Wikia

WoWWiki

Talk:Nefarian

101,499pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Top KillsEdit

Random Comment Edit

it's not 20 of each color --Compnewb 05:05, 12 February 2006

Phase 2 Edit

Wild Polymorph has no range limitation, and moving does not prevent you from casting it on anyone in the encounter. --Bwmathis 13:39, 28 July 2006 (EDT)

  • What if, when a mage is wild polymorphed, that you do not clense mages of the polymorph until the callout is over? Wouldn't this prevent them casting Polymorph or not?--Cigawoot 14:00, 4 December 2006 (EST)

Phase 3 Edit

Can someone please confirm if Stratholme Holy Water helps in phase 3? --Kiltek 06:46, 24 May 2006

Yes, indeed it does. As the article says, Paladins are also invaluable, if they all cast Holy Wrath the problem evaporates rather quickly. Greggor 09:43, 31 May 2006 (EDT)
Phase 3 is so incredibly easy if you have paladins. Build Mage-Paladin pairs, the paladin has to use blessing of protection on his mage when the construct zerg spawns (mages begin to AoE immediatly), then divine-shield yourself, then fire off holy wrath, then (if any constructs are still alive) throw your stratholme water. This order ensures that both the mage and the paladin will survive. For the rest, warriors chain AoE taunt. MT uses shield wall to prevent from being healed while the constructs spawn, that will ensure that no construct will run for the healers.--Thundor 09:30, 10 August 2006 (EDT)

Battle Shout vs Demoralising Shout Edit

There is only one "AOE" effect able to generate very mild aggro - it's Demoralising Shout, not Battle Shout (which is just a Buff for warrior and his party) - anyone can explain if strategy describing Battle Shout as aggro generator is not mistake?

No, buffing does generate threat, and the threat generated is dependent on the number of targets buffed. The article is correct to state that a warrior constantly rebuffing his group with Battle Shout will generate steady threat. Eorl 04:04, 1 October 2006 (EDT)
Does the buff actually work if the targets already have the buff though ? or do they need to remove it from themselves as much as possible? if there is 1 warrior, with 4 rogues + 4 pets, then that's 8 buffs gained = lotsa aggro  - CJ talk / cont  10:36, 6 November 2006 (EST)
Yes, the buff works even if target already has the buffs. The methodology is to primarily use hunters or warlocks with pets on passive in the warriors group. That is, 1 warrior, 4 hunter/locks with pets on passive. The hunters and locks also need to be in range to receive the buff. Hunters should shoot at the mobs at the far end as near ones will probably too close to shoot, and/or contribute to the AE with volley. Rodanu 20:03, 12 November 2006 (EST)

Battle Shout Edit

My guild used the Battle Shout method exclusively before the patch and couldn't do so after 2.0.1 went live; we had to switch to the two-doorway method. If someone else can confirm, that info can probably be stripped from the page. -- Xelcyon 23:29, 14 December 2006 (EST)

That's what it seems like, I'll remove it. --Cigawoot 23:57, 14 December 2006 (EST)

Another Random Comment Edit

I think the very first sentence can be stripped from the article, or at least change it so it speaks of Nefarian and not Deathwing. Just wanted to say something about it. --Lodra 21:02, January 28, 2007 (EDT)

  • A) New discussion topics at the end of the article.
  • 2) Comment is not random, it has a purpose
  • Zed) The sentence to which you are referring (or at least, the one I think you're referring to, correct me if I'm wrong) at the beginning of "Background", introduces the remainder of the topic; it sets him up with Deathwing because Nefarian himself comes from Deathwing. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 00:26, 29 January 2007 (EST)

Yet another random comment Edit

What in Azeroths name is an "Assist Train"? Shouldn't this be linked and explained somewhere? - Flyonthewall 06:32, 26 February 2007 (EST)

I'm not sure I could tell you, but I've heard the term before. So yes, it probably should have a page for itself... :O--Sky 06:35, 26 February 2007 (EST)

Dead Edit

It seems that with the coming of the latest patch Nefarian became dead. Lady Sinestra, a black dragon says in the game:

"You have no doubt heard about Nefarian's failures on Azeroth... While he has fallen, the experiment continues. My master... He continues the work that his progeny began."

Regards, --Theron the Just 21:32, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

What about the manual? It already confirmed that he was challenged too...
"Within Blackrock Spire the legacy of the black dragon Deathwing continued to unfold as Nefarian followed in his father's contemptible footsteps. Nefarian worked toward replenishing the black dragonflight. To that end, he created chromatic dragons: unspeakable hybrids of both red and black dragons...The heroes of the world have bravely faced these challenges and more, struggling to ensure the continued survival of their races."-PG 6

Baggins 21:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

None of those lines implies that he would have died. Same cannot be said about Lady Sinestra's lines, so it seems that he is now dead. Regards, --Theron the Just 21:45, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

...or she believes he has died. But considering how villains tend to be able to escape seeming death and defeat, I wouldn't be completely sure of his demise.Baggins 21:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

He most likely is dead for good. This "master" of Lady Sinestra seems to be a very high ranking member of the Black Dragonflight, possibly even Deathwing himself, and is it unlike that he/she would make mistakes like this. --Theron the Just 22:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Its "speculation" due way we admins set the policy, due to the fact that there are two possible assumptions that he is dead, or that the black dragon flight think he is dead. Neither have 100% been confirmed.Baggins 22:15, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
As Baggins says, speculation means anything that we do not know for certain. One character's offhand, unclear statement does not certainty make. I would love to get Blizzard's view on this. Any Encyclopedia update? Kirkburn talk contr 22:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I say that Nefarian, being the son of ONE OF THE FREAKIN' DRAGON ASPECTS could have died a lil' bit more dramatically (although we never really heard of him up until WoW) I say it's a better death than "accidentaly burning his finger and forgetting to put neosporin on it and dying from the infection" or "having a heatstroke". I think I've made my point (If there is one ). -Mrscribbles .

Quick-and-easy Bookkeeping solution: His status is Killable unless his instance is removed from the game, or until the next released game, novel or encyclopedia entry, or other incontrovertable evidence. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I beg to differ. Being possibly dead lorewise doesn't mean that the instance (or Nefarian) has to be removed, that would not make sense at all. *scratches head* The Avatar of Hakkar has been defeated lorewise in the Temple of Atal'Hakkar, confirmed by RPG, but the boss is still there. See the point? No one is saying that it would be certain fact, but as even the Black Dragonflight at least seems to presume that he is dead, there is room for the two small words, "Dead (Presumed)". Regards, --Theron the Just 13:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I like to think of the level order of quests as a lore "timeline", with the things you can do at 60 coming cronologicly before 70 events/quests.--SWM2448 19:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Status will remain "Killable." There is enough evidence to warrant a mention in the article body. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 20:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Originally, I thought the comment made by Sinestra is intentionally written to be ambiguous about whether he is dead or not, kind of like when Illidan fell to Arthas at the end of Frozen Throne. It can be mean they presume he is dead or merely defeated, having lost his army and power. Except that since only the heroes of the alliance and horde has fought him since the beginning of wow, and we saw him die in the battle (taking his head with us), it might be safe to assume he is dead. Raze 05:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Strangly though being beheaded doesn't necessarily mean you can't be brought back, :p.Baggins 05:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
He is definitely confirmed dead, especially after the novel "Night of the Dragon". Sinestra mentions his death and failure more than once in the novel. Neltharion (talk) 02:35, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Blackwing and Nefarion as namesEdit

I don't believe he was ever referred to by either of those names, and would like to delete the section. Can anyone show some proof otherwise? Blackwing Lair doesn't imply that it is his name either. Raze 05:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

He was in fact refered to as Blackwing in one of the RPGs. i myself once thought the same, that blackwing was nothing more than the name of the lair, but did a little research and blackwing turned out to be his "nickname". looking for the page number right now.Warthok 06:19, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
found it. pg 167 HPG. "Rend has now pledged his service to Lord Victor Nefarius - also known as Nefarian, or Blackwing, the son of Deathwing - and he resides in the clan's namesake fortress of Blackrock Spire." btw blizz needs to stop switching vowels out on the dragons names. Nefarian was called Nefarion a third of the time and Nefarius another third. not to meantion soridormi/saridormi, tyrygosa/tyrigosa, and tyranastrasz/tyranistrasz...sry just venting.Warthok 07:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I appreciate it. I wonder if it is even intentional, probably won't matter to the characters I suppose. Raze 07:57, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Blacking as a nickname is intentional. Nefarion vs. Nefarian, is probably a typographical error.Baggins 07:59, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

AgeEdit

Considering that he's Neltharion's eldest son, I'm guessing that Nefarian is over ten thousand years old. But... could it be Neltharion's current heir, having lost a number beforehand? In which case, is there anything in the RPGs or otherwise which gives a hint at his age? ---- Battlegroup RoundIconVorbis AvailablequesticonTalk ActivequesticonContribs 22:18, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki