Conquest of the Horde

This one is always a powder keg, but here we go. Round two, whether living death knights are possible, GO!

First, this is a continuation of the lore infodump we got in another thread. Link: http://www.conquestofthehorde.com/Thread...evs-2-Lore

I originally was on the stance of "Its probably possible, and it should be up to the individual player" when it comes to living DKs. However, my opinion has changed over time, due to the lore tid-bits provided by Blizzard. Here's a basic run-down of the problems right now:

1. With the d20 declared non-canonical, the ritual that allows people to be living DKs is rendered the same, as it was in Dark Factions.
2. The only other possible reference to living DKs was Arthas himself. The problem is, that's not certain either, as it's never explicitly stated in lore when he turned undead. We know he was definitely alive prior to the undead campaign in Reign of Chaos (when he was still a paladin,) and that he was definitely undead at the end of Frozen Throne after he merged with the Lich King.
3. Even if he was alive between those two times, he's second-gen, and thus that possibility may not count at all towards the DKs that we're playing.
4. The intro cinematic for DKs explicitly stated that you died.
5. The answers regarding various questions about the effects of light magic on undead in a previous lore infodump implied that Blizzard counts all DKs as undead.
6. Logic would dictate that the Scourge would kill first, then raise in order to minimize complications.

Now, retconning DKs to all be dead would probably fit better in the lore, but it might also cause a bit of a stir and problems with past RP (for example, I know that at least one DK married a normal human not long ago.)

There's also the question of just how "undead" DKs are in terms of their physical functions. In general, DKs seem to be similar to how most other settings portray vampires, in that they're well preserved and generally able to pass as living in certain respects. Plus, DKs can manipulate blood and all that. At the very least, they seem more "functional" than Forsaken, which are obviously in a state of decay by this point.

NOTE: Do not use this thread to bash people playing living DKs. Also, don't use this thread to bash DK ERP. Seriously, it's not worth it and solves nothing. What people do in their own party chats is up to them, and we're still in question just what body functions are still possible with a DK. If you *must* bring up the subject of ERP, do so in a civil and rational manner. Thank you.

(06-24-2011, 10:19 AM)Grakor456 Wrote: [ -> ]NOTE: Do not use this thread to bash people playing living DKs. Also, don't use this thread to bash DK ERP. Seriously, it's not worth it and solves nothing. What people do in their own party chats is up to them, and we're still in question just what body functions are still possible with a DK. If you *must* bring up the subject of ERP, do so in a civil and rational manner. Thank you.

Well, there goes my argument.

Kidding.

But seriously, for the reasons listed above, there is no longer any firm lore saying that Living Death Knights are possible. Sure, one could point to Arthas, as you did, but he got converted to a Death Knight by a Runeblade. That didn't happen to any of our characters.

I'm taking neither side in this, as both seem plausible from my own point of view. My opinions follow in no particular order.

Quote:4. The intro cinematic for DKs explicitly stated that you died.

Video added mostly for reference purposes. (Dialogue is the same, it's just an early version of the Ebon Hold.)

The introduction claims that you "purchased another dawn for the world with your life". This could be considered explicit, but it's also open to interpretation if one were to choose to interpret it as such. Being captured by the Scourge and turned into an unholy psychological weapon and shock troop is pretty much equivalent to "giving up your life", I would think.

My main point of contention with an argument against living Death Knights is that (and this may be rescinded later) to my knowledge, they still allow all the "living" skin options upon creation, which implies some level of "life" above that of the standard undead/Forsaken level.

Quote:There's also the question of just how "undead" DKs are in terms of their physical functions. In general, DKs seem to be similar to how most other settings portray vampires, in that they're well preserved and generally able to pass as living in certain respects. Plus, DKs can manipulate blood and all that. At the very least, they seem more "functional" than Forsaken, which are obviously in a state of decay by this point.

Going on the belief that both sides are undead, this could make sense. Death Knights seem to be being created from fresh corpses, with the necromantic energies involved in their creation more powerful than those involved in the creation of Forsaken. In essence, they've "got more within them counteracting death", and a "fresher" body to start with, as most Forsaken seem to be raised from graveyards and could have been decomposing for years.

Quote:1. With the d20 declared non-canonical, the ritual that allows people to be living DKs is rendered the same, as it was in Dark Factions.

Quote:Q: Are the Warcraft and World of Warcraft RPG books considered canon?

A: No. The RPG books were created to provide an engaging table-top role-playing experience, which sometimes required diverging from the established video game canon. Blizzard helped generate a great deal of the content within the RPG books, so there will be times when ideas from the RPG will make their way into the game and official lore, but you are much better off considering the RPG books non-canonical unless otherwise stated.

In this, I propose that CotH not allow it to influence "too much". All things considered things like Runemasters, a large chunk of the CotH lore interpretation and events and so on would also be considered "non-canon". It's a gray area, and with no solid say one way or another, loose interpretation and a general willingness to say "Well. Seeing as they didn't say, let's leave it open" may be better in the long run. Unless a definitive yes or no answer is given, the RPG books are still the best "guide" to how to handle all the lore Blizzard hasn't explicitly stated. They create " engaging role-playing experience, which sometimes requires diverging from the established video game canon."

Quote:6. Logic would dictate that the Scourge would kill first, then raise in order to minimize complications.

Yes and no. This is where it's important to remember the psychological warfare aspect of Acherus's mission. Think about it. Is a risen corpse (which you've already done a lot of) of a dead champion, twisted to suit your own ends shocking? Well, isn't it more shocking to show your enemies that you can turn them into (again, I use the term relatively) "living supersoldiers" on the side of said undead, corrupted by your energies but still very much alive?

Personally, I'd see the latter as a more horrific prospect. Especially if fighting against zombies.


(This is my opinion and the suggested solution.)
That said, every Death Knight is likely Undead in some capacity, but that doesn't necessarily make them a walking corpse. It was once implied that Death Knights are without a "soul". (I don't know if this is still the CotH standard or not.) Is being soulless that much different from being lifeless? In this case, perhaps yes, but only technically. While the body still lives, the spirit is undead, where in the case of the Forsaken, the body is undead but the spirit still lives.

This is just a lot of speculation and suggestion on my part, mind. And I play a living Death Knight. Just sayin'.

There wasn't much lore to support it to support them to begin with, IMO. Arthas aside, the only real support was that the ritual didn't include death, and the speculation that the Scourge was sloppy. The Scourge is not sloppy. They are a well-tuned, well-oiled killing machine. Thry follow a strict protocol to do things. There is nothing anywhere that implies that a Scourge/Cult of the Damned Necromancer wouldn't be smart enough to make sure their target before raising them. In fact, quite the opposite: as I said before, the Scourge aren't stupid. They hold some of the most brilliant minds out there. If anyone can show any evidence that slipping up is possible for them, then please do so.

On the subject of retcon: Why would we not retcon them all to undead? It's a fairly simple change. You were living? No you weren't.

Second generation Death Knights, as a rule of thumb, were all of the living sort.

First generation Death Knights, unanimously, were the spirits of Death Knights bound to the body of a knight. Indubitably of the not-so-living sort.

What defines a third generation Death Knight?


Most remarkably, even if there are living Death Knights amid the third generation, the line between them and those of the less living variety is infinitely blurred by the fact that they're both Death Knights.

You also should take into account that doing the quest to designate your DK into the Horde/Alliance, Thrall/Varian says that the DK is dead, as in:

You will welcome these former heroes of the Horde and treat them with the respect that you would give any ally of Orgrimmar!

Varian says the Alliance version, but you got the point. It's just another reason why all DK's are undead and not living.

Quote:My main point of contention with an argument against living Death Knights is that (and this may be rescinded later) to my knowledge, they still allow all the "living" skin options upon creation, which implies some level of "life" above that of the standard undead/Forsaken level.

Yeah, but the first line is "A hero, that's what you once were." While what I'm about to say is speculation myself.They're implying that you died and was risen. not to mention how can we have living Dreanei DK's, They just came to Azeroth around 2 years ago by CotH's time, correct?

Playing the devil's advocate here.

(06-24-2011, 10:57 AM)PurgatoryDuck Wrote: [ -> ]You also should take into account that doing the quest to designate your DK into the Horde/Alliance, Thrall/Varian says that the DK is dead, as in:

You will welcome these former heroes of the Horde and treat them with the respect that you would give any ally of Orgrimmar!

Said "former heroes" also spent a fair amount of time betraying their faction, against their will or otherwise. "Former" could apply to their status as a member of said faction, their status as a "hero", or any number of things.

In my point of view, both seem plausible, and the differences between the two are negligible.

Undying ones really only have a pulse going for(or against?) them, giving them one more weakness - death by blood loss, and make an exchange of gases with the outside environment - breathing.

That's pretty much it. Everything else is the same, save for stuff like -feeling- hunger and thirst.

I have always treated Death Knights as being in a suspended animation of sorts - a place between life and death. Like vampires're treated in other settings, only these ones need to feed on suffering and death, rather than blood.

An argument in favor of them being Undying is Lichborne. And since we're going more and more by game mechanics - which I wholly disagree with, but I'll play the devil's advocate on this one - it suggests all DKs are Undying in some way/degree, and are not wholly undead.

CoTH has always been a land of choice. Free choice is what I suggest for Death Knights being undying or undead.

Note, that I use the term undying, rather than living, since there's a difference. Namely, not requiring of sustenance, nor tiring, nor needing sleep.

I'm all for having both kinds of DKs. Fel, I have two undying ones and one undead one, and all three are fun to role-play, as they all allow a measure of diversity and bring something new to the table, each in their own way.

Quote:Yes and no. This is where it's important to remember the psychological warfare aspect of Acherus's mission. Think about it. Is a risen corpse (which you've already done a lot of) of a dead champion, twisted to suit your own ends shocking? Well, isn't it more shocking to show your enemies that you can turn them into (again, I use the term relatively) "living supersoldiers" on the side of said undead, corrupted by your energies but still very much alive?

Personally, I'd see the latter as a more horrific prospect. Especially if fighting against zombies.

That said, every Death Knight is likely Undead in some capacity, but that doesn't necessarily make them a walking corpse. It was once implied that Death Knights are without a "soul". (I don't know if this is still the CotH standard or not.) Is being soulless that much different from being lifeless? In this case, perhaps yes, but only technically. While the body still lives, the spirit is dead, where in the case of the Forsaken, the body is dead but the spirit still lives.

This is just a lot of speculation and suggestion on my part, mind. And I play a living Death Knight. Just sayin'.

Well, they have the Psychological part, which I don't believe would happen. Why? Death Knights skin is covered, and they only talk to Scarlets during one quest in the chain. There'd be little to no way for the Scarlet Crusade to even know that one was living, or such. Then, on the other hand, we have the fact that the Death Knights were made to kill. Why would the Scourge waste the time, when something needs to be killed, to feed the Living Death Knight, to treat their wounds, to do anything they'd need to do for a living person. Why not just get rid of all of that and throw them onto the battlefield? Their job wasn't to intimidate or hurt moral, it was to kill.

Meaning no hostility or offense, I possess the opinion that the idea of Death Knights of the less dead variety harboring mundane desires stands as self-evident fanon.

Though my argument has no whit of more solid ground... Can you imagine Arthas stopping for a snack during the invasion of Quel'thalas?

Third Gen. DKs were raised for one purpose, and one purpose only: to be cold-blooded, ruthless, murdering, burnin', pillagin' Paladin killers. To be alive is to breathe, yes, but it is also to have a sense of morals. To be alive, thus, is a risk the Scourge will not allow, in regards to their shocktroop Paladin killers. Hesitate, and die.

(06-24-2011, 11:05 AM)FlyingSquirrel Wrote: [ -> ]Well, they have the Psychological part, which I don't believe would happen. Why? Death Knights skin is covered, and they only talk to Scarlets during one quest in the chain. There'd be little to no way for the Scarlet Crusade to even know that one was living, or such. Then, on the other hand, we have the fact that the Death Knights were made to kill. Why would the Scourge waste the time, when something needs to be killed, to feed the Living Death Knight, to treat their wounds, to do anything they'd need to do for a living person. Why not just get rid of all of that and throw them onto the battlefield? Their job wasn't to intimidate or hurt moral, it was to kill.

flammos200 Wrote:Note, that I use the term undying, rather than living, since there's a difference. Namely, not requiring of sustenance, nor tiring, nor needing sleep.

That would generally be why. They are undead in a fashion, and very much possessing of their own unique powers and abilities to kill. It's just that they aren't the same sort of undead. Also, Forsaken Death Knights? Pretty much undead in every possible fashion.

(06-24-2011, 10:59 AM)dragonmad Wrote: [ -> ]Playing the devil's advocate here.

(06-24-2011, 10:57 AM)PurgatoryDuck Wrote: [ -> ]You also should take into account that doing the quest to designate your DK into the Horde/Alliance, Thrall/Varian says that the DK is dead, as in:

You will welcome these former heroes of the Horde and treat them with the respect that you would give any ally of Orgrimmar!

Said "former heroes" also spent a fair amount of time betraying their faction, against their will or otherwise. "Former" could apply to their status as a member of said faction, their status as a "hero", or any number of things.

Yeah... This is where I -hate- euphamisms, or however you spell that. It's just what I think is Blizz's intentions, is that they are dead, and they were risen. Also when you're in ICC (if most CotH palyers were to get into ICC in retail) Why would Arthas wait for us to die then ressurect us as champions of the scourge? He could raise hell in the middle of ICC and turn us all evil, still being alive.

Death Knights are a very high order of undead, worth bearing in mind.

In the vicinity of Liches, Val'kyr, Patchwerks, Frost Wyrms, and Grobbuli.

More self-evident fanon (but self-evident fanon I believe in) is the idea that third generation Death Knights are just a really pansy and half-hearted subcategory of a really rigged demographic.

(06-24-2011, 11:11 AM)dragonmad Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-24-2011, 11:05 AM)FlyingSquirrel Wrote: [ -> ]Well, they have the Psychological part, which I don't believe would happen. Why? Death Knights skin is covered, and they only talk to Scarlets during one quest in the chain. There'd be little to no way for the Scarlet Crusade to even know that one was living, or such. Then, on the other hand, we have the fact that the Death Knights were made to kill. Why would the Scourge waste the time, when something needs to be killed, to feed the Living Death Knight, to treat their wounds, to do anything they'd need to do for a living person. Why not just get rid of all of that and throw them onto the battlefield? Their job wasn't to intimidate or hurt moral, it was to kill.

flammos200 Wrote:Note, that I use the term undying, rather than living, since there's a difference. Namely, not requiring of sustenance, nor tiring, nor needing sleep.

That would generally be why. They are undead in a fashion, and very much possessing of their own unique powers and abilities to kill. It's just that they aren't the same sort of undead. Also, Forsaken Death Knights? Pretty much undead in every possible fashion.

This isn't about undying Death Knights, this is about Living Death Knights.