That Ascalon/Charr thread, but properly articulated — Guild Wars 2 Forums

That Ascalon/Charr thread, but properly articulated

witcher.3197witcher.3197 Member ✭✭✭✭
edited September 28, 2019 in Lore

So I never expected the other thread to blow up so much, letalone be misinterpreted so hard on reddit and twitch. I just wanted to rant a bit and vent my frustration with a particular part of how the story is being told - or rather, how it isn't.

I'd like to give it another go, but this time provide proper feedback instead of ranting.

TL;DR The human-Charr conflict is a rich and perfect setting for people to get invested in different sides and could be the best place for telling a gray story in GW2. Unfortunately I don't think Anet's doing a good job at exposing the playerbase to both sides of the conflict in GW2, instead we are being spoonfed the Charr narrative endlessly and the whole thing comes off as too black and white. Not only that, but instead of building on what was set up in GW1, GW2's narrative works to undo and invalidate its predecessor.

The shift in narrative

It's pretty clear that Charr were never supposed to be likeable at the time of GW1. They were some of the earliest and most ruthless villains of the story with absolutely no redeeming qualities, and many players got invested in the Ascalonian side. When Anet decided to make Charr playable in GW2 they felt it necessary to change how the playerbase viewed the Charr. Thus began the problems.

How NOT to tell a gray story

So Anet took a conflict that was perhaps the most black and white in the entire lore, and seemingly tried to turn it into a more "gray" one. But the way they did it was the following: they painted it just as black and white as it was in GW1, except switched which side is supposed to be in the right which only alienated some of the established fanbase.

When such a story is told right, both sides have valid points and the audience is split on the matter in a good way, allowing people to get attached to either of the sides and make arguements for their favorite.

Problem with GW2 is that Anet is trying to heavily overcompensate for how evil the Charr were in GW1. They are basically giving them amnesty for the Searing, genocides, child slavery, burning women alive, eating prisoners / forcing them to fight to the death for entertainment, and more. They even get to be vindicated for their whole conquest of Ascalon by the "we just wanted to take our land back" narrative which Anet wasted no time hammering home before GW2 even released. They shoehorned this into the cinematic of their very first dungeon and released it before the game even came out.

It's a very consistent theme since before release to paint the Charr as the victims of humanity. First, this goes against everything that was set up in GW1, creating a rift between the narrative and communities of the two games. Second, I think it doesn't even do justice to the Charr because it makes them appear way more tame, heavily downplaying their warmongering nature which is supposed to be their cornerstone as a race. Since when do Charr need a valid reason to go to war?

Meanwhile Ascalonians get reduced from tragic victims of a brutal invasion, to mindless villains for the most part.

What I'm trying to say is that this "conflict" is way too onesided in GW2. Charr are never held accountable for their sins, and Ascalonians are expected to just roll with it - because those who don't are portrayed as evil and get killed off.

"But that's just the Charr's propaganda, not Anet's official stance!"

I keep hearing that GW1 was human centric so GW2 merely gave us the Charr's (biased) perspective and we are supposed to take it with a grain of salt. Problem is, not everyone played GW1. New players - and especially the more casual ones who started off with GW2 - never ever get exposed to the atrocities of the Charr, and the Charr POV never gets challenged even for a second.

If you want to sell a gray story, then tell the story from both sides IN ONE GAME. That way fans of neither side feel betrayed by the narrative.

Each side telling biased half-truths could be a great narrative tool IF we spent time exploring both sides, but that's not happening at all. Those who started with GW2 never really get exposed to anything but the Charr side, the Charr truth. Since their story is never challenged, it becomes THE truth. Players shouldn't have to go back and play a 14 year old game if they wanted to get the full picture, but without doing so the story becomes much more bland and black and white.

Bangar and the Charr victim complex

I'm glad that we are getting a character like Bangar. He represents what Charr should be: warminded, constantly on edge, seeing enemies everywhere - yet intelligent, calculating, and even rational in his own way. Truly a hero of his own story and we need more characters like him.

The line that set me off however was him complaining about how "Ascalonians used to wear our fur as armor". Don't get me wrong, it's in character for him to say such things!

Again, my problem is that this is just yet another continuation of the Charr victim narrative that's been going on for 7 years, completely undisputed. GW2 players aren't going to know the circumstances, they won't know that this happened after the Charr commited genocide against 3 human kingdoms. They lack context.

Anet's painting a completely distorted view of the whole conflict to those who never played GW1. They aren't creating a divide between people who agree with humans and those who agree with the Charr (which would be good storytelling), rather a rift between those who played GW1 and those who didn't.

Retcons

This is from the original manuscript for GW: Prophecies.

Once, Ascalon was a beautiful, fertile land of rolling green countryside and magnificent cities. Her people were viewed as grim by their neighbors. This was perhaps, to be expected, given their never-ending war against the aggressive Charr. Indeed, it was their unfailing vigilance, their Great Northern Wall, and the blood they shed each year to defend it that had protected not only Ascalon, but also Kryta and Orr through the ages.

This was the original story. The whole "we just came to take back our land" is a GW2 retcon that Anet wasted no time to spoonfeed it to new players over the years. Most people today use this reasoning to justify basically everything the Charr ever did. Anet took one of the best and most iconic conflicts of GW1, decided they want none of it in GW2, and then made the aggressors seem like the good guys in the sequel with no room for debate. I think that was a huge mistake and a waste of potential for great tensions.

This excuse doesn't even hold up, because events unfolded exactly as the manuscript said they would: Charr invading the other human kingdoms the moment the wall was breached. What happened to the "we are just here to take it back" narrative? Are we supposed to believe that Kryta and Orr were also originally Charr land?

Because of all the retcons GW2 doesn't really expand on the story told in GW1, rather tries to replace it. Again this creates a situation where, instead of the GW2 playerbase being divided on the human-Charr conflict in a good way, the true divide lies between GW1 and GW2 players. I think that's bad storytelling.

If the intent was to flip the narrative on its head, drag Ascalon through the mud and justify the Charr's genocides and whatnot, alienating a large chunk of the former playerbase then I guess it's a success. If however the intent was to provide a gray story, then they've failed, but maybe it's not too late to salvage the situation and this saga is the perfect opportunity for that.

<1

Comments

  • Thornwolf.9721Thornwolf.9721 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I agree the charr have been changed and sometimes not fully for the better, If they wanted to tell more of a grey story they could of talked about the relationship between the norn and the charr. They had conflicts but the charr typically never tried to antagonize the norn for fear of what the norn would do to them in retaliation. Ascalon was a beautiful place and honestly I wish they had offered us different perspectives of the conflict, blood would see it as justified. While ash and Iron saw it more as "It happened, it sucks but there is little we could do now about it."

    They could of allowed it to be that iron legion was allowing the humans to build the wall back to glory, and make a "New ascalon" but with charr being there to help them remake and retake their homeland. A sign of good will and in return within divinities reach a charr area would be built for charr to live among the humans, teach them how to make guns and weapons and to help in their war against the centaur. Then you could have Ash collecting data on the humans and maybe even working with the shining blade to help snuff our the separatists. With them finding out around this point that Bangar was the one who was fueling them this whole time, because blood legion or at least the main part of blood legion under him didn't agree with this at all. With rytlock and the pc being in blood-legion and being so far from them and being alongside smodur and helping iron legion they would have a different perspective.

    Bangar reignites the human vs charr tension but a lot on both sides refuse to fight each other because despite their differences they see one another as friends now. Perhaps even blossoming relationships begun to take place (Why not.) So when the time comes and tensions rise the Charr and humans band together, against bangar and his plot and turn to show bloodlegion that you can co-exist. I feel like rebuilding Ascalon would be fitting, I feel like building the beauty that was near to where it was and rebuilding the wall would be a wonderful way to aleviate your issues with the plot. Because then it would feel like the charr took responsibility and realized what they had done was wrong and didn't need to happen, this would probably alleviate tensions between the races as well.

  • Narcemus.1348Narcemus.1348 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 30, 2019

    I feel like your previous discussion is proof that they have done a good job of creating a grey story. Many of us long term Guild Wars 1 vets have disagreed with you on how the humans are "villianized". It is pretty obvious that there are two fairly large groups of player perspective for either side. You yourself claim this to be the goal of creating a grey story, and it exists.

  • witcher.3197witcher.3197 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 30, 2019

    @Narcemus.1348 said:
    I feel like your previous discussion is proof that they have done a good job of creating a grey story.

    Then you don't know what a gray story is.

    In a gray story we'd have two sides who each get about the same amount of attention in the story in the same game, each are given valid claims, and the conflict could go either way.

    At no point in the history of this franchise does this happen. Humans are the definitive good guys in GW1 while Charr are the bad guys with absolutely no redeeming qualities. Then GW2 rolls around and Anet goes "oh kitten we have to make these guys playable and have them work with humans, what do we do?", proceed to retcon the kitten out of the story, going out of their way of justifying why the Charr get to keep Ascalon, meanwhile Ascalonians are sidelined and we are barely introduced to their side of the arguement in GW2.

    Ascalonians are all but written out of the story in GW2 because Anet wants 0 conflict over Ascalon and therefore they just don't fit the narrative. They are given a peace treaty where the gratious Charr let them live in their mountain corner and that's it. Everyone who opposes the treaty is killed off by the writers. The Charr basically win and we are expected to NEVER question it. That is the OPPOSITE of a gray story.

    Many of us long term Guild Wars 1 vets have disagreed with you on how the humans are "villianized". It is pretty obvious that there are two fairly large groups of player perspective for either side. You yourself claim this to be the goal of creating a grey story, and it exists.

    Most of the people who were alienated by the narrative of GW2 are probably not going to be around to discuss things on the lore forum 7 years in, let's be honest. The "many of us" is a sample size of what, half a dozen? Irrelevant. All Charr fans too I assume, of course you like the narrative because it caters to you endlessly.

    I'd be more interested in how many non-GW1 players even considered taking the Ascalonian side of the arguement. Not many, I'd imagine. Do you know why? Because again, Anet had decided that the Charr shall have Ascalon and they don't want anyone to dispute it, ever. They never really make it an option to symphatize with the humans of Ascalon in GW2. Hell they don't even put the full history into the game, just cherrypick the parts that make the Charr look good and humans look bad to spin a narrative around that. The only people who even bother to discuss this for the most part are those who played both games, the GW2-onlies probably never even questioned whether the Charr were in the right or not.

  • Aaron Ansari.1604Aaron Ansari.1604 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 30, 2019

    I don't agree with all of witcher's points- I don't think we are expected to 'never' question the charr's right to Ascalon, and I don't think ANet ever pursued a deliberate policy to write off the Ascalonian perspective- but I also don't think it's up for debate that they've given that perspective very little visibility within the confines of GW2, and that imbalance will naturally have affected the views of players who aren't interested in dealing with a much older and very different game or with the novels. I'd boil it down to A.) ANet baking a ton of different conflicts into their setting and inevitably having to let a few fall through the cracks to balance the rest, and B.) not giving themselves any kind of tools within the game capable to exploring nuance, but regardless of the reasons why, the discrepancy is present... just not really relevant to the main story, which is less 'the charr win, deal with it' and more 'it doesn't matter who wins, we kinda have bigger fish lizards to fry.' In short, I'd argue that it is a gray story, but one told very poorly, simply because it isn't the story they're trying to tell.

    As for "All Charr fans too I assume, of course you like the narrative because it caters to you endlessly," well... witcher, I know at least three of the people who disagreed with you in the other thread are 'human fans' who have at various points objected to the way that the race has been marginalized during the GW2 period. At least one of those is also a 'charr fan'- the two aren't mutually exclusive- and the fact of the matter is, the charr have been just as marginalized for almost as long. The humans have intermittently had the spot light through Seasons 3 and 4 and PoF. A valid argument could be made that those developments have been detrimental and it might've been better if they hadn't been touched upon, but ANet did at least try to give us something interesting. The charr haven't had center stage since... well, depending on how you frame things, since ever. All of their real 'gains' were in the background reading leading up to the game's launch. It's their turn in the sun, and even if the sylvari and human players aren't happy with what they got when they were up, that's no reason to want the charr (and norn!) players to have it bad now. I may not be as engaged with this plot as I was with previous ones, but personally, I do hope the charr get a proper deep-dive here.

    R.I.P., Old Man of Auld Red Wharf. Gone but never forgotten.

  • Stramatus.5219Stramatus.5219 Member ✭✭
    edited October 1, 2019

    I think my problem is that as someone who mained an Ascalonian Human for as long as GW2 has now been out (2005 to 2012), I felt very little to no ties to being a Krytan in GW2. And indeed the personal story Dead Sister branch allowed me to state to Logan that my GW2 character was "Ascalonian and kitten proud of it." or something like that. Yet there is really no mechanism within the human side of the story to effectively play my character as Ascalonian. I find that to be overall rather jarring. Especially since I tied my toon as a descendant of my GW1 toon (hall of monuments, linked accounts). It would stand to reason that my toon would perhaps view the conflict somewhat differently, but throughout the story acts as a Krytan.

    Meanwhile the Charr became a playable race and the double whammy was that not only were Ascalonians completely diminished as something the player could be, the story was then reframed around "retaking a homeland" which did frame the Ascalonians in a different light than GW1, especially to a player base that might not have played GW1 or was otherwise familiar with the lore outside what's in the game.

    "Remember The Searing."

  • Gorgaan Peaudesang.8324Gorgaan Peaudesang.8324 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 1, 2019

    witcher.3197 said:
    Because of all the retcons GW2 doesn't really expand on the story told in GW1, rather tries to replace it.

    The story told in GW1 foreshadowed the certain demise of the Human Kingdom of Ascalon, and the Ascalonian hero took the difficult decision to leave his nation behind for a better life in Kryta.

    Regardless of what EOTN did to flesh out the Charr, the dynamics of the Human race in Central Tyria was already known and GW2 is true to it: Ascalon was a lost cause while Kryta was, and still is, the most sustainable kingdom in the continent.

    In 1325 AE, Ascalon is a cursed land operated by the Charr for generations. What would be the point to reclaim the fallen human kingdom if your perspective is:
    -at worst, getting crushed by the overwhelming force of the Charr?
    -at best, getting the honor to endlessly fight your ancestors?

  • Narcemus.1348Narcemus.1348 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 1, 2019

    @witcher.3197 said:
    Most of the people who were alienated by the narrative of GW2 are probably not going to be around to discuss things on the lore forum 7 years in, let's be honest. The "many of us" is a sample size of what, half a dozen? Irrelevant. All Charr fans too I assume, of course you like the narrative because it caters to you endlessly.

    Yes, and many of the people who are not bothered either way on the subject find the idea of reading such lengthy discussions dull and don't bother commenting. We cannot assume anything based on those who do not say anything. And you seem to assume that I am a "All Charr, all the time" player which isn't true. I play charr probably 1/4 of the time at best. I have 5 characters one for each race, my main is a Sylvari (who I see as a reincarnation of my main from prophecies) and my next closest to main is my Human Ascalonian Guardian (descendant of my main also). I spent years playing Guild Wars before Guild wars 2 came out during which time I played through all of the games in chronological order, my main was my first pre-searing character, I also have and love my perma-pre and have a third ascalonian character that I used to help bring another player up through the game. I've hated the charr with every fiber of my being, and have grown to respect what Arenanet has done to grow them as a race.

    In my time outside of the game, I have spent many hours on these forums discussing the good nature of humans and the balanced nature of the good and evil on both sides to those who view things in a "only charr" sort of way, and have been hated against by some for that reason (hated may be a strong word, perhaps belligerently argued against me?). To add to that, I have never once heard from any of my guildies (from Guild Wars 1) anything along the lines of what you are discussing. I have one guildie that refused to play a charr character in memory of GW1, but he never complained about any unfairness. I do know at least one that would claim that the Asura did more to destroy the feel of Guild Wars than any other race. But we'll just have to agree to disagree. I find the idea of having to shoehorn a lot of human centric perspective into a land where the charr rule and their perspective should be prevalent to be a bad one. The only proper places for human centric perspective in Ascalon anymore should be from human Ghosts, Ebonhawke, and roaming priory members. This is the last I will add to this subject, though. I don't feel the need to hit my head against a brick wall when my OPINION is out there now.

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭

    You lost me once you got to the part about the Charr retaking their land in GW2...you do realize that was what they where trying to do in GW1 even, don't you?

    Yes...no...maybe...what do you want, can't you see I'm busy saving the world...AGAIN!

  • witcher.3197witcher.3197 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Zaklex.6308 said:
    You lost me once you got to the part about the Charr retaking their land in GW2...you do realize that was what they where trying to do in GW1 even, don't you?

    Look up what a retcon is.

  • Harak.8397Harak.8397 Member ✭✭

    Says who ? Who asked the Charr why they were attacking the wall back then ? All we had was the human perspective: "These monsters have been attacking us forever, they enslave or kill and eat us. We must fight back." It isn't until EotN that we learn they can actually communicate with more than grunts and growls.

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:
    You lost me once you got to the part about the Charr retaking their land in GW2...you do realize that was what they where trying to do in GW1 even, don't you?

    That seems like you're being deliberately obtuse. While it's possible that the motivation behind the Charr attacking Ascalon was codified as being a retaking of land in Guild Wars: Prophecies, it wasn't framed that way and none of the Charr, even in GWEN mention as such. Pyre hints at it being so by telling Gwen 'You know nothing of my people' in Eye of the North if you're being generous, but even then...

    It was likely written after in Guild Wars 2 as a means of making the Charr more sympathetic. If this is any indication some people take the stance that it does, and...others do not. I'm of the stance I don't mind the change, I hardly view the humans as violent colonists for breaking the oppressive Charr empire and driving them north. The Centaur and Heket have far better claims to objecting to human expansion on grounds of morality.

    @witcher.3197 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:
    You lost me once you got to the part about the Charr retaking their land in GW2...you do realize that was what they where trying to do in GW1 even, don't you?

    Look up what a retcon is.

    You'd both have to delve deeper into the lore to know it's neither a retcon or unknown at the time...and have read what some of the devs said back then as well, oh wait, unless you had been in one of the...hmm, wonder if the NDA from that still applies too, like the current one for GW2 still applies from back when.

    Yes...no...maybe...what do you want, can't you see I'm busy saving the world...AGAIN!

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 4, 2019

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:
    You lost me once you got to the part about the Charr retaking their land in GW2...you do realize that was what they where trying to do in GW1 even, don't you?

    That seems like you're being deliberately obtuse. While it's possible that the motivation behind the Charr attacking Ascalon was codified as being a retaking of land in Guild Wars: Prophecies, it wasn't framed that way and none of the Charr, even in GWEN mention as such. Pyre hints at it being so by telling Gwen 'You know nothing of my people' in Eye of the North if you're being generous, but even then...

    It was likely written after in Guild Wars 2 as a means of making the Charr more sympathetic. If this is any indication some people take the stance that it does, and...others do not. I'm of the stance I don't mind the change, I hardly view the humans as violent colonists for breaking the oppressive Charr empire and driving them north. The Centaur and Heket have far better claims to objecting to human expansion on grounds of morality.

    @witcher.3197 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:
    You lost me once you got to the part about the Charr retaking their land in GW2...you do realize that was what they where trying to do in GW1 even, don't you?

    Look up what a retcon is.

    You'd both have to delve deeper into the lore to know it's neither a retcon or unknown at the time...and have read what some of the devs said back then as well, oh wait, unless you had been in one of the...hmm, wonder if the NDA from that still applies too, like the current one for GW2 still applies from back when.

    Like I said, possible, but unlikely. At the very least horrendously miscommunicated if that's the case, the Charr do not exactly come off as a victimized indigenous tribe so much as a relentless band of conquerors. Which is consistent even with Dev comments in the modern day, which paint them as being a historical parallel with the Mongol horde.

    If there is some dev statements from 2005 that indicate that was the original intention of the Charr though i'd be happy to see them.

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:
    You lost me once you got to the part about the Charr retaking their land in GW2...you do realize that was what they where trying to do in GW1 even, don't you?

    That seems like you're being deliberately obtuse. While it's possible that the motivation behind the Charr attacking Ascalon was codified as being a retaking of land in Guild Wars: Prophecies, it wasn't framed that way and none of the Charr, even in GWEN mention as such. Pyre hints at it being so by telling Gwen 'You know nothing of my people' in Eye of the North if you're being generous, but even then...

    It was likely written after in Guild Wars 2 as a means of making the Charr more sympathetic. If this is any indication some people take the stance that it does, and...others do not. I'm of the stance I don't mind the change, I hardly view the humans as violent colonists for breaking the oppressive Charr empire and driving them north. The Centaur and Heket have far better claims to objecting to human expansion on grounds of morality.

    @witcher.3197 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:
    You lost me once you got to the part about the Charr retaking their land in GW2...you do realize that was what they where trying to do in GW1 even, don't you?

    Look up what a retcon is.

    You'd both have to delve deeper into the lore to know it's neither a retcon or unknown at the time...and have read what some of the devs said back then as well, oh wait, unless you had been in one of the...hmm, wonder if the NDA from that still applies too, like the current one for GW2 still applies from back when.

    Like I said, possible, but unlikely. At the very least horrendously miscommunicated if that's the case, the Charr do not exactly come off as a victimized indigenous tribe so much as a relentless band of conquerors. Which is consistent even with Dev comments in the modern day, which paint them as being a historical parallel with the Mongol horde.

    If there is some dev statements from 2005 that indicate that was the original intention of the Charr though i'd be happy to see them.

    Unfortunately, they where sort of internal statements...made during testing, when we'd have informal discussions, so not sure if you can even count those as canon...but we could always say it's a matter of opinion and then everyone would be right to a degree.

    Yes...no...maybe...what do you want, can't you see I'm busy saving the world...AGAIN!

  • witcher.3197witcher.3197 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Stramatus.5219 said:
    In GW1 and lore writings it was very clear that Ascalon shielded other realms in Tyria from the Charr. Perhaps a bad analogy, but reminds me of Gondor shielding much of Middle-earth from the bulk force of Mordor.

    That's a pretty good analogy actually. Charr were originally supposed to be Orcs but it was changed because they wanted a less generic enemy, thus creating the Charr aka "demon cats" as they were called internally.

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:
    You lost me once you got to the part about the Charr retaking their land in GW2...you do realize that was what they where trying to do in GW1 even, don't you?

    That seems like you're being deliberately obtuse. While it's possible that the motivation behind the Charr attacking Ascalon was codified as being a retaking of land in Guild Wars: Prophecies, it wasn't framed that way and none of the Charr, even in GWEN mention as such. Pyre hints at it being so by telling Gwen 'You know nothing of my people' in Eye of the North if you're being generous, but even then...

    It was likely written after in Guild Wars 2 as a means of making the Charr more sympathetic. If this is any indication some people take the stance that it does, and...others do not. I'm of the stance I don't mind the change, I hardly view the humans as violent colonists for breaking the oppressive Charr empire and driving them north. The Centaur and Heket have far better claims to objecting to human expansion on grounds of morality.

    @witcher.3197 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:
    You lost me once you got to the part about the Charr retaking their land in GW2...you do realize that was what they where trying to do in GW1 even, don't you?

    Look up what a retcon is.

    You'd both have to delve deeper into the lore to know it's neither a retcon or unknown at the time...and have read what some of the devs said back then as well, oh wait, unless you had been in one of the...hmm, wonder if the NDA from that still applies too, like the current one for GW2 still applies from back when.

    Like I said, possible, but unlikely. At the very least horrendously miscommunicated if that's the case, the Charr do not exactly come off as a victimized indigenous tribe so much as a relentless band of conquerors. Which is consistent even with Dev comments in the modern day, which paint them as being a historical parallel with the Mongol horde.

    If there is some dev statements from 2005 that indicate that was the original intention of the Charr though i'd be happy to see them.

    They don't have to be a victimized indigenous tribe to be "retaking their homeland".

    I've never taken the Charr as being victimized, but that Iron legion/at least some consider Ascalon and ancestral homeland.

  • ZDragon.3046ZDragon.3046 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Charr are the victims its not the standard sit around and cry about it they chose to out right do something about it. One of the legions going as far as to make the first un cultural step (even if not fully in the best ways or right direction) to assure they wouldn't lose which resulted in them branching off from the other 3 and becoming out cast. That said ive never felt like charr were some race that was victimized probably because they retaliated so well when threatened and they are quick to do it without warning "Female charr especially"

    I imagine charr in the past were even more head strong than they are now (in terms of gw1 and what we can imagine before gw1)
    Its kind of easy to see though how some charr such as Bangar would be stuck in the ways of the past.

    The charr have always been war culture strong and very very VERY hardheaded when it comes to changing and adapting away from their culture and beliefs even if its only temporary. This stands out with blood legion more so than any other legion too. Its no surprise to me that Bangar still clings to the past and dislikes the other races. Assuming he lives through everything i doubt he will ever trust any non "blood legion born" charr.

  • ZDragon.3046ZDragon.3046 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Harak.8397 said:
    Says who ? Who asked the Charr why they were attacking the wall back then ? All we had was the human perspective: "These monsters have been attacking us forever, they enslave or kill and eat us. We must fight back." It isn't until EotN that we learn they can actually communicate with more than grunts and growls.

    Well from my understanding (and i could be wrong) charr were in Tyria long before humans were. If a new species just pops up on your land boarders one day thats kind of a problem.
    IF aliens try to land on earth do you think we are going to sit and have tea with them or try and figure out what they are? No the initial human response will be shoot first figure out the mess later.
    I imagine this is what the charr were doing and what they would try do to any race they came across that was not their own.

  • witcher.3197witcher.3197 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 18, 2019

    @ZDragon.3046 said:

    @Harak.8397 said:
    Says who ? Who asked the Charr why they were attacking the wall back then ? All we had was the human perspective: "These monsters have been attacking us forever, they enslave or kill and eat us. We must fight back." It isn't until EotN that we learn they can actually communicate with more than grunts and growls.

    Well from my understanding (and i could be wrong) charr were in Tyria long before humans were. If a new species just pops up on your land boarders one day thats kind of a problem.
    IF aliens try to land on earth do you think we are going to sit and have tea with them or try and figure out what they are? No the initial human response will be shoot first figure out the mess later.
    I imagine this is what the charr were doing and what they would try do to any race they came across that was not their own.

    Sure Charr were just picking flowers on their ancestral land™ when the evil humans showed up. Yeah right give me a break. Charr are warmongering savages, always were, they took Ascalon and then the humans took it from them. But S O M E H O W only Charr have a claim to Ascalon because they were uhh.. they were there. For unspecified time. And that also absolves them of all their warcrimes that they commited 1k years later.

    Wish people would stop with this terrible arguement.

    Or if we're sticking with it, let's go all the way:

    • The Dominion of Winds is built atop Sanctum Cay - Tengu deserve to annihilated, it's within the right of Krytans to do so, since they were there before them.
    • Sylvari lands are on former Krytan lands too. When are we going to throw some napalm on the grove? It's Kryta's birthright afterall. Might as well chase down the sylvari living elsewhere because reasons.
  • ZDragon.3046ZDragon.3046 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @witcher.3197 said:

    @ZDragon.3046 said:

    @Harak.8397 said:
    Says who ? Who asked the Charr why they were attacking the wall back then ? All we had was the human perspective: "These monsters have been attacking us forever, they enslave or kill and eat us. We must fight back." It isn't until EotN that we learn they can actually communicate with more than grunts and growls.

    Well from my understanding (and i could be wrong) charr were in Tyria long before humans were. If a new species just pops up on your land boarders one day thats kind of a problem.
    IF aliens try to land on earth do you think we are going to sit and have tea with them or try and figure out what they are? No the initial human response will be shoot first figure out the mess later.
    I imagine this is what the charr were doing and what they would try do to any race they came across that was not their own.

    Sure Charr were just picking flowers on their ancestral land™ when the evil humans showed up. Yeah right give me a break. Charr are warmongering savages, always were, they took Ascalon and then the humans took it from them. But S O M E H O W only Charr have a claim to Ascalon because they were uhh.. they were there. For unspecified time. And that also absolves them of all their warcrimes that they commited 1k years later.

    Where did the humans come from and when. Where there other races there before them?
    And if you stick your finger on or next to an active ant bed do the ants bite you despite you meaning to do no harm? OF course they do they dont know what you are and thus the instinctive reaction is to savagely attack you.

    Wish people would stop with this terrible arguement.

    lol no need to get so aggressive dude not everyone is a lore master. Im not even trying to make an argument i was just having discussion. I even stated that i could be wrong because someone probably knows pre gw1 details better than i do. Your tone is very unnecessary.

    Or if we're sticking with it, let's go all the way:

    • The Dominion of Winds is built atop Sanctum Cay - Tengu deserve to annihilated, it's within the right of Krytans to do so, since they were there before them.
    • Sylvari lands are on former Krytan lands too. When are we going to throw some napalm on the grove? It's Kryta's birthright afterall. Might as well chase down the sylvari living elsewhere because reasons.

    If not for charr getting involved with other races before Sylvari showed up i dont doubt they likely would have treated them the same way just that to be honest with you.

  • Gryphon.2875Gryphon.2875 Member ✭✭✭

    Did the ancient humans who settled Ascalon even realise the Charr were sentient? The Elonians who went into the Crystal Desert thought the Forgotten were beasts, too.

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    @witcher.3197 said:
    Sure Charr were just picking flowers on their ancestral land™ when the evil humans showed up. Yeah right give me a break. Charr are warmongering savages, always were, they took Ascalon and then the humans took it from them. But S O M E H O W only Charr have a claim to Ascalon because they were uhh.. they were there. For unspecified time. And that also absolves them of all their warcrimes that they commited 1k years later.

    Wish people would stop with this terrible arguement.

    Okay, A: Are you seriously implying that because the Charr are "warmongers" that means they get no claim to lands?
    B: Nobody, at all, has ever said that they are absolved of the searing or other things. Stop saying that people are unless the person has legitimately done it.

    Also, sure, like the humans met the charr and offered to peacefully co-exist in the fertile land of Ascalon. Oh wait, they didn't. The humans outright attacked and drove the Charr from the area without ever trying diplomancy.

    Or if we're sticking with it, let's go all the way:

    • The Dominion of Winds is built atop Sanctum Cay - Tengu deserve to annihilated, it's within the right of Krytans to do so, since they were there before them.
    • Sylvari lands are on former Krytan lands too. When are we going to throw some napalm on the grove? It's Kryta's birthright afterall. Might as well chase down the sylvari living elsewhere because reasons.

    Wasn't Sanctum Cay mostly only inhabited by White Mantle?
    Sylvari lands were actually not in Kryta, or the parts that weren't really inhabited. They are actually more on the original EOTN Asura controlled lands.

    And frankly, I find it rather sad that people will constantly demonize and hate on the Charr for what happened in GW1, then turn around and act as if Humanity doing those very same things toward the Charr, today, would be just fine and acceptable.

    @Harak.8397 said:
    I make no apologies for what the Charr are. Historically, they ARE driven by war and conquest. It does seem that early Charr diplomacy involved taking a bite out of something to see if it bled first ( as a shark would with anything else in the water ). That landed them into a thousand years of trouble with the humans.

    Now this prey pushed back HARD and for a thousand years the Charr broke against shield wall, fortifications and eventually great wall behind which the humans created a kingdom. Putting a castle where someone you displaced used to hunt does not give you a better claim to the land in question but might DOES make right and for a thousand years the Humans' claim stood on that weight alone.

    Then the Charr were offered a way to break the wall and challenge that claim. They took it and challenge it they did. Now the black Citadel stands where Rin once stood. A thousand years of Charr blood led to this. That's really all there is to it.

    Touching slightly on this, as I said before. If humanity had tried to make peace with the Charr on first meeting, and coexist peacefully but the Charr attacked? Then we could easily say the Charr are aggressors and their war-mongering nature is a bad thing. But instead, we know that humanity conquered Ascalon and Kryta, shoving the Charr and Centaur aside by force. And guess what? Those two races pushed back. Centaurs took longer, but they've made strong pushes when the Modniir forced the other two tribes into an alliance. The Charr got lucky and caused more damage earlier, but in the end, guess what? They don't see humanity as a race to conquer, but invaders to defeat and drive away. Are they CORRECT/RIGHT? Maybe, maybe not. But because humanity started the interaction by attacking and driving the Charr away first, The Charr saw a challenge to defeat, a foe who kicked their butt, and now they'll come back and return the favor!

    Who has the most righteous claim to the land ? Who cares ? That's not even how it works in the real world. ( watch the news recently to see what I mean )

    Who owns the land now ? The Charr, by right of conquest if nothing else.

    The thing that a lot of people fall into is acting as if People who go "Searing is ancient history" or such imply that Charr have a right to the land. The real thing is the only bits of Ascalon as a nation left are Ebonhawke/Ascalon Settlement. The people of Kryta are removed from the conflict and frankly, have tons of issues themselves. You have Krytans talking about food shortages, centaur attacks, bandit troubles... And then the Ascalonian screaming about the Searing and how the Charr must pay, no peace ever!

    So you get "The searing is ancient history, get over it." because guess what, the rest of the room looks at Ebonhawke, now secure and probably one of the safest human strongholds/cities with the truce/cease fire. And then their troubles at home.

    So yeah, a Charr might tell you " We used to live on these lands before the humans came" followed with "Then they came and took it from us" without indignation in his voice , and finally "but we took it back" with no small amount of pride. To him they warred over something both races wanted and came out on top. End of story. A human would tell you "We came here to settle but were relentlessly attacked by savages". "We fought them off but were eventually overwhelmed and had to find refuge in Kryta" which is in very few words, the narrative of GW: Prophecy... and you know, both of them would be right.

    Yep. The only people of Ascalon who are villianized, are those who are so fixed on the past they refuse to change. Like Adelbern, they'll hold onto a grudge till beyond the grave rather then accepting a helping hand from a former enemy.

    It's funny, because like the above thing, Banger is similar (if more intelligent and Charismatic) to Adelbern. Hell, look at this example of human "atrocities" and why he can't trust Humanity... They wore Charr skin/fur as clothing and armor, and use Charr horns, skulls, and bones as decorations/armor ornaments. His "what the enemy did to us!" is, hundred, hundred fifty years out of date? Much like an Ascalonian ranting about the Searing, Bangar doesn't bring up anything recent to show why he demonizes humanity/hates them. He brings up an ancient item, one that, as far as we can see, doesn't even exist anymore. Charr-hide armor has all seemingly been destroyed or secreted away, yet that's one example of why he can't trust humans.

  • Aaron Ansari.1604Aaron Ansari.1604 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 19, 2019

    @Kalavier.1097 said:
    The humans outright attacked and drove the Charr from the area without ever trying diplomancy.

    For what it's worth, we don't know that. We don't know which side attacked first, and we don't know whether either side ever made an effort at peaceful coexistence. All we know about that first conflict is A.) there were voices on both sides calling for indiscriminate war, B.) the humans drove the charr out of Ascalon when they won said war, and C.) the last Khan-Ur died under mysterious circumstances.

    Or if we're sticking with it, let's go all the way:

    • The Dominion of Winds is built atop Sanctum Cay - Tengu deserve to annihilated, it's within the right of Krytans to do so, since they were there before them.
    • Sylvari lands are on former Krytan lands too. When are we going to throw some napalm on the grove? It's Kryta's birthright afterall. Might as well chase down the sylvari living elsewhere because reasons.

    Wasn't Sanctum Cay mostly only inhabited by White Mantle?

    Uninhabited, actually, as of GW1. There was an abandoned monastery, but by that time it was just a layover point for ships. The Mantle were only there because we rebel scum were using the ruins to conduct 'secret' handoffs.

    Sylvari lands were actually not in Kryta, or the parts that weren't really inhabited. They are actually more on the original EOTN Asura controlled lands.

    Yes and no. The Pale Tree was planted in the middle of a (recently slaughtered) Krytan village, and there were scattered human settlements as far as the current site of Rata Sum, but the keyword there is 'scattered'. The sylvari's occupancy in Caledon as a whole, though, extends up further, clear through Riverside Province, which was one of Kryta's most densely settled regions in GW1... although, again, the territory seems to have been abandoned long before the sylvari entered the scene. Probably lost after the shift north when Zhaitan rose.

    R.I.P., Old Man of Auld Red Wharf. Gone but never forgotten.

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    @Aaron Ansari.1604 said:

    @Kalavier.1097 said:
    The humans outright attacked and drove the Charr from the area without ever trying diplomancy.

    For what it's worth, we don't know that. We don't know which side attacked first, and we don't know whether either side ever made an effort at peaceful coexistence. All we know about that first conflict is A.) there were voices on both sides calling for indiscriminate war, B.) the humans drove the charr out of Ascalon when they won said war, and C.) the last Khan-Ur died under mysterious circumstances.

    Isn't there a blurb from GW1 era about how humans conquered or took whatever they wanted as they arrived? And that the Khan-Ur was assassinated?

    Ah yeah, History of Tyria. "This new race of creatures was none other than us humans, and in no time we began to take over. Cities bloomed across the continent. Walls were erected, and weapons forged. Those things that we humans lacked, we simply built. We didn’t need tough hides nor rending claws when we could make metal armor and sharpened spears. We discovered fire, wrote books of our own, passed knowledge to one another through song and verse. Soon humans had everything we required, and it was then that we began to prey upon the other creatures. We hunted animals for sport, chased the druids from the jungle, and took up residence in lands that did not belong to us. We became the masters of this world. We took all of the privilege and none of the responsibility. "

    Oddly enough, I never knew the one wraith in personal story was the same person as the author of the History of Tyria.

    Or if we're sticking with it, let's go all the way:

    • The Dominion of Winds is built atop Sanctum Cay - Tengu deserve to annihilated, it's within the right of Krytans to do so, since they were there before them.
    • Sylvari lands are on former Krytan lands too. When are we going to throw some napalm on the grove? It's Kryta's birthright afterall. Might as well chase down the sylvari living elsewhere because reasons.

    Wasn't Sanctum Cay mostly only inhabited by White Mantle?

    Uninhabited, actually, as of GW1. There was an abandoned monastery, but by that time it was just a layover point for ships. The Mantle were only there because we rebel scum were using the ruins to conduct 'secret' handoffs.

    I was thinking that it was unihabited in GW1. I think during the Krytan Civil War the White Mantle setup a base there we raided during the Guild wars beyond "era". Or I was mistaking that for the Sanctum Cay mission.

    Sylvari lands were actually not in Kryta, or the parts that weren't really inhabited. They are actually more on the original EOTN Asura controlled lands.

    Yes and no. The Pale Tree was planted in the middle of a (recently slaughtered) Krytan village, and there were scattered human settlements as far as the current site of Rata Sum, but the keyword there is 'scattered'. The sylvari's occupancy in Caledon as a whole, though, extends up further, clear through Riverside Province, which was one of Kryta's most densely settled regions in GW1... although, again, the territory seems to have been abandoned long before the sylvari entered the scene. Probably lost after the shift north when Zhaitan rose.

    We know Kryta abandoned a couple coastal towns with the rise of Zhaitan, some of which got turned into pirate bases, so it makes sense that some of those regions got abandoned in favor of "safer" areas.

  • Aaron Ansari.1604Aaron Ansari.1604 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 19, 2019

    @Kalavier.1097 said:

    @Aaron Ansari.1604 said:

    @Kalavier.1097 said:
    The humans outright attacked and drove the Charr from the area without ever trying diplomancy.

    For what it's worth, we don't know that. We don't know which side attacked first, and we don't know whether either side ever made an effort at peaceful coexistence. All we know about that first conflict is A.) there were voices on both sides calling for indiscriminate war, B.) the humans drove the charr out of Ascalon when they won said war, and C.) the last Khan-Ur died under mysterious circumstances.

    Isn't there a blurb from GW1 era about how humans conquered or took whatever they wanted as they arrived? And that the Khan-Ur was assassinated?

    Ah yeah, History of Tyria. "This new race of creatures was none other than us humans, and in no time we began to take over. Cities bloomed across the continent. Walls were erected, and weapons forged. Those things that we humans lacked, we simply built. We didn’t need tough hides nor rending claws when we could make metal armor and sharpened spears. We discovered fire, wrote books of our own, passed knowledge to one another through song and verse. Soon humans had everything we required, and it was then that we began to prey upon the other creatures. We hunted animals for sport, chased the druids from the jungle, and took up residence in lands that did not belong to us. We became the masters of this world. We took all of the privilege and none of the responsibility. "

    Oddly enough, I never knew the one wraith in personal story was the same person as the author of the History of Tyria.

    Nothing in there about whether the charr or centaurs fired first, though. (Nothing about the charr or centaurs at all, until you get to the part where magic is introduced.) The way Prophecies presented it, actually... and maybe even EotN... the charr were 'from the north,' not natives of Ascalon at all. The first time I remember that coming up was Ecology of the Charr, which, for the record, says much the same thing about the charr as the Prophecies Manuscripts say about humans:

    "The Charr were once a primitive people, filled with rage and a primal drive to dominate and control. They fought everything that threatened them—even one another—only surviving this brutal period by evolving into a strict hierarchical society. Disparate, fierce, and independent warbands unified under a single leader, the Khan-Ur, for the good of the race, and a golden age of Charr dominance began.

    No longer clamoring over the same territories, the unified Charr spread throughout the northern reaches of their homeland, and down into the lands east of the Shiverpeak Mountains. The Charr subjugated or destroyed any and all who dared defy them within their territories; they were masters of all they surveyed.

    With dominance, however, came the inevitable problems. Internal strife, reckless power-mongering, and brutal feuds threatened to tear apart this otherwise secure empire. Only the strong personality of the Khan-Ur kept this ferocious and, yes, still-primitive race unified....

    Then, the humans came, an infestation caused by beings called gods that had been enemies to the Charr since the beginnings of history. The humans worshiped and revered these gods, and in return were given magic the likes of which the Charr had never before. This upstart race spread like a plague across the continent, and the Charr soon faced the true challenge to their dominance—the threat of humanity.

    Driven back in the first war against the humans, the Charr were forced to surrender the lands that would become Ascalon. Undaunted, and now truly unified against a common foe, the Charr prepared to launch a bitter counterstrike, intending to burn everything in their retreat. However, as they planned the assault, tragedy struck the empire—the Khan-Ur was assassinated.

    To this day, no one knows who murdered the last Khan-Ur, nor if some legion had been behind the assassination or if was the humans or their powerful gods. With his death, however, the legions once more fell into conflict and chaos. Records of this portion of Charr history are scattered, much like the legions themselves. In the wake over the power void, the children of the Khan-Ur squabbled among themselves and ultimately divided the empire in their futile attempts to claim the title of Khan-Ur and regain control of all the Charr legions."

    Both sources blame the spread of humans, but stop short of actually saying they started the killing. Neither race is painted in a good light, and both are said to have had no scruples about killing anyone not of their own kind.

    Or if we're sticking with it, let's go all the way:

    • The Dominion of Winds is built atop Sanctum Cay - Tengu deserve to annihilated, it's within the right of Krytans to do so, since they were there before them.
    • Sylvari lands are on former Krytan lands too. When are we going to throw some napalm on the grove? It's Kryta's birthright afterall. Might as well chase down the sylvari living elsewhere because reasons.

    Wasn't Sanctum Cay mostly only inhabited by White Mantle?

    Uninhabited, actually, as of GW1. There was an abandoned monastery, but by that time it was just a layover point for ships. The Mantle were only there because we rebel scum were using the ruins to conduct 'secret' handoffs.

    I was thinking that it was unihabited in GW1. I think during the Krytan Civil War the White Mantle setup a base there we raided during the Guild wars beyond "era". Or I was mistaking that for the Sanctum Cay mission.

    Nope, no Sanctum Cay during GW Beyond. The bases we raid are in Riverside Province, D'Alessio Seaboard, and Divinity Coast.

    R.I.P., Old Man of Auld Red Wharf. Gone but never forgotten.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 19, 2019

    I do find it mildly amusing that a person would say that Bangar is a 'more intelligent and chirsmatic' version of Adelbern because he brought up a peace of ancient history to justify his hatred. It's like, you do realize that Adelbern was unanimously loved by his people during his reign to the point that they casted off the chains of royalism and elected him as a king out of line with King Doric? and that when he was leery of both Krytans and Charr it wasn't a hundred years out of date but basically yesterday? He became lord of his kingdom because he beat back the Krytan empire and did away with the corrupt guilds that tried to seize control of humanity, likewise he personally there the Searing happened and had been witnessing Charr atrocities against his people for countless years.

    Of the two, Adelbern is the far more sympathetic. Madness took hold of him after he watched everything he loved burn to the ground, saw everything, even his own son, be lost to a war he desperately wanted control of. He did not need to bring up ancient history to justify his actions because the life he lived was such a nightmare that what reasonable person would blame him for losing his grip on reality? Bangar is the opposite of that. He grew up on a narrative of blood and war, lost friends and likely family to the fighting, but he has yet to see Grothmar sacked and all he loved driven before him by some great force of evil.

    No, instead he just assumes that'll happen because humans are 'that way' while conveniently ignoring hatred begets hatred, violence begets violence, and humanity has by far been more open to ptuting down their arms. Jennah is openly for peace in a way that no one save perhaps Smodur was, Malice had to keep her involvement on the down low for awhile. Even Wade, the person who has the most reason to continue a war, wants to set his weapons down and retire to a farm to make things grow again. But if Grothmar is any indication the idea of dying on a farm in such a way is disgraceful to the Charr, always they must fight the Other, because without an Other to kill what do they define themselves against?

    By comparison, what Bangar had was a childish tantrum. One partially rooted in reality, but not nearly so omnipresent in his life.

  • Harak.8397Harak.8397 Member ✭✭
    edited October 19, 2019

    Kalavier.1097 Did not say Bangar was more "charismatic and intelligent" because he did those things. To me this reads as a simple offhand comment on how the character comes accross. As for Adelbern, I don't think we were ever supposed to like him even in GW1 where the narative was far more in favor of his son, Rurik.

    Still you are right, his descent into madness is quite understandable. On the other hand Bangar isn't mad... he's afraid. That fear too is understandable given what he sees as dubious allies and their superweapon. It's clear he never believed in the cease fire with humanity (if he's been backing the renegades as we are lead to believe currently ) and would rather have a superweapon of his own to maintain the balance than be in a position to say " I told you so" when his allies "inevitably" betray the Charr. To me this feels very much like post war Western Allies VS Soviet Union (I'm old, apologies ) and the unease that came with one side having the A Bomb and the other not.

    Now though, I seriously doubt Jormag will be content with just "balancing things out". Bangar having a word to say about that however, is doubtful.

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    I do find it mildly amusing that a person would say that Bangar is a 'more intelligent and chirsmatic' version of Adelbern because he brought up a peace of ancient history to justify his hatred. It's like, you do realize that Adelbern was unanimously loved by his people during his reign to the point that they casted off the chains of royalism and elected him as a king out of line with King Doric? and that when he was leery of both Krytans and Charr it wasn't a hundred years out of date but basically yesterday? He became lord of his kingdom because he beat back the Krytan empire and did away with the corrupt guilds that tried to seize control of humanity, likewise he personally there the Searing happened and had been witnessing Charr atrocities against his people for countless years.

    Of the two, Adelbern is the far more sympathetic. Madness took hold of him after he watched everything he loved burn to the ground, saw everything, even his own son, be lost to a war he desperately wanted control of. He did not need to bring up ancient history to justify his actions because the life he lived was such a nightmare that what reasonable person would blame him for losing his grip on reality? Bangar is the opposite of that. He grew up on a narrative of blood and war, lost friends and likely family to the fighting, but he has yet to see Grothmar sacked and all he loved driven before him by some great force of evil.

    I said this because shortly after meeting Adelbern in GW1, we then see him (almost immediately after going to post searing as I recall) fly off the handle wanting to MURDER a Krytan in a sham trial of "treason" (against somebody not even part of his kingdom) simply because of what Nation he comes from. Even though that Krytan was there in the name of peace and offering much needed aid to a ruined Kingdom.

    GW1's manual, story, and lots of stuff heavily pointed that Adelbern had circled the wagons and become stubborn to the point of large chunks of the population wanting Rurik to be King, not Adelbern. Which is why a heavy portion of the people followed Ruirk across the mountains.

    Bangar is more intelligent and Charismatic seeming because he set aside one old hatred (Flame legion) and ran a rally, including humans, the Pact, and other groups to gather a large amount of people together, selectively isolate and recruit those sympathetic to his cause, and get them to follow him to try to control Jormag, while also stealing the one weapon known to the world at the moment able to hurt the dragon. Bangar accepted the peace treaty with humanity, despite absolutely hating it because he knew that there was no chance of victory fighting the Flame legion, as well as Ash and Iron. He looked at the world and admitted that he couldn't win this fight. And now? We know he only intends to possibly open that fight again if he has control of an elder dragon.

    Adelbern after the searing? Screamed at former foes, sat in a crumbling ruin and refused to admit the world around him was destroyed and there wasn't hope. Ascalon "survived" as a people, because of everybody who fled him or was banished by him.

    I don't find Adelbern Sympathetic. He went from a loved leader, to an insane madman in two years, who only grew more insane and dragged his nation down into eternal torment, rather then admit he had lost and to back off.

    @Harak.8397 said:
    Kalavier.1097 Did not say Bangar was more "charismatic and intelligent" because he did those things. To me this reads as a simple offhand comment on how the character comes accross. As for Adelbern, I don't think we were ever supposed to like him even in GW1 where the narative was far more in favor of his son, Rurik.

    Still you are right, his descent into madness is quite understandable. On the other hand Bangar isn't mad... he's afraid. That fear too is understandable given what he sees as dubious allies and their superweapon. It's clear he never believed in the cease fire with humanity (if he's been backing the renegades as we are lead to believe currently ) and would rather have a superweapon of his own to maintain the balance than be in a position to say " I told you so" when his allies "inevitably" betray the Charr. To me this feels very much like post war Western Allies VS Soviet Union (I'm old, apologies ) and the unease that came with one side having the A Bomb and the other not.

    Now though, I seriously doubt Jormag will be content with just "balancing things out". Bangar having a word to say about that however, is doubtful.

    I'd partially disagree in his descent to madness being completely understandable, but it was well documented at least. And yes, GW1 prophecies storytelling was clear in that Rurik was the reasonable, smart leader, and he left Ascalon so his people could live. It gave a clear indication that Ascalon was doomed, whether in the long or short term, and the Adelbern would never accept external aid.

    Bangar is an old guard, like Adelbern, and refuses to accept the changes that are happening around him. The difference is while Adelbern stabbed his flag into the ground, circled the wagons and refused to budge, Bangar did. He saw he couldn't win, and agreed to (for now) play along. Then he apparently got bad intel regarding Aurene and the Commander, viewing the relationship as like a ranger and a pet, or a siege weapon and it's operator. He saw Aurene's attack on that branded siege devourer as the commander directly ordering Aurene, instead of the dragon attacking a large branded target free of what the commander wants.

    Bangar is playing politics, and even his trip to find Jormag isn't actually breaking the treaty. Now the commander attacking him would possibly breach the treaty, at least in his viewpoint (He considers the Commander an active part of Pact leadership, which isn't true anymore). If suddenly the Pact/humanity breaks the treaty, Bangar's stance is justified and he can probably sway chunks of Iron, Ash, and even maybe Flame into his side by pointing out that fact.

  • Kossage.9072Kossage.9072 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 19, 2019

    I never quite viewed charr as anything but different shades of grey in GW2 to make the troubled history between them and humans more nuanced and interesting (along with revelations of more human crimes to even the odds and show how both sides had their share of heroic and villainous feats and why reconciliation between the races has been quite a long journey). The charr are shown to deliberately manipulate historical narratives to paint themselves as victims or heroes in their biased narrative (see e.g. charr accounts in Black Citadel about the "tyrant" Rurik using the Stormcaller to massacre the charr "hero" Bonfaaz Burntfur in a "treacherous ambush").

    The game doesn't forgive or brush over charr crimes but gives us a reason to view events from their point of view to understand their way of thinking to make Tyria more complex as a world. This is admittedly also done to justify having charr as playable characters in a game which specifically doesn't let players act like villains (with some exceptions like ogre genocide hearts etc. but one could argue that those could be seen as antiheroic feats...although the jaded Hero of Nightfall would have a harsh thing or two to say about whether good intentions should ever justify evil deeds).

    We're still lacking information about the circumstances of the Khan-Ur's death beyond him being assassinated, and it would be intriguing to learn if some charr, humans or even the gods were responsible for that feat. Humanity committed horrific atrocities in their waves of conquest, and ironically there are quite a few similarities between human and charr ambitions when it comes to struggles against those they deem "lesser races" and against those within their own ranks via civil wars and such. The three High Legions, even after placing the blame of many of their past deeds on the Flame Legion, still show that they're far from angelic saints; while they have warmed up to non-charr to some extent, we still see inter-legion rivalries, racism towards other races and spellcaster allies within the High Legions (poor Euryale), and Renegades going rogue and continuing the fight against their leaders' orders.

    Fields of Ruin in particular is a lovely map to showcase much of this comparison when we look at the Renegades and Separatists and how their minds are stuck in the past, unable to let go. The handling of the mature narrative of letting go of old hatreds and learning to forgive ancient foes, while also being aware that such hatred and guilt can never be washed away but that we should struggle for such anyway so future generations have a better, less violent world to live in, is something worth telling. It's the kind of nuanced storytelling I hope to see more of in The Icebrood Saga after the promising beginnings of Bound by Blood, especially if we touch on the rightful Heir of Ascalon storyline (with Magdaer, King Adelbern's crown and the Krytan royal locket) with a chance of possibly cleansing and redeeming Adelbern, Barradin and the ill-fated ghosts of Ascalon in the face of a greater threat. To quote Ebon Vanguard Captain Tanner who puts the narrative of hate and forgiveness the best in Fields of Ruin:

    Tanner: To be honest, I was skeptical. Maybe I still am. I've spent a long time hating charr. That hatred tends to get in the way of seeing what can be accomplished by our two races.
    Player: Anything changing your mind?
    Tanner: I talk with Legionnaire Frazarblade. She still hates us, but she's trying to get along with humans. It's strange, but I can relate to what she's going through. It's like we got something in common.
    Player: I hear a "but" coming.
    Tanner: But I don't think we'll really see peace until both of us are dead and the new generation takes over. The rest of our lives will be devoted to making sure we give those kids that chance.

    Regarding Bangar playing politics and how justified his actions are, he is about to break the terms of the treaty via scheming to assassinate the other imperators as soon as he's "evened the odds"...assuming that the Renegades are referring to Bangar with "he" in their speech rather than some third party (as Crecia believes that Bangar is being played by the Renegades or some other party that may or may not have ties to Jormag):

    Unknown Voice: We should kill the other imperators now. Cut their throats while they sleep.
    Unknown Voice: Orders are to stay put. Keep an eye on things here. Now's not the right time. He still needs to even the odds. (Source)

    Ash Legion Scout (1): How did I let myself get talked into this? She has eyes and ears everywhere.
    Ash Legion Scout (2): Trust me, no one'll know a thing. This peace has gone on for long enough.
    Ash Legion Scout (1): She won't be happy when she finds out.
    Ash Legion Scout (2): You better not get cold feet on me! We made promises. You're in this now, like it or not. (Source)

    Bangar also allowed and possibly even encouraged charr acts of violence against other races during the Rally under the pretense of charr forgetting how "fragile" humans can be and how it is simply in charr nature to have a bit of rough fun during celebrations. He has likely planted spies, possibly with Renegade and rogue Flame Legion assistance (in case any of these Flame moles were part of the late Trybulus Griefblade's spy network) within the Legions and likely within the three Orders as well depending on how far-reaching his contacts are. It wouldn't surprise me if Bangar has planted spies in the Priory and is aware of them guarding the Sanguinary Blade (aka Dragon's Blood blade) which, like the Dragonsblood Spear was to Kralkatorrik, may be harmful to Jormag due to having been forged from Jormag's frozen blood.

    After the developer reveal that Jormag's speech in the Icebrood Saga announcement trailer is specifically addressed to Bangar, we learn what Bangar's fears are via the dragon's whispers: "You do not fear death. You fear something far worse. You fear outliving the ones you swore to protect. You fear the day your children no longer feel the chill of the frost or the warmth of the flame. It is this fear that is your enemy, not I. The prison in which all races of Tyria suffer. But you need not fear me, champion, for I can set you free. Join me, and you shall have the strength to protect your people in the trials to come. Stand against me, and you stand alone." Whether we actually hear this speech in game in full when the time of confrontation comes or not should be interesting to find out. :)

    That speech--along with suspicious appearances of pro-Jormag norn in the valley, an icebrood construct raised by some unseen Svanir shaman or other magic user to stall the Commander's party, mysterious footprints on the roof near Bangar's office, and two corrupted weapons (which are Jormag related) in Bangar's office--suggest that Bangar's fears may have possibly been stoked by an unknown party.

    What's also particularly interesting about that sudden Branded incursion into the valley is Vetia Foerazor voicing out speculations that someone may have deliberately sabotaged the Brand Stompers in the valley as they all broke down at the same time under mysterious circumstances. This sabotage thus rended protection from Brand null and allowed the Branded broodmother and its minions to emerge and invade at a crucial moment, leading to Aurene's shocking flyover. It was almost as if someone was making sure that this Branded invasion would happen according to a plan to force Aurene into action and make her and the Commander look suspicious in the eyes of Bangar and other visitors who didn't know them any better (and thus further make Bangar feel justified to continue with his plans):

    Vetia Foerazor: So that whole thing about Branded being gone? Not entirely true. There are lots of Brand shards underground, poisoning the soil. We have devices that neutralize them, but every one is broken.
    Player: What kind of device?
    Vetia Foerazor: We call 'em Stompers—they look like big mechanical hammers. Strange they all broke at the same time, but that's where you come in! Be careful of any Branded energy seeping through the soil.
    Player: Anything else?
    Vetia Foerazor: Deploy repair golems to fix them. Careful though, the repairs will take a while and who knows what you might run into out there. Start wherever you want. Come back to me when you're done!
    Player: Wait, golems?
    Vetia Foerazor: Yeah, golems. An asura actually pointed out the issue first...something about a thesis? You know how those little guys are. Anyway, he programmed some repair golems to fix the stompers for us. [...]
    Player: What caused the malfunction in the first place?
    Vetia Foerazor: Not sure. Could've been some of the rowdier Rally attendees. I've heard stories about sabotage going around.
    Player: Sabotage?
    Vetia Foerazor: I don't know much about it, really. Who knows? Could be just talk...

    This--and the inclusion of Researcher Dwidd (one of the valley's few non-charr uniquely named NPCs who appears to be Inquest based on his clothes and who voices out the possibility of harnessing Aurene's magic as a weapon)--suggests that the Inquest and/or possibly some other party have become interested in the changed status quo since Aurene's ascension. While it's possible that the Rally just happened to have a visiting asuran genius, who not only spotted the stompers malfunctioning before Vetia realized something was wrong with them but also offered some golems to help fix them, the timing seems too beneficial given the recent(?) sabotage.

    The whole conspiracy opens the question whether Bangar deliberately had the stompers sabotaged via his associates to manipulate Aurene's actions and use it as a means to scare several charr into siding with him (while providing grade A acting of shock to not raise suspicion) or if the proposed third party (Inquest or some other tech-savvy villain/faction) used the sabotage to manipulate both Aurene and Bangar into this escalating arms race for as of yet unknown reasons. :)

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 19, 2019

    @Kalavier.1097 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    I do find it mildly amusing that a person would say that Bangar is a 'more intelligent and chirsmatic' version of Adelbern because he brought up a peace of ancient history to justify his hatred. It's like, you do realize that Adelbern was unanimously loved by his people during his reign to the point that they casted off the chains of royalism and elected him as a king out of line with King Doric? and that when he was leery of both Krytans and Charr it wasn't a hundred years out of date but basically yesterday? He became lord of his kingdom because he beat back the Krytan empire and did away with the corrupt guilds that tried to seize control of humanity, likewise he personally there the Searing happened and had been witnessing Charr atrocities against his people for countless years.

    Of the two, Adelbern is the far more sympathetic. Madness took hold of him after he watched everything he loved burn to the ground, saw everything, even his own son, be lost to a war he desperately wanted control of. He did not need to bring up ancient history to justify his actions because the life he lived was such a nightmare that what reasonable person would blame him for losing his grip on reality? Bangar is the opposite of that. He grew up on a narrative of blood and war, lost friends and likely family to the fighting, but he has yet to see Grothmar sacked and all he loved driven before him by some great force of evil.

    I said this because shortly after meeting Adelbern in GW1, we then see him (almost immediately after going to post searing as I recall) fly off the handle wanting to MURDER a Krytan in a sham trial of "treason" (against somebody not even part of his kingdom) simply because of what Nation he comes from. Even though that Krytan was there in the name of peace and offering much needed aid to a ruined Kingdom.

    GW1's manual, story, and lots of stuff heavily pointed that Adelbern had circled the wagons and become stubborn to the point of large chunks of the population wanting Rurik to be King, not Adelbern. Which is why a heavy portion of the people followed Ruirk across the mountains.

    Bangar is more intelligent and Charismatic seeming because he set aside one old hatred (Flame legion) and ran a rally, including humans, the Pact, and other groups to gather a large amount of people together, selectively isolate and recruit those sympathetic to his cause, and get them to follow him to try to control Jormag, while also stealing the one weapon known to the world at the moment able to hurt the dragon. Bangar accepted the peace treaty with humanity, despite absolutely hating it because he knew that there was no chance of victory fighting the Flame legion, as well as Ash and Iron. He looked at the world and admitted that he couldn't win this fight. And now? We know he only intends to possibly open that fight again if he has control of an elder dragon.

    Adelbern after the searing? Screamed at former foes, sat in a crumbling ruin and refused to admit the world around him was destroyed and there wasn't hope. Ascalon "survived" as a people, because of everybody who fled him or was banished by him.

    I don't find Adelbern Sympathetic. He went from a loved leader, to an insane madman in two years, who only grew more insane and dragged his nation down into eternal torment, rather then admit he had lost and to back off.

    @Harak.8397 said:
    Kalavier.1097 Did not say Bangar was more "charismatic and intelligent" because he did those things. To me this reads as a simple offhand comment on how the character comes accross. As for Adelbern, I don't think we were ever supposed to like him even in GW1 where the narative was far more in favor of his son, Rurik.

    Still you are right, his descent into madness is quite understandable. On the other hand Bangar isn't mad... he's afraid. That fear too is understandable given what he sees as dubious allies and their superweapon. It's clear he never believed in the cease fire with humanity (if he's been backing the renegades as we are lead to believe currently ) and would rather have a superweapon of his own to maintain the balance than be in a position to say " I told you so" when his allies "inevitably" betray the Charr. To me this feels very much like post war Western Allies VS Soviet Union (I'm old, apologies ) and the unease that came with one side having the A Bomb and the other not.

    Now though, I seriously doubt Jormag will be content with just "balancing things out". Bangar having a word to say about that however, is doubtful.

    I'd partially disagree in his descent to madness being completely understandable, but it was well documented at least. And yes, GW1 prophecies storytelling was clear in that Rurik was the reasonable, smart leader, and he left Ascalon so his people could live. It gave a clear indication that Ascalon was doomed, whether in the long or short term, and the Adelbern would never accept external aid.

    Bangar is an old guard, like Adelbern, and refuses to accept the changes that are happening around him. The difference is while Adelbern stabbed his flag into the ground, circled the wagons and refused to budge, Bangar did. He saw he couldn't win, and agreed to (for now) play along. Then he apparently got bad intel regarding Aurene and the Commander, viewing the relationship as like a ranger and a pet, or a siege weapon and it's operator. He saw Aurene's attack on that branded siege devourer as the commander directly ordering Aurene, instead of the dragon attacking a large branded target free of what the commander wants.

    Bangar is playing politics, and even his trip to find Jormag isn't actually breaking the treaty. Now the commander attacking him would possibly breach the treaty, at least in his viewpoint (He considers the Commander an active part of Pact leadership, which isn't true anymore). If suddenly the Pact/humanity breaks the treaty, Bangar's stance is justified and he can probably sway chunks of Iron, Ash, and even maybe Flame into his side by pointing out that fact.

    Bangar is absolutely and one hundred percent insane, I do not believe for a moment that what he believes is the working of a rational mind. Well, not rational in the typical sense, his mentality of constantly othering and excluding other individuals(His own people included.) is pretty consistent with numerous Fascist organizations, which speaks of a broader madness in the Charr as a culture but we can spend a day and a half on that. While he certainly has things that are similar to the Soviet Union, his mentality comes off closer to Germany under the National Socialists:

    • Heavily nationalistic well dressed leader, charismatic, older man who was in a previous war.

      • Pulling in parties regardless of political ideology, sometimes at gunpoint, for manpower.
      • Fixation on displays of personal power to entice large crowds of impressionable people with spectacle.
      • Constantly going on about national spirit and the need for victory, how unacceptable defeat was and how one should never submit to the 'Other'.
      • Distaste for a previously agreed upon treaty, which he heavily contests the value of and argues his nation should break.
      • Distaste for other leaders both beside and above him with differing ideologies to the point of being willing to carry out their murders in a political purge. During 'Deeper and Deeper' the renegades comment that once Bangar evens the odds they'll slit the other Imperators throats in their sleep.
      • Radicalization of the youth up to and including underage soldiers. One of the Renegades is a teenager, Bangar is targeting his rhetoric at a group of brainwashed youngsters who believe real Charr die in battle, die for their fatherland, and are deeply distrustful of foreigners. To the point where he's basically taking kids right out of the Fahrars.
      • A literal treatise on Volk or the ideology of 'One people, one blood, one nation' above all others. Volk as a concept was powerful tool for stirring up the fervor of the masses into doing what the National Socialists want them to do.
      • Belief that only through war can people prosper, this is common to Charr in general but Bangar even more so. Combat is what they were made for, what they live for, they can't imagine a world where economically they live without war. It's to such a point that farmers are disrespected for their role in Charr prosperity, the 'sedentary' professions are where the elderly, weak, and infirm go to die.
      • Heavily altered and censered lyrics, even suppression of songs to an approved list fits the kitten parties ideology that the only true art can be made in the name of the kitten's themselves and all other art was inferior, or worse, dangerous.
      • The notion that the 'Other' will destroy them if they don't destroy the other first. During the time period things like concentration camps were justified as protecting the Volk from Jewish oppression. When German families were starving after WW1 the Jewish families livered relatively well off by comparison, leading people to perceive them as hoarding wealth. Believe it or not this is referenced by Longeyes Landslide in a conversation between two Charr. There they talk about how ever since the treaty the Charr constantly have to swallow their pride and take concessions while the other races get the good stuff, which now apparently includes an Elder Dragon. According to them it's 'Asymmetrical' and they need to 'even the odds' for the betterment of the Charr people.
      • Forcing people out of businesses and jobs simply because they were not the ideal race, or feigning a cosmopolitan attitude while secretly expelling anyone they didn't like. Propaganda about the Jews, Homosexuals, Romani, and such were less common then they might think they were. Triumph of the Will doesn't mention the kitten parties racist attributes really at all. Didn't stop them from forcing out minorities while pretending to have peoples best interests in mind.
      • Rewriting history to fit a narrative. Charr did this since the core game, but as of Grothmar Valley Asuran Historians are literally being threatened for referring to the Charr/Human conflict as the war for Ascalon independence rather then the Ascalon insurrection.
      • Of course the whole thing about CULTURAL REBIRTH is a massive red flag and basically the cornerstone of Bangars belief system. In embracing the 'Volk' of Charr society, the true Charr that is, they will bring about a new era of glory to the Charr people.
      • Big sweeping claims about doing things that you just weren't responsible for. Such as saying that the Charr killed the last son of Kralkatorric when in fact many branded were left, many branded in Grothmar valley even. Lying to the public even when easily accessible information to the public was commonplace. The idea was enough repetition would make people believe anything even if their eyes told them otherwise, and this propped up the kitten regime just by constantly hammering in notions of victory and conquest regardless of reality.

    And those are just the things off the top of my head. If anyone was driven by fear it was Adelbern, who had a lot of reasons to be afraid of both the Krytans and the Charr after surviving the Guild Wars. As far as breaking the treaty? Bangar already broke it as soon as he sent assassins after Gorrik, assassins you can choose to kill if you so desire.At least for one iteration of the commander in Deeper and Deeper things had gone way too far. Adelbern wanted to defend his home and his people, Bangar wants to conquer or kill everyone who could change the destiny of the Charr as a people. To me the difference is night and day, Adelbern may of done horrible things but it was under an intense degree of stress.

    At least from what I can tell of Grothmar, Bangar has been well and truly sick for a very, very, very long time.

  • Ben K.6238Ben K.6238 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    At least from what I can tell of Grothmar, Bangar has been well and truly sick for a very, very, very long time.

    I don't really see any evidence of that. Most of those problems could have started yesterday in the story, for all we know.

    Jormag likely took his natural suspicion and xenophobia, and twisted them into something even more sinister. It's pointed out during the story that he's started to do things that are out of character, but the difference has been subtle enough that not many have noticed yet.

  • It's an easier pill to swallow if you think of GW2 simply as an alternate timeline.

    It's kind of like Abrams version of ST, or Disney's version of SW. They both are obviously couched in their respective original histories, they just have a different vision of what they want the modern story to look like. And to do that they often have to tweak a few of the old concepts that most people assume (usually rightly so) as foundational canon.

    GW2 is no different in that respect. As the new game would have multiple player races, ANet had to find a way to introduce 4 new playable races into a narrative that historically only had one. And in order to avoid an awkward balance of power (at least culturally speaking) they had to do this in a way that gave each new race general parity with each other. Almost all modern games with vastly different playable races have roughly equal balances of power; not just in military might but also in cultural and social significance. This is done simply to give players a good array of choices and not peg any one race as "the" dominant power.

    Had the humans not already been so culturally diverse (Ascalons, Krytans, Luxons, Kournans, etc.), this would have been immensely easier for ANet. Unfortunately, they had to choose one and stick with it if they didn't want the game to be seen as favoring humans. Of those on Tyria (the continent, not the world), the Krytans were the obvious choice for the surviving human playable race in GW2 because the Orrians were all dead, and the Ascalons were apparently barely hanging on (admittedly debatable). All they needed to do was to cleverly reinvent the Charr/Ascalon conflict to have juuust enough ambiguity so that the modern narrative becomes plausible. Plausibility = Playability.

    The reason the Charr have a legitimate claim to Ascalon at all has nothing to do with which point of view you take. It's because the Krytans just happened to be the only human kingdom that was still strong and intact after Prophecies was written. Had the Prophecies author changed the ending to have Ascalon somehow get all their territory back and Kryta somehow fall to the Mantle, Centaurs, Titans, or whoever, this discussion would still be happening. But the only difference would be Kryta's and Ascalon's fates would be flipped for GW2.

    ANet just needed humans to be a relatively homogenous culture with a lot smaller kingdom, and Kryta was the only logical choice for that. It's really that simple.

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    @Kossage.9072 said:
    The whole conspiracy opens the question whether Bangar deliberately had the stompers sabotaged via his associates to manipulate Aurene's actions and use it as a means to scare several charr into siding with him (while providing grade A acting of shock to not raise suspicion) or if the proposed third party (Inquest or some other tech-savvy villain/faction) used the sabotage to manipulate both Aurene and Bangar into this escalating arms race for as of yet unknown reasons. :)

    Okay, while you have a great, but huge post I'ma focus on the Conspiracy, and how you brought up things to my mind I had never even considered, that paint Bangar in a much more sinister light.

    So, before I thought Bangar was viewing the Commander-Aurene relationship as a warbeast and it's handler, using bad information to come to that idea.

    But what if instead, Bangar knew fully the commander couldn't control Aurene, but wanted to make the Charr believe that? He can't just declare war or openly suggest conflict, even among Blood Legion. So he hosts the rally, convinces the flame legion to a truce and to come. He invites the Pact and various merchants to visit. He subtly has the Renegades start not only recruiting/finding like-minded warbands for his trip to get Jormag. He has Braham distracted and seperated from the commander, and constantly fed free beers until he blacks out during a fight so the bow/quiver can be stolen.

    He also knows Aurene is cleansing branded locations, so what does he do to make the charr start viewing Aurene as a weapon, instead of an ally? Capture the largest branded they can contain, and sabotage the brand stompers in the area. Have the branded siege devourer be part of the opening act (which probably lured more branded into the area). So now there is a massive, pissed off branded siege devourer attacking and spawning/luring in more and more branded devourers to the area. So Aurene dive-bombs and kills the big branded infront of the entire crowd, including all the leaders of the legions.

    Then, he loudly comments making it appear as if it was part of the show, and that the commander was responsible for that. As they met, he calls the commander out for "pointing their heaviest artillery at them" as opposed to merely "Coming armed, as befits a military leader." Have some renegades ordered nearby, or just have general Charr overhearing this? Now rumors spread about the the Commander having total control over Aurene, and possibly having her in a threatening posture toward blood legion at least. So his agents pluck up the Charr who agreed with him.

    @Obsidian.1328 said:
    It's an easier pill to swallow if you think of GW2 simply as an alternate timeline.
    Had the humans not already been so culturally diverse (Ascalons, Krytans, Luxons, Kournans, etc.), this would have been immensely easier for ANet. Unfortunately, they had to choose one and stick with it if they didn't want the game to be seen as favoring humans. Of those on Tyria (the continent, not the world), the Krytans were the obvious choice for the surviving human playable race in GW2 because the Orrians were all dead, and the Ascalons were apparently barely hanging on (admittedly debatable). All they needed to do was to cleverly reinvent the Charr/Ascalon conflict to have juuust enough ambiguity so that the modern narrative becomes plausible. Plausibility = Playability.

    The reason the Charr have a legitimate claim to Ascalon at all has nothing to do with which point of view you take. It's because the Krytans just happened to be the only human kingdom that was still strong and intact after Prophecies was written. Had the Prophecies author changed the ending to have Ascalon somehow get all their territory back and Kryta somehow fall to the Mantle, Centaurs, Titans, or whoever, this discussion would still be happening. But the only difference would be Kryta's and Ascalon's fates would be flipped for GW2.

    GW1 was pretty clear that Ascalon was in very bad shape, Adelbern was refusing all help being offered to him, and the land was ruined. Ascalon was in very bad shape, and there is no way it could've lasted 250+ years as it was when we left it at the end of Prophecies.

    "Though many followed Prince Rurik in his quest to secure a better future for the people of Ascalon, there are those who remained behind. Despite the Charr threat, they could not bring themselves to leave the soil on which they had been born. Now, they are in grave danger. Ascalon's great walls and soldiers have withered in Rurik's absence. An old king dons his armor, heavy with time, to fight a battle he cannot win. It is his will alone that keeps Ascalon alive. Now it is up to you to make sure he too stays alive. Hurry to the Frontier Gate!" Vision of Glint, sending the PC to save Adelbern from the titans.
    "A long time have I fought for Ascalon. First as a soldier blessed by Balthazar, now as its king. Though I have survived one more battle, and I will see another day, it will not make me any more wise… only one day older. I have lost all that a man can lose. All that I have left is this antiquated set of armor and the remains of this tattered kingdom. I thank you for your help today. Rurik would have been very proud of all you have accomplished." Adelbern, after the Titans were defeated.
    "The clouds of war gather on the horizon. The hour of the storm is upon us, yet Adelbern still refuses to give me audience. Old fool would rather kill us all than accept help." Evennia, while waiting for Audience with Adelbern during the War in Kryta, to offer Ascalon full military and resource aid, in exchange for help kicking the White Mantle out. She went missing, presumed murdered by Adelbern (or imprisoned and left to rot)

    There was no "reinventing" the Charr-human conflict. As GW1 left it, Ascalon was steadily crumbling, what was left being held together only by Adelbern's stubbornness, and that Ascalon was receiving no aid at all from the outside. As Gw1 told us, once Adelbern died, Ascalon would fall. And guess what? The Movement of the world/Gw2 shows us this exact outcome. He remained unmoving and refusing to budge an inch. He kicked everybody out who challenged his rule (Like he did with Rurik). The founding on Ebonhawke book comments on the surge of civilians suddenly joining the Ebon Vanguards deployment south (along with the suddenly assigned civilian workers and others). "Is this love for the Vanguard, or fear of Adelbern?"

    @Ben K.6238 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    At least from what I can tell of Grothmar, Bangar has been well and truly sick for a very, very, very long time.

    I don't really see any evidence of that. Most of those problems could have started yesterday in the story, for all we know.

    Jormag likely took his natural suspicion and xenophobia, and twisted them into something even more sinister. It's pointed out during the story that he's started to do things that are out of character, but the difference has been subtle enough that not many have noticed yet.

    I mean, we know he's manipulative and Charismatic, and has been manipulating Charr, and controlling the renegades without his second in command knowing a single thing. Rytlock even mentions this to Crecia. "How's it feel, being cut out of his inner circle and told nothing?"

    So if Jormag subtly is making Bangar amp up the suspicion and all, and we can easily see that. The corrupted items in Bangar's office (the only place I've seen the ice weapons casually laying around in a non svanir/icebrood enviroment), the footprints all over the roof of the blood keep, etc.

    So, Bangar's starting to go a little more outside of the normal, in possibly dangerous ways.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭

    Frankly from what i'v heard his normal was already dangerous, so at least for the last decade since the treaty signing he'd been gearing up for a potential confrontation. The way things in Grothmar look makes it seem like he's been having this going for a few years at least, taking the Flame Cubs was reprehensible enough but the way they treat their elderly and how primed the population was to jump on Bangars wagon seems like he'd been drip feeding his madness into the mainstream population for awhile. As Malice said we don't know how far back, but Crecia points out all he really needed was every legion in one place.

    If Jormags influence is recent, then it's just amplifying an already Fascist ideology that had been boiling under the surface.

  • Obsidian.1328Obsidian.1328 Member ✭✭
    edited October 22, 2019

    @Kalavier.1097 said:
    As Gw1 told us, once Adelbern died, Ascalon would fall.

    Where on earth did it say that?

    Until EotN, there is literally no reference to Ascalon actually falling aside from the very first line of Prophecies cinematics: "The last day dawns for the kingdom of Ascalon..." So I guess if you want to use that as proof of Ascalon's demise that is your right...pretty thin evidence though.

    If you were around the GW forums back in late 2007, you would have seen a lot of players wondering why the war was still going on when EotN came out. It was assumed by almost everyone to be over by then, and it's even stated as such in the Factions introductory lore document:

    "At the time of this writing, the kingdom of Ascalon is recovering from the conflict with the Charr and is establishing new treaties with the Krytans and Elonians."

    That was from an Ascalon historian visiting Cantha after the war.

    The fact is that the Charr war was supposed to end in 1072 AE, and the Charr were never meant to be anything more than the initial antagonist for the Guild Wars game. Obviously the GW2 writers had different ideas about that, which is perfectly fine. But that doesn't change the fact that they were supposed to lose that war. GW2 could have kept human Ascalon and still used the Charr...there were leagues and leagues of uncharted territory north and east of Ascalon for that (the idea that Ascalon was the Charr homelands was never even mentioned until 2012 when GW2 was released). Bottom line, there was nothing in the original Prophecies story to prevent them from keeping Ascalon intact, in fact it would have been more true to the original narrative had they done so.

    But the reason GW2 didn't was because of the reason I already mentioned in my first post: they needed humans to be more homogenous and inhabiting a lot less real estate in order to equalize them with the other 4 new races. And Kryta was the only human kingdom that could fit that bill in Tyria. If anything, human Ascalon's demise was because of a marketing decision.


    ~note: your quotes up there were written 2 full years after Prophecies, around the same time EotN was released. "The Last Day Dawns" quest was not even available to do until 2007, again, 2 years after Proph. New writers added all that stuff (Gwen's story, Evennia's Adelbern reference, even Glint's Vision quests) primarily as supporting material for the EotN storyline.

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    @Obsidian.1328 said:
    ~note: your quotes up there were written 2 full years after Prophecies, around the same time EotN was released. "The Last Day Dawns" quest was not even available to do until 2007, again, 2 years after Proph. New writers added all that stuff (Gwen's story, Evennia's Adelbern reference, even Glint's Vision quests) primarily as supporting material for the EotN storyline.

    Yes, and EOTN is part of GW1. You cannot say "Oh, they rewrote it all in Gw2."

    https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Titan_quest

    Also you are completely wrong. Last Day Dawns, the titan quests were added in 2005. So the same time sorrow's furnace was added to the game. It was released months after Prophecies, and before factions.

    So no, only the Evennia quote came after factions.

  • Obsidian.1328Obsidian.1328 Member ✭✭
    edited October 22, 2019

    @Kalavier.1097 said:

    @Obsidian.1328 said:
    ~note: your quotes up there were written 2 full years after Prophecies, around the same time EotN was released. "The Last Day Dawns" quest was not even available to do until 2007, again, 2 years after Proph. New writers added all that stuff (Gwen's story, Evennia's Adelbern reference, even Glint's Vision quests) primarily as supporting material for the EotN storyline.

    Yes, and EOTN is part of GW1. You cannot say "Oh, they rewrote it all in Gw2."

    https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Titan_quest

    Also you are completely wrong. Last Day Dawns, the titan quests were added in 2005. So the same time sorrow's furnace was added to the game. It was released months after Prophecies, and before factions.

    So no, only the Evennia quote came after factions.

    Good, you checked the source. You're right, they were done in 2005.

    So since my other quote was written in 2005, do those chronological standards also apply to that?

    EotN was created specifically to bridge the two games, there are even posters in this very thread who would agree to that. It has a foot in both worlds. Keep in mind that if GW2 had never never made, EotN would not have been made either. You can't say the same for the trilogy, they stand on their own two feet.

  • XenoSpyro.1780XenoSpyro.1780 Member ✭✭✭

    @witcher.3197 said:
    absolutely no redeeming qualities

    Somebody missed Pyre's independence arc

    When Anet decided to make Charr playable in GW2 they felt it necessary to change how the playerbase viewed the Charr.

    Wow, it's almost like a lot can change in the span of 250 years coughUnitedStatescough

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 23, 2019

    @XenoSpyro.1780 said:

    When Anet decided to make Charr playable in GW2 they felt it necessary to change how the playerbase viewed the Charr.

    Wow, it's almost like a lot can change in the span of 250 years coughUnitedStatescough

    Yep. Nations die, new nations appear, what was inhabitable becomes lifeless, what was lifeless regrows.

    Lots can happen.

    Or, as opposed to what some people love to think in regards to the Charr, a new generation grows up to continue the war of their fathers. I gotta love how at the end of GW1 Prophecies, there wasn't a single thing to imply the Charr were beaten. Outside of one blurb "Ascalon is recovering from the war against the charr", but that doesn't remove the possibility of another attack by the Charr. We never wiped out their armies or destroyed their cities.

    @Obsidian.1328 said:
    Good, you checked the source. You're right, they were done in 2005.

    So since my other quote was written in 2005, do those chronological standards also apply to that?

    EotN was created specifically to bridge the two games, there are even posters in this very thread who would agree to that. It has a foot in both worlds. Keep in mind that if GW2 had never never made, EotN would not have been made either. You can't say the same for the trilogy, they stand on their own two feet.

    And it should be noted that it doesn't say they have treaties signed. Recovering from one wave doesn't mean another won't come.

    And we are later shown that no treaty between Kryta and Ascalon was finished, if it was even made. Besides, I'd ask this question of the factions quote. Who was the treaty being made with? The White Mantle? Considering how Ascalonians were responsible for their gods being killed and their power weakened, I find that odd.

    Yes, EOTN was made to be the bridge. But people act as if GW1 prophecies ended with Ascalon intact and surviving, and the Charr defeated forever and that GW2 (and just GW2) came along and ruined this by daring to imply the ruined Kingdom in a Wasteland, held together only by the Stubborn refusal of it's king to move (who was also intensely racist and hated Krytans, the only nation left able to help him effectively), would last 250+ years and be fine!

    I mean, come on. The Charr attacked for hundreds, maybe thousands or years, caused Orr to be destroyed, nearly took Kryta and Ascalon, and we'll call them defeated because... we destroyed one or two attack forces and killed a singular war-leader? Yes, we may have pushed back the Charr... for now. Nothing ever indicated that the Charr were defeated for good.

  • anninke.7469anninke.7469 Member ✭✭✭

    Where was it actually stated that the Charr have any kind of legitimate claim to Ascalon by anyone else than a Charr? Because it seems absolutely logical for Charr to insist on whatever ancestral "rights" they believe they have. I don't recall anyone relevant saying that the Charr are only victims of evil humans or anything like that. And of course Bangar would play on the victim note. It's easy and it works. However, I really can't remember a single thing that would make me believe there's anything more than "we were stronger so we're here now" to Charr presence in Ascalon, even though I didn't play GW1 (which seems to be what worries some posters).

    Do not fear difficulty. Hard ground makes sore feet.
    Act with wisdom and axe.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 23, 2019

    @Kalavier.1097 said:

    @XenoSpyro.1780 said:

    When Anet decided to make Charr playable in GW2 they felt it necessary to change how the playerbase viewed the Charr.

    Wow, it's almost like a lot can change in the span of 250 years coughUnitedStatescough

    Yep. Nations die, new nations appear, what was inhabitable becomes lifeless, what was lifeless regrows.

    Lots can happen.

    Or, as opposed to what some people love to think in regards to the Charr, a new generation grows up to continue the war of their fathers. I gotta love how at the end of GW1 Prophecies, there wasn't a single thing to imply the Charr were beaten. Outside of one blurb "Ascalon is recovering from the war against the charr", but that doesn't remove the possibility of another attack by the Charr. We never wiped out their armies or destroyed their cities.

    @Obsidian.1328 said:
    Good, you checked the source. You're right, they were done in 2005.

    So since my other quote was written in 2005, do those chronological standards also apply to that?

    EotN was created specifically to bridge the two games, there are even posters in this very thread who would agree to that. It has a foot in both worlds. Keep in mind that if GW2 had never never made, EotN would not have been made either. You can't say the same for the trilogy, they stand on their own two feet.

    And it should be noted that it doesn't say they have treaties signed. Recovering from one wave doesn't mean another won't come.

    And we are later shown that no treaty between Kryta and Ascalon was finished, if it was even made. Besides, I'd ask this question of the factions quote. Who was the treaty being made with? The White Mantle? Considering how Ascalonians were responsible for their gods being killed and their power weakened, I find that odd.

    Yes, EOTN was made to be the bridge. But people act as if GW1 prophecies ended with Ascalon intact and surviving, and the Charr defeated forever and that GW2 (and just GW2) came along and ruined this by daring to imply the ruined Kingdom in a Wasteland, held together only by the Stubborn refusal of it's king to move (who was also intensely racist and hated Krytans, the only nation left able to help him effectively), would last 250+ years and be fine!

    I mean, come on. The Charr attacked for hundreds, maybe thousands or years, caused Orr to be destroyed, nearly took Kryta and Ascalon, and we'll call them defeated because... we destroyed one or two attack forces and killed a singular war-leader? Yes, we may have pushed back the Charr... for now. Nothing ever indicated that the Charr were defeated for good.

    I mean, that's a vast oversimplification. Ascalonian forces in killing their gods and butchering their way across the the continent had pretty badly beaten the Charr. They hadn't just killed Burntfur, but also numerous officers under him and killed hundreds, perhaps over a thousand Charr in battle. Sure the Charr weren't beaten but their primary power source was gone and their forces crippled for the foreseeable future, you could argue that the fact that Adelbern was still around by the end of that battle and the White Mantles Mursaat were slain would mean that humanity would reunite as the Shining Blade began to seize control again, and likely beat back the Charr Legions. They were after all heavily reliant on their magic, and frankly that's true even in GW2, without the Searing Cauldrons the Charr military is somewhat unimpressive.

    I suppose where I disagree with those people is with the idea that Ascalon was a total loss though. While Ascalon City is gone the way the war is portrayed makes it seem like the Charr were wedged into an increasingly hopeless battle against an enemy that basically just had to wait for them to collapse. The only reason the Charr didn't consider what was in practice a surrender in the Fields of Ruin before is to save face. Smodur required something to make it seem like the Charr were getting a thing out of this deal, and Malice couldn't reveal her intentions at all until the negotiations were underway properly. In that sense the Charr actually lost the Ascalonian War for Independence, and pretty badly.

    Sure Ascalonians didn't get Ascalon, but they got almost everything between Ebonhawke and twin sisters crossing. Perhaps more now that the Brands being undone and there's not an excuse for the Sentinels to remain, can't imagine that Bangars put the Charr into a good bargaining position on the thing.

  • Kalavier.1097Kalavier.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    I mean, that's a vast oversimplification. Ascalonian forces in killing their gods and butchering their way across the the continent had pretty badly beaten the Charr. They hadn't just killed Burntfur, but also numerous officers under him and killed hundreds, perhaps over a thousand Charr in battle. Sure the Charr weren't beaten but their primary power source was gone and their forces crippled for the foreseeable future, you could argue that the fact that Adelbern was still around by the end of that battle and the White Mantles Mursaat were slain would mean that humanity would reunite as the Shining Blade began to seize control again, and likely beat back the Charr Legions. They were after all heavily reliant on their magic, and frankly that's true even in GW2, without the Searing Cauldrons the Charr military is somewhat unimpressive.

    We have no information implying their forces are crippled. As of GW1 prophecies end, we have no idea what the strength/numbers of the Charr are, and how many may be north in their homelands. Rurik, after killing Burntfur and the horde at Rin declared the war to be a lost cause. Rurik, who was in charge of Ascalon's Vanguard which was the primary offensive unit that Ascalon's army had. The main Ascalon army was almost entirely defensive, and it wasn't until EOTN that we met the Ebon Vanguard, which was the other Offensive arm of the forces of Ascalon. The Ebon Vanguard being the Ascalon Vanguard, once again under Adelbern's control and finances. Interesting bit is the blurb about Langmar.
    " King Adelbern recognized Langmar's stoicism and ability to lead in the face of death and despair. He gave her the command of the Ascalonian Vanguard and ordered her north, behind enemy lines, on a mission of desperation."

    As for the Charr strength, at the end of the Nolani academy mission, Rurik comments on their strength being "Many thousands" at that point, and they should make for Kryta to rebuild their strength. So as far as the game has informed us, the Charr strength as of Rurik's party leaving Ascalon was quite large.

    Prince Rurik: "Trumpets! The king must be near. The fall of Rin will have darkened his heart. Hail King Adelbern!"
    King Adelbern: "Rise, my son. you have done well. The discovery of Stormcaller is surely a sign of victory."
    Prince Rurik: "It is a powerful weapon, but I fear not powerful enough. The Charr have amassed an army of many thousands."
    King Adelbern: "You overestimate these beasts, Rurik. Do not be afraid."
    Prince Rurik: "I am not afraid, father. I have seen them in battle. Rin has been destroyed! It would be wise to escape while we can. We should make for Kryta and rebuild our strength. Not wait here for death."
    King Adelbern: "I will never allow Ascalons to live in the shadow of the Krytans! It is Rin that will be rebuilt. And you will learn your place."
    Prince Rurik: "You have grown proud, Adelbern of Ascalon...proud and foolish!"
    King Adelbern: "You would dare call your king a fool? I will hear no more. I banish you from Ascalon! You are no longer my prince, and you are no longer my son!"
    Prince Rurik: "People of Rin! Your king will lead you to death. If you wish to see better days, if you wish to live, then leave the beasts behind and follow me over the Shiverpeaks. We make for Kryta and a new life, free of the Charr."
    

    Also, as of the end of Prophecies the White Mantle was not defeated at all, just beaten and the Mursaat killed. Kryta was not liberated, nor the shining blade implied to actually be in a spot to overtake them. Do remember, we left Kryta with the Shining blade being betrayed and almost wiped out, seeking a way to kill the Mursaat.

    I suppose where I disagree with those people is with the idea that Ascalon was a total loss though. While Ascalon City is gone the way the war is portrayed makes it seem like the Charr were wedged into an increasingly hopeless battle against an enemy that basically just had to wait for them to collapse. The only reason the Charr didn't consider what was in practice a surrender in the Fields of Ruin before is to save face. Smodur required something to make it seem like the Charr were getting a thing out of this deal, and Malice couldn't reveal her intentions at all until the negotiations were underway properly. In that sense the Charr actually lost the Ascalonian War for Independence, and pretty badly.

    I don't see at all how the Charr were in a hopeless battle. We see Ascalon quite literally one year after the cease fire and while things are rough in specific areas, overall it's stable. Ebonhawke was not in any spot to actually push out, they didn't need to surrender at all. What happened was the dragon threat became real for them, and the brand carved a path through Ascalon. The Truce faction subtly managed to get enough support to make the deal for the Claw in exchange for a truce, allowing troops to go to fight the dragons (As the truce faction was headed by Almorra, Malice, and Smodur). What happened was both sides could turn to face the branded/ogre threat in the area, instead of each other.

    Sure Ascalonians didn't get Ascalon, but they got almost everything between Ebonhawke and twin sisters crossing. Perhaps more now that the Brands being undone and there's not an excuse for the Sentinels to remain, can't imagine that Bangars put the Charr into a good bargaining position on the thing.

    Treaty is already signed and finalized. The war is over, and the Rurik faction of Ascalonian's succeeded. The Adelbern Ascalonians will fade away as their hatred and idiotic stubborness causes them to die out, just like Adelbern caused his followers.

    The ones that remain will be happy to be able to live without the fear of bombardment or attacks, able to use the vast Quarry and mining/stonework skills to sell to Kryta for important goods.

    In the end, quite literally everybody wins. The Charr won the war, reclaiming most of Ascalon. Ebonhawke survived, and it's people have the corner to themselves to live on around their fortress. The idiots who can only think of war and want the total destruction of the other side will die out, as the Separatists have lost their main funding/supplier a while ago (the white mantle lead by Cadeucus), and I'm sure we'll be dealing with Bangar and his renegade influence for good in the upcoming story.

    Ascalon survived, not as Adelbern's insane stubborness wanted, but how the beloved Rurik envisioned it. Rebuilding within Kryta, returning when they had strength (Ebon Vanguard), and securing a home. He saw that to survive one couldn't cling to old hatreds, unlike his father. He saw their old foes as possible future allies. Just like Jennah, and the Duke of Ebonhawke does.

  • Loesh.4697Loesh.4697 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 23, 2019

    @Kalavier.1097 said:

    @Loesh.4697 said:
    I mean, that's a vast oversimplification. Ascalonian forces in killing their gods and butchering their way across the the continent had pretty badly beaten the Charr. They hadn't just killed Burntfur, but also numerous officers under him and killed hundreds, perhaps over a thousand Charr in battle. Sure the Charr weren't beaten but their primary power source was gone and their forces crippled for the foreseeable future, you could argue that the fact that Adelbern was still around by the end of that battle and the White Mantles Mursaat were slain would mean that humanity would reunite as the Shining Blade began to seize control again, and likely beat back the Charr Legions. They were after all heavily reliant on their magic, and frankly that's true even in GW2, without the Searing Cauldrons the Charr military is somewhat unimpressive.


    We have no information implying their forces are crippled. As of GW1 prophecies end, we have no idea what the strength/numbers of the Charr are, and how many may be north in their homelands. Rurik, after killing Burntfur and the horde at Rin declared the war to be a lost cause. Rurik, who was in charge of Ascalon's Vanguard which was the primary offensive unit that Ascalon's army had. The main Ascalon army was almost entirely defensive, and it wasn't until EOTN that we met the Ebon Vanguard, which was the other Offensive arm of the forces of Ascalon. The Ebon Vanguard being the Ascalon Vanguard, once again under Adelbern's control and finances. Interesting bit is the blurb about Langmar.
    " King Adelbern recognized Langmar's stoicism and ability to lead in the face of death and despair. He gave her the command of the Ascalonian Vanguard and ordered her north, behind enemy lines, on a mission of desperation."

    As for the Charr strength, at the end of the Nolani academy mission, Rurik comments on their strength being "Many thousands" at that point, and they should make for Kryta to rebuild their strength. So as far as the game has informed us, the Charr strength as of Rurik's party leaving Ascalon was quite large.

    Prince Rurik: "Trumpets! The king must be near. The fall of Rin will have darkened his heart. Hail King Adelbern!"
    King Adelbern: "Rise, my son. you have done well. The discovery of Stormcaller is surely a sign of victory."
    Prince Rurik: "It is a powerful weapon, but I fear not powerful enough. The Charr have amassed an army of many thousands."
    King Adelbern: "You overestimate these beasts, Rurik. Do not be afraid."
    Prince Rurik: "I am not afraid, father. I have seen them in battle. Rin has been destroyed! It would be wise to escape while we can. We should make for Kryta and rebuild our strength. Not wait here for death."
    King Adelbern: "I will never allow Ascalons to live in the shadow of the Krytans! It is Rin that will be rebuilt. And you will learn your place."
    Prince Rurik: "You have grown proud, Adelbern of Ascalon...proud and foolish!"
    King Adelbern: "You would dare call your king a fool? I will hear no more. I banish you from Ascalon! You are no longer my prince, and you are no longer my son!"
    Prince Rurik: "People of Rin! Your king will lead you to death. If you wish to see better days, if you wish to live, then leave the beasts behind and follow me over the Shiverpeaks. We make for Kryta and a new life, free of the Charr."
    

    Also, as of the end of Prophecies the White Mantle was not defeated at all, just beaten and the Mursaat killed. Kryta was not liberated, nor the shining blade implied to actually be in a spot to overtake them. Do remember, we left Kryta with the Shining blade being betrayed and almost wiped out, seeking a way to kill the Mursaat.

    I suppose where I disagree with those people is with the idea that Ascalon was a total loss though. While Ascalon City is gone the way the war is portrayed makes it seem like the Charr were wedged into an increasingly hopeless battle against an enemy that basically just had to wait for them to collapse. The only reason the Charr didn't consider what was in practice a surrender in the Fields of Ruin before is to save face. Smodur required something to make it seem like the Charr were getting a thing out of this deal, and Malice couldn't reveal her intentions at all until the negotiations were underway properly. In that sense the Charr actually lost the Ascalonian War for Independence, and pretty badly.

    I don't see at all how the Charr were in a hopeless battle. We see Ascalon quite literally one year after the cease fire and while things are rough in specific areas, overall it's stable. Ebonhawke was not in any spot to actually push out, they didn't need to surrender at all. What happened was the dragon threat became real for them, and the brand carved a path through Ascalon. The Truce faction subtly managed to get enough support to make the deal for the Claw in exchange for a truce, allowing troops to go to fight the dragons (As the truce faction was headed by Almorra, Malice, and Smodur). What happened was both sides could turn to face the branded/ogre threat in the area, instead of each other.

    Sure Ascalonians didn't get Ascalon, but they got almost everything between Ebonhawke and twin sisters crossing. Perhaps more now that the Brands being undone and there's not an excuse for the Sentinels to remain, can't imagine that Bangars put the Charr into a good bargaining position on the thing.

    Treaty is already signed and finalized. The war is over, and the Rurik faction of Ascalonian's succeeded. The Adelbern Ascalonians will fade away as their hatred and idiotic stubborness causes them to die out, just like Adelbern caused his followers.

    The ones that remain will be happy to be able to live without the fear of bombardment or attacks, able to use the vast Quarry and mining/stonework skills to sell to Kryta for important goods.

    In the end, quite literally everybody wins. The Charr won the war, reclaiming most of Ascalon. Ebonhawke survived, and it's people have the corner to themselves to live on around their fortress. The idiots who can only think of war and want the total destruction of the other side will die out, as the Separatists have lost their main funding/supplier a while ago (the white mantle lead by Cadeucus), and I'm sure we'll be dealing with Bangar and his renegade influence for good in the upcoming story.

    Ascalon survived, not as Adelbern's insane stubborness wanted, but how the beloved Rurik envisioned it. Rebuilding within Kryta, returning when they had strength (Ebon Vanguard), and securing a home. He saw that to survive one couldn't cling to old hatreds, unlike his father. He saw their old foes as possible future allies. Just like Jennah, and the Duke of Ebonhawke does.

    Rurik went out of Ascalon to lead the refugees to Kryta, essentially saving them by moving them somewhere else. I somehow doubt that Rurik had any idea that we would wind up actually fighting and exterminating the Charr gods at some point in the conflict. His story starts, and ends, pretty early on in prophecies and frankly even then i'm unsure of how accurate Ruriks assessment of the war is. After all we know for a fact it's not a lost cause because...well, Ebonhawke wins in the end. It doesn't win EVERYTHING but it beats out the combined forces of the Legions and takes over the Fields, ensuring that Adelberns Ascalonians survive into the forseeable future on Ascalonian soil. Sure the White Mantle might not of been wholly wiped out but, well, their gods are dead, their time in the sun is over. Inevitably another revolutionary force would of picked up where the Shining Blade left off, assuming they didn't somehow survive.

    I think I already mentioned this in another post, but the Charr very explicitly did not pull out just because of the Dragons. Vanguard Morrison points out exactly where the Charr forces in Ebonhawke went, they were all being funneled into Fireheart Rise. not really surprising, the Legions were never going to put THAT many troops into the Pact, since their people were first and foremost focused on themselves. When you talk to the dissatisfied factions in the area they point out much the same, the Charr are agreeing to this because of the Brand yes, but also because of the immortal ghosts and the Flame Legion. Elwin Fairchild certainly believes that before anything else the Charr did this to make the civil war more manageable, and whether or not the commander believes it is up for debate but it's the line of reasoning they take to calm down both Separatist and Renegade sympathizers. The former they tell the Charr Legions are utterly defeated and doing this to save face, the latter they tell are in such a position that without the humans the Charr Legions are going to suffer on the Flame, Ghosts, and Dragons.

    The Brand was an important turning point yes, but it's not the sole reason the treaty was signed and never was. The Ogre Revolt slaughtering the forces pitched out in front of the Ebonhawke Gates was just the nail in the coffin to a slow grueling war that seemed without end. That's why Bangar's rhetoric is so intoxicating, why it mirrors so closely to Alt Right speech that both tells you that you are both a lsoer but also that your time is now and you can reclaim the world if you can rise up against the manipulative forces that always profited off your weakness. Now that your eyes have been forced open, your time is now, just seize it.

    They feel like they lost, and from a certain point of view they did. I mean you've defined your entire culture by war, and now you have to stop warring. How do you reconcile the notion of giving up on a fight you've pursued for centuries and giving up the land your ancestors fought to humans? How powerful is that shame of dead Charr to you? Further if you've been indoctrinated to believe that land was always your land, or gods forbid that ALL land was your land, Ebonhawke will forever exist as a thorn jammed into the side of your heart, not only did you fail to exterminate your hated foe, but you gave them the space to grow and prosper.

    As for Rurik and Adelbern, Ruriks faction of Ascalonians definitely succeeded, but the Ebon Vanguard never 'returned when they were strong enough'. To the contrary they kept fighting long after Rurik had escorted those refugees, always pushing on the Legions while sparing only a few of their forces to aid Kryta during the war against the Mantle. More then Adelbern wanted sure, but definitely less then Salma would of hoped for. The vast majority kept fighting up north, going south when called by Adelbern, and then building a keep on his orders as the last holdout. Whether motivated by his madness, or by an evil he suspected to be there(Kimmes logs point to either possibly being true.) Ebonhakwe is first and foremost his legacy.

    So yes Rurik succeeded, but in a strange way so did Adelbern. It wasn't the victory he would want, he didn't retake all of Ascalon, but it was a victory fueled by his stubborn desire to stay. His people survived, they remained in Ascalon, and they even expanded out beyond the last holdout that he had originally envisioned.

©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.