People who have any ideas or thoughts for Broxigar, Rhonin or Krasus please post here [Archive]

rudynoname

07-01-05, 02:42 PM

I think they meant the first recored half elf conception of twins. ill have to double check.

as for having an effect, well its extremely unlikely the effects would conviently not even surface until after warcraft 3. the entire story would be effect ever since the events occoured to the present day azeroth. theyve already guaranted it would change things in the future but possibly it changed things to how they happened in the games we played. we never knew Hakkar died in the third war, we didn't know about it till we read the book. maybe because he was killed earlier the hstory happened as we know it. though im going to have to check the whole troll worship events to doublecheck times.

And Knaak was writing this book in 2003 i believe. at that point warcraft 3 was out and was going off the really simplified history. knaak afterwards came in and wrote te detailed history where brox was added. Chris and Knaak may have planed it that way in advance but its doubtful. also brox and cenarius never fought didnt they.

rudynoname

07-01-05, 02:46 PM

sorry for double post. the edit button didn't work till just now

yea checked. knaak goofed. oh well it happens.

oh and Hell's the book takes place after the events of RoC, not nessesarly TFT. we dont really have enough information to base when exactly the present day part of the book takes place. the book was being written about the same time frozen thrne was released. honestly it could start after the events of TFT but its also likely it start before those events.

Reign of Kalos

07-01-05, 02:47 PM

Wrong. The beginning of the book happens after the frozen throne. basically, it's a story of the future. It's not about the plot of warcraft3, instead, it's an independent story of how warcraft4, or more accurately the future of warcraft after the events in RoC and tFt might turn out. As a result, it does not interfere with the wc3 plot and therefore, rather contradicts your claim that the author is ' an enormous idiot with the warcraft III plot', since he isn't writing anything that actually affects the plot.

I know that this time-meddling stuff should have an impact on the warcraft plot since it does happen way way way in the past, but for now in the book the time-travelling stuff happens in the future and therefore any history-altering also happens in the future, after arthas ascended the frozen throne.
Not the warcraft III plot, the warcraft lore in general. He is claiming for example, that Rhonin and Vereesa are having a baby, the first half elf in existence. However, the actual creator of the game background, the actual world storyline, Chris Metzen, has written about others before then. Knaak messed up there, a big screw up. Don't tell me he is somehow correct. Knaak writes things that go against the lore in places, so he does indeed mess up the warcraft world.

All we can say for certain is that the book is written (time scale wise) after warcraft 2 BTDP. I would hazard a guess and say just after the events of tft, but theoritically it could be right in the middle of it, or earlier still.

rudynoname

07-01-05, 03:00 PM

Ive noticed people aren't big fans of Knaak here. i know he does goof but honestly he doesn't do it that often and he gives us deatails we otherwise would not have known, and they are approved by Chris. Basicly its Blizzard sanctioned so ill consider any lore he gives Gold until otherwise stated in another source. i see no point in fighting his lore, rather better to embrace it. im sure some ppl here wont be too happy with that though.

TheNewHorde

07-01-05, 05:31 PM

I think you guys misunderstood what I meant. I mean something like this:

In a movie I once seen, there was this weird scientist believe in time travel. He found a time portal at the Brooklin Bridge, he jumped. And he got back to 1776, (or 1876) and he met this count who followed him to the future. And he got into a series of unfortunate events, so he stays in the hospital for weeks. And the count lived in his house and went down his apartment and meet this women, they fall in love and have a whole bunch of story. At the end, the sad dude got out of hospital, and he send back the count. He then got the photos he printed out, and in the photos, (which is the first time the dude went into the portal,) the woman who fall in love with the count in 2002 was in the picture behind the count of 1776. The scientist and the woman's brother realized that they didn't distroy the time order, it was already set. He was suppose to have the count come to 2002, and then, they showed the woman the picture. She realized what went on, so she jumped into the portal and got with the count at 1776. And it was then where the scientist first took the picture, which works out like a perfect circle.

Conclusion, going to the past didn't mess up the time, because they were SUPPOSE to travel back in time, they were in the past for the first time. But history didn't record it because it was too long ago. I know the storyline is planned later, but I think this is what Knaax is planning to do, he is trying to show that the world of warcraft is a 4 dimensioned world.

Reign of Kalos

07-01-05, 05:51 PM

But how does the theories of predestinantion, that life is on the rails, fixed and you can't change it tag into this? We honestly worked that out, but we don't get what you're trying to say here. That Krasus went out of his way to spill the beans on a future that hasn't happened yet, in over to maintain causality? Yes I agree it would work as a possibility, but how does that relate to time being the fourth dimension? It hasn't gotten anything is common with the first three. They measure the size of any 3D object in this reality, all three make up the three dimensions of shapes. The fourth, time, that you are suggesting, doesn't really link up to it. Time isn't a measurement on the same sort of scale. I suppose one could see it as a dimension, but calling it the fourth is a bit misleading as it doesn't link to the first three. Better to count it as seperate. If time can be factored in as the fourth dimension, you'll have to factor in things like gravity being the fifth and so forth.That's if you're running by the dimensions being effective in a real time enviroment.

Kingcrazygenius

07-01-05, 05:59 PM

Time is Nozdormu's thing, not Korialstrasz's.

I personally favor the idea that in the end the events in the Well of Eternity series will have no affect on the events of the universe, except that they kept them from being truely ****ed up.

Of course anyone who fails to make Aszhara kick 700% ass is a failure in my book.

Rowan Seven

07-01-05, 06:29 PM

Ive noticed people aren't big fans of Knaak here. i know he does goof but honestly he doesn't do it that often and he gives us deatails we otherwise would not have known, and they are approved by Chris.

True. While I plan on reserving final judgment on the "War on the Ancients" trilogy until I've read the third installment, I don't think we can solely blame Knaak for the continuity problems. One would hope that editors would catch and correct storyline errors, but, for whatever reason, this doesn't seem to be the case with several Blizzard-related products. The Warcraft RPG books share this fault. Although they're often a wealth of information, they too usually contain several storyline contradictions and mistakes.

TheNewHorde

08-01-05, 12:01 AM

Like many other time travel stories, I believe that the story goes as the dude is at the past and instead of change, it makes it into the future. As for how did they got there in the first place? well, that's something else entirely, because it's just the way fiction story goes. If something like that really exists, then the world theories would be completely different.

isildur21

08-01-05, 01:38 AM

the whole half elf thing contradicts itself.....finnal goldsword is literary proof for that....also Cenarius couldn't have probably fought Orcs before...so he was referring to the Legion as a whole....in the wc handbook they mentioned that mannoroth may be the original source of the orcs' bloodlust....this is confirmed later by the Orc warchiefs drinking the guy's blood....so we could expect an apocalyptic battle between mannoroth and cenaruis....also i notice azshara has quite a small role which further contradicts the storyline in the ne campaign...all in all i think knaak made a little error which turned out to contradict the whole storyline.....

Diskordjah

08-01-05, 05:49 AM

time travel pissed me off.

see, if Rhonin plays such a crucial part that the war couldnt have been won without him, then the legion would have won originally. if the legion would originally have won, the High Borne wouldnt have founded quelthalas, and that means that Dalaran would never have been founded. without Dalaran, Rhonin wouldnt have been who he was, and therefore, when the time anomaly first show up, not the person who COULD play the crucial part.

paradoxes pisses me off too.

TheNewHorde

08-01-05, 08:26 AM

This is what I meant. There is no such thing as the first time, this is what you need to get through ur head. IT IS A CIRCLE, THERE IS NO FIRST TIME. This is just the way fiction stories goes. Now, these are just fiction, don't think too much on it. :y-curtain :y-curtain :y-curtain :y-curtain

Reign of Kalos

08-01-05, 08:50 AM

But what set that circle in motion to begin with? That is the definition of a time paradox, a loop in time. with no apparent ending or starting other than destiny as an explaination.

Personally I think the explaination behind linear time is a little sketchy anyway. Time is a constant, not a variable.

And don't tell us it's just fiction when we actually make a good point. That's a weak mans way out of dodging out. That explaination that "it's all fiction" could be used to explain practically everything in the lore. It's simply not acceptable as an answer on this forum, at least to those of us who want an intelligent debate.

rudynoname

08-01-05, 02:45 PM

Knaak also originaly had dwrven females with beards. problem is things change and were not going to be sure until later on. even Chris isnt perfect and contradict himselff. the half elf thing was obviously a goof. and we havent seen the full extent of azshara's involvement. at least he's meantioned shes not a figurehead and hopefully he is saving her for sundering. his mistakes are small and hardly stroyline contradictionary. thats overexaggerating.

Kingcrazygenius

08-01-05, 03:54 PM

Rhonin's involvement with the War of the Ancients is like Crono's involvement in Chrono Trigger. All the things that he did happened without him doing them, but since he traveled time it was he and his friends who did them. Originally Ayla alone defeated the Black Tyranno, but Crono appeared so he and another helped. Frog defeated Magus, but when Crono appeared Crono and Frog did it.

You see? Rhonin wasn't always the crucial figure in the past, but because he travelled into the past he became the crucial figure he now is.

TheNewHorde

08-01-05, 09:31 PM

Ummm..... totally confused.....
Intelligent debate?!? I'll show you a intelligent debate!
The pokemon phyduck and slowpoke chats about who have more mental powers.

Phyduck: Phy?
Slowpoke:Slowwwpoke.
Phyduck: Phy? Phyaaaduck!
Slowpoke:Slowwwppppooookkkkee.
Phyduck: Phyduck!!! Phyphyphyduck!
Slowpoke:Slowyyyyyypoke.

Then a pikacu comes in a zap them both to death. How's that for an intelligent debate?

Nephalim

08-01-05, 09:40 PM

I tend to take two steps into a Knaak-related thread before referencing the promiscuity of his mother and questioning the legitimacy of his birth.

Now, violating canon is certainly not a plus. I can forgive minor details. I'm a Warcraft nut and know pretty much everything one can possibly know (discounting World, of course) but I understand this, and that not everyone is so closely concerned with every detail as I am. I'm not trying to blow my own horn or rebuke everyone else, I'm just saying.

Yes, the half-elf thing could've been handled better. Yes, the portal could very easily be in the Well of Eternity. But these don't really matter in the end, and I could forgive it if it was that alone. What ultimately matters is the story, and the characters. And this is where my real problems lie. Knaak has demonstrated repeatedly that he doesn't understand the characters he's using, and perhaps in an effort to conceal this, he makes the story all about the characters he created. This worked fine in Day of the Dragon when the story was being run entirely by original characters, but this falls apart in the War of the Ancients, when he's using major, well-established characters, in major, well-established events. That, and he ignores fundamental philosophies that have made Warcraft so unique and rich. I'm specifically referring to magic addiction, which has been completely ignored in War of the Ancients. The resistance has a line of sorcerers, and Illidan is first among them, whereas we learned before that Tyrande was helping Illidan deal with his magic addiction, and that Malfurion knew that it was the reckless use of the arcane that was the source of the trouble since the beginning. This is a crucial detail. with it no longer a factor, Illidan's betrayal is over jealousy, which makes his character extremely, well, stupid. I'm not even remotely an Illidan fan but I give him more credit than Knaak has.

rudynoname

09-01-05, 12:02 AM

Things can be rewritten and reconsidered. Chrs Metzen has approved of these ideas and thus unless another newer and more reliable piece of offiical information counters it (such as Finnall) then it is solid gold as a piece of lore whether we personnely like it or not. I wish things hadn't exactly as Knaak wrote but he is the official source, not my own opinions and biases. i am also a warcraft nut as you know and have devoured every detailed, placed it to memory and tried to keep it as fresh as possible. so i have no more problem using his books are actual information as anything else published about the story. And knaak is just trying to make the story realistic. It really is not incredibly hard to believe that Illidan would use his magic to help his brother and Tyrande's cause. now at last he has turned. Chris wrote a brief sumary of the events earlier which was shown to us in the warcraft 3 manual, and it seems many people were hopuing Knaak would do no more than take those few paragraphs and add in all the details, which is absurb. he is supposed to create a vivid story which depicts the history, he has done this and even given the characters more than 1 dimension, as true stories and characters would have. Chris has rewriten the story many times and many interactions in World come directly from his work. I give knaak all the credit for writing a good believeable story and a rich history. a few small mistakes do not matter and chris has made them himself. until Chris says himself Knaak screwed up here and that goes completely against what warcraft is about, I'll consider Knaak's books gold.

Lord Kil'jaeden

09-01-05, 10:25 AM

You can see it another way.

You knew the legends about the War of the Ancients, and now you know the reality of this long past events.
The legends are the story about long past events, that are told from genretions to generations, but often at the end the story can have been so much modified by the time that the legends resulting can be very different from the reality of the prime event.

In the legend, Azshara was the personnification of the powerfull Queen, which authority was supreme.
While the reality show her as an insignificant person mostly without susbtance.

In the legend, Illidan betrayal was told to be related to his addiction to magic, so in some ways, it was said that is was not only his own fault as this kind of magic is an external item provided by the Neither, and so you could take him in pity.
But in reality , it is the jealousy that finally led him to betray his brothers, showing that the fault is entirely his own and not caused by the external power of the Neither magic.

So , and as rudynoname said, unless Chris Metzen states suddenly that the books about War of the Ancient are just an error, you have to assume that what you knew before it , with the Warcraft 3 lore, was just the result of the legend going over the long time of the history, and so is different from the reality told in Richard Knaac books.

History rewriting and adjustements , even when it touched really big events or characters, are a speciality of Blizzard, so there is nothing new to worry about.

Nephalim

09-01-05, 11:41 AM

This is all sort of true, I'll admit, but the biggest support in my corner is Shadows and Light, which is a newer source than the War of the Ancients, and we know for a fact that the Blizzard team was actively involved in it, and several details in it wholly disagree with what the War of the Ancients said.

To simply say that Metzen approved it doesn't do it for me, because I don't know what he approved. The final cut? The first draft? The pitch? I don't know enough about the situation to make an informed statement on his involvement.

The corrupting nature of the arcane is a huge theme in post-Reign of Chaos Warcraft and these books have yet to pay it any heed. Since all other sources agree with that philosophy SAVE War of the Ancients, I'm tempted to think that Knaak was not properly informed. So while, yes, it's an official source, one has to wonder about how much legitimacy we can look at it with if the author is simply not well-versed in the universe he's dealing with. Which, I would argue, he isn't, Blizzard stamp of approval or no.

Kingcrazygenius

09-01-05, 12:02 PM

Well either way at least the current Azshara is an all powerful sex goddess and magical font.

Lord Kil'jaeden

09-01-05, 03:47 PM

This is all sort of true, I'll admit, but the biggest support in my corner is Shadows and Light, which is a newer source than the War of the Ancients, and we know for a fact that the Blizzard team was actively involved in it, and several details in it wholly disagree with what the War of the Ancients said.

To simply say that Metzen approved it doesn't do it for me, because I don't know what he approved. The final cut? The first draft? The pitch? I don't know enough about the situation to make an informed statement on his involvement.

What would be interesting on the subject would be to know the date the informations available in the Shadow&Light were collected and put together , and when Knaack wrote his own story before making it to book stores.

Because knowing the dates of creation of those 2 source of Lore would be very helpfull to know who was not "up-to-date" in comparison with Blizzard decisions about the actual Lore status : Knaack or the writers of Shadow&Light ?
As it is always possible that the authors of Shadow&Light prepared their book a very long time ago before going in store enough to be at the same level of Knaack first writings about War of the Ancients
But how much of time , that is not yet known.

And so which of the Lore versions has the more actual Blizzard "stamp of approval" deciding what is considered now the true Lore ?

I guess World of Warcraft not yet discovered events would be the best answer to such questions.

TheNewHorde

09-01-05, 08:43 PM

Ok... I know I wasn't being a good sport. And I'm sorry, but few things wanna ask.
1. Who is this other half elf guy you were talking about?

2. Rudynoname said Hakkar die twice before, (not including War of Ancients) I never seen Hakkar in any of the WC3 levels, would you mind telling me where you seen he died?

3. Yeh, Kingcrazygenius, I totally agree. Azshara is definitely an all powerful sex godess. The descriptions Knaax used for her simply makes me hope to meet her in person, but I believe she is still virgin... cause that is probably the high borns were all dying to have her. It's like one of those you can see but you can't touch thingy...

Nephalim

09-01-05, 09:30 PM

Finnall Goldensword is the bastard daughter of Daelin Proudmoore and the Dalaran elf Kilnar Goldensword. And also, it's been previously established that while rare and socially ostrasized, half-elves are not entirely unheard of.

Hakkar is also the name of an Old God the jungle trolls of Stranglethorn worship. However, I don't believe this is supposed to be the same entity, and they just happen to have the same name.

Kingcrazygenius

09-01-05, 11:11 PM

3. Yeh, Kingcrazygenius, I totally agree. Azshara is definitely an all powerful sex godess. The descriptions Knaax used for her simply makes me hope to meet her in person, but I believe she is still virgin... cause that is probably the high borns were all dying to have her. It's like one of those you can see but you can't touch thingy...

You realize she is currently a giant tentacled Naga, correct?

Diskordjah

10-01-05, 01:01 PM

Kingcrazygenius

10-01-05, 01:18 PM

If Blizzard didn't want us to assume they are one in the same, they would have been given different names. It is the Windrunners. Why would they all be given that last name if they weren't supposed to be related?

Nephalim

10-01-05, 02:54 PM

If Blizzard didn't want us to assume they are one in the same, they would have been given different names Which begs the question of how much Blizzard had to do with it. You fight Hakkar, or an avatar of Hakkar, in World of Warcraft. The troll god Hakkar, and he looks nothing like his description.

Rowan Seven

10-01-05, 03:26 PM

What would be interesting on the subject would be to know the date the informations available in the Shadow&Light were collected and put together , and when Knaack wrote his own story before making it to book stores.

"Shadows & Light" was one of the books planned when the Warcraft RPG series was announced. If I remember correctly, Bob Fitch wrote the stats for Cairne, Thrall, Jaina, Tyrande, and Malfurion at the same time he created the stats for the 'villains' in "Manual of Monsters". The heroes, I think, were originally intended to be published in the "Alliance & Horde Compendium", but disagreements over how the books in the line should be set-up pushed them back to "Shadows & Light". The layout of the book was probably more or less finalized over a year ago, and I imagine active development on it started at least several months ago. With that said, though, the information the writers of the book used could and probably is older than that.

Which begs the question of how much Blizzard had to do with it. You fight Hakkar, or an avatar of Hakkar, in World of Warcraft. The troll god Hakkar, and he looks nothing like his description.

"Shadows & Light" does confirm some of what Knaak has written. It has write-ups of both Lord Xavius and Aviana (although, to me at least, the RPG Aviana seems somewhat different from the Aviana in "War of the Ancients").

Diskordjah

10-01-05, 07:33 PM

Which begs the question of how much Blizzard had to do with it. You fight Hakkar, or an avatar of Hakkar, in World of Warcraft. The troll god Hakkar, and he looks nothing like his description.

as described by Knaak, who you dont trust anyway, silly neph.

Nephalim

10-01-05, 09:28 PM

as described by Knaak, who you dont trust anyway, silly neph.Touché
"Shadows & Light" does confirm some of what Knaak has written. It has write-ups of both Lord Xavius and Aviana (although, to me at least, the RPG Aviana seems somewhat different from the Aviana in "War of the Ancients").Read the write-up for Lord Xavius, and the circumstances surrounding his death and transformation into a satyr not only differ dramatically from the War of the Ancients' account, but also corroborates the original story of the portal being within the Well of Eternity itself. (On a side note, this leads me to doubt that Xavius was originally concieved by Knaak.)

rudynoname

11-01-05, 05:30 AM

Neph made a good point about the most recent source. if shadows and light is more recent then thats the source to go off of, though at the time knakk wrote his story it was accurate however. i think knaak only recently wrote demon soul however ( i mean shortly before publishing and shadows may have been written out a while ago. or not. whose knows. we may be better informed in the 2nd warcraft rpg

as far as hakkar. well its true it may not be one and the same but i doubt they would make 2 recent characters with the same name. and for those keeping track he has dies trice. and by died i mean....well yea it really probably doesn't mean much

1) in war of ancients with malfurion etc....u all read that scene. maybe him, maybe not, maybe avatar, maybe true self, maybe killed, maybe not.

2) with the troll rebellion. they killed his avatar or whatever

3) in the third war (reign of choas, etc...) though we never knew so maybe the story we know now is the modified story....or maybe not. maybe him, maybe not, maybe avatar, maybe true self, maybe killed, maybe not. etc.....

or maybe he was only killed/defeated once or twice because more than 1 of those might not be possible. maybe 2 and 3 are impossible if 1 happened, etc....i hate maybes. but we will just have to wait and see. damn every time a question is answered, 20 more pop out.

TheNewHorde

11-01-05, 07:18 PM

THIS IS THE HUGE PROBLEM I DON'T GET! What do you mean he was killed in WC3? He wasn't even in the campaign or novels of WC3!

rudynoname

11-01-05, 11:10 PM

calm down...breath in and out....okay now

well we never heard of him dying in the game or novels. it was simply stated in the book that he died during the third war. it wasn't meantioned anywhere else. so its possible he was killed and we just didnt hear and werent told about it. basicly we knew manaroth died and archimionde and ticondrius. hakker too, at that point he may not have been invented yet and they are just telling us that it did happen. so it happened it jsut wasnt in the campaign.

or maybe in this timeline it didn't happen. thats the whole problem with the time travel thingy.

Nephalim

12-01-05, 12:39 PM

though at the time knakk wrote his story it was accurate however.I'm sorry, but if what came before his story disagreed with it, and what came after disagreed with it, but what came after coincides with what came before, I'd have to argue that his story was never really accurate.

rudynoname

12-01-05, 01:21 PM

I have to disagree. even if the story beforehand and afterward disagree with it, at the time of its publication it was accurate. things change in warcraft, and they usualy change more than once. you know that

but we dont really know if any sources have come after it. its accurate until Chris himself says otherwise. and with the whole time travel thing involved. well maybe the third book will answer some questions.

TheNewHorde

12-01-05, 06:06 PM

Hakkar the great demon...... Ummmm.... Curious, very curious. I simply started the thread because I was curious, never expect to have REAL warcraft experts to decipher this time travel things.

Anyways, thanks for answering all my questions. But after all that was discussed, I stay with my original thought. Nozdurmu sends Krasus and Rhoin there because they were there at the first time, it just that this is a cycle that does not get broken. I believe they wouldn't change the time, they made the time the way it was. They were SUPPOSE to travel back in time and change it, which really didn't CHANGE it, but they SHAPED it to how it was suppose to be. All would be clear once everything is cleared, I believe Nozdormu was planning it all alone. I really am curious about how Knaax is going to end the story.

P.S. Crazykinggenius, no, I don't believe Azshara is a serpent, I believe she died in the Sundering when the well exploded. And the naga just makes statues worshipping her. Or another possibility is she suicide after seeing herself as an ugly serpent. Or she simply aged to death. Because naga is not like Night Elves, they do not have the world tree to support them to imortality. They don't have the Sun Well to make them live a long time like the high elves do. They are just twisted serpents who do not have the power to make them live forever.

Reign of Kalos

12-01-05, 06:43 PM

P.S. Crazykinggenius, no, I don't believe Azshara is a serpent, I believe she died in the Sundering when the well exploded. And the naga just makes statues worshipping her. Or another possibility is she suicide after seeing herself as an ugly serpent. Or she simply aged to death. Because naga is not like Night Elves, they do not have the world tree to support them to imortality. They don't have the Sun Well to make them live a long time like the high elves do. They are just twisted serpents who do not have the power to make them live forever.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought it was fact now that Azshara survived. I could be wrong of course, my sources aren't what they used to be three years ago.

Kingcrazygenius

12-01-05, 06:50 PM

She is most definately still alive, and listed as an eternal to boot. She even has a challenge level of 50 something.

Nephalim

12-01-05, 06:59 PM

All previous changes came from the same place. THIS came from someone who was not even remotely involved with the story of the game, and has little more than a rudimentary knowledge of them. Shadows and Light was worked on by people from Blizzard, not just "approved" by them, and it has facts which disagree with the War of the Ancients. Hell, several points of World of Warcraft disagree with it.

rudynoname

12-01-05, 07:38 PM

shes alive. very powerful as well.

Chris reviewed the book and set it forth as official warcraft lore. i know ur not a fan and are hoping knaak did his own thing, but its a safe bet chris poured over every inch of that book. now unless the time travel changes things or some sources later on confirm its wrong, it is true.

Kingcrazygenius

12-01-05, 09:05 PM

Maybe the characters in Warcraft are really just as shallow as Knaak shows them to be.

Nephalim

13-01-05, 10:21 AM

but its a safe bet chris poured over every inch of that book. I don't see why that's a safe bet at all. If that's true, then why wouldn't he have changed the half-elf thing, the amber eye thing, or other such inconsequential details? I have no indication of Metzen's, or anyone else's, involvement, save for Knaak saying that he "approved" it. But Metzen's the creative director at Blizzard so I don't know if simply signing the work order constitutes approving.

This isn't just because I didn't like the book. Fundamental themes are ignored, major characters are mangled, well-established events, supported by other work, is changed and not even remotely for the better. Blizzard doesn't just rewrite their lore for the hell of it, these changes have happened for reasons, but there's no justification for the changes Knaak makes save to hoist Rhonin and Krasus on pedestals.

rudynoname

13-01-05, 01:13 PM

Neph their are a few small errors. you know the book had to have been approved or otherwise knaak would have hundreds of inconsistancies and wouldn't have been even remontely close to our beloved story. a few small mistakes are a far fetch from mangling the warcraft lore. the major characters came across really well, and their actions make complete sense, as do their deamenors from how we know them in later times. well established events are changed but in order to create a better story. theyve been changed before for the other games, etc.....they have to be adjusted to a new game like RoC or tides of darkness, here it had to be adjusted for a book. but it was adjusted for the better. Knaak is not right some piece of fan fiction. this is an official warcraft source. knaak knows what he is doing, he is a great writer and as far as warcraft lore, second only to metzen.

Nephalim

13-01-05, 05:43 PM

he is a great writer and as far as warcraft lore, second only to metzen.All right, first of all, Metzen is not the sole man behind Warcraft, so there are a LOT of people in front of Richard A. Knaak even if I did give credence to the War of the Ancients. Second, there are small errors which are inconsequential to the story that even someone casually interested in Warcraft would pick up on. So if this was proofread by someone on the Blizzard writing team before going into publication, why would those errors persist?

you know the book had to have been approved or otherwise knaak would have hundreds of inconsistancies and wouldn't have been even remontely close to our beloved story. I would argue that he hasn't. The Ancients aren't fighting the war that was named for them, arcane corruption hasn't even been mentioned, but it was why Malfurion founded the resistance. The portal is no longer in the well. They have yet to seek out Cenarius, and instead of Cenarius rallying the dragons, that's fallen to Krasus. Tyrande never helped Illidan with his magic addiction, and he left to join Azshara because he thinks it will impress Tyrande. Amber eyes are apparently a mark of greatness, but every single male night elf in World of Warcraft has amber eyes. The dwarves are also known to the night elves even though there virtually won't be such a thing as dwarves for another seven thousand years.

So, yes, Knaak has gotten the gist of the story, but it's completely deviated from what it once was. This could've been very interesting, and could've developed tons of characters we know were involved in this. Vashj, Athrikus Narassin, Dath'Remar, Azzinoth, the origin of the harpies, even an elaboration on Azsune would've been nice. Instead, it's Rhonin this and Krasus that, magic here, badly written violence there.

Do you honestly like this new characterization of Azshara? You would seriously deem it better than the one we had already?

Rowan Seven

14-01-05, 01:44 AM

Tyrande never helped Illidan with his magic addiction, and he left to join Azshara because he thinks it will impress Tyrande.

Nephalim, I think you're overlooking an alternative explanation. Yes, it is possible that Illidan left to join Azshara, but it is _also_ possible that he journeyed to the capital on a self-appointed mission to rescue Tyrande. At any rate, I plan on waiting till I've read the third book installment before making any full judgments of "The War of the Ancients" trilogy. Also, I don't think you can solely blame Knaack for any displeasure you feel over the story. As a Blizzard approved product, I'd assume that they'd, in theory, have _some_ responsibility for what is released.

Nephalim

14-01-05, 02:20 AM

it is _also_ possible that he journeyed to the capital on a self-appointed mission to rescue Tyrande. Correct me if I'm wrong, and I may well be, but I was under the impression that he left the resistance before Xavius' attack, so he wouldn't be aware that she had even been captured. In any case, it completely undermines his original motivations. Illidan has a recurring trend: he loves Tyrande, but he loves his magic more. He's not evil so much as he is weak to his power-lust. This is utterly lost in the rewrite.

And I agree. While I blame Knaak for the piece itself, I blame Blizzard for not being more diligent. But I don't know enough about the situation to know who's more guilty. Maybe they didn't like the draft but were forced to run with it anyway because of publication deadlines. Maybe a million other things. I understand your hesitation to judge the book before you're done it, but as far as I'm concerned, he's deviated so heavily that I see no possible way of getting back on track. I mean, the time travel thing is ridiculous and pointless.

But I think it's rather unrealistic to say that this MUST be canon until they basically come right out and say it isn't, because doing so would just be bad business and, in particular, extremely rude to Knaak. I mean, Kil and Rudy, the only thing that would sway you to my side is something that you must admit would never happen even if I'm right about this.

rudynoname

14-01-05, 03:56 AM

again Neph you are blowing this way out of proportion. blizzard is far from being careless enough to simply release a book without it being proof read. that is a riddiculous notion that they would simply allow Knaak to write whatever he liked and not care if he would have screwed up the story, which he did not. the few small inconstianciesmay be something new, or simply small errors that weren't fixed. however these tiny errors hardly make the story invalid. you know quite alot about warcraft lore as well and you know how many inconsistancies there are between sources and how in some cases one source can be right while another wrong. i'd hardly put a simplified paragraph in a outdated game manual as a better source than an offical published novel that was approved by the writting team. Knaak story is correct as of this point, and should be accepted as the truth.

as far as being close to our stories there are a few things anyone who knows something about the warcraft lore must consider. 1) things change, our beloved story may now be rewritten into a better, more detailed, more relaistic, and overall improved story. its hard to let go of the past but weve done it before and can do so again. 2) simplification can give a false impression. read the story website and youll notice alot of events are extremely simplified and do not accurately state a few things for the purpose of staying short and sweet. the warcraft 3 manual could be the same way where they made a quick simple story and now that they can actualy go back they are expanding upon it. maybe things in the manual should be taken word for word. 3) there are things we dont know of yet. its true theirs no ancients, krasus contacted the dragons, etc... however amny may be meantioned in the next book and/or have changed. if they are meantioned, great! if they have been changed then equally great!. its an official source and should be treated as such. im not going to fight the warcraft lore, i'd much rather embrace it. as for azshara, well im hoping she begins to act up in the third book. shes een bidding her time, etc....we have yet to see. i think after the third book is published you will be a bit more satified.

neph its published, we know its approved, etc....if we decide to say this isn't cannon we might as well say neither are any of the other books, nor the manuals, nor the rpgs, etc....hris has other ppl doing the story for him since he cant do everything. obviously he did not rwrite every ingle quest in wow, every description on the website, etc.....Knaak is Chris's agent which is good enoughto be cannon. well at least for me. each person to their own. i just love the books and would rather embrace the new lore rather than fight it. and besdes, it will change eventualy. it always does. thats half the fun.

Rowan Seven

14-01-05, 10:28 AM

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
!

Unless I'm mistaken (and I doubt I am in this case), Illidan left the resistance after Lord Xavius' attack. While Illidan was in contact with Malfurion's mind during the Satyr Lord's assault, he 'heard' Malfurion's mental realization that Illidan loves Tyrande but Tyrande loves him. Between this and his recent 'dismissal' by Lord Ravencrest, Illidan seems to have spent the rest of the battle in a deep depression, and when the book catches up with him again he's outside the gates of the capital claiming he wants to serve Queen Azshara. Now, it could be that Illidan's true motive is exactly what he asserts it is, but I think it's also possible that he came to the same decision his brother did and is there to try to rescue Tyrande. Perhaps it's a combination of the two or neither. The third book should have the answers, at any rate.

As for canon, the RPG books, novels, and games contradict themselves and each other. I try to remedy this for myself by going with the sources that seem to be the most reliable and using the secondary sources where they make more sense and to supplement grey areas. For example, "World of Warcraft" is the most recently released and arguably most reliable source right now, but when it comes to Blackhand the Destroyer practically every other source agrees that he became Warchief after the orcs traveled to Azeroth and, for now, that's the order of events I consider to be true despite what the timeline for "World of Warcraft" states.

Nephalim

14-01-05, 11:23 AM

What about when Knaak contradicts things we saw and played through in Warcraft 3? Should I assume he's right then?

You have yet to answer the question of why they wouldn't have changed the details that don't impact the story. They don't matter, so why leave them erroneous? The fact that it's an "official blizzard source" only goes so far for me, and we have to apply some critical reasoning to it. If these changes ARE legit, then why wouldn't we see them in the World of Warcraft timeline? Why would multiple alternate sources corroborate the same, different story? I'd like to think that Blizzard wouldn't let their authors just go off and do their own thing, but after the Black Road and Liberty's Crusade, the leashes are evidently not that tight.

Lord Kil'jaeden

14-01-05, 11:47 AM

On a related note , i remember Lothar was killed in a treacherous ambush by a swarm of Orcs in Warcraft 2, while now we have admitted that it was an epic duel , the heroic way between Lothar and Doomhammer that sealed Lothar fate.

The problem is not exactly Knaack , but more Blizzard versatility about their own story, as changing some important key element of the warcraft universe never gave them any problem.

And this one i took in example was not just a minor change for our perception of the Orcs, as before that, for the player the Orcs were a bunch of green treacherous killing machines, their presence was just 'the enemy'.

After that Lothar legend change, and before the tale of Thrall we played in Warcraft 3, we then saw the Orcs with a kind of nobility and honor in their hearts.

So, personnally i would not blame Knaack alone for the oppositions in the actual key elements of the story, as it is the usual way of Blizzard.

And of all the source of lore, i think that the only one that will count, as being up-to-date will be the World of Warcraft events, as like what occurs in every MMORPG Blizzard will add new Lore to the game with the time.

While both RPG books and Knaack ones are already mostly finished
a long time ago before going retai, WoW will contain only the actual version of the Lore

rudynoname

14-01-05, 02:05 PM

actualy remeber that WoW was begun before warcraft 3 was even released. they may not have gone back and fixed all the lore elemnts. the books were also published very shortly before the publishing dates. however im not sure exactly what in WoW contradicts the trilogy. most cases it would be best to follow what the game states.

however multiple sources do not disagree with knaak. 1 old outdated source disagees with him. but he is wrong now as well. im simply stating at the time the books were published they wwere accurate, witht he exception of a few small errors, which are in every game, manual, novel, etc.... anything thats been published afterwards which specificly states an event happened differently in deatil would then replace that section of Knaak's story. remeber in DotD dun algaz was north of grim batol. thats no longer true so we just assume the story knaak gave us was different.

as for things that happened in Warcraft 3 that Knaak contradicts, of course you should follow knaakk version instead. a good example is the description of the interaction btw arthas and sylvannas. the version in the book was much more detailed and a game can only hold so much detail. remeber in warcraft 2 we saw king terenas killed. we had ti disregard that as well. things change.

Nephalim

14-01-05, 09:57 PM

as for things that happened in Warcraft 3 that Knaak contradicts, of course you should follow knaakk version instead. a good example is the description of the interaction btw arthas and sylvannas. the version in the book was much more detailed and a game can only hold so much detail. I disagree with this entirely. First off, it wasn't detailed. Simply saying that he took her to the Necropolis and tortured her for hours is hardly detailed. Second, I could see him maybe changing this if that's what the story was about. But this was such an aside that I see absolutely no purpose in deviating from the game. It imparted no new insight, and held no impact on the story whatsoever. It's one of the prime reasons that I don't regard War of the Ancients as legitimately as I do other sources. Rudy, you're giving more credence to an account given second-handedly than the one we witnessed. You're affording Knaak a ridiculous amount of power, here.

As for several other points, the attack on Lordaeron is hardly an example, because it's an ending that never happened, just as the Warcraft 1 human ending never happened. Also, I'd hesitate to call a mere three-year-old story outdated. There was a seven year gap between Warcraft 2 and 3, but new material has been steadily coming since Warcraft 3. I do think that this is an important distinction.

rudynoname

14-01-05, 11:01 PM

honestly i am affording knaak no more amount of power than chris and the story team at blizzard gave him. i know you'd rather they didn't but realisticly you know they wouldn't let him publish unapproved garbage (though maybe you think it is). i dunno. i personaly like his books. he's not really that good of a writer, but he is a good storyteller. i dont argue against the lore. i simply learn it.

as for arthas ad sylvannas i think you misunderstood. i didn't really mean the actualy words were more detailed, i mean the events. the wording was a few sentances and in the game it was a few lines, etc... about the same. only thing was we got more detailed story of her transformation. instead of being killed she was taken back to arthas's necropolis, etc.... im not saying its a story in it own right, its still extreemly short, im just saying it put some details into the story the game couldn't or didn't. they would have had to make an entire new cutscene right in the middle of a mission. would be difficult. the game sadly while probably uor best source, has its technical limits. even wow does, and eventualy even warcraft 7 or will have its limits. and i would call 3 years outdated easily. things change evry game, every book, rpg, that is released. things have probably already changed in chris's mind that we wont even know about till the next game or a long time for now.

Nephalim

15-01-05, 05:03 AM

Rudy, the changes from Warcraft 2 to 3 were done in the hopes that they wouldn't have to revise their history again, because they understand that the inconsistencies are confusing enough as it is.

And this Sylvanas/Arthas thing still boggles my mind, because there is absolutely no purpose to it, and it changes the timetable of the attack significantly. It demonstrates to me that he's changing things simply for the sake of changing them. Is the scene in the book any deeper for it? With this new information, are we now to look on Sylvanas with some different light? No, on both counts. So why bother to change it?

I'm not going to assume that I saw Warcraft 3 through some crude looking glass, technical limitations or no. If this is the way they had wanted things to be, the cut scene could've very easily depicted this without being much longer.
know you'd rather they didn't but realisticly you know they wouldn't let him publish unapproved garbageSeriously though, if it was so prudently pored over as you claim it to be, then why would they have allowed such small, inconsequential inconsistencies to make the final draft? The amber eye thing, the dwarf thing, the half-elf thing, Cenarius' parentage, etc. These are wrong, don't matter, and don't add to the story. So why would they be left in?

Of course they approved it, I just have no idea exactly what they approved, or what "approved" even entails. While I'd like to think they're a little more responsible with their books, they've demonstrated in the past that they're not. I'm referring to Liberty's Crusade and the Black Road. If these manage to get through the radar, War of the Ancients does not surprise me.

rudynoname

15-01-05, 02:05 PM

Neph those changes made in between every game are in hopes that they wont have to revise their history again. its true the changes in between warcraft 2 and 3 were some of the most dramatic and ground shattering. but that doesn't mean its how they are to be set in stone forever. they will be modified and changed, etc....

I personnely like the Arthas Sylvannas thing. it makes things a little more vicious, makes the anger and tesion between the 2 a little more real. i know you'll never admit to that, but it adds to the story.

they had a time limit for warcraft 3, and everything had to be tested. they weren't going to add a cutscene for every tiny detail thst could have happened. they did their best but yes games have technical limitations. as does everything. adding in details to our story is a great way to make it more realistic. they couldn'tt have every conversation and every event otherwise why not add a cutscene to explain everything, such as 1 when admiral proudmoore comes in explaining his son's death att eh hands of orcs and dragon thus justufying his hate for them more. or why not make the horde more than 6 grunts we would see every oncce in a while. or the many conversation arthas probably had with Kel'thuzad that we ddin't see. these things weren't nessesary and neihter was the whole arthas sylvannas temple thing. they just needed you to get a taste of the situation. the dozen buildings that made up orgrimmar were so you get an impression of the city, as was the sylvannas encounter. a sample. plus at that time this idea probably hadn't even been concieved yet. they cant have every detail in the game. but it was a nice adddition, made it seem more maliciuos etc...a liberty the book could take, but a game couldn't.

Seriously though, if it was so prudently pored over as you claim it to be, then why would they have allowed such small, inconsequential inconsistencies to make the final draft? The amber eye thing, the dwarf thing, the half-elf thing, Cenarius' parentage, etc. These are wrong, don't matter, and don't add to the story. So why would they be left in?
Neph how long have you been studying warcraft. you already know the answer to this. theres mistakes everywhere. in manuals, the rpg books, etc.... just yesterday in Lands of conflict i was reading hat Illidan killed mannoroth. wow that was something new (sarcasm). and these books were even more watched over by blizzard than Knaaks were. so mistakes happen. They are proofread but the tiny technical errors may be found to late to change or just completely skipped over. now while its quite easy to miss a small mistake, its not that easy to ignore a storyline that is inaccurate. Knaak is canon and thats all there is to it. the two talked during the writing of the book and Knak probably presented chris his storyline and chris made sure verything was changed in order to be accurate. and then tiny technical mistakes still get through.

Liberty's crusade. wow even hearing the name makes me cringe. but remeber Knaak had already written 1 book for them before. they asked him back for a reason. Liberty's crusade (cringle) was unfortune (underexxagerating) but its silly to think they would ask Knaak back if they didn't approve of his work. Thing is they were proof read and are now official sources for the warcraft lore.if you don't want to accept them thats absolutely fine. each person is going to have their own opinion.

Nephalim

16-01-05, 03:06 AM

If Knaak had simply added things that were left out of the campaign, I would have no problem, and all of the examples you brought up are just things that may have happened but we didn't see. This is different. We SAW this happen, and he says that what we saw didn't happen.

I don't see how this gives us any insight because, now, we have no real concept of what was going on. You say it was more malicious but how can you know that? You don't even know if Arthas was present for it, if you accept this new stuff, because it was vague and undetailed. So now, instead of the clear scene we saw depicted, we have only a crude synopsis of this new version? That doesn't do it for me.

These aren't typoes and misprints we're talking about in War of the Ancients. These are misrepresented story arcs. If he said Kil'jaeden when he meant Archimonde, fine, I've done stuff like that in conversation before, too. These are numerous, repetetive mistakes, occasionally dwelt on, that, if proofread, SHOULD have been rectified. And even if it WAS proofread by someone, if all these mistakes managed to slip through the radar, who's to say this was a very discerning proofreader? Which in turn asks what else he got wrong?

You don't KNOW that they talked about it. You have no idea of Metzen or anyone else's involvement, save for Knaak's assurances that it was "approved" and you can't honestly tell me that that can't be taken a million different ways. You can't just say they were proofread and "that's that."

New information has come up since which corroborates the original story. Why wasn't the backstory for World of Warcraft changed to accomodate War of the Ancients, ESPECIALLY when it does incorporate several key elements of it, IE Neltharion's betrayal, but leaves the rest unchanged?

Ultimately, though, Rowan's right, the Sundering will be the deciding factor. And I have a hunch that it's going to have several things that make no sense. Expect to see dwarves fight when dwarves didn't exist yet. Expect to see Illidan become blinded in a climactic fight with Malfurion, and never fight Azzinoth. Expect Rhonin and Krasus to become immortalized in the Azerothien pantheon as the greatest heroes the world ever saw. Expect to be boggled as to why the war was named after people who didn't fight in it until the last possible moment. Expect Tyrande and Azshara to do nothing useful, and finally, expect the Well of Eternity to blow up for no real reason since the portal isn't in it anymore. Oh, and expect the time travel to be unsatisfyingly shrugged off.

Knaak has backed himself into a corner, and it'll be either an amusing romp to read him digging his way out of it, or read him say "Oh well, the lore that established a worldwide fanbase isn't important, I'm just gonna run with whatever the hell I feel like."

rudynoname

16-01-05, 04:52 AM

Neph a proofreader might miss a detail or two but they arent going to miss is a story is completely off the line. i'd be shocked if chris himself didn't read it before it was published. its an extremely safe bet he did though you seem to be hanging on to that tiny shiver of hope that he didn't. thats not likely.

as for adding things vs. changing things. that has always been done. its nothing new. in warcraft 1 medivh was killed by a group of soldier that did not include Khadgar. later in the book we see khadgar there. it doesn't erase what we saw in the game. it simply adds more detail the game couldn't. i don't see you argueing that people shouldn't think Khadgar had anything to do with medivh's death. and yes it does give a more detailed version with more background and more interesting events. that much is obvious neph, it sounds like you don't want to give knaak even a shread of credit.

but Neph you may not have noticed but world also considers events that occoured in knaaks books. you ahve areas named after key caracters. (ravencrest and xavius). i expect you will try and say these were last minute additions or changes into wow to try to justify knaak's so called "errors", but hionestly you know as well as i do that metzen had to have been involved and he obviously likes knaak and approves of him if they ask him back. Neph it just makes not even a shread of sense to believe Knaak's story is of completely his own invention without any corrections made by Chris. this is the new warcraft story unless the whole time travelt hings changes it back. the old story was only a few paragraphs. knaak is adding in the detail and he is doing a marvelous job at it.

the third book will let us all know what has happened. but it might not be to yor satisfaction, we will see whats true. wether metzen has decide to stick to the old lore or whether he and knaak have decided to change the lore around. either way warcraft is still warcraft and what Metzen says, and in turn Knaak says, goes. remeber eventualy what happens in this book will be standard lore and it will be whats correct. i'd hate to see a dislike for an author ruin the warcraft expiereince for someone whove ive personelly had a lot of fun having discussions about this little world with.

however remeber im not arguing for knaaks version or for the old version. im just in favor of whatever happens. if at the end of the trilogy something happens where 1 version never happened and the other did, i will gladly accept that and build from there, equally happy wether it is closer to the lore described in warcraft 3 or that described in the trilogy. or of course the 2 versions may be one and the same. we will see what metzen and Knaak have decided upon soon enough.

Nephalim

16-01-05, 11:34 AM

Rudy, I've said before that I doubt Xavius was Knaak's creation, because Shadows and Light has information on him that conflicts with Knaak's account of him in War of the Ancients. We also know he didn't create Aviana, or the dragon aspects. He was likely told in advance.

And I'm sorry, but you still have no evidence of Metzen's involvement. Just saying it's an extremely safe bet over and over doesn't make it so. If they are trying to actively change the Warcraft story, why doesn't Xavius' biography agree with it? Why didn't the World of Warcraft story accomodate it? If they were going to corroborate it, World of Warcraft would've been the perfect chance, so why let it slip by and instead support the original story? Why aren't the erroneous details rectified? I know you think these are just slipping through the radar but if I notice them on the first reading, then I doubt that the creator of this universe would fail to see them.

And while your concern is touching, this won't ruin the Warcraft experience for me because I don't consider it a part of the Warcraft experience, and I'm afraid that the trilogy itself is the only thing that's not on my side in this.

rudynoname

17-01-05, 12:04 AM

neph if the book is published as an official source and the author himself said him stated he was talking to Metzen as he was writting this book then of course its the official story (yea i know your gonna say knaak needed to save face or whatever, but realisticly you must know that Metzen hd to have read this book and been checking up on him). its true we don't have evidence of Metzen's involvement, but we also don't have evidence of him not being involved. for every error you critize, knaak provides a dozen new interesting FACTS about warcraft that very likely he himself did not come up with but rather were fed by him through metzen. if metzen was not involved the book would have been way off the mark and we wouldn't even be able to recognize it. If Knaak was this close to the old version of th story its only logical to assume he was guided through it by the creative team at blizzard and they weren't going to fix some prts and just gnore others. they had to have been involved.

i realized you want the equivilent of a statement from Metzen saying its offical and that being the only way you'll accept this, but that likely won't happen. the mnauals and games come directly from him and we know the rpgs books are worked on by him as well, and it can logicly be assumed the books too. otherwise why bother even believeing the books at all. khadgar probably didn't kill medivh (notice its stated now several other places like the rpg book which means metzen does consider it lore). taretha, who was only meantion in the book and not any of the summaries, never existed then, and Rhonin actualy led the dwarves on the battle against the dragonmaw orcs. in a later summary it says the refugee dwarves who attacked the caravan were led by Rhonin, we know thats not true. the summaries are written in a very simple matter and are open to interpretation. writing off an entire novel because a few paragraphs in an outdated game manual disagree with it makes absolutely no snese.

your saying we have no evidnce but it makes 100 times more sense to believe all the books are official rather than they not being. the differences are actualy quite small when you get right down to it. for evey little thing knaak wrote differently (noticely i said differently not incorretly) theres a dozen areas where he remained the same. the books is hardly going against the lore. also you keep claiming that later sources go against knaak but actualy no later source actualy gives enough detail to either favor knaak or the outdated version. the only things are the books which we find scattered around azeroth, and with the vague summaries it can still lead to either version or simply be outdated since they couldn't incorporate the new version since it hasn't finished being published. thats where its wrong to say that newer sources go against knaak: newer source are too vague still, and Knaaks story isn't done.

again blizzard put its seal of apporval on the book and released it as one of its own products. we know metzen is in charge of this and obviously it went through him. its not likely hes going to come out and state anytime soon that yes tthe events are accurate so we have to go off what we know. otherwise we might as well forget the other books at this point.

as for whether its lore or not thats ur choice. but it will make things difficult later on considering you don't accept the facts from one of the larger centerpieces of the warcraft lore.

Nephalim

17-01-05, 12:03 PM

The later sources may be vague, but they still conflict with Knaak and agree with each other. I think the other books are legitimate because they have been supported by other, later lore, and War of the Ancients is the only novel for which this is not the case. The only thing in it that is supported is Neltharion's betrayal. However, the World history, and several quest dialogues, confirm details of the original version that Knaak ignored.

My evidence of Blizzard's lack of involvement is the substantial errors which I have continually cited, and you continually shrug off. If they were proofread, it was by someone not well-versed enough in Warcraft lore to notice them, or by someone who noticed them but didn't think we would and didn't care enough to change them, or by someone who did notice them, wanted to change them, but couldn't for a variety of reasons.

Changing the nature of the arcane is not a small change. Replacing important figures with his own is not a small change. Removing Tyrande from the final battle and reducing her to a damsel in distress is not a small change.

The story could've easily survived without Krasus or Rhonin's involvement. You've never seen a detailed novella of the original so it perplexes me that you assume that this makes a better story. This could easily have been true to lore, and could have fleshed out existing characters substantially. Blizzard reps have said on several occasions that they're trying to keep all new lore as consistent as possible, and they don't want another 2-3 rift. They accepted the rift because they needed it to allow for things that would make Warcraft more distinct and unique, so it seems rather counter-productive to allow for ANOTHER rift that makes it more generic and stereotypical. These changes serve no purpose, so one might naturally draw the conclusion that they were made simply because they're the way Knaak wanted to go, and he should not have had that liberty.

Like I said before, I don't know the nature of the relationship between Knaak and Blizzard and Pocket Books. If Knaak retained creative control, contractually, he could've overruled any editing, no matter who it came from, and Blizzard would have been bound to go ahead with it. And if they had called for a rewrite, Pocket Books may have overruled that, seeing as that would put them way behind schedule, and while they allowed this with Lord of the Clans, this is a full trilogy, so more is at stake. This is all theories, though, that I'm just coming up with off the top of my head. The only thing I can say with absolute certainty is that getting books published has more politics than you'd think. Bearing this in mind, I don't know what "approved" means.

On I side note, I have nothing against Knaak, as a person or an author, and I would appreciate it if you'd stop inferring such is the case, and trying to deride my position as a simple victim of bias.

rudynoname

17-01-05, 10:24 PM

Neph wold of warcraft was started years ago and was released in november. knaak barely wrote both books before they were published. at the time the 2nd book came out the 3rd book wasn't even written (it may still be in the works right now). so the fact that other books were supported by later lore is simply becuase later lore exist for them. such is not the case for knaak's books. these are the newest version of the lore and we probably won't see much support from other sources till blizzard releases something new sucgh as a game, expansion, book, etc....

Neph im not shrugging off any errors. theres 2 possible reasons for these so called despreacies you continue to say exist. 1 reason is that the summarys were the oriinal ideas and now Chris is allowing Knaak to write in the actual history. which means the older version no longer exist therefore there are no discrepacies because the book agrees with the newest most up to date lore: itself. ohter reason is that those few paragraphs that you continue to base this book's illigetinicy on are just summaries and are open to interpretation. the summaries can not have every little detail in the, in the history page, one of the newer sources, the second war is summarized in only a few paragraphs. they dont even meantion every orc and human nation, who dies, who attacked who, etc.....

another thing u must consider is that the final battle has not yet occoured and tyrande is anything but a damsel in distress in this book. Knaak was allowed to write his own story but under the creative teams control. you are saying its sterotypical etc..... that is nothing more than your own personnel opinion and holds no mert when it comes down to decidding whether its actualy lore or not. same goes for my own opinions. ive said it before doesn;t matter if i like it or not, its official. now my own persnnel opinion is i didn't see the need for Rhonon and Krasus. however is Knaak and therefore Chris says they are nessesary then so be it, i'll accept that, and add it to my knowledge of warcraft.

now as for approved. all im saying is we can be pretty sure Chris poured over this as weve seen him do with every other piece of lore. simply because you dislike something is no reason to say it is the exception. the book doesn't stray any farther than any other book has in the past. Besides even Metzen changes his mind (tirion fordrings son's age being a recent change from something that was written witht the lore already fixed for warcraft 3). lets go out on a limb and say Metzen didn't approve it or never saw it. it was still published under blizzards consent and as an official product. so either way its official lore. not to dis Metzen or anything. the guy is great and has been the main guy in cahrge of the lore since warcraft 2, but he is not the only person and if warcraft goes on long enough he will eventualy need a replacemnt. basicly while metzen is in charge currently of the warcraft story, the true owners and ppl who decide what it is is the blizzard company who had this book publsihed. either way its cannon. of course chance that he didn't approve it are slim to none. Metzen weve seen is very dedicated, but he does change his mind. also now that the book is published it is lore and you can bet Metzen isn't going to say "that never happened, im going to continue creating the warcraft lore as if the events depicted in the books didn't occour". on the tiniest chance that metzen wasn't fully behind these books, he is now. lore from this point will take into consideration the actions at occured in these books. it probably won't have any huge differences since this lore is very similar to the otdated version.

and calling a book illigitiimate over a few paragrpahs doesn't make any sense to me. its true the current books in azeroth have the old version instead of knaak, but its simply because knaak hasn't finished yet. even after he does you know its unlikely they would go through and change the books. 1 reason being it really is unnessesary since mot ppl wouldn't care or even notice the difference so why bother, and the second being the fact that the current version is actualy knaak's story, but since it has to be summarized all of knaak's details are simplified into what we have now.

were both stuborn and nether is goning to be convivnced till the next rewrite of the history. every new game just has the last game's history summary. wonder if they will do any overhauls for warcraft 4 or 5. might be a while...

also sorry if u thought i was trying to undermine ur arguement by saying it was full of bias. i think ur arguement is objective, and biases in your arguement or my own have nothinng to do with why i disagree. im sincerly sorry i gave you that impression. hope you can forgive me :y-thumbsu

Nephalim

18-01-05, 12:04 AM

Let me tell you the story of Greg Weisman.

Greg Weisman came up with the concept for a television show called Gargoyles, about a race of magical guardians in the dark ages who were frozen in stone for a thousand years to awaken in present day Manhattan. The show was made by Disney and went to air. Weisman had his story elaborately mapped out. Subtle references and characters would be left in mystery for almost a season before they would be uncovered. Everything went out according to the plan Weisman had conceived, for two seasons and about 60 episodes.

However, Disney took Weisman off his project after the second season. Before he left, he gave some instruction to those who were staying on, but his plan was virtually abandoned, and most fans agree that the quality of the series took a notable slide, and that characters became particularly inconsistent. 13 episodes later, Gargoyles went off the air, never to return.

More recently, Weisman has told fans that if, by some miracle, or clerical error, he ever managed to get Gargoyles back on, he's still uncertain whether or not he would attempt to incorporate the events of the third season into his master plan. The most hardcore of the fans don't regard the third season as legitimate, and as far as many are concerned, Gargoyles ended after the first episode of season 3 (the last episode Weisman was involved with).

So I say again, simply being official only goes so far. If it's wrong, it's wrong, and I don't really care what the huge corporation that has the rights to it tells me. If you read someone doing something they would never do, you have the right to say that they're completely out of character, you aren't forced to accept it just because it's "official."

Those discrepencies I've said are there ARE there, and I don't see how you can deny that. If the lore favours Knaak, then that renders Finnall Goldensword non-existent, a large hunk of the dwarf plot for World of Warcraft "outdated," and all that junk about magic corruption mere paranoia. Knaak is the one making the mistakes, and I don't expect Metzen and the Blizzard team to scramble to appease them, and frankly I find it a tad incredulous that you do.

Honestly, if Metzen pored over it as you claim, why weren't the inconsequential errors dealt with? Because they don't really matter? That hardly sounds dedicated, and that hardly sounds like Blizzard in general. Everything about it is in the details, so when you get those details wrong, it takes away from the story. Every time I come across something that doesn't fit, it pulls me out. So am I expected to pay for my knowledge and devotion? Whatever the case, I have legitimate grounds to be considerably pissed off at these books, because if what you're saying IS true, it means they did a rather half-assed job of it, and if what I'm saying is true, it means they handed over their franchise to a guy who knew alarmingly little about it, or didn't respect it enough to stick to it.

Ultimately, if someone asks me who rallied the dragons against the demons, I'll say Cenarius.

You say this is all my opinion, but step back and look at it. Illidan, one of the most conflicted and intriguing characters in Warcraft 3, is here reduced to a lovesick child, trying to impress the woman of his dreams. Where's the desperate power-lust? Where's the struggle against his addictions, and his finally giving into them when he realizes that Malfurion's plans mean magic will be gone for good? Thrown entirely out the window. Knaak has taken one aspect of Illidan's character and made it his whole character, but there is more to him than that. That's not an opinion. You know this; you've SEEN this.

rudynoname

18-01-05, 04:29 PM

Neph so ur saying if Chris gets fired you'll continue to go off what Chris says rather than what the new games published by blizzard and its products are. thats cool and its ur choice i dont disagree with it. im just letting you know if Chris leaves i would rather follow blizzard's story rather than whatever chris said on the way out. that is unless the story just becomes ridicoulous. however knaak is a talents and best selling author and while his story telling style might be different than chris's it is not inferior.

regardless the point is irrelevant. we can be pretty damn sure chris read and approved those books and probably even guided Knaak through them. as for discrepencies, ive already given you several reasons you continue to ignore, the main 3 reasons being changes to the story, simply a more detailed story built off those paragraphs, and a twist involving the time warp concept.

Neph even Chris makes mistakes and forgets things. a few tecnical errors that were left are hardly a reason to say the book is illigetimate and unapproved. small tiny mistakes that we know far enough about to ingore are very common in everything that blizzard has published. however tiny mistakes don't subtract from the quality of work. as far as half assed work that is nothing more than an opinion and is baseless. i think Knaak did a good job of filling in the details, however that doesn't amtter. what matters is that it is now official. i still see it as a piece of quality and personelly have no problem accepting it and even hope they get knaak to write more books (i think he meantioned he might write another trilogy). you told me before your not going to let ur biases get involved and i sincerly hope you mean it. Knaak did a huge service to warcraft and while i won't hold him in chis's position he ddeserves credit for that.

And unless something changes everything ill be refering to the new version of the story for any questions about the war of the ancients.

Again neph that is an opinion. and so is this. The games only go so far. Knaak has made Illidan come to life with real emotion. he's shown us this torn character who acts impulsively, feels the jealous and has become completely blinded by his love for magic. same with furion. in warcraft 3 he seemed uptight and unreasonable at times. this book has shown that he too has his flaws, its made him more realistic, and it has shown us just how much Furion actualy does care for his brother which blizzard could barely do with this game. what we saw in warcraft 3 was the surface. knaak has given it depth. of course thats only my opinion. regardless of wether i like it or not its lore. the only thing our opinions decided is whether we continue to learn more about the lore and ive decided for myself that its a great piece, well written, piece of lore and will continue to persue the warcraft story.

basicly all im saying is that this is the lore. not saying its wonderful or that its garbage, our opinions are nothing more than our opinions. all im saying is regardless of whether we like it or not, its lore.

unless the time travel concept changes it all anyways :y-wink2:

Nephalim

18-01-05, 06:26 PM

My only point with Gargoyles is that I don't think simply being official makes it legitimate. Chris Metzen is not the only man behind Warcraft, and he didn't have a master plan going into it. That's all I was trying to illustrate. I mean, how far does this story have to go before you second-guess it?

This isn't lore because it's not supported. Officially, it's NOT the most recent source, and even if it was, you're trying to tell me that World of Warcraft is less credible than this? This doesn't strike you as ridiculous? The book is more legitimate than what it's based off of?

You said yourself before that if Metzen or someone else from the Blizzard creative team hadn't proofread the books, they would be riddled with inconsistencies. They ARE riddled with inconsistencies. He went on for almost a page about the half-elf children, he's continually brought up the dwarves. If Metzen missed these, then I have to wonder what the hell he was smoking when he proofread it. These are multiple, repeated errors (that are in no way technical) that DO subtract from the story, and every literature professor you talk to will agree with me. JRR Tolkien said that the most important thing to keep in mind when writing fantasy is internal consistency.

My argument is not just because I dislike it. Even if I liked it I wouldn't consider it legitimate. YOU are the one that keeps glorifying his writing talents, but my point had nothing to do with his talents as an author. It has to do with his faulty knowledge of the subject matter, and I'm not going cite someone who obviously has a weak grasp of the material he's basing his story on as a reliable source for one of the most important events in the history of the world in question. I mean, even if it was proofread and those blatant mistakes were missed, those are mistakes that Knaak has made, and it demonstrates that he's not up to speed. My gripes with his 14-year-old diction is just an aside.

rudynoname

18-01-05, 11:49 PM

if metzen leaves, someone else takes over and eventualy metzen comes back and says that never happened thenj its not lore. unless metzen or the creative team at blizzard say knaak was off. then its lore. well at least to me, maybe not to you. everything is an opinion in the end.

it uis supported, this isn;t some piece of fan fiction. and while waorld of warcraft is definetly a better source than the novel (no arguements there saying the book is a better source is ridiculous), the novel is still a better source than the little books you find scattered round. we know those basicly have the old lore from warcraft 3 with a few adjustments. later on after knaak is done thos ebooks will be outdated but wow won't. WoW is a better source then the novel, but not if its a book we know has outdated lore.

Neph these are harldy inconsistancies if they are in accordance with the lastest source: itself. these are changes. and weve seen metzen even in his own book have inconsistancies. this is nothing new. as for whether subtracting, ill have to disagree. Its very well written, and knaak is a professional best selling author. Chris is a great story teller but we both read his novel and know that writing novel is not his strongest point. Knaak gave ife and added to the story, not subtracted. any professor will tell you its a well writeen book. knaak has been doing this a while and knows what good writing is. otherwise blizzard wouldn't ask him back. as for consistancy, things cahnge. even tokien changed his mind on a few things. the difference here is that tolkien has passed away and can no longer make corrections or additions. warcraft is still being writeen and new info is added and changedon a constant basis. the war of the ancients might change again and again and again, im sure eventualy pieces of the books info will become outdated. look at DotD. dun algaz was north of grim batol. thats no longer true. eventualy it may c hange agin.

i am not glorifing his writting talents. his credentials can tell you he is a good author. you keep critizing him otherwise and while youve said yourself you are not being biased, honestly at times it has begun to appear that way. even if i disliked his story i would consider it legit, because it is. he hardly has a weak grasp on it and for every error he has 100 things that stay true to warcraft and that most people wouldn't know unless they had a firm graps of the concepts and the creative team behind them. a few technical errors don't make the book illegit. even things in world of warcraft contradict themselves. so he messed up on the dwarves. just assume he meant earthen. these are tiny erros and makes no sense. just because World of warcraft contradicts itself in a few points doesn't mean im going to going to say any lore that comes from it is garbage. just because knaak was wrong about the nam of the dwaf like creature doesn't mean he was wrong about malfurion illidan krasus rhonin etc....and again this may have never happened. damn time warp is giving me a headache.

Nephalim

19-01-05, 11:56 AM

Like I just said, the fact that War of the Ancients was poorly written has nothing to do with my argument.

Once again, War of the Ancients is NOT the latest source of information. Shadows and Light, Lands of Conflict, and World of Warcraft itself are all more recent. And even if they were sanctioned changes, they're STILL inconsistencies. That's what inconsistent means.

The hundred true things he says for every error are only true if it's legit, and violate what came before. Simply changing dwarves to earthen still makes no sense as they slept through all this. The night elves should have no idea who dwarves or earthen are.

And you ARE glorifying his writing talents. Saying it was marvelous, it gave the story life, etc, as if it's an excuse for all the mistakes he's making. I know he's a good writer, which is why I'm perplexed at the degree to which these books suck. But that's all beside the point. Ultimately, he's telling a different story. These aren't technical errors, they're content errors, and shouldn't be overlooked just because a casual fan would miss them, and I don't see how they WOULD be overlooked if someone from the creative team had actually proofread it.

perfectgamer911

19-01-05, 03:31 PM

who said the NE knew about the dwarfes maybe Krasus or Rhonin mentioned them and said it was an other race just like the the Tauren.

Nephalim

19-01-05, 03:41 PM

They were suggested by Malfurion to Ravencrest, and Ravencrest obviously had at least some idea of who they were talking about. Why would he be disgusted by the idea if he had no idea what they were? That aside, they're still sleeping, and would offer no help to the current plight. Rhonin and Krasus would know this.

rudynoname

19-01-05, 04:54 PM

yea krasus and rhonin was not how the NE knew about dwarves. thats just a small goof on knaak's part.

Neph the books are still being written. they are the most current source of info. and yes inconsistancies are inconsistancies but the new story is inconsistant with an old outdated version of itself. therefore its right.

and the earthen slept after the sundering. not before it. at this time the earthen are still active.

Neph im hardly a casual fan. not even a tiny bit. you know that. yes i caught the mistakes the firs time through, registered in my head and made sure i would take them into consideration. however as part of that consideration you might have to consider something you claim to be inconstancies m,ay just be changes. is it really that hard to imagine things would still change. ive been following this game so long changes are nothing new. these things happen.

and no i am NOT glorifying him Neph, im not the one making this personnel. ive said before his writing style, while good, is not exactly to my taste. he is a good writer, but this the same way i can recognize good poetry even though im not a huge poetry fanatic. saying that the books sux are your own opinion. it has no merit. my own opinion is that are quite good and knaak did a good job of fleshing out the characters weve already known. true its not perfect and he better show azshara geting off her rear soon, but for every thing that may not be as well portrayed, he portrays many things much better, such as Illidan, Malfurion, Cenarius, etc.... no one is perfect. but knaak was a good choice imo. not that my opinion matters either. books can be garbage and it would still be lore. good thing its not garbage, again IMO.

all im saying is its lore. i personely think its good as well and you have every reason to think its bad. but understand that i disagree. again, all im trying to get across is that it is oficial lore.

Nephalim

20-01-05, 05:37 PM

1 - I've never denied that they're official. My point is that simply being official doesn't mean a whole lot if everything else - equally official - doesn't agree with it.

2 - Stop saying changes and inconsistencies as if they're two different things.

3 - You keep on referring to Knaak's writing abilities as if it's an excuse for all the blatant mistakes Knaak makes. My responses about how profoundly it sucks have been in response to those, and like I said before, even if the books DIDN'T suck but violated the lore this much, I'd still be critical of their reliability. You call Knaak second to Chris Metzen in the warcraft hierarchy and DON'T expect a heated reply? If you're going to say I'm getting personal every time I take a dig, then stop calling me on.

4 - It's a little perplexing to me that you call it outdated, since it's been reinforced by several sources at late as last month. Knaak is NOT still writing these books. There's a significant pause between the day you finish a book and the day it hits the shelves. That aside, when do we make the call? At the time of its writing? It's inception? It's availability to the public? War of the Ancients being THE freshest piece of lore around depends on a lot of standards which I see no reason to implement.

rudynoname

21-01-05, 03:29 PM

1) if you havent then really we dont disagree on anything that is actualy important to the lore. just differing opinons.

2) changes and inconsistancies are only the same things in a few cases. if the new change is right, then its inconstat with an old outdated incorrect version

3) Knaak's abilities are no excuse for any mistakes he might make or not make. however im just saying "mistakes" are almost certianly not mistakes. but rather jsut changes. all other mistakes such as th dwarf issue are techinicl we we can assume its an small honest mistake that got overlooked by knaak and blizzard, and doesn't take away from the stroyline. also knaak being second is not a compliment. it merely means unless chris says otherwise (and by chris i naturly mean the creative crew at blizzard, not just metzen himself since they all work on it) then knaak is correct.

4) the warcraft 3 manual is outdated. and at the time the second book was published the third hadn't even been written yet. yes Neph im not ignorant and dont think books go from author to bookstore in a week, however many books are out within just a few months of the authors writing them. the thrid book isn't due out for a while and it wouldn't be surprising if knaak wasn't done. also consider chris may not want to implement the new lore from the first two books yet because it might give away details from the third or maybe knaak and metzen have only recently decide the exact events. it only makes sense that it is the latest piece of lore. even newer than the rpgs and world which has been in production a while and is currently using a slightly modified version of the history given us in warcraft 3. hopeflly the next series of rpg books will give us more insight to these changes.

Nephalim

21-01-05, 09:14 PM

1 - While I've never argued that it's not official, I HAVE argued that it's not credible.

2 - OK, I would never call anything that came before incorrect. But if it's inconsistent, it's inconsistent, and you were the one that said that if Blizzard hadn't looked it over, it would be full of inconsistencies, which it is.

3 - The half-elf thing, the nature of the arcane, Sylvanas' defeat, etc. are not simply typoes. The whole arcane magic thing has become a central, important, and distinctive feature of Warcraft so I would be reluctant to call anything which so profoundly ignores it an honest mistake before I'd call it a display of ignorance and inexperience as far as Warcraft is concerned.

4 - Details regarding Neltharion's betrayal were released and incorporated into the World lore before the release of the Demon Soul, and that source came out after Well of Eternity, so it could've incorporated the "changes" from that, but didn't. I doubt that suspense is an issue.

But let's just get back to this. When World and War of the Ancients disagree on something, you're going to favour Knaak's account? This doesn't strike you as outrageous?

rudynoname

21-01-05, 11:40 PM

1 - well credibility is all an opinion Neph. since it is an official blizzard product and weve seen how the books are incorporated before, id hardly call it credible.

2 - what came before wasn't incorrect but it is incosistant with waht is now right. things have changed before. look at the warcraft 1 manual and see how many things are inconsistant with the lore we know now. its incorrect.

3 - things such as the half elf thing and dwarves were simply mistakes. most likely technical mistakes. they may have meant to state birth of twins or earthen. regardlss we easily know what they most likely meant, even if they weren't, and dont subtract from the story. as for the rest, them being different is still not credible. the sylvannas thing was better explained in the book than in the game (things can't be drawn out as well in a game as in a book), and the arcane addiction actualy hasn't contradicted anything we know. in fact its being shown quite well. thats your own opinion Neph.

4 - well actualy that just shows the team is very likely inolved with the book. its already quite obvious they are this just furthers the point.

Of course its not outrageous. and yes i will favor Knaak's account. world of war was started ages ago and was built with the old warcraft lore. basicly the lore as it was as of warcraft 3. thats changed now. it is far more outrageous to believe the newest freshest source wrote a story that was wrong if theyve known all along the actual event were something else. the war of the ancicents books weren't finished in time to be incorporated into WoW. but next time metzen gives us a summary of the history it will likely include the new version. it would be doing the lore justice to try and hang on to the old.

Nephalim

22-01-05, 08:11 PM

Ok, uhh, you contradiced yourself about five times in that post to the point that I have no idea what you're trying say.

rudynoname

23-01-05, 08:10 PM

damn. yea miswordings. usualy i go back and fix them. forgot to do so last time. anyways:

1 - well credibility is all an opinion Neph. since it is an official blizzard product and weve seen how the books are incorporated before, id hardly call it uncredible

2 - for number two i didnt contradict myself you simply didnt understand. when they were written they were not incorrect, however now they are outdated and no longer true. the new story is inconsistant with the old because the old has been changed.

3 - things such as the half elf thing and dwarves were simply mistakes. most likely technical mistakes. they may have meant to state birth of twins or earthen instead of dwarves. regardlss we easily know what they most likely meant doesnt take away from the actual story. as for the rest, them being different is still not a credible reason to ignore them. the sylvannas thing was better explained in the book than in the game (things can't be drawn out as well in a game as in a book), and the arcane addiction actualy hasn't contradicted anything we know. in fact its being shown quite well. thats your own opinion Neph.

4 - sorry meant wouldn't. oh come on Neph u know exactly what i meant. the reasons for accepting the new lore are clear cut and dry. i explain them further here but honestly they can pretty much explain themselves.

Nephalim

25-01-05, 09:31 AM

Your reasons all eventually lean on the fact that they're official. I'm of the mind, however, that the seal of approval means little if War of the Ancients remains THE single piece of lore that is corroborated only by itself. Metzen can approve it all he wants, but his actual work conflicts with that approval. The Warcraft timeline has been published repeatedly and it's always the same. You call the Warcraft 3 manual outdated, but updated versions have been published that STILL conflict with Knaak's account of events. There's the Reign of Chaos manual, the RPG core book, Lands of Conflict, Shadows and Light, the World of Warcraft story resource, and the books found within World of Warcraft itself. All of these agree with each other.

I have no visible evidence that this book was proofread, and all the evidence that you have is Knaak saying that he and the Blizzard team worked to keep it as consistent as possible, which, despite the possibility of meaning a hundred different things, is really the only thing he could say. He's not going to say that he's just throwing lore to the wind and doing his own thing with it, even though that's evidently what he's doing.

Yes, World of Warcraft has been in the works for several years, and it's the product of careful planning and forethought. They're not going to negate that to accomodate Knaaks various deviations - Knaak should be accomodating THEM. Yes, Blizzard has had some rather substantial lore inconsistencies in the 2-3 gap, but they didn't come out of the experience enjoying it so much that they're hoping to do it again. Slight geographical shifts and changing ages are extremely minor details with no bearing on the story and you know this. Why characters do what they do, and their involvement in one of the most important events of Azeroth, however, are rather significant details which largely impact the story, which I've been led to believe (repeatedly) that the creative team is hoping to never have to change. The 2-3 shift had a distinct purpose - to solidify several philosophies regarding magic and "evil." So now that this has been established, they're not going to undermine the purpose of those changes.

The fact is this: it's harder to stick to someone else's story than to just do what you want. So Knaak took the lazy way out and did his own thing as opposed to putting forth the extra effort to make his story coincide with existing lore, which he either failed to research, or knew about and ignored.

And you're going to have to explain how the nature of the arcane has been adequately demonstrated considering it has yet to be mentioned.

On a side note, the "it's all opinion" only goes so far. This book was not well-written. You can say "Well I found it well-written" but it simply wasn't. His action scenes are rushed and try to be gory but come off as cartoonish. His similes are juvenile, his dialogue is uninteresting, and his characters archetypal. This is not just my opinion. You can like it all you want, but that doesn't make it well-written. Now what boggles my mind about this is that Day of the Dragon and Legacy of Blood are significantly better than this, in terms of technicality.

Speaking of technicality, a technical detail would be a problem with his technique. If you get the content wrong, then it's not a technical error.

rudynoname

25-01-05, 11:01 AM

Neph weve seen the care Chris metzen takes with the lore and we know this book is sanctioned and actualy part oft he lore. despite a few errors and differences the book is very close to the story we know which would have been impossible had the creative team not been involved. for every change there are many things that remained the same. however also take into account this is the newest piece and is not even complete. its safe to assume the creative team would not incorporate it nto anything else until the story was actualy complete because of the nature of the book (time travel) and the possibility of giving the story away, also the fact that the book is not complete. if Metzen publishes something new that continues to go against Knaak later on then the old version is correct. however as of now this is the official lore despite your opinion.

And Neph its silly to believe the story won't change again. they wanted to publish a few novels and decided to use the war of the ancients. its absurb to think they would follow the warcraft 3 manual word for word. so yes i agree that they are reluctent to make changes, but that doesn't mesn they won't if its or the greater good of the lore, as is here and alread in several places for world of warcraft. theyve changes the lore since then, its no surprise they would change it again. you of all people should know this.

Fact is this book was approved and sanctioned and until otherwise noted the book is the lore despite ur hangups about it. you can choose not to accept it but it would be similar to reading book series and because of your deslikes for one of the books you decide to pretend it never happened.

and weve seen Illidan dealing with the arcane, the rush of power, the glory etc.....notice the well is still there and Illidan has access to it. Also they are allowing Illidan to use his magic to help with the cause (another of those changes im sure your crazy about). so it would be kind of silly to show him suffering from a magic withdrawal. they showed what the arcane can do, its an addiction and it even caused Illidan to switch sides.

and yes it is your opinion. Neph Knaak is a good writer, his plot development is great, mixing in lore and action as nessesary. also how he uses suspense and allows to to disover more little by little by things that are meantioned. also his characters are far more believeable that most other authors and he did a terrific job of fleshing them out, their actions, personalities, and dialogue all tie together very well, unlike a fe other novel, which coincidently i still consider lore. Saying its badly written is your own opinion. when an university english professor tells me its bad i'll believe, but im pretty sure they would agree with me and tell you it is a solid well written book.

as for technicality, you know i dont mean a language error Neph. its like the expression. the fact that they forgot about the hgh elves or maybe meant to say twins, or the whole deal about the earthen and dwarves, in the overall book are jsut technicalities and don't ruin the entire book. i dont literaly mean they are technical errors of language.

Nephalim

25-01-05, 09:29 PM

Neph weve seen the care Chris metzen takes with the loreYes, care enough to not allow something so riddled with inconsistencies.the book is very close to the story we knowI completely disagree. I mean, the gist is the same, yes. I could give the book and the original the same blurb in TV guide, but the details are all wrong. Characters are playing roles and have motivations entirely different then what was described. however as of now this is the official lore despite your opinion. Official - yes. Reliable - no.
its absurb to think they would follow the warcraft 3 manual word for word.Why?
you can choose not to accept it but it would be similar to reading book series and because of your deslikes for one of the books you decide to pretend it never happened.I've said over and over that I'm not just saying this isn't a credible piece of lore because I dislike it and I think I've given sufficient reasons demonstrating that, so, once again, I would appreciate it if you wouldn't attempt to overturn my argument as simple bias.

weve seen Illidan dealing with the arcane, the rush of power, the glory etc.....notice the well is still there and Illidan has access to it. Also they are allowing Illidan to use his magic to help with the cause (another of those changes im sure your crazy about). so it would be kind of silly to show him suffering from a magic withdrawal. they showed what the arcane can do, its an addiction and it even caused Illidan to switch sides.The resistance doesn't know about arcane corruption. Malfurion doesn't but it was his main reason for founding the resistance. Illidan's prime motivation is impressing Tyrande, though originally he was choosing the arcane OVER Tyrande. Rhonin has yet to mention it, too, even though he would have some insights on the subject that would be useful against the high-borne and the demons. If I didn't know about the corrupting nature of the arcane before coming into this, I would see no evidence of it here.

Knaak is a good writer Yes, so I wonder what the hell's wrong with him when he wrote these. His plot's cliched, his characters are HF stereotypes, and his action scenes are sloppy. Since you don't think I'm qualified enough to come to these conclusions, even though I've been studying why good writing is good for going on three years, TAKE either of these books to someone who has a degree in the subject and they'll agree with me.

But once again, the fact that they are badly written has no bearing on this argument.
as for technicality, you know i dont mean a language error Neph.I know that's not what you mean so I'm encouraging you to stop saying it.

Kingcrazygenius

25-01-05, 10:44 PM

Is it me or have you guys just been posting your same posts over and over again for the last page of this thread?

Look, I couldn't even read the first book, so I know it sucks. And it's already being replaced by other sources, so I am not exactly seeing a reason for this debate.

All we can agree on is that you both smell of boiled cabbage.

rudynoname

25-01-05, 11:21 PM

Yes, care enough to not allow something so riddled with inconsistencies..

eactly he does care enough not to allow something that is riddled with incosistancies. and he never did.

I completely disagree. I mean, the gist is the same, yes. I could give the book and the original the same blurb in TV guide, but the details are all wrong. Characters are playing roles and have motivations entirely different then what was described.

called changes. Neph. learn them, embrace them. theyve happened and will continue to happen. even Knaaks version will be chaged eventualy.

Official - yes. Reliable - no.

Oficial yes. Reliable definetly. this whole unreliable thing is nothing more than ur opinion. its totaly reliable.

Why?

Because background for a game and a novel have different writing styles Neph. i wont explain further as i think thats an answer right there and explaining it further would be insulting to both our intelligence.

I've said over and over that I'm not just saying this isn't a credible piece of lore because I dislike it and I think I've given sufficient reasons demonstrating that, so, once again, I would appreciate it if you wouldn't attempt to overturn my argument as simple bias.

and i agreed with you ealrier but it keeps appearing that way. regardless even if it isn't because of any bias your reasons still dont add up to the point where it makes sense to disregard the book.

The resistance doesn't know about arcane corruption. Malfurion doesn't but it was his main reason for founding the resistance. Illidan's prime motivation is impressing Tyrande, though originally he was choosing the arcane OVER Tyrande. Rhonin has yet to mention it, too, even though he would have some insights on the subject that would be useful against the high-borne and the demons. If I didn't know about the corrupting nature of the arcane before coming into this, I would see no evidence of it here.

Malfurions main reason now to to fight the demons and save his people. dont you think thats reason enough to fight? so things have changed, oh well. things will change again. weve seen the damage arcane causes. just look at the high borne. anyone reading this could easily see the arcane is adictive and dangerous, just look at the legion. and that druidism is the way to go.

Yes, so I wonder what the hell's wrong with him when he wrote these. His plot's cliched, his characters are HF stereotypes, and his action scenes are sloppy. Since you don't think I'm qualified enough to come to these conclusions, even though I've been studying why good writing is good for going on three years, TAKE either of these books to someone who has a degree in the subject and they'll agree with me.

But once again, the fact that they are badly written has no bearing on this argument.

Neph he is a professional best selling author. i'll take his credentials over most other people's opinion any day. and while most professors will probably dislike fantasy style writing, they would still agree its well and solidly written, mixing in just what is needed to make a good book, good vocabulary, not overly wordy, etc.... the books are engaging and quite enjoyable as well. although i agree that this book wasn't his best work, not quite as good as DotD.

however yes, like ive meantioned before, this has no bearing on it being lore.

I know that's not what you mean so I'm encouraging you to stop saying it.

lets not get into a language war here. lets stick to the topic.

and yes king is right. we keep posting the same thing over and over. your not going to convince me because i firmly believe what i know is right and im sure you believe the same.

yunn

25-01-05, 11:28 PM

OK, group hug, guys.

*long, uncomfortable silence*

rudynoname

25-01-05, 11:33 PM

group hug! im all for it

haha don't be scared. we get intense when we discuss the lore, i take it very seriously. but i don't think weve ever gotten to the point where any of us take it personally.

Nephalim

26-01-05, 10:41 PM

eactly he does care enough not to allow something that is riddled with incosistancies. and he never did.This is getting extremely repetetive. This IS inconsistent. Inconsistency is the relationship between propositions that cannot both be true. One says one thing happened, the other says something different happened. This is, by DEFINITION, an inconsistency, so please, for the love of god, stop pretending it isn't.
called changes. Neph.Ok, let's just step back a second and recall that I was responding to your claim that the book was very close to the original.
Because background for a game and a novel have different writing styles Neph. i wont explain further as i think thats an answer right there and explaining it further would be insulting to both our intelligence.Well, feel free to insult it, because that makes no sense. Explain to me why you couldn't make a book out of the manual. The story given in the manual was like the outline of a book, and a book could have easily been made illustrating those events without violating them. Obviously, I'm not looking for a reprint of the manual. I'm looking for an elaboration, not a deviation. Of course they have different writing styles but style doesn't influence content. So explain to me why a book that didn't violate a single word of the original story is not possible, and don't try to scare me into not pursuing the matter.
and i agreed with you ealrier but it keeps appearing that way. regardless even if it isn't because of any bias your reasons still dont add up to the point where it makes sense to disregard the book.Well, first off, I've never suggested disregarding the book. Second, if my arguments are so illogical then you shouldn't have to resort to the "just because you dislike it" tactic to render them invalid.
so things have changed, oh well. things will change again.I don't know where you got this impression that Warcraft is so eager to rewrite itself at every available opportunity.
just look at the high borne. anyone reading this could easily see the arcane is adictive and dangerous, just look at the legion. and that druidism is the way to go.All right, then just look at the resistance. These sorcerers are using arcane magic to stop the demons. Rhonin and Krasus appear to be tossing around arcane magic all the time. Differences between the arcane and divine are not mentioned. The book also showed that Malfurion's powers could be extremely dangerous. What's the difference? As far as these books are concerned, there either isn't one, or it's not important, but according to the original, this was one of the MOST important things going on. The way this book portrays it, I would question Malfurion for outlawing arcane magic. It's addictive properties haven't even been addressed. I mean, sure, they like it, so they use it. That hardly makes it an addiction. I like toast, and I eat it whenever possible. However, I don't go into sweaty paranoid spaz-outs after some time without it, looking for my next toast-fix. The only way to illustrate magic as an addiction would be to show the effects of withdrawal. This hasn't been done.
Neph he is a professional best selling author. i'll take his credentials over most other people's opinion any day. and while most professors will probably dislike fantasy style writing, they would still agree its well and solidly writtenLook, I KNOW that this was not well-written, so your guessing at what a university professor's going to say about it isn't going to do much for me. So, honestly, TAKE it to someone who you seriously deem qualified.
lets not get into a language war here. lets stick to the topic.You're calling these inconsistencies technical to make them seem like they don't matter, when the word technical doesn't apply. If you stop doing that, I'll stop telling you to stop doing that. If I'm expected to understand what you're saying, then I'd expect you to use words by definitions they actually possess.

rudynoname

27-01-05, 07:17 AM

neph it's something new. saying it's inconsistant with something that may already be outdated is silly. get off this whole inconsistant issue.

and yes its close but theres also changes. because a book makes one change it is no longer the same basic story and now some horrible misrepresentation. i don't think so.

as far as the formats go, books need events to progress the plot, etc.... build suspense, the tools writers use. the style in whcih the manual was written wouldn't work for a good book. trying to force a book into a strict outline in a game manual would be like trying to jam a square into a circle, it would be terrible (though according to you it already is). the story needed to be split up into three books with their own plots etc....of cource events had to be added and yes even had to be changed around to work with the format. its not rocket science it pretty obvious.
and Neph feel free to pursue the matter, or at least atempt to, that is. not trying to scare just really didn't think you needed it to be explained to you.

as far as saying ur biases are the reason ur wrong. that couldn't be farther from the truth. ive already told you your biases and my own don't mean a thing. probably said that a dozen times now. the reasons i've given you is why the books are valid, not some petty bias.

and im not saying the story changes for change's sake. Neph stop over reacting. im saying if the story needs to be changed it will. they won't do it just because but only if they have a very good reason, such as the publication of a series of books.

as far as the arcane addiction. it is extremelly obvious, no searching needed. theyve made very clear the difference's between's Illidan's arcane and malfurion's divine, especialy in all the scene's with malfurion and cenarius. weve seen Illidan toss reason to the wind and abondon his brother, his love, and his people for more power. i'd hardly call that not being addressed. as far as wthdrawl, remeber there has been no withdrawl. even with the shield Illidan was still able to cast spells. he hasn't faced withdrawl yet so why would knaak write about it.

neph ur guessing as well. and don't be silly, as if a professor is actualy going to take time and read a book just to give me his opinion because of a claim of urs. duh its not knaak's best work, its obviously not gonna win book of the year anytime soon, and its far from ground breaking, but it's still a solid well written book.

and yes thats exactly it. i was using that word because thats how insignificant these errors are. so they missed a word or skiped over it. Neph nothing is perfect. a few erros doesn't make the Books Illegit.

hey for all we know the time travel concept might have some strange effects, might change everything froomm before, maybe chaged it to how it is now, or away from it etc.....thats another thing, the series isn't done. and when it is i plan to read it and remeber every event and see what actualy happens so i don't have a outdated version of the lore in my mind, regardless of what the final result is.

Nephalim

27-01-05, 09:39 AM

neph it's something new. saying it's inconsistant with something that may already be outdated is silly. get off this whole inconsistant issue.OK, maybe I haven't been very clear for the last page and a half of posting, but my whole issue is the inconsistency issue. You see, several sources are consistent with each other, and tell the same story. Then, War of the Ancients remains the only exception to this rule.
as far as the formats go, books need events to progress the plot, etc.... build suspense, the tools writers use. the style in whcih the manual was written wouldn't work for a good book. You have absolutely no basis to be saying this, because you have no example that's true to form. The original didn't have events needed to progress a plot? It couldn't have had suspense? Are we reading the same thing? The outline wasn't that strict and could've easily been worked within with elbow room. Of course a different style would've been adopted to write the book, I mean, for god's sake, THAT is obvious. But this doesn't mean that the original events and themes have to be abandoned.
and Neph feel free to pursue the matter, or at least atempt to, that is. not trying to scare just really didn't think you needed it to be explained to you.So you told me that if I asked for further explanation, I was just stupid.
and im not saying the story changes for change's sake. Neph stop over reacting. im saying if the story needs to be changed it will.And this needed to be changed?
as far as the arcane addiction. it is extremelly obvious, no searching needed.Rudy, if you didn't know that the arcane was addictive, you wouldn't from this book, and you can not honestly tell me differently. Illidan is just on a power-lust to show up his brother. This makes him jealous, not addicted. If War of the Ancients was your primary source, you would have no reason to assume that arcane magic is addictive.
neph ur guessing as well.I have several repeated sources that were written by the Blizzard creative team and corroborate each other. Then I have ONE source written by someone NOT on the Blizzard creative team that says they're all wrong. This is what we like to call citable evidence. All you have is confidence in Knaak and his relationship with Blizzard.
but it's still a solid well written book.Just because he wrote good books in the past does not mean that everything he ever writes will be well-written. This "of course it's well-written, he's a best-selling author" isn't even a relavent reason.
and yes thats exactly it. i was using that word because thats how insignificant these errors are.Technical error does not mean insignificant error. It means error in technique.

rudynoname

27-01-05, 01:10 PM

When it 1 source that different right in the middle of a whole bunch of other sources it's inconsistant. when its a new source that hasn't even been completed yet it's a change. thats how these things work.

As far as the format goes, its doubtful. they might like one event better than another for a certain part of the plot in each book. they aren't going to have him write a crappy book. yes it is possible to stay completely within the otline, however the quality of the book might suffer. they create the story to work with the games, and the same should be expected of the books. a few paragraphs in an old game manual is not a reason to make a book turn out horribly wrong.

I said it didn't need further explaination and i still think you know exactly what i mean and just wanted me to write it out. i've known you here a while, and ur far from stupid which is why it surprises me this conversation is even happening.

yes it did. heres the thing blizzard is a company and they need to make money. one source of income is the books. as are the games. if the story needs to be chaged so it wil allow them to publish a book they will.

as far as Addiction, i think basicly you want Knaak to staate "arcane magic is ddictive". thats not how these things work. he has dropped hints, shown obvious examples, etc....

and its reliable. ive said it before its the newest source and hasn't even been completed so of course its not in anything published by blizzard at the moment. unlike in the book blizzard can't travel in time and add this new lore back into it's old manual games and rpgs. also blizzard isn't going to incorporate these events until the third book is published. we know knaak was talking to blizzard and it extremely doubtful they would just brush it off and say: "that never happened". well unless the time thing actualy does make it never happen.

and yes its true. writing good books doesn't prevent you from writing bad ones. but that has nothing to do with this.

and im saying its about as insignificant as a technical error. a lone technical errors is rarely important to the quality of the plot. thats the whole point.

Nephalim

27-01-05, 06:41 PM

When it 1 source that different right in the middle of a whole bunch of other sources it's inconsistant. when its a new source that hasn't even been completed yet it's a change. thats how these things work.No, actually, it's both. Look, go grab a dictionary, and look up inconsistency. This IS inconsistent.
As far as the format goes, its doubtful. they might like one event better than another for a certain part of the plot in each book. they aren't going to have him write a crappy book. yes it is possible to stay completely within the otline, however the quality of the book might suffer. they create the story to work with the games, and the same should be expected of the books. a few paragraphs in an old game manual is not a reason to make a book turn out horribly wrong.So when did they hold council and decide that the original story was terrible? I, for one, LIKED it. The quality of the book might suffer no matter what you do, and everything in the original account could translate into a perfectly good book. Give me a specific example as to why this is not so. What could not have been expressed? What's the detail that would have tangled any author and ruined it?
I said it didn't need further explaination and i still think you know exactly what i mean and just wanted me to write it out. i've known you here a while, and ur far from stupid which is why it surprises me this conversation is even happening.This is ridiculous. You make a nonsense claim, tell me I'm an idiot if I ask you to explain it, don't give an adequate explanation when I ask for one, and then STILL insist that I was stupid to ask for it.
yes it did. heres the thing blizzard is a company and they need to make money. one source of income is the books. as are the games. if the story needs to be chaged so it wil allow them to publish a book they will.Once again, why was it necessary to change the story to make it into a book? Are Rhonin and Krasus so vital to the franchise that we have to contrive vague, illogical reasons to force them into an era they don't belong in?
as far as Addiction, i think basicly you want Knaak to staate "arcane magic is ddictive". Wow, you should really stop guessing what I want. The book showed people using magic. Is this one of your obvious examples? Motivations which SHOULD be addiction are replaced by jealously and powerlust. If I was new to the franchise, I'd think that Illidan primarily betrayed them because of Xavius' coaxing. There are no signs of magic as an addiction. Stop just saying it's obvious.
and its reliable. ive said it before its the newest source and hasn't even been completed so of course its not in anything published by blizzard at the moment. unlike in the book blizzard can't travel in time and add this new lore back into it's old manual games and rpgs. also blizzard isn't going to incorporate these events until the third book is published.This is not true. Like I've said before, Neltharion's betrayal was added to the prologue, and yet, all the other details remain unchanged. In face, the prologue was created with Neltharion's betrayal in it even before the Demon Soul came out, so they're obviously not shy about including details from an incomplete series. So if they added THIS detail, why would they leave the rest unchanged?
and yes its true. writing good books doesn't prevent you from writing bad ones. but that has nothing to do with this.When I challenged you to actually get these books looked at by someone qualified, you countered with "Neph he is a professional best selling author. i'll take his credentials over most other people's opinion any day." as if that should render my previous statements overturned. I've given you examples, and specific reasons, why these books are not good books, and you reply with "it's solid."
and im saying its about as insignificant as a technical error. a lone technical errors is rarely important to the quality of the plot. thats the whole point.So, what, you were calling them technical when they're not just to be ironic?

rudynoname

27-01-05, 11:33 PM

yes i even said it was inconsistant. look at a few post ago. but guess what? warcraft 3 was inconsistant with warcraft 1. why? because they changed the story a bit. warcraft 3 was right, as is this newer version. they are inconsistant with an old outdated now incorrect version. theories today are inconsistant with ancient ones, but that doesn't make them wrong.

Neph, i LOVED the original story. it was great, and that is an understement. completely believeable good characters, excellent plot, etc.....i am a huge fan of the old story. i'll shout it from the highest mountian, etc.....however it changes. and knaak wrote a good story as well. some examples are the books finales. they need 3 major climaxes in the story now besides the big one they had in the manual (sundering). they had to add things around, maybe not have time to address an issue in one book and still make sense with the new climax so they moved it to the next, etc....it different, but its the new lore.

neph u got ur answer and choose to ignore it like you've done many times. if ur going to be stuborn im not going to bother. i know you know the reasons, you know the warcraft story very well.

was it nessesary to change the story to make it into a book? no. to make it a good book, yes. they wrte the summary with some detail. when writing the books they needed to add alot more and making a good book with plot development, character development etc... would be difficult to stick to a format that wasn't intended to be a trilogy. Npeh thats really obvious, come on now...

Neph weve seen how Illidan is draining the moonguard, growing arrogant, doesn't have complete control of himself when he gets into his arcane powers. he needs it so much and wants it to the point of betrayal of everything he has ever known. it is very obvious. and yea i know you don't actualy want "arcane magic is addictive" statement, im just using it to show you why i think its silly to ignore what we already have.

ahha so they did add something. well thats 1 reason but i gave several. other reasons were not to spoil the ending of book 3, whcih revealing some betrayal info wouldn';t really affect too much, and another is that book 3 is not done yet but weve seen the effects of the betrayal and since that part is finished it may have been alright to add it. remeber book 3 wasn't even written at the point book 2 hit stores. so including a few details isn't reason enough to assume that the series as a whole isn't new.

also if they included that then obviously they would include the rest in the lore later on.

no ive given you reason etc....., again you ignore them. go back and read my post. "it's solid" is usualy at the end of an entire paragraph telling you why it's good.

and no i'm doing it to show you a point.

Nephalim

28-01-05, 02:02 AM

yes i even said it was inconsistant.And then you said it wasn't. I hope you understand how frustrating this makes having an argument with you.
they need 3 major climaxes in the story now besides the big one they had in the manual (sundering). they had to add things around, maybe not have time to address an issue in one book and still make sense with the new climax so they moved it to the next, etc....it different, but its the new lore.But it didn't have to be different. New stuff needed to be added; fine. You can add new stuff without changing old stuff. You can make a story just more generally grounded in Warcraft. Why aren't the litany of characters who we know were involved in these events even mentioned? You want climaxes that apparently aren't there? Try these:
Malfurion tries to stop the high-borne too late; Azshara summons the first of Sargeras' army and lays waste to the night elves. End of book one, flip tape over.
Illidan is unable to bear the thought of losing his magic forever and so once he hears of Malfurion's plan to destroy the Well, goes mad and leaves to side with Azshara. End of book two.
The night elves "win" and the World Tree is planted on Mount Hyjal. Malfurion sadly imprisons Illidan in the Barrow Deeps and then resolves to rebuild his shattered civilization. End of book three.
neph u got ur answer and choose to ignore it like you've done many times. if ur going to be stuborn im not going to bother. i know you know the reasons, you know the warcraft story very well.This is becoming increasingly frustrating. These ARE NOT REASONS. The story of the War of the Ancients has more than enough ups and downs to facilitate a book. Why couldn't they add to it without deviating from it? Why were these changes necessary? Despite what you may think, you actually have not answered this question. You've just said it's necessary because it's necessary.
Neph weve seen how Illidan is draining the moonguard, growing arrogant, doesn't have complete control of himself when he gets into his arcane powers. he needs it so much and wants it to the point of betrayal of everything he has ever known. it is very obvious.Malfurion also doesn't have control of his powers. He gets depressed and an uncontrollable wave of destruction sweeps across the battlefield. I could also easily argue that Illidan betrayed them because he was jealous and because he thinks if his magic was more potent he'd impress Tyrande.

Like I said before, the way it is here, I really have to raise an eyebrow at Malfurion saying that arcane magic is evil and outlaws it. Other sorcerers were desperately using their powers to stop the demons, and Rhonin and Krasus are obviously sorcerers, have full control of their faculties, and are integral to the resistance. Knowing all this, Malfurion would likely see that magic is only corrupting if one lets it be corrupting. Just because Illidan became an asshole hardly seems reason enough to ban the whole thing.
other reasons were not to spoil the ending of book 3, whcih revealing some betrayal info wouldn';t really affect too much, Neither would changing the story to reflect Azshara's newfound uselessness or the Well no longer containing the portal, or that magical addiction is no longer the reason for Illidan's betrayal, or that Malfurion apparently doesn't figure out the corrupting nature of the arcane until some time after it says he does.
another is that book 3 is not done yet but weve seen the effects of the betrayal and since that part is finished it may have been alright to add it.Like I said before, this was revealed some time before the second book was released.
also if they included that then obviously they would include the rest in the lore later on. I don't think that's obvious at all. Why would they add only one detail? Why wouldn't they wait until the end to release all the apparently sanctioned changes at once? Why wouldn't they incorporate all the changes I mentioned above? It wouldn't reveal anything for readers (which the Neltharion detail DID).
no ive given you reason etc....., again you ignore them. go back and read my post. "it's solid" is usualy at the end of an entire paragraph telling you why it's good.Oh no, I got all those. "It's a good plot, they're good characters, it's totally solid. Therefore, it's a good book."
How about that "Cenarius' breath on his cheek was like a lover's touch"? Does THIS fall under your examples of good writing?
and no i'm doing it to show you a point.So, now you were calling them technical when they're not to show me a point. How uncharacteristically subtle of you.

Kingcrazygenius

28-01-05, 12:44 PM

"Cenarius' breath on his cheek was like a lover's touch"?

What game was he playing!? Cenarius doesn't even begin to be some kind of all-loving hippie. Cenarius is nature incarnate, the badass among badasses among green-colored lifeforms.

rudynoname

28-01-05, 03:22 PM

Neph it's because you continue to repeat thing iover and over and ignore what i tell u in each post. its even more frustrating trying to have this debate with you.

And while those are possible ending they are not the only ones. remeber theres this whole time anamoly (and while i know part of it was to include rhonin krasus etc...which i cringed when i first heard about it but was later pleasently surprised how well he worked them in) but the other reason is to tie it into the present day azeroth. things did have to be changed such as the addition of characters etc..... as far as the rest it's alot easier to write a believeable summary rather than a believeable book. changes needed to be made or the book would have bveen garbage. only difference between this book and the others was the fact that this book was based on events that had previously been described. the other books for the most part weren't.

Neph i told you why they couldn't, accept it. if you'd rather not it still won't matter because this is now correct. and "deviate" from it is just ur opinion. im sure a professional author and a creative director at a company know more about writing a book based on lore than you do.

as far as the arcane goes your begining to make excuses. Illidan demonsrates it, malfurion and cenarius speak of it, etc.... it clearly stated. really difficult to not see that.

yes but like ive meantioned earlier hey aren't going to go back and change everything. yes the portal issue has changed , malfurion no longer throws Xavius into it, owever that was probaly something decided early on and then when the book was being wrtten it was decided it would be difficult for malfurion would be able to actualy toss xavius into the well via his emerald dream form. like ive meantioned earlier is easy to write a good summary or paragraph. its another to write a believeable novel.

well that just shows metzen already had the plan out and talked about it with knaak. again the stories have far too many similarities to call it illegit. we have no way of knowing wether chris got the idea from knaak or vice versa. If Knaak got it from chris then obviously chris is involved, if the other way around then obviously knaak is listening to chris. what i mean is if that part is sanctioned then likely the rest is as well, as if we couldn't figure that out already. (though something tells me your going to say this was an isolated incident.

and i never said it was perfect, i even said it has its faults. i remeber a few sentances in there that did make me cringe besides that one. temporary lapse of judgement on knaak's part. but i forgive him.

Neph language can be figurative. again yes ill call them technical errors again just to make you see how silly ur acting. though i think ur stuborness here will continue to hang onto this issue. im trying to show you how silly it is to call a book illegit on a few small errors. they really might as well be spelling erros for how little they matter.

Nephalim

28-01-05, 10:57 PM

Neph it's because you continue to repeat thing iover and over and ignore what i tell u in each post.When you say things that conflict with each other how the hell do you honestly expect me to follow?

You say it's consistent, then you say it isn't, then you say it is again, and then, you say it isn't again, while reminding me that you once said it was.

You say you didn't like the time travel thing, and then you say you did. You went from "Knaak's an ok writer" to "Knaak is a bestselling author and this is a great book."

And then you say I'm ignoring your points when all your points are circular arguments. When I challenge you for actual reasons, you throw in words like "obviously" and then say the same thing over again.

You expect me to take the position that it's all or nothing. If Neltharion's betrayal is credible, so must the rest be. However, when I say that since we know he got several details wrong, the rest should be subject to scrutiny, you claim that they don't matter. Following your posts, the significance of everything he gets wrong has steadily decreased in your mind over the last two pages of posts.

Let's strip the flesh off all of this and take it as objectively as we possibly can, shall we?

The book was based on the game. Comissioned by the creators of the game. Those creators have written material that conflicts with certain points of the book. So who do we trust? The guys who made the franchise? Or the guy they hired?

I mean, Alone in the Dark just came out today as part of Uwe Boll's continuing scheme to bring the video game industry to a screaming halt. It's been officially sanctioned by the game's creators. It's considerably newer than the game. But when someone asks you, when going to play Silent Hill, "what happened in Alone in the Dark?" are you going to give them an account of the game or the movie?

You are assuming everything. You're assuming that Metzen pored over every page of this book, despite all the mistakes he must've missed. But then, they're insignificant so he wouldn't have bothered to change them even if they were noticed, right? You're also assuming that if Metzen or the Blizzard creative team didn't agree with it, it wouldn't have gone to publishing. You're assuming that a version true-to-form is impossible, and you assume that adding things means changing things.

And you do have yet to give me an actual reason for why the original couldn't have been a book. And I mean a specific reason. They have different styles? That doesn't even mean anything. Knaak should've been using every available reasource. This trilogy should be obscure references 101. I want some Azsune, I want some Dath'Remar, I want some Azzinoth, hell, I'll take some Anathera and Latherion. You said yourself, World of Warcraft has been in the works for years, so why wouldn't new lore presented from there be included in War of the Ancients, since it was written later? And especially if Metzen's working on it. I mean, mention Lathorian and Anathera. People would LOVE that. They do stuff like this ALL THE TIME, and War of the Ancients is the only exception.
as far as the arcane goes your begining to make excuses. Illidan demonsrates it, malfurion and cenarius speak of it, etc.... it clearly stated. really difficult to not see that.Why are you not responding to all that crap I'm saying about Malfurion's powers, or the resistance sorcerers? Or how this book renders his future reasoning illegitimate? It is NOT clearly stated, and I'll say it again - if you hadn't known before, you wouldn't know from this. Stop just saying it's clear over and over without backing it up with something.

Illidan is shown being reckless with magic. This doesn't amount to addiction. Xavius is ambitious for more power. This doesn't amount to addiction. Azshara, vaunted as THE most powerful sorceress of her time and the poster-girl of magical corruption, has yet to cast a SINGLE spell. This doesn't, in any way, amount to addiction.

I've had about enough, and if you're just trying to piss me off into giving up, you're very very close. Call me stupid or silly or stubborn again, and we'll see how it goes.

Kingcrazygenius

28-01-05, 11:06 PM

I mean, mention Lathorian and Anathera. People would LOVE that.

Who the ****?

Nephalim

28-01-05, 11:21 PM

They're two night elf warriors who died in each others' arms during the War of the Ancients, so we learn in a lore-heavy quest.

Kingcrazygenius

28-01-05, 11:26 PM

How tragically romantic.

rudynoname

29-01-05, 01:00 AM

Neph read my posts ive already posted my reasons. i said knaak is a greater writer, but this not his best work, said it is inconisitant but also correct, etc.....your twisting waht ive been saying all along. ive kept the same mesage and am not going to change my mind on something just to appease you. the same is true for the rest. go back faar enough you'll see ive kept consistant. i have my stance and am not changing it until you give me good solid reasons which you haven't even come close to.

and Neph i've been objective the entire time. if either of us has included biases here it sure as heck wasn't me. i give you reasons and you never respond to them and respond to maybe one sentance out of a paragraph.

now lets be realistic. this is a book that was sanctioned by the creative team. theyve written lore in the past and had it adjusted for when they had books written, books mind you, that they were involved in. this is no different than the other books written before. only difference is that they are newer and haven't been incorporated yet.

and believe me the whole movies thing has occoured to me before. examples like books and comics made into movies that were changed etc....of course it would be absurb to follow the movies ideas. the movies aren't actualy official story for actual events in whatever book or comic they are portraying. the warcraft books are however. blizzard takes these books and its actualy part of the story rather than some little bigshot's interpretation of it. thats the difference in this situation. Dotd wasn't Knaak's independant version of what happened at grim batol, it was the actual events, as is his neweest books. we will see their lore in the future and i think you know that.

as far as for why things aren't in there we can't answer. we don't now whats going on and it might be difficult to have everything written in. all these events could easily still happen in the new version. and unless were given reason to believe they never did , then they still must have happened. simply because knaak didn't show it doesn't mean it never happened. it would be silly to assume every event would be shown to us when the book is written through a few main character's perspective's and they may not have room for every little piece of lore. for instance, Illidan may have gotten his blades during any battle or encounter he had with the demons. not saying knaak is perfect just saying his story should be followed. even blizzard isn't perfect.

Neph it's clear througfh action's, hints droped etc.... ive repeated them dozens of times now and im begining to think you skip most of what im typing. u said urself u didn't actualy want it to the point they actualy say "arcane magics are addictive", however its beging to seem that way. i mean just look at Illidan. the guy himself is all the proof anyone needs. look at the highborne, xavius, the moonguard. neph the proof is right out in to open.

again it still amazes me were even debating the legitimacy of this book. if you want perfection it isn't going to happen. but this book is nowehere near the point of being considered illigetimate. i do believe theres a point where even a book thats published by the official company should be considered trash and forgotten about, but this book isn't anywhere near that point.

relax neph, i wouldn't bother doing this to piss you off. and im not a cruel or vicious enough person to do something like that. im having this debate only because i believe in what im saying, not out of any motivation to make you angry. i'd have this debate whether it was with you or anyone else here, with no animosiyy whatsoever. even after this debate i'd still laugh and joke with you anytime. and thats not me trying to play nice or anything like that, i sincerly mean that.

Bloodbeard

29-01-05, 10:17 AM

When I first heard about the proposed War of the Ancients, I prayed that the main characters were Malfurion, Tyrande and Illidan. Why couldn't he just have done it that way, Lord? Why did he have to bring that static character Rhonin into the mix??

Oh wait, because he created Rhonin and wants to make his characters huge figures in WarCraft. Arrogant bastard.

Nephalim

29-01-05, 12:28 PM

Neph it's clear througfh action's, hints droped etc.... ive repeated them dozens of times now and im begining to think you skip most of what im typing. u said urself u didn't actualy want it to the point they actualy say "arcane magics are addictive", however its beging to seem that way. i mean just look at Illidan. the guy himself is all the proof anyone needs. look at the highborne, xavius, the moonguard. neph the proof is right out in to open.Stop just saying that and actually give me specific citations.

rudynoname

29-01-05, 02:52 PM

yea thats what originaly got me a little scared about this book. i think it could have been done without them. however if he had to include them ive think he's done a good job of keepin em in check. definetly not going to say Knaak's ego didn't have a part to play in that decision.

and Neph i already have. Illidan abondoning his people, all the highborne, etc....im not going to post them again becuase you don't want to go back and read. if you want speicific quotes you're in luck. i cycle through reading all the warcraft books and i just started rereading well of eternity. i'll post quote's etc....as i come across them. but sorry im too busy to go through the books just to give you the proof you need.

Nephalim

29-01-05, 09:49 PM

Illidan abandoned his people, according to his book, because Xavius gave him some telepathic prodding to do so and because he's convinced it will impress Tyrande. And just saying "all the highborne" doesn't mean anything. These people are not magic addicts, they're powermongers. The only way to illustrate this as distinctly addictive would've been to show the effects of magical withdrawal, which he could've done if he had stuck to the story.

You said yourself before that the story had to be changed to facilitate a book. For the record, I think this is bull****, but that's beside the fact. You said this, and this is just how a story has to be changed to facilitate a movie. So if the only reason they're changing the story is because it simply will not work in its original form as a book, then how can you say we trust this over the original? Since the original is what was actually intended, and, according to your logic, they were only forced to change it to facilitate the needs of a trilogy.

KillAllZerg

30-01-05, 12:23 AM

For some strange, idiotic reason, I find myself understanding and agreeing with Nephalim's argument more readily than I do with Rudynoname's. After carefully reading all the arguments and going over all the proof and support literature presented, I have to agree with Nephalim that just because the "War of the Ancients" recieved a "stamp of approval" doesn't mean it is a dependable account of the history in the twisting world of Warcraft. Unless the author was part of the original team that created the Warcraft universe and all the subsequent lores, or went over every aspect of the Warcraft saga with a fine toothpick(which he obviously didn't), there was no way he was in the necessary mindset to have created the trilogy as a depenable source of information on the Warcraft universe.

An example of this would be a personal biographer. To fully understand the depth of the subject and give an accurate acount in their book, the biographers' will research everything about that person: their parents, their religious beliefs and ideologies, the social norms during the times of that person's upbringing, their social status in the comunities, and every bit of information concerning that person. It doesn't matter if it is seemingly useless, such as the amount of time that person urinated on a specific date.
The reason for the seemingly endless acqusition of information by the biographer on the person that they will write about is simple: in order to write properly about the subject, they must become the subject. Indeed, the end product will not be seen by the author as a biography on their subject, but be seen as an autobiograpghy of themself. In fact, it its, for everything that has happened to their subject happened to them as well, for the biographer's mind is so deeply entrenched in the memories and actions of their subject that they can't discern between which memories are their's and which memories are not.

This is the kind of dedication that an author needs in order to fully understand and comprehend the the subject at hand. However, it is clear that Knaak did not possess the said dedication, and therefore did not have the correct mindset to properly go about his work. The results clearly show in his works. Otherwise, how can you explain and defend the numerous mistakes that he made? Because he was never in the minds of those who created Malfurion Stormrage, Tryande Whisperwind, or Illidan Stormrage, he never knew how any of those characters will act with any given situation. When presented with a problem, the solutions chosen by the main characters as written by Knaak will greatly differ from the solutions their creator imagined, indeed if not predicted, they would have chosen. Because of this, the Malfurion we see is not the stoic or intelligent leader who led his people in their darkest hour, as described in Warcraft history. Nor is Illidan the magic obsessed sorcerer we predicted he would be. Instead, we get a love lorn schoolboy in his place. The only thing that the Knaak seems to have correct is the location and the time of the conflict. But those factors alone des not make it a good book, nor does it make it dependable Warcraft lore. Blizzard approved or otherwise.

rudynoname

30-01-05, 01:24 AM

yes but theyve also forced the story to facilitat game mechanics, novels in the past, etc...and unlike movies the novels are official part of the lore. thats what makes the difference.

as for withdrawl, that is another and probably very good way to show the arcane addicton and yes its true it hasn't been sown. but again thats one of those things that was in the old and not in the new. he still manaages to show arcane being addictive and dangerous however.

Killallzerg. i agree an author must understand what he is writing about in order to produce a good book, and i counter than knaak knew very well. it seems the main reason people might not quickly accept these books is because of a few small differences and erros. however also notice in the warcraft lore we get differences and errors all the time and war of the ancients, while having it's share of them, is still very close to the original story we knew. also keep in mind that author are usualy on schedules and may not have the liberty of spending months and months pouring over a subject. they do the best they can, which i'll admit they stil do a fine job, and metzen later makes sure any loos ends are taken care of. this as happened before and Im actaly shocked people could decide to ignore this book while readily accept the others. in time however im sure the eevents will be updated and we will see this book backed by the future lore as the books of the past have been.

Nephalim

30-01-05, 05:47 AM

yes but theyve also forced the story to facilitat game mechanics, novels in the past, etc...and unlike movies the novels are official part of the lore.The X-Men movie was overlooked by Stan Lee, and produced in part by Marvel. It's official.
he still manaages to show arcane being addictive and dangerous however.Alluring, yes. Addictive, no.
in time however im sure the eevents will be updatedDespite foregoing numerous opportunities to do it already, I take it.

KillAllZerg

30-01-05, 12:17 PM

Basic argument:

If Knaak can't get the personalities of three of the most important characters in Warcraft correctly, how do you expect him to get ten thousand plus years of Warcraft history correctly?

Kingcrazygenius

30-01-05, 01:15 PM

If you are referring to Illidan, Tyrande, and Malfurion as the most important characters I have little choice but to disagree.

KillAllZerg

30-01-05, 03:06 PM

There are other important characters out there, but they are not in the book. I was simple refering only to those three because they actually matter in this argument.

rudynoname

31-01-05, 02:48 PM

He got them about right. thats something that hasn't really changed. theres a few differences such as Malfurion seeming a little less high and mighty. that was one reason malfurion wasn't too poular in warcraft 3, ppl saw him as a little too full of himself, an all known intelligent maybe a little snobby figure (not me though, im just repeating what i heard from most ppl, but then again most ppl dont know the lore very well). the book makes him a little more human (well night elf, u know what i mean). remeber these are the characters 10000 years ago so they are bound to be slightly different. also while warcraft 3 did give us a lot of insight into these characters, it wasn't really such a large amount. we got a taste of them basicly, enough to understand attitues, personalities, etc... Knaak has stayed pretty close to their personalities.

Neph. okay official might not be a right word. now i know very little about xmen so are you saying the movie is actualy consider a part of the actual events? and i dont mean a theatrical interpretation of it i mean in its entirety. well regardless we know blizzard doesn't make these books as these little extras on the sides for ppl to just buy. they are actualy official legitimate parts of the lore. weve seen it before and will see it again.

alluring definetly, addictive also. its been made apparent. the rush, etc... i'm repeating myself here.

and no, few opportunities have been presented. WoW has been in production for years and its doubtful they would or ever will go back through every single little piece of lore and update it. however expansions in the future may show the effects of the new war of ancients. and the rpgs already have a few details we did not know before the books.which also shows that blizzard and knaak are in fact on the same page. however they were finsihed before the book series was done, i mean we have the rpgs books in our hands while we know the third book may not even be finished at this very point.

KillAllZerg

31-01-05, 09:29 PM

Jesus Christ man, use proper English!!! You know how much it hurts to make sense of your writing? Capitalize those damn first letters and use some stinking grammar!

rudynoname

01-02-05, 02:10 PM

lol. its quite easy to make sense of, its still in english. believe me when i want to use proper english i can, my friends know this and because of that i end up being the one double checking most of their essays. however its a gaming forum and never really undestood people becoming angry over ppl not using standard english on a forum. thing is i cant type very quickly and if i had to type everything out and fix every littl mistake i'd be here forever. its not rocket science, just go through it.

Diskordjah

01-02-05, 05:00 PM

personally Im more bothered by the discussion that the english. :y-sealed:

Nephalim

01-02-05, 07:17 PM

Come, now, Disk, you can't expect to say that and then not be asked to elaborate.

Kingcrazygenius

01-02-05, 07:20 PM

Oh sure he can. Just like the time I chewed on that celebrity.

TheNewHorde

01-02-05, 07:49 PM

Oh geeze....... This thread started out as a spam thread by me and then turned into a interested discussion of time travel then turn into wonderfully organized information of the warcraft lore. During my absense, it have utterly turned into a childish sissy fight between rudynoname and nephalim. (I didn't even bother to read the two page long debate between the two.) I simply dropped my jaw when I saw how this have turned... we should find a moderator specialist for this specific thread... *I volunteer* LOL

Kingcrazygenius

01-02-05, 09:33 PM

I will see to it that you are never a moderator.

Nephalim

02-02-05, 03:26 AM

(I didn't even bother to read the two page long debate between the two.)Then how, pray, are you qualified to condemn this argument as "childish" or "sissy"?

Diskordjah

02-02-05, 06:52 AM

Come, now, Disk, you can't expect to say that and then not be asked to elaborate.

two of our brightest minds engaged in a discussion that doesn't seem to go anywhere. and the discussion is ALSO on the subject of War of the Ancients. Which features time travel.

time travel pisses me off.

KillAllZerg

02-02-05, 03:34 PM

time travel pisses me off.

If you were given a chance to go back in time and make yourself king of the world, will it still piss you off then? :y-candle:

TheNewHorde

02-02-05, 05:32 PM

Fine... People don't have to be so mean. Oh, I thought of a good way to make friends, it's called a peace treaty. Here is my peace treaty, write "I Do" under this post and we will all become friends.

We the people of the War of the Ancient time travel discussion thread of the Unofficial Warcraft III forum in order to form a more perfect union, decided to be friends and no being mean to each other. Sign "I do" if you agree to this peace treaty.

rudynoname

02-02-05, 10:34 PM

i dont think we were ever at war. dont see the need for a peace treaty. im not against it im all for peace in the forum, just dont see the need for a treaty. however if neph wants me to sign it i will. otherwise i see no need for it.

and it was not a childish arguement. its was a well orginized debate. i dont think neph and me ever came close to crossing the line into spam.

KillAllZerg

04-02-05, 09:47 PM

The fact that this war between you two has nothing to do with the topic and the fact that it could've been conducted with IM's makes it look otherwise....

Kingcrazygenius

04-02-05, 09:52 PM

If you were given a chance to go back in time and make yourself king of the world, will it still piss you off then? :y-candle:

Somehow I doubt Disko's ambitions involve global domination.

KillAllZerg

05-02-05, 06:10 PM

Somehow I doubt Disko's ambitions involve global domination.
I'm sure Disko's lack of ambition doesn't apply to you.

Kingcrazygenius

05-02-05, 06:39 PM

Not even I can begin to concieve what I truely desire.

Nephalim

05-02-05, 08:01 PM

Zerg, stuff goes off topic. It happens, and it's not a bad thing, and I'm perplexed as to where the notion that off-topicness was the bane of every internet forum first appeared.

Discussions evolve, and if you want to chart that evolution, then read this thread post by post.

And I'm also surprised to see people so afraid of a little anger. The moment anyone starts getting passionate about their argument, they're picketed by other forumers claiming it's a flame war.

I'd be more concerned with the fact that the argument was just going nowhere.

KillAllZerg

05-02-05, 10:32 PM

There is passion, and then there is zeal. One leads to anger, but the other leads to hate.
---So says my fat Scotish arse while I scratch it :toothy:

You are not the first nor the last to realize that this dual between you two has come full circle. I have no qualms with arguments, provided they are serious and the author truely knows what he/she is talking about. The only thing I find disturbing is the fact that both of you realize that the other cannot be swayed, yet continue on nonetheless. Expressing one's opinons is one thing, arguing to enforce one's views as the only correct one is quite another.

Nephalim

06-02-05, 02:32 AM

Kingcrazygenius

06-02-05, 02:35 AM

My cat's breath smells like catfood.

KillAllZerg

06-02-05, 12:28 PM

Well, you likely realize that it's incredibly doubtful you'll convince me of pretty much anything you just said. So, why did YOU bother posting it?

Apologies all around, I'm just getting a little tired of people sweeping in after the fact, and critiquing the general attitude of an argument without even remotely adding to it.
I didn't post it to convince you of anything. It was just to simply state my opinion.

Besides, I read the entire thread, including the long arguments between you and rudynoname BEFORE i decided to add my own opinion on the matter (In fact, I supported your view on things). So don't YOU jump to conclusions before the entire story is known to you.

Nephalim

06-02-05, 12:33 PM

I didn't post it to convince you of anything. It was just to simply state my opinion.To what end? Just for the sake of it?
i decided to add my own opinion on the matterYes, and when Rudy replied with a perfectly legitimate counterpoint, you replied by utterly ignoring his post and attacking him because he didn't capitalize his sentences.

I took a liesurely stroll to my conclusions.

KillAllZerg

06-02-05, 12:59 PM

[QUOTE=Nephalim]Yes, and when Rudy replied with a perfectly legitimate counterpoint, you replied by utterly ignoring his post and attacking him because he didn't capitalize his sentences.[QUOTE]
I didn't attack him on anything. I just simply stated my wish that he capitalize his sentences. After working three hours correcting the grammars and spelling errors of five entire classes of third graders, one does wish to read a post that while not perfect, doesn't state " i LiKE mY kittY So MuCh!!!"

Besides, I don't understand what the problem you have with simply stating an opinion without any legitimate reason to do so. KCG does so all the time, and most of his post doesn't even contain any topic REMOTELY related to any disscusions within the thread.

And while I'm at it, you seem to seemed to have ignored reasonable points of rudynonames arguments as well. I agree with you that just because a story is Blizzard approved doesnt mean that it is lore. However, as rudynoname has pointed out, Knaak doesn't have enough time to fully immerse himself within the living world of Warcraft. Therefore, one must expect mistakes of massive proportions (at least according to die-hard fans such as yourself). He did get a lot of things incorrectly, but most of his work does correspond with what we know of the War of the Ancients and the Sundering. For all we know, the changes he added might have come at Blizzards request (as to why, that could be anyone's guess. Blizzard tends to have plans that are future oriented and quite unfathomable to commoners such as ourselves).

Kingcrazygenius

06-02-05, 01:14 PM

KCG you are not. Don't think what I can get away with and what you can get away with are corolated.

KillAllZerg

06-02-05, 01:33 PM

KCG you are not. Don't think what I can get away with and what you can get away with are corolated.
Thats because you are a moderator, and you abuse your powers to state anything you feel like and get away with it. Personally, you remind me of George Walker Bush: you both make statements and doesn't correspond to the topic at hand; you both abuse your powers to get whatever it is that you want (he with his war in Iraq, you with your nonsecqetor[sp?] posts); plus, you both make great butt-ends of jokes.

Anyways, back to the reason why this thread was started: I personally believe that with the intervention of Rhoin and his gang, the future that HE knows will not be changed. When and if he travels back to the future, things will be the same as he left them. However, his intervention in the past will have consquences. Another reality will been have started, this one with history mentioning the aid of the three heores, and it will branch off form the original reality at where Rhoin traveled back into the past. Think of it as a tree if you will. The main trunk represents the events that both realities share, but at one point, one reality branches off to the left, while the other reality continues straight on ahead. Within these two realities, other realities branches off them as well, just like that of a tree. The braching effect will not stop until time ends, and when it does, there will have been infinite realities out there, but all were started by only one, represented by the main trunk of a tree.

Kingcrazygenius

06-02-05, 01:55 PM

What does being a moderator have to do with my actions? You are far too anal and snappish, not to mention lacking in the humor department. And to think they let you near children.

Oh, and you missed a similarity; me and Bush are both Texan :lol:

KillAllZerg

06-02-05, 02:10 PM

Oh, and you missed a similarity; me and Bush are both Texan :lol:
Explains why you claim to be dirt poor and live in a trailer.

Nephalim

06-02-05, 02:44 PM

Besides, I don't understand what the problem you have with simply stating an opinion without any legitimate reason to do so. KCG does so all the time, and most of his post doesn't even contain any topic REMOTELY related to any disscusions within the thread.On the contrary, I have no problem with it. My point is that everything we do here is just for the sake of doing it and serves no real purpose. I mean, you just state your opinion just so that we can have the privelage of knowing where you stand on the subject. Rudy and I were arguing about which of our opinions were more merited. I mean, at least we were under the pretense of getting SOMETHING done.
And while I'm at it, you seem to seemed to have ignored reasonable points of rudynonames arguments as well.This may be so, but everything you just said, I addressed during the argument with Rudy (would you like me to repeat them for you?). So I probably did ignore a point or two, but if that's so, bring up points I actually DID ignore. That aside, I didn't just ignore entire posts and bitch about his bad grammar.

It just seems that every time you're confronted with a post you can't adequately respond to you change the topic entirely.

Kingcrazygenius

06-02-05, 04:43 PM

Explains why you claim to be dirt poor and live in a trailer.

When have I ever claimed to be dirt poor and dwelling in a trailor?

yunn

06-02-05, 08:00 PM

Thats because you are a moderator, and you abuse your powers to state anything you feel like and get away with it. Personally, you remind me of George Walker Bush: you both make statements and doesn't correspond to the topic at hand; you both abuse your powers to get whatever it is that you want (he with his war in Iraq, you with your nonsecqetor[sp?] posts); plus, you both make great butt-ends of jokes.He's been like that with or without mod powers, what the hell are you talking about? And no, you don't have to answer to that question, it's just rhetoric.

Icicella

06-02-05, 08:20 PM

Man, if I had to choose a trailer to live in, I'd pick the Sin City one. That looks sweet.

And does anyone else find it ironic that the guy who came in here whining about forum conduct is now the guy mudslinging?

Kingcrazygenius

06-02-05, 08:25 PM

At the rate I'm going I'll live in a box in downtown Dallas within a year. The prospect of being a homeless bum with a full beard intruiges me so.

KillAllZerg

06-02-05, 11:28 PM

Cerebral_009

07-02-05, 06:50 AM

Wow. The bitch must have gotten her new pinky
May your dreams be wracked with feverish nightmares, the like of which would cause Tam O'Shanter's mare to sprout a new tail.

>!<

Blastcan

18-02-05, 11:11 PM

You have to be asleep at the wheel to think the novel is using the 'Rhonin and Krasus were destined to fight in the war' scthick at the part they killed Hakkar. Rhonin was sweating bullets because he helped kill Hakkar in HIS time. That was a big road sign that history CAN be changed, and that there were things going on this time that shouldn't be happening that didn't involve them killing Hakkar (such as the timekeeper dragon not being present at Deathwing's betrayal, Krasus riding his past self).

The time travel plot goes like this: someone, probably from the War3 present, went back in time and is actively helping the Burning Legion win.

According to some sources, the Avatar of Hakkar in WoW doesn't end the Hakkar quest chain; it apparently continues in Zul'gurub, which isn't open yet. We don't know for certain if the Hakkars are one and the same, or different entities entirely. Knaak seems to think the Hakkars may be the same.