Good Vs Evil.. GW2

Dwarves are extinct, they all turned to stone apart from Ogden

unless you mean Stone Summit

Yep, any dwarves really.
A story plot can easily be introduced about how certain / specific Dwarves and their ancestors did not take up the rite to be turned to stone, just like Ogden.

I'm getting tired of explaining this.
As of GWEN, we destroyed the Summit last stand, eradicating the majority of the Summit dwarves.
And Ogden made it clear that he would undergo the ritual eventually, because, as the Tome of Rubicon says, all the Dwarf race is oging to be changed forever.
Anet probably made that for Ogden so we wouldn't cary a stone dwarf and probably spoil the others who were playing.

So, no dwarves in GW2, except a few who live in the mountains ecansed in stone, sedentaries and alone, apart from the rest of the world.

ah,you paid more attention than I did to the end of the GWEN storyline

hehe :P

so, basicly, that's why Dwarfs cant be a playable race.

Conquering people doesn't make you evil.

We only saw a portion of each one we dont really know about the charr history. And anything can happen in 200 years from now. We really dont know anything about them and in gw2 we will learn alot more thats even if gw2 will even come out. Aion right now is top priorty i guess.

Lawful
Chaotic
Good/Neutral/Evil

I do so miss DnD alignment, and it was such an integral part of the game (given your DM was half-way decent) - and no MMORPG has ever even come close to implementing it as it existed circa 1980-1984 DnD/ADnD. WoW was piss-poor at best, with the horde crap.

And plenty of more idealistic settings would put a race like the Tau in the role of bad guys or at least an honourable antagonist - they're still highly expansionist and basically the only way to have real political power in the Tau Empire is an Ethereal.

(One might also argue the non-dark Eldar - again, in a more idealistic setting they'd probably be cast as Well Intentioned Extremists at best, but they do still seem to value the lives of aliens of races that don't threaten them much higher than anyone except the Tau. They're nasty from an Imperial perspective (but the Imperium is nasty right back - the Eldar generally at least need a reason to kill humans, even if it's that some Farseer predicted that if the multi-billion population of a planet wasn't wiped out there would be the possibility of an Eldar maiden breaking a nail five thousand years later), but the Craftworld Eldar and the Tau are probably the only codex races a member of a non-codex race could surrender to and have a chance of getting anything better than a quick death. That makes them... well, the lightest shades of grey.)

This is a second-hand opinion (never played WoW, and I consider Burning Crusade the franchise's shark-jumping moment)... but I suspect that's because Blizzard itself is trying to have it both ways. They want to cater to the "Evil is cool" and "I want to be a hero" crowds simultaneously.

/agree... King Doric anyone?

But my big question is for GW2... the 6 gods... are they still going to be around? And it seems that there are atleast 4 known evil dragons to go after... maybe the dragons are counter points to the gods... ergo your good vs evil track for GW2?

Desert Dragon, Primordus, Orrian Dragon, Deep Sea Dragon, Ice and Snow Dragon, they're 5 :b

As for now, the Dragons are the main antagonists. Now to they why they are the main antagonists, is unknown, we don't know why their only goal seems to be 'deciamte & destroy'.

And the Gods are still around, they just don't interfere with Tyria anymore, the last sign that they care was Balthazar opening a portal to the Rift in LA.

Asuras are evil.

Just look at their attitude. Besides, they didn't get that name for no reason.

Say what you want, but it's not the first time there is an inconsistency in a plot of 'the lore' (hint: warcraft series versus WoW storyline).

Guild Wars without Dwarves is Guild Wars no more, and fans will let Anet know that, if for some reason they decide to not include them. Fan service, you know? Dwarves will be, because they have to be, even if not as playable race.

by what are you referencing that? you can't play as Dwarves in GW1 so why GW2?

Because it's pretty doubtful Anet will decide to completely wipe out all the Dwarves from the game (**** the prophecy lol, who cares ) in GW2. They just can't do that

from the Guild wars 2 wiki:

Dwarf

From Guild Wars 2 Wiki

(Redirected from Dwarves)

Dwarves are deathless humanoid creatures, encased in stone. They once inhabited the Shiverpeak Mountains. They gave up their flesh and their mortality 250 years ago in the name of their god, the Great Dwarf, to help defeat Primordus' greatest general, the Great Destroyer. They were successful, but at a great price.

Their physiology is short, stocky, bearded and, of course, rocky. Once the greatest crafters and smiths in Tyria, their position was quickly taken by the Asura after their demise.

Those few Dwarves who survived the battle against the Great Destroyer live an isolated, unending existence in the depths of Tyria and the highest reaches of the mountains. Scattered across the continent, they now serve as the guardians of Tyria from the minions of Primordus who dwell beneath the ground. As long as they try to break out and find new ways of reaching the surface, the Dwarves will be watching.

You got faster than I did.
Yeah, basicly that's why the Dwarves aren't that promenient in GW2, as stated in The Movement of The World, we are going to be lucky ones if we ever come across one.
Yeah, Anet isn't going to end the Dwarves, we all know that. They just can't be a playable race, because there's just too few of them. In an expansion, if they ever find a way to reproduce, then yeah, they can become a playable race. In the original GW2, no, they just can't.

And you are the first one to QQ about no Dwarves as playable races. At least that I know of.

Says who? Guild Wars is Guild Wars even if the human race is wiped out. Just like reality is still reality if a civilization is wiped out (which has and will always happen). Denying races being wiped out just goes against the fact that any group of any existence will eventually fall to time.

Uhhh, they won't. They are just near extinct and cannot reproduce. What is done is done. And who cares? How about every freakin "lorist" who hates retconing.

Doesn't matter if people want them around in GW2, unlike Mursaat, there is proof they are not only low in numbers, but cannot reproduce. Mursaat - the only "near extinct" race to survive by player demand - can still reproduce.

Anet probably prevented saving the Dwarven race because of the good ol' Mursaat Rally. x)

Well, the thing people always seem to forget is, just because they are "near extinct" doesn't mean they can't be a playable race. Elves are "nearly extinct" in Warhammer Online, but they are a playable race. All "near extinct" means is we won't see towns full of em and lots of NPCs. If you make "stone dwarf" some sort of unlockable prestige class, it might still be kinda rare.

Not that I expect that to be happening. I still think Dwarves won't be a playable race (at least, not until an expansion). Just saying the whole "near extinct" thing doesn't mean anything as a defense to why this won't happen. They aren't a playable race because A.net says so, not because of lore reasons.

That doesn't make sense, the whole extinct race being playable. Mainly because it's rather contradictory to lore (that is, a large amount of people being a part the nearly extinct race). But I guess this also is an issue with just the large amount of "adventurers" in the world, preventing the players as a large from being canon lore...