Sylvanas And Baine Are Both Wrong

[Wylyth1992]

I think it was wrong for Baine to give Derek to the Alliance, as it was a clear security risk. At the same time, Derek shouldn't have been enslaved (as it pretty much breaks the one rule regarding undead is that they can do what they want as long as they don't threaten the Forsaken), it should have been "Hey, join the Horde and continue your unlife, or die a second time." Because, if Sylvanas will do it to one raised Alliance person, who is to say she won't do it to others? Thomas Zelling for one was perfectly willing to be loyal to the Horde until the situation with Derek. Whose to say that, with positive reinforcement instead of torture, Derek would have willingly join the Horde. A long shot, sure, but still.

[Nathasil]

I think it was wrong for Baine to give Derek to the Alliance, as it was a clear security risk. At the same time, Derek shouldn't have been enslaved (as it pretty much breaks the one rule regarding undead is that they can do what they want as long as they don't threaten the Forsaken), it should have been "Hey, join the Horde and continue your unlife, or die a second time." Because, if Sylvanas will do it to one raised Alliance person, who is to say she won't do it to others? Thomas Zelling for one was perfectly willing to be loyal to the Horde until the situation with Derek. Whose to say that, with positive reinforcement instead of torture, Derek would have willingly join the Horde. A long shot, sure, but still.

You have been out in the wilds for a time...but Sylvanas enslaved HUNDREDS of innocents she murdered during the Silverpine Questline. She raised many, many more during the Battle for Lordaeron and she did enslave Night Elves she murdered while they were defending their home and children.
Also, you may not have noticed, but Sylvanas currently has the Horde genociding Kul'Tirans for absolutely jack-shit of a reason in the most cruel ways possible (Brennadam). OF COURSE Derek would willingly join her! Because everybody is as fucked up in the head as Nathanos! Or wait...no, they are not.

[Varodoc]

You have been out in the wilds for a time...but Sylvanas enslaved HUNDREDS of innocents she murdered during the slverpine Questline. She raised many, many more during the Battle for Lordaeron and she did enslave Night Elves she murdered while they were defending their home and children.
Also, you may not have noticed, but Sylvanas currently has the Horde genociding Kul'Tirans for absolutely jack-shit of a reason in the most cruel ways possible (Brennadam). OF COURSE Derek would willingly join her! Because everybody is as fucked up in the head as Nathanos! Or wait...no, they are not.

It's the Alliance's fault. They started the war in Stormheim. They deserve it all

[Nathasil]

The Horde started the War in Blasted Lands. There i said it.

Hint: As a Horde Fanboy you should NEVER engage in the "but they did it first" game. It may take some time but in the end you will lose every single fucking time.

[Wylyth1992]

I really hate this expansion in terms of lore. I wish we could go back to the Vanilla days of the Horde and Alliance of ACTUALLY being "shades of grey". But I also know I will not enjoy classic in terms of gameplay.

[ls-]

Baine can't be wrong, he's the heart of the Horde, the best it has to offer.

[desercitus]

Well, duh.

But just to play the advocatus diaboli: Sylvanas would argue that the Horde's survival is more important than anything. That the Forsaken should prefer a little uncertainty about their precious freedoms over not existing at all due to being eradicated by the Alliance. In her mind, enslaving Derek would have been the only way to save the Horde, so every truly loyal Horde member should accept is as a necessity.

On the other hand, Baine might (quite correctly) argue that a Horde that stoops to such levels and commits such crimes would not be worth preserving, and that vengeance against that is not only inevitable, but well deserved. So it's only logical he tries everything in his power to thwart Sylvanas' scheme: To not only save the Horde, but to make sure it stays worthy of saving. What I don't get is how he sees this as justification to slaughter other Horde members without provocation over a policy dispute with the warchief. At least Vol'jin had the (excellent) excuse of getting attacked first by Garrosh's lackeys, but here it's Baine who threw the first stone - which may be why his rebellion is so unpopular with the player base.

[Wylyth1992]

Baine can't be wrong, he's the heart of the Horde, the best it has to offer.

Baine has been a problem since Tides Of War, since he considered the attack on Camp Taurajo justified (even though many civilians died) as it was a "military camp" while Theramore was not even though Theramore was pretty much the second port for the Alliance in Kalimdor and thus a military target, not to mention that Theramore was home of the Northwatch, which have been a big threat to Durotar. While the way of gettng rid of Theramore was wrong, Theramore WAS a threat to the Horde, since it was clear Jaina could not control her soldiers.

[ls-]

Baine has been a problem since Tides Of War, since he considered the attack on Camp Taurajo justified (even though many civilians died) as it was a "military camp" while Theramore was not even though Theramore was pretty much the second port for the Alliance in Kalimdor and thus a military target, not to mention that Theramore was home of the Northwatch, which have been a big threat to Durotar. While the way of gettng rid of Theramore was wrong, Theramore WAS a threat to the Horde, since it was clear Jaina could not control her soldiers.

Oh, I'm well aware of what Baine has and hasn't done so far. But none of that matters. In BfA Blizz repeatedly stated via in-game means that Baine was the one we needed to root for.

You need to start thinking less, being heavily invested in WoW's lore is one of the biggest mistakes you can make, been there and done that. Just enjoy the ride and facepalm occasionally/regularly.

[Wylyth1992]

Oh, I'm well aware of what Baine has and hasn't done so far. But none of that matters. In BfA Blizz repeatedly stated via in-game means that Baine was the one we needed to root for.

You need to start thinking less, being heavily invested in WoW's lore is one of the biggest mistakes you can make, been there and done that. Just enjoy the ride and facepalm occasionally/regularly.

I really wish we had a "not my problem" option in this quest. I don't want to side with Baine NOR Sylvannas.

[Varodoc]

I really wish we had a "not my problem" option in this quest. I don't want to side with Baine NOR Sylvannas.

It was an option planned for the Sylvanas/Zekhan choice in 8.1, but it was dropped.

[Fetus Rex]

There is nothing wrong with what Sylvanas did. Decent plan to deliver a dagger.

[TheImperios]

You have been out in the wilds for a time...but Sylvanas enslaved HUNDREDS of innocents she murdered during the Silverpine Questline. She raised many, many more during the Battle for Lordaeron and she did enslave Night Elves she murdered while they were defending their home and children.
Also, you may not have noticed, but Sylvanas currently has the Horde genociding Kul'Tirans for absolutely jack-shit of a reason in the most cruel ways possible (Brennadam). OF COURSE Derek would willingly join her! Because everybody is as fucked up in the head as Nathanos! Or wait...no, they are not.

To be fair, Kul Tiras had a genocidal agenda against the Horde as well. Two wrongs do not make a right but the Kul Tirans are hardly innocent.

"You have always been naive, my daughter. You aren't old enough to remember what these monsters did to our homeland. The orcs and their kin cannot be trusted. They must be exterminated like the mongrels they are!"

If you are an Alliance fan, you of course may agree with Daelin, which is perfectly fine. I am after all a supporter of genocidal Alliance too.

- - - Updated - - -

The main problem is not with the Horde, it is the Alliance. Were it given a chance to be more aggressive, more evil, both Sylvanas and Baine's agendas would resonate stronger with the playerbase.

[Super Dickmann]

Slavery is in no way morally inferior to killing, which Baine did to the Forsaken on his own side to help the enemy, as when you're dead and burning in hell, you are deprived of all choice without any possibility of making future choices. Death is the ultimate deprivation of free will.

Even if it weren't, The Horde has always had slavery. Sylvanas enslaving one guy for a tactical purpose is leagues below Thrall allowing the enslavement of far more people for the sake of entertainment in gladiatorial pit fighting and it also pales before her raising Baine's own people as skellies.

Mind, none of this matters because Baine has writer fiat on his side and will be the Kalimdor Colonial Governor on behalf of Anduin at the end of this.

He might've had a better case if he called out Sylvanas for her plan being staggeringly retarded, which it is, but alas that wasn't his angle.

tl;dr Re: Derek, like with everything, Baine is wrong.

[Wylyth1992]

There is nothing wrong with what Sylvanas did. Decent plan to deliver a dagger.

Seems overly risky.

[Kyphael]

Derek Proudmoore is likely going to end up being some kind of brainwashed assassin or unaware chemical weapon that will detonate at a strategic time, anyway. No way he was resurrected just as a plot device to drive home the "Baine is a traitor to Sylvanas' Horde vehicle." His very existence would be awkward without a caveat when the dust settles. He's an Undead, just randomly hanging with the Alliance?

[formerShandalay]

I think what bothers me most is that Baine doesn't seem to have any friends or even connections to someone.... anyone... inside the Horde.
First of all, if Derek's treatment bothers him so much, why didn't he intervene before he was taken to that 'secret Forsaken ship far away'? When he sees Derek hanging there, go to his people and his allies (which he should have, given he is one of the longest standing freaking members of the Horde) and demand she leave that be. If she refuses, make your little speech about enslaving Forsaken right then and there and take your chances with that. You'd have gotten around all of the traitor thing with that.

But ok, he doesn't have anyone he trusts, doesn't want to bother his people and allies or whatever reason he has for doing this all alone ... oh, sorry, except for a newly risen undead who clearly doesn't have any contacts or connections yet and also can't exactly use his former contacts anymore, with the undeath and all.
So why not simply take Derek away from there in secret... you know, without killing all of the Forsaken guarding him.... and then taking him to a nice cave in Mulgore while you work out where to put him? Maybe.. you know... contact someone like Hamuul, who may know more or Aponi Brightmane, or Dezco or any number of Forsaken who went away from Undercity before? They clearly exist in several places. Jaina could still be contacted by those, or even in a small desperate attempt by Derek himself and you could have the very same story as before, just without Baine actually betraying the Horde for Jaina specifically.
Sylvanas could still be mad at Baine for messing with her plans and arrest him and even shoot Zellig if she absolutely has to, but there would be no Alliance involved. Horde gets the meeting with Hamuul (or whoever) as a cinematic and Alliance gets Jaina picking him up and doing the exact same thing as in the ingame cinematic now, just without Baine.
You could still have the exact same discussions about if Sylvanas is going too far and if Baine did the right thing just without the added 'bonus' of him actually working with the Alliance for it. It would have made him still be a 'listen to your heart'-person, and from Sylvanas's perspective even a traitor, but not a complete failure as a leader and as a member of the Horde as a whole, because he never talks with his Tauren about anything and has no friends inside the Horde or inside other factions.

[mcnally86]

I think it was wrong for Baine to give Derek to the Alliance, as it was a clear security risk. At the same time, Derek shouldn't have been enslaved (as it pretty much breaks the one rule regarding undead is that they can do what they want as long as they don't threaten the Forsaken), it should have been "Hey, join the Horde and continue your unlife, or die a second time." Because, if Sylvanas will do it to one raised Alliance person, who is to say she won't do it to others? Thomas Zelling for one was perfectly willing to be loyal to the Horde until the situation with Derek. Whose to say that, with positive reinforcement instead of torture, Derek would have willingly join the Horde. A long shot, sure, but still.

I have been unhappy with this. What Baine is doing is not honorable. Sneaking behind the scenes and killing Forsaken soldiers to get his way is not honorable. He should openly do things if he has faith in them. Doing something you think is right is honorable, backstabbing and murder to do it is not.

I also have issues on the Forsaken side. As a precata player I remember the story of what they were was very grey. They were the dead people of Lorderon, killed and enslaved by Arthus. After Arthus left supposedly Sylv helped them pull free of his control and they had their minds again. On the other hand, there were a number of quests that made them unsure of that. As people they were different. The Forsaken themselves did not know if it was because they had become scarred from the war, death magic changed them, or Sylv took control of their mind secretly to influence their actions. From the Scarlet and Alliance perspective it was the last 2. This made it ok for them to try and clear these folks off their land again and take it "back". Uncle Chuck died so he should quit complaining, crawl back into the ground, and give up his inheritance. Uncle Chuck would not be sure if his nephews were wrong, but he would eat the brains of anyone messing with his farm anyhow. I thought that conflict was neat. I thought they were bringing it back with Darkshore. When that elf warden died and got back up angry and joined the Horde it looked to the Horde like death was scary and having a leader that could beat it back made them strong. From the alliance side it would look like using a Valkyr to res someone caused their mind to break.

My point is when Sylvanas stood on that boat and said she could control the minds of Undead all of the guards should have had an existential crisis and stabbed her before she could try it on them, or they should have stood to attention to reveal that she had already been binding the will of the Forsaken like she was the Lich King 2.0.

- - - Updated - - -

Seems overly risky.

Seriously, she should just plague their grain shipments or something... oh wait.

[TickTickTick]

Maybe before we start thinking about this, let's ask a question how the hell does death in warcraft even work? He's been dead for how long? 20? 30 years? His spirit chilling wherever it was chilling (it it even was, we dont know even where the spirits go) and suddenly he's pulled back to the life plane? I understand that stronger entities go by different rules, but a simple human?

That whole Derek questline (both his body and his soul) was a mess comparable to "there are many legions in different universes", they just opened another can of worms

[Kumorii]

I don't get how people can link using an enemies corpse as a sleeper agent against said enemy to robbing free will from forsaken...it's no different from torturing an enemy for whatever reason. Doesn't mean you suddenly devalue every single person on earth for it.
It's an ethical issue, sure... But the leaps people take are ridiculous.

It's all about context and circumstances. Just like killing is sometimes OK, sometimes it's bad and sometimes it's downright sickening.