The "modern values" argument

[justandulas]

Yeah not murdering Civilians and attempting Genocide and Cannibalization is something we'd only ever consider modern Values and in a fictional World everyone would be ok with such things.

- - - Updated - - -



I'd say this is the wrong game for you, as you are always playing as heroes lorewise.

It wasn’t always like this. Each faction of the horde and ally had different values. I picked undead warlock to be a villain, not to betray sylvanas and be a hero forever

We are a collection of every fantasy villain race made; embrace it. The true horde is the wc1-2 horde. Not thralls hippy band of gutless weinies

[Powerogue]

I usually RP with the established values of the factions/races. It can be hard to discern the difference at times.

Sylvanas has been up to supervillainy as of late though (raising her bar from standard Cataclysm villainy) to a degree that I don't know how people would muddy the water with arguments like this. Is there an azerothian culture that does think you should hunt down and enslave refugees, while blighting all the resources you stole from them?

(I mean besides the forsaken, apparently. Even Gallywix would say it's a waste of money.)

[Skytotem]

The way I like to refute this is simple. Yes, Azeroth isn't modern day western civilization.

But it also is NOT dark ages Europe despite all the knights and castles etc.

hell, even dark ages europe would've considered a lot of the forsaken do messed up

- - - Updated - - -

You're argument has no real point because it is essentially:

"these groups agree with me so THIS point is invalid"

keeping in mind that these are different groups with different cultures/history than what we've experienced isn't invalidated because there's a popularity contest in a group you decide to poll.

You're trying to argue you're validated in your dislike by showing that others are also share this dislike.... that is all.

I... what? I really think you're misunderstanding me, I'm not saying anyone 'agrees' with me.

I'm saying that YES the modern values argument is pointless BUT just because we don't apply modern values, that the Forsaken are still doing things groups INGAME consider heinous, and the playerbase should focus discussion on that instead.

[Zandalariprelate]

Thing is, if cultures in azeroth think what the Forsaken do is bad, then we have to say that Alliance also does bad things. I mean, if anything, Sylvanas is Arthas product. Hence, it's a conflict that WarCraft needs.

The alliance has a nice propaganda/PR department, they act as many of their own bullshit never happened or are even proud of that. Besides if you pay attention most of the alliance races has a bad guy that did a lot of damage while still affiliated in alliance institutions and said places never faced any consequences like the Cathedral of the Light in Stormwind, you have already 2 twilight cultist being head leaders on that organization and Fandral was the right hand of Ragnaros.

[Skytotem]

As regards Lordaeron it's fairly obvious that the fact that they were caught too far forward, that these blightthrowers were there from the very beginning and that none of them take issue with the gassing themselves makes it plain that it was just part of the defensive plan and that they were not meant to be there in the first place. If anything should have been a huge taboo there, that would be the necromancy, which goes against tauren and orcish customs to a massive degree. Using poisons or Blight by itself is something even the Cenarion Circle do at one point, so it doesn't carry the same connotations, not to mention the whole bit about its initial use being by apparent traitors. We'll sidestep the whole Wrathgate nonsense entirely.

But where it does concern undeath, I agree with you that it should be a much bigger deal and it should be a greater ground for mistrust. There's been an overall softening of attitudes towards all sorts of evil things, going from Forsaken being kill on sight in Vanilla, to the mopeathon of BTS and from warlocks hiding in the basement or getting the noose to Varian loudly praising people who suck out souls and use them as fuel to summon demons from hell.

That having been said, this was not an entirely hostile relationship at any point. In Cataclysm we see cooperation and mutual support with things like the seadogs, Orkus and especially Cromush's gradual turn from minder to honorary Forsaken and we are told that Sylvanas has taken ample credit for the victory over the Legion, saving the Horde at the Broken Shore which was only possible through her val'kyr, moving to Orgrimmar and pandering to all their cultural customs and attending events. She has purposefully aimed to soften the Forsaken image. On top of that, of the wars waged, only two areas are actually using heavily Forsaken tactics - Darkshore, where there's no one else to see except a bunch of goblins and Lordaeron, where it's their home so it's something of a given. So there's reasons set up within the narrative for the attitude to shift, though it should be nowheren near as drastic, nor tolerate things like said necromancy of their own that go heavily against the belief system of many present.


Garrosh was extremely popular precisely because of his victories over both the Scourge and the Alliance among the common folk and the army, which is basically the same thing for a lot of the Horde races at the end of Wrath, per Shattering. He maintains this popularity among the races even up to the end of Tides of War when he's already tightened his grip on the Horde with a giant parade present where all the races cheer him on, and we're shown his charisma among the tauren, Forsaken and orcs. Only the heightening of racial conflict and his heavier approach explain the mass turn against him by the end, not that people really wanted to be friends with the Alliance or regretted the amount of territory or technological progress he brought them, what with even Vol'jin preferring the Divine Bell go to Garrosh after his assassination, than to the Alliance.

The people who whinged about Garrosh are the same cabal of dickless wonders and their progeny that are bitching now, disregarding Vol'jin since he's a ghost. Cairne committing suicide over a false flag and Baine then banishing his own people are just the same as what Baine is doing now, with again zero impact on the attitudes of his people, who were alright with self-defense or even an aggressive war then and now. Vol'jin speaking the troll case against war is different when there's Kul Tiras involved, they're even fewer than they were before and the Warchief in charge is Vol'jin's own pick. Bob is Bob. Couple that with Sylvanas' more subtle approach towards controlling the Horde, her pandering to their customs and apathy to what they do provided they contribute to the war and a bit of spin, it's easy to see why people don't hold ejecting one of their long-term foes from the continent against her. The Horde have never been pro-peace, they've always been a warlike group and they've never in their majority wanted peace with the Alliance on poor terms.

1. Yeah I still think it's dumb writing that horde soldiers were fine with being blighted cause they were too far forward. But that's admittedly subjective. I do think the necromancy without clearing it with soldiers ahead of time is dumb and ought to be more controversial as well.

Your use of the Cenarion Circle in this example is disingenuous though, they use it as a last resort against a massive Naga army to protect both factions and all of Desolace's denizens from their invasion, and Karnum is explicitly Loathe to use it because of how vile it is. It's absolutely still got a taboo.

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Cleansing_...sse_(Alliance)

Everyone may not see what's going on in Darkshore but everyone saw the Burning of Teldrassil, but it's barely mentioned ingame. That is bad writing when it should be more controversial.

2. I mean, I'm not arguing why Garrosh was popular or not, I'm saying that if the Horde rebelled against Garrosh, then the people left right now should be the same people who were opposing him for his wars and shit. So they ought to oppose Sylvanas too, so it stretches credulity that we're doing this stupid civil war plot again.

Cairne didn't commit suicide by any reasonable interpretation.

How has Sylvanas been subtle?

Yeah but the writing doesn't really explain why the Horde hasn't been pro-peace, it's been in this messy state where Blizz has been trying to write both the WC2 and WC3 horde at the same time and it's satisfying no one.

[Melsiren]

Though gradually, though no one remembers exactly how it happened, the unthinkable becomes tolerable. And then acceptable. And then legal. And then applaudable

Thank you so fucking much.

[Mehrunes]

1. Yeah I still think it's dumb writing that horde soldiers were fine with being blighted cause they were too far forward. But that's admittedly subjective. I do think the necromancy without clearing it with soldiers ahead of time is dumb and ought to be more controversial as well.

They were already dead anyway. At least by tying Alliance forces in combat while the Blight was deployed their deaths weren't in vain.

Your use of the Cenarion Circle in this example is disingenuous though, they use it as a last resort against a massive Naga army to protect both factions and all of Desolace's denizens from their invasion, and Karnum is explicitly Loathe to use it because of how vile it is. It's absolutely still got a taboo.

The point is that if even treehuggers use Blight when necessary, the Horde army shouldn't really care about it much.

2. I mean, I'm not arguing why Garrosh was popular or not, I'm saying that if the Horde rebelled against Garrosh, then the people left right now should be the same people who were opposing him for his wars and shit. So they ought to oppose Sylvanas too, so it stretches credulity that we're doing this stupid civil war plot again.

But aside from a handful of Alliance-loving cretins, no one really had a problem with the war itself. The Horde started rebelling when Garrosh got drunk on paranoia koolaid and started to oppress other Horde races.

[Skytotem]

They were already dead anyway. At least by tying Alliance forces in combat while the Blight was deployed their deaths weren't in vain.




The point is that if even treehuggers use Blight when necessary, the Horde army shouldn't really care about it much.




But aside from a handful of Alliance-loving cretins, no one really had a problem with the war itself. The Horde started rebelling when Garrosh got drunk on paranoia koolaid and started to oppress other Horde races.

1. oh c'mon, don't forget Chronicles retcons when it favors your argument. They had a chance still.

2. I mean, some of the Horde's army are tauren, and if there's an orc and they had a buddy get melted at wrathgate it'd be reasonable if they're gonna care about the blight and dislike it.

3. I don't think that's true, plenty of Horde members had quests about disliking the war for how it affected both sides, hell, we've had more in Cata/MoP than in BFA.

That shaman with the dumb moral in Durotar, the Stonetalon stuff, the earthen ring folks in the barrens, etc.

[Mehrunes]

1. oh c'mon, don't forget Chronicles retcons when it favors your argument. They had a chance still.

The Chronicle hasn't covered BfA period yet so I really don't know what you're talking about.

2. I mean, some of the Horde's army are tauren, and if there's an orc and they had a buddy get melted at wrathgate it'd be reasonable if they're gonna care about the blight and dislike it.

Are all Tauren Cenarion Circle members now? And why should Orcs care because of the Wrathgate? If Putress got a fucktillion of archers during his surprise attack instead of Blight catapulst, would the Orcs throw a fit whenever they saw an arrow?

3. I don't think that's true, plenty of Horde members had quests about disliking the war for how it affected both sides, hell, we've had more in Cata/MoP than in BFA.

That shaman with the dumb moral in Durotar, the Stonetalon stuff, the earthen ring folks in the barrens, etc.

Those are still individual cases. And Stonetalon questline was about a guy who went too far even in Garrosh's eyes, so people protesting him and his shenanigans don't exactly reflect on the war as a whole.

[Super Dickmann]

1. Yeah I still think it's dumb writing that horde soldiers were fine with being blighted cause they were too far forward. But that's admittedly subjective. I do think the necromancy without clearing it with soldiers ahead of time is dumb and ought to be more controversial as well.

Your use of the Cenarion Circle in this example is disingenuous though, they use it as a last resort against a massive Naga army to protect both factions and all of Desolace's denizens from their invasion, and Karnum is explicitly Loathe to use it because of how vile it is. It's absolutely still got a taboo.

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Cleansing_...sse_(Alliance)

Everyone may not see what's going on in Darkshore but everyone saw the Burning of Teldrassil, but it's barely mentioned ingame. That is bad writing when it should be more controversial.

I think a soldier accepting that he may be collateral if he stands in a place where artillery is dropping isn't to be unexpected this is pretty standard. It's the mockery of his afterlife afterwards that really should've had literally any reaction at all. I don't take issue with the Blight and my example wasn't to illustrate that the druids love using it, but that they're willing to accept its use in dire circumstances - the possible defeat of your faction against a giant Alliance army that its use would allow you to defeat easily meets that threshold and the Horde have far less moral scruples than the druids.

As regards the Burning, your average Joe has no idea there's only civilians there and your average Joe also operated the catapults, stoked the flame etc., per A Good War. The average Horde soldier, especially the orcs, have wanted the night elven lands since an elf first popped up to shoot them in the head and are very unlikely to really care unless they are privy to the intimate esoteric reasons for why Sylvanas did and who was inside it.

2. I mean, I'm not arguing why Garrosh was popular or not, I'm saying that if the Horde rebelled against Garrosh, then the people left right now should be the same people who were opposing him for his wars and shit. So they ought to oppose Sylvanas too, so it stretches credulity that we're doing this stupid civil war plot again.

Cairne didn't commit suicide by any reasonable interpretation.

How has Sylvanas been subtle?

Yeah but the writing doesn't really explain why the Horde hasn't been pro-peace, it's been in this messy state where Blizz has been trying to write both the WC2 and WC3 horde at the same time and it's satisfying no one.

Garrosh's popularity is important to note because it was built on the back of war with the Alliance and that wasn't an element of his program the greater Horde public ever had an issue with, only the same people who now complain about Sylvanas. And those who did complain oppose her too. The greater population don't, since they wanted this war.

Cairne was willing to depose the Warchief over a false flag he didn't investigate after the Alliance had declared war in order to maintain a status quo where the orcs kept on starving because of our buddy Thrall. It takes balls to do so and he had that fight won barring poison, but let's not kid ourselves about how much more admirable those goals were than his spawn's.

Sylvanas's subtlety is in that there are no Kor'kron going around enforcing a certain method or ideology as Sylvanas does not give a shit and that she attends and apes Horde cultural customs of all origins in order to make herself palatable to the people, hence the feasts, parades and so on. She has not implemented any racial policies and the only people she's ever acted against, barring Thrall whom the public don't know about, are those who already betrayed her prior and had attacked Horde soldiers or actively aided the Alliance. If Garrosh's program of conquering Kalimdor was already popular and the racial tension at the time was unpopular, then a leader who is more successful at the former (due to Garrosh's groundwork) and has none of the latter has an obvious appeal.

Finally as regards the Horde, barring the fact that they have individual racial grievances, be they the camp that shouldnt' be named and subsequent invasions of their land, the whole business around Kul Tiras, the orcs in their camps or any of the other grounds Sylvanas brought up, benefit from seizing territory, are from warlike cultures or ones that have a cult of personality to her and have recently both attempted what was cast by her as an Alliance coup attempt at Arathi as well as provocations in both Silithus and Stormheim, coupled with spies littering Stormwind to show the Alliance's disregard for their borders. Your average orc will want to fuck them up and benefits immensely from doing so since he takes rich lands.

[Skytotem]

The Chronicle hasn't covered BfA period yet so I really don't know what you're talking about.

1. Reread chronicle portion of wrathgate.

2. Man we can go back and forth forever we're not going to convince each other. You have a good day.

[Zandalariprelate]

Yes. I just don't get how people can believe that alliance is "chaotic good". I mean, WarCraft is not even classical RPG that you can even sort things like that but people being people, they just have to make things two sided.

That is because the playerbase has become spoiled with all the crap being brushed off and winning against every single faction since the launch of WoW, the alliance and horde needs a really good ass kick and show more moralities tropes to the playerbase like Noble Demon, the anti-villain(Arthas was a good one, too bad he is dead).

Also I really want to see Anduin and Jaina get to know what suffer truly means, especially Anduin who has never experienced any tragedy in his life and act like nothing happened, getting impaled and his soul fueled for some powerful spell would do the trick

[Skytotem]

I think a soldier accepting that he may be collateral if he stands in a place where artillery is dropping isn't to be unexpected this is pretty standard. It's the mockery of his afterlife afterwards that really should've had literally any reaction at all. I don't take issue with the Blight and my example wasn't to illustrate that the druids love using it, but that they're willing to accept its use in dire circumstances - the possible defeat of your faction against a giant Alliance army that its use would allow you to defeat easily meets that threshold and the Horde have far less moral scruples than the druids.

As regards the Burning, your average Joe has no idea there's only civilians there and your average Joe also operated the catapults, stoked the flame etc., per A Good War. The average Horde soldier, especially the orcs, have wanted the night elven lands since an elf first popped up to shoot them in the head and are very unlikely to really care unless they are privy to the intimate esoteric reasons for why Sylvanas did and who was inside it.



Garrosh's popularity is important to note because it was built on the back of war with the Alliance and that wasn't an element of his program the greater Horde public ever had an issue with, only the same people who now complain about Sylvanas. And those who did complain oppose her too. The greater population don't, since they wanted this war.

Cairne was willing to depose the Warchief over a false flag he didn't investigate after the Alliance had declared war in order to maintain a status quo where the orcs kept on starving because of our buddy Thrall. It takes balls to do so and he had that fight won barring poison, but let's not kid ourselves about how much more admirable those goals were than his spawn's.

Sylvanas's subtlety is in that there are no Kor'kron going around enforcing a certain method or ideology as Sylvanas does not give a shit and that she attends and apes Horde cultural customs of all origins in order to make herself palatable to the people, hence the feasts, parades and so on. She has not implemented any racial policies and the only people she's ever acted against, barring Thrall whom the public don't know about, are those who already betrayed her prior and had attacked Horde soldiers or actively aided the Alliance. If Garrosh's program of conquering Kalimdor was already popular and the racial tension at the time was unpopular, then a leader who is more successful at the former (due to Garrosh's groundwork) and has none of the latter has an obvious appeal.

Finally as regards the Horde, barring the fact that they have individual racial grievances, be they the camp that shouldnt' be named and subsequent invasions of their land, the whole business around Kul Tiras, the orcs in their camps or any of the other grounds Sylvanas brought up, benefit from seizing territory, are from warlike cultures or ones that have a cult of personality to her and have recently both attempted what was cast by her as an Alliance coup attempt at Arathi as well as provocations in both Silithus and Stormheim, coupled with spies littering Stormwind to show the Alliance's disregard for their borders. Your average orc will want to fuck them up and benefits immensely from doing so since he takes rich lands.

1. Blight isn't normal artillery it's depicted as an especially excruciating way to die.

Moreover, keep in mind that after the battle the soldiers are going to know Sylvanas blew the city so many are likely to resent dying needlessly.

And we don't know what the average joe knows, I wouldn't make assumptions. If blizz depicted the Horde ingame as thinking there were still enemy forces in the tree that'd be one thing, but they haven't done that. (Also the catapults were STUPID)


2. I mean, if we're to believe the tweets and such the greater public definitely had issues with it. otherwise they would've been at war before the starving and whatnot.

I agree Cairne should've confirmed if Garrosh actually had anything to do with it, but Cairne could've negotiated a peace where the orcs could trade again and not starve.

Weren't the parades and such Baine and Saurfang's ideas? And even if she doesn't have racist policies she had a ton of Orwellian stuff in BTS, we just haven't seen anything with her actually GOVERNING

3. I agree the Horde COULD have lots of motivation, but none of that is shown ingame, my main complaints are with Blizz's presentation.

[Super Dickmann]

1. Blight isn't normal artillery it's depicted as an especially excruciating way to die.

Moreover, keep in mind that after the battle the soldiers are going to know Sylvanas blew the city so many are likely to resent dying needlessly.

On the contrary, because that assumes she was going to blow up the city even if the Blight and the skellies defeated the Alliance, which isn't the case. Blowing up the city was a contingency, much like the Blight was a contingency in case conventional battle and the azerite machine failed. This is the one case in the whole expansion where Sylvanas is actually allowed to have a brain after all. If anything being willing to destroy her own city and pack in with them rather than hold onto her own land at their expense, especially after just delivering them control over all of Northern Kalimdor as this was pre-Night Warrior would do wonders for Sylvanas' approval ratings.

As regards torturous deaths, the Blight is unpleasant, no doubt there, but again, even druids were willing to use it in dire circumstances, and the Horde are people who have warlocks, zombies and so forth.

The catapult thing was stupid, and really could've just been a shot of her using ships with azerite salvos to do it, but my point is less that the Horde were told there weren't civilians there but that they principally don't care that much and destroying the enemy capital is something desirable, which coincides wth their enthusiasm to go to war in the first place.

I mean, if we're to believe the tweets and such the greater public definitely had issues with it. otherwise they would've been at war before the starving and whatnot.

They were, the war was going on since Wrath and the orcs were unhappy with starvation since TBC, per the story. The only info we have on Garrosh's approval rating was that it was still high after Theramore and that 'only a minority of orcs' followed him at the end, the grounds for which are never given. There's little reason to assume it's because of the faction war, as in his crowning act vs the other faction, i.e Theramore, he was still supported.

Weren't the parades and such Baine and Saurfang's ideas? And even if she doesn't have racist policies she had a ton of Orwellian stuff in BTS, we just haven't seen anything with her actually GOVERNING

Her orwellian stuff was only for the Forsaken, who were in another continent. She's much more hands off with the Horde, funnily enough because she doesn't view them as her people so she doesn't have some obsessive overprotectiveness going. While the parade was Baine's idea, it's mentioned that Sylvanas attends all these things with regularity and that she's unhappily committed herself to being Warchief. Hence people raising babies to wave at their Warchief and so on. The governance thing is mostly because Sylvanas hasn't actually changed the Horde all that much from when Vol'jin was in charge, since she lets everyone do their thing, unlike Garrosh, who was trying in vain to get the Horde to be about something and meet a certain standard.

All these things I've mentioned are either in-game or in the various side novels - the bit about Arathi and Stormheim are from BTS and A Good War respectively, the rogues are also from A Good War as is the glimpse into the mind of your average orc and how much he wants to bash some heads. The rest are inferences from the totla lack of opposition Sylvanas has apart from the leadership for all of BFA and the 8.2 text and new dev interviews that confirm that this is intentional.

[GreenJesus]

1. Blight isn't normal artillery it's depicted as an especially excruciating way to die.

Moreover, keep in mind that after the battle the soldiers are going to know Sylvanas blew the city so many are likely to resent dying needlessly.

And we don't know what the average joe knows, I wouldn't make assumptions. If blizz depicted the Horde ingame as thinking there were still enemy forces in the tree that'd be one thing, but they haven't done that. (Also the catapults were STUPID)


2. I mean, if we're to believe the tweets and such the greater public definitely had issues with it. otherwise they would've been at war before the starving and whatnot.

I agree Cairne should've confirmed if Garrosh actually had anything to do with it, but Cairne could've negotiated a peace where the orcs could trade again and not starve.

Weren't the parades and such Baine and Saurfang's ideas? And even if she doesn't have racist policies she had a ton of Orwellian stuff in BTS, we just haven't seen anything with her actually GOVERNING

3. I agree the Horde COULD have lots of motivation, but none of that is shown ingame, my main complaints are with Blizz's presentation.

Fire mages burn people alive and cause people to become living bombs. Hunters shoot people in the dick with arrows and let their pet bear maul people. Warlocks turn people's souls into cookies. Death knights spread diseases and explode corpses and raise them. War causes pain. What's your point?

[mickybrighteyes]

I... what? I really think you're misunderstanding me, I'm not saying anyone 'agrees' with me.

Apologies then... it seems ratehr pointless to be so worked up you have to attempt to formulate an argument in an attempt to disprove a point of view if you're not invested with a side to begin with. Thus the assumption that you were in agreement with showing disdain since otherwise why even target the notion of defending the group... ONe might consider targeting the groups actions and how those groups are being viewed rather than the reasoning some might use to mitigate bias.

While you didn't say it was in agreement with you, your argument seems to heavily imply your bias.

I'm saying that YES the modern values argument is pointless

You're saying this and providing no proof beyond your opinion.

BUT just because we don't apply modern values, that the Forsaken are still doing things groups INGAME consider heinous,

And there are many groups that consider other groups' actions heinous. That is perspective, it doesn't prove one side more right or more wrong.

and the playerbase should focus discussion on that instead.

This is a pointless call to further discourse that is trying to redirect away from something you don't like. That is all. You don't like that someone can argue "but from this perspective [...]" so you want to justify ignoring that argument by saying others feel a certain way in the lore.

You're basically trying to assert that fuck a given perspective these guys are still dicks. Discuss... and trying to pass it off as:

a pretty good argument

[Mardux]

I usually RP with the established values of the factions/races. It can be hard to discern the difference at times.

Sylvanas has been up to supervillainy as of late though (raising her bar from standard Cataclysm villainy) to a degree that I don't know how people would muddy the water with arguments like this. Is there an azerothian culture that does think you should hunt down and enslave refugees, while blighting all the resources you stole from them?

(I mean besides the forsaken, apparently. Even Gallywix would say it's a waste of money.)

It really depends on who is being hunted and enslaved. If it's forsaken or trolls being hunted or orcs being enslaved, then yes.

If it's a race that's part of the alliance, then of course not.

[Skytotem]

You're basically trying to assert that fuck a given perspective these guys are still dicks. Discuss... and trying to pass it off as:

Yeah... I think you're just being obtuse and weirdly passive aggressive here.

- - - Updated - - -

Fire mages burn people alive and cause people to become living bombs. Hunters shoot people in the dick with arrows and let their pet bear maul people. Warlocks turn people's souls into cookies. Death knights spread diseases and explode corpses and raise them. War causes pain. What's your point?

That Blizz should write better, because neither the reactions to the blight on any side nor the general lore of the war is presented well.

- - - Updated - - -

You make perfect sense. Same as applying 2019 values to things that happened in 1945.

The Forsaken are undead, and all that comes with them. They've been saying 'Beware the living!' (if I remember correctly) since Vanilla...

Can anyone else parse this cause I'm not sure what Mavfin's trying to communicate here.

[GreenJesus]

Yeah... I think you're just being obtuse and weirdly passive aggressive here.

- - - Updated - - -



That Blizz should write better, because neither the reactions to the blight on any side nor the general lore of the war is presented well.

Yeh I'd love for Sylvanas to say "Spare me your 'morality'. You and your mages burn soldiers alive and use them as living bombs. Your shamans electrocute and throw lava at people. Druids use swarms of bugs to eat people alive and suffocate people with plants. Your warlocks trap people's souls inside of gems and torment people with curses and corruption and summon demons. You have your magic and I have my blight. I will use whatever tools I have in my arsenal just like you do. Now get out of my way. I have a war to win." But since IRL there is the geneva convention and PG-13 rating they have to make chemical warfare bad.

[Skytotem]

Yeh I'd love for Sylvanas to say "Spare me your 'morality'. You and your mages burn soldiers alive and use them as living bombs. Your shamans electrocute and throw law at people. Druids use swarms of bugs to eat people alive and suffocate people with plants. Your warlocks trap people's souls inside of gems and torment people with curses and corruption and summon demons. You have your magic and I have my blight. I will use whatever tools I have in my arsenal just like you do. Now get out of my way. I have a war to win."

See, would that be so hard for Blizz to put ingame?