Will anything happen to make Ascalon great again? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Will anything happen to make Ascalon great again?

Imba.9451Imba.9451 Member ✭✭✭

Basically the title says it all.
I find it extremly infuriating, that Ascalon became the mess that it is today. GW1 players started there, we all remember that it wasn't that scorched wasteland before. And now all the characters, most being good people, are bound in an endless cycle of reliving the terrors of war each and every day, while being scoffed at by the charr. I don't think they deserve it.
(Same thing with the poor sunspears btw. I just started playing after i finished PoF half a year ago, played the new frac, and hated every second of it. It's like Anet hates humans.)

<134

Comments

  • Everything can rise and everything can fall.
    May be ANet will clear Charr story about how to handle ghost of ascalon,Flame legion,Separatist.
    Ascalon will be free or clean from they curse like Orr. . .but how and when.

  • Imba.9451Imba.9451 Member ✭✭✭

    Then the Charr will be the legit rulers of Ascalon, but they also will have no more reasons to fight everyday. They will feel extremely awkward because of that.

    Not only would I dislike the Ascalonias being wiped completly, it actually benefits the nature of the charr to somehow bring them back. That way, charr can have a fragile "peace" with their new neighbours, but also potential for conflict.
    If it were up to me, I'd say make the Ascalonias kick those furballs all the way back to the northern borders of the map, but that won't happen. Sadly :p

    But since the foefire effect seems to be some kind of curse, I think there is enough room for some artistic freedom besides simply wiping the remnants.

  • Imba.9451Imba.9451 Member ✭✭✭

    @Rognik.2579 said:
    Now, when you say you want to make Ascalon great again, do you want it to become a human kingdom again, or make it a decent place for the charr with the ghosts put to rest? Because those are two very different goals, and I'm sorry to say that outside of Ebonhawke, the human kingdom of Ascalon has fallen. Rurik saw that

    The thing is, this happened before the Charr got retconned.
    Ascalon being overrun by ferocious beasts may be sad, but it makes a nice, tragic plot. Ascalon being taken over by concious creatures, that basically make fun of the population that are bound by an eternal curse feels like a spit n the face for me, as most of my GW1 characters have been Ascalonians. It just doesn't fell "right" to me. I do not ask for Blizzardification, but a little less grim and W40k-ish would be nice.

  • Blocki.4931Blocki.4931 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Svennis.3852 said:
    Didn't Ascalon originally belong to the Charr? Then the humans came in a kicked them out. The Charr ruled under the Flame Legion were super awful and evil, but I thought it was established as far back as GW1 that the Charr assaulted Ascalon in part to reclaim their homeland.

    ^ This

    I'm just worried it wouldn't stop at Ascalon. Maybe warbands would split up from the rest to get more human territory now that the main threat is gone, peace is fragile after all no?

    Smugly chuckling forever.
    My sentence doesn't make sense? Well, I probably forgot to write half of it before posting.

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I agree, lets rally the troops and finally push out those Charr!

    We will need some yarn...

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • Lahmia.2193Lahmia.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Svennis.3852 said:
    Didn't Ascalon originally belong to the Charr? Then the humans came in and kicked them out. The Charr ruled under the Flame Legion were super awful and evil, but I thought it was established as far back as GW1 that the Charr assaulted Ascalon in part to reclaim their homeland.

    Pfft. That's all just Charr propaganda. It has always belonged to the humans and will be once again. DEATH TO THE FALSE RULERS!

    "Surrender and serve me in life, or die and slave for me in death."

  • Castigator.3470Castigator.3470 Member ✭✭✭
    edited May 19, 2018

    While no one can say with absolute certainty what the future holds, we can find some arguments, that make it appear unlikely that the charr will be pushed out of Ascalon by the ghosts of the foefire. Namely:

    • In the 241 years since the foefire (1331 AE) the ghost have been trapped reliving the same moment, the same fight, not learning, not changing. They have been consistently been defeated by charr forces and there's no sign of that changing.
    • In fact, there have been great technological improvements since 1325 AE. Ghostbore Ammunitions®, ghost containment units, turrets and anti ghost batteries have greatly diminished the need for active personnel dealing with ghosts.
    • Not only has there been less need for charr on ghost duty, there have been more charr overall in Ascalon. In 1090 the foefire failed to eradicate the charr. Since that time the charr population of the Iron Legion, but also the other legions has only multiplied. The number of human ghosts has stayed largely constant and even decreased a little in 1327 AE when Rytlock made his first attempt to pull the ghosts into the mists. As time moves on Adelberns final gambit will become less and less relevant.
    • Other threats to the charr have been contained or eliminated aswell. The separatists never really stood a chance. See this thread for likely dimensions of population matched against each other. Add to that, that Ebonhawke has made peace with the legions and Caudecus, who financed the separatists, having died and the separatist movement may have gone inactive.

    In addition to these points, the current leadership of the Iron Legion seems very interested in good relations with Kryta, especially since humans have entered an economic relationship with the legions. There is one major trader artery over the shiverpeaks. Between Foewatch Camp and Splintercrest Fort there seems to be a mutual assistance agreement between charr and humans against the branded and the ogres.
    The brand may even weaken since Kralkatorrik has moved much further south than he did previously. Then again, his newly acquired magic may increase the brand's power. However, where there were originally only the sentinels watching over the brand there are now the Fallen Angels watching their northern border, Sentinels watching the Brand in general, Tribune Steeleye keeping the eastern territories accessible, the Pact consisting of Priory, Vigil and Order keeping the dragon minions in check.
    Flame legions has likely capitulated between 1325 and 1330 AE.

    In a situation like this, the only thing that could jeopardize the charr's success is the charr themselves. There are some ways this could concievably happen.
    The charr could unite under a Khan Ur. Depending on who that is, they might do something stupid because of it. Or the legions turn to infighting (again).

    In any case, the Kingdom of Ascalon is unlikely to ever return. Even if you magically got rid of all the charr, the ghosts would just kill anybody who entered their realm, since the curse doesn't terminate through passing time nor does it end when the charr are gone. The place would just become a dead land where kitten ghosts attack anyone who enters, because to them, any living creature is a charr.

    And lastly. The retcon issue:

    Common useage: Retroactive continuity, or retcon for short, is a literary device in which established facts in a fictional work are adjusted, ignored, or contradicted by a subsequently published work which breaks continuity with the former.
    Intended meaning: Adding information to the back story of a fictional character or world, without invalidating that which had gone before. -Damian Cugley

    1078 AE: Eye of the North. Pyre starts his rebellion against Flame.
    1079 AE: Guild Wars Beyond episodes. Salma defeats White Mantle; becomes Queen of Kryta. (GW1 ends here.)
    1080 AE: Adelbern recalls Ebon Vanguard, Ebonhawke founded. (Rurik already took half the population, now it just hit rock bottom.)
    1090 AE: Charr conquer Ascalon City, Foefire happens.
    1105 AE: Durmand Priory established, New Krytan becomes universal writing system. (Even the Charr adopt it.)
    1112 AE: Black Citadel erected on ruins of Rin. (With its own territory and capital, the Iron Legion was finally able to research on its own.)
    1116 AE: Kalla Scorchrazor leads rebellion against Flame Legion, succeeds.(Less access to magic, the Legions need an edge over Flame. Adopt dwarven technology.)
    1219 AE: (Sea of Sorrows) 107 years after the foundation of the Black Citadel. Zhaitan awakens; causes great flood.
    1220 AE: The construction of Divinity's Reach as the new capital of Kryta began, after the ministry was founded and the pirates had settled in Lion's Arch.
    1256 AE: Prince Edair reignites conflict with the charr, who until then were considering peace with Ebonhawke. Great krytan blockade of Lion's Arch.
    1316 AE: Jennah of House Doric becomes Queen of Kryta.
    1324 AE: (Ghosts of Ascalon) Peace negotiations between charr and humans.
    1325 AE: Orders unite against Zhaitan (Guild Wars 2 begins here.)
    From this timeline we can conclude, that the added lore doesn't contradict previously established lore. It does add more information.
    This fulfills one of two mutually exclusive exclusive definitions of retcon. The former has a negative connotation, because disregard for a worlds continuity does hurt immersion in the long term.
    The second kind is necessary if you want to continue any type of narrative where you want to introduce additional information, backstory, or simply advance the plot.
    Thanks to this unsatisfactory situation, please clarify what kind of retcon and if you think it's bad.

  • Imba.9451Imba.9451 Member ✭✭✭
    edited May 20, 2018

    @Lahmia.2193 said:

    Pfft. That's all just Charr propaganda.

    "We killed our gods with machines of war" or something like that. Last time I played GW1, it was my character and the awesome companions he gathered along the way that killed the last titans in tyria. Together with Adelbern by the way :p

    @Castigator.3470 said:

    From this timeline we can conclude, that the added lore doesn't contradict previously established lore. It does add more information.
    This fulfills one of two mutually exclusive exclusive definitions of retcon. The former has a negative connotation, because disregard for a worlds continuity does hurt immersion in the long term.
    The second kind is necessary if you want to continue any type of narrative where you want to introduce additional information, backstory, or simply advance the plot.
    Thanks to this unsatisfactory situation, please clarify what kind of retcon and if you think it's bad.

    While you may be right objectively, it's how the original game gave us information, that leaves a sour taste after we got the new one.
    I mean, it is highly unlikely, that Ascalonians never met a talking charr. Or any Charr behaviour that suggested them to be concious beings. Even in EotN, if I remember correctly, the group is suprised that Brandor could speak.
    The game made us believe (deliberatly), that Charr are ferocious monsters. So even while the given information might not interfere on an objective level, it completely twists what the game made you believe in a rather non-plausible way. And thats what I call retcon, fully intending it to sound negative.

  • Imba.9451Imba.9451 Member ✭✭✭
    edited May 20, 2018

    €: Double post. Can I delet this somehow?

  • Castigator.3470Castigator.3470 Member ✭✭✭

    @Imba.9451 said:

    @Lahmia.2193 said: This

    "We killed our gods with machines of war" or something like that. Last time I played GW1, it was my character and the awesome companions he gathered along the way that killed the last titans in tyria. Together with Adelbern by the way :p

    @Castigator.3470 said: This.

    While you may be right objectively, it's how the original game gave us information, that leaves a sour taste after we got the new one.
    I mean, it is highly unlikely, that Ascalonians never met a talking charr. Or any Charr behaviour that suggested them to be concious beings. Even in EotN, if I remember correctly, the group is suprised that Brandor could speak.
    The game made us believe (deliberatly), that Charr are ferocious monsters. So even while the given information might not interfere on an objective level, it completely twists what the game made you believe in a rather non-plausible way. And thats what I call retcon, fully intending it to sound negative.

    While the last Titans fell to our adventurers, if we recall EoTN, this wasn't the end of Flame Legion's attempts at idolatry as a means of social control. Remember how Hierophant Burntsoul tried to establish destroyers as the new focus of worship? Last time I checked destroyers are a lot easier to kill than Titans.
    And that was just the new fad of 1078 AE. I suspect that the Shamans had a few more objects of mandatory worship n the 38 years until Scorchrazor's rebellion.
    And then some in the 206 years Flame Legion had to come up with new types of bovine excrement.
    I mean technically Flame Legion is still building their Effigies in 1325. At one point they will have attempted to force Effigy worship down the throats of the other legions. Not to mention Gaheron appointing himself as a god in recent times. Given enough attempts at decieving the charr, I can see why they are so opposed to worship in general.
    So while the Titan claim is likely propaganda, it's not like there was a shortage of other Flame Legion "gods" for the other charr to kill.

    About the retcon part: I pondered a bit on that. I mean, had you known that the charr are sentient beings, I suspect many would have had at least mixed feelings when farming charr for their Warrior Elite Charr Hide Armor. I mean technically the player character was hunting and killing sentient creatures for the charr hides to give them to a collector and get your fur squares. Plus, we didn't learn why the charr and Ascalonians were at war. Only that they were. The NPCs told us charr were these evil monsters and we had no reason to disbelieve them, as we were dropped right into the story.
    Remember how Guild wars Prophecies started? King Adelbern was preparing another offensive into charr territory. To quote:

    Sir Tidus said:

    "I've been looking for you everywhere, (Character name). The king has ordered a new offensive against the Charr. This is your chance for glory and adventure, but you'll need to know more about your craft before going north of the Wall.

    After you complete your profession training, you hear rumours of charr preparing an attack. You'll meet Vatlaaw Doomtooth, who was scouting the area south of the wall. The searing happens and two years later you find your character in the ruins of Ascalon. At this point you see that the charr have managed to breach the great wall and turn Ascalon into a wasteland via magical nuke. Ascalonians have been fighting for their lives for two years, until finally Prince Rurik decides that the humans are slowly losing the war and evacuated half of the remaining population over the Shiverpeaks. To this day, the humans of Gendarran fields and eastern Kryta are ethnically Ascalonians.

    Also, there is a big indicator that the charr were not just beast like wolves, bears, or mountain lions. They have names. Quite a few in fact. Do you think the Ascalonians named each charr they encountered? Swag the Lasher, Drub Gorefang, Slur Scharchest, Maul Riptear, by the way, remember that Maul and the other charr necromancers drop their armor, which is named Ash FiendTrappings? Does that indicate their legion even back in Prophecies?
    Then there's the fact that they use class abilities.

    We even Speak to a charr questgiver back in Nightfall. Recall Scorch Emberspire?
    That was before Eye of the North, but somehow our character was not surprised to do two quests for the charr. He even thanked us after completing "Dismember the Titans", where we killed two Titans in the Realm of Torment. Then again, having a conversation with a charr is one of the least weird things that can happen there.

    And finally in EoTN, where we meet Pyre and his warband. We learn that the charr in general don't like humans, don't like other charr, and don't like being sacrificed. Our character is not surprised that they talk. In fact, we quickly make a deal with him. See the Cinematic video by AcashicAtticus.

    So, the Prophecies campaign did not have you talk to the enemy. Justified, in that humans and charr had a kill on sight policy in Ascalon. Nightfall had a charr questgiver, EotN finally introduced more dialogue and you could hear their battle cries. This was before GW2.

    Is this development non plausible? Or maybe it is, but you as a player feel betrayed? The game started and you were the good humans and there were these evil animals called charr, who are at war with the humans. As Gwen said:"All charr are evil!" You may feel tricked by the narrative, but our player characters did what he or she held to be the right thing at the moment. Their perception filters were applied to you, the player, which made the game overall very immersive. The downside is that the limited information makes you, the player, share the biases of your character. The rest is history. Quite literally so. Ascalon fell. It was certainly sad to see Ascalon go down in flames, but this is why the campaign was named Prophecies.

  • Imba.9451Imba.9451 Member ✭✭✭

    @Castigator.3470 said:

    Also, there is a big indicator that the charr were not just beast like wolves, bears, or mountain lions. They have names. Quite a few in fact. Do you think the Ascalonians named each charr they encountered? Swag the Lasher, Drub Gorefang, Slur Scharchest, Maul Riptear, by the way, remember that Maul and the other charr necromancers drop their armor, which is named Ash FiendTrappings? Does that indicate their legion even back in Prophecies?
    Then there's the fact that they use class abilities.

    We even Speak to a charr questgiver back in Nightfall. Recall Scorch Emberspire?
    That was before Eye of the North, but somehow our character was not surprised to do two quests for the charr. He even thanked us after completing "Dismember the Titans", where we killed two Titans in the Realm of Torment. Then again, having a conversation with a charr is one of the least weird things that can happen there.

    And finally in EoTN, where we meet Pyre and his warband. We learn that the charr in general don't like humans, don't like other charr, and don't like being sacrificed. Our character is not surprised that they talk. In fact, we quickly make a deal with him. See the Cinematic video by AcashicAtticus.

    So, the Prophecies campaign did not have you talk to the enemy. Justified, in that humans and charr had a kill on sight policy in Ascalon. Nightfall had a charr questgiver, EotN finally introduced more dialogue and you could hear their battle cries. This was before GW2.

    Is this development non plausible? Or maybe it is, but you as a player feel betrayed? The game started and you were the good humans and there were these evil animals called charr, who are at war with the humans. As Gwen said:"All charr are evil!" You may feel tricked by the narrative, but our player characters did what he or she held to be the right thing at the moment. Their perception filters were applied to you, the player, which made the game overall very immersive. The downside is that the limited information makes you, the player, share the biases of your character. The rest is history. Quite literally so. Ascalon fell. It was certainly sad to see Ascalon go down in flames, but this is why the campaign was named Prophecies.

    Can't say much against this. I guess my memories tricked me in some regards, as it has been a while.
    The only thing I can hold against, is that giving names to the most fearsome enemy creatures doesn't seem that far fetched to me. It basically comes down to preparing a hunters story, like "Hey, you remember that Charr, furball the fuzzy? Yeah, I killed it. Now give me free beer."

    Gwen was actually the best plot device the game could give to you. She basically IS pre-searing ascalon. and whats left of that old doctrine, and the game tries to talk her out of her madness. I can accept your immersion point as valid.
    So yes, it makes sense from a story point. But the fact, that all this got made up later, still exists. Imagine the writing somehow developing into "The Mursaat did nothing wrong and only wanted to prevent a greater threat from emerging!" (Heck, I'd love that to be honest, as Mursaat are, hands down, the coolest race in Guild Wars. But you get the point.)
    It's easy to shape a story after it's been published. But it leaves that sour taste of lacking artistic integrity in my mouth. It's like getting played by the author: "Hey, remember what I made you feel while experiencing that story? Hah, screw you, cuz my twist will put everything you think to know into question!"
    Just my personal opinion. Feel free to feel differet about it.

  • Aaron Ansari.1604Aaron Ansari.1604 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited May 20, 2018

    @Castigator.3470 said:
    Remember how Guild wars Prophecies started? King Adelbern was preparing another offensive into charr territory. To quote:

    If by 'charr territory' you mean land that had just been half the kingdom of Ascalon, including its capital. Before the invasion everything from the Wall to the Ascalon Foothills, and at least a fair bit beyond that, had human settlements, human cities. At the point of the intro cutscene, the charr had already attacked, and gotten deep into the countryside.

    Also, there is a big indicator that the charr were not just beast like wolves, bears, or mountain lions. They have names. Quite a few in fact.

    So do devourers, spiders, drakes... basically anything in GW1 large enough to fight, be it intelligent or not. Granted, the fact that charr wore armor and fought with weapons should've been a tip-off... but having names really did mean nothing.

    by the way, remember that Maul and the other charr necromancers drop their armor, which is named Ash FiendTrappings? Does that indicate their legion even back in Prophecies?

    Not unless there was also a Mind legion, Axe legion, Stalk legion, and so on. I wouldn't be surprised if ANet drew the legion names from some of the charr varieties they'd implemented over the years, but clearly not every variety was used that way.

    Then there's the fact that they use class abilities.

    Again, so do bugs, plants, reptiles, mammals, and basically every kind of beast in GW1 except for ranger pets. Many of them even used spells- skale were prolific hexers in Prophecies, and there were seeds that were some of the game's most vexing healers. And don't get me started on ibogas and their mesmer nonsense.

    In general, I don't agree with Imba, but I do get where they're coming from. GW1 was very much framed as 'people vs. monsters,' with people mostly meaning humans until EotN. It didn't matter whether they were intelligent or not, the monsters were dangerous predators that needed to be put down, the same way orcs and goblins and dragons have commonly been portrayed across fiction. In other words, being intelligent didn't make you count as a person, and thus, despite names and armor and spells, charr were not treated as people. GW2 (including EotN here) took a different tack, where just about anything that's not an Elder Dragon is at least potentially redeemable. While that doesn't carry over to the gameplay very well, that shift in lens has had vast, potentially jarring implications for the setting. It's not about logical contradictions or hard retcons, just a change in tone and approach, which in its own way is even more important. It made charr people, and while I find that to be a change for the better, I cannot deny that it was a change, a huge one.

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

  • Imba.9451Imba.9451 Member ✭✭✭

    @Aaron Ansari.1604 said:

    In general, I don't agree with Imba, but I do get where they're coming from. GW1 was very much framed as 'people vs. monsters,' with people mostly meaning humans until EotN. It didn't matter whether they were intelligent or not, the monsters were dangerous predators that needed to be put down, the same way orcs and goblins and dragons have commonly been portrayed across fiction. In other words, being intelligent didn't make you count as a person, and thus, despite names and armor and spells, charr were not treated as people. GW2 (including EotN here) took a different tack, where just about anything that's not an Elder Dragon is at least potentially redeemable. While that doesn't carry over to the gameplay very well, that shift in lens has had vast, potentially jarring implications for the setting. It's not about logical contradictions or hard retcons, just a change in tone and approach, which in its own way is even more important. It made charr people, and while I find that to be a change for the better, I cannot deny that it was a change, a huge one.

    I wouldn't even mind the Charr becoming a concious race, if it weren't at the Ascalonians expense.
    The is simply SO much you could do with that story arc right now. Lifting the curse, redeeming Adelbern, aknowleding his role in the fall of the titans. Making the ghosts find peace, making the Charr finally showing some respect for them, so they not only claimed Ascalon by force, but also get accepted by the ghosts. (I think of Return of the King, when Aragorn releases the ghost army. They vanish, but deeply satisfied to finally find rest.)
    So much could lead up to the lifting of the course. Interacting with some ghosts, who periodically regain their free will, fighting side by side with the commander. Heck, if it'd be up to me, I'd love to see the curse not only vanish, but also everyone who ws affected by it to be revived, and get another chance in that new world.

    There are many ways this could potentially go.

  • norbes.3620norbes.3620 Member ✭✭✭

    In gw1 it was always obvious (at least to me) that the charr are a sentient species just from they way of fighting. (using weapons, looking how they acually fight/move, come up with strategys) no wild beast is able to do this to this extent.
    Yes animals can hunt an structure themself in a pack but thats was still visibly different from the charr with coordinated patrols and defending strategical Points in the landscape.
    Regarding what we know bout the backstory of gw the charr conquered ascalon stumbled over themselfs andthe humans were able to push them aside. After internal Problems were solved the "way of the charr" and how they solve things plus the necessity for the flame Legion to demonstrate the overhelming power of the "gods" they striked back to Claim their land back.
    the charr are a fight hungry sentient but still wild species whose territory was taken away. they knew the humans are sentient too but their line of thinking did not accept negotiations with the weaker "meat". (from that we can conclude that charr indeed ate humans)

    People who think of themselfs as the superior "race" or lifeform tend to be ferocious against others who they consider as the weak (european vs native americans for example). regarding this Point it is understandable that the charr who look for victory in challanging wars are furiously attacking the weak human who dared to take away their territory.

    so the humans who fear the charr cuz they only know their brutal soldiers who kill and conquer the human lands are not likely to negotiate either .. cuz they think of themselfs as the superior beings with so awesome Technology and poetry and art and kitten they they could think of ..
    this leads to humans looking down on those furrocious charr who just run wild kill capture and eat humans.
    looking down on the charr is a reason to deny them beeing able to negotiate with. (what was not necessarily false at that time cuz i dont think that humans nor charr were able to make the needed sacrifices to seal a deal.)

    later in gw1-EotN the PC were able to stand above These prejudices and .. Kind off.. made friends with a charr. or let us say they came to an Agreement favorabel for both sides in the Task at Hand which was not that much of a surprise that charr are able to communicate it was more surprising to learn about the internal structures and conflicts within the charr.
    until that Point they could have had somewhat like a hivemind cuz except for 1 charr in the realm of torment i cant remember interacting with charr different then killing one so they did not Show off much individuality. well they hat have leading personalitys in Charge tho..

    and still this friend was not easy to deal with for the other companions following the PC (specially Gwen but she is a Special case anyway in that regard)

    so to sum it up the real reason for These wars were mostly psychological and rooted in ignorance and intolerance vs other races with less humanoid/ charrlike bodys

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited May 22, 2018

    @Imba.9451 said:
    "We killed our gods with machines of war" or something like that. Last time I played GW1, it was my character and the awesome companions he gathered along the way that killed the last titans in tyria. Together with Adelbern by the way :pensive:

    -coughs-

    But more seriously: the reasoin why Pyre and his warband were imprisoned is because they had witnessed humans killing the titans (The Last Day Dawns quest that you reference), and had rallied other warbands to do the same. They had killed both shamans and Titans, and after doing this for six years, were captured, imprisoned, and sentenced to death for it.

    So it's not entirely false that the charr "killed their gods", since they actually did kill some titans, even if the first titans felled in Ascalon were killed by lowly humans. They also helped in killing the replacement gods (aka destroyers).

    @Castigator.3470 said:
    Also, there is a big indicator that the charr were not just beast like wolves, bears, or mountain lions. They have names. Quite a few in fact. Do you think the Ascalonians named each charr they encountered? Swag the Lasher, Drub Gorefang, Slur Scharchest, Maul Riptear, by the way, remember that Maul and the other charr necromancers drop their armor, which is named Ash FiendTrappings? Does that indicate their legion even back in Prophecies?
    Then there's the fact that they use class abilities.

    We even Speak to a charr questgiver back in Nightfall. Recall Scorch Emberspire?
    That was before Eye of the North, but somehow our character was not surprised to do two quests for the charr. He even thanked us after completing "Dismember the Titans", where we killed two Titans in the Realm of Torment. Then again, having a conversation with a charr is one of the least weird things that can happen there.

    For Nightfall, there's also Garfaz Steelfur. But more importantly, I feel, are various Prophecies quests. While they do not have any speech, there's multiple references of the charr utilizing tactics, traps, etc. The very first named charr we encounter in the storyline is a scout who utilized the catacombs to avoid detection. That's intelligence, not feral thoughts.

    We also see the charr housing prisoners for more than preserving food which wouldn't happen with mindless beasts. They create structures, as crude as they may have been, and as others noted, had clothing and wielded weapons. They had a very obvious culture from the very beginning in the form of the Prophecies manual, which mentioned that the charr worshiped beings of fire - the very existence of a religion screams "not mindless beast".

    To me, the charr were first presented not as evil, mindless beasts, but rather as a species which had a language barrier that prevented any form of peace. Nightfall's addition of two charr who could talk turned this from language barrier to cultural barrier and simply a lack of desire for conversing.

  • Ardid.7203Ardid.7203 Member ✭✭✭✭

    All I can say is I love to be playing GW2 instead of GW1.

  • Imba.9451Imba.9451 Member ✭✭✭

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

    For Nightfall, there's also Garfaz Steelfur. But more importantly, I feel, are various Prophecies quests. While they do not have any speech, there's multiple references of the charr utilizing tactics, traps, etc. The very first named charr we encounter in the storyline is a scout who utilized the catacombs to avoid detection. That's intelligence, not feral thoughts.

    We also see the charr housing prisoners for more than preserving food which wouldn't happen with mindless beasts. They create structures, as crude as they may have been, and as others noted, had clothing and wielded weapons. They had a very obvious culture from the very beginning in the form of the Prophecies manual, which mentioned that the charr worshiped beings of fire - the very existence of a religion screams "not mindless beast".

    To me, the charr were first presented not as evil, mindless beasts, but rather as a species which had a language barrier that prevented any form of peace. Nightfall's addition of two charr who could talk turned this from language barrier to cultural barrier and simply a lack of desire for conversing.

    Well, Grawl basicall could do the same. And thats the same level I categorized charr back then: A primitive species. Like the Orks in W40k, it's all about stompin' an' smashin'.

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Imba.9451 said:
    Well, Grawl basicall could do the same. And thats the same level I categorized charr back then: A primitive species. Like the Orks in W40k, it's all about stompin' an' smashin'.

    In Prophecies, we could also see grawl congregating around monuments made by other species (which led some players to speculate they worshiped the then Five Gods), and were constantly seen fighting each other (particularly in Regent Valley). They never wore metal armor either, just crude cloth, the most intricate thing being the feather-and-stick crowns; and their weapons tended to be sticks and stones rather then metal (what metal weapons they had could be attested to scavenged given they lived where civilized races lived - charr, humans, dwarves, and tengu).

    The charr had metal armor and weapons, fine woven clothe and leather, and a pretty obviously strict and notable societal hierarchy in Prophecies alone, even if not speech.

    There were similarities, to be sure, but the charr were still pretty clearly above the level of grawl without either Eye of the North or Nightfall.

  • Stramatus.5219Stramatus.5219 Member ✭✭
    edited May 25, 2018

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

    @Svennis.3852 said:
    Didn't Ascalon originally belong to the Charr? Then the humans came in and kicked them out. The Charr ruled under the Flame Legion were super awful and evil, but I thought it was established as far back as GW1 that the Charr assaulted Ascalon in part to reclaim their homeland.

    No. Charr did conquer Ascalon before humans who conquered it from charr, but it wasn't theirs originally.

    Charr took it from others (given the hints we see, from grawl and dwarves) and claimed it for themselves. Less than a generation later, humans took it from charr and held it for over a thousand years.

    So the charr held Ascalon for less than a century.

    Sources:

    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

    https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Ecology_of_the_Charr

    The grawl are native to Tyria, and Ascalon in particular. The earliest mention of them is found in early charr military tributes that predate the arrival of humans in the area. In these annals, the charr are always portrayed as victors with the defeated grawl pulling the charr commanders in great chariots. The charr dominated the grawl, forcing them into the Shiverpeak and Blazeridge Mountains and beyond, where they lived at a subsistence level.

    https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Planet_of_the_Grawl

    "Somewhere in these depths rests the legendary Kathandrax's Crusher. Kathandrax Steelsoul was a great Dwarven hero who repelled the Charr time and again. The Charr came to view Kathandrax with respect, and his weapon with fear."

    https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Swithin_Nye

    And lastly, in Edge of Destiny novel, Logan, Caithe, and Rytlock stumble upon an ancient dwarven town underneath southern Ascalon not far from Ebonhawke and ogre territory (so somewhere underneath Fields of Ruin is most likely).

    Given all this, it is clear that Ascalon truely belongs to the grawl, not charr nor humans.

    #MakeAscalonGrawlAgain

    @Aaron Ansari.1604 said:

    @Svennis.3852 said:
    Didn't Ascalon originally belong to the Charr? Then the humans came in and kicked them out. The Charr ruled under the Flame Legion were super awful and evil, but I thought it was established as far back as GW1 that the Charr assaulted Ascalon in part to reclaim their homeland.

    All of that was GW2 era. Back in GW1 we didn't even know that there were separate Legions- as far as we were told, all charr had always been burning sacrifices alive. The only motive we were provided was that they were bloodthirsty and served at the whim of malevolent entities with a grudge against humanity.

    We were told in Prophecies that charr came from 'the north', and in EotN we got a region called the Charr Homelands (what GW2 renamed as the Blood Legion Homelands). Never any indication that they'd been in Ascalon before humans, although we did know they'd been launching raids into Ascalon for centuries.

    (Incidentally, you can argue that Ascalon originally belonged to the grawl, not the charr. Even the GW2 lore grants that they didn't start in Ascalon; they expanded into it and subjugated whatever races were living there beforehand.)

    It is technically from The Ecology of the Charr, which was released shortly after Eye of the North's release (October 2007 iirc); years before GW2. So one could argue it was GW1 era.

    Though it wasn't really stated to be grawl territory before the charr until Planet of the Grawl, which came out late 2011.

    Thank you! The whole premise of Ascalon being "charr homeland" and the propaganda perpetrated by the game (and subsequently the players whose entry into the series was with GW2) of the Charr as "reclaiming a homeland" through the GW2 story/world has been nothing short of infuriating to me as a GW1 veteran. I get it somewhat as the saying goes history is written by the victors.

    But my god, they have totally trampled on Ascalonians. It's like give me a paper cut. Ok now go ahead and pour some lemon juice on it. Ok...now why don't you rub some salt in too while you're at it for good measure. What makes it worse is as a player I have a chance in the Dead Sister path of the human personal story to choose my heritage as Ascalonian (and PROUD of it), and then never in the game since then have I been able to play through that heritage identity. It's sing and hold hands kumbaya with Rytlock who inexplicably (going on 6 years now) has Rurik's sword, go help the charr kill your old countrymen (yeah ok, I get it, foefire, but still), oh and here's a fractal where we make you a charr and go kill all the Ascalonians.

    And not only that, in GW1 the Charr crossed the Shiverpeaks to attack Kryta, and the Crystal Desert to attack Orr which lead to Vizier Khilbron enacting the Cataclysm that sunk Orr. Am I to believe those are Charr homelands too? Give me a break.

  • Imba.9451Imba.9451 Member ✭✭✭

    I am looking forward to the sub forum in about 3 weeks to ask these questions. Anet hasn't forgotten about us. And while I am at it, I want the Mursaat back. As playable race.

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Stramatus.5219 said:
    Thank you! The whole premise of Ascalon being "charr homeland" and the propaganda perpetrated by the game (and subsequently the players whose entry into the series was with GW2) of the Charr as "reclaiming a homeland" through the GW2 story/world has been nothing short of infuriating to me as a GW1 veteran. I get it somewhat as the saying goes history is written by the victors.

    In all honesty, the situation is pretty similar to Jerusalem and who "deserves" to own that holy city. There are many factions proclaiming rights, due to their ancestors having owned it at one point or another, so there's no clear "owner".

    In the sense that the charr ruled Ascalon before humans, they would be reclaiming a homeland.

    But in the sense that charr owned Ascalon longer than humans, they wouldn't be.

    It's a matter of "how does one define who has the right to rule".

    Many fantasy stories will often proclaim that the "rightful king" is not the one who currently rules and has for several decades or even generations, but the bloodline of the original lineage, who nowadays happens to only be found in this peasant who fought for the people's rights.

    In all honesty, the charr's claim follows that exact same trope. "We were here first, so it is ours." / "It was my ancestor who founded this land, so the crown is mine by rights."

    Though in technicality, it would be second, but those who were there first - dwarves and grawl - are either extinct thus no right to rule, or so disorganized and primitive they couldn't maintain a nation even if their hand was held through the process.

    @Stramatus.5219 said:
    And not only that, in GW1 the Charr crossed the Shiverpeaks to attack Kryta, and the Crystal Desert to attack Orr which lead to Vizier Khilbron enacting the Cataclysm that sunk Orr. Am I to believe those are Charr homelands too? Give me a break.

    They were never conquered, just assaulted.

  • @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    In all honesty, the situation is pretty similar to Jerusalem and who "deserves" to own that holy city. There are many factions proclaiming rights, due to their ancestors having owned it at one point or another, so there's no clear "owner".

    I do agree with that analogy. I just go down the path that says which race did ANET retcon? That would be the Charr. Every lore indication says that Ascalon was never their **original ** homeland. And if you look at the land area of Ascalon compared to the rest of the Charr territory north and east of it, Ascalon is a very small part of it.

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Stramatus.5219 said:

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    In all honesty, the situation is pretty similar to Jerusalem and who "deserves" to own that holy city. There are many factions proclaiming rights, due to their ancestors having owned it at one point or another, so there's no clear "owner".

    I do agree with that analogy. I just go down the path that says which race did ANET retcon? That would be the Charr. Every lore indication says that Ascalon was never their **original ** homeland. And if you look at the land area of Ascalon compared to the rest of the Charr territory north and east of it, Ascalon is a very small part of it.

    There was no retcon, really. Not in the way of "replacing old lore with new". This was just adding new lore where we had nothing before. We knew that Ascalon was taken by humanity in 100 BE, and we even knew that in 115 BE there were immense wars that Doric had been a part of, and that King Doric was crowned in ~100 BE in Ascalon. While we never knew the context of those 115 BE wars, it would be no real retcon to say "it was against the charr in taking Ascalon for humanity".

    As for size, I would say that much like Jerusalem, it's not about the number of acres that is covered, but more the principle of owning it. The loss of Ascalon to humanity was the very first time the charr had suffered a major defeat, ever. That is a huge blow to pride, one that as we see with our own history for why various groups despise each other, is not unrealistic to last generations and centuries. Especially if the battles last that long too.

  • Tbf, the Charr allowed the original inhabitants to remain there while they ruled. So, technically, they didn't take the land from them. They simply destroyed any enemy who challenged their rule.

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭

    There is no hint of dwarves in Ascalon in GW1, so they were definitely forced out it seems, and grawl got displaced into the Shiverpeaks due to the charr (or otherwise enslaved until humans came along), so I wouldn't say they allowed the original inhabitants to remain.

  • @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    There is no hint of dwarves in Ascalon in GW1, so they were definitely forced out it seems, and grawl got displaced into the Shiverpeaks due to the charr (or otherwise enslaved until humans came along), so I wouldn't say they allowed the original inhabitants to remain.

    Perhaps those were the ones who couldn't stomach serving and refused to fight to the death about it? Either way, ecology says they subjugated or destroyed those who defied them.

    How is enslaving not allowing them to remain?

  • Castigator.3470Castigator.3470 Member ✭✭✭
    edited May 31, 2018

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    There is no hint of dwarves in Ascalon in GW1, so they were definitely forced out it seems, and grawl got displaced into the Shiverpeaks due to the charr (or otherwise enslaved until humans came along), so I wouldn't say they allowed the original inhabitants to remain.

    However, we do not know to what extent the dwarves settled the ascalonian basin, nor do we know which faction eventually drove the dwarves back. There are dwarven ruins in what is today the Blood Legion Homelands, the lack of dwarven remains suggests, however, that these places were abandoned, rather than conquered. It is likely that the dwarves evacuated due to the presence of both Primordus and Kralkatorrik, who would have made it impossible to hide either above or underground.

    • Ascalon, or rather its south was inhabited by the forgotten, who at some point retreated south into the Crystal Desert. Before that, the charr avoided any area with a larger presence of forgotten by using the mountains as fallback positions. as stated in the "Ecology of the Charr". So if we're super pedantic the forgotten may have been the earliest documented inhabitants of (southern) Ascalon within the last cycle of elder dragon activity. If I recall correctly that cycle ended on a sour note. The Mursaat phased out, the Seers swore vengeance, the Jotunn abandoned their magic in order to survive, the dwarves hid underground and the forgotten hid in the Mists, while maintaining some presence on Tyria.
    • There were also sparsely distributed grawl tribes, many of which exist to this day, but since they have been annoying, but never threatening to the other races, there was never a large campaign to get rid of them. In fact not even the Flame Legion has attempted to drive out the grawls, they did employ them as slaves, though, see the Pig Iron Mine in Fireheart Rise. The book "Ecology of the Charr" also states, that the charr subjugated or destroyed anyone who opposed them. "Planet of the Grawl" even mentions the existance of charr artwork depicting charr leaders, who recieve tribute from the grawl, so it's safe to say the grawls were not driven out, but milked for tribute.
    • The next sentient race to settle the land is the charr, who were quick to claim Ascalon and in the absense of the forgotten declare themselves undisputed rulers of the land. This coincided with the unification of the charr warbands under a leader so ferocious and awe-inspiring, that he managed to put an end to their infighting. Thanks to another event, we can somewhat accurately date the charr settlement of Ascalon somewhere between 200 B.E. and 100 B.E., but much more likely somewhere between 150 B.E. and 100 B.E. Since charr seem to mature at about the same rate as humans, that's about one generation, with one generation of charr being born in Ascalon.
    • The humans arrived on the surface of Tyria in 786 B.E. in Cantha, brought into the world by their gods. The Kingdoms of Orr, Istan and Elona were all founded around 205 B.E and it took them another 105 years to arrive in Ascalon in 100 B.E. The human arrival coincided with the assassination of the Khan Ur, which made the charr vulnerable and easy to push out of the immediate area. And while the Kingdom lasted an incredible 1190 years, I presume, that Ascalon in the time of 100 B.E. until 1 B.E. was a sparsely settled Kingdom centered around its initial settlement and gradually expanded into the surrounding countryside. In the year before the Exodus, however, the humans were granted immense magical power by the gods, which allowed the humans to really crank up the expansionist attitude, subjugating, or driving out all the other races, encouraged to do so by Balthazar. The charr, like other cats, are incredibly stubborn and put up a fight. While they were pushed back more and more, they did not give up. Instead they constantly led assaults on Ascalon, which led to the construction of the great wall. Even if the territories north of the wall got periodically overwhelmed, the humans could always bounce back from the wall's protection. Until 1070 A.E when the wall was breached by the Searing. Without the wall, the Ascalonians valiantly held out for another 20 years, but in 1090 A.E their capital fell. The ascalonian basin still has a human population in Ebonhawke at the southern edge of the region. The duchy of Ebonhawke is a de facto vassal of Kryta, however.
    • Ascalon is also home to the Harpies, who seem to be similar non threats to the charr. They have migrated from Elona, sometime after 1090 A.E.
    • The newest sentient race to enter the land is the ogres, who push into Ascalon in search of land and creatures to tame. The ogres seem to have increased their efforts in 1320 A.E. but they are periodically pushed back into the Blazeridge Mountains by both humans and charr.
  • Imba.9451Imba.9451 Member ✭✭✭
    edited May 31, 2018

    So #MakeAscalonForgottenAgain?

    To me the point still stands, that humans built the greatest social, cultural and historical legacy in Ascalon. Before them, every other race has simply "been there" at some point, but noone actually did anything worth remembering. The Charr as a race have been in their social-evolutionary infancy, hardly able to stop infighting let alone build anything of cultural importance.
    So, judging not by "who was there first" or "who put up da best stompin'n'smashin'", the humans actually made best use of the land they inhabited/conquered. Imho, thats worth something.
    Charr took another few hundreds of years until they finally have been able to settle down and built something thats worth calling society. And they still could get some inspirations on how to build some nice-looking architecture :D
    Thats where the Jerusalem Analogy lacks. Ascalon ain't some form of "holy site", it simply is a case of Charr stubborness and fragile pride.

  • norbes.3620norbes.3620 Member ✭✭✭

    I would not say that the Charr did not build something woth calling a Society. we still dont know much about that. but we can assume that the charr control the biggest area and just to Keep an area like that is not easy to accomplish. maybe they lack of high cultural stuff like Theater or stuff like that. but thats more to the fact that their whole Society is more militaristic and functional then what ur used too. they simply do other stuff for fun like gladiator fights for example.
    and u can say the same about the architecture.. (i hate it really its super ugly) still its functional they build the black citadell into a fortress made of metal scrap and junk they did not Need for warmachines(at least it Looks like that, but i think i read something regarding this in the wiki- someone wanna do some Research?)

    the charr are just not a race who care about "lookin nice an fancy" - and it would not fit them as they are designed now. cuz it would stand out too much from the rest of their buildings

  • CETheLucid.3964CETheLucid.3964 Member ✭✭✭

    @Imba.9451 said:
    So #MakeAscalonForgottenAgain?

    The Forgotten are a dead race. You've got statues and branded specimens. That's it.

    Now if someone went and did that freeing ritual that the forgotten themselves developed on some of the branded forgotten, I wonder how that would turn out?

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited May 31, 2018

    @Dustfinger.9510 said:

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    There is no hint of dwarves in Ascalon in GW1, so they were definitely forced out it seems, and grawl got displaced into the Shiverpeaks due to the charr (or otherwise enslaved until humans came along), so I wouldn't say they allowed the original inhabitants to remain.

    Perhaps those were the ones who couldn't stomach serving and refused to fight to the death about it? Either way, ecology says they subjugated or destroyed those who defied them.

    How is enslaving not allowing them to remain?

    I'd hesitate to call the grawl of GW1, let alone a thousand years prior, sophisticated enough to be capable of pre-emptively leaving due to foreseeing slavery. Especially when Planet of the Grawl tells us they were forced out.

    "The grawl are native to Tyria, and Ascalon in particular. The earliest mention of them is found in early charr military tributes that predate the arrival of humans in the area. In these annals, the charr are always portrayed as victors with the defeated grawl pulling the charr commanders in great chariots. The charr dominated the grawl, forcing them into the Shiverpeak and Blazeridge Mountains and beyond, where they lived at a subsistence level."

    Further, you stated the charr "allowed the original inhabitants to remain there while they ruled. So, technically, they didn't take the land from them." This implies two things. First, the people were completely enslaved. Second, they owned the land still, but did not govern themselves.

    If an entire species is either exiled or enslaved, then they do not have their land.

    @Castigator.3470 said:
    However, we do not know to what extent the dwarves settled the ascalonian basin, nor do we know which faction eventually drove the dwarves back. There are dwarven ruins in what is today the Blood Legion Homelands, the lack of dwarven remains suggests, however, that these places were abandoned, rather than conquered.

    The sole confirmed dwarven structure in the now-called Blood Legion Homelands, the Catacombs of Kathandrax, is the tomb of a dwarf who fought against the charr until death...

    That's the pure definition of dwarven remains and being conquered.

    https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Kathandrax_Steelsoul
    https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Swithin_Nye

    @Castigator.3470 said:
    It is likely that the dwarves evacuated due to the presence of both Primordus and Kralkatorrik, who would have made it impossible to hide either above or underground.

    The dwarves were gone from Ascalon long before GW1. Such "evacuation" would be have to be well prior to 100 BE, in fact. Over a thousand years before Primordus or Kralkatorrik woke up.

    @Castigator.3470 said:
    Ascalon, or rather its south was inhabited by the forgotten, who at some point retreated south into the Crystal Desert. Before that, the charr avoided any area with a larger presence of forgotten by using the mountains as fallback positions. as stated in the "Ecology of the Charr". So if we're super pedantic the forgotten may have been the earliest documented inhabitants of (southern) Ascalon within the last cycle of elder dragon activity. If I recall correctly that cycle ended on a sour note. The Mursaat phased out, the Seers swore vengeance, the Jotunn abandoned their magic in order to survive, the dwarves hid underground and the forgotten hid in the Mists, while maintaining some presence on Tyria.

    The Ecology actually explicitly states the Forgotten were not inhabiting Ascalon at the time, but south of Ascalon - south of even Ebonhawke, as they were south of the mountain range. This would place them around northern Desert Highlands or that gap between Fields of Ruin and Desert Highlands at the time.

    And you don't recall. The mursaat did phase out, and it was the mursaat who swore vengeance. The jotun's abandonment of magic is unclear to be willing (as you say) or forced upon them with the creation of the Bloodstone. Nothing actually suggests the dwarves hid underground. And the Forgotten didn't hide in the Mists - they were hidden by Glint (as were the dwarves, jotun, and Seers); they originally came from the Mists, they never retreated into them (that was the mursaat's "phasing out").

    @Castigator.3470 said:
    Planet of the Grawl" even mentions the existance of charr artwork depicting charr leaders, who recieve tribute from the grawl, so it's safe to say the grawls were not driven out, but milked for tribute.

    Planet of the Grawl also state that some grawl did get driven out by the charr (just not all grawl), into the Shiverpeaks, thus explaining why we see some grawl tribes in the mountains.

    @Castigator.3470 said:
    The next sentient race to settle the land is the charr, who were quick to claim Ascalon and in the absense of the forgotten declare themselves undisputed rulers of the land. This coincided with the unification of the charr warbands under a leader so ferocious and awe-inspiring, that he managed to put an end to their infighting. Thanks to another event, we can somewhat accurately date the charr settlement of Ascalon somewhere between 200 B.E. and 100 B.E., but much more likely somewhere between 150 B.E. and 100 B.E. Since charr seem to mature at about the same rate as humans, that's about one generation, with one generation of charr being born in Ascalon.

    The charr unfiied under the Khan-Ur before even entering the now-called Blood Legion Homelands... That said, his death is what allowed the charr to scatter enough for humans to conquer Ascalon in 100 BE. So Ascalon and "Charr/Blood Legion Homelands" north of Ascalon were conquered in less than a generation so yes, likely between 200 and 100 BE. Less than one generation would be born in Ascalon though.

    @Castigator.3470 said:
    The humans arrived on the surface of Tyria in 786 B.E. in Cantha, brought into the world by their gods.

    We actually do not have a date for when humanity arrived on the world. Human history suggests they arrived on the world at Orr, but with Cantha being founded before Orr, that would imply they were quickly taken to another land before sailing back to Central Tyria and Elona in 205 BE. Whether they were initially taken to Cantha or some other land is unclear.

  • @Imba.9451 said:
    So #MakeAscalonForgottenAgain?

    To me the point still stands, that humans built the greatest social, cultural and historical legacy in Ascalon. Before them, every other race has simply "been there" at some point, but noone actually did anything worth remembering. The Charr as a race have been in their social-evolutionary infancy, hardly able to stop infighting let alone build anything of cultural importance.
    So, judging not by "who was there first" or "who put up da best stompin'n'smashin'", the humans actually made best use of the land they inhabited/conquered. Imho, thats worth something.
    Charr took another few hundreds of years until they finally have been able to settle down and built something thats worth calling society. And they still could get some inspirations on how to build some nice-looking architecture :D
    Thats where the Jerusalem Analogy lacks. Ascalon ain't some form of "holy site", it simply is a case of Charr stubborness and fragile pride.

    And this is why I feel the humans have an overall better claim to Ascalon.

    The propaganda of the Charr in claiming it is their homeland is just not factually supported by anything. Did they occupy it for a time? Yes, but far less than the Kingdom of Ascalon. Were they originally from Ascalon (in order to claim it as a 'homeland')? No.

  • Castigator.3470Castigator.3470 Member ✭✭✭
    edited June 1, 2018

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    Further, you stated the charr "allowed the original inhabitants to remain there while they ruled. So, technically, they didn't take the land from them." This implies two things. First, the people were completely enslaved. Second, they owned the land still, but did not govern themselves.
    If an entire species is either exiled or enslaved, then they do not have their land.
    Planet of the Grawl also state that some grawl did get driven out by the charr (just not all grawl), into the Shiverpeaks, thus explaining why we see some grawl tribes in the mountains.

    Still, the point remains that there are Grawl tribes in today's Ascalon, who are left alone for the most part. The only exception to this is when they stir up some trouble, like the statue of Balthazar incident in Ashford. As we learned in "Planet of the Grawl" the grawl prefer to stick to the periphery, avoiding contact with other races, unless they can get some trinkets out of them. The only exception is their tendency to worship what they cannot understand. Flame Legion has been known to exploit that tendency. This matches the observations in Guild Wars, where Galton Frank remarks the following: > Galton Franks said: > Wherever you find grawl, Charr are not far behind. I've convinced the Vanguard to test this theory. I think the grawl are either proto-Charr or, more likely, an important source of Charr nutrition. Either way, removing the grawl should help thin out the Charr. If you want to aid my research, kill grawl and bring me their stone "necklaces" so I can keep an accurate count. Ultimately we may have to remove all the grawl as part of the solution to the Charr problem. For now, for every 8 Stone Grawl Necklaces you bring, I will give you: This indicates that the humans were not any nicer to the Grawl than the charr were. Plus, there were grawl in the Shiverpeaks in the Southern Shiverpeaks in 1072 A.E. before the charr even had full control over Ascalon. They either were pushed out by someone else, settled the area prior to the time of GW1, or escaped their slavers. There is an example of what I mean in Fireheart Rise. The Nrocroc, Tarstar and Wupwup tribes live in the relative vicinity of Flame Legion. They are regularly tricked into working for the Charr by the likes of Shaman Scaldmaw.

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    The sole confirmed dwarven structure in the now-called Blood Legion Homelands, the Catacombs of Kathandrax, is the tomb of a dwarf who fought against the charr until death...
    That's the pure definition of dwarven remains and being conquered.

    Yes, there is the Catacombs of Kathandrax, who fought against charr, pushed them back and earned their respect. There is, however a distinct lack of settlements, cities, villages, or mines. The dwarves were known as excellent builders and the Catacombs of Kathandrax, while awe inspiring cannot be the only trace left by the dwarves. Unless there was a settlement below ground. Well, it does fulfill the definition of dwarven remains being conquered.
    Still we don't know anything about the life of Kathandrax Steelsoul, or whether or not he died by the hand of a charr, or even just old age. Only that his hammer is buried in a dungeon guarded by a fire elemental.

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    The dwarves were gone from Ascalon long before GW1. Such "evacuation" would be have to be well prior to 100 BE, in fact. Over a thousand years before Primordus or Kralkatorrik woke up.

    As far as we know, the last rise of the elder dragons happened somewhere between 10.000 B.E and 1000 B.E. We do know where this rampage ended and yes, this must have taken place before 100 B.E. . The locations of the sleeping elder dragons make it seem reasonable that they relocate until the world of Tyria has been grazed off, so to speak. And just one elder dragon getting close can turn a landscape uninhabitable. Also, we don't know whether Kathandrax was from this or the former cycle. The dwarves could have been long gone when the charr arrived. Considering how far away the Blood Legion Homeland is from the Deldrimor Front, and the Tomb being referred to as ancient even back in GW1, this could have meant charr and dwarves clashed as far back as 1000 B.E. The dwarves retained the records of the past and even some charr tales exist, that may allude to the elder dragons.

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    The Ecology actually explicitly states the Forgotten were not inhabiting Ascalon at the time, but south of Ascalon - south of even Ebonhawke, as they were south of the mountain range. This would place them around northern Desert Highlands or that gap between Fields of Ruin and Desert Highlands at the time.

    Except that makes no sense, becuase the charr would not have to hide in the Blazeridge Mountains, if their only threat is far to the south behind the southern mountain range. That would only make sense if the forgotten maintained some presence in the ascalonian basin, or the charr were already there. You don't have to put two mountain ranges between you and the forgotten, when one is sufficient. And since we can rule out major charr presence in Ascalon before the time of the Khan Ur, there must have been something to prevent them from just settling in. That, or the forgotten made some excursions into the land.

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    And you don't recall. The mursaat did phase out, and it was the mursaat who swore vengeance. The jotun's abandonment of magic is unclear to be willing (as you say) or forced upon them with the creation of the Bloodstone. Nothing actually suggests the dwarves hid underground. And the Forgotten didn't hide in the Mists - they were hidden by Glint (as were the dwarves, jotun, and Seers); they originally came from the Mists, they never retreated into them (that was the mursaat's "phasing out").

    The who betrayed who for whom of the last cycle is likely a complex issue. Case in point: The mursaat rejected the seer's Bloodstone plan, they sought a military victory over the dragons, the forgotten freed Glint and the Jotunn, formerly a race of powerful sages and magic users, collapsed.
    But if the dwarves did not dwell underground, then how did they get to know the Asura and how did the Stone Summit enslave the dredge? Sorrows Forge was no open cast mining operation and there seems to have been an extensive underground settlement in Fortune's Vale. That doesn't prohibit the dwarves from surface dwelling either, nor does it state that Glint did not help to keep them hidden. She knew, after all, the places where Kralkatorrik wouldn't be looking.

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    The charr unfiied under the Khan-Ur before even entering the now-called Blood Legion Homelands... That said, his death is what allowed the charr to scatter enough for humans to conquer Ascalon in 100 BE. So Ascalon and "Charr/Blood Legion Homelands" north of Ascalon were conquered in less than a generation so yes, likely between 200 and 100 BE. Less than one generation would be born in Ascalon though.

    I suppose you are referring to this:

    The Ecology of the Charr:
    "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."

    To claim that the Blood legion homeland was not settled by charr is a bit of a stretch, when it calls it the northern reaches of their homeland. This implies it was already part of their homelands, but their control of the area may have been contested.

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    We actually do not have a date for when humanity arrived on the world. Human history suggests they arrived on the world at Orr, but with Cantha being founded before Orr, that would imply they were quickly taken to another land before sailing back to Central Tyria and Elona in 205 BE. Whether they were initially taken to Cantha or some other land is unclear.

    There is a timeline in "Road to the Desert" by Scott McGough. The timeline states, that humans first appeared in Tyria in 786 B.E then spread to Orr in 200 B.E. , where Arah was constructed as a dwelling for the gods, and finally to Elona.

  • @Imba.9451 said:
    So #MakeAscalonForgottenAgain?

    To me the point still stands, that humans built the greatest social, cultural and historical legacy in Ascalon. Before them, every other race has simply "been there" at some point, but noone actually did anything worth remembering. The Charr as a race have been in their social-evolutionary infancy, hardly able to stop infighting let alone build anything of cultural importance.
    So, judging not by "who was there first" or "who put up da best stompin'n'smashin'", the humans actually made best use of the land they inhabited/conquered. Imho, thats worth something.
    Charr took another few hundreds of years until they finally have been able to settle down and built something thats worth calling society. And they still could get some inspirations on how to build some nice-looking architecture :D
    Thats where the Jerusalem Analogy lacks. Ascalon ain't some form of "holy site", it simply is a case of Charr stubborness and fragile pride.

    if we're going by doing something worth remembering, i'd say the Charr have surpassed the Ascalonian humans. Their inventions alone contribute more to the world than a nice looking stone castle does.

  • @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

    @Dustfinger.9510 said:

    @Konig Des Todes.2086 said:
    There is no hint of dwarves in Ascalon in GW1, so they were definitely forced out it seems, and grawl got displaced into the Shiverpeaks due to the charr (or otherwise enslaved until humans came along), so I wouldn't say they allowed the original inhabitants to remain.

    Perhaps those were the ones who couldn't stomach serving and refused to fight to the death about it? Either way, ecology says they subjugated or destroyed those who defied them.

    How is enslaving not allowing them to remain?

    I'd hesitate to call the grawl of GW1, let alone a thousand years prior, sophisticated enough to be capable of pre-emptively leaving due to foreseeing slavery. Especially when Planet of the Grawl tells us they were forced out.

    "The grawl are native to Tyria, and Ascalon in particular. The earliest mention of them is found in early charr military tributes that predate the arrival of humans in the area. In these annals, the charr are always portrayed as victors with the defeated grawl pulling the charr commanders in great chariots. The charr dominated the grawl, forcing them into the Shiverpeak and Blazeridge Mountains and beyond, where they lived at a subsistence level."

    Further, you stated the charr "allowed the original inhabitants to remain there while they ruled. So, technically, they didn't take the land from them." This implies two things. First, the people were completely enslaved. Second, they owned the land still, but did not govern themselves.

    If an entire species is either exiled or enslaved, then they do not have their land.

    Let's not change the goal post. Premptive leaving, as a requirement, is no where in the discussion. If they are currently on the land and have always been, they were allowed to stay.

  • I would like human Ascalonian to return from Kryta and rebuild Ascalon City and the other major human cities like Serenity Temple and Fort Ranik. Realistically I would say that only Ascalon City will be multicultural and be like Lion's Arch - but ruled by a human council representing all cities of human-Ascalon: Ascalon City, Ebonhawke, Serenity Temple and Ashford(?). (PS: Note I chose Serenity Temple as a city as well since I believe it holds such an important cultural and religious significance to humans.)

  • Lord Trejgon.2809Lord Trejgon.2809 Member ✭✭✭

    @Nicholas S Lin.6187 said:
    I would like human Ascalonian to return from Kryta and rebuild Ascalon City and the other major human cities like Serenity Temple and Fort Ranik. Realistically I would say that only Ascalon City will be multicultural and be like Lion's Arch - but ruled by a human council representing all cities of human-Ascalon: Ascalon City, Ebonhawke, Serenity Temple and Ashford(?). (PS: Note I chose Serenity Temple as a city as well since I believe it holds such an important cultural and religious significance to humans.)

    convincing charr to allow for this would be...... interesting task xD

  • Eekasqueak.7850Eekasqueak.7850 Member ✭✭✭

    @Nicholas S Lin.6187 said:
    I would like human Ascalonian to return from Kryta and rebuild Ascalon City and the other major human cities like Serenity Temple and Fort Ranik. Realistically I would say that only Ascalon City will be multicultural and be like Lion's Arch - but ruled by a human council representing all cities of human-Ascalon: Ascalon City, Ebonhawke, Serenity Temple and Ashford(?). (PS: Note I chose Serenity Temple as a city as well since I believe it holds such an important cultural and religious significance to humans.)

    Human religion sucks though, the gods are kitten and there's no way this would happen anyway, the only city in the area they have or will likely ever have is Ebonhawke.

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

    @Ardid.7203 said:
    Then the Charr will be the legit rulers of Ascalon

    Yeah over my dead body. That'd be the final spit in the face of GW1 players.

  • Konig Des Todes.2086Konig Des Todes.2086 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Eekasqueak.7850 said:

    @Nicholas S Lin.6187 said:
    I would like human Ascalonian to return from Kryta and rebuild Ascalon City and the other major human cities like Serenity Temple and Fort Ranik. Realistically I would say that only Ascalon City will be multicultural and be like Lion's Arch - but ruled by a human council representing all cities of human-Ascalon: Ascalon City, Ebonhawke, Serenity Temple and Ashford(?). (PS: Note I chose Serenity Temple as a city as well since I believe it holds such an important cultural and religious significance to humans.)

    Human religion sucks though, the gods are kitten and there's no way this would happen anyway, the only city in the area they have or will likely ever have is Ebonhawke.

    This is not entirely true. Based on Fields of Ruins and Blazeridge Steppes, Smodur is more than willing to concede the lands between the Dragonbrand and the Blazeridge Mountains. The humans have already established three outposts (two in FoR, one in Blazeridge) since the peace talks began. Meanwhile, the charr abandoned two outposts of theirs (leaving for the brand and ogres to take one each).

  • Eekasqueak.7850Eekasqueak.7850 Member ✭✭✭

    @Dante.1763 said:

    @witcher.3197 said:

    @Ardid.7203 said:
    Then the Charr will be the legit rulers of Ascalon

    Yeah over my dead body. That'd be the final spit in the face of GW1 players.

    Except..i played GW1 for a long time, 7 years. And as much as i loved Ascalon, i love it even more now that i can play a Charr.

    Yeah I played 1 too and it just made me not want to play humans in 2.

  • Justine.6351Justine.6351 Member ✭✭✭✭

    While the story of the Human Kingdom of Ascalon is a sad one, lets not forget that every human that lived in the Kingdom of Ascalon is dead and gone by multiple generations. Sometimes history is just that, history.

    Anet buff me :-(
    Make me good at game!

<134
©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.