When and why exactly did Arthas turn evil?

[Kyux]

Most people would say that Arthas' turning point was the Culling of Stratholme. I disagree. I think that it was a difficult decision, possibly made easier by a desire for vengeance, but rational nonetheless. I realise that others may disagree with me about Stratholme, but bear with me and argue in the alternative. If not the Culling, then when exactly did Arthas cross the line? I think taking up Frostmourne is a clear turning point but from that point he could be considered under the influence of the Lich King and so I do not think it is fair to completely attribute his actions to him.

My next best guess is when he burnt his ships and back-stabbed the mercenaries and soldiers in Northrend. If this is the point in time, then why exactly? I don't think that a desire for vengeance is well supported and doesn't fit well with his character. I find it hard to believe a prince who is also a paladin would be overcome by vengeance so easily. I would believe it if he was influence by, say, an Old God or Sha.

So, when exactly do you think Arthas cross the line (if not Stratholme or taking Frostmourne) and do you think he was under some extra influence at that point?

[Frumpy Frumpy Frak]

I agree that he did the pragmatic, albeit un-paladiny, thing at Stratholme.

I think his turning point was when he chased Mal'ganis to Northrend instead of securing Lordaeron. Rushing into unknown and most likely hostile territory without any sort of strategy or reconnaissance was stupid, by that point his judgement must have been clouded by the desire for vengeance.

[Kyux]

That's not true for burning the ships in Northrend, he knows it's evil and doesn't care. So for me that is the moment.

Agreed. So then what turned him from being a decent person, paladin, and prince to someone who would do something like that? Do you think that was just his personality? I don't. Was it some other influence?

[MatadorMedia]

Arthas was never evil. He did what was necessary to ensure the survival of his people, even if that meant killing and raising them as undead. His methods were certainly villainous, but for inherently good reasons.

[Kaleredar]

What makes Arthas a good character is that he did everything he wanted to WITHOUT any "sha corruption" or "the old gods did it" nonsense that plagues other characters.

You can say Ner'zhul influenced him, sure... but in the end, Arthas got what he wanted out of that arrangement. Arthas defeated Ner'zhul and took over the mantle of Lich King.

Kel'thuzad, who had destroyed his homeland, became Arthas' servant.

Uther, who kicked him out of the Knights of the Silver Hand, was bested by Arthas.

Mal'Ganis, who had kill his countrymen and taunted him, was destroyed.

And he wasn't just going to have lordaeron as a kingdom; he was going to have ALL of Azeroth as his kingdom.


Sounds like Arthas got everything he wanted to me.

Well until he died

[Rend Blackhand]

Arthas did some cold and dodgy shit but wasn't really evil.

That only came when he took up Frostmourne and it took his soul. From there he became the death knight we all know and love.

[faithbane]

Most people would say that Arthas' turning point was the Culling of Stratholme. I disagree.

I understand why you disagree but his turning point was clearly the culling of stratholme. It was the point of no return for him, deep down he convinced himself that it was the necessary/right thing to do while doing it but after the act you can tell he immensely regretted the act and projected it as hatred/vengeance for Malganis to keep his psyche intact. The reason he marched on to northrend, the reason he chased him across the frozen north although he had ample opportunity and reason to return is his trying to get "payback" for what malganis made him do. While playing the level in the game we are basically just killing undead and fighting scourge but the cutscene/story shows that Arthas burned down a big chunk of the city and had to kill a lot of people before they were actually turned undead which you can see from the piles of dead human looking bodies. He couldn't cope with the fact that Malganis basically forced him to do that, he couldn't think of the greater good and returned even after he rescued muradin and acquired great intel of northrend, he could have returned a hero. it was not the paladin but the royal prideful prince in him that had to square off with malganis but without culling of stratholme I think he could have come to his senses and not fall for the gigantic bait.

As you said past the point of picking of frostmourne he is basically controlled by LK so I'm not going into any of that.

[Evangeliste]

I personally think his personality changed. No outside influences or whatnot.
He grew up in times of war. He knew nothing really of peace or tranquility as it was always on his doorstep. Him and Varian were friends and look at how Varian's inner journey went - the only salvation he had was his son compared to Arthas, Jaina would be his salvation in context really, and he simply cut it off.

Varian and Arthas are parellels in a way. Both grew up with a lot of decisions and events that were not exactly happy and very challenging to understand as a child. Varian made a range of choices but later made ones with ideals of togetherness that he (and others with him) could overcome, children are very inspirational to parents whom listen. Varian was a parent who ultimately did and became a 'better' person, meanwhile Arthas made questionable choices and in the end, very selfish ones even if they appear to be "the right thing" *eyes Stratholme*, that's as subjective as it can get... Was it selfless to follow Mal'ganis to Northrend? No not with Lordaeron needing aid... He made many without the aforementioned ideals of togetherness, he had no-one he could be inspired by (and on the same level of children, in my opinion Jaina would be that)... Thus that resulted in him being one with the Lich King.

Any one person can experience something, a personal trauma can change them. For Arthas, it might have been killing people. It might have been several events that poisoned his mind from the Paladin he was to the Death Knight he became. I would say for Arthas it was a lifetime of caring, duty, honour - everything that Paladins uphold till one day someone like Mal'ganis turned it all to dust and made Arthas realise it was for naught (even if it wasn't), he continued on to be one with the Lich King thereafter.

Naaru being the divine Light beings can be corrupted and turned too like M'uru. It may have been an outside influence, but you really it's the individual themselves and their resolve. If something so pure of Light can be turned to Shadow and darkness... Arthas isn't exempt.

[Wildmoon]

Arthas had all the qualities ready for him to turn evil in the first place. He was insecure, too eager to prove himself, too demanding of others's recognition. It's the recipe for disaster. If you wanna pinpoint the moment he really turned evil then it would be when he vowed to chase Mal'Ganis to the end of the earth. At that point, his people were not in his head anymore. It was purely personal vendetta. You could even argue that the reason Arthas felt so obsessed with killing Mal'Ganis was not because of the harm inflicted to his people but because he felt that he personally lost to Mal'Ganis.

He is not unlike Illidan. They are generally decent persons but their moral are very fragile and easily broken down once certain conditions are met like feeling betrayed for example.

[Stormdash]

He lost moral perspective around the time of or shortly before Stratholme -- once you become a moral consequentialist, evil is a step away.

[Deleted]

This here frostmourne consuming his soul might have had something to do with it.

[Deleted]

When Jaina denied him. Had she never denied him, he wouldn't have chased Mal'ganis or picked up Frostmourne. That is my theory at least. When she left him, which she did after having promised never to deny him, she left a big hole inside of him and the biggest feeling of betrayal he had ever felt. You could say he lost his moral compass with Jaina and after that nothing really mattered to him save but power, because with power you can force people not to deny you. He was not ever going to be denied again.

[Evangeliste]

When Jaina denied him. Had she never denied him, he wouldn't have chased Mal'ganis or picked up Frostmourne. That is my theory at least. When she left him, which she did after having promised never to deny him, she left a big hole inside of him and the biggest feeling of betrayal he had ever felt. You could say he lost his moral compass with Jaina and after that nothing really mattered to him save but power, because with power you can force people not to deny you. He was not ever going to be denied again.

Only, Arthas told Jaina to go... Not the other way round. Jaina rejected Kael'thas advances for Arthas instead which may be what you got confused on.

[yetgdhfgh]

As soon as Frostmourne took his soul that was when imo

Things he did before was dickish but not necessary evil. For instance burning the boats was a tactic where if people knew there was no way home unless total victory they would fight harder and not retreat that tactic is called deathground.

As for the culling he only did what most people did with infected people back in the day and thats to purge them hell back in the great plague those who was infected was bordered up and left to die so they got it easy!

[Draedarr]

I also agree that it was on Northrend, he knowing that his soldiers wanted to depart and allying with the mercenaries only to burn the ships and later blaming all the action from being made only by the mercenaries.
He knew what he was doing and did only to accomplish his goal of continue on Northrend and pursuit Mal'Ganis, for him nothing else mattered, only his desire to wipe out the dreadlord above all.

[Wildmoon]

As soon as Frostmourne took his soul that was when imo

Things he did before was dickish but not necessary evil. For instance burning the boats was a tactic where if people knew there was no way home unless total victory they would fight harder and not retreat that tactic is called deathground.

As for the culling he only did what most people did with infected people back in the day and thats to purge them hell back in the great plague those who was infected was bordered up and left to die so they got it easy!

He also blamed the burning of the boats on the mercenaries who just fought with him causing his men to murder them. If that is not evil then I don't know what is.

[Deathquoi]

It's been a long time since I played WC3 but the way I remember the Culling mission is that you actually are racing Mal'Ganis to kill the people of Stratholme BEFORE he can turn them. Am I remembering that wrong?

[yetgdhfgh]

He also blamed the burning of the boats on the mercenaries who just fought with him causing his men to murder them. If that is not evil then I don't know what is.

The killing part was borderline but it was a necessary evil if his plan for deathground was to be achieved. Otherwise his troops would mutinied and left and the Dreadlord wouldve escaped to fulfill his plan.

[Draedarr]

It's been a long time since I played WC3 but the way I remember the Culling mission is that you actually are racing Mal'Ganis to kill the people of Stratholme BEFORE he can turn them. Am I remembering that wrong?

I think that because all the grains were already infected, and the people were already turning into undead.
He feared that Mal'Ganis would control everyone and gather more numbers.

[Mirishka]

For me it was when he took up Frostmourne. That was the moment of basically selling his soul to the devil, as it were. Stratholme was... extreme, but I understood it to an extent because 'extreme' is what situations like that require sometimes.

Ever seen a zombie/infected/plague movie where the government or military like, bombs the shit out of the quarantined area, or at least considers it? Awful, yes, extreme, yes... but in the long run that could potentially save more lives than it ends.