Look I was fine with how Wrath ended for Arthas. Blizzard made a mess of it and with any luck Metzen or someone will fix it and if its means a soft retcon so be it.
Just let it go. Only weirdos desperately want hm back anyway
1 Like
No. And with any luck maybe metzen will do something about the damn thing.
Would you feel this way if it had been the other way around - if Arthas’s soul survived but Sylvanas was obliterated?
1 Like
Probably not but then again I never liked Sylvanas and have had a decade more to hate her then Arthas. However, she would have gotten some sympathy for me as oppose to my abject hate of her now.
All I can hope for now regarding her is she never darkens warcraft’s door again or if she does she gets kick right back to Pelagos so we can get rid of her A la Malygos/Sindragos style.
Blizz almost never wholesale retcons something from a previous expansion and you damn well know that. They worst they do is recontextualize it.
And Metzen has part of the problem you realize that? He was around was around when Rule of Cool became popular
But going “yeah apperently there is still a part of Arthas’ soul left, and unreliable narrator Sylvanas was wrong” is a recontextualization that they can do.
Its not like that has ever gone away. Even now rule of cool has sway on lore, like it is the reason say Tyr is back.
It’s just super creepy how some people put Metzen on a higher pedestal than everyone else is all. Like he did start a lot of the lore problems to begin with and it snowballed from there.
And that’s fine. He can be in some afterlife living his best life, but coming back to Azeroth should be a definite hard no from the devs
1 Like
Look at every last one of my posts regarding Arthas, never in any one of them do I talk about him going to back to Azeroth, much less the Alliance.
I am not stupid or naive enough to think he is some god emperor who will change everything, however I am willing to think WoW will be profoundly affected by his return, for good or ill I can’t really say. I would also point out for all the lore issues he has created he has made lore that to this day is important to WoW points at the draenei.
I know, just voicing my opinion is all 
I thought he admitted that the Draenei retcon came about because he literally forgot some of the previous lore they written about them being the demons who corrupted Sargeras originally?
Yup, he did.
The original draenei were only the now called broken ones.
And the eredar were one of the original demon species.
That is why Archimonde can be fel-corrupted and all blue.
My boy Metzen forgot everything. They forgot a lot of things at that time, red shirt guy also pointed out some mistakes made by them.
4 Likes
And nuke the horror aspect of it? What would Stormbringer be if it literally did not eat the souls it took? The fact that every single time Elric used it in a battle of consequence it would take the soul of a friend, including those of the women he dared to love?
And that is why a story needs at least some objective truth. That is why canon matters. To use your example, if Michael Moorcock went back and retconned out Stormbringer’s soul-eating, it removes an important part of the story and character, which has a flow-on effect. Or imagine if Moorcock went back and retconned the story so the Gods of Order are the story’s heroes and Elric was the villain and loyal servant of Stormbringer.
Funny you should bring it up. Moorcock was never happy with the final product of any of his works and would frequently make small changes on each printing. But he’d be the last to claim that any of his works were “objective”.
And you’re talking apples and oranges here. It’s a lot easy for the Elric novels to be consistent even with his minor changes… BECAUSE HE’S THE ONLY PERSON WRITING THEM.
I am not a fan of DND or Warhammer or what ever that name is associated with… but every time I see you guys mention that name…
I admit, a juvenile giggle. I think googling that name with an accidental space bar might not necessarily be an author’s face.
He pretty much predates both. He’s also an inspiration for both and listed as part of Gygax’s bibliography of sources in the AD+D books. In fact his pantheon was included (without permission) in the orignal Dieties and Demigods, which along with the additional non licensed inclusion of the Lovecraft pantheon required a reprint of the book, making the original version a high valued collector’s item.
He’s also associated with the British rock band, Hawkwind
2 Likes
I didn’t know that about Moorcock, except the part where he predates most fantasy authors apart from a few like HP Lovecraft, JRR Tolkien or Robert Howard (speaking of Howard, iirc Moorcock originally conceived Elric as an inversion of Conan the Barbarian).
That said, he was making an objective statement with his “Eternal Champion, balance between law and chaos necessary” idea. And he’d be the first to state that Elric was no loyal servant of Stormbringer.
I’m really starting to wonder what the word “objective” means in your head.
Michael Moorcock and most self honest authors would never claim that they were writing an “objective truth”. Which by the way you still haven’t demonstrated what it is nor how any religion or moral code exemplifies it.
When I say he made an objective statement, I meant he made a statement he considered a fact, regardless of agreement, disagreement or how anyone feels. Moorcock’s statement - regardless of if it’s right or wrong - was that there needs to be a balance between order and chaos; what he considers an objective statement.
You’re just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing at this point, either because of a pathological aversion to objectivity, or because it’s me who’s making the point (maybe both).
That’s the textbook example of subjective thought.