No, you just accuse me of red herring because you either don't want or cannot deal with the argument I present.
You were the one that made a statement of fact:ah yes, the argumment of "how you know void elves re no eating a dark naaru on the dailly basis to be like alleria?, thats a fallacy
Dude. Do you even know what "appeal to ignorance" means? It means, and I quote: "asserting a conclusion to be true because there is no evidence that disproves it".No, you are bringing nonsense, its the prime example of the appeal to ignorance, you are like a walking fallacy
And that is exactly what you are doing. You are asserting your conclusion to be true because there is no conclusive evidence against it. While I am offering alternate possibilities that fit within the available evidence.
Sorry, but no. At no point you specified that was what you were talking about, there. You made broad, sweeping generalizations about my arguments.Your nonsense is "how do you know void elvs are not eating a dark naaru" don't try to backpedal the nonsense you are saying.
And your claims are just as much hypothesis as mine. The difference is that, unlike you, I'm not stating mine as fact.first, your hypothesis is just that, your damn hypotesis,
You literally accused me of "making shit up" when I mentioned how rare dark naaru are.lmao, you are chaning goalpoints,
And funny how everyone who "called me out" made the same mistake as you did: assuming I'm talking about two races sharing player models, when I'm not.No, you are using double standarts and you have bein called out here not just by me.
No, because I'm not talking about textures, but the player MODEL. One would think me repeating the words "player model" over and over would clue you in on that.Void elves literally had their own visual identity muddled to comport high elves, they can literally not look like how they should look if they chose, and youa re telling me a forsaken, cannot look like an human or an elf when forsaken was always about then? with their leader being an elf since warcraft3?
Again, this is you either accidentally or willfully misunderstanding my arguments. Considering the amount of times I've explained yet you insist on the misunderstanding, I'm leaning toward the latter.you do not even know wtf you are tlking about, right? you ae going o throw shit on th wall hoping it sticks?
That's not how it works. It can easily be either way. There is nothing, and I repeat, nothing in the lore that disproves the hypothesis that Alleria could already assume a void form prior to eating the dark naaru. You're assuming your headcanon as fact.unless they ate a dark naaru, they didn't. And that is canon until proves otherwise, not the other way around
until you can prove she does, she didn't, she could not.
This is just blatant misrepresentation of my arguments considering I never presented my ideas as true, only that they could be true, i.e., they're a hypothesis. You're the one projecting since the only one who is making assertions of facts is you.even funny comming from someone that entire topic is based on the appeal to ignore
"how do you know my absurd theory isn't true? you can't refute that!1!!
No, it's not. She never claimed herself to be a void elf until after she rescued Umbric and his group.Before she was a high elf, she never claimed or stated she was anything beyond that. That is the proof.
Her never transforming before is not evidence that she could not. And check the whole quote you posted: "that she could turn on and off at will". This was never stated anywhere, so it means this is the interpretation of whoever edited that part of the WoWPedia's article, considering it doesn't cite any sources.She never transformed before, she never had those powers before, and it is stated that her metamorphosis
First, it's not Locus Walker that says the line you quoted. That is WoWPedia's interpretation of the cinematic.The cinematic show her gaining new power as she absorb the naaru:
Locus-walker said is a newfound power, if she could do before, this would not be "new":
Second, it is not stated that this "new power" is the ability to take on a void form.
Third, Locus Walker's actual words were: Locus-Walker yells: Seize the power of the portals, Alleria! It can become your weapon!
Meaning that there's a possibility these "new powers" she awakened with is the ability to create portals.
First: next time, link a source. It's not hard. Second: this is not official information. This is just trivia which is observation of the mechanical functionalities of the ability. They're not necessarily canon information.the racial article says that:
Everything state that she only had this power aftrf absorbing the dark naaru, you are the one brining up anedoctal "hypothesis" tryign to shift the focus, using appeal to ignorance, im not going to respond on this anymore, its done, you can live with your world of hypothesis.
Please learn the difference between playable race and actual race. Both are not the same, considering that Worgen are a separate playable race but they are not a different race than humans:they are stated in the game as another race, and they ar until something proves otherwise, is how it works
Yeah, bad wording on my part, there. What I meant is that both have the same origins, whereas the mag'har orcs come from a different dimension.you just didn't said they are the same race, you said they are the exact same race:
For the first part, we don't have any official statement either way. As for the second half, you're using BfA numbers. Brown orcs were never in "big numbers in every Horde battle" before then.they never have being staed as a dying race but extinct, they always show as big numbers in evey horde battle, but of course, you ae going to use this dumb argument
I did not. You, on the other hand, did:the funny thing is how you do not realize this is applied to you, since you said there was mroe high elves than maghar,
So, I'll repeat the question: how do you know? Did you count them all?
- - - Updated - - -
You will almost always be a wolfman/woman every time group content is involved, and most of the time where solo grouping is involved. So, again, unless you're going to argue that "upright blood elf forsaken" will instantly and immediately turn into "hunched human forsaken" the moment they get in combat, using the worgen as example is not a good argument.
Not really. The arms are still just as bulky. And so are the legs. And so are the shoulders and the body. In other words: an upright orc still looks like an orc. What we're talking about is making another race be made to look like another race altogether all the time, regardless of the situation.Read closely. The entire SiLHOUETTE changes. Your argument implied silhouettes should not be changed, and this is an example of a silhouette changing.
Trolls are still trolls, and dwarves are still dwarves. Humans are not elves.And the advent of Wildhammer and Sand Troll customizations have rendered that argument moot. Lore does not hold any value here if it is not being adhered to. Exiles Reach is Blizzard's solution to this.
There are leagues of differences between making orcs stand upright and making allied races look like existing races, and making already existing races be able to look exactly alike another already existing race.There is a difference in having an opinion, and making a claim that is backed by fallacies. You are doing the latter, and I am pointing out the errors of your argument.
Personally I have been absolutely clear to you where I stand in terms of what Blizzard does. I don't agree with Blood Elves on the Horde, I don't agree with allied races excluding Wildhammers, I don't agree with many many things they do.
But its clear to me that they are blurring the lines of visual identity and of racial lore by opening up customization, and I can see them opening that up even further with more and more options, including proportion changes if their technology supports it. I don't see reason in 'visual identity' playing any part in limiting this.
The bulk of your last few responses against me had you get all hang up on the specific wordings of my arguments, like when you did right here:If the context is answering your initial question of 'How do you KNOW Kul Tirans look like regular (Stormwind) Humans', then no, the context does not have a LEAGUE of difference.
The context is the same - We have seen Kul Tiran Navy AND Nation as represented by their Naval army, and they looked like regular Humans. You were not questioning whether they could be diverse you were asking how we know they look THE SAME.
If you can't remember the context of your own argument, then maybe you should consider paying attention to your own words instead of just cherry picking the arguments and shifting your goalpost.
Because I am calling you out and holding you to your words. You have already claimed once to have not asked me to prove my words, and when I called you out on your own hypocrisy you just brushed it off like it didn't matter. Remember who you are replying to and the words you are using
If you use a word like Silhouette, then you should know the definition and know that 'they still look like an Orc!' does not change the fact your initial argument said silhouette specifically. This is especially the case when you have used this terminology specifically to defend some of your other statements regarding 'Visual identity'.
And now you engage in the exact same thing you're accusing me of, when you wrote "the full nation of Kul'Tiras". Why is it when you respond to my arguments, it's only the literal meaning of every single word that I write that matters, regardless of nuance and context, but when you do it, it's "context matters"? Seems like a case of "rules for thee but not for me", here. You're better than this.If your argument is that races have a FIXED visual identity