new forsaken leader spoilers

[Mehrunes]

I would say the claim that Anduin or Jaina are her "best friends" is the semantic argument, as this has no real basis I can find. Jaina obviously greets Calia warmly because of all she's done for her brother Derek, but whether or not they were great friends when Jaina was involved with Arthas is unknown (and this service has nothing to do with the Alliance in specific). Similar to Anduin, who she apparently just met while serving in the Conclave, and with whom she shares an ideology in terms of the priesthood of the Light. Derek's allegiances are also uncertain, he's been dead for many years now and world he knew has moved on in ways he scarcely knows, and he has also been irrevocably changed. Simply put, Calia has rendered no special duties to the Alliance outside her personal and neutral calling as a priestess of the Light. Whatever ties she has are purely personal.

I'd say sharing an ideology with the High King of the Alliance kinda indicates a character leaning towards the Alliance. Especially since Calia shares no such ideology with Horde members.

"Sharing a line" with an Alliance and/or Horde leader isn't necessary for someone to declare for a given faction, either; so this line of reasoning doesn't seem particularly valid.

Given how she hasn't declared for the Horde yet, it's kinda obvious that it's her current allegiance that's being discussed here. And her having no connection whatsoever to Horde leaders, or even important Horde characters other than a single meeting with Voss in 8.3, doesn't exactly support the notion of Calia being some great Horde patriot.

I am uncertain of what would be required to be associated with the Horde culturally - this seems like a "No True Scotsman" type of argument.

A cultural association would be my guess. Which Calia has none of.

[DotEleven]

I would say the claim that Anduin or Jaina are her "best friends" is the semantic argument, as this has no real basis I can find. Jaina obviously greets Calia warmly because of all she's done for her brother Derek, but whether or not they were great friends when Jaina was involved with Arthas is unknown (and this service has nothing to do with the Alliance in specific). Similar to Anduin, who she apparently just met while serving in the Conclave, and with whom she shares an ideology in terms of the priesthood of the Light. Derek's allegiances are also uncertain, he's been dead for many years now and world he knew has moved on in ways he scarcely knows, and he has also been irrevocably changed. Simply put, Calia has rendered no special duties to the Alliance outside her personal and neutral calling as a priestess of the Light. Whatever ties she has are purely personal.

"Sharing a line" with an Alliance and/or Horde leader isn't necessary for someone to declare for a given faction, either; so this line of reasoning doesn't seem particularly valid.

- - - Updated - - -



I am uncertain of what would be required to be associated with the Horde culturally - this seems like a "No True Scotsman" type of argument.

- - - Updated - - -



She was still young and pretty uninvolved in the court. In "Arthas: Rise of the Lich King" Calia considered herself too young to be married off, which was part of her reason for refusing the arrangement and feuding with her father (who was under Prestor's charming enchantment at the time).

She considered herself too young, but she was still older than Arthas. She also in the timeframe of Prestor disappearing and Lordaeron getting sacked had the time to get Pregnant and have said kid. Just saying, it's not like she was a kid at the time and she was quite entrenched in politics by purpose of being a princess whether she wanted to be or not.

I mean, depending on how we consider her undead state she is technically the rightful leader of the Alliance.

[Mehrunes]

A notion I disagree with on its face. Correlation is not causation - a Forsaken having living relatives in the Alliance doesn't make them any less a citizen of the Horde. This isn't how political affiliations work.

I wouldn't be so sure about Forsaken. Apparently you can become a Forsaken by refusing to join the Forsaken so they may surprise you in context of affiliations.

[Yoshingo]

I am uncertain of what would be required to be associated with the Horde culturally - this seems like a "No True Scotsman" type of argument.

Ding ding ding, this is the correct answer. She is not Sylvanas therefore she has no connection to the Forsaken therefore she is bad. She will never be the correct answer to anybody making this fallacy because she's not Sylvanas.

[Super Dickmann]

That doesn't make them close - Jaina simply says she's glad to have Calia back in her life after such a long time, a fine statement, but completely lacking in the context you're attempting to shoehorn in. Jaina allows Calia space and time because she's actively helping Derek. I'm sure Jaina and Calia were familiar with one another due to Jaina's involvement in her brother Arthas' life, but there's still nothing underlining that they enjoyed any kind of especially close friendship or rapport besides from the current - and Jaina is likely happy to see *any* part of Arthas' life untouched from the darkness that ultimately claimed him. Both Anduin and Faol helped Calia attain her status an undead, but this was both facilitated and ultimately the product of Saa'ra's doing - giving credit to Anduin alone would be objectively wrong. Calling Voss her "worshiper" is equally hyperbolic and goes to show your own bias in the quarter - Voss wants to use Calia, as the quest text in 8.3 itself says, which regardless of her ethical outlook isn't really the goal of a "worshiper." By your rubric, Velen's actions in TBC make him a Horde leader since he actively aids the Blood Elves in restoring the Sunwell, and they were and remain a Horde race.

You can read that into Jaina's relationship with Calia, but it's pretty desperate and it's not what the material is trying to sell. Jaina cares for Calia greatly and vice versa and that she's missed means that they had a bond before hand. Jaina's mother would consider it rude to ditch Calia and Jaina notes that Calia can stay in Kul Tiras and she'd be happy with that. To ascribe to her a purely utilitarian need to help out Derek both disregards the allusion to their friendship in life and the obvious work put into showing that all three close are to each other. Ditto, while Saa'ra pushed Calia away from the bohemian life of shagging footmen or whatever, it was Anduin who first spoke with Calia about reaching to the Forsaken and Anduin whom she urged the Forsaken at the Gathering to go to the protection of. Voss purposefully seeks out Calia to crown her and have her lead the Forsaken, gushing over her exquisite qualities. As for the last point...

A notion I disagree with on its face. Correlation is not causation - a Forsaken having living relatives in the Alliance doesn't make them any less a citizen of the Horde. This isn't how political affiliations work.

This, like the Velen example, is a strawman. Having ties to the other faction's characters by itself doesn't make you a character from that faction, as I later go on in detail to explain why Calia fits no definition of the Horde. Having more ties to the other faction, character and value-wise makes you a character from that faction. The draenei and thus Velen have bonds with the night elves and his race was clashing with the blood elves for most of TBC, he helps them out, but he's never part of them, relies on them etc. Ditto, the Forsaken have been part of the Horde for fifteen years and have a radically different identity from what they were in life - having family on the other side doesn't make them the same. Calia, by contrast, has no ties on the Horde whatsoever and has zero values resonance with any aspect of it except 'honor', which is conveniently the trait identical across both factions.

@Yoshingo

You're free to point out what makes her remotely Horde. Here's a guide:

Compare the Mists of Pandaria blurbs and do you think "struggling to keep aggression in check" "monstrous" and "values strength (and honor)" fits Calia better or maybe "nobility, faith, honor and sacrifice". Or to go over the list of the traits mentioned in the other thread - Calia is not militaristic in any sense, she's never been in a fight and dislikes it, she's not evil, she's honorable, but so is literally everyone on both factions so that's not a qualifier for anything, she's not monstrous, but beyond human perfection and she's never been rejected by anyone but is loved by every character who encounters her who isn't Satan incarnate. Add that to being the hereditary princess of the pre-WoW Alliance kingdom, with all the trappings thereof and explicitly aiming to restore its identity in contradiction with what it was for its entire tenure in the Horde. She is neither a noble, shamanistic and tribal character, nor a reject joining out of convenience. There is absolutely nothing about her that's Horde.

[Mehrunes]

Ding ding ding, this is the correct answer. She is not Sylvanas therefore she has no connection to the Forsaken therefore she is bad. She will never be the correct answer to anybody making this fallacy because she's not Sylvanas.

Ding ding ding, this is a straw-man. And trying to boggle down the topic to Sylvanas vs Calia is a false dichotomy. A nonsensical one given how Sylvanas isn't even in the picture anymore. And guess what, Calia has no connection to the Forsaken even if you pretend Sylvanas never even existed. And that is why she's bad. But keep on with dem fallacies. Maybe you'll construct an actual counterargument out of them at some point.

[Aucald]

You can read that into Jaina's relationship with Calia, but it's pretty desperate and it's not what the material is trying to sell. Jaina cares for Calia greatly and vice versa and that she's missed means that they had a bond before hand. Jaina's mother would consider it rude to ditch Calia and Jaina notes that Calia can stay in Kul Tiras and she'd be happy with that. To ascribe to her a purely utilitarian need to help out Derek both disregards the allusion to their friendship in life and the obvious work put into showing that all three close are to each other. Ditto, while Saa'ra pushed Calia away from the bohemian life of shagging footmen or whatever, it was Anduin who first spoke with Calia about reaching to the Forsaken and Anduin whom she urged the Forsaken at the Gathering to go to the protection of. Voss purposefully seeks out Calia to crown her and have her lead the Forsaken, gushing over her exquisite qualities. As for the last point...

I think it's pretty much what's on offer, along with the fact that we have no historical context for Jaina and Calia's relationship prior to the Third War of any kind. Claiming they had some grand friendship then just seems like you're inferring a past that might well have never existed. Jaina might well have cared for Calia greatly since she was Arthas' sister and she once cared for Arthas greatly - I mean I care for my wife's niece quite a great deal as well, but I wouldn't say we have a strong friendship since there's about 20 years between us. They might well have been friendly as well, at least in passing; but given the fact that Jaina never really stayed in Capitol City for any length of time makes it seem unlikely they enjoyed a strong rapport. You're also wrong about Calia and Anduin, because in "Before the Storm" it was Faol who brought Calia to Anduin specifically - and Faol who set up much of the organizing that led to the Gathering through outreach via the Conclave's Forsaken contingent. You give Anduin far too much credit for the undertaking, though it was first his idea, and give far too little to both Calia and Faol for their roles.

This, like the Velen example, is a strawman. Having ties to the other faction's characters by itself doesn't make you a character from that faction, as I later go on in detail to explain why Calia fits no definition of the Horde. Having more ties to the other faction, character and value-wise makes you a character from that faction. The draenei and thus Velen have bonds with the night elves and his race was clashing with the blood elves for most of TBC, he helps them out, but he's never part of them, relies on them etc. Ditto, the Forsaken have been part of the Horde for fifteen years and have a radically different identity from what they were in life - having family on the other side doesn't make them the same. Calia, by contrast, has no ties on the Horde whatsoever and has zero values resonance with any aspect of it except 'honor', which is conveniently the trait identical across both factions.

Well, yes, it's a hyperbolic example underlining why your "one drop" philosophy as concerns loyalty is misplaced and unworkable - it's not a classic Strawman argument because it's not one you ever made, but it is a logical and reasonable conclusion using the same guidelines you've previously outlined. Calia has thus far one instance of helping the Alliance, with the Gathering itself, just like Velen has one instance of helping the Blood Elves. Her work with Derek is her tending to a Forsaken, and since both Derek and Calia's loyalties can be question is hardly conducive toward painting her as predominantly Alliance. Calia has a few ties to the Alliance and almost none to the Horde, but her desires to minister to and aid the Forsaken ought to count to some degree, should they not? If Calia sacrifices her Alliance connections to join the Forsaken to render aid to them, that pretty much makes her Horde, does it not? Just like the Blood Elves left the Alliance and joined the Horde.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd say sharing an ideology with the High King of the Alliance kinda indicates a character leaning towards the Alliance. Especially since Calia shares no such ideology with Horde members.

By that logic, every Horde Paladin or Priest that uses the Light shares an ideology with the King of the Alliance and thus leans toward the Alliance. That doesn't seem workable on its face.

Given how she hasn't declared for the Horde yet, it's kinda obvious that it's her current allegiance that's being discussed here. And her having no connection whatsoever to Horde leaders, or even important Horde characters other than a single meeting with Voss in 8.3, doesn't exactly support the notion of Calia being some great Horde patriot.

She has no real current allegiance save to the Conclave, which is neutral in the Horde/Alliance conflict. She's very likely to join the Forsaken in some capacity very soon, which requires declaring for the Horde.

A cultural association would be my guess. Which Calia has none of.

That's a tautology - I'm asking what a cultural association would be in this context, the answer to which can't be itself in other words.

- - - Updated - - -

She considered herself too young, but she was still older than Arthas. She also in the timeframe of Prestor disappearing and Lordaeron getting sacked had the time to get Pregnant and have said kid. Just saying, it's not like she was a kid at the time and she was quite entrenched in politics by purpose of being a princess whether she wanted to be or not.

I mean, depending on how we consider her undead state she is technically the rightful leader of the Alliance.

Being a princess, especially one not in contention for the crown, doesn't automatically embroil one in politics - a lot of royals don't bother with it if they're not in the line of direct succession for the crown. She's also abdicated any sense of leadership of the Alliance herself, and since the Alliance as it exists today isn't the Alliance of Lordaeron that existed prior to the Third War it's unlikely she would technically be its rightful leader regardless.

[Super Dickmann]

I think it's pretty much what's on offer, along with the fact that we have no historical context for Jaina and Calia's relationship prior to the Third War of any kind. Claiming they had some grand friendship then just seems like you're inferring a past that might well have never existed. Jaina might well have cared for Calia greatly since she was Arthas' sister and she once cared for Arthas greatly - I mean I care for my wife's niece quite a great deal as well, but I wouldn't say we have a strong friendship since there's about 20 years between us. They might well have been friendly as well, at least in passing; but given the fact that Jaina never really stayed in Capitol City for any length of time makes it seem unlikely they enjoyed a strong rapport. You're also wrong about Calia and Anduin, because in "Before the Storm" it was Faol who brought Calia to Anduin specifically - and Faol who set up much of the organizing that led to the Gathering through outreach via the Conclave's Forsaken contingent. You give Anduin far too much credit for the undertaking, though it was first his idea, and give far too little to both Calia and Faol for their roles.

The game works to communicate a friendship between Jaina and her family and Calia, and by virtue of Calia even just occupying that space, nevermind Jaina's remarks which imply a prior bond and a currently strong connection, both are head and shoulders over any interaction by Calia with anyone in the Horde. While Faol presented Calia to Anduin, I don't see how that affects my point - Calia establishes a strong relationship and trust in Anduin and works with him and the Alliance ins etting up the Gathering, in urging the Forsaken to defect to the Alliance and was later raised partly by Anduin and spent time in Alliance territory from that point on. To downplay the role of Anduin in this is pretty dubious given that he's been the character she's had the most screentime with up to this point and who facilitates her entire journey as well as having mutual respect, values and goals.

Well, yes, it's a hyperbolic example underlining why your "one drop" philosophy as concerns loyalty is misplaced and unworkable - it's not a classic Strawman argument because it's not one you ever made, but it is a logical and reasonable conclusion using the same guidelines you've previously outlined. Calia has thus far one instance of helping the Alliance, with the Gathering itself, just like Velen has one instance of helping the Blood Elves. Her work with Derek is her tending to a Forsaken, and since both Derek and Calia's loyalties can be question is hardly conducive toward painting her as predominantly Alliance. Calia has a few ties to the Alliance and almost none to the Horde, but her desires to minister to and aid the Forsaken ought to count to some degree, should they not? If Calia sacrifices her Alliance connections to join the Forsaken to render aid to them, that pretty much makes her Horde, does it not? Just like the Blood Elves left the Alliance and joined the Horde.

It's a good thing there is no one drop philosophy as I already outlined in both my prior post and the first one. Thrall also has a strong bond with Jaina, but no one would dispute he's a Horde character, given that he was Warchief of the Horde, leader of the orcs, had strong relationships with all the OG Horde cast and every story he's in concerns his relationship with the Horde in some fashion. But unlike Thrall or say, Vol'jin with Tyrathan, these relationships with Alliance characters are all the interpersonal connections Calia has. It's about the ratio involved, the history and ideology of the character and their bond with other characters and what form it takes. I've already explained how thematically she doesn't mesh with any version of the Horde, be it Thrall, Garrosh, Blackhand or what have you, but she is pitch perfect for the Alliance. In turn, when it comes to the Forsaken, they are the ones who adopt her view and invite her in, not she who loses or gives something up by going with them. They are the ones who adopt the closest they possibly can to their pre-Horde, which is to say Alliance identity on her behalf, and her entire original sthick was to connect them more strongly with the Alliance, which stands to reason will also be her time in office. Calia taking over the Forsaken does not make her more Horde, it makes them more Alliance, because they are the ones shedding prior traits and bonds, not her.

[Mehrunes]

By that logic, every Horde Paladin or Priest that uses the Light shares an ideology with the King of the Alliance and thus leans toward the Alliance. That doesn't seem workable on its face.

Since when does merely using a magical power constitute an ideology?

She has no real current allegiance save to the Conclave, which is neutral in the Horde/Alliance conflict. She's very likely to join the Forsaken in some capacity very soon, which requires declaring for the Horde.

Obviously her prancing around Stormwind hand in hand with the High King of the Alliance doesn't count because reasons.

That's a tautology - I'm asking what a cultural association would be in this context, the answer to which can't be itself in other words.

Except your question is blatantly in bad faith as you're asking for something that's beyond obvious while feigning otherwise. The Horde, as any significant group, has its own culture. Sharing in that culture forms a cultural association. Kinda simple. And there's no way, shape or form for you to pretend that Calia, a person who has never even set foot in a Horde town, has anything to do with it. She wasn't raised among Horde, she has no significant relationship with Horde members, she has no Horde role models. As per her behavior in Before the Storm she still worships the Light in typically Alliance fashion. There's literally nothing that could link her to Horde's culture. Or Horde anything for that matter.

[Jastall]

The Forsaken are Sylvannas. This has always been an issue with the race. Love her or hate her, there is nobody that could replace her. Except maybe Arthas but Blizzard isn't crazy enough to go there, yet...

Indeed, that's been my strongest beef with the race, that their entire identity is a cult towards a single character. Get rid of her, and suddenly there's nothing left but angry zombies who chuck green goo at things.

The Desolate Council could have been an answer had they been built as something else than sad zombies who need a hug. Nathanos could have been an answer had he not been a total Sylvanas groupie. Belmont could have been an answer had his screentime been something else than getting frozen. Zelling could have been an answer had he not been killed for muh shock value. Hell Voss, even retconned as she is, could have been an answer had they developed her more.

But na, let's have the Forsaken do a total 180 and go from lolevil puppy eaters to sad dead people because of a change in leadership, leadership which is as Alliance-themed as it gets this side of Anduin himself. Here's hoping a wrench is thrown in these plans, the Forsaken largely reject Calia and she merely absconds with some devotees to make an Allied Race instead.

[wanax]

Indeed, that's been my strongest beef with the race, that their entire identity is a cult towards a single character. Get rid of her, and suddenly there's nothing left but angry zombies who chuck green goo at things.

The Desolate Council could have been an answer had they been built as something else than sad zombies who need a hug. Nathanos could have been an answer had he not been a total Sylvanas groupie. Belmont could have been an answer had his screentime been something else than getting frozen. Zelling could have been an answer had he not been killed for muh shock value. Hell Voss, even retconned as she is, could have been an answer had they developed her more.

But na, let's have the Forsaken do a total 180 and go from lolevil puppy eaters to sad dead people because of a change in leadership, leadership which is as Alliance-themed as it gets this side of Anduin himself. Here's hoping a wrench is thrown in these plans, the Forsaken largely reject Calia and she merely absconds with some devotees to make an Allied Race instead.

Hopefully this or something like this happens. I’d gladly take shirvallah worshiping trolls or something. as the last AR instead of light undead.

[Khelek]

Idk even Voss makes little sense. There’s a whole cast of Forsaken higher ranked than her yet somehow she’s suddenly speaking for the Forsaken after specifically not joining the Forsaken back in Cata and her entry into both the Forsaken and Horde sounding more like conscription then any kind of loyalty or real care for either? o ok, yeah that one quest in Stormsong really fleshed her entire history out! She loves Forsaken now!!!

I agree Voss is not great either, but the War campaign did try to build her up as someone who understands the forsaken and helps them transition, which is more than can be said for Calia.

To be honest, the writing is just sub par all around, sadly.

[Ersula]

I agree Voss is not great either, but the War campaign did try to build her up as someone who understands the forsaken and helps them transition, which is more than can be said for Calia.

To be honest, the writing is just sub par all around, sadly.

The Forsaken elected a parlementary council while Sylvanas was busy in Orgrimmar, consisting of their most important citizens, then these were coincidentally the same ones who were convinced by Calia to meet with their extended family in the Alliance. Then conveniently all murdered by the Dark Rangers. And one of the major reasons people think Calia might have some sort of conniving streak & manipulated these events to come to pass.

[Quintalos]

Actually, it's never indicated anywhere that Calia is taking over as leader, merely visiting Lordaeron at the behest of Voss to help the displaced Forsaken rediscover themselves (particularly the newly undead Night Elves). I'm not saying Calia won't end up being the leader of the Forsaken, but I think at the moment, there's nothing datamined that effectively sells this notion as fact.

Would it be cool? Sure. After all, she's the rightful heir and it's interesting that something so aligned with the Alliance could end up a Horde leader. It shows progress on a macro level as well as take the Forsaken in a new direction, thus creating new stories.

[Aucald]

Since when does merely using a magical power constitute an ideology?

When said power is bound up into the tenets of a spiritual philosophy and devout organization to which all said practitioners basically belong?

Obviously her prancing around Stormwind hand in hand with the High King of the Alliance doesn't count because reasons.

No more so then the one time Orgrimmar was held prisoner in Capitol City, Lordaeron makes Orgrim a member of the Alliance. There's nothing magical about being on the grounds of Stormwind that confers membership into the Alliance, and there's nothing about being a neutral party temporarily working an Alliance dignitary that makes one a member of the Alliance.

Except your question is blatantly in bad faith as you're asking for something that's beyond obvious while feigning otherwise. The Horde, as any significant group, has its own culture. Sharing in that culture forms a cultural association. Kinda simple. And there's no way, shape or form for you to pretend that Calia, a person who has never even set foot in a Horde town, has anything to do with it. She wasn't raised among Horde, she has no significant relationship with Horde members, she has no Horde role models. As per her behavior in Before the Storm she still worships the Light in typically Alliance fashion. There's literally nothing that could link her to Horde's culture. Or Horde anything for that matter.

No, it was an honest question that you summarily failed to answer - nothing "bad faith" about it, unless you just wanted to assume that for reasons unknown. The Horde is a crazy-quilt of cultures - the Orcs have theirs, the Forsaken have theirs, the Blood Elves theirs, and last I checked there wasn't a whole lot of hegemony in the Horde (unlike the Alliance). So again, what culture is she supposed to share in? The Forsaken are former Lordaeronians, and Calia is also a former Lordaeronian, so that's a culture touchstone she shares with a Horde race. None of the Forsaken were raised among the Horde, either. There's not an "Alliance fashion" to worshiping the Light, either; and the Blood Elves and Forsaken share the same basic tenets of the Church of the Light. So there's your link, such as it is.

- - - Updated - - -

The game works to communicate a friendship between Jaina and her family and Calia, and by virtue of Calia even just occupying that space, nevermind Jaina's remarks which imply a prior bond and a currently strong connection, both are head and shoulders over any interaction by Calia with anyone in the Horde. While Faol presented Calia to Anduin, I don't see how that affects my point - Calia establishes a strong relationship and trust in Anduin and works with him and the Alliance ins etting up the Gathering, in urging the Forsaken to defect to the Alliance and was later raised partly by Anduin and spent time in Alliance territory from that point on. To downplay the role of Anduin in this is pretty dubious given that he's been the character she's had the most screentime with up to this point and who facilitates her entire journey as well as having mutual respect, values and goals.

Again, they knew one another of old, and they're friends now - but nothing communicates any notion that they once enjoyed a deep bond of any kind outside of uncorroborated projection. Calia working with Anduin i.e. the Gathering is no different than the Argent Crusade working with the Alliance, it still doesn't confer Alliance membership upon them reflexively by any means. Screen time doesn't predicate someone's role, either; Anduin could eat up all the screen he wanted but this wouldn't necessarily predicate his role beyond that which the narrative presents us. Anduin and Calia sharing mutual respect, values, and goals doesn't really matter over much, either. Anduin and Saurfang shared much of those same things.

It's a good thing there is no one drop philosophy as I already outlined in both my prior post and the first one. Thrall also has a strong bond with Jaina, but no one would dispute he's a Horde character, given that he was Warchief of the Horde, leader of the orcs, had strong relationships with all the OG Horde cast and every story he's in concerns his relationship with the Horde in some fashion. But unlike Thrall or say, Vol'jin with Tyrathan, these relationships with Alliance characters are all the interpersonal connections Calia has. It's about the ratio involved, the history and ideology of the character and their bond with other characters and what form it takes. I've already explained how thematically she doesn't mesh with any version of the Horde, be it Thrall, Garrosh, Blackhand or what have you, but she is pitch perfect for the Alliance. In turn, when it comes to the Forsaken, they are the ones who adopt her view and invite her in, not she who loses or gives something up by going with them. They are the ones who adopt the closest they possibly can to their pre-Horde, which is to say Alliance identity on her behalf, and her entire original sthick was to connect them more strongly with the Alliance, which stands to reason will also be her time in office. Calia taking over the Forsaken does not make her more Horde, it makes them more Alliance, because they are the ones shedding prior traits and bonds, not her.

I have actually seen Thrall's loyalty disputed, so I'm not so sure I'd be ready to say that's as settled as you seem to. The idea that Calia has to have a preexisting relationship with a Horde leader or member to count as Horde seems like a fuzzy one to me, a false purity test designed solely to keep an otherwise unwanted party out of the in-group. There's no ratio here that designates a member of the Horde, or of the Alliance for that matter, there's only the declaration of one's loyalties and the acceptance of those loyalties by the leadership of a given faction. Calia's never declared for either faction, and neither leadership has accepted her fealty, so it remains that she's neutral. I'd imagine she'd mesh pretty well with Thrall, given that they likely share a lot in common in terms of their ethical philosophies (just as Thrall shares a good deal with Jaina). They've never met to my knowledge, but if Calia is on the trajectory it appears that likely won't be long in occurring. If she declares herself for the Forsaken and the Forsaken accept her, and the Horde leadership accepts her fealty, then she is Horde - there's no other real metric to speak of.

[Super Dickmann]

Again, they knew one another of old, and they're friends now - but nothing communicates any notion that they once enjoyed a deep bond of any kind outside of uncorroborated projection. Calia working with Anduin i.e. the Gathering is no different than the Argent Crusade working with the Alliance, it still doesn't confer Alliance membership upon them reflexively by any means. Screen time doesn't predicate someone's role, either; Anduin could eat up all the screen he wanted but this wouldn't necessarily predicate his role beyond that which the narrative presents us. Anduin and Calia sharing mutual respect, values, and goals doesn't really matter over much, either. Anduin and Saurfang shared much of those same things.

They are close enough friends that their parting is a big deal, that Jaina provides her with a house to live and chill in and entrusts her with her brother for months on end and they reminisce about all the good times. Jaina is a prominent Alliance leader, Anduin is the prominent Alliance leader. All of Calia's interaction with prominent characters has been with them. Calia outright urges people to defect from the Horde to the Alliance on the basis of those friendships. She differs with Anduin on no points whatsoever. As for Saurfang, they did end up agreeing a lot in this one, and boy did do Saurfang a lot of good, didn't it? He sure got a lot of appreciation for being lectured on one of the core precepts of orcish culture by a human teenager. Even then, Saurfang showed self-awareness in his last two appearances, differing from Anduin's idealism on the basis of his experience as, guess what, a member of the Horde.

I have actually seen Thrall's loyalty disputed, so I'm not so sure I'd be ready to say that's as settled as you seem to. The idea that Calia has to have a preexisting relationship with a Horde leader or member to count as Horde seems like a fuzzy one to me, a false purity test designed solely to keep an otherwise unwanted party out of the in-group. There's no ratio here that designates a member of the Horde, or of the Alliance for that matter, there's only the declaration of one's loyalties and the acceptance of those loyalties by the leadership of a given faction. Calia's never declared for either faction, and neither leadership has accepted her fealty, so it remains that she's neutral. I'd imagine she'd mesh pretty well with Thrall, given that they likely share a lot in common in terms of their ethical philosophies (just as Thrall shares a good deal with Jaina). They've never met to my knowledge, but if Calia is on the trajectory it appears that likely won't be long in occurring. If she declares herself for the Forsaken and the Forsaken accept her, and the Horde leadership accepts her fealty, then she is Horde - there's no other real metric to speak of.

I use Thrall because Thrall is the most gentrified orc known to man and an Alliance appeaser who tried to apply Alliance models to the Horde. His Horde is a vegetative thing that does nothing unless otherwise prompted and is free of internal struggle until the Wrath-era changes and earlier the addition of blood elves and Forsaken. And yet Thrall is unquestionably Horde - he uses Horde cultural institutions to bring about the above changes, that of the Warchief, he calls upon Horde and orcish history through using the names of Second War orc heroes and their memory to motivate people, he brings back the traditions of the Frostwolf in terms of shamanism. He deals with their legacy with Daelin and the Dark Horde. He struggles with whether he himself matches up to what an orc should be given his origins and makes errors on that basis, both with the placement of Durotar, the rationale for his appointment of Garrosh, etc. Every Thrall story is a story about him and the Horde. Thrall is inseparable from having been the Horde's Warchief.

Now, much of this is no longer applicable, since all those institutions are gone, the Horde no longer has to deal with any consequences of their actions in any incarnation, the shamanism thing is bunk since half the races in it don't subscribe to it, the history has been shat on by the face of the Horde for this one, Saurfang, etc, etc. but that doesn't alter that Calia is the Jaina in this situation - she'd get along with Thrall because they're both nice people who want world peace. That's about it. Any of the other distinguishing traits of either his Horde or any other Warchief's she lacks even more so than races that're already outliers that need to go the alliance, like the blood elves and nightborne, with the undead under her soon fitting as well. She is Horde in the sense of soon having the label of it, which is just as well, since if we ignore even the elements of being Horde that Thrall represents, that's all the Horde is at the moment - a label, it differs in no way from the Alliance except that it has a weaker cast, no internal conflict, no remaining traits outside of commonalities with the Alliance and a muddled aesthetic because of having to lug races that don't fit in with the WC3 Kalimdor trio around.

Of course an in-group must have a way of delineating the outgroup, that's the purpose of literally all group identification - what are the criteria for X to be in it, what are the criteria for X to not be in it, and this in turn means defining what the qualities of the group and thus its members are. By the bolded parts of your argument here, those criteria are tautalogical - all you need to be part of the Horde is to be part of the Horde. Congratulations, that's as true as it is meaningless. If the Horde stands for nothing except goodness and the Alliance also stands for goodness, then the Horde has no reason to exist, as it indeed doesn't. I can think of no more damning indictment of this faction. Someone like you can indeed argue that a character who's sole purpose in the plot is to tie the undead closer to the Alliance, restore their identity as they were when they were living members of the Alliance of Lordaeron, who's friends are Anduin and Jaina, the top two Alliance characters, is a fitting Horde character because she might soon have the red tag. And where in any other incarnation of the Horde that would cause raucuous laughter, here it's not even all that wrong, since the Horde is as the bad grey lady said, nothing, it's an admitted formality even to the people who defend it.

[Aucald]

They are close enough friends that their parting is a big deal, that Jaina provides her with a house to live and chill in and entrusts her with her brother for months on end and they reminisce about all the good times. Jaina is a prominent Alliance leader, Anduin is the prominent Alliance leader. All of Calia's interaction with prominent characters has been with them. Calia outright urges people to defect from the Horde to the Alliance on the basis of those friendships. She differs with Anduin on no points whatsoever. As for Saurfang, they did end up agreeing a lot in this one, and boy did do Saurfang a lot of good, didn't it? He sure got a lot of appreciation for being lectured on one of the core precepts of orcish culture by a human teenager. Even then, Saurfang showed self-awareness in his last two appearances, differing from Anduin's idealism on the basis of his experience as, guess what, a member of the Horde.

Again, Calia is helping Jaina's brother who was just raised from the dead - obviously there's going to be a great sense of warmth between them *now*, and providing them a place for Calia to tend to Derek is pretty much a given, no real surprise there. Calia has no such friendships when she urged the Forsaken to defect, either; she had had no interaction with Jaina whatsoever in "Before the Storm," and the impetus of her actions seemed to come from Saa'ra's influence in her dreams, if not from the Light itself in some manner (definitely not at the urging of Anduin or anyone else in the Alliance). Anduin explicitly did *not* want Calia to do what she did in any case, as we know from his own words in "Before the Storm," and upbraided Calia for it later on. Saurfang saved the Horde from Sylvanas, who very obviously had no good intentions for it (and also tries to murder the Horde Champion and everyone one else sent to Nazjatar), so yes, I would say Saurfang did a great deal of good.

I use Thrall because Thrall is the most gentrified orc known to man and an Alliance appeaser who tried to apply Alliance models to the Horde. His Horde is a vegetative thing that does nothing unless otherwise prompted and is free of internal struggle until the Wrath-era changes and earlier the addition of blood elves and Forsaken. And yet Thrall is unquestionably Horde - he uses Horde cultural institutions to bring about the above changes, that of the Warchief, he calls upon Horde and orcish history through using the names of Second War orc heroes and their memory to motivate people, he brings back the traditions of the Frostwolf in terms of shamanism. He deals with their legacy with Daelin and the Dark Horde. He struggles with whether he himself matches up to what an orc should be given his origins and makes errors on that basis, both with the placement of Durotar, the rationale for his appointment of Garrosh, etc. Every Thrall story is a story about him and the Horde. Thrall is inseparable from having been the Horde's Warchief.

Hyperbole about appeasement aside, I'm unsure how this matters aside from trying to shift the frame of the debate to more stable footing. Nothing in this has any bearing on the notion that Calia and Thrall would probably have a lot in common in terms of their personal philosophies. I never said Calia and Thrall share any kind of heritage, just that they their thinking would probably be compatible on several levels.

Now, much of this is no longer applicable, since all those institutions are gone, the Horde no longer has to deal with any consequences of their actions in any incarnation, the shamanism thing is bunk since half the races in it don't subscribe to it, the history has been shat on by the face of the Horde for this one, Saurfang, etc, etc. but that doesn't alter that Calia is the Jaina in this situation - she'd get along with Thrall because they're both nice people who want world peace. That's about it. Any of the other distinguishing traits of either his Horde or any other Warchief's she lacks even more so than races that're already outliers that need to go the alliance, like the blood elves and nightborne, with the undead under her soon fitting as well. She is Horde in the sense of soon having the label of it, which is just as well, since if we ignore even the elements of being Horde that Thrall represents, that's all the Horde is at the moment - a label, it differs in no way from the Alliance except that it has a weaker cast, no internal conflict, no remaining traits outside of commonalities with the Alliance and a muddled aesthetic because of having to lug races that don't fit in with the WC3 Kalimdor trio around.

The tenets of Shamanism, the primary one being stewardship of the world, doesn't really require one to be a Shaman to adhere to. It's a theme that the Horde, and one that most of the Horde's races accept to some degree or another, even if they approach those tenets in different ways. But again, this has nothing at all to do with Calia, so it's just a meandering tangent that serves no purpose accept maybe confusing the matter. Calia's not a Shaman, that's a given, but it's not required that she needs to be. There aren't any Forsaken Shaman, either; and the Forsaken have been members of the Horde for some time now. I mean if you want to change the argument to saying that the Forsaken don't and never belonged in the Horde that's certainly a debate to be had, but it's not the one we're having. Cliched as this charge is now, you're quite literally moving the goalposts of this conversation outside the context it's occurring in.

Of course an in-group must have a way of delineating the outgroup, that's the purpose of literally all group identification - what are the criteria for X to be in it, what are the criteria for X to not be in it, and this in turn means defining what the qualities of the group and thus its members are. By the bolded parts of your argument here, those criteria are tautalogical - all you need to be part of the Horde is to be part of the Horde. Congratulations, that's as true as it is meaningless. If the Horde stands for nothing except goodness and the Alliance also stands for goodness, then the Horde has no reason to exist, as it indeed doesn't. I can think of no more damning indictment of this faction. Someone like you can indeed argue that a character who's sole purpose in the plot is to tie the undead closer to the Alliance, restore their identity as they were when they were living members of the Alliance of Lordaeron, who's friends are Anduin and Jaina, the top two Alliance characters, is a fitting Horde character because she might soon have the red tag. And where in any other incarnation of the Horde that would cause raucuous laughter, here it's not even all that wrong, since the Horde is as the bad grey lady said, nothing, it's an admitted formality even to the people who defend it.

It's not tautological at all, the composition of a given group can change in terms of internal demographics based on who or what the group accepts - what is advantageous to accept, who is advantageous to allow entry, etc. etc. The Horde isn't a static absolute, it can and has changed over time (you accept this in your argument just above). So again, the only real metrics of what it is to be Horde is who the Horde accepts among its ranks, the acceptance of their fealty. When the Horde took in the Forsaken back before WoW, it's demographics changed. Ditto for the Blood Elves. Ditto for all its Allied Races. Nothing tautological about that - it's quite literally what occurred and was accepted in terms of the narrative. The Horde doesn't have a cultural hegemony in the same way the Alliance does - it's a looser coalition of nation-states, all of them bringing their own aesthetics (both social and physical) to the table. So, again, the same question remains: "what culture does Calia need to claim in this context?" My answer is still "she doesn't because it's not a requirement." Calia isn't going to be bringing the Forsaken to the Alliance any time soon, and she's demonstrated no real desire to do so (and it seems highly unlikely the Forsaken would ever permit it) - again, you're making an entirely different argument that has no bearing at all on what I'm saying.

[Super Dickmann]

Again, Calia is helping Jaina's brother who was just raised from the dead - obviously there's going to be a great sense of warmth between them *now*, and providing them a place for Calia to tend to Derek is pretty much a given, no real surprise there. Calia has no such friendships when she urged the Forsaken to defect, either; she had had no interaction with Jaina whatsoever in "Before the Storm," and the impetus of her actions seemed to come from Saa'ra's influence in her dreams, if not from the Light itself in some manner (definitely not at the urging of Anduin or anyone else in the Alliance). Anduin explicitly did *not* want Calia to do what she did in any case, as we know from his own words in "Before the Storm," and upbraided Calia for it later on. Saurfang saved the Horde from Sylvanas, who very obviously had no good intentions for it (and also tries to murder the Horde Champion and everyone one else sent to Nazjatar), so yes, I would say Saurfang did a great deal of good.

She had no friendship with Jaina back then, but the first friendship she did (re)build after being raised was with Jaina. In BTS, she spent almost all of her pagetime teaming up with Anduin, the Alliance king, before urging the Forsaken to defect to the Alliance. Anduin chastised her on the basis of her poor thinking, not on the basis of her heart being in the wrong place. They do not meaningfully differ and they're still strongly connected with one another. As for Saurfang, I am not referring to his moral standing, but to his quality as a character and the reception by the playerbase to Anduin being the one to teach him about honor and spur him towards rebellion, which are the most lambasted parts of his story except for the Alliance playerbase, who rightly take issue instead with Anduin's moral equivalence. Saurfang is still a Horde character despite this, though his function for most of the expansion was as an Alliance patsy, because of his history and values, drawn out in his more pessimistic assessment of things in the chat with Anduin and his hearkening back to the Horde's earlier actions. Calia is not capable of these things because she has never been associated with the Horde or any of its races.

Hyperbole about appeasement aside, I'm unsure how this matters aside from trying to shift the frame of the debate to more stable footing. Nothing in this has any bearing on the notion that Calia and Thrall would probably have a lot in common in terms of their personal philosophies. I never said Calia and Thrall share any kind of heritage, just that they their thinking would probably be compatible on several levels.

I don't disagree that they would have a lot in common, since they both love world peace. What I'm demonstrating is what separates Thrall from Calia and why the strawman you immediately pivoted to in lieu of ever addressing the points regarding Calia's complete detachment from any incarnation of the Horde and in turn, very strong thematic connection with the Alliance is such a pisstake. Despite Thrall's failings and his ties with the Alliance, he has much larger ties with the Horde, ergo, he's unquestionably a Horde character. Calia does not have ties, she does not have thematic connection, she hasn't even shared a scene with them, but has robust ties to the Alliance on all of these counts.

The tenets of Shamanism, the primary one being stewardship of the world, doesn't really require one to be a Shaman to adhere to. It's a theme that the Horde, and one that most of the Horde's races accept to some degree or another, even if they approach those tenets in different ways. But again, this has nothing at all to do with Calia, so it's just a meandering tangent that serves no purpose accept maybe confusing the matter. Calia's not a Shaman, that's a given, but it's not required that she needs to be. There aren't any Forsaken Shaman, either; and the Forsaken have been members of the Horde for some time now. I mean if you want to change the argument to saying that the Forsaken don't and never belonged in the Horde that's certainly a debate to be had, but it's not the one we're having. Cliched as this charge is now, you're quite literally moving the goalposts of this conversation outside the context it's occurring in.

The Forsaken do not fit in with the WC3 Horde, that much is obvious to everyone with eyes and I've never disputed it. I've also never hidden my disinterest for the WC3 Horde in general. What I told you is that there are several versions of the Horde - Thrall's, with a union of tribal races united with finding a place in a harsh world to peacefully exist in accord with the elements and practicing shamanism, with a general 'primitive' aesthetic, the Eastern Horde who're in an alliance of convenience bolstered by being rejected by the world and a shared monstrosity, Garrosh's/the Iron Horde as a militaristic war machine centrally tied around orcish interests, or even Sylvanas's Horde as an entirely impersonal vehicle of grievances with no higher values, despised by the one running it. The Forsaken fit with the second, and they found their place in the latter two as well. Calia fits with the values, aesthetic and positions of none of them. The blood elves haven't fit with any of them since TBC, when they were no longer rejected, the 'monstrous' aspect fell away since they pushed fel magic and their naaru abuse out of the limelight, along with slavery and mana vampirism and the nightborne were just the post-TBC blood elves, but purple and so likewise have no connection to outweigh a sophisticated aesthetic. Now the undead join them in this camp - undead that reclaim their Lordaeronian identity, which is to say their identity into the Alliance and work to create bridges with the Alliance through a leader who's friends are Alliance, who were always in the Horde chiefly out of necessity and convenience, belong on the Alliance following this huge cultural shift because the things that separated them from the Alliance no longer apply. The bit about how shamanism is also the safeguarding of the world is an irrelevance, since that just falls into the same camp as being 'honorable', both factions are honorable and both want to safeguard the world, it's the tribal practices, ancestor worship, reverence for the elements vs. the organized, western church-like religion of the Light that was the key differentiation between the Alliance and the WC3 Horde of which the current Horde is a pale imitation.

It's not tautological at all, the composition of a given group can change in terms of internal demographics based on who or what the group accepts - what is advantageous to accept, who is advantageous to allow entry, etc. etc. The Horde isn't a static absolute, it can and has changed over time (you accept this in your argument just above). So again, the only real metrics of what it is to be Horde is who the Horde accepts among its ranks, the acceptance of their fealty. When the Horde took in the Forsaken back before WoW, it's demographics changed. Ditto for the Blood Elves. Ditto for all its Allied Races. Nothing tautological about that - it's quite literally what occurred and was accepted in terms of the narrative. The Horde doesn't have a cultural hegemony in the same way the Alliance does - it's a looser coalition of nation-states, all of them bringing their own aesthetics (both social and physical) to the table. So, again, the same question remains: "what culture does Calia need to claim in this context?" My answer is still "she doesn't because it's not a requirement." Calia isn't going to be bringing the Forsaken to the Alliance any time soon, and she's demonstrated no real desire to do so (and it seems highly unlikely the Forsaken would ever permit it) - again, you're making an entirely different argument that has no bearing at all on what I'm saying.

The Horde changed with the addition of the Forsaken and blood elves yes, but they had the shared trait pointed out elsewhere of monstrosity and rejection by other powers, necessitating they be a part of this bloc and preventing them from being part of the other. These factors are now right out. Let me describe a race to you - they are the people of a WC2-era Alliance kingdom, afflicted by a condition that put them at odds with their former kin, this curse was initially set up as very delibitating and mentally altering but has over time been reduced to a cosmetic effect that doesn't make them any less human. These people, who distanced themselves heavily from the Alliance at a point in their existence, have as their leader a monarch of the same lineage as the WC2-era kingdom, who through contracting this cosmetic condition, grew more close to people who'd previously been distant from him, and resolved to lead them on a course that reestablishes their links to the Alliance. Their capital was destroyed by Sylvanas through Blight and their leader is a foil and counterpart to Sylvanas. Which race am I describing right now? Which faction do you think that race should be on, given said description? Trick question on that last one, since no matter who you identified as the race, the answer would still be the Alliance.

But I kind of feel like I wasted my time, because by your own bolded admission you do not think the Horde has any cultural and thus by extension thematic requirement to fit in with it so there's no point in discussing any of this. Anyone can be Horde, provided they are part of the Horde. Any watering down of the Horde further is fine, because it was previously watered down and shifted. As such any talk of themes, values, history, character ties and so forth is so much hot air, because you operate from the view that not only are the Horde and Alliance just labels that any story character can belong to and fit in with irrespective of their qualities, but that this lack of any real identity is desirable. All leaders fit with one bloc, even ones who's sole conceit is to extend the bonds with the other bloc and reaffirm the identity of that people back when they were part of that other bloc. It's damn convenient that the Horde didn't need to have values to have someone be part of it only kicked in after Sylvanas left, else the whole arguments about how she's violating their values, which back then did actually exist and did delineate a specific identity would not hold much water.

[Okacz]

which is why I think Voss should be an important player in this, seeing thats exactly the problem, and her stepping up to be the real leader of the forsaken.

I'm still waiting for the big reveal that Sylv has, in fact, succeeded in twisting Derek's mind and hoped for Baine to free him (since Baine is the only one Jaina could trust in that situation). With Derek being basically a sleeper agent, a lot of shit might go down, that could end up with Voss taking charge. Or anyone else other than basically a human priest after getting a rezz.

[Aucald]

She had no friendship with Jaina back then, but the first friendship she did (re)build after being raised was with Jaina. In BTS, she spent almost all of her pagetime teaming up with Anduin, the Alliance king, before urging the Forsaken to defect to the Alliance. Anduin chastised her on the basis of her poor thinking, not on the basis of her heart being in the wrong place. They do not meaningfully differ and they're still strongly connected with one another. As for Saurfang, I am not referring to his moral standing, but to his quality as a character and the reception by the playerbase to Anduin being the one to teach him about honor and spur him towards rebellion, which are the most lambasted parts of his story except for the Alliance playerbase, who rightly take issue instead with Anduin's moral equivalence. Saurfang is still a Horde character despite this, though his function for most of the expansion was as an Alliance patsy, because of his history and values, drawn out in his more pessimistic assessment of things in the chat with Anduin and his hearkening back to the Horde's earlier actions. Calia is not capable of these things because she has never been associated with the Horde or any of its races.

Given that "Before the Storm" was about Anduin and Sylvanas this is more or less understandable - Calia was a secondary character in that novel. I've already said that Calia and Anduin share a worldview by dint of them both being Priests, but this doesn't make Calia a member of the Alliance anymore than it makes Aelthalyste one. Saurfang has next to nothing to do with Calia one way or the other, so bringing him up was and is somewhat meaningless. Although given how you think a mere conversation with Anduin makes Saurfang "an Alliance patsy" I can see how you'd also think this for Calia, who actively worked with Anduin toward a shared goal. But outside the realm of hyperbole and insularity this isn't how faction allegiance works one way or the other.

I don't disagree that they would have a lot in common, since they both love world peace. What I'm demonstrating is what separates Thrall from Calia and why the strawman you immediately pivoted to in lieu of ever addressing the points regarding Calia's complete detachment from any incarnation of the Horde and in turn, very strong thematic connection with the Alliance is such a pisstake. Despite Thrall's failings and his ties with the Alliance, he has much larger ties with the Horde, ergo, he's unquestionably a Horde character. Calia does not have ties, she does not have thematic connection, she hasn't even shared a scene with them, but has robust ties to the Alliance on all of these counts.

Thrall created the modern Horde, so yes, he obviously has quite a lot to do with the Horde. It's also not *my* Strawman because I didn't bring it up, I only said that Calia and Thrall would share a lot in common in terms of their worldview and that was it. If you think that's a Strawman argument, well, feel free to do so - but it wasn't my argument, so you'll have to take that up with whoever first brought it up. I've already said Calia has more in common with the Alliance than the Horde, so all this has more in common with beating a dead horse than it does any form of pisstake, I've only said that what she does or doesn't have in common doesn't have a bearing on her ultimate loyalties, which are likely to be the Forsaken (and thus to the Horde). If she's accepted then she'll become a member of the Horde despite the fact she is friends with Jaina and Anduin. I mean Baine is friends with Jaina and Anduin as well, so there's even a precedent for it. It's really a non-argument.

The Forsaken do not fit in with the WC3 Horde, that much is obvious to everyone with eyes and I've never disputed it. I've also never hidden my disinterest for the WC3 Horde in general. What I told you is that there are several versions of the Horde - Thrall's, with a union of tribal races united with finding a place in a harsh world to peacefully exist in accord with the elements and practicing shamanism, with a general 'primitive' aesthetic, the Eastern Horde who're in an alliance of convenience bolstered by being rejected by the world and a shared monstrosity, Garrosh's/the Iron Horde as a militaristic war machine centrally tied around orcish interests, or even Sylvanas's Horde as an entirely impersonal vehicle of grievances with no higher values, despised by the one running it. The Forsaken fit with the second, and they found their place in the latter two as well. Calia fits with the values, aesthetic and positions of none of them. The blood elves haven't fit with any of them since TBC, when they were no longer rejected, the 'monstrous' aspect fell away since they pushed fel magic and their naaru abuse out of the limelight, along with slavery and mana vampirism and the nightborne were just the post-TBC blood elves, but purple and so likewise have no connection to outweigh a sophisticated aesthetic. Now the undead join them in this camp - undead that reclaim their Lordaeronian identity, which is to say their identity into the Alliance and work to create bridges with the Alliance through a leader who's friends are Alliance, who were always in the Horde chiefly out of necessity and convenience, belong on the Alliance following this huge cultural shift because the things that separated them from the Alliance no longer apply. The bit about how shamanism is also the safeguarding of the world is an irrelevance, since that just falls into the same camp as being 'honorable', both factions are honorable and both want to safeguard the world, it's the tribal practices, ancestor worship, reverence for the elements vs. the organized, western church-like religion of the Light that was the key differentiation between the Alliance and the WC3 Horde of which the current Horde is a pale imitation.

The Horde changed with the addition of the Forsaken and blood elves yes, but they had the shared trait pointed out elsewhere of monstrosity and rejection by other powers, necessitating they be a part of this bloc and preventing them from being part of the other. These factors are now right out. Let me describe a race to you - they are the people of a WC2-era Alliance kingdom, afflicted by a condition that put them at odds with their former kin, this curse was initially set up as very delibitating and mentally altering but has over time been reduced to a cosmetic effect that doesn't make them any less human. These people, who distanced themselves heavily from the Alliance at a point in their existence, have as their leader a monarch of the same lineage as the WC2-era kingdom, who through contracting this cosmetic condition, grew more close to people who'd previously been distant from him, and resolved to lead them on a course that reestablishes their links to the Alliance. Their capital was destroyed by Sylvanas through Blight and their leader is a foil and counterpart to Sylvanas. Which race am I describing right now? Which faction do you think that race should be on, given said description? Trick question on that last one, since no matter who you identified as the race, the answer would still be the Alliance.

I mean I don't really disagree with this, but it's not relevant and entirely another debate that's not really germane to this topic. Although I disagree that religion is all that separates the Alliance and the Horde - I would say the biggest divide is actually their history of opposition stemming from the First and Second Wars.

But I kind of feel like I wasted my time, because by your own bolded admission you do not think the Horde has any cultural and thus by extension thematic requirement to fit in with it so there's no point in discussing any of this. Anyone can be Horde, provided they are part of the Horde. Any watering down of the Horde further is fine, because it was previously watered down and shifted. As such any talk of themes, values, history, character ties and so forth is so much hot air, because you operate from the view that not only are the Horde and Alliance just labels that any story character can belong to and fit in with irrespective of their qualities, but that this lack of any real identity is desirable. All leaders fit with one bloc, even ones who's sole conceit is to extend the bonds with the other bloc and reaffirm the identity of that people back when they were part of that other bloc. It's damn convenient that the Horde didn't need to have values to have someone be part of it only kicked in after Sylvanas left, else the whole arguments about how she's violating their values, which back then did actually exist and did delineate a specific identity would not hold much water.

Well then, I'd say you don't quite understand what I'm saying - whether this is because you're being purposefully obtuse or simply not grasping the concepts I'm unable to say. I would say the Alliance has more of a cultural hegemony than the Horde, largely one based on Human aesthetics, whereas the Horde lacks a central core of aesthetic hegemony in favor of a coalition of necessity. This isn't to say the Horde doesn't have shared values, just that what unites them is a bit more dynamic and a bit more tenuous than what unifies the Alliance. It's easier for an outsider of any kind of fit in among the Horde than it is the Alliance, after all; the Horde has billed itself a haven for misfits and outsiders of all kinds. You want to argue this position then do so, preferably without quippy and incorrect statements or appeals to some notion of insular Horde jingoism.