Talk:Rumored Races/Archive5

Class Restrictions

It seems that with the arrival of Blood Elf Paladins and Draenei Shamans we no longer have to worry about class problems. This opens up a rather big box of possibilities for the Alliance in particular. Anyway, I've removed all Alliance shamanistic negative points from the races list. --Vorbis 22:53, 21 July 2006 (GMT)

The Faceless Ones

Well, would they not make a cool race? They would make a nice counter to the Tuskarr in a Northrend expansion, and are just plain cool. Here are some ups and downs...

+ Little Lore

+ If I am correct, they fought the Scourge

+ Many consider a cool race.

+ Would fit well in a Northrend expansion

- Some are relitivly big

- Very Strong

That enough to add them? ~ Seros

I'm with you up to the lore, but that stops. I can't recall where exactly it happened, but it was established that the Faceless are connected with the Old Gods, and Blizzard is unlikely to create create playable races with a connection such major villians. And While there are probably some of my colleagues who would disagree, I dislike "Cool Race", and "Break the mold" as factors. Must I invoke the Draenei? ;-) --Ragestorm 20:52, 4 July 2006 (EDT)

Though that is true, Blood Elves have a connection with Kael, who will be a major raid boss (along with Illidan, Akama, and Queen of Naga [forget name]). And since they have little lore, Blizzard could make up something (betrayed, or more)... we just got to wait and see :) ~ Seros

Are you happy?

This is to all of you who insisted on putting the stupidest, most outlandish, and unlikeliest races on here. The "OMG IT'Z WORGEN!!!" crowd especially. Are you happy that this page was entirely ruined before the race was announced? Are you happy that you had your stupid option up there? Are you happy that we had to stop listing your favorite was as "Unlikely" because you couldn't stand the facts? However, I guess I should thank you. You all helped me realize how much of a lost cause WoWWiki really is when it comes to lore. You can't expect people to not make stupid changes just because they would like it that way or to help prove themselves right in something. 'Too many cooks spoil the broth,' so they say. This is especially true when you're trying to follow an exact recipe... Anyway, I felt I had to say that. I hope you enjoy your rumored races page, and the rest of WoWWiki, just the way you've all collectively warped it. =) --Kakwakas 14:49, 15 May 2006 (EDT)

It's okay... You can take your pills now. --Adonzo 18:57, 15 May 2006 (EDT)

Does this mean you'll be resigning from the Bookkeepers, only it's very inconvienient to downsize for the sake of one person's sanity. :-P--Ragestorm 19:02, 15 May 2006 (EDT)

Feel free to remove me from the member list. Sorry if I seemed rude, guys. Some of you do know your stuff and help try to make WoWWiki a viable resource, but at this point, it just seems futile. I wish the best of luck to you. I might stop by from time to time and help a little bit, too, but it won't be often. --Kakwakas 21:28, 15 May 2006 (EDT)

I tend to agree with Kakwakas' opinion that the Rumored Races page is out of control and silly. Perhaps he could contribute to a Less Stupid Rumored Races page? The whole idea of removing likelihood to avoid offending people with obsessions over a particular race being playable sickens me. Especially the race ideas with only a few lame reasons like my favorite: "Blizzard hasn't said it's not the new race, so it could be!" --Fandyllic 1:57 PM PDT 16 May 2006

It does make an interesting psychology project, though- a new mental illness, "Rumored Races Psychosis" or "Rumored Race Synthesis Syndrome." I think that could be applied to half of the races rumored. I find the whole "Yeah, it doesn't match the race lore, but Blizzard likes to defy expectations!" yeah, like making dwarves pilot gryphons as opposed to elves and making the Draenei descended from eredar is the same as making centaur, Tuskarr or tigons a playable race. --Ragestorm 18:39, 16 May 2006 (EDT)

Aw, hey now. The Tuskarr are perfectly plausible... Just not for this particular expansion. Tigons on the other hand... And don't even get me started on things with "technical difficulties" (multiple legs, no legs, etc.). Also, whoever suggested Mountain Giants needs to be hung. =O --Adonzo 01:30, 18 May 2006 (EDT)

Well, I'll give you that- my point was that just because Blizzard has changed the traditional racial biases from high fantasy or D&D, it doesn't mean that they're going to suddenly change an established racial behavior- for example, the Centaur or Gnoll cultures have been established as not advanced enough for a playable race, not sophisticated enough for distinct classes. Also, many insisted that the naga made sense as an ALLIANCE race just because Blizzard likes to change expectations. --Ragestorm 06:50, 18 May 2006 (EDT)

On the contrary, Ragestorm, the Centaur make ideal candidates for a playable race. Not only do we have lore that suggests that centaurs are preparing for a reformation, but also a few nice plot hooks, the fact that we can get friendly with them, the fact they wear armour and build structures and enough variation within the NPC types to suggest that they could have multiple different classes. As for 'established behaviour'; established behaviour for the Tauren was a bull with a log in Warcraft 3. Established behaviour can change, and for a few examples I suggest you look at real life scenarios. As for 'technical difficulties', we know that Blizz could overcome problems easily if they tried and they thought the outcome would be worth it. To get to the point; NO races can be discounted because it is never impossible for them to make it. --Vorbis 15:11, 25 May 2006 (GMT)

And the debate starts to spin up again. When it comes to putting together strings of logic, it's easy enough to have a debate of what could be. The thing is, when there is a single place where you put an opinion without having an official standard of how to score it for an answer, you will have fights. In the end, we got a name we were famillar with a face and history we were not. Is that the true irony? I figure listing things like Worgen and Tigons and outing them as rumor actually stopped a lot of other sites from publishing information on them. I believe this page has done a service, and all of us working together on this (sometimes nicely) isn't totally unlike the way our government works. I also think we've gotten a lot better at communicating with each other. Can't we all just get along? :) --Xmuskrat 14:54, 5 June 2006 (EDT)

This is too expansive a debate for me anyway ;-) My point was, and is, that saying Blizzard likes to defy expectations or "break the mold" is not a good enough reason for a race to qualify. And yes, it is pages like these that bring out the best in us (though I've met the worst, and it's vindictive)--Ragestorm 18:14, 8 June 2006 (EDT)

Cleanup

So...

I think it's about time somebody rebuilds this page, with a focus on future expansions in general and BOTH factions. It kinda imploded over the past few days... --Adonzo 18:39, 10 May 2006 (EDT)

I totally agree... the various pieces of evidence need to be combed through to get rid of their slant toward being a Burning Crusade race or rewritten for their likelihood of being a future expansion race. --Fandyllic 6:38 PM HST 11 May 2006

That's the consensus of the BCRR discussion below; I don't think anyone is going to get sentimental about losing a jumble of outdated rumors, so just have at it. A good first step might be archiving the entirety of this overloaded discussion page and starting from scratch.--Aeleas 22:53, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

As a postscript, my personal feeling is that the individual "xxx rumor" pages can just be replaced with redirects to this page as well. They try and analyze in minute detail what races are likely to be added, but as we've seen with the addition of the draenei and before, Blizzard is fond of throwing curve balls and revising existing lore, meaning that creating a detailed quasi-scientific analysis is a useless enterprise. I don't think anything more than an entry for each race on this page's chart is needed. If you look at the Draenei Rumor, even though it was technically correct, much of it was irrellevant. All the salient points in that race's favour were included on this page.--Aeleas 23:02, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

Yeah, I think can have a lot of cleanup on this. On the next "version" of this page, it'd be nice to still see the races that were not chosen still listed so we can bluesky on what future expansion packs would have for characters. --Xmuskrat 05:23, 12 May 2006 (EDT)

I'm thinking there needs to be some way to differentiate between Horde and Alliance points as well, like making Alliance points blue text and Horde points red text. Or just make two different pages entirely. --Adonzo 16:23, 12 May 2006 (EDT)

NEW RACE CONFIRMED: Draenei

Woohoo! What a blast.

Give this page a few days and we should clean it up for the next expansion pack. :) --Xmuskrat 10:44, 10 May 2006 (EDT)

I suggest not to clean this section up. Rather it should be marked as "rumored races for Burning Crusade" and a new "rumored race" section started for future expansions. A lot of arguments were based on the theme of BC or the comments given by the desingers. The same goes for the fakes, most of them claim to be within Burning Crusade. If someone would clean up, a lot would have to be removed, and this is a very good gathering of all known rumors. Furthermore, i think we should consider to freeze this site right now, there is no possible new rumor for Burning Crusade. Whatever comes now will be confirmed Information and should go into a Dranei/Eredar Alliance race page.--Athistaur 13:57, 10 May 2006 (EDT)

I'm okay with renaming this page Rumored Races for the Burning Crusade, but this page has always been called Rumored Races and covers multiple expansions already. Then a new Rumored Races page can be created with future races How's that? Or perhaps we should just leave this page as it is, and let it evolve over time. --Xmuskrat 14:26, 10 May 2006 (EDT)

I don't think this is a good idea. Why change the page's title ? Just create another page called "BCRR" or alike, explain there how we discussed during months and move the BC arguments to that page. And keep this one for future expansions.--Kirochi 03:50, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

BCRR

I'm posting there because there's a real need to restart this page. I've copied/pasted the BC part of this page to the new Burning Crusade's Rumored Races page, which still isn't complete. However, I didn't take off anything from the genuine RR page ; I think I'd have to set up a vote about cleaning this page of everything concerning the Burning Crusade expansion, though I still don't know how that system works, will anyone help me to implement it right here ? (note that I won't do anything in this way until the 'Yes' gets an important majority towards the 'No')--Kirochi 16:54, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

I don't think a vote is necessary just to keep this page current. I would suggest just going ahead and making whatever revisions are necessary to make this a current, generally applicable list of potential future races. Personally, I don't think BCRR is necessary; pages recounting out-of-date versions of rumors don't strike me as important or interesting enough to create special archives for.--Aeleas 18:06, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

In total agreement with Aeleas on this one.Baggins 18:25, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

That's fine people, you don't have to tell me what to do about this page, and you don't seem to understand my question : I'm asking you all WoWwikists if you agree to take off this page everything's related to the BC Alliance new race.--Kirochi 23:50, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

Okay guys, I cleaned it up. I got some new content that I'll introduce soon, perhaps the first quotes on the next expansion set. I just have to prepare some video files so it can be properly sourced. --Xmuskrat 11:28, 12 May 2006 (EDT)

Gah. This page has never been so small for months.--Kirochi 14:46, 12 May 2006 (EDT)

Do we still need BCRR? I can't think of a good reason to have it around. Schmidt 10:17, 5 June 2006 (EDT)

Ummm ... Maybe because its presence doesn't hurt anyone and because I like it ?

No, seriously, I see no reason to delete it either.--Kirochi 08:51, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

"Proposed Expansion"

How about putting a new column into the table: "Possible Appearance", where you would have to speculate about which of the rumored expansions (link to the list at the start) you propose your race to appear in. It could further help weed out the weirder ones, IMO --Potbasher 07:24, 18 May 2006 (EDT)

Aye. I'd also like to see something along the lines of 'proposed faction' - though this may be a bit blurry and is never definite, there are some that would only really fit into only one of the factions. Ogres, for example. --Vorbis 12:26, 21 May 2006 (GMT)

Table Format

I think we probably all agree that the page needs to be made a bit clearer - I think the colour coding idea would be useful, rather than having bold and italics.

This has likely been discussed before, but I would suggest this: several colour levels from bright green to red: Bright green - strong reason; Darker green - weak reason; white - neutral; orange - unlikely; red - strongly against

This is could also include splitting the reasons section into three parts: First - general reason; Second - reasons for joining alliance; Third - reasons for joining horde.

That way we won't have totally conflicting reasons next to each other (maybe even resulting in fewer arguments! =) -- Kirkburn 09:49, 25 May 2006 (EDT)

Well well well. I haven't written much here since the end of the BC issue. I just have one thing to say : that's great. You've brought to this page's format more ease than anyone else. Maybe you wouldn't have done anything without the others' contributions but you're the first to show a really improved RR page. Congratulations from Kirochi.--Kirochi 10:07, 27 May 2006 (EDT)

Thanks! I aim to please :) -- Kirkburn 08:56, 28 May 2006 (EDT)

Table removed

Any opinions? It shouldn't take too long to do that for the entire table. -- Kirkburn 10:05, 25 May 2006 (EDT)

I like your ideas, however getting people to agree on what reasons are strong, neutral or unlikely is almost impossible when dealing with pure speculation. Trust me, we've tried before. --Xmuskrat 12:51, 25 May 2006 (EDT)

Nooo, no I don't mean for it to change from the current ranking system ... it would just convert over from the existing system as below:

• + Bold - lime green
• + Normal - green
• + Italic - white
• - Normal - orange
• - Bold - red
• (? - grey)

Something along those lines. Much clearer than all the different formatting styles we currently have. Certainly splitting it into General/Alliance/Horde would help in my opinion. I might try it with another (longer) section to show the idea more clearly -- Kirkburn 13:05, 25 May 2006 (EDT)

Table removed

Work-in-progress updated version, see User:Kirkburn ... any good? -- Kirkburn 14:03, 25 May 2006 (EDT)

Very nice idea, but could we keep the +, - and ? symbols (but not the bold or italic writing) for obvious reasons? -- Vorbis 00:18, 25 May 2006 (GMT)

Rumoured Races Test

Okay, so I've updated the table - what do you think of it? Link killed

It may have some errors from the transcribing, but overall I think it looks pretty good!

Underneath "First seen in...", could be added the other notes people had suggested, such what addon-pack one might see the race in. -- Kirkburn 16:11, 25 May 2006 (EDT)

Scourge?

Okay, there are some really dumb race ideas on this page (*cough* Mountain Giants)... but thus far Scourge is the first one that has made me want to hunt down and brutally murder the person that suggested it. "I know, let's make one of the primary bad guy factions in the entirety of Warcraft a playable race! I'm sure we could come up with some BS explanation for it!" --Adonzo 01:27, 2 June 2006 (EDT)

I've broken one of my own rules and removed it. Here are the reasons:

• For a start, it is not a race - it's a faction. Plus, they are evil - it's like giving us a race called 'The Burning Legion'.
• We already have undead, so that rules out any point of an identical race.
• They are all mind controlled, so technically a player shouldn't have any power over his character.

I know I've championed unlikely races in the past, but the Scourge as a playable race is, well, impossible. About as impossible as Blizzard giving the Alliance a race of 20ft tall boulder-men - maybe I'll remove Mountain Giants too... --Vorbis 17:41, 2 June 2006 (GMT)

You've got my support :) -- Kirkburn 11:38, 2 June 2006 (EDT)

Done. --Vorbis 19:14, 2 June 2006 (GMT)

Humans

What about other Human kingdoms? I know it's technically not a "new race", but they could still be introduced as a choice for players in one expansion or the other. There are people of Gilneas, Kul Tiras, nobody knows what's going on in Dalaran, there's quite a lot of people in Arathor - if the Arathi would reclaim Strom and clean up the Highlands a bit, they would have a ready capital and a good starting position... Gilneas and Dalaran could be somehow transformed by some kind of magic, to make them distinct from Stormwind humans, but even without it, the kingdoms are as distinct from each other as various troll tribes - and look how many of those we got in the table already. The Horde could counter that with recruitment of Syndicate and Defias, for example --Potbasher 07:52, 2 June 2006 (EDT)

There are a few major problems with this idea. For a start, humans are not actually a fantasy race, and so aren't quite so flexible in terms of appearance in fantasy games. Also, there's the fact that more humans would make a pretty boring expansion race. For a start, we already have humans, and there's no mention in the lore that there could be humans so vastly different that they could be a new *race*. High Elves and Night Elves are vastly different, but Gilneas Humans and Stormwind Humans are not. (Note: I realise that Gilneas Humans may be werewolves, but a race that needs two seperate model/texture sets is a waste of time. If they're going to be added, they will be added solely in the Worgen form.) Nevertheless, more humans are not impossible, so if you can think up a pretty good reason why they should be added then slap 'em on the table. --Vorbis 17:48, 2 June 2006 (GMT)

Technical difficulties

Why is having more than two legs or having one leg a technical difficulty? As it is, mounts have four legs (or more, if you have one that you can find in Silithus). There are numerous beasts that have more than two or even four legs. Designing armor for such characters would be as easy (or as difficult) as redesigning them for any new two-legged character that hadn't been remapped. I mentioned this earlier, and I did get a reply but I can't remember what it was, and I didn't find it in the archives. Now I don't have any expertise in 3d rendering, but this just doesn't make sense to me, since stuff we already see has more than two legs. Redesigning armor should be similar to simply reskinning the mob like Salamander and Naga. Just like the different colors of mounts. Can someone restate why this is a technical difficulty and address this? Schmidt 10:17, 5 June 2006 (EDT)

Well, er, it is a technical difficulty. To retool all the armour and skins to take account of a completely different body shape would require an awful lot of effort on Blizzard's side. It's not to say it's impossible, but it would cause problems. For example, collision detection would have to be changed for 'horse' shaped characters. -- Kirkburn 10:50, 5 June 2006 (EDT)

Not so. We have horse-shaped mounts right now. If anything needs to be changed for hitting a wall, it can just be a rectangular prism around the character in the same way that a horse is dealt with. If being mounted currently has no effect on collision detection, then you could make a change similar to the difference between that for tauren (largest) and gnomes (smallest). With a horse-shaped character, all you'd have to do is make the already-existent prism (or whatever shape is used) larger. For that, the prism may need to have more than four faces, but it's not a revolutionary change.

And regarding retooling armor, what's the difference between designing an armor item for a tauren and that for a gnome, and everything in between, in male and female? Adding naga or centaur shouldn't present much more effort than adding any other race, other than of course those that are already modeled like goblins and high elves. If anything, it may be a design difficulty, but not technical. And design difficulties have been overcome in order to get this whole game made. Overcoming one more would be no inordinate effort. Schmidt 11:05, 5 June 2006 (EDT)

Very good points. Well, I don't know ... certainly it seems sensible that the difficulties shouldn't be classified so harshly, more orange than red. The difficulties still exist imho though, if only because it would require Blizzard to do more work rather than being able to reuse existing animations and suchlike. Perhaps also rename them 'design difficulties'? -- Kirkburn 11:12, 5 June 2006 (EDT)

That sounds like a good idea. But maybe yellow would be better, since they would pretty much have to change everything for any race other than the obvious ones. Now if someone can tell that I've missed something that makes it more significant, I wouldn't mind hearing about it. It simply didn't make sense to me to count it as near-insurmountable. It might be good to let this mellow for a day or so, though, so other input can be taken. Schmidt 11:19, 5 June 2006 (EDT)

There a few problems with technical difficulties... Mounts would be difficult to design for the races with more than 2 legs, and they wouldn't be able to use other races mounts, excluding them from things like "Exalted" mounts and rare drops. You could suggest something like the old "plainsrunning", but we all know how well that went over.

As for Naga, how, exactly, would they equip boots? --Adonzo 23:32, 5 June 2006 (EDT)

I knew someone would think of something I hadn't thought of. Maybe they could have hovermounts. lol. I'm not sure what you mean by plainsrunning, especially since you say "we all know how well that went over". If it helps, I started playing this game last August. It just so happened I found this site shortly thereafter. Cool, huh?

Anyways, maybe in the same way that paladins and warlocks get free mounts at level 40, maybe folks like centaurs could get a skill similar to Aspect of the Cheetah, except it would increase speed by 60% of course. Now that wouldn't be difficult to manage. Regarding epic droppable mounts, maybe you could just say that they can't use them, in the same way that a pally can't use a bow or a gun or a wand, or that a priest can't use a two-hand sword or wear plate armor.

As for boots for naga or for centaurs, well, shoot. I don't know. Don't ask me stuff like that! I'm sure someone else will think of something, or perhaps you could just say that they are like horseshoes (for centaurs) and tail-bracers (for lack of better term, for naga). After all, you realize that tauren and gnomes wear the same exact armor. It just happens that the item deforms according to the wearer. It's magic! Besides, boots are not rendered on tauren and trolls, so in the case of centaur or naga, they simply don't have to be rendered on them either. Schmidt 08:01, 6 June 2006 (EDT)

It's time to be annoying again :) Plainsrunning was what the Tauren used to have instead of Kodo mounts, and it had balancing difficulties (regarding casting time, attackability and more). Restricting the mount options for a species wouldn't go down well with the community, but that's less serious. Regarding boots, for Tauren and trolls, the boots can be adapted for use (even if the models aren't shown) ... with Naga, there's just no possible way for boots to be equippable, since they don't have feet. Same goes with leggings, tbh. -- Kirkburn 09:35, 6 June 2006 (EDT)

Design problems or not, the reason why we get two-legged humanoids is simply because they are easier to manage - how do you begin to explain how a Naga is wearing boots? Which female Naga hands do you put that two-handed weapon in? Which Nerubian eye do we put an eyepatch over? How can an enormous horse-man lie down on a bed in Goldshire or, for that matter, ride a Gryphon (hold onto a talon and pray?)? Not that I'm saying that I don't like the idea of being a Centaur. The fact that you're already half horse makes up for not having a mount and I'm sure that it will give a whole new RP perspective and that. It's just things like the Gryphon problem that nag at me... --Vorbis 17:59, 6 June 2006 (GMT)

I have fought naga recently in my ventures with my mage, and I have noticed that naga do in fact wield two-hand weapons, even four-hand naga do. In Azshara and in Hillsbrad alike. There goes that argument. It's a little late, I know, but the fact still stands. Schmidt 03:47, 29 August 2006 (EDT)

Actually, no. My point is that those are mobs - mobs often have a single handed weapon and absolutely nothing in the other hand. With players it's different: they want to be equipped to the full. So my point stands - what do you do about the spare hands? Does this mean Naga get extra equipment, or does it take four hands to use a two-handed weapon? --Vorbis 13:14, 29 August 2006 (GMT)

Do elves have equipment to fit on their ears? Do tauren have equipment to fit on their horns, and trolls on their tusks? Do we get so little as a tabard to put on our mounts? No, not even a cosmetic improvement. I think it's safe to say that people wouldn't be like "But we have two extra arms! We should be able to equip an extra 2-h or an extra 1-h and shield!" Bah. That, imoho, is preposterous. Even so: if people were wanting something to occupy those two extra hands, that would hardly be a technical difficulty. It would be a game mechanics difficulty, and that is a very different thing.

But wait -- what mobs do you know of have a 1-h weapon in one hand and not a shield or another weapon in the other? Ogres are all I can think of at this time, and as far as that goes, you wouldn't be able to expect them to be smart enough to have anything in their other hand. All the Blackrock orcs I remember seeing are either dual wielding, have a 2-h weapon, or carry a sword and board. Similar situation with all the humans, such as Defias Brotherhood and Scarlet Crusade. Same goes with the Dark Iron dwarves, and so it goes. I don't remember fighting murlocs much, so I don't know what they use, but if memory serves, the naga all wield two-hand weapons, since all the females seem to be casters, they have the staff and sometimes bow, and the males have only two arms, and carry a polearm from what I've seen. Schmidt 12:41, 13 September 2006 (EDT)

That doesn't quite work out properly there. If you're a fully armoured war machine, what would you do with two extra hands? The answer 'absolutely nothing' is ridiculous. Seriously, if you've got extra appendages then you normally make use of them. Horns or tusks? Useless in full scale war against heavily armoured foes unless you're somewhere in the region of 'gigantic' and have plenty of room to move your head (seriously, have you ever tried headbutting Ragnaros [or indeed anything whilst wearing some of the more restrictive types of armour]? And tabards and ears... I'm not sure how useful [or dignified] a quick flap at your enemy would be). But weapons; they're something different entirely. There is simply no reason not to use what you've got, so your argument isn't exactly logical. As for 'game mechanics' difficulty, I'm sure I could add another minus to the Naga list. ;P

I don't exactly follow your second paragraph, but I know for certain that all naga have numerous 1-h weapon animations; and that there are several mobs known to have single one handed weapons - troggs, ogres, various gnomes (usually lepers), trolls, undead and furbolgs amongst others. --Vorbis 21:36, 13 September 2006 (GMT)

The fact that remains, and that I was searching for, is that there are certain issues in implementing these things, but you have to call a problem the way it is. An argument for dismissing a race for technical difficulties is like saying "Who will ever use something such as this newfangled device that Alexander Graham Bell made?" (A phone, for those that aren't familiar.) You know, after all the lore that has been written for Warcraft, and the changes that have been made to things like Draenei, do you think Blizzard has suddenly run dry? In any case, we can say – hypothetically, if they were to implement either naga or centaur – that neither of them could wear boots. Simply that. If it's not reasonable for them to wear boots, they can't wear them! Just like Wookies in Star Wars, Knights of the Old Republic II, can't wear any armor (or very little), we can say that neither centaur nor naga can wear boots. Simple as that. Maybe give them a racial attribute that makes up for it, or whatever! You can't say "This race can't wear boots, so we can't allow it." Priests can't wear plate because it's not feasible. Pallies can't wield staves (for no known reason). Centaur can't wear boots. Naga can't wield two-hand weapons. Gnomes can't wield two-hand weapons because a normal one-hand weapon would be two-hand to a gnome. And so it goes.... Things can be worked out. Never underestimate the human imagination. Oh – and what of Night Elves wearing head armor? Their ears stick out! Schmidt 17:15, 6 June 2006 (EDT)

We aren't Victorians - we don't call other cultures "savage" or suddenly decide to annex Kenya for the British Empire. So it's not quite the same as when Alexander Graham Bell showed off his telephone or when Marconi invented the radio ("who will ever pay for a device that is intended to send a message to no-one in particular?"). We know the ups and downs of WoW like the back of our hands. It's all simply about balance. There could never be a suitable Naga boot replacement racial ability for example because, simply, how would it increase with level and differentiate between classes? Boots may not be powerful things in real life but boy, in WoW, they can make the difference between life and death - or a full armour set. This isn't Knights of the Old Republic, because KotOR was far more skill focussed and less equipment-orientated than WoW: there was only one particularly effective armour slot anyway, and if you were a Jedi you had Jedi Defense in any case. Oh, and it was far easier to balance because there was only you and your party vs the enemy. I sense I'm ranting here, so I'll get to the point. Equipment-focussed WoW would never allow the absense of boots without major balance issues (and you know how much people already complain about balance). There's a reason why Gnomes CAN have two-handed weapons, and a reason why Night Elves CAN have helmets. It's always balance, balance, balance. And that's why having technical difficulties is a red negative. --Vorbis 21:12, 7 June 2006 (GMT)

There you have it: If gnomes can wield two-hand weapons and night elves can wear helmets, centaur and naga can wear boots. If it's all about balance, then appearance and physical feasibility go out the window. If centaur and naga can't wear boots, gnomes can't wield two-hand weapons and night elves can't wear helmets (or take a comfortability hit due to their ears laying flat against their head). Simple as that. Can it be more complicated than that?

Conclusions, summed up, then:

• not all items need to be rendered – you can remove helmets and cloaks from display, and trolls and tauren boots are not rendered at all
• gnomes can wield and wear the same items as a tauren, elves can wear helmets (no explanation here, except balance) – so boots that fit a human should have no problem being fitted to a centaur or naga (no explanation needed, just balance)
• setting up collision for centaur and naga should be similar to the difference between – once again – gnomes and tauren
• redesigning armor for centaur and naga should be the same process for redesigning armor for any other new race
• paladins and warlocks get a free mount and summon theirs, hunters get aspect of the cheetah (not quite a mount, but mount-like behavior), centaur and naga might be able to have a similar skill (obviously someone could probably be a little more creative, but this works for now)

And maybe I missed something, but why did you refer to Victorians and Kenya? And I'm still kind of wondering what plainsrunning was. What was the nature of it? Was it mountlike speed that you get at level 40 or something? If one of these conclusions is not fair, please let me know, but based on all that has been said, it seems to speak for itself. Schmidt 14:44, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

Because of your reference to Alexander Graham Bell and how the Victorians first rejected it, that's why. :D You're missing the point though. Nagas don't have the right appendages to attach equipment to. Current races do. Sure they are tailored to fit each race but that's only game mechanics. Lorewise, you'd see Tauren wearing boots - it's not impossible to fit them onto hooves. But you would never see Nagas wearing boots. --Vorbis

Something tells me that lorewise you would not see tauren riding kodo, considering the original plainsrunning skill. In any case, however, as was said elsewhere in the conversation, maybe naga would have tail bracers or something like that. After all, you wouldn't want your tail exposed to any stray blades, now, would you? Legging items would protect part of their tail, and a boot item would protect the rest. It sounds reasonable to me. Schmidt 15:47, 8 June 2006 (EDT)

The only technical difficulty I see is this: Blizzard does all of the character animations to one central skeleton. They'd just have a lot more animations to make for a race that didn't use this. I'm not saying they couldn't do it, I'm just saying it'd be more difficult. Does that really make them more unlikely? Not really. It just means it'd take them more time. --Xmuskrat 17:25, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

Plainsrunning was a racial trait of the Tauren during early Beta testing. At level 40, instead of getting a mount
they'd get +60% speed like on a mount, but it had a cooldown timer and such, much like a mount. The main issue
with having this as an ability as opposed to a mount was that Tauren players thought they deserved mounts too.
Blizzard agreed and thus the Kodo mount was born. --Geofram

Troll and Tauren boots are rendered, but as ankle-braces. For this reason, the Naga having no feet is an easily surmountable tech-difficulty in my opinion. Just give them tail-braces or something, as you suggested. But like Geofram said, one of the reasons they removed Plainsrunning was because the Tauren players wanted mounts. Race selection is supposed to have relatively little effect on your character. People don't like the idea of getting screwed out of something cool like a mount because of their race selection. This is why things like centaurs and nerubians wouldn't work. I also have difficulties seeing something like a Centaur riding a gryphon or a wyvern.

As such, I think the technical difficulties involving Naga could be bumped to a minor, centaurs and nerubians still have a major problem. --Adonzo 22:22, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

As far as "one central skeleton" being maniupulated in animations, well, you see centaur already running around, and you see mounts running around already as well. Applying that animation to a player character should be nothing new. As for flying, I agree that that would remain an issue. I still can't think of a way to do that other than create a new animal for that, or something. I'm not sure about that one. In any case, any of those three you mentioned – centaur, naga, nerubian – would be difficult to pull off for flying.

As for the issues with Plainsrunning, well, the thing is, every other class gets a semi-unique type of mount, colored in such a way, spotted or striped (in the case of elves' sabers), but pally and warlock mounts all look the same. One pally's charger looks like every other's, and one warlock felsteed looks like every other's. "I want something to call my own!" Pfft. I wouldn't mind watching my pally blitz around without a mount, and I wouldn't mind having a semi-unique mount either. Heck. I don't mind my mount as it is. But anyways, if I had plainsrunning I wouldn't complain. In fact, I imagine it would look really cool. Probably better than the dumb kodo mounts now, anyways. But it would be a lot easier to pull off plainsrunning with centaur, if it was the first time. Now they've probably abandoned it.

All told, I agree with your suggestion, Adonzo, and bump naga's "Technical difficulties" to minor. But a better description than "Technical difficulties" might be in order, such as "Mount/flight difficulty" or some such. I can't think of anything better at this time. Schmidt 23:48, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

Let me try to explain again. Humanoid mobs that use the human skull have far far more animations available to them them then mobs that use a separate skeleton. Instead of animating these for each race, Blizzard animates the points on the skeletons. All that means is that if they decided to go with something with a whacky skelletin, they'd have to make a large amount of simple animations. When you start thinking about Centaurs on flying mounts, it just gets weird. It doesn't mean it won't happen (Blizzard could, say, make a level 70 quest to turn you into a pegasus) the thing is just takes more work. Blizzard pretty much selected "easy" races with the first few, and may do so in the future. However, I believe it's a minor reason. In the end, if it's cool, Blizzard is the type of company to make it happen. --Xmuskrat 17:11, 8 June 2006 (EDT)

That makes sense. Why didn't you say that a long time ago? Although, if you had, I would have said the same as I did earlier anyways: It's just something else that Blizzard could have overcome a long time ago, since they overcame similar issues with all (each) of the humanoid races that are described by what you just said. In case that wasn't understandable, I mean to say, They've done it before, they can do it again. Nothing new here. Schmidt

One thing they could do is like, in one expansion, give the Horde Centaurs and the Alliance Children of Cenarius. That way it would be balanced between factions, and both factions will have a quadriped race that can't mount, but that can fight while running at mount speed. this would be counterbalanced by, say, outright stunning the player in they get hit while dashing. But again, there is still a matter of flying. it would definately add a new twist to the game.

in my opinion, blizzard should some kind of mounted combat to the game. then Centaurs and such wouldnt be such a problem. front what ive seen, the flying mounts in the expansion actually behave like a flying mount. they need speed to take off, they can't u-turn on a tenth of a dime... if blizzard added realistic mount mechanics to the other mounts and mounted combat, that would be uber. --Adonzo 02:09, 11 June 2006 (EDT)

I have to disagree here. I know that this debate is about multi- legged diffuculties and such, but the idea of Ogres and Mountain Giants is just absurd. Every door in the entirety of the race's faction would have to be completely redone. But anyway, back to legs. The problems with not being bipedal are A) Certain platforms (and other things) would not be able to accomadate the bulky, elongated frame. The same goes for the Naga. And B) Armor designed for a bipedal race would end up horribly contorted, for example, leg armor. It would need to be stretched to outlandish proportions to fit a centaur or Child of Cenarious. And some races would not even have certain armor slots, such as the Naga's lack of feet; How would they wear boots? --Geohevy 22:08, 20 Jun 2006

Mountain Giants were a dumb idea, but Ogres are probably the single strongest candidate for a future horde race. Yes, they can get monstrous, but if you've never seen the ones in Mulgore, they stand the same height as a Tauren. --Adonzo 22:28, 20 June 2006 (EDT)

Yes, but the enemies in early areas are, as a general rule, made smaller to seem less intimidating versus later enemies. And the vast majority of ogres throughout the world are the "huge" variety. Note the Horde-allied encampment in Dustwallow, all of Dire Maul, the ogres running around the Burning Steppes, et cetera. The general implication isn't that those ogres are abnormally large, but that the Mulgore ones are abnormally small. Add to that the fact that they've designed multiple different models for the ogres (design work and time that they would have avoided if they planned to make them an armor-using player model), and it seems unlikely that they're going to turn around and open up the ogres for players. --Emcepticon 16:55, 21 June 2006 (EDT)

You realise how many blood elf models there are in the game, right? And how they still rebuilt the entire thing for the Burning Crusade? Kinda nulifies the model argument. But you are right on the size thing. --Adonzo 18:02, 21 June 2006 (EDT)

Blood elves in the game now are both rare, and slight edits of the high elf model - which in and of itself is an edit of the night elf model. (They used this same shortcut with Sylvanas, so if you're ever wondering why she looks nothing like her former self, there you are.) It's a different matter to take an existing model and slightly tweak it (other elves still all use night elf animations) than to craft an altogether separate one. Since we're now up to about four or five separate models for ogres (versus retextured models in red for the blood elves), it doesn't seem like they're looking to remove all the existing ogres and repopulate the areas with player-model ogres. Of course, by the same argument, if Blizzard comes up with something that makes them want to make ogres a player race, this would hardly stop them... I just don't think they're in the candidate pool at the moment. --Emcepticon 11:31, 22 June 2006 (EDT)

Actually, they didn't use the same shortcut with Sylvanas. Sylvanas is a retextured night elf, and as such is fully rigged for gear. High elves, while built on the Night Elf skeleton, ARE a different model, and are not rigged for gear. Anything you see them wearing is actually part of the model. The high/blood elves in game are not just retextured night elves.

Also, there are in fact only 3 ogre models in game, versus 8 high elf models (4 for each gender). And in the end, the ogre skeleton is unique to ogres (unlike many other model skeletons), and they have the most developed character animations of all non-rigged models in the game. Would it even be necessary to make a new model? Just rig it for armor, and ta-da!, ogre models are ready to play. --Adonzo 20:07, 22 June 2006 (EDT)

My apologies - I didn't make my point accurately. What I meant was that with both Sylvanas and the High Elf/Blood Elf models, they took them directly from the Night Elf models. In Sylvanas's case, they retextured her but kept the same model. In the High Elf case, they tossed on equipment and used them as a seperate set of models. In all cases, however, they are descended from the body type and basic features of Night Elves, such as the overlong eyebrows on the men, the extremely extended ears, et cetera. The point that I was trying to get at that another kind of elf, like another kind of troll or another kind of dwarf, is pretty easy to implement in the game without actually editing the underlying model.

As for just rigging the ogres for armor and bringing them over, I'd have to know more about model construction to answer that usefully either way. However, I'm tempted to go on the assumption that there are certain elements of the ogre skeleton that would need to be seriously edited first, for one reason: goblins are rigged for armor, despite not being a playable race, and there are a fair number of goblins to be fought in the game. It would have saved the developers lots of time to just rig the ogres for armor and visually differentiate them in that fashion.

Really, I don't think ogres are in the cards. They've made a point of distancing the new Horde from the old Horde in as many ways as possible - it would be odd to turn around and let things start backsliding. But that's just rampant speculation there, rather than actual arguments one way or the other. --Emcepticon 09:58, 23 June 2006 (EDT)

Just don't forget to add breasts, to take off some belly and to invent some lore to explain why Ogre females have been hiding for so long ...--Kirochi 05:41, 23 June 2006 (EDT)

Centaur and Naga could see the addition of new armor types. Rather than having boots, Centaur get barding for their horse portions. Naga would have two piece tail armor.-- Bridgettebeneshe

Reading more thuroughly through the entire run of posts, I want to bring up a point. Centaur and Naga could mount up, in a way. It may sound odd, but why not have the centaur regular mounts include a cart that they ride in. As for the flying mount, they could have special harnesses. In fact, for a naga or a centaur, the special harness would probably be easier on a flying mount since centaur would be use to tucking their legs in under them, and naga would coil round the harness. This would reduce the interfearence of the rider's legs on the mount's wings. As for the Cenarians, my big concern is that they are a major part of Druidic lore, and that affects both Night Elf and Tauren. Would they turn on Tauren do deliberately even if they are more allied with Night Elves?--Bridgettebeneshe

Don't worry about Cenarion/Tauren relationships - the Tauren have slaughtered many of them in the Stonetalon Mountains alongside the Horde to make the entire idea of a Cenarion/Tauren alliance totally implausible. Either way, I strongly doubt we will ever see the Cenarions as playable in WoW. Anyway, back to Naga and Centaur... the Naga won't have much of a problem at all riding a mount - they can just ride side-saddle and curl their tail around. As for the Centaur... this 'cart' just sounds weird and rather ridiculous. I'm sure nobody would mind if plainsrunning was implemented for the Centaur, especially if it came with some cool animations - ie. galloping at full tilt followed by a trail of magic. After all, Centaurs already have the added interest of a mount bolted to their midsection. How about even turning their lower half from horse into some kind of genie trail - bolt on some new lore etc., draw from the old Mesopotamian Djinn myths that the Centaur gel rather well with. Or having it turn, Druidlike, into some other, faster, form. There are plenty of ways to do this. --Vorbis 21:39, 11 August 2006 (GMT)

Further discussion at below

Comments from wowlock

Well, I feel that the races wil be chosen(to be playable) mostly on lore issues and that about 2/3 of the suggested races just would not fit in well to the WoW universe at all and to be honest are not even romotely palusble. Starting from most likely to least here are the races i feel could someday be added. Centaur-becuse the mara storyline seems to suggest that the centaur will be unified etc. etc. and they have many npc classes already. They may also get their own god in the form of Therazane, seeing as they are her direct descendants. The furbolg seem to fit into the storyline very nicely as well with their own abilities and deities. Next the quillboar seem fairly likely as well for the same reasons, although they would be a bit harder to fit into the storyline. And, because of their lack of appearances, the tuskaar of what ever the walrus ppl are called have such a capacity for new lore that they are immediately a candidate as well.

Now, as for the goblins and pandaran, they would also be fun to have, but the problem with that is blizzard would have trouble rosolving fairness issues because these two are extremly popular on both factions. Instead there might be a new neutral faction with them,which would be cool to be able to play with both the alliance and the horde. Supporting this si the fact that the pandaran are on a remote island and the goblins are the big travelers in azeroth (boats and zeps). However i am not sure how the pandaran could ally with the very worldly goblins. It would be blizzard's taskt to find/make some common ground Wowlock

(Moved from Less Stupid Rumored Races) by Luci 06:53, 29 June 2006 (EDT)

Goblins could be added by doing something a bit novel. In an expansion that adds one new race (two different factions of that race) and a few new classes, Goblins could be added to both sides, though with different classes. Goblins have one major factor no one seems to look at. There are several different merchant princes out there. One could join the Horde and one join the Alliance. There could even be differences in the skins of the two goblin factions (say green to yellow for one, green to blue for the other).

As for the Lore, a lot of it is legend, not history. Not to give a history lesson, while many legends are based in historical fact, they aren't anywhere near accurate. Thus, we could find out that the Harpies came from Night Elves (or High Elves), but were not cursed, since that is legend. The story could easily be that they were created by magic to protect the woodlands better, but were corrupted (except for a small band, like with the Draeni).- Bridgettebeneshe

I hate to say it, but Blizzard's recent decision to twist the lore to allow Blood Elves to have paladins and Draenei to have shamans gives notice that the corporate overlords are probably now making the decisions and sensible lore will not stand in the way of anything. If for some reason Blizzard decision-makers see making any particular race playable will increase marketshare or please some desirable demographic, you can probably bet it will become playable. I can't begin to fathom the decision-making process anymore, but it surely isn't constrained by lore consideration. --Fandyllic 10:26 PM PDT 27 Jul 2006

For those wondering, I chose, myself to eliminate what I wrote before because that argument is superceded by new data. Draenei are listed as a Shamanistic race according to all the lore we had on them before the expansion announcement was made. Further, they are also listed as devoted followers of the Light. Also, for five months prior to the announcement of the Draenei, people were pushing for an Alliance race to have Shaman. This is not just the corporate bigwigs deciding that this makes money sense, but a lot of people wanted this. Unfortunately, you can't make everyone happy. -bridgettebeneshe 12:10, 27 July 2006

I'm not a great student of Warcraft Lore, but the recent incarnation of the Draenei (the blue ones) seems a marked departure from previous info about them. However, I don't have a tremendous dispute over Draenei shamans. Most of my disgruntlement comes from Blood Elf paladins. I ask the question: What if a big alliance raid kills the Blood Elf sorcerers who maintain the source of Holy Light (a naaru) in Silvermoon that allows them to have paladins? Will the Naaru be freed? Will the Blood Elf paladins lose their power? I doubt it. All because Blizzard is bending over backward to maintain some mythical balance. If the Draenei can be both shamanistic and drawing on the Holy Light, why not give that to the Taurens via some less nefarious explanation? At least the Taurens are relatively noble as Horde races go.

Ironically, I've heard alot of Horde shamans complain that with the includion of paladins, they will lose their spots in alot of high-end raids because they tend to be heal bots their and paladins just have more survivability with nearly equal healing. C'est la vie... --Fandyllic 12:44 PM PDT 17 Aug 2006

Sorry, but I just have to say it... if a big alliance raid storms Orgrimmar and kills Thrall, is he actually dead and will the Horde be thrown into chaos? --Adonzo 18:19, 17 August 2006 (EDT)

Yeah, but no abilities of Horde classes are based on Thrall being alive or dead... :-P --Fandyllic 12:31 AM PDT 19 Aug 2006

(Hi I'm back) Hum I'm causing further embarrassment here, but yeah, Thrall showed the Orcs the shamanistic path xD--Kirochi 10:03, 26 August 2006 (EDT)

i someone saved the naaru in silvermoon wouldnt that stop all blood knights (blood elf pally) and if you save it it would prolly just sit there till they respawn and start sucking energy again how stupid is that.

Furbolgs additions

I have some things that *should* be added on the Furbolgs tab -

They could be added in the Northrend Expansion also - Polar Furbolgs.

Shamans have been added to the Alliance, thus solving the problem of intigrating Furbolgs (who practice shamanism) with the Alliance (which never used to.)

Blizzard has avoided using Mount Hyjal and the Barrow Deeps in this expansion

There are several areas of Furbolg specific content (such as Timbermaw Hold in Azshara) which are as yet un-used. -- Mastia

Good points. I've slightly altered the furbolg section to add what I can add of your points (some points, though valid, would not belong on the list) -- Kirkburn 11:17, 27 August 2006 (EDT)

Most of those things on your list have been implemented, Mastia. However, some things are a given anyway - shamanism, for example, is simply no longer a problem: it isn't, however, a pro or a con. The note I put at the top of the page makes up for having to include it. :) --Vorbis 22:06, 27 August 2006 (GMT)

Wildhammers?

I hadn't had time to read all of the archives of rumored races but i think that Wildhammers are possible as a new race.

• +they are different then the Ironforge dwarfs as they live above the ground and greatly prefer the wild then technology.
• +they already have a place in the lore.

Alliance:

• +They already have fought with the Alliance for years.
• +They are good friends with the High Elves wich are already part of the Allience and they still have connections with Ironforge.
• -They don't want war with the Horde

--Hefaistus

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. I was going to add them after scanning through the discussion page to see if they where removed or something Saimdusan

Race = race; Race # faction. Wildhammer-looking Dwarves are already customizable; no new skin = no interest.--K ) (talk) 17:18, 3 November 2006 (EST)

Umm, I would think the Wildhammers would have to exhibit some essential difference like the difference between Blood Elves and Night Elves fo rthem to be considered a separate race. They don't look physically different as far as I can tell. --Fandyllic (talk) 5:52 PM PST 3 Nov 2006

Hmmm... that's a doozy... I'll have to think about that. There most be some way they could become different... Blizzard could do whatever they want really. Wildhammers would have different Classes, different racial traits, different starting attributes, different culture, and different starting zones... hey I remember this forum thread called "Lineages" it was pretty interesting, and would be a pretty good way to add wildhammers: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=34363549&sid=1

Also, I don't think they should be removed, just added as a negative point as a problem (I added them... though I couldn't put the reasoning in the right place S:Saimdusan

They aren't customizable. The skin colour and tattoos aren't available to players. --Tinkerer 05:11, 4 November 2006 (EST)

Yes they are. Try out modelviewer. Normal dwarves with tatoos. And if you're going to add Wildhammers, why not add Dark Irons, Cult of the Damned, Earthen, Leper Gnomes and Highbourne in the process? -_^ It's the same idea... Oh, also add these minuses:

• - Speak Dwarvish, already a language in use (by the Ironforge dwarves)
• - Almost physically identical to the Ironforge dwarves. 600 years doesn't allow much room for evolution - the difference between the night elves
• + it dosent matter dwarvis is an already spoke languadge since all alliance knows common

and blood elves is like the difference between chimps and orangutans. The difference between dwarves and dwarves, however, is like the difference between the Americans and the Maori - one has tattoos, another doesnt. On a similar note, I suggest the removal of the high elves as a possible race because right now I see them and the Wildhammer dwarves as less likely as the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles when it comes to Blizzard choosing a new race. --Vorbis 11:23, 4 November 2006 (GMT)

Althogh I am a big fan of anything dwarven I to feel a bit scepticle about about the wildhammers becomeing a race I believe the darkiron clan would be a a more likely candidite do to there past the ironforge dwarfs they would be a good candidate for the horde

Some comments

Centaurs

+ "Diplomacy" line of quests in Desolace shows Alliance as interested in friendship with Centaurs

The Horde have the same quest line.... this is not really a valid argument, and as a counter argument for the Horde... a tauren can do the quest line just fine, and become neutral / friendly with the faction in desolace

Harpy

Only females. ? welll. those eggs have to come from somewhere.

Just because we never seen any males of this species doesnt mean they dont exist. :P

CJ 09:16, 22 September 2006 (EDT)

Umm, some official source confirmed that there AREN'T any male harpies, they just capture males from other races (i.e., NIght Elves), rape them and then devour them.--Kirochi (talk) 11:49, 22 September 2006 (EDT)

Disgusting but possible. Also like Ogres aren't confirmed having any females but it is possible so it is possible for harpy males just saying though. Lichkingofthescourge 22:43, 28 February 2007 (EST)

Credits

I agree with the recent edit by Apollozeus removing the credit section; it isn't appropriate for wiki pages. The edit history demonstrates precisely who did what, there is no reason to include it in the article as well. The whole wiki is the result of a lot of work by many people, but the articles aren't the place to acknowledge that. --Aeleas 12:57, 29 October 2006 (EST)

I disagree. This isn't the same as a normal wiki page - this is a rather unique effort by the wiki community. I suggest a vote if you really want it to be removed. --Vorbis 18:03, 29 October 2006 (GMT)

I prefer discussion and consensus building to voting, but why would one be required? Why do you feel entitled to "make the rules" and revert Appolozeus' edit without discussion? And what makes this page different from any other, where no credit is given?--Aeleas 13:15, 29 October 2006 (EST)

Turning that around, I don't see why Appollozeus has any right to change it without discussion. You should note that I'm not credited on there, so it isn't some big dent in my ego if he removes it. I simply think the wowwiki community deserves some praise for putting together this big page from scratch for little reason other than a) the fun of it and b) to work out what the hell Blizzard is thinking. This isn't just any old page, it's something we warred over for months. I don't feel entitled to "make the rules", but I simply don't think some guy should have any right to. --Vorbis 22:33, 29 October 2006 (GMT)

High Elves

These guys are looking less and less likely every day. With the addition of new high elf skins for the blood elf models in the Burning Crusade, I feel these guys are never going to appear as playable. They are pretty much physically identical. If you want a high elf, I suggest that it would simply be much easier to RP one (the same with the Wildhammers) ;) --Vorbis 11:39, 4 November 2006 (GMT)

That seems fair to me :) -- Kirkburn (talk) 10:19, 4 November 2006 (EST)

Not to say your wrong, but Blood ELves are addicted to magic so they focus on magic, but if High Elves are available they might foucs on Warrior,Hunter or Rogue classes. Lichkingofthescourge 22:34, 28 February 2007 (EST)

I like the High Elves and I think they could be a race maybe in the 2nd WoW or possibly more after that. Besides alot of people like them because Im pretty sure more people have talked about them in their discussion then humans. I'm sorry I dont mean to be rude or anything, its just theyre cooler then some of the current races. (Mr.X8 01:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC))

Technical Difficulties (continued)

Moved from above discussion

Just to revive a bit of the technical difficulties discussion in regards to naga, the 2.0 patch (And thus the Burning Crusade) has introduced a WIP Male and Female Naga model rigged for armor. It's not perfect, still lacking texturing on the model itself, and not working with helms/cloaks, but it's there. Pants cover the tail fully, boots are ignored. Just food for thought. I can provide some screenshots if anyone is interested, but decided to err on the side of caution as it's close to datamining. --Wormsborough 16:21, 24 December 2006 (EST)

Interesting info - what exactly is it from? As long as it's not too salubrious, I don't mind links on talk pages - they're easily removed if found to be crossing the line. :) -- Kirkburn (talk) 16:44, 24 December 2006 (EST)

I noticed when checking out version 0.5 of WoW Model Viewer. Can check it out for yourself I suppose. :) --Wormsborough 16:47, 24 December 2006 (EST)

Ooh, I hadn't heard of the new site. Yeah, it's fine to link it, we just don't want screenshots from it on the main pages. I'm more flexible with talk pages :) (basically I am okay with images being linked from here, but not uploaded) -- Kirkburn (talk) 16:58, 24 December 2006 (EST)

If you want some in-game shots of them with armor, here are two. Haven't seen any more than that (probably some in Coilfang wear more. Haven't run through it, myself, though). --Maenos 17:01, 24 December 2006 (EST)

Ah, Coilskar. Lovely place, and lots of domesticated Helboar nearby. :) -- Kirkburn (talk) 17:19, 24 December 2006 (EST)

Just to show off some more, male Naga in Might, female Naga in Arcanist [1]. I'd guess the models are more capable of this for the same reason the Goblins are however. It's interesting to note that there's also a model for male Broken (Which share the animations with male Tauren), a half-finished model for female Broken (And it's literally half-finished, just one half of the model exists), and for Skeletons (The Skeleton model interacts really oddly with most gear, probably because it's not intended to wear anything but customized graphics, or anything outside of shoulders). --Wormsborough 17:37, 24 December 2006 (EST)

There's lots of male Broken around the place, not really looked out for or noticed female Broken though. And yup, some skellies exist with a bit of armour :) -- Kirkburn (talk) 17:53, 24 December 2006 (EST)

Mo'arg

I'm not going to get into all the inconsistencies (I don't have a spare month), so let's focus on one: I'm not certain that players wanting to play demons is a major factor in deciding playable races. It is a factor, as WoW is mostly about marketing, but it isn't something so major it's going to decide the whole argument. For these reasons, we could easily suggest that every sentient race in the Legion (apart from Pit lords and man'ari) will join the Horde!--Ragestorm, Head Bookkeeper 09:10, 26 December 2006 (EST)

Ah, I've got the time. Hit me with the big ones. ^^ --Vorbis 16:51, 26 December 2006 (GMT)

Makrura / Alliance

A "pro" reason that should be given for Makrura joining the Alliance should be a reference to the PnP RPG book "Lands of Mystery." That book a Broken Isles section, which is an area that would surely be included in a "Great Sea" expansion; which may be expansion #2), contains a lot of suggestions that Brann Bronzebeard is negotiating diplomacy with the Makrura on behalf of King Magni Bronzebeard (Ironforge), and by extension, the Alliance. The Broken Isles would be a very important zone in such an expansion, as it's where great Kaldorei ruins lay, as well as the Tomb of Sargeras (possible raid zone). Here are a few relevant quotes (written in the first person as Brann Bronzebeard): "I have a feeling that they [Makrura] aren't naturally jerks. In fact, I have a theory that we might get the makrura to fight on our side (more on this below.)" And then later in the section about the Izal-Shurah library ruins, "As much as I wanted to get in there (my brain watered in anticipation), I found that makrura overran the place. I didn't think a lone dwarf assaulting one of their strongholds would be good for future diplomatic relations, so I left them alone." My guess is that Brann is using the term Makrura loosely, and that the crab-men he wants to actually negotiate with are an evolved version that has more humanoid hands (for wielding weapons), can wear armor, etc., possibly the rumored "Lobstrok" race that has a file directory in the WoW graphics. Just as it was easy to write off the Draenei as a playable race when all we had to go on were the mugwump-ish "Lost Ones", we don't really know what the Lobstrok, or other types of Makrura actually look like, so it's possible Blizzard would come up with a cool version that players would really like (sexy crab-women even ! : ). --Verdantrex 13:47, 28 December 2006 (GMT)