4th espec wants and desires?

[Rashagar.8349]

40 minutes ago, Dadnir.5038 said:

 

That's merely the result of your education. URSS was considered as evil because there was a difference of ideology between capitalism and comunism which led to tensions between the "good guys" that are responsible of your educations, the one that sculpted your beliefs and the "evil guys" whose ideology is, obviously, "wrong and dangerous" from the point of view that you've been trained to have. 

 

I was going to chime in to make this point, but you made it as well as I ever could! 

 

Especially when you consider the current young people view of "capitalism = the root of all evil because it functionally supports environmental disaster", the narrative of "USA = good because it opposed anti-capitalism" takes on a different stint, and is probably a lot less likely to stand the test of time.

[Fueki.4753]

Revenant needs good long range (1500) power damage that isn't primarily about AoE or ground-targetting.

I also want another female legend. We currently have six males and two females.

Edited April 17, 2022 by Fueki.4753

[Dawanarth.4601]

3 hours ago, Fueki.4753 said:

Revenant needs good long range (1500) power damage that isn't primarily about AoE or ground-targetting.

I also want another female legend. We currently have six males and two females.

Perfect for Scarlet Briar

- Rifle

- Woman (Well it's more complicated)

- Evil

 

[LucianTheAngelic.7054]

10 hours ago, Dadnir.5038 said:

Seriously, guy, it's the winner that write history and define who is the good guy and who is the bad guy. You need to understand that.

 

No, this is an asinine ideology.  I know it's a frequently repeated statement, even quoted by Winston Churchill himself, but if you actually look into it logically with historical evidence it's not actually true, and especially less true in the 21st century. While yes, the "victor" does have an influence on the cultural narrative (especially if the country is a dictatorship), if you go even as far back as the Ancient Near East scholars have found pieces of evidence and history that display multiple sides to conflicts.  Try as the "victor" might, they can't fully erase the perspective of the other side; it will always persist in some form and the "losers" will always find ways to document their side of history as well even if it doesn't end up being as well preserved.  Since the dawn of the internet it's become incredibly hard for the "victor" to "write history" without being a totalitarian regime like North Korea, as all sides are now able to upload their perspectives in real time.

As for how this theory affects works of fiction?  Well, plainly, it doesn't unless it's being used as a plot device or information is being told from the perspective of an unreliable narrator.  Unfortunately for your argument, neither are being used in Guild Wars 1 Factions; we as the player see exactly what happened, historically, during this time period.  There is no "victor writing the history" here, it's literally Anet writing exactly what happened and showing the player.  The "winner writing history" theory just doesn't work in fiction. 

10 hours ago, Dadnir.5038 said:

There is always 2 sides to a story.

Shiro is manipulated by Abbadon and kill the emperor, sure. What if instead of being killed afterward he had become an emperor himself like many do? He would have just written history as him taking down a tyrant and would have been regarded as a hero.

Is being ambitious and realizing your ambitions something evil?

This isn't what happened in the story.  There is no "what if" here, we 100% know exactly what happened.  There are no "2 sides" in fiction in the way you mean unless it's told from the perspective of an unreliable narrator, which this story isn't. 

10 hours ago, Dadnir.5038 said:

I mean, it's not difficult to make shiro into a Hero.

- Someone come to him to tell him that the emperor is a threat.

- This person show him how badly the empire's people live, opening his eyes to the poverty and misery of the mass.

- This person point out that the emperor try to bring under it's rule more and more territories and races.

- Then obviously there is a need for someone to be a "hero" and bring down the tyrant and then take over the mantle of emperor to bring prosperity to the people of cantha.

 

The difference is that shiro is killed after bringing down the "tyrant" and before taking over the emperor's mantle by people faithful to the emperor that was killed. Thus he become the bad guy that killed a good and wise emperor.

He then become a messenger in death and let his ressentment brew and grow until he find a way to unleash this ressentment.

Again, you can RP all you want and create random hypotheticals, but it's irrelevant.  This didn't happen.  We know what happened.  Since this is fiction and not real life, we know exactly what he did as the writers have shown us precisely what he did.  There is no debate as to what transpired. 

Let's look at Shiro's life and what he did in context of what most people consider to be a general sense of "good" or "evil."  While not everyone agrees 100%, in almost every culture across human existence murder, especially murder without due cause, is considered wrong and evil.  This isn't just a 21st century morality; it goes all the way back to the Sumerians and probably further.  Conversely, what is considered "good" tends to be "actions that help other people and society."  Some actions like "forgiveness and remorse" tend to be lumped in here too.  While I'd argue that "good" morality is more subjective across history, what is "evil" has remained fairly static comparatively.  Anyway with these definitions in mind, here's Shiro's life:

1) Shiro is an assassin (which is already questionable morally) and is respected by the Emperor so he is appointed head bodyguard. 

2) Shiro is manipulated by a fortune teller by Abaddon and becomes paranoid that the Emperor is going to kill him

3) Shiro kills the Emperor and steals Dwayna's magic because he is now paranoid that the Emperor is going to kill him, no other reason.  This is cold-blooded murder driven from paranoia and not "just cause," which is considered evil. 

4) Shiro is killed and lets out a "death wail" and causes the Jade Winds with Dwayna's now corrupted magic, killing Vizu, St. Viktor, Archemorus, and many others by turning them to stone, and creating one of the biggest ecological disasters all of Tyria has ever known.  This completely devastated Canthan society and caused massive suffering and death, both directly and indirectly.  While it could be argued that "Shiro didn't know this would happen" it's irrelevant because he still did cause it to happen directly by killing the Emperor and taking his magic.  It's extreme negligence at best and completely malicious at worst.  Also, in the recent dialogue at Harvest Temple he states he would "do it all again just to see everything crumble" meaning he probably did it intentionally, and even if he didn't he shows no remorse for it.  Jade Winds = clearly massively evil action

5) Shiro then tries to come back to life after becoming an Envoy and get revenge.  In doing so he intentionally unleashes the Afflicted Plague across Cantha and creates the Shiro'ken as his personal army.  Throughout this he kills thousands, perhaps even hundreds of thousands or even millions (unclear how big the affected Canthan population was) all so that he can selfishly come back to life.  He then kills Master Togo to restore himself.  Murder and Bio-terrorism on a grand scale!  Clearly evil by most human standards!

6) Shiro is banished to the Realm of Torment and then becomes one of Abaddon's generals.  He has no qualms at this point with working with a god who is okay with genocide and other atrocities.  In GW2 he even calls him "my friend" if you take Shiro to the Mouth of Torment.  Not something a "good guy" does

7)  In GW2 again, his Harvest Temple dialogue as mentioned above shows that he has no remorse for the things he's done and he would "do it again to see everything crumble."  No remorse and definitely not the words of what the vast majority would consider a "good" person!  Definitely Evil!

Shiro is clearly evil.  He's entirely selfish, doesn't think of anyone but himself, and he believes that murder is justified for whatever his goals are, which are largely paranoia and revenge driven.  Across almost all human existence cultures would consider this evil.  As I established earlier the "winner writes history" theory can't be used here because it's fiction and we 100% know what happened.  There is no debate here unless you want to specifically say that "mass murder and bio-terrorism without just cause are not evil actions" which you'd be hard pressed to get the vast, vast majority of people to agree to that. 

The reason I bring all this up is you stated previously:
 

On 4/16/2022 at 12:14 AM, Dadnir.5038 said:

Do you perhaps think that it would be right for the main character to channel someone that want to enslave others or promote racism or whatever that would make it a villain? You'd have people all over the forum to protest against the release of such legend. The devs have to thread carefully when they chose the legend and make the lore as accomodating as possible in order to avoid those uproars that are very common nowadays.

 

Look, wouldn't it be easy to find a random Kraith name and call it a legendary slaver. Similarly it would be easy to find an asura legend with a superiority complex that look down on all other races and make unethical experiments on poor peoples. That would be villains but would they be well received or accepted? I'm sure there would be people ready to sue ANet if they dared do that.

 

The best the devs can do is to find either neutral theme for their legend or "good guys". They just can't make an "bad guy" e-spec unless they somehow turn why these legend did what they do in a light that make it acceptable to the public. And there is definitely the need to share a common goal

 

 

 Clearly your opinion here is incorrect.  They HAVE already given us two legends that have committed major atrocities.  The "main character" ALREADY channels two legends that are have done horrific things; there is no requirement for the legend to have "aligned views."  There was no public uproar to either of these legends and no one sued them lmao.  Anet clearly can give us villainous, evil legends; there's literally nothing stopping them from doing so.  They've literally already done it. 

I for one would like to see a villainous legend for our next elite specialization.  We don't have a villain as an e-spec yet and it helps provide interesting lore and diverse feelings across the Revenant profession. 

Edited April 17, 2022 by LucianTheAngelic.7054

[Rashagar.8349]

2 hours ago, LucianTheAngelic.7054 said:

No, this is an asinine ideology.  I know it's a frequently repeated statement, even quoted by Winston Churchill himself, but if you actually look into it logically with historical evidence it's not actually true, and especially less true in the 21st century. While yes, the "victor" does have an influence on the cultural narrative (especially if the country is a dictatorship), if you go even as far back as the Ancient Near East scholars have found pieces of evidence and history that display multiple sides to conflicts.  Try as the "victor" might, they can't fully erase the perspective of the other side; it will always persist in some form and the "losers" will always find ways to document their side of history as well even if it doesn't end up being as well preserved.  Since the dawn of the internet it's become incredibly hard for the "victor" to "write history" without being a totalitarian regime like North Korea, as all sides are now able to upload their perspectives in real time.

You know that this is exactly what the saying means, right?

 

That the ones in power (the "victors") get to influence the cultural narrative more than those without power. It's not claiming that the only version of events that becomes documented at all is the one the "victor" writes, it's not dealing in absolutes like that.

 

But those in power can make sure that the only version taught to kids is the one they sanction, and thereby shape their own cultural image of themselves. If you think that's limited to totalitarian regimes ehhh.... you're wrong.

 

If it helps, I can DM you a shedload of examples of it if you like? 

*Editing to say: we're in danger of veering wildly off topic here, hence the "fancy a DM chat?" part heh. 😃

Edited April 17, 2022 by Rashagar.8349

[Kheron.9062]

13 hours ago, Dadnir.5038 said:

Is being ambitious and realizing your ambitions something evil?

"Who cares if I burn this orphanage? If I commit genocide? All that matters is that people adore and worship me. That isn't evil, that's called being a BOSS. An entrepreneur. A go-getter."

My dude, I don't at all hate to say this: your morals are severely out of whack.

[TheDeafGuy.4519]

11 hours ago, Dadnir.5038 said:

Racism is often people thinking that a different skin color, hair color, culture, langage or other silly things make someone "evil". Heck! Women were burnt at the stake merely because they had red hairs which led people to believe they were "witches" and that as such they were "evil". Now, if you look at those past deed would you say that the red haired women were "evil" or the one that burnt them due to their prejudices were "evil". The answer? Neither were evil, the women had unfortunate body characterics while the other were led by their beliefs and fears (even if it make them monsters in our 2020 eyes).

Yeah I like Gw2 too.

[Fueki.4753]

10 hours ago, Dawanarth.4601 said:

Perfect for Scarlet Briar

- Rifle

- Woman (Well it's more complicated)

- Evil

While that may be true, (from what I remember reading) Arenanet doesn't want to give us characters who are alive during the GW2 story. (Joko being a partial exception, but he isn't actually alive anyway and only channelled once). That's why Eir can be ruled out, as well.

Edited April 18, 2022 by Fueki.4753

[Fueki.4753]

7 hours ago, Rashagar.8349 said:

You know that this is exactly what the saying means, right?

That the ones in power (the "victors") get to influence the cultural narrative more than those without power.

We literally had cutscenes of Shiro's past in GW1, showing his descend into madness caused by Abaddon.

We have proof from Arenanet themselves, that Shiro turned evil after falling under Abaddon's influence.

Unless you claim Arenanet's writers themselves are the "victors", that saying means nothing in this context.

Edited April 18, 2022 by Fueki.4753

[Dawanarth.4601]

51 minutes ago, Fueki.4753 said:

While that may be true, (from what I remember reading) Arenanet doesn't want to give us characters who are alive during the GW2 story. (Joko being a partial exception, but he isn't actually alive anyway and only channelled once). That's why Eir can be ruled out, as well.

Well she did die before the Revenant appeared (HoT)

And they planned at some point of having Mai Trin as a Revenant channeling her

[Dadnir.5038]

9 hours ago, LucianTheAngelic.7054 said:

This isn't what happened in the story.  There is no "what if" here, we 100% know exactly what happened.  There are no "2 sides" in fiction in the way you mean unless it's told from the perspective of an unreliable narrator, which this story isn't. 

That's where you're wrong.

There is even a very obvious case in the lore of GW2, as Adelbern is now seen as the responsible of the searing, ordering his mages to burn everything. While the player of GW prophecy know very well that it's not true, that it's the charrs of the flame legion that burnt ascalon and caused the searing.

You see, Adelbern is now the "bad guy" and I'm pretty sure if he had a legend he would get skills that would lead to think he was a "bad guy" because this is how he is remembered.

Rurik, the grief striken reckless rebelious prince of Ascalon going against the order of his superior hierarchic the king and dying a meaningless death in the middle of his journey by going Leeroy Jenkins when everything was in control is new remembered as a "hero", a "good guy".

From a military point of view he is a sinner, a deserter, from the point of view of the one that survived the searing thanks to him he is a savior and from the point of view of the one that worked with him he was a massive pain in the back (You can't deny it, for a long time he was the most hated NPC of prophecy). There I'm pretty sure he would get a set of heroic skills if he was a legend like using the tempest horn for a wide area attack or an invulnerability in memory of his fight to stop the mean dwarf-boss-that-ride-hisdrake so that the perfectly safe refugees in a perfectly safe situation can get away safely.

 

[Rashagar.8349]

54 minutes ago, Fueki.4753 said:

We literally had cutscenes of Shiro's past in GW1, showing his descend into madness caused by Abaddon.

We have proof from Arenanet themselves, that Shiro turned evil after falling under Abaddon's influence.

Unless you claim Arenanet's writers themselves are the "victors", that saying means nothing in this context.

 

Disagree. 

 

Your argument here is that the saying means nothing in this context, because we the players have perfect information.  But us having perfect information doesn't stop characters in the GW universe from having imperfect information, or personal motivations that would cause them to create government-wide lies about the past.

[LucianTheAngelic.7054]

1 hour ago, Dadnir.5038 said:

That's where you're wrong.

There is even a very obvious case in the lore of GW2, as Adelbern is now seen as the responsible of the searing, ordering his mages to burn everything. While the player of GW prophecy know very well that it's not true, that it's the charrs of the flame legion that burnt ascalon and caused the searing.

 

What?  This is completely and demonstrably false.  Adelbern is not responsible for the Searing.  He's responsible for the Foefire.  Two completely different events...This is not an example of "Winners write history."  If what you're saying was true (it's not) it would just be a retcon since this is fiction.  However, what you're saying is not true, they did not "rewrite history" in this case they very literally added to it.  Also, again, "Winner's write history" does not exist in fiction unless used as a plot device, like stories being told from an "unreliable narrator" point of view.  As players we are completely knowledgeable of the events as they unfolded from an unbiased perspective.  We see them happen in real time.  Anet are the literal gods of this universe; they decide exactly what is or is not the history and plot of this universe, not some fictional country or group of fictional people within it.  

As for the Searing and the Foefire

The Searing - "The charr shaman Bonfaaz Burntfur used magic to rain burning crystals down over the human holdings in Ascalon, causing widespread destruction. These events were depicted in Guild Wars Prophecies. "
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Searing

The Foefire - "the spell that brought the explosive end to the Last Battle of Ascalon City and ultimately, the human nation of Ascalon during the Human-charr conflict in 1090 AE, resulting in the destruction of Ascalon City and the lands becoming haunted by Ascalonian ghosts."

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Foefire

 

Edited April 18, 2022 by LucianTheAngelic.7054

[Rashagar.8349]

1 hour ago, LucianTheAngelic.7054 said:

What?  This is completely and demonstrably false.  Adelbern is not responsible for the Searing.  He's responsible for the Foefire.  Two completely different events...This is not an example of "Winners write history."  If what you're saying was true (it's not) it would just be a retcon since this is fiction.  However, what you're saying is not true, they did not "rewrite history" in this case they very literally added to it.  Also, again, "Winner's write history" does not exist in fiction unless used as a plot device, like stories being told from an "unreliable narrator" point of view.  As players we are completely knowledgeable of the events as they unfolded from an unbiased perspective.  We see them happen in real time.  Anet are the literal gods of this universe; they decide exactly what is or is not the history and plot of this universe, not some fictional country or group of fictional people within it.  

I mean, your first assertion was that "history is written by the victors" doesn't exist at all, and your new assertion seems to be that it just doesn't exist in fiction, except for the times when it does. 

 

I've kind of lost track of what you're trying to accomplish, to be honest.

[LucianTheAngelic.7054]

2 hours ago, Rashagar.8349 said:

I mean, your first assertion was that "history is written by the victors" doesn't exist at all, and your new assertion seems to be that it just doesn't exist in fiction, except for the times when it does. 

 

I've kind of lost track of what you're trying to accomplish, to be honest.

Re-read my reply near the top of this page it’s all laid out fairly clearly. There’s multiple points, not just one. Honestly I don’t even need the “history is written by the victors doesn’t exactly exist” portion of the argument (it was never the main point) since debating the semantics and possible meanings of a vague statement is irrelevant to fiction writing (which was point #2 in my first post at the top of this page). And correct, you have understood my argument; “history is written by the victors is irrelevant in fiction, unless the author is specifically using it as a plot/world building device.”  Why? Because as readers/viewers we’re essentially privy to omniscience within the realm of media granted to us by the writers.  There is no “subjective” aspect (this is necessary for the creation of biased history) to a narrative unless it’s designed to be that way by the writer.  
 

In Anet’s case with the history of the villains they are NOT using “winner writes the history” as any sort of plot device most of the time, and certainly not in the case of most old GW1 narratives. We are shown, effectively by the gods of the narrative, precisely what actions characters take and are shown the consequences of their actions.  There is no bias being inserted here; there literally can’t be since the author controls and forms literally every aspect of the story.  There can’t be debate about the plot/history aspects in the way Dadnir means unless intended by the author.  How can a trope that informs possible cultural/historical bias in the real world (which can only exist because omniscience isn’t possible) have an effect on a created, fictional world where omniscience is the norm? 

Edited April 18, 2022 by LucianTheAngelic.7054

[Rashagar.8349]

2 hours ago, LucianTheAngelic.7054 said:

Re-read my reply near the top of this page it’s all laid out fairly clearly. There’s multiple points, not just one. Honestly I don’t even need the “history is written by the victors doesn’t exactly exist” portion of the argument (it was never the main point) since debating the semantics and possible meanings of a vague statement is irrelevant to fiction writing (which was point #2 in my first post at the top of this page). And correct, you have understood my argument; “history is written by the victors is irrelevant in fiction, unless the author is specifically using it as a plot/world building device.”  Why? Because as readers/viewers we’re essentially privy to omniscience within the realm of media granted to us by the writers.  There is no “subjective” aspect (this is necessary for the creation of biased history) to a narrative unless it’s designed to be that way by the writer.  
 

In Anet’s case with the history of the villains they are NOT using “winner writes the history” as any sort of plot device most of the time, and certainly not in the case of most old GW1 narratives. We are shown, effectively by the gods of the narrative, precisely what actions characters take and are shown the consequences of their actions.  There is no bias being inserted here; there literally can’t be since the author controls and forms literally every aspect of the story.  There can’t be debate about the plot/history aspects in the way Dadnir means unless intended by the author.  How can a trope that informs possible cultural/historical bias in the real world (which can only exist because omniscience isn’t possible) have an effect on a created, fictional world where omniscience is the norm? 

I've read it a couple of times at this stage tbh and the only bit I find jarring is how someone could dismiss the real world provable examples and come to the conclusion it's an "asinine ideology". 

 

In terms of how it's portrayed in fiction in general, I'd contest that the default position for readers/players is one of omniscience. You don't have to be an unreliable narrator to expose the audience to a biased view (unbiased views are exceptionally rare and probably mostly boring haha), and you don't have to retcon to reveal previously-unrevealed information (since retconning carries the connotations that it wasn't planned and was changed afterwards). But I'm glad we seem to agree about it's use in fiction.

 

In terms of how it's portrayed in this game, there's a couple of places off the top of my head where they do employ it quite well, particularly with the Joko bits, and his portrayal of the main character's actions and the legacy "we're" leaving.

 

None of this is me saying that Shiro is a paragon of virtue, by the way, but I do think that, if they wanted, there was room in the narrative/sequence of events where his actions could have been heroic *from his own perspective*. (For a time at least. Whether or not they chose to do this I don't remember, because I only played Factions when it came out and that was a very long time ago).

Edited April 18, 2022 by Rashagar.8349

[Howluffu.7259]

Can we stick to the topic?

[Thon.3780]

Let ‘s back to topic

 

If assumption is god seat available from Balthazar fall.  So champion may assist someone to be new god.

so Menzies can be final boss or 4th elite.

also there are open story about old god arachnia that dead since gw1 , so ANET might dig them out and make story like descendants return.

 

[Thornwolf.9721]

I want Svanir, where we become the "nornbear" and basically turn into the big icebrood werebear monster from eye of the north, incorporate a mechanic where you loose the ability to legend swap and rather swap between two variants of each legend. And give us main hand axe. 

This means for shiro would could get his envoy abilities so an envoy form and his norm form, which would make us translucent like he was in the beginning of factions. 

Jalis would get us to turn to stone until you swap back when swapped, and maybe get some wacky  physical skills where we go from what have now to a more offensive bruiser?

Ventari gets something, I dunno. 

and Mallyx just gets amped with Abaddon stuff; Or maybe becomes more physically present as in we transform into him? 

(Could also do duel daggers, call them the fangs of jormag) 

I'd like for jormag to be involved within the svanir legend, like maybe its both of them in some respects with the whispers playing a role in our ambience? I'd like for his legend to be about a more hunting feel where you're the predator and anything and everyone else is the prey. 

And the name could just be something like : "Visage" or "Embodiment"

Energy could play the role of adrenaline sort of on warrior, where once you proc enough energy you remain in your form until you toggle it off to use your other abilities or you are no longer in combat. Svanir himself likely should either have physical abilities or he could have something new. I'm honestly not sure and I'm not putting much work into this because I had done so before; And I know A-net doesn't care what any of us want so I'm not about to waste my time doing their job for them.

[Dawanarth.4601]

21 minutes ago, Thornwolf.9721 said:

I want Svanir, where we become the "nornbear" and basically turn into the big icebrood werebear monster from eye of the north, incorporate a mechanic where you loose the ability to legend swap and rather swap between two variants of each legend. And give us main hand axe. 

This means for shiro would could get his envoy abilities so an envoy form and his norm form, which would make us translucent like he was in the beginning of factions. 

Jalis would get us to turn to stone until you swap back when swapped, and maybe get some wacky  physical skills where we go from what have now to a more offensive bruiser?

Ventari gets something, I dunno. 

and Mallyx just gets amped with Abaddon stuff; Or maybe becomes more physically present as in we transform into him? 

(Could also do duel daggers, call them the fangs of jormag) 

I'd like for jormag to be involved within the svanir legend, like maybe its both of them in some respects with the whispers playing a role in our ambience? I'd like for his legend to be about a more hunting feel where you're the predator and anything and everyone else is the prey. 

And the name could just be something like : "Visage" or "Embodiment"

Energy could play the role of adrenaline sort of on warrior, where once you proc enough energy you remain in your form until you toggle it off to use your other abilities or you are no longer in combat. Svanir himself likely should either have physical abilities or he could have something new. I'm honestly not sure and I'm not putting much work into this because I had done so before; And I know A-net doesn't care what any of us want so I'm not about to waste my time doing their job for them.

So like as weapon skills ? So that you would have each Legend have 2 weapon kit or one (Would be fair I suppose since it would mean we get 3 weapon total)

I like the concept, but i don't really get the link with the Legend, maybe Razah could fit it better (Being 100% Mist) and would fit better with the Dagger/Dagger, Zvanir or any Norn career should be with Main-hand Axe

[Thornwolf.9721]

Just now, Dawanarth.4601 said:

So like as weapon skills ? So that you would have each Legend have 2 weapon kit or one (Would be fair I suppose since it would mean we get 3 weapon total)

I like the concept, but i don't really get the link with the Legend, maybe Razah could fit it better (Being 100% Mist) and would fit better with the Dagger/Dagger, Zvanir or any Norn career should be with Main-hand Axe

No, its svanir or asgeir and the idea is that its the norns ability to shapeshift thats allowing the legend to change into different echoes of itself. If they did razah I'd never touch it; Im done with human legends and I am beyond done with whatever vindicator and renegade were intended to be. The next spec has to be something cooler than "One dodge less cool power herald" or "discount ritualist". 

If it's not a norn I'll just stick to herald. They can't please me at this point, I Feel like I've waited way too long for my preferred lore to be touched. The scuffed all of it in Icebrood saga and as a norn player our race is ALL ABOUT becoming a legend, be it for good or for bad. Hell I'd take Olaf, seventh son of Olaf at this point.

As for dagger dagger, it could be in reference to the "fangs or claws" of the norn bear? Heck name them that? The fang and the claw? It can work. 

[Aeolus.3615]

On 4/17/2022 at 5:28 PM, Fueki.4753 said:

Revenant needs good long range (1500) power damage that isn't primarily about AoE or ground-targetting.

I also want another female legend. We currently have six males and two females.

Nika and Vizu(mother and daughter) imo was more fitted for the dual legend than the current ones :|

For the range we have hammer needs to be adressed, still with the upcoming summer balance patchs we don't know what Anet states has overperforming and builds with strong carry momentum that needs to be adressed, since they stated they will want the game more player skill wise (i find that extremely hard with the current gw2 mechanics lol).

Edited April 22, 2022 by Aeolus.3615

[Dawanarth.4601]

25 minutes ago, Thornwolf.9721 said:

If they did razah I'd never touch it; Im done with human legends

Razah isn't a human

And Norn aren't that far from human either

[Thornwolf.9721]

57 minutes ago, Dawanarth.4601 said:

Razah isn't a human

And Norn aren't that far from human either

Norn are far different from humans, at least in this universe. I still wont touch it if its razah because he's basically human from the way they portray him (And by your logic of the norn. Human.) So now. I won't bend. But I also don't trust A-net to make anything good for revenant as they really haven't done anything but damage the class at this point.

PS: Razah should be a legend tied to invocation , as he was in guild wars 1 a mist walker much like the six gods. A being of the mists. 

Edited April 22, 2022 by Thornwolf.9721

[Dawanarth.4601]

2 hours ago, Thornwolf.9721 said:

PS: Razah should be a legend tied to invocation , as he was in guild wars 1 a mist walker much like the six gods. A being of the mists. 

The Gods aren't clearly being of the mist, as a few of the 6 have had cannon human/mortal life previously, and I think it's implied that another was a known mortal before but I don't know which

Razah and Arachnia are the Mist being that could become Legends