Shadowknight12

8596

Well, that sounds like a good compromise. I can't say how glad I am that the PWP tag exists for cases like this one. It really makes a world of difference, especially when you want to get a sex scene out of your head and you can't find a way to make it work in your story. I do disagree with you guys when it comes to art vs. porn (since the Adult part in AFF doesn't necessarily mean 'all that matters is teh pronz'), but hey, to each their own!

LOL. Well, you know what they say about heat... Rogues Do It From Behind... In My Pants.

Beat It... In My Pants. ... yeah, why not.

^ Is apparently right behind me. < Needs more coffee. V Will get me some.

8592?

Not guilty. And if I did, it most certainly wouldn't be a walk of *shame*. Have you ever been in a street fight?

I'd be... flaming. YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH. If I were a poisonous snake...

Oh, how I'd wish that was sarcasm! And actually, ALL males in a work have Canon Balls. Except the emasculated ones.

Hm. This is actually something I've been pondering myself, lately. Of course, when two characters have sexual chemistry between one another, your only problem is how NOT to get them into bed together (build-up to sex is good!). Then you have the gray areas, where you just can't tell if two characters have chemistry, or if a certain character would be into the OC you created. In that case, you just have to make an effort so that it makes sense and the character in question remains canon. Now, the problem comes when you want to do something that goes against what canon stands for. Personally, I disagree with dwitefry above. I think that if the author really does their job to justify the sex scene to me (doing research, finding a way for the character to remain IC, using logic, etc.), I'm going to think "hmmm, I actually respect this author for trying so hard. I'm going to suspend my disbelief to read this scene, he/she deserves that much." Whether or not that effort on my behalf will be rewarded in the end is up to the writer, but so far I haven't really regretted having enforced this policy.

I think there's one or two things I can contribute with, that haven't been touched yet. For you girls, I think that the best way to imagine how an erection feels like, clothes or not, is to think of your clitoris. Some of you may not know this, but a clitoris is basically an internal penis. The actual clit would be the equivalent of the male glans (the 'head' of the penis) and it's just the tip of the larger body that extends behind your vaginal wall. If you want to know what an erection feels like, then get aroused and pay close attention to how your clit behaves. You'll notice that at first it's just small, but that as your arousal increases, it begins to swell with blood and become very responsive to pleasure. That's pretty much what we feel, too (and really, it's the exact same erectile tissue, the sensations are practically the same), including the build-up to an orgasm. You can also draw a parallel between a clitoris and an uncut cock. A clit has a 'hood' covering it, called prepuce, which is pretty much the female equivalent of a guy's foreskin (so if you want to know how foreskin feels like, well... you have a way to find out). It protects the clit from abrasion and chafing. This varies from guy to guy and woman to woman, but generally, a woman who's not aroused or only slightly so might actually feel discomfort or pain if (for example) a guy rolls back the prepuce and tongues her clit directly. That happens to uncut guys who aren't fully hard, too. As the levels of arousal increase, the erectile tissue is capable of enduring more direct contact, to the point where it's actually very pleasurable for both to apply direct stimulation. And finally, a penis is not (usually) something that can be turned on and off like a lamp. Going from limp to throbbing hard and back again isn't something that happens in a matter of seconds (save specific exceptions, like exceedingly powerful stimuli). There are stages of hardness, but the time that takes the guy to go from one to another varies depending on the guy in question and what's triggering the arousal. Also, not all guys have the same amount of stages. Some have just four, some have more, some may even have only three or two. The first stage is limpness, which is the cock that hasn't even begun to experience arousal. This is the default state (when an erection is the default state, it's called priapism and it's a very hilarious illness). Then there's the 'stirring' stage, where the male first sees something vaguely arousing. He might catch a glimpse of cleavage or start fantasizing. The cock is not hard here, but it sends 'warning signs' to the guy, telling him that if he keeps going down that road, things are going to get stiff. If the guy is clothed, nothing is visible. If the guy is naked, his cock might twitch on its own or even roll lazily a little, across his leg/navel/hip. Might grow an inch or so if the guy's a grower (that is, if his cock changes size between limp and hard. Some guys have the same size regardless of arousal, they're usually called 'showers'). Then you have the 'half-hard' stage, in which the arousal continues its course and blood begins to flow into the penis. Here is when the guy starts to get slightly stiff and his dick starts to grow. If the stimulus isn't strong enough, the growth might stop here. If a guy catches sight of a nice ass, for example, maybe it won't get him fully hard (depends on his personal tastes), but it might be enough to get his blood flowing. Usually the cock remains like this for a few moments even after the arousing stimulus has passed, it doesn't immediately go back to limp (assuming he doesn't see something horrifying that completely kills his mood, of course). It's like his cock is saying "hey, are you SURE you don't want to keep thinking about that ass? I already have all this blood here, it would be a shame to send it back to the body..." Some guys have different stages of hardness, and whether all or some of them should be called "fully" hard is a matter of debate. What they all have in common is that a guy can orgasm in this state. If a guy is jerking off, for example, to relieve stress or because he's used to it or because his body demands release, he might not become 100% hard. He might only reach 90% of his potential, but it's still enough to climax. It's like a chore, the guy's not really into it. He gets hard enough to do his job, comes, and then he goes back to limp very fast (in a minute or less). Now, if the guy is actually interested and he's very aroused, he might reach his peak and become as hard as he can get. The main difference between these is basically the intensity of the orgasm and the volume of cum. In the first case, the guy may have a quick orgasm and shoot a small load, maybe a couple of shots. In the latter, the guy may have a longer, 'better' orgasm, and his ejaculation might be a little or a lot more copious. Oh, and in the latter case, the cock usually stays hard for a long time after climaxing (from a couple of minutes to remaining hard enough to go at it again once the refractory period is finished). Of course, some guys have more than these stages. Maybe a guy gets 80% hard when he's jerking off every day, but he can get 90% hard when he's getting laid, and 100% hard when his girlfriend/boyfriend has him tied down and spanks him with gusto; or he engages in his favorite fetish. It varies. And as a closing advice: watch porn. No, seriously. The best way to familiarize yourselves with a penis is by looking at it so often and from such different angles that you can practically draw it with your eyes closed. Look at the different shapes they come in, how they change color depending on how hard they are, how most guys will start dribbling precome if they're REALLY aroused and they're not getting any. It doesn't need to be video, of course. Pictures/manga/etc work just fine, too. The key is to get as familiar with it as you can. I think that's all, hope this helps iron out some leftover details on the matter.

Friends are overrated. Seriously, they are, this isn't a troll comment. People nowadays go to ridiculous lengths to please people who ultimately treat them like crap. This shit has to stop. There's almost 7 thousand million people out there. You can pick and choose. You can afford to be selective. You can afford to look at someone in the face and say "I have always hated the way you look down on [X group of people]. When you die, I will dance on your grave and spit on your grieving mother." Believe me, I have said it and it feels good. As an aside, you don't really need to ram your dick into the first chick willing to spread her legs for you. Like I said, 7 thousand million people. Keep that in perspective. People are disposable. You don't like your friends? Ditch them like yesterday's vomit and find new ones. Don't like those, either? Ditch and keep looking. Eventually you'll find people you can tolerate. And if you don't find anyone you like, guess what? There are no negative consequences for not having friends. You won't die if you don't get laid. You'll have more time, energy and money to spend on worthwhile stuff, like a job, studies, family (if you haven't cut them out of your life, of course), and those hobbies you always wanted to take up but didn't have the time.

Eh. Every published author has to deal with this at least once. I wouldn't be surprised if there was an entire business field dedicated to finding "plagiarized works" for their estates to sue the latest best-seller. The results of these things is either a) the author milking fame for themselves, or B) the author throwing money at the issue until it goes away.

If I ever come across the anthropomorphic personification of mortality, this is pretty much what I'll be telling he/she/it.

Found these in a google image search. Thought they had decent craftsmanship and good image quality. Not much to say about the reason I picked them as my avatar. I like blades.

Huh, just noticed this today. Been around for a short while, this place looks cool. Quiet, though. Not much to say about me, other than I consider myself fairly open-minded and knowledgeable about stuff (and if I don't know about something, I'm usually spurred to go find out about it). I write to improve my writing skills (crazy, huh?), though I consider myself more of a reader. And speaking of that, I'll echo what's on my profile and state that I'm not that picky. I'll read pretty much anything and review if requested (and I have the time, of course. I go to college and I have a story to finish, so there's that, too). About my personality, well, let's just say I'm blunt, sarcastic, fiercely competitive and a perfectionist at heart. I'm all around weird, too, and misanthropy often plagues me like a bad hangover. On the plus side, people say this is rarely noticeable. I think that's about it. See you guys around.

Huh, this seems interesting. I have to read the OP carefully because I still don't quite grasp how this works, but I'll see if anything posted here catches my eye. I'll try to review even if it's not something I'd ordinarily read, to encourage others to do the same.

Well, it's a self-challenge thing. I'm aiming to prove myself I can be unbiased and write a story that doesn't particularly appeal to me, with characters I don't identify with, and the only thing that actually kept me interested in the story was the (to me) original way of presenting the chapters. This is actually for a good reason besides what I just stated. If I don't really care about the story, I can keep my inner editor quiet long enough for me to actually finish anything. If I actually do care, then I will insist on it being *perfect*, which is not possible, which makes me hate the story for not living up to my standards, which makes me give up on it. By remaining emotionally detached, I'm able to actually achieve something for once. I thought about writing it in a huge chunk and posting it all at once, but I reconsidered. Posting it somewhere gave me a pretty tangible incentive to actually finish it, since there'd be the whole "people are expecting it to be finished" thing. if it's on my hard drive, who's going to bat an eyelash if one day I just give up on it? And then there's the fact that I calculated an increase in received feedback if I posted the chapters one by one (meaning, I'd be able to get multiple reviews from the same reader, as opposed to a single one). Eh, I get what you mean. It wasn't actually random, in case I haven't made it clear. I have pretty much all chapters/interludes planned in advance. I may rearrange their order (like I did with these past few interludes, when I realised I had miscalculated the length of the storyline, and so I had to cram a few together), but it's a very minute thing. I never intended for the Angrathar interlude to be anywhere near its actual place in the timeline, because I wanted to go for something different. I mean, I thought about introducing the Therenil interludes closer to the place where he appears in the main plot, but I felt it would be boring and predictable, it'd be pretty much what I did with Aeranil and Thrum. Yes, he doesn't make sense *now*, but the Angrathar interlude showed where he fits in the storyline, he's not some random dude I threw in, he's a main character that will appear later on. Now, that was to dispel any notion that I might be just throwing interludes at random; because I thought you meant "it seems random, even though I know you planned this stuff in advance, you just failed at executing it properly," and now I'm actually getting the feeling that you think I just flip a coin and type whatever comes to me. Because shit, the thought of that just made me laugh out loud at how OOC that'd be for me. Yah, I know what you mean. EDIT: Should be fixed, with any luck. Yeah, hah, the problem is that I *like* the way it is right now, but that's evidently not the way I'm going to get readers. And that's the important thing, in the end. That's the reason I'm posting it here, to get feedback. If I scare away the readers, I'm just defeating the entire purpose of what I'm doing in the first place. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH, that was a good one. I honestly wish I could afford the luxury of working on a chapter for a long time, so that it slowly distils into sheer excellence. In my case, however, time simply increases the chances of deletion/complete rewriting/disgusted abandonment. That's also the reason behind the speedy updates! It's for the story's own good, even if quality must be sacrificed in the process. Yeah, you can say that again. Though I actually thought this sort of thing would be common knowledge by now, since Cata is all the rage. Four years ago is BC. Three years ago would be WotLK. Official Timeline --> Lacks the entry for Cataclysm, but it should be in the year 30, according to this article: Then, there's the Malfurion reference from the first chapter, coming from this article: Malfurion#Cataclysm, which states that his awakening happened shortly before Cata (and definitely after WotLK). In retrospect, I could have been clearer about it, but I didn't want to be too heavy-handed.

Hah, wow, looks like I fucked shit up, eh? Onto the reviews! Of course I want honest opinions! It's the best policy and all that, right? Yeah, sorry about that, I tried cutting it as short as possible, but I guess it was a pretty jarring deviation. Hopefully, you'll stick around for the next four chapters, where I'll be picking up the main storyline again. Oh, hey! Let me just say at first that I really appreciate you (and Serronas above) leaving a comment to state this kind of stuff instead of just vanishing. I can't tell you how constructive all of this is to me. Writing talent? What writing talent? Ah, yes, I see where you're getting at. Geez, now I know how Ayn Rand felt. Hah, I wish I could just say I drink half a bottle of vodka before writing every chapter, so that I can at least have an excuse for this sort of thing. (You may notice I'm not disagreeing with anything you've said so far, and that's because I fully understand what you're saying). As a tiny, quiet comment from the dark corner of this thread, I want to point out that the destruction of the Verdant Glade (as portrayed in the very, very first chapter) happens *after* Wrath of the Lich King (three years after that, in fact, given that the comment at the beginning of every journal entry reminds the reader that the events portrayed happened four years ago), which means that technically I haven't said anything one way or another. But since it evoked this kind of comment from the both of you, I must have clearly done something wrong. But yes, that little comment aside, I completely get what you two mean. I failed to properly convey what I intended, and it's something I should examine in greater detail to avoid making the same mistakes again. Yeah, I see what you mean. I do that every 20 chapters (chapter 40 was due next), but apparently I need to do it more often. I'm not trying to defend myself here (since I have an artist friend who seriously cannot take any criticism ever, and I really don't want to be like him), but I think that the problem here is that I'm writing the kind of story I wish I could read. I mean, that's what this site is for, right? The thing is that my tastes deviate so far from the majority that what appeals to me is a complete turn-off for most. And since those tastes aren't sexual in nature, I can't put a warning in the summary for it. You see, the ideal story to me is the one that keeps me on my toes, that's not boring and predictable. I want to read a story where everything is jumbled out of order and I have to use my brainpower to piece everything together, rereading it several times until I finally get the big picture. To me, that kind of story is just awesome, because it's unusual and actually requires the reader to be an active participant instead of a passive spectator. I like mystery and suspense, I like being presented with contradictions so that I can figure out how the author is going to reconcile them, I like being shown hints of what comes (like Wrathgate) and being left to wonder just how that's going to come to pass. But I guess I forgot (as usual) that most people would find that annoying and confusing. Well, that or I just haven't managed to pull it off well. Either way, I've some thinking to do about this. Oh, I don't care about the characters, and I don't expect the reader to, either. I mean, *I* know them, and they're all awful, awful people (except maybe Ceristrasz). My purpose when writing this story is to explore the myriad facets of interpersonal relationships from an original point of view. And I guess this sort of thing is one of the risks of exploring what's off the beaten path. Sometimes you find something that works, sometimes you step into quicksand and die a painful death. Hah, wow, looks like I achieved exactly what I wanted to achieve, only somehow wrongly. My intention with Therenil was exactly that, to let the reader decide on their own what to think of him. If you wanted to feel bad for him, go ahead! If you thought he was a pathetic wretch who needs to die, then awesome! I guess I was just wanting to portray a meaningful scene without biasing the reader one way or another. I mean, what's the point in portraying all of this AFTER you know Therenil? You're obviously going to feel at least a little sad, and that's a foregone conclusion (unless you never liked him, in which case you're not going to be affected one way or another). How often do you get the chance to watch a meaningful event without previous knowledge of the people involved, just look at it from above with cold detachment? Meh, I guess I'm just weird like that. What I wanted to do with Therenil was to just stop doing the trite "here, meet this character, once you're used to him, I'll show you the important stuff" thing. I've already done that with the others! I wanted some variety, to change things. With him, you'd start seeing very important moments in his life, then the way he is now, and then the way he was before the Scourge. But on the other hand, I can put myself in your shoes, and I can definitely see how all of this makes no sense and feels random and poorly written. The problem right now is that I don't really see myself as having done anything "wrong," per se (other than a general, chronic failure in execution that goes beyond a single chapter). I wilfully took a chance with originality and I failed, it's not something that can just be rewritten like a battle/sex scene, or fixed like a typo. I suppose I'll just increase my rereads like you recommended, keep clarity in mind, and try to finish the story asap. I mean, my main purpose here is to actually finish a story, I honestly don't care if it ends up being good or bad, I'll be satisfied the second I type the words "The End." I can't even remember how many aborted projects I have piling up in my memory, notebooks and hard-drives. When I started writing this story, I told myself that finishing it would be my main priority, with quality and originality coming far below that. If I can achieve all three, awesome. If not, tough luck, I'll have to make do with "finished." Anyway, I want to stress that I am very grateful that you took the time to write so much. I know it's far more than the story deserves, and I don't want you to think I'm one of those people that just makes up excuses when they're being criticised. What I wanted to do here was to explain my reasoning for doing what I did, not as a way to defend myself, but as a way to illustrate what goes on behind the chapters. I completely agree with what you said, and I'll definitely try to keep it in mind for the future.

I'm all for stepping out of the norm. Sadly, my current plans to remain fresh and original seem to be backfiring. What I did was to throw a bunch of guys together, each with its own personality, and then see what happens. I tried to stay true to real life as much as possible, so that the readers couldn't tell who'd end up with who. Not to mention the fact that these people are so screwed up I'm kinda toying with the prospect of just killing them all to spare them even more failure in their awful, awful lives. But what I have in mind is far worse than death, so I'll probably go with that. Anyway, back on topic: I think more authors should focus on crafting compelling characters, coming up with a situation that brings them together (and ideally, keeps them that way long enough for the story to unravel) and then just sit back and let things happen. Of course, this doesn't imply a large number of characters, it can be done with just one person, really (and their imagination, I presume). And as a corollary, more authors should try to avoid clichés. Some of them are fine, especially if used in moderation, but an entire story built on clichés is like a house built entirely out of plaster.

I am amazed at how this news is at once really good and really, really sad. EDIT: As a clarification, I think it's sad because we should've totally made it higher.

When I review, I try to make a point of saying at least one good thing the author has done right and at least one bad thing the author could improve on. Once that's done, I write my general impressions and let my judgment tell me if I need to add more praise or point out more stuff that could be fixed. Above all, I try to be fair and polite, because I've come across as a troll/flamer before, since I have a hard time "cushioning" criticism. If I think a character is a dick, I'll tell you he's a dick. If I think that the sex scene lacked realism, that's what you'll be hearing from me. But lately I've been trying to sound more humane. It's a selfish thing, really, because if the author is offended by my review, they'll disregard it, making me waste the time I spent writing the review in the first place. When I receive reviews, I am oh so very wary of praise. It's not that I don't like it (on the contrary!), I just don't fully believe it. When I see someone saying "Oh, you're such a great writer!" or "This story is awesome!" I just narrow my eyes and go "...okay. Thank you!" and wonder if they really meant it. Of course, longer reviews like the kind I write are actually heavenly, because I can get a better idea of what the reader actually thinks. Those are the reviews that make me keep on writing. But on a broader scope, I think that you can't improve without criticism. A single review that points out your flaws is much, much better than 100 reviews that praise how awesome you are. If you can have both, great, if not, tough shit, life ain't perfect. I do think that people should give more feedback, of ANY kind, but that's probably what 99% of all authors around here believe.

Everywhere, really. Life inspires me. I overhear conversation, see someone unusual walking down the street, read a particularly well-constructed phrase, hear the wind blowing through the trees, or just catch myself daydreaming on the bus. That's actually a bad thing, to get inspired so often. Everything sounds cool at first, but then I lose interest and nothing ever gets finished. So what I do is let myself get a little inspired and then I put a hold on that until I can actually sit down to write. Then I let go. It's been working so far. So yeah, I can basically see/hear/smell/touch/taste anything and think of a story. And sometimes, when there's absolutely nothing inspiring at all, I just retreat into daydreamville and make shit up on my own. It's a good way to avoid being bored, but it doesn't fucking help when you can't actually write the stuff you come up with.

I assume you mean consensual torture? Because non-consensual torture is, by definition, abuse. Now, if consent is a yes, then it's actually pretty easy. You need to figure out what kind of torture you want to be portrayed in your fic. You can have physical or emotional torture. Physical torture is pretty straightforward, but it does have things to be mindful of. Psychological torture is subtler and arguably harder to convey effectively in writing. It's the sort of thing you can't fully appreciate unless you know the tortured character and have some way to identify yourself with him/her. I'll cover the easy stuff first, which is physical torture. This one is what most people know as "kinky stuff." You know, nipple/clit clamps, bondage, blood-letting, sounding, spanking, S&M, etc. The important thing to mind here is never to go overboard with pain. It could be said that finding just the right amount of pain to enhance pleasure is a form of art. The process itself is fairly easy. The "victim" must be as relaxed as possible (unless you're combining it with psychological torture, which comes below). This is important because tension tends to increase perceived pain, and it can be hard to gauge the right amount. Bondage is not strictly necessary in this stage (that's actually more of a psychological thing). Another aspect to consider is that pain should come after the person is aroused, and preferably after it's been teased for a while. This is advisable because arousal helps the brain handle pain, and it allows the person to mingle it with pleasure. After that, then it really depends on what your characters get off on. Males might like getting their balls slapped or their erections sounded, females might like nipple/clit clamps, and everybody can get off on spanking, hair-pulling, all-around rough sex or even anal play. Blood-letting is best left for fantasy stories, since IRL it tends to raise all sorts of strange questions, and can actually end up in infections if not properly treated. The "torture" should start slow (unless the couple is used to it), and then slowly work its way up in intensity, ideally accompanying a similar increase in pleasure. Another piece of advice is to get on the internet and look up this sort of thing, see what you like. Just don't run blindly, because there's some pretty hardcore stuff out there that might not be suitable for everybody. So, to sum up: Relaxation, Arousal, Introduction of Kink(s), Micromanaging Pain and Pleasure. Now comes psychological stuff. This, as I mentioned before, is best left for when the readers have become familiar with the characters, otherwise they'll probably just miss the point (for example, they might fail to understand why a character gets off on being tied and gagged if they don't know that the character is an uptight CEO who just NEEDS to stop being in control all the time). The entire purpose of psychological torture is to generate the same pain that physical torture elicits, only on the mind. The simplest form of this concept is what we know as teasing. Offering someone pleasure but denying it to them at the last moment (or denying them completion) generates frustration, which is a sort of psychological pain. This builds up within the subject, generating a stronger and stronger drive to reach what's being kept away from him/her. This, ironically, greatly enhances the sensation of triumph once said completion has been reached. This basic principle is where the rest of the psychological stuff builds upon. Now, the point here is to get to know your characters. Figure out their strengths, and above all, their weaknesses. Find out what they want and can't have. The combination of weaknesses and hidden desires is what makes psychological torture effective. In the CEO example above, his weakness is an inability to delegate and relinquish control, while his hidden desire is to be able to do just that. Being tied and bound and at the complete mercy of someone else is an enormously scary experience. However, once the sexual act is completed and the CEO realizes that he's still fine (and that he actually enjoyed not being in charge for once), it enhances the pleasure he receives. Next time, he'll be looking forward to it, and will actually start enjoying himself while he's at it. There's a ton of different ways to torture someone psychologically. What works for one person might not work for the next, which is why the characters must come up with these things on their own. Analyze the characters, then use logic and intuition to figure out what would simultaneously give them both pleasure and pain. For example, if one character is shy and quiet, he might be asked to take on a commanding role in the bedroom ("I'm going to tie myself to the bed and I want you to FUCK me"). This ought to fill him with anxiety and nervousness, but the entire point is that the bedroom is the place to act out on fantasies and hidden desires. Another example could be someone afraid of the dark being asked to wear a blindfold in bed, or someone who relies heavily on a sense (again, it could be sight, but it could just as easily be hearing or any of the others) being deprived of it. Then there's bondage for people who are afraid of relinquishing control, or submissive positions for those who put on a strong and proud façade and are scared of being seen as weak. The list goes on and on. A good formula is to take away something the other person relies on, to force someone to face their fears (like using fake spider-webs all over the bed when fucking an arachnophobic), to deny them what they want (teasing), to put them in the opposite role of the one they normally play in daily life (make a sub out of a leader), or sometimes to simply figure out what turns them on but are too afraid to admit it to themselves, and giving them just that. Hope this helped!

Thanks! I actually kind of thought the same thing when I saw the final result, that it was too "broken up" into small sections, and it would make the lyrics disruptive. Well, I got the lyrics (and their meaning) from this WoWwiki article and this youtube video. Firstly, I completely agree with you. I feel kind of stupid that I didn't think of grouping two sets of lyrics together the way you suggested, it really reduces the clutter the way you put it. And actually, I thought about the meaning of them as I placed them, and I noticed that in some places it didn't quite fit. And lastly, thanks, I like the way it looks now. Less clutter, more meaning. Ahhh, I was wondering if anyone would catch that. I can't really say much without spoiling, but if you look at the stuff Therenil says in the Wrathgate Interlude (recognising Putress immediately, saying Sylvanas isn't the woman they used to know) you can actually guess what his "race" would be in WoW. However, he considers himself a High Elf (and not a Blood Elf!), and that's what I'll be using to describe him. Well, I just want to point out that technically, they can still go to Northrend, come back and get killed. Chronologically, the story begins shortly after the Cataclysm, with the destruction of the Verdant Glade. The journals are actually somewhere in mid-Burning Crusade right now (which would be 4 years before Cata). When we're done with the journals, the story will change writing style to reflect that we're finally moving forward. Think of these phase as a looooooooooooong introduction to the actual plot. Awww. Well, here's to hoping you'll do well. Thanks again for this awesome post!