WoW Petopia Community

rubybeam wrote:Even with all this I still feel that we shouldn't let malnores model become tamable, plus malnore lived MILLIONS of years ago and died in a war, any animal children I doubt could survive that long unless they were immortal or something
I agree with everyone else that hunters get too spoiled
I should also mention that luqoe and all of his children weren't major lore charrys

Well, they could have generations of his children. One may happen to pass the gene of a similar look. And hunters getting spoiled? For what? having beautiful skins or pet options? Blizzard could've dumped the entire list of beasts as tameable to us hunters. But instead they fall back to giving us them one by one. It was just a suggestion, I mean if you look in the past alot of "demi-god" or other beasts that appear to have alot of power were tameable. It seems the only thing holding it back is because Malorne is considered a Major lore character. But somewhere along the lines you have to consider the possibility that Malorne mated with another stag, and the generations that followed. Also, Malorne did exist millions of years ago. Did he create the Stags? and if so, one of them could take on his appearance. Elune does have beast children. According to the Night Elves many beasts are the children of Elune. And unless Elune can just pop children whenever she wants to I don't think Malorne was her mate since the beginning of time.

Er. I don't see the OP demanding anything. This thread is certainly becoming pretty damn hostile when it isn't even an issue of Malorne himself, but using a similar model. Might want to take it down a few notches? Particularly TygerDarkstorm. Seriously, guys?

this is turning into a fight? okay sorry I didn't realize, I 'll just stop here then, I could spit out some more reasons why he shouldn't be tamable but im just not going to mention them
I didn't try to turn this into a fight by the way that first post I made there was just my opinion

TygerDarkstorm wrote:Hell, we're still heavily hoping that hydras will be finalized in 4.2 and here you come barging in practically demanding that stags should be made tamable just because Malorne got a fancy model?

I'm going to disagree. I think Malorne's model should be left alone, just like after realizing the flaming cat is Fandral's cat form, I don't think those should be tamable. If they reskinned and recolored them...maybe, but otherwise I think major lore characters should be left alone.

Hydra's family is already in the game. I have Spirit of Atha, and I already know my "uniqueness" is about to run out. They wouldn't just keep it on one un-tameable forever. And I'm "demanding" nothing. It was just a thought due to how they did similar with Tortolla and Ghamoo-ra. I wouldn't mind just normal stags becoming tameable ethier way. I was just saying because of Malorne's presence, and the fact he IS considered a beast, perhaps somewhere along the line an NPC could have a similar model or skin. Because of this, I was thinking it could be a great opportunity.

And "fancy model" me this. If Terrorpene wasn't made an available ancient fire turtle skin, do you think turtles would be used more than Beetles? looking at how common Terrorpene is over any other turtle, I would think this would be correct. Perhaps Tortolla shouldn't have gotten a similar model. I mean, he IS an ancient after all. Just like Malorne. Just because Malorne is a god doesn't mean he's as special or well-known as Elune. Tortolla and Malorne are BOTH considered ancients after all. And the fact even one ancient got a similar skin elsewhere I figured we could do the same for Malorne. Hell, perhaps they could make a Stag Spirit Beast someday that looks like him.

As I said, it's a suggestion. I was just suggesting Malorne having a similar tameable NPC for icing on the cake. I'm not demanding anything.

I'm gonna say I never said the OP was demanding it. Someone else that commented was. I wasn't trying to be hostile. I was just stated my views on it and I stand firmly by it to leave Malorne's model to him only. He's never had an appearance. Let him be special in the spotlight for once.

And that suggestion was -his- opinion. I didn't get the impression it was a demand at all, any more than our "suggestions" to Noah. But it's pretty laughable....and hypocritical....for any of us here to say we're "already too spoiled", and that makes this suggestion bad. I suppose we can just close the suggestions thread then? Or any other mention of things we'd like to see, Blizz has given us enough, end of story, Noah, you can clock out now? Yeah, I don't think so. And trying to start a lore debate is also pointless, since he never said we would tame Malorne himself, unless I missed something.

He wants an updated stag the way I'd love Echee without sugar-dipped whiskers. There's nothing wrong with that.

Ijomi wrote: Er. I don't see the OP demanding anything. This thread is certainly becoming pretty damn hostile when it isn't even an issue of Malorne himself, but using a similar model. Might want to take it down a few notches? Particularly TygerDarkstorm. Seriously, guys?

I didn't say "demanding" I said "practically demanding" and yes, that does change the meaning.

The title and opening statement are basically "Malorne's getting a fancy model in 4.2 therefore stags should become tamable as should some form of Malorne's model."

And for the record, I'm game for stags being tamable and I even agreed to a different version/style of Malorne's model. Are you people trying to say I'm being hostile for the hell of it?

I never said there's anything wrong with suggesting stuff; I've done it several times in the suggestion thread. I take issue, however, to someone saying "this and this should be tamable in this and this patch" which is exactly how the title of this thread reads. We still haven't even gotten tamable hydras yet, who are we to request an entire new tamable family this patch? Blizz has more than enough on their plates with all the content coming out in 4.2 as it is.

Ijomi wrote:And that suggestion was -his- opinion. I didn't get the impression it was a demand at all, any more than our "suggestions" to Noah. But it's pretty laughable....and hypocritical....for any of us here to say we're "already too spoiled", and that makes this suggestion bad. I suppose we can just close the suggestions thread then? Or any other mention of things we'd like to see, Blizz has given us enough, end of story, Noah, you can clock out now? Yeah, I don't think so. And trying to start a lore debate is also pointless, since he never said we would tame Malorne himself, unless I missed something.

He wants an updated stag the way I'd love Echee without sugar-dipped whiskers. There's nothing wrong with that.

Thank you, and that's exactly what I was trying to suggest or point out. But I guess some people are too lore addicted to even consider another NPC having a similar model or skin. But hey, if they want to limit themselves on an updated model of a stag as icing on the cake for a new family they can go right on ahead. I'll go right out and say that I'm hardly a RPer, and even I have read about Malorne's lore and backstory. Yet that isn't keeping me from the theory of a tameable stag that looks similar. Not every hunter out there is lore-bound. It's a game with lore as it's guide. Not everything in the game has to be limited because of lore. Considering Blizzard has broken the "lore-barrier" MANY times before.

I for one don't mind if common beasts get the same skins as special and unique demigods, providing they look like beasts. It's happened more than once. Since he has druid tattooing, however, I don't think it'd look right. Same as having tameable druid bears or fandral's fire cat skin.

Without those markings, maybe. But... I must be the only person who thinks Malorne's model looks more wooden than the old stag model. I know there's a danger in judging it too early, or without added particle effects, but so far to me it looks like a mannequin, like there's no life behind that face.

TygerDarkstorm wrote:

Ijomi wrote: Er. I don't see the OP demanding anything. This thread is certainly becoming pretty damn hostile when it isn't even an issue of Malorne himself, but using a similar model. Might want to take it down a few notches? Particularly TygerDarkstorm. Seriously, guys?

I didn't say "demanding" I said "practically demanding" and yes, that does change the meaning.

The title and opening statement are basically "Malorne's getting a fancy model in 4.2 therefore stags should become tamable as should some form of Malorne's model."

And for the record, I'm game for stags being tamable and I even agreed to a different version/style of Malorne's model. Are you people trying to say I'm being hostile for the hell of it?

I never said there's anything wrong with suggesting stuff; I've done it several times in the suggestion thread. I take issue, however, to someone saying "this and this should be tamable in this and this patch" which is exactly how the title of this thread reads. We still haven't even gotten tamable hydras yet, who are we to request an entire new tamable family this patch? Blizz has more than enough on their plates with all the content coming out in 4.2 as it is.

You completely got the message wrong. Stags should become tameable someday, sure. But another suggestion would be to have an updated model that is similar to Malorne. So that we have both the options of an old model and updated. Oh, and if you agree to having a different version/style of Malorne's model then why are you saying I'm "practically demanding" that Stags just become tameable for that reason alone? (Which I'm not) or perhaps should I just go ahead and edit the title and opening statement for you, because you obviously work for Blizzard?

If you want to go ahead and mention "Who are we to suggest an entire new family this patch?" then I guess the demand of Hydras and new versions can wait until after Cataclysm. Because hey, it isn't like original bugged Hydra-crocolisk owners didn't find their bugged crocolisk now a Ferocity with a Hydra-icon. Who are we to suggest more skins to Blizzard every patch when we already have as many as we do now? Who are we to suggest to Blizzard to give us more pets? We obviously have enough now and new families can wait until every expansion? I mean it isn't like Blizzard can add more families they originally had planned for Cataclysm. Please, don't make me laugh.

Wain wrote:I for one don't mind if common beasts get the same skins as special and unique demigods, providing they look like beasts. It's happened more than once. Since he has druid tattooing, however, I don't think it'd look right. Same as having tameable druid bears or fandral's fire cat skin.

Without those markings, maybe. But... I must be the only person who thinks Malorne's model looks more wooden than the old stag model. I know there's a danger in judging it too early, or without added particle effects, but so far to me it looks like a mannequin, like there's no life behind that face.

I wouldn't mind that. Just take away those marks and make it more acceptible-looking to hunters.

Wain wrote:I for one don't mind if common beasts get the same skins as special and unique demigods, providing they look like beasts. It's happened more than once. Since he has druid tattooing, however, I don't think it'd look right. Same as having tameable druid bears or fandral's fire cat skin.

Without those markings, maybe. But... I must be the only person who thinks Malorne's model looks more wooden than the old stag model. I know there's a danger in judging it too early, or without added particle effects, but so far to me it looks like a mannequin, like there's no life behind that face.

Agreed with this. You said what I was trying to say. It's just not right and even without the tattoos, it wouldn't look right. It'd look hideous.

Also on a separate note: If you bring up a lore character and even mention wanting to tame it or any form of it, expect lore to be brought up to be part of the argument and it IS a viable reason.

Well here is something I think everyone can agree on.... When your character becomes a major lore character then you can tame malorne model until then you can't kthxbai

Kurenio wrote:Well here is something I think everyone can agree on.... When your character becomes a major lore character then you can tame malorne model until then you can't kthxbai

LOL! That actually made me laugh. XD <3

Jessibelle wrote:

Kurenio wrote:Well here is something I think everyone can agree on.... When your character becomes a major lore character then you can tame malorne model until then you can't kthxbai

LOL! That actually made me laugh. XD <3

win!

Kurenio wrote:

Jessibelle wrote:

Kurenio wrote:Well here is something I think everyone can agree on.... When your character becomes a major lore character then you can tame malorne model until then you can't kthxbai

LOL! That actually made me laugh. XD <3

win!

Definitely. Well played sir/madame.....well played.

Wait so does this mean I'll never get my dream of having a stable full of druids as pets?

TygerDarkstorm wrote:Hell, we're still heavily hoping that hydras will be finalized in 4.2 and here you come barging in practically demanding that stags should be made tamable just because Malorne got a fancy model?

Yes, telling someone he was "barging in" "practically demanding" doesn't come off as remotely angry at all. He didn't "barge in". He was posting his wishful thinking, like any of us do, and have a right to do. So no, I'm not saying you're being hostile for the hell of it.

The title of the thread is "More reason why Stags should be tameable in 4.2", not "BLIZZARD MUST MAKE STAGS TAMABLE IN 4.2 OR I SHAVE THEIR CATS". Capslock optional.

That model may look hideous to some, it may appeal to others, like any pet. A lot of Cata models look rather lifeless to me, and for my own taste this model is just another one on that list. However, to each their own, and I certainly agree with updating stiff, outdated models. To take the markings away would not change the actual physical model of that stag one bit. Arcturis is a slightly tweaked druid bear form, and I hear no complaints about that one.

Ijomi wrote:That model may look hideous to some, it may appeal to others, like any pet. A lot of Cata models look rather lifeless to me, and for my own taste this model is just another one on that list. However, to each their own, and I certainly agree with updating stiff, outdated models. To take the markings away would not change the actual physical model of that stag one bit. Arcturis is a slightly tweaked druid bear form, and I hear no complaints about that one.

Because Arcturis looks nothing like the druid bear, hate to tell you. He's just a normal bear model, just made spectral. The druid bear model is WAY different.

http://liti4.files.wordpress.com/2009/0 ... -druid.jpg

http://www.wow-petopia.com/look/spectralbear.html

That's odd, because when I was Alliance some of my druid guildies fit perfectly inside my Arcturis....crest included. But I did say tweaked. And the fact remains that markings on that stag's body do nothing to alter the actual body structure itself, in any case.