Which lore should be used ?

Role-play forum section.

Re: Which lore should be used ?

by Knetik » Sun Mar 01, 2015 1:52 pm

Joseph wrote:- I think we should create our own lore and when I say our own lore I mean a team of people working together to create it. Though I understand that this may be an unreasonable idea, I just suggest it because I think it might be fun if we create something our own rather than staying with 10 year old lore.

If we do create our own lore then we have to explain why things are the way they are:
1. Factions, why are humans and night elves together?
2. History of provinces and kingdoms, why is Andorhal filled with undead?
3. In-game NPC factions like Argent Dawn, Zandalar tribe will probably have to stay the same since there is no way to alter that timeline. (This also involves faction leaders and faction representatives)

- Also I do not believe that lore should be at a standstill even if we do stay at 1.12 lore or 6.0 lore, more storyline should be created as the server progresses or else everyone will be frozen in time. If anything there should be a thread to discuss server-lore or something of the sort to keep players on track or know whats happening, like its a newspaper.

- This idea is just a suggestion and I realize its very incomplete and may be unreasonable.

However I also do like the idea of Role-Playing as your character that learns things through experience.


What you are describing is DnD. Host a DnD game, don't change WoW RP.
User avatar
Knetik
Senior Sergeant
Senior Sergeant
 

Re: Which lore should be used ?

by Joseph » Sun Mar 01, 2015 2:59 pm

Why do you have to be so rude about it? LIKE I SAID, it was just a suggestion, and I do not care if we don't use it.
User avatar
Joseph
Senior Sergeant
Senior Sergeant
 

Re: Which lore should be used ?

by Raktae » Mon Mar 09, 2015 2:17 pm

For lore that we, as characters, know or can find out about I would stick to the 1.12 version of events. As for the lore that should take precedence in being 'correct', we should use our brains and splice together the events up to 2.0 to fix up anything that might not make any sense in connecting to various portions of the game. Say, explaining Draenei as more advanced, we know that they're supposed to be highly intelligent and light-bound beings but the world has only seen the Broken and would view them as the standard Draenei. So a character that could manage to meet them, say one following after the Orc campaign into Outland, wouldn't understand that the Broken weren't the same Draenei we know to exist today assuming that they're in the Azeroth-gen of Orc and not one that would remember Draenor in its prime.

I definitely do not suggest throwing down "Custom" lore, as that will only make things even more confusing. Leave custom lore to guild relations and make calls on whether or not it fits the narrative on a case by case basis.
Image
User avatar
Raktae
Grunt
Grunt
 

Re: Which lore should be used ?

by Rheia » Thu Apr 09, 2015 8:27 pm

I haven't read all the thread but I can say with certainty I intend to ignore anything from future expansions because the new lore is in many cases tantamount to setting vandalism.

The Naaru altered the entire nature of the Human 'Light' away from how it had been presented in Warcraft II, Warcraft III -and- (Vanilla) World of Warcraft. Human heroes have always been badass Paladins and turning the Light into windchime-midichlorians silos was one of the worst changes in the lore so far.

Akin to a revelation that Elune is actually one of the Old Gods and actually hung around with kobalds who were these sexy anime mice-girls before they 'devolved' into what we see ingame
Rheia
Tester
 

Re: Which lore should be used ?

by WhiteGameWolf » Sat Apr 11, 2015 6:05 pm

I personally intend to roll with the new stuff. In the long run it doesn't hugely matter, almost all of the "retcons" or rewrites etc don't matter really since we don't actually know about those things yet. I think using lore up to a certain patch point will just become a little confusing eventually.
WhiteGameWolf
Private
Private
 

Re: Which lore should be used ?

by PaleRaven17 » Tue Apr 21, 2015 10:26 pm

Personally, I am playing in the period of time my character is in. We are currently four years after the Third War's end:
- The Legion and Undead are still a significant threat on Azeroth - holding wide swaths of land that could prove a detriment to all if these nefarious beings are left to their devices.

- The Twilight's Hammer is on a peculiar rise all over,

- The Elements are in a fit (with Ragnaros causin' trouble).

- The black dragon siblings: Onyxia and Nefarian, are still causing havoc for both the Alliance and Horde,
pitting them against one another (Which is at least how the Alliance/Horde war sparked, but we don't know that Lorewise)

-Nefarian's Dark Horde are rising in the Searing Gorge/Redridge area

-the Dark Irons are in a civil war, as well as rising under their new master, Ragnaros.

-The Silithid are acting up, wreaking havoc from their Hives in southern Kalimdor (Feralas, Tanaris,
Un'goro, Silithis, some of Barrens (very small hives on the cusp of forming))

- The Troll Empire Remnants, Gurubashi and Farraki are on the rise from their cities (With the Gurubashi being the more deadly considering they are summoning the Blood God)

- The Naga terrorize the shores of Kalimdor/Eastern Kingdoms nearly endlessly

- The Bloodsails and pirates also unleash hell on Eastern Kalimdor/Southern Eastern Kingdoms

- Worgen tear up the Silverpine woods, giving the Forsaken and any Lordaeronian remnants in the area hell, under Arugal's control.

- The Scarlet Crusade, of course, are acting wildly (moreso than they used to) To that end, they are now a threat to be watched, but are not really a major threat to the anyone unless they make their way into the Plaguelands.

- The Defias Brotherhood cling to their gorilla warfare tactics in Westfall/Elwynn/Dustwallow (I think that lore had the Defias located in Dustwallow as well, I forget) - these tactics cause disarray in the Alliance military.

- The Horde have to contend with the Burning Blade demon worshippers, who have recruited beyond their traditional orcish following and expanded to encompass all who would accept and aid in summoning their demon overlords - the majority of the Blade is located in Kalimdor at this time - even utilizing the Ragefire Chasm beneath Orgrimmar to meet their nefarious goals.

(Let me know if I've missed any issues in this period of time in WoW History - Again, I chose to RP my character/guild in this time period as if it were the past, unaware entirely of what the future will bring, future expansions included - feel free to contribute as you see fit C:)
Dilan - Paladin
Captain of the <Argent Hammer>
PaleRaven17
Tester
 

Re: Which lore should be used ?

by PaleRaven17 » Tue Apr 21, 2015 10:37 pm

TheLockKing wrote:
Keldan wrote:
Shadow wrote:Just stick to the lore that is available at the current timeline and you'll be fine. As for orcs being green, the Blackrock Clan from the mountain could prove you otherwise. Though I don't think you'll live much longer after you see their skin up close.


At the time we thought they gained a darkish skin because they lived too much time beneath Blackrock Spire. This made sense at the time for numerous reasons :
- Before 1.11.1, all orcs were green, including Blackrock orcs. Remaining green orcs could be seen in Redridge Mountains. This was fixed with TBC I think, where they tried to be a little bit more coherent as they introduced brand new brown orcs. Note that Saurfang is still green, however.
Why they changed the color : previously, the Blackrock clan was mainly in Alliance areas. Now, the Horde would fight them in BWL. They wanted a visual difference between friendly orcs (green) and bad orcs (black).
- In previous games all orcs were green. Especially BR ones as they were the main protagonists in WC1&2.
- Before the novel Rise of the Horde released shortly before Burning Crusade, the Blackrock, Dragonmaw (and others I think) were said to be formed AFTER the orcs crossed into Azeroth and joined the Blackrock Spire. So thinking they were a "subrace" would have been nonsense.

I guess the current lore but at the 1.12 point in time is the easiest choice.


Actually... >.> they weren't.
Grom Hellscream was a red orc (WC3 model significantly darker color from Thrall and darkens a bit more when the drinks the Chaos Well) after he'd drank the Blood of Mannoroth.And from the wiki:

"A Blood Curse, also known as the Blood Pact, is when an orc or group of orcs consume the demonic blood of a powerful pit lord to gain supernatural strength, speed, resilience and stamina. The effects as well as side effects are immediate, and the symptoms that manifest from blood consumption are green skin, glowing red eyes and a considerable increase in size. Further exposure and physical change cause the skin to turn red, a greater increase in body mass, green/purple eyes, extra tusks and bone growth that breaks the skin."

Green orcs exist because of the Blood Curse and basically make all children of the drinkers (and their children, and so on) green as well. One small exception is... The Frostwolf Clan. Yep. Thrall is green, yet his father and mother didn't drink the Blood, nor did he. The Frostwolf Clan was unfortunately situated VERY close to Hellfire Citadel and its overabundant Fel Energy during the building of the Dark Portal and prior to the Invasion of Azeroth. So they were eventually tainted with green without being affected by the Curse.

Saurfang the Older (Varok) is green because he drank the Blood. Saurfang the Younger (Varok's son, Dranosh) is brown because he was too young at the time and is chillin in Nagrand.. or Mag'har.. one of the two. ALSO ImageImage

Ner'zhul from WC2 and WoW. Brown, and it makes sense.. he was the one who warned Durotan about the Blood.

Also. The Blackrock clan was around before they entered Azeroth, as Blackhand (The Destroyer, not Rend Blackhand) was Gul'dan's puppet leader of the Horde during and before the First War (Detailed in WC1). They took Blackrock Mountain later on as tribute to both themselves and their home.

Orcs from different clans do have different features, but it's not a "subrace" but more along the lines of ethnicities. Blackrock orcs are usually gray, Dragonmaw are a light purpleish-gray, and the other clans were originally various shades of brown.

Orcs know this. Non-orcs almost certainly don't since its not a part of their history.



I'd argue that people in neutral organizations such as the Cenarion Circle, Earthen Ring, and Argent Dawn would know more, or even entirely the history of the Orcs considering they all utilize Orcish, or have members that were/are friends, or even researched Orcish history prior to coming into contact with these factions. To that end - that would most likely be Ex-Horde members (though it is not limited to Ex-Horde affiliated with those factions).
Dilan - Paladin
Captain of the <Argent Hammer>
PaleRaven17
Tester
 

Re: Which lore should be used ?

by SonOfDad » Fri May 01, 2015 1:31 am

Keldan wrote:With the perspective of writing fictions and/or role playing on an older version of World of Warcraft, an interesting question appears : which version of the lore should be used ? What should be canon ?

We have several options.



- Illidan is presumed dead. The Blood Elves are in Outland and no one knows really what happened after that (TFT). Quel'thalas is ruined by the Scourge.

- No draenei & Draenor retcons : the draenei are native from the mushroom covered world of Draenor (which is also know as the Red World), they is only one version of them (the ugly one). They built crude cities within the world's towering cliffs and peaks. They have no links with the Eredar. The Eredar (along with the Nathrezims) corrupted Sargeras, not the opposite.

- Dragons usually kills you at sight. Not many exceptions. They are not your f*cking friends, they are big lizards who don't care about your little mortal life.


What do you think ?


Illidan is not presumed dead, see http://db.vanillagaming.org/?object=175759

What are the ugly one u talk about? Do you mean the lost one?
U should read: http://db.vanillagaming.org/?object=175724
We can assume that the indigenous race are the draenei. They become corrupted and u get the lost ones.
It also says that Sargeras was corrupted by the Natherezim, not the eredar ("Sargeras defeated the Nathrezim easily, but their corruption affected him deeply.").


As far as dragons go; dont forget about chromie.

There is more than enough lore in game wihtout having to make shit up.
SonOfDad
Private
Private
 

Re: Which lore should be used ?

by Cultist » Thu May 14, 2015 12:18 pm

Just to echo some other posters: While it's important to have a consensus on the position of the lore timeline I think a lot of roleplayers get very caught up in it without considering how much of it their characters actually know, and how much of that knowledge is actually the real version of events. There's nothing that irks me more than IC know-it-alls who have apparently gained access to an in-game retrospective lore manual.

I bet the Alliance does a lot of censoring and other damage control to stop its horrendously beleaguered populace from losing all hope. Sharing a tale or two with the locals about the horrors of the plaguelands and the citizens of the Alliance now called the Forsaken would surely incite unrest. In this respect, maintaining lore inconsistencies and skewed versions of canon events is probably a more authentic and entertaining approach.
Cultist
Tester
 

Previous

Return to Role Play