User talk:Kossage

Welcome to the Wiki

Hi, and welcome to the wiki. I've moved the dialogue from Fort Marriner to the main page, the /dialogue pages are used for old dialogue and this one is current. --Sialor (talk) 19:58, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Valiant Blanaith

That's quite a switch in dialogue there, so I'm curious, is the new dialogue you added from interacting with them on both a Sylvari and non-Sylvari character? It kinda feels like that's sylvari exclusive dialouge, but if that's not the case, then the old dialogue should still be listed on the page below. - Do_odleplex 22:49, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Before my edit, Blanaith's page had the exact same dialogue as Peacemaker Cronkka, which got me curious if that was truly the case (with ANet maybe having messed it up because the "old" dialogue of Blanaith as listed in the wiki was stylistically asuran, which seems odd for a sylvari who rarely use asuran lingo) or if the wiki editor who had written it had maybe copy&pasted Cronkka's dialogue there by accident while adding the dialogues (which to me seems more plausible). It's not often that NPCs with unique names share the exact same dialogue in vanilla Tyria maps, after all.

I visited both NPCs with a sylvari and a charr and noticed that the dialogue for Blanaith was completely different than what was listed in the wiki for both of my PCs. Sylvari PCs have two dialogue options while charr only have one; thus the sylvari-only extra dialogue option is noted in the article. I've yet to visit the area with the other three races to verify if they have some unique dialogue with these NPCs, but I intend to do so soon unless someone else beats me to it.

There's of course a chance that Blanaith did originally have the messed up Cronkka dialogue before ANet stealth fixed it at some point in time to its current in-game iteration; they're known to have done such before although I don't recall any other as big changes happening to any other vanilla game NPC's dialogue tree. If Konig or someone else remembers (or happens to have screenshots of) interacting with said NPCs from a few years ago and what the dialogue looked like then, that would give us a definitive answer. But until then, I personally believe that the similar dialogue between Cronkka and Blanaith was just a wiki editor's mistake while adding the dialogues; I've noticed other such mistakes in some old NPC dialogue sections albeit in a smaller scale, so it wouldn't be too far fetched, IMHO.

If editors feel (or have the proof) that Blanaith's old dialogue was actually there and not just one editor's mistake, they can add it back as historical dialogue with an annotation if needed. I'm fine with whatever consensus people come to regarding the matter. :) --Kossage (talk) 17:44, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Looking at the two pages, you could be right about it being editor error, both pages were made within two minutes of each other, but here's why I asked initially: the German wiki still lists that original dialogue. I just poked the German version, and the page was made nearly a year earlier, along with a note saying "she has the same dialogue as Cronkka", so based on that, I'd guess that originally they did have the same dialogue, but somebody at ANet came by and fixed it at some point. Since it seems more like a mistake than intentional dialogue, I think a note will work here instead of adding in her "historical" dialogue, so thanks for the info! <3 - Do_odleplex 17:57, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

PoF "Act I"

Is there a source for calling it "Act I" or is it just stipulation? If the later, it's best not to include such. For all we know, PoF isn't divided into acts or chapters like before. Konig (talk) 18:39, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I remember seeing it like that in the achievement panel while I was in the demo. I imagine that's where Kossage got it from as well. - Do_odleplex 18:48, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Me 2, the achievement panel called it Act 1 --Doctor Refrence (talk) 18:53, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Fair enough. Not sure how I missed that then, I scoured the achievements for new things. Konig (talk) 22:25, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, as said by others above, I noticed the achievements from the "Sparking the Flame" story instance (e.g. not receiving burning damage while reviving fallen villagers) being listed under "Path of Fire: Act 1" in the panel, so I listed the mission belonging to such. :) --Kossage (talk) 00:25, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Dhuum's state in the raid (spoilers)

Per your edits to Dhuum in regards to this thread. Dialogue before the first boss implies the siege has been ongoing for some time, not being a very recent thing; and a Reddit thread showed dialogue that implied Dhuum is killed. So how sure are you about stating that he recently broke free and that he is reimprisoned rather than killed? Konig (talk) 03:41, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I was working on what was known at the time, so that's the reason why I posted the biography section with the stub tag specifically calling out editing in missing info from the raid story to flesh stuff out. There's undoubtedly more to the story that the raiders have not checked yet from optional dialogues and such since my writing the article, so folks will no doubt change or expand on the lore where needed as more info is revealed to us. As for Dhuum being sealed instead of killed, I haven't witnessed the actual defeat dialogue or read the Reddit threads yet, but there's a cinematic posted on Youtube where Desmina looks on as Dhuum's essence leaves his armor and is sealed up with magical chains holding the prison in place. This to me indicates that the Reapers' ritual (which plays a major part in the boss battle as you need to keep them from getting killed while battling Dhuum) was successful. If any dialogue that takes place after the cinematic tells us more about Dhuum's ultimate fate, people are welcome to edit it in to clarify stuff, but the aforementioned cinematic does look rather conclusive to me. --Kossage (talk) 06:40, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Does sound like imprisonmnt but that cinematic upload time is suspect compared to reddit thread kill time claims. And I've seen more comments of "killing Dhuum" but that cinematic does make it seem hard to tell if he's killed or spectrally imprisoned (or would that be *both*?).

Shame they made him effectively a divine exalted. His undead appearance from GW1 was superior, imo. :( Konig (talk) 07:07, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

IO Ezrielia

Thanks for welcoming me ^^ you are part of the nicest contributors I met :)--Inquest Overseer Ezrielia (talk) 12:57, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome. Always nice to see more folks contributing to the wiki with such a positive and open-minded attitude. :) --Kossage (talk) 18:45, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Doesn't this seem a bit much?

It does to me. A major reason why I dislike and was against the notion of "reference tagging everything". For me, the references take up nearly an entire screen's worth of text. Do we really need to quote verbatim text displayed in the link? I can understand quoting the book, but quoting the other text seems a bit much and massively bloats the reference section. Konig (talk) 18:04, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

I was indeed wondering what would be considered too much, but I had a difficult time figuring out how to best make it work without cutting out useful information so I left it as it is until a better solution presented itself. If you or others find a good middle ground for it to get the point across, I'm all for anyone editing the page to keep the citations short. Perhaps a reference to the chapter title itself would suffice in this case, or just selecting the most crucial lines to be cited? --Kossage (talk) 18:29, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

I'd say maybe treat it like how I was taught to do for papers in school, just add a number/refence anchor-thing that goes to the bottom of the page where a small line with the author, the book & page number, or in this case the name of the NPC who said the thing and a wiki link to the page where they said the thing. Short, links to all the things, doesn't start making the page blow up. - Do_odleplex 18:44, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

And now Elder Dragon is insanely huge at the bottom. >.> Konig (talk) 21:00, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Elder Dragons are the centerpiece of GW2 lore with lots of history and in and out of game lore statements about them, so naturally there would be several relevant sources citing some important information, hence the size of the References section for that page (similar to how we have multiple references for Balthazar's page which expand on his character or help clarify lore matters due to his extensive narrative role and history). My reasoning for adding actual relevant quotes in the cited sources instead of just having the sources link to the relevant wiki page itself (unless we can directly refer to a short wiki page like the books such as "The Elder Dragons") is the following: Given old and more recent dev comments on streams and forums/reddit, including as recent as Jessica Price's replies, we know the narrative team likes to browse the wiki for lore. Based on recent comments, it appears their internal lore bible may not actually be extensive enough on certain matters for various reasons so they rely on the wikis for more in depth or at least up to date info; all we know for certain, though, is that some lore was "retconned" because GW1 and GW2 wikis didn't cite exact sources for e.g. the Secondborn date of awakening or Primordus being the statue in Central Transfer Chamber, which made the devs assume there was no conflicting lore when they expanded on the lore. The devs are often on limited time, so quoting snippets from the exact relevant passage(s) from e.g. lengthy dialogue heavy pages (looking at you, "The Way Forward") saves that precious reading time. It also lets readers (developers; lore focused content creators who rely on wiki documentation to verify if wiki's lore statements are objective or biased; other visitors like lorehounds, casual fans, curious onlookers etc.) instantly get what the citation is in reference to. If there's a more elegant solution to the aforementioned dilemma, I'd be happy to hear it, but currently I feel like this compromise is the only feasible way for References section to work when it comes to some of the interwiki stuff while keeping visitors, who are interested in lore, in mind. :) --Kossage (talk) 01:54, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Joko and Scriptures of Abaddon

Not all were fakes it seems, Konig (talk) 21:11, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up! I keep constantly finding all sorts of interesting interconnected things in GW1Wiki while browsing the quests, so one can only wonder if Joko's lichdom had anything to do with wishing a djinn for immortality or abusing deity scriptures somehow... --Kossage (talk) 21:19, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Vlast and Aurene

File:Vlast S4E4 Trailer.jpg Erm... Where's Aurene? I don't see her? Konig (talk) 05:37, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Isn't that the vague outline of the egg within it, or am I just imagining things? Would there be any other reason for Vlast to gaze upon it in particular in this very specific shot composed in Glint's lair for the trailer alone while using the playback of Vlast's memory addressing Aurene from PoF? But I suppose the file could be renamed to avoid such ambiguity just to be on the safe side if that isn't the case. :) --Kossage (talk) 05:53, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

That looks exactly like the last memory crystal we encounter during Crystalline Memories - and that rendition of Glint's lair, too. Konig (talk) 07:22, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, compare to File:Intact Memory Crystal.jpg. Same exact room with the angled beams and everything. Looks like they didn't even remove the Brand effects in the background, either, just put the camera to avoid the majority of the purple corruption. Konig (talk) 07:23, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Ah, that would make sense, then. Thanks for the detective work. :) --Kossage (talk) 20:21, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Pact Commander

Just wondering, what was the reason for this edit? I know the Commander is mentioned in that story, but it doesn't really tell us anything about them that we didn't already know from LWS4. —Idris 23:50, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment! My reasoning for including it is that while it's Rytlock's point of view through and through, it also explicitly continues the plot of Episode 5 and, more importantly, provides insight into the Commander's personality, actions and reactions (The Commander cries and views Aurene as a daughter in particular, none of which was explicitly told to us in "The Crystal Dragon") which we wouldn't necessarily witness otherwise as the short story technically isn't part of said episode's content..in game, at least. It's the same reason we've listed various short stories in their relevant NPCs' pages to provide insight into the characters presented in said stories (e.g. Short Story: Evon Gnashblade Disembarks in the "See also" section of Evon Gnashblade's wiki page) for any wiki visitor wishing to discover more about this or that character. However, I'm fine if there's a compelling reason to leave it out despite the aforementioned points, but so far I feel that these points would support the link's inclusion in the article rather than its removal. :) --Kossage (talk) 04:45, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

That's fair, I thought it might be something along those lines! It's just that linking the story in the "see also" section, to me, implicitly says "this story is about the Commander, or might as well be" -- so it's weird to read it and find it's all about Rytlock with only the briefest references to the Commander. (The example about Evon you linked, on the other hand, it entirely about him.) I do think the insights about the Commander in this story are worth including in the article, but I think that writing them into the bio with a ref tag would be more appropriate than dropping a link to the entire story. What do you think? :) —Idris 06:17, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, when you put it that way, I can definitely see where the confusion would be coming from. The problem is that, due to understandable reasons of preferring to link to the respective expansion and living world story summary pages (and which is why I believe the personal story summary on Commander's biography is only temporary until the personal story page itself is properly fleshed out), the Commander doesn't exactly have the same kind of biography section as the prominent NPCs have so I'm not sure how the ref tag would work in that context when only a link is provided for Commander's S4 involvement. If there's a graceful enough solution for the ref tag inclusion in the Commander's page or the S4 story summary page, though, I'm all for it. :) --Kossage (talk) 06:30, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Ah yeah, now you point it out I see the problem. One solution might be to add it to the trivia -- "Rytlock sees the Commander as x, y, z [source]"? —Idris 06:34, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

After giving it some thought, perhaps mentioning the story in trivia will serve the page the best without confusing any reader. I'll also go ahead and add a link to the Hero NPC page as they are, more or less, the Commander's symbolic predecessor from GW1. :) --Kossage (talk) 15:30, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Mordremoth's infobox image

Hey there, I was wondering whether you'd mind weighing in on the discussion at Talk:Mordremoth#Infobox image. I changed it to be the newly-available render, but I hadn't realised that you'd already started a discussion in the past about the same subject, so I thought I'd give you the heads-up. –Santax (talk · contribs) 11:29, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Btw, I just scrolled up and it doesn't look like I've ever said - you've done a great job maintaining the lore articles these last few years. I'm sure others have told you this, but it is appreciated. –Santax (talk · contribs) 12:28, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, and thanks for the kind words. I've always liked your and Konig's lore contributions to the wiki, and it's nice to see you back in action, as you're one of the folks whose works inspired me to hop into the lore bandwagon and start expanding the articles with cited sources and participate in lore discussions. I'll try to calm down my fanboying about Bangar Ruinbringer's charr-ming reveal in the recent Icebrood Saga announcement stream and weigh in on the Mordy discussion during this weekend. :) --Kossage (talk) 20:01, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Raven

Are we really sure that the giant raven is actually Raven? Dialogue implies it's a blessing, so it could just be an avatar or spell. Konig (talk) 05:38, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

It could be an avatar, but the meta info on the right with the progress for Havroun Energy Charge shows the following text during one of the phases: "Havroun Weibe is channeling energy to summon Raven and drive the storm back." Havroun Weibe also states in written dialogue: "I'm asking Raven to send us aid." and "I can summon Raven to clear the skies, but I'll need your help." while upon failure he states "Raven won't return to us for a while." Meta completion text also states: "Clear Skies--Raven has cleared all signs of the blizzard." These, to me, seem to indicate that the spiritual raven seen in the sky is either a powerful avatar of Raven or Raven himself given the way it's being referred to with capital R during and after the meta. --Kossage (talk) 03:20, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Gender and sexuality in Tyria

Hey, just wanted to thank you for all the work you've put into fleshing out the lore on the gender/sexuality article. Since it looks like it's mostly you who's been working on that, I thought I'd ask your opinion on the current state of the article: it's just getting really long, and I'm wondering if we should consolidate the lesser races section so it describes general trends across races that approach things similarly, rather than splitting it up into endless sections. —Idris 18:31, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey, and thanks for the kind words! I try to find sources where I can as I've discovered that the devs have actually had quite a bit of thought put into fleshing out the races and their respective cultures over the years. As for the article, I'm fine if there are any changes made to the layout to make the descriptions more concise and/or more readable; I just generally tend to list stuff under headers for easier referencing as that's what I'm used to as I'm unsure what stuff is worth emphasizing over others. I trust your judgement on making changes. Also, good to see you back in the swing of things! Keep up the good work, Idris, and know that your contributions (both in articles and in your detailed feedback where you're always friendly and trying to look at things from multiple POVs) are valued. :) --Kossage (talk) 18:53, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words too! I also trust your judgement; I really respect your detailed understanding of the lore and dedication to fleshing out lore articles. I think, given the number of them, a lot of the lesser-race sections are just too small to justify a dedicated section, and I presume there isn't more info to add to them, so consolidating them could be worthwhile. I also think that there's currently a lot of focus on reproduction; I get the feeling you've been scrounging any vaguely relevant lore just to have something to talk about. Having paragraphs that cover "trends in biology", "trends in gender roles", "trends in sexuality", etc might keep the article more focused. :) —Idris 19:14, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome. And your suggestions sound solid. I'm sure all of us contributors can make the page for this topic even more attractive to visitors browsing the wiki, and what you've proposed is a good step forward in that direction. :) --Kossage (talk) 19:19, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Heads up that I've gone ahead with the overhaul, and a lot of lore has been cut as a result -- please feel free to give it a look-over and add back in (or remove) anything you think might improve it further. —Idris 14:30, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I looked at it, and you did a good job with the overhaul. :) --Kossage (talk) 17:20, 8 July 2020 (UTC)