Quote:This conversation seems a bit silly, in the sense that the debate over lore accuracy can go on and on, but at the end of the day staff should perhaps decide what's playable and what's not on the basis of lore, but more importantly - what's fun.
Thank you, for being one of the few that states the GM needs to decide on it and not the playerbase. This entire thread has become a "I feel that I am right with my logics" versus the "You are wrong because of my logics."
Can we all stop caring about living and dead Deathknights? It has been decided they are allowed, and thus people are free to make and create them. You
don't have to like it and in this case, if you do not. Don't post about it.
I've requested this to be locked and frankly, I hope it happens. I got nothing against anyone who posted in here, I got something against the never-ending debate.
Edit: Derp, Bounty beat me to it as I was typing.
Just to add one thing, before this gets locked...
Quote:I neglected the above reasons.
In the end, it doesn't matter if you neglect to accept those ways of forming living death knights. We have, do, and will continue to accept them under these circumstances, and thus it's become server lore. Cold, hard, solid fact that it occurs (at least in CotH's lore).
(06-06-2011, 01:20 PM)kirilldun Wrote: [ -> ]I think death knights should be based of off the original lore, they were created by Gul'dan to serve Doomhammer. So them being servants to the Lich King had no real connection until blizzard wanted to mess with the lore and make no sence. The lore of the death knights in WOTLK is just blizzard pumping out an expansion.
Actually this is how it worked, prepare thine mind.
...
So Ner'zhul and a few of Gul'dan's death knights (defected) were intercepted in the nether by Kil'jaedan. Ner'zhul was turned into the Lich King, and his forces (his elite spellcasters) were transformed into liches in his service. Ner'zhul replicated the death knights and then... it all goes from there.