn't appear spectral because they apparently didn't feel like making ghost charr models until the BMP). So to try to blame the charr, shaman caste, or just Flame Legion on "soul sacrifice" is outright false. They did assist such, but unwittingly so - to the point where even the sacrificers would become food for the titans in time.

    Regarding Orrians, their numbers are so few that they pretty much are "wiped out". There werne't Orrian armies in Kryta - the armies fellback to Orr when the Searing occurred, because they expected the charr assault. Those who weren't in Orr during the Cataclysm were a) early refugees, b) merchants and travelers, c) guilds, and/or d) stragglers for returning home for the defenses. Even then, most people of Orrian origins don't like announcing such, due to all the bad things that have come from Orr (first Khilbron's undead, then Zhaitan's "undead"). IIRC, we only ever meet one human who announces his Orrian heritage.

    And it certainly is not debateable if Khilbron knew what he was doing the DIsplaced Towers provide unfallible proof he knew.

    As for human expansion, I think Kalavier was focused on Tyria - the expansions into Kryta has displaced centaurs out of northcentral Kryta back in 300 AE to 800 AE (and with Jormag's awakening and the Maguuma drying up, they now have very little hospitable land, resulting in the renewed Centaur War), and similarly, expansions into Kryta had forced the Caromi out of their lands, and they had to take up settlement of Sanctum Cay when they were in central Kryta (Kessex Hills and Queensdale, comparatively). Elonian expansions, which weren't brought up, also forced displacement of hekets, which is more on par to the charr's displacement of grawl.

    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 26, 2019

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @Kalavier.1097 said:
    Okay, I'd like to know the source of souls being fed to the titans. Ritual sacrifice doesn't mean souls got fed. Likewise, humanity has done just as much displacement and enslavement. Look at the Tengu, the Centaurs.

    The Cataclysm, in a sense, was actually far, far worse. You see, the searing ruined the land and killed a lot of people sure, but the Cataclysm caused a nation to be wiped out (Yes, there were survivors on both sides but the number of Orrians was so small it didn't matter. You don't see "Orrians" anymore, but you do see Ascalonians.), and then the vast majority of it's military to be raised as undead instantly because they died so quickly they didn't even know they were dead.

    The people or Orr were killed horrifically, their culture erased from the planet, and then forcibly raised into undeath not once, but twice.

    The source is from Nightfall in the Realm or Torment, a portion of the fight to Abaddon is spent alongside the Oddbodies, a multi-racial group of soldiers tasked with fighting off Abaddons influence. One of them is Garfaz Steelfur who turned on the Titans when they consumed the souls of his companions. The Titans are, after all, demons and they share the capricious appetites of all of their ilk.

    Secondly, the notion that Orrians were 'wiped from the face of Tyria' by the Cataclysm is false. Again there's a Zealot of the Shiverpeaks in Defenders Field and the armies of Orr were over in Kryta, likewise they had people travelling abroad that for obvious reasons survived just due to not being in the blast when it happened. Also, what do we define as 'worse'? Do we mean in terms of intent or sheer body count? I would argue the Searing likely killed a comparable number of people either way, but the intent of it was far more widespread among the Charr. It's debatable if the Vizer even knew using the Forbidden Scrolls would result in a cataclysm, it's certainly argued about in universe by priory scholars.

    Edit: On rereading your post I caught the bit about the number of Orrians being so small it didn't matter. It's likely they were just incorporated into other nations since they don't own any land, where the Ascalonians still identify as a nation because of their Freeholds. That doesn't say how many Orrians did, or did not, survive as we simply don't know.

    As for land displace,ement, I think saying humans did 'just as much' is somewhat reductive. It ignores how humans went about expanding in favor of focusing on the raw amount of land taken. The Tengu Wars weren't a one sided affair where humans did all the killing. Tengu tribes killed and potentially cannibalized people for expanding away from the Jade Wind, as well as lead assaults on humans for the foreign diseases they brought during transition that were given to their young. Horrible yes, but how controllable that is is debatable. By contrast the Charr seemed to just kill and enslave every race they encountered with little distinction.

    Regarding the soul thing, the titans consumed the souls of those who died and were sent to the Realm of Torment. The charr had no idea the titans were consuming the souls of the dead; the one who found out, Garfaaz, was dead when he found out (he doesn't appear spectral because they apparently didn't feel like making ghost charr models until the BMP). So to try to blame the charr, shaman caste, or just Flame Legion on "soul sacrifice" is outright false. They did assist such, but unwittingly so - to the point where even the sacrificers would become food for the titans in time.

    Regarding Orrians, their numbers are so few that they pretty much are "wiped out". There werne't Orrian armies in Kryta - the armies fellback to Orr when the Searing occurred, because they expected the charr assault. Those who weren't in Orr during the Cataclysm were a) early refugees, b) merchants and travelers, c) guilds, and/or d) stragglers for returning home for the defenses. Even then, most people of Orrian origins don't like announcing such, due to all the bad things that have come from Orr (first Khilbron's undead, then Zhaitan's "undead"). IIRC, we only ever meet one human who announces his Orrian heritage.

    And it certainly is not debateable if Khilbron knew what he was doing the DIsplaced Towers provide unfallible proof he knew.

    As for human expansion, I think Kalavier was focused on Tyria - the expansions into Kryta has displaced centaurs out of northcentral Kryta back in 300 AE to 800 AE (and with Jormag's awakening and the Maguuma drying up, they now have very little hospitable land, resulting in the renewed Centaur War), and similarly, expansions into Kryta had forced the Caromi out of their lands, and they had to take up settlement of Sanctum Cay when they were in central Kryta (Kessex Hills and Queensdale, comparatively). Elonian expansions, which weren't brought up, also forced displacement of hekets, which is more on par to the charr's displacement of grawl.

    The displaced tower is interesting, I did not know about that. Fair enough on that front, the Vizer very much knew what he was doing when he casted the Cataclysm. That said in regards to the first point, while the Shaman Caste didn't know what was happening to the souls in question there is something to be said for intent in the broader topic of this discussion. Are we counting the intent of the people as a whole? their unwitting actions? or simply raw consequences? In the case of both the Foefire and the Forbidden Scrolls the general population didn't really know about the actions of these individuals. At most you could argue that Adelberns inner circle guarding him during the ritual might of known. By and large the Charr were however very much onboard with the Searing, so much so that they tried to cast in multiple times, to me that's something that you can very much blame the Legions on where how much of the Cataclysm and the Foefire is on humans in the debatable.

    I also did not know about the army recall to Orr. so that too is entirely fair. In regards to central Tyria with the Centaur and Hekets that's also fair, I definitely view the Centaur as being the most sympathetic of the displaced races caused by human expansion. Where the Charr and Tengu were of questionable hospitality the Centaur at the very least actually owned the land first AND we don't have any major records to indicate the Centaur may of attacked humanity to begin with beyond the fact that they tended to be a somewhat warlike culture, but one that didn't have the same track record of conquest as the Charr. The reluctance of the Harathi and Tamnii under Modniir certainly indicates that the Centaur are being forced into a position of fighting, rather then it just being something ingrained in them.

  • perilisk.1874perilisk.1874 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The Searing, the Cataclysm, and the Jade Wind were all massive, genocidal acts of widespread destruction.

    It's true that the Searing had more survivors, and that life bounced back, but it took a while, and Ascalon still looks like kitten in a lot of places (though some of that might just be pollution from Charr society).

    The Cataclysm seems the most destructive of all, from a terrestrial perspective. However, clearly sea life was able to colonize the continent in short order, so not a total loss from a natural perspective (say, relative to the Brand or something).

    The Jade Wind was at least as omnicidal as the Cataclysm. The affected areas have been somewhat recolonized by people and terrestrial life as of GW1, but of course they've had an extra two centuries, versus the Searing, so it's hard to compare.

    However, I agree with those that argue that the Searing was the willful, broadly accepted act of one society against another, whereas the Cataclysm and Jade Wind were the acts of individuals (who were under malign supernatural, rather than social, influences) against their own societies and which don't meaningfully implicate those societies.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    I also think that when we talk about the Foefire and Cataclysm it's worth noting for whom we generally consider the atrocity focused on. In both cases the major victims were the humans themselves who were killed or raised into undeath. It's hard to argue that the Charr were the victims of either magical cataclysm because during the events in question the Charr themselves weren't exactly the most sympathetic group of people. Further while the humans killed were civilians(And you could argue in both cases the civilians would be killed by the Charr regardless or enslaved) the Charr were soldiers and conquers. Because of the target of the atrocities and the intent it makes, at least for the purposes of comparison, like apples and oranges.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 27, 2019

    @Seatox.4065 said:
    If we're playing games of "who's species committed the biggest atrocity", may I remind people about the Canthan Ministry of Purity, and What They Did To Their Own People Without Even Needing Doomsday Weapon Magic?

    In the broad stretch of Tyrian history, no major culture is free of some kind of atrocity done in their name. No, not even the non-nightmare Sylvari (Remember those peaceful Maguuma Centaurs that your sister introduced you to, Caithe?). Screaming "the charr are all evil! no it is the humans alone who are all evil!" misses the storytelling going on: It's all about breaking the various vicious cycles that keep bringing about these apocalypses. Human supremacy nonsense (Have you forgotten the infamous Minister Caudecus's various motivations already?) is as poisonous as charr supremacy nonsense, or skritt supremacy.

    One Shiny! One Skratch! One Skritt! yes yes?

    I mean on one hand I agree, in fact I largely agree, that everyone has done bad things. At the same time that doesn't mean we should view those cultures as equal from a morality standpoint, especially in a story like this. I'm wary of the 'Everyone did something wrong' mentality because it can be used as a way to just say let bygones be bygones and don't worry about what other nations do with their culture and their people. I don't think that's a sane way to run the world however, while humans have individuals who go insane such as Caudecus, Adelbern, Joko, and Emperor Usoku, it's also worth noting that there are significantly more positive aspects given to human society over the years in both Guild Wars 1 and Guild Wars 2, where by and large in my eyes the most postive Charr i'v met such as Tybalt and Almorra are societal outcasts.

    That is not to just condemn the Charr as an evil monolith unworthy of redemption as that's not a healthy way to think about ANY group of people, but rather to recognize the way that the Charr have structured and organized their society is more conductive to large scale acts of evil and indoctrinating the populace to the same. While there are definitely things I condemn the Charr for, ultimately the purpose is to reform and say that their people can, and should, be better then what came before. I think the Icebrood Saga will largely be about how that path takes shape, if that makes any sense.

  • ugrakarma.9416ugrakarma.9416 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 27, 2019

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    That is not to just condemn the Charr as an evil monolith unworthy of redemption as that's not a healthy way to think about ANY group of people, but rather to recognize the way that the Charr have structured and organized their society is more conductive to large scale acts of evil and indoctrinating the populace to the same. While there are definitely things I condemn the Charr for, ultimately the purpose is to reform and say that their people can, and should, be better then what came before. I think the Icebrood Saga will largely be about how that path takes shape, if that makes any sense.

    This is just a very forced historical anachronism, the idea of "inherently evil culture" was just political propaganda used by empires to justify some conquest. Just remember that our "real world" itself was organized around warrior like tribal cultures in 99% of their existence. The way Charr organized their society is completely fine even if they made religious sacrifices, cannibalism or slavery. Also remember that Charr aesthetics and thematics is heavily inspired in Roman Empire, Roman Empire doesnt take things softly and their economy was based on slavery. All civilizations is almost build upon on rivers of blood and pyramids of skulls, the United States itself was at war at 93% of their existence time, this blog counted this on 2017. https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/50473

    "It's a testament to the folly of the humans and their gods. They say Arah was sacred, but all I see is one big dragon nest."(Rytlock Brimstone)

  • @ugrakarma.9416 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    That is not to just condemn the Charr as an evil monolith unworthy of redemption as that's not a healthy way to think about ANY group of people, but rather to recognize the way that the Charr have structured and organized their society is more conductive to large scale acts of evil and indoctrinating the populace to the same. While there are definitely things I condemn the Charr for, ultimately the purpose is to reform and say that their people can, and should, be better then what came before. I think the Icebrood Saga will largely be about how that path takes shape, if that makes any sense.

    This is just a very forced historical anachronism, the idea of "inherently evil culture" was just political propaganda used by empires to justify some conquest. Just remember that our "real world" itself was organized around warrior like tribal cultures in 99% of their existence. The way Charr organized their society is completely fine even if they made religious sacrifices, cannibalism or slavery. Also remember that Charr aesthetics and thematics is heavily inspired in Roman Empire, Roman Empire doesnt take things softly and their economy was based on slavery. All civilizations is almost build upon on rivers of blood and pyramids of skulls, the United States itself was at war at 93% of their existence time, this blog counted this on 2017. https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/50473

    From the Orrian History Scrolls you can find sitting around Shelter Docks in Malchor's Leap -
    "Balthazar came in fire and wrath, carrying the head of his father and leading his fierce hounds, Temar and Tegon. He swept Orr with a cleansing flame."
    "It was he who claimed Tyria for humanity; he who said the other races would be easy to defeat. It would not be the only time that the Master of War was wrong."

    Balthazar, god of colonialist imperialism. I think Ares/Mars probably still has him beaten for mythological warcrimes, but yeah.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    @Seatox.4065 said:

    @ugrakarma.9416 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    That is not to just condemn the Charr as an evil monolith unworthy of redemption as that's not a healthy way to think about ANY group of people, but rather to recognize the way that the Charr have structured and organized their society is more conductive to large scale acts of evil and indoctrinating the populace to the same. While there are definitely things I condemn the Charr for, ultimately the purpose is to reform and say that their people can, and should, be better then what came before. I think the Icebrood Saga will largely be about how that path takes shape, if that makes any sense.

    This is just a very forced historical anachronism, the idea of "inherently evil culture" was just political propaganda used by empires to justify some conquest. Just remember that our "real world" itself was organized around warrior like tribal cultures in 99% of their existence. The way Charr organized their society is completely fine even if they made religious sacrifices, cannibalism or slavery. Also remember that Charr aesthetics and thematics is heavily inspired in Roman Empire, Roman Empire doesnt take things softly and their economy was based on slavery. All civilizations is almost build upon on rivers of blood and pyramids of skulls, the United States itself was at war at 93% of their existence time, this blog counted this on 2017. https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/50473

    From the Orrian History Scrolls you can find sitting around Shelter Docks in Malchor's Leap -
    "Balthazar came in fire and wrath, carrying the head of his father and leading his fierce hounds, Temar and Tegon. He swept Orr with a cleansing flame."
    "It was he who claimed Tyria for humanity; he who said the other races would be easy to defeat. It would not be the only time that the Master of War was wrong."

    Balthazar, god of colonialist imperialism. I think Ares/Mars probably still has him beaten for mythological warcrimes, but yeah.

    It's worth noting however that Melandru and Dwayna were very much NOT like that however, and there are equal examples of humans behaving much like migrants, rather then just as colonial conquerers. Charr conquests seem considerably more violent, which contributes to their lack of alliance with the other nations of Tyria.

  • ugrakarma.9416ugrakarma.9416 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 27, 2019

    @Seatox.4065 said:

    @ugrakarma.9416 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    That is not to just condemn the Charr as an evil monolith unworthy of redemption as that's not a healthy way to think about ANY group of people, but rather to recognize the way that the Charr have structured and organized their society is more conductive to large scale acts of evil and indoctrinating the populace to the same. While there are definitely things I condemn the Charr for, ultimately the purpose is to reform and say that their people can, and should, be better then what came before. I think the Icebrood Saga will largely be about how that path takes shape, if that makes any sense.

    This is just a very forced historical anachronism, the idea of "inherently evil culture" was just political propaganda used by empires to justify some conquest. Just remember that our "real world" itself was organized around warrior like tribal cultures in 99% of their existence. The way Charr organized their society is completely fine even if they made religious sacrifices, cannibalism or slavery. Also remember that Charr aesthetics and thematics is heavily inspired in Roman Empire, Roman Empire doesnt take things softly and their economy was based on slavery. All civilizations is almost build upon on rivers of blood and pyramids of skulls, the United States itself was at war at 93% of their existence time, this blog counted this on 2017. https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/50473

    From the Orrian History Scrolls you can find sitting around Shelter Docks in Malchor's Leap -
    "Balthazar came in fire and wrath, carrying the head of his father and leading his fierce hounds, Temar and Tegon. He swept Orr with a cleansing flame."
    "It was he who claimed Tyria for humanity; he who said the other races would be easy to defeat. It would not be the only time that the Master of War was wrong."

    Balthazar, god of colonialist imperialism. I think Ares/Mars probably still has him beaten for mythological warcrimes, but yeah.

    but is juts this i called "historical anacronysm". imperialism, colonial wars, "evil cultures", was just one attempt to apply ideas to a era/place where that these discussions did not exist. Tyria is heavily inspired in our ancient world, not the modern world, wars are almost waged on basis on "perceived threat", or some economic chaos that driven some ppl into pillagery wars.

    "It's a testament to the folly of the humans and their gods. They say Arah was sacred, but all I see is one big dragon nest."(Rytlock Brimstone)

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    Also while I can see your point about humans and Charr working together in Heart of Thorns, to me that story felt way more about how the Pact could easily fracture, as well as it could come together. The level of racism and violence enacted on the Sylvari for what Mordromoth had done was brutal, through the entire thing my thought process wasn't 'Look how tight knit the pact is!' it was 'Everything is balanced on the head of a pin and they could tear out each others throats at the slightest provocation'. Which seems to be a theme followed up in Grothmar, the Vigil are pretty racist towards the Charr there just as the Charr are racist towards everyone else.

  • @Loesh.4697 said:
    Also while I can see your point about humans and Charr working together in Heart of Thorns, to me that story felt way more about how the Pact could easily fracture, as well as it could come together. The level of racism and violence enacted on the Sylvari for what Mordromoth had done was brutal, through the entire thing my thought process wasn't 'Look how tight knit the pact is!' it was 'Everything is balanced on the head of a pin and they could tear out each others throats at the slightest provocation'. Which seems to be a theme followed up in Grothmar, the Vigil are pretty racist towards the Charr there just as the Charr are racist towards everyone else.

    And there's vigil who aren't racist. And charr who are likewise not racist. There's one human who goes on about Almorra being "One of the good ones!" which is a classic racist dogwhistle, while the Asura they're talking to is audibly holding their tongue, there's a sylvari who admires Malice Swordshadow, there's an ash legion captain brutally chewing out her subordinate for his bigotry.

    In the end, they're all sapients. People. Nobody in Tyria has ALIGNMENT: LAWFUL GOOD or ALIGNMENT: CHAOTIC EVIL painted on their character sheet that they must adhere to or the DM will take away their paladin powers. It's a huge mess of people being themselves under stress like all well written sociopolitical thrillers should be.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    @Seatox.4065 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    Also while I can see your point about humans and Charr working together in Heart of Thorns, to me that story felt way more about how the Pact could easily fracture, as well as it could come together. The level of racism and violence enacted on the Sylvari for what Mordromoth had done was brutal, through the entire thing my thought process wasn't 'Look how tight knit the pact is!' it was 'Everything is balanced on the head of a pin and they could tear out each others throats at the slightest provocation'. Which seems to be a theme followed up in Grothmar, the Vigil are pretty racist towards the Charr there just as the Charr are racist towards everyone else.

    And there's vigil who aren't racist. And charr who are likewise not racist. There's one human who goes on about Almorra being "One of the good ones!" which is a classic racist dogwhistle, while the Asura they're talking to is audibly holding their tongue, there's a sylvari who admires Malice Swordshadow, there's an ash legion captain brutally chewing out her subordinate for his bigotry.

    In the end, they're all sapients. People. Nobody in Tyria has ALIGNMENT: LAWFUL GOOD or ALIGNMENT: CHAOTIC EVIL painted on their character sheet that they must adhere to or the DM will take away their paladin powers. It's a huge mess of people being themselves under stress like all well written sociopolitical thrillers should be.

    I mean yeah, isn't that what I just said? At the same time the EXISTENCE of those people does not mean that the cultures in question are of equal morality, or that the Pact isn't fragile. In fact i'd say that Heart of Thorns is in large part an argument against what you bring it up as an example of, it showcases that the races of Tyria have a core weakness in their ability to organize and maintain the peace between each other because of their bigotries, if their faith is tested they can bend and break, they can break badly.

    We should examine the factors that lead to that stress, rather then simply say people will be people.

  • @Loesh.4697 said:
    The displaced tower is interesting, I did not know about that. Fair enough on that front, the Vizer very much knew what he was doing when he casted the Cataclysm. That said in regards to the first point, while the Shaman Caste didn't know what was happening to the souls in question there is something to be said for intent in the broader topic of this discussion. Are we counting the intent of the people as a whole? their unwitting actions? or simply raw consequences? In the case of both the Foefire and the Forbidden Scrolls the general population didn't really know about the actions of these individuals. At most you could argue that Adelberns inner circle guarding him during the ritual might of known. By and large the Charr were however very much onboard with the Searing, so much so that they tried to cast in multiple times, to me that's something that you can very much blame the Legions on where how much of the Cataclysm and the Foefire is on humans in the debatable.

    Technically, it is possible that the charr on a whole weren't aware of the extent. But to say they were "on board" is a bit of an overstatement. Keep in mind that the Flame Legion and shaman caste were an oppressive group, who effectively forced their will on the non-shamans of the legions. They made open executions of those who defied their orders, sacrificing them to the titans and their other rituals (if the lore about effigies in GW2 pertains to GW1, then that means all the few mobile effigies we fought were powered by taking lives).

    A more apt comparison may be the White Mantle. A number of White Mantle knew about the sacrifices and committed them willingly, but there were also a number who either a) were unaware until finding out, or b) were doing so because they were forced to and they didn't just rebel for the sake of not being sacrificed themselves. Granted the White Mantle didn't go about performing massive magical catastrophes, but they did sacrifice over a thousand people in the course of ~2 years.

    @perilisk.1874 said:
    However, I agree with those that argue that the Searing was the willful, broadly accepted act of one society against another, whereas the Cataclysm and Jade Wind were the acts of individuals (who were under malign supernatural, rather than social, influences) against their own societies and which don't meaningfully implicate those societies.

    To be fair, the Searing was also performed under malign supernatural influences. It's just that those under said supernatural influences (Abaddon via titans) then forced others to cooperate or die. Charr society was basically under an ultimatum by order of the shaman caste, and remained so until one warband took the risk of ignoring that ultimatum after enough warbands had had enough.

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    Iwhile humans have individuals who go insane such as Caudecus, Adelbern, Joko, and Emperor Usoku, it's also worth noting that there are significantly more positive aspects given to human society over the years in both Guild Wars 1 and Guild Wars 2, where by and large in my eyes the most postive Charr i'v met such as Tybalt and Almorra are societal outcasts.

    I don't think we can say Usoku is insane. I also don't think we can label the evil or questionable actions of nations to the ruler-of-the-time's deeds alone. Yeah, Caudecus was insane, but he still had people willingly work for him and be just as oppressive, racist, biggots as he was. Same with Joko and Usoku. I'm sure there were several Ascalonians in GW1 who we can look at dialogue and go "that man there is racist" (in fact, we can argue all of Ascalon were, since they viewed the charr as nothing more than savage animals prior to the Ebon Vanguard's adventures up north, despite the fact they wore metal armor, clothing, and wielded their own forged weapons - blacksmithing are a staple of culture and civilization).

    I also wouldn't really say the best good charr are social outcasts. Smodur and Malice have made active claims to end the wars and find a new direction for their people. I'd say that's a pretty bright sign there. And, imo, Malice moreso, because Smodur seems to be doing it - at least to a degree - to better his position as becoming Khan-Ur.

    @Seatox.4065 said:
    Also, Chief Engineer Timblin and the SCAR team would like to object to your kitten-hero-charr erasure. Honestly, one of the better bits of writing in Heart of Thorns was the way both humans and charr, forced into a hellish jungle war rapidly put their differences aside in the name of mutual survival... and being paranoid as hell around those kitten sylvari. Well, it's progress of a sort, right?

    A similar scene to this is in Edge of Destiny, when Rytlock and Logan both meet. They're leading two groups of their respective races, and in a millennia-old war with bitter hatred for the other race. But the moment ogres come crashing through the trees, both groups - the entire groups - set aside their differences because of a greater foe marching down on them.

    Sadly, only Logan and Rytlock survive - if more had, perhaps that would have changed their views on the other race just as it had for Logan and Rytlock (at least to the degree of a "they're good enough to fight alongside for survival if need be"). Same with at the end of the novel, when Logan lets out the charr prisoners to help fight off branded, when Jennah was still recooperating, there was no sign of human-charr fighting while the branded were around, despite the heavy hatred.

    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.
    All these squares make a circle.

  • You can't assign absolute moralities to a culture, though. Morality is always relative to the culture or individual holding those morals. You, and the society you come from, might consider Pizza On Pineapple to be a grave sin, worthy of punishment by death. The people over the Cola-ocean consider Pineapple to be the most Sacred of Pizza Toppings, and those who oppose Pineappling Pizza to be hideous subhuman monsters, to be shunned and slain with no guilt. The moment you start going forcing your moral viewpoint onto a different culture, you open up a huge wormy can labeled "Moral Philosophy and Ethics", and then your problems REALLY start, because then you're into some seriously dense literature.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.