This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Emerald Dream article.

Be polite
Assume good faith
Be welcoming

If you wish to discuss the subject itself, please use Talk:Emerald Dream/Analysis.
Non-editorial comments made here should be moved to the Analysis page.

"Without the interaction of intelligent beings" Edit

I'm not QUITE sure this is the right place for this (or if it needs to be in that other section on discussing the topic itself), but several places on the page it mentions that the Emerald Dream is what Azeroth would be like without the interference of (intelligent) races. This is only partially true, environmentally friendly as it is.  :)

The Emerald Dream also doesn't show weathering effects or the ravages of time. It does, however, show nature's effects, like growing plants and trees, but without the accompanying animals. That is, vegetable forms of life but not animal. Mountains do not show the effects of wind or rain weathering, so many craggy spires or deep canyons (formed by running water over eons) are glazed over in the Dream. These are NOT the effects of intelligent beings, but rather of the (non-"nature", in the sense of plantlife) elements. Wind, water, fire, lightning, ect.

I'm not sure what a better way to word it is, but it does paint a different picture. A world without the intelligent races would still see weathering effects and animal life, both of which shouldn't be in the Emerald Dream. So...basically I'm saying this is a bit misleading. I'm not sure if whoever wrote it wasn't familiar with that or not, but it was what I noticed most about Malfurion's trips into the Dream in the War of the Ancient's trilogy. Namely how the mountains were smooth and rounded, not weathered by the elements and time. And I can provide quotes supporting this, if needed. --SubduedRadical 23:29, 23 October 2010 (CST)

The Image on This Page Edit

What is this image supposed to be? Supposed to prove? It's a swatch from a WC3 map, not anything from WoW, and unless I'm forgetting something major, we never saw the Emerald Dream in WC3. Ergo, I'm going to presume someone's trying to pull a fast one here... --Brommon 14:08, 23 May 2006 (EDT)

Old Emerald Dream Data Edit

I recently edited that there are in fact areas in the game files you can access with GM powers that represent the Emerald Dream, even posted a youtube link of someone exploring it. It was removed with reasoning "no datamined contet", yet I see Ulduar related articles full of datamined information. And since it was youtubed as if being in-game (private server ofc, but it was/is in game files), so what's the deal? Why's some datamined content allowed to be here? --RocketBrother (talk) 11:10, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

The Ancients Edit

It seems to me that the Demigods who die seem to be ending up there. We know for certain that Cenarius is there, and Malorne is rumored to be either there or at Elune's side. Just about all the others who died have either come back to life or rumored to come back soon. Then the whole thing about Ursol and Ursoc just "sleeping until they overcome their wounds." Sounds like a pretty obvious tie in to me. Is this worth mentioning? Meneldir 03:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

WotLK Edit

On Feb. 05 2008 Jeff Kaplan mentioned in an interview on Wrath of the Lich King that "some time after release" the next hero class (after Death Knight) might be an Archdruid and that the quest for this hero class would be "directly connected to Malfurion Stormrage and the much-anticipated Emerald Dream.". So one might conclude that the Emerald Dream is planned as a content patch for Wrath of the Lich King.

I've removed this section because it is misinterpreting the linked article and causing confusion. Kaplan mentioned nothing of the sort in the article. The quoted parts concerning an Archdruid hero class and the Emerald Dream were conjecture on the part of the article's author. They were a "Zitron tip". That is, they were made up. --Djr 22:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Ehm... Who wrote that wasn't that far from the truth... Whoa!!! look at this [1] --N'Nanz (talk) 22:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
'Archdruid hero class' and 'directly connected to Malfurion Stormrage and the much-anticipated Emerald Dream' are not equal to 'some quests'. Still woot.--SWM2448 02:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

"Dreamform" and "dream"Edit

I'll talk about an extract of Stormrage, but no that is no spoiler of the story.

In Stormrage, Tyrande (roughly) says that they should all fall asleep to get into the Emerald Dream, which Fandral replies that "dreamform" is different from "mortal sleep". But, in Nightmares, the intro states that those two things are one and the same.

So who is right? Or did I read Nightmares wrong?

IconSmall Hamuul Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 13:27, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

Probably an oversight of earlier accounts. Without knowing the exact phrasing in both stories, a way to combine these statements is that preparing for actual sleep helps the transition into Dreamstate, and/or that the preparation is more like falling asleep than meditation. So Nightmares just simplified the explanation. ~ Nathanyel (talk) 17:02, March 14, 2010 (UTC)
It might be a difference like the one between dreaming and lucid dreaming.--SWM2448 17:48, March 14, 2010 (UTC)

What is the threat of the Emerald Dream?Edit

Linking the Emerald Dream to the non dream could cause problems, but what other threat could it cause?
Does the Naga Queen Azshara linger in the dream in another form, or can people only be in ether the Dream or in regular Azeroth at any given time? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Knighthonor (talkcontr).

For a Future ExpansionEdit

So at BlizzCon 2010, it was mentioned that the Emerald Dream, will in fact, be in the future. Should this be included? Hu'Alock (talk) 18:08, October 24, 2010 (UTC)

As your section title might be misleading though, I'll add that it sounded like a content patch, meaning a raid, not its own expansion. I think they phrased it something like "between 4.2 and 6.2" but I'd have to look that up again. ~ Nathanyel (talk) 05:47, October 25, 2010 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.