Official High Elf Discussion Megathread

[FlubberPuddy]

That Blizzard CAN change something is not particularly pertinent to the debate at hand in my opinion. We are debating what constitutes a race right now from what we know and the two lines we have are biological and ethnic.

Nope, and this proves Aucald's point even further. What you are debating are "playable races" . Just because say Taunka are not playable doesn't mean they aren't a race in so far as WoW is concerned.

And what Blizzard considers a "playable race" is completely arbitrary because they do not all follow the same rules. I can make a White Draenei right now who would be similar to a Lightforged Draenei sans yellow eye color, yet it's the yellow eye color that is separating the LF Draenei from the regular Draenei. But this isn't followed with Blood Elves for example - who received Golden Eyes are still members of its same playable race.

You can make a Dark skin/Red eye Dwarf to makeshift your "Dwarf race" as a Dark Iron, but Dark Iron are still truly a separate category. Now that Classic is out the resemblance is even more crazy, your dwarf character in Classic can very easily look like a Dark Iron Dwarf.

Blizzard have gone on record for stating that Kul Tirans are Humans therefore they don't even consider Kul'Tirans a separate race but put them into a separate "playable race" category.

And this has been the whole point of Aucald's recent posts, if we aren't settling on the terms we're discussing it's just going to be a bunch of talking past one another thinking "I have the correct definition".

Besides, other than CM Ornyx, there hasn't been an actual clarification of what races mean other than his post:https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/...9267207#post-6

Where he pretty much states, "it's more that when you play a Human or a Blood Elf, or any other race for that matter, your character comes from a specific "faction" within that race."

"Playable Humans are always from the nation of Stormwind. Playable Blood Elves are always from Silvermoon."

This is also why you will never get the High Elf experience players are asking for just by "making a Blood Elf". Because the Blood Elf starting experience is not the story High Elven members of the Alliance went through at all.

[Aldo Hawk]

Yeah I'd love for them to base Alliance's High Elves off Nozdormu's model! It would also make sense since we know from the Encyclopedia that many High Elves used meditation as a way to deal with their mana withdrawal coupled with the fact that a lot of the High Elves we see out and about are typically rangers. It could be their "iconic" body look and is way different from the Blood Elves.

Yeah, anything that could make sense is welcomed.

Take a look at my idea of mixing 'retrospective' developing with current history developing for their appearance.

A mix of fel untainted, different dealing High elf. It would be lore friendly, give a better concept for both groups, and solve the 'looking the same' problem some people 'have'.

Ielenia's idea of hard trained High elves in order to combat withdrawal also matches the High elf's overall military fantasy. Trained to overcome addiction they maintained these routines even after Sunwell's restoration so they are always prepared for battle.

They could even make them willingly cut themselves off the Sunwell in some final way to distance themselves from their former land, maybe leaving some kind of scar, or even giving a meaning to the tattoo idea. Magical runes meant to be used to cut the High elves' conection with the Sunwell. But in this case every one of them would have to wear them. Which is not a really big deal if you ask me.

[FlubberPuddy]

Yeah, anything that could make sense is welcomed.

Take a look at my idea of mixing 'retrospective' developing with current history developing for their appearance.

A mix of fel untainted, different dealing High elf. It would be lore friendly, give a better concept for both groups, and solve the 'looking the same' problem some people 'have'.

Ielenia's idea of hard trained High elves in order to combat withdrawal also matches the High elf's overall military fantasy. Trained to overcome addiction they maintained these routines even after Sunwell's restoration so they are always prepared for battle.

They could even make them willingly cut themselves off the Sunwell in some final way to distance themselves from their former land, maybe leaving some kind of scar, or even giving a meaning to the tattoo idea. Magical runes meant to be used to cut the High elves' conection with the Sunwell. But in this case every one of them would have to wear them. Which is not a really big deal if you ask me.

Both of those sound very interesting and welcome. Anything that makes sense for the High Elves to be further differentiated from Blood Elves I'd welcome (if Blizzard truly believes there isn't enough differences already).

Look at the point where we are now, about half-way through BFA and the Void Elves have done shit all of note, barely anyone is discussing their lore (because they have none/barely received a scrap) since their inception yet often I see High Elves are still being talked/debated about. More people care about High Elves than Void Elves, even those that oppose them care more about putting the energy forth toward High Elf talk than Void Elf talk lol.

[Ielenia]

That Blizzard CAN change something is not particularly pertinent to the debate at hand in my opinion.

Actually, it is pertinent to this debate because, at the root of it, this thread is about wanting Blizzard to change things.

The reason I think you're trying to assert it's not is because "Word of God" is one of, if not THE most used argument you have used in this thread, and the idea that Blizzard can change things, especially their minds, goes directly against "Word of God" arguments.

And of course, as goes without saying, the Pandaren experiment of a neutral race was ultimately regarded as a failure by Blizzard with the damage done to faction diversity being the chief reason it has not been repeated.

I think this is rather dishonest to assert. Yes, the pandaren situation is generally regarded in a bad light by Blizzard, but they have never gone in detail as to why.

• Was it because the pandaren are a "true neutral race"? As in, same starting zone for them before splitting when choosing factions.
• Was it because the pandaren have the exact same class choices?
• Was it because the pandaren have the exact same racials?

If it was any of all of those three, or even all three, then the same reasoning would not apply to playable high elves, since high elves are unlikely to have the same starting zone as the blood elves, are unlikely to have the same class choices as the blood elves, and are unlikely to have the same racials as the blood elves.

[Obelisk Kai]

No, it is not pertinent to your historical argument in this thread, but it is pertinent to the post I recently made that you've been responding to. The time it takes them to shift their position in any direction has no bearing on its ultimate arbitrary nature, either. It is entirely at their discretion, and thus at their whim if they so choose.

Which of course boils down to that if they want to change something they can, which I have historically acknowledged. But an interrogation of the available facts allows us to debate how likely that shift is. In this particular instance, they have never shown themselves to be adverse to sub-races and thus offering options based on ethnic lines, but have proven to be adverse to options based on political lines. It is not hard to understand why either, an ethnically diverse race can (and has been) sold as a truly distinct option from a parent race whereas a political variant is a subjective experience, most of the difference exists entirely in the mind of the player.

The difference between the Houjin and Tushui Pandaren is both philosophical as well as political, given their choices of faction allegiance. The shared experience, while nice for the Pandaren as a people within the narrative, isn't really material in my opinion. The two Pandaren "races" within the game are still divided by their politics and their philosophy for approaching life.

There is one Pandaren race. Most of them are truly neutral. There are two small Pandaren factions which are divided on a philosophical and political point and they have chosen to align themselves with the Alliance and Horde to express their beliefs. But nowhere do these differences entitle them to define themselves as distinct races. Nowhere are they defined as distinct races, neither in terms of gameplay or in terms of lore. They only reason people may have for attempting to define the Pandaren factions as distinct races is because the logic of defining the High Elf exiles as a distinct race would compel them to do so in regards to the Pandaren. The simpler answer is that the High Elven exiles are not a distinct race, but are what they have always been presented to be, a purely political faction of an already playable race.

That is true, but many arguments have been forth as to why that case isn't entirely applicable vis-à-vis the Blood Elves and High Elven exiles. I don't personally consider the Pandaren option a failure, myself; but that's not my distinction to make. Nor do I think the developers are either inerrant or objectively correct in several of their own conclusions about the game. The argument to authority is not generally how I approach this concern.

The Pandaren are not a failure. They are a great race. It is the concept of neutrality that failed in that it undermined the distinctiveness of the two factions. Pandaren would have, in hindsight, been better served by going to the Alliance with the Horde getting it's own unique option native to the continent out of the several interesting races we met there. But that is in the past.

Whilst arguments have been put forward as to why the Pandaren failure does not apply to the Blood Elves and the High Elven exiles, those arguments have never really stood up to scrutiny. Even in the Q and A where playable Alliance high elves were definitively ruled out, Ion counted off a few genuine differences between Blood Elves and the exiles with the implication being these differences were, in the grand scheme of things, minor and irrelevant in terms of providing a truly different option. Most of them were subjective, i.e attitudes...philosophies...politics and the one physical difference, eye colour, really isn't a substantial difference by any real measure (and Blood Elf players are making a good argument as to why it should be a customization for them and ironically Ion gave them more of a commitment than they have ever given High Elf advocates, albeit jokingly in the form of contact lenses).

While the developers are not inerrant, neither are the fans. For all the talk of how 'high elves are the most requested race ever' they are also, by a considerable margin, the most opposed. Whom then do the developers listen to on this topic? I believe the developers were not inerrant on this topic as their expressed opinions closely matched my own. You believe they were inerrant as the result was not to your tastes. And yet, what we are arguing over is not them coming down four square behind one point of view. We are arguing over their compromise, Void Elves.

For all intents and purposes, this discussion is over as a result of that compromise. A variant of the demanded race, but one which allowed the Horde a monopoly on the aesthetic and theme of the traditional High Elf.

Why would they ever have added Void Elves if there was even a chance they would ever add the High Elf exiles? They used the leeway they afforded themselves by shifting their lines to accommodate the ethnic differences to meet the Alliance players' request in a fashion, because they were unwilling to shift their lines to accommodate the more abstract differences you cited as hypothetical (and which they have refuted in word and deed).

- - - Updated - - -

I think this is rather dishonest to assert. Yes, the pandaren situation is generally regarded in a bad light by Blizzard, but they have never gone in detail as to why.

• Was it because the pandaren are a "true neutral race"? As in, same starting zone for them before splitting when choosing factions.
• Was it because the pandaren have the exact same class choices?
• Was it because the pandaren have the exact same racials?

If it was any of all of those three, or even all three, then the same reasoning would not apply to playable high elves, since high elves are unlikely to have the same starting zone as the blood elves, are unlikely to have the same class choices as the blood elves, and are unlikely to have the same racials as the blood elves.

It was because the same race was offered to both sides, diminishing the diversity of both factions as a result. And they have actually stated this, firstly through Ghostcrawler who addressed the situation directly when asked, and secondly through Ion who cited faction diversity as the reason behind not giving the Alliance High Elves and inventing Void Elves instead. If giving the exact same race that is currently playable on the Horde to the Alliance unacceptably blurs the lines between the two factions, then doing so in 5.0 had the same effect.

Making a mistake is not a license to repeat that mistake on a bigger scale. It is a learning experience that prevents you from making that mistake a second time. Almost makes you think that if they hadn't have gone with a neutral race in 5.0 and thus learned the downsides, they might have taken a chance on High Elf exiles in 8.0.

Oh well. At least you have Pandas.

[Aucald]

Which of course boils down to that if they want to change something they can, which I have historically acknowledged. But an interrogation of the available facts allows us to debate how likely that shift is. In this particular instance, they have never shown themselves to be adverse to sub-races and thus offering options based on ethnic lines, but have proven to be adverse to options based on political lines. It is not hard to understand why either, an ethnically diverse race can (and has been) sold as a truly distinct option from a parent race whereas a political variant is a subjective experience, most of the difference exists entirely in the mind of the player.

Which I have acknowledged, and which could be addressed in a number of ways put forth by other parties. But again, neither here nor there.

There is one Pandaren race. Most of them are truly neutral. There are two small Pandaren factions which are divided on a philosophical and political point and they have chosen to align themselves with the Alliance and Horde to express their beliefs. But nowhere do these differences entitle them to define themselves as distinct races. Nowhere are they defined as distinct races, neither in terms of gameplay or in terms of lore. They only reason people may have for attempting to define the Pandaren factions as distinct races is because the logic of defining the High Elf exiles as a distinct race would compel them to do so in regards to the Pandaren. The simpler answer is that the High Elven exiles are not a distinct race, but are what they have always been presented to be, a purely political faction of an already playable race.

There is one Pandaren people, yes - and in the ethnological sense, there is one Pandaren race. But in the gameplay sense there are three Pandaren "races": the Horde-aligned Houjin, the Alliance-aligned Tushui, and the non-playable and neutral mainland Pandaren. Again, referring to the original substance of my original and recent post, what truly defines a "race" in the gameplay sense is their game mechanics and faction, not ethnological difference. Lightforged Draenei aren't their own people, after all, they're part of the Draenei race. Kul Tiran Humans similarly aren't a different species from a Stormwindian or Lordaeronian Human - they've got some physical distinctiveness, but not enough to change their effective genotype (and both the regular Humans and Kul Turan Humans are offshoots of their Vrykul progenitors). The High Elven exiles aren't a different species from the Blood Elves, and they're of the same ethnic extraction as well, but in gameplay terms they are a different "race" in the same way the Lightforged Draenei are separate from the original Draenei in the game systems.

The Pandaren are not a failure. They are a great race. It is the concept of neutrality that failed in that it undermined the distinctiveness of the two factions. Pandaren would have, in hindsight, been better served by going to the Alliance with the Horde getting it's own unique option native to the continent out of the several interesting races we met there. But that is in the past.

Whilst arguments have been put forward as to why the Pandaren failure does not apply to the Blood Elves and the High Elven exiles, those arguments have never really stood up to scrutiny. Even in the Q and A where playable Alliance high elves were definitively ruled out, Ion counted off a few genuine differences between Blood Elves and the exiles with the implication being these differences were, in the grand scheme of things, minor and irrelevant in terms of providing a truly different option. Most of them were subjective, i.e attitudes...philosophies...politics and the one physical difference, eye colour, really isn't a substantial difference by any real measure (and Blood Elf players are making a good argument as to why it should be a customization for them and ironically Ion gave them more of a commitment than they have ever given High Elf advocates, albeit jokingly in the form of contact lenses).

While the developers are not inerrant, neither are the fans. For all the talk of how 'high elves are the most requested race ever' they are also, by a considerable margin, the most opposed. Whom then do the developers listen to on this topic? I believe the developers were not inerrant on this topic as their expressed opinions closely matched my own. You believe they were inerrant as the result was not to your tastes. And yet, what we are arguing over is not them coming down four square behind one point of view. We are arguing over their compromise, Void Elves.

For all intents and purposes, this discussion is over as a result of that compromise. A variant of the demanded race, but one which allowed the Horde a monopoly on the aesthetic and theme of the traditional High Elf.

Why would they ever have added Void Elves if there was even a chance they would ever add the High Elf exiles? They used the leeway they afforded themselves by shifting their lines to accommodate the ethnic differences to meet the Alliance players' request in a fashion, because they were unwilling to shift their lines to accommodate the more abstract differences you cited as hypothetical (and which they have refuted in word and deed).

I've never actually thought anything was wrong with what was done with the Houjin and Tushui divide in the Pandaren - if anything, I think it actually serves to make the Pandaren more culturally unique than any other playable race in WoW. Only the Pandaren could be so philosophically distinct that they could seemingly and arbitrarily choose which superpower to join with based on their own philosophies. I can understand it might've caused some upset to the status quo, but it works for the Pandaren as a people within the story itself, at least insofar as I'm concerned.

And of course the fans aren't inerrant - if that were the case we wouldn't even be having this debate, that was never a claim made to my knowledge. The fact that the developers aren't inerrant isn't a personal or subjective one - it's a patent statement of fact, we *know* they've been wrong before. They've admitted to being wrong many times. They'll be wrong again in the future, no doubt. This isn't a "your side/my side" distinction, it's just a fact of the matter like water rolling downhill. They can and have been wrong, their word or opinion on a given matter isn't the end-all or be-all of a given debate, especially in the sense of the dialectic.

This discussion is a critical exegesis on the matter of the truth of opinions - it does not, as I see it, have an objective right or wrong answer that any authority or person can provide. I'm not right in my position, and neither are you, no one is - we're just two parties with opinions on the matter in a sea of other opinions that may or may not agree with ours in whole or in part. Part of the problem of this thread has been parties trying to ram their opinion into fact, which of course parties who disagree are going to take issue with, and which will inspire some of those other parties to try to ram their own opposing positions into fact. Treating this debate as objective is wrongheaded, in my view. Subconsciously adding "in my opinion" to the end of every other sentence you read here would probably help a lot of participants.

As for the quantity and degree of specific differences in the High Elven exiles and the Blood Elves, that is a largely subjective conclusion - and it hinges wildly on the emphasis you place on certain elements. I would say one's choice of Azerothian faction/political affiliation in the Warcraft universe is a huge factor that cannot be understated - but that is my own opinion, to which others may agree or disagree. Similarly, I think the distinction between the Lightforged Draenei and the regular Draenei is exceedingly minimal, moreso than the one between the Blood and Void Elves, but that is also my opinion - to someone who RP's a Lightforged Draenei or is more immersed in the gameplay experience of them, the opposite could be true (and I can see the validity of such arguments despite not sharing in them).

[Ielenia]

It was because the same race was offered to both sides, diminishing the diversity of both factions as a result. And they have actually stated this, firstly through Ghostcrawler who addressed the situation directly when asked, and secondly through Ion who cited faction diversity as the reason behind not giving the Alliance High Elves and inventing Void Elves instead. If giving the exact same race that is currently playable on the Horde to the Alliance unacceptably blurs the lines between the two factions, then doing so in 5.0 had the same effect.

Making a mistake is not a license to repeat that mistake on a bigger scale. It is a learning experience that prevents you from making that mistake a second time. Almost makes you think that if they hadn't have gone with a neutral race in 5.0 and thus learned the downsides, they might have taken a chance on High Elf exiles in 8.0.

Oh well. At least you have Pandas.

Again, you're making huge extrapolations out of too vague information. We don't know what exactly about the pandaren situation is a negative to the developers, especially since there are so many possible reasons, and an even bigger number of possible combinations of reasons, for the developers' reaction regarding the pandaren.

Worse yet: there are two important facts regarding the developers who expressed those views regarding the pandaren: one, they worded their claims as being their personal opinion; and two, those developers no longer work at Blizzard, as far as I know. Who's to say that the 'new blood' doesn't agree with their predecessors' views?

[FlubberPuddy]

Worse yet: there are two important facts regarding the developers who expressed those views regarding the pandaren: one, they worded their claims as being their personal opinion; and two, those developers no longer work at Blizzard, as far as I know. Who's to say that the 'new blood' doesn't agree with their predecessors' views?

That in 8.2.5 Ji and Aysa become the introductory NPCs to the Allied Races shows that Blizzard continually puts the neutrality of Pandaren as one of the pillars of their identity.

The High Elves don't hold such a neutrality, with the recent War Campaign showing that the Sunreavers did not forget about the Purge from MoP and seek to destroy the Alliance yet there's some people who still think that somehow the High Elves in the Alliance would be okay with this? The logic doesn't follow and the game continually shows the High Elves that are in the Alliance do not want to be associated with their Horde kin, and neither do the majority their Horde kin want to do anything with them.

A far cry from the neutrality that exudes from the Pandaren.

[Obelisk Kai]

There is one Pandaren people, yes - and in the ethnological sense, there is one Pandaren race. But in the gameplay sense there are three Pandaren "races": the Horde-aligned Houjin, the Alliance-aligned Tushui, and the non-playable and neutral mainland Pandaren. Again, referring to the original substance of my original and recent post, what truly defines a "race" in the gameplay sense is their game mechanics and faction, not ethnological difference. Lightforged Draenei aren't their own people, after all, they're part of the Draenei race. Kul Tiran Humans similarly aren't a different species from a Stormwindian or Lordaeronian Human - they've got some physical distinctiveness, but not enough to change their effective genotype (and both the regular Humans and Kul Turan Humans are offshoots of their Vrykul progenitors). The High Elven exiles aren't a different species from the Blood Elves, and they're of the same ethnic extraction as well, but in gameplay terms they are a different "race" in the same way the Lightforged Draenei are separate from the original Draenei in the game systems.

The conflation of race and faction here is what is confusing matters. There are three distinct political factions based on their political alignment, one horde, one alliance, and the overwhelming majority who are neutral. I would point out that in terms of gameplay, there is only a single Pandaren race option with the choice of faction being made after the choice of race.

I have to say, the Lightforged Draenei are an odd hill to argue from and a poor comparison with high exiles when the Void Elves are a far more appropriate match. Both consist of individuals who were previously bog standard members of their race transformed by outside powers into something unique, and thus were differentiated along ethnic lines and justified their position as Allied races. A lightforged draenei in other words, is as distinct from an ordinary Draenei as a Void Elf is from a Blood/High Elf. Were they as close to Draenei as High Elf exiles were, they'd simply be bog-standard Draenei who had been on their spaceship for a couple of millenia and they would almost certainly not be an Allied race.

And of course the fans aren't inerrant - if that were the case we wouldn't even be having this debate, that was never a claim made to my knowledge. The fact that the developers aren't inerrant isn't a personal or subjective one - it's a patent statement of fact, we *know* they've been wrong before. They've admitted to being wrong many times. They'll be wrong again in the future, no doubt. This isn't a "your side/my side" distinction, it's just a fact of the matter like water rolling downhill. They can and have been wrong, their word or opinion on a given matter isn't the end-all or be-all of a given debate, especially in the sense of the dialectic.

This discussion is a critical exegesis on the matter of the truth of opinions - it does not, as I see it, have an objective right or wrong answer that any authority or person can provide. I'm not right in my position, and neither are you, no one is - we're just two parties with opinions on the matter in a sea of other opinions that may or may not agree with ours in whole or in part. Part of the problem of this thread has been parties trying to ram their opinion into fact, which of course parties who disagree are going to take issue with, and which will inspire some of those other parties to try to ram their own opposing positions into fact. Treating this debate as objective is wrongheaded, in my view. Subconsciously adding "in my opinion" to the end of every other sentence you read here would probably help a lot of participants.

As for the quantity and degree of specific differences in the High Elven exiles and the Blood Elves, that is a largely subjective conclusion - and it hinges wildly on the emphasis you place on certain elements. I would say one's choice of Azerothian faction/political affiliation in the Warcraft universe is a huge factor that cannot be understated - but that is my own opinion, to which others may agree or disagree. Similarly, I think the distinction between the Lightforged Draenei and the regular Draenei is exceedingly minimal, moreso than the one between the Blood and Void Elves, but that is also my opinion - to someone who RP's a Lightforged Draenei or is more immersed in the gameplay experience of them, the opposite could be true (and I can see the validity of such arguments despite not sharing in them).

Yet the reason you are able to cite previous instances of developers making mistakes is because they have admitted it and taken steps to rectify the damage. Is it not inappropriate to therefore use their own admissions of wrongdoing on occasion to say that because they were clearly wrong on X, and they admitted it, that they are clearly wrong on Y? That seems a bit of a leap. Particularly as the body of official commentary on this topic covers nearly fourteen years, from the Caydiem blue post in 2005 to the leaked CM response from the High Elf discord where a pro High Elfer was told that while they value people voicing their opinions, that that doesn't automatically mean they have to agree with them. That is the critical difference between previous occasions where they were making mistakes, and this debate, that they haven't said they were wrong and they keep reiterating their position on this matter. Those reiterated positions become the developer commentary regularly cited as the underpinnings of the 'anti High Elf' position, the body of evidence we have which we take to these debates to prove the opinions of the pro High Elf side wrong.

After all, when two groups get into an argument, how do you settle it? You cite evidence to back up your position. The inability of the other side to cite evidence,(once again evidence is something the creators have said, something written in an official work or something done in game) means that the other side dedicates itself to proving the official commentary wrong. Disagreeing with another fan's opinion can be considered one thing, disagreeing with a developer because what they say contradicts your own opinion is another thing, but disagreeing with a fan...then disagreeing with the developer...then insisting not only is the developer wrong but that you are right is pure arrogance (you have not done this of course, others have).

The developers stand behind faction diversity as the reason to deny playable High Elf exiles. As they have not accepted this is wrong, their rationales are valid and perfectly citeable in debate.

[Aucald]

The conflation of race and faction here is what is confusing matters. There are three distinct political factions based on their political alignment, one horde, one alliance, and the overwhelming majority who are neutral. I would point out that in terms of gameplay, there is only a single Pandaren race option with the choice of faction being made after the choice of race.

Except if you go into the character creation UI you will see two Pandaren options underneath the races selectors for Horde/Alliance, and we know there's a third that is also unplayable but appear in-game as NPC's the like. I am pointedly saying not to conflate the terms here and use the one that is applicable to what you're discussing - in-game "race" vs. ethnographic race. Conflating the terms is the problem, yes. In the case of the Pandaren their faction identity constitutes the in-game "race" choice you make.

I have to say, the Lightforged Draenei are an odd hill to argue from and a poor comparison with high exiles when the Void Elves are a far more appropriate match. Both consist of individuals who were previously bog standard members of their race transformed by outside powers into something unique, and thus were differentiated along ethnic lines and justified their position as Allied races. A lightforged draenei in other words, is as distinct from an ordinary Draenei as a Void Elf is from a Blood/High Elf. Were they as close to Draenei as High Elf exiles were, they'd simply be bog-standard Draenei who had been on their spaceship for a couple of millenia and they would almost certainly not be an Allied race.

Why is that? The Lightforged Draenei are definitely a great pick to underscore the differences between in-game race and ethnographic race, even better than the Void Elves since the Void Elves are more substantially changed both physiologically, ethnographically, and politically (turning into a Void-tainted species, altered appearance, and with a change in faction affiliation to boot). The Lightforged Draenei as still obviously Draenic in appearance, are Alliance-affilitiated like their regular brethren, and beyond an additional ritual to give them golden tattoos and eyes are no different than their cousins who arrived on the Exodar. And yet in the game UI they appear as another "race" altogether.

Yet the reason you are able to cite previous instances of developers making mistakes is because they have admitted it and taken steps to rectify the damage. Is it not inappropriate to therefore use their own admissions of wrongdoing on occasion to say that because they were clearly wrong on X, and they admitted it, that they are clearly wrong on Y? That seems a bit of a leap. Particularly as the body of official commentary on this topic covers nearly fourteen years, from the Caydiem blue post in 2005 to the leaked CM response from the High Elf discord where a pro High Elfer was told that while they value people voicing their opinions, that that doesn't automatically mean they have to agree with them. That is the critical difference between previous occasions where they were making mistakes, and this debate, that they haven't said they were wrong and they keep reiterating their position on this matter. Those reiterated positions become the developer commentary regularly cited as the underpinnings of the 'anti High Elf' position, the body of evidence we have which we take to these debates to prove the opinions of the pro High Elf side wrong.

They were still wrong - their admission of that wrongness wasn't what caused the original wrongness. What are you trying to argue here? No is claiming that having been wrong before makes them wrong now, it simply means they can't be used as an objective authority on the matter - their word doesn't make them wrong anymore than it makes them right, it's just their opinion on the matter. Even Blizzard came right out and said "there will never be playable High Elves ever, from now unto the end of time because that is the substance of our decree" it wouldn't matter, and it wouldn't make them right. It's what would happen, sure; but people would still argue it because it's not a matter of objective truth.

After all, when two groups get into an argument, how do you settle it? You cite evidence to back up your position. The inability of the other side to cite evidence,(once again evidence is something the creators have said, something written in an official work or something done in game) means that the other side dedicates itself to proving the official commentary wrong. Disagreeing with another fan's opinion can be considered one thing, disagreeing with a developer because what they say contradicts your own opinion is another thing, but disagreeing with a fan...then disagreeing with the developer...then insisting not only is the developer wrong but that you are right is pure arrogance (you have not done this of course, others have).

Depends on the argument in question - there are different forms of argument all with different means and procedures for proving truth. Evidentiary argumentation is one form of arguing, yes; but it has its necessary limits. This is not a type of argument where evidence is paramount because it's a dialectical argument - it is about opinions and subjective stances, what is or isn't proper, what should or shouldn't be done. What Blizzard thinks is simply one position in that argument, but it's not the truth of it anymore than my stance is, or your stance is. It's like arguing about something that should be done in the future: how you cite evidence for something that has no rational existence? What's your evidence for where you should go have lunch tomorrow? Is pizza superior to salad, etc. etc. etc. Even arrogance doesn't make someone "wrong" in this kind of debate, it just means people are unlikely to go along with their opinion because it's apt to badly stated or spoken.

The developers stand behind faction diversity as the reason to deny playable High Elf exiles. As they have not accepted this is wrong, their rationales are valid and perfectly citeable in debate.

Their rationale is valid and perfectly worthy of citing, yes; what it doesn't do is make them automatically correct in the matter.

[MyWholeLifeIsThunder]

Sounds to me like Devi has set a precedent already, meaning dark skin Thalassian elves exist. Why the devs decided to only put fair skin and purple skin options for playable elves is baffling. Maybe some sort of personal bias?

Kinda, but mostly just passive, result of WoW's highly derivative origins. Which I don't have issues with it, but like you can clearly trace the aesthetic inspirations of WarI and II to Classic Medieval Fantasy, Warhammer and Lord of the Rings.

Warcraft has been subverting its own narrative since War3, tho, and that's when the story IMHO began to feel more unique, with the orcs redemption, Arthas fall and the Night Elves, and ever since WoW ha become more and more unique narrative wise.

But stuff like "White Elves" keeps being a holdover of a previous blueprint. White everything humanoid sans humans really; like they realizes they had to add variety of skin color on humans at the time, but somehow that didn't click for dwarves, gnomes and elves.

asian thalassian :O

ThalAsian, if you will.

But for real; I love the concept, but I didn't like the actor they chose at first; then I realized that for some reason I think elves should have long/oval faces? IDK why. But someone like Godfrey Gao, Takeshi Kaneshiro or Ju Ji-hoon. Then I realized that wow generally gives men oval shaped faces to men and round faces to women and I was like woah. Now I really like this elf and his badass scar, must be a ranger, and I kinda ended up basing one of my chars on him

- - - Updated - - -

As for the quantity and degree of specific differences in the High Elven exiles and the Blood Elves, that is a largely subjective conclusion - and it hinges wildly on the emphasis you place on certain elements. I would say one's choice of Azerothian faction/political affiliation in the Warcraft universe is a huge factor that cannot be understated - but that is my own opinion, to which others may agree or disagree. Similarly, I think the distinction between the Lightforged Draenei and the regular Draenei is exceedingly minimal, moreso than the one between the Blood and Void Elves, but that is also my opinion - to someone who RP's a Lightforged Draenei or is more immersed in the gameplay experience of them, the opposite could be true (and I can see the validity of such arguments despite not sharing in them).

Hanging on a bit from this and the previous sayings about the Huojin/Tushui divide, I can't help but bring up that the High Elf/Blood Elf political and ideological divide has had more consequences and a more lasting effect than the former. I sure hoped than the pandaren divide led to more conflict, but nary a thing.

In contrast, as recently as 8.2.5 we are still dealing with the actions of the Silver Covenant as Jaina's enforcers when we deal with Hathorel, because the Purge of Dalaran an subsequent repercussions are something that can't simply be forgotten for obvious reasons.

[Frenchvince]

A new story opens for the High Elves with 8.2.5.

May be an HE option for BE / VE or a new breed added.

[Syegfryed]

A new story opens for the High Elves with 8.2.5.

ah yes, the good old "anything that happens in warcraft is somehow someway a new story or a hint to high elves"

[Hallowseve17]

Vereesa and Alleria Windrunner are tasked with tracking down Sylvanas in the war campaign finale. There was no need to put Vereesa in there when she's done nothing this expansion, except for being in Three Sisters. Perhaps she is there to give the high elf fans hope.

[Rhlor]

Now that it is clear that the factions will dissolve stop asking for high elves? just play with a blood elf

[Obelisk Kai]

Vereesa and Alleria Windrunner are tasked with tracking down Sylvanas in the war campaign finale. There was no need to put Vereesa in there when she's done nothing this expansion, except for being in Three Sisters. Perhaps she is there to give the high elf fans hope.

Veressa was put in there for the same reason she was put on Argus, she has a familial connection with an important character in this particular storyline.

[elbleuet]

Veressa was put in there for the same reason she was put on Argus, she has a familial connection with an important character in this particular storyline.

That's so funny because she was also there along with Varian and Jaina during the Siege of Orgrimmar back in MoP ... Maybe she had familial connection with Varian who knows...
She was also there during the Siege of Suramar and now the Siege of Orgrimmar 2.0.
No, she's just there because she's an important Alliance character.

Also those high elven siege weapons just in front of Orgrimmar ... that's priceless ! Was glad to see them, and was glad to see Alleria and Vereesa. Was wondering if they'll show up eventually...

[Obelisk Kai]

That's so funny because she was also there along with Varian and Jaina during the Siege of Orgrimmar back in MoP ... Maybe she had familial connection with Varian who knows...
She was also there during the Siege of Suramar and now the Siege of Orgrimmar 2.0.
No, she's just there because she's an important Alliance character.

Also those high elven siege weapons just in front of Orgrimmar ... that's priceless ! Was glad to see them, and was glad to see Alleria and Vereesa. Was wondering if they'll show up eventually...

She was there in Siege of Orgrimmar because she had played a role in the Isle of Thunder as a part of the Dalaran forces that were then a part of the Alliance during 5.2.

She was there during the Siege of Suramar as a part of the Dalaran forces sieging the city.

And she was alone as a High Elf exile (I didn't see a single other one) during this most recent battle, accompanying her sister like the good sidekick she is because they were dealing with her sister. People love family drama. It's an easy narrative for people to sink their teeth into.

Veressa exists as either a flunky or a sister. That is her narrative role. As evidence, this is the first time I believe Veressa has done anything in game since Argus. This 'important Alliance character' managed to sit out the entire rest of the war.

[elbleuet]

She was there in Siege of Orgrimmar because she had played a role in the Isle of Thunder as a part of the Dalaran forces that were then a part of the Alliance during 5.2.

She was there during the Siege of Suramar as a part of the Dalaran forces sieging the city.

And she was alone as a High Elf exile (I didn't see a single other one) during this most recent battle, accompanying her sister like the good sidekick she is because they were dealing with her sister. People love family drama. It's an easy narrative for people to sink their teeth into.

Veressa exists as either a flunky or a sister. That is her narrative role. As evidence, this is the first time I believe Veressa has done anything in game since Argus. This 'important Alliance character' managed to sit out the entire rest of the war.

Haha, what ?

That's actually more than what Lor'Themar did in 7 expansions whereas he's a racial leader and Vereesa's not.

And when the Legion threatened Azeroth from Argus he was taking care of his hairs at that time. Does that mean he's irrelevant as a character ?

[FlubberPuddy]

Also those high elven siege weapons just in front of Orgrimmar ... that's priceless ! Was glad to see them, and was glad to see Alleria and Vereesa. Was wondering if they'll show up eventually...

I guess I missed this, do you or anyone else know what they are called so I can look it up on wowhead/etc?

- - - Updated - - -

As evidence, this is the first time I believe Veressa has done anything in game since Argus. This 'important Alliance character' managed to sit out the entire rest of the war.

That’s strange to consider “evidence” since there’s the time that Vereesa in Cataclysm helped clear out trolls with that one dude (I forget his name but he’s the other ranger dude alongside Lorthemar, not Rommath). Then ofc MoP with the Purge which Blizzard didn’t forget about as it became a plot point reference in rescuing Baine in 8.2, showing it to be a major plot point.

One could actually even claim that with Sylvanas being set up as a villain that Vereesa will have even more of a role to play in upcoming story related to Sylvanas.

The same way people keep saying Void Elves will get fleshed out yknow, “just wait and see” etc etc.