Talk:Lore

Deletion

I think this is a cool story, but it's not the whole truth to the guild wars lore. -- Mepp 09:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

If it is entirely true, it should be at a different location. Most of the important lore is covered in The Movement of the World. And I'd prefer something official from Anet. Calor 14:10, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I also prefer something offical from ArenaNet -- Mepp 15:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Delete this. Lord Belar 16:08, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't delete, rewrite imo. It's an article we're sure to need in the future, so instead of deleting it, improving would be better. -- pling | ggggg 00:15, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The article contradicts the established history. The Great Giants predate the gods of Tyria by thousands of years and the ancient dragons predate the Great Giants. It also neglects the Fissure of Woe, the Underworld, Dhuum and the unnamed predecessor of Abaddon. I don't see any point in keeping it. -- Gordon Ecker 06:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Gordon Ecker -- Mepp 20:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, makes sense. Some of it was made up and other bits were gleaned from reading thousands of articles. It took my entire Guild to write the Mystic Tomes which is where this comes from. Heres a question I forced myself to answer one day. Why is Abaddon so evil? So I said: Because someone made him evil, thats what he did to the Lich Lord and Shiro. Then I said: so why are the Dragons bad. Arent they supposed to be good, maybe Abaddon made them bad when Nightfall happened. Didn't the Game say Nightfall washed over the land? Maybe the Dragons went crazy and decided to wake up and kill everyone but not before the Great Destroyer woke up and messed everything up. I will repost a huge article on our take on guild wars lore. Don't get me wrong, thanks for the constructive criticism but don't delete it. Now I have to rite it all down again. Just put a post saying "Not official Guild Wars Lore" It would be nice. BTW: The Fissure, Underworld, and all that are the Gods work. Valor made the 4 realms and then left. Dhuum was a god before Grenth but Dhuum betrayed the Gods to Abaddon and let him into the City of Arah so he as cast down alongside him. and there IS NO UNNAMED PREDECESSOR OF ABADDON, he was the God of Know edge and Magic before his fall. But there was nothing before him except Valor and Revenant's Magic. I haven't seen evidence to sway me otherwise, and the Movement of the World is after GW! this stuff is pre-history before the Gods stuff. Up to the Poisoning of Abadon and his Fall. Everything else is the games. Thanks for your consideration and ban this IP if you wish. I'll just get the whole rest of our Alliance to get writing the Mystic Tomes for us to keep. We wont post it if you don't want it.

63.209.236.223 02:18, 23 April 2008 (UTC)The Order of the Obsidian Flame Alliance

Lol @ above IP: Valor? Revenant? No one by those names in GW Lore. No predecessor of Abaddon? The Apostate point blank states there was, but doesn't give a name *it is suspected to be Arachnia found in the gw.dat*. No evidence saying Dhuum "betrayed the Gods to Abaddon and let him into the City of Arah" - Dhuum was cast down for being unjust in his job of judging the dead. While I do theorize he tricked Abaddon into giving magic. And "why are the Ancient Dragons evil? Aren't they suppose to be good" - the Movement of the World states that the Ancient Dragons are the complete opposite of Glint/Kuunavang (The good dragons) implying that the Ancient Dragons are evil and are much much more powerful - and not related to those two. "this stuff is pre-history before the Gods stuff" What? The only info on "before the Gods stuff" that we have is in the manual - which is so miniscule and sooooo very far from what you are saying. I had a good laugh. If you have questions about Lore, let me know, and if I don't know it, I know someone who would. -- Konig Des Todes 03:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Lore VS Equality

→ moved from Talk:Main Page

Should GW follow lore and make Norn "better" for Warrior like profession and Asura "better" for caster like professions; or should it follow equality and be fair? I think that equality is the way Aney should go, even if it doesn't make any sense to have a giant norn charcater rasining minoins and having 60armor or a tiny asura sin spiking (that would be sweet) I think more people will be upset if they follow lore instead of equailty. Lost-Blue 20:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Same post. 3 wikis. Ownage. Lord of all tyria 21:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

gw1:User talk:Gaile Gray/Guild Wars 2 suggestions would probably be a better place for something like this ;) --Xeeron 11:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

That page is a hellhole. I think I actually get stupider every time I go there. --71.229.204.25 20:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Then you must go there a lot. :P Lord Belar 21:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

lol Pwnd.PheNaxKian(T/c) 22:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

:< --71.229 22:14, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Knock it off. —Tanaric 04:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I hope they go for equality, but I think they won't. I (personally) think they want to make it more WoW like, even though some of us (me included) think this makes the developers plain heretic's. I thought I read something about this subject somewhere on the wiki, saying that the developers where going for the lore. I still pray they won't! Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 11:06, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Lore's more natural.think about it, you have Norns described in EotN as giant warriors. Warriors, not casters. The point of making it lore based is that it makes it more like an RPG game. Just look at your standard RPGS, you tend to have different races and classes, each bringing to the table their own unique capabilities. It might not necessarily mean that a norn can't be a caster, but it just might mean they're not as good as say...Asuras (they seem like a caster type race to me =p) they might do like what they do with professions, and introduce a unique arribute to each race or something, which naturally increases as you level (which would be quite kool IMO). Anyway Lore>equality in RPG's (and yes i agree GW2 does sound rather WoW like, but as long as they don't make it look like it, give us mounts, remove map travel and crap like that (and make it so the big ass things can attack towns) i'd say it's a lot better than WoW (oh also they need to keep the skill limit, it's stupid that in WoW you can have like all your skills equiped at once and have elites take hours to recharge ~_~) PheNaxKian(T/c) 19:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Then why do Humans always master just about everything? That's unnatural... --- -- (s)talkpage 20:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I find with most RPGS that humans just tend to be "all round" characters.... they don't specialise in anything specific but they're good all rounders...PheNaxKian(T/c) 21:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

That's because we use humans as our point of reference for everything, because we're human. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 23:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Still it would be so cool to have a asuran assa, a norn mesmer, a sylvian necro, and things like that. It's not likely, but it would be SO cool. But then again, you are right about the lore point. But there is one thing that should not change: the second profession. Thats the puller for Guild Wars, and if they take that out, I quit. You can have so many cool combo's that it isn't even fun anymore....Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 06:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Well you could perhaps (possiably-just speculating here) have half breeds or something (how fucking funny would that be a half norn half asura thing) though yeh i do agree, i would be rather dissapointed by the lack of a second proffesion. PheNaxKian(T/c) 11:44, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent.) Doing the "lore" thing is not necessarily more natural. There's no reason to think that a Norn caster can't be just as good as an Asuran character. Norn are known as warriors and Asurans as casters because that's what their respective cultures value and promote. Thus, more Norns are going to become excellent warriors because that's what gets them respect from their fellow Norn. An Asuran individual will get more respect becoming a great mage. It does not follow from this that the Asuran has any advantage as a caster. A lot of bad RPG's seem like to see characters embody gross stereotypes, but that's pretty much the opposite of good roleplaying. A good RPG allows players to be much more creative. --68.187.144.197 19:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Great! You'r absolutly Right!. Now we just need to get that in to the heads of the dev's. You got any contacts?Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 07:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

"There's no reason to think that a Norn caster can't be just as good as an Asuran character." I beg to differ. While all the playable races in GW2 are at least vaguely humanoid, they look very different. It would be impossible for two species that are that different in size and appearance to be physiologically identical. Look at the Norn and the Asura. Compared to the Norn, the Asura are tiny - there's no way that the average Asuran is as strong as the average Norn, especially considering that the Norn have their Bear Form. However, the Asura make up for their lack of physical strength with their intelligence, allowing them to wield magic more effectively and advance their technology.

"A lot of bad RPG's seem like to see characters embody gross stereotypes, but that's pretty much the opposite of good roleplaying." Ever heard of Dungeons and Dragons? Every race has its own advantages and disadvantages, and yet DnD is widely considered one of the best role-playing games ever. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 13:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

What if the Asura found a way to enhance their strength through their smarts. chevy09:03 April 21, 2008 --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:68.149.47.22 (talk) .

They did. We call them "golems." Lord Belar 21:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

D&D is definitely the most used rpg rules system out there, but that's because it was the first, not because it's the best. It's definitely worse than many many other game systems, but sadly it's not gonna make room for better systems anytime soon. Ofcourse we could hope 4th ed to make it better, but in the lights of the currently released material... well, I don't hold high hopes. -- (gem / talk) 23:06, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Addition: I still agree that a using stereotypical and easy to understand classes / races is the way to go when you make a game for the masses. Only a small marginal group is interested in games with weird new races like "Ghargolux" and "Hexrodragur" which have even weirder appearances and roles. -- (gem / talk) 23:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I by no means am saying the D&D rules are easy to understand, but i think the great thing about them is they take into account so many different factors, which jsut makes things more interesting, and lots of classic RPGs run on the D&D system (Never winter nights being the main one that springs to mind....which i still need to get round to finishing at some point...-.-)

I Also agree that while you should keep to what people already know in terms of race, i don't think it'd be horrible to introduce some new races (i Say some) i vaguely recal somewhere that the Charr were actually a one of a kind (~ish) species which the GW team created. But i would agree with not making them weird and wonderful. PheNaxKian(T/c) 19:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Simplicity or complexity is not what I mean when I say that D&D is bad. There are both simple and complex rules systems that are great. There's just so much that's bad in D&D, but I'll leave that for now.

Yeah, adding races like the Charr isn't bad. People can cope with a few races that are unique to the specific fantasy world that the game takes place in, as long as there's any sense in the races. But making each of them a bit stereotypical is usually necessary to make a good game, and that's what the ANet team has done. Charr are big and strong, asura are small, irritating and smart, etc. -- (gem / talk) 00:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

But...

If Norn fail as Monks (or at least are worse at Monking somehow), how will they ever get into High End PvE without other races? Builds based on being able to survive with minimal help generally deal pathetic dmg with the 8-slots setup... So, go go equality! --- -- (s)talkpage 21:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Uuhm, (just speculating) Say the norn uses his half-bear form. Then he instantly becomes stronger. A LOT stronger. Wouldn't he be able to survive long enough on his own to deal enough damage to make taking a Norn warrior worth while (and trouble)? Next to the fact that PvP is gonna change a lot, so it's not gonna be the same as it is right now? Wouldn't that cange a lot? Like way more ppl in pvp? (world PvP any1?)Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 06:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Even if some races are gonna be better with certain classes, who cares? Don't we have primary and secondary professions right now, with certain combinations who are stronger, and some who are weaker? Why do you chose a secondary profession? Because it's more effective to have that profession combined with your primary profession. Races are just like that, but probably with less skills, and a lot more of different appearances. Does anyone complain about some secondary professions combining better with Monk primary than other secondary professions? No! Does anyone complain about seeing more monks in high-end PvE/PvP than Assassins or Paragons? No! Then why do people complain about races having advantages with certain primary professions and races who are gonna bee seen more in high-end PvE/PvP than other races, even before knowing their exact advantages? --Sir Bertrand 18:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Because unlike secondary professions, races are almost certainly going to become an unchangeable option that you can only choose one for each character. (And actually, people DO complain that Paragons and Assassins don't see as much PvE play as Monks. A lot.) People don't like to get stuck with a character that can't do what they want in high-level play. Even more seeing that getting to high level play will likely be taking much longer with the increased level cap. Crystal Myr 22:07, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

There is nothing in the lore that state that Norn are warriors. In game, especially during Wintersday, we see a Necromancer, Ritualist, and Monk Norn. We also see a Warrior Asura *one that survives a Destroyer attack without our characters' help*. So, where ever this strange concept came from, is entirely false. -- Konig Des Todes 03:31, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Ghosts of Ascalon

I understand that we're holding off on most of the deeper machinations of GoA until the book has had time to circulate, but how are we going to incorporate its lore into this page? The book gives us in-depth legends of the Foefire, of Gwen, of the Elder Dragons, of Kalla Scorchrazor - the list goes on and on. What's more, each of these legends has at least two interpretations - one from the human perspective of Dougal or Riona, and another from the charr perspective of Ember Doomforge. Technically, the book itself could be considered lore for Guild Wars 2 because it takes place before the actual present-day in-game, too. How are we going to incorporate all this into the article? Fabala011 14:49, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

There's a discussion about that here, Fabala011. Chriskang 15:17, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

This page is Stub

Why is the official Lore page on the Wiki both a Stub article in 2021, and furthermore, not even marked as such?

A rando, IDK what time it is UTC, July 18th 2021 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 107.11.28.150 (talk) at 07:57, 18 July 2021‎ (UTC).

Because lore belongs on whatever specific page is relevant, not here. -Chieftain Alex 12:27, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, this page exists only to give a background to the Guild Wars franchise, there are literally dozen links at the bottom where you can continue reading on the lore. Adding everything that has happened in the game would make the page to be unable to be loaded. EDIT: Though I agree it is not perfect and there are some users that would like to rework it, so if you have any ideas, shoot us. ~Sime 14:30, 18 July 2021 (UTC)