Frostmourne should become DK transmog option

[kenn9530]

Man... this is a dk weapon no explanation needed. Why would it need the same powers? If it ever becomes available for players there is should be : requires death knight. Blizz made it a dk weapon and people remember as it is. Why would you let paladins or warriors wear it.. when the dk does have the blades already where warrior or paladin never had those

A runeblade is not a DK specific weapon as anyone can use it, blizz never made it a DK weapon they made it a lich king weapon and the lich king is a seperate class from DK.

Frostmourne is one of those weapons that should stay out of players hands, the next expansion will probably be about reforging the helm to get the scourge under control as thats the whole point of the helm.

[Claymore]

Runeblades are intimately tied to Death Knight lore. It is heavily implied the Runeblades slowly turn their wielders into DK's, by slowly corrupting them, which would in turn cause them to seek out training from the Scourge.

In any case... I absolutely agree, Frostmourne should be implemented in *SOME* capacity as a Transmog-option. As others suggested, just make it some kind of end-game, ultra-challenging trial to unlock, so that only the most badass of DK's can obtain it.

Also, like the Warglaives of Azzinoth, I think Shadowmourne should become a DK-exclusive transmog option. Everything about acquiring that weapon resolved around Death Knights and their Lore, and I think it would kind of ruin a bit of the fun by making it available to all.

[Alanar]

A runeblade is not a DK specific weapon as anyone can use it, blizz never made it a DK weapon they made it a lich king weapon and the lich king is a seperate class from DK.

Frostmourne is one of those weapons that should stay out of players hands, the next expansion will probably be about reforging the helm to get the scourge under control as thats the whole point of the helm.

Ok lets go over it again, it's the same as kael'thas or Anduin for go sake.. ye they are to you/us differnt, they are hero units if you will, they have over the top powers or can wield or wear stuff the player can't. Just like Illidan we can't fly like a demon hunter, we can't raise hundred of undead at the same time and we can't mass ress as a shadow priest. Buttom line Arthas is still a Dk and Illidan still a Demon hunter. They are the class icons and many people lean on those to have a sense of what that clss should be/look/feel like.

So yes a runeblade in wow is a Dk weapon ->lore/gameplay, blizz created this fantasy with death knight right at the start of Arthas picking up the runeblade. We can see this as a thing in the dk starting zone, so I am not sure why a runeblade is suddenly not a dk weapon. sure everyone can wield a dagger or a sword, but that's not the point. the point is people want to wear it and there is nothing stopping them (lorewise) to do so. The power is gone, in the end if it's 2hand or 1 hand it would just be what ever the death knight prefer to use or for us (a Transmog options, so no power or nonsense) The quest for the glaives of illidan is something you can see as an example. The demand is there and since we already posses frostmourne in that regard everything is possible.

I am not saying they should or aaarch I must have my LK sword noaw!!, but this realy isn't hard to imagine and the arguments of it should never be in players hands or it's evil and we should not wield it are all falling flat at the moment, the talk on 2 hand frost sparks many players interests and this shouldn't come as an surprise.

- - - Updated - - -

I think it is you who is mistaken, WC3 for one only uses 4 abilities all from after getting frostmourne, and every single bit about deathknights is about them being created by someone else, arthas was not created to be a deathknight, all he did was become undead and use the powers frostmourne which doesnt make you a real deathknight, if he then spent years training and learning deathknight abilities then yes but he became the lich king and it doesnt look like he did any training at all because frostmourne had all the power he required.

First deathknights were infused with the souls of warlocks into corpses of death knights, current deathknights were created by the lich king and had a place to train and develop those abilities, being undead and using a runeblade does not make you a deathknight.

Arthas is an undead knight so only a deathknight because thats the closest comparrison and using frostmourne grants him abilities some deathknights would learn, without frostmourne he would only have access to deathknight abilities if he actually learnt them.

There is so much wrong here.. some one else please take over my god.

[kenn9530]

Ok lets go over it again, it's the same as kael'thas or Anduin for go sake.. ye they are to you/us a differnt, because like Illidan we can't fly like a demon hunter, we can't raise hundred of undead at the same time. Buttom line Arthas is still a Dk and Illidan still a Demon hunter. They are the class icons and many people lean on those to have a sense of what that clss should be/look/feel like.

So yes a runeblade in wow is a Dk weapon ->lore/gameplay, blizz created this fantasy with death knight right at the start of Arthas picking up the runeblade. We can see this as a thing in the dk starting zone, so I am not sure why a runeblade is suddenly not a dk weapon. sure everyone can wield a dagger or a sword, but that's not the point. the point is people want to wear it and there is nothing stopping them (lorewise) to do so. The power is gone, it would just be what ever the death knight prefer in the end if it's 2hand or 1 hand. The quest for the glaives of illidan is something you can see as an example. The demand is there and since we already posses frostmourne in that regard everything is possible.

I am not saying they should or aaarch I must have my LK sword noaw!!, but this realy isn't hard to imagine and the arguments of it should never be in players hands or it's evil and we should not wield it are all falling flat at the moment, the talk on 2 hand frost sparks many players interests and this shouldn't come as an surprise.

runeblades have existed for thousands of years, deathknights have only been around since the 1st great war, so no runeblades are not DK weapons, arthas was not even a real deathknight, he just used the powers of frostmourne and wielded no deathknight abilities beyond that, the lich king is a necromancer.

If the power in frostmourne is gone then its not frostmourne anymore, and anyone that can wield a 2h can use the weapon but fact is it wont be coming in as a transmog and would just turn it into another scrub transmog option, the glaives are not even powerful weapons so it doesnt matter a transmog for them.

[Kithelle]

Man... this is a dk weapon no explanation needed. Why would it need the same powers? If it ever becomes available for players there is should be : requires death knight. Blizz made it a dk weapon and people remember as it is. Why would you let paladins or warriors wear it.. when the dk does have the blades already where warrior or paladin never had those.

- - - Updated - - -



The blade was reforged into 2 blades we already have.
Like i said no one would care or notice if the dk does reforge it. Reason: benefit what ever spec or he/she plays gameplays wise. Dont look to much into this.. people wsnt to wear it just like we are able to wear the glaived on dh with transmog and with 8.3 other legendary... if they allow us to do this in shadowlands it would be a cool.hook for dks.

I am over explaning myself and there is no need for recreating the same evil power or what ever you on about. Once again we already used the blades in legion without any bad side effects as far as I am a ware.

This would be a fanservice thing big time, non the les not one that would hurt at all.. frostmourne broke.. the helm broke so what is the lich king now anyway?? And if 2hand frost makes it return whybthe f not?

Exactly....it would be pointless fan service and nothing else so there is no logical reason it would actually be done in game so it doesn't need to be done. Glad we agree!

[rhorle]

There is literally no upside to it...just because some players want it for vanity doesn't mean it fits anywhere into the game.

So? Not everything fits into the game. We can literally become Arthas with a toy. We have a whole magical book of appearances, toys, and pets. The models of weapons are not designed to simply fit into the game but to appease the players. It is why we have dozens of different looks when they are not realistic to be that varied or even drop from a dragon.

Of course there is an upside to it. It would be a cool thing to transmog.

[Syegfryed]

its only stronger just to fit the story in the game

but it is, there is nothing to question anymore, just because you don't agree

but it doesnt have all the powerful abilities frostmourne has, raising undead dragons and such.

Are you for real? the sword do EVERYTHING and BETTER, and we did raise a lot of undead dragons trough the class hall campaign, we even raise our class mount

Frostmourne lay entire armies to waste while blades of the fallen are no more than swords with ice powers.

wrong

It says nowhere he was the first deathknight

In Northrend, Arthas became the first of the Lich King's death knights.

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Arthas_Menethil

didnt use any deathknight abilities bar the ones that frostmourne possesed

what it matter?

so you dont just learn all these abilities because you wield a runeblade, all deathknights were created, all arthas did was become undead while using a runeblade and then became the lich king, he is undead and a knight so only by definition can be called a deathknight, without frostmourne he would of just been another undead. The skills he posses are all from the runeblade, how else do you think he could lay waste to entire armies after obtaining frostmourne.

did you played the game? all his skills are death magic related, that HE used, nothing was about ice powers.

[GrimReaper673]

he is only by definition a death knight, im not contradicting myself at all, the powers he even wields is from frostmourne so is not really a deathknight at all, you cant become a deathknight just by wielding a runeblade and becomming undead, all the power arthas ever wielded before becomming the lich king is from frostmourne, then he fused with a necromancer but still only really used the powers frostmourne wielded.



the quest never mentions once the use of frostmourne or the weapons themselves raising the dragon, as the deathlord you should be powerful enough to occasionally raise a powerful undead. It states nowhere that the blades of the fallen posses any other abilities other than the frost powers.

That's my point exactly. If the Deathlord is powerful enough to raise a dragon without their weapon coming into it, why wouldn't Arthas be strong enough as the Lich King to do so without Frostmourne's assistance? Frostmourne =/= source of dead-raising power.

[Alanar]

Exactly....it would be pointless fan service and nothing else so there is no logical reason it would actually be done in game so it doesn't need to be done. Glad we agree!

You got my message wrong and you need to read up some lore.. this is beyond tiresome.


No logical reason is needed besides what people want for years and if you dismiss that by that I mean (fun) then you are just weird and you should move on.

- - - Updated - - -

That's my point exactly. If the Deathlord is powerful enough to raise a dragon without their weapon coming into it, why wouldn't Arthas be strong enough as the Lich King to do so without Frostmourne's assistance? Frostmourne =/= source of dead-raising power.

Thanks for this, this was point earlier as well.
People tend to forget we as players did kinda the same, but without the need of frostmourne. Thats all I needed to read.

- - - Updated - - -

but it is, there is nothing to question anymore, just because you don't agree


Are you for real? the sword do EVERYTHING and BETTER, and we did raise a lot of undead dragons trough the class hall campaign, we even raise our class mount


wrong


In Northrend, Arthas became the first of the Lich King's death knights.

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Arthas_Menethil



what it matter?



did you played the game? all his skills are death magic related, that HE used, nothing was about ice powers.

Also thanks for this, its like people come in thinking to know the lore so well.. only to fall flat within seconds.

- - - Updated - - -

But we never actually had it

We do, but shattered and called differntly.

[kenn9530]

but it is, there is nothing to question anymore, just because you don't agree


Are you for real? the sword do EVERYTHING and BETTER, and we did raise a lot of undead dragons trough the class hall campaign, we even raise our class mount


wrong


In Northrend, Arthas became the first of the Lich King's death knights.

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Arthas_Menethil



what it matter?



did you played the game? all his skills are death magic related, that HE used, nothing was about ice powers.

it says nowhere what abilties blade of the fallen prince have apart from its from powers we see from the talents on the weapon, you cant just claim it has all frostmournes abilties when that is not stated anywhere. The weapons have nothing to do with the rasing of the dragon or class mount or do you believe all three weapons hold that power.

first deathknights were created in the first great war so your wrong as they were created by guldan, he may of been the lich kings first deathknight but was never the first deathknight created.

runeblades have multiple abilities and they should wield types of magic for each of the runes that deathknights use.

That's my point exactly. If the Deathlord is powerful enough to raise a dragon without their weapon coming into it, why wouldn't Arthas be strong enough as the Lich King to do so without Frostmourne's assistance? Frostmourne =/= source of dead-raising power.

he is only given the ability temporarily to raise dragons and the 4 horsemen as its a general quest for all 3 weapons, arthas as the lich king would no longer need frostmourne to raise the dead as he was fused with the previous lich king, lich king has the power on his own to raise whatever undead they want.

[Yarathir]

This is still going? You guys gotta realize by now that there's no changing his mind.

[Syegfryed]

it says nowhere what abilties blade of the fallen prince have apart from its from powers we see from the talents on the weapon, you cant just claim it has all frostmournes abilties when that is not stated anywhere. The weapons have nothing to do with the rasing of the dragon or class mount or do you believe all three weapons hold that power.

with the blades of the fallen prince power you can raise not only the dragons but also the 4 hourseman.

the Sword talents prove it had its own powers and stronger than frostmourne itself.

Again, the blades are stated canonically in the lore as powerful than the frostmourne itself, no matter if you don't like, its the truth.

first deathknights were created in the first great war so your wrong as they were created by guldan, he may of been the lich kings first deathknight but was never the first deathknight created.

the first "dks" created by gul'dan are only Death knights in name, they are more necromancer on a horse

we all are talking about the lich king death knight

runeblades have multiple abilities and they should wield types of magic for each of the runes that deathknights use.

and?

he is only given the ability temporarily to raise dragons and the 4 horsemen as its a general quest for all 3 weapons, arthas as the lich king would no longer need frostmourne to raise the dead as he was fused with the previous lich king, lich king has the power on his own to raise whatever undead they want.

proving the b lades of the fallen power was strong enough to rivarly with the Lich king powers, stronger than frostmourne alone.

[Chinese Bootlickers]

I like having a soul thank you very much. Parts of it also sit in banks of DKs everywhere.

[Alanar]

Ok so ... we never actually had it ...

Have what? We picked up the scattered remains of frostmourne to reforge it as a DK, dont know what's so hard about that?
Remember back in wotlk if you played back then.. we destroyed it...

The thing we are talking about, is picking up blades of the fallen king and reforge it again to make it a 2 hand sword.
Giving dk's the option to transmog and with the talk of 2 hand frost, this is something people seem to want.

[kenn9530]

with the blades of the fallen prince power you can raise not only the dragons but also the 4 hourseman.

the Sword talents prove it had its own powers and stronger than frostmourne itself.

Again, the blades are stated canonically in the lore as powerful than the frostmourne itself, no matter if you don't like, its the truth.



the first "dks" created by gul'dan are only Death knights in name, they are more necromancer on a horse

we all are talking about the lich king death knight


and?


proving the b lades of the fallen power was strong enough to rivarly with the Lich king powers, stronger than frostmourne alone.

blades of the fallen dont have the power to raise the dead, it states nowhere it has this power, the quest is a general DK quest that does not have anything to do with the weapons and thats fact. It states nowhere at all the the weapons hold any other powers apart from the ones relating to frost.

The only criteria to be a deathknight is being undead and a knight/soldier, lich king deathknights are no more a deathknight that the first ones created, compared to magic melee is weak.

[rhorle]

The only criteria to be a deathknight is being undead and a knight/soldier

Stop creating head canon. If what you say were the case then forsaken warriors would be Death Knights. But they are not because there is more to being a Death Knight then an undead Knight. This isn't Dungeons and Dragons or what ever role playing game you are using as source for your increasingly insane arguments

[kenn9530]

Stop creating head canon. If what you say were the case then forsaken warriors would be Death Knights. But they are not because there is more to being a Death Knight then an undead Knight. This isn't Dungeons and Dragons or what ever role playing game you are using as source for your increasingly insane arguments

If your undead and a knight then by definition your a deathknight, you dont just magically becoming a deathknight by holding a runeblade or being raised by the lich king, just being undead and holding a runeblade does not make one a true deathknight, arthas never trained in the arts of a deathknight so is not a true deathknight, the rest of the lich king deathknights trained for a long time to learn all the skills.

[Justpassing]

No wonder they picked this guy to do Star Citizen PR., talk about being anal...

[rhorle]

If your undead and a knight then by definition your a deathknight

You also don't magically become a death knight by being an undead knight/soldier. You would just be an undead knight, or an undead soldier. The definition of a Deathknight in Warcraft is not what you are making it out to be. You are going off of head canon or another games source material.

[Yarathir]

I don't care :P You just want Frostmourne and you don't want to hear otherwise. I was mostly just making an in-game transmog restriciton joke. We never equipped it so we can't mog it. Plus Blizzard removed reforging so we can't make Frostmourne again (that's another joke)

I get the joke, but why should he want to hear otherwise? Like, in all seriousness? It should be a thing. B)