Official High Elf Discussion Megathread

[delus]

If Blizzard does cave in and make (Silver Covenant) high elves an allied race? Does that mean there's still hope for vrykul and ogres?

I wouldn't be surprised if ogres or at least Mok'Nathal were in the works. The kul'tiran rigging would work fine for both. Vry'kul are way too tall but an addition could possibly be explained with Kul'tirans having some Vry'kul ancestory and additional customization.

[Shibito]

I wouldn't be surprised if ogres or at least Mok'Nathal were in the works. The kul'tiran rigging would work fine for both. Vry'kul are way too tall but an addition could possibly be explained with Kul'tirans having some Vry'kul ancestory and additional customization.

Kul tiran animation gonna be interesting hope its good.

[Doffen]

If Blizzard does cave in and make (Silver Covenant) high elves an allied race? Does that mean there's still hope for vrykul and ogres?

[papajohn4]

Thumbs up for this! I love Elves and I can never have enough Elve races :P

[Theodarzna]

seriously, get it through your skull, WORD OF GOD IS CANON, Ion says that high elves are blood elves and the ones that didn't rename are too few in number to be considered for an allied race, its a fact, that's it, no clicking your heels 3 times and making a wish for it to be a false statement, stop living in a fantasy/denial.

Yet he describes Void Elves as a squad, when has a squad ever been more than 10 people?

High Elves have raised an army and navy for the alliance and staffed it. Sorry, it's just a sign that Ion doesn't pay much attention to what he is doing. Plus if you can invent a race out of nowhere that nobody ever heard of and has zero lore and until you finish the quest, zero members, you can invent a surviving legion of High Elves if you wish.

[Deleted]

Even a Blizzard admin joined the discrod channel. Not only they are constantly blue post both the US and EU High Elf thread, now Blizz joined the Discord as well. They are listening, it's happening.



and for any that does not believe me she is the EU admin, she has a blue post in the eu helf thread you can go and check

[Kyphael]

High Elves with blue facial/chest/arm markings and different hairstyles and give the Horde a skeleton/model we have they want (half-Ogre based on the new Rexxar model?) I don't see what all the drama is from the anti-high elf camp is. They KNOW why pro-high elf players want high elves in the alliance, their counter argument is "we don't want you to have it! wah wah" essentially veiled in "WE ARE HIGH ELVES/ITS OUR MODEL." Just take your half ogres, let alliance have high elves and put this to bed, the fact this thread is 110 pages of this back and forth useless arguing is staggering.

[protip]

High Elves with blue facial/chest/arm markings and different hairstyles and give the Horde a skeleton/model we have they want (half-Ogre based on the new Rexxar model?) I don't see what all the drama is from the anti-high elf camp is. They KNOW why pro-high elf players want high elves in the alliance, their counter argument is "we don't want you to have it! wah wah" essentially veiled in "WE ARE HIGH ELVES/ITS OUR MODEL." Just take your half ogres, let alliance have high elves and put this to bed, the fact this thread is 110 pages of this back and forth useless arguing is staggering.

It's not "we don't want you to have it." It's that we have a vision of the game in which factions remain distinct. High elves for the Alliance are one example of an addition that would erode that vision. It's not spite, it's an honest difference in opinion of what the game should be.

[Gaexion Ramza Beoulve]

Hey looks like you're having a wonderful chat and productive discussion.

Just wanted to remind everyone that it will never happen.

[Pheraz]

Just one tiny thought to the "we need visual seperation"-dudes: what about pandaren? H and A and they look OFC the same because they've chosen a side. Ha! High11 confirmed!

[Strippling]

their counter argument is "we don't want you to have it! wah wah" essentially veiled in "WE ARE HIGH ELVES/ITS OUR MODEL."

And pro-high elf supporter arguments are "we wan't to play the prettiest model in game! wah wah" essentially veiled in "MUH HIGH ELVES ARE BLUE EYED BLOOD ELVES... ON THE ALLIANCE". Fact of the matter is that the thalassian elf model and story has been a core part of the Horde since TBC... not the alliance. It seems that pro-high elf supporters for the most part essentially just want to be able to play a pretty normal skinned elf on the blue side and throw any reason they can muster up to try and justify it. Bro, the reality is is that thalassian elves are a CORE part and big identity to the Horde and for that reason alone there is a lot of push back from non pro-high elf supporters. To you and other pro-high elf supporters it doesn't seem like a big deal... because you want them. To others (the non-supporters), we are trying to maintain our faction identity.

Side note... I'd probably be less upset if HE were to use the human model with pointy ears added. The model shouldn't be slimmed down though, else it'd be pushing the boundaries of resembling BE too much. On top of that, I wouldn't want HE to detract from the BE or VE story development (INCLUDING stealing development time which could be used for the existing playable thalassian elves). At this current stage, I can't see where HE fit in the story. It seems like the story is going to focus more on rivalry between BE and VE (light vs void). To add HE would just seem out of place IMO.

[seleri]

I say this as a huge lore nerd and an avid RPer. Trying to use lore to justify why something should or shouldn't become a playable race is probably one of the weakest arguments possible. Blizzard has shown and said so many times that gameplay comes before story. It's almost as weak as the silhouette argument now that we have pandaren, void elves, and nightborne.

Personally, I think eventually blue eyed, human skin tone thalassian elves will be playable with the Alliance in some form but I'd much rather get some more kind of unique (allied) races before them.

[protip]

I say this as a huge lore nerd and an avid RPer. Trying to use lore to justify why something should or shouldn't become a playable race is probably the weakest argument possible. Blizzard has shown and said so many times that gameplay comes before story. It's almost as weak as the silhouette argument now that we have pandaren, void elves, and nightborne.

Personally, I think eventually blue eyed, human skin tone thalassian elves will be playable with the Alliance in some form but I'd much rather get some more kind of unique (allied) races before them.

Pandaren were an exception that they weren't happy with. Void elves were the high elf compromise. Nightborne not only have a thinner silhouette than night elves, but were given to the Horde in return for the Alliance getting void elves.

You say that the silhouette argument is weak, but it's not just about silhouettes. It's also about theme and feel. That's why so many high elf fans aren't happy with void elves. Nightborne don't have access to the night elves' most iconic class because they have different themes; it's the same thing. They were willing to sacrifice the silhouette for high elf fans, but took away the theme and feel in return. It's not a copy in the way that high elves would be. That's not new information though, it just bears repeating because people keep trying to discredit longstanding design philosophies with the same weak evidence. You're welcome to speculate that their ideas have changed, but your argument here doesn't prove anything.

[Grand Phoenix]

I always wanted playable High Elves, and while for now Void Elves kind of scratch that itch they aren't too much different class-wise from Blood Elves. Hell, I would definitely be down to roll a High Elf if they had, say, shaman or druids - more so the former than the latter, if we're looking to establish race fantasy and distinguish them from both Blood Elves and Night Elves.

The way I see it, I would have High Elves be able to play as:

- Warrior, Paladin, (and maybe Death Knight?) for Plate classes;
- Hunter and (possibly) Shaman for Mail classes;
- Monk and Rogue for Leather classes, (probably Druids, as well, but I'd rather that stay with the Night Elves), and;
- Mage and Priest for Cloth classes

While I could argue a case for Warlocks and Demon Hunters, I think these would be considered outliers and only applicable to a few NPCs. Warlocks would stand a better chance for High Elves would learn, but I think the chances are just as slim as them wanting to be demon hunters. The whole point of the High Elf fantasy is that they refuse to resort to using fel magic.

[Ithekro]

And pro-high elf supporter arguments are "we wan't to play the prettiest model in game! wah wah" essentially veiled in "MUH HIGH ELVES ARE BLUE EYED BLOOD ELVES... ON THE ALLIANCE". Fact of the matter is that the thalassian elf model and story has been a core part of the Horde since TBC... not the alliance. It seems that pro-high elf supporters for the most part essentially just want to be able to play a pretty normal skinned elf on the blue side and throw any reason they can muster up to try and justify it. Bro, the reality is is that thalassian elves are a CORE part and big identity to the Horde and for that reason alone there is a lot of push back from non pro-high elf supporters. To you and other pro-high elf supporters it doesn't seem like a big deal... because you want them. To others (the non-supporters), we are trying to maintain our faction identity.

Side note... I'd probably be less upset if HE were to use the human model with pointy ears added. The model shouldn't be slimmed down though, else it'd be pushing the boundaries of resembling BE too much. On top of that, I wouldn't want HE to detract from the BE or VE story development (INCLUDING stealing development time which could be used for the existing playable thalassian elves). At this current stage, I can't see where HE fit in the story. It seems like the story is going to focus more on rivalry between BE and VE (light vs void). To add HE would just seem out of place IMO.

This argument does not make sense anymore. In what way does playable High Elves on the Alliance hurt the Horde faction identity? It can't realistically since there are already High Elves in the Alliance and Blood Elves in the Horde with Void Elves being a recent addition. They exist already, so how can they detract from the Horde's identity? That doesn't compute. The only thing the High Elves are not presently is playable. And the only reasoning given for that was that their population is too small. That use to be a valid point. But with the introduction of Void Elves and Allied Races, that doesn't hold water anymore. There is no possible way there are more Void Elves than High Elves by any realistic method of calculation. And with the Allied Race system, the new races do not need Starter Zones, nor vast territories. They only need a Character Creation Hub, and that is about it.

So what's left? That they will look too the same in the game? Why should that matter at all? The High Elves and Blood Elves look more or less the same in game already and they are in the process of hating on each other. That is highly realistic. Much more realistic than the two Pandaran factions. They start as neutral and have to pick an ideology. Blood Elves and High Elves do not start as neutral. They pick their faction on the creation screen, with Blood Elf being vastly easier to access, due to Allied Races requiring a lot of preparation work before you, as a player, can gain access to them. That alone will keep the High Elf population in game down. Effort spent.

As for story. The Blood Elves have their story and the Alliance cannot take that away from them. This is true. High Elves have a different story following the Third War, when the split happens. That will be their story, and not the Blood Elves story. Two separate paths. There should be no issue here. As for core identity, what does that even mean in the Horde? The core identity for the Horde is Orcs and Forsaken. The rest of the races get little representation from time to time, but the Blood Elves get probably the least representation outside of the Silvermoon areas and Outland (which is mostly Kael's forces, or the remains of the Sons of Lothar Alliance Expeditionary Forces from the Second War). The other times the Blood Elves get story they tend to share it with the High Elves in relation to things Dalaran, up to and including Suramar. So there is some shared story, but that is also faction specific and natural. Both sides have different takes on these events even though the events are shared.

Development time? If they are using the same base model, any upgrade will effectively be useful for both. Halving development time (or more due to three playable models). This is another reason why people thing Vuplera will be playable, because all the work done to their facial model will also be usable for the goblin model, which needs that face refit from WoD.

So why is this a perceived problem? I doesn't look like a real problem, but an imagined problem. But maybe I'm just a human who looks at history and says "we fight wars against people that look just like us all the time. Why should two same looking elves fighting each other be a problem?"

[Strippling]

The way I see it, I would have High Elves be able to play as:

- Warrior, Paladin, (and maybe Death Knight?) for Plate classes;
- Hunter and (possibly) Shaman for Mail classes;
- Monk and Rogue for Leather classes, (probably Druids, as well, but I'd rather that stay with the Night Elves), and;
- Mage and Priest for Cloth classes

[/QUOTE]

NO to death knight - 1) All AR start at Lvl 20. When they reach Lvl 110 they earn a set of heritage armor. A DK starting at Lvl 55 would be an unfair advantage. 2) No other AR can be DK, why would HE be the exemptpion?

NO to shaman - 1) Horde have not received an AR that can be shaman/pally/druid where the parent race cannot already be. Why should alliance be given this? Noting that Kul Tirans can be druids which is now a new race/class combo. 2) Does not fit the lore. 3) No Zandalari paladins = No elf paladins for Alliance...IMO

No to druid - 1) Pretty much the same as No to shaman, plus it would detract from NE druids and culture.

No to warlock - 1) Does not fit lore.

No to DH - 1) Same as death knight, all other AR start at Lvl 20. Starting at Lvl 100 would be an unfair advantage. 2) Does not fit lore.

No to Paladin - 1) Thalassian elf paladins were known as Blood Knights which are Blood Elves.. not High Elves. 2) A case can be made that since HE have been living in Stormwind they have now learnt how to wield the light in combat... BUT AGAIN... No Zanda Paladin = No Elf Paladin in the Alliance... IMO.


If HE were to be considered as playable (I hope they don't), then classes should be Warrior, Hunter, Rogue, Monk, Mage, Priest

[Niovi]

May i ask why some of you are against Highelf Deathknights? Or think they are not fitting? I always thought they were one of the most logical new races for DK lore-wise, so i'm just wondering.

[Kemsa]

Fine you want HE then ask for Forest Trolls too then we are set

[Strippling]

So why is this a perceived problem? I doesn't look like a real problem, but an imagined problem. "

With regard to faction identity. BE have been playable since TBC.. for the Horde. HE have been an NPC race with some minor story here or there...mainly related to BE story. The PLAYABLE thalassian MODEL is core to the HORDE, not ALLIANCE. You now have VE, adding HE will effectively offer two variations of thalassian elf customization to the Alliance even though it is originally a Horde model. You want HE?? Well how about advocate to have one of your own models used (ie human or NE, not BE).

With regard to story, I agree that BE and HE story have usually been integrated but with different paths/outlooks from each faction. With the inclusion of VE, it seems that the new path will likely be BE vs VE progression..so where do HE fit? HE story has pretty much been directly related to BE story... should HE get their own separate storyline now? I don't like that thought because A) this is where story development time could be detracted from BE or VE development time, and B) three stories for the same elf??? (BE, VE, HE) Seems excessive...

The real problem is people want the pretty normal skinned thalassian elf model on the blue side, and use lore to justify their want. I don't disagree with the lore.... HE have been allied to the alliance (that's fact). What I DO disagree with is this concept of "we want it and are entitled to it"... with that logic then Horde might as well say "we want Alterac humans with new and improved customization options, we want undead who can pick any race to customize, we want dark iron because they have aided the horde before, etc..." These 'wants' would detract from faction identity to the Alliance. And given that this game in general is about faction vs faction, and given that this upcoming expansion is putting a GREAT emphasis on faction pride and identity... your 'want' for HE doesn't bode well for me, for others and for the game. Lorewise it fits, gameplay wise it doesn't... it just goes against the motto of the game. Can you argue that?

- - - Updated - - -

May i ask why some of you are against Highelf Deathknights? Or think they are not fitting? I always thought they were one of the most logical new races for DK lore-wise, so i'm just wondering.

1) DK start at Lvl 55. Every AR currently starts at Lvl 20. Gameplay wise that would be an unfair advantage. Especially considering the whole heritage armor concept.

Gameplay > Lore.

2) No other AR can be a DK, why should HE?

3) Lore-wise, which possible Horde AR could possibly be a DK? (there may be some that I can't think of but just curious). If none, then I don't think Alliance should be given extra DK class/race combo when Horde wouldn't.

To me, these are reasons why HE would not be DK.

[Ithekro]

Zandalari Paladins is pretty much a given at this point. It makes sense that to gain the trolls trust and entrance into the Horde, the "Adventurer" will help them regain the Light of Rezan.