Talk:War of the Ancients (novel account)

Logic
Totally can't get this out of my head, but must RP'rs in World of Warcraft accept this lore as the "true"? The official from Blizzard existed before this and since Knaak knows as much about timetravel as an ant, logic is completely killed in it... Any thoughts?


 * Well, I would suggest actually trying time travel before you start criticizing someone else's interpretation. More importantly, however, there is no real difference in the end result of the two timelines- as far as we can tell, the only difference is that Hakkar the Houndmaster did not survive the original war.
 * Third, just because there was earlier lore doesn't mean squat. I REALLY hate to use this example, but in Star Trek, the Borg simply assimilate Capt. Picard, but later, it's established that it was part of some grand scheme thought up by the Borg Queen.
 * Finally, if the Role Players pick and choose which lore to rolepay from, what's the point of roleplaying?--Ragestorm 00:33, 17 December 2006 (EST)


 * Have read the books actually... how to describe them... ever read Eragon? *shrugs*
 * You will have to forgive me but I have no idea what a Borg or who Picard is.
 * Oh and about the timetravel... it isn't logical, atleast not to a human mind, and the travelers (whatever their names were) raises too many paradoxes... Like why didn't Tyrande recognize them or the Old Gods thing that says on the article page...*headache*
 * Anyway, thanks for your help... I think ---Celebant


 * TIME TRAVEL IS SO ANNOYING!!! AGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.  Better hope Nozdormu never gets corrupted/dies or everyone is quite doomed... Time travel denies free will, meaning, and basically makes Nozdormu the supreme god.  Also, where are the good titans, playing billiards or croquet???  How come Sargeras is the only Titan that does anything anymore... Gotnov 18:35, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Trust me, I'm fuming about Tyrande's failure to recognize (that's why we've speculated on Nozdormu's intervention).
 * It's no good comparing WotA to Eragon, they're in completely different worlds, in many more ways than one.
 * While I'm surprised you don't get the ST references, you're definetly blessed for not knowing them.--Ragestorm 10:37, 17 December 2006 (EST)


 * Ah, then I'm not alone;)
 * Oh, meant that it's as good as Eragon. And since Eragon is  that good....
 * Haha, too young I'm afraid... was always Smallville and cartoons for me... ---Celebant


 * Erm, i don't know why there is a problem with Tyrande not recognizing Orcs. War of the Ancients is set after WC3 and Before WoW IIRC, the changes to the timeline would have not happened until after then, resulting in WC3 and previous sources correctly following the previous timeline, and WoW the new timeline. Sounds oddly like a plan to introduce new lore to WoW without retcon issues huh? Well that's exactly the idea. ;) -- Zeal ( talk  -  contr  - web) 13:34, 23 December 2006 (EST)


 * Ooh, I see what you're saying. The changes weren't made until *after* WC3 was played (by us), so changes may well have occured to the WC3 story as a result ... but we wouldn't know because we played the original timeline. That's ingenious! -- Kirkburn  (talk) 13:38, 23 December 2006 (EST)


 * Well unless someone has any ideas why that isn't correct, may i suggest removing the superfluous specultion on it? -- Zeal ( talk  -  contr  - web) 13:59, 23 December 2006 (EST)
 * I'm seconding this viewpoint as it makes the most sense. The WC3/TFT we played was the original timeline.  The intervention of the Old Gods occured, temporally, after the Third War at which point they, acting in a different time (completely within their nigh-infinite powers), were the voices that sent Neltharion into a mad quest to create the Dragon/Demon Soul which would be the ultimate key to unlocking their prison.  At the end of the trilogy when Nozdormu returns Rhonin, Krasus, and Brox's axe to the future, they arrive at a future in which the events that occured while they were in the past had always happened.  In the WoW-timeline, Jarod had always been the leader of the army and Tyrande, Malfurion, Illidan, and the others had known Rhonin, Krasus, and the orcs.  However, since the point at which that knowledge would have been apparent (the beginning of the Third War) was already past.  One would imagine that in that timeline, Tyrande and Malfurion had known about the orcs' existence, just not that they would ever invade/settle Azeroth in the manner they did.  One would also imagine that Tyrande and Malfurion would have had an awkward time around Rhonin if they had ever met him before his journey into the past.  Personally, I'd like to see Rhonin and maybe Krasus go and visit Tyrande to catch up on old times.  ;-P  Emodeathmachine 17:58, 16 April 2007 (EDT)


 * Sigh, children these days :P How can you not have watched Star Trek? It's not old! I digress.
 * The novels have all been written under the supervision of Chris Metzen, and what Knaak wrote is canon (excepting mistakes, which are just that mistakes). -- Kirkburn  (talk) 13:10, 23 December 2006 (EST)


 * Star Trek is old... seriosuly^^
 * C.M supervised them? And let them get published? He's been PvP'ing too much on GM island... fried braincells.
 * I'll just view this (along with several others) as "filler arcs"... those who have seen Naruto knows what I mean...:P
 * ---Celebant

Star Trek may be from the 70s, but I believe that my reference came from a Next Generation episode in the early 90s. Comparatively, neither series is truely old, nor does it make it irrelevent... would you have us remove the discussion of Night elf arcitecture because the Japanese style it's based upon was perfected in the 400s? Avoid explaining the origin of a ziggurat because the original ones were built 6500 years ago? --Ragestorm, Head Bookkeeper 16:38, 23 December 2006 (EST)


 * So offensive, Ragestorm. It's a discussion, don't beat us to a pulp just yet:P And no, doubtful anyone would do that, but (if I am getting this correctly and we are speaking of the same thing) we are questioning this origin.---Celebant


 * There is no 'we'. Most of your edits have been reverted - I wonder if you realise yet why? -- Kirkburn  (talk) 17:04, 23 December 2006 (EST)
 * Oh, and Star Trek is not old. The last series only ended about 2 years ago! -- Kirkburn  (talk) 17:05, 23 December 2006 (EST)

I'm an anthropologist- such conversations are part of the new job description.--Ragestorm, Head Bookkeeper 16:58, 23 December 2006 (EST)


 * Never said there was a 'we' here, Kirkie, but I am guessing by your manners that you're not very
 * good at seeing the lines in a debate. I might just realise why, yes... most er... WoWwikians ::: rely on the Novels, Knaak and his lot, as genuine sources... and Blizz has published them, have ::: those facts in their Encyclopedia, but due to their contradictions and slightly... hum hum, need
 * a better word here: idiotic plots that alters the story (not much but some) many, many       ::: roleplayers disagree. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (may he rest in peace) wrote the ending of Sherlock
 * Holmes and published it, causing major dislike and eventually made him re-write the ending.  ::: Sherlock lived in this one... see the meaning of the example? Hint hint, nudge nudge...       ::: ---Celebant


 * "guessing by your manners that you're not very good"


 * ...Wow, no reason to resort to Ad Hominem...really that won't help your line of debate...Baggins 12:57, 25 December 2006 (EST)

OK, now I'm getting offensive. You talk of roleplayers disagreeing and idotic plot lines. First of all, roleplayers have not, and never will, decide lore matters. I noticed you've watched Smallville. I enjoy it very much, but it's frankly one of the most idoitic things I've ever seen. As for contradictions within WotA, what in the Nether do you expect when we're dealing with time travel? And I cannot fathom that Tyrande's failure to recognize the Orcs is that nuch of a breach to cause Sherlock-like rage. Speaking of which, Doyle's case is rare; the endings of Roswell, The Prisoner, and many other popular franchises caused outrage, and they were not changed. It's lore, it's canon. If you can't deal with it, or other roleplayers can't deal with it, that's not my problem. And since Blizzard doesn't need your opinion, you don't need mine, but I warn you: my task here is to ensure the quality and the upkeep of the lore pages, and NPOV, which you have violated in the past, is vital to that. I am the Head Bookkeeper, and that is the role that I play.--Ragestorm, Head Bookkeeper 18:36, 25 December 2006 (EST)


 * Also, when I said there was no "we", it was to point out that no-one was on your side :P Anyway, we're the ones discussing, and not the ones who were deleting info from pages without asking. The world does not revolve around your ideals, and there are very good explanations as to why the WotA effects had not been seen.
 * One convincing argument (for me) is that WC3 was written describing the original timeline. The changes occured afterwards, and therefore if WC3 was made now, it would be different. But it wasn't, and it describes the original timeline. -- Kirkburn  (talk) 19:31, 25 December 2006 (EST)

Alternate? - Problem
As I've been sifting through different articles it seems that there's a bit of confusion as to where the "Alternate History" tag applies; is "alternate" the original story, which would logically seem 'out of date' (pun intended ;)), or is it Knaak's addition, which, though seemingly retconning old canon, is 'new'?

The Earthen article would suggest that 'Alternate' is the original. This one, on the other hand, supports to opposite theory. I think it may be best to choose one or the other.

--Pure.Wasted 04:21, 1 October 2006 (EDT)


 * Knaak's writings are "alternate," the WC3 manual is "original." If it weren't for Jarod, Rhonin and Vereesa not appearing in-game, there'd be no question.--Ragestorm 22:29, 1 October 2006 (EDT)


 * Is that really a problem, though? There's things missing from WarCraft 2 or WarCraft 3 but we don't doubt their canon status. Apart from all the references that could also only connect WoW to Day of the Dragon, we DO have Xaviaar, or whatever that Satyr area is called. And Xavius never existed before War of the Ancients... P.S.: that means the Earthen page needs an edit, then. --Pure.Wasted 10:11, 2 October 2006 (EDT)


 * I think that the Earthen page is alright given the current convention. You do have a point, though about WC2. This does call for something a little more official I suppose... --Ragestorm 12:13, 2 October 2006 (EDT)


 * I don't know which source came first, but Xavious is in Shadows & Light as well. I think the release date for both sources is actually pretty close.Baggins 16:41, 23 December 2006 (EST)

As I approuch the end of readin the third novel of the War of the Ancients Trilogy, its starting to seem like this history may not be so alternative as I orginally though.

Anyone else read the third novel yet? Any idea how we should handle the integration of the Original history and the information in the 3 novels?

Don't read this if you haven't finished.

Yea, it seems that this is the new history. They never say "history goes back to normal" or anything, and make it seem that the revisions are permanent.

As far as I can tell, everything still fits, except the death of Hakkar. But maybe he didn't actually die in the first book. (If you didn't know, apparently you get to fight him in Zul'Gurub.) I can't remember that part...

I'm wondering if the Old Gods have always been the cause of the invasion and Neltharion's betrayal, or if it's a plan they came up with in the present day and then distorted time to do it. Of course, the invasion never would've happened in the first place if not for them. Either way, it sure says some very interesting stuff about them.

Also, I'd love to see Brox's axe in Thrall's throneroom somewhere.


 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 22:20, 21 Aug 2005 (EDT)

I wonder whether Jarod Shadowsong did exist in the "unchanged" history. What happened to him at last?--Sevil 08:16, 26 Nov 2005 (EST)

The the trilogy is listed as part of Burning Crusade's history
As mentioned to the Burning Crusade expansion pack Faq Page. I made note of this in the article.Baggins 22:54, 9 October 2006 (EDT)


 * Don't you think this choice of words is a little too big? The FAQ just mentions the Burning Legion appears in the novels. Nothing more, nothing less. The Alliance Players Guide on the other hand clearly states the original history is the official one. I also made note of this in the article. Tulon 03:45 19 May 2007


 * "The Alliance Players Guide on the other hand clearly states the original history is the official one"\
 * No it doesn't specifically say its using the original history, no where does it specifically state, "this based off the Warcraft III manual", infact both Player's Guides make references to material that only appears in novel trilogy, for example Hakkar the Houndmaster. If truth there are very few differences between the two versions of the history except that trilogy is a bit more detailed considering its length, but as for lore the novel trilogy is definitely an official account, though it's likely that those in charge of lore probably take both sources into account, and blending of the two is the "true" history.Baggins 23:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Characters like Hakkar would exist in both timelines, of course, so you are probably right in pointing out that the current official lore is a blending of both sources. I just noticed that the APG mentions that, for example, Illidan warned Azshara - which he did not in the novels. That said, we should probably mention that neither of the two sources is 100% official, but a mix of them would be. What do you think about that? Tulon 23 May 2007

Flavor lore. Something that happened as long ago as the War of the Ancients would be very subject to it. Another thing to consider is that the new WOTA takes place in three novels, each over three hundred pages. That makes it hard for the writers to skim when they need to confirm a fact. It's also worth noting that not only does Brann refer to Hakkar, but he says he was killed in the original War of the Ancients. --Austin P 17:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

"Alternate" and "normal" War of the Ancients
Well, I think that the most logic explanation to all of this (differences between two timelines) is that since Rhonin and Krasus returned home Nozdormu could prevent Old God's intervention into the time. So, War of the Ancients returned to its normal timeline, but all timetravelers (Krasus, Rhonin) and PRESENT day Nozdormu and Old Gods remember all events of alternate War of the Ancients, but since breaking Old Gods plans time was never changed. User:Mardook


 * Unlikely. For one, they wouldn't be able to remember if there was no change. There are things in the existing timeline that match WotA novels, but not the old events, so there was definitely changes. Nozdormu is powerful, but theres no evidence to suggest he can reset time as you've suggested, quite the contrary with how he relies on physical presence to undo changes. -- Zeal  talk   contr  web 16:45, 12 February 2007 (EST)

Timeline (prime) and Timeline (new)
I've taken the liberty to change this article to cover both timelines presented in the novels, and then compare both of those timelines to accounts of the war given in other sources. Since Knaak makes refrences to two timelines, and describes elements from both, I've decided to refer to them as timeline (prime), and timeline (new), for his version of an "unchanged" timeline, and his second timeline made through the influence of time travelers.

The reason for this is that there are certain "discrepencies" in both of Knaak's timelines, that do not quite match up with other accounts of the history given in other sources.

A specific example being the fate of Hakkar the Houndmaster. In that the sources that mention him agree that he died in the War of the Ancients and never made it to the Third War. Where as in "timeline (prime)" he supposedly made it to the Third War, although he does not appear in any other account of the Third War. Which implies that Knaak's first timeline isn't even the same timeline Warcraft III was based on.

It would seem that the current accounts of the "true" history seems to be a mix of the accounts from Warcraft 3, WoW (& it's website), expansions/side stories to the history added by various sources (short stories, games, etc), along with new material established in Knaak's timeline (new), and that timeline (prime) is an entirely different account altogether.Baggins 07:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Illidan section/ page ideas
This section kinda ruins the flow of this page, and isn't all necessary.

Firstly, The page goes on to events up to a point, but then stops, and goes into a massive section about Illidan, only to carry on again, despite some of the events being covered in the above section, albeit through Illidan's perspective. Also, perhaps it is his popularity which causes us to have a massive section on him, but most of this information is available on his wowwiki page, so we do not need to have a massive section on his side of the story on this page. However, I do like the way it starts. It discusses about how his role in the new timeline varies from the original. Though we have a rough outline of overall differences, we don't have how the character's accounts change, nor retcons concerning character age and the like. Therefore, for the major Night Elf characters, we could possibly add sections that cover that. However, as Jarod Shadowsong is a new character, we would either have to A) leave him out, or B) have a section concerning how his addition has affected other characters and Azerothian history, e.g how he has an affect on Maiev's actions later on in Warcraft history.

This is my first talk page addition, so, well, what d'ya reckon? Hope it works ok going in through edit. If not, please don't hesitate to send me a message via my talk page and sort out any mess I may have made on this page Warden Shadowsong (talk) 20:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)