Stupid myths about lore of Warcraft

[Shinrael]

I'm sorry, but when have I been denying that he claimed it to be so? Spare me your remarks about how I'm to lazy when you can't even be bothered to properly read what you are replying to (making said remark rather ironic). Meanwhile in the world of things that have actually been said, what I actually claimed is that his entire position contradicted the way Blizzard itself presented and sold the Chronicles, making it irrelevant prior to Blizzard changing their mind. Which part of that didn't you get the first time? I thought you were supposed to be smarter than everyone doubting Blizzard's "totally not a desperate attempt to justify the retcons they already made to the Chronicle".

Except for the part where it is the ultimate truth in its own context. Which is precisely how the word canon gained its usage in wider literature (and later other mediums concerning storytelling like movies and video games). I.e. to describe what is absolutely true for a given setting.

But you cannot deny that he was claiming it to be so and you cannot deny the fact that he argumented himself with reasonable examples. It is all there, in his videos.

My post contained two statements:
1) You cannot deny that he was claiming it to be so
2) You cannot deny that he argumented himself with reasonable examples

One of them applies directly to your post above, one of them doesn't (but applies to other people in general). You chose to point out how ironic it is that one of them doesn't apply, completely ignoring the important part that the other one does. I can't help you mate :3

===

The Bible is not an ultimate truth How do I explain that to you... you're going to get this thread closed, do you realize that ?

It is a text that someone wrote. The author wrote things as he wanted to present them. For his or someone else's benefit.
The Chronicle is a text that someone wrote. The author (Titans) wrote things as he wanted to present them. For his (the Titans) or someone else's (the Light) benefit.

In that sense, Metzen saying that the Chronicle is like WoW's Bible, basically is a hint that it is biased/not the ultimate truth.

[StillMcfuu]

My post contained two statements:
1) You cannot deny that he was claiming it to be so
2) You cannot deny that he argumented himself with reasonable examples

One of them applies directly to your post above, one of them doesn't (but applies to other people in general). You chose to point out how ironic it is that one of them doesn't apply, completely ignoring the important part that the other one does. I can't help you mate :3

===

The Bible is not an ultimate truth How do I explain that to you... you're going to get this thread closed, do you realize that ?

It is a text that someone wrote. The author wrote things as he wanted to present them. For his or someone else's benefit.
The Chronicle is a text that someone wrote. The author (Titans) wrote things as he wanted to present them. For his (the Titans) or someone else's (the Light) benefit.

In that sense, Metzen saying that the Chronicle is like WoW's Bible, basically is a hint that it is biased/not the ultimate truth.

You are being pedantically ignorant. The use of Bible is long established to mean that it is the definitive reference for which it is referred to.

INFORMAL
a book regarded as authoritative in a particular sphere.
noun: bible

Also let go of the whole Pyro thing. He made a couple of off-hand remarks because he was having issues justifying retcons within Chronicle, he got lucky, Monkeys with typewriters. Just in case you are unfamiliar with that idiom, it means that a room full of monkeys randomly hitting buttons will eventually create a work of literature (recreate Shakespeare as the og goes). Pyro throws out multiple theories in every video, he was eventually going to get one right.

[Aucald]

Right. That's why that nearly omniscient perspective was already retconned. Which is the very reason why the question about whether Chronicles are still canon or not was even asked in the first place.

Basically the same as every other canon resource penned from an omniscient narrative perspective that came before it, yes. Doesn't change the fact that these previous sources of canon (e.g. novels, short stories, comics, in-game events, etc.) were all canon themselves, as is "Chronicle." Canon != inerrant, and canonicity is subject to the whims of retcons or re-contextualization via new information.

[LuminaL]

another myth: Taurens will give milk if you milk them, no Karen that's not milk, that's why it smells funny.

[Nephys]

About what is or isn't canon: there have been so many retcons that even that can't be answered for sure. What is canon today may very well not be canon tomorrow. Chronicles is a prime example of that: why would you write a series of books (which already retcon a lot of stuff) only to retcon them afterwards, as IIRC already happened? The "Chronicles is from the Titan's perspective" excuse is obviously just a way to both keep some lore paths open for the future and excuse any mistakes/retcons commited by the books.

Because of this fluid canon, discussing Warcraft lore has become increasingly frustrating, disappointing and also pretty much pointless.

Usually people who scream "retcon" are just lacking on their knowledge about the lore. Don't get me wrong, wow's lore was never that great, it has some interesting stories, but most of it is quite bad, but saying that its impossible to discuss it because of retcons is just lack of knowledge or closemindness.

[Mehrunes]

Also let go of the whole Pyro thing. He made a couple of off-hand remarks because he was having issues justifying retcons within Chronicle, he got lucky, Monkeys with typewriters. Just in case you are unfamiliar with that idiom, it means that a room full of monkeys randomly hitting buttons will eventually create a work of literature (recreate Shakespeare as the og goes). Pyro throws out multiple theories in every video, he was eventually going to get one right.

And in this case (to expand on the idiom), it happened only because Shakespeare Inc changed Shakespeare's work in a way that just so happened to match those theories long after the theories have been make. Which makes the whole thing even less impressive.

My post contained two statements:
1) You cannot deny that he was claiming it to be so
2) You cannot deny that he argumented himself with reasonable examples

One of them applies directly to your post above, one of them doesn't (but applies to other people in general). You chose to point out how ironic it is that one of them doesn't apply, completely ignoring the important part that the other one does. I can't help you mate :3

Given the whole zero of people denying that Pyro made those claims in this thread, you are oh, so convincing. And no, the other one still isn't important because how strong Pyro's amazing examples were or not is still largely irrelevant to my point. Because my point is that he became "right" only after Blizzard retconned things in a way that just so matched his theories. While at the time of him making him the nature of the Chronicles was completely different. Making the whole achievement of Pyro utterly non-existent.

If I claim that Sargeras is secretly into rabbit porn with existing Blizzard description of that character contradicting this, I won't magically become a theorist that's simply ahead of my time if Blizzard just so happens to retcon Sargeras this specific way. My theories were still crackpot, I'd just so happen to be made right only retroactively by Blizzard.

The Bible is not an ultimate truth How do I explain that to you... you're going to get this thread closed, do you realize that ?

It is a text that someone wrote. The author wrote things as he wanted to present them. For his or someone else's benefit.
The Chronicle is a text that someone wrote. The author (Titans) wrote things as he wanted to present them. For his (the Titans) or someone else's (the Light) benefit.

In that sense, Metzen saying that the Chronicle is like WoW's Bible, basically is a hint that it is biased/not the ultimate truth.

Which part of "in its own context" eluded you? Well, whatever, it seems that the concept of canon (and the word Bible in non-literal sense, as @StillMcfuu pointed out) is simply utterly lost on you.

Basically the same as every other canon resource penned from an omniscient narrative perspective that came before it, yes. Doesn't change the fact that these previous sources of canon (e.g. novels, short stories, comics, in-game events, etc.) were all canon themselves, as is "Chronicle." Canon != inerrant, and canonicity is subject to the whims of retcons or re-contextualization via new information.

There's a difference between retconning an omniscient narrator and retconning an omniscient character within the story. If something written from Aman'thul's perspective is wrong then he's not omniscient. And, effectively, that whole attempt at justifying Blizzard's shift of tune about what Chronicles are falls apart. But that wasn't even the point.

The point is that in this particular case Blizzard advertised something as codification of Warcraft lore that was explicitly not written by a character in the story (Metzen said it was written from top down perspective and one of the other writers outright said it's not written by a character) and then shat the bed because they are sloppy, lazy excuses of writers that couldn't keep their story straight even if it could cure covid-19. That is why they did a 180 and talked about how Chronicle is written by the Titans. This whole thing was just a pitiful attempt to justify them shooting their "codification" in the back of its head due to their own ineptitude, nothing more.

[Aucald]

There's a difference between retconning an omniscient narrator and retconning an omniscient character within the story. If something written from Aman'thul's perspective is wrong then he's not omniscient. And, effectively, that whole attempt at justifying Blizzard's shift of tune about what Chronicles are falls apart. But that wasn't even the point.

The point is that in this particular case Blizzard advertised something as codification of Warcraft lore that was explicitly not written by a character in the story (Metzen said it was written from top down perspective and one of the other writers outright said it's not written by a character) and then shat the bed because they are sloppy, lazy excuses of writers that couldn't keep their story straight even if it could cure covid-19. That is why they did a 180 and talked about how Chronicle is written by the Titans. This whole thing was just a pitiful attempt to justify them shooting their "codification" in the back of its head due to their own ineptitude, nothing more.

I originally said "nearly" omniscient, and "pretty much" all-knowing. Aman'thul can literally see the future, although that future sight is limited by external actors retroactively altering the timeline he sees. This was in the vein of explaining why "Chronicle" is both canon and functioning reference material, though not inerrant (like pretty much all the other sources of canon in the Warcraft universe).

As for the improper advertising of "Chronicle" I already addressed that and confirmed it was an error on their part, and had they just said they were "written from the Titans' perspective" it would've been fine from the beginning.

[matrix123mko]

Remember Warcraft 3 night elves? Their power level in WoW makes more sense than what Knaak has written.

[Eurhetemec]

dress it up in Christie Golden's YA-tier dialogue

That's like three tiers higher than most game dialogues. Just sayin'...

But yeah most of BfA's better dialogue is YA-tier. Which makes it better than almost all other expansions (and like 1000% better than all the writing in Cataclysm).

[Terongor]

People (Pyromancer) have been telling you for YEARS that the Chronicles are written from the Titan's perspective and you shat on them and when Blizzard finally confirmed it true, "ermagerd that's just an excuse to make more stories"... Are you for real???

You know, maybe it's just you that and the people like you who weren't smart enough to figure out the *obvious* hints that Blizzard gave us? If you have no clue about the lore ofc every single plot twist will seem like an asspull.

And how many wrong theories pyromancer had? More than right ones like his theory what ny'alotha was or his theory about old gods being death and not void.

Having one lucky though progress really doesn't prove anything about him.

[DemonHunter18]

LMAO who cares about pyromancer's theories or fortunetlling xd

[Shinrael]

You are being pedantically ignorant. The use of Bible is long established to mean that it is the definitive reference for which it is referred to.

Also let go of the whole Pyro thing. He made a couple of off-hand remarks because he was having issues justifying retcons within Chronicle, he got lucky, Monkeys with typewriters. Just in case you are unfamiliar with that idiom, it means that a room full of monkeys randomly hitting buttons will eventually create a work of literature (recreate Shakespeare as the og goes). Pyro throws out multiple theories in every video, he was eventually going to get one right.

In the sense that you can refer to it for factual information - yes absolutely. Chronicle very well describes how the heroes defeated certain bosses, it very well describes how certain events unfolded. So you can refer to that yes. It is simply missing some details here and there and it is using some vague explanations for very specific topics such as the Void and the Shadowlands. Everything else can be used as definitive reference.

Sure, if it wasn't you who made a theory and was proven right, then everyone else is just lucky, right?

Given the whole zero of people denying that Pyro made those claims in this thread, you are oh, so convincing. And no, the other one still isn't important because how strong Pyro's amazing examples were or not is still largely irrelevant to my point. Because my point is that he became "right" only after Blizzard retconned things in a way that just so matched his theories. While at the time of him making him the nature of the Chronicles was completely different. Making the whole achievement of Pyro utterly non-existent.

If I claim that Sargeras is secretly into rabbit porn with existing Blizzard description of that character contradicting this, I won't magically become a theorist that's simply ahead of my time if Blizzard just so happens to retcon Sargeras this specific way. My theories were still crackpot, I'd just so happen to be made right only retroactively by Blizzard.

Which part of "in its own context" eluded you? Well, whatever, it seems that the concept of canon (and the word Bible in non-literal sense, as @StillMcfuu pointed out) is simply utterly lost on you.

The point is that in this particular case Blizzard advertised something as codification of Warcraft lore that was explicitly not written by a character in the story (Metzen said it was written from top down perspective and one of the other writers outright said it's not written by a character) and then shat the bed because they are sloppy, lazy excuses of writers that couldn't keep their story straight even if it could cure covid-19. That is why they did a 180 and talked about how Chronicle is written by the Titans. This whole thing was just a pitiful attempt to justify them shooting their "codification" in the back of its head due to their own ineptitude, nothing more.

A bunch of forum posters "the whole zero of people" lol. Just a few hundred years ago philosophers and scientists got burned on stakes because "a whole zero of people" couldn't fathom what those innovators were doing. Your numbers mean nothing.

Sure, if it wasn't you who made a theory and was proven right, then everyone else is just lucky, right? Thank Blizzard for Pyromancer's fortune, honestly!

I mean, if you found a cave on Argus which had images of rabbits fucking and Sargeras' sword lying right next to them... I'd be very valid to theorize about Sargeras being into rabbit porn. And if then Blizzard revealed it to indeed be so, then yes, by all means you would be right. Regardless of who tells you otherwise. You'd be lucky that you found the cave, yes, but ultimately your theory would have been right.

As to the bible.... maybe, just maybe, Metzen ment it in literal sense though? Sure you cling to your "bible in non-literal sense" and "canon in its own context" but maybe that is the wrong way of looking at it Shocker, I know right?

As to the last part - once again I ask you - source on the "not written by a character"?

And how many wrong theories pyromancer had? More than right ones like his theory what ny'alotha was or his theory about old gods being death and not void.
Having one lucky though progress really doesn't prove anything about him.

It's called a theory for a reason. It is not a statement, it is but a theory. It can be right or it could be wrong. He himself seems to be very aware that most of the stuff he theorizes about might well be just wrong. But that doesn't take any credit away from his theories which were proven correct.

[Terongor]

In the sense that you can refer to it for factual information - yes absolutely. Chronicle very well describes how the heroes defeated certain bosses, it very well describes how certain events unfolded. So you can refer to that yes. It is simply missing some details here and there and it is using some vague explanations for very specific topics such as the Void and the Shadowlands. Everything else can be used as definitive reference.

Sure, if it wasn't you who made a theory and was proven right, then everyone else is just lucky, right?



A bunch of forum posters "the whole zero of people" lol. Just a few hundred years ago philosophers and scientists got burned on stakes because "a whole zero of people" couldn't fathom what those innovators were doing. Your numbers mean nothing.

Sure, if it wasn't you who made a theory and was proven right, then everyone else is just lucky, right? Thank Blizzard for Pyromancer's fortune, honestly!

I mean, if you found a cave on Argus which had images of rabbits fucking and Sargeras' sword lying right next to them... I'd be very valid to theorize about Sargeras being into rabbit porn. And if then Blizzard revealed it to indeed be so, then yes, by all means you would be right. Regardless of who tells you otherwise. You'd be lucky that you found the cave, yes, but ultimately your theory would have been right.

As to the bible.... maybe, just maybe, Metzen ment it in literal sense though? Sure you cling to your "bible in non-literal sense" and "canon in its own context" but maybe that is the wrong way of looking at it Shocker, I know right?

As to the last part - once again I ask you - source on the "not written by a character"?



It's called a theory for a reason. It is not a statement, it is but a theory. It can be right or it could be wrong. He himself seems to be very aware that most of the stuff he theorizes about might well be just wrong. But that doesn't take any credit away from his theories which were proven correct.

Two out of what ovet 100 theories proven to be correct while there are over 20 which can be proven to be wrong and yeah it does as they can be seen as lucky flukes nothing more.

[Shinrael]

Two out of what ovet 100 theories proven to be correct while there are over 20 which can be proven to be wrong and yeah it does as they can be seen as lucky flukes nothing more.

You're pulling numbers out of your ass right now

[Rendark]

The Chronicles are dumb and should not be canon.

[Michael Jackson]

"Pandaren played a major role in Warcraft 3" is what always gets me.

You had one fucking pandaren in the middle of the desert and Thrall with this thousands of men and heroes, and to top it all he was an optional recruitable character - but people keep citing that encounter as a "major role in Warcraft 3's founding of Durotar".

Even now with Reforged...so many people replaying and seeing for themselves...how can you keep making this shit up?
Besides and including Warcraft 3, before the expansion retcons, this race had and have never, ever done jack fucking shit for Warcraft lore.

I never had anything against the pandaria expansion itself, other than the out of nowhere lies about how it was this really asked for and beloved expansion...whose numbers literally started dwindling after the first month it launched, almost every month (minus like 1 or 2) till it ended.

No one asked for Cataclysm yet its numbers grew to 12 mil until the Dragon Soul drought, but "the most asked for expansion by everyone" starts dropping subs from its first quarter? I always hated that bullshit, and always will.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, do not forget that 1 to 1 Arthas is weaker than Lei Shen, as mentioned on Twitter.

Case in point of even more bullshit that came with this expansion.

[Terongor]

You're pulling numbers out of your ass right now

lets start counting them talking the shadowlands map leak was right, Azeroths dream is the source of old gods, returm of Ki''thix, his theory at end legion n'zoth is in deepholm and azshara is loyal to n'zoth(made before the release of bfa), hakkar theory in for bfa, his theory about return of lich king (made during 7.3.5), link betwen argus and n'zoth, "Argus Bleeds... Loa Blood?", Odyn being a boss in BfA, Sargeras feeding argus light, The Burning of Teldrassil: Who Did It & How Will Elune React?, The Legion & Old Gods Are WORKING TOGETHER!, Warchief Sylvanas, Destroyer of Hope...(has shit ton of mistakes),The Dark Origin of the Trolls & Is G'huun A TRUE Old God?(two mistakes both), separating void and shadow, him saying zandalari could be warlocks, Sylvanas: Agent of N'Zoth & Bringer of the Apocalypse(two which can be proven wrong) and What Sylvanas REALLY Saw When She Died... "Edge of Night", What We Know About The CURSE OF FLESH IS A LIE! there is already over 20 claims there which can be proven to be wrong.

actually no excat numnver of videos is 433 while numbers of of lore videos is litte bit under 200 so saying over 100 videos is correct

[Shinrael]

lets start counting them talking the shadowlands map leak was right, Azeroths dream is the source of old gods, returm of Ki''thix, his theory at end legion n'zoth is in deepholm and azshara is loyal to n'zoth(made before the release of bfa), hakkar theory in for bfa, his theory about return of lich king (made during 7.3.5), link betwen argus and n'zoth, "Argus Bleeds... Loa Blood?", Odyn being a boss in BfA, Sargeras feeding argus light, The Burning of Teldrassil: Who Did It & How Will Elune React?, The Legion & Old Gods Are WORKING TOGETHER!, Warchief Sylvanas, Destroyer of Hope...(has shit ton of mistakes),The Dark Origin of the Trolls & Is G'huun A TRUE Old God?(two mistakes both), separating void and shadow, him saying zandalari could be warlocks, Sylvanas: Agent of N'Zoth & Bringer of the Apocalypse(two which can be proven wrong) and What Sylvanas REALLY Saw When She Died... "Edge of Night", What We Know About The CURSE OF FLESH IS A LIE! there is already over 20 claims there which can be proven to be wrong.

actually no excat numnver of videos is 433 while numbers of of lore videos is litte bit under 200 so saying over 100 videos is correct

For the majority of the theories you named there, it is too early to judge whether they are wrong or not. For some it is vague because it is up for interpretation. You cannot judge it simply by the title. Wanna try going argument by argument for each separate video?

And in the end, as I said, they are simply theories. Nothing wrong with some of them being wrong. The Chronicle topic however was a very personal one for him, as he had been criticized for it many times and he was very convinced in his claims. And they turned out to be true. Of course he will get passionate about it.

Also he has openly admitted to being wrong about some things in some of his videos. His channel is all about speculation. The infinite possibilities. It doesn't matter if it turns out to be true or not in the end. He considers a possibility and lays down the argumentation for it to us. Him being wrong isn't anything newsworthy. Him being correct however is impressive because he does come up with some innovative and outrageous ideas/theories and most people doubt him.

[matrix123mko]

The Chronicles are dumb and should not be canon.

War of the Ancients is dumber and still considered canon.

[Soon-TM]

War of the Ancients is dumber and still considered canon.

Even that abomination known as Before the Storm is canon. With Sylvanas' inner monologue lying to the audience and to herself