Charr are not good or evil.
Charr are like cats. If they like you, they won't eat you.
That's all.
"Good" Charr = fail.
MithranArkanere
psycore
Should take Pyre to KC, Kamadan or LA to clean up the rat problem.
Snow Bunny
Move this to Lore....
I thought this was going to be a discussion on the pve AI of the charr....
I thought this was going to be a discussion on the pve AI of the charr....
dont feel no pain
This is rarther funny, i wouldn't mind ether way 
ShadowStorm
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bryant Again
Forced Character = fail. I'm not a sick son of a bitch - not because of the bondage, but because my character and myself would never, ever be that cruel.
|
Sometimes, I get really sick of listening to all the racist comments the NPCs throw at our characters and really wish I could torment them and show them their place. I probably would have chosen the evil option in this scenario in retaliation for Pyre calling me "Meat" and Gwen "Mouse". If I could smite the Asura everytime they called me "Bookah", I'd do that too. Same with Zhed's Two-Legs talk.
I really hope Anet gets a clue in Guild Wars 2 and stops making every single non-human race condesending, arrogant and racist. Either that, or give the player an evil option to put them in their place.
Bryant Again
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ShadowStorm
Guild Wars doesn't really have the option to play good or evil characters. The storyline in all four campaigns forces your character to be good. If Anet had programmed an option to do something like what the OP suggested, it would have made the game ALOT more interesting. I personally would have applauded Anet for including ingame options like this.
Sometimes, I get really sick of listening to all the racist comments the NPCs throw at our characters and really wish I could torment them and show them their place. I probably would have chosen the evil option in this scenario in retaliation for Pyre calling me "Meat" and Gwen "Mouse". If I could smite the Asura everytime they called me "Bookah", I'd do that too. Same with Zhed's Two-Legs talk. I really hope Anet gets a clue in Guild Wars 2 and stops making every single non-human race condesending, arrogant and racist. Either that, or give the player an evil option to put them in their place. |
However, if we *can't* choose how our characters are, I'd rather we weren't included in anything. Have the cutscenes just have you as a bystander, have us say nothing. For me, the immersion is broken when my character says something I don't want him to say.
Zahr Dalsk
I disagree with the OP of the thread.
I think we should have been allowed to kill Gwen. She made me want to kill her for pretty much all the cutscenes with her and the Charr.
Wait, the norn tournament let us face her in combat (or rather, let my spirits kill her) and slaughter her (one of the easiest opponents in the tournament aside from Mhenlo). Ok, I guess things are fine as they are
Word at the BioWare forums is that they're trying to move away from alignments in their games.
I think we should have been allowed to kill Gwen. She made me want to kill her for pretty much all the cutscenes with her and the Charr.
Wait, the norn tournament let us face her in combat (or rather, let my spirits kill her) and slaughter her (one of the easiest opponents in the tournament aside from Mhenlo). Ok, I guess things are fine as they are
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bryant Again
I heard Bioware might be working on a Star Wars/KotOR MMORPG, so I'd imagine allignment or such in there.
|
R!ghteous Ind!gnation
Interesting thread.
Darksun
Meh, no.. there are so many things wrong with this thread.
What happened in-game makes way more sense..
btw, if you could Domination-Magic whatever you wanted onto your team, the Charr would be no problem at all. Makes no sense..
QFT... I liked the cute Gwen so much more.. the new "badass" one is SO annoying.. gah..
lol, So you could be just like the characters you don't like? Then EVERYONE can be annoying, racist & self centered! Just like real life! weeeeee!
What happened in-game makes way more sense..
btw, if you could Domination-Magic whatever you wanted onto your team, the Charr would be no problem at all. Makes no sense..
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk
I disagree with the OP of the thread.
I think we should have been allowed to kill Gwen. She made me want to kill her for pretty much all the cutscenes with her and the Charr. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ShadowStorm
Sometimes, I get really sick of listening to all the racist comments the NPCs throw at our characters and really wish I could torment them and show them their place. I probably would have chosen the evil option in this scenario in retaliation for Pyre calling me "Meat" and Gwen "Mouse". If I could smite the Asura everytime they called me "Bookah", I'd do that too. Same with Zhed's Two-Legs talk.
|
Elena
Alignment...
takes me back to Fable... i could kill every person i didn't like or yust who i wanted to kill and they still expected me to kill the main villain and then they're surprised i join forces
takes me back to Fable... i could kill every person i didn't like or yust who i wanted to kill and they still expected me to kill the main villain and then they're surprised i join forces
arcady
If I remember right, there in the printed manual for Prophesies was all the justification the Charr needed to invade Ascalon. They've never really been the bad guys. Humans did it to them first.
The lore for this traces back, and I'm really looking forward to playing a Charr in GW:2 and getting some revenge on those pesky human invaders.
The lore for this traces back, and I'm really looking forward to playing a Charr in GW:2 and getting some revenge on those pesky human invaders.
TabascoSauce
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Darksun
lol, So you could be just like the characters you don't like? Then EVERYONE can be annoying, racist & self centered! Just like real life! weeeeee!
|
Thanks!
TabascoSauce
Bryant Again
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk
Word at the BioWare forums is that they're trying to move away from alignments in their games.
|
Kashrlyyk
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BlackSephir
Agreed.
That's what's wrong with MMORPGs... They're MMO alright but not RPG enough. *sigh* My lil Assa is acting like all do-gooder, saying that he understands everyone and all... What kind of people go to Shing Jea to become Assassins and save the world? The hell? "Ok Pyre, here's the deal. First, you'll help us find Ebon Vanguard or I'm going to go Boa-Sin on your ass. Then I'll think about finding your friends" /slits throat after Vanguard is rescued. *sigh* Real MMORPG is yet to come. |
Nevin
The charr in control have brainwashed the rest. Simple as that.
Zahr Dalsk
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bryant Again
Omgz fo real?...That's quite a big let down
|
http://www.forums.bioware.com
Andisa Kalorn
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ShadowStorm
Guild Wars doesn't really have the option to play good or evil characters. The storyline in all four campaigns forces your character to be good. If Anet had programmed an option to do something like what the OP suggested, it would have made the game ALOT more interesting. I personally would have applauded Anet for including ingame options like this.
Sometimes, I get really sick of listening to all the racist comments the NPCs throw at our characters and really wish I could torment them and show them their place. I probably would have chosen the evil option in this scenario in retaliation for Pyre calling me "Meat" and Gwen "Mouse". If I could smite the Asura everytime they called me "Bookah", I'd do that too. Same with Zhed's Two-Legs talk. I really hope Anet gets a clue in Guild Wars 2 and stops making every single non-human race condesending, arrogant and racist. Either that, or give the player an evil option to put them in their place. |
I had no problem with the "good" charr. After all, we've done quests with them as allies in the realm of torment. But those charr weren't so insulting, so I didn't expect Pyre to be that way. It's already obvious that charr can be both good and non-offensive. So why do we get such an annoying hero?
Bryant Again
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk
Nah, it's actually a good thing since that will allow for better choices than either Good or Stupid Evil (Stupid Evil is evil like mindless killing, it's something any brute can do, and it is most easily seen in the Sith from Star Wars).
http://www.forums.bioware.com |
acidic
GWEN aND BONDAGE o HELL YES
Meat Axe
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Andisa Kalorn
I don't want a good/evil option, I just want the option to not be so disgustingly good... At least in nightfall my characters had an issue with Zhed's "two-legs". In EotN it's all "well it's perfectly fine for you to insult me as long as I know what the insult means".
I had no problem with the "good" charr. After all, we've done quests with them as allies in the realm of torment. But those charr weren't so insulting, so I didn't expect Pyre to be that way. It's already obvious that charr can be both good and non-offensive. So why do we get such an annoying hero? |
So, I think that our character was just trying to turn the situation so that we'd get a definite ally, instead of shutting him down at the first insult that his prejudice came up with. To me, that's a smart thing. Don't anger potention allies, especially when that potential ally is from a species known for the cruelty.
Personally, I don't see what's so insulting about being called meat anyway. It's like "Okay, yeah, he'd probably eat me, given the chance. Fair enough that he calls me that."
Anyway, I agree with those saying that we shouldn't be forced into an evil storyline. It would be nice to have a choice, even if it just had an option upon character creation that let you choose, and gave you a seperate set of cutscenes or something. But I think the majority of players would choose to be good (that's just an unfounded assumption on my part). Also, it fits better into the storyline of the games for the players to be good.
EDIT: I almost forgot.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MithranArkanere
Charr are not good or evil.
Charr are like cats. If they like you, they won't eat you. That's all. |
Zahr Dalsk
The Charr never became good; Pyre was angry about his people being tricked into following false gods. He allied with the player because that was the best way to get his warband freed. He helped the player because that was the deal he made. The player goes along with him because he has no other choice. It is not a matter of good or evil.
Thom Bangalter
bad fan fiction is bad.
blue.rellik
I like to send Gwen into a pack of Frost Wurms in Frostmaw's Burrow
Sha Noran
Pyre should have gruesomely bit Gwen's face off ala Resident Evil 4 death scene, so that none of us had to listen to her unreasonable whining for the rest of the short game.
Why is this thread not locked?
Why is this thread not locked?
Phaern Majes
Good question. The attitude reminds me of a... what's it called... sociopath.
Kashrlyyk
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bryant Again
....
However, if we *can't* choose how our characters are, I'd rather we weren't included in anything. Have the cutscenes just have you as a bystander, have us say nothing. For me, the immersion is broken when my character says something I don't want him to say. |
Muspellsheimr
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sha Noran
Why is this thread not locked?
|
I was expecting it to lock within an hour of it being made...
-Loki-
At least Pyre is humorous, sort of like a more cruel HK-47 from KotOR.
Commander Ryker
I don't understand everyone's attitude here. You are all playing this game and yes, it's not real, but isn't that the point? It's not real so we can go about killing the bad guys. If I wanted real, I'd watch the news.
To the OP: Gwen so should have been able to do something like that.
To the rest of you with no imagination: Go watch the news.
To the OP: Gwen so should have been able to do something like that.
To the rest of you with no imagination: Go watch the news.
Bryant Again
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Commander Ryker
I don't understand everyone's attitude here. You are all playing this game and yes, it's not real, but isn't that the point? It's not real so we can go about killing the bad guys. If I wanted real, I'd watch the news.
|
Aeon221
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nevin
The charr in control have brainwashed the rest. Simple as that.
|
Fortunately, Anet didn't ask us to swallow such stinking fecal matter. What is actually occurring amongst the Charr is closer to a schism of the existing faith, where the main religious leaders have adopted a new pantheon, but conservative elements amongst the Charr have chosen to remain faithful to the old pantheon. Is it any wonder that there is significant infighting, or that the reactionary Charr are willing to accept even the help of humans (much as the French assisted the Protestant Union in order to defeat the greater threat of the Catholic League and its Counter Reformation) to prevent a change.
I'm ignoring the strong insinuations of Anet that many of the Charr are now atheists, as that just seems screwy to me. Even in the most modern nation on the planet, only a small minority of the populace is Atheist. There's just no way that the Charr could even hope to have a significant minority of them in a world full of magic and gods that bloody well indicate their existence by letting you romp around in their homes. You'd have to be effing stupid to deny the existence of Grenth and his ectos.
Zeek Aran
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aeon221
I'm ignoring the strong insinuations of Anet that many of the Charr are now atheists, as that just seems screwy to me. Even in the most modern nation on the planet, only a small minority of the populace is Atheist. There's just no way that the Charr could even hope to have a significant minority of them in a world full of magic and gods that bloody well indicate their existence by letting you romp around in their homes. You'd have to be effing stupid to deny the existence of Grenth and his ectos.
|
draxynnic
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zeek Aran
I thought they didn't want gods for themselves. Believing in and worshipping/paying tribute to gods is one thing, and refusing to do so is a different. Doesn't mean they don't believe they exist.
|
On working with Pyre in the first place - I thought of it as a case of both sides using the other as tools. Neither Pyre's followers nor the Ebon Vanguard (for which you and Gwen are acting as the representatives) have the power to bring down the Shamans individually, but working together they might just be able to do so, and they both think they'll be better off with the Shamans gone. There's nothing to indicate, however, that either side believes or intends the alliance to last longer than the fall of the Shaman caste - in fact, some of the ending scenes for Gwen indicate that the aftermath doesn't make the Charr any less hostile, just that a small number of humans have earned respect from some of the Charr.
Which could be a seed that flowers in GW2 with whatever disasters it starts with, but not necassarily any sooner than that.
kazjun
I don't really care if they believe in gods or not. Do you think any of the charr actually regret levelling ascalon? They're angry that they got tricked by the shamans, doesn't mean they wouldn't have seared the whole continent again if they had the choice. Hell, pyre's proud his dad had a part in leveling ascalon. Even if they gain a little more respect for humans, doesn't mean anything. You can respect an enemy, but that doesn't mean you won't still kill him. You reckon that even if they overthrow the shamans they're all suddenly going to become fuzzy little human lovers?
As for gwen? Cmon, her whole family got killed, her home turned into a burnt out ruin (she takes you there with the quest for her flute) and everyone she knew was slaughtered or enslaved. And she grew up with that. Of course she's gonna hate the charr. She'd have to be a psycho not too. Or is it all okay the charr destroyed her life, just cause they look 'cool'? I reckon anet went right with the angry avenger gwen. More realistic.
As for gwen? Cmon, her whole family got killed, her home turned into a burnt out ruin (she takes you there with the quest for her flute) and everyone she knew was slaughtered or enslaved. And she grew up with that. Of course she's gonna hate the charr. She'd have to be a psycho not too. Or is it all okay the charr destroyed her life, just cause they look 'cool'? I reckon anet went right with the angry avenger gwen. More realistic.
draxynnic
Heck, one of Pyre's battle quotes is "You will burn like Ascalon!"
From the GW2 information, the important thing to the Charr is victory. It doesn't matter if you destroy a country or work with one enemy to bring down another to achieve victory, it's the victory that matters.
From the GW2 information, the important thing to the Charr is victory. It doesn't matter if you destroy a country or work with one enemy to bring down another to achieve victory, it's the victory that matters.
Iuris
I'd like to point out that I was actually a bit disappointed by how far apart the humans and Charr remained at the end of the game. War is still on, it seems...
Sleeper Service
Char = Klingon. Pyre = Kang.
nuff said.
nuff said.
wilderness
Firstly, you need to stop typing such abstract terms a 'Good' and 'Evil'. This is War, there is only relative perspective. Char may be considered cruel in Human terms, but they're an entirely different species and as such won't ever share the same ideals of morality.
They will, however, be linked at the very core of some of their ideals, and through not after just one uneasy alliance, in the centuries between GWs and GWs2, a strong understanding between Char and Human is a distinct possibility.
To reiterate to clarify: Shared experience in times of great need will breed great understanding.
Also to consider: in times of war, peoples tend to demonize their enemy as much as possible for the obvious reasons, and although the char were most definitely responsible for barbaric and inhumane acts (the human element being the key there), I'm sure some humans were also.
The Klingon analogy above is a pretty good one.
Also, consider Halo, the Humans and the Elites made perfect sense when rallying against a common foe, and so it does here.
They will, however, be linked at the very core of some of their ideals, and through not after just one uneasy alliance, in the centuries between GWs and GWs2, a strong understanding between Char and Human is a distinct possibility.
To reiterate to clarify: Shared experience in times of great need will breed great understanding.
Also to consider: in times of war, peoples tend to demonize their enemy as much as possible for the obvious reasons, and although the char were most definitely responsible for barbaric and inhumane acts (the human element being the key there), I'm sure some humans were also.
The Klingon analogy above is a pretty good one.
Also, consider Halo, the Humans and the Elites made perfect sense when rallying against a common foe, and so it does here.
Vickie
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aeon221
Pyre: I <3 <3 <3 me some human killin!
Gwen: Shitbonerz, let there be purple glow! My PMS will destroy you! Pyre: Lol noob, do you not know that RANGERS are the true interruptors?! Suck DSHOT on your weeny skillz Gwen: I've got the power to bleed and cry at the same time! Pyre: r9 biatch Gwen: =( You: lol Gwen, you pve nub. Pyre, lets go raid Droks for ph4t l3wt. Pyre: r9 biatch You: =( |
And just because Pyre is on our side doesn't mean he's "good".
Remember, we kill stuff for spectacles.
Zahr Dalsk
My character destroys souls (summons a spirit and then uses Gaze of Fury) denying them any chance of an afterlife. I wouldn't call him a good person So, no problems with teaming up with Pyre here.