07-14-2008, 06:37 PM
The concepts upon which I am about to relate actually came about when responding to another thread. I choose to withdraw my response, however, as I felt a new topic was introduced that required a thread of it's own.
My questions are in regard to in-game quests and quest chains that happen chronologically within the context of retail, yet are built upon by the lore.
One good example is the quest chain involving Tirion Fordring, in which he (informally) refounds the Silver Hand, but only after the death of his son Taelan (the new Highlord of the Scarlet Crusade) and the death of Grand Inquisitor Isilien. In this chain, what could be considered two major lore characters are killed while another major lore character performs what could be world altering actions.
Later, the dialogue that takes place at Light's Hope refers to the above events as though they had already occurred (as well as the discovery of Balnazzar at the head of the Crimson Legion). Thus setting such events in permanence within the lore, meanwhile the initial quest remaining available for players who did not complete it. This is no doubt a gameplay mechanic, to advance the story without having to remove content from the game, but how it is to be interpreted in roleplay is a subject to question.
There are numerous other quests of this nature, such as those surrounding Van Cleef and the Deadmines, Blackwing Lair, and Ahn'Qiraj (particularly the opening of the gates), along with countless others with less lore significance. Not to mention many more with the release of the Burning Crusade.
Now we speed up to the time period of Conquest of the Horde. Seven years have passed and a deadly plague of true death has cut the world's population in half. But, lorewise, what happened in regard to all these quests that *may* have happened chronologically? Are Taelan, Isilien, and Balnazzar still alive and active in the Scarlet Crusade? Or were they killed as the game chronicled? (speculation indicated that Abbendis (the last of the leaders) was actually trying to rule out the hostility toward other non-scourge factions, which may be unrealistic to leave unaccounted for in the course of 7 years had the other leaders truely been killed, but that's a topic for a different thread)
Getting back on track, with the release of the Burning Crusade, the events of all old world quests were more or less set in permanence by the manual and introduction (which details some of the adventures players took in the original game and cements them into the lore). But at the same time the expansion also introduced numerous other quests carrying the same chronological confusions.
Ultimately, my question is this. Does the server lore exist as though the events of these quests actually happened seven years ago when they would have been available? Or are we to interpret the world as though nothing happened seven years ago (no quests were completed and the lore unaltered by their plots), and all the changes the world underwent as a result were written over (lorewise) by the new plague of server lore?
While it would certainly make more sense to establish server lore as though these quests have been completed and their events passed, we must also take into account that the same quests (although some of which are bugged) are also available to players in the present time of server lore, at least gameplay-wise, as well as many characters that would be chronologically dead are alive and spawned as mobs in the world. I was under the impression these quests and characters were meant to be taken as IC actions and people, but the arguement that some of these quests may be contradictory to current server lore can be made. (Example: Any quest involving Lakeshire would likely be obsolete since the Blackrock Orcs have taken over. While some quests are obviously obsolete as they are directly related to such places, those that are more subtle references to such places (such as deliveries) beg the question: where do we draw the line?)
I'm not entirely sure so here, so I'll leave that up to the GM's. But clarification would be greatly appreciated, whenever you have the time. I haven't forgotten we're on freeze and don't expect a GM response if it is inconvenient, as I'm certain you place priority on more relevant concerns of the server. Regardless, I think this is something the community as a whole should address, possibly setting some guidelines for referencing quests (and the characters surrounding them) in roleplay until GM's can offer a final solution/explanation when it is more convenient for them. It may yet be a simple matter of time before something of this nature causes some major chronological issues within roleplay and storylines.
My questions are in regard to in-game quests and quest chains that happen chronologically within the context of retail, yet are built upon by the lore.
One good example is the quest chain involving Tirion Fordring, in which he (informally) refounds the Silver Hand, but only after the death of his son Taelan (the new Highlord of the Scarlet Crusade) and the death of Grand Inquisitor Isilien. In this chain, what could be considered two major lore characters are killed while another major lore character performs what could be world altering actions.
Later, the dialogue that takes place at Light's Hope refers to the above events as though they had already occurred (as well as the discovery of Balnazzar at the head of the Crimson Legion). Thus setting such events in permanence within the lore, meanwhile the initial quest remaining available for players who did not complete it. This is no doubt a gameplay mechanic, to advance the story without having to remove content from the game, but how it is to be interpreted in roleplay is a subject to question.
There are numerous other quests of this nature, such as those surrounding Van Cleef and the Deadmines, Blackwing Lair, and Ahn'Qiraj (particularly the opening of the gates), along with countless others with less lore significance. Not to mention many more with the release of the Burning Crusade.
Now we speed up to the time period of Conquest of the Horde. Seven years have passed and a deadly plague of true death has cut the world's population in half. But, lorewise, what happened in regard to all these quests that *may* have happened chronologically? Are Taelan, Isilien, and Balnazzar still alive and active in the Scarlet Crusade? Or were they killed as the game chronicled? (speculation indicated that Abbendis (the last of the leaders) was actually trying to rule out the hostility toward other non-scourge factions, which may be unrealistic to leave unaccounted for in the course of 7 years had the other leaders truely been killed, but that's a topic for a different thread)
Getting back on track, with the release of the Burning Crusade, the events of all old world quests were more or less set in permanence by the manual and introduction (which details some of the adventures players took in the original game and cements them into the lore). But at the same time the expansion also introduced numerous other quests carrying the same chronological confusions.
Ultimately, my question is this. Does the server lore exist as though the events of these quests actually happened seven years ago when they would have been available? Or are we to interpret the world as though nothing happened seven years ago (no quests were completed and the lore unaltered by their plots), and all the changes the world underwent as a result were written over (lorewise) by the new plague of server lore?
While it would certainly make more sense to establish server lore as though these quests have been completed and their events passed, we must also take into account that the same quests (although some of which are bugged) are also available to players in the present time of server lore, at least gameplay-wise, as well as many characters that would be chronologically dead are alive and spawned as mobs in the world. I was under the impression these quests and characters were meant to be taken as IC actions and people, but the arguement that some of these quests may be contradictory to current server lore can be made. (Example: Any quest involving Lakeshire would likely be obsolete since the Blackrock Orcs have taken over. While some quests are obviously obsolete as they are directly related to such places, those that are more subtle references to such places (such as deliveries) beg the question: where do we draw the line?)
I'm not entirely sure so here, so I'll leave that up to the GM's. But clarification would be greatly appreciated, whenever you have the time. I haven't forgotten we're on freeze and don't expect a GM response if it is inconvenient, as I'm certain you place priority on more relevant concerns of the server. Regardless, I think this is something the community as a whole should address, possibly setting some guidelines for referencing quests (and the characters surrounding them) in roleplay until GM's can offer a final solution/explanation when it is more convenient for them. It may yet be a simple matter of time before something of this nature causes some major chronological issues within roleplay and storylines.