Re: Warlords of Draenor - General Discussion

by **erwtenpeller** Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:35 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **Sadok** Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:54 pm

Vaell wrote:"no where in-game or in lore that his upbringing among humans has left any marks on his physical shape." yet his story is remarkably similar to Planet of the Apes and he is pictured, by Blizzard, as straight backed. You may not like it, but it's lore.

That would be an association fallacy, methinks: 1- Thrall was brought up by humans; 2- Thrall has a straight back; Therefore, Thrall's upbringing gave him a straight back.

I could similarly posit that 1- All dogs have four legs; 2- My cat has four legs; Therefore, my cat is a dog.

Thrall is not unique in being depicted without a hunch, as seen in the WoD intro cinematics featuring Garrosh and Nazgrim, the SoO cinematic and the WoD cinematic, featuring just about everyone. Given that Garrosh, Nazgrim, Grom, Ner'zhul et al almost certainly weren't raised under humans, it's hard to accept the premise of upbringing inducing a physiological transformation in Thrall alone.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

More likely is that Blizz's art team and such prefer depicting orcs with straight backs, yet the hunch has been left in the player model as an 'iconic quirk' (despite its unpopularity).

by **Muzjhath** Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:56 pm

Well, arguing with Ert about stuff in WoW since in his mind every character have an inbuilt brainclock that should lorewise be there because there is one in the interface for player convinience.

by **Lexgrad** Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:04 pm

ert thinks Warriors are magical. Bad ert.

by **erwtenpeller** Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:16 pm

Spell Reflect, Thunderclap, Superhuman strength.
Magic, baby!

To all of the above: That's the magical power of animation tricking y'all. Those models are no different from the orcs you get as a player.

by **Lexgrad** Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:28 pm

srsly for a moment, as an artist.... You must realise that how someone enjoys the art is subjective. So not liking or liking new models is ultimately up to the individuals.

My point of view is that none of the WoW models after updates touches ESOs.

And Warriors are not magical.

by **erwtenpeller** Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:32 pm

You make some compelling arguments there, Lex.

by **Shriukan** Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:33 pm

Kozgugore wrote:An in-game model choice from almost nine years ago (is that what 'a decade' is nowadays?)

Just cause I felt like clearing this up, the orc model is 12/13 years old seeing as it was actually designed far back in late 2001 / early 2002 and only got a pixel upgrade with the Vanilla beta.

by **Sadok** Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:37 pm

erwtenpeller wrote:Spell Reflect, Thunderclap, Superhuman strength.
Magic, baby!

To all of the above: That's the magical power of animation tricking y'all. Those models are no different from the orcs you get as a player.

The models are no different but the hunch is gone in all those cases.

Although working with the base model, these cinematics are created by individually manipulating the skeletons of each model rather than using default emotes and animations -- hence they're much more fluid and dynamic than gameplay. But crucially, while these skeletons could have been animated with a hunch, the animators chose not to, allowing Garrosh, Nazgrim and such to stand tall. It's possible to manipulate the new models in such a way too, and frankly, it's a massive upgrade:

Before:

Spoiler:

After:

Spoiler:

Before looks like a squished and clumsy mongoloid. After looks like a finely-trained brute (and there's a Frostwolf sigil on his cape that you can't even see on the default model). Makes it hard to believe that Blizz think the first one is superior.

by **siegmund** Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:42 pm

and there's a Frostwolf sigil on his cape that you can't even see on the default model

Point there

by **Lexgrad** Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:53 pm

erwtenpeller wrote:You make some compelling arguments there, Lex.

Well, tradition says if you think my point is silly counter it with one of your own. I do not know what else to say in response to your rather glib flavoured insincerity. I thought you were a little awkward with your art critics but you at least possitted something more than "blizz said" and "bury head". I did believe you better than this ert, you might as well resort to an ad ad hominem at this rate.

Concede the point or counter it.

by **erwtenpeller** Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:57 pm

Why? It's pretty clear you fellows have made up your minds. It's a very tiresome discussion to keep having.

by **Lexgrad** Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:01 pm

If you find it to tiresome to discuss might I inquire why you raised the point in the first place?

by **Kozgugore Feraleye** Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:07 pm

Shriukan wrote:
Kozgugore wrote:An in-game model choice from almost nine years ago (is that what 'a decade' is nowadays?)

Just cause I felt like clearing this up, the orc model is 12/13 years old seeing as it was actually designed far back in late 2001 / early 2002 and only got a pixel upgrade with the Vanilla beta.

I hate to be "that guy", but the alpha WoW, the one you refer to from a decade ago, was actually quite different.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

What do you know? Not as much of a hunch on the alpha either!

And agreed, if you don't have any decent arguments to add to the discussion, why bother responding to it in the first place? You've been doing that when the discussion started several pages back and it hasn't changed yet. I don't go butting into any arguments that I don't have any personal interests either. We respond because we have a case to make, rather than posting unrelated image macros and comments. The discussion could have ended pages ago if you wouldn't continue to do just that either, but I simply continued to respond because, for one, the argument that I have a "wrong view on warcraft orcs" was reason enough for me (even if that in itself wasn't much of an argument at the time either).

by **Izzifix** Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:30 pm

erwtenpeller wrote:Spell Reflect, Thunderclap, Superhuman strength.
Magic, baby!

Or superpowers. The Rage system is clear: All warriors are the hulk. "YOU WON'T LIKE ME WHEN I'M ANGRY! WARRIOR SMASH!"

by **Shriukan** Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:37 pm

Kozgugore wrote:I hate to be "that guy", but the alpha WoW, the one you refer to from a decade ago, was actually quite different.

Huh. I don't know why I remembered them differently. Touché.

by **erwtenpeller** Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:49 pm

Dwyburn wrote:
erwtenpeller wrote:Spell Reflect, Thunderclap, Superhuman strength.
Magic, baby!
Or superpowers. The Rage system is clear: All warriors are the hulk. "YOU WON'T LIKE ME WHEN I'M ANGRY! WARRIOR SMASH!"

I would definitely count superpowers as a magical attribute.

And you guys are right. That Alpha model has the posture of a norse god. I guess blizzard intended their orcs to be upright all along, and something just went horribly wrong in the animations department!

by **Kozgugore Feraleye** Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:56 pm

I take it that with your very well thought-out remark that has no further value to add to the discussion, I can finally let the matter rest.

by **Sanara** Wed Apr 16, 2014 9:10 pm

Shriukan wrote:
Kozgugore wrote:I hate to be "that guy", but the alpha WoW, the one you refer to from a decade ago, was actually quite different.

Huh. I don't know why I remembered them differently. Touché.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **Ixirar** Wed Apr 16, 2014 10:26 pm

To be honest, some change in the model, while not reasonable to -expect- or -demand-, wouldn't be impossible. Look at the tauren. That one feels remarkably different from the old model. Albeit, the old tauren model is probably the worst one of all the races. But stull, their stance is visibly different from what it used to be.

by **Izzifix** Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:55 am

erwtenpeller wrote:
Dwyburn wrote:
erwtenpeller wrote:Spell Reflect, Thunderclap, Superhuman strength.
Magic, baby!
Or superpowers. The Rage system is clear: All warriors are the hulk. "YOU WON'T LIKE ME WHEN I'M ANGRY! WARRIOR SMASH!"
I would definitely count superpowers as a magical attribute.

In a world of magic, natural selection isn't all that natural. As such, I might agree that the typical abilities of the warrior are the results of the magic shaping the entire world he exists in. I don't really see them as magical on their own, however.

Thunderclap? The rage-driven, adrenaline-filled übermensch warrior breaks the sound barrier with his bare arms, rawr!
Spell Reflection? The Warrior has found his inner, angry core, in perfect sync with every part of himself, he shrugs off the next feeble attempt a magician would try to alter reality near him. The warrior's enviroment is a product of him, not the other way around!
Superhuman strength? A warrior is more than a common grunt. A warrior is the naturally strong, shaped and perfected by years and years of training. A warrior is never done training, he can always become stronger, faster, more flexible or more agile. A warrior's body is the physical evidence of the rage within him and his readiness to release it on his enemies.

... A IC warrior in combat is not a arcane paladin. Nor is he a grunt/regular infantrist. He is something harder. Fiercer. Something untamed, instinct-based that thrives on the battlefield where others come to die. An antimagic field does not weaken that which is an avatar of natural(kind of) strength. The warrior is many things, but blowing it off as "magic" does not do him justice.

That's my impression at least.

by **Shanyuan** Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:15 am

Frankly, many of the abilities are there due to game mechanics. Pointing at them and using them as justification, is a rather flimsy arguement. Instead, try looking at the lore where it's presented in a fashion where game mechanics don't matter at all; stories. In none of the stories, characters who fit the 'warrior' archetype, has pulled out magic or leaped fifty feet into the air, they've simply done things that are realistically possible.

However, realistic doesn't make for compelling gameplay in the Warcraft universe, so that along with lore takes a backseat in favor of gameplay. And that's fine, since we all want a game that's fun to play, but that doesn't mean that warriors are magic wielders.

by **Gor'Thrak Frosthowl** Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:48 am

There's no blue poster stating directly that 'this' specifically is how Warriors work. They, as well as all other classes (Amongst other things), can be interpreted in many different ways, and there's nothing saying that a Warrior can't in one way or another have aqcuired some form of magic (I mean, Humans can be both mages and warriors, is there something that entirely blocks off a person from the arcane upon becoming a warrior?), or developed unhuman strength and power.

Therefore I think it's wrong to claim that something specific is the only way to go, due to it purely being speculation without hard proof to set it in stone. Leave it up to the individual how he wants to explain his character, and what set of abilities he has. That only makes it more interesting as well, watching the differing takes at the class, and it gives the scene more diversity and spice. Smile

Another reason for that I think this way is that there will always be differing opinions, and certain individuals will accept something as alpha & omega, while others will dismiss it completely. You'll never get an entire population of some size to agree on everything. In this case some accept ingame representations and involve them in their roleplay, while others don't, and it's wrong to say that one side is right while the other is wrong, there's simply no definite answer to it.

by **Sanara** Thu Apr 17, 2014 2:13 am

Warrior abilities such as Avatar, Stormbolt, Shockwave and Thunder Clap are very much magical. They're just not necessarily arcane magic.

Mountain kings boast prodigious combat abilities. They are ferocious in melee combat, wielding the traditional weapons of their race to decimate their foes. Their attacks leave opponents stunned and reeling. While they do not focus their efforts on discovering the secrets of the titans, they have long known of a powerful spark within every Ironforge dwarf - and mountain kings draw upon this spark and fan it into a raging flame. They conjure magic hammers and axes to hurl at their targets, stunning and slowing them so they can get close enough to use their real weapons. They transform themselves into silver-sheened creatures of living stone, shrugging off all attacks and hacking through flesh and bone with frightening ease.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

In WarCraft, magic is a wide and nebulous thing, and is only ever really clearly defined how it works with Arcane magic (The Last Guardian) and Shaman magic (Lord of the Clans).

by **siegmund** Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:26 am

Wielding both enchanted warhammers and hand axes, these fierce fighters live to test themselves against worthy opponents.

People can enchant their stuff too.

But! Remember classes ingame as I see it are basically a lot of these lore classes, bit peeled and stuffed into a blender added some milk and then poured into your cup that is called warrior/rogue/etc maybe not something like a paladin which is more or less better shown as a solid thing.

Mountain Kings which probably got like Storm Bolt talent, well that's Blizz puting it there and it's something Mountain Kings would use.

Still I find them a lot more physical bar a few abilities and they can be explained in a lot of ways, but I'm pretty sure if you really want a Blizzard answer on this you might as well just ask them.

Far as super strength either hard work or steroids, deffo the latter *Nod*

Again one could argue for ages about this like hey it's from the RPG books mainly, or hey says they Dwarf only so makes just sense for Dwarfs, or etc etc
*insert random comment*

MAGIC! (Or a bit disturbing, or awesome?)

by Sponsored content