We need criteria for characters who appear here Edit
|Your comments are desired.|
For the Category:Major characters I used the criteria of at least 2-3 Warcraft cites/refs. It's not clear some of the "notable" characters on this page meet even that low reqirement. Also, we need to be much better at citing sources for lore that appears in WoW. Just putting it down because you read it in some quest text is not good enought. You should cite the quest or NPC speech, if that's where you got it. -- (talk · contr) 4:19 PM PST 23 Jun 2008
- I would argue that those who appear on this page are A) the ones in your category or B) characters who've had significant portions of the Warcraft storyline told from their point of view, with a bit of flexibility for oft-appearing background chars. You're right, though, people like Talgath or Ishanah are noteworthy, but not that major.-- (talk · contr) 23:36, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
- When I think of major characters, Arthas, Illidan, Thrall all spring to mind. Mostly because in my vast Warcraft Experience (W3...) they were the ones that had the story told from their point of view, as said in the comment above. They are what I see as major, Azeroth-impacting characters, someone who's had a large portion of lore for themselves. R3volv360 (talk) 12:56, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think we have criteria yet for this article. Please more feedback. Most of the changes I've seen so far range from arbitrary to completely unjustified.
- I'd also like to point out that restricting the list to characters that have a storyline in WC3 told from their perspective is a very poor criteria for a major character.
- Here is my criteria:
- A leader of a major faction or organization.
- Appears in multiple sources of lore (this includes the RPG).
- Has a pivotal role in major events in the Warcraft universe (being a follower of another major character isn't enough).
- -- (talk · contr) 12:29 PM PST 22 Dec 2008
How come Kil'jaeden is listed as being in WoW?--Illidan Rocks 04:49, 4 April 2006 (EDT)
- *shrug* i didn't do it. and i don't believe he is anyways. removed it, also bumped Kil'Jaedan up to a red (seen as how he did orchestrate the corruption of the Orcs and the creation of the Scourge) --Adonzo 21:26, 4 April 2006 (EDT)
- I removed the entry and marked the SB page for speedy delete. - ClydeJr 11:43, 29 June 2006 (EDT)
Lore is people who have backstory, major is for people who have a lot and are important.--18:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
This Category page is horrific and in desperate need of a reformat.
1) Break this list into atleast two categories, one for important WoW Characters and one for the Warcraft Strategy series.
2) Straight list, not comma seperated entries. It looks sloppy and its hard to read.
3) Get rid of the silly dots, just list them in order of importance (subsort Alphabetically if needed).
Other Categories are neater, why was so much effort put into information on this page? Its not really supposed be informative, merely present a readable list, which it doesn't do.
--JamesR 20:22, 29 January 2007 (EST)
I brought it down into a straight list and sorted them in order of importance, I think the dots should stay, I like the visual because it can help give you a better idea of just how important they are.
--Blarnay 17:50, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
Gul'dan and Uther Edit
Is there any reason they aren't considered to be two of the most improtant characters in Warcraft lore? Uther was the first Paladin, founded the Knights of the Silver Hand, and trained Arthas, whereas Gul'dan's treachery was (arguably) the main reason the Orcs lost the Second War, not to mention his forming of the Shadow Council and raising the Tomb of Sargeras, with the latter one allowing Illidan access to the Eye of Sargeras. --TheLightbringer 19:51, 31 January 2007 (EST)
- I guess only those who really define Warcraft itself should be considered as 'most important in Warcraft lore'. Arthas, Malfurion, Kil'jaeden: the big guns. The biggest heroes and the biggest villains. The movie stars. As it stands, neither Uther nor Gul'dan can be defined such - they're the Robin to Batman; the Wormtongue to Saruman; arguably even the Pippin and Merry to Frodo and Sam. Whilst major characters, the lore does not revolve around them. They add detail to lore, but don't generate as much of it. To illustrate: here in the real world, who will be remembered the longest? Jesus, Genghis Khan and Adolf Hitler or Simon Peter, Jamuqa and Heinrich Himmler?
- However, I understand entirely where you're coming from. Though I understand that my choices may be controversial, I'll go and demote some so that only the 'core characters' remain in the top category (C'Thun should be orange for example... yes, he's an Old God, but with that logic, why isn't Aman'Thul higher up? Until C'Thun does something like name himself the leader of the Old Gods and beat up Aggramar, thus starting a cataclysmic war to consume Azeroth, then he's just a little less important). Do you get it? :) --Vorbis 18:06, 1 Feb 2007
- Makes sense when you put it that way :). I got it now. Also, thanks for switching some characters around so it's more obvious about important v. all-important (C'Thun was actually one of the characters that had me a little confused). --TheLightbringer 13:24, 1 Feb 2007 (EST)
- Gul'dan should definetly have a red dot. After Ner'Zhul backed out on his deal with Kil'jaeden, the demonlord needed Gul'dan to turn the Horde into the bloodthirsty weapon of slaughter we saw in Warcraft I and II. He was once referred to, though I don't know where, as the most powerful mortal warlock ever. Even in death, his legacy has lived on. You can see the Hand of Gul'dan, the Volcano that he raised by magic, in Shadowmoon Valley. And much of the power that Illidan now wields was granted to him by Gul'dan's skull. He's definitely more than a supporting character.--Flamestrider 01:45, 8 February 2007 (EST)
- Hmmm... maybe Gul'dan should have a red dot considering his impact on the story and the destiny of the orcs and the Horde (not to mention the havoc his skull has wreaked). Nevertheless, remember that this isn't all about power. It's about lore focus. A little kid from Goldshire could get a red dot, but he has to have done something to turn the world on its head at least once first. --Vorbis
I'd like to throw my two cents in here: when considering the most major characters of all, think carefully: take into account not only their actions and impact but who they are. In the case of Gul'dan, a major player, would he have had such an impact if someone else were in his place? If a character has a huge impact, but his actions could have been done by someone else, I think that warrants an orange dot. If a character has a huge impact, and her actions are dependent on the fact that she is who she is, then that's a red dot. Furion, Tyrande, or Thrall, for example- their actions could not have been taken by anyone else. Gul'dan, however, simply took action- any other power-hungry shaman would have had the same impact in this situation. I'm not sure about Uther. -- (talk · contr) 15:51, 8 February 2007 (EST)
- Gul'dan did turn the world on its head. In fact, he turned two worlds on their respective heads at the same time. The futures of both Azeroth and Draenor changed dramatically because of his actions.
- And he didn't just do what anybody would have done in his situation. Ner'Zhul was offered the same choice and ended up backing out of the deal because he was afraid of the consequences. Gul'dan wasn't merely powerhungry. He was batshit insane. Gul'dan is the reason that the Horde became a bloodthirsty war machine capable of annihilating Stormwind in the first war, and the reason that the Horde lost the second war. All of this has very much to do with Gul'dan himself.
- While we're on the subject, I have a few other issues with this page. Lothar should be an orange dot, not a red dot. His actions were very important to the Alliance, and especially to Stormwind, but he hasn't had such a great impact on the entire world. He's pretty much comparable to Doomhammer, and Doomhammer has an orange dot.
- There's some characters here who shouldn't even be on this list. In my opinion those would be Zuluhed the Whacked, Tagar Spinebreaker, Fenris the Hunter, Barthilas, Saiden Dathrohan, Magellas, Khadros Wildhammer, Detheroc, Baron Rivendare, the Trade Princes, Gyth, The four Emerald Dragons, Mogor, Ouro, Aku'mai, Myzrael, Duke Hydraxis, and the Elemental Invaders. If anybody thinks any of those characters shouldn't be on the list, please give your reasons, and I'll give mine.
- And lastly, in the place of those characters, there are a few more who I think should be added. Eranikus, Kazzak, Highlord Mograine, and Halduron Brightwing come to mind. I'm sure there are others as well.
What do you guys think?--Flamestrider 19:43, 10 February 2007 (EST)
- <shrug> My point about Gul'dan was that any insane, power-hungry shaman, who didn't care about the ancestors, would have done, meaning that he was sightly less important than you might think, whereas Furion had to be Furion. Your suggestions should be added, but not ranked too highly. -_ (talk · contr) 19:53, 10 February 2007 (EST)
- You're treading on very uncertain ground when you get into counterfactuals. How do you know that, say, any power-hungry night elf wouldn't have done the same things that Illidan did? The fact is, neither of us know what might have happened. All we know is what did happen, and, by that logic, Gul'dan is among the most significant characters in the series.
- Do you (or anybody else) have any objections to me demoting Lothar to orange or removing the characters I mentioned in my previous post? If, not, I'll go ahead and make those changes.--Flamestrider 14:14, 11 February 2007 (EST)
<shrug> since this isn't technically lore, it's not technically my department (even I admit may case against Gul'dan is relatively weak). Whatever you do, however, I don't think you should demote Lothar. -- (talk · contr) 18:14, 11 February 2007 (EST)
- Alright, Lothar stays. I'll make the other changes. If anybody else has any issues, address them here.--Flamestrider 19:07, 11 February 2007 (EST)
I think we should also group the orcs - half orcs and mok'nathal have only one representative character so it would look better if we had "Orcs and cross-breeds" or something like this. Dakovski 16:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Grom Hellscream Edit
Surely he is one of most important characters in lore. He was the first chieftan to drink the demon blood and he killed Mannaroth, one of the most poweful being in the Warcraft universe. And what's more, by doing this, he freed the orcs from the blood curse for ever!
Oh god, I'm such a geek :D Warchiefthrall 08:58, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
More characters EditI added
Do you thing we should add any of the following : Rage Winterchill, Kaz'rogal, Anetheron or Mephistroth? Dakovski 16:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
It would be fine with me to add them, as long as they're marked as white :) Warchiefthrall 19:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
And what about Tari Foxton? I think she's important as well. -- Shaera 16:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Questions & Concerns Edit
Found this marvelous little corner of the wiki, which is actually really, really useful for anybody trying to find out more about their favorite characters and otherwise. I added "Tides of Darkness" (the novel) to the abbreviation list and all the corresponding characters have had a "ToD" mark placed, as per the character list from http://www.wowwiki.com/Tides_of_Darkness. However, the page could use some help with organization and I have a few concerns and questions I wanted to bring up:
1. A few characters, such as Arthas, Kel'Thuzad, Kael'Thas and Sylvanas have appeared as more than a single race, and are (for the most part) appropriately in more than one category. However, should their appearances be also divided? IE. "Humans> Arthas> (ToD, WC3, WC3X)" and then "Lich King/Arthas (WC3X, WoW:LK)"? OR should the entire list appear for any version of the character, so that it would say for Lich King/Arthas (ToD, WC3, WC3X, WoW:LK) and likewise include WC3X and WoW for Sylvanas in her High Elven category? Anyway, all that's necessary here is some consistency either way, which right now is lacking. I'd offer to triple-check the characters if there's some consensus on what should be done. I suggest to have a full list on every occasion the character's name comes up, as at least in some small part the character is there (I'm thinking of the Lich King/Arthas split, specifically). Just my suggestion, of course.
2. WC2: BtDP is listed as WC2X, WC3: TFT is listed as WC3X, however WoW: BC is listed simply as "WoW." That seems inconsistent becase it is a full expansion just like any others before it, and deserves proper nomination (ie. WOWX). Seems like an easy fix to a straight-forward inconsistency... however! What happens when LK comes out? WOWXX? That doesn't seem like the best solution, but some solution seems wanting. I suggest moving away from the "X" system and toward using the full acronyms, but it's very timid suggestion.
3. Should we start adding 100% confirmed characters from things such as the new WoW comic, Night of the Dragon and Beyond the Dark Portal novels, and WoW: LK? ie. we know for a fact that Rhonin will feature in NoD and that Arthas will feature in WoW: LK. Is there a "title must be published and out the door" policy, even against confirmed appearances? No suggestions here, just wondering.
4. The order things are placed in is very inconsistent and unorganized. For example Archimonde's tag reads: "WC3, WA1, WA2, WA3, RotH, WoW." By chronology of publication, the list should look something like WC3, WoW, WA1, WA2, WA3, WoW, RotH. By chronology of the world, the list should look (arguably; I hate time travel) something like WA1, WA2, WA3, RotH, WC3, WoW. Or we could divide it to have books first and games after, or games first and books after. But right now it's simply inconsistent, not only from character to character, but evidently within individual characters as well. I suggest "books, then games" in order of publication history, with maybe a consistent inconsistency regarding writing out trilogies (and more) together, just because it follows logically, and doesn't make sense to break them up. So Rhonin's list would appear as something like "DoD, WA1, WA2, WA3, NoD, WoW:LK." But again that's just my suggestion!!
I can go through these no problem and arrange them properly once these issues are straightened out. But I wanted to see what the general public thought of these small inconsistencies and what the best way of going about them would be before doing anything. :) --Pure.Wasted 12:48, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'd say go with splitting them. Opinion, but it works.
- WoWBC, and WoWWotLK, or WoWLK, seem appropriate.
- Nah. Wait for them to come out, just as a matter of keeping our sanity. Moreso so we don't have to double check later to see which were dealt with and which weren't.
- I would suggest by "order of appearance", regardless of book or game. They appeared first in wc3, that gets the first spot. And etc. --Sky (talk | con | ) 06:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Gray dots Edit
I'm going to be bold and remove the gray dots, as any character classified as "not important at all" shouldn't therefore even be on a list of major characters. I also propose a vetting process for any characters people wish to be added to the list.
Edit: Yeah, I reconsidered removing green and Pathaleon. Still, a lot of these characters need to be reclassified. I've seen several yellows and even greens which should really be oranges, and both Kel'Thuzad and Lo'Gosh (our up and coming "Anti-Thrall") should really be red. ---- Vorbis Talk Contribs 12:45, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- Pathaleon is not just "something fun to kill", he shows up in several important moments of Outland lore, including the first revelation that Kael'thas is a betrayer at the colossus crystal in Hellfire, as well as in conversations with the Firewing leader and the head of the Manaforges, leading up to the revelation that Kael'thas and his minons have joined with the Burning Legion. I say keep the green and just change its description from "a not very important character" to something akin to "a notable character". --User:Varghedin/Sig 14:47, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I think we should add some notable naaru to the list. A'dal and M'uru can be added with yellow dots for example. What do you think?Dakovski 20:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
- The only major one I know of is Anub'arak. However, he is undead and is allied with the Scourge. Maybe in WotLK there will be some "living" nerubian characters.Dakovski (talk) 05:50, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
WotLK characters Edit
- Yes, I think we should. Actually, we still have yet to add some important characters from BC (Terokk, for instance)! Here are some to be added:
- Green: High-Oracle Soo-say
- Yellow: Grom'thar the Thunderbringer (WoWRPG)
- Orange: King Ymiron (WotLK)
- Yellow: Queen Angerboda (WotLK)
- Green: Ingvar the Plunderer (WotLK)
Suggested Removals Edit
Now when it comes to what constitutes major and what doesn't, I'll admit that there's definitely some gray area. However, there are several people on the list who puzzle me being on there. Kalthar, Kryll, Brymadine Zecker, and Silas Darkmoon. Kalthar barely appeared in the War of the Ancients trilogy and has barely any lines. Kryll's role in Day of the Dragon - his only appearance - is a fairly minor one; it surprises me that someone would think to add Kryll but not Rom or Duncan Senturus. Brymadine Zecker hasn't actually appeared in anything, he's only been mentioned in the RPG books as an inventor. While this might be a significant addition to the engineering world, he's by no means a major character - he's barely a character in any real sense. The same goes for Silas Darkmoon. Sure, he's famous, but we've never seen him do anything nor do we know anything about him. I think that if the standards of "major character" are low enough to allow them into this list, then there should be way more people on it. Dylan Bissel (talk) 17:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps I overstepped, but I went ahead and removed these characters, as well as two others, from the list, I will explain my choices here.
- Talgath - Had one scene and we never saw him again. His role was a very minor one and the only significance he had over other eredar who became man'ari was that we knew his name.
- Mephistroth - While everyone always seems to talk about him like he's a big deal, he too was only in one scene, and his role as a figure within the Legion was never stated.
- Brymadine Zecker - He has had repeated mention in the RPG, this is true, but so do a number of other characters. Zecker's never actually been featured firsthand anywhere, and his significance to us as both an in-world figure and as a character is overshadowed by plenty of other dwarves.
- Silas Darkmoon - He's famous to players, and maybe in-world, too, but only as a symbol. His role in the lore is minor, and we've no concept of him as a character.
- Kryll - As far as the character hierarchy goes in Day of the Dragon, Kryll is far down the list. Despite being in it for a while and being a developed character, he hardly qualifies as a major character. I consider Lorena a more pivotal and relevant character, but wouldn't suggest she go on the list either.
- Kalthar - His role was very small in War of the Ancients, and any further role he has in the Horde is pure speculation.
- If someone thought to add those characters to the list, then there are likely those who will disagree with my decision but I feel like there are too many characters for people to declare them major without giving good reasons.Dylan Bissel (talk) 03:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- Kalthar is confirmed as a high advisor to Thrall in Cycle of Hatred. He has perhaps five lines. At the core of this issue is whether these are major characters from an in-universe or a real-world perspective. If the former, then Talgath and Kalthar have a chance for the list. If the latter, you're fine. Actually, I think you're fine in either case, but perspective is something that should be considered in future. -- (talk · contr) 03:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- What was that goblin's name, the one tahat helped Deathwing during the War of the Ancients? Also, I'm not quite sure Varian is for a red dot, Rhonin for example, has much more deeds than Varian, maybe in the future however, he is going to prove really important.Dakovski (talk) 19:33, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
More information Edit
I hope you dont mind but i put Putress in since i'm tired of waiting for someone to put him in for Forsaken. HE was in the Wrathgate Cinematic, he played a major role in the Scourge Invasion Vol 2. He was in The Battle for Undercity ( Alliance), also he was there when the Scourge attacked Org. I think he deserves at least a Yellow dot. If you dont agree please dont remove until u explain y hes not important or that hes not a yellow but a green. If u want to make him organge thats cool too;)--Sig:User: Maelstrong 01:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- I'd say he deserves yellow, yes. His actions have left a major mark upon Azeroth. 09:19, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Dot Colors Edit
ok heres what i think about the dot colors: Red dot means that they are one of the most important characters in WoW Lore aka if they were taken out of WoW lore then the whole story would shift into a new plot. example: if Medivah never came into WoW lore then no one would create a portal into Draenor, i'm saying portal since they could have called something other than Dark Portal, but thats not all. If Medivah was never brought into WoW Lore then Thrall and Jania would never had gone to Kalimor and joined forces with the Night Elves to stop the Burning Legions invasion. I'd love to explain the other three dots but..... my point is that i think we should add one more color dot so it fits that 1 out of 5 rating.Oops, forgot sig;) --Sig:User: Maelstrong 14:00, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Characters that should be added Edit
ok since Gourra wont stop undoing the characters i added i'll explain a few that deserve addition:
The other three Horsemen should be added, all green, they made a first appearance in WoW in naxx patch and made an appearance in the Ashbringer comic.Should be put under Scrouge aswell. Korrak the Bloodrager should also be added, as green. Hes leader of a Troll tribe and he was in AV but got removed, then came back in WoWWotLK in the Amphitheater of Anguish. Shouldnt Varians Slave master be added to the page too? Rehgar Earthfury as a yellow since if it wasnt for him Varian would never had met Broll and Valeera and they'd still be slaves. I mean come one, if Rehgar Earthfury hadnt found Varian then he would have gotten killed by other orcs or something for being in Durotar. Ok, one more thing, shouldnt Saidan Dathrohan be added as a yellow since he was one of the first Paldins and one of the first members of Knights of the Silver Hand. Also hes the Grand Crusader of the Scarlet Crusade, he got killed and possessed by Balnazzar, plus he was a major character in Of Blood and Honor. Theres alot more that i'd like to talk about, but just go to history and check out what Gourra undone. again, i never said this is "my" article, i said it was one of my favorites.--Sig:User: Maelstrong 15:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Rend Blackhand Edit
Can someone please explain to me y Rend Blackhand is an Orange Dot? More importantly y is he the only Orange Dot? Saurfang should be an Orange Dot if Rend Blackhand is one.--Sig:User: Maelstrong 19:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- My guess for why Rend is there is because of his heritage, being leader of a influencial faction that opposes the New Horde, his dealings with the black dragonflight, etc etc. Saurfang while popular for Horde fans and what happened at the gates in Sithilus hasn't left as much as an impact in the world as Rend. SuperN (talk) 19:40, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- Because Rend has appeared since warcraft II, he has appeared in the RPGs, novels and he is the leader of his own horde. And Saurfang has just appeared in WoW. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 19:44, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
yeah i guess so, the Saurfang thing was an example, kinda werid that Blackhand is the only only Warchief thats not a Red Dot, but a yellow dot. Well he didnt really do much.... as far as i've read on his article-- Maelstrong 19:47, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Kargath is also a warchief and has a yellow dot, also remember that they are false warchiefs. Also I think Rend's article needs some rework with Dark Factions information, the Dark Horde article has good information about the alliances he has made. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 19:56, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Meryl Winterstorm Edit
should Meryl Winterstorm be added?--Maelstrong 17:13, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, a fouding member of the Council of Tirisfal should appears. Both as a human and undead maybe.
- Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 17:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
k, want me to add it or do you want to?--Maelstrong 17:19, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- Be bold :)
- Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 17:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
lol, i put him under Forsaken and placed him with a Yellow dot. Does that sound good/right?--Maelstrong 17:32, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Trag Highmountain Edit
shouldnt Trag Highmountain be added now that hes being added to the game in patch 3.2? Yellow or Green if so--Maelstrong 13:03, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Green for now, maybe more after...
- Too bad I spoiled myself on the PTR, now I know the end of Fate...
- Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 13:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
i have changed ragnaros from yellow to red for his role in the upcoming expansion cataclysm do you think it's right ?