Can we get Female satyr? Broken? etc and male Shivarra/Harpies etc

Community General Discussion
529

Just call it something else, for the love of all that is holy.

530

Ok.
Satyra.

531

I dont see a reason to keep replying to someone who admitted they were in the thread to troll only. Especially when looking at the other things said poster has posted. It just reeks of troll sweat.

3 Likes
532

Satyr can be the race they are (which is kinda how it is already defined), then they are split into male and female. Like how we say there are male and female humans, we don’t say human and humanness.

1 Like
533

Except Satyrs would be an all male race. Much like man and woman, you can’t have women that are men or the opposite.

That’s why they’re bringing in the Incubus and not the ‘male’ Succubus.

1 Like
534

With succubus/incubus their actual race is Sayaad then they get split into the two. Satyr/Satyress (whatever they make it) would be fine with me if their race was given a gender-independent name.

535

Clearly not you, then.

It’s a quintessentially MALE spirit creature. It’s not simply that one example that appears in the mythos happened to be male. The satyr is MALENESS personified.

You can’t even post a complete accurate description of one without running afoul of the forum rules.

Think “third leg always enlarged and always upward pointing” and you’d be close.

536

Guess i’ll just repost this again

The wow team is not forced to adhere to the historical definition of what a satyr is. That goes for anyone that is writing fiction.

1 Like
537

No, but they’re subject to criticism for cultural appropriation and ignorance of the material they’re cribbing from other cultures. Which is all I’m doing.

Having a female satyr is like having a male merMAID. The creature is male by definition. It’s practically just a male member attached to a goat torso (goats being a symbolism for ruttiness).

I’ve suggested elsewhere that they simply call the race Satyrites or Satyrions or something. Wouldn’t be any more a problem than calling their not-quite-a-brontosaurus a brutosaur or their not-quite-a-hippo a river beast.

To be honest about it, I guess part of why this upsets me as much as it does is that if Blizzard were culturally appropriating something from any other culture, there’d be a hue and cry about it, but since it’s from Western Culture, it’s okay.

Can you imagine if they took a creature from Central African folklore and butchered it this badly what would be the result? Or something from Native American culture (they’re already talking about removing the headdress from that Tauren hero).

I just think that cultural appropriate is cultural appropriation and that skin color or ethnicity shouldn’t matter.

If we’re going respect peoples’ cultures that can’t be limited to everyone-but-whitey’s culture and the Greeks pretty much defined that for a long while.

And for the record, yes, I did have a problem with the Voodoo references in BfA. They were disrespectful and I spoke about it often on the toon I played for that expac.

1 Like
538

Ok. Maybe you need to accept the change and move on?

2 Likes
539

… Literally EVERYTHING ABOUT WOW is “reformed from established ones.” The ENTIRE THING IS DERIVITIVE

3 Likes
540

Precisely WoW derives from other stuff ALOT as has been explained multiple times. I dont see a point in arguing something that has been proven. I mean Aside from being the devils advocate.

I really wish this discussion could move on.

1 Like
541

Derives from and entirely misses the point of are two different things entirely.

The satyr is MALENESS personified, the wild essense of men.

The whole idea of a female satyr is a massive oxymoron.

542

Lol, this is some nice bait.

543

Yes. I’m a master at it.

1 Like
544

Thanks for the chuckle

545

Not sure what you find chuckleworthy there. That’s an almost verbatim quote from the academic description of the satyr.

And my central point.

Why coopt an essentially male creature and then redefine it elsewise? What’s the point other than to simply use a word that’s already been coined (albeit for a ridiculously backwards meaning).

546

But it has already been redefined by the company. It no longer matters. The academic description does not apply in this fantasy realm.

Does it destroy your gameplay right now that they exist as a different rendition from your academic description? Does the female Night Elven Priestess turned into a Satyr, because she fell to the corruption of the Legion also destroy your gameplay?

Satyr in Warcraft are cursed Night Elfs, mostly. They can also pass their curse into other races now. The curse is corruption from Fel. They are both male and female. They are not a symbol of male virulence. They are Legion and Nightmare corrupted mortals twisted by Fel magic. That is in the Warcraft Encyclopedia and Chronicles. Those are the sources of Warcraft lore which apply to this race. Academic descriptions are meaningless.

2 Likes
547

look as has been pointed out repeatedly. WoWs trolls are not giants cave monsters that basically look like ogres. and wows ogres are not Shrek look alikes. And there are also female trolls in the game.

2 Likes
548

WoW has always made twists on traditional fantasy.

Warcraft kobolds are rats and not any sort of reptile for instance.

2 Likes