Dragonflight Beta SPOILERS! Titan Lore Objects

[Super Dickmann]

Overall story writing insofar as the Titans, Azeroth, and the Keepers are concerned, yes. But debating about random points of an unrelated expansion and its set of stories is pretty radical scope creep for this thread.

I concur, which is why I'm confused why you decided to debate a throwaway comment with me that was otherwise on-topic.

@Le Conceptuel

I entirely agree with them blandifying the factions to the utmost, but I don't follow on the idea of them trying to muddy up otherwise straightforward races. The characterization of the Titans in this thread and consequently DF is completely in keeping with what came earlier and their earlier concept. We're not talking cases like with the Light, where I argue there's not much revisionism but you can make a decent case that they're muddying a previously straight good force, it's activities and mentalities that are entirely in line with what they do before. As regards the Void though, they did fuck up the angle of it and it's why I keep going back to Mists and its portrayal of it. You can say many things about the Mantid for example, but not that they aren't a perfectly functional and elaborate society with many skillsets that aren't otherwise visible and their worship of Y'shaarj is a core component of it. We can see the difference between constructive, but still evil and abjectly immoral as their society's structure based on faith in him worked as opposed to the Sha as an uncontrolled void. The Sha and Y'shaarj comparison also is the best rendition of the Void as being reflective of will they've done and the closest it's come to that, because we see the contrast between the standard functioning of the race vs. how the sha as an uncontrolled corrosive element works. See also the naga.

If they meant to do this though, then BFA skullfucked them in that regard pretty definitively. You have snippets of this direction with G'huun as a representation of the Titans' isolating the Old God's corrupting instinct but absent anything else with his influence depicted through motifs of decay, with everything from his followers to his home being a rundown shithole in perpetual degradation as contrasted to the somewhat impressive Zin-Azshari and Ny'alotha. N'zoth is too much of a blando baddie to sell any nuance though and Ny'alotha itself as an empire that's literally and figuratively the stuff of dreams and focused will, with all the horror that entails is instead just Ahn'Qiraj - lava edition.

That DF tries to do this while at the same featuring a trip down to Ny'alotha as part of its main quest just drives the point in all the more. It is kind of funny though.

[Shara Ishvalda]

No. You did. Nothing implies that other extreme. It's just a Void claimed world being claimed by Order. The Old Gods are not "good" and the Titans aren't "the bad guys". Quit shoving morals in a Cosmic scuffle where the forces care not for such banal ideals.

I think you may have misread what I said or are purposefully misunderstanding it. Either way, I don't really care enough nowadays to discuss WoW's "lore" anymore, so good day.

[Le Conceptuel]

I entirely agree with them blandifying the factions to the utmost, but I don't follow on the idea of them trying to muddy up otherwise straightforward races. The characterization of the Titans in this thread and consequently DF is completely in keeping with what came earlier and their earlier concept. We're not talking cases like with the Light, where I argue there's not much revisionism but you can make a decent case that they're muddying a previously straight good force, it's activities and mentalities that are entirely in line with what they do before. As regards the Void though, they did fuck up the angle of it and it's why I keep going back to Mists and its portrayal of it. You can say many things about the Mantid for example, but not that they aren't a perfectly functional and elaborate society with many skillsets that aren't otherwise visible and their worship of Y'shaarj is a core component of it. We can see the difference between constructive, but still evil and abjectly immoral as their society's structure based on faith in him worked as opposed to the Sha as an uncontrolled void. The Sha and Y'shaarj comparison also is the best rendition of the Void as being reflective of will they've done and the closest it's come to that, because we see the contrast between the standard functioning of the race vs. how the sha as an uncontrolled corrosive element works. See also the naga.

If they meant to do this though, then BFA skullfucked them in that regard pretty definitively. You have snippets of this direction with G'huun as a representation of the Titans' isolating the Old God's corrupting instinct but absent anything else with his influence depicted through motifs of decay, with everything from his followers to his home being a rundown shithole in perpetual degradation as contrasted to the somewhat impressive Zin-Azshari and Ny'alotha. N'zoth is too much of a blando baddie to sell any nuance though and Ny'alotha itself as an empire that's literally and figuratively the stuff of dreams and focused will, with all the horror that entails is instead just Ahn'Qiraj - lava edition.

That DF tries to do this while at the same featuring a trip down to Ny'alotha as part of its main quest just drives the point in all the more. It is kind of funny though.

This is all completely fair—I agree with the Titan assessment, as this behavior is consistent with the Titans and especially with Odyn (though the diction doesn't feel like his), though I think the same issue arises as with how BfA characterized the Black Empire. The Titans were portrayed in Legion in such a manner that it feels like there's a degree of inconsistency—we went from the Titans being a mysterious, morally-ambiguous alien race mainly concerned with making things "functional" according to their nebulous understanding of such a state, to the Titans being these legitimate and traditionally-ethical paragons of goodness, to the Titans again being a mysterious, morally-ambiguous alien race mainly concerned with making things "functional" according to their nebulous understanding of such a state. This is certainly very consistent with the Titans as we knew them around WotLK, though, and I feel like it's not a particularly bad direction.

As for the Mantid, I suppose I didn't account much for that—they do very clearly demonstrate servants of the Old God establishing a mostly-functional society. This somewhat connects to the "Aztec" vision I considered of a culture which is particularly harsh and cruel but also still functional and perhaps even innovative. As I said, I think there are ways in which the portrayal of the Void as we know it could be consistent with the idea of it establishing a functional society. The idea of a force entirely representative of change, open-mindedness, and individual willpower making for this interesting kind of society which permits a great deal of innovation. Perhaps, if we could read the sorts of innovations they produce as dangerous to preexisting structure and function, it could give a strong reason for the Titans to have this information censored. The Old Gods did, after all, produce the Curse of Flesh, which imparted free will to mortal life and caused them to deviate from their programming.

I could envision a culture built on the Void as almost akin to BioShock's Rapture—a place where the strong rule and the weak are trampled underfoot, and where extraordinary people create great innovations at the expense of others. It would be a place of raw willpower, competition, and individual liberty, for better or worse.

I probably could analyze this more, but I've been awake for much of the night, so I'm sadly less cognizant than I could be.

[Nymrohd]

to the Titans being these legitimate and traditionally-ethical paragons of goodness

When did we go there? They helped us seal Sargeras, their brother who murdered them and had been torturing them for who knows how long until they broke and became his minions then send us off. In what way was any of that behaviour good instead of neutral? We barely interacted with any of them except Eonar and even with her our interaction was entirely within the premise of us saving her ass.

[Aucald]

I concur, which is why I'm confused why you decided to debate a throwaway comment with me that was otherwise on-topic.

Because I thought, and still think, your throwaway comment was fundamentally incorrect - in addition to the rather mocking fashion in which you gave it to the original poster you were replying to. There was no real need for that to telescope into a multi-page exegesis of 19-year-old expansion, though.

[Nymrohd]

As for the Mantid, I suppose I didn't account much for that—they do very clearly demonstrate servants of the Old God establishing a mostly-functional society. This somewhat connects to the "Aztec" vision I considered of a culture which is particularly harsh and cruel but also still functional and perhaps even innovative. As I said, I think there are ways in which the portrayal of the Void as we know it could be consistent with the idea of it establishing a functional society. The idea of a force entirely representative of change, open-mindedness, and individual willpower making for this interesting kind of society which permits a great deal of innovation. Perhaps, if we could read the sorts of innovations they produce as dangerous to preexisting structure and function, it could give a strong reason for the Titans to have this information censored. The Old Gods did, after all, produce the Curse of Flesh, which imparted free will to mortal life and caused them to deviate from their programming.

Mantid society did not even exist during the Black Empire. Aqir differentiation happened well past the fall of the Black Empire; only after the Aqir-Troll wars and with the fall of Azj'Aqir did the aqir splinter and evolve into the qiraji, nerubian and mantid. It is in that time that the Mantid discovered the Kypari and created their society and their worship of Y'shaarj is inherited and ancestral; as a culture they never really lived under him. He is nothing but a unifying principle for them and a promise of future glory, effectively a classic case of a nationalist mythology that excuses irredentism. The only reason they are a working fascist society (which is entirely what they are) is that their leader literally and effectively can exercise supreme power over them. Something made painfully obvious when the moment the leader gets compromised their entire society is on the verge of collapse.

[Aucald]

Are the titans really a reliable source anymore when they openly lie to us?

Canonicity != truth, which is itself a strange but true statement. That a Titan lied or is revealed (or suspected) to have lied is itself part of the canon of the story - WoW's story is full of perspective conflicts, all of which are canon. The only truths we can really know are third-party developer statements meant to clarify specific story points. Chronicle is flavor lore written from a perspective, but it has elements that are validated by external and corroborating sources, and it also has elements that are omitted but nonetheless covered elsewhere. The same is true of a lot of WoW's secondary lore material, like the novels, comics, and short stories - all of which are written from various perspectives, but from which we can still glean certain facts.

- - - Updated - - -

I would say these observations reflect something that I think is worth noting—in your previous posts, you've referred to Arthas as the antagonist of Frozen Throne for these reasons, but I'd actually disagree. I think, as the POV character for the last (relevant) campaign and the one whose adventure is shown from beginning-to-end in a very personal fashion and to a great extent, Arthas fulfills his role as the centerpiece of the plot in the role of protagonist. He's an evil protagonist, sure, but he's a protagonist nonetheless—in the first half of the story, he and the Lich King set the dominoes to fall to dispose of the Burning Legion and unleash the Scourge, playing a pivotal role in eradicating the actual unifying villain. In the second half, Arthas continues to serve more in the role of protagonist than antagonist, with Illidan (and by extension Kil'Jaeden) arguably doing more to directly antagonize anybody, namely Arthas.

Arthas' portrayal is also more in line with that of a protagonist. He develops personal connections with his minions, especially Kel'Thuzad, goes through great ordeals and trials in the interest of defeating a greater threat and restoring a sort of stability (albeit under the Scourge), and ultimately culminates in his unambiguous victory and crowning as the Lich King. We see him grow from his initial point, whereas the arguable antagonist, Illidan, is already ancient and near his peak at the beginning. Illidan emerges mainly to prevent Arthas from progressing and lacks many motives of his own other than "don't get killed by Kil'Jaeden", he undergrows minimal growth outside of in power, and his personal connections are fairly professional in nature outside of with Tyrande and Malfurion and more of that of a master to his minions than a hero to his friends. By all accounts, I would argue Arthas has a very good case for being the unifying thread of WarCraft III and Frozen Throne by virtue of being the protagonist, not antagonist.

Arthas' role in WC3: TFT is a bit more complex than being either an absolute protagonist or an absolute antagonist, really. I'd argue he's definitely the protagonist of his own story, which a large part of the Scourge campaign in WC3: TFT is about - but he's an antagonist of Sylvanas in the same campaign when the action centers on her, and he's also an antagonist from the perspectives of Illidan, Malfurion, Tyrande, and the rest when it comes to his connection to the true overarching antagonist of the story: the Lich King of the Scourge. The truest antagonist of the story is the Lich King himself, though; and even Arthas is ultimately opposed to the original Lich King (the spirit of Ner'zhul) as is later revealed - even though Arthas' story in WC3: TFT is motivated at his behest, there is a strong element of subversion even in that story, before Arthas' actual heel-face betrayal of Ner'zhul later on. Illidan, in the Night Elf campaign, is presented in an antagonistic role early on, but it's revealed to be a body swerve on the story's part - his goal is actually relatable and even well-intended, even if the manner of his execution causes problems. He slips strongly into an anti-heroic role when he even abandons that goal to help his brother save Tyrande from the Scourge, despite the personal cost of failure in his case.

[Le Conceptuel]

Mantid society did not even exist during the Black Empire. Aqir differentiation happened well past the fall of the Black Empire; only after the Aqir-Troll wars and with the fall of Azj'Aqir did the aqir splinter and evolve into the qiraji, nerubian and mantid. It is in that time that the Mantid discovered the Kypari and created their society and their worship of Y'shaarj is inherited and ancestral; as a culture they never really lived under him. He is nothing but a unifying principle for them and a promise of future glory, effectively a classic case of a nationalist mythology that excuses irredentism. The only reason they are a working fascist society (which is entirely what they are) is that their leader literally and effectively can exercise supreme power over them. Something made painfully obvious when the moment the leader gets compromised their entire society is on the verge of collapse.

You appear to have misunderstood what I was referring to. I and Dickmann were citing the Mantid as representative of the capacity of the Void and its associated forces to produce a functional society in some capacity, presenting possible precedent for some hitherto unseen facet of the Black Empire. You are correct in what you're saying, but this is just a matter of establishing precedent for similar cases, so all these observations bear no relevance to the topic.

[Aucald]

In comparison with Arthas, who do you think is more evil? Him or Illidan?

I'd say Arthas is eviler in the strictest sense - Illidan's motivations have been shown to be grounded in strong moral convictions, even if his execution is ofttimes extreme and causes a good deal of collateral damage. Arthas, by contrast, has no similar lofty convictions, he is motivated by a need to avenge himself on Mal'ganis at first, and is offered chance after chance to back down from his course by both comrades and coincidence, but fails to heed every warning and ends up damning himself to undeath and servitude to a greater evil instead.

Neither character is a paragon of good by any means, of course; as both have their motivations tinctured by what we'd consider base or negative emotions. Illidan is often spiteful, jealous, and unconcerned with what he implicitly seems to regard as less-significant beings. Arthas is wrathful and immature, two emotions that are eventually manipulated into unthinking hatred by the scheming Mal'ganis, causing him to turn against his own people well before he's turned into a Death Knight of the Scourge.

[Le Conceptuel]

Arthas' role in WC3: TFT is a bit more complex than being either an absolute protagonist or an absolute antagonist, really. I'd argue he's definitely the protagonist of his own story, which a large part of the Scourge campaign in WC3: TFT is about - but he's an antagonist of Sylvanas in the same campaign when the action centers on her, and he's also an antagonist from the perspectives of Illidan, Malfurion, Tyrande, and the rest when it comes to his connection to the true overarching antagonist of the story: the Lich King of the Scourge. The truest antagonist of the story is the Lich King himself, though; and even Arthas is ultimately opposed to the original Lich King (the spirit of Ner'zhul) as is later revealed - even though Arthas' story in WC3: TFT is motivated at his behest, there is a strong element of subversion even in that story, before Arthas' actual heel-face betrayal of Ner'zhul later on. Illidan, in the Night Elf campaign, is presented in an antagonistic role early on, but it's revealed to be a body swerve on the story's part - his goal is actually relatable and even well-intended, even if the manner of his execution causes problems. He slips strongly into an anti-heroic role when he even abandons that goal to help his brother save Tyrande from the Scourge, despite the personal cost of failure in his case.

I'm using "protagonist" in a more specific narrative sense. What you're talking about is a hero, not a protagonist—it's sometimes an odd distinction to make, but they are distinct roles. In general, I envision a "hero" to be a major actor possessing the relative moral high ground or trying to prevent the villain from seeing their goals accomplished. In the dynamic between Arthas and Illidan, Illidan is quite plainly the hero, but his role is more antagonistic than protagonistic in terms of the story's scope. Conversely, a protagonist is simply the primary living object of the story, the person whose growth is the centerpiece of the story and for whose journey the story acts as a vehicle. As I said earlier, I'm quite tired due to having been up all night, meaning that my description is likely very awkward or lackluster, but I could probably elaborate on how I perceive this distinction a little later.

[Aucald]

I'm using "protagonist" in a more specific narrative sense. What you're talking about is a hero, not a protagonist—it's sometimes an odd distinction to make, but they are distinct roles. In general, I envision a "hero" to be a major actor possessing the relative moral high ground or trying to prevent the villain from seeing their goals accomplished. Conversely, a protagonist is simply the primary living object of the story, the person whose growth is the centerpiece of the story and for whose journey the story acts as a vehicle. As I said earlier, I'm quite tired due to having been up all night, meaning that my description is likely very awkward or lackluster, but I could probably elaborate on how I perceive this distinction a little later.

I'm referring to the character's multiple roles within the story depending on the context and perspective of a given story. Arthas, via his use as a device in multiple stories going on concurrently in WC3: TFT, serves multiple roles. Sylvanas is the principal character, and thus the protagonist, of her story in the Scourge campaign where she opposes Arthas, Kel'Thuzad, and the three Dreadlords who rule Lordaeron at the time - casting all who oppose her in the antagonist role. Arthas takes up the protagonist role when the story centers on him and his journey to Northrend and Icecrown to reunite with the Lich King. If we were debating more overarching roles in terms of importance to the story overall, I'd probably agree that Arthas is the majority protagonist, as the central pillar of the expansion's story is about him and his journey, and it's on his story (with him fighting Illidan at the foot of Icecrown as its effective climax). That being said, I'd still say the majority antagonist remains the Lich King himself, even for Arthas.

[Le Conceptuel]

I'm referring to the character's multiple roles within the story depending on the context and perspective of a given story. Arthas, via his use as a device in multiple stories going on concurrently in WC3: TFT, serves multiple roles. Sylvanas is the principal character, and thus the protagonist, of her story in the Scourge campaign where she opposes Arthas, Kel'Thuzad, and the three Dreadlords who rule Lordaeron at the time - casting all who oppose her in the antagonist role. Arthas takes up the protagonist role when the story centers on him and his journey to Northrend and Icecrown to reunite with the Lich King. If we were debating more overarching roles in terms of importance to the story overall, I'd probably agree that Arthas is the majority protagonist, as the central pillar of the expansion's story is about him and his journey, and it's on his story (with him fighting Illidan at the foot of Icecrown as its effective climax). That being said, I'd still say the majority antagonist remains the Lich King himself, even for Arthas.

Ah, that's fair—we were just addressing different scopes, then. I was thinking of the story as a whole, whereas you were accounting for the different campaigns as self-contained stories. That one's just a difference of perspective.

In regards to the true antagonist of the story overall, I'm not sure if it would be Kil'Jaeden or the Lich King. Admittedly, I never really perceived insubordination in Arthas' relationship to Ner'Zhul, at least in regards to the original story of WarCraft III, as one of a rebellious servant and an antagonistic overseer—I've never read Rise of the Lich King, so I may be missing some information here. I always figured their relationship, up until Arthas decided to dispose of his own better nature and Ner'Zhul at once, as being one of a fairly loyal servant and overlord. I think that if all of the protagonists have someone who is making their lives difficult, it is Kil'Jaeden.

However, I do suppose that the Lich King could easily take the antagonist role for filling the gap between Kil'Jaeden and Archimonde, as he is the unifying thread that permits the Legion's invasion. However, I would figure that the scheming of Kil'Jaeden generally marks him as the ultimate villain of the story and, arguably, the antagonist whose schemes are responsible for directly impeding or harming everybody in some capacity.

Once again, I apologize if this is all somewhat awkwardly-phrased, but this is the best I can do accounting for my general state of sleep deprivation.

[Nymrohd]

You appear to have misunderstood what I was referring to. I and Dickmann were citing the Mantid as representative of the capacity of the Void and its associated forces to produce a functional society in some capacity, presenting possible precedent for some hitherto unseen facet of the Black Empire. You are correct in what you're saying, but this is just a matter of establishing precedent for similar cases, so all these observations bear no relevance to the topic.

But the Void was not a part of Mantid society. At no point do you find Mantid who channel it. If anything the Mantid are focused on their own physiology and on using a unique local resource. Their relation with the Void is historic and treated as such; they revere the Old God of their Aqir predecessors. It is similar with the Nerubians who had largely forsaken and greatly feared the influence of the Void and its other servants (and who also developed a complex society and a massive civilization and unlike the Mantid have not shown to be militaristic or absolutist)

[Aucald]

But the Void was not a part of Mantid society. At no point do you find Mantid who channel it. If anything the Mantid are focused on their own physiology and on using a unique local resource. Their relation with the Void is historic and treated as such; they revere the Old God of their Aqir predecessors. It is similar with the Nerubians who had largely forsaken and greatly feared the influence of the Void and its other servants (and who also developed a complex society and a massive civilization and unlike the Mantid have not shown to be militaristic or absolutist)

I think the takeaway from above is that while the Mantid may not revere or even acknowledge the Void, as extracts of the Aqir and thus creations of the Old Gods, they're still products of it. The Mantid, like the Nerubians and to a lesser degree the Qiraji, were able to create advanced civilizations with distinct technologies and belief systems despite their genesis being from the Void and its essential chaos, as opposed to being products of Order as creations of the Titans or the Keepers. The Keepers specifically are philosophically opposed to the notion that the Void can create civilizations of beings that are themselves "worthy of genesis," because that undermines their own perceived idea of the Titans and themselves as progenitors and orderers of existence.

[Zelk]

Feel like it should be mentioned that we briefly travel to the black empire during thaldraszus questing and it definitely still looks evil and everything. Nice cameo for Ragnaros and Al'Akir also.

[Aucald]

Feel like it should be mentioned that we briefly travel to the black empire during thaldraszus questing and it definitely still looks evil and everything. Nice cameo for Ragnaros and Al'Akir also.

I appreciated the VO clips for all the Old Gods showing again, too. I'd missed C'Thun silkily threatening me with his understated menace.

There was also a new VO clip for Yogg-Saron, I think it is, although it's only tagged as "Knowing Presence" in the log. He says "I... know you. What you were. What you will yet be. You will follow him to the deep places. The dark waters will flow in his wake." Presumably, he's talking about our role in freeing and confronting N'Zoth in BfA.

[Le Conceptuel]

I appreciated the VO clips for all the Old Gods showing again, too. I'd missed C'Thun silkily threatening me with his understated menace.

It is a shame that Blizzard went with the rather generic baddie voice they gave N'Zoth, though I suppose it did at least have a quality of legitimate insidiousness absent from the Jailer or most other deep-voiced big bad meatheads. Yogg-Saron and C'Thun are some memorable voices, and Y'Shaarj was no slouch in that department, either.

[Aucald]

It is a shame that Blizzard went with the rather generic baddie voice they gave N'Zoth, though I suppose it did at least have a quality of legitimate insidiousness absent from the Jailer or most other deep-voiced big bad meatheads. Yogg-Saron and C'Thun are some memorable voices, and Y'Shaarj was no slouch in that department, either.

I wasn't sure which of the Presences in the Black Empire scenario represented N'Zoth, and haven't really gone back to connect them all. Yogg seemed to be the "Knowing Presence," and C'Thun was the "Observing Presence." He might've been the "Piercing Presence," but the only line I snapped of his seemed to connect to Y'Shaarj.

I think C'Thun really has the best voice of all the Old Gods who speak in WoW. There's something just unnerving and off-putting about how his voice has no real inflections, and everything he says is just measured and matter-of-fact. The rest of the Old Gods kind of betray emotions, be it maniacal pronouncements like Yogg or bog-standard threats and menacing from N'Zoth. C'Thun just seemed like he really does not give a shit about you or whatever you're doing, and it really helps sell the otherworldly nature of the Old Gods. A close contender would probably be Il'gynoth, who mostly just spouts prophecies and vague utterances, but still betrays occasional emotionality.

[Kralljin]

I'd say Arthas is eviler in the strictest sense - Illidan's motivations have been shown to be grounded in strong moral convictions, even if his execution is ofttimes extreme and causes a good deal of collateral damage.

That depends which Illidan you're talking about.

The "pre Legion" Illidan or the post Legion Illidan?

The Pre Legion Illidan is entirely motived by vanity, he wants to be the best, he wants to be a hero of his people, and so forth.
He literally says in TFT that all he has done was for the sake of power.

Arthas, did what he did for Lordaeron, at least until revenge Mal'ganis completely overtook him.

Just for context, post Legion Illidan has done everything to defeat the Legion, so we're just idiots for not understanding his goals.

[Le Conceptuel]

I wasn't sure which of the Presences in the Black Empire scenario represented N'Zoth, and haven't really gone back to connect them all. Yogg seemed to be the "Knowing Presence," and C'Thun was the "Observing Presence." He might've been the "Piercing Presence," but the only line I snapped of his seemed to connect to Y'Shaarj.

I think C'Thun really has the best voice of all the Old Gods who speak in WoW. There's something just unnerving and off-putting about how his voice has no real inflections, and everything he says is just measured and matter-of-fact. The rest of the Old Gods kind of betray emotions, be it maniacal pronouncements like Yogg or bog-standard threats and menacing from N'Zoth. C'Thun just seemed like he really does not give a shit about you or whatever you're doing, and it really helps sell the otherworldly nature of the Old Gods. A close contender would probably be Il'gynoth, who mostly just spouts prophecies and vague utterances, but still betrays occasional emotionality.

C'Thun was quite easily the most alien of the Old Gods for that reason, and it made him particularly effective—an alien space tick of inscrutable nature and completely unrecognizable motives absolutely should not have the inflection and demeanor of a human person. A force of chaos in itself is far more intimidating when it comes across as a legitimately alien creature rather than a generic baddy who has a convenient out for having any motives or nuance. I'd say Yogg and Y'Shaarj were also quite good, though. Yogg-Saron's voice acting is one of the stronger points of what is easily my favorite Old God, and although it displays something resembling traditional emotion, it is sufficiently bogged-down in absolute insanity that it does still feel like it's's some kind of malevolent alien intelligence rather than a creature we would recognize as humanlike in its manner of thinking. Y'Shaarj is a little less alien in nature than the other two, but I think its voice acting does still work because his precise goal is to evoke emotion, so it has a strong motive to speak in his more prosaic and narrative fashion.

N'Zoth is the only one that I was ever really disappointed by, since everything about him is far too familiar in nature. Yogg-Saron, C'Thun, and Y'Shaarj all seemed legitimately alien in their nature, concerned mostly with emanating chaos and insanity, representing their nature as effectively psychic tumors. N'Zoth just struck me as something reminiscent of a powerful alien conqueror, too recognizable as a sapient being as we understand it. I figure I could reach into his head and understand everything he's thinking, whereas the logic of the other three would escape me if I read their minds.

I think one problem with N'Zoth was that he made plans—this seems like a broad and odd reservation to have, but his use of a transparently human breed of logic sort of deprives him of the somnambulant nature of the Old Gods. The Old Gods, in my mind, should sort of act automatically. They can be very intelligent, like Yogg-Saron, but they sow and emanate chaos sort of by nature rather than as a fully conscious effort, and its desire to escape captivity was more that of a creature looking for freedom in itself than a person trying to reestablish a society. N'Zoth was too deliberate, too goal-focused. Nothing about him made me feel like he was a creature whose mode of thought is wholly irreconcilable with mortal life. When Yogg-Saron conducted its plans, there was some underlying logic, and it strikes me as very highly intelligent, but it was not that of an ambitious entity following personal goals of an almost-political nature, the idea of restoring the Black Empire in itself—Yogg-Saron orchestrated madness and chaos simply because it is an Old God. It recognized where there was potential and exploited it. It is a scientific entity which pulls at loose threads and invents new means by which it can corrupt the inventions of the Titans, and although it possesses the intelligence to recognize these loose threads and exploit them as destructively as possible, it does so solely by its nature. N'Zoth is a person, whereas Yogg-Saron is a truly alien entity that exceeds our fragile human modes of reasoning.