From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Read somewhere about the new book "Rise of the horde" where Ner'zhul is pictured as a hero for disobeying Kil'jaeden. Maybe we should add something about that

Not sure entirely what you mean. Do you mean that the book will portray him as a hero, or that the orcs in the book regard him as a hero? Either way, we won't include it until the book is published. --Ragestorm 14:09, 2 November 2006 (EST)
Based on the game manuals for WC3 and WoW, the original Ner'zhul didn't seem that bad to me. He made tentative contact with a demon and then realized his mistake and canceled the deal. From then on events were more or less out of his control.--Illidan Rocks 16:03, 10 January 2007 (EST)
RotH actually reveals that Ner'zhul was tricked into the deal- admittedly, his own streak of ambition and hedonism made him more supple, but he was still manipulated.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 10:00, 11 January 2007 (EST)
I'm reading RotH right now and from all I've seen, Ner'zhul is genuinely regrettful of causing the orcs to be corrupted. though I haven't finished the book, I find it curious that during the second war he would openly embrace the demon magics and perpetuate the war by invading Azeroth. I understand his anger and generally pissed attitude once he became the Lich King, being tortured by Kil'jaeden and then getting locked into a block of ice, but even that doesn't fit with his "repented" attitude presented in the book. Am I the only one who's confused with this issue? --Geofram 23:11, 27 February 2007
I see Ner'zhul as a being with a good strong set of morals. However, he's willing to forsake these morals for the sake of ambition. For instance, he treats his Scourge servants with a relative amount of paternal love. For the most part he seems to regard Kel'thuzad and Arthas like his children (well Arthas at least). He's never been really portrayed as pure evil. The only people he's actively combated are the dreadlords, the legion and humanity. All of which were his enemies in life.--Aldrius 02:53, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
Umm... I think you'll find that he has been portrayed as something close to pure evil (he wasn't quite at that point yet) until RotH. In BtDP, he was the evil Warchief seeking to bend the powers of Sargeras to give the Orcs new, rich worlds to conquer. In the RoC manual, he lacked only the "brazen audacity" to carry out Kil'jaeden's plan, and in the game... well, I think the Scourge speaks for himself. You're right that he has morals he gives up in the face of ambition, but the whole "liches as children" thing is a bit of a stretch...--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 09:15, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

Spirititually speaking, Ner'zhul is pretty much dead,if he didn't die in the events of the second war,he died when he became the lich king. Zarnks 03:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Correction, spiritually speaking, Ner'zhul is "undead".Baggins 04:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I mean the good in him is dead

I doubt the good in him is dead, maybe just forgotten. But the story said that "at that moment, the orc known as Ner'zhul was shattered forever". But if you read Rise of the Horde, you will see that he was trying to do the right thing, he wasn't evil, just tricked and misunderstood. He was one of the wisest people in Warcraft history, he aimed to save his people from evil. It was not intentional to lead them into the very heart of it. Baldr 00:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC) Zarnks 16:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


Added two more successions that i believe ner'zhul was part of, the fact he created the first horde and his position in the shadowmoon clan --Diggory 08:00, 29 January 2007 (EST)

Removed the Shadowmoon one, as they're no point in having it if both preceding and succeeding are unknown. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 08:38, 29 January 2007 (EST)


Did he become a warlock (and gain a cool robe) some time between the start of the first war and the BtDP or was that retconed? The way I see it, he sucummed to/embraced demonic corruption but still had a deep hatred for what Kil did to his people, so he tried to find a new unspoiled world to invade and start over (or try, the orcs were still pretty bloodlusted) and save his people.--SWM2448 00:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

It's never clear, but it does appear that he was some brand of warlock for a while, but it's implied that that stopped when Gul'dan usurped him. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 03:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd say it's wrong to class him as Warlock: In neither of the novels Rise of the Horde, Tides of Darkness and Beyond the Dark Portal, Ner'zhul shows any sign of being Warlock.
He remains a Shaman into the bitter end, when he is transformed into the Lich King.--WoWWiki-Odolwa (talk) 20:09, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Well... A shaman doesn't open otherworldly demonic portals. A warlock does!!! --N'Nanz (talk) 20:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I doubt you are required to be a Warlock to open those portals, if you got all the super-artifacts that Ner'zhul had. It should suffice with being a magic-wielder of some sort. Remember, Khadgar was able to close the Dark Portal having the Spellbook of Medivh, and Khadgar is a Mage.--WoWWiki-Odolwa (talk) 20:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

In Rise of the Horde, Ner'zhul encourages the training of warlocks initially, though there isn't any evidence suggest that he himself took up the practice (on the other hand, there's nothing to say that he didn't, either). In Beyond the Dark Portal, it's established that Ner'zhul still has control over elemental forces, even though the Spirits had completely forsaken him. Golden/Rosenberg mentions that he'd found "other sources of power" or something like that. Could have been using warlock techniques to control the elements, but the matter isn't explained at all. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 01:00, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

What you say is true, but the Warlock-thing remains as speculation. I don't think we should post such important statements unless we are sure about it. I have now removed "Warlock" from his Character class, but anyone is welcome to put it back should you find any proof of this.--WoWWiki-Odolwa (talk) 16:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

As I pointed out, vague either way. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 18:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


How many portals did this guy open and to where? Besides the portal from Outland (Draenor) to Azeroth. Mr.X8 01:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Gul'dan opened that one. There's never been a number given for how many gates were opened, though four is the absolute minimum. Probably at least two or three times that number. As to where, various planets in the Twisting Nether. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 01:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Really... Then I have a theory on this and the worgen. Maybe when Ner'zhul opened a portal to another planet he opened a portal to the worgen's homeworld. Which besides the scythe is also how they got here cause it says Velinde saw the Worgen fighting the Burnin Legion on their planet. Mr.X8 02:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Well he had one in Zangarmarsh and one or more in Nagrand, the Blade's dge mountains is a good bet, and Netherstorm, well that is kind of self-explanitory. Baldr 00:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

See Dimensional gateway.--SWM2448 00:50, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

The Note

In my opinion, this note is just silly:

"It is not known if the Lich King is aware that Thrall is Durotan's son, who was the only orc chieftain on Draenor to listen to his warnings. If he ever would find out, it is unknown if he would still spare him should the Scourge invade Kalimdor..."

Ner'zhul has been very twisted since the days of old. He is no longer the wisened, good Shaman that warned Durotan of the coming disaster. He no longer got a conscience, and appearantly feel no remorse at all for killing scours of innocient people. I very much doubt he would even have any regret in raising the body of his deceased mate Rulkan as a mindless undead. So I see no reason why he would spare any at all, and I doubt Thrall would been granted mercy. Besides, Durotan was the only chieftain that actually was warned by Ner'zhul.--Odolwa

While the presence of Arthas in his being, who is undeniably sociopathic, would change things, there's nothing to say that he couldn't remember his conscience temporarily, when he discovers that an enemy is the family of one of his trusted peers.Iwanttobeasleep 05:23, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't go so far as to say Ner'Zhul and Durotan were peers. It seems from RotH that Durotan was the most visible person who distrusted Gul'Dan. It seems more that Ner'Zhul and Durotan briefly had their interests aligned and Ner'Zhul wanted to help bring down Gul'Dan to help the orcs. There is no evidence Durotan was a peer let alone trusted. yorgiorgiorg

Defeated the legion

Its been noted that Ner'zhul planned for the Legion to fail (Quotes Arthas "The master i serve will benifit from the Legions downfall). What if the only reason that Nerzuel summond the legion was to defeat it (as well as to destroy all life on the planet but he needed them to kill the legion 1st)(What better way to kill your boss than to invite them to your house and have a huge knife in your hand and say "Why dont you just sit down while I prepare your dea.. eh danish.) Its like a strategy not so commonly used this warcraft 3 throzen throne custom game Azeroth wars strategy. After defeating all oposing factions summon the Legion just so you can lure Archimonde to his doom that is right out side of the portal XD --The last Alterac 06:52, 24 October 2007 (UTC) (Btw if any of you guys are interested the name is anomynous-167 I apear on the servers us east and europe

Ner'zhul was ordered to bring the Legion into Azeroth, and was policed by the Dreadlords. Of course, the second their backs were turned, he instructed Arthas and Kel'Thuzad to start preparing their dea... err, danish. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 13:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


Is Ner'zhul really as evil as he seems to be? He was mostly deceived and enslaved. Kil'jaeden tricked him into giving the orcs over to him in the guise of his past mate, only to realize that Kil'jaeden was in fact an evil entity come to destroy/enslave the orcs. When he tried to fix his mistake he was disposed of and replaced by Gul'dan. (He did also try to warn his people of their coming destruction if they drank the Blood of Mannoroth.)

Then after Gul'dan failed and Ner'zhul attempted to escape the wrath of Kil'jaeden, Ner'zhul ended up coming face to face with him, was tortured and made to choose, to be tortured for eternity or to serve. Of course he chose to serve, and eventually became the Lich King and has tried and succeeded in the merciless slaughter of many people, but he was faced with a tough choice: Eternal torture or eternal service.

So is Ner'zhul really an evil being, or was he just looking out for his own well being? Or perhaps he became evil after being tortured for that unimaginably long amount of time. I'd probably end up evil too after that :P Jpsblue 02:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd say he became evil after the torture thing, after reading the path of damnation. I'm sure the novelization of Beyond the Dark Portal will clear it up a little, though.Tweak the Whacked (talk) 03:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Even after defeating the Burning Legion, though, he's still spreading the Scourge. He may have had a tragic history, sure, but there's no question about his evil now. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 06:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Read identity crisis of the Lich King. Who can say as good as Ner'zhul is that Chris Metzen!? ;p --N'Nanz (talk) 20:32, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


At the end of Arthas: Rise of the Lich King, it stated that Arthas killed off both his last bit of humanity and Ner'zhul's remaining spirit. So should Ner'zhul's status be changed to Deceased and have the Lich King stated as Arthas without sanity or something? Or should it be left alone since it could be left for interpretation on the fact it could've just been only a dream? Even though he awoke right after and said "It's begun" at the beginning of the WotLK cinematic.

I think stauts should be changed to unknown and a small section explaining what happened and a line or two explaining under speculation each theory (dead or banished). But not yet, we still aren't posting spoilers.Warthok Talk Contribs 05:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I consider him to still be merged with Arthas based on his comment in Alliance Howling Fjord that he "was once a shaman." If it was just Arthas, he wouldn't have said that. I think that the Arths killing Ner'zhul andgood Arthas was justa representation of the Lich King entity killing off any remnant of individuality of the two spirits. Skreeran (talk) 08:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Dead or not, as of Rise of the Lich King, Ner'zhul is no longer part of Th Lich King.
IconSmall Hamuul.gif Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 09:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I wouldn't go as far as no longer part of the Lich King, but he isn't dominant, that much is certain. The two came together and one took over.--TheUltimate (talk) 10:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Would "Parasit/Host" be a nicer formulation? ^^
IconSmall Hamuul.gif Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 10:23, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Technically Arthas would be the parasite then heh. Hm, I was gonna do a serious "It would actually be" kind of thing but heh...that pretty much sums it up. Ner'zhul(Host) + Arthas(Parasite) / Arthas(BeingStrongerThanAnOldMan) = new Lich King--TheUltimate (talk) 10:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
In WoW, the NPC(s) is called "The Lich King", not "Arthas the Lich King" or "Arthas the majority of the Lich King". In the RPG, they would actually say "Ner'zhul the Lich King" as much as "Ner'zhul" or "the Lich King". This is before the "fusion". Rolandius Paladin.gif (talk - contr) 10:56, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
If Arthas killed Nerzhul's soul, and Arthas' heart exploded taking with it his "humanity", what left in there? Pudim17 (talk - contr) 12:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
My guess is the undead part of Arthas. --g0urra[T҂C] 12:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
All that is left is Art'zhul or Nerthas. Take your pick. Rolandius Paladin.gif (talk - contr) 12:35, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Art'zhul or Nerthas was before we know of the events of RotLK.
Now, the only thing left is the Arthas with cold-cunning intelligence and brute force. The "evil side" of his former personnality.
IconSmall Hamuul.gif Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 12:38, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
So did Arthas destroy the "evil side" of Ner'zhul and perhaps Ner'zhul's "good side" is still hiding? Rolandius Paladin.gif (talk - contr) 12:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
What? You must be confused; the first post here states "Arthas killed off both his last bit of humanity and Ner'zhul's remaining spirit". It more or less means that Arthas' good side (humanity) doesn't exist anymore and that Ner'zhul is gone from the Lich King, which more or less means that the Lich King is the "evil side" of Arthas. --g0urra[T҂C] 12:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Did Ner'zhul still had a "good side" after being turned to the Lich King? I don't know, but he still had a free will (to escape the Burning legion control)
IconSmall Hamuul.gif Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 12:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure. I know Ner'zhul did not choose to become the Lich King, and after he became the Lich King he must have been mad at the Burning Legion for doing that to him, but was stuck in the Frozen Throne and had "jailors". Rolandius Paladin.gif (talk - contr) 12:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
What we have left is Arthas, that is himself and everything that was Ner'zhul, as the new Lich King. With Matthias dead-er and Ner'zhul consumed by the stronger personality of Arthas, we just have Arthas left. If there was any good left in Ner'zhul, I'm sure the Legionlord knocked that out of him before throwing him to Azeroth.--TheUltimate (talk) 12:58, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
So I guess Ner'zhul did not plan on this happening when her merged with Arthas in the past. Rolandius Paladin.gif (talk - contr) 13:03, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Ner'zhul's plan probably went like this:

Ner'zhul: Ok, here is the plan necromancer. I'm going to trick a emo horse loving prince into spiraling down into despair and vengeance and he will come here to take this increadiably powerful sword that Kil'Jaeden, for no reason, gave to me. I will use him to beat the Burning Legion for me and once they are defeated, I will have the prince come back to Northrend, release me from the Frozen Throne and I will merge my spirit with his and be free to move around again.

Kel'Thuzad: What if something goes wrong? Like I don't know, that emo prince's spirit turns out to be stronger than yours. It is HIS body that you are trying to invade, and you aren't...well young anymore.

Ner'zhul: Nah things will work out. --13:08, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

If Ner'zhul is completely gone and it's just Arthas in there, someone explain why he said he was once a shaman in Howling Fjord? Arthas and Ner'zhul as individual entities are gone. There is just the Lich King. It's not a parasite/host relationship and it's not just Arthas. It's both and it's neither. Skreeran (talk) 04:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

They merged, became one being which Arthas' spirit took over. Everything Ner'zhul was Arthas is now and together they are the Lich King.--TheUltimate (talk) 11:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Rise of the Lich King points that they are no longer together as the Lich King, only Arthas would be.
Rhapsodia (talk) 12:10, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, there's no Ner'zhul and there's no Lich King, only Arthas Menethil. About the shaman thing, that's because he probably stole Ner'zhul's powers. They merged, but, instead of remaining merged, Arthas destroyed Ner'zhul and took control of everything.--Lon-ami (talk) 13:03, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
"There is only I. I am the Lich King and I am ready" tends to disagree with there's no Lich King. The Legends preview also disagrees that there is no Ner'zhul. But this debate can go on forever.--TheUltimate (talk) 13:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

It's probably the same scenario as when Illidan consumed the Skull of Gul'dan. Illidan aquired Gul'dan's memories (as Arthas did with Ner'zhul), but Gul'dan's conscious spirit remained dead. It's most likely the same with Ner'zhul now that Arthas killed his spirit, and Ner'zhul should now be considered dead.--WoWWiki-Odolwa (talk) 13:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Agree with Odolwa. Anyway, Lich King is just a title, and not a character name. The character name is Arthas Menethil, and the info about the character is at that article. Some info remains at Lich King, but it's just the history of who was in charge of the title, and information that helps lighten original articles.
Anyway, let's move this to policy forum and discuss it: Forum:Character naming: Arthas Menethil or Lich King?.--Lon-ami (talk) 15:05, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the book constitutes as canon-material. If we based this off the games then Ner'zhul would still be part of the Lich King whereas in this book he isn't anymore. FireLordZuko (talk) 18:16, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

Blizzard has said repeatedly that the novels are canon. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 18:30, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

He is not dead nor he is consumed.

post #10 in this thread as quoted by Crygil a blizzard poster when someone stated arthas killed/consumed ner'zhul, "He didn't actually erase the persona of Ner'zhul. In point of fact, these two beings merged to make up what was collectively known as "The Lich King".

also this next bit is from the wow blizzard developers on twitter chat:

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.

The book stating that ner'zhul was killed off has been retconned, and thank god because ner'zhul is too cunning for some stupid crap like that to happen. He is now more than likely in control of bolvar. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Straider0 (talk · contr).

While interesting and should be noted somehwere this doesn't actualy qualify as a retcon. The actions that take place in the novel are quite open to interpretation (Plus not that it matters in this discussion, but Blizzard wouldn't just throw something out like that all willy nilly). Even were this clearly a retcon it is not our place to decide such, thus why wowwiki does not use words such as canon or retcon in the definitve sense in it's articles. Blizzard would have to state the existance of a retcon explicity; i.e. "We retconed this." and then we would state that clearly in the main section of the article.
So if i were you i would add these passages as notes near the bottom of the page, but paraphrase it into a short summary and then use the reference tool to add the links. However don't touch the infobox until we actualy know something concrete. Unknown is as accurate as were gonna get right now. And of course no personal speculation whatsoever (i.e. Bolvar).Warthok Talk Contribs 21:48, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Responding about Ner'zhul

See Forum:Arthas and Ner'zhul

Icecrown was merely a set back...

So I was thinking. Since Ner'zhul is trapped within the whole suit of armor (Helm, Plate of Damnation and Frostmourn) Wouldn't he still be around? Like in Lord of the Rings, Sauron's power was mainly in the Ring (Frostmourn) But he was able to come back after losing it. And now that Bolvar is wearing the Helm, he has to fight with the remains of Ner'Zhul soul that's still in the armor. That's why there is still the Scourge. If it was just Bolvar, he'd most likely recall the Scourge and destroy it, But with Ner'Zhul still kicking, he can't do that. He'd be fighting Ner'Zhul for control of them. 20:11, October 27, 2010 (UTC)Gorlack2231

"Bond with ner'zhul"

I believe this was stated as "a bond with the lich king", since at that time, ner'zhul and lich king were used in alternance

IconSmall Hamuul.gif Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 08:12, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Warlock 2

Considering his AU self was stated to be a Warlock and there had been suggestions about our Ner'zhul having used Warlock magic, I think it's quite safe to list him as one now, don't you think?Elveonora (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

No. Different circumstances. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 17:13, 15 January 2015 (UTC)