The background color for Artanis' name should be green, for his obviously a member of the Akliae Tribe, whose tribal color is green. He is certainly not a member of the blue Sargas Tribe.-UPL2229 18:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
He is a member of the "Fleet of the Matriarch", which is blue. His forces are blue in every mission he's seen in in Brood War. Even his forces attacking Kerrigan in Omega is blue.
We don't know what tribe he belongs to. The only Protoss characters we can be sure of are Khas (probably Ara, not 100% sure, used to be Shelak) and Aldaris (Conclave member, so almost certainly Ara). PsiSeveredHead 22:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Executor Artanis ?[]
So now the "The sotry so far" article openly refers to him as the executor we play in both Starcraft and Brood War. It sounds quite strange, should we rewrite the page accordingly ?
Yes. It's something I'm intending to do. Alas, I've been busy. But note other contributors are welcome to edit the page. PsiSeveredHead 22:45, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I think that's an error on Blizzard's part -- it was obvious in the game that the player and Artanis were two seperate entities, I'm not sure how this would be confused. Maybe add a note at the end to say that this is what this release says and then list why this isn't the case. SilentDragoon 22:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm not going to pretend I'm happy about it. However, Blizzard is probably not making a mistake.
I didn't like Queen of Blades, but I have to admit it introduced at least one other retcon that has since been backed up - specifically, Zeratul's green eyes.
At the Lore Panel, the Blizzard people (Chris Metzen and Andy Chambers) said they're getting rid of the player characters. So, for instance, Raynor and "the Commander" are now the same person. (Sometimes Raynor will be called "Commander"). Looks like the same thing for Artanis/"the Executor". (Also, Uprising - written by a Blizzard Entertainment employee - started the retcon for Duke's rank. Looks like it made it through.)
Retcons change things. We can't just say it makes some previous statements make little to no sense, because those statements are effectively being changed. Blizzard does not put things up on their website for no reason. PsiSeveredHead 22:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Although Blizzard is phasing out player characters, I wouldn't say that Raynor and "the commander" are the same person. We know that the Mar Sara magistrate did indeed exist as seen in Liberty's Crusade, personally leading refugees to a concentration point (mission 1) and involved in negotions with Mengsk (mission 3 briefing). He isn't seen in the book however, as it doesn't deal with the mission briefings. As the novel doesn't extend to mission 10, we don't see him 'in action.' Exactly what happened to "the commander" is a mystery but, in terms of position, seems to have been replaced by Matt Horner as Raynor's XO.--Hawki
Maybe he was Matt Horner! (Kidding, kidding.)
Blizzard isn't necessarily making the novels more canon than the game. They have the right to override any part of the novels they don't like.
The Colonial Magistrate already existed in StarCraft I, so putting him into the novel doesn't make him "more canon". If Blizzard removes him with a retcon, then he ceases to exist, regardless of what the novel or even StarCraft I says. PsiSeveredHead 23:28, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
The Episode II cerebrate is a prime example of a player character being phased out, being killed in QoB. I guess missions 9 and 10 have Araq as the player character.--Hawki
When that Cerebrate was allegedly killed (I say that because QoB broke canon in so many areas...) it was right before the new Executor (Artanis) came to pick up Tassadar... in Protoss 4. The novel covered events between Zerg 6-ish to Protoss 4 that weren't covered in the game. The "player" Cerebrate could have been coordinating things on Aiur from Char during the early portion of that period (eg Zerg 9 or 10).
If your character changed during the game (eg right before Zerg 9), they would have mentioned that one way or another.
Of course, they could retcon all that in the StarCraft II manual; I wouldn't be happy, and I doubt they'll do it, but they can. At the moment, the game still trumps the novel, but Blizzard's official StarCraft II material should trump material from StarCraft I. PsiSeveredHead 23:28, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
As for Artanis, while he's the Executor of Episode III, he is not the one of Episode IV, as he's become a NPC.--Hawki
True ... unless Blizzard retcons it. We won't know until they do the second part of the "Story So Far". PsiSeveredHead 23:28, 23 November 2007 (UTC) As far as the Praetor-Executor relationship goes, it actually makes sense historically (to an extent) that Praetor is a higher rank than Executor, although it's a bit more complex than the chain of command between say a General and Colonel. I'll probably create a Preator article at some point.--Hawki 23:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
QoB is obviously (and thankfully) not considered canon. The version presented in the article follows the game's timeline, in Warcraft they tried to follow the novels rather than the games when the two contradicted and parts of the lore just didn't make sense. The game version is much better than QoB's. However, I'm quite sure Praetor is a lower rank than Executor. Fenix and Artanis were both Praetor, and they have to follow our orders, unlike Aldaris for instance, that was clearly the Executor's superior. Maybe Blizzard will clarify this issue in the Q&A next week.
High Templar?[]
What source says Artanis is a High Templar? Does it directly say so somewhere or does something imply it?
It says so in the Brood War manual. PsiSeveredHead 03:27, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Is this image genuine?[]
I found this in one of the cafes in Naver. Is this image real? It looks like it, judging by the texture.
- StarShade 17:44, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Personally, I'm sceptical. It doesn't look like anything from the SCII cinematic sequences we've seen thus far, and it seems a bit too high res to be a game unit. Couldn't you have just linked to the image at the source site instead of uploading it? Especially given how we're if its from Blizzard? Please note that the Help:Images policy has been recently updated and I'd be nice to start naming and categorizing uploaded images in a saner fashion. Meco 20:05, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Praetorship retconned?[]
The Story So Far Part 2 mentions Artanis as the Executor during Episode IV. That doesn't mean that Episode IV player character was retconned, but it seems to retcon Artanis being appointed Praetor.
Alternatively, it could mean he was appointed Praetor at the very start of the evacuation. XEL 15:19, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
According to the Lore panel at BlizzCon 2007, the concept of all player characters has been retconned (specifically to remove them from the game). From Story So Far part 1 and Queen of Blades, we find that Artanis was the "executor" (hence, player character) from StarCraft Episode III.
The praetor vs executor stuff gets complicated. In some areas, Blizzard has suggested that there can only be one executor at a time (eg Adun), in others it's been suggested there were numerous executors simultaneously, etc. It doesn't help that the only time we're told of an executor other than Tassadar or Artanis is in novels and semi-Blizzard products. Kimera 757 (talk) 15:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
This may be slicing Story So Far part 2 rather thinly, but in Brood War itself, we don't even see Artanis until mission 2 (Shakuras), where he tells you he's the new praetor. He could have been executor in the first mission. (In which case, Story So Far part 2 and Brood War don't actually conflict.)
If it's a retcon, it's not entirely clear. Kimera 757 (talk) 15:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Actually, Artanis is present in Brood War from the very start of the Protoss campaign. He shows up in the mission briefing of Escape from Aiur, where Aldaris tells he was appointed Praetor.
Metzen and Chambers rather said they are getting rid of the player characters, read- there will be no player characters in SC2, not that they are retconning them out.
Artanis seems to be appointed Praetor just at the start of Retreat From Aiur. As for Executors and Praetors, they don't appear to be in higher or lesser position to each other. The Executors are few and they are given command of the Prototss fleet and carry out important missions. Praetors command Protoss forces on Aiur (Fenix, who was the Praetor of the Protoss Defense Forces and Conclave's Praetor Guard). XEL 15:50, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
But there will be player characters in StarCraft II, just not the same faceless variety from StarCraft I. They will be like Warcraft III characters, having actual personality and actually being seen.
There may or may not be more than one Executor. Blizzard has never confirmed that either way.
I'll go fix that praetor stuff. Kimera 757 (talk) 15:55, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm. But Blizzard authorized Insurrection and Retribution, where other Executors are present and Shadow of the Xel'Naga is canon with all doubts about it being destroyed by The Dark Templar Saga.
So, just to clarify, was Artanis never a Praetor? Or was he an Executor and then became Praetor at the beginning of the Brood War? Sry to bring up old discussion topics =/ --Thebrowncloud 22:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure Blizzard retconned Artanis' rank (so that he was never a praetor) in all the newer sources. Since Blizzard directly wrote SSF2, we have to go with what is says. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) 03:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Under "player character" I mean faceless entity like in SC1. XEL 15:58, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Canon or not, all of the novels (even Dark Templar Saga) have inaccuracies and/or contradictions, which is why I was bit hesitant to say we know that for sure. (For instance, Shadow Hunters said the Executor is the leader of the Templar Caste, which contradicts Shadow of the Xel'Naga. Or does it? Executor could be a rank like General, with the SotXN Executor being the equivalent of a Brigadier General and Adun being a four-star General (there's only supposed to be one per branch of service)).
For this wiki's executor article, we assume there's more than one, as otherwise we'd have to cut out big chunks of the novels :) But I don't know what Blizzard's intentions were. In the absense of clarity of them, we go with the novels. Also, it's possible that after Adun's death, they decided to create more than one Executor posistion. Etc etc.
For player character, the wiki discusses both StarCraft I and StarCraft II styles. Kimera 757 (talk) 16:04, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Rank and Age[]
In this reading it says that Artanis was young to achieve the rank of Executor. This is clarified in any place that I can find. It does however state that he as the youngest to achieve the rank of Praetor in the Brood War manual.
Paul Ainsley vs Patrick Seitz[]
Why did Seitz replace Ainsley? Didn't Ainsley die AFTER WoL came out? MarKreationsStudios1 (talk) 22:42, April 21, 2015 (UTC)
Served Nerve Chords[]
"Personality and Traits" says he severed his nerve chords, but the Oblivion trailer linked as a source shows quite clearly and repeatedly that his chords are intact. DrakeyC (talk) 14:42, July 16, 2015 (UTC)
Article Length[]
Some of these character articles are getting rediculously long (i.e. Sarah Kerrigan? Should they be split into manageable Character (Lore), Character (SC1), Character (SC2), Character (Coop-Mode), etc., articles (i.e. Marines)? --Falconeye (talk) 05:54, December 8, 2015 (UTC)
- No. There's no reason to split up the article from a lore perspective as the information doesn't exist in isolation from one another. Game units get separated sometimes as the info can exist in isolation from one another, and that how one unit functions in one game can be very different from another. In the case of Artanis, I don't know if there's enough game info to warrant a split between articles.--Hawki (talk) 07:53, December 8, 2015 (UTC)
- That's not a case of legibility, that's a case of length. Can't comment on the character, but taking it as is, that either suggests that there's little info on said character, or it's been severely truncated. Length and legibility are too separate issues anyway. So unless there's issues such as spelling, grammar, sentence structure, etc., there's not a legibility issue being presented.--Hawki (talk) 11:40, February 22, 2016 (UTC)