Future Cosmology stories [Bellular Lore interview]

One of the things we’ve tried to do with the Mag’har Orc storyline…we see the conflict just didn’t go away between Yrel and her forces and Grommash and his Orcish forces. Clearly, there’s some more story to tell there. Legion gave us some great opportunities to delve into the lore of the Light more with Xe’ra, and her interactions with Illidan, and Turalyon’s POV on it, Velen’s POV…I think Velen learned a lot about the light. At one point he may have been blindly devoted to that, and I think he’s gotten some different perspectives. That’s definitely a storyline that will be playing out.

So, they are kinda stiring Velen away from the fully devoted Light worshipper, as well as acknowledging the upcoming storyline regarding Yrel, AU Draenor and the Light.

Why would they want to distance Velen from the “Blind worship” Team? Could it be because they want others to take the bullet in said potential story?

Could it be that they are dumping all the eggs on Turalyons apparent prophecy (regarding Evil Light themes)?.

He also mentioned the “Moral vs Cosmology” dilemma that they are now proposing (as opposing the previous Light=Good, Void=Bad)

The same could be said of the Light–what happens when Illidan didn’t go along with Xe’ra’s plan? Well, sparkles rained down from the sky […] Even, for example, in Visions of N’Zoth, when you think about the things N’Zoth was saying, he wasn’t like ‘serve my evil will!’ He was like ‘I can make you stronger! I can help you!’ There’s a bunch of bad stuff out there, you should be joining me and letting me help you do these things.’ You could say ‘was he lying to me?’ Well part of it…probably was. But there’s truth in it too.

In a way that tries to highlight how even N’zoth’s angle wasn’t entirely wrong (?). Or how the Light was indeed shown “as bad”.

1 Like

…didn’t they do that already? Or was him questioning his faith after the Light didn’t prevent him from killing his son, and getting awfully close with nihilist, anti-prophecy Illidan too subtle for the target audience?

Well… he kinda was. His direct interactions with the player might have been the exception, but there was plenty of mind-slavery going around. So no, they didn’t show what they are selling now.


I commend whatever team Blizzard has that trains their employees at giving non-answers.

Can’t wait to hear more of “perhaps we will learn”; “this is cool to think about”; and “we should really keep that in mind” instead of some to the point, matter of fact answers.

I mean, who needs those, anyway?


Ugh, this. Honestly, at this point I sort of automatically dismiss whatever Blizzard representatives are saying. It seems like whenever they open their mouths it’s either to give us three paragraps of fluff which essentially boils down to ‘maybe,’ or tell us that the thing they promised last year is not happening.

He may have had a crisis of faith but as the ending of Legion went, it was unsure as to whether it would have an everlasting effect on the character.

Plans such as these, seem to point at the fact that its a noted plot circumstance that they aren’t dropping or brushing aside.

For Turalyon for example, it wasn’t all that impact-full on a long term.

They obviously won’t reveal it all in these interviews. But for all their known vagueness, these answers sort of narrowed what their short-term future plots will be about.
What seemed as some speculative theory from players, seems to also be something they have in mind for upcoming events.

I mean, they went ahead and said:

Evil Light incoming!
We will loot paladins!

I see only darkness © someone


I am not that big of a fan when it comes to WoW story. And certainly I did not pay too much attention to it in early days of the game because a lot of reasoning for the events, explanations of characters and their choices, was offloaded outside of the game.

But there are some thing I remember from the school days. Glimpses of discoveries in a fantasy world, looking around for how things changed after Warcraft 3, etc. There are some a bit sentimental things in those old-ish memories.

When I look at this whole Light thing, I’m in 2 minds about it. On one hand, it’s ok to have some development, etc. On the other, it just cannibalizes what was there. When I look at that side of the story I see how memories of M’uru, willing to endure the torture and death to help save the blood elves, K’ara convincing others to kick her out of the ship to save others, A’dal, being a beacon of hope and wisdom on the remains of a dying Outlands, all of it being phased out for the sake of “morally grey”.

I am not mad, just disappointed.

gl hf


Even if I agree that the more they explain regarding cosmology, the less “mystery” is left for us to discover, the angle given about the Light here is less about putting everything under a negative light, and more about acknowledging the morality shades of it. Instead of taking for granted that it’s an all-benevolent force.

People may get the impression that this is the case because in order to tone the previous angle (the one that had us thinking the Light was Good by default), they need to go overboard with it and showcase exaggeratedly the opposite. If only for the sake of balancing years of good image.

1 Like

Don’t you guys think it is ok for a WoW “religion” to be morally grey ? Most already are. The Light has often been viewed as WoW’s take on christianism, maybe they want to challenge that perception

Is till hope against hope that it won’t actually change the lore, just add a new Scarlet-like faction, now new with COSMIC goals. I mean, you really don’t need to drag all Light-users down to have a radical faction of Light-users - and Naaru. I’m totally fine with some Naaru being buttholes. I’m totally fine with some Light cults being fanatics. That was always the case.

Just don’t let them take moral gradation we already had away in service of edginess. You don’t need to deny the existence of black and white to have some gray. Indeed, you just make the spectrum smaller if you do.

I will agree with you once if it would be possible to see both kinds of them to encounter. When there is a naaru / Light follower on the horizon, if care, compassion, even self sacrifice for the sake of others would be as likely as a possibility of encountering someone zealous / single-minded, I’ll be able to agree with you.

For now, however, I do not see likes of A’dal and others mentioned having one of central spots in stories involving the Light.

In order to show that there are different kinds IMO a good enough thing to do would be to just copy-paste what the Light was: it was a choice. One could make a choice of care, overcoming hardships, etc. Other willingly make a choice of single mindedness. “Many are the paths of the light”.

To show that there are different sides, it’s necessary to show different sides. And have both represented. I am perfectly fine with there being those kinds of characters. As addition. But for now all I feel is that the devs say “oh, you liked that thing? Put it into a trash can for indefinite amount of time”.

I would be too. Because as you said, that was the case since the beginning. Different characters make different choices. You have those who are willing to risk all they have for a chance to help others, and those who use the Light for torture purposes. But there were both sides in the picture.

There was ambiguity with Scarlets. With both how they treated outsiders, and what the Light did to them. Why did the Light never bothered to uncover treatchery of dreadlords? Why it gave them visions that led to their slaughter in Northrend? Why not explore those things?

How they changed from having characters of different races in their ranks to where they are? From the place representing the best related to Light, into the place of hatred, torture and madness. But for whatever reason they are left out as generic enemies.

Instead it’s just that likes of Xe’ra are placed now as typical, and those that were before are nowhere near as likely / represented / active. To me it looks like a caricature inquizition.

gl hf

I don’t know what you prefer. I thought that if there are different characters / sides in the story, it’s inteersting to have different characters in the story. Not copy-paste of the same.

Some prefer to have in the game races to be copies of each other with minimal difference in culture / views / etc. Some might prefer different races to be shown as different.

Sure, a good story can be told if there is 1 dominant culture / race among others if there are apropriate set-ups and explanations of such dynamic. But a good one possible when there is some divercity.

Same with cosmo forces. To me the point was that they are different. In views, in methods, etc. And now it’s just the same: pursue one’s vague unexplained vision all things be damned, and using others as tools for that. Repear 6 times.

To expand the story I think it could be more productive to expand the story. Especially given how many things are just left out hanging. not doing anything.

But maybe it’s a valid option to leave unfinished things as unfinished and bash some of others till they fit a new vision.

gl hf

The interview itself hints at it.

That seems to be the reason as to why they mention Velen as a moderated alternative.

As i said, we’ve have literal years of the former, with far to little about the latter.
Blizzard needs to balance years of far to much of one side. That will inevitably give the impression that they are now focusing on the bad side of it (and still, they seem to have Velen in mind as balance.

What interview seemingly hints at (IMO) is that they do not want to write off Velen for now and he is claimed to be “good” in his doubts.

So, was you happy with how BfA treated Sylvanas?

To have balance IMO what is needed is balance. To expand things - to expand things. Not to :poop: all over what is there, like what happened to Sylvanas story. Of course, maybe you consider it as a good way to add some moral greyness to her character. I think it was ridiculous. And this thing is really similar.

my problem is that it’s not a natural evolution of bad / questionable sides that were there since the release of Vanilla WoW. It hijacking of what is there while other things that could be used for such purpose are left rotting without continuation.

gl hf

And if you are to expand on a story that delves into the nature of a cosmic force (from a more neutral point of view), whose worshippers have been written throughout the years as good by default, you may need to make extra emphasis on the existence of bad ones.

Contrary to a retcon, this isn’t overlapping narrative developments.

Relativism, which seems to be the endgoal here, requires of a balanced presence of both the good and the bad.
And after years of having stuff about the good, and characters that impersonate the good, its inevitable to end up requiring to give extra emphasis on the bad.

Much like they already started doing with the Void (a cosmic energy that had years, and years, of plot development destined to highlight its negative aspects), and the introduction of “good guys” the likes of Alleria, the Locus-Walker, the Void Elves, Xalatath, etc.

And why did you not mention a thrown away story about visions from the Light leading Scarlets to being eradicated in Northrend?

Is that, or Benedictus, or those regular draenei who chose to “serve without question” back in TBC days, who suggested to wipe blood elves out of existence - are those things that alway been there not good enought to expand or explore? Add to it more naaru like Xe’ra, explanation for why some might make a choice to be like that - and voila, we have fresh (TBC days fresh) genocidal Light worshippers, torturing others for fun and profit.

I have a feeling that you did not do the alliance draenei-related quests of starting islands and Outlands, which had moment like killing a captive, military that “serve without question”, and rather radical suggestions. As a concious choice of some to follow that path. To willingly replace their own judgement and ideas by the following of another force without a question.

It has years (since WotLK at least) of development that could be summarized as “cagey titans that do not explain what and why are they doing, and sent one of their servants to kill all of us, are telling vague things about the motivations of creatures we know next to nothing about”.

Of course, it’s possible to interpret the story in a way that makes them look “evul”, but they were and are as cunning and manipulative as ever, and not clear what the hell do they want. And some of them did and do want to consume everything.

Locus Walker and Xal’atath say things rather contradictory, with Xal literally saying that the ethereal is going to his demise and Alleria already lost her battle, to paraphrase it for compactness.

gl hf

1 Like

But “The Light” is no longer a “religion”. It’s not make-believe. It exists, as one of the fundamental aspects of the Cosmos.

And now it can no longer be “gray”. Because “fundamental” can only be “pure”. It cannot deal in “maybe” or “perhaps” anymore. It cannot deal with nuance. It’s one of the cosmic extremes, poised against the other five cosmic extremes, and the conflict between them is creation.

An ideal without context is a grotesque and vicious thing.

1 Like

And who is to say that they won’t treat both sides of it in a balanced way?

Regardless of whether we had other “evil” light users before, the overwhelming majority followed the same good guy narrative.
Its only natural that if the upcoming story is about the different aspects of the Light, they will unequivocally focus on the “evil” light users more than they do on the good ones.
What would be the point otherwise? We’ve had the likes of Tirion, Anduin, Uther, Velen, etc., all being positive Light influences across multiple years of storytelling.

In order to show the shades of said cosmic energy, they need to signal balance.

And there wasn’t one up until now:
Light was majorly good, Void was majorly bad.

That was it. That was the whole take on both cosmic energies.

The Void is now being given several examples of the “good”, so the Light will inevitably have several examples of the “bad”.

That doesn’t negate the positive development it has had up until now. Its exponents and examples will all remain there.
But now we will also have those that take to a negative extreme, and those that are directly introduced as bad.

So far it is said in the interview that Light and naaru are more or less moved into the category of “just the same as other 5”. Doubting them is a positive development, Draenor is free thrown into a trash can on the background, and instead of having “maybe both sides contributed to problem on alt Draenor” we’re likely on the track to one being clearly a bigger problem.

How many of them did we have in the stories? I mean, there is Anduin. Velen. Some Argent Crusade members. And, arguably Tirion. Very long list of central charcters. So it happened that most Light followers are in the alliance. Not willing to make alliance less “goody” is a separate problem.

To show that there is a personal choice? Tyrande made choice to use Night Warrior power. Something similar could be here. Explore both sides, strengths and weaknesses of them.

On a semi-joking note, I’d consider him an idion. Devos told him so many time about his desive for vengeance. And after he did all the mess all he said was “what we did was not justice”. Like, no :poop: Sherlock, she told you so.

That is the relevand part. Who are those etc.?

Light was the only power different from the rest in them doing something for mortals. Even risking their existence. I mean, is it a good idea to make them more like a clone of others? Or would it be better to explore, how could that be the case with all the shady things I mentioned in the previous post at the same time? I mean, different people have different preferences.

Void was told about as it is bad. What it is - not clear even now.

Still waiting to see both sides of naaru to have regular representation in the story. We’ll see.

Overall, I think that I am a bit too emotional on the topic of such things, so maybe I should go away from this discussion not to say something questionable by accident or in a heat of thoughts.

To summarize the thing:

  • I do not see Sylvanas-style “progression” of anything as any good. Throwing a lot of :poop: on something or suddenly praising is not good IMO and does more harm than good.
  • if instead of respecting the original the idea is to change it, IMO it should be done carefully, without fast swings, and with proper explanation.
  • I do not see homogenisation as a good thing for the story. I do not want to see races losing their identity. I do not want to see cosmic entities acting in a same way, using same methods, having same views (use other for own interests).

If other people see things differently, and sudden :poop: shower on somebody / something in a story is seen as a positive and interesting development - God bless you, have good health and creative successes.

gl hf, stay healthy and positive

There is an entire creed in Stormwind that revers the Light as a benevolent force.
A similar one has ruled almost every titan-based race on Azeroth, as well as other alien species such as the Draenei.
The Light creed was the default force that led the fight against every major threat against the planet. Be it the Old Horde, the Scourge, or the Legion.

We’ve had protagonists across the RTS and MMO games. And neutral organisations that bridged entire plots with a “the Light is good” theme.

Yeah, the stories have made it abundantly clear as to where they often situate the Light as opposed to, say, the Void.

And why would the upcoming story negate said choice? By acknowledging that there are practitioners with a wider range of moral standards, Blizzard is precisely doing that: Showing that the cosmic energy can be both good and bad.

The thing is that the setting has been so saturated with the good side of it, that its inevitable that when they finally address it as a plot driver, the “bad” side of it will come into focus.

We had plenty of the good, and almost nothing of the bad. If we are to be shown “balance”, then the story will now inevitably focus more on the bad.
It has already offered tons of the good.

Given it’s supposed to be taken as a neutral energy in the cosmos? Yeah.
Elements are neutral. Life and death are natural.
We have chaos and order.

Gravity isn’t inherently good or bad. It just is.

If we are to take Light as yet another force in the universe, its usage must be neutral. And to balance years of how “good” it was, Blizzard will probably show now how people use it negatively.

We already had…

In Legion X’era disagreed with A’dal. And while the former was seen as a fanatic, the latter was seen as benevolent.

I do not see how this is comparable to Sylvanas.
We’ve had “evil” light users since the RTS.

Having Blizzard take it the logical step further in a story that tries to focus on the Light itself as a neutral force, and inevitably having to showcase the negative aspects of it, instead of only the good ones (as it had been doing for most of the story up until now), isn’t the same as retconning or developing contradicting lore.

Honestly, if Blizzard was to introduce now a cult of Light worshippers that would kill or convert anyone they find guilty of heresy…what would it retcon? We already knew a few of said mindset.