Danikat.8537 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 All the people saying the charr wouldn't allow a human to have the Claw of the Khan-Ur seem to be forgetting that the main bit of lore we have on it - the Ghosts of Ascalon book - is all about a charr (Almorra Soulkeeper) arranging for a human to retrieve the Claw so the human government could present it to the charr as a peace offering. If the charr were so sensitive about anyone else having anything to do with it that would never have even been suggested, the events of the book would never have happened and we may not have even heard about it's existence. Going back to the original topic I agree it would be nice to have more lore for the original legendaries. We get some hints from the precursor collections - for example the Bifrost seems to be tied to ancient Jotun magic and astronomy. But it would be nice if there was more info on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Danikat.8537" said: > All the people saying the charr wouldn't allow a human to have the Claw of the Khan-Ur seem to be forgetting that the main bit of lore we have on it - the Ghosts of Ascalon book - is all about a charr (Almorra Soulkeeper) arranging for a human to retrieve the Claw so the human government could present it to the charr as a peace offering. If the charr were so sensitive about anyone else having anything to do with it that would never have even been suggested, the events of the book would never have happened and we may not have even heard about it's existence. > > Going back to the original topic I agree it would be nice to have more lore for the original legendaries. We get some hints from the precursor collections - for example the Bifrost seems to be tied to ancient Jotun magic and astronomy. But it would be nice if there was more info on them. Almorra organised the expedition to help in making the human-charr treaty. Group members were to recover and hand over the weapon, not to "wield" it as their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zealex.9410 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > Claw of Khan Ur being legendary weapon delivered in the current system is slap in the face to every lore freak. I'm out. > > > > > > > > Iirc the legendaries u get from zommoros' are copies of the originals. > > > > > > > > The display of multiple legendaries in his lair and also a boss in arah having twilight further supports that theory. > > > > > > Copies of what exactly. Because only few legendaries have any lore tied to them. Also... every player in GW2 is same person in lore - the Commander. > > > > Copies of the original weapons supposedly. > > Charr wouldn't allow anyone to copy their "sacred" weapon. implying a djiin or w/e would care about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"zealex.9410" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > Claw of Khan Ur being legendary weapon delivered in the current system is slap in the face to every lore freak. I'm out. > > > > > > > > > > Iirc the legendaries u get from zommoros' are copies of the originals. > > > > > > > > > > The display of multiple legendaries in his lair and also a boss in arah having twilight further supports that theory. > > > > > > > > Copies of what exactly. Because only few legendaries have any lore tied to them. Also... every player in GW2 is same person in lore - the Commander. > > > > > > Copies of the original weapons supposedly. > > > > Charr wouldn't allow anyone to copy their "sacred" weapon. > > implying a djiin or w/e would care about that. Djinni would need to aquire original co make a copy in first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 Even gemstore has lore, so your argument doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner.4621 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > Even gemstore has lore, so your argument doesn't work. Yeah it does. Game mechanics /= lore. Proof: Horses appear nowhere in the game models, but they are frequently mentioned in the lore tie in novel, in the lore of the game itself, and by NPCs in the game, which means horses exist. That is a game mechanic, the model never having been created, not equaling the lore that explicitly tells us they exist. This is a model for players to carry around and show off, which does NOT mean that the commander actually has, or has a replica of, the actual weapon itself which lore EXPLICITLY states is in the possession of Smodur. That is a game mechanic, and is not lore, because the actual lore says otherwise. Every player can't LITERALLY be the pact commander... lore establishes there is only one... again, an example of game mechanics /= lore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > Even gemstore has lore, so your argument doesn't work. > > Yeah it does. Game mechanics /= lore. Proof: Horses appear nowhere in the game models, but they are frequently mentioned in the lore tie in novel, in the lore of the game itself, and by NPCs in the game, which means horses exist. That is a game mechanic, the model never having been created, not equaling the lore that explicitly tells us they exist. This is a model for players to carry around and show off, which does NOT mean that the commander actually has, or has a replica of, the actual weapon itself which lore EXPLICITLY states is in the possession of Smodur. That is a game mechanic, and is not lore, because the actual lore says otherwise. Every player can't LITERALLY be the pact commander... lore establishes there is only one... again, an example of game mechanics /= lore. No, it's not the same. Explained in previous posts. Feel free to read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner.4621 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > Even gemstore has lore, so your argument doesn't work. > > > > Yeah it does. Game mechanics /= lore. Proof: Horses appear nowhere in the game models, but they are frequently mentioned in the lore tie in novel, in the lore of the game itself, and by NPCs in the game, which means horses exist. That is a game mechanic, the model never having been created, not equaling the lore that explicitly tells us they exist. This is a model for players to carry around and show off, which does NOT mean that the commander actually has, or has a replica of, the actual weapon itself which lore EXPLICITLY states is in the possession of Smodur. That is a game mechanic, and is not lore, because the actual lore says otherwise. Every player can't LITERALLY be the pact commander... lore establishes there is only one... again, an example of game mechanics /= lore. > > No, it's not the same. Explained in previous posts. Feel free to read. You "explained" in previous posts, but you are wrong. Game mechanics does not equal lore, period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > Even gemstore has lore, so your argument doesn't work. > > > > > > Yeah it does. Game mechanics /= lore. Proof: Horses appear nowhere in the game models, but they are frequently mentioned in the lore tie in novel, in the lore of the game itself, and by NPCs in the game, which means horses exist. That is a game mechanic, the model never having been created, not equaling the lore that explicitly tells us they exist. This is a model for players to carry around and show off, which does NOT mean that the commander actually has, or has a replica of, the actual weapon itself which lore EXPLICITLY states is in the possession of Smodur. That is a game mechanic, and is not lore, because the actual lore says otherwise. Every player can't LITERALLY be the pact commander... lore establishes there is only one... again, an example of game mechanics /= lore. > > > > No, it's not the same. Explained in previous posts. Feel free to read. > > You "explained" in previous posts, but you are wrong. Game mechanics does not equal lore, period. Game mechanics are part of the lore, they are made to present the lore, execute the lore or even create the lore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner.4621 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > Even gemstore has lore, so your argument doesn't work. > > > > > > > > Yeah it does. Game mechanics /= lore. Proof: Horses appear nowhere in the game models, but they are frequently mentioned in the lore tie in novel, in the lore of the game itself, and by NPCs in the game, which means horses exist. That is a game mechanic, the model never having been created, not equaling the lore that explicitly tells us they exist. This is a model for players to carry around and show off, which does NOT mean that the commander actually has, or has a replica of, the actual weapon itself which lore EXPLICITLY states is in the possession of Smodur. That is a game mechanic, and is not lore, because the actual lore says otherwise. Every player can't LITERALLY be the pact commander... lore establishes there is only one... again, an example of game mechanics /= lore. > > > > > > No, it's not the same. Explained in previous posts. Feel free to read. > > > > You "explained" in previous posts, but you are wrong. Game mechanics does not equal lore, period. > > Game mechanics are part of the lore, they are made to present the lore, execute the lore or even create the lore. They are only lore if they are stated as being lore. Some mechanics are, such as waypoints and asura gates, but others are not such as there being literally thousands of "commanders" despite there being only one. Is there, at any point, literally ANY place in the game where it states that this is the actual Claw of the Khan-Ur? There is not. That means it isn't lore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > Even gemstore has lore, so your argument doesn't work. > > > > > > > > > > Yeah it does. Game mechanics /= lore. Proof: Horses appear nowhere in the game models, but they are frequently mentioned in the lore tie in novel, in the lore of the game itself, and by NPCs in the game, which means horses exist. That is a game mechanic, the model never having been created, not equaling the lore that explicitly tells us they exist. This is a model for players to carry around and show off, which does NOT mean that the commander actually has, or has a replica of, the actual weapon itself which lore EXPLICITLY states is in the possession of Smodur. That is a game mechanic, and is not lore, because the actual lore says otherwise. Every player can't LITERALLY be the pact commander... lore establishes there is only one... again, an example of game mechanics /= lore. > > > > > > > > No, it's not the same. Explained in previous posts. Feel free to read. > > > > > > You "explained" in previous posts, but you are wrong. Game mechanics does not equal lore, period. > > > > Game mechanics are part of the lore, they are made to present the lore, execute the lore or even create the lore. > > They are only lore if they are stated as being lore. Some mechanics are, such as waypoints and asura gates, but others are not such as there being literally thousands of "commanders" despite there being only one. Is there, at any point, literally ANY place in the game where it states that this is the actual Claw of the Khan-Ur? There is not. That means it isn't lore. In lore every player character is the same person. Also... what? Nowhere in game it states we are wielding legendary Claw? How about its name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner.4621 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > Even gemstore has lore, so your argument doesn't work. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah it does. Game mechanics /= lore. Proof: Horses appear nowhere in the game models, but they are frequently mentioned in the lore tie in novel, in the lore of the game itself, and by NPCs in the game, which means horses exist. That is a game mechanic, the model never having been created, not equaling the lore that explicitly tells us they exist. This is a model for players to carry around and show off, which does NOT mean that the commander actually has, or has a replica of, the actual weapon itself which lore EXPLICITLY states is in the possession of Smodur. That is a game mechanic, and is not lore, because the actual lore says otherwise. Every player can't LITERALLY be the pact commander... lore establishes there is only one... again, an example of game mechanics /= lore. > > > > > > > > > > No, it's not the same. Explained in previous posts. Feel free to read. > > > > > > > > You "explained" in previous posts, but you are wrong. Game mechanics does not equal lore, period. > > > > > > Game mechanics are part of the lore, they are made to present the lore, execute the lore or even create the lore. > > > > They are only lore if they are stated as being lore. Some mechanics are, such as waypoints and asura gates, but others are not such as there being literally thousands of "commanders" despite there being only one. Is there, at any point, literally ANY place in the game where it states that this is the actual Claw of the Khan-Ur? There is not. That means it isn't lore. > > In lore every player character is the same person. Yes, that is EXACTLY what I just said. The lore is, by necessity, that the commander is a single person. However, the story that everyone plays through makes THEM the commander, which means by GAME MECHANICS, everyone is the commander. That means that the game mechanics by necessity contradict the lore. You can't have it both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > > Even gemstore has lore, so your argument doesn't work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah it does. Game mechanics /= lore. Proof: Horses appear nowhere in the game models, but they are frequently mentioned in the lore tie in novel, in the lore of the game itself, and by NPCs in the game, which means horses exist. That is a game mechanic, the model never having been created, not equaling the lore that explicitly tells us they exist. This is a model for players to carry around and show off, which does NOT mean that the commander actually has, or has a replica of, the actual weapon itself which lore EXPLICITLY states is in the possession of Smodur. That is a game mechanic, and is not lore, because the actual lore says otherwise. Every player can't LITERALLY be the pact commander... lore establishes there is only one... again, an example of game mechanics /= lore. > > > > > > > > > > > > No, it's not the same. Explained in previous posts. Feel free to read. > > > > > > > > > > You "explained" in previous posts, but you are wrong. Game mechanics does not equal lore, period. > > > > > > > > Game mechanics are part of the lore, they are made to present the lore, execute the lore or even create the lore. > > > > > > They are only lore if they are stated as being lore. Some mechanics are, such as waypoints and asura gates, but others are not such as there being literally thousands of "commanders" despite there being only one. Is there, at any point, literally ANY place in the game where it states that this is the actual Claw of the Khan-Ur? There is not. That means it isn't lore. > > > > In lore every player character is the same person. > > Yes, that is EXACTLY what I just said. The lore is, by necessity, that the commander is a single person. However, the story that everyone plays through makes THEM the commander, which means by GAME MECHANICS, everyone is the commander. That means that the game mechanics by necessity contradict the lore. You can't have it both ways. Thing is, lore never explaines how the Commander received Claw. I'm not mad because this weapon became legendary, I'm pissed off because of aquisition method which is an insult to any lore enthusiast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner.4621 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > > > Even gemstore has lore, so your argument doesn't work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah it does. Game mechanics /= lore. Proof: Horses appear nowhere in the game models, but they are frequently mentioned in the lore tie in novel, in the lore of the game itself, and by NPCs in the game, which means horses exist. That is a game mechanic, the model never having been created, not equaling the lore that explicitly tells us they exist. This is a model for players to carry around and show off, which does NOT mean that the commander actually has, or has a replica of, the actual weapon itself which lore EXPLICITLY states is in the possession of Smodur. That is a game mechanic, and is not lore, because the actual lore says otherwise. Every player can't LITERALLY be the pact commander... lore establishes there is only one... again, an example of game mechanics /= lore. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, it's not the same. Explained in previous posts. Feel free to read. > > > > > > > > > > > > You "explained" in previous posts, but you are wrong. Game mechanics does not equal lore, period. > > > > > > > > > > Game mechanics are part of the lore, they are made to present the lore, execute the lore or even create the lore. > > > > > > > > They are only lore if they are stated as being lore. Some mechanics are, such as waypoints and asura gates, but others are not such as there being literally thousands of "commanders" despite there being only one. Is there, at any point, literally ANY place in the game where it states that this is the actual Claw of the Khan-Ur? There is not. That means it isn't lore. > > > > > > In lore every player character is the same person. > > > > Yes, that is EXACTLY what I just said. The lore is, by necessity, that the commander is a single person. However, the story that everyone plays through makes THEM the commander, which means by GAME MECHANICS, everyone is the commander. That means that the game mechanics by necessity contradict the lore. You can't have it both ways. > > Thing is, lore never explaines how the Commander received Claw. I'm not mad because this weapon became legendary, I'm pissed off because of aquisition method which is an insult to any lore enthusiast. At this point you are deliberately being obtuse. The fact is it cannot be lore unless it is stated. You can have your own lore in your head, but that doesn't matter, because it's the dev's that matter. They make the lore, not you. There is no lore that states that the legendaries are even replicas, or that they exist at all. There is no lore that suggests it is actually possible to tame a branded raptor and ride it as a mount. There IS lore that states that the Claw is owned by Smodur, and that he has it in his office. In fact you can go there right now and see it in a glass display case.  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 So how the Commander aquired the Claw? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner.4621 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > So how the Commander aquired the Claw? He didn't, it's a game mechanic, not lore. The claw is there. I even gave you a picture. The commander doesn't have it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 Weapon name is Claw of Khan Ur, it's in game, it's canon. Unfortunately, it's not explained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zalani.9827 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 I like to imagine that Kudzu was created the same way Caladbolg was, either by a champion of the pale tree or some other druids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner.4621 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 The weapon is in a glass case in Smodurs office, in game, which means it's canon. That means that they contradict each other. They can't both be canon/true. And you can't say "well instances are time locked" because they literally just added that glass case yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zealex.9410 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > Claw of Khan Ur being legendary weapon delivered in the current system is slap in the face to every lore freak. I'm out. > > > > > > > > > > > > Iirc the legendaries u get from zommoros' are copies of the originals. > > > > > > > > > > > > The display of multiple legendaries in his lair and also a boss in arah having twilight further supports that theory. > > > > > > > > > > Copies of what exactly. Because only few legendaries have any lore tied to them. Also... every player in GW2 is same person in lore - the Commander. > > > > > > > > Copies of the original weapons supposedly. > > > > > > Charr wouldn't allow anyone to copy their "sacred" weapon. > > > > implying a djiin or w/e would care about that. > > Djinni would need to aquire original co make a copy in first place. All zommoros needed to do is to take a good look at it and then design it as closely as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"zealex.9410" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > @"zealex.9410" said: > > > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > > Claw of Khan Ur being legendary weapon delivered in the current system is slap in the face to every lore freak. I'm out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Iirc the legendaries u get from zommoros' are copies of the originals. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The display of multiple legendaries in his lair and also a boss in arah having twilight further supports that theory. > > > > > > > > > > > > Copies of what exactly. Because only few legendaries have any lore tied to them. Also... every player in GW2 is same person in lore - the Commander. > > > > > > > > > > Copies of the original weapons supposedly. > > > > > > > > Charr wouldn't allow anyone to copy their "sacred" weapon. > > > > > > implying a djiin or w/e would care about that. > > > > Djinni would need to aquire original co make a copy in first place. > > All zommoros needed to do is to take a good look at it and then design it as closely as possible. So when was Zomorros invited by Smodur to take a look at the claw? We never saw it until now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Trejgon.2809 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > @"Palador.2170" said: > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > That's cool. Anet definitely achieved weakening it as a symbol yesterday. If anything like this happened in game, to explain stuff you know, because random wiki speculations are not part of gw2 lore. > > > > I'm pretty sure it has more backing in lore than your personal speculations about what the charr would or would not do with the thing. > > > > If you're upset, fine. Be upset. That doesn't mean ANet screwed up. > > So what lore was presented to justify the Claw (or replica) being now in hands of the commander? > > What events in game explain that Smodur wants to lower the significance of the Claw and what actions did he took to proceed with his plan? what lore present to justify it? very simple: Mystic Forge lore. Commander have replicated precuror weapon and gave it with some other stuff to zommoros and zomoros gave him in return exact replica of the claw. this is it, no need for more because mystic forge and zommoros ARE present in lore and are source of all legendary weapons EDIT: and on what base you assume zomorros would need to physically see the weapon himself considerign how he is giving them away for quite a time via some magical portal despite himself being half the continent away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Lord Trejgon.2809" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > @"Palador.2170" said: > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > That's cool. Anet definitely achieved weakening it as a symbol yesterday. If anything like this happened in game, to explain stuff you know, because random wiki speculations are not part of gw2 lore. > > > > > > I'm pretty sure it has more backing in lore than your personal speculations about what the charr would or would not do with the thing. > > > > > > If you're upset, fine. Be upset. That doesn't mean ANet screwed up. > > > > So what lore was presented to justify the Claw (or replica) being now in hands of the commander? > > > > What events in game explain that Smodur wants to lower the significance of the Claw and what actions did he took to proceed with his plan? > > what lore present to justify it? > > very simple: Mystic Forge lore. > Commander have replicated precuror weapon and gave it with some other stuff to zommoros and zomoros gave him in return exact replica of the claw. > > this is it, no need for more because mystic forge and zommoros ARE present in lore and are source of all legendary weapons > > EDIT: and on what base you assume zomorros would need to physically see the weapon himself considerign how he is giving them away for quite a time via some magical portal despite himself being half the continent away? It all sounds like an easy way to justify anything and any time while disrespecting their own universe in the process. In any other game I would have epic quest leading to the boss from which I would loot this legendary weapon. In GW2 all I need to do is pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felipe.1807 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > Weapon name is Claw of Khan Ur, it's in game, it's canon. Unfortunately, it's not explained. Dont expect Anet to folow its own lore and try to create a immersive experience for the player...lore wise the Claw is with the Imperator on the Black Citadel, Smoldur or whatever is his name, that is the canon...the commander aint supposed to have the Claw or the Shining Blade, this is just for gameplay only. I agree, allow the player to craft it on the day its released(if you have a lot of gold) takes out any kind of prestige of these weapons, theres nothing "legendary" about the way you obtain these weapons. You should have to go on a quest, a extremely hard and solo only, should be a test of skill and mastery on the game mechanics and not how well you play the TP or farm Instan 24/7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Godrik.5841 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Sojourner.4621" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > > > > Even gemstore has lore, so your argument doesn't work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah it does. Game mechanics /= lore. Proof: Horses appear nowhere in the game models, but they are frequently mentioned in the lore tie in novel, in the lore of the game itself, and by NPCs in the game, which means horses exist. That is a game mechanic, the model never having been created, not equaling the lore that explicitly tells us they exist. This is a model for players to carry around and show off, which does NOT mean that the commander actually has, or has a replica of, the actual weapon itself which lore EXPLICITLY states is in the possession of Smodur. That is a game mechanic, and is not lore, because the actual lore says otherwise. Every player can't LITERALLY be the pact commander... lore establishes there is only one... again, an example of game mechanics /= lore. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, it's not the same. Explained in previous posts. Feel free to read. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You "explained" in previous posts, but you are wrong. Game mechanics does not equal lore, period. > > > > > > > > > > > > Game mechanics are part of the lore, they are made to present the lore, execute the lore or even create the lore. > > > > > > > > > > They are only lore if they are stated as being lore. Some mechanics are, such as waypoints and asura gates, but others are not such as there being literally thousands of "commanders" despite there being only one. Is there, at any point, literally ANY place in the game where it states that this is the actual Claw of the Khan-Ur? There is not. That means it isn't lore. > > > > > > > > In lore every player character is the same person. > > > > > > Yes, that is EXACTLY what I just said. The lore is, by necessity, that the commander is a single person. However, the story that everyone plays through makes THEM the commander, which means by GAME MECHANICS, everyone is the commander. That means that the game mechanics by necessity contradict the lore. You can't have it both ways. > > > > Thing is, lore never explaines how the Commander received Claw. I'm not mad because this weapon became legendary, I'm pissed off because of aquisition method which is an insult to any lore enthusiast. > > At this point you are deliberately being obtuse. The fact is it cannot be lore unless it is stated. You can have your own lore in your head, but that doesn't matter, because it's the dev's that matter. They make the lore, not you. There is no lore that states that the legendaries are even replicas, or that they exist at all. There is no lore that suggests it is actually possible to tame a branded raptor and ride it as a mount. There IS lore that states that the Claw is owned by Smodur, and that he has it in his office. In fact you can go there right now and see it in a glass display case. > >  > That must be new. I don't remember seeing that at all before. And I map completed 9 times. Bravo a net for adding that the little morsel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now