Right, so. Heres the deal as I see it.

We have lore supporting a willing fall into death knighthood. We have lore supporting the raising of corpses into Arthas' army. All equal in Arthas' eyes, since they're all pawns to be used to crush the living.

All of them are likely under Arthas' mind control, or bound to his will, or mind raped, or whatever.

If you want to role play a Death Knight who studied the magic for themselves and willingly bound themselves to Arthas, cool.

If you want to RP a knight who fell and was risen against their will to fight for arthas, cool.

It's not going to break your gaming experience if you disagree with someone else. No one here is 'Right'. No one here is 'Wrong'. Well, except for the Worgen Druids. That's just full of fail and dunce cap..

I jest.

Some blue said we're all dead, Mel's found evidence that we all started out alive. It's a draw. Is this forum really about bashing other peoples role play and telling them they're doing it wrong just because they choose a slightly different background for their character? I'd like to think not.

Right! A mage can't really show up at Acherus with suit of armor, a sword and a twelve pack and say "Fuck yeah, Necromancy!" and get accepted as a Death Knight of Acherus.

So, for the last time, I'm repeating this: I, nor does anyone arguing the point, actually care how you RP your character, you're free to do it how you'd like. However, while the Knights of the Ebon Blade certainly accept necromancers(Hey, Amal'thazad!), they're not Death Knights of Acherus, and, therefore, are not the player character Death Knights.

Taking slight liberties is fine. Like, the location of your character's start. In fact, it's probably encouraged. Not everyone could have been the Paladin that killed Garrick Padfoot, just like not everyone could have been there to kill Nefarian or C'thun.

What? Where?

He would be referring to the Warcraft site for Wrath.

http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/wrath/featu...knight/lore.xml

Definitive? No. But I'll tell you what caught my eye. I'll annotate in red/bold

...the immensely powerful Lich King created a new breed of death knights: malevolent, rune-wielding warriors
of the Scourge. The first and greatest of these was Prince Arthas Menethil, once a mighty paladin of the Silver Hand, who sacrificed his SOUL (Not necessarily life) to claim the runeblade Frostmourne in a desperate bid to save his people.

Unlike Gul'dan's death knights, modern death knights consist mainly of paladins who lost their faith and pledged their SOULS to the Lich King in exchange for the promise of immortality (no mention of dying yet). Death knights who fall in battle (read: were not previously dead, also the first mention of dying, period) are soon raised again to continue in their master's service.
(Okay, NOW they're dead, and naturally we've seen plenty of undead DKs, so this shouldn't be a surprise)

Again, definitive? No. But I've also read the Death Knight class description both at character creation and in the manual that shipped with the game and neither make any reference to Death Knights being slain nor risen, and this lore interview seems to carefully avoid any reference to them ever dying until AFTER they're death knights, citing the conditional, that if they are slain, they can be risen again to continue the fight.

Food for thought.

Uhhh... those are second generation death knights. And I think it's well known that Arthas didn't die when he took up Frostmourne - but it did claim his soul. Whether he's alive or living now doesn't really matter, because he's so not your typical death knight.

I hope I'm doing this quoting thing right.

The origin of the Death Knight Formerly Known As Arthas is specific to him. It's not something that Blizzard has extended to player-created death knights. TDKFKAA is an anomaly, created by those who invented this whole thingy. Moreover, I am pretty sure he/it is undead [I]now. His/its experience of death knighthood is != those of PC DKs.

I think what it all boils down to is this:

1) Blizzard's language/stance on whether death knights must in fact be dead before being made as death knights is inconclusive.

2) Regardless of whether or not a DK is created from a dead, un-living corpse or a living, breathing, willing humanoid (with Forsaken being the exception; they're clearly undead[lore] humanoids [game mechanic]), the point of contention seems to be whether or not the process of becoming (or state of being) a DK makes one undead as well. For me, the language and evidence provided infer undeath more strongly than they do not. However, there is enough wiggle room to allow players to make up their own minds on whether or not DKs are undead.

Well.... if ANY PC is slain in battle, they can be risen again to continue the fight. But that doesn't make them undead. It doesn't fix the condition of Forsaken undeath, either. If a DK (PC or NPC) <loses all their hit points> in battle, and is "raised" or "resurrected," it brings them back to the state they were prior to <losing all their hit points in battle>. So this doesn't really convince me either way of what sort of state DKs are in prior to losing all those hit points. IMO it makes more sense for them to be undead. YMMV.

It also means that you would not be free of the Lich King's grasp. You sacrificed your soul. If you got it back, you'd just kind of be a normal person again.

Which are different because? Because you've decided that Acherus is a factory and not a fortress?

And Rowain, I don't know where you're getting the presumptions you're getting. Did you read this thread at all?
http://adrp.3.forumer.com/index.php?showto...indpost&p=14863

Or are you assuming because it's convenient? More than enough citations have been provided throughout this thread that point toward the existence of much variation in the creation of Death Knights. And at every turn within the game and nearly all documentation from the character creation screen to the manual shipped with the game to the website itself, Blizzard has carefully avoided defining the actual origin of these new death knights, with the exception of a single, arbitrary blue post that offers no citation or backing.

http://www.wowwiki.com/Death_knight#Lore

Have you read this? There are only two definitions of Death Knight. There is no "third generation" of Death Knights birthed in Acherus. Acherus is a base of operations, like every other Necropolis you see floating around or crash-landed in Northrend.

The only thing differentiating between the Knights of the Ebon Blade and the "Champions of the Lich King" is their allegiance.

I also suggest perusing this:
http://www.wowinsider.com/2008/05/23/why-a...ore-standpoint/

It's not Blizzard Official nor is it canon, but it is a very interesting read that explores why each race might have ended up a part of the Lich King's army, and it explores it entirely without presuming for a second that they ever give up their lives.

Hopefully I'm getting this quoting thing right.. heh!

Something just occurred to me.... and I was so blinded by my nerd rage that I didn't see it before.

If Blizz has NOT defined EXPLICITLY whether or not DKs are dead, undead, or alive...

then it's irrelevant.

Blizz HAS defined them as Humanoids for the purposes of game mechanics. But they have only *implied heavily* that DKs are undead/once-alive.

In literature, it seems that when an author doesn't define something, or doesn't give clarity where ambiguity exists, it often is because said definition is not relevant to the outcome or meaning of the work. I'm thinking of a Nathaniel Hawthorne story, "Young Goodman Brown", in which Hawthorne never clarifies whether or not Goodman's experience was a dream or an actual event. It turns out that the experience's veracity within the context of the story is irrelevant -- Hawthorne's meaning is still communicated either way.

That is what I have to conclude about DKs... Blizzard hasn't stated explicitly whether they are undead or not... therefore it probably doesn't matter. I still *feel* that they *are* or *should be* undead, but... YMMV.

Which presumptions?

Let me check on that thread; I'm not sure if I read it.

EDIT: You're going to have to specify what it is you wanted me to respond to... it looks like pages and pages on "what is dead" and right now I have to say I just don't have the desire/attention span to get into it.

When Rowain loses all her hit points,the game gives me a message that says "You are dead." That's good enough for me.

Yes, many quests instruct us to go find "what became of Explorer Whosiewhatsit" and we trek into the woods and find a corpse that can't be resurrected. That's "dead" too. Is this what you're talking about?

Dead is dead. Do we really need to split fine hairs over a game mechanic? Lore is one thing.

*sigh*

Okay..

That's fair enough. And that's probably why this post is 10 pages long...

..because we're trying to decide whether the picture is of a beautiful young woman or an old hag.

If you get my meaning.



(and don't worry about the thread. I don't care. You might have pointed out the section below the wowwiki lore part that says they're fallen knights and then I'd have pointed out that there is a big flag on that section saying there has been no citation for it yet, and blah blah blah. >_< I'm out of breath.)

Double edit: I mean that with the best intentions. No hard feelings. I've always been willing to accept both. I expect it. I've never tried to force a backstory on anyone. I guess I just get tied up in a knot when a disagreement turns into the whole "you're wrong but that's okay" passive aggressive approach. But we're all friends here.

IMO Blue is its own authority. If Blue says something, then that's What It is. Why? Because it's THEIR world. I would suspect that anything Blue doesn't make it to forums or wherever without clearance from On High, Irvine CA, and if it *is* incorrect info that Blizz moves swiftly to correct it. But I'm not an expert on How Things Work at Blizz. If the creators of a work Say Something, I will Tend to Believe Them.

Yes, that's where I took

"A second generation death knight is essentially the body, soul, knowledge, memory, and personality of a fallen hero who was reanimated into a preternatural state of eternal undeath by the Lich King."

from.

Right, whereas my eyes immediately fall on the

part headlining that particular section.

It's a cycle... >_<

Madness, I tell you!