Jump to content
  • Sign Up

ArenaNet Forum Chat -- April 2018


Gaile Gray.6029
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • ArenaNet Staff

Hello,

We want to be sure to reach out especially to the members of our Lore Subforum, whom we would really love to have join several of our devs for the April 2018 ArenaNet Forum Chat (AFC) that will take place on April 26 and 27, 2018.

Here are some details:

  • Chat begins/Subforum Opens: Thursday morning (Pacific Time), April 26, 2018
  • Chat ends: Friday afternoon (Pacific Time), April 27, 2018
  • Topic: Guild Wars & Guild Wars 2 Lore
  • Subforum: April 2018: Guild Wars and Guild Wars 2 Lore

Join us to ask questions, ponder mysteries, share feedback, and generally engage with team members directly involved in the lore of Tyria, including several members of the Design and Narrative Teams. We'll be talking with folks who are involved in storytelling and development, including a few who have been working with (and on) lore since the first installment of Guild Wars!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@"Bloodstealer.5978" said:I am particularly interested in the one about elemental lore.. ya know the lore is spot on when fire eles get downed by fire, ice ele's slowed with chill and down with ice attacks, heck earth eles bleed etc, etc. Should be fun to read :)

heh about these... same reason as how you can bleed or poison stone in Tyria

I think that's just game mechanics. Back in GW1 there were more detailed mechanics that labeled certain enemies as ["fleshy"](https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Fleshy ""fleshy"") which made them susceptible to poison, bleeding, disease, etc., ice damage did more damage to some enemies and less to others. In GW2, everything is just simpler from a design perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Athrenn.9468 said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@"Bloodstealer.5978" said:I am particularly interested in the one about elemental lore.. ya know the lore is spot on when fire eles get downed by fire, ice ele's slowed with chill and down with ice attacks, heck earth eles bleed etc, etc. Should be fun to read :)

heh about these... same reason as how you can bleed or poison stone in Tyria

I think that's just game mechanics. Back in GW1 there were more detailed mechanics that labeled certain enemies as ["fleshy"](
""fleshy"") which made them susceptible to poison, bleeding, disease, etc., ice damage did more damage to some enemies and less to others. In GW2, everything is just simpler from a design perspective.

More like design choice. There are still remnants of GW1 desing, making some elementals or pure destroyers immune to burning or hyleks immune to poison. GW1 had much more depth in design considering damage and in addition it was logical. Fire creatures were almost invuln to fire spells and attacks while taking more damage from cold. I know that GW2 is all about simplicity but still it removes flavour and logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@"Bloodstealer.5978" said:I am particularly interested in the one about elemental lore.. ya know the lore is spot on when fire eles get downed by fire, ice ele's slowed with chill and down with ice attacks, heck earth eles bleed etc, etc. Should be fun to read :)

heh about these... same reason as how you can bleed or poison stone in Tyria

I think that's just game mechanics. Back in GW1 there were more detailed mechanics that labeled certain enemies as ["fleshy"](
""fleshy"") which made them susceptible to poison, bleeding, disease, etc., ice damage did more damage to some enemies and less to others. In GW2, everything is just simpler from a design perspective.

More like design choice. There are still remnants of GW1 desing, making some elementals or pure destroyers immune to burning or hyleks immune to poison. GW1 had much more depth in design considering damage and in addition it was logical. Fire creatures were almost invuln to fire spells and attacks while taking more damage from cold. I know that GW2 is all about simplicity but still it removes flavour and logic.

Yep.. Elemental lore is what it is.. and for the most part its logic.. GW2 does seem to suffer when it comes to elemental logic, but there are aspects of it in game, just not very consistent considering that every man and his dog are able to deal pretty much every kind of elemental dmg no matter what class/weapon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Games that find a way to blend game mechanics and lore are an exception these days, and I would be extremely impressed with one that taught you about the world using every little detail down to the combat mechanics. Sadly, it's just not something I expect from MMOs. Not that I wouldn't love to see it happen, but it's very hard to find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@"Bloodstealer.5978" said:I am particularly interested in the one about elemental lore.. ya know the lore is spot on when fire eles get downed by fire, ice ele's slowed with chill and down with ice attacks, heck earth eles bleed etc, etc. Should be fun to read :)

heh about these... same reason as how you can bleed or poison stone in Tyria

I think that's just game mechanics. Back in GW1 there were more detailed mechanics that labeled certain enemies as ["fleshy"](
""fleshy"") which made them susceptible to poison, bleeding, disease, etc., ice damage did more damage to some enemies and less to others. In GW2, everything is just simpler from a design perspective.

More like design choice. There are still remnants of GW1 desing, making some elementals or pure destroyers immune to burning or hyleks immune to poison. GW1 had much more depth in design considering damage and in addition it was logical. Fire creatures were almost invuln to fire spells and attacks while taking more damage from cold. I know that GW2 is all about simplicity but still it removes flavour and logic.

Main reasoning behind this, IIRC, is the removal of hexes and enchantments in favor of simply conditions and boons. This simplified things greatly, but also made conditions so much more common and thus needed to be more versatile across the entire game. Having so many enemies immune to basic DoT conditions like bleed and poison both would be highly detrimental to even the most basic of builds and skills.

They wanted to simplify things due to the massive amount of effort that balancing GW1 took with its 1,000+ skills and combinations. Making skills do similar things by just having them apply the same effects would theoretically simplify things greatly.

I find that it hurt the game, same with the removal of quests (as shown by how much people loved Burden of Choice and Knight of the Thorn stuff, those kinds of quests would be an awesome benefit, especially if character based like Knight of the Thorn).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@"Bloodstealer.5978" said:I am particularly interested in the one about elemental lore.. ya know the lore is spot on when fire eles get downed by fire, ice ele's slowed with chill and down with ice attacks, heck earth eles bleed etc, etc. Should be fun to read :)

heh about these... same reason as how you can bleed or poison stone in Tyria

I think that's just game mechanics. Back in GW1 there were more detailed mechanics that labeled certain enemies as ["fleshy"](
""fleshy"") which made them susceptible to poison, bleeding, disease, etc., ice damage did more damage to some enemies and less to others. In GW2, everything is just simpler from a design perspective.

More like design choice. There are still remnants of GW1 desing, making some elementals or pure destroyers immune to burning or hyleks immune to poison. GW1 had much more depth in design considering damage and in addition it was logical. Fire creatures were almost invuln to fire spells and attacks while taking more damage from cold. I know that GW2 is all about simplicity but still it removes flavour and logic.

Main reasoning behind this, IIRC, is the removal of hexes and enchantments in favor of simply conditions and boons. This simplified things greatly, but also made conditions so much more common and thus needed to be more versatile across the entire game. Having so many enemies immune to basic DoT conditions like bleed and poison both would be highly detrimental to even the most basic of builds and skills.

They wanted to simplify things due to the massive amount of effort that balancing GW1 took with its 1,000+ skills and combinations. Making skills do similar things by just having them apply the same effects would theoretically simplify things greatly.

I find that it hurt the game, same with the removal of quests (as shown by how much people loved Burden of Choice and Knight of the Thorn stuff, those kinds of quests would be an awesome benefit, especially if character based like Knight of the Thorn).

Well elemental lore is as old as the hills.. ignoring having something's in and out of that basic of lords is just kinda lazy imo.. this GW2 not GW1 besides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Bloodstealer.5978 said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@Bloodstealer.5978 said:I am particularly interested in the one about elemental lore.. ya know the lore is spot on when fire eles get downed by fire, ice ele's slowed with chill and down with ice attacks, heck earth eles bleed etc, etc. Should be fun to read :)

heh about these... same reason as how you can bleed or poison stone in Tyria

I think that's just game mechanics. Back in GW1 there were more detailed mechanics that labeled certain enemies as ["fleshy"](
""fleshy"") which made them susceptible to poison, bleeding, disease, etc., ice damage did more damage to some enemies and less to others. In GW2, everything is just simpler from a design perspective.

More like design choice. There are still remnants of GW1 desing, making some elementals or pure destroyers immune to burning or hyleks immune to poison. GW1 had much more depth in design considering damage and in addition it was logical. Fire creatures were almost invuln to fire spells and attacks while taking more damage from cold. I know that GW2 is all about simplicity but still it removes flavour and logic.

Main reasoning behind this, IIRC, is the removal of hexes and enchantments in favor of simply conditions and boons. This simplified things greatly, but also made conditions so much more common and thus needed to be more versatile across the entire game. Having so many enemies immune to basic DoT conditions like bleed and poison both would be highly detrimental to even the most basic of builds and skills.

They wanted to simplify things due to the massive amount of effort that balancing GW1 took with its 1,000+ skills and combinations. Making skills do similar things by just having them apply the same effects would theoretically simplify things greatly.

I find that it hurt the game, same with the removal of quests (as shown by how much people loved Burden of Choice and Knight of the Thorn stuff, those kinds of quests would be an awesome benefit, especially if character based like Knight of the Thorn).

Well elemental lore is as old as the hills.. ignoring having something's in and out of that basic of lords is just kinda lazy imo.. this GW2 not GW1 besides.

You missed the point.

That's not elemental lore. It's mechanics. And mechanics do not always equal lore. This is one such case.

You're not actually making stone bleed or fire burn in the lore of the game's world. You're damaging them over time and the game mechanics represents these specific damages over time via the conditions of bleed, burning, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:

@Bloodstealer.5978 said:I am particularly interested in the one about elemental lore.. ya know the lore is spot on when fire eles get downed by fire, ice ele's slowed with chill and down with ice attacks, heck earth eles bleed etc, etc. Should be fun to read :)

heh about these... same reason as how you can bleed or poison stone in Tyria

I think that's just game mechanics. Back in GW1 there were more detailed mechanics that labeled certain enemies as ["fleshy"](
""fleshy"") which made them susceptible to poison, bleeding, disease, etc., ice damage did more damage to some enemies and less to others. In GW2, everything is just simpler from a design perspective.

More like design choice. There are still remnants of GW1 desing, making some elementals or pure destroyers immune to burning or hyleks immune to poison. GW1 had much more depth in design considering damage and in addition it was logical. Fire creatures were almost invuln to fire spells and attacks while taking more damage from cold. I know that GW2 is all about simplicity but still it removes flavour and logic.

Main reasoning behind this, IIRC, is the removal of hexes and enchantments in favor of simply conditions and boons. This simplified things greatly, but also made conditions so much more common and thus needed to be more versatile across the entire game. Having so many enemies immune to basic DoT conditions like bleed and poison both would be highly detrimental to even the most basic of builds and skills.

They wanted to simplify things due to the massive amount of effort that balancing GW1 took with its 1,000+ skills and combinations. Making skills do similar things by just having them apply the same effects would theoretically simplify things greatly.

I find that it hurt the game, same with the removal of quests (as shown by how much people loved Burden of Choice and Knight of the Thorn stuff, those kinds of quests would be an awesome benefit, especially if character based like Knight of the Thorn).

Well elemental lore is as old as the hills.. ignoring having something's in and out of that basic of lords is just kinda lazy imo.. this GW2 not GW1 besides.

You missed the point.

That's not elemental lore. It's
mechanics
. And mechanics do not always equal lore. This is one such case.

You're not actually making stone bleed or fire burn in the lore of the game's world. You're damaging them over time and the game mechanics represents these specific damages over time via the conditions of bleed, burning, etc.

Of course it's mechanics but those mechanics are centred around the lore (in some cases) . For example a skill offering both base physical damage plus fire dots should should only cause physical damage and the fire dots negated due to resistance/invulnerability.ANET does this with some but many have been missed.. unless one fire else is different to another for example ... just needs some consistency and a bit of consideration... going to be fighting alot of fire eles or fire biased mobs best take frosty, chills, water etc in your skill/weapon choices...... forewarned is forearmed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Bloodstealer.5978" said:Of course it's mechanics but those mechanics are centred around the lore (in some cases) .

And this is one case where that "in some cases" does not apply.

@"Bloodstealer.5978" said:ANET does this with some but many have been missed..

There's only three cases of this in the entire game that I can think of. Dredge with blindness, core destroyers with burning, and S3 destroyers with chilled.

These are more outliers than the norm, as much as I'd like to see Anet do this across the map, it's pretty clear that they've taken an overarching "nope" stance to it, and it isn't really a lore question but a mechanic design one.

And GW2 has no "physical damage versus fire damage" that you bring up (there are "damage modifiers" - fire, cold, choking, lightning, etc. - but this only affects death animations AFAIK).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

@"Bloodstealer.5978" said:Of course it's mechanics but those mechanics are centred around the lore (in some cases) .

And this is one case where that "in some cases" does not apply.

@"Bloodstealer.5978" said:ANET does this with some but many have been missed..

There's only three cases of this in the entire game that I can think of. Dredge with blindness, core destroyers with burning, and S3 destroyers with chilled.

These are more outliers than the norm, as much as I'd like to see Anet do this across the map, it's pretty clear that they've taken an overarching "nope" stance to it, and it isn't really a lore question but a mechanic design one.

And GW2 has no "physical damage versus fire damage" that you bring up (there are "damage modifiers" - fire, cold, choking, lightning, etc. - but this only affects death animations AFAIK).

I did not say physical dmg vs elemental dmg.. I said a weapon can inflict physical damage plus additional elemental dot ie fire.Therefore when elemental lore is applied that dot effect is negated.. in some cases but not in others.. hence the request for consistency.That is a lore based logic that could/should be consistent throughout the game.. especially as there are so many dots available and so many skills/weapons that anyone can inflict at a drop of a hat.. that's why the elemental logic if applied gamewide would improve gameplay imo as it stands anything can do anything to everything, with a few exceptions that yes you have listed amongst though there are others like fire eles that some are invulnerable, some aren't.

Just my 2 cents worth if anet are wanting to look for discussion topics ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ArenaNet Staff

Reminder that this start tomorrow morning. I'll be opening the subforum in the morning, Pacific Time. My goal is around 8:30 or 9:00 AM Pacific Time. You're welcome to join the subforum then, and start posting your questions, input, suggestions, and anything else you'd like to talk about at that time, and the devs will join in as they are able to do so throughout the day and into Friday afternoon.

Thanks in advance for your participation. I consider the members of this subforum a great group of people, and I hope you'll have a blast with this little mini-event!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ArenaNet Staff

@TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:Thanks for giving us a time. I'll make sure not to stay up too late tonight powering my Norn through the story so I can get up early enough to be one of the first to post my question. :P

Sounds like a solid plan. I, on the other hand, have some map clearing to do with one of my chars. Dwayna only knows when I'll hit the hay. Or wait, I have to open the darn thing... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...