Talk:Herald of Balthazar

Identity

Do we have any source on Devona is the Herald of Balthazar the notes that are scattered around don't say that she is Devona. Only asking and it seems daft now as some one has edited out the early years. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SpongeBobSquare (talk).

I agree, there needs to a 100% confirmation on her identity otherwise a phrase similar to, ¨...based upon strong evidence, it is a belief held by many of the player base, that the Herald of Balthazar is Devona, a hero during the times of Guild Wars 1.¨ -- endeavor7530 13:42, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Bobby Stein didn't give a direct confirmation so as to avoid spoilers but given his phrasing and the evidence, there's literally (and I mean that in the actual definition of the term and not the "actually meaning to use the word 'metaphorically') no one else she could be and no one else that Stein could have been talking about in that Guild Chat episode. Konig (talk) 15:01, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Issue is it's not in game and is subject to change as ANET have done with other lore like the Sylvari thus the wording here is wrong and can lead others to thinking it is 100% confirmed SpongeBobSquare —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SpongeBobSquare (talk).

You can sign your comments by doing --~~~~ 😊 –Santax (talk · contribs) 17:33, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Based on how Bobby Stein was talking, it was definitely intended for the Herald to be Devona and no other way around it. She's not likely to ever return either, so I don't see a reasonable situation where they'd change it. The sylvari lore that got changed was from obscure forum posts on guildwars2guru.com, not on an ArenaNet sponsored video. Further, it's less "what's in-game is untouchable" like you seem to be implying but rather "what is officially released (game, books, blog posts, etc.) will always takes precedence and what is unofficially released (interviews, forum posts, etc.) is 'true until proven otherwise.'" But should for some odd reason they do decide to change things, then we can reword it then, because as it is now this is the situation. Konig (talk) 20:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

I agree, she isn't likely to ever return. As for the sylvari lore you're referring to; can you elaborate because I have no idea what you're talking about and I'm curious about it. As for the Herald saying, "Prove you can kill my god. Please." Does that imply she was not complicit in her actions? (slightly off topic from identity.) -- endeavor7530 21:33, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

To answer your questions: The main "sylvari retcon" (there may or may not have been others) would be the Secondborn's age. In 2010/11, Ree Soesbee made a few comments on guildwars2guru forum (and possibly elsewhere) after the "sylvari week" of blog posts; among them she mentioned the Secondborn were 5-6 years younger than the Firstborn. At the end of Season 1, Scarlet's age was revealed with her being born in 1304 AE - two years after the Firstborn - and it was later clarified that she was a Secondborn, and Bobby Stein made a comment that "anything not in the game is subject to change" (this later got clarified and expanded to "anything not officially released" and that dev comments on forums and interviews should be taken as "true until proven otherwise").

And to the question of the Herald being complicit - nothing really explicit for her specifically (she does say she was made Forged without the chance to chose though), but Forged in general (but not universally given Zaishen) do seem to be puppets rather than willing conscripts, as most Forged are souls from the Domain of the Lost and/or the souls of those killed by Forged. Konig (talk) 22:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)