Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Confer with Bangar updates


Sajuuk Khar.1509

Recommended Posts

Here is the dialog for today's update with Bangar

1st is you asking if hes ready to talk, or if hes still sulkinghttps://i.imgur.com/XgGuJ8P.jpg

2nd is you asking about how did Ryland/Jormag happenhttps://i.imgur.com/wia9vot.jpg

3rd is you asking him if he ever suspected Jormag was just using himhttps://imgur.com/fkKqGqk

These new conversations reveal some stuff

  1. Bangar was hearing the whispers, and admits Jormag was playing him
  2. Ryland apparently never heard the whispers at all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 2 weeks later...

@"Sajuuk Khar.1509" said:Here is this weeks updates for the Bangar achievement.

Basically, Rytlock questions how Bangar could let what happened with Ryland happen, and says he should have gone back to the homelands a long time ago, and Bangar says Rytlock has forgotten what it means to be Charr.MMj1hQV.jpgAjvaPlr.jpgHoa96BF.jpg

I really enjoy these little snippets of content, lore and dialogue every few weeks. I hope they keep these things up. Reminds me of the little mini content patches between releases in Season 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm actually disgusted that the Charr "...don't have sons". Also the second line above it; where Bangar admires the mother (Crecia) and dismisses Rytlock, the father. It really shines a spotlight on the disposable male trope, like their male cubs are just meaningless meat to be fed into the war machine. It's telling that they specify their sons, not their daughters, as it ties in very well with some current real-world radical ideological opinions. If anet wanted to make the Charr truly monstrous (in more than just appearance) they have succeeded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Funky.4861" said:I'm actually disgusted that the Charr "...don't have sons". Also the second line above it; where Bangar admires the mother (Crecia) and dismisses Rytlock, the father. It really shines a spotlight on the disposable male trope, like their male cubs are just meaningless meat to be fed into the war machine. It's telling that they specify their sons, not their daughters, as it ties in very well with some current real-world radical ideological opinions. If anet wanted to make the Charr truly monstrous (in more than just appearance) they have succeeded.

That's just your human point of view though.What did you think they are like when they don't care for their children and just drop them off and don't look back?What this actually does is cement the fact that they are extremely war minded and that many of their leaders don't have a regard for the individual, just the cause they fight for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Blocki.4931 said:

@"Funky.4861" said:I'm actually disgusted that the Charr "...don't have sons". Also the second line above it; where Bangar admires the mother (Crecia) and dismisses Rytlock, the father. It really shines a spotlight on the disposable male trope, like their male cubs are just meaningless meat to be fed into the war machine. It's telling that they specify their sons, not their daughters, as it ties in very well with some current real-world radical ideological opinions. If anet wanted to make the Charr truly monstrous (in more than just appearance) they have succeeded.

That's just your human point of view though.What did you think they are like when they don't care for their children and just drop them off and don't look back?What this actually does is cement the fact that they are extremely war minded and that many of their leaders don't have a regard for the individual, just the cause they fight for.

It's my human point of view because i'm not a Charr IRL, nor do i RP as one. The point i'm making is that Bangar specifies sons, NOT children, meaning that their daughters have value but their sons are trash. So by extension, every player-made male charr is also worthless- this is a very damaging stance to take, to know that every member of your race thinks less of you that the soles of their paws. Would you be so agreeable if the genders were swapped? I wouldn't be, because i think all children are valuable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Funky.4861 said:

@Funky.4861 said:I'm actually disgusted that the Charr "...don't have sons". Also the second line above it; where Bangar admires the mother (Crecia) and dismisses Rytlock, the father. It really shines a spotlight on the disposable male trope, like their male cubs are just meaningless meat to be fed into the war machine. It's telling that they specify their sons, not their daughters, as it ties in very well with some current real-world radical ideological opinions. If anet wanted to make the Charr truly monstrous (in more than just appearance) they have succeeded.

That's just your human point of view though.What did you think they are like when they don't care for their children and just drop them off and don't look back?What this actually does is cement the fact that they are extremely war minded and that many of their leaders don't have a regard for the individual, just the cause they fight for.

It's my human point of view because i'm not a Charr IRL, nor do i RP as one. The point i'm making is that Bangar specifies sons, NOT children, meaning that their daughters have value but their sons are trash. So by extension, every player-made male charr is also worthless- this is a very damaging stance to take, to know that every member of your race thinks less of you that the soles of their paws. Would you be so agreeable if the genders were swapped? I wouldn't be, because i think all children are valuable.

You’re reading too far into what he said. Rytlock referred to Ryland as his son and Bangar responded in kind. Could he have said children? Sure. That doesn’t mean he couldn’t have said sons either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Funky.4861" said:I'm actually disgusted that the Charr "...don't have sons". Also the second line above it; where Bangar admires the mother (Crecia) and dismisses Rytlock, the father. It really shines a spotlight on the disposable male trope, like their male cubs are just meaningless meat to be fed into the war machine. It's telling that they specify their sons, not their daughters, as it ties in very well with some current real-world radical ideological opinions. If anet wanted to make the Charr truly monstrous (in more than just appearance) they have succeeded.

How are you this pathologically bad at understanding media.

It's an entire (fictional) society built around the culture of the barracks; nurturing has been replaced by training and kinship has been replaced with espirit de corps. The whole Icebrood storyline is about what operating that way for generations has cost them, even as they consider themselves free from having thrown off the yoke of Flame Legion and the Titans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are both missing the point. It's extremely sexist and in my opinion indefensible. I doubt either of you would adopt the stance you have if Bangar had said 'daughters' and ryland had been female. If it doesn't pass the genderswap test, then it's discrimination. It's alienating and othering, and really makes me think about deleting the only charr character i have- I want nothing to do with such blatant misandry.

There is nothing that i've come across in Charr lore (as far as gw2 is concerned) to indicate that they view their males as completely disposable. I remember that there was an all-female warband and that Almorra played a key part in validating females, who seemed to be protected in a similar gynocentric way to most mammal groups, but this is the first line i've seen which has thrown their males into the composter.

P.s. I'm not bad at understanding media; i'm bad at accepting a radical ideology, seemingly at odds with the culture it's embedded in, being suddenly imposed onto my character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Funky.4861 said:It's extremely sexist and in my opinion indefensible.It literally isn't. As @Ayrilana.1396 pointed out, Bangar mentioned sons because Rytlock was talking about his son Ryland. Had Rytlock been talking about a hypothetical daughter, Bangar would have said daughter, since both statements are true. Charr do not have sons or daughters, they don't have children.

.I doubt either of you would adopt the stance you have if Bangar had said 'daughters' and ryland had been female.I literally wouldn't care either way, because Charr treat both men and women equally. Specifically, they treat both as just disposable warriors in the Charr war machine.

P.s. I'm not bad at understanding media; i'm bad at accepting a radical ideology, seemingly at odds with the culture it's embedded in, being suddenly imposed onto my character.Nothing in this dialog implies anything of the sort. You are really reaching to find some sort of agenda were there isn't one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol, ffs! It's two dudes talking about what fatherhood means to them, in a society that teaches you it's unpatriotic to desire a personal parental relationship with your biological children because they need to be educated first and foremost to advance the needs of community/state/race. The fact that this is how childrearing in their society operates for all children is shown to you repeatedly in the Black Citadel, Grothmar Valley, &c. (Did you miss the whole subplot with the Flame Legion cubs trying to integrate into this new-to-them social system?)

In this particular conversation, Rytlock wears his heart on his sleeve. He is having a midlife crisis (in Jacques' full sense of the term) about how the (actually rather complex) course of his life denied him even the contact other Charr "unofficially" have with their kids, and how he had a brief hope of getting to know his son as an adult, but now that's all turned to regret because he figures Ryland is doomed now.

Bangar is, even now, two-faced and self-interested, so he's rubbing in Rytlock's attachment as unseemly weakness even though in the Prologue he was crowing about how Ryland was like a son to him. Because he's still a jerk, even in defeat; because hurting Rytlock is about the only way he can feel powerful in his present circumstances; because if he actually allows himself to stop and experience regret, it's going to completely destroy what's left of his ego.

This is all "Cat's In The Cradle" Peak Dad Stuff. It's a story of two dudes who actually have a pretty complicated relationship with aspects of fatherhood in a society that pretends this kind of individual parental relationship shouldn't exist. But clearly it does and it matters and that's stamped all over how they act and what's happening to them now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it curious that Bangar's statements are either contradictory or hypocritical with the way they're presented.

Bangar Ruinbringer: On the other hand, if anyone's trust has been abused, it's mine. Did I lie? Did I ever break my word?
Bangar Ruinbringer: I told everyone exactly what I wanted and what I would do to get it. That kind of candor is rare these days.

Bangar has the gall to say that he has never broken his word when his actions with the Dominion, and his behind the scenes collaboration with the Renegades, proves he never honored the word he had given when signing the Ebonhawke Treaty to end hostilities between charr and humans. Instead of honoring the terms, he allowed Renegades to kill countless humans, possibly even funded them all along, and made charr desert to the Renegade cause. His journals reveal he explicitly ordered the Drizzlewood Coast human genocide (along with the norn and the tengu) as payback for what those races' ancestors had done to the charr (not sure how tengu had ever wronged the charr, but I guess the charr may have had skirmishes with the Caromi and the Avicara in the past during the conquest phase?).

So no, Bangar, you have never told everyone exactly what you wanted: if you had, you would have made your point clear when being forced to sign the treaty rather than appearing as an ally while scheming behind everyone else's backs and even managing to fool Malice long enough despite her growing suspicions.

Rytlock Brimstone: "The plan" so brilliant, you never even noticed my son was plotting against you?
Bangar Ruinbringer: Got me there. I don't have an answer. Maybe I'm losing a step. Maybe I was too focused on creating a future for the charr.
Rytlock Brimstone: You mean a future for yourself!
Bangar Ruinbringer: Or maybe I was so busy seeing the Stoneglow in him...I forgot about the Brimstone.
Rytlock Brimstone: The hell is that sup—
Bangar Ruinbringer: I mean, you've clearly forgotten yourself. Charr don't have "sons," Rytlock. Crecia knows that. Everyone knows that.

Here we have the classic Bangar tactic of changing the subject by accusing the accuser when said person hits too close home. Just like he did during the meeting in Grothmar where he shifted the topic of controlling charr violence to Rytlock's long absence from the homelands.

Rytlock has a point, though. Whether it was partly Jormag's influence or there all along, Bangar had Caudecus and High Councillor Flax-like megalomania during our confrontation with him in the Frost Citadel:

Bangar Ruinbringer: You can't stop this. Jormag will wake up regardless.
Bangar Ruinbringer: And when it does, I will tower over not just you—not just the charr—but everything. Everything!
Bangar Ruinbringer: (ROAR!)

It wasn't just about unifying the charr into a charr empire and crushing those he deemed a threat to the charr. He fully intended to pretty much take over the world with Jormag as his weapon. Sure, that is a future for the charr, or rather the One Charr who other charr would be subservient to. It is curious that Bangar never bothered to steal the Claw of the Khan-Ur and use it as another symbolic weapon to signify his dominant position as a Khan-Ur ascendant. Wielding the Claw, being blood-related to the Khan-Ur, and subjugating Jormag would've given him enough influence to declare himself Khan-Ur and actually have some credit to that claim.

It is also pretty funny how Bangar says how charr don't have "sons", yet he grew angry at Almorra for mentioning Ajax's name:

Almorra Soulkeeper: You forget what you did to our son. Poisoned his will with your bottomless hate. How many more will die like Ajax?
Bangar Ruinbringer: Don't you DARE say his name! He sacrificed himself for the charr while you were off gallivanting with anyone but.

Clearly Bangar cared for his son, perhaps more than he wants to admit to Rytlock. ;)

As for Bangar valuing a Flame female (Crecia) over a Blood male (Rytlock), I don't necessarily see any sinister views on it as far as gender roles go. Bangar has always antagonized Rytlock (although the dialogue in the prologue suggests that maybe Bangar wasn't like this when Rytlock was a cub, but sadly Rytlock cuts himself off before he reveals more about his childhood in the fahrar), so it makes sense he'd elevate even Crecia (who he once trusted until he decided to leave her out of his Dominion) over Rytlock at this point just to hurt Rytlock more. That's why Bangar refers to sons than sons and daughters; to him, Rytlock was a kind of son (possibly even his own son depending on if the writers reveal who Rytlock's parents were; it is rather odd how obsessed and personal Bangar gets with a "mere" tribune like Rytlock so that oddness could be explained if Bangar sired Rytlock and wanted him to become more like him in a twisted fatherly way), and they both have a relationship with the treacherous Ryland, so of course Bangar wants to twist the knife as he only has his words to use as a weapon while he's caged.

With that said, I do hope someone actually walks up to Bangar and brings up two names in his presence: the female Blood martyrs Bathea Havocbringer and Kalla Scorchrazor who died in their struggle for freedom against god-worshipping tyranny. It is rather ironic that Blood, who are now set in the old ways of the charr, were once the most progressive of the four legions: only Blood backed Kalla's rebellion at first whereas Iron and (funnily enough) Ash opposed females joining the rebellion against the shaman caste until Kalla convinced them otherwise. And now Bangar has spit on Bathea and Kalla's legacy by serving the charr up to yet another would-be deity, Jormag, in exchange for power. The two female charr must be seething with rage right now assuming that Dhuum didn't devour their spirits when he redirected the River of Souls to feed him. Then again, if Gwen is still out there, it stands to reason that the two charr heroines might've survived Dhuum's invasion too.

If there's any justice in the world, we'd either see some living NPCs mention this historical irony to Bangar to shame his Blood heritage, or Kalla and Bathea actually appear from the Mists as Glint's Mist Wardens to chew him out. I wonder if Bangar might react to the famous Blood heroines' words and start to genuinely atone or if he's too thick-headed to even care about betraying Blood Legion's legacy with his selfish and short-sighted actions.

As for Funky's argument, Almorra never validated females; that was what Kalla did centuries ago. What Almorra did do was validate outcasts, taking in people who were mocked by others or who had nowhere else to go. As a gladium, Almorra understood what loneliness means, and she turned the Vigil into the world's largest warband, an extended family of soldiers who may banter and play rough but ultimately care for one another. In Jora's Keep there's even a sylvari who mentions that when she was shunned by others after the sylvari origin as dragon minions was revealed, Almorra still accepted her in with no questions asked, and she was so impressed by this act that she'd die for Almorra while also being one of the few people in the Vigil to show sympathy towards norn Vigil members despite the keep massacre as she wants to give the norn a chance to show they don't succumb to Jormag's whispers just like Almorra gave her a chance to prove herself.

We also have to remember that there aren't just male charr villains. There are female charr antagonist extremists out there too such as the so far unseen but popular (lorewise) Iron tribune Fume Brighteye, a hero antagonist who hopefully stayed loyal to Smodur rather than joining the Dominion in the civil war. She would be the perfect candidate to contest Mia Kindleshot for the Iron throne as core Tyria lore states that Fume has long been bucking to be the next Iron Imperator. Now that the spot is vacant, she should fight tooth and nail for it while promoting the anti-human stance of the charr (which we've already seen among our allied Iron charr in Drizzlewood Coast who curiously antagonize their Seraph allies by saying that the two races are only on the same side for the time being) which of course puts her in opposition to Mia's pro-treaty stance.

Given how lorewise only bloodlines descended from the Khan-Ur can become imperators, I wonder if this rule has been abolished or if Efram, Crecia and Mia can potentially claim to be descended from that bloodline to justify their claims for imperator. Fume might actually be in favor of abolishing this tradition if she's not blood related to the Khan-Ur so she can strengthen her position as a candidate while also appearing to be "progressive" to the naysayers.

Likewise, I wonder if anyone from Blood will contest Crecia's claim for the Blood throne due to her Flame heritage; we've yet to see some of the Blood tribunes unless they all died in the civil war with the newly promoted officers, and we don't yet know how the old school Blood Tribune Fierhan Sparwind feels about Bangar's imprisonment and Crecia's impending ascension.

Then there's Efram who, by any rights, doesn't hold a valid claim for the Flame throne. There must still be several Flame tribunes (and maybe even a new hierophant) out there to contest him and his "soft" ways. One of these factions could be led by Crecia's evil shaman sire just to bring Efram and Crecia on the same side due to facing a shared antagonistic figure from their past. I just hope we get to meet some evil, not Dominion-affiliated Flame Legion splinter groups before long; if Efram intends to become the new Flame Imperator, he has to earn it by facing his competitors and proving himself as the progressive elementalist that he is.

As for Asp's statement, I wouldn't say the fahrar system itself is bad for charr society per se as such a way helps cubs bond into a new family and helps hone their skills where each one's strengths are valued as part of a greater whole as they grow up. That's part of the army training as well IRL as you get to know and bond with your fellow recruits, potentially becoming friends for life if those bonds grow strong enough.

The one mistake the charr society has done is seemingly making most parents distant from their cubs when basically the parents should also be part of the cub's family unit as a strengthening force rather than distant observers (with a few notable exceptions as seen in story and open world NPC chatter). If the charr can figure this out and learn to show their softer side rather than hiding it most of the time, it'll lead to a healthier society overall while still allowing the fahrar system to blossom. Basically the optimal scenario would be the relationship Argus Foolkiller, one of our potential sires, had with the player's warband where each warbandmate had precious memories about him and he clearly enjoyed his time with the player and the warbandmates as revealed in their recollections of Argus in An Unusual Inheritance. Multiply that with both parents for each cub, and you get quite a nice, extended family with hijinks and lovely memories to share, strengthening the unity of the group. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Funky.4861" said:I'm actually disgusted that the Charr "...don't have sons". Also the second line above it; where Bangar admires the mother (Crecia) and dismisses Rytlock, the father.

Bangar isn't dismissing Rytlock in that line. He is saying that Ryland has personalities from both his parents, but that he did not suspect that Rytlock's history of usurping superiors in often violent ways would show up in Ryland. He is saying that Ryland betraying him, is obviously a result of personalities acquired from Rytlock... because Rytlock had been just as brutal in the past.

Also Bangar isn't admiring Crecia. He is simply saying he though Ryland was enough like Crecia, that he could keep Ryland by his side, just like Crecia has been all this time. Crecia is Bangar's loyal second in command even through the end of the prologue, so he hoped Ryland would be just like so.

Bangar is just saying, that in hindsight, he should have balanced the idea that Ryland could be loyal like Crecia or power hungry like Rytlock, and that he misjudged Ryland to not be like Rytlock.Of course the Rytlock the commander knows is vastly different that the Rytlock that Bangar saw in the past. And Bangar has been trying to tease the old Rytlock out for who knows why. Maybe just to prove a point? Or maybe Bangar is just too lost in how an ideal charr should act in legion culture.

And Bangar, saying charr have no children (he does mean "children" not just "sons", because that is the cultural "norm" in charr legions) is just trying to antagonize Rytlock, because at the end of the day, charr only pretend to not have/care about (grown) children. It is a lie. Sure children are raised in the fahrar at which point parents (should) give up interest in them. But it isn't what many charr want or actually do. It is debunked in the lore, in the charr personal story. The biological family is very suppressed in charr legion culture, but that culture is antagonistic to their actual behavior.

That is also why the Olmakhan are so different too. They seem to be more in tune with nature, including their own nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@PseudoNewb.5468 said:

@"Funky.4861" said:I'm actually disgusted that the Charr "...don't have sons". Also the second line above it; where Bangar admires the mother (Crecia) and dismisses Rytlock, the father.

Bangar isn't dismissing Rytlock in that line. He is saying that Ryland has personalities from both his parents, but that he did not suspect that Rytlock's history of usurping superiors in often violent ways would show up in Ryland. He is saying that Ryland betraying him, is obviously a result of personalities acquired from Rytlock... because Rytlock had been just as brutal in the past.

Well, he is dismissing Rytlock, but because of - as you point out - Rytlock's history. Not because Rytlock was male, as Funky is so caught up on. Funky's seeing Bangar insulting Rytlock and not insulting Crecia, and taking this to be a sexist anti-male attitude when it isn't, it's just an anti-Rytlock attitude.

Or, another way to look at it, it's an anti-liberal attitude, because the conservative charr (which is Bangar) is a charr who holds no value to bloodline (except, in a bit of irony, in the Khan-Ur's bloodline that makes up the Imperators), while Rytlock adopts new approaches and flaunts it - making him a bit of a liberal charr. Those new approaches being first and foremost being good relations with non-charr, and holding value in familial ties (which he picked up from his non-charr buddies). Of course, Crecia also holds such values in high regard, but Bangar and Rytlock have such a negative history that Bangar hypocritically ignores that aspect of Crecia whenever he uses that viewpoint to insult Rytlock.

[For clarity, because the terms conservative and liberal are tossed left and right in politics, I am not associating those terms to any modern political stance, but their definitions - someone who holds to traditions and old values, and someone who holds to new values and behavior.]

And of course, as we see in Grothmar and even the charr personal story (particularly the second chapter dealing with the PC's sire), this view of importance of family is a steadily growing aspect of charr society - one that Bangar, Renegades, and Dominion oppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

@Kalythsu.8350 said:My god... wait 3 weeks for 3 scripts lines maybe... :'( bad achievement :(

It's a story update that's trickled in between the episode releases, so expect it to take ~2 months total. Note that the steps aren't on a timer but rather unlock on specific dates, so you can simply come back at the very end to do them all at once, and probably with voices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Healix.5819 said:

@Kalythsu.8350 said:My god... wait 3 weeks for 3 scripts lines maybe... :'( bad achievement :(

It's a story update that's trickled in between the episode releases, so expect it to take ~2 months total. Note that the steps aren't on a timer but rather unlock on specific dates, so you can simply come back at the very end to do them all at once, and probably with voices.

Yes I know. It will be 2 months at the end of September that we have this achievement. We will wait 2 more months for the continuation and the end? This achievement is abused. There was more fun as a way to give information about the rest of the story I find :'(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...