Conquest of the Horde

(06-30-2011, 11:08 PM)Binkleheimer Wrote: [ -> ]By the way, the some people who are arguing that they should be retconned is basically summarized as you, Flyingsquirrel, and a few peons.

Also notice how I said most of the people who complain about this have prestige classes. I stand by it. It's me noting that a lot of you have a prestige class of some kind. For instance, Dead Shot. RPG only, as far as I know. That means, there is no lore basis for them. So, shouldn't FlyingSquirrel lose Shivala's Prestige because of it?

Two things, then I'll leave again.
1) I've agreed with Living DKs being a Special Profile. Sure, I'd like them retconned, as there literally is no lore for them any more and, hey, there's lore for vampires, so why can't we play them but we can play living DKs? However, I'm fine with them just being more special.

2) I'm fine with losing Shiv's prestige. I've been considering retconning it or just retiring her because, honestly, all that Prestige has done is given me the exact opposite of what I want; More RP. But if that happens, then that would lose the large majority of a whole branch of character development that many people are leaning on. The problem with your statement is that Prestiges are a way for Character Development, where as Living Death Knights are not -- They're just something people like to play that can't even be backed up any more.

EDIT: Ohey, 1,000th post, defending myself. How charming.

So, Binkleheimer says the same thing as I did with an attitude, and everyone agrees with him? I see how it is.


Joking aside, the man has said it all.

This all boils down to wether the administration want to rile up the community over this issue or not. There'll be people complaining if they get retconned for sure, since we'll be losing our characters. If they're not, everything remains the same. This thread is slowly escalating into a flame war and I doubt I'm the only one seeing it; People are starting to take things personally and get offended, and at this point, nothing good is going to come out of it.

Rosencrat's decision to close it three pages ago was right. I don't think there even are any further arguments to be made.

Anywho, I apologize if I offended anyone with this post or any other post I've wrote in this thread; I'm simply trying to convey my opinions in the earnest way possible.

Quote:...Prestiges are a way for Character Development, where as Living Death Knights are not...

I'd say, as someone who doesn't really enjoy playing an emotionless wall of flesh that doesn't feel any pain nor has any emotions to speak of, that Character Development for a Living Death Knight comes ten times easier than a Dead one. This is coming from experience as well, having played both in the past, not because I was running around ERPing across Azeroth like some people think living DKs do, but because the emotional and mental effects of living give more depth to the typical juggernaut of awesome that the Dead Death Knights are.

I find it quite silly that there's a penalization for wanting to make an enjoyable character in which we lose power by playing, by way of possibly deleting whole characters as some are suggesting. I do believe they're a rare occurrence and should be special profiles as I've said multiple times in the past, but wiping them off the face of Azeroth is a little silly. Especially when the whole issue could be resolved by Kretol saying, "On CotH we have and do accept Living Death Knights, and as such it's server lore that the ritual to become a Death Knight doesn't kill a person as is stated in the RPG books."

That hasn't happened yet however, and I doubt it will...

While I may not have an opinion on this, because I really don't care, I will however remind you all about the respect rule and that it applies everywhere.

Quote:I'd say, as someone who doesn't really enjoy playing an emotionless wall of flesh that doesn't feel any pain nor has any emotions to speak of, that Character Development for a Living Death Knight comes ten times easier than a Dead one. This is coming from experience as well, having played both in the past, not because I was running around ERPing across Azeroth like some people think living DKs do, but because the emotional and mental effects of living give more depth to the typical juggernaut of awesome that the Dead Death Knights are.

I find it quite silly that there's a penalization for wanting to make an enjoyable character in which we lose power by playing, by way of possibly deleting whole characters as some are suggesting. I do believe they're a rare occurrence and should be special profiles as I've said multiple times in the past, but wiping them off the face of Azeroth is a little silly. Especially when the whole issue could be resolved by Kretol saying, "On CotH we have and do accept Living Death Knights, and as such it's server lore that the ritual to become a Death Knight doesn't kill a person as is stated in the RPG books."

My bad for the misunderstanding there. I meant that a Living Death Knight can't really provide any special character development to an already existing <Class>, whereas Prestiges can. Yes, they can have character development, but I meant to others. My bad for the misunderstanding.

(06-30-2011, 07:34 AM)Rosencrat Wrote: [ -> ]This topic is giving me an embolism.

Pretty much.

I think the idea to remove characters totally is preposterous- I highly doubt either of the admins would consider it, so I don't believe its really worth mentioning such an idea at this point.

I think the much more logical approach would be just to go to special profile; Death Knights in general tend to be rather invested into lore, and thus this would help iron out any kinks in their backstory just to begin with.

Notice something real quick;

Quote: I think

So don't flip out and act like I'm stating any facts. I haven't been around for a month, so I'm not really in tune with what opinions are at the moment.

Personally though, I'm fine with living DKs. I think they can be interesting to play, and can have some really neat backstory to them.

But I don't really agree with the people who think they would be forced into the position- If I'm not mistaken there was an explanation somewhere that many paladins became Death Knights because they had become fed up with anger against their order for their inability to save the people from the plague, as well as just the general chaos- many of them willingly submitted to the Lich King because they came to hate the people they were protecting.

And personally I always thought that was how a living DK should work. I don't really buy that the scourge would make a living DK that might resist them- that is, forcefully create a DK. It just makes more sense to kill them and raise them into unquestioning pawns. People may say that living DKs might be more intimidating- being your friends forced against you- but really I don't see that either, just because of the perks they would receive as undead. That's including the lack of a need to sleep, eat, the ability to feel pain, the undead strength, so forth. It just makes them a better soldier, and thus more profitable to the scourge as a whole.

On the other hand I could easily see the power-hungry or those feeling betrayed casting their lot into the scourge, and really that seems like such a more interesting backstory than 'I was captured and forced into this!'. It seems like a much more deep development into the character; it shows they have faults, temptations, or just says mounds for their lack of morality. In contrast the captured scenario just makes them a victim, like any other undead DK.

EDIT: And that's not to say that a living DK should always be evil- good people can do terrible things in throes of depression or anger, and that's a very human reaction to stress. Just because they willingly pledged themselves into the scourge doesn't rule out any possibility of their reform later.


...Anyways, that's my own take on things. Take with a grain of salt, etc.


Also as said, chill doods- Whatever comes out of this debate, odds are it won't be nearly as bad as what you may be expecting.

(07-01-2011, 10:30 AM)Rigley Wrote: [ -> ]If I'm not mistaken there was an explanation somewhere that many paladins became Death Knights because they had become fed up with anger against their order for their inability to save the people from the plague, as well as just the general chaos- many of them willingly submitted to the Lich King because they came to hate the people they were protecting.

Well that's the problem, now isn't it? Those Death Knights are extremely powerful because their power comes from a genuine vampiric runeblade. Their numbers are few, and for the most part, they are raid bosses in the game.

That's the biggest reason I'm against the concept of a living Death Knight. The playable Death Knights were created in a different manner. This issue is the reason why I vote for special profiles.

(07-01-2011, 10:30 AM)Rigley Wrote: [ -> ]EDIT: And that's not to say that a living DK should always be evil- good people can do terrible things in throes of depression or anger, and that's a very human reaction to stress. Just because they willingly pledged themselves into the scourge doesn't rule out any possibility of their reform later.

I am iffy on this one, however. Ner'zhul/Arthas doesn't let just anyone into his ranks. It is not likely that he would bestow a vampiric runeblade to someone who would turn on him. You have to prostrate yourself in front of the Frozen Throne and pledge undying(lol as in: unwavering) loyalty to the Lich King and the Scourge to become a Death Knight (of the second generation). The Lich King -does- often make the mistake of raising pissed off people who eventually turn on him from the dead: i.e. Sylvanas, Mograine, ect. But that's just it. Those people are dead.

EDIT: "Much as Arthas had before them, these renegade paladins succumbed to bitter hatred over the course of their grueling quest. When they finally reached Ner'zhul's icy fortress in Northrend they had become dark and brooding. The Lich King offered them untold power in exchange for their services and loyalty. The weary, vengeful warriors accepted his dark pact, and although they retained their humanity, their twisted souls were bound to his evil will for all time. Bestowed with black runeblades and shadowy undead steeds, death knights serve as the Scourge's mightiest generals."
-http://www.wowpedia.org/Death_knight_organizations#Of_the_Scourge

(06-24-2011, 11:24 AM)flammos200 Wrote: [ -> ]...Umm... What are living Death Knights?

-No- Death Knight -at all- suffers from fatigue, starvation, dehydration or mortality. None. They can't die of not eating. They can't die of not drinking. Sure, they can do it if they feel the psychological need to - or are trying to mimic their former states, but they won't be bothered at all if you don't feed them or give them stuff to guzzle down.

Sure, the Undying can try their hand - and inevitably fail at - breeding, since they have a pulse, and can drown if left underwater for too long, but combat-wise, other than feeling pain - which both Undying and Undead may or may not, depending on if they have working nerves or not - they're the same.

What do -you- mean by living Death Knights?

Pretty much this. I have a 'living'-slash-'undying' death knight myself. While she has mundane desires, she doesn't need to eat, drink, or sleep--she tries at times, simply out of desperation--but she certainly doesn't need to. The only thing she needs to live is to kill. She has a pulse--although given that she's Blood she would be unable to bleed out unless trapped in an antimagic zone or unconscious--has emotions--twisted, often muted, but present--and yet still could, in many ways, be considered undead to an extent: Light is horribly painful to her, even if it is intended to heal; she has enough necromantic energy to be detected by any Paladin and would be negatively effected by...say, an exorcism.

Not to toot my own horn (I am relatively certain I am ) but precisely why must we continue to fruitlessly discuss this matter? It invariably results in drama from both sides, and I think it goes without saying that players of living Death Knights aren't simply going to drop or retcon their characters simply at the staff's say-so; not without copious unnecessary (and honestly understandable) rage.

Actually, just picked this off the Acherus WoWPedia page.

Quote:Within the halls of Acherus were mounds of bodies, the corpses of slain heroes gathered by the Scourge to resurrect as death knights.

We've argued this a lot. People have presented their reasoning. And the consensus is that they're staying, mostly because it would be hell to re-roll all those characters.

(07-21-2011, 06:41 PM)Etmosril Wrote: [ -> ]We've argued this a lot. People have presented their reasoning. And the consensus is that they're staying, mostly because it would be hell to re-roll all those characters.

Eh, I've never wanted that. I've always been for special profile. Besides, I've seen no such post of an official consensus being reached.

Let's just drop it, Squirrely. It's obvious that we are not going to come to an agreement without some sort of GM interference. Also, I'm sick of arguing with people who will never concede to evidence. Forgive me for saying so, but it's just something that bothers me on a personal level.

Will someone please just lock this thread until a GM can post an official statement? I believe enough evidence has been presented by both parties to make a decision. But as Etmosril said, it seems like we won't see a change until/if we update to Cata.

PS: If you don't like Living DKs, just avoid them. No one is forcing you to interact with them. (This sounds a bit anti-social, but it's the best compromise we're going to get.)

Edit: However, I would also like to throw in that I would like to see these characters become special profiles if anything.

Really, rekindling this flaimbait isn't really doing anyone any good. I agree that future living Death Knights should be special profiles at this point. It's a fair enough middle ground and if it means we can all stop arguing over it, then I'll be fine with that being the end result.

What I don't agree with is telling people with living Death Knights that they have to retroactively alter their characters to fit the standards of a Special Profile.

I do agree with Dragonbeard (again. I agreed on the last time this thread was locked... I understand why it was unlocked but I fear this may cause and lure unnecessary drama and fights and such.) It seems like the majority of people who were so inclined have expressed their opinion. I could be wrong, of course, but I think that continuing this argument, even if with sound, reasonable logic from both sides (Which I haven't seen from the bulk of either side, but that's not my point here. (I admit I'm guilty of some of this too.)) is just going to end badly for all involved.

Dragonbeard Wrote:PS: If you don't like Living DKs, just avoid them. No one is forcing you to interact with them.

Quoted for agreement.

EDIT: "Much as Arthas had before them, these renegade paladins succumbed to bitter hatred over the course of their grueling quest. When they finally reached Ner'zhul's icy fortress in Northrend they had become dark and brooding. The Lich King offered them untold power in exchange for their services and loyalty. The weary, vengeful warriors accepted his dark pact, and although they retained their humanity, their twisted souls were bound to his evil will for all time. Bestowed with black runeblades and shadowy undead steeds, death knights serve as the Scourge's mightiest generals."
-http://www.wowpedia.org/Death_knight_organizations#Of_the_Scourge
-Dragonbeard

For some reason, I'm having trouble quoting. :S Anyways, the only reason I have trouble with the whole 'living' Death Knight thing is this. They pledged themselves to the Lich King to be blessed by this power. They wanted to serve the Lich King to become stronger. Wouldn't it make sense that they'd be pissed that he's gone and no longer able to support them?

I mean, they wouldn't join the Ebon Blade, because they are 99% (The 1% being Mograine.(Roughly, obviously)) dead Death Knights who were FORCED to do his bidding. Most of the EB Death Knights hated the Lich King, for forcing them to do things. In Acherus, it is stated and shown many DEAD bodies which are used to make EB Death Knights. The living ones CHOSE to serve him. There are no exceptions, because vampiric runeblades aren't found ANYWHERE. Frostmourne is an ancient blade created with Ner'zhul. Demonic in nature. Sure, you can argue that the Lich King could con a 'hero' into using a vampiric runeblade of his own creation, but they would either turn and follow the Lich King, or die and the sword be passed to someone who will/can.

And also, wouldn't any of the Death Knights who are conned by him and/or joined him considered a Second Generation Death Knight, which are not allowed?

I'm providing evidence, that living Death Knights do exist, however they do not have the Alliance/Horde' best interests in mind and if they were to be created/allowed, they should be hostile to both factions. Special Profile, exempt from all Horde and Alliance cities. No one would trust a man/woman who sold her soul to the Lich King for power. Treason is treason, after all.

http://www.wowpedia.org/Vampiric_runeblade
http://www.wowpedia.org/Koltira
http://www.wowpedia.org/Thassarian
http://www.wowpedia.org/Acherus