1. #22261
    Elemental Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    8,402
    Honest question: You dont get tired of yourself Ielenia?

  2. #22262
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Because you discredited your own story elements when you asserted that fiction "does not have to follow realistic probabilities".
    The fiction would follow the intents of the direction of the story, set by the creator.

    If I were to ask what are the chances Harry Potter will defeat Voldemort, then "Highly unlikely because many who tried to take him down failed" is a dismissive answer that refuses to look at the plot set forth. It doesn't regard the intent of the fiction itself. It doesn't regard the intent of the characters and for what purpose they are created. It is simply asserting that the lore has set up a high chance for anyone fighting against the villain to fail, without regarding the question's context of a main character's chances of defeating the main villain in a young adult novel series. The purpose of the story and the framework of the medium it's presented in informs us of certain variables of expectation and predictable outcomes.

    The probability of Harry Potter defeating is very high because Harry Potter is the protagonist of a young adult novel, he has motivations to put Voldemort to justice for killing his parents, he is touted as the 'Chosen one', and the entire wizarding world is built to support his character, his story, and his journey towards realizing his goals/fate. These are factors that aren't subject to the standard of 'realistic probability', it's a (arguably subjective) discussion of intent.

    It has to if it wants to be considered valid. A suggestion that Thrall is actually a zergling in disguise is a suggestion, but not one worthy of consideration when we're discussing WoW lore and possible future events.
    And you're pitting the worst examples forward in order to directly invalidate them, making it only so that the most extreme cases would be subject to being invalidated.

    I pointed out that souls might be able to take any form in the fiction, or that disguises may carry over to souls just as clothing does. The lore has not invalidated the possibility that a Dwarf could have very well be posing as Thrall all this time. I don't believe there is any reason to believe that this opinion was proven wrong. It could simply be regarded as an unpopular opinion, otherwise there's nothing about lore that invalidated the situation, considering the entire possibility could have just as easily be explained through current lore, or involve retcons.

    Maybe it's just a matter of you feeling the need to have to defend against any argument against you that prevents you from fully considering the topic. If this is the case, it makes it more understandable why I'm simply not *getting through* to you.

    That's not an absence of evidence fallacy. Pointing at the insurmountable amount of times event A happened (meeting but not marrying) and pointing at the very small amount of event B happened (meeting and marrying) is not "absence of evidence" fallacy. It would be if I simply pointed out at event B and nothing else, you'd have a point.
    It's absence of evidence because you're assuming that since we have observable events of something that didn't happen, it statistically makes it unlikely to happen at all. And it's the same as saying if it didn't snow in the past 10 months then it's unlikely to snow this month. You're ignoring everything except the pure statistics. Statistics don't work like that when applied to a body of fiction that is still progressing. You're simply providing statistics that work in a vacuum.

    The probability of marriage is the not the same between all characters. Anduin is a character that has a *higher chance* of getting married because of his role in the story. We know that the kingdom of Stormwind operates with a Monarchy system within the fiction, and Anduin is written as Stormwind's sole heir, making it purposeful for him to get married in order to bear a legitimate heir to the throne. Tangents or conflicts in the plot that get in the way of him getting married do not actually affect his overall purpose in the story, and it's the purpose that drives the probability, not 'statistics'.

    This condition would not apply the same to say a leader of the Horde, whose rank system does not work based on bloodline, and thus the characters chances of marriage may be considered more neutral and case-specific. Thrall didn't get married and have babies because of any specific purpose in the story. Thrall's post-Warchief story arc was written as a metaphor that expressed (some of) Metzen's own life experiences. That is intent, that is purpose. That is something beyond the probabilities defined by existing lore.

    Only if have no evidence or idea where the lore will go, otherwise there is zero point in discussing because the lore then would have equal chance to go in any direction, regardless of how plausible or implausible they are.
    It is not equal chance because fiction has intent. That is what makes certain things more plausible than others.

    It's the subjective interpretation of this intent (the idea where lore will go) that can be discussed. I don't truly believe there is anything as 'evidence' if we ever regard fiction, because ultimately it is beholden to the creator and not limited by maintaining any consistent standard of continuity. If an author chooses to create a more cohesive, consistent universe where factors could be considered more predictable or expected, then that's an intended choice to make; but it is not something you can glean 'evidence' from when any given story only tells the audience information on a need-to-know basis. Plot twists and contrary information is a common part of story telling that typically renders any 'evidence' as inconclusive. The plot is dictated by the author. Fiction is a creative body of work by design, and the design's purpose informs the probabilities.

    You don't design a car with a 50% chance for its engine to start.

    otherwise there is zero point in discussing
    There is zero point in validating suggestions with lore when we regard that fiction can be changed, altered and progressed in any matter to serve the creator's purpose.

    No opinion can truly be invalidated by the lore if we consider that any possibility can be retconned in.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2020-11-12 at 11:58 PM.

  3. #22263
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    The fiction would follow the intents of the direction of the story, set by the creator.
    So you agree with me that our opinions are below the canon lore of the game, yet you quote me as if to mock me.

    And you're pitting the worst examples forward in order to directly invalidate them, making it only so that the most extreme cases would be subject to being invalidated.
    What's the problem with "worst examples"? Aren't you defending ALL suggestions as being valid for being suggestions? It should make no difference to you if I pick a bland example or an extreme one.

    It's absence of evidence because you're assuming that since we have observable events of something that didn't happen, it statistically makes it unlikely to happen at all.
    That's how statistics and probability work. You observe an event happen over and over again and write down the results, and how often said results happened. And again: this is not "absence of evidence" because we do have evidence: there are people who met and married in the Warcraft universe. After all, babies and children exist. My point, though, is that there is a greater number of people who meet and do NOT get married, which is why saying that two people will marry just because they met, once, is highly unlikely to exist.

    It is not equal chance because fiction has intent. That is what makes certain things more plausible than others.
    Which is meaningless since we are not privy to the intent.

    There is zero point in validating suggestions with lore when we regard that fiction can be changed, altered and progressed in any matter to serve the creator's purpose.
    In other words, there is zero point in discussing. "Oh, you have a suggestion? Ok, cool. Moving on to something that can actually be discussed..."

  4. #22264
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    So you agree with me that our opinions are below the canon lore of the game, yet you quote me as if to mock me.
    Er, they are dictated by the creator, but our wants and needs are not defined by what the creator gives us. The creator could just as easily listen to the fans desires and have it influence the creative. Opinions are not below or above the canon. Look at the classes we got playable instead of a Tinker. Look at the return of 'dead' characters like Illidan, and likely even thr return of Arthas in Shadowlands. Popular opinion has a direct influence to this creative.

    I'd say Star Wars is a good example. Sometimes the creative is consistent, sometimes tries to reinvent itself for a new generation of kids, sometimes it just seeks to subvert everyone's expectations. And then we get a series like the Mandalorian that just absolutely gets what the fans actually want out of a new Star Wars.

    The intent of the creator is not always mutually exclusive from the opinions of fans. Sometimes those opinions are taken into consideration, and the lore molded around those considerations. The fact we have High Elf-like options for Void Elves can be a testament to this thread, and it's something that is now a part of Warcraft's lore even if it never gets explained. The mere representation makes its mark as canon.

    What's the problem with "worst examples"? Aren't you defending ALL suggestions as being valid for being suggestions? It should make no difference to you if I pick a bland example or an extreme one.
    Because obvious examples are obvious. No one is gonna care if you say Protoss in Azeroth is unlikely, but people are gonna turn heads if you say Anduin getting married is highly unlikely.

    That's how statistics and probability work. You observe an event happen over and over again and write down the results, and how often said results happened. And again: this is not "absence of evidence" because we do have evidence: there are people who met and married in the Warcraft universe. After all, babies and children exist. My point, though, is that there is a greater number of people who meet and do NOT get married, which is why saying that two people will marry just because they met, once, is highly unlikely to exist.
    But that is simply conjecture.

    Fiction is not driven by statistics lol. The chances of anything happening are driven by the narrative. Also you are ignoring rhe presence of a main character, you are only addressing statistics of any two given people, not of major characters.

    This is like saying no one will beat the next bad guy in Dragonball because the lore said the villain has been undefeated. Statistics in the fiction are absolutely purposeful in hyping up a villain to give the main character a challenge, as well as elevate the accomplishment of the hero in beating an undefeated villain. Statistics need context in order to work, and the way you are using it here is irrelevant to the context of Anduin getting married.

    Which is meaningless since we are not privy to the intent.
    Intent is not needed to have a discussion. You seem very hung up on only discussing things that are absolutely known, and seem to overlook any 'point' in having discussions of possibility.

    In other words, there is zero point in discussing. "Oh, you have a suggestion? Ok, cool. Moving on to something that can actually be discussed..."
    If you aren't interested, why do you go to discussion forums? To use evidence to prove people wrong?

    I mean if you don't like it, honestly move on. No one is committing you to regard anyone's opinion regarding lore, you can simply choose not to partake in the discussion.

    Trying to prove someone's opinion is wrong using lore as evidence? Thats just being an asshole.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2020-11-13 at 08:04 AM.

  5. #22265
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Er, they are dictated by the creator, but our wants and needs are not defined by what the creator gives us.
    That's irrelevant, though, considering, once again, I never claimed what one can or cannot give as ideas or suggestions, or can or cannot have as an opinion.

    The creator could just as easily listen to the fans desires and have it influence the creative. Opinions are not below or above the canon. Look at the classes we got playable instead of a Tinker. Look at the return of 'dead' characters like Illidan, and likely even thr return of Arthas in Shadowlands. Popular opinion has a direct influence to this creative.
    Just below you accuse me of using conjecture, and here you are doing the same. First off: your "tinker" example contradicts your claim, as if it was true, we would have had that class by now. As for the return of Illidan and Arthas, I'll repeat: that is conjecture, because I don't recall Blizzard every saying "back by popular demand".

    Because obvious examples are obvious. No one is gonna care if you say Protoss in Azeroth is unlikely, but people are gonna turn heads if you say Anduin getting married is highly unlikely.
    How do you know it's not the other way around?

    But that is simply conjecture.
    Is it, though? Conjecture is making a conclusion based in incomplete data. Are you going to tell me somewhere else in Warcraft there is an area in which the ratio of people meeting AND getting married is so abnormally high that it would skew the probability of Anduin and Taelia getting married just because they met from 'highly unlikely' to 'likely'?

    Also you are ignoring rhe presence of a main character, you are only addressing statistics of any two given people, not of major characters.
    Because it has no weight. Vol'jin did not get married. Baine did not get married. Jaina did not get married. Bolvar did not get married. Lor'themar did not get married. Etc, etc.

    This is like saying no one will beat the next bad guy in Dragonball because the lore said the villain has been undefeated.
    That's a misrepresentation since I never said that Anduin and Taelia would never get married. Also, your example does not fit considering that, if the heroes do not defeat the villain, the show ends. If Anduin and Taelia do not get married, WoW does not end.

    Intent is not needed to have a discussion. You seem very hung up on only discussing things that are absolutely known, and seem to overlook any 'point' in having discussions of possibility.
    I am interested in discussing ideas and suggestions. Find out if they are likely and probable within the lore.

    If you aren't interested, why do you go to discussion forums? To use evidence to prove people wrong?
    I'm interested in discussing ideas. You're the one shutting down discussion by saying "ideas and suggestions don't need to be discussed".

  6. #22266
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    That's irrelevant, though, considering, once again, I never claimed what one can or cannot give as ideas or suggestions, or can or cannot have as an opinion.
    Yet you can consider them wrong, which is just as bad.

    Just below you accuse me of using conjecture, and here you are doing the same. First off: your "tinker" example contradicts your claim, as if it was true, we would have had that class by now. As for the return of Illidan and Arthas, I'll repeat: that is conjecture, because I don't recall Blizzard every saying "back by popular demand".
    The difference is I am offering information that has not been considered in your conclusion. I am not framing it as immutable fact or evidence to say it is the only outcome, I am suggesting an idea which can be argued and discussed further. It is not under the guise of trivializing ones opinion with baseless statistics.

    My argument is that if you are saying you factor many possibilities then why are you not considering the ones that matter most regarding fiction? Consider these points. It is not a truth I present, but an opinion that you consider them.

    Blizzard doesn't have to say 'back by popular demand' any more than they have to exclaim 'Anduin will be getting married'. It's neither here nor there; there is no hard evidence to define what drives the fiction.

    You aren't factoring all relevant possibilities; you're defining probabilities based on your subjective choice of evidence. It's inconclusive at best. If you were simply framing an opinion then sure, that is something you can absolutely believe; but the issue is you're not framing it as opinion, you're framing it as lore-driven evidence that defines a certain probability which you have described as 'above opinion'.

    Is it, though? Conjecture is making a conclusion based in incomplete data. Are you going to tell me somewhere else in Warcraft there is an area in which the ratio of people meeting AND getting married is so abnormally high that it would skew the probability of Anduin and Taelia getting married just because they met from 'highly unlikely' to 'likely'?
    I would tell you the chance is for anything happening in fiction is not exclusively based on statistics garnered from 'fictional history'.

    I would say its conjecture because your conclusion is based on incomplete information. It is not wrong, but it is concluded using a narrow opinion.

    Such as looking at sharks in WoW, seeing them swim in deep waters and concluding that they must live in water like real fish do. If that were all the information available to you then concluding that isn't wrong, but short-sighted because you did not investigate whether or not they truly do, nor explored the possibilities of the framework of this fictional world. No investigation of sharks living elsewhere, simply a conclusion based on your observation of them being where they are.

    In the magical world of Warcraft, we have flying sharks, and sharks that live in the Dalaran Sewers up in the air. The fiction is not bound to realism.

    And if we consider the fiction and the possibilities, then it's not simply a matter of being 'highly unlikely that Sharks can fly' due to statistics. The chance isn't highly unlikely simply due to the fact this is a magical world that is peppered with pop culture references and memes alike that make things like this not only possible, but plausible.

    Because it has no weight. Vol'jin did not get married. Baine did not get married. Jaina did not get married. Bolvar did not get married. Lor'themar did not get married. Etc, etc.
    Not 'did not', 'have not'. You can only address this as truth if the fiction has completely stopped and we regard these as unchanging facts. We can regard Lord of the Rings this way because the canon is no longer worked on.

    WoW is not this. It is progressive and these things may still happen in the future. That they aren't already married is not an example that they never will.

    Also Bolvar did not get married? We don't know the exact state of his relationship to Taelia's mother.

    That's a misrepresentation since I never said that Anduin and Taelia would never get married. Also, your example does not fit considering that, if the heroes do not defeat the villain, the show ends. If Anduin and Taelia do not get married, WoW does not end.
    You drew a conclusion based on statistics which willingly ignored other factors. Your purpose could be argued as being dismissive.

    If someone were presenting a suggestion and this is what your reply tries to trivialize the discussion using arbitrary statistics to define a low probability, your intentions could be considered confusing or insulting. You aren't openly providing a counter opinion, you're simply bringing up statistics in an argument that trivializes a person's opinion, possibly even rendering it 'pointless' (within the context of lore). Yet as I said before, these are arbitrary standards since opinion is not bound to abiding lore.

    I am interested in discussing ideas and suggestions. Find out if they are likely and probable within the lore.
    If you are proving other peoples opinions wrong then you aren't discussing ideas and suggestions, you are just trivializing those opinions.

    Opinions aren't wrong just because they don't follow your interpretation of the lore.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2020-11-13 at 07:22 PM.

  7. #22267
    You know, admire the passion, but you guys are such a drag holy shit.

  8. #22268
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    <snip>
    I have a lot to say about everything you wrote, I agree with almost none of it, but this has gone wholly off-topic, so I'm stopping here.

  9. #22269
    While Void Elves do seem to be kicking around some, the overwhelming majority I see have switched their cosmetics to High Elves. To the point that I'm almost surprised now when some have void options. It's pretty obvious which one is more popular.

  10. #22270
    Quote Originally Posted by Traycor View Post
    While Void Elves do seem to be kicking around some, the overwhelming majority I see have switched their cosmetics to High Elves. To the point that I'm almost surprised now when some have void options. It's pretty obvious which one is more popular.
    Well, I changed my priest to look more quel'dorei. Since priests use void, I don't really feel my void racials are hurting my high elf fantasy. On my void elf rogue, I stick with void elf fantasy.

  11. #22271
    Quote Originally Posted by Traycor View Post
    While Void Elves do seem to be kicking around some, the overwhelming majority I see have switched their cosmetics to High Elves. To the point that I'm almost surprised now when some have void options. It's pretty obvious which one is more popular.
    I also see a lot of void elves with normal skin colors, but with tentacles, which is kinda weird. Also, as with Alleria, the Entropic Embrace proc works really great with normal skins as a visual contrast. I never liked the idea of bluish elves becoming even more bluer. And yes, my subtlety rogue now looks more like a quel'dorei, but velves racials only enhance his shadow abilities.
    Last edited by BaumanKing; 2020-11-16 at 07:42 AM.

  12. #22272
    Quote Originally Posted by Traycor View Post
    While Void Elves do seem to be kicking around some, the overwhelming majority I see have switched their cosmetics to High Elves. To the point that I'm almost surprised now when some have void options. It's pretty obvious which one is more popular.
    I mean, because those options should have been available from the start.

    Alleria Windrunner, leader of the Ren'dorei, is a Void elf who retains her fair skin form.

    Make no mistake, fair skin forms remain part of the Ren'dorei identity, and have always been.
    Last edited by Varodoc; 2020-11-16 at 09:53 AM.

  13. #22273
    Quote Originally Posted by BaumanKing View Post
    I also see a lot of void elves with normal skin colors, but with tentacles, which is kinda weird. Also, as with Alleria, the Entropic Embrace proc works really great with normal skins as a visual contrast. I never liked the idea of bluish elves becoming even more bluer. And yes, my subtlety rogue now looks more like a quel'dorei, but velves racials only enhance his shadow abilities.
    For a lot of us we kinda are just stuck with them and pretend they are not there. We could really use some more hair options :P

    Specially poignant for those who have TRP or XRP and change their race tag to High Elf/Quel'dorei

    Quote Originally Posted by Varodoc View Post
    I mean, because those options should have been available from the start.

    Alleria Windrunner, leader of the Ren'dorei, is a Void elf who retains her fair skin form.

    Make no mistake, fair skin forms remain part of the Ren'dorei identity, and have always been.
    I mean unless the player has TRP/XRP, whether their intent to portray a VE or a HE is rather speculative on either part. Sure some people want to be normal skinned VE's, but would be disingenuous to say all VE characters with fair skin are meant to be so, when VE's were widely criticized for both their subpar introduction and apparent replacement of HE's; a lot of people already considered their VE's as HE's.

    As much as Void Elves and High Elves now overlap aesthetically wise -such as with Alleria- let's not dismiss the fact that people have been always vocal about having something closer to the HE fantasy.

  14. #22274
    Quote Originally Posted by BaumanKing View Post
    I also see a lot of void elves with normal skin colors, but with tentacles, which is kinda weird. Also, as with Alleria, the Entropic Embrace proc works really great with normal skins as a visual contrast. I never liked the idea of bluish elves becoming even more bluer. And yes, my subtlety rogue now looks more like a quel'dorei, but velves racials only enhance his shadow abilities.
    I think the fact that you're seeing a lot with the new skin tones but tentacle hair can simply be attributed to the fact that Void Elves have few hairstyles to begin with. There are 10 for female (not including bald), and 12 for male (not including bald). Of the 10 female hairstyles only 4 do not have tentacles. And of the 12 male hairstyles only 6 do not have tentacles, and two of those seem less popular than the others (top row #3 and bottom row #1 seem less frequently used on my server).



    And not for nothing but many of the tentacle hairstyles for the females are really stylish and attractive even with the tentacles so it could simply be people picking what they like. That's what I did with my Warlock who has dark brown skin, red tentacle hair, and pupil-less cyan colored eyes.


    (tentacles on the back of that hairstyle)
    Last edited by Kyriani; 2020-11-16 at 07:45 PM.

  15. #22275
    I think the tentacle hair with fair skin options look very pleasing aesthetically. They remind me of Sarah Kerrigan's appearance after she was de-infested. She looks like a normal human, yet she has zerg hair, which indicates that she was infested.

    Same thing here. To the unaware, you look like a normal elf. But to those who pay attention, the tentacle, void-y hair gives away the secret of the Void elves. It's a very intriguing character concept and has countless RP possibilities.

  16. #22276
    Tentacles should become a toggle like the new draenei face tendrils did. Then you'd have a bunch of new options for hairstyles (that currently have them) to go without them, plus you could add them to the ones that don't currently have them too.

  17. #22277
    Quote Originally Posted by Varodoc View Post
    I think the tentacle hair with fair skin options look very pleasing aesthetically. They remind me of Sarah Kerrigan's appearance after she was de-infested. She looks like a normal human, yet she has zerg hair, which indicates that she was infested.

    Same thing here. To the unaware, you look like a normal elf. But to those who pay attention, the tentacle, void-y hair gives away the secret of the Void elves. It's a very intriguing character concept and has countless RP possibilities.
    That is actually quite good idea. I like that idea of being a void elf whose initial void corruption diminished, but he still maintains his void given powers. Now, I wonder if we will get full tentacle hair to make true Kerrigan lookalike It could look like slightly modified dreadlock hairstyle humans got recently.

    Quote Originally Posted by FossilFree View Post
    Tentacles should become a toggle like the new draenei face tendrils did. Then you'd have a bunch of new options for hairstyles (that currently have them) to go without them, plus you could add them to the ones that don't currently have them too.
    With core races getting option to customize tendrils, tails, eyes, moustaches and beards separately, I think separate tentacle option for void elves is inevitable. We just need to wait.

  18. #22278
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaedan View Post
    That is actually quite good idea. I like that idea of being a void elf whose initial void corruption diminished, but he still maintains his void given powers. Now, I wonder if we will get full tentacle hair to make true Kerrigan lookalike It could look like slightly modified dreadlock hairstyle humans got recently.



    With core races getting option to customize tendrils, tails, eyes, moustaches and beards separately, I think separate tentacle option for void elves is inevitable. We just need to wait.
    Yes, It would be very good to have this hairstyle, but with astral tentacles instead:

    Last edited by Varodoc; 2020-11-17 at 11:28 AM.

  19. #22279
    Quote Originally Posted by FossilFree View Post
    Tentacles should become a toggle like the new draenei face tendrils did. Then you'd have a bunch of new options for hairstyles (that currently have them) to go without them, plus you could add them to the ones that don't currently have them too.
    Whole bunch of yes to that! Tentacle toggle to change them into braids would rock (even just turn them into normal locks of hair). Either way, a toggle would dramatically increase the available number of hairstyles if you don't want tentacles.

    Of course, it would also be nice to have some non-goth hairstyles. These could be pulled from humans and Kul Tirans so the blood elf players don't feel poached.

  20. #22280
    Quote Originally Posted by MyWholeLifeIsThunder View Post
    You know, admire the passion, but you guys are such a drag holy shit.
    Problem is that people are whining about the lack of features when Allied Race customization updates haven't even happened yet.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •