Official High Elf Discussion Megathread

[FossilFree]

So uhh, is this


a void elf with green eyes, void elf earrings (on closer inspection they are the blood elf leaves earrings but not sure if the gem is blue or green), a storm's wake tabard with light hair then?
Not to mention a different hairstyle. and silver jewelry. It could also be someone messing up with the promo image and this is supposed to be a blood elf. I'm leaning towards a mistake with the tabard.

Hmm, maybe a preview of upcoming customization options?

[Ielenia]

When it comes to any type of suggestion for the game, there is no such thing as a strong argument based on lore. You can't use lore as the limit because that's not how it works. Either you like it or you don't like it, there is no such thing as strong argument or weak argument.

If I said Tauren should branch out towards adopting the power of Shadowlands-brand Undeath that befits modern lore that branches beyond their conservative culture which prevents them exploring extreme 'dark' powers, then that's simply an argument one can make. Whether it is weak or strong is up to you individually to decide. We could brand this as tapping into the power of the Ancestors and brand this subculture/power similarly to the Revenant class in GW2, which taps into the spiritual power of long-dead heroes. Yet if you look at Tauren lore right now, there's nothing to say they would ever embrace such powers of undeath willingly, only that they have a passing connection to the Spirits and Ancestors through the Spirit Walker unit; an otherwise Shaman-specific bit of lore. There is no weak or strong argument here if we're talking about ideas that are out of the box, there's only individual subjectivity defining whether you would be willing to accept it or not. You would be using your subjective judgement to consider this as a strong or weak argument.

I mean what if I were to suggest a Dragonsworn class that is lead by Wrathion. There is no lore to suggest this would ever happen, no lore that would support such a case. So should we simply not ever talk about it because there is no precedent for a Dragonsworn class lead by Wrathion? Or that we can't talk about Dragonsworn at all because none formally exist in Warcraft lore?

The claims themselves (tauren using Shadowlands powers; dragonsworn class led by Wrathion) are not what are weak or strong. It's the reasoning offered behind such claims that can be weak or strong.

For example, saying that Baine Bloodhoof's soul is trapped within his son's body because we don't see him in the Shadowlands is a weak argument. While saying that Tirion is likely to be redeemed from his actions in the Shadowlands because the guy is a follower of the Light, with a strong sense of justice, and is likely being tricked by someone else is a strong argument to make.

That sounds like a problem specific to you, not to Blizzard. We're talking in a discussion forum, so obviously Blizzard doesn't have to do anything about anything.

That's not the point. The point I'm trying to make here is that we cannot assume Blizzard will retcon stuff so our ideas make sense, regardless of the fact that Blizzard has retconned stuff in the past. I mean, if I said that, after Shadowlands, Blizzard is going to retcon Sylvanas out of the Warcraft franchise and completely reboot and remake the history of the forsaken race... would you call it a valid suggestion?

Why? We're not Blizzard so we CAN make these suggestions, CAN come up with ideas and discuss it all. Otherwise, what is the point of coming to forums to discuss? You might as well stay in the Lore subforum and avoid every suggestion thread.

There is a difference between discussing ideas that are possible within the present lore (whether or not Garrosh's actions were his own or influenced by the Sha of Pride, for example) and ideas that are impossible within the present lore (like saying the Varian that died at the Broken Shore was just a random soldier polymorphed to look like Varian because the real Varian was too much of a chicken to fight the Legion, and is currently hiding somewhere in the Swamp of Sorrows).

I don't understand the reason you are putting the lore on a pedestal and defending it as though it's something precious that no one else should alter with their ideas.

I'm not, though. I'm just saying that "Blizzard can do it" is not a strong argument to make. You should back your arguments with what the lore presents or does not present to us, instead of saying "Blizzard can retcon the lore so anything goes."

[Vaedan]

So uhh, is this


a void elf with green eyes, void elf earrings (on closer inspection they are the blood elf leaves earrings but not sure if the gem is blue or green), a storm's wake tabard with light hair then?
Not to mention a different hairstyle. and silver jewelry. It could also be someone messing up with the promo image and this is supposed to be a blood elf. I'm leaning towards a mistake with the tabard.

Hairstyle, haircolor and eye color imply it is a blood elf, but Storm's Wake tabard is indeed confusing.

[Varodoc]

She is a Void elf. The tabard is Alliance exclusive and the earrings are those little amethyst earrings that Void elves have.

This shouldn't surprise anyone. Blood elf hairstyles and hair colours should be shared, as well as the green eyes.

There are Silvermoon scholars in Telogrus Rift too, not just Quel'dorei ones. NEVER forget that.

[Triceron]

The claims themselves (tauren using Shadowlands powers; dragonsworn class led by Wrathion) are not what are weak or strong. It's the reasoning offered behind such claims that can be weak or strong.

For example, saying that Baine Bloodhoof's soul is trapped within his son's body because we don't see him in the Shadowlands is a weak argument. While saying that Tirion is likely to be redeemed from his actions in the Shadowlands because the guy is a follower of the Light, with a strong sense of justice, and is likely being tricked by someone else is a strong argument to make.

Neither of those are suggestions to the game. Those are just explanations of existing lore. I don't see this pertaining to the topic we're discussing, since what you're talking about is still just the lore as it stands, not introducing any particularly new element to discuss.

That's not the point. The point I'm trying to make here is that we cannot assume Blizzard will retcon stuff so our ideas make sense, regardless of the fact that Blizzard has retconned stuff in the past. I mean, if I said that, after Shadowlands, Blizzard is going to retcon Sylvanas out of the Warcraft franchise and completely reboot and remake the history of the forsaken race... would you call it a valid suggestion?

Why would any suggestion be considered invalid? Because it doesn't happen? It's a suggestion.

If I didn't like Garrosh's character and I vocally suggest that they get rid of him as Warchief, then that's a suggestion that can be made and would not be invalidated by Blizzard having him actively be a Warchief. And Blizzard decidingly does get rid of Garrosh, then that's not validation of a previous suggestion either, it's just what Blizzard decided to do.

A suggestion is an opinion. Judging the validity of an opinion, is also an opinion. You can't invalidate an opinion by using facts (or using your own opinion), because it is an opinion. If someone thinks rain isn't wet, then even if it's factually untrue, it is still their freakin opinion. They can be factually wrong, but their opinion can't be invalid if the context is they're just expressing what they think.

When it comes to discussing lore, there are no real discerning facts to begin with. Lore doesn't really exist. It's like talking about who is more powerful, Goku or Superman; there is no internal consistency to these characters because it doesn't formally exist. They aren't based on facts. The story in Warcraft is not factual, it is complete fiction, and so it becomes a very wavy subject to make any decree on which opinions regarding lore are considered valid and which would be invalid. You can't really regard lore as factual truth, only express your preferences through opinion.

How do you kill a Vampire? Stake through the heart, Garlic, holy water? No. You kill it any way you want because Vampires don't exist.

There is a difference between discussing ideas that are possible within the present lore (whether or not Garrosh's actions were his own or influenced by the Sha of Pride, for example) and ideas that are impossible within the present lore (like saying the Varian that died at the Broken Shore was just a random soldier polymorphed to look like Varian because the real Varian was too much of a chicken to fight the Legion, and is currently hiding somewhere in the Swamp of Sorrows).

Yes, and that difference is what you make of it. There is no global standard for what you are talking about. You intentionally bring up an example of something you deem worthy of discussion and something you deem not worthy of discussion, but ultimately you chose the material based on your own biases. That's your opinion, and you need to recognize what that means when discussing in a public forum. Expression of opinions is not limited by any of your criteria, because the only one being affected by it is you. You are defining the rules as you go along considering there are no rules to what should or should not be suggested or discussed.

I can agree with you that your latter example is utterly ridiculous, but I wouldn't go so far as say it's a completely invalid suggestion. It's still just one person's opinion, and you don't have to fight every opinion you disagree with and prove how invalid it is. That's just being anal retentive. (that being said, I have no qualms about being anal retentive myself :P)

I'm not, though. I'm just saying that "Blizzard can do it" is not a strong argument to make. You should back your arguments with what the lore presents or does not present to us, instead of saying "Blizzard can retcon the lore so anything goes."

There is no such thing as a strong argument for why a suggestion should be valid. All suggestions are valid because they are ultimately opinions.. "Blizzard can do it" is a matter of fact, and is what makes any suggestion absolutely viable. Because Blizzard has shown to break their own rules. Why would you limit people to the rules is Blizzard is actively changing and breaking them at will? You understand how ridiculous that is, right?

[Valandale]

She is a Void elf. The tabard is Alliance exclusive and the earrings are those little amethyst earrings that Void elves have.

I thought those were the amethyst ones but if you zoom in, it's got the little filligree around the lobe like the BE "leaves" option, along with a necklace and arm bracings.

I do hope it's a precursor tho, maybe VEs only get silver to match their aesthetic and BEs keep gold jewelry as exclusives?

[FossilFree]

She is a Void elf. The tabard is Alliance exclusive and the earrings are those little amethyst earrings that Void elves have.

This shouldn't surprise anyone. Blood elf hairstyles and hair colours should be shared, as well as the green eyes.

There are Silvermoon scholars in Telogrus Rift too, not just Quel'dorei ones. NEVER forget that.

Now that Blood Elves received Void Elf purple eyes, I see no reason why Void Elves shouldn't get green. Don't forget that blue was originally a Void Elf color (minus DKs) and Blood Elves got that too. At this point, Blood Elves have almost taken more from Void Elves than the other way around, especially since tanned and dark skin tones went to both at the same time, so really all Void Elves received in the trade was the light skin tones.

[Varodoc]

I thought those were the amethyst ones but if you zoom in, it's got the little filligree around the lobe like the BE "leaves" option, along with a necklace and arm bracings.

I do hope it's a precursor tho, maybe VEs only get silver to match their aesthetic and BEs keep gold jewelry as exclusives?

That explains the earrings but then what about the tabard? Those promotional pics are done with in-game toons, No? In-game Horde characters cannot wear Alliance-exclusive tabards.

Now that Blood Elves received Void Elf purple eyes, I see no reason why Void Elves shouldn't get green. Don't forget that blue was originally a Void Elf color (minus DKs) and Blood Elves got that too. At this point, Blood Elves have almost taken more from Void Elves than the other way around, especially since tanned and dark skin tones went to both at the same time, so really all Void Elves received in the trade was the light skin tones.

Which is why they will get additional options in the future. It is clear that allied races are FAR from being overhauled like core ones.

Because, at the end of the day, fair skin tones for Void elves are just that... skin tones. Core races got A LOT MORE than just skin tones.

[FossilFree]

That explains the earrings but then what about the tabard? Those promotional pics are done with in-game toons, No? In-game Horde characters cannot wear Alliance-exclusive tabards.



Which is why they will get additional options in the future. It is clear that allied races are FAR from being overhauled like core ones.

Because, at the end of the day, fair skin tones for Void elves are just that... skin tones. Core races got A LOT MORE than just skin tones.

It would make sense to give each Thalassian elf a set of shared neutral options, and then a "cosmic power" set of options on top. Void Elves already have the void options, so maybe Blood Elves could get even more lightforged options, undead options, or a deeper dive into the fel.

[Varodoc]

It would make sense to give each Thalassian elf a set of shared neutral options, and then a "cosmic power" set of options on top. Void Elves already have the void options, so maybe Blood Elves could get even more lightforged options, undead options, or a deeper dive into the fel.

Honestly I would welcome Undead options for Blood elves, because then Undead Paladins would finally be playable.

Which means that the few arguments left against Void Elf Paladins (how they do not make sense "thematically") would be thrown out of the window.

So YES! Bring on the Undead BElves!

[FossilFree]

Honestly I would welcome Undead options for Blood elves, because then Undead Paladins would finally be playable.

Which means that the few arguments left against Void Elf Paladins (how they do not make sense "thematically") would be thrown out of the window.

So YES! Bring on the Undead BElves!

Agreed. Plus, I don't see any reason why Void Elf paladins would be a bad idea. You'd think being able to resist void influence and not succumb to the whispers would be something a follower of the light would really benefit from.

[Varodoc]

Agreed. Plus, I don't see any reason why Void Elf paladins would be a bad idea. You'd think being able to resist void influence and not succumb to the whispers would be something a follower of the light would really benefit from.

The funny thing is that there are already Void paladins in the game. It is not even a mere concept, it is reality. There are several corrupted paladins serving the Twilight Hammer Cult, the crazy organization that worships the Old Gods and the end of the world.

[FossilFree]

The funny thing is that there are already Void paladins in the game. It is not even a mere concept, it is reality. There are several corrupted paladins serving the Twilight Hammer Cult, the crazy organization that worships the Old Gods and the end of the world.

That's true. The precedent is already there.

[MyWholeLifeIsThunder]

They need to follow up on the story thread with Alleria and the Sunwell having a dark entity within. Maybe some Void Elf meddling causes the Sunwell to explode, and Blood Elves are forced to start using fel again. Then they could really double-down on the fel theme.

Eh, I'd find that unnecessary TBH. I think an important part of allowing Fel is that it doesn't pose the same threat to the Sunwell as Void did, so it's about what's complementary to a society/culture, not forcing BE on X path because Y thing happened.

My point is about delving on the contrast between Light and Fel within the same society, so forcing BE's to use fel defeats that purpose.

- - - Updated - - -

So uhh, is this


a void elf with green eyes, void elf earrings (on closer inspection they are the blood elf leaves earrings but not sure if the gem is blue or green), a storm's wake tabard with light hair then?
Not to mention a different hairstyle. and silver jewelry. It could also be someone messing up with the promo image and this is supposed to be a blood elf. I'm leaning towards a mistake with the tabard.

Yeah, that's a blood elf with the Storm's wake tabard; Hairstyle and Color are BE, eye, BE, jewelry on ears and arms, BE -silver option- Nothing would imply she's a VE, just the odd context of a BE using an alliance tabard. So either this BE got to be alliance, or they simply made a mistake in the outfit for the pics.

- - - Updated - - -

She is a Void elf. The tabard is Alliance exclusive and the earrings are those little amethyst earrings that Void elves have.

This shouldn't surprise anyone. Blood elf hairstyles and hair colours should be shared, as well as the green eyes.

There are Silvermoon scholars in Telogrus Rift too, not just Quel'dorei ones. NEVER forget that.

Dude you are exhausting, you are so pro VE you outright lie or delude yourself. Those are all BE options, those are the wing earrings, Bangles? Eye color? Hairstyle and color? they are all BE options.

For sure it's weird that this BE is wearing an alliance tabard, but when you contradict facts simply because you want them to be different, you loose all credibility.

[FossilFree]

Eh, I'd find that unnecessary TBH. I think an important part of allowing Fel is that it doesn't pose the same threat to the Sunwell as Void did, so it's about what's complementary to a society/culture, not forcing BE on X path because Y thing happened.

My point is about delving on the contrast between Light and Fel within the same society, so forcing BE's to use fel defeats that purpose.

Well, I don't think they should lose the options because the story advanced. I just think Blood Elves were more interesting before the Sunwell Plateau raid. I also really want to see what happens with all of these story threads they set up for Alleria that have gone nowhere. Like the threat to the Sunwell and the story with Locus Walker.

Plus, playable felblood elves would be just plain badass.

[Garfurion]

Agreed. Plus, I don't see any reason why Void Elf paladins would be a bad idea.

Blizzard doesn't seem to agree:

Interviewer: Are there other examples like that, where there are classes that just don’t make any sense at all with the selections available at launch?

Alex Afrasiabi: Paladin for Void Elves, because that’s weird.

source

It's probably related to Turalyon being hurt when he passes through a void portal, and Alleria and Turalyon not being able to physically touch each other without hurting each other.

You'd think being able to resist void influence and not succumb to the whispers would be something a follower of the light would really benefit from.

You don't need to be a Void Elf to resist whispers. I think shadow priests of any race hear Old God whispers.

[FossilFree]

Blizzard doesn't seem to agree:

Interviewer: Are there other examples like that, where there are classes that just don’t make any sense at all with the selections available at launch?

Alex Afrasiabi: Paladin for Void Elves, because that’s weird.

source

It's probably related to Turalyon being hurt when he passes through a void portal, and Alleria and Turalyon not being able to physically touch each other without hurting each other.



You don't need to be a Void Elf to resist whispers. I think shadow priests of any race hear Old God whispers.

It's not about "needing" to be a Void Elf to resist, but rather that they are essentially inoculated to the void in a way that other followers of the light would lack. Look how easily the paladin Arthas descended into darkness. I doubt a Void Elf paladin would have fallen so easily.

[MyWholeLifeIsThunder]

Well, I don't think they should lose the options because the story advanced. I just think Blood Elves were more interesting before the Sunwell Plateau raid. I also really want to see what happens with all of these story threads they set up for Alleria that have gone nowhere. Like the threat to the Sunwell and the story with Locus Walker.

Plus, playable felblood elves would be just plain badass.

Yeah, but none of those things requite the Sunwell to explode. That's what I am saying, Blood Elves can be more without the need of a traumatic event/loss.

Hell yeah felblood elves would be badass, but we don't need to lose the Sunwell for that, we just need the Illidari re-integrate with Quel'thalas and rehabilitate any Felblood Elves still out there. I would be totally on board with Blood Elves pushing for unification of all those lead astray by Kael'thas, while understanding they can't allow Void studies because the threat they posses to the Sunwell.

In the same manner, I want to see Void Elves and the Locus Walker story to expand -it needs it- but it neither needs the Sunwell to be told. I am so more interested in seeing Void Elves reinventing themselves without the Sunwell.

[Ielenia]

Neither of those are suggestions to the game. Those are just explanations of existing lore. I don't see this pertaining to the topic we're discussing, since what you're talking about is still just the lore as it stands, not introducing any particularly new element to discuss.

What I'm talking about is about adding new stuff to the lore without retconning already established lore (by invoking the "Blizzard can do it" argument).

Why would any suggestion be considered invalid? Because it doesn't happen? It's a suggestion.

Because it goes against established lore. Asking for Garrosh to be deposed does not go against established lore, because a warchief can be deposed, considering that twice it almost happened with Garrosh challenging Thrall for mak'gora, then later Cairne challenging Garrosh for the same. Banshees retaking their old bodies, though, has only happened once, despite the abundance of banshees around Azeroth. That suddenly all banshees have the ability to take dead bodies as their own would be a retcon. I'll repeat what I said earlier: the question has never been about "can Blizzard do it?" It has always been "should Blizzard do it?" And retcons is something that shouldn't happen, because it cheapens the lore. More than it already is, according to some.

Yes, and that difference is what you make of it. There is no global standard for what you are talking about. You intentionally bring up an example of something you deem worthy of discussion and something you deem not worthy of discussion, but ultimately you chose the material based on your own biases. That's your opinion, and you need to recognize what that means when discussing in a public forum. Expression of opinions is not limited by any of your criteria, because the only one being affected by it is you. You are defining the rules as you go along considering there are no rules to what should or should not be suggested or discussed.

I can agree with you that your latter example is utterly ridiculous, but I wouldn't go so far as say it's a completely invalid suggestion. It's still just one person's opinion, and you don't have to fight every opinion you disagree with and prove how invalid it is. That's just being anal retentive. (that being said, I have no qualms about being anal retentive myself :P)

Are you arguing that saying something fits within the lore or does not fit within the lore is subjective? Because I don't think it is. A claim, an idea, either fits in the lore or it does not. Invoking the "Blizzard can retcon the lore" is a clear indication that the idea presented does not fit the current established lore.

There is no such thing as a strong argument for why a suggestion should be valid. All suggestions are valid because they are ultimately opinions..

Yes, there are such things for "strong arguments". Giving a good basis within the lore, and detailing why this or that can happen and how this and that do not affect the chance of your idea happening is a strong argument. Saying "because I want to" or "because Blizzard can do it" is not a strong argument.

When you're presenting an idea here, you're presenting it to us, not Blizzard. It's us who you have to convince about your side of things, not Blizzard.

"Blizzard can do it" is a matter of fact, and is what makes any suggestion absolutely viable.

That is precisely why "Blizzard can do it" is a non-answer, because not only it does not answer questions of "why would this happen?" and "how should this happen?", but it also makes even the most outlandish and illogical suggestions "just as viable" as reasonable ones. I'll repeat: it doesn't matter what Blizzard can do, because they can do anything they want. The questions is: what should they do?

[FossilFree]

Yeah, but none of those things requite the Sunwell to explode. That's what I am saying, Blood Elves can be more without the need of a traumatic event/loss.

Hell yeah felblood elves would be badass, but we don't need to lose the Sunwell for that, we just need the Illidari re-integrate with Quel'thalas and rehabilitate any Felblood Elves still out there. I would be totally on board with Blood Elves pushing for unification of all those lead astray by Kael'thas, while understanding they can't allow Void studies because the threat they posses to the Sunwell.

In the same manner, I want to see Void Elves and the Locus Walker story to expand -it needs it- but it neither needs the Sunwell to be told. I am so more interested in seeing Void Elves reinventing themselves without the Sunwell.

Fair enough. I'm not really married to the idea of it exploding, I was just brainstorming how to bring back the fel, so to speak.