Curse

Mordakai · Sep 24, 2007, 09:00 PM // 21:00

It's definately more complex than the typical fantasy set-up. Who knows if Anet intended it to be this way? It could have been that the original concept was Ascalon was a kind of European culture with walls protecting it from the "monsters to the North." Later, when Anet wanted the Charr as a playable race, they make up the bit about the humans displacing the Charr. IMO, it still does not justify the searing.

That's why I was sure GWEN would reveal the Searing was a Shaman plan, and the rest of the Charr would settle for letting the remaining Ascalons live in peace, as long as they didn't cross the wall. Then, maybe after 250 years of relative peace, the Dragons would awake, and either push the Charr down or push the humans up. Either way, I'll miss Ascalon. I like Kryta, but it will be hard to call it "home."

I'm not sure why there are Ascalonian bridges to the North, that's a good question! They don't seem like Charr design, and I'm sure the Ascalonians are able to build their own bridges. Hmm, still a lot of questions to be answered.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malchior

And how in hell did the ascalonians manage to build that freaking heck of a wall in the time it took between the charr being pushed out and the time they pushed back.

Oh, yeah, I left out a bit: After the initial human "invasion," the Charr we're prepared to push back. Then their leader (can't remember name, sorry) was mysteriously assassinated. His sons fought among themselves, giving time for the humans to build the wall, and even expand further North into Charr territory. It wasn't until the Shamans of the Flame Legion found the Titans that they were able to re-unify the Charr and push back the Humans (the Searing).

EDIT: Found some dates in the GW Manuscript (rulebook): 898 AE, Northern Wall Built; 1070 AE The Searing.

So, it was hundreds of years after Humans settled in Ascalon before the wall was built, and a hundred more years before the Charr destroyed some of it.

Interesting Side Note: Female Charr were not allowed to fight under Shaman rules. They were supposed to stay home and take care of the house. Female cubs stayed home, male cubs joined a Legion, which became their family. The legion name becomes part of the Charr last name: (ex. Pyre Fierceshot's warband consists of Bonwor Fierceblade, Gron Fierceclaw, Seer Fiercereign, Cowl Fiercetongue, and Roan Fierceheart.)

So, part of Pyre's legacy is Female Charr liberation!

Onarik Amrak · Sep 24, 2007, 10:12 PM // 22:12

It's really all shades of grey isn't it?

sindex · Sep 25, 2007, 02:15 AM // 02:15

There seems to be a huge gap in the history of the Charr, and what actually happened just before EotN. It seems the Charr did eventually get to Ascalon, to which King Adelbern kills his entire people and a Charr legion off. However this was just prior to Pyre Fierceshot’s rebellion, and our evolvement in EotN. So actually the Ascalon we knew is already dead and buried in GW 1.

It actually seems that all of the Charr are just fighting ghosts now, so they can retake their lands. I mean the only reason why Ascalon formed was because humans took it away from the Charr, when they received their magical blessing from the God’s.

I don’t see the Charr actually being evil now; it’s just so much they have a saver dislike towards humans for what happened in the past.

On a side note the magazine does detail that the former ecosystem of Ascalon is starting to come back.

The Shelf · Sep 25, 2007, 02:20 AM // 02:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

Either way, I'll miss Ascalon. I like Kryta, but it will be hard to call it "home."

Well, depending on what you liked about Ascalon, there's still hope. If it was just the atmosphere, then I wouldn't worry too much. A lot can happen to the climate and culture of a country in 250 years, especially after the changes caused by the revived Orr. Also, if you don't like Kryta, then don't pick a human. Even if Ascalon were still around, it would only be the starting city for the humans. Each of the other four races would be starting out somewhere else anyway.

Hehe, of course, if you started playing during the beta weekends, then you probably wouldn't call Ascalon "home" anyway. The betas always started out in Lion's Arch. I kinda liked Pre-Searing Ascalon, but once the searing came through, I spent most of my time just trying to get back to Kryta as soon as possible. For me, GW2 will just be restoring "home" status back to Kryta. And thanks to what the creators have said about the searing, I now know that my "home" will not be wiped out like old Ascalon.

draxynnic · Sep 25, 2007, 02:23 AM // 02:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malchior

But instead they turned to destroying the land? Like, talk about irony, why would they do that to their own land?

Possibly because they figured it would regenerate in time? Heck, we don't know exactly what Vatlaaw and any other infiltrators were actually doing... it is in the realm of possibility that one of the objections of infiltration was to collect breeding populations, etc, of the various species native only to the area so they could be re-introduced later. Although that would be showing a lot more consideration than most medieval scorched-earth policies...

Basically, though, they figured that with Ascalon destroyed they'd at least get the territory back... and that it would eventually recover.

To go to the other side of the discussion, in response to the fair treatment of POWs point: Any signatory of the Geneva Convention is required to show POWs with at least a modicum of respect. Even Nazi Germany was at least reasonably civil with Allied prisoners as long as they were caught in uniform, with the possible exception of the Russians.

Of course, the Geneva Convention is a fairly modern concept to be applied to a medieval setting, but even in medieval times there was the consideration that there were advantages to treating prisoners with dignity with the expectation that if the tables were reversed that your enemies would do the same for you. This was generally restricted to the nobility, though, and between foes that were close enough culturally to consider each other 'civilised' - for instance, it might occur for the prisoners taken in a battle in the Hundred Years War, but probably not in the Crusades. And given that Charr and humans are different races, not simply different cultures within the same race...

Now, if I do make the move to GW2, this isn't likely to stop my primary's successor from having a very strong grudge against the Charr - my primary is an Ascalonian mesmer and is still bearing a grudge from having one of her mentors burned alive. On the other hand, that's probably not going to stop me from having a Charr character as well.

PS Sindex's point about the Charr having a special dislike towards humans was foreshadowed in events in GWEN - for instance, in that apart from [spoiler] they'd been mostly coexisting peacefully with the 'we don't need an army' Norn, which would otherwise appear to be easy pickings for an organised army, and that during Charr Invaders humans were described as "foul creatures" while Norn were just... the Norn, implying that humans had special status rather than the Charr hating all other sentients.

That said, Ascalon wasn't in fact destroyed before GWEN: The tapestry quest shows that Ascalon was in fact still intact at the time, although the Charr attacks were still occuring.

arsie · Sep 25, 2007, 02:38 AM // 02:38

One of the first things that governments, even today, do before waging war against another country, is to demonize the enemies.

The media, government rhetoric, popular entertainment like movies and novels, will create an atmosphere where it is acceptable to view these enemies as sub-humans.

To somehow reduce them below human. This allows the general public to stomach collateral damage to the enemy's civilian population. It also focuses the minds of the combatants, that defeat would allow these sub-human demonized enemies to brutalize his loved ones.

Mordakai · Sep 25, 2007, 03:06 AM // 03:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by sindex

There seems to be a huge gap in the history of the Charr, and what actually happened just before EotN. It seems the Charr did eventually get to Ascalon, to which King Adelbern kills his entire people and a Charr legion off. However this was just prior to Pyre Fierceshot’s rebellion, and our evolvement in EotN. So actually the Ascalon we knew is already dead and buried in GW 1.

I'll admit, it's confusing, since it's not all written in order, but the fall of Ascalon happens more than 30 years after the Titans are overthrown. (How King Addlebrain is still alive is beyond me).

40 years after that, Pyre's Grandcub, Kalla Schorchrazor finally overthrows the Flame Legions domination. She does it by recruiting women warriors. Badly outnumbered, the Shamans are forced to surrender.

Oh, and it's possible the Charr starting point will be the Iron Citadel, built on the ruins of the human city Rin.

Looks like I'll be making a Charr just to check that out...

draxynnic · Sep 25, 2007, 01:21 PM // 13:21

On the original topic, according to the article linked to in the 'GW2 Spoilers' thread, the Charr are looking to wipe out humans everywhere. Total extinction.

Sounds like a pretty evil outlook to me...

Mordakai · Sep 25, 2007, 01:42 PM // 13:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

On the original topic, according to the article linked to in the 'GW2 Spoilers' thread, the Charr are looking to wipe out humans everywhere. Total extinction.

Sounds like a pretty evil outlook to me...

As far as Humans are concerned, Charr are evil. And Humans are evil according to Charr.

The other races don't seem to mind the Charr, the Norn allow them to pass through their land unharmed, the Asura trade with them, and the Sylvari...

well, who knows if the Sylvari and Charr have even met yet. Since the Sylvari are essentially pod-people, I doubt the Charr have a taste for them (pad pun).

In Guild Wars 2, Humans are no longer the center of the Guild Wars universe. I'm starting to accept that, but at least there is hope for Ascalon:

From the new lore available at http://www.pcgamer.com/archives/2007...-_ultimat.html

There's Ebonhawke, the last Ascalon stronghold against the Charr lies at the far southern tip, where the eastern Blazeridge Mountains merge with the western Shiverpeaks.

And there's a hint about two Flame Swords, either Adelbern’s Magdaer or Prince Rurik's Sohothin, that could give the humans the power to become King of Ascalon again... or maybe just give the ghosts in Ascalon eternal rest. We'll have to wait until GW2 to see what Anet has in store for us Ascalon lovers.

Malchior · Sep 25, 2007, 01:45 PM // 13:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

On the original topic, according to the article linked to in the 'GW2 Spoilers' thread, the Charr are looking to wipe out humans everywhere. Total extinction.

Sounds like a pretty evil outlook to me...

Indeed.

If they were fighting to eat us just to survive, fair enough. We do the same to lower creatures IRL, it's just how nature works.

But total extiction is beyond simply helping themselves, it's just mad. The charr seem to hate all they come into contact with, and I'm surprised they even have any form of an alliance with the Norn. (Though perhaps this could have something to do with the dragons seeing as alot has changed.)

draxynnic · Sep 25, 2007, 02:24 PM // 14:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

As far as Humans are concerned, Charr are evil. And Humans are evil according to Charr.

Humans from Ascalon, sure. But I don't think humans from Istan or Cantha, let alone areas we haven't even seen, care one bit about the Charr unless they've had contact with a Krytan or Ascalonian.

From the sentence "Although the legions have no central rule, they work together to maintain their territories in Ascalon, and make plans to one day spread farther—eradicating humans wherever they fester on the face of the world", however, it seems that the Charr do care about humans in Istan and Cantha. They're busy with Kryta and what's left of Ascalon now, but when they've finished with them they'll be looking for more humans to kill, even if those humans never went anywhere near their home territories and dwell in terrain so inhospitable that it's useless to any but the natives.

That said, I am interested in the Gold Legion. The implication is that the Gold Legion is the remnants of the Shaman caste... but other sources put the Shamans as the Flame Legion, and the online article doesn't actually stipulate this (although it may be explained more precisely in other material I don't have access to. Speaking of which, if the magazine this is in doesn't have Guild Wars on the cover, could someone let me know what is on the cover?). Could the Gold Legion actually be outcast for some other reason - say, for instance, for getting too friendly with humans during the time of the rebellion?

Mordakai · Sep 25, 2007, 03:34 PM // 15:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

Humans from Ascalon, sure. But I don't think humans from Istan or Cantha, let alone areas we haven't even seen, care one bit about the Charr unless they've had contact with a Krytan or Ascalonian.

Well, since I assume the humans we play will start in Kryta, I assume they will have at least knowledge of the Charr. With Cantha and Elonia cut off, the only Canthans and Elonians we'll probably be able to play are ones that have moved to Kryta.

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

That said, I am interested in the Gold Legion. The implication is that the Gold Legion is the remnants of the Shaman caste... but other sources put the Shamans as the Flame Legion, and the online article doesn't actually stipulate this (although it may be explained more precisely in other material I don't have access to. Speaking of which, if the magazine this is in doesn't have Guild Wars on the cover, could someone let me know what is on the cover?). Could the Gold Legion actually be outcast for some other reason - say, for instance, for getting too friendly with humans during the time of the rebellion?

The Gold Legion is the old Flame Legion... they were directly responsible for the Searing, so, no I don't think they got too friendly with Humans.

The are called the Gold legion as a reference to worshipping false idols - the Titans.

I can't remember if there is a new, uncorrupted Flame Legion or not. (Left magazine with Ecology fo the Charr at home).

Mordakai · Sep 25, 2007, 03:36 PM // 15:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malchior

Indeed.

If they were fighting to eat us just to survive, fair enough. We do the same to lower creatures IRL, it's just how nature works.

But total extiction is beyond simply helping themselves, it's just mad. The charr seem to hate all they come into contact with, and I'm surprised they even have any form of an alliance with the Norn. (Though perhaps this could have something to do with the dragons seeing as alot has changed.)

It is madness. It is revenge. The Charr see themselves wronged by Humans for crimes that happened hundreds of years ago, and vice versa.

And so the cycle of revenge continues...

arcady · Sep 25, 2007, 07:52 PM // 19:52

Here's another radically different take on the situation - 250 years into the future, a lot can change in that time span.

I know the OP asked us to keep it in GW terms, but this kind of discussion is impossible without analogies. But I will keep mine to aspects of nearly ancient history and only to the facts and not any judgments of them.

That's just short of the amount of time it took Rome to go from feeding the members of a new sect in one of the provinces to the lions to becoming the empire that spread the 'sect,' now a major religion, around the world.

250 years in Mexico changed it from a region controlled by a conquering minority with a faith based on human sacrifice of the majority locals (Aztec practices against the native Toltecs) to a region that was arguably the most dedicated in the world to the above mentioned 'new religion' of those Romans.

Imagine if we come back to the world of Tyria 250 years later to find the Charr are now the 'faithful' of the gods the Humans adhered to in the past, and are after those humans that they see as responsible for the spread of such falsities as Abaadon, Palowo Jako, and the Musuraat, among others.

Not the path they're taking, but it is not as illogical of an idea as it sounds, given the examples above.

In 250 years cultures can and have gone through some major changes in ideology.

My last post though, on the Charr being the original inhabitants of the Ascalon region - I read that bit of lore back in late 1995, which is why I say I'm still searching for where I read it. If its in PC Gamer that's great, but I believe its always been a part of the lore and not a piece of Anet 'revisionism'.

What it also shows is that up to now, for the most part, outside of one obscure little reference I can no longer find, we've only heard this story from one side's POV.

Now we get to the other side tell its story.

There are a lot of ethnic conflicts in human history that, when told from one point of view only, make the other side look downright evil. And if you flip around then hear the other side only, you flip your idea of which side is evil.

As an aside, since I think it was already brought up somewhere - this is also true in the Warcraft Orc situation. In the first Warcraft game back in the early 90s, the Orcs looked downright evil. Over time we got more and more pieces of their story, and by the time of the MMO, it is almost easier to say it was the humans and not the Orcs who were in the wrong for the majority of the conflicts - or if not that, that the problem is 90% about poor communication and historic mistrust, and only 10% anything else.

So, now we get to hear the Charr's POV on this whole history.

I for one, am seriously looking forward to that.

arcady · Sep 25, 2007, 08:04 PM // 20:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

On the original topic, according to the article linked to in the 'GW2 Spoilers' thread, the Charr are looking to wipe out humans everywhere. Total extinction.

Sounds like a pretty evil outlook to me...

Only if they first accept humans as other people. Humanity long considered it a moral good to wipe out all wolves everywhere. If you've ever dealt with wolves you'll know that they have emotions, their own concept of a moral compass, they feel, and they are possibly one of the smartest creatures on the planet outside of us, chimps, and dolphins.

But we see them as animals - and for most of our history as predators that were a threat to us.

So was it evil then to kill a wolf? If you judge it by modern environmentalist notions yes, but try to explain to a hunter before the mid-20th century that he is evil for killing wolves, and you will be looked at as a dangerous element.

I'm sure the humans have the same plan for the Charr - wipe them all out. Does that make the humans all evil?

Or are we really just seeing great moral failings on both sides?

Malchior · Sep 25, 2007, 09:09 PM // 21:09

Personally, I used to seriously hate the charr. As far as I knew they were these random invaders in our lands who would stop at nothing to pretty much kill all humans and take their lands for no reason at all.

I know now tha ascalon was charr teritory before the humans pushed them out, stealing their land. Now although I don't side with the charr at all, I can understand more why they attacked and it does put ascalon more in the wrong.

However I'm still unsure why the attacked Kryta and Orr too, when they could have used them to team up and take back ascalon easier, lol. But hey thatt's the charr for you; big and stupid.

Mordakai · Sep 25, 2007, 09:23 PM // 21:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malchior

Personally, I used to seriously hate the charr. As far as I knew they were these random invaders in our lands who would stop at nothing to pretty much kill all humans and take their lands for no reason at all.

I know now tha ascalon was charr teritory before the humans pushed them out, stealing their land. Now although I don't side with the charr at all, I can understand more why they attacked and it does put ascalon more in the wrong.

However I'm still unsure why the attacked Kryta and Orr too, when they could have used them to team up and take back ascalon easier, lol. But hey thatt's the charr for you; big and stupid.

Just as we see the Charr as all the same, I'm sure they see Humans as all the same as well. They don't distinguish between Krytan, Ascalonian, or even Canthan and Elonian (if they met them).

draxynnic · Sep 26, 2007, 12:53 AM // 00:53

Thanks, Mordakai. I don't have anything beyond what's available on the net (yet) so I didn't have anything that expressly stated that.

And I'd be very surprised if you read something about the Charr and Ascalon in 1995, since ANet didn't exist back then. Did you mean 2005?

To clear things up about the Orcs... the Orcs were DEFINITELY in the wrong in the space covered by the first two games. Yes, they were tricked by outside forces, but they were violently invading another world and killing as much as of the populace because they'd finished off everything else in their own world and needed an outlet for their demonically-inspired bloodlust. The few Orcs that were still clinging to shamanic ways were staying out of the fighting - the rest were wholly on the side of evil. There may have been a few rotten eggs, but on the whole the Alliance were The Good Guys Valiantly Defending Their Homes And Families.

It wasn't until after Thrall managed to throw off the shackles of demon-worship that the shades of grey began to appear as the Alliance failed to recognise that the Horde wasn't actually out to kill every single one of them, man, woman and child, any more. It's worth noting that Thrall himself has a view of those orcs still clinging to demon worship that is just as dim as that of the Alliance - he'd probably be among the first to agree that the Horde as it was in the first two games was evil. (Remember, Doomhammer may have overthrown the Shadow Council because he felt they were misleading the Horde, but until the demons withdrew their 'blessing' after their defeat in the Second War and Ner'zhul's departure into the Twisting Nether, they were still driven by the same bloodlust).

The Charr at least do have the excuse that it may have been their lands in the first place. The Orcs had never set foot on Azeroth before they invaded.

Mordakai · Sep 26, 2007, 01:40 PM // 13:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcady

My last post though, on the Charr being the original inhabitants of the Ascalon region - I read that bit of lore back in late 1995, which is why I say I'm still searching for where I read it. If its in PC Gamer that's great, but I believe its always been a part of the lore and not a piece of Anet 'revisionism'.

As draxynic mentioned, you couldn't have read it in 1995... maybe 2005?

I re-read the original Guild Wars "Manuscript" (manual) last night, and they give no indication of the Charr being anything other than mindless brutes that worship fire. That's not to say Anet didn't have plans for them, even back then, but I've seen nothing that even hints at a sympathetic portrayal of Charr until the PcGamer Ultimate Guild Wars Guide "The Ecology of the Charr" article.

It states that the Charr were the dominant race in the Ascalon area, united under a single leader, the Khan-Ur. Then the Humans came, "an infestation caused by beings called gods that had been enemies to the Charr since the beginning of history." I had missed this before: So, the Charr and gods were enemies even before there were humans. Perhaps humans were created by the gods just to wipe out the Charr, which would explain the hatred between the two sides.

Which just raises more questions: who are these gods anyways? Are they powerful ancestors of humans, like Tolkiens "true-men" (the people of Numenor), or something else?

Here's the Melandru quote:

"They knew of Melandru, and even had legends that described how she created the world. But to the Charr, these beings were not to be worshipped or feared - they were to be fought, and if possible, destroyed."

The Shelf · Sep 26, 2007, 03:37 PM // 15:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

Which just raises more questions: who are these gods anyways? Are they powerful ancestors of humans, like Tolkiens "true-men" (the people of Numenor), or something else?

You're a little off on the similarity. The gods of Tyria are much more like the Valar of Tolkien's world. They have power to create things and shape the world just as the Valar did, but they are not the omnipotent creators of the world. The only real difference is that the gods of Tyria can apparently be destroyed while the Valar cannot. The Numenorians, or "true-men" as you call them, are just normal humans that were granted extra long life by the Valar since they helped them fight back against Melkor (a Valar turned bad, much like Abaddon) while all the other men either stayed neutral or even worked for Melkor.

Speaking of LotR similarities, I think the new great dragons are meant to be similar to the Balrogs of LotR (only stronger). The Balrogs were Maia, which is to say, they were less powerful Valar (as were the wizards and Sauron). They have "power to rival the gods," but they are not quite as powerful as them.