Talk:Drooburt's Ghost

Really pathetic? How is that different than every other quaggan? The only way way I can see him being more pathetic is if he literally starts crying and begging for his life when approached. Psycho Robot (talk) 21:43, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

I sense a deep hatred towards quaggans possibly instigated by childhood trauma. Do you care to talk about it? Here, have a seat on this comfy chair and tell me, what was your childhood like? --Ventriloquist (talk) 21:59, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

what happens if you give him silver and gold? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Leki (talk • contribs).

Nothing, as far as I can tell. –Santax (talk · contribs) 18:31, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Quaggan loves you. Obviously. Vili 点 23:08, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Should we mention that donating does nothing or simply leave it as is? --Vaught (talk) 06:05, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I bet Drooburt's current troubles would have been avoided if more people donated coins to him. We should feel ashamed. Vili 点 21:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Actually, according to his twitter, he got enough gold to waypoint somewhere out of Dry Top. Unfortunately... --Ventriloquist 21:36, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

He was called really pathetic by Peter Fries source. That is why it said really pathetic before. Anzenketh (talk) 21:22, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Dead reference link

Seems like the POI link is dead, might I recommend we use the youtube link? I'm not sure if putting in a youtube link is acceptable, but this is on the official GW2 channel. -Darqam (talk) 21:19, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

"they're two very different NPCs"

→ moved from User talk:Doodleplex

No they aren't. They're the same figure, just got a name change. We don't have a separate article for when Rytlock is called "Rytlock Brimstone" versus "Tribune Brimstone", or Kasmeer for when she's called "Kasmeer Meade" (pre The World Summit) versus "Lady Kasmeer Meade" (post The World Summit). We don't have separate articles for Scarlet Briar and Ceara, despite the latter appearing twice. We don't separate Faolain from Vinetooth Faolain, or Apatia from her Lionguard, Crusader, and Risen variants, or Howl the Brazen or Ferghen the Tracker from their Risen variants. And there's many others. Konig (talk) 22:25, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I think Hero-Tron would be a good comparison- he's served many mechanically different NPC roles, with name and model changes throughout the course of living story, yet he only has the one article. - Felix Omni 22:41, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Except this is not a NPC getting renamed, one is a dead Quaggan found in Dry Top, the other is a seasonal/temporary ghost NPC that first appeared during Halloween in 2015 to now and is linked to several achievements. If the one running around in the Lab was named properly, I doubt this would have even come up. - Do_odleplex 22:50, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Ho-Ho-Tron is also a seasonal/temporary NPC who is linked to several achievements. Still same article. - Felix Omni 23:02, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

So close. The NPC that we see for the achievements is Replica Ho-Ho-Tron. - Do_odleplex 23:13, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Quite a discussion that's been sparked here; looks like you got ahead of yourself in removing the merge tag so quickly! I agree with the others that we should merge. If the corporeal version of Drooburt currently in Dry Top was still interactable, then maybe you'd have an argument, but he's just a dead body now -- he doesn't even have a nameplate, so you can't even tell if his body is an NPC or an object, and there's no risk of a new player curiously searching for "Drooburt" to learn more about this dead guy they just came across. I don't see why his historical version needs an article all to himself when he can just be a sub-section on his ghost's article. --Idris (talk) 23:55, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I've also just noticed that the "New Afterlife For Quaggan" achievement refers to "Drooburt" and not "Drooburt's Ghost". I think it'd be really helpful to people trying to complete the achievement if they could be redirected to Drooburt's Ghost whenever they search for "Drooburt". --Idris (talk) 00:08, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

"Except this is not a NPC getting renamed, one is a dead Quaggan found in Dry Top, the other is a seasonal/temporary ghost NPC" Technically the corpse in Dry Top is not an NPC. It's an ambient art asset, no capability of selecting him. Besides this, NPCs can be in multiple places at once (see Laranthir of the Wild and Cin Fursarai) due to ArenaNet's change that maps are "stuck in time" (so Dry Top = 1326 AE Drooburt, Halloween = 1327 onward Drooburt). I actually was going to bring it up once I realized Drooburt had a unique name in LA but not Lab.

" I think it'd be really helpful to people trying to complete the achievement if they could be redirected to Drooburt's Ghost whenever they search for "Drooburt"." I was just in Dry Top where someone asked "how do you feed Drooburt candy corn if he's dead?" So agreed here. Konig (talk) 01:52, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

And for that matter, the Drooburt article really isn't accurate at all now because the listed dialogue and quotes are inaccessible in the current state of the game. Also I'm gonna move this conversation to Drooburt talk page for better context. - Felix Omni 05:13, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Konig, the Dry Top question was rhetorical question. And Felix, this article is still accurate since that's what he did say before he got strangled to death by Mordremoth's vines. If Drooburt never said those things, then it would be inaccurate. - Do_odleplex 05:24, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I think what Felix meant is that it doesn't make the historical nature of that dialogue clear. How about moving this article to "Drooburt/Historical" or some such as a compromise? --Idris (talk) 05:41, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Ah good point, yeah the dialogue and quotes should be moved to a dialogue subpage as he doesn't say those things anymore. Works for me. - Do_odleplex 05:45, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Uh hold up. I agreed that Drooburt's dialogue should be documented elsewhere. NOT that the pages should be merged nor moved, because they shouldn't be moved. They are still two different NPCs. - Do_odleplex 06:33, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sorry. I honestly thought you were agreeing to everything. You could have posted an emergency "STOP!!" on my talk page to alert me quicker; it certainly wasn't my intention to barrel ahead with the change before consensus had been reached.

What do you make of the fact that Drooburt's corpse isn't actually an NPC anymore? Go visit him -- he doesn't have a nameplate, can't be targeted. Like Konig said, he's more of an art asset than an NPC these days. So if we were to preserve separate articles, then "Drooburt" the NPC by necessity would have to be a historical article, so there wouldn't be any point in moving the dialogue to a separate page. This why I made the mistake I did; by agreeing to a separate page for historical dialogue, I assumed you were accepting that he didn't need his own article anymore. --Idris (talk) 06:44, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I'd be okay with making him historical, that makes sense and works for me, though I am going to ask you to move the pages back until this is all sorted. I honestly was thinking for a good long time on the drive after visiting family to try to figure out what Anet was doing, and I really think they intentionally split the two NPCs so people didn't get confused and go to the wrong one in Dry Top, similar to Replica Ho-Ho-Tron and Ho-Ho-Tron. - Do_odleplex 07:08, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I've restored the pages back to their original state. (Let me know if you spot something I missed). I'll post a proper response to your above comment once I've had time to mull it over. :) --Idris (talk) 07:24, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Take 2

Okay, so. Doodle and I have had a chat about this ingame, and in summary: she feels that a merge would be confusing and not a good idea, whereas I feel that separate articles are confusing and a merge is required. Neither of us is likely to budge on our respective opinions. Thus, a compromise is needed. I recommend we refresh the conversation and start with the question: what will be the least confusing way of presenting all Drooburt-related information? --Idris (talk) 08:17, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Here are all the facts that I'm aware of:

• There are three NPCs named "Drooburt": the historical NPC in Dry Top who has been replaced with an art asset of a dead quaggan, a ghost called "Drooburt's Ghost" in LA, and a ghost named "Drooburt" in the labyrinth.
• All three NPCs have unique dialogue.
• Only "Drooburt's Ghost" will accept candy corn for the achievement.
• There is a mini called "Mini Drooburt's Ghost".
• There is an item called "Drooburt's Ghostly Taffy".
• The achievements "New Afterlife For Quaggan" and "Craving Quaggan" refer to the NPC known as "Drooburt's Ghost" as simply "Drooburt".

--Idris (talk) 08:44, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Maybe make a disambiguation page as the main page? That way nobody gets confused? Also I'm going to pull a Greener and tell you to go get some sleep. XD - Do_odleplex 08:59, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I considered a disambig, but I'm guessing that the majority of people who search for "Drooburt" just want to get their achievement done, so making them navigate through a disambig page full of rarely-requested articles seems annoying. But if you're not willing to budge on keeping the "Drooburt" name attached to the Dry Top version, then a disambig does seem like the only solution. I would really like to brainstorm alternatives, though. And yeah, I'm going to bed now, for real. --Idris (talk) 09:12, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Hey y'all. I agree with what Idris, Felix & Konig stated above. Drooburt's article refers to him in the past tense, since any and all information (aside from location and a few sentences noting his ghost) is historical. Now, if we look at this from a player perspective - which article would serve the readers more? An article that talks about a dead NPC with some trivia facts or a relevant article talking about an NPC currently functionally in the game. The argument is even more supported by the fact that Drooburt lost his nametag; for all we know, he might be called "Dead Drooburt" internally (although it's just an art asset). I support the merge. —Ventriloquist 12:37, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

To be clear, there is no NPC in Dry Top named Drooburt. There is a piece of environmental art formerly known as Drooburt. The character that is Drooburt, his "soul" in a narrative sense, is now purely a seasonal NPC. We document characters, not specific instances of data. The article titled "Drooburt" should be about the character of Drooburt, who is dead all of the time and a ghost some of the time, so they should be merged. - Felix Omni 15:44, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

What about renaming the historical version to "Drooburt (historical)" and then document the two ghosts under "Drooburt's Ghost", with "Drooburt" being a redirect to the ghost? That way, we can keep them separate while still avoiding confusion. My preferred solution is still a merge, though. --Idris (talk) 16:48, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't see a need to invent a new convention just for ol' Droobs here. Using Hero-Tron as a template, we just move his past dialogue to Drooburt's Ghost/dialogue and his past quotes to Drooburt's Ghost/dialogue#quotes, add 'Historical locations,' and Bob's your uncle. There's nothing else on his page that needs to move- Wintersday story trivia can stay, notes can say "When Drooburt was alive, donating..." etc. - Felix Omni 16:55, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

In all the history of the two wikis, the only NPCs we kept separated were gww:Prince Rurik (gww:Undead Prince Rurik) and gww:Kormir (gww:Goddess of Truth). They were kept split because "massive ending spoilers" (gww:Spoiler-related boss gww:Spoiler-related Cipher) - same reason we had kept Balthazar and Lazarus separate during the reveal of Episode 5 (which was a good move given Lazarus' actual return in Episode 6). I think that if it turned out Balthazar was in fact Menzies at the end of PoF, a plot twist some were expecting, then we would have kept the two NPC articles separated.

Drooburt is no spoiler. There is no reason to keep the two separated when we never separate any other article of multiple names, looks, and locations. This is an odd exception to the rule, one without reason beyond "it's fine how it is" as far as I can see, and one I feel we do not need. Konig (talk) 17:04, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree. Sorry Doodles, but I think you're going to have to accept that you've been out-voted on this one. --Idris (talk) 17:22, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I made a quick example of what I'm envisioning here. - Felix Omni 17:33, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Felix I'm not sure why you keep referring to Hero Tron, because it's still not the same NPC that you turn stuff into for Wintersday. And Konig, this is not the Guild Wars 1 wiki, what applies there does not always apply here. Since clearly this is going to happen even though it's a bad idea, at least make the main NPC Drooburt's Ghost since by Konig's logic that is his "current" name and make "Drooburt" a disambiguation for the original NPC, the ghost, and the mini. - Do_odleplex 17:28, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

No, Hero-Tron was in fact the NPC that you turned stuff into for Wintersday in 2013. There is a replica now who is distinct from Hero-Tron, but that's immaterial. Putting that aside, can you give an example of why a player would need to access the "original NPC" page instead of seeing the old info on Drooburt's Ghost? - Felix Omni 17:33, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

"And Konig, this is not the Guild Wars 1 wiki, what applies there does not always apply here." While true, the GWW also has many of the same practices as GW2W, and it's worth bringing up because I'm also stating that not once in all of GW2W have we split NPCs if they're the same in lore.

"though it's a bad idea" You've not exactly said why it's a bad idea, from what I've seen. The only thing close to an explanation beyond "they're two different NPCs" (they're not) is "I really think [ArenaNet] intentionally split the two NPCs so people didn't get confused and go to the wrong one in Dry Top" But the thing is, they didn't. We did. Replica Ho-Ho-Tron is not Hero-Tron, hence the new name. Drooburt's Ghost is Drooburt, hence the name Drooburt in Mad King's Labyrinth. I think the point of adding "'s Ghost" was poking fun at the guy rather than saying "hey, don't go to Dry Top" because they've never done that before, and there is no NPC in Dry Top anyways (nor would calling it "Drooburt's Ghost" prevent folks from going to Dry Top over LA - as proven by the fact I saw people asking in Dry Top last night how to feed a quaggan corpse).

So why is it a bad idea? Konig (talk) 17:46, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

"But the thing is, they didn't. We did." -- I think what Doodle meant was that ANet must have created the ghost with the name "Drooburt's Ghost" so that people trying to complete the achievement would know that they need to visit his ghost and not waste a journey trying to visit "Drooburt" the corpse in Dry Top. I don't believe that this was ANet's intention, however, because if they were making a point of ensuring players were directed to the correct NPC, then why does the achievement simply say "Drooburt" and not "Drooburt's Ghost"? --Idris (talk) 17:55, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

If anything, I suspect that the person Konig found in Dry Top was led there after googling or /wiki'ing "Drooburt" and seeing his location listed as "Town of Prosperity" even though there's no NPC there. IMO the current state of affairs is actively unhelpful to players. - Felix Omni 18:28, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

@Idris: My point was that renaming an NPC when they show up in a new location doesn't separate the two.

@Felix: That, or they knew of Drooburt in Dry Top but not his appearance in LA for xyz reason. Konig (talk) 18:51, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I think it got lost in the discussion many indent resets ago, but Doodle's opinion is that the person Konig came across in Dry Top was likely making a sarcastic joke, and actually knew perfectly well that they needed to visit LA. While this is certainly a possibility, I would prefer if we didn't assume our readers already have a good understanding of the game; they come to us specifically because they don't. I strongly feel that for someone with no knowledge of Drooburt, directing them to the historical NPC when thy search for "Drooburt" is the most confusing thing we can do. A disambig would be an improvement, but they'll still have to judge whether they should click on "Drooburt (Dry Top)" or "Drooburt's Ghost" -- not a simple choice when all the information they have to go on is a line on the achievement saying simply "give candy corn to Drooburt". --Idris (talk) 19:05, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Given the way the conversation went, the person 100% was not making a sarcastic joke (others, however, did - myself included). Konig (talk) 19:14, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) A disambig between two Drooburts would be absurd because of course there is only one Drooburt, who is dead and a ghost and in Halloween areas only. We're going in circles here. Absent an actual reason not to do so which has not been presented yet, we should merge the pages asap while the content is relevant to the current event. - Felix Omni 19:15, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Alright. I was hoping we could come to a compromise that Doodle was happy with, but consensus really does seem to be that we should merge. --Idris (talk) 19:23, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I'm currently too frustrated to answer logically, so if any action could wait a bit, I'd appreciate it. - Do_odleplex 19:27, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I won't take any action until you've had a chance to respond, but I will point out that, as 4 in unequivocal favour of a merge vs 1 against, we have pretty much reached consensus. Consider if what you have to say is really likely to sway that consensus, or if it's just going to bring us around in circles again. I do sympathize with your feelings that a merge mustn't go ahead because it will be confusing -- but if the majority opinion is the opposite, then you have to consider that your opinion of what is confusing may not reflect what the majority of users will find confusing. --Idris (talk) 19:40, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm against it because it's confusing to me. I came in long after Drooburt was dead, the only Drooburt I knew was Drooburt's Ghost. I had no idea there even was a Quaggan named "Drooburt" who had existed in Dry Top until I started editing the wiki and was going through the image request, and found the request for a better image for him. So yeah, by all accounts to me, that "Drooburt" is historical, I'll never meet him, never give him a copper. I have however met Drooburt's Ghost, interacted with him(do ghosts have genders?), gave it Candy Corn, heard it talk to Mad King Thorn during Halloween. It strikes me as being the same as Hauke (Risen) and Hauke, and not "the many names of Hero-Tron went through" since Drooburt was never renamed, his corpse is still in Dry Top, even though there's no nameplate on it or any of the other former villagers killed there who's bodies are now swaying from vines. I do not want Drooburt's Ghost merged into Drooburt because Drooburt is gone, simply enough. Doing it the other way, wouldn't be too terrible though, but I still wouldn't be terribly happy with it either. - Do_odleplex 01:43, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I was playing GW2 when Drooburt was still alive, but I happened to never come across him before he died, so like you, his ghost is also the first and only Drooburt I've ever known. It feels obvious to me to think of the ghost as "Drooburt", because, well, that's his name. When I search for "Drooburt" -- which, need I remind you again, is the name given as a clue in related achievements -- I expect to get his ghost as a result. It's really confusing to get some Dry Top NPC instead. And judging from the direction this discussion has gone, my reaction seems to be the more typical one. A merge will help more users than preserving the status quo. --Idris (talk) 02:11, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

It's definitely my intention (and as far as I understood it, the others') that Drooburt gets merged into & redirects to Drooburt's Ghost, not the other way around. I shared an admittedly silly example above that may have gotten missed since I did a double edit, but it shows that Drooburt's Ghost, the NPC that you know, gets the spotlight. I think this approach would actually be an advantage for players who didn't know OG Drooburt (aka Trueburt), because they'd get to see some of the character's backstory, while avoiding the possibility that they might not make the connection between Drooburt (who they didn't know existed until they found his wiki page) and his Ghost, and end up in Dry Top asking how to feed a corpse. As an aside, I believe that Hauke & Hauke is a special case because both of them exist in the same moment; the Risen corpse of Hauke is a distinct and separate entity from his spirit, as noted on its page. That doesn't apply here because Deadburt is just scenery- it would be more like Risen Ferghen, who redirects to Ferghen the Tracker. - Felix Omni 02:22, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

"It's definitely my intention (and as far as I understood it, the others') that Drooburt gets merged into & redirects to Drooburt's Ghost, not the other way around." -- My initial attempt to perform the merge was treating "Drooburt" as the default and reducing "Drooburt's Ghost" to the redirect, but I would be just as happy with your version. --Idris (talk) 02:38, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Go ahead and move it to Drooburt's Ghost. Just make sure are the other wiki's links are corrected if needed. - Do_odleplex 04:23, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Doodle. :) I've completed the merge, but I haven't changed the links on the German and French wikis yet because I'm not sure what we should do for that -- they both still have separate pages for living droobs and ghost droobs. Given that "Drooburt" now redirects to "Drooburt's Ghost" anyway -- maybe no change is needed? --Idris (talk) 06:25, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Drooburt’s Ghost, Dragon Bash

You have to give Drooburt’s 1000 candy to get the Dragon Bash Star Cake recipe.

Can the recipe be attained cumulatively, as in giving 10 taffy pieces at a time, or does it have to be all 1000 pieces at once? 47.204.18.101 21:44, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

You sadly don't get the recipe, but only a single piece of the food (which honestly, for that price is not worth at all but you mainly do it for the achievement points). You do not have to give him all the taffy pieces at the same time, though. ~Sime 22:02, 6 June 2023 (UTC)