Curse

draxynnic · Aug 15, 2009, 09:16 AM // 09:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

Welcome to the skewed idea of Bushido and the way of the warrior, ESPECIALLY the Klingon idea of it...

A Klingon would shoot the other for giving up the information and being weak... Actually so would a Samurai

Heck, WW2 showed how much bushido cares about the rights of the prisoner...

(In fact, it pretty much specifically says that prisoners have NO rights, and that a follower of bushido should die rather than allow themselves to be taken prisoner. As far as bushido is concerned, anyone that lets themselves be defeated while still alive deserves whatever happens to them.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martacus Grognoggin

Um, I'm not sure, but If I remember correctly, no one came out and explicitly said, "Hey, your GW2 chars will the fruit of your GW1 char's loins, guys. Now go speculate on how RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOed of a family tree that makes, see you in 4 years."

Konig did point out in the post he made just before the one you quoted that it doesn't necessarily mean literal biological descent - just some form of passing on the legacy.

Lonesamurai · Aug 15, 2009, 01:14 PM // 13:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

Heck, WW2 showed how much bushido cares about the rights of the prisoner...

(In fact, it pretty much specifically says that prisoners have NO rights, and that a follower of bushido should die rather than allow themselves to be taken prisoner. As far as bushido is concerned, anyone that lets themselves be defeated while still alive deserves whatever happens to them.)

actually your right,not only that but from Samurai history it is well documented that samurai used to use prisoners for sword practice

and then used Bamboo if they ran out

Bamboo came higher on the social status ladder than a prisoner

Konig Des Todes · Aug 15, 2009, 01:28 PM // 13:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martacus Grognoggin

Um, I'm not sure, but If I remember correctly, no one came out and explicitly said, "Hey, your GW2 chars will the fruit of your GW1 char's loins, guys. Now go speculate on how RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOed of a family tree that makes, see you in 4 years."

So, maybe the word "Children" is used in a figurative sense...

Unless you want to play a game where the devs see a giant cat raping a human lady and making a half cat-man baby as being all fine and dandy lore-wise.

You didn't see my earlier post did you... Let me quote for you:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

Ownership doesn't mean biological descendant. Could be adoption or teacher/student passing on. Also it's the children of legends - Zhed, Pyre, Vekk, Jora, Ogden are all legends.

So descendant of legends doesn't mean descendant from your individual character. Though Humans and Norn are known to be able to have children (biologically speaking, other races cannot have children, Humans and Norn are, however, genetically close enough to each other to have children it seems). And aside from Humans and Norn, the only possible races to be able to mate with each other might be Forgotten, Naga, and Krait. Though their differences may be the same as humans and monkeys - i.e., close genetically, but not close enough to have proper offspring.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eliz Genevieve

No, just no.
evil, semi evil, neutral, semi kind, kind?
Why would one need that many alignments?

Not everyone wants to be a goody-goody-two-shoes, which is where evil and neutral come in. But not everyone wants to be pure evil either. Which is where semi-evil and semi-good comes in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

actually your right,not only that but from Samurai history it is well documented that samurai used to use prisoners for sword practice

and then used Bamboo if they ran out

Bamboo came higher on the social status ladder than a prisoner

A being with no honor is no longer living. Besides, knowing a blade can cut through people is more useful than knowing a blade can cut through bamboo.

Lonesamurai · Aug 15, 2009, 01:35 PM // 13:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

A being with no honor is no longer living. Besides, knowing a blade can cut through people is more useful than knowing a blade can cut through bamboo.

Totally agreed

however, partfrom the abundunce of bamboo in Japan ofcourse, it also has a certain consistency which gives it nearly muscle like qualities and the outer bark is tougher than skin and it was used not only in armour manufacture (at first as armour itself and then as padding as metal was woven into and thenplaced over), but also for house building and Sword production for making sure a blade was upto a certain level of manufacture and quality(if it can cut babmoo, it can cut armour and flesh)

Eliz Genevieve · Aug 15, 2009, 02:05 PM // 14:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

Not everyone wants to be a goody-goody-two-shoes, which is where evil and neutral come in. But not everyone wants to be pure evil either. Which is where semi-evil and semi-good comes in.

Evil Neutral and Good alignments, yeah, I could live with that, if it weere implemented right.
The semi thing, I'm seeing that as an intermediate point, like you said, some don't want to be pure evil/good.
But how would you implement that in GW2?
Sure, we don't know the story yet, but how would a pure evil character help the good ones against the Dragons?

Hum, I'm having a brainfart right now, so if I can't make myself clear, I apologize.

draxynnic · Aug 15, 2009, 02:19 PM // 14:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eliz Genevieve

Evil Neutral and Good alignments, yeah, I could live with that, if it weere implemented right.
The semi thing, I'm seeing that as an intermediate point, like you said, some don't want to be pure evil/good.
But how would you implement that in GW2?
Sure, we don't know the story yet, but how would a pure evil character help the good ones against the Dragons?

Hum, I'm having a brainfart right now, so if I can't make myself clear, I apologize.

The traditional tropes for getting evil to work with good are "evil is not monolithic" and "if that guy WINS, I'm just as dead as the rest!"

Lonesamurai · Aug 15, 2009, 02:21 PM // 14:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

The traditional tropes for getting evil to work with good are "evil is not monolithic" and "if that guy WINS, I'm just as dead as the rest!"

Mutual cooperation

NeHoMaR · Aug 15, 2009, 02:31 PM // 14:31

I don't exactly want this for GW2, but Dungeon & Dragons rules include a deep alignment system, it's out there from year 1974: CLICK HERE

The only video game I know using that alignment rules is Neverwinter Nights; Even in D&D Online you are the "good guy", the "hero", cannot be evil afaik.

Martacus Grognoggin · Aug 15, 2009, 03:15 PM // 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

You didn't see my earlier post did you... Let me quote for you:

Words.

Yeah, I understand what you're saying, but it seems to me that in the 250 years between the two Guild Wars games, heroics have kind of fallen out of fashion what with the whole world coming apart business. In "The Movement of the World," it is implied that heroes have been somewhat lacking in that time:

"If there are heroes left in these lands anywhere among the races, it is time for them to step forward, if the world is to be saved.

Someone must rise to seize glory, offer a moment of hope, and perhaps give the world one last chance for peace. If those who would be heroes are listening...

...Now is your time."

I'm not discounting your ideas, Konig. I just don't think they really fit with the lore, because even if our GW2 chars have been given some sort of super secret, 250-year-old hero training, that means that there were generations of would-be heroes that just sat back and watched the world burn.

draxynnic · Aug 15, 2009, 03:39 PM // 15:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martacus Grognoggin

I'm not discounting your ideas, Konig. I just don't think they really fit with the lore, because even if our GW2 chars have been given some sort of super secret, 250-year-old hero training, that means that there were generations of would-be heroes that just sat back and watched the world burn.

Or they didn't, and burned along with the world.

One of the keywords is left - that could mean that heroic types have been trying over the centuries and facing high attrition in the process, to the point where people might think that the inheritors of the legacies of the heroes of the past have been wiped out.

HawkofStorms · Aug 15, 2009, 04:20 PM // 16:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeHoMaR

The only video game I know using that alignment rules is Neverwinter Nights;

Baulder's Gate.

Konig Des Todes · Aug 15, 2009, 04:30 PM // 16:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martacus Grognoggin

Yeah, I understand what you're saying, but it seems to me that in the 250 years between the two Guild Wars games, heroics have kind of fallen out of fashion what with the whole world coming apart business. In "The Movement of the World," it is implied that heroes have been somewhat lacking in that time:

"If there are heroes left in these lands anywhere among the races, it is time for them to step forward, if the world is to be saved.

Someone must rise to seize glory, offer a moment of hope, and perhaps give the world one last chance for peace. If those who would be heroes are listening...

...Now is your time."

I'm not discounting your ideas, Konig. I just don't think they really fit with the lore, because even if our GW2 chars have been given some sort of super secret, 250-year-old hero training, that means that there were generations of would-be heroes that just sat back and watched the world burn.

No one said the descendants of the heroes all have to be heroes themselves. And there have been "heroes" (I use quotation marks as they are, more or less, failed heroes) and adventurers that have existed past GW1. Though only one was given a name: Kalla Scorchrazor. Who, incidentially, was a descendant (grandcub) of Pyre Fierceshot.

4thVariety · Aug 15, 2009, 04:47 PM // 16:47

I doubt GW2 is going to have five low level starter areas. Seriously how much fun is that really? Every MMO is always short on high end content, so why waste time on multiple tutorials? I doubt there will even be two. Good guys, that's us, bad guys, that's some dragons. Rivalries between the five races will be an excuse for PvP nothing more, just like Kurzick-Luxon. In terms of the story it will be a five way group hug from the start.

As far as picking up the GW1 loot at the Eye for your new character, I am sure any excuse you make for being the rightful heir is good enough. Why really bother with lore at this point. All the rest about heroes, adventure and other fantasy stuff... ...that's just the promo talking to teens, nothing anybody should really concern himself about in terms of the actual game.

Martacus Grognoggin · Aug 15, 2009, 05:08 PM // 17:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

No one said the descendants of the heroes all have to be heroes themselves. And there have been "heroes" (I use quotation marks as they are, more or less, failed heroes) and adventurers that have existed past GW1. Though only one was given a name: Kalla Scorchrazor. Who, incidentially, was a descendant (grandcub) of Pyre Fierceshot.

But then if the descendants of heroes weren't all heroes themselves, how does training someone in heroics get passed down?

Maybe it's just my preference, but I think the story in Prophecies was much better than in Factions and Nightfall because it was all about relatively ordinary people (granted, they may have been hand-selected to serve in the Ascalon Vanguard, but they were not trained specifically for heroics) becoming heroes out of necessity and not because they had the ambition to be. Not only that, but the Prophecies campaign gives a little more wiggle-room for a character's morality. A Prophecies character starts wanting to protect Ascalon, but the motivation behind each character has the room to grow beyond wanting to be a beacon of morality and heroism as is the case in Nightfall. I'd like to see that repeat itself in GW2 instead of me being roped into having a shining, heroic nature just because of some ancient relative

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

Or they didn't, and burned along with the world.

One of the keywords is left - that could mean that heroic types have been trying over the centuries and facing high attrition in the process, to the point where people might think that the inheritors of the legacies of the heroes of the past have been wiped out.

I like the fact that you say, "inheritors of the legacies" because, while I have no problem with GW2 chars having an implied connection to a linked GW1 char, I do think that the whole "descendant" idea is kind of lame...more a cop-out than anything.

TottWriter · Aug 15, 2009, 07:36 PM // 19:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4thVariety

I doubt GW2 is going to have five low level starter areas. Seriously how much fun is that really? Every MMO is always short on high end content, so why waste time on multiple tutorials? I doubt there will even be two. Good guys, that's us, bad guys, that's some dragons. Rivalries between the five races will be an excuse for PvP nothing more, just like Kurzick-Luxon. In terms of the story it will be a five way group hug from the start.

As far as picking up the GW1 loot at the Eye for your new character, I am sure any excuse you make for being the rightful heir is good enough. Why really bother with lore at this point. All the rest about heroes, adventure and other fantasy stuff... ...that's just the promo talking to teens, nothing anybody should really concern himself about in terms of the actual game.

While I have nothing against the first half of your argument, I have to say, your second point is a little cynical. One of the points consistently raised on this forum, and by Guild Wars players in general, is how good the storyline is (well, developed, at least. Opinions on stry features are debated as much as anything else), and what a difference that makes to overall enjoyment of the game. It's a feature that sets it apart from other MMOs.

Lore is a key feature of Guild Wars because of this, and because it's a draw to the game. While GW playes might start GW2 and not need lore straight away, because they'll spend most of their time in the 'endgame', what about newer players? A Game is like a book - if it doesn't catch your attention in the first few pages (read: Quests) you put it down and do something else.

Guild Wars 2 needs to capture its audience quickly, because by the time it comes out there will be an awful lot of games out there competing for people's attention. No Monthy Fees will only do so much.

Konig Des Todes · Aug 15, 2009, 07:42 PM // 19:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martacus Grognoggin

But then if the descendants of heroes weren't all heroes themselves, how does training someone in heroics get passed down?

Who said the training gets passed down? That would only be the case for the same profession, if that. What if the descendants don't train under their parents, but from someone else? It's not training, profession, or techniques which get passed down via HoM, it's possessions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martacus Grognoggin

Maybe it's just my preference, but I think the story in Prophecies was much better than in Factions and Nightfall because it was all about relatively ordinary people (granted, they may have been hand-selected to serve in the Ascalon Vanguard, but they were not trained specifically for heroics) becoming heroes out of necessity and not because they had the ambition to be. Not only that, but the Prophecies campaign gives a little more wiggle-room for a character's morality. A Prophecies character starts wanting to protect Ascalon, but the motivation behind each character has the room to grow beyond wanting to be a beacon of morality and heroism as is the case in Nightfall. I'd like to see that repeat itself in GW2 instead of me being roped into having a shining, heroic nature just because of some ancient relative

Propheices: Joining the Army. Factions: Training (unknown what job one will have, it's rather up to the person). Nightfall: Continent-wide "army." Factions seems to have the most "wiggle-room" to be honest.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martacus Grognoggin

I like the fact that you say, "inheritors of the legacies" because, while I have no problem with GW2 chars having an implied connection to a linked GW1 char, I do think that the whole "descendant" idea is kind of lame...more a cop-out than anything.

Didn't I say that it didn't have to be biological descendant though... I think I did in my very first sentence on this...

Martacus Grognoggin · Aug 15, 2009, 08:05 PM // 20:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

Who said the training gets passed down? That would only be the case for the same profession, if that. What if the descendants don't train under their parents, but from someone else? It's not training, profession, or techniques which get passed down via HoM, it's possessions.

Propheices: Joining the Army. Factions: Training (unknown what job one will have, it's rather up to the person). Nightfall: Continent-wide "army." Factions seems to have the most "wiggle-room" to be honest.

Didn't I say that it didn't have to be biological descendant though... I think I did in my very first sentence on this...

1: Which is why it's just as likely the characters in GW2 just stumble upon them in the ruins of the EotN. I don't understand why this had to be blown into a whole argument because I proposed a theory that may be different from yours.

2: I think that's a really shallow way of looking at the campaigns. In Factions and Nightfall, you come from what amounts to "hero-training" where most of your contemporaries end up being...heroes! In Prophecies, though, you can see (especially as a Necromancer, through Oberan and Verata) that you come from the same stock as villains. Granted, you become a "hero" regardless in each campaign, but I think Prophecies has a bit of depth there that I'd like to see carried over into GW2 in developing your character. Being the hero all the time is kind of boring.

3: You did, I was just set off by the word "descent." So, I suppose I should apologize for taking that out of context and arguing against what amounts to nothing. Still, the fact remains, direct biological descent from GW1 to GW2 is a cop-out. A non-biological descent that still retains some connection is less so, though I don't think there NEEDS to be any connection at all. In the end though, it's A-net's decision, and since we really have no information as of yet, all we can do is wait and see.

By the way...what the hell is a lore guild?..unless it's just the tag, in which case....never mind.

Konig Des Todes · Aug 15, 2009, 08:36 PM // 20:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martacus Grognoggin

1: Which is why it's just as likely the characters in GW2 just stumble upon them in the ruins of the EotN. I don't understand why this had to be blown into a whole argument because I proposed a theory that may be different from yours.

My argument came from someone *now forgot who* about who the heroes of GW2 will be (descendants or not of the GW1 characters). I wasn't saying anything about the HoM. They most likely just stumbles upon the HoM.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martacus Grognoggin

2: I think that's a really shallow way of looking at the campaigns. In Factions and Nightfall, you come from what amounts to "hero-training" where most of your contemporaries end up being...heroes! In Prophecies, though, you can see (especially as a Necromancer, through Oberan and Verata) that you come from the same stock as villains. Granted, you become a "hero" regardless in each campaign, but I think Prophecies has a bit of depth there that I'd like to see carried over into GW2 in developing your character. Being the hero all the time is kind of boring.

Not sure if they ever mention past students of the monastery (aside from the teachers and the Crimson Skull leader). And for Nightfall, you're just a recruit in an army force which protects all three provinces of Elona. The army becomes a group of heroes due to the actions of individuals in the army (from past *such as the three ghosts you see in one of the Istan primary quests) and those like the hero. Everyone from those two areas are not heroes. Many may strive to be heroes, but not all of them.

You bring up Verata and Oberan. I bring up Quimang (the leader of the Crimson Skull who was a favorite student of Togo). I don't know of any "traitor" sunspears in GW1 (but I do think there is a istan quest *or quests* that bring up a traitor, or was that a traitorous shorewatcher...), but once Joko takes over, many split off to form the Mordant Crescent. Though I doubt you'd count the Mordant Crescent.

Point is, even in the training areas of the campaigns, there are "fellow students" from those areas which can/does get corrupted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martacus Grognoggin

3: You did, I was just set off by the word "descent." So, I suppose I should apologize for taking that out of context and arguing against what amounts to nothing. Still, the fact remains, direct biological descent from GW1 to GW2 is a cop-out. A non-biological descent that still retains some connection is less so, though I don't think there NEEDS to be any connection at all. In the end though, it's A-net's decision, and since we really have no information as of yet, all we can do is wait and see.

I suppose one can say that "Children of Legends" doesn't even refer to the heroes of GW1. Odran was a legend, Ventari was a legend, Adelbern, Doric, and even more legends once existed. So that would be another get around that line.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martacus Grognoggin

By the way...what the hell is a lore guild?..unless it's just the tag, in which case....never mind.

The tag is Lore, but my guild is a guild for lore lovers (basically, a guild version of a lore forum such as Druid's Overlook).

Martacus Grognoggin · Aug 15, 2009, 09:15 PM // 21:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

You bring up Verata and Oberan. I bring up Quimang (the leader of the Crimson Skull who was a favorite student of Togo). I don't know of any "traitor" sunspears in GW1 (but I do think there is a istan quest *or quests* that bring up a traitor, or was that a traitorous shorewatcher...), but once Joko takes over, many split off to form the Mordant Crescent. Though I doubt you'd count the Mordant Crescent.

Point is, even in the training areas of the campaigns, there are "fellow students" from those areas which can/does get corrupted.

Actually, I had not ever heard of Quimang, seeing as I really never did too much in the Factions starter area. And no, I probably wouldn't count the Mordant Crescent in the context of GW1, but as far as GW2 is concerned, I think you make a very good point by bringing them up...or at least the few who accept Joko's leadership without being killed and reanimated.

Regardless, it's these kind of conflicts that lead someone astray from what we look at as the "hero's path" that I'd like to see implemented in the character development in GW2...which leads us right back to the Good vs. Evil topic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

The tag is Lore, but my guild is a guild for lore lovers (basically, a guild version of a lore forum such as Druid's Overlook).

While extremely nerdy, that is a pretty cool idea for a guild.

If outposts in GW2 can become controllable by guilds and alliances a la Factions, you guys should look into taking the Durmand Priory.

NeHoMaR · Aug 15, 2009, 09:20 PM // 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4thVariety

I doubt GW2 is going to have five low level starter areas.

Actually, I bet it will.

I can't imagine a starting area where all 5 races start at level 1, in the same place, with the same story line? come on! that's ridiculous. That make different races unneeded.