Talk:Hakkar the Soulflayer

Faceless
Nitpicking about lore here: --Ragestorm, Head Bookkeeper 09:37, 23 December 2006 (EST)
 * 1) What is the exact quotation that makes people link him to the Faceless Ones?
 * 2) What links him to the Old Gods?
 * IIRC, Erankius says it is Hakkar that has corrupted him. Malfurion then says it is "old whisperings" that corrupted him. This would suggest Hakkar is in league with an/the Old God(s). The Troll mentioned calls him "the Faceless One" from what i remember, and i doubt that was intended as a link to the tFT versions. I'll have to double check up on accuracy and sources, but it goes roughly something like that. -- Zeal ( talk  -  contr  - web) 10:00, 23 December 2006 (EST)


 * No problem- I'm accepting the Old God connection, but I find it difficult to link him to the creatures in TFT, especially since he called "The Faceless". More importantly, this will answer a fair question: did the Faceless-Old God connection arise from Hakkar, or people thinking that the Forgotten One is an Old God?--Ragestorm, Head Bookkeeper 10:14, 23 December 2006 (EST)


 * Yeah i agree, and it seems people made the Old God connection via the Forgotten One-Old God and Faceless One speculation, long before the information from Malfurion. -- Zeal ( talk  -  contr  - web) 10:26, 23 December 2006 (EST)


 * Yet, no evidence for Forgotten/Old; and Hakkar is clearly not one of the Faceless/Unbroken.--Ragestorm, Head Bookkeeper 10:31, 23 December 2006 (EST)

Dumb question, but why he is called the Faceless One? Heck, why are the faceless ones called faceless ones? They look like they have faces to me.--Austin P 16:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Elemental Lieutenant?
Forgive my ignorance, but has anyone voiced the idea that perhaps Hakkar is the Elemental Lord of the Wilds? The 5 Shamanistic Spirits each have a corrsponding "Lord" that serves the old gods, except for the Wilds. This would tie in to the idea that he might be an Old god or the son of an Old God. Just as the Dark iron dwarves might worship Ragnarros as a god, perhaps Hakkar convinced the Trolls to worship him in a similiar manner.--User:Chickamauga 15:33, 26 March 2008 (EST)

Sounds acceptable, except for the facts that there aren't any wild elementals (as far as I know). Xavius, the Satyr Lord (talk) 09:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Nor are the four Elemental Lords tied to specific Old Gods. The four of them served all five of the Old Gods. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 21:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Player's fault
Shouldn't it say in wiki that Hakkar's return to Azeroth is actually "heroes" fault? It comes clear when we do the Yeh'kinya quest line and later confront him about it http://www.wowhead.com/?quest=8181

"Blizzard Cross-Overs" section
Where does this information come from? I have never heard of any of the claims made in this section. (And the base model of Hakkar is a naga...) Rutéa (talk) 02:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Citations?
I think it would be a good idea to cite the direct quotations from the in-game book "Wrath of Soulflayer." (IE, everything from "The long centuries following the Great Sundering were difficult ones for the troll race" to "the trolls succeeded in destroying Hakkar's avatar and banishing him from the world." I was wondering where that lore came from. Siadea (talk) 03:16, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

What if he's just in league with the Old Gods?
There's a lot of speculation that's been going around that he's descended from or is an Old God. He seems to lack the power to be one. And since there is a wind serpent loa in Northrend who also is very malicious to those who haven't worked for her, could this just mean Hakkar's one very bad loa that is working with the Old Gods? And could it be that he has such strong ties with them that he considers himself to be like one? Which could explain why he's been referred to by trolls and such as things that have described Old Gods. He seems to be a loa, purely, and not an Old God at all. Obviously I can't cite anything because nothing has been stated and I'm remaining speculative. But it seems like common sense to me that he just works with these ultimate evils and isn't actually one of them. Mykael Mourningsun (talk) 05:14, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm loathe to say that he's an Old God, simply because he doesn't seem to fit the Lovecraftian style of the two revealed so far. I'm more inclined to believe he is either the creation of an Old God, in league with one or my personal choice, an Old God 'projecting' an imitation of the Troll blood god for its own purposes - one that will be revealed in time. Metalmunki (talk) 02:37, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

Loa of Blood
"The Vilebranch trolls here were always worshippers of the foul god Hakkar, the loa of blood. He was a sick and twisted entity that nearly broke through to our world, but he was defeated long ago." Egrem (talk) 06:58, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.wowhead.com/quest=26524

Status
Edited status to reflect his current situation. Aphetoros (talk) 02:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Zul'Gurub
The lore regarding Hakkar's resurrection pre-Cata eluded me but has it been specified how did the priests bring Hakkar back? Minutes ago I found some quests from Yeh'kinya implying the Filled Egg of Hakkar was used. --Mordecay (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes. Nice catch. I don't know why it wasn't there.-- 01:53, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Cataclysm's canonity
I'm wondering whether the quests in the Temple of Atal'Hakkar are actually canon as there are the cases with the prophet and Eranikus which ignores the actual lore. The dungeon didn't receive a story update as the Shadowfang Keep did. So... should the first Cataclysm's section of this page mention that the quests should be taken with a grain of salt or something?--Mordecay (talk) 16:06, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It received sort of a "soft" story update; it was the same basic premise, but it plays out rather differently. I assumed it was just the Gurubashi trolls' second attempt at resurrecting Hakkar, and explains his presence in the updated Zul'Gurub. What cases did you notice that "ignore the actual lore"? -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 16:12, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Is Hakkar's appearance in 4.1's Zul'Gurub connected with the temple? There is just his spirit being controlled or whatever and I don't think this connection is mentioned anywhere. And to explain ignore the actual lore so Eranikus is deceased as per Stormrage but yet we see his shade here and Itharius doesn't mention Stormrage's events at all. And also Jammalan... killed in a pre-Cata quest but yet still alive in Cata (even outside of the dungeon).--Mordecay (talk) 16:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The Blood God Hakkar would seem to suggest a connection, and Eranikus (quest) doesn't really contradict Stormrage since Itharius explicitly states it was only his shade, and not Eranikus himself. He even says "Let us hope that his full form does not still exist..." (emphasis mine). As for Jammal'an, most of the vanilla dungeon bosses have turned up again in new quests in Cataclysm, often in a way that assumes they were simply never killed. Hell, the entire Scholomance roster got moved out into the Western Plaguelands questing in Cataclysm, and wasn't removed from the dungeon until its Mists of Pandaria revamp. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:10, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Aah, yes, after all, it can be as you are saying. And... with Eranikus I was thinking that with him being deceased there can't be his shade.--Mordecay (talk) 17:28, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Didn't Aran have a shade while deceased? --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 17:31, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Good one!--Mordecay (talk) 17:37, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

The Heart of the Temple is worded in a way that could mean that he was brought back from his death in Stormrage, or that he just left an echo/shade of himself there. Eranikus (quest) clarifies the quest before it, but it also seems to forget what was just said. It goes from "I hear it is a shade that is maybe him, or maybe an echo." to "It was just a shade?! He may still be out there!" It also implies that Eranikus has not appeared (or died) before, which would make this still a precursor to his attack on Moonglade. The Blood God Hakkar seems to put the quests after the first Zul'Gurub, as I don't think Hakkar (who they are using the actual bones of this time) was physically summoned before that. I recall that being debated in relation to the Gurubashi civil war. It seems half sequel, half anachronistic reboot. My advice is to describe the content as an isolated story, but not try to hard to make up a narrative for it to fit into.-- 20:47, 25 August 2014 (UTC)