In WoW I’m not sure. There’s nothing I’m sufficiently invested in to really want the mystery preserved. I felt that Arthas was somewhat lessened by the increased focus on his character in Wrath (and the Lich King was massively lessened by the writing out of Ner’zul).

That’s probably something that should have been left open.

Why should I attack the other faction doing their fishing daily in Wintergrasp? Just because Blizzard thinks that would be fun?

http://blessingofkings.blogspot.com/2009/08/nature-of-war.html

I think Cataclysm is their chance to set up a convincing background for a real conflict. The attempts to create a conflict where there was so much love in the air were rather miserable.

So yeah, either just ignore open questions if you only have a shitty answer, or start making sense.

But in a PnP RPG, the job of the publisher is generally not to tell the consumer a story. It’s providing consumers the resources they want/need to tell stories themselves. The stories are, to a far greater degree, owned by the players.

I think when it comes to traditional storytelling, the consumer doesn’t really have a leg to stand on when it comes to not wanting revelations. For some WoW examples, I can speculate all I want about what happened to Bolvar Fordragon after the Wrathgate, or what Nozdormu’s relation to the Infinite Dragonflight is, but it’s up to Blizzard to answer. But for PnP RPGs, I think it’s good for creators to leave some stuff unanswered. Not everything, but the way Steve Jackson Games did it with In Nomine’s “canon uncertainties” seem to be a good way to handle it. Similarly, I doubt Wizards of the Coast will ever reveal the true cause of the creation of the Mournland in the Eberron setting (especially now that they’re taking a publish-and-abandon approach to settings).

And, to echo Ephemeron, In Nomine was awesome. Now you have even more of my respect.

P.S. In Nomine was brilliant.