Lore concerns in the 2.4 raids
by Mike Schramm 
Feb 14th 2008 at 8:00PM
All right, let's put this issue to rest once and for all. Seems like every time Blizzard releases a new patch, we get someone saying "you're killing the lore!" on the forums, and complaining that Blizzard is killing off all the figures we know and love around the Warcraft universe. And apparently patch 2.4 is going to be no different.So let's have the final word on this right now: Blizzard has tons of people to kill off, and even if they started running out of people, they've created enough heroes since WoW started (an all-Saurfang instance, anyone?) that they'd be fine on lore for at least the next decade of expansion. There. Now when it is discovered (and it hasn't been discovered as of this writing yet) that we're killing Arthas off in the next expansion, no one needs to raise a fit. Besides, I kind of like that Blizzard is starting to put out some hits on heroes we know and love. I'd rather mix it up with famous Warcraft faces than kick around some nobodies just so the almightly Lore gets protected.
But I do have to agree with Vorith's other point: it might be kind of nice to do something with these NPCs besides kill them. I think he forgets that Maiev played a nice role in the Illidan fight, and that we've already been told we're going to interact with Arthas a lot outside of the actual raid, but yeah, the raid boss killing us might make for a nice change.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Blizzard, Instances, Lore, NPCs
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Poddo Feb 14th 2008 8:06PM
IMO, if I wanted to be playing a static game where the lore is "sacred," I'd still be playing WARIII, where everytime you play, you do the same thing, and the lore stays intact. If we're going to have a dynamic, living world, "some peoples gunna die!" Let the heroes fall, let the story advance.
Stoneblade Feb 14th 2008 8:12PM
What I find so interesting about the people who are lamenting the killing of Illidan or the possible killing of Arthas is that there are core, central lore figures that are killable now, and lots of people have no qualms about bringing about their deaths if they're able to...
I'm not even talking about loot pinatas like Illidan, I'm referring to Thrall, Jaina Proudmore, Tyrande, etc. These are characters who are central to the plot, but how often do we hear of people raiding a major city with the intent of killing one of their city leaders? Are Thrall or Magni Bronzebeard or Sylvannas somehow less important than Arthas or Illidan? Do they just not cut the mustard, because they don't have that "antihero" quality that seeps like an overturned syurp truck, like Mr. Betrayer or Mr. Frosty? Or, is it because they lead your opponent's faction, and they drop honor, that they forfeit their important lore character status and no one has qualms about killing them?
It seems, unfortunately, that honor might trump lore, in that regard.
Soeroah Feb 14th 2008 8:18PM
Killing major players in the lore is better than freezing it to a stand still. It would be the same as leaving a story half untold. Who wants that? You get to the juicy part about Arthas becoming the Lich King, and suddenly half the playerbase wants it left like that?
We aren't killing the lore, anyway. As long as Blizzard has NPCs helping in some way with the boss fights, we are just the footmen, the Druids of the Talon, the Priests, the Sorceress' of the Warcraft RTS, and the NPC is the hero that will forever be recorded in lore.
People will remember Illidan being slain by Akama and Maiev, not by the Gnomish Warrior Puffyp4nts.
klashby Feb 14th 2008 8:28PM
Uhhh - guys . . .
Fiction! It's not real, it's made up . . . Helloooo?
Perderedeus Feb 14th 2008 8:41PM
The problem with killing Arthas as opposed to Illidan is that Arthas is, for all intents and purposes, "the" supremo bad guy in Warcraft lore. Currently. Illidan was defeated by Arthas and although powerful is only second fiddle to the Lich King. Are there more powerful entities? Sure. Old Gods. Titans. Dragon Aspects, perhaps. Maybe a handful of others. Are they as "real" as Arthas? "Real" as in reachable, as in ACTIVE in the world? No. Arthas is DOING things. Illidan was hiding, but Blizz did a good job of making him central to Outland operations. Still, I can more easily stomach offing Illidan as opposed to Arthas.
Poddo Feb 14th 2008 8:44PM
If Blizz has half a brain, they will be writing a way for a new "supremo" bad guy to come in during the events of Wrath. I would bet it would be hinted at in quests and such during the original Wrath content, and would become a tad more central in the Naxx/Sunwell type patch of 3.x. The new bad guy doesn't have to be someone you know, it could be a new character.
Charlie Taylor Feb 14th 2008 10:39PM
You're forgetting Sargares! He's the entire reason why Illidan (who consumed Gul'dan's skull, who was corrupted by Sargares) exists, why Arthas (The Lich King was created from the shell of Ner'zhul, who was also corrupted by Sargares) exists. HE is the supremo bad guy in Warcraft lore! And while we might have killed off his physical form he's still lurking in the twisting nether somewhere!
Dave Feb 14th 2008 8:46PM
I think it's already been said (blizzcon?) that we're probably NOT killing Arthas.
What exactly we're doing is as yet unknown, but most likely we're going to fight Arthas, remove him from the Lich King's control and kill the Lich King. Now, maybe Sylvannas will come along and kill him, or someone else will kill him after he's no longer the lich king.... but I'm pretty sure that it's not just going to be a walk into Arthas' lair and kill him, grab some loot and that's that.
Josef Feb 14th 2008 8:57PM
I think its going to be the otherway round, we are going to kill arthas, but the Lich king remains, finds a new host, personally I bet its tirion fordring. Now THAT would be a kick in the teeth for the paladins :)
I can't really understand why people are so concerned by killing these characters anyway, they are huge pieces of lore yes, but the real lore of Warcraft hasn't actually been around that long, its only been WCIII and WoW that have covered it (sorry to say but the first two games were basically warhammer rip offs)
Heck they added C'thun and the Qiraj in WoW alone, look how well that turned out!
Sapphiron Feb 14th 2008 9:01PM
I am torn as well. I think killing Kil'jaden, while cool, might kill a bit of the lore. However, the other characters, imo, are all ok to be killed, and this includes illidan. However, we have to remember that, like the author said, there are other people to be used. I think that blizz could do a whole expansion on the Naherazim who, they could say, corrupted Sageras (further) and now have an agenda of their own now that he is dead...there are still possibilities.
Super Guest Man 9000 Feb 14th 2008 9:36PM
We're not killing Kil'jaden exactly. Simply stopping the summoning of a physical form on Azeroth. More than likely us "killing" him won't do much more that banish him back to the Twisting Nether.
Padooj Feb 14th 2008 9:06PM
How about killing recently raised Sargeras when we get to 90?
jumb Feb 14th 2008 9:13PM
I don't understand, what does the link have to do with 2.4?
Liel Feb 14th 2008 9:53PM
I would love the idea of instead of just killing Arthas the raid works on a redemption of Arthas. Maybe a fight where during different stages Arthas tries and seperates from the Lich King and then he joins you in destroying the Lich King
At least it would be original.
Fraufrau Feb 14th 2008 10:00PM
Working with NPC's?
Go to Hyjal, nearly every fight involves a NPC of significant status within The Lore
Kellgrim Feb 15th 2008 4:09PM
OK lets remember one thing here please that sadly the article seems to have missed out.
Why create an MMORPG for an established universe and already established lore - rather than do everything from scratch ?
the answer is VERY VERY simply - and not just to make more money - calm your avarice my dear friend.
it is to continue the universe and EVOLVE it - to enable a fan to take interact closer in the world (of warcraft) and even change events that happen inside it - the new sun plat is an example of this - the more dailies get done the more content gets made available and faster too ( remember AQ20/40?).
This concept is even being carried a step further with ideas like the new Stargate MMORPG that intends to actually alter the TV/Movie universe via player generated events set within the game world
Blizzard just do this differently via the use of concept panels, Forums, feedback, fiction writers, conventions, and working VERY hard to establish a firm and secure "player community" i.e. wowinsider, wowhead etc... etc...
all of this serves to keep a game or fantasy universe ALIVE and kicking and usually gives the players what they want in the end- and lets face it we ALL want MOREEEEEEEEE
now give WotLK ;p
hope that helps to answer why the lore changes a little :)
Ouzak Feb 15th 2008 8:18AM
Yes, it does involve lore characters, but that's because it IS lore. Caverns of time, remember, is a reimagining of past events. Nothing that a raid does there changes the lore in any way. Killing Illidan takes place in the present and has to be considered part of the lore from now on. Same as if Wrath allows us to kill Arthas.
SaintStryfe Feb 14th 2008 9:59PM
There's an old GM term from the Pen-and-Paper days:
If you stat it, they can kill it.
Put it into the game, the players will want to get 25 friends together to kill it without mercy.
Feoremar Feb 14th 2008 10:08PM
See, I'm alright with major characters dieing. In fact, I encourage it....however, my only problem is HOW they die.
I want an epic and MAJOR character to die in an epic and MAJOR famous. Uther was great, he died in a, perhaps not so epic, but mythical way, as did King Terenas. Anduin Lothar died awesomely. Orgrim Doomhammer, not the most epic, but qjuite memorable. Best deaths of all howeve,r have to be Grom's and Brox's. Those were all awesome and epic/memorable deaths.
I have no problem with Illidan dieing. In fact, I knew he would, after playing Warcraft three. My problem is HOW he died. I expected him to die epicly against Arthas, or atleast encountered him at least once more before his death. Dieing at the hands of 25 random people...isn't so epic....
However, it is true Maiev and Akama had a hand in it, and I could see how they could fit it into classic lore format. But Illidan's death just doesn't serve the character right. If this is just the end of him, than that sucks. I do hope though Blizzard expands on Illidan's story, of maybe how he survives, via the emerald dream somehow, his demonic magics, Kil'Jaeden trapping his spirit, etc.
Please Blizz, just don't 'kill' him off from the lore. Expand on him, somehow.
Terrant Feb 14th 2008 10:53PM
My concern is related to yours. I feel with all of WoW's major baddies taken out by (in Lore terms) random adventurers, it kind of makes the major figures like Thrall or Jaina seem fairly powerless, as all they do is stand around and delegate to you, the player. The universe should have heroes, not managers.
If Blizzard never makes another RTS in the Warcraft world, perhaps it's not a big issue. But there's definitely something gone about from the charisma of these guys.