Frostmourne should become DK transmog option

[Cizr]

Frostmourne is gone. It has been shattered and what was left of it was used in making DK artefact weapons. Thats your Frostmourne and lorewise now its power is gone too.

Could there be another sword that LOOKS like Frostmourne crafted? Sure I guess. But Frostmourne was crafted by Nathrezim and I dont see many of them around.

[Yarathir]

Frostmourne is gone. It has been shattered and what was left of it was used in making DK artefact weapons. Thats your Frostmourne and lorewise now its power is gone too.

Could there be another sword that LOOKS like Frostmourne crafted? Sure I guess. But Frostmourne was crafted by Nathrezim and I dont see many of them around.

It's a transmog thing. Transmog doesn't have to make sense, just as shadow priests can still transmog Xal'atath even though it has long left their grasp and Demon Hunters can transmog Warglaives of Azzinoth despite it making no chronological sense unless they just quickly snagged them in the few seconds between returning to Black Temple and attacking Wardens and subsequently being locked into crystal prison by Maiev.

Oh, and just as I can kill Ragnaros and Aggramar, loot their weapons and have them shrink to the size of my hands and have them be transmoggable.

Inb4 "No yeah but this kind of unobtainable is arbitrarily different from this other type of unobtainable because I say so."

[Treng]

its not just my opinion its fact, it would already be a transmog currently if they were going to do it.

You're wrong. Currently we cannot transmog Shadowmourne. On Tuesday we will be able to. This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that just because we can't now is not concrete that we will never be able to.

[kenn9530]

Wrong. Your ignorance of the lore is not an argument. If you wanna go argue what DKs should and should not have, then at the least know your DK (and Frostmourne) lore or you're just gonna look silly.

So it is an opinion.

Yes, but we're talking about a brand new model made for Legion in specific that ended up only being seen once as a quest item in a Frost DK only quest. Try to keep up.

ignorant of what lore, blades of the fallen do not posses frostmournes strongest ability to absorb souls and use them whenever, also its other strong ability is using frostmourne to create undead minions like sapphiron, your trying to ignore all facts to try and justify obtaining frostmourne, i bet your would even argue it being DK exclusive when anyone that can use a 2h could wield it.

They are not new models, just updated models of whats already there.

You're wrong. Currently we cannot transmog Shadowmourne. On Tuesday we will be able to. This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that just because we can't now is not concrete that we will never be able to.

big difference is you can obtain and use shadowmourne so its you who is wrong, if it was ingame it would then just be a welfare transmog and hold no value whatsoever, it wouldnt even look good since you would see it everywhere.

[Yarathir]

ignorant of what lore, blades of the fallen do not posses frostmournes strongest ability to absorb souls and use them whenever, also its other strong ability is using frostmourne to create undead minions like sapphiron, your trying to ignore all facts to try and justify obtaining frostmourne, i bet your would even argue it being DK exclusive when anyone that can use a 2h could wield it.

Why are you doubling down on trying to sell me your ignorant take on lore. Read WoWpedia first and find out how the Blades of the Fallen Prince work and what their powers are. Sorry for being crude, but I'm not going to spend a whole thread arguing something that can be clarified by a quick hop to WoWpedia or any other source of relevant information such as the actual game.

And yes, of course they'd be DK exclusive. Did you have a problem with the Blades of the Fallen Prince being DK exclusive?

They are not new models, just updated models of whats already there.

So in other words.. new models.

[Treng]

ignorant of what lore, blades of the fallen do not posses frostmournes strongest ability to absorb souls and use them whenever, also its other strong ability is using frostmourne to create undead minions like sapphiron, your trying to ignore all facts to try and justify obtaining frostmourne, i bet your would even argue it being DK exclusive when anyone that can use a 2h could wield it.

They are not new models, just updated models of whats already there.



big difference is you can obtain and use shadowmourne so its you who is wrong, if it was ingame it would then just be a welfare transmog and hold no value whatsoever, it wouldnt even look good since you would see it everywhere.

You could never obtain the uncorrupted Ashbringer. Legion changed that.

Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

[Yarathir]

You could never obtain the uncorrupted Ashbringer. Legion changed that.

Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

Appeals to status quo.

Aren't they fun, Treng?

[kenn9530]

Why are you doubling down on trying to sell me your ignorant take on lore. Read WoWpedia first and find out how the Blades of the Fallen Prince work and what their powers are. Sorry for being crude, but I'm not going to spend a whole thread arguing something that can be clarified by a quick hop to WoWpedia or any other source of relevant information such as the actual game.

And yes, of course they'd be DK exclusive. Did you have a problem with the Blades of the Fallen Prince being DK exclusive?

So in other words.. new models.

considering wowpedia says absolutely nothing about the abilities of blades of the fallen its you who is completely ignorant to the lore, read the whole quest line for the blades and it never once mentions the ability to store and use souls.

Runeblades are not DK exclusive so frostmourne wouldnt be DK only, arthas used it as a paladin.

You could never obtain the uncorrupted Ashbringer. Legion changed that.

Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

In legion ashbringer didnt have an owner anymore, you cant wield a weapon if someone already has it can you, its common sense.

[Yarathir]

considering wowpedia says absolutely nothing about the abilities of blades of the fallen its you who is completely ignorant to the lore, read the whole quest line for the blades and it never once mentions the ability to store and use souls.

Runeblades are not DK exclusive so frostmourne wouldnt be DK only, arthas used it as a paladin.



In legion ashbringer didnt have an owner anymore, you cant wield a weapon if someone already has it can you, its common sense.

The journal of the artifacts in Ebon Hold goes into detail about Frostmourne and mentions its ability to reap souls very specifically. Nowhere is it said that the Blades of the Fallen Prince have lost this ability. And it wouldn't make sense for it to lose that capacity anyway, because that's a vampiric runeblade's very essence and it has/had an artifact trait specially revolving around it.

https://www.wowhead.com/spell=214904/soulbiter#comments

You're gonna have to argue why the Blades of the Fallen Prince wouldn't consume souls? You know, as that is more or less their source of power and even the artifact relics represent that. Give me a source or stop babbling nonsense.

It would be DK only because it's an iconic DK weapon that, like all vampiric runeblades, slowly turned the wielder undead.

[Claymore]

I still like my idea where it's a questchain to do with the Forge of Domination. It's where Frostmourne was created, and we're gonna use it in Shadowlands to craft legendaries, so it would be nice to tie a little questchain or challenge for DKs to it that leads to the Frostmourne mog.
Maybe it can be through Torghast.

- - - Updated - - -


I feel that's ignoring the context, though.

As you said, Paladins got Ashbringer, Shamans got Doomhammer.

Death Knights get blueballed twice. First with Shadowmourne being not-Frostmourne, and second time with Legion. They get Frostmourne.. but not quite. It's logical that there's a frustration there that even when they are allowed to wield Frostmourne, it's just two toothpicks. Toothpicks that are stronger than Frostmourne, mind you, but they're still not the same thing.

The same way Paladins would've been unhappy if Blizzard said "You can have Ashbringer. But it's a smaller one-handed swords and a shield for prot spec."

That makes a ton of sense, and I would definitely be down! It could even play in nicely with the different Covenants. Performing new Blood/Frost/Unholy rituals, using the powers present in the Shadowlands as a resource. I definitely dig the idea. Hell, I'd be down for Warriors and Paladins getting similar things, perhaps reforging Gorshalach (Warriors) and... I dunno, something equally legendary for Paladins. Or Gorshalach for Paladins, and a suped-up Gorehowl for Warriors (I'm still shocked it wasn't a Warrior Artifact, given how iconic its design is).

[rhorle]

considering wowpedia says absolutely nothing about the abilities of blades of the fallen its you who is completely ignorant to the lore, read the whole quest line for the blades and it never once mentions the ability to store and use souls.

It is implied. It is not like capturing spirits is something nothing else can do. Warlocks capture and store them with the Affliction artifact. The blades of the fallen prince however do have spirits inside of them still and you subdue them as part of the quest line. You may not be capturing new spirits but you are using spirits left over in the fragments at very least.

Runeblades are not DK exclusive so frostmourne wouldnt be DK only, arthas used it as a paladin.

This doesn't mean anything. Anyone in lore can put on plate armor but it is restricted mechanics wise. There is nothing wrong with having class exclusive items. Shamans got shaman only mail transmogrify despite hunters being able to wear mail. No one cared that only they could equip it. Stop acting like it is an issue now. It is only being brought up because you have no other argument to attempt claim that it can't happen. So you fall back on "well anyone can have it then because it is a weapon!"

No one can rationally deny that Frostmourne fits Death knights above any other class. Yes it has been used by other "classes" and there is nothing in lore that restricts it to any specific class. That still doesn't change it being a cool class prestige for Death Knights. Just like Warlock green fire. Shamans and Mages could theoretically get green fire as "fel" is not class restricted in lore.

[Yarathir]

That makes a ton of sense, and I would definitely be down! It could even play in nicely with the different Covenants. Performing new Blood/Frost/Unholy rituals, using the powers present in the Shadowlands as a resource. I definitely dig the idea. Hell, I'd be down for Warriors and Paladins getting similar things, perhaps reforging Gorshalach (Warriors) and... I dunno, something equally legendary for Paladins. Or Gorshalach for Paladins, and a suped-up Gorehowl for Warriors (I'm still shocked it wasn't a Warrior Artifact, given how iconic its design is).

Yeah, I didn't wanna mention it in this thread because it's specifically for Frostmourne, but I also would really like for the WoD model of Gorehowl to be made available, to all melee players or to warriors in specific, fine with either. That's just another cool model wasting away in the database due to changes in plans.

Maybe warriors will be able to visit Grom's spirit in the Shadowlands? Garrosh's I don't know.

- - - Updated - - -

It is implied. It is not like capturing spirits is something nothing else can do. Warlocks capture and store them with the Affliction artifact. The blades of the fallen prince however do have spirits inside of them still and you subdue them as part of the quest line. You may not be capturing new spirits but you are using spirits left over in the fragments at very least.

Like all vampiric runeblades, Blades of the Fallen Prince do grow in power due to capturing new souls. In gameplay, this is artifact power, but in the story, they get more powerful with each person slain. Some other artifact weapons do, too.

The aforementioned artifact trait in my post also refers to that ability, as do the frost artifact relics.

[rhorle]

Like all vampiric runeblades, Blades of the Fallen Prince do grow in power due to capturing new souls. In gameplay, this is artifact power, but in the story, they get more powerful with each person slain. Some other artifact weapons do, too. The aforementioned artifact trait in my post also refers to that ability, as do the frost artifact relics.

Wrong. Artifact power is not "capturing souls in lore". They never gave a real lore based explanation for artifact power and it is wrong to head canon in an explanation just because it proves your argument. There is nothing explicitly stated about the blades of the fallen prince that say they capture souls. They have the souls that did not leave Frostmourne when it was shattered. Ability names, and a challenge appearance name does not equate to lore. Names are often just names.

The artifacts that actually take spirits or get more powerful with each thing killed actually state such in the lore. The blades of the fallen prince actually never state they capture souls. It could be argued but that does not make it reality. As of now it is an unconfirmed ability of the blades. The only thing confirmed is that they still have souls with in the fragments and that Death Knights had to subdue those souls in order properly master the blades.

[Yarathir]

Wrong. Artifact power is not "capturing souls in lore". They never gave a real lore based explanation for artifact power and it is wrong to head canon in an explanation just because it proves your argument. There is nothing explicitly stated about the blades of the fallen prince that say they capture souls. They have the souls that did not leave Frostmourne when it was shattered. Ability names, and a challenge appearance name does not equate to lore. Names are often just names.

The artifacts that actually take spirits or get more powerful with each thing killed actually state such in the lore. The blades of the fallen prince actually never state they capture souls. It could be argued but that does not make it reality. As of now it is an unconfirmed ability of the blades. The only thing confirmed is that they still have souls with in the fragments and that Death Knights had to subdue those souls in order properly master the blades.

They obviously had to tie artifact progression to a globalized system, such as artifact power. That doesn't preclude that the implication is that a vampiric runeblade grows with the amount of souls it has slain. Moreover, unless it's explicitly said that the Blades of the Fallen Prince do not feast on souls, they still do. It was a central mechanic to Frostmourne, which they are built out of, there are artifact traits and relics built around that whole theme, yet Blizzard hasn't seen fit to mention "Frostmourne ate souls but the Blades of the Fallen Prince didn't." Obviously they didn't, because that's not the truth.

https://www.wowhead.com/spell=214904/soulbiter#comments

[kenn9530]

The journal of the artifacts in Ebon Hold goes into detail about Frostmourne and mentions its ability to reap souls very specifically. Nowhere is it said that the Blades of the Fallen Prince have lost this ability. And it wouldn't make sense for it to lose that capacity anyway, because that's a vampiric runeblade's very essence and it has/had an artifact trait specially revolving around it.

https://www.wowhead.com/spell=214904/soulbiter#comments

You're gonna have to argue why the Blades of the Fallen Prince wouldn't consume souls? You know, as that is more or less their source of power and even the artifact relics represent that. Give me a source or stop babbling nonsense.

It would be DK only because it's an iconic DK weapon that, like all vampiric runeblades, slowly turned the wielder undead.

Frostmourne is not a vampiric runeblade and the blades of the fallen are not vampiric either, soulbiter which is the only thing even mentioning souls does not absorb souls, it damages them thats all. Your just making an assumption based on no facts that blades of the fallen consumes souls because frostmourne did.

The first person to use frostmourne was a paladin, DK has nothing to do with being able to use frostmourne, its designed for the sole use of the lich king so if it was somehow remade it would then go to the next lich king.

It is implied. It is not like capturing spirits is something nothing else can do. Warlocks capture and store them with the Affliction artifact. The blades of the fallen prince however do have spirits inside of them still and you subdue them as part of the quest line. You may not be capturing new spirits but you are using spirits left over in the fragments at very least.



This doesn't mean anything. Anyone in lore can put on plate armor but it is restricted mechanics wise. There is nothing wrong with having class exclusive items. Shamans got shaman only mail transmogrify despite hunters being able to wear mail. No one cared that only they could equip it. Stop acting like it is an issue now. It is only being brought up because you have no other argument to attempt claim that it can't happen. So you fall back on "well anyone can have it then because it is a weapon!"

No one can rationally deny that Frostmourne fits Death knights above any other class. Yes it has been used by other "classes" and there is nothing in lore that restricts it to any specific class. That still doesn't change it being a cool class prestige for Death Knights. Just like Warlock green fire. Shamans and Mages could theoretically get green fire as "fel" is not class restricted in lore.

capturing souls and using them to create minions or just using the abilities those souls have is two different things, blades of the fallen only real power is enhanced frost abilities.

[Yarathir]

Frostmourne is not a vampiric runeblade and the blades of the fallen are not vampiric either, soulbiter which is the only thing even mentioning souls does not absorb souls, it damages them thats all. Your just making an assumption based on no facts that blades of the fallen consumes souls because frostmourne did.

The first person to use frostmourne was a paladin, DK has nothing to do with being able to use frostmourne, its designed for the sole use of the lich king so if it was somehow remade it would then go to the next lich king.

Frostmourne is a vampiric Runeblade and the Blades of the Fallen Prince are as well. That's why the former turned Arthas into an undead.

And notice how you didn't come with any evidence that they aren't? Blizzard hasn't seen fit to mention that the Blades of the Fallen Prince somehow lack the ability that Frostmourne had despite it being a pretty huge thing worth mentioning if it were the case. You're just insisting "No, they don't because I say so."

The ability reads: "Your blades thirst for souls, tearing away at the essence of those they strike."

"Your blades thirst for souls, tearing away at the essence of those they strike."

What do you think that means? You're being deliberately obtuse in order to have grounds to dig your heels into, unwilling to admit that you are wrong. Meanwhile, you've supplied 0, absolutely zero evidence for your argument other than "I say it is, so it is."

And Arthas was a Paladin, indeed. Know what Frostmourne did to him? Might be kind of a pivotal detail to take note of.

[kenn9530]

Frostmourne is a vampiric Runeblade and the Blades of the Fallen Prince are as well. That's why the former turned Arthas into an undead.

And notice how you didn't come with any evidence that they aren't? Blizzard hasn't seen fit to mention that the Blades of the Fallen Prince somehow lack the ability that Frostmourne had despite it being a pretty huge thing worth mentioning if it were the case. You're just insisting "No, they don't because I say so."

The ability reads: "Your blades thirst for souls, tearing away at the essence of those they strike."

"Your blades thirst for souls, tearing away at the essence of those they strike."

What do you think that means? You're being deliberately obtuse in order to have grounds to dig your heels into, unwilling to admit that you are wrong. Meanwhile, you've supplied 0, absolutely zero evidence for your argument other than "I say it is, so it is."

And Arthas was a Paladin, indeed. Know what Frostmourne did to him? Might be kind of a pivotal detail to take note of.

Unless otherwise stated the blades of the fallen do not posses the ability to absorb and store souls let alone use them, there is no evidence at all in your assumption.

And where excatly does it say frostmourne or blades of the fallen are vampiric weapons, stealing a soul is nothing to do with vampiric magic its death magic, if a normal person used blades of the fallen it would not turn them undead.

Tearing away is the opposite of absorbing souls, its you who are wrong and would make up any reason to use frostmourne and only keep it for DKs alone, when lore proves you wrong, if frostmourne was reforged they would leave out the ability to absorb and corrupt the users soul but then it wouldnt really be frostmourne, it cant be wielded by anyone in its origional form.

[rhorle]

Moreover, unless it's explicitly said that the Blades of the Fallen Prince do not feast on souls, they still do.

This is head canon again. Just because they did not say something does not mean it is the truth. It is unknown if they feast on souls because it is never stated that they do. There is a difference between confirmed and unconfirmed. You are claiming it is confirmed simply because it is the outcome that you want rather then using anything in lore. None of the quests referencing the blades indicate they still feast on souls. Other weapons which are designed to feast on souls actually mention it.

The only thing that is mentioned is that the blades contain souls that were present in Frostmourne. That is all that is confirmed about the blades of the fallen prince. Artifact power is also not "whatever a poster wants it to be so their argument can be true" just because it was a a global reward system.

[Yarathir]

Unless otherwise stated the blades of the fallen do not posses the ability to absorb and store souls let alone use them, there is no evidence at all in your assumption.

And where excatly does it say frostmourne or blades of the fallen are vampiric weapons, stealing a soul is nothing to do with vampiric magic its death magic, if a normal person used blades of the fallen it would not turn them undead.

Tearing away is the opposite of absorbing souls,

Wrong. It has to be stated that something made from Frostmourne does not have Frostmourne's core ability. You're being disingenuous.

You also don't get what a vampiric runeblade is. A vampiric runeblade is a runeblade wielded by second generation Death Knights that feeds on souls and turns the wielder undead. First generation Death Knights were Orcish spirits transferred to human bodies like Teron Gorefiend, second generation Death Knights were ones like Arthas, Baron Rivendare, usually Paladins and men of high esteem offered power through a Vampiric Runeblade that then corrupted them into undeath as they wielded it. A good portion of their power comes from this blade. Third generation are the Acherus Death Knights, who runeforge weapons and were pretty much designed to be much less expensive to create. By that, I mean they didn't need a Vampiric Runeblade to turn into Death Knights, something which is somewhat of a luxury, allowing the Lich King to create more of them more easily.

And yes, if a normal person used Blades of the Fallen Prince, they would turn undead.

You're being extremely dense here with the word choice. The blade thirsts for souls and it tears into the essence of a person, like an animal taking a chunk of a being's flesh. But instead it's the blade tearing into a person's soul. Basic comprehension of context.



Very special mention is made of Frostmourne's ability to steal souls, yet no mention is made that the Blades of the Fallen Prince lost that ability.

The onus is on you to prove that they didn't possess that ability, rather than insisting you're right because you're right. I'm tired of having to do the legwork for you while you just go "nuh-uh."

its you who are wrong and would make up any reason to use frostmourne and only keep it for DKs alone, when lore proves you wrong, if frostmourne was reforged they would leave out the ability to absorb and corrupt the users soul but then it wouldnt really be frostmourne, it cant be wielded by anyone in its origional form.

You're acting like this is some kind of naughty secret you've uncovered that I think Frostmourne, replica or otherwise, should be DK-only. It's not, I'm very candid about it. Yes, any Frostmourne transmog that is to be made available should be Death Knight only. It's an iconic Death Knight weapon. That's like saying the Ashbringer shouldn't be Paladin-only.

- - - Updated - - -

This is head canon again. Just because they did not say something does not mean it is the truth. It is unknown if they feast on souls because it is never stated that they do. There is a difference between confirmed and unconfirmed. You are claiming it is confirmed simply because it is the outcome that you want rather then using anything in lore. None of the quests referencing the blades indicate they still feast on souls. Other weapons which are designed to feast on souls actually mention it.

The only thing that is mentioned is that the blades contain souls that were present in Frostmourne. That is all that is confirmed about the blades of the fallen prince. Artifact power is also not "whatever a poster wants it to be so their argument can be true" just because it was a a global reward system.

No, the onus is on you to prove that they don't. If Blizzard doesn't at any point state that the two blades have lost that ability, even in the same paragraph where they emphasize Frostmourne's soul-stealing qualities, and if Blizzard added an ability overtly referencing a core Frostmourne mechanic, then it now comes to you to prove it wrong.

Stop projecting you're "that's a headcanon," on me and get to proving that Icereaper and Frostbringer do not feast on souls. Chop chop.

[rhorle]

Very special mention is made of Frostmourne's ability to steal souls, yet no mention is made that the Blades of the Fallen Prince lost that ability. The onus is on you to prove that they didn't possess that ability, rather than insisting you're right because you're right. I'm tired of having to do the legwork for you while you just go "nuh-uh."

No. The burden is on you to prove your claim that they still had that ability. You have yet to do so. You point out how the make a "special mention" of how Frostmourne can steal souls but they do not make a "special mention" of that existing in the blades when describing them. There is an absence of evidence either way. That does not mean your claim is proven true because of a lack of evidence for both claims.

You are literally insisting you are right because you are right. And that no evidence is proof you are right.

- - - Updated - - -

No, the onus is on you to prove that they don't. If Blizzard doesn't at any point state that the two blades have lost that ability, even in the same paragraph where they emphasize Frostmourne's soul-stealing qualities, and if Blizzard added an ability overtly referencing a core Frostmourne mechanic, then it now comes to you to prove it wrong. Stop projecting you're "that's a headcanon," on me and get to proving that Icereaper and Frostbringer do not feast on souls. Chop chop.

It is head canon though. Because you are using no mention of soul stealing as proof that it can soul steal. You are just as required to prove your claim as truth as any one else. I have never said that they can't only that there is no proof that they can. Because there is no proof either way. That means they both can and can not currently and we do not know which one is truth until Blizzard clarifies the lore further.

Frostmourne could steal souls. Frostmourne being able to do something does not mean the blades can automatically do it. That is why I keep mentioning head canon. Because you are claiming that everything Frostmourne could do is transferred to the blades just because. With no lore to back it up. Prove your claim right with out a reason of doubt.