Feedback talk:User/Nathe/Leave Gwen/Thackery story as is


 * I explained already, it's there, but there's been no discussion at all the several weeks since I put it up there. And I wanted to get it to Linsey's attention before she and the rest of the team started working on the new WD content, which would likely start just after Halloween, only a month away. Sorry for the redundancy. And Wyn, I understand, I was just hoping for a simple yes/no on the matter from her, is all, nothing too much into what they're planning for the new stuff as a whole. --Nathe 15:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There's probably a reason there's been no discussion. No one else cares whether Gwen and Thackery have a once in a lifetime love match, a torrid romance, or a tawdry tryst. -- Wyn [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon2.png|19px ]] talk  16:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You've asked every single GW player in existence, then, Wyn? Because that is the only way you can say "no one else." Again you misunderstand me. Some people want them together, others don't. Leaving things as they are now keeps both groups happy, since there's no definitive answer given either way. And that's how it should stay. And incidentally, it requires no action on the Live Team's part at all, just a decision to not act on this story arc. --Nathe 19:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * By "no one else," I, as a human of average intelligence, was able to garner that Wyn meant "a very small minority." She employed a technique known as hyperbole. I suggest you do your best to interpret such phrases from known on, lest you look like a trolling asshole. ···  Danny  Pew   Pew  19:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ^ &mdash;Jette  [[Image:User_Jette_awesome.png|19px]] 20:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, Wyn's an effin calculator, with a built in spell check and other tools for statistical information. 000.00.00.00  20:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You turned her into firefox? &mdash;Jette  [[Image:User_Jette_awesome.png|19px]] 20:54, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There's no way to verify her claim, though, so it's meaningless. And you missed the fact that I was deliberately exaggerating in my previous post to make that statement, Jette. --Nathe 00:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh and incidentally, how did Thackeray even know what Gwen's symbol was in the first place, Linsey? He never knew her before she joined the Vanguard. He didn't know her in pre-Searing Ascalon. He was never there. So how could he have found out what her symbol was? --Nathe 18:29, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * * cough*Gwen's baby?*cough*. I guess we'll see Gwen and Thackeray together this Wintersday : ) Erasculio  19:34, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * What in the world does Nathe mean by Gwen's symbol? --Musha [[Image:User_Musha_Sigc.png|19x19px]] Talk  01:14, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I believe he is refering to the item we had gotten infused from her mother's spirit in the Wintersday Quest with her families symbol? As for Gwen's baby, would that not be more likely, her Great-Great-Great Grandson??  Though for me, I hope to see more of the saga between Gwen and Lt. Thackeray, since Koss had his drama, why not expand on Gwen's :)MystiLefemEle 13:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * And why have an arbitrary conclusion that a chunk of the playerbase may not like, rather than leave it open for anybody to interpret as they choose? And her symbol, I believe, came from the dress she wore in pre-Searing. A dress that Thackeray never saw. So he couldn't have known what her symbol was. Which should make his entire quest with her non-canon since it's based on an impossibility. --Nathe 13:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Another thing. Did it ever once occur to you, Linsey, that some folks might have liked to believe that one of their human GW2 characters might have been a descendant of one of their GW1 chars and one of the heroes? Did it ever occur to you that some players might like the idea of one of their characters ending up with one of the heroes? Did it ever even occur to you to allow for that? I'd really like to know. You yourself said that part of your job is to make sure that content, gameplay and lore are done in such a way as to be fun and enjoyable for as much of the playerbase as possible. Does it then make sense to skip a part of that playerbase just to give an arbitrary and not entirely wanted conclusion to this story arc?  --Nathe 15:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Firstly, Nathe, the quest is canon - we don't know how, but he was able to know Gwen's family sigil. It may be he knew her or her family before the Searing and remembered it - he could have easily had a childhood crush on Gwen for all we know. Secondly, every storyline has an ending, sometimes you won't like it, sometimes you will, but just because some don't doesn't mean that everyone doesn't like it. There are probably one "character history" for GW2 for every single character for every player who likes to make backgrounds for his or her character (this does not mean you must be a roleplayer, as I do this and am not a roleplayer) - this adds up to far over a million I bet, it is impossible to satisfy everyone in this aspect. So sorry your character cannot marry Gwen, or 100,000 fanboys cannot have their characters be with Livia or Jora. Sometimes, nay, all the time, canon lore proceeds over fan fiction. -- Konig/ talk 17:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No, Thackeray can't have known Gwen in pre-Searing because he was never there. He's never been shown to have been there. And Gwen's own comments at that time indicate there were no other kids around her age for her to play with. She said that herself. So Kieran was elsewhere at the time, not in/around Ascalon City and the nearby village. So he couldn't have known what her symbol was. He never met her in pre-Searing. He was never there. And no, not every story arc needs to have a definitive conclusion. Things CAN be left open for us to decide for ourselves. It IS possible and completely feasible to do so. All Anet needs to do in this case is make it official that while Logan Thackeray in GW2 may be descended from Kieran, all else about his family history is unknown and will always be unknown. And to add no new content in GW1 to the G/T arc but simply leave it as is.  --Nathe 18:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You do realize that, to us, Pre-searing takes place during just one day. In fact, not even a day, more like an afternoon. How do we know that, perhaps a year before, or a even month before, Gwen and Thackeray knew each other - or at least Thackeray's family knew of Gwen's family - but Thackeray had to leave (family moving south perhaps)? Perhaps his family didn't live in the area, but had traveled to Ascalon City and he saw Gwen there. There are many many possibilities and just because we don't know doesn't mean it isn't possible. And technically, the whole GwenxKieran thing is, in fact, still just speculation. But in reality, everything has an end in the eyes of the writer. Take Harry Potter for instance (just because it is popular), we don't know what happens in the story, but Pottercast and the like have had interviews with the author who has stated certain facts of what happens later. In the eyes of those who tell the story, the story does have an ending and a conclusion, just because we are not told doesn't mean there isn't one. And if people really want to have their characters be with NPCs (only the six know why), they can just have their little own world of imagination (which I don't think is healthy) because honestly 90% of the fan-fictions that are written in the world - not just for Guild Wars - are not consistent with the canon story. -- Konig/ talk 21:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * So you've read every fanfic ever written then that you can make that statistical assessment? Anyway, unless something is shown or stated in-game it isn't possible for it to be canon.  --Nathe 22:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It is called a survey, I have looked at (not read, but noticed differences between the canon story and the fan-fiction) of a large amount - not just GW - fan-fiction stories. And I won't even bother with this anymore, to be honest, because you're just trying to force your own views and desires on the canon lore - let the devs do what they want to do and stop trying to force yourself on them. -- Konig/ talk 01:36, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

This hasn't been answered by Linsey yet, so don't move it. --Nathe 20:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It has been answered in the last video. Thackeray has descendants. You know how it goes. Mith[[Image:User MithranArkanere Star.png]]Talk 10:39, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thackeray may, but unless Logan specifically said that Gwen was an ancestor, it's still open to interpretation as to whether Kieran and Gwen get together or not. Which is as it should be. --Nathe 16:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Personally, Gwen should've hooked up with Langmar. And Thackery is pretty insignificant beyond WD, I think it's safe (albeit painful) to assume that Logan's ancestry is significant in some other way especially since they even bothered to make that quest in the first place.  Foreshadowing, yay.  This is just going by facts, it's possible that Thackery became awesome later on or one of his kids with another woman became awesome, but there are no observable facts to support that yet.  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ  аІiсә  [[File:User Aliceandsven 1.png]]  ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 14:58, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Until Logan himself confirms it or until GW2 or the GW books say it, the possibility still remains open for them each to end up with others. As it should be. We should not be dictated to. Anet could have closed the story by adding something new this past Wintersday, the first since Kieran's introduction, but they didn't. I'm inclined to believe that they understand the value in leaving room in the story for player interpretation. And even if we allow that he and Gwen do get together, there's still room for a player to bring in someone else in their mind if he or she wanted to. For example, say that the two got together, had a son, then Kieran died/left/whatever at some point after that. Preserves the name for Logan to have in the future while still allowing another to take Kieran's place. Just a thought. --Nathe 18:13, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Like Pyre or maybe Langmar! Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ  аІiсә  [[File:User Aliceandsven 1.png]]  ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 20:44, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * If that's your fancy. Me, I'd go with something a little more normal. And whoever said it had to be an npc? But that's just me. --Nathe 23:42, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem with pc/npc is that if you turn out paired with an NPC then everyone should, since we all did the exact same stuff. Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ  аІiсә  [[File:User Aliceandsven 1.png]]  ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 01:58, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I guess I'm not understanding what you mean, but what I meant was different players decide for themselves what happened, each in their own mind. Nothing in-game to say one way or another. And no, not everyone does the exact same thing. Not everyone's main is a Proph character, for instance, so not everyone did her background quest. And not everyone does her other quest either. Some people don't even keep her in their party at all. Different people do different things. --Nathe 17:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC)