Commander in the new episode

[penguin.7536]

Did anyone else notice they went from using they/them to gendered pronouns for a commander? I'm not here to start a big debate about pronouns (please don't), I just appreciated it being neutral when I'm not the same gender as my character while playing story.

Edit: I wanted to block this out because I think the fact that the commander isn't often referred to by gender very often may be playing into why I previously thought it was more intentional that the character seen as neutral, + the effort to have more gender neutral rep in EoD and in an interaction in open world might be what made it stand out more when we heard he/she at the end of the episode. I agree that the Commander is not a conduit for the player and making decisions to cater to the player is generally not a great decision, but I did appreciate the lean towards more gender neutral rep in EoD.

As an aside, too, I think the writing for the commander in this episode is really jarring considering their previous history. We've had so many plots about seeing hallucinations that it feels like that commander's trauma of losing people like their mentor, Trahearne and Eir, is getting dug up again to fill a gap with not having new content (we didn't get to know Almorra personally and if your character isn't Vigil I feel they don't know her much off the battlefield, so why're we freaking out?). The fact they get aggressively guarded and don't tell anyone they're hearing/seeing dead people straight after Jormag is a real step back imo

Edited March 3, 2023 by penguin.7536
typo + clarification

[Zok.4956]

2 hours ago, penguin.7536 said:

I just appreciated it being neutral when I'm not the same gender as my character while playing story.

I appreciate Anet giving players more choices for their characters (like choosing "neutral" in an EoD mission, as a start) but the wording in game should match the gender of the player character, if the player character is addressed, and not that of the player.

 

[Bobby Stein.3612]

8 hours ago, Zok.4956 said:

I appreciate Anet giving players more choices for their characters (like choosing "neutral" in an EoD mission, as a start) but the wording in game should match the gender of the player character, if the player character is addressed, and not that of the player.

 

Is that not happening? We usually can specify a response based on PC choice at character creation. There might be the occasional line when an NPC uses the encompassing "them" for simplicity, but I'm pretty sure there are gender specific lines re: the PC in this patch. Do you have an example?

[Zola.6197]

The commander’s behavior is “off” because a demon that causes fear, paranoia, self-doubt is literally targeting their mind. It’s not jarring to me because that’s a pretty classic trope when it comes to demons in fiction. They mess with people’s heads and get them to act in ways they normally wouldn’t. The commander is acting odd because an outside force is influencing them to do so.

As for the pronoun thing, I did notice the use of she/her pronouns for my female commander. I’m not sure why it stood out, but maybe it is because gender-specific terms aren’t often used in reference to the commander. It didn’t bother me though - thought it was neat. I’m sure there are other examples but couldn’t say where.

I don’t think it’s wrong to prefer gender neutral pronouns for your character, but the dialogue already feels pretty limited when the narrative team has to write for 10 different commanders across gender/race that I do enjoy little bits of specificity in dialogue/personality whenever possible. Makes me feel like my character creation choices matter vs being cosmetic.

[Zok.4956]

13 hours ago, Bobby Stein.3612 said:

Is that not happening? We usually can specify a response based on PC choice at character creation. There might be the occasional line when an NPC uses the encompassing "them" for simplicity, but I'm pretty sure there are gender specific lines re: the PC in this patch. Do you have an example?

No, I don't have an example and I didn't mean to imply that the dialogue is different. I was just responding to the statement "I just appreciated it being neutral when I'm not the same gender as my character".
 

[Dawdler.8521]

Its almost as though you are supposed to take on a role when playing this game, thats why you create a character of your choice. Ingame characters should react to that character, not the player.

Edited March 3, 2023 by Dawdler.8521

[Danikat.8537]

I can't remember ever noticing the pronouns used for the commander in earlier story lines, but I agree it shouldn't take the player into account (like being gender neutral in case the player's gender is different to the character). I'm not in the game, the NPCs don't know I exist and they're only talking to/about my character, not me, so they don't need to factor me into the conversation.

(One option could be for Anet to let us choose pronouns independently of choosing to make a male or female character, but then I'd want it to be a per-character choice, not a universal one, because again I want them to be speaking to my character, not to me.)

Also while I don't think it's surprising the commander is having issues with their mental health and feelings of guilt given everything they've been through I also don't think it's surprising that it's flaring up in this location, or that it's reflective of how they'd feel and act anywhere else. The episode is called What Lies Beneath, one of the Jade Brotherhood miners is yelling about how no one there has read a history book and one area of the map is called The Deep.

Spoiler

I think we're in the early stages of re-discovering Kanaxi.

 

Edited March 3, 2023 by Danikat.8537

[penguin.7536]

On 3/2/2023 at 4:09 AM, Dr Meta.3158 said:

I'd recommend a playthrough the personal story again. Almorra has been around for a long time. Losing close ones, dealing with constant world ending threats and being expected to solve them, and literally dying once is pretty good cause for mental instability. That said, not that much focus is placed on it. Although, that would make a more interesting story at this point. I'm personally starting to suffer from Marvel fatigue from the continous upping the ante with the same story beats from the storyline now. I miss Joko.

 

 

I definitely don't disagree with you here - it's always a common thing for a hero in a long-running story to just shrug off everything that's happened to them, and I've always appreciated GW2 for making the commander someone with a voice and history. However, I don't think this theme is particularly new to the commander. They've been made to face their loved ones deaths ever since their mentors guilt over death multiple times:

Mordremoth
The Shining Blade Initiation
Their death to Balthazar
Eir coming back in Sun's Refuge
Jormag manipulation
Soo Won Battle
Pretty sure this is the third time we've seen our mentor

Psychological damage and lingering to the commander is touched upon so many times in the GW2 story that if you did a playthrough of all of it back to back, you'd revisit your dead loved ones multiple times in succession ever since your mentors die. When fights aren't revolved around the effects of magic or the opponent themselves, it's usually introspection on the commander's psyche. These moments are usually brief, or build to a bigger ending, and admittedly don't really get into how the commander feels about it.

I guess where my frustration lies is that the Commander has gone through these situations many times over and communicated with their team about it, made efforts to lay their friends to rest, and when a demon emerges it's revisiting this concept again in a very quick way (keeping in mind more content is coming, so this could be alleviated). The Commander has been made to hallucinate and become paranoid that they're seeing their loved ones so many times over, so guess I thought there would have been more of a nod to how they've experienced this before. The lack of nod to it kind of makes me feel like there wasn't much taken away from things like Jormag's manipulation, and kind of makes me feel like previous instances didn't have much impact.

The concept of revisiting guilt is not something I'm opposed to - and progress with coping with trauma isn't linear and I'd love for it to give more nuance to the character. The return to the manifestion of a dead loved one's echo I guess is where the frustration lies, and the fact the Commander has so much experience with past content that I, in an entirely subjective view, feel like they would've done more than just dismiss it and not communicate with Gorrik. I'm also aware that people who are in situations of paranoia and exposure to the haze aren't necessarily prone to reason so it's left me feeling mixed about it.

Also, when it comes to things like missing Joko - I think one of the best dialogue moments in the game was straight up just hearing from a villain that you've wreaked a lot of havoc in the name of doing good, because it's an external force making you look at your actions and go "hm, maybe that was questionable of me, yeah." It's a lot more effective to me.

Edited March 3, 2023 by penguin.7536

[penguin.7536]

23 hours ago, Zok.4956 said:

I appreciate Anet giving players more choices for their characters (like choosing "neutral" in an EoD mission, as a start) but the wording in game should match the gender of the player character, if the player character is addressed, and not that of the player.

 

I don't necessarily disagree with this point, though I think (subjectively) it's popular in other games of this genre that have dialogue that's specific to your character choice in the game and to me, it's not really anything new. I don't need the commander to be a conduit of myself as a player, and I think writing to that isn't encouraged for good reasons. I did, however, think (of my own poor memory) that they were leaning the commander towards neutrality and after reviewing I believe that's more me than what they're doing.

Edited March 3, 2023 by penguin.7536
typo again

[penguin.7536]

13 hours ago, Zola.6197 said:

The commander’s behavior is “off” because a demon that causes fear, paranoia, self-doubt is literally targeting their mind. It’s not jarring to me because that’s a pretty classic trope when it comes to demons in fiction. They mess with people’s heads and get them to act in ways they normally wouldn’t. The commander is acting odd because an outside force is influencing them to do so.

As for the pronoun thing, I did notice the use of she/her pronouns for my female commander. I’m not sure why it stood out, but maybe it is because gender-specific terms aren’t often used in reference to the commander. It didn’t bother me though - thought it was neat. I’m sure there are other examples but couldn’t say where.

I don’t think it’s wrong to prefer gender neutral pronouns for your character, but the dialogue already feels pretty limited when the narrative team has to write for 10 different commanders across gender/race that I do enjoy little bits of specificity in dialogue/personality whenever possible. Makes me feel like my character creation choices matter vs being cosmetic.

I definitely understand the intention behind the writing. Demons are probably one of my favorite things from GW1 lore going into GW2 and I would love to see them fleshed out beyond being a thing you attack. However, coming straight out of Jormag manipulation and many many many experiences of seeing loved ones over the commander's guilt - I guess I expected the commander to be more situationally aware, and viewed them not being in touch before their reason degrades (just brushing Gorrik off the first time it happened) felt off to me with IBS so fresh in my mind. It's totally my opinion only, and not like a view of "this is bad." I wish it showed more wow, the commander has a history with this thing, even if it had the same result by the end.

I'm really glad you thought it was neat! It did stand out to me a lot, enough for me to make the post. I wish that that specificity was more honed in around the character's origin the same way they made efforts in HoT, but that's a long time gone by and the constraints of dialogue variations are something I'm sure is limiting these days.

Edited March 3, 2023 by penguin.7536

[penguin.7536]

1 hour ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Its almost as though you are supposed to take on a role when playing this game, thats why you create a character of your choice. Ingame characters should react to that character, not the player.

I 100% agree with you on this and I suppose my sentiment was worded poorly. I think that writing to who is playing the game rather than building on the personality of the commander leads to poor development. However, I mistook their efforts on more neutral options in EoD as an effort to lean the commander in that direction, which is something I appreciated.

[penguin.7536]

36 minutes ago, Danikat.8537 said:

I can't remember ever noticing the pronouns used for the commander in earlier story lines, but I agree it shouldn't take the player into account (like being gender neutral in case the player's gender is different to the character). I'm not in the game, the NPCs don't know I exist and they're only talking to/about my character, not me, so they don't need to factor me into the conversation.

(One option could be for Anet to let us choose pronouns independently of choosing to make a male or female character, but then I'd want it to be a per-character choice, not a universal one, because again I want them to be speaking to my character, not to me.)

Also while I don't think it's surprising the commander is having issues with their mental health and feelings of guilt given everything they've been through I also don't think it's surprising that it's flaring up in this location, or that it's reflective of how they'd feel and act anywhere else. The episode is called What Lies Beneath, one of the Jade Brotherhood miners is yelling about how no one there has read a history book and one area of the map is called The Deep.

  Reveal hidden contents

I think we're in the early stages of re-discovering Kanaxi.

 

I also don't play the game as "the player" and I like to get immersed in the narrative as the Commander, with a voice and history and personality. It's one of GW2's strongest writing points when it comes to comparing it to MMO protagonists. I've reviewed this and I think the occassional "them" and lean in EoD for more neutrality made the return to he/she for the commander stand out more. That option definitely sounds like it would be fantastic, though I imagine it would take too much time/resources than what's available.

I also don't think it's surprising, it's just something I think isn't new, so to revisit it again with the commander aggressively not talking to their team about something they've experienced before (keeping lack of reasoning due to the effects of the haze in mind) was what struck me. It's an intentional choice, but it does make me feel like the commander hasn't ever learned anything by being in similar situations.

The history aspect of the episode is what really drew me in. My brain lit up when I realized we were getting into demons again - maybe a very specific demon -  it's one of my favorite things from GW1. So when we revisit the Commander's trauma, with time that I feel could be spent on investigation of that history, I do feel like I'm missing the opportunity to be more invested in the enemy we're facing when we're revisiting a theme we'd already seen. GW2 has leaned into being intimately character focused for a long time now, and it's a big positive when it comes to feeling like your characters really care about each other. However, I think world lore takes a backseat when the limited time we spend on story these days is becoming increasingly shorter. This might just be chalked up to it being post-release and there being more content to come.

[penguin.7536]

16 hours ago, Bobby Stein.3612 said:

Is that not happening? We usually can specify a response based on PC choice at character creation. There might be the occasional line when an NPC uses the encompassing "them" for simplicity, but I'm pretty sure there are gender specific lines re: the PC in this patch. Do you have an example?

 

Hey Bobby - after reviewing this, I don't think you need to worry about any discrepancies. The gender-specific lines align with previous content aside from what you described, with an encompassing them for simplicity. Appreciate you checking in on this.

[Kalavier.1097]

On 3/3/2023 at 6:51 AM, penguin.7536 said:

I guess where my frustration lies is that the Commander has gone through these situations many times over and communicated with their team about it, made efforts to lay their friends to rest, and when a demon emerges it's revisiting this concept again in a very quick way (keeping in mind more content is coming, so this could be alleviated). The Commander has been made to hallucinate and become paranoid that they're seeing their loved ones so many times over, so guess I thought there would have been more of a nod to how they've experienced this before. The lack of nod to it kind of makes me feel like there wasn't much taken away from things like Jormag's manipulation, and kind of makes me feel like previous instances didn't have much impact.
 

Here's the thing though. In terms of "hallucinations" and stuff, that's happened once before outside of Mordremoth's mindscape. (in terms of hostile attacks and not something the commander willingly went into)

And that was an instance where everybody was being messed with at the exact same time by the exact same force.

Notice that when the commander asks "Have you heard anything weird?" The reply from gorrik is an instant "Nope, maybe a Jade brotherhood comm is causing trouble/somebody in the jade brotherhood's having his call splice into your unit."

Nobody else is seeing these things, or hearing these things. The comamnder isn't sure if it's THEM, or something else going into it. They aren't prepared for mental attacks like they were going after Jormag. Come to final battle where the commander is fighting to protect one thing, but it's really just Gorrik, Yao, and Rama that are being protected.

Edited March 9, 2023 by Kalavier.1097

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

Regarding the pronouns thing, I can see where some people are coming from. I've had alot of friends who don't see themselves as their avatars, who don't roleplay, who just create "toons", and prefer to be referred to in a gender-neutral way in game (or be a silent protagonist), because it makes them uncomfortable.

 

This is a side-effect of the "toon" culture as I mentioned, which started with World of Warcraft, I think. Back in the days of Everquest and other older games, it was extremely uncommon to detach yourself from your character, since the whole point of playing online games was the escape the real world and be someone or something else for a while. Sadly, people these days just seem to think very differently about online gaming.

 

I find it strange these players find themselves attracted to this game in particular. Its kind of like opening a box of chocolates and then saying "I didn't want chocolate".

Edited March 9, 2023 by SoftFootpaws.9134

[Danikat.8537]

On 3/6/2023 at 5:57 PM, Kalavier.1097 said:

Here's the thing though. In terms of "hallucinations" and stuff, that's happened once before outside of Mordremoth's mindscape. (in terms of hostile attacks and not something the commander willingly went into)

And that was an instance where everybody was being messed with at the exact same time by the exact same force.

There's a possible exception with Mordremoth if you're playing a sylvari. Then they'll get mind attacks and hallucinations which only affect them (or other sylvari who are around at the time) including one point where your allies briefly become attackable (yellow names, so they're not hostile but you can kill them).

(I played HoT on a sylvari first, so I actually got thrown off when that didn't happen when I switched characters.)
 

10 hours ago, SoftFootpaws.9134 said:

Regarding the pronouns thing, I can see where some people are coming from. I've had alot of friends who don't see themselves as their avatars, who don't roleplay, who just create "toons", and prefer to be referred to in a gender-neutral way in game (or be a silent protagonist), because it makes them uncomfortable.

 

This is a side-effect of the "toon" culture as I mentioned, which started with World of Warcraft, I think. Back in the days of Everquest and other older games, it was extremely uncommon to detach yourself from your character, since the whole point of playing online games was the escape the real world and be someone or something else for a while. Sadly, people these days just seem to think very differently about online gaming.

 

Basically roleplay is dead and video games are now just slot-machines with some combat.

 

I find it strange these players find themselves attracted to this game in particular. Its kind of like opening a box of chocolates and then saying "I didn't want chocolate".

I realise this is a frustrating issue for you, but I'm not sure the hyperbole is going to help get your point across. There have been other people in this topic talking about how they see their character as distinct from themselves and not simply an on-screen representation of them, elsewhere on this forum you can find people giving whole backstories for their characters, talking about how they make sure they're using lore appropriate names and titles, pick armour skins based on the character's personality etc. and people organising role-playing groups. So no, role-play is not dead and you are not the only one who sees games as more than just slot machines. It may not be a universal view, but it's a bit absurd to claim no one ever does it any more.

Also that approach definitely pre-dates WoW. Ultima Online actively encouraged it: the player character in the Ultima games is called The Avatar and was literally someone who got sucked through a computer into that world. UO wasn't as explicit but still called the characters avatars and the game would consistently talk about what you were doing and where you could go, rather than talking about your characters. A lot of people still chose to role-play, but it certainly wasn't universal.

Maybe the proportion of players in each group has shifted over time or between games, but I certainly wouldn't say one attitude is newer and has replaced the other, it's just different people with different preferences.

(Personally I don't do self-insertion even in games where you're supposed to. Someone told me the first time I played a Zelda game that you're supposed to put your name in and pretend it's you in the game, I tried that and got as far as literally the first step - walk unarmed across a monster infested beach to pick up a sword and fight your way back - and had to give up on the idea because there's no way in hell I'd do that. If I had a self-insertion character in GW2 they'd stay in Lion's Arch running logistics for the Pact team continuing Trahearne's work reviving Orr.)

[Gibson.4036]

23 hours ago, Danikat.8537 said:

There's a possible exception with Mordremoth if you're playing a sylvari. Then they'll get mind attacks and hallucinations which only affect them (or other sylvari who are around at the time) including one point where your allies briefly become attackable (yellow names, so they're not hostile but you can kill them).

(I played HoT on a sylvari first, so I actually got thrown off when that didn't happen when I switched characters.)
 

I realise this is a frustrating issue for you, but I'm not sure the hyperbole is going to help get your point across. There have been other people in this topic talking about how they see their character as distinct from themselves and not simply an on-screen representation of them, elsewhere on this forum you can find people giving whole backstories for their characters, talking about how they make sure they're using lore appropriate names and titles, pick armour skins based on the character's personality etc. and people organising role-playing groups. So no, role-play is not dead and you are not the only one who sees games as more than just slot machines. It may not be a universal view, but it's a bit absurd to claim no one ever does it any more.

Also that approach definitely pre-dates WoW. Ultima Online actively encouraged it: the player character in the Ultima games is called The Avatar and was literally someone who got sucked through a computer into that world. UO wasn't as explicit but still called the characters avatars and the game would consistently talk about what you were doing and where you could go, rather than talking about your characters. A lot of people still chose to role-play, but it certainly wasn't universal.

Maybe the proportion of players in each group has shifted over time or between games, but I certainly wouldn't say one attitude is newer and has replaced the other, it's just different people with different preferences.

(Personally I don't do self-insertion even in games where you're supposed to. Someone told me the first time I played a Zelda game that you're supposed to put your name in and pretend it's you in the game, I tried that and got as far as literally the first step - walk unarmed across a monster infested beach to pick up a sword and fight your way back - and had to give up on the idea because there's no way in hell I'd do that. If I had a self-insertion character in GW2 they'd stay in Lion's Arch running logistics for the Pact team continuing Trahearne's work reviving Orr.)

It’s fascinating reading you both talk about this because it’s not something I’ve though about. I’m having a little lightbulb moment.

I’ve always been puzzled by all the people who name their characters like you’d pick a forum handle or login name. I never thought about it carefully to realize I’m relating to my characters completely differently, as characters, rather than just an avatar of me in a virtual world.

I don’t really roleplay in GW2, but I do have a vague sense of personality and background for all my characters.

Edited March 10, 2023 by Gibson.4036

[Kalavier.1097]

5 hours ago, Danikat.8537 said:

There's a possible exception with Mordremoth if you're playing a sylvari. Then they'll get mind attacks and hallucinations which only affect them (or other sylvari who are around at the time) including one point where your allies briefly become attackable (yellow names, so they're not hostile but you can kill them).

(I played HoT on a sylvari first, so I actually got thrown off when that didn't happen when I switched characters.)

(Personally I don't do self-insertion even in games where you're supposed to. Someone told me the first time I played a Zelda game that you're supposed to put your name in and pretend it's you in the game, I tried that and got as far as literally the first step - walk unarmed across a monster infested beach to pick up a sword and fight your way back - and had to give up on the idea because there's no way in hell I'd do that. If I had a self-insertion character in GW2 they'd stay in Lion's Arch running logistics for the Pact team continuing Trahearne's work reviving Orr.)

Yeah, I've been meaning to actually go back and finish heart of thorns on my Sylvari but it's just... never happened. I need to gear my alts with builds and equipment before I try to heavily play them again.

Though for the second part, one thing I've done is disconnect my "characters" from the story steps. I will do EoD, but then figure out what my Kurzick descended character would do/be involved in. I try not to let my personal thoughts of character clash with the Commander's story as I don't see my character as "The commander".

[Gibson.4036]

18 hours ago, Kalavier.1097 said:

Yeah, I've been meaning to actually go back and finish heart of thorns on my Sylvari but it's just... never happened. I need to gear my alts with builds and equipment before I try to heavily play them again.

Though for the second part, one thing I've done is disconnect my "characters" from the story steps. I will do EoD, but then figure out what my Kurzick descended character would do/be involved in. I try not to let my personal thoughts of character clash with the Commander's story as I don't see my character as "The commander".

I’ve enjoyed playing the story with my kids. I have several characters that are the commander’s constant companion.

Unfortunately, I still had to ignore the occasional time the story makes you interact with NPCs in the open world as the commander.

Also, it’s amazing how often NPCs say stuff like “oh, you came alone?” Or “just the two of you” meaning the commander and a member of Dragons Watch. I like to jump up and down during those moment shouting, “Hey, what about me? I’m right here!”

[mandala.8507]

On 3/2/2023 at 5:09 AM, Dr Meta.3158 said:

An obsession with one's own identity in regards to the uniqueness and specificity of their identity apart from others including the use of nonbiological usage of personal pronouns, obsession over one's sexuality, body image, and emotional status over that of others is a strong indication of narcissistic personality disorder. So I would be wary of indulging in that game.

What 1950s textbook did you get this from? lol

[Mara.6782]

Time to drink my krait oil so i don't start see things.

[Andur.9275]

Huh, interesting. I, as a kinda retired role player, never thought about people seeing their characters as a direct representation of themselves (I would rather expect that in Second Life).

Of course my characters are influenced by my personal preferences and traits, but a very important rule in my old pen & paper group was to distinguish strictly between player and character knowledge, which lead automatically to the mindset of playing a character (like a puppeteer) and not me directly partcipating in the story in disguise.

Therefore it feels more familiar to me when NPCs address my character - if they adressed me directly, it would feel like a forth wall break.

I wouldn't mind if we could choose the character's pronouns along with their gender during the creation phase, though.

[Randulf.7614]

It’s not always about a direct representation of yourself (that is still a truth for many though), but playing a character you envision a certain way. For me, I pick a norn because I want to embody the culture, the legends, the attitudes of the race represented in GW1 and to some extent early GW2. I have a human character I can play for a more realistic, diverse and emotionally grounded set of responses.

I expect my Norn to act like a Norn. He represents the avatar I chose for him and I expect some concession towards that culture. Norns don’t cry and whimper over their long since dead. They mourn through honour, legends, ballads and through the stories they tell. Even when forced into hallucinations, it feels incorrect to instead grovel for forgiveness. I accept it more on my human and my sylvari.

I should know better by now after 11 years that races don’t matter to Anet, but it still annoys me when these touches aren’t respected. Everything has to be made into human-generic emotions. I hated it when they humanised the Dragons - that was a truly bizarre (and very poor) decision to make. I don’t want my non-human races treated like humans in terms of their emotional responses.

[Kalavier.1097]

I always find it weird when people approach Norn as if they aren't an incredibly varied race that can see a range of emotions and behaviors due to the way they approach culture/beliefs. Is it so odd that a Norn who has spent, frankly, a MASSIVE amount of time (10 years or more) living and working among other races may have had their own behaviors somewhat change as the years go by?

Norn who live in Hoelbrek behave differently from those who live alone out in the roughest parts of the shiverpeaks. Which isn't like the Norn who live in Lion's Arch or Vigil Keep.

Hell, we have a literal front row seat into this kinda thing with the Charr and seeing Lion's Arch and the Olmakhan, how some of these things aren't some biological aspect, but a culture one. One that individuals can shift out of.

Who says Norn can't suppress or hide doubts of what they may have been able to do to help fallen comrades. In the public everybody cheers the glory of the fallen's heroics in the war, but at night stare at the ceiling wondering "Could I not have done something better that would've kept them alive?"

Eir grieved as well. She outright went on a series of risky missions to commit suicide by adventure over Snaff and Destiny's Edge falling to pieces and not seeing a way to rebuild those relationships!

[Eekasqueak.7850]

Norn being stoic to the point that mourning and having regrets aren't things with them would make them extremely shallow. They'd almost have to be a race of sociopaths.