Talk:Flesh-shaping

Flesh-shaping

Flesh-shaping involves using blood (a type of life-energy) to shape (mutate) a creature's or person's flesh while they are conscious. It's stated in canon that blood magic can employ felblood, and felblood can be used to shape (mutate) flesh. Ergo, flesh-shaping can be achieved through felblood. My reference even shows that the victim of flesh-shaping achieved through fel is conscious and screaming loudly when the body is being mutated, which is what victims do when their flesh is being shaped (they are conscious and screaming loudly).....you're purposely removing my changes for what reason now? Do you think flesh-shaping can't be achieved through felblood? Do you think Gul'dan's and Galakrond's body mutating/stretching for consuming too much life-energy isn't flesh-shaping? Do you think growing horns, wings, extra heads, extra eyes, etc. doesn't involve getting your flesh shaped/stretched/mutated?#getwreckedVisionOfPerfection (talk) 03:22, 4 February 2015 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

I do not see an explicit connection between mogu flesh-shaping and fel mutations.--SWM2448 03:51, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

This page isn't specifically about mogu flesh-shapers, it's about flesh-shaping and the mogu were not the only flesh-shapers fyi. Flesh-shaping is a magical art where anima (blood, which is a type of life-force) is used to shape the flesh of creatures and people and felblood can be used for flesh-shaping so....VisionOfPerfection (talk) 03:59, 4 February 2015 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection.

The term comes from the mogu practice. You re making up rules for both the page and the concept. I think you want your theories on one of the "fel" pages.--SWM2448 04:07, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

It is actually YOU who is making up rules for both the page and the concept. You have some retarded theory that Flesh-shaping achieved through felblood isn't real Flesh-shaping even though you don't have source that suggests Flesh-shaping CAN'T be attained through Fel. Like Cemotucu, you probably think that Enchanting through Fel energy isn't true Enchanting because Enchanting was stated to be a school of another type of energy that isn't fel.

You claim I'm posting theories, but you're not discrediting any of these so called theories, because you can't. It's not a theory that Flesh-shaping involves using blood to shape flesh, that's a fact. It's not a theory that felblood can be used to shape flesh, that's a fact. You need to learn the difference between theory and fact, insipid clown.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 04:26, 4 February 2015 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

The practice of molding the bodies of creatures certainly extends beyond what was in MoP and the context of the mogu. The Flesh-shaping page seems like as good a place as any for info on those practices. Maybe put a distinction/section separation between the mogu-attributed "flesh-shaping" and other types? --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 04:47, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that would be ideal...it would definitely be better than just completely removing the changes I've made for a good reason.....that Sandwichman person-thingy and Cemotucu need to stop. They can state Flesh-shaping is the art of using blood type A to shape flesh, still doesn't change the fact that blood type B (felblood) can be used to shape flesh as well.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 04:59, 4 February 2015 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

At least keep the methods/sources in separate sections. It is still quite a leap in logic to say: the mogu method is anima, which is blood, so felblood counts, so fel counts, so necromancy counts, so all Scourge flesh-modifiers and modified creatures should be listed with the mogu term.--SWM2448 06:54, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I would also recommend against calling people "insipid clowns" when you disagree with them. That sort of thing has gotten you banned in the past. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 06:57, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

It's actually not a leap in logic to say that the mogu's flesh-shaping method involves anima, which is blood, so felblood counts, so fel counts, so necromancy counts. Flesh-shaping involves using anima (blood) to shape flesh and blood is a type of life-force (In simpler terms for you: Flesh-shaping involves using life-force to shape flesh) and fel magic involves manipulating life-force, so you're just wrong. Stop insinuating that flesh-shaping through one type of blood is completely different from flesh-shaping through another type of blood. In the end, flesh-shaping is flesh-shaping.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 08:10, 4 February 2015 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

"Flesh-shaping" has only been used to describe the mogu discipline. Even when the effects are similar to some uses of fel magic, it is non-canon to say there's a variant of fel-based flesh-shaping. It is, at best, well supported speculation. Maybe asking Kosak on Twitter can provide a definitive answer.  Cemotucu (talk contribs) 14:39, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

You blatantly enter conversations with no intention of acknowledging what people have to state and you're still holding on to your retarded theory that Enchanting achieved through, let's state, Shadow energy is not true Enchanting (Enchanting achieved through Shadow energy is "non-canon") because Enchanting was called a school of the Arcane in canon.

Canon states Flesh-shaping involves using anima (blood) to shape/mutate flesh. Canon states blood is a type of life-force. Canon states life-force (blood) is being used to shape/mutate flesh. Canon and common sense states felblood is a type of blood. Canon states flesh can be shaped/mutated by felblood.

^I don't see any speculation there, only facts; the mogu may have used a specific type of blood for flesh-shaping but that is IRRELEVANT. You and Sandwichman may continue to state that shaping flesh with felblood isn't flesh-shaping, but the practice of molding/shaping/mutating flesh with felblood is canon, and there isn't anything that you can do to change that other than to continue being the ignoramuses that you are.

Stop assuming that shaping/mutating flesh with one type of blood is not flesh-shaping while shaping/mutating flesh with another type of blood is flesh-shaping, that's like assuming Necromancy attained through Void energy is not Necromancy while Necromancy attained through Arcane energy is Necromancy....oh wait, you assumed and stated that too.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 17:17, 4 February 2015 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

Okey... Do as you are allowed. This is going nowhere. Cemotucu (talk contribs) 18:58, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm glad that you agree that "this" isn't going anywhere. You're not providing anything insightful, you're still ignoring the fact that the type of life-energy (blood) used to shape flesh is "irrelevant", and you're still ignoring the fact that the type of energy used in Enchanting, Necromancy, etc. is "irrelevant". Enchanting is Enchanting, the energy used to enchant is "irrelevant". Flesh-shaping is Flesh-shaping, the blood type used to shape flesh is "irrelevant".

This is me: Shaping flesh with saurok blood is flesh-shaping. Shaping flesh with felblood is flesh-shaping.

This is you: No it isn't LOLOLOLOLOZ.

On twitter you claimed that Necromancy is the art of using Arcane energy to manipulate Void energy. You're just witless, a joke, and that's why you're incapable of understanding that you are.

Pyromancy is not the art of using Arcane energy to manipulate fire energy. If Pyromancy is the art of using Arcane energy to manipulate fire energy then manipulating fire with fel magic is not true Pyromancy. If Necromancy is the art of using Arcane energy to manipulate Void energy then using Void energy directly is not true Necromancy. <-That is what you've basically stated/claimed, and I've had enough of your garbage.

As I have stated before, you enter my discussions with no intention of acknowledging what I have to state, you're not providing anything insightful, and you're just so full of garbage, I can't handle it without having to insult you. Everyone here should know that I don't like you (you should definitely know that I don't like you), and so everyone, including you, can deduce that you come in here to troll and to provoke me. Just stop.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 20:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection