Know Your Lore: Where is WoW's story headed in the distant future?

Because of the way we experience the setting, the story of World of Warcraft progresses in bursts. It's fair to think of each expansion as a new series, and the patches as episodic, in the same manner as British TV series such as Doctor Who or Turning Evil. Therefore, each expansion brings new settings, new dangers, and a new, overarching storyline, while each patch is an advancement of that storyline, bringing it to a conclusion with the ultimate patch of each expansion. In this way, Patch 4.3 is effectively a multi-part episode concluding the story of our confrontation with Deathwing.
I bring this up because with Mists of Pandaria, we're going to see a whole new place and explore it. In essence, it will be an expansion that introduces a great deal of new -- new lands, new peoples, new experiences. While it will still be part of Azeroth and still part of the unfolding storyline, it's also a change to switch gears and get away from the familiar. In a game like WoW, it's necessary to introduce new elements in this way to keep the setting engaging. It may be hard to relate now, but Ragnaros, Ahn'Qiraj, the Old Gods, the Silithid, all were introduced in World of Warcraft and not any of the RTS games. Look at the Warcraft III map of Kalimdor. You'll notice pretty much everything south of Feralas is blank on it.
This puts me in mind to speculate on the future of the game and where the lore is going to take us. Not just in Mists, of course, as I expect that much of the lore of the expansion is well and truly fleshed out already, and I'm as eager as anyone to see it. But we've got expansions down the road and trends to consider. None of this absolutely will happen ... but some of it might.
The Blackrock clan and the Horde
The Blackrock clan of orcs is placed in an unusual position as the war between Alliance and Horde continues. They still hold Blackrock Mountain, but with the death of Rend Blackhand and many of the corrupt leaders of the Blackrocks and the rooting out of Nefarian once and for all, the Blackrocks are at a tipping point. Consider that this was the clan of Blackhand the Destroyer, the clan of Orgrim Doomhammer, the clan that led the charge through the Dark Portal and that shaped the very destiny of the Horde entire for decades. Now, for the first time, they're leaderless and not under the control of an outside force like Nefarian. What does that mean?
Considering that we know that Eitrigg and his son Ariok are Blackrocks, it's possible that we'll see a renaissance for the clan. For one thing, they still hold a bastion of power directly north and south of Alliance territory. From Blackrock Mountain, Blackrock orcs can threaten Redridge and Northshire and can even strike north into the Searing Gorge. They're at war with the Dark Iron dwarves, who are also free of Ragnaros at the same time that the orcs are free of Nefarian, and we know that Moira Thaurissan is making progress toward claiming rule of both Bronzebeard and Dark Iron for her son, Dagran Thaurissan II. This puts the Blackrocks in a position where they need alliances to survive.

Furthermore, the Dragonmaw offered a port and a toehold into the Twilight Highlands, a territory fairly distant from any other Horde base and with minimal strategic importance aside from bringing war to the Twilight's Hammer. The Blackrocks can offer a fortress right in the heart of the Eastern Kingdoms, quite close to Kargath and Stonard for ease of resupply and reinforcement, that divides Khaz Modan from Redridge. If you want to eventually move to sack Stormwind, this is a tempting forward base.
Keep an eye on the Blackrocks. They have nothing to lose at this point and nothing stopping them from agreeing to recognize Garrosh as Warchief. And if they do, the Alliance will find the wolf is now squatting directly on their door. A stronger Blackrock/Horde relationship doesn't need to happen during Mists, but it almost seems inevitable once we move past it.
The Prophecy of Velen
Pandaria and its wonders and dangers are compelling and new, and I for one am looking forward to exploring them. But I definitely see our sojourn there as an interlude where we get to see a place that developed on its own for 10,000 years and experience their different perspectives and histories. Always looming in the background is the prophecy that Velen spoke to Magtoor and Avuun. Azeroth is not merely a world torn apart by wars, with a history of conflict and clashes against great, terrible forces of destruction. There's a war coming, a war of cosmic significance before which even Deathwing is merely a harbinger. And that ultimate conflict between equal and opposite cosmic forces will be fought on this small, twice-sundered planet.
One of the creatures mentioned in previews of the upcoming expansion is the Sha, living manifestations of dark energy. The Sha remind us not only of Entropius (the dark cycle form of M'uru) but also of the stained glass entities seen in the Descent Into Madness in Ulduar.

This leads us to consider that our sojourn in Pandaria is more than a vacation, but rather is another step on the rediscovery of the forces arrayed against us in the coming conflict. The Sha, with their connection to negative energy, could well be foot soldiers of the prophesied army of darkness. The revelation that it is the negative emotions of mortals that help nurture the Sha (just as it was the Blood Knights' own arrogance, desperation and addiction that may have led to M'uru's becoming Entropius) may be a lesson we need to learn before we can be ready.
We definitely need to keep an eye on the Sha and their origins and genesis. They're the first clue that Mists is more than just a fun change of pace. It's a new chapter in the story we've been seeing since we stepped foot onto the alien soil of Outland. It may not be a coincidence that the ethereals have returned and set foot on Azeroth proper for once. They lost a world to a Void Lord named Dimensius the All-Devouring, who bears a striking resemblence to Entropius. We know little about the origins of Voidwalkers, after all. They could well be a cosmic form of the Sha or akin to them. If negative emotions can create negative entities, how much negativity can the destruction of a world generate?
The Abyss and our tendency to stare right into it
We're going to Pandaria as part of the escalating conflict between the Horde and the Alliance. Our presence there and the fact that we bring our wars with us will destablize a world that's been apart for 10,000 years, bring back the Sha, set the ancient Mogu on the path to reclaiming their empire from the Pandaren, and otherwise upset a whole mess of apple carts.
One of the aspects of this conflict that I think will need to be sharpened is the tendency to try and show that neither faction is composed of plaster saints or Snidely Whiplash clones. We'll need to see the Alliance attack more often, more aggressively, and in a more convincing manner than the half-hearted Camp Taurajo massacre. No more We tried to leave them an escape route through the Quillboars; we had no idea the Quillboars hated them so much! back doors out of looking bad. We need to take a page from the real history of warfare and see the Alliance pull a Dresden, striking hard and without mercy at the Horde, even if it means civilian casualties. We need to see people who we identify with on both sides take actions that normally would be unthinkable.
I expect we'll get that in the lead-up to Pandaria and that a great deal of the Horde or Alliance specific questing and exploring is going to be couched in terms of the growing war and choices. Do you destroy that village, or let the Horde have it and an advantage over you that could well win them the war? Do you let the Alliance alone while they're battling a host of Mantid warriors, or do you take advantage of their weakened state to crush them even when they were offering no threat to you? By going to a new land, we get to see ourselves through an entirely new context, and I expect some of us might really dislike what we see. I even hope for it, because that kind of conflict is storytelling gold.
Next week: the Scholomance.
While you don't need to have played the previous Warcraft games to enjoy World of Warcraft, a little history goes a long way toward making the game a lot more fun. Dig into even more of the lore and history behind the World of Warcraft in WoW Insider's Guide to Warcraft Lore.
We definitely need to keep an eye on the Sha and their origins and genesis. They're the first clue that Mists is more than just a fun change of pace. It's a new chapter in the story we've been seeing since we stepped foot onto the alien soil of Outland. It may not be a coincidence that the ethereals have returned and set foot on Azeroth proper for once. They lost a world to a Void Lord named Dimensius the All-Devouring, who bears a striking resemblence to Entropius. We know little about the origins of Voidwalkers, after all. They could well be a cosmic form of the Sha or akin to them. If negative emotions can create negative entities, how much negativity can the destruction of a world generate?
The Abyss and our tendency to stare right into it
We're going to Pandaria as part of the escalating conflict between the Horde and the Alliance. Our presence there and the fact that we bring our wars with us will destablize a world that's been apart for 10,000 years, bring back the Sha, set the ancient Mogu on the path to reclaiming their empire from the Pandaren, and otherwise upset a whole mess of apple carts.
One of the aspects of this conflict that I think will need to be sharpened is the tendency to try and show that neither faction is composed of plaster saints or Snidely Whiplash clones. We'll need to see the Alliance attack more often, more aggressively, and in a more convincing manner than the half-hearted Camp Taurajo massacre. No more We tried to leave them an escape route through the Quillboars; we had no idea the Quillboars hated them so much! back doors out of looking bad. We need to take a page from the real history of warfare and see the Alliance pull a Dresden, striking hard and without mercy at the Horde, even if it means civilian casualties. We need to see people who we identify with on both sides take actions that normally would be unthinkable.
I expect we'll get that in the lead-up to Pandaria and that a great deal of the Horde or Alliance specific questing and exploring is going to be couched in terms of the growing war and choices. Do you destroy that village, or let the Horde have it and an advantage over you that could well win them the war? Do you let the Alliance alone while they're battling a host of Mantid warriors, or do you take advantage of their weakened state to crush them even when they were offering no threat to you? By going to a new land, we get to see ourselves through an entirely new context, and I expect some of us might really dislike what we see. I even hope for it, because that kind of conflict is storytelling gold.
Next week: the Scholomance.
While you don't need to have played the previous Warcraft games to enjoy World of Warcraft, a little history goes a long way toward making the game a lot more fun. Dig into even more of the lore and history behind the World of Warcraft in WoW Insider's Guide to Warcraft Lore.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, The Burning Crusade, Lore, Know your Lore, Cataclysm, Mists of Pandaria






Reader Comments (Page 3 of 4)
Philster043 Jan 18th 2012 6:57PM
The notion that the Ethereals might have come back because of some unseen danger that originally destroyed their world just makes me think that after Mists, in a future expansion, we'll see a return to Outlands/Draenor - or at least maybe another world, or even a fragment of the destroyed Ethereal world, mostly populated by the Ethereals. It would be pretty cool.
Pyromelter Jan 18th 2012 7:09PM
It's a fairly common expectation that if we get to like wow 15.0 or something crazy, that we will at some point be visiting Argus and taking the fight to the Burning Legion.
jfrombaugh Jan 18th 2012 7:58PM
It's funny you mention the Velen prophecy. I was planning on making a WoW machinima set some time in between WotLK & MoP where my Holy Priest has recieved a vision from the Light that's something like this:
"The Alliance & the Horde have been given the opportunity to be the heroes of Azeroth, but much is expected of those to whom much has been given. The Alliance & the Horde have been given more of everything than any faction in the history of the Azeroth and they have failed to be humble with the power. If the Alliance & Horde continue to metaphorically spit on the Light's virutes of Respect & Compassion by arrogantly warring upon each other, both factions will have the Light's blessing withdrawn. Madness will strike the factions' Priests and Shamans which will result in civil chaos. The factions will lose the ability to defend themselves due to the costly war, leaving them vulnerable to more serious threats such as Azshara. Because of the quick-tempered nature of the people, you will have warriors killing merchants for gold & armor. The rest of azeroth will watch in horror as the two factions are obliterated by bloodlust. The Dragon Aspects, Argent Crusade, and the Earthen Ring will not intervene because they have been victims of exploitation by both factions. They will welcome the annihilation of such arrogant people. The Alliance & Horde must change immediately and become the teachers of compassion and heroism to the rest of the Azeroth. Today the two factions are the primary merchants of war and the culture of fascism that they preach to their people. This will come to an end because you have the seeds of your own destruction within you. Either you will destroy yourselves or the Light will bring it to an end if there isn't a change."
KLRMNKY Jan 18th 2012 9:44PM
The first time the Alliance does something morally reprehensible, or specifically target civilians or does anything that could be called "evil" the Alliance fanbase will be in a uproar that Blizzard is turning the Alliance into the Horde and players who like the "goody-guyness" of the Alliance will get upset. The Alliance players lose what moral high ground they have while the Horde players will just continue to point to that, like they do constantly with Camp Taurajo and say that the Alliance is just as bad as the Horde or even worse.
C'mon, they promised that the worgen were going to be a dark/forsaken type race that makes the Alliance edgier and we ended up with carbon copies of night elves who do everything they can to avoid war outside of Gilneas and want to protect sacred forests and all that. It doesn't fit with the Alliance's kit to havce a darker, more mroally ambigious race and how they've been presented, so they had to change to fit in with the "goodness" that is the Alliance.
I'd love for the Alliance to take the glove offs. And they have had plenty of chances and they all get whitewashed.
Maybe MoP will change things, maybe turning Jaina into a warmonger that wants to drink the blood of the orcs over what they did to Theremore will change things.
But while the Horde can get away with doing such things, the Alliance cannot due to the nature of what they are all about.
But let's see what happens in MoP...
Glaras Jan 19th 2012 2:02AM
I think you've seriously underestimated what the average Alliance player, the ones who've been paying attention to the dismal state of Allied leadership, want to see. We know that the razing of Theramore is coming, and we are sick to death of ineffectual responses... Or total lack of *any* response! Most of the ones I know won't bat an eye at the gloves coming off.
travis.henson1 Jan 18th 2012 9:46PM
MEH. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Wow has jumped the shark a while ago.
I know this will get down rated but its true. Cant wait till the NEW stats come out about MORE players leaving. Dont hate b/c you know its true. Ive already canceled because 1/2 of my guild left after 4.5 years of playing. All good haters will hate, we all know how its gonna turn out.
I still love wow insider and will still read B/C of the writers. Best reads so far with the talent. Very long time reader even before turp and BRK was on top and left.
Matthew Rossi Jan 18th 2012 11:18PM
Any time someone makes an argument that anticipates disagreement with dismissal, I immediately wonder why that person didn't counter those arguments instead. You've basically posted your opinion, then said "I know you may disagree but I neither care enough to articulate why you are incorrect nor feel my own opinion is strong enough to defend." So you just end up looking like the fox justifying that the grapes he couldn't reach probably don't taste that good anyway.
I am sorry that you're not having fun in game, and do think you've made the right decision if that's the case. Don't play if you're not having fun. If WoW slipped to 8 or even 6 million but those remaining players were actually having fun, I'd consider it a win.
Silversol Jan 18th 2012 10:34PM
When you stare into the abyss, the abyss makes a noise, points in a direction, exclaims "WHAT WAS THAT???" then runs away.
Prystus Jan 18th 2012 11:06PM
Side note, that jump the shark thing? Is nonsense. that episode came out like.. halfway through the TV series, if it signaled the end fo the show, and its writers ability to make stories, the show would have ended that season, instead of going on for 4-5 more years. That's one meme that needs to stop entirely do ti retardenenss.
Al Jan 18th 2012 11:23PM
No, it's the point when the writers have run out of ideas/lost the plot/given up. It'll drag on, in need of a mercy kill.
Hence a a 50s comedy having people ski-jump over sharks for no reason.
vegemite Jan 19th 2012 2:54AM
you can still be a force for good without committing atrocities.
And it is a disgraceful excuse for article writing to applaude the firebombing of a civilian target
Matthew Rossi Jan 19th 2012 5:00AM
Noting that something happened is not the same thing as applauding it.
Atlanta was a civilian target. So was Savannah. Sherman was none too gentle with them, and I know I consider the North to be the 'good guys' of the Civil War. It's time the Alliance acting like people who when pushed to the wall, the same way Britain acted when Germany brought air war to them. When someone is attacked, they counterattack. Was the Luftwaffe somehow considerate of civilian targets?
"War is all hell." - Sherman
To paraphrase RE Lee, it's just as well war is so terrible or we might grow too fond of it. Our fiction can only benefit by understanding and portraying it.
vegemite Jan 19th 2012 5:23AM
damn thing went in the wrong location... man this place needs a new comment system
You didnt just note that something happened , you advocating that the "alliance need to pull a dresden" which is exactly the same as applauding what was done in dresden as you obviously consider it to be a good thing.
The firebombing of Dresden bypassed most of the military targets ( the military base wasnt bombed and still exists and is still used, the autobahn network wasnt touched and they hit only one quarter of the factory output in the city). It is true that the germans and the crazy holocaust deniers inflate the casulty figures but Dresden was packed with civilians and refugees and in one night the approximately the same number of people died as died during the entire length of the London blitz. Comparing the scale of the bombing done in dresden to what the luftwaffe did in london is like comparing apples to oranges. Also a couple of weeks later twice that number died in the firebombing of hamburg. at this stage the war was essentially won and there are many historians that consider these to be war crimes
The Luftwaffe were not a bunch of medieval heroes by any stretch of the imagination but to say ( like you did on the wow insider show) that the allies actions during the war were entirely justified and none of them were war crimes is wrong. bombing cities full of civilians is a war crime unless there is sufficient military justification. In Dresden there were military targets to bomb but most of them weren't targeted instead phosphorous bombs were dropped on the city creating a firestorm that literally sucked the air out of peoples lungs. While the most henious actions during the war were carried out by the Germans, the noteriety of these actions was affected by who wrote the history, there were a number of Allied warcrimes. For example
Major-General Raymond Hufft (U.S. Army) gave instructions to his troops not to take prisoners when they crossed the Rhine in 1945. "After the war, when he reflected on the war crimes he authorized, he admitted, 'if the Germans had won, I would have been on trial at Nuremberg instead of them.'"
The second world war was a war that needed to be done as hitler and co were totally mental but neither side came out of it clean
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_dresden
and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II
and to even it out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_and_Germany
tried to enter the oen for japan but it wouldnt let me
Matthew Rossi Jan 19th 2012 5:39AM
"The second world war was a war that needed to be done as hitler and co were totally mental but neither side came out of it clean"
I was going to debate you, but then you did this. This makes my point for me. This is the true nature of war, and it needs to be in the story. Leaving aside every other point you make: as I know you know you're deliberately leaving out how the precision bombing of the American Army Air Force was completely ineffective and caused horrendous US casualties, I know you know you're leaving out how Germany was not surrendering but rather drafting children and the elderly to fight, and I know you know that not a single person was convicted of a war crime in relation to Dresden or Hamburg, the fact remains:
War is all hell.
People make horrific choices in war.
Arguing that the story should be sanitized of that aspect of personal nature is foolish. Even as you pretend to present Dresden and the air war objectively (you're not, you know: you're leaving out how the attempt to push into Europe via purely military bombing was a pure failure that extended the war by at least a year, and I can tell that you've read enough to know that - how many died in camps in that year's time? We both know the answer to that one is "too many") you make my point for me. Presented with acting with pure military honor and losing all of their air force, or sacrificing their ideals and actually winning the war, the Allies chose to sacrifice their ideals.
It's just like Operation Greif, which I'm sure you're familiar with. Germany knew it was losing. It didn't surrender, it just dressed up soliders in Allied uniforms and sent them to sabotage behind enemy lines in violation of the Geneva Convention. Every war has stories like this. Andersonville comes to mind.
As you said, neither side comes out clean. It's time to show that.
vegemite Jan 19th 2012 5:53AM
Im leaving all that out as this is a comment board on a warcraft forum not a historical debating society, my point was confined to dresden as your commend was confined to dresden. not a single person was convicted for dresden or hamburg because the allies won the war not the germans. Victors write the history
my only point was that nobody should adovcate the bombing of civilian targets or " pull a dresden" as you so charming put it, accidents do happen in war but you should try to avoid them. The fact that you are saying this needs to be done in a game that people come here to enjoy and forget about all the nonsense that happens in real war is annoying. I like relaxing in warcraft, not wrestling with deep moral issues, i get enough of that outside the game.
and you dont debate you get the last word there is a difference
Zanathos Jan 19th 2012 11:25PM
You'd be more compelling if you didn't come across as so whiny, vegemite. Suggesting a story element would add to the narrative isn't the same as advocating it, in any case. Deathwing firebombing random leveling zones is a nice way to get everyone involved in the expansion. Noting that isn't advocating setting people you meet on fire.
Diabloelmo Jan 19th 2012 3:44AM
Personally, I'd very much like to see a resolution to many of the storylines that were explored during WotLK, and then promptly forgotten. Like Mograine and his Knights of the Ebon Blade - his entire reason for existing was to take down Arthas, which has been done. However, there has been no mention of the faction that is as important to Death Knights as the Earthen Ring and Cenarion Circle are for Shamans and Druids respectively. What were they doing during the Cataclysm? What are their plans now that Deathwing has been destroyed, and the Alliance and Horde are just fighting each other? I hardly expect an expansion revolving around this, but a bit of continuation to the story would be nice...
Smoe Jan 19th 2012 1:51PM
"We'll need to see the Alliance attack more often, more aggressively, and in a more convincing manner than the half-hearted Camp Taurajo massacre."
Remember that time in Northrend when you slew mothers and fathers just to sell their children into slavery to the Kalu'ak? http://www.wowwiki.com/Quest:Planning_for_the_Future
Remember that time you found potential allies in a distant land who were in a state of chaos caused by a mutual enemy and you decided to go into their city and slaughter them? http://www.wowwiki.com/Gundrak
Remember that time you found a backwater town and decided to slay everyone and strew their corpses everywhere before burning the place down and calling for tactical cannon strikes just for the hell of it?
http://www.wowwiki.com/Quest:Burn_Skorn,_Burn!_(Alliance)
I'm sorry to say, but there's gonna be a lot more Thuum where that came from (seewhatididthere?)
---------------------------------------------------------
Ok, now with the whole Blackrock thing. That will probably happen, but when it does do you think the Horde will be in a position to attack Kahz'Modan by then? Those Valkyrs in Andorhal seem to be saying that the Forsaken may not be in compliance with the Hordes ideals much longer. Even more so when they draw the eyes of the Argent Crusade and the Brotherhood of the Light. The Flights wont be all too happy either when those Valkyrs start raising Frostwyrms again. And if anything escalates the war between the Horde and the Alliance, it will probably be the Forsaken using Chemical Weapons (Blight) on the Alliance.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Now for this thing with the prophesy and the Sha. Wouldn't it make more sense if they were alligned with the Old Gods? Going back to the corruption of M'uru, it wouldn't make sense if some lowly demons were the ones controling him since Naaru are beings of The Light and The Light is known for burning demons and undead out of existance. Compare that to the most successful corruptions of immortal minds (Neltharion, Sargeras, and all of Ulduar). The Old Gods would make a lot more sense in Velen's Prophesy as well. If Deathwing is the Harbinger of it all and he introduces the forces of N'zoth, the Old God, who's awakening 1 expansion (or year effectively I believe) after Yogg Sarron shows a quickening trend of the awakening of the Old Gods who are known to be alien and rival to the Titans who created this world. On top of that, the Old Gods are so rooted into Azeroth that to get rid of them would cause unprecedented amounts of damage (enough to scare the Titans into letting the Old Gods survive) which means that the battle would HAVE to take place on Azeroth.
I know these are some pretty jumbled thoughts at 4 am, but what are your thoughts on this?
vegemite Jan 19th 2012 5:22AM
You didnt just note that something happened , you advocating that the "alliance need to pull a dresden" which is exactly the same as applauding what was done in dresden as you obviously consider it to be a good thing.
The firebombing of Dresden bypassed most of the military targets ( the military base wasnt bombed and still exists and is still used, the autobahn network wasnt touched and they hit only one quarter of the factory output in the city). It is true that the germans and the crazy holocaust deniers inflate the casulty figures but Dresden was packed with civilians and refugees and in one night the approximately the same number of people died as died during the entire length of the London blitz. Comparing the scale of the bombing done in dresden to what the luftwaffe did in london is like comparing apples to oranges. Also a couple of weeks later twice that number died in the firebombing of hamburg. at this stage the war was essentially won and there are many historians that consider these to be war crimes
The Luftwaffe were not a bunch of medieval heroes by any stretch of the imagination but to say ( like you did on the wow insider show) that the allies actions during the war were entirely justified and none of them were war crimes is wrong. bombing cities full of civilians is a war crime unless there is sufficient military justification. In Dresden there were military targets to bomb but most of them weren't targeted instead phosphorous bombs were dropped on the city creating a firestorm that literally sucked the air out of peoples lungs. While the most henious actions during the war were carried out by the Germans, the noteriety of these actions was affected by who wrote the history, there were a number of Allied warcrimes. For example
Major-General Raymond Hufft (U.S. Army) gave instructions to his troops not to take prisoners when they crossed the Rhine in 1945. "After the war, when he reflected on the war crimes he authorized, he admitted, 'if the Germans had won, I would have been on trial at Nuremberg instead of them.'"
The second world war was a war that needed to be done as hitler and co were totally mental but neither side came out of it clean
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_dresden
and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II
and to even it out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_and_Germany
tried to enter the oen for japan but it wouldnt let me
robsmith77 Jan 19th 2012 11:49AM
I disagree with you on this. Making reference to a particular event in no way, shape or form implies that you condone that event.