Talk:Lich King

Lich King "Individual" links
I just decided that in the quote on the top of the Lich King page I would change the word individuals so it would link to Arthas and Ner'zhul seperately, like this: individuals. If this isn't such a good idea, just change it back. ;)   16:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Lich King Portrait
How did anyone get that picture? I've seen that trailer dozens of times and I've never spotted him, whole body, Frostmourne glowing and him standing in the snow there. Also what was he doing with Frostmourne, the wisps coming out of the air into the sword? Please direct your answers onto my tallk page. BobNamataki.
 * That picture is one of the promo renders they did, and appears in the cinematic art book among other places. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 21:43, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * The things coming from the air and onto Frostmourne weren't wisps, they were snowflakes... Malfurion Stormrage (talk) 8:27, 13 October 2009

Frostmourne
What was he doing with Frostmourne, it looked like wisps were melding with his sword. Also, it's very disappointing you can't get Frostmourne during the Icecrown Citadel (instance). Why Shadowmourne? I wonder why it's catering to the Orcs and Trolls.

BobNamataki.
 * You get Shadowmourne instead of Frostmourne because wielding Frostmourne would steal your soul and turn you into the new Lich King. As for thw wispy thingies, it's purely for visual effect. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 18:07, September 30, 2009 (UTC)

CONFIRMED: McConnohie is STILL the Lich King
Michael McConnohie is involved with Hidden Frontier Productions, which makes Star Trek fan series (they've been making them since 2000). I am a fan of this show and have seen him in episodes of this series done earlier in the year, and he was a guest at a chat room session that we hosted tonight (November 2). After sorta...confusing what I meant to communicate (a friend of mine who also plays WoW pushed me into the right direction), he answered this question to my satisfaction (Michael is "OhDoubleGood"). --Joshmaul (talk) 03:03, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

How powerful is the Lich King
Exactly how powerful is he... i heard his more powerful than kil'jaeden


 * Kil'jaeden created him, so I don't think he could be more powerful than Kil'jaeden. And he certainly isn't powerful enough to regain control over Sylvanas and the Forsaken, but it is unknown whether that is because he failed to regain the powers he lost at the end of The Frozen Throne, or whether Sylvanas and the Forsaken are simply stronger than they used to be. Seeing as he has more recently lost control over the Death Knights, it is likely that the Lich King is continuing to lose power. Alpha Sigma Sigma (talk) 21:03, November 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * Firstly, confirm your sources. Ner'zhul the Lich King lost control over Sylvanas. Arthas the Lich King is more powerful, carrys frostmourne and has a very high kill count. BobNamataki (talk) 20:24, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ner'zhul had Frostmourne too, albeit no arms to swing it. In that regard, Arthas is indeed more powerful than Ner'zhul. On the other hand, Ner'zhul lost a lot of magical power throughout the undead campaign of The Frozen Throne and never got it back, as evidenced by the fact that the Forsaken remain free of his control to this day. (If Arthas were powerful enough to regain control of the Forsaken, as Ner'zhul was, he would have done so by now.) Lich King Arthas' overall power may be greater than Lich King Ner'zhul's, if Arthas' physical strength is greater than the magical power that Ner'zhul lost, but the fact remains that Arthas isn't as strong magically as Ner'zhul was. And Arthas never recovered from the battle at Light's Hope Chapel either, as evidenced by the fact that the Death Knights have also remained free of his control. Alpha Sigma Sigma (talk) 22:35, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * I like your reasoning. It's like, all the body does is make the Lich King look cool.  --Super Bhaal (talk) 01:39, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Not just make him look cool. He also has infinitely more physical strength than he had before the merger. The only question is whether that compensates for the magical strength that he lost throughout TFT. I think it doesn't. Alpha Sigma Sigma (talk) 14:57, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Add to the fact he was weakened further when his heart was destroyed. Whether he recovered from this is up for debate though.  ¥ S uper N ovice ↔ T alk 2 M e  ¥ 21:26, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Status from 3.3.0
I've went ahead and changed the Lich King's status to killable in WoW. Just wanting to know if there are any objections to that change.AhotahThunderhorn (talk) 21:50, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * Eh, I don't object (not that I have any say in this matter...). There is, after all, a special Lich King model in the model viewer that has a "death" animation... I guess if anything you'd be asked to revert and wait a little while for people to find out you can beat the stuffing out of him... --Super Bhaal (talk) 22:03, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * Not to mention the patch wallpaper showing his empty helmet next to the shattered hilt of Frostmourne... I think it's a reasonable assumption to make unless we find out otherwise. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:04, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Unable to Edit?
Hey there. I've been attempting to add something into the Speculation area in the

In a dream state where Arthas sees past, present, and future, presented by Ner'zhul, Arthas murders the child manifestation of his humanity (e.g. love, compassion, and so forth). Delighted at this decision Ner'zhul states "We are one, Arthas. Together we are the Lich King. No more Ner'zhul, no more Arthas -- only this one glorious being." With that Arthas murders Ner'zhul and tells him "No we. No one tells me what to do. I've got everything I need from you -- now the power is mine and mine alone. Now there is only I. I am the Lich King. And I am ready." Ner'zhul is stunned by the betrayal, then disappears.[4] It is uncertain if this dream state actually results in Arthas murdering Ner'zhul's essence, but it would seem to indicate that Arthas's soul lords over Ner'zhul's.

And add in a new paragraph;

However, it is also believed that The Lich King may be in a way it's own entity. Seeing that Arthas's soul is attempting to stop the Lich King, while Ner'zhul's soul was eradicated and betrayed. It would make some sense that, seeing Arthas himself was the "small flame inside of him" that stopped him, hesitated him from doing things. So it might be possible that, the current Lich King is neither Arthas nor Ner'zhul. And, if this speculation is true, would make some sense as to whom killed King Terenas, destroyed Quel'Thalas and so on, seeing Arthas himself attempted to stop "Death Knight Arthas."

If anyone knows why I can't edit, or can do me a favor in adding this, it would be great.Frostmourne Hungers. (talk)


 * The article is locked to avoid spoilers until the 3rd.
 * If I understood your paragraph, you would say that the Lich King is not the wielder of Helm of Domination but a self-entity in the Helm? That sounds strange because the Helm was only designed to contain Ner'Zhul's spirit and give him control over the deads.
 * 11:34, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * He is, I mean. According to Arthas: Rise of the Lich King, Arthas' true spirit attempted to stop the warmongering Death Knight Arthas. This might hint of that, in a way, Arthas was both "Prince Arthas Menethil" -and- "Death Knight Arthas." Upon merging Arthas's soul with Ner'zhul's, they "became one."
 * However, there were -three- figures in that book. A death knight, the sickly child (Arthas), and the old orc (Ner'zhul).
 * Now, if Arthas was the real Arthas in Warcraft 3 and so on, he kills himself? It may be his soul was split, or similar. But my belief that, Frostmourne nearly fully absorbed Arthas' soul, true. But what remained behind? Who was it, if Arthas had no control over himself? That, is what I want to add into the speculation area. Which, if this means anything, seeing Arthas eradicated nearly utterly "the sickly child" and "the old orc," both betrayed, it would mean it's both Arthas and Ner'zhul. But he is not them. He is a duplicate of Arthas, a duplicate of Ner'zhul, and thrown together. That, I believe, is why Blizzard said they are both combined. Yes, he is both combined. But my, and my friends' speculation is; -is- he both of them? Or is he both of them .. yet both Ner'zhul and Arthas are still individual spririts?Frostmourne Hungers. (talk)


 * Well the statement "There must always be a Lich King" does lean toward the notion that the title/rank/powers etc of the Lich King exists separate from the host. Although if the Lich King was a separate intelligent entity then why does it need a host? First there was Ner'zul, than Arthas, then presumable Ner'zul disappeared (although this is fairly vague) and then there was Bolvar. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by.

ICC Ending Cinematic Transcription
The following is a transcription of the cinematic that plays following the defeat of the Lich King in ICC, as revealed in Patch 3.3.2. Fair warning that anything beyond this point can be considered spoilers - though if you're concerned about those, you probably wouldn't be here! Placed here for convenience's sake, with regard to any future updating needs.
 * - Pheryl (talk) 12:57, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Arthas lies supine, the shattered remnants of Frostmourne beside him. He starts as the ghost of Terenas Menethil materializes over him, and the characteristic blue glow dissipates from his eyes.
 * Arthas Menethil: Father! Is it... over?
 * Terenas Menethil II: At long last. No king rules forever, my son.
 * Arthas Menethil: I see... only darkness... before... me.
 * Arthas' eyes roll back into his head, and apparently dies. Terenas closes his son's eyes as Tirion walks in.
 * Terenas Menethil II: Without its master's command, the restless Scourge will become an even greater threat to this world.
 * Terenas Menethil II: Control must be maintained. There must always be a Lich King.
 * Terenas' ghost disappears, Tirion retrieves the Helm of Domination and examines it.
 * Tirion Fordring: The weight of such a burden... must be mine. For there is no other...
 * Bolvar Fordragon: Tirion! You hold a grim destiny in your hands, brother - but it is not your own.
 * The scorched caricature of Bolvar is revealed, sitting atop the Frozen Throne.
 * Tirion Fordring: Bolvar! By all that is holy...
 * Bolvar Fordragon: The dragons' flame sealed my fate. The world of the living can no longer comfort me. Place the crown upon my head, Tirion. Forevermore, I will be the jailer of the damned.
 * Tirion Fordring: No, old friend. I cannot.
 * Bolvar Fordragon: Do it, Tirion! You and these brave heroes have your own destinies to fulfill. This last act of service... is mine.
 * Tirion Fordring: You will not be forgotten, brother.
 * Bolvar Fordragon: I must be forgotten, Tirion! If the world is to live free from the tyranny of fear, they must never know what was done here today.
 * Tirion nods, and accedes to Bolvar's request.
 * Bolvar Fordragon: Tell them only that the Lich King is dead. And that Bolvar Fordragon died with him.
 * The throne freezes over.
 * Bolvar Fordragon: Now, go. Leave this place, and never return.


 * Question. Did you get that from an official source or made that yourself? Since really, "Bolvar's voice blends with Ner'zhul" is a misleading comment.Frostmourne Hungers. (talk)


 * This is imo just a booming voice, nothing to do with Ner'zhul
 * 19:25, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * I thought the "voice sounding like a bunch of people hitting each other with lawn chairs" was part of the whole merging thing.--TheUltimate (talk) 19:30, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

ICC Ending Cinematic
I just found the cinematic in YouTube WOW_FotLK_1024.avi --Gbergalli (talk) 14:37, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

What should this article focus on now?
The Lich King as a title (which belonged to Ner'zhul, Ner'zhul/Arthas, Arthas, and now Bolvar), or the Lich King as a character (the Arthas-dominant one that served as the antagonist throughout Wrath of the Lich King)? For the purposes of the introduction and NPC box, I would suggest the latter. It's important to note what came before and after, but I think the character from WotLK is what most people will be looking for here. Egrem (talk) 20:33, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * It's worth noting, that the article also focuses on the Lich King has he appeared in WC3 and WC3:TFT: i.e. the disembodies spirit trapped in an ice cube. It is also worth noting that as of now, Bolvar was the Lich King for all of 20 seconds in the cinematic, and then probably some text blurb afterwards.--TheUltimate (talk) 20:39, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well the biography section should keep up telling the whole story (a king to another).
 * The box should remain focused on the actual Lich King (Bolvar's carac).
 * Fine as it is going no?
 * 20:43, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thats fine. But Gourra seems to have laid down the law.--TheUltimate (talk) 20:49, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, that's the thing. I think the biography section should tell the whole story (from Ner'zhul to Arthas to Bolvar), but the box should be focused on the Lich King Arthas.  He was the main character of Rise of the Lich King and the main character of Wrath of the Lich King.  When people think "Lich King", isn't that what they'll be looking for?
 * Egrem (talk) 20:57, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * The box is supposed to be about the character in its current state, for exemple Garrosh Hellscream is not yet credited as Leader of the Horde.
 * 21:00, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Right, but they're not really the same character. If we're treating "The Lich King" as a character, I think the article should focus on the Lich King from WotLK.  If this article is just treating "Lich King" as a title, it should be something more like the article for Warchief - a basic history of the title and links to the pages of the characters that have held it.  Egrem (talk) 21:27, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Problem is Warchief is not a character, whereas the Lich King is. The biography fully explain who was the Lich KIng, how and when.
 * How about keeping an "actual" box and add a Sub-part named "Lich Kings of the Scourge" (based on Warchiefs of the Horde) with a quick list?
 * 21:32, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what an "actual box" sub-part "Lich King of the Scourge" thing is...--TheUltimate (talk) 21:35, February 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ignore that, I'm an idiot.--TheUltimate (talk) 21:36, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * I mean, keeping an actualised box (current state of the character).
 * Take a look at it now: Lich King.
 * 22:13, February 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Perhaps there should be a page for "Lich King", that goes over the history of the title, and a page for "The Lich King", pertaining specifically to the WotLK character and his in-game appearances? It may not be necessary yet, but it's something to keep in mind for later, if this article eventually grows too large. Egrem (talk) 18:44, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * I say we leave it as is, about Arthas with a note about Bolvar at the end, until we see what Bolvar is like as the Lich King. It's possible that the "spirit" of the Lich King will persist in him, making them effectively the same entity. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:53, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * I noticed that the box's latest addition says the Lich King is Bolvar Fordragon, alone. Are we sure he's alone? I've been under the impression that Ner'zhul's spirit is bound to the helm, so it's likely Ner'zhul / Bolvar. --JakeARoonie (talk) 20:00, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * The short version is that we really don't know. Ner'zhul's spirit may or may not have died with Arthas; there's also evidence that his spirit may have died long ago when Arthas fully took control. The only thing we know for sure is that Bolvar is the Lich King. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 20:01, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

mispelling
The word "presence" is misspelled under the Scarlet Enclave section (Johnandrebutler (talk) 22:36, February 2, 2010 (UTC))

and this was important enough to warrant a discussion section because...........? Julio144 (talk) 05:20, July 15, 2010 (UTC)

Bolvar the "newly conjoined spirit"?
I'd say it's safe to say that he is the ONLY spirit. Ner'zhul was killed off in Rise of the Lich King, however you want to debate it. Arthas was shown dying, meaning his soul is no longer a piece of the Lich King anymore. Since this is now Bolvar taking command to chain down the Scourge from causing further destruction, that would mean neither of the previous spirits are a part of that anymore. Ner'zhul was completely hell bent on breaking free and destroying everything; if he were still there with Bolvar, we'd be going through this all again, but with Fordragon rather than Arthas. Mykael Mourningsun Vae Victis 23:16, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * Presumably, anyway. The truth of the matter is that we don't REALLY know exactly what happened to Ner'zhul, simply that Arthas took control. The scene was suitably symbolic that he might have simply been suppressed rather than destroyed, and then there's the whole thing with Matthias Lehner and the implications his appearance might have for Ner'zhul... Anyway, we don't know whether or not his spirit is still contained within the helmet, or whether or not any of Arthas is still in the helmet, or whether the helmet is just a control focus for the Scourge now, or what. However, what we do know for sure, and in fact the ONLY thing we know for sure, is that Bolvar Fordragon is the Lich King now, and that is the only thing should appear until we learn otherwise. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 23:42, February 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well we only see Arthas 'killing' Ner'zhul in a freaky dream world, where he also kills himself (or the child version of himself). Its easy to say Arthas is dead, you see his corpse on the ground, the problem comes in with Ner'zhul who didn't have such a clearly definable 'dead' state. Ner'zhul is a spirit bound to magical armor. I am in agreement with Dark T Zeratul that all we know is that Bolvar is currently wearing the armor, Arthas' body is dead (he's spirit might also still be in the armor for all we know).


 * Q. Will Ner'zhul appear at any point in 3.3 or the near future?
 * A. Well, he is a chunk of the Lich King now. But if you mean will he appear as an orc, we're not ready to tell his story just yet. We have a lot of stories left to tell, but his is a good one.
 * If that doesn't make it obvious that Ner'zhul is still lurking around, then note the interview in the latest issue of the Blizzard Insider, which was released the other day:
 * Also, it bears mentioning that the Lich King and Arthas are actually two separate entities. The Lich King is the lingering spirit of the orcish shaman Ner'zhul. Ner'zhul originally started the demonic invasions in Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal. So, in a sense, the entity that players know as the Lich King has been around for a long time, even long before Arthas was born, and has had an even larger hand in shaping the ongoing history of the Warcraft universe.
 * They pretty obviously state that they're not done with Ner'zhul yet, I think. Saying that Bolvar is "alone" is just as speculative as anything else. I think it would be best to leave that as "unknown" for the time being, even though Blizzard clearly hints that Ner'zhul will probably return at a later date. WoWWiki-Suzaku (talk) 06:56, February 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it's pretty much been confirmed by Blizzard that Ner'zhul is still "alive". From the Twitter Dev Chat just a few weeks ago:
 * Well the statement does elude to the possibility. Until Blizzard comes out and tells us if Bolvar is sharing the frozen throne we can't make a definite statement about it either way.
 * I edited the List of Lich King indicating that Bolvar is presumed the only Lich King at present, although it true that we have developer chat which indicated that Ner'zhul still exists what we know is that Bolvar puts on the helm meaning that Bolvar is definitely the Lich King and Ner'zhul is possible still around (although for all we know he might just be ghost external to the Lich King or inhabiting one of the Lich King's minions or a number of other possibilities). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by.

Bolvar, the Undead?
I noticed this line in the section "A New King Rises". "The undead paladin sat upon the Frozen Throne, having been horribly burned by dragonfire and tortured by Arthas." I find this quote both misleading and a bit inaccurate, tell me if I'm wrong. If I were told that Bolvar had become undead, well, I would have assumed that he was risen into undeath by a necromancer or the Lich King himself. Also, at the begining of the Icecrown Citadel raid, he yells in defiance of the Lich King, so obviously he is in no state of undeath where he is under servitude of the Lich King. Perhaps a slight change of the text is in order, or perhaps I was fed false information and it shouldn't be. ---   Aldolas Hawkwing | 04:33, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * There have occasionally been those who have been raised into undeath and still defied the Lich King. Zeliek comes to mind. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 05:52, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll take that. Although I'll admit it's not inaccurate I still find it slightly misleading. If anybody bothers to post on this again (which I doubt will happen), I have one last question. Was Bolvar returned to life at the hands of the Scourge or the Red Dragons-which is what I was originally told. If it was the Scourge's doing, where can I read up on this? --- Aldolas Hawkwing 02:57, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Almost certainly the Scourge, given that Arthas was seen torturing and corrupting him and that while Alexstrasza is the life-binder, red dragonfire is still inherently destructive in nature. In the Bridenbrad questline, she even says that she's not positive the flame won't destroy the crusader along with the plague. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 04:04, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well Bolvar says: "The dragons' flame sealed my fate. The world of the living can no longer comfort me". This seems to indicate that the dragon fire did more than just burn him a bit, debatable if he was raised to undeath that would also have removed the comfort of the living world but he specifically prefixes the statement with the dragons' fire.
 * Some speculation, including my me (although the evidence is 'iffy' at best) that the red dragon fire along with the plague pushed him into a state between life and death. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by.

Alignment
I went ahead and changed his alignment to "Lawful Good (As Bolvar Fordragon)" and "Chaotic Evil (Formerly)" since technically, Bolvar is still Lawful good, and is now the Lich King, this is up for debate, if people want to edit it, go ahead, but I remain on the point that he is no longer Chaotic Evil, and is at least True Neutral, I simply put Lawful good because that is Bolvar's Alignment. 23:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Just cause in life he was lawful good, doesn't mean things haven't changed since his death, rebirth, and merger into the lich king. We'll leave as is for now. 07:55, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Bolvar's standing is highly in question right now, so it would probably be best if we waited for things to become more clear or at least not go farther than any assumptions. Worst case scenario, you can always just stick a little "(Presumed)" suffix in there. --- Aldolas Hawkwing 02:57, February 5, 2010 (UTC)

Bolvar and the Frozen Throne
When exactly did Bolvar decide to sit on the Frozen Throne? Did he sneak up there as the Lich King fights Tirion and the raid group? If not, and he was always up there, why on Azeroth did the Lich King torture and attempt to corrupt Bolvar on HIS throne!?!

AhotahThunderhorn (talk) 21:51, February 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * He wanted to make Bolvar his new champion. The frozen throne because that's his private place since the beginning.
 * For Bolvar sitting, I believe he sits during the cinematic, but this is not shown.
 * 21:56, February 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * No idea. He just sort of appears there at some point between when players kill the Lich King and when he stops Tirion from putting on the helmet. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 21:56, February 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * He's chained to some icy outcroppings surrounding the throne, in a sort of crucifix style. Check one of the kill videos (not the cinematic).  Now, I know this isn't a forum, but my guess is that they were magical chains and broke when Frostmourne was shattered, or the Lich King's "working" mind died.  --Super Bhaal (talk) 22:05, February 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Look here for a screen of Bolvar hanged over the Lich King
 * 22:50, February 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd say that answers the question rather conclusively. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:51, February 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm... Arthas... what a terrible place to hold a prisoner... what if he had to.. relieve himself.. =/ 23:10, February 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I suspect undeath, well, "relieves" one of such responsibilities. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 23:35, February 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * That sheds new light on this one very inappropriate nickname I've given the character! --Super Bhaal (talk) 23:45, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

There must Always be a Lich King?
It is believed by some people that Ner'Zhul was losing influence on Arthas. This is said by a poster in MMO-Champion, wich I quote him now: _________________________________________________________________________________________________

"It seems the general consensus among the forums is that this cinematic was disappointing, anti-climactic, and lacking a true purpose. I won't lie, at first glance I thought that to, but through watching the video enough times, and analyzing it extensively, I would like to share my thoughts on the subject. I will break down the video into significant parts, and elaborate on them


 * First: King Terenas Menthil II. Okay, understandable. First Uther appeared, now Arthas' own father. There to say I told you so. But it's not really his father. In the Halls of Reflection, Uther's ghost presents to us this BRAND NEW and UNHEARD OF fact...That there must ALWAYS BE A LICH KING. Okay, dead-man's trigger. Clever Blizz. But that wasn't the purpose. NER'ZHUL. The grand warlock. The cunning orc who out smarted the entirety of the Burning Legion. The driving force behind Arthas' corruption into the Lich King. He made Uther appear to us. he gave us the idea of a new Lich King. Why? Arthas was turning against him. He was weak. His corruption had been lengthy, and he was still in society throughout it all. He wasn't broken well enough. And he had turned. Ner'zhul knew he must get rid of his conduit, and he also knew he'd need another. So here comes the idea: Tell the future King Slayers that they must find another soul to be damned to be the "Jailer of the Damned". Now it's Terenas. Listen closely. He has a double voice. Hmmm...Someone else had a double voice this entire expansion. Ner'zhul summoned this ghost, and used it to further lure Tiron into believing he must find a new Lich King, that the rule should not and could not be destroyed. That the cycle cannot (or is it really must not?) end.


 * Second: Tirion Fordring holding the helm of the Lich King. Now it may seem logical, even righteous and selfless for him to want to take the "burden" of being the Lich King. But listen carefully to his tone, and especially his word choice. "The weight of such a burden...it MUST be mine." Must. Seems like an okay word, maybe a bit strong, but we'll let it slide. But he emphasizes it so much. It's a inflection which makes us believe he craves it. And to reinforce this, it shows his reflection in the helm. But two of them. This is to communicate to us that our champion of the Light is, in fact, being corrupted just by holding the crown. Subtle, but nonetheless there.


 * Third Fiery, ugly, forceful Bolvar Fordragon. He is riddled with subtle queues as to what is really going on. First, his voice. Even while his "normal" form, he has a double voice, the second being subtle, but there. Perhaps Ner'zhul again? Yes. Where Ner'zhul failed with the corruption of Arthas, he would not fail with this Paladin of the Light. He broke Bolvar DIRECTLY. He made sure that there would be no vestige of whom he used to be left. He had him purged by the Dragon's Flame. Why? So he would be stronger than Arthas. Immune to even more powers that might be stacked against him; the great Aspects.


 * A major thing that implies to us that Bolvar is not the same (despite his overwhelming contempt in his voice) is that he says "the world of the living can no longer comfort me". He wants Tirion to believe he understands his fate, but really, he has known his fate, and he knows he is not meant to be anything other than the Lich King. Another intriguing case of word choice; instead of asking Tirion to give him the helm, Bolvar says "place the crown upon my head". Okay, why not put it on himself? Because, kings NEVER put on there own crown when being inducted into kingship. And guess what? This is Bolvar's induction into kingship. He demands Tiron give place the crown upon his head, getting even more forceful. Why? Because if he doesn't get this crown..well then his motives become known. And as he states, the crown is his. His "last act of service" (as Bolvar) isn't really a service to the people of Azeroth.

During the kinging process, Bolvar tells Tirion he MUST be forgotten, claiming its for the good of the people. But what if it's a cover, what if he needs time to rebuild the kingdom of the damned? To raise more armies? To use his new powers as the Lich King? All an elaborate (and well crafted) cover.


 * Fourth: Bolvar, the new Lich King. MAJOR voice change. The second voice is noticeable. It's no longer being hidden. He tells Tirion to say that the Lich King AND Bolvar died there. Because Bolvar is dead. No longer is the benevolent, righteous, strong herald of the Light in existence. He has been corrupted into Ner'zhul's champion, into the perfect Lich King.


 * And at the end, the biggest part of the WHOLE ENTIRE CINEMATIC. "Leave this place and never return". Cool ending line. But listen. Where is Bolvar's voice? Who's voice is that? Is that...and orc?

Ner'zhul has achieved complete control over a new conduit. His power is complete once more."


 * An interesting idea, but keep in mind that Bolvar doesn't have Frostmourne (or at least, he doesn't have it in one piece); Arthas did. That alone makes it highly unlikely that Bolvar could be as big a threat as Arthas was, I think. Alpha Sigma Sigma (talk) 17:37, March 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * My thoughts are that, if i've read correctly, the lich king cannot be formed unless frostmourne and the helm are together. Remember, Ner'zhul made Arthas retrieve Frostmourne before he came to the throne (also because only Frostmourne could break the ice) and he wasn't formed until they were BOTH together, therefore, if i'm correct, Bolvar and Ner'zhul will never be merged because frostmourne is destroyed, meaning Bolvar only has control of the scourge himself... Mass suicide, anyone? User:Nightfox Takahashi


 * Grand theory, except that you consider Ner'zhul's spirit "alive" (which we really don't know about), and the LIch King is only the guy who wears the Helm of Domination, no need for Frostmourne.
 * Bolvar is most likely the only Lich King nowadays.
 * 08:15, March 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * I always though that the only reason why Arthas had to get Frostmourne first is because it was the tool which corrupted him into such a willing pawn of the Lich King. It is never stated that the Lich King's Regalia (head, sword, chest) full set bonus is "+1 Power of the Lich King". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by.


 * Same old "this is not a forum" But I did notice that his voice changes from when we enter ICC and the final trailer, and one thing to bug your minds... What happened to Mal'ganis? Azahel (talk) 22:33, March 27, 2010 (UTC)

I think that Mal'ganis is either back on the Natherizem planet, seeing that there's no use for the Scarlet Onsluaght besides cleaning up Northrend.

Just interesting and not a serious thing
It is possible that "Lich King" have a Russian origin. Tsar Koschei (tsar≈King, koshei=lich) are a Slavic immortal king of evil creatures.UeArtemis (talk) 13:49, March 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeap, from what I remember, fantasy liches and other such undead sorcerers were inspired by that legend, although I remember my sister saying something about there being a Lich King in the early editions of the Talisman board game as well... So while it's obvious "lich" came from the legend, the title "Lich King" was likely a reference to Talisman. I could be wrong.  --Super Bhaal (talk) 14:54, March 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Talisman was released in 1983. The word "lich" is over a thousand years old (and refers to a corpse), but it was first associated with a specific type of creature (an undead spellcaster who stores its soul in a phylactery, ala Koschei) by Gary Gygax in 1977.  The title of "Lich King" was a small step from there, and many powerful D&D liches (like Acererak, Vecna, and Larloch) were referred to as such. Egrem (talk) 06:46, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Godhood
I know this has been talked to death, and although I'm not entirely sure if this will affect the article itself (the part that refers to his godhood), but when reading the World of Warcraft Magazine on its site, it said, "With an angry demigod chasing you from behind..." (page 32). Does this mean that now the debate is closed on whether he is a god or not, since Blizzard used the word demigod to describe the Lich King? jclipps (talk) 23:53, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems official enough to me. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 23:57, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * So does that mean it should be changed? Or is the piece in the article up purely to talk about the debate among fans, not the actual godhood of the Lich King?  I don't want to change it if there's a legitimate reason for keeping it up. jclipps (talk) 06:18, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * I've already made the "demigod" change to the relevant pages. I think that the official WoW magazine can be considered an official source, especially in an article that contains several developer quotes (even if this wasn't one of them). -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 06:24, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with this, while Arthas may not be a god, The Lich King definitely was. He had a cult following, this is no different from any religion in real life. User:Digman14 (talk) 07:01, September 7, 2010 (UTC)

Arthas dominant?
This bit seems a bit hasty a conclusion. Especially since the novel Rise of the Lich King directly contradicts a blue post, and I think a Blizzard employee's word is more solid than a novel. Plus not only did Blizzard state the exact opposite of the novel, the indications in Wrath of the Lich King say to me that Ner'zhul's essence is more dominant. For one thing the Lich King's voice is Ner'zhuk's, not Arthas'. Second his personality is closer to Ner'zhul's than Arthas' (lacks Arthas' witty sense of humour and other such slightly lighter aspects). Finally in Howling Fjord the Lich King mocks shamanism and says "I was a shaman once" which would make little sense if Arthas was truly dominant. I think the explanation is what the blue post said in that neither Arthas nor Ner'zhul exists anymore, it's just the Lich King. In fact the novel even has Ner'zhul explain this and then have Arthas kill him. That's a pretty clear move towards directly contradicting Blizzard. MegaNerd18 (talk) 01:10, July 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, the thing about that is that in his dream state, Arthas "kills" both his human side and Ner'zhul's orc side, leaving Arthas to be a vessel of incredible power he took from Ner'zhul. Ner'zhul+Arthas= Lich King 2.0 . Lich King 2.0 > Ner'Zhul and Good Arthas . Lich King 2.0 - Ner'Zhul - Most of Good Arthas + Ner'Zhul's smarts, power, necromancy + Arthas's body = What we get in ICC. It's all very simple math. Gorlack2231 (talk) 22:41, July 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * * Thinks about that for a moment* ... *head pops*. 22:43, July 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh, and divide by zero Gorlack2231 (talk) 00:22, July 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * That's confusing actually. All sources directly from Blizzard have said that Arthas and Ner'zhul don't exist seperately anymore, but are simply the Lich King. Nobody's 'dominant', there's only the Lich King.MegaNerd18 (talk) 03:10, August 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Why would a forum post from a community manager - someone not part of creative development - take precedence over an official novel? The deep voice is caused by wearing the Helm of Domination (as are the glowing eyes), and we have a quote from Chris Metzen (who is part of creative development) saying the Lich King has Arthas' personality.  His portrayal in the game supports this - he's very arrogant and his goal is to see the player characters follow in his footsteps. Egrem (talk) 06:22, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Killable?
I have been absent from WoW since the release of Wrath of the Lich King, and sfter the Fall of the Lich King patch I'm wondering if he's still killable? I remember reading somwhere that killing him was a one-time event in WoW. --Sir Tristram (talk) 18:25, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No, like any instance, bosses are not removed just because we head into the future. 20:38, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Sweet. I really want to participate in that.-- Sir Tristram (Speak, mortal. My Conquests.) 02:24, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

BlizzCon 2010
From the Q&A at the BlizzCon 2010 Quests and Lore Panel:


 * Q: I have a question for you regarding the storyline of Ner'zhul. Is he finished, or what's going on with that?  And what's going on with Bolvar?
 * A: Yes. Yeah, Ner'zhul is done. He served us well in that capacity, but really the Lich King idea... really is the ultimate expression, you know, as Arthas or whatever. Ner'zhul's done. Relative to Bolvar...  let me think about this guys...  it's kinda weird, there's where my instinct goes in terms of the storyline, and then there's kind of like, we're probably not going to build another Northrend expansion anytime soon, right?  So, you know, we're trying to push ideas in new and fresher directions. But it's kinda like one of those Outland things, right, Cataclysm is kind of present day. How do we illustrate for you guys what's going on in Northrend, right? Like Bolvar's sacrifice is pretty bitching, and ultimately, for some length of time, he's gonna be up there keeping a lid on the Scourge. You know, with the Argent Crusade kinda playing "good cop", you know, and making sure that the undead are not getting rowdy again. But Bolvar, and the fact of him being this new kind of Lich King, is definitely fertile soil, but we are unlikely to chase big undead themes for the next little while, so it's kinda hard to say how that role will play out.

Based on Metzen's statement, I think it's safe to assume Ner'zhul was truly destroyed in Rise of the Lich King. If we can agree on that, it would lay all that "identity crisis" speculation to rest. Egrem (talk) 04:03, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * There is still the mysterious "The Lich King" entity that was in there along with Arthas. I recall Metzen mentioning that the helmet was completely empty at some point, but I may be remembering wrong.-- 04:30, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * "The Lich King" has always been a title, not an entity in its own right. The three beings in the shared consciousness were Arthas (as a death knight), Ner'zhul (as an orc), and Arthas' humanity (as a sickly boy). The latter two were destroyed, although an echo of the boy remained with Arthas' heart. Egrem (talk) 20:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Wrath of the Lich King itself contradicts, or expands upon, Rise of the Lich King. I tried to figure this out on Forum:The Lich King's head. I should probably expand upon what I wrote there using the BlizzCon 2010 info.-- 01:09, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Cathedral of darkness
The lich king makes an appearance in the quest Tirions Gambit and is physically in that quest. Why is it not part of his lore appearances on his page? Considering that a major event like the destruction of his very heart happened in that quest, it should be there. Also his appearance in that quest should be listed in his disambiguation page.--Beyoturk (talk) 04:45, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Title
This seems like more of a title since Ner'zhul, Arthas, and Bolvar have all been described as Lich King. I wanted to change it to more of a page like Warchief but I wanted to hear what other people had to say first. (talk contribs) 17:55, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I consider him a character that retroactively became one with interchangeable minds. It is not a title.-- 20:45, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Eyes
Does anyone else think his eyes changing from a glowing blue to a fire red was symbolism of the transition of Wotlk to Cataclysm?  (talk contribs) 22:54, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I want to think it had something to do with Bolvar's being on fire, or his being (having been?) a paladin. --SCARY WIZARD (talk) 02:36, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As a lore reason sure but I was just wondering if anyone else got the idea. [[Image:inv_helmet_44.png|22px]]  (talk contribs) 03:01, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I never really gave it much thought, I just though that it was supposed to be cool. --Sairez (talk) 03:25, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think it is just because Bolvar is fire-based, not because Cataclysm was fire-based.-- 03:41, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Bolvar's Photo
Should we use Bolvar's Art as the main image since it's more up to date or stay with Arthas's since it's more recognizable?


 * I think Arthas's image is more relevant. He was the focus of Wrath of the Lich King, and the majority of this article is about him.  Bolvar may become important in the future, but right now he's little more than a footnote. Egrem (talk) 21:16, 4 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I can understand that position. But the story has progressed, Arthas is no longer relevant as the LK and Blizzard has already made reference to Bolvar as the new LK in other media. Visibility in-game or no, Bolvar is the current LK. Blizzard even updated the Northrend loading screen to show the change. I think this page should reflect that. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 21:28, 4 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Bolvar is more current, but I'd argue that Arthas remains more relevant. Rise of the Lich King and Wrath of the Lich King were about Arthas, and Blizzard continued making Arthas merchandise (and giving him prominent roles in other products, like Snow Fight and Heroes of the Storm) even after his death.  Metzen called Arthas "the ultimate expression" of the Lich King idea.  Even in-universe, Arthas is a household name while Bolvar's status is known only to a few.  If Bolvar were playing an active role in the story, I'd agree with the switch, but he hasn't really done anything yet (other than keeping the Scourge passive).  There are fewer than a dozen sentences about him in this article.  Egrem (talk) 23:00, 4 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Just seems disjointed to have the infobox list Bolvar as the current LK, while the picture is of a previous one. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 00:08, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with Aquamonkeyeg. Same goes for Azshara. While she was far more prominent during her night elven times we choose her current form.--LemonBaby (talk) 05:16, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Should a character's infobox image always depict them in their most recent state, even if an earlier one was more iconic? What about Kael'thas or Ner'zhul? Egrem (talk) 05:33, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I'd argue yes for the following reasons:
 * The photo is a way of providing information in itself. A quick check to say "this is how the character currently looks" (or looked at the time of death or whatnot).
 * What counts as "iconic" can be very subjective. For example, Thrall in Doomhammer's armour is far more iconic to me than him being in shaman's robes. Yet that's been his attire since around Cataclysm, and I could understand why people would consider that iconic also. Ergo, while I prefer "armor Thrall" to "robe Thrall," I'd still argue that "robe Thrall" is the better choice of picture as it's his current physical state.Hawki (talk) 06:26, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Fair points. Looks like it's 3 to 1 in favor of using the most up-to-date version.  Egrem (talk) 22:33, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Frost DK Artifact event
Here's a transcript of the event inside the reforged swords.
 * say
 * say


 * Stage 6: Purge the blades of the malevolent souls within.
 * Frostmourne floats in front of the spirits of Ner'zhul and Arthas. Arthas is wielding his paladin hammer, Light's Vengeance.
 * say
 * say
 * say
 * say
 * say
 * say
 * When Arthas reaches low health.
 * say
 * Arthas runs to grab Frostmourne and begins channeling Dark Pact.
 * say
 * say
 * Once Arthas finishes channeling Dark Pact, fight resumes.
 * Upon defeating Arthas.
 * say
 * say

--Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 20:23, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * They seem to be reenacting WC3, which is why I don't believe it's their actual spirits but just echoes reliving their past. The edit war that's been brewing about this needs a specific answer, and I asked Kosak and Afrasiabi about it on Twitter but I don't expect them to reply. Either way, the LK was still only Arthas in Wrath. He stabbed Ner'zhul with Frostmourne in his book, so if that's the real Ner'zhul then that is why his spirit is inside it. ReignTG (talk) 20:29, 6 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I really dunno what to make of this. It really looks like reliving their past but Ner'zhul then speaks about Arthas's soul which could be Arthas's post-death, no? I'd like to think that when Arthas consumed Ner'zhul that it wouldn't sent him to the Frostmourne. Both, Metzen and Loreology said that Ner'zhul is really gone... but heck, they said that about Archimonde too and we know what happened... --Mordecay (talk) 20:39, 6 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Don't get me wrong, I want it to be the real Ner'zhul because I never liked that Arthas took complete control, but as you said Metzen and Loreology have both said he's gone for good. This doesn't necessarily contradict that, and no one at Blizzard has said that they changed their minds about him. For now it's still the case.ReignTG (talk) 20:50, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

The DK Artifact Reveal says they are spirits trapped within and must be subdued: Countless souls were freed from the broken blade, but others were not so fortunate. Today the shards of Frostmourne can be recrafted and infused with even more power. However, the spirits still trapped within must first be subdued and bent to the wielder's will. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 22:04, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

When Sylvanas saw Arthas´s spirit (a boy), she too would materialize in the Frostmourne then? --Mordecay (talk) 22:14, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I guess Arthas stabbing Ner'zhul just sucked him up instead of obliterating him, then. ReignTG (talk) 23:37, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Yea, that seems to be the case. IDK what to make of Arthas' soul being in Frostmourne when Sylvanas saw it in the dark void-whatever of Edge of Night. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 03:49, 8 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Yep, that I could work with. But the Sylvanas thing. --Mordecay (talk) 22:00, 10 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I guess the void in her story was also Frostmourne. There's also a theory that what she saw was never real and the val'kyr were tricking her. I never bought it, but it is a theory I've seen. As a third option, we've seen souls be in Frostmourne but also be somewhere else; Uther was both in WPL at his tomb but in Frostmourne in the 5-mans.ReignTG (talk) 03:05, 11 December 2015 (UTC)


 * And also what about Matthias? He should be in Frostmourne too if the boy from the novel and Matthias were supposed to be the same but there is a mention on Matthias´s page that he was created without Golden´s knowledge and thus only for "game purpose". --Mordecay (talk) 23:25, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

It seems that the mobs have been renamed to "Echo of Arthas Menethil" (ID=93963, WoWDB still lists it as "Spirit of Arthas Menethil") and "Echo of Ner'zhul" (ID=94982, WoWDB still lists it as "Spirit of Ner'zhul"). --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 18:59, 30 December 2015 (UTC)"


 * That's certainly better! --Mordecay (talk) 19:16, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Class
What's the idea behind the listing the class of previous entities that is and were Lich King? The character Lich King itself isn't a shaman / paladin or death knight. Thoughts? --Mordecay (talk) 17:30, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Ner'zhul used his (seemingly) shaman ability to see into the future while LK. But for the most part, the LK itself was never any of those classes, just the people who embodied the LK were formerly of those classes. I think removing them would be fine. If someone insists on keeping them, then put "formerly". --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 17:55, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


 * It's not entirely previous entities, the Lich King does have shamanistic powers such as the ones Aqua mentioned, plus elemental power over frost (the Warcraft III manual says he gifted liches with exactly that, which I guess extends to death knights too), so in that regard he fulfills the "shaman" archetype. However I agree that they should just be removed, in fact most of the time the whole "Class" thing doesn't apply and are usually stretches. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 20:06, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Seemingly! --Mordecay (talk) 21:50, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

You're the Best
Was the lich king the best general? lets looks at this strategically i personally think that he was a very sneaky and down right bastard but you can not judge a general on what he did you must judge a general on his tactics and his outcome of battle the lich king was very brutal and did not care for his servants or lower lackeys lives<by why should he he does not need too respect them he only has respect for his high ally's and death knights and after the downfall of the scourge i think we can all agree he deserved it after slaughtering hundreds of innocents burning Quel thalas the eleven kingdom of old to the ground but lets face it his tactics were amazing if you ever played the undead campaign we saw how arttharas commanded by the lich king smashed through allied army blitzkrieg through there defences and serounded and crushed them but this leaves the question was he a good General? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by

Chronicles 3
So, the account of Chronicles on page 171-172 (which are the official canon now, as far as I understand) regarding the interlude differs from the novel (no Lehner, Arthas wanting to defend Azeroth against the Legion and the Old Gods). Should we mention this as a retcon?HorstVanDoom (talk) 10:44, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Just because Chronicle doesn't mention something doesn't mean it's no longer canon. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:16, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The how should it be worded? "According to one account, ..." "according to another account"? As it stands, the situation presented in Chronicles is entirely different from the novel.HorstVanDoom (talk) 17:39, 28 August 2019 (UTC)