Good or evil im not sure about, but one thing is for sure, the charr would make a nice rug to sit in front of my fire.
I wonder what charr meat tastes like?
Ecology of the Charr
Azael Durge
|pyro|
Before you say if Charr are good or evil, define good, when is somebody doing something good?
KalleDamos
Plain and simple, its all about view point. Because many played on the side of ascalon, they veiw the humans in the right. However, if you look at it differently, from the charr's side, they may be in the right in there own sense. So it all a matter of which side you play because all sides are biased to their own oppinion. So yeah, still the charr are great for target practice. So may not see many charr characters of mine in the near future.
Vicks
I got one thing to say about this whole "are the Charr evil?" thing:
Garfaz Steelfur!
"Greetings, human! Have no fear! If we encounter demons you can hide behind me. They won't lay a claw on you!"
Garfaz Steelfur!
"Greetings, human! Have no fear! If we encounter demons you can hide behind me. They won't lay a claw on you!"
Fangclaw
I believe that Charr arent as bad as they are depicted...
As said before, we've only met their military. Plus, if your whole race had been worshipping evil fiery ''gods'' for a few centuries it would be hard to break the old patterns and the traditions already in place.
That said, I believe Charr can be ''Evil'' by human standards (Gwen apart); or maybe the Ascalonians are just being blind themselves, still blaming the Charr for The Searing... After all, They have been figthing The Charr all this time...
In a way, The Charr are like the Orcs from the Warcraft universe.
As said before, we've only met their military. Plus, if your whole race had been worshipping evil fiery ''gods'' for a few centuries it would be hard to break the old patterns and the traditions already in place.
That said, I believe Charr can be ''Evil'' by human standards (Gwen apart); or maybe the Ascalonians are just being blind themselves, still blaming the Charr for The Searing... After all, They have been figthing The Charr all this time...
In a way, The Charr are like the Orcs from the Warcraft universe.
Mark Nevermiss
The Charr "nation" ARE the military.
- They are morons, destroying 70% of what they perceive as their homeland to spite the Ascalonians.
- They are brutish savages and a threat to every other nation. They did not just attack Ascalon [which we may have understood their reasons for] They attacked Norn-land, Kryta, Orr and who knows where else?
- They are only strong because they have overwhelming numbers. Look at them in the Cathedral of Flames. Torn to shreds by the undead and begging for our help. If there had been an option to aid Murakai I'd have gone for it.
-They treat their prisoners worse than animals and sacrifice them for their amusement.
- They are morons, destroying 70% of what they perceive as their homeland to spite the Ascalonians.
- They are brutish savages and a threat to every other nation. They did not just attack Ascalon [which we may have understood their reasons for] They attacked Norn-land, Kryta, Orr and who knows where else?
- They are only strong because they have overwhelming numbers. Look at them in the Cathedral of Flames. Torn to shreds by the undead and begging for our help. If there had been an option to aid Murakai I'd have gone for it.
-They treat their prisoners worse than animals and sacrifice them for their amusement.
Sirius-NZ
The Charr are barbaric and vindictive, certainly. For some, that may be part of the charm (although I reserve the right to steer clear of you in real life if so!), but it undermines their effectiveness in the end.
Fangclaw
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark Nevermiss
The Charr "nation" ARE the military.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark Nevermiss
- They are morons, destroying 70% of what they perceive as their homeland to spite the Ascalonians.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark Nevermiss
- They are brutish savages and a threat to every other nation. They did not just attack Ascalon [which we may have understood their reasons for] They attacked Norn-land, Kryta, Orr and who knows where else?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark Nevermiss
- They are only strong because they have overwhelming numbers.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark Nevermiss
-They treat their prisoners worse than animals and sacrifice them for their amusement.
|
Most of the things your talking about happened during Titan/Shaman rule. We dont know for sure what will happen now that they are free.
-Makai-
The Charr may enslave and consume humans, but at least they don't wear them (i.e. Charr warrior armor).
Sirius-NZ
That's precisely what the Charr do, though (eating/torturing/etc prisoners; Gwen's BMP mission took place where they were feeding prisoners to a devourer from memory). It is pretty much as low as you can go.
Ascalonians would be unlikely to spare the Charr much any more, but I suspect they'd sooner execute all the Charr they captured than play games with them. Or eat them. Heh.
Before the searing, they tended to think of the Charr as lesser creatures, and I'm not sure they would have felt it necessary to perform a searing of their own, even if they could. Post-searing, definitely. There is no love lost at all between Ascalonians and Charr now.
Not all races are a threat to every other nation; the Forgotten certainly aren't (if they ever were), and the Centaurs, Naga and Tengu have very well-defined enemies. Then again, the Charr show little inclination of trying to pull off world domination any more either, without the Titans forcing their way.
Ascalonians would be unlikely to spare the Charr much any more, but I suspect they'd sooner execute all the Charr they captured than play games with them. Or eat them. Heh.
Before the searing, they tended to think of the Charr as lesser creatures, and I'm not sure they would have felt it necessary to perform a searing of their own, even if they could. Post-searing, definitely. There is no love lost at all between Ascalonians and Charr now.
Not all races are a threat to every other nation; the Forgotten certainly aren't (if they ever were), and the Centaurs, Naga and Tengu have very well-defined enemies. Then again, the Charr show little inclination of trying to pull off world domination any more either, without the Titans forcing their way.
Eldin
Primarily the Shaman Caste, and, in turn, their "Gods" are leading the Charr this way.
The Charr seem much like the WarCraft orcs - a higher power had led them to commit atrocities, and now the whole world hates them, though there are some who wish to leave those darker times behind and move on.
The Charr we play as in GW2 will probably be like Pyre's - against the Shaman Caste.
The Charr seem much like the WarCraft orcs - a higher power had led them to commit atrocities, and now the whole world hates them, though there are some who wish to leave those darker times behind and move on.
The Charr we play as in GW2 will probably be like Pyre's - against the Shaman Caste.
Mark Nevermiss
Pyre himself said it: Some Charr are more evil than others.
cataphract
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sirius-NZ
That's precisely what the Charr do, though (eating/torturing/etc prisoners; Gwen's BMP mission took place where they were feeding prisoners to a devourer from memory). It is pretty much as low as you can go.
|
Someone already mentioned Garfaz Steelfur as one Charr that wasn't *evil*. On the contrary, he was being protective over us "mice". But there is one more Charr imprisoned in Realm of Torment - Scorch Emberspire. I remember doing his quest for the first time ever - I felt so sorry for him. He looked more like an abbandoned kitten than a furry beast.
Sirius-NZ
Oh, there's definitely been some reference to Charr eating prisoners, but I doubt all of them would do it. Garfaz Steelfur is certainly an exception as well, although exactly how common his sort is is anyone's guess.
Solus Spartan
The entire world is evil then. Charr worship different religions, they invade to expand. Yes they are rather cruel, but there are cases in all races of this occuring. Charr may be evil from the asaclonians point of view, but not from their's.
arsie
Why wouldn't Charr treat humans as meat? They are carnivores, humans are a different species.
Some individual specimens of tigers have been known to have a sort of friendship with certain humans, but the rest of the tiger population sure as hell treat us as walking meat.
Some individual specimens of tigers have been known to have a sort of friendship with certain humans, but the rest of the tiger population sure as hell treat us as walking meat.
Floski
Quote:
| Why wouldn't Charr treat humans as meat? They are carnivores, humans are a different species. |
Konig Des Todes
Due to the amount of posts, i have not read them all yet, so if I state something that has been stated, my apologies. My view on the charr is this, they have always loved a challenge *much like the charr* except they have less honor *doesnt mean no honor*. Also, since the Ascalonians took their lands, it seems reasonable to try to take them back *happens all the time in real life, why not in a game? One perfect example is Israel, both sides of the war believe the land is their, the Israelites (their land by ancestry, like the charr) and the muslims (their land because they've lived their for the past so and so hundred years, liek the Ascalonians)*.
In terms of their "Victory at any cost" I would have to agree with that, at least to some extent. I don't think they would want a victory if it will cost them their life *yes I know, burntsoul unleashed the destroyers that would have killed him, but he was in a corner and there was no way out for him really, so why not take your enemies with you? Also, I think that he went mad with power, as many leaders do.*
I'm sure I have more on this topic, but I cannot think about it at the moment, will post more later.
In terms of their "Victory at any cost" I would have to agree with that, at least to some extent. I don't think they would want a victory if it will cost them their life *yes I know, burntsoul unleashed the destroyers that would have killed him, but he was in a corner and there was no way out for him really, so why not take your enemies with you? Also, I think that he went mad with power, as many leaders do.*
I'm sure I have more on this topic, but I cannot think about it at the moment, will post more later.
Konig Des Todes
For the charr being good or evil in GW2. I just have 3 things. First, I think the Charr has a good enough reason to hate humans, humans stole HALF of their land, if not more. Second, the Charr have *as shown in the PCGamer GW issue* been a survival of the fittest race. Third, a LOT can happen in 250 years, so their opinion about humans can change, for the better or the worse.
Songbringer
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Shelf
I like to think of the Charr as a cross between the Klingons of Star Trek and the Orcs of LotR. They're similar to orcs because they have no honor and will use dirty tricks whenever it suits them, but they're like Klingons in that they love fighting and war. I know, the Klingon resemblance is hard to see because Klingons are all about honor, but if you can picture a Klingon that has no sense of honor, then I think that would be the Charr.
Really, I see the Charr as the anti-human. They're almost completely opposite of us. As such, I don't think anyone will ever try to play them to be the hero, but rather to be the anti-hero. Anyone familiar with comics should definitely know what I mean. Venom (from Spider-man) was portrayed as an anti-hero for a long time. Basically, that sums up the role that I think the Charr players will fulfill in GW2 -- the anti-hero. They're not villains anymore, but they're not quite heroes yet either, they're anti-heroes. They do good when it suits them. Picture a typical party that has one character of every race, and you'll likely see the human as the leader, the Asuran as the brainiac, the Norn as the warrior, the Sylvari as the voice of reason, and the Charr as the obnoxious jerk who no one wants around but no one can do without due to the skillset he brings to the table. Here's another way to think of it. The Asurans balance out the Norn. The Sylvari balance out the Charr. And the humans are balanced already because we always manage to span the personality gamut. |
THAT SUMS ME UP BABY!! My first class is gonna be a charr in gw2 and im gonna kick all the little humans azzezzzzzzz
enishicz
The Charr race is a symbolism of American imperialism in the modern day. Americans are war hungry and xenophobic who treat those different from them like sh*t. They both employ dirty tricks to get what they want (land for Charr and oil for Americans). duh
But as an American, I hear everyday that people use religious or philosophical rationale to justify this, perhaps the Charr uses the Titans to justify their thirst for power.
But as an American, I hear everyday that people use religious or philosophical rationale to justify this, perhaps the Charr uses the Titans to justify their thirst for power.
enishicz
How are humans any less evil than the Charr? the Roman Empire enjoyed fierce gladiator battles between enslaved men and beasts (duke gaban vs devourer anyone?) We eat chicken, Charr eats us, what's the difference? Charrs employ traps and tricks and have no honor? there is no honor on the battle field my friends, ever heard of a little book called "The Art of War"?
Numa Pompilius
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sirius-NZ
That's precisely what the Charr do, though (eating/torturing/etc prisoners; Gwen's BMP mission took place where they were feeding prisoners to a devourer from memory). It is pretty much as low as you can go.
|
Also, even assuming that Charr females look like Charr males, like with the Dwarves, there should still be Charr pups, Charr livestock, perhaps Charr crops (if they eat vegetables). I don't think we've seen anything of civilian Charr society, we've only seen warbands and warcamps.
Furthermore, Charr society is - judging by naming conventions - clan-based, which is typically associated with warlike societies where infighting, raiding, and blood feuds are common.
Basically the Charr are primitive, and like all primitives their lives are, in the words of Hobbes, "poor, nasty, brutish, and short".
But inherently evil? No.
darc-smasher
The charr's leader was hinted to be suicidal and crazy, maybe that was why they attacked tyria etc. As for the honor bit, they do look at humans as weaker and smaller and were probably trained in a manor to kill without thinking and such, and unlike the orcs they have inteligence. I think that calling them evil would be from the human perspective of them not by there's or other races.
draxynnic
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius
You can actually go lower: you can not take prisoners at all. Which appear to be the ascalonian policy towards charr.
|
Besides, considering the way the Charr treat their prisoners, they may have a 'better to die than be taken prisoner' attitude.
And even with all that, there may be confinement locations for Charr POWs that we don't see in the game.
creelie
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mordakai
I do think they wish to conquer the world of Tyria, despite their respect of Norn and Asura, I don't think this would stop them from going to war against either race if it suited their purposes.
|
draxynnic
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by creelie
I know the Charr respect the Norn, but how do we know what they think of the Asura? I can think of exactly one instance where a Charr appears to know the Asura exist at all: the Polymock-playing Dune Teardrinker refers to them as "those big-eared creatures". I can't think of any other cases where a Charr speaks to an Asura directly or talks about the race in general. Same with the Norn. Given that both races view humans as fairly small and weak, what do they think of a race knee-high to humans that is obsessed with machinery?
|
According to the future histories we've seen, the Asura have been maintaining a strict neutrality policy while providing gates to all the major cities. The more warlike races may mock them behind their proverbial backs for being small and wimpy, but they're too valuable to insult to their faces. (From a Charr's viewpoint... would you risk antagonising them and having them side with the humans? Mark Whatever G.O.L.E.M.s are probably scary enough without considering what strategic advantages exclusive use of the gate network might provide...)
Gmr Leon
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by draxynnic
You know, I do find this thing about the Charr being antagonistic towards all gods, even before the rise of the Shaman caste, to be interesting. Did they get burned by godlike entities - possibly these dragons - before they even encountered humanity? Are they so embarassed about having been defeated by "mice" the first time around that they rationalise to themselves that it had to be due to divine backing, even though according to history it was humanity that had upset the balance that the gods had originally estabolished, a balance that presumably included a space for the Charr? Or are the Charr just that vicious, aggressive, and possibly paranoid that they see anything that could possibly compete with them for the position of top of the food chain as a foe to be destroyed... implying that the pseudo-alliance with the Norn is simply a convenience while the Charr have bigger fish to fry?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Ecology of the Charr
Before the time of the humans, it is said the Charr had no gods, no concept of divine beings with more power than themselves. 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 worshiped or feared–they were to be fought, and if possible, destroyed. Yet when the Charr saw the humans worshiping gods–and receiving power from them–they blamed this power for the humans’ victory. Only with such powers on their side could the humans have ever defeated the Charr.
|
Konig Des Todes
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GmrLeon
Error!
Basically they detest the humans for worshiping such beings. |
creelie
Well they don't detest humans *just* for worshipping such beings. They also think humans are cowardly land-thieves who are potentially delicious.
Free Runner
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Azazel The Assassin
So, what your getting at, is that Charr don't hate humans for taking half their lands, don't find them inferior, and don't find them good to eat. The reason why Charr attack humans, is for the fact that humans worship the 5*now 6* gods? Then why don't they hate norn for their nature spirits, or the Asuran for their religion, or any other race for their own personal religion.
|
Konig Des Todes
I think the land being conquered is the main reason and the gods being the second reason. I know that the gods is the reason why the Charr adopted the Titans, and later the Destroyers, as gods, but I wouldn't say it is the main reason why the Charr hate humans.
Gmr Leon
Charr hate the human Gods for blessing them and see them as weak because without being blessed with magic they probably would have ended up extinct. Of course they hate the humans for the simple reasons of weak, inferiority, and stealing half of their land in the Ascalon region.
I wasn't very clear in my post, I was trying to display one of their main reasons for detesting the Gods. My apologies for that.
I wasn't very clear in my post, I was trying to display one of their main reasons for detesting the Gods. My apologies for that.
distilledwill
I imagine that the Charr that will be playable in GW2 will be portrayed as those who have rejected the false gods (and any gods, for that matter). That leaves them open to have both "evil" Charr - those that still follow some kind of malevolent "god" - and "good" Charr - the playable, secular race.
They will likely be embittered and wary of other races, but just as the human race is split and so has wars between different factions, so can the charr.
Morally, neither are evil and neither are good. The Charr only did what any country nowadays would do if it wanted to conquer a county... bomb/sear it into oblivion. Its a matter of perspective.
They will likely be embittered and wary of other races, but just as the human race is split and so has wars between different factions, so can the charr.
Morally, neither are evil and neither are good. The Charr only did what any country nowadays would do if it wanted to conquer a county... bomb/sear it into oblivion. Its a matter of perspective.
Konig Des Todes
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by distilledwill
I imagine that the Charr that will be playable in GW2 will be portrayed as those who have rejected the false gods (and any gods, for that matter). That leaves them open to have both "evil" Charr - those that still follow some kind of malevolent "god" - and "good" Charr - the playable, secular race.
They will likely be embittered and wary of other races, but just as the human race is split and so has wars between different factions, so can the charr. Morally, neither are evil and neither are good. The Charr only did what any country nowadays would do if it wanted to conquer a county... bomb/sear it into oblivion. Its a matter of perspective. |
2)As said in the article Ecology of the Charr, the Charr are constantly attacking any threat to them, within and without. But, I believe that recently the Charr have begun to stablize as a single race *I need to re-read that article*.
Chexer
I think it says alot that the Charr would so easily kill off Pyre for speaking out against the shamans, who were already wrong about giant walking fire beasts once.
Pyre should have some importance to the charr because of his family. One of his band members calls him the son of Vatlaaw. I have to assume that finding a way around the wall and uniting the Grawl against humanity makes Vatlaaw a sort of hero, or something.
Pyre should have some importance to the charr because of his family. One of his band members calls him the son of Vatlaaw. I have to assume that finding a way around the wall and uniting the Grawl against humanity makes Vatlaaw a sort of hero, or something.
Free Runner
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chexer
I think it says alot that the Charr would so easily kill off Pyre for speaking out against the shamans, who were already wrong about giant walking fire beasts once.
|
To them it would be speak out against the Shamans and die or kill off Pyre and live. Most of the Charr probably dont care and some dont want to be involved in the feud at all (Torg Bloodspine for example)
Mark Nevermiss
Its ironic though that the Charr who view humans as "weak" and "prey" and "meat" beg the same puny creatures to purge the Cathedral of Flames of those nasty undead, who wiped the floor with them, to get a precious treasure which they would use to buy off their freedom in case they were recaptured and our puny selves werent there to free their sorry asses again.
illidan009
No culture would consider themselves "evil" by definition, but they could commit acts that are despised by others... IMO Charrs can go to hell.
imnotyourmother
Spoiler
It would seen that I read somewhere that in G2 we will be able to be a charr toon. That should unravel some of the interesting dynamics of the game.
What if in g2 we get to be the baddies and in g3 we get to be anyone that we want for the domination of all lands.
It would seen that I read somewhere that in G2 we will be able to be a charr toon. That should unravel some of the interesting dynamics of the game.
What if in g2 we get to be the baddies and in g3 we get to be anyone that we want for the domination of all lands.