Curse

Gmr Leon · Jun 24, 2009, 08:13 PM // 20:13

That sounds likely to have been the Shaman caste's plan, but it would seem that most of the Charr, after the Shaman caste was cast down, were more than comfortable enough with the idea of maintaining that pseudo-alliance. After all, once they seize control of Ascalon, we don't hear anything of them raiding the Shiverpeaks.

Although, there are still humans in Ebonhawke, but I don't think they would be a large enough threat to distract them from killing the Norn if they really wanted to. Then again, consider how their pseudo-alliance was formed in the first place, the Norn slaughtered each warband thrown at them.

Mordakai · Jun 24, 2009, 08:20 PM // 20:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

Hmm, that is true. Perhaps the Shamans originally saw it as a better chance to remove the more hated foes (humans and their gods) first? With the intention to then attack the Norn? After all, the Charr do attack the Norn as well.

Yes, I think you're right. I missed the first part:

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_...t_of_the_World

"Many expected the initial Charr expansion through northern Tyria to become a tide of blood that would crash upon the Shiverpeaks, drowning Charr and Norn alike. The reality proved different. When the Charr reached the foothills, the Norn drove them back with a single crushing blow, completely decimating every warband sent against them.

Although it is certain the Charr could have destroyed the Norn resistance if they but turned their entire army—or even one full legion—to the cause, warbands and smaller raiding parties could not overcome the individual strength of the Norn. These initial skirmishes taught both sides to respect the strength of the other.

From this accord of mutual respect and strength arose a strange pseudo-alliance that has yet to be broken. For nearly two hundred years, the eastern border of the Shiverpeaks has been stable. The Charr are allowed passage through Gunnar's Hold, and the lower canyons where the Norn had spread.

In fact, during the Searing, the Norn allowed the Charr armies passage through the northern pass from Ascalon into Kryta, setting the stage for the Charr invasion of the central human lands. Although this was not a sign of any alliance, it set the stage for the two races to live within a watchful peace.

No peace accord was ever signed; a treaty would have been meaningless to the individualistic Norn and no Charr would even spit upon such a paper. However, the two races allowed one another passage and trade, while keeping their borders secure. Occasionally, a warband (or a Norn hunter) might cross the line into the other's land, only to be cut down without prejudice...but these skirmishes do not disrupt the accord reached by mutual consent between these nations."

I suspect that the Dragons will force the Charr and Humans to ally for awhile.

(I also feel compelled to add that the probable reason this "psudeo-alliance" business sounds untrue to Charr character, is because it had to be written as a kind of "ret-con" to explain how the Charr got to Kryta unmolested. That's what happens when you add new characters to a story already written...)

Konig Des Todes · Jun 24, 2009, 09:45 PM // 21:45

I had actually forgotten about that line in the Movement. As for "the probable reason this "psudeo-alliance" business sounds untrue to Charr character, is because it had to be written as a kind of "ret-con" to explain how the Charr got to Kryta unmolested."

I would kind of have to agree. Though it does seem like the Charr did get a little "molested" on their way to Kryta - at first that is. Perhaps there was a rare more talky Charr (as opposed to the kill-all Charr) who made a truce to let the Charr legions through (and, due to Norn culture, had to prove himself worthy by fighting first). If that were the case, than it was probably a Shaman - as they seem more like talkers and less like fighters to me - that is, of those we see.

And Leon, I was actually thinking that (and thought I implied that) as well.

Mordakai · Jun 25, 2009, 06:50 PM // 18:50

I thought it would be cool to put these two pics together...

not because they look alike, but just to compare.

Stormlord:

Unknown GW art, posted by pumpkin pie here http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/n...eply&p=4708493

Could the latter be the Iron Citadel?

Konig Des Todes · Jun 25, 2009, 09:09 PM // 21:09

IMO, that looks like a better candidate for a more human structure - like Divinity's Coast.

Mordakai · Jun 25, 2009, 10:01 PM // 22:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

IMO, that looks like a better candidate for a more human structure - like Divinity's Coast.

I'll have to re-read ecology of the Charr, but isn't it possible the Iron Citadel was built by humans?

(EDIT: Nevermind, built by Charr on the ruins of Rin.)

Anyway, the foliage around it is Ascalon looking, not Krytan.

It could just be an unused pre-searing concept art for all we know!

Konig Des Todes · Jun 25, 2009, 10:41 PM // 22:41

That is true, the trees and leaves look more like Charr Homeland/Non-seared Ascalon. It could be the Iron Citadel - if it is highly influenced by human building. Or it could be concept for Pre-searing Ascalon, possibly a structure meant to be off of the aqueduct-like structure in Regent Valley.

draxynnic · Jun 27, 2009, 02:00 AM // 02:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

I had actually forgotten about that line in the Movement. As for "the probable reason this "psudeo-alliance" business sounds untrue to Charr character, is because it had to be written as a kind of "ret-con" to explain how the Charr got to Kryta unmolested."

I would kind of have to agree. Though it does seem like the Charr did get a little "molested" on their way to Kryta - at first that is. Perhaps there was a rare more talky Charr (as opposed to the kill-all Charr) who made a truce to let the Charr legions through (and, due to Norn culture, had to prove himself worthy by fighting first). If that were the case, than it was probably a Shaman - as they seem more like talkers and less like fighters to me - that is, of those we see.

And Leon, I was actually thinking that (and thought I implied that) as well.

That is possible, yes. Alternatively, it could simply be a leadup to demonstering the Charr so they can become a playable race - demonstrating that, yes, they are capable of coexisting with other races for a time. Considering that the Charr were really fleshed out in the leadup to EOTN (previously, they were basically just 'generic aggressive race to serve as the Titan's catspaws', pun not intended) they could easily have made them not quite so aggressively paranoid. Instead, they did, but also gave the Norn as an exception.

It's not explicitly stated, but the Grawl seem to be another exception - possibly because the Charr find them easy to manipulate in turn.

The real deciding factor could well be in the observation that if the Charr had thrown everything at the Norn, the Norn would have fallen. If the Charr knew that as well, than the pseudo-alliance could simply have formed from the Charr deciding that the Norn are strong enough not to be worth conquering for economic reasons (they'd be unlikely to make good slaves, and the snowy terrain probably isn't of much interest to the Charr) but not strong enough to be an actual threat. This probably means the days of the Norn would be numbered according to how long it took for the Charr to decide to turn on them, but while they have humans to fight they won't... and we know that before they finish mopping up the remains of Ascalon (the ghosts in Ascalon City, Ebonhawke) the dragons will awaken, drive the Norn south, and present the Charr with another threat.

Regarding the Charr getting to Kryta - that could easily have been explained without the pseudo-alliance by simply having the Charr stomp through any opposition while the majority of the Norn remain in their homesteads. While the Charr might take some casualties along the way, enough of them would get through.

Konig Des Todes · Jul 03, 2009, 08:03 AM // 08:03

I have moved two pages worth of posts from a thread meant for the Ancient Dragon's location because it was getting too off-topic. The concept art that let to this discussion is the one of the dragon in post 24 of this thread.

Winnies Bro · Jul 05, 2009, 06:32 PM // 18:32

I dont think that ascalon theme concept art thingy is human made, it is made out of metal and looks very un-humanish.
edit: where the hell did you get that first picture from? holy hell that dragon thingy and whatever the hell else is there.

Operative 14 · Jul 05, 2009, 08:23 PM // 20:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winnies Bro

I dont think that ascalon theme concept art thingy is human made, it is made out of metal and looks very un-humanish.

Although it does bear a resemblance to Divinities Reach in a way, and it would make sense for a fortification.

Konig Des Todes · Jul 05, 2009, 09:29 PM // 21:29

That concept art doesn't really look Ascalonian or Charr. So hard to tell.

And that Dragon concept art, which was first brought up in the forums by myself in the dragon location thread, was found on one of the artists' websites, I believe.

Winnies Bro · Jul 06, 2009, 04:21 PM // 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Operative 14

Although it does bear a resemblance to Divinities Reach in a way, and it would make sense for a fortification.

No it doesnt really look like that at all...

Konig Des Todes · Jul 06, 2009, 05:25 PM // 17:25

Perhaps you'd like to say why it doesn't look like a fortification. Because I think it kind of does. That is, a kind of citadel, which are used as fortifications.

Free Runner · Jul 06, 2009, 05:47 PM // 17:47

It reminds me of Ascalon purely from the Autumn theme. Also the bridge leading into the building reminds me alot of the building in pre searing Ascalon city.

Operative 14 · Jul 07, 2009, 09:29 AM // 09:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winnies Bro

No it doesnt really look like that at all...

Care to elaborate?

Winnies Bro · Jul 07, 2009, 02:44 PM // 14:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Operative 14

Care to elaborate?

..because they are both completely different...

Konig Des Todes · Jul 07, 2009, 04:52 PM // 16:52

You are comparing the two concept arts, I take it. It should be noted that the first one isn't said to be a fortification in any theory except that it is the Iron Citadel - the other theory is, assuming it is even GW2 concept art, that it is Augury Rock.

What you said is - in no way, shape, or form - saying how the bottom picture, and the bottom picture alone, doesn't look like a fortification.

Free Runner · Jul 07, 2009, 07:48 PM // 19:48

I'm getting confused here. Isnt Winnie saying that the concept art of the metal fort with the bridge and the concept art of Divinities Coast look nothing alike?

Gmr Leon · Jul 07, 2009, 08:26 PM // 20:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Runner

I'm getting confused here. Isnt Winnie saying that the concept art of the metal fort with the bridge and the concept art of Divinities Coast look nothing alike?

I'm pretty sure that's what he(she?) is saying as well. Konig seemed to think he was saying it didn't look similar to a fortification, rather than that it didn't look like the supposed Divinity Coast concept art.

It also doesn't precisely help that Konig's second response's last sentence lacks a doesn't before look, which is what he initially assumed Winnies was saying.