Talk:Rumored Races/Archive11

Ok, lets take this in a different direction
Ok, I'd like to try something a little different. Rather than introduce a new race and have to work out the mechanics and have people leave their mains for a while to get the new one, why don't we find ways to modify the races we have. Example, lets pretend I have an orcish warrior for a main. I undertake a number of quests which finally involve me drinking some pit-lords blood. My Orc is now a fel orc, in some ways the same, but with a few extra racial abillities and modifiers, and blood red skin. This could happen to any race with different results as far as how it would change the model. It could have different racial abilites for each racial modifier or it could be universal. I have ideas beyond fel. These include naturalized for lack of a better name (example of this would be the night elf starting to grow antlers), worgren (gives you the ability to take on a worgren wildshape, regardless of class), vampiric (you'd have to be bitten ritually by a dreadlord), light-touched (opposite of fel coming from the naaru), etc. please add ideas to this or argue with it as much as you please. |Meneldir


 * Just one point, modifications/alterations to currently playable races isn't the topic of this particular article. A good page for a discussion of this type might be under the talk pages for corrupted creature - Talk:corrupted creature, Fel-sworn - Talk:Fel-sworn, Corrupted Ones - Talk:Corrupted Ones or tainted - Talk:tainted.--Baggins 18:09, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Perfect idea, im all for it, it makes High Elves plausible.--Gurluas 18:14, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Just to re-iterate what Baggins said, a discussion of altered versions of existing races should have its own page, like Future altered race ideas. -- Fandyllic (talk &middot; contr) 11:55 AM PDT 11 Oct 2007


 * 'Future' seems like there is some in-game now.-- 19:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Well actually, blood-elves are twice-altered from night elves, and night elves "may" be altered from trolls. Undead are altered from humans...Baggins 20:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Possible future altered race ideas (too long?) or just Altered race ideas would work. Nevertheless, I feel that it would be, again, too much work for too little gain. Blizzard can't hope to put in all those changes for every race to create a sub-race (reworking the models for example...) and expect to make much money out of it. How would the antlers fit with current druid antler-helms? Should we expect worgen to wear armor? (Just a note about vampires: they don't exist in Warcraft, the Dreadlord soul-vampires are the closest you'll get.)
 * If it's just skins you want, its possible they could be introduced. But in the way of drastic changes in appearance, such novelty items as "Dartols Rod of Transformation" are all we can really hope to expect.--


 * On a related note, worgen skins have already be introduced through one of the books you can read in Kharazan. As for other skins, one can become ogres, bats, change sex, skeletons, undead, goblins, humans, gnomes, arrakoa, fel orcs, furbolgs, and other faction races through various items found in the game. There are various debuffs in the game that can polymorph you into other animals, like chickens, frogs, worms, cows, etc.Baggins 21:06, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, i've started using the the Altered race ideas page. Oh, and baggins, this is more than skins, this would also add racial abillities. Anyone who would like to continue discussing this possibillity please do visit the page and contribute, argue, etc.Meneldir

Fill the gaps in the current selection of races
1. Why pick a race that is clearly unlikely to be played, like Naga? They are not only ugly, but nowhere near humanoid enough to even be considered.

2. Fill the gaps in current race selection. For example, the Horde does not have a really short character, such as gnome. Which would make Goblins an obvious choice. In fact, this is the most obvious choice of all of them.


 * Goblins, being a strange neutral race (unlike goblins of Tolkien lore), would make a good lead race for the proposed new Neutral Faction. ;&gt; 23:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

3. For the Alliance... i don't know. I knind of like the Moonkin, would fill a need for a big round type of race for their side. And they are freaky enough looking to fill that void in the 'light' side, which seems rather cartoony, or cutesy, overall.


 * On the naga point, I assume you probably only refer to the males. While it's true the males are not really the kind of type you would hug like a teddy bear, the females are not ugly at all to me at least. Not to mention they are a popular race, despite what you said. Sure, you might not play them, but don't assume other people also won't. and they are certainly humanoid enough to be playable, compared to some other race suggestions, like Makrura. I'm sorry, but there are many races that are far less humanoid than the naga, so naga is a bad example of a barely humanoid race (concidering they are the most civilized and cultured non-playable humanoid race except goblins). For further proof that naga definitely is humanoid, please refer to the naga article and the article on humanoids. On the short and small races for the horde, I think that just because the alliance has a short race doesn't mean the horde should have one too. Not that I wouldn't play goblin, but adding goblins to the horde because the alliance has gnomes is ridiculous to me. But they are fitting, and would be a good choice for the horde, regardless of the size facts. And for moonkin to the alliance, it's just a big no. Druids already have a moonkin form, and that they suddenly can transform to a whole new playable race and back to their standard forms, would cause a hell of a lot of confusion. I don't oppose that the alliance get an animal-ish race, but Moonkin is by far the worst choice I have seen for an animal-type race. --Kulsprutejojjo 09:01, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Very good points... on my main point, that a short Horde race is needed, the primary reason is role-play. Many people like to pick a race/class that suits who they are in real life. There are alot of short people in the world, as well as large Obese people, but that's not necessarily a bad thing, just look at bikers. They really like being big bad bikers. So, it seems to me that the Horde is lacking in a race for short people and a race for big round people (though the Tauren fit the bill rather well), and the Alliance is definitely in need of a big round type of character. Granted, the Moonkin are out. I think Naga could be a good Horde race, except that their size is covered. We need a short Horde race. ;&gt; 21:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

So:

What is a good short race for Horde?

 * not Murlocs, agree?

Do they need a small race,it dosnt need to even out.-- 22:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Why not? ;&gt; 23:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Goblins. -- 23:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I see gobs more neutral,because look at all the neutral citys.-- 23:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Goblins are neutral, but you gotta admit they're kinda horde biased. The goblin Zepplins are horde exclusive, and most goblin cities are either in horde territories, or contested. They hate gnomes and are green too. XD I could see a goblin on the horde, and they could get bonuses to reputation with neutral factions (the same way humans get rep bonuses). Just my two cents.--Blayaden 23:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Goblins are traditionally associated with Orc (Tolkien Lore, see 'The Hobbit'). However, the neutrality of the goblins is interesting enough to warrant more discussion. (Neutral Faction) ;&gt; 00:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * It is also worthy to note that Metzen classed goblins as a horde race in the art piece "Horde Races", and that many goblins already can be found with the horde, like the zeppelin masters and guardians, and the engineers in Ashenvale etc. They truly are the best choice for a short horde race, but I don't really think Blizzard is aiming for especially short races, but physically appealing races. Not that the goblins are physically repulsive, however. To be honest, they look rather good, and a bit funny too, which can be a good factor for making them playable. --Kulsprutejojjo 10:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

But hunestly,I dont think horde NEEDS a small race,Horde seems like the monster race Faction,just like Alliance would be the more political Human Race faction.-- 16:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

How many players what to play a small horde character? It is not as much about need the horde being bigger in general, but about offering an option of playing a smaller character on the horde side. Goblins, however, have too much baggage, and they are rather cute and buggy for a player character. Something more serious looking i think. Where can I find a list of short races? It sure would be cool to compare them side by side. 21:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The goblins are short, yes. But isn't part of this thread trying to find an "intelligent" race too?  Short and smarty (with a big heaping dose of insanity.)  What more do you want?  Blizzard seems to like them alot too...--Blayaden 14:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Vote of approval
...the winner is ____, with ____ coming in a close second (yes, ogres are not short, but the only other race even close to positive enough with the horde). The other short races are really not worth doing, though perhaps murlocs, hahahah! no! We need more candidates, as with the alliance options. 18:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * This won't change anything, but I can't see it doing any harm. --


 * ...let the voting begin!

1. Goblin:   23:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Goblins are my favorite race. Zakolj 15:18, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

2. Ogre:

(put your sig above, in either section... Ogres may not be small, but they sure are cool, any other suggestions?)

The count:

Goblins: 2

Ogres: 1

What is a good big/bulky race for Alliance?

 * perhaps draenei qualify here. If so, then what does the Alliance need?

;&gt; 21:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Furbolgs?-- 22:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Pandaren are kinda stocky... but they are also a horde candidate... probably, if blizzard was serious about adding a big, strong race to the alliance, they would probably have to make one up.(or go reeely far back and retcon something obscure from lore). Dwarf ogres on an newly discovered island! Didn't stop the draenei! XD--Blayaden 00:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Grrr Enough pandas~-- 00:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm a big fan of the Pandaren, but I have to agree here. Isn't it getting tiring?-- K )  (talk) 00:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Would Pandaren be a good candidate for the new Neutral Faction? 01:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I wasn't being all that serious! I really don't think there currently any races that qualify for this categoy.  The only way I see is if blizzard "makes up" a new race.  Either way, I'd rather have an existing race added, weather they're beefy or not.  (and you can take a wild guess  whom I would vote for) goblins for the horde seem far more likely than a new beefy race "popping out of nowhere for the Alliance."--Blayaden 16:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Heh heh HURRAY for High Elves!-- 16:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

...mmmmmm... ...Beeefy... (thats the word i was looking for, thanks) 21:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * No races which qualify at all? Odd... where'd all the ogres, centaur and big beefy furbolgs go?
 * I'd rather they use an existing race than create a new one. Furthermore, a race - no, rather a *species* - with an argument which has remained strong throughout (all of which are in the article); and not so soundly beaten and annihilated yet so persistent as the high elf debate. There's nothing left of that dead horse to flog. --

As long as the High Elf race is still in WoW, there WILL be an arguement on them.


 * Aplause*Go Nairb!-- 22:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

High Elves might be considered a possible Hero Race, like the Death Knight is a Hero class. Any elf character might trancend or transform or morph or something into a High Elf once certain race qualifications are met. perhaps this could be limited to Night Elves, since Blood Elves are low by definition. 23:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Now, let's see what we can see about possible new short 'species'. 23:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Dang. I'm all for high elves, but I didn't mean to spark that one off.  Ogre's are a definate  no-no for the Alliance, but do you think furbolgs would qualify?  I dunno...  They don't speak common, and you almost never see them wearing anything besides their loincloths.  Are they really all that strong?  They mostly seem stocky and barbaric.  Just cause' you have thick fur/skin doesn't make you super strong.  Take dwarves for example...---Blayaden 00:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The clothes issue is less of a problem than you might think. A good example is the naga case, where they didn't wear much clothes at all in the beginning (mostly only the sea witches who wore those chestpieces), while in the Burning Crusade they recieved support for most clothes and armor. Just becasuse a race doesn't wear many clothes now doesn't mean they can't add support for clothes in the future. This means that lack of clothes is not an issue at all, really. --Kulsprutejojjo 07:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't know that. Anyways, if anything happens to the furbolgs, I hope something similar happens.  Those thongs look painful. o_0 --Blayaden 15:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * My point, Mr.X8, is that you could have an argument on the likeliness of Mr Potato Head to appear as a playable race in WoW, with unwavering support and as strong words of dedication as I have seen for the noble high elves, but it will make his case no more likely than when it started. I'd bet a million dollars on the unlikeliness of the high elves to appear as a playable race, and I promise you that I'd get back every last cent. I tire of continually having to confront ideas of a high elf playable race - I could write an essay on reasons why the high elves have no chance in hell in making it as a fully fledged playable race; yet I may as well be speaking Swahili for the amount Airiph has listened to my reasoning. Jamvaru, your compromise idea is different and sensible, though I still consider it unlikely. I can't honestly see how high elves can bring anything new to the table (the blood elves having already taken the position of high elven 'new thing') to merit their inclusion as anything more than a costume.
 * But enough of that. Ogres, Blayaden, are indeed far more likely to become a Horde race than Alliance though I wouldn't be so quick to strike them off the list. I wouldn't vouch for them as the "Alliance big race", but Blizzard have gone off on a tangent with ridiculous ideas often enough - e.g. draenei - to make me believe the ogres stand a chance.
 * About the furbolgs: the Timbermaw are fully able to speak and understand Common and Orcish, so your statement is untrue. Furthermore, your point about strength is false:- "Furbolgs are big and strong" . --

My Troll/Shaman was always looking down on Furbolgs. I'd like to see an Alliance pc race at least as tall as a Troll. Perhaps the intention was for the Alliance to be overawed by the sheer size of the Horde in general. Like, 'eeeekk, monsters!'. 21:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, but trolls *are* the tallest playable race in WoW (I can't remember how tall the draenei are in comparison). In any case, a simple height change to more accurately comply with the APG values given (7 to 10 feet ) could help you get the tall race you want. Then again, we don't want them to be too tall and broad... --

Hey George Washington, Rosa Parks, Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson at the Firsrt Battle Bull Run and Leonidas fought against impoosible odds and they won, so why can't this idea? Maybe no one else will fight for this idea, but I will.

You would vote for Titans,you would step on my,even TAUREN!-- 22:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Right, like the pc version of the druid Moonkin is bigger than the wild version. Thanks for the APC info, waycool. Thanks for supporting my idea ;). Remember the Titans!  Alliance does not have an animal face type of character, ala tauren, so furbolgs might be even more of an interesting choice, hmm...  23:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I was unaware of the furbolgs speaking anything but their own language, but I checked it out  and you're right. They may not be a race I'd play, but there is little I can say against them. (I'm kinda hoping they update the models at the least, making a difference between sentient and feral versions... and maybe pants.)XD  As for a certain  controversial  race, we are just going to accept reality. Nothing we say or do is going to change that. There will always tabletop RPing and fanfiction... lets let it rest for now...--Blayaden 01:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I will never surrender!


 * Look, please... I want high elves just as much as you do, but this is NOT the place to talk about it! Even if we convince everyone that they would be the awesomest, greatest, bestest race in the universe it would not make any difference! Don't fight your naval battles in the desert!  Even the greatest generals knew "when to hold em' and when to fold em'."--Blayaden 03:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe PGT Beauregard knew when to "fold em' at the First Battle of Bull Run.


 * You should realise that what you're doing more closely resembles Lord Cardigan leading the Light Brigade of the British cavalry against the Russian cannon in the Battle for Balaclava - or for a Civil War simile, like General Burnside sending sixteen charges at the Confederate line in the Battle of Fredericksburg. ;) --


 * This is hopeless... you're not proving anything making civil war references. Only that you're a fanatic going the wrong way to make a point.  Unless something  like an actual argument  (not one sided mr:X8) happens here, this thread is pointless.  The arguments have already been made... --Blayaden 14:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Only a bit of good humored banter Blayaden, as there appears to be nothing more to discuss. Like you've said, all the arguments that can be made, have been made. If you look in the archive, you'll find we've had several similar discussions before. --

How strange... someone says 'High Elves!' and theres a weird civil war discussion... 18:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Well since we can't come to an understanding, let's just agree to disagree. &#123;&#123;User:Mr.X8/Sig}} 22:59, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Hold your horses, guys. I'm getting confused as to who specifically these comments are directed to. --

Vote of approval
...the winner is _____, with _____ coming in a close 2nd. Unfortunately, we do not have any other real contenders. 18:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, winner? Where was the vote? --


 * ...cool, let's vote, then!

1. All for Pandaren, put your X here:  23:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Pandaren gets my vote, mainly because I likte them more than furbolgs, and they have a lot larger selection of classes. Furbolgs probably only could be able to play warrior, shaman, hunter, and possibly druid. Any other class simply doesn't fit in with the furbolgs, while pandaren could at least adapt a few of these. --Kulsprutejojjo 07:58, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

2. All for Furbolg, put your X here: -- 23:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Zakolj 19:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I disagree, Kulsprutejojjo, and I cannot see why pandaren would have a larger selection of classes - actually, I believe them to be more restricted in their class choice (no druids, no arcane magic etc.). See my furbolg argument and furbolg class possibilities pages (the furbolgs are more adaptable than you think!) for more information. Furthermore, one furbolg tribe (the Stillpine) is affiliated with the Alliance, and the race as a whole is so Alliance-leaning that they were included as a "new race" in the APG with more traditional Alliance-friendly races - half elves and Wildhammer dwarves. The pandaren, however, are a solidly neutral faction.
 * Ps. If you wish to reply, do so on my talk page or on either of the above furbolg argument talk pages. ;)--

the count so far: (i mean sig, of course)
 * Furbolgs seem like a better candidate, the pandaren aren't even in-game.--Blayaden 00:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Pandaren: 2

Furbolg: 3

What other choices are there? 23:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Now you know Blayaden, to me your arguement sounds very one-sided. I suppose it's really what your opinion is. &#123;&#123;User:Mr.X8/Sig}} 22:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't want to start anything. Look at the bears and pandas!--Blayaden 00:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Alternatives
I was actually hoping for a more 'human' type of character, without it being human, of course. Actually, Giant would have been my choice, except that they are known for being troublemakers, not a very alliance-like attribute. Ogres would be another, yet, they are even stupider than giants, i think. Sort of thinking of them as human off-shoots, mutants, perhaps. But, at least, if we could keep the selection to a race that has a 'noble' bearing, which i don't see in the furbolgs, but seems to be evident in the Pandarens... however, their decidedly inhuman appearance leaves me wanting more. I'd rather not have a race of 'teddy-bears'. Neither a race of rabid bears, as the furbolgs seem to be. Odd that the choices are bears, hmm? We already have a sort of horde turn-coat, so we don't need another 'evil' race that became good, like demons or dragons or lizards or something. Rather, we need essentially a race that is not available. Or perhaps it is time for centaurs. Surely they can squeeze into those tight places and around corners? 21:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC) The Alliance doesn't have a single Horde like race in World of Warcraft and is currently extremely homogenous. Zarnks 21:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

WHAT IS THIS FOR? You say good races for the Alliance are Furbolgs, Pandaren, High elves, Ogres, Centaur... Titans?... Giants?... Then you vote on it. Is that for which one is your favorite or which one it will be? The favorite option is irrelevent, and we can not decide which one it will be. The civil war is off topic, though used metaphoricly it was OK. Ogres are not mutant humans and the Alliance is sadly homogenous.-- 01:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Not quite, the draenei have some very animal-like features especially in the legs, feet, cranium and tails. Sure females are pretty, but so are orc and troll females imo.Baggins 01:46, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Pandaren Experiments
"A reference to the pandaren in the Eastern Kingdoms, trying to prevent Illidan's blood elves from escaping Dalaran.(TFT)" Should be removed in the Pro-Alliance portion on the Pandaren for the race speculation becuase they appeared to it after Garithos said to unleash the experiments. Sairez


 * Actually pandarens are specifically not "experiments". First note that Pandaren were not part of the experiments seen in "Dungeons of Dalaran". Note that Alliance & Horde Compendium also mentions Pandaren in the Eastern Kingdoms, on the Alliance side as well. Infact if you watch the final wave, you can see Pandaren Brewmaster comes out of Alter of Kings (Hero Shrine), and Pandarens themselves come from Mercenary Camps. In other words they are not experiments. Experiments only originate from the Arcane Vaults in Garithos compound.


 * Mercenary camps around Garithos base were where Garithos was hiring mercenaries to do his bidding, and it should also be noted that there are other non-experiments (I.e alliance forces, mercenaries, and dragons) that are released after he says release the experiments, including Siege Engines, a mountain king, an archmage, more goblin zeppelins with goblin shredders, red dragons, centuar khans, as well as the pandarens. Baggins


 * In case people haven't checked from where various troops originate, I've spelled it out in Garithos' Elite Guard.Baggins 04:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh thx for clearing that up for me Sairez


 * Glad to help.Baggins 05:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Interesting and very observant. However, I wouldn't say that completely rules out the possibility of them being held prisoner. Julzwinfield 011:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I haven't heard of "imprisoned mercenaries", infact as far as I know mercenaries by definition are soldiers of fortune.

"one that serves merely for wages; especially : a soldier hired into foreign service"-Webster

If they were imprisoned and forced to fight then they then by definition would not be "mercenaries". However they were mercenaries according to the game itself, coming from mercenary camps. Mercenary camps being defined in the game where one can hire mercenary troops.

Besides as I said previously Horde & Alliance guide already specifically states they visiting Alliance cities and chose to help their friends fight on the side of the Alliance during the events of The Frozen Throne, in order to prevent blood elves from escaping. That doesn't sound anything like "imprisonement to me" if they are friends. Perhaps its a retcon or not, but who knows, but it sounds like that was Blizzard's intent on the matter. There is at least a retcon in that they joined of their own free will, not for profit as they were in TFT. They were no longer considered mercenaries.

In anycase only the basic pandarens are mercenaries, Alliance & Horde implies that it was the Pandaren Brewmasters that were the ones that chose to side with the Alliance out of friendship however, which is to explain the Pandaren Brewmaster coming out of the Alliance Altar of Kings, though not neccessarily the mercenary ones.

However, as I've said before while they may have friends in the Alliance, and a few friends in the horde, or both, all of them as a whole are completely neutral. One can see this is Blizzard's intent entirely for the species, as they remained neutral throughout the Role playing game, and Chen is completely neutral according to the TCG as well.Baggins 16:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Who has...
I just have a question, does anyone know who added that "Danes Race Ideas" to the article? He has also added a link to YTMND and some "Your Mom" category?

Dude,you did,User:Tomatketchup-- 19:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Well excuuuuuusssssseeeee meeee princess User:Tomatketchup


 * What "Danes Race Ideas" section? I can't see such a section there!-- K )  (talk) 20:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm humoured, but would ask that you don't post it on such articles in future :) 20:27, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Ketchup, you're an idiot. I like you. --

Thank you ;) Reason: I was bored lol User:Tomatketchup PS: Airiph, I maked so you could see your comment. Thank you for choosing Illidari Shampoo. DS

Ogres
Actually in Rise of the Horde ogres joined the old Horde very willingly. The bit about them being enslaved is only speculation by an orc scholar. Zarnks 23:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

No offense man, but you've said this on like 3 different talk pages, and... WE GET IT. Also. not all joined willingly.

Its very possible that some ogre tribes were forced. Clearly all ogres were not forced to join as the quote seems to imply. Zarnks 23:40, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. You should put in the ogre's article.


 * First off the scholar was actually Eitrigg. It should be pointed out that both Horde Player's Guide and Rise of the Horde were being written at the same time, Metzen was ultimately in charge of both. But he didn't do a good job of making sure both knew what was being written, and let both accounts slip through. HPG went alot into what Necrolytes were doing, and Golden conspiciously left them out, and only covered the history of the Warlocks (references to the necrolytes actually appear in The Burning Crusade). As a side note Rise of the Horde is also for the most part from the POV of history being told from the POV of Thrall and Drek'thar.


 * It might be related but Metzen mentioned when asked, that the novels are "mostly canon" they are of a lesser sort of canon to MMO and "other sources", at Gencon this year. To paraphrase from what I can remember, he mentioned that he more or less lets the authors have some leeway to write stories within their own creative style, and some freedom as to what goes on, even if they bend continuity. He mentioned that he may let continuity issues slip through into novels, just as long as they fit the flavor of Warcraft. However apparently he is not obligated to follow them to the letter, although he often tries to keep some consistency between them. But essentially his point was that not everything in novels are to be taken at face value and Blizzard plays it "ear by ear", as far as what info gets referenced in the "MMO and other sources" in the ultimate canon.


 * What does this mean for WoWWiki? Well we have no idea what internal "ultimate canon" is in Blizzard itself. Nor do we know how much in Rise of the Horde was what Blizzard and Metzen told her to write, and how much is her own creative "spin". This more or less means we have to treat all the sources at equal face value, and point out they are just alternate POV by different authors (that is not all new versions of events may be 'retcons'), that Blizzard authorized. But they may not necessarily be ultimate version of the events as kept in the so called "bible" of lore at Blizzard studios. It may also explain why in-game books were not updated. It also explains why there are inconsistencies between the books and references in the MMO. But basically the only true "retcons" would be if the MMO changes history itself. What occurs in the novels may actually be the author's "spin", or "flavor lore", what have you, and not necessarily a retcon, or the trueist version of the events.


 * On the related issue, he also said the upcoming comics are canon (he didn't specify as to how much, with any qualifiers like "mostly" or what not) but we also know much like the novels, they were given some leeway as far details, they didn't have to follow everything 100%, as long as the story is good, and they preserve the integrity of the universe (in this context the them rather than nit-picky level of continuity).
 * In the end its a pretty tricky issue.Baggins 16:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright whoever deleted my comment. That is cited in Rise of the Horde and needs a mention. Zarnks 04:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

If there are no objections I wll add this back in. Zarnks 19:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Add what back in exactly?Baggins 19:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The part about ogres joining willingly in ROTH. Zarnks 19:26, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I added the part that a clan or two joined willingly after being freed from the Gronn. Actually its rather unclear which clan/s that joined. We only know of that one group by the gronn cave in the blade edge mountains. Most ogres were enslaved however, according to most sources of lore.Baggins 20:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Keepers of the grove
Do we really need this guys? They're just an extension of the night elf race. Zarnks 05:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, though they are a cool race, it just would be like adding high elves, to much like an existing class in both lore, building, class, and ability.Rannulf 23:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

So is anyone for keeping this guys? Zarnks 23:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Again, they will not be removed until we have heard all sides, and have a majority deciding it will be removed. In which case the admin staff will remove it.


 * Personally I'd have them removed for other reasons than your above opinion that they are an "extension of the night elf race", such as the fact they fall outside standard humanoids. They are fey in lore, and have more than 2 legs. I'd probably remove centaur for the same "more than 2 legs" thing as well.Baggins 00:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with Baggins that they aren't "an extension of the night elf race", and that they need to be removed for having more than 2 legs. Zakolj 19:54, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thats four delete votes so far. Zarnks 03:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * You know I was just thinking, they made darkspear trolls and gnomes more or less extensions of orc and dwarven races considering they lack their own major cities, and rely heavily on latter race's hospitality and resources. I vote we remove them from the game ;).


 * Humor aside, I wonder what Vorbis or Kirkburn's thoughts on this issue are.Baggins 03:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Trolls and gnomes have distinct cultures and classes. They don't have cities because of lack of time. Keeper of the groves have the same culture and classes as night elves. Zarnks 04:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually there is more implication that night elves learned their culture and classes from Cenarius, the Keepers and dryads, rather than the other way around. That is the night elves are an extension to Cenarius' culture rather than coming up with it on their own. They learned most everything from him and his children.


 * The Highborne were actually the ones that created an advanced culture, that went beyond what Cenarius and his childrent taught, but most of that was destroyed or evolved into current high elven culture. Also there seems to be more to dryads as we know know they are behind something called a "Dryad shrine" so apparently they do have artistical and structural designs of their own.


 * Also beyond that, you are moving really into speculation territory, spouting your opinion one that isn't necessarily supported by lore, as there isn't enough know exactly details to substantiate your claims.


 * As for classes, actually alot races share the same classes, that's hardly an issue as far as mechanics go. All they have to do is choose a balance of classes.


 * The fact remains the way the implemented gnomes and darkspear they mainly work as extensions to orcs and dwarves, sharing the same starting areas, quests, and major city. They could easily do the same thing for cenarius children, if they were implemented at all.Baggins 05:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

They have look exactly like night elves from the upper body. They have the exact same classes(it doesn't matter who taught who). In world of warcraft there aren't any two other races that share the same exact class set like the Keepers. They're another elf race. Overall their archeitecture is the same as the night elves. Finally they aren't a race but a bunch of forest spriits. They wouldn't be added to the game any more then fel orcs or lost ones. If keepers were added I guarantee it would start an uproar.

The Reason trolls and gnomes have the share cities. Is because Blizzard didn't have enough time to implent capital cities for them. They do have their own smaller cities with unique architecture unlike the Keepers of the groves. Zarnks 06:21, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually gnomes and dwarves tend to share the same structures, although there is definitely a gnome and dwarf style. But both races utilize those structures. The same occurs for trolls to some extent. Again blizzard cheaped out on the issue really, They could do it again if they needed to save time. If they made short cuts to save time in the past, they can do it again. The fact remains how they implemented the races, left them essentially extenstions to other races in their areas.


 * Actually we don't know enough about the "Children" and "Night Elves" to know which particulary buildings are night elf design and which ones are the Children's designs. That makes too many assumptionson to assume that its all "night elf" or all "children". Apparently "dryad shrines" is an example of dryad architecture.


 * Also the children are actually a race. For example, "Remulos...the father of the dryad race...".


 * I'm not sure what you are trying to get with your claim that they are "nature spirits", and not a "race". Fey does not equate to "nature spirit", fey is actually a specialized humanoid form. They are infact humanoids in game as well.


 * BTW, the new dryads do not look "night elf"-like anymore, nor do they look high elf like either.


 * As for classes, actually they are open to most of the known classes in the rpg with the exception of a few horde specific ones, and overly arcane types (that is they share classes with alot of races, not just night elves). Actually they could take on most of the classes in the MMO game as well, with the exception of warlocks, or paladins, really. They could easily handle the warrior, hunter, priest, shaman, druid, rogue, etc (apparently there are even dryad mages, strangely enough...). But um actually that pretty much covers all the classes in the game, shared by most of the races in the game. The classes in game are limited, sure there is going to be overlap, all the current races in game have overlap. Its the limits to the game's mechanics as they currently exist in game, because there are only so many diffrent classes in the game.Baggins 06:54, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I would be wary of removing the dryads from the list until we see what Wrath of the Lich King has in store for them. The fact that new un-nightelfish models are appearing for them in the expansion leads me to believe there may well be other developments; possibly new lore and even unique architecture. Nevertheless, as another race with an elf-like appearance and culture and with numerous technicalities stacked against them, I won't grumble if a decision is made not to keep the Keepers. ^^ --

Surprised this is being seriously discussed. I's a page for race ideas that lists why a race could happen and why it can't. Everything is clearly marked as being fan speculation and nothing is saying blizzard must or will implement these races. As long as the reasons for it not being implemented are clearly stated theres no reason for it to be removed. Even bipedal game mechanics aren't the absolute end-all. At the end of the day they are not the same race. Yes very similar cultures, appearances, lore, etc. But when it comes down to it they are a different race. Removing them kinda defeats the purpose for this page.Warthok 07:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Warthok some good points, but actually the article is more than just "fan speculation" or anything could be listed. Read the rules at the start of the article please.Baggins 07:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * too much junk to wade through, i mean, Nathrezim ??? delete the bs


 * This race (cenarian) is like high-elves, a race not meant to be played as a player character. Maybe if you choose centaur and get to level 100 and complete some sacrificial super quest you could become a cenarian, same for elves --> high-elves.  Perhaps when WoW 6.0 comes out.  ie - never... delete, not a possible pc race.  'nuff said   19:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you brought up centaurs, centaurs are just as bad as the cenarion children, only difference they have human body tacked onto a horse's ass so to speak.Baggins 19:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Also if we followed your train of thought, then blood elves should never have been playable as they are more or less derived from high elves and night elves. Yet they became playable, and look almost exactly the same as high elves except a few cosmetic differences. So players are kinda playing high elves in a way.Baggins 19:51, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * the point of the difference is that the races people want to play, but cant, are 'mentor' races, or guiding races, or guardian races, whatever... they are 'above' the level of the playable race, who starts out as a little whelp and grows into herohood. High elves, and cenarians, are like the Kennedys... they are born into Camelot, while the rest of us have to work for it.  Kind of like saying Demons should be a playable race... come on!   19:56, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually high elves are on the bottom of the totem pole now they have lost their homes to the blood elves (who still hold the "camelot"), they are fewer in number than blood elves, and they are mistrusted by many of the races because of blood elves. The blood elves are the true "Kennedys" if we used your logic, and they have become playable. AS for the cenariosn we really don't know enough about them to know if they were "rich people born into rich homes". There is very little lore on them. However they are more or less the same thing as the centaur just a different skin, all three make up the the cenarion children according to lore actually.Baggins 20:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * rediculous... the high elves are high, the blood elves are bloody, they stole the home of the high elves... where is your focus? cenarions are 'children of cenarius'.. centaurs are just centaurs... you have no perspective.   20:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Wow someone doesn't know the lore, the blood elves are the high elves they didn't steal the high elven land, they just became blood elves, 90% of the high elves to be exact changed their culture into the blood elf culture, and the system was started by King of elves even, Kael'Thas. The centaur are Children of Cenarius as well, just the bastard black sheep of the family, "Night elves claim that centaur are the bastard children of the demigod Cenarius. Cenarius bore three children: the centaur, the dryad and the keeper of the grove. Like all of Cenarius’s children, centaur favor druidism over other divine arts." . All three are his children, but the keepers and dryads are "Cenarius’ favored children"


 * If you are going to use lore to support your arguements are just plain don't know the lore, don't try to argue please... Btw, flaming comments, like "no focus, or no focus", or "rediculous" will get you no where, especially if you don't know the official lore..Baggins 20:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * thats fine... don't much care... but you said 90%, so 10% are still high-elves? Are you saying that they are both 'high' and 'blood'?  Seems like they lost something to me.  How does that make it ok to now play high-elves?  And how does that make it ok to play Cenarians?  So how does the difference between centaurs and cenarians jibe with high-elves and night-elves?  What if cenarians decided to become cannibals?  Would that make it ok to play them as a race?  Forsaken are cannibals.  Can you not understand the difference between high and low?  You seem twisted, like the blood-elves.  You want to twist the cenarians?   20:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Randomly stating irrelevant stuff isn't actually discussing the subject at hand. 20:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * First off, if you continue to flame, and say call people things like "twisted" we may have to take action and ban you. Insults are not allowed.


 * Secondly you don't seem to be knowledgable about the lore the blood elves are a culture that arose out of high elves.


 * Let me bring up an analogy. Its sort of like how England's angelican church arose out of previous catholic culture by the king's of england's degree. Just like in england not everyone went along with the king's degree, and many remained catholic. So there are still high elves, they don't like to associate with the blood elves. You read the Elven, blood elves and high elves articles as you seem to be clueless on the history behind them. Yes, I'd say High/Blood/Highborn elves lost something they lost Kalimdor way back win. The majority took troll lands after being banished from their original land, and they lost that new land to the scourge during the Third War. After most of the race became blood elves, the blood elves later were able to retake their lands back, and are in the state they currently are in.


 * Next off please add a citatio to the term "cenarion" as far as I can tell it doesn't exist officially. Secondly, the lore states that centaurs, keepers of the grove, and dryads are all children of cenarius, the dryads and keepers just happen to be his favored children. I suggest you read the Children of Cenarius, Centaur, Keeper of the Grove and Dryad articles and learn the history behind them.


 * Like kirkburn said you are starting to spout alot of gibberish and irrelvant stuff hardly helps your argument or discussing the subject at hand. Again official lore trumps all speculation. Your what-ifs are all very irrelevent.Baggins 21:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Kolkar being a red point and Tuskarr being lightr green for the Horde.
Wait was wrong with my edits. Why aren't the tuskarr point light green. They are actually allied with the Horde or part of it. I say thats definetly more of a green point then a lot of other green points. Kolkar isn't any more of a red point then the Alliance fighting corrupted furblogs or Horde killing Bloodscalp. As Kolkar are hated by other centaur tribes. Centaur are one of the most divided races in the game as all tribes hate each other's guts. If a tribe of centaur joined the Horde or the Alliance they would likely be more glad to hurt other centaur tribes. Zarnks 23:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Tuskarr info is still fairly unknown, and until Wrath is released confirming the details we cannot mark them a strong green yet, until we know more. We do not know how much of an "alliance" they have, if its just a treaty of the likes that the Reventusk have, then it would just make them towards horde, but not specifically Horde members. Once we get more confirmation then they can be upgraded or downgraded depending on the issue. Remember things still under speculation cannot be marked strong green.


 * As for corrupted furbolgs? They are actually considered a seperate race from regular furbolgs, they don't count when discussing the furbolg race. As for Bloodscalp, well the game already has playable Jungle trolls so they will not even be added to the list. As for kolkar, that info should probably be merged into one of the other sections as it is just general information.Baggins 00:12, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I've merged the Kolkar information into the information from the RPG that centaur race in general "are evil and sadistic creatures, and enemies of the Horde".Baggins 00:18, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thats much better. Zarnks 00:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Even if it is a treaty like the Revantusk it is still a light green pont. Zarnks 00:56, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * No a light green is only for actual strong members (or if a quote specifically states they are strongly alligned, or strongly alligned in the past (goblins for example were once strongly aligned)). If reventusk or say wildhammer were on the list they would not get "light green" because they are currently "neutral", only partially alligned to the alliance. The fact they haven't truly commited to their related faction lowers their color, as it is stated specifically they "aren't members" and that info would be cited.


 * A group like half-elves, or high elves would get "light green" as they are actual members, and that info is citeable.


 * Until we know more about Tuskarr and how much of the race as a whole alligned with the Horde, or how strongly they are alligned with the horde, it will remain dark green. Technically it could be demoted to ? as the game hasn't been released, and current released info has Kaskalla as an "independent" city.Baggins 01:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)