Would you support Sylvanas Windrunner if you still had the choice?

[bagina]

It's funny that this post would normally get you an accusation of realizing Godwin's Law, but in this case, the Hitler analogy fits really well.

We don't yet know Sylvanas' endgame but the rough idea is that she is willing to sacrifice most of the world in order to realize her dreamed peaceful, ordered world of which she deems more just. That actually really reminds me of Hitler.

Which makes this poll pretty spooky.

It's not"spooky" at all. Because it's a video game. A ridiculous videogame with time travel, magic and ghosts, immortal beings and every other clownery you can come up with at that. A video game where you can play as an undead. It's no surprise that an undead wouldn't care what happens to the world of living. I would absolutely support Sylvanas in game even if out of sheer curiosity and the novelty of it. WoW's story has run its course, there's nothing new for it to say, of fucking course I would support the reset.

Your own character killed more beings than all main characters combined. You have no problems with your character killing thousands upon thousands but can't deal when NPCs act similarly, appropriately to the setting? In a supposedly "role playing" game some people can't accept that people want to explore different, not completely tired paths.

Never before WoW have I seen such idiotic divide between a fanbase, that's been purposefully and artificially introduced by the creators themselves. Horde/Alliance divide is the worst thing about WoW, it ruins it.

It's like WoW players don't realize it's all fiction, it's like they live in WoW 24/7 and act like what happens in WoW affects their real life.

[Kumorii]

It's not"spooky" at all. Because it's a video game. A ridiculous videogame with time travel, magic and ghosts, immortal beings and every other clownery you can come up with at that. A video game where you can play as an undead. It's no surprise that an undead wouldn't care what happens to the world of living. I would absolutely support Sylvanas in game even if out of sheer curiosity and the novelty of it. WoW's story has run its course, there's nothing new for it to say, of fucking course I would support the reset.

Your own character killed more beings than all main characters combined. You have no problems with your character killing thousands upon thousands but can't deal when NPCs act similarly, appropriately to the setting? In a supposedly "role playing" game some people can't accept that people want to explore different, not completely tired paths.

Never before WoW have I seen such idiotic divide between a fanbase, that's been purposefully and artificially introduced by the creators themselves. Horde/Alliance divide is the worst thing about WoW, it ruins it.

It's like WoW players don't realize it's all fiction, it's like they live in WoW 24/7 and act like what happens in WoW affects their real life.

It's scary how many seem to conflate video game morals with real life morals...

[Itori]

Thats like being in an abusive relationship, best thing to do with her is let the jailor snap her neck and use her soul anima to power his fancy xxl japanese toilet.

[Zuben]

Whatever her reasoning it's clearly not in the Horde's benefit. Though I'm still inclined to support her when the alternative is Baine. Fuck Baine.

[Raisei]

It's not"spooky" at all. Because it's a video game. A ridiculous videogame with time travel, magic and ghosts, immortal beings and every other clownery you can come up with at that. A video game where you can play as an undead. It's no surprise that an undead wouldn't care what happens to the world of living. I would absolutely support Sylvanas in game even if out of sheer curiosity and the novelty of it. WoW's story has run its course, there's nothing new for it to say, of fucking course I would support the reset.

Hating fictional characters is hardly new or exclusive to WoW. But note that I have no problem with liking evil characters. I just absolutely do not accept the defenses people bring forth that are supposed to make evil characters look grey or even purely innocent. That is what I am argueing against. Be it the Orc Hordes during the first and second war, be it Garrosh, be it Sylvanas. It is fine liking them, but it is not fine declaring that they did no wrong.

Also, by now I find siding with Sylvanas far beyond simply evil and more in the realm of stupid. She has made it quite clear that she cares nothing about the Horde or anyone else, her goal is the destruction of everything and everyone. Supporting her is not just evil, it is suicidal.

Your own character killed more beings than all main characters combined. You have no problems with your character killing thousands upon thousands but can't deal when NPCs act similarly, appropriately to the setting? In a supposedly "role playing" game some people can't accept that people want to explore different, not completely tired paths.

Well, there are differences. Our Player Character usually does not kill innocents, children or so (with some few Forsaken quests being the exception). We kill the bad guys or we remove dangerous wildlife /non-sentient lifeforms before they remove us. Unless it is for a Nesingwary quest, then we are monsters.
This is very different from torching a tree full of innocent sentient people or using refugees as target practice, after nuking their city.

Never before WoW have I seen such idiotic divide between a fanbase, that's been purposefully and artificially introduced by the creators themselves. Horde/Alliance divide is the worst thing about WoW, it ruins it.

It's like WoW players don't realize it's all fiction, it's like they live in WoW 24/7 and act like what happens in WoW affects their real life.

I tend to agree. The problem is that many people and mainly on the Horde side do not want this divide to end. They do not want the factions to change and grow closer. Just look at the reactions to the new Horde Council. "Alliance Lapdogs", "Red Alliance", "Anduins slaves". The reaction is exceptionally negative and only because with this council the chance of a new war between Horde and Alliance is small. Obviously with these reactions coming from the community the Devs will return to the faction war soon.
As long as people are unable to accept change in a game after 15 years the game won't change and the divide will not close.

[jurgenaut]

How can I support her when I don't know what she wants to do?
Based on her history, I'm all for stringing her up the nearest tree.

[Syegfryed]

I did not lie about anything, but arguing facts with you has never been successful.

you straight up said they were not mind-controled: they were, you lied

You said they "were ofered power to destroy planets, and they accepted because is what they wanted, destroy planets": again, incorrect lie number two

You also said they were perfectly fine with the slaughter of innocents and war, they just didn't like being slaves: another lie, the third

You also said MU and AU "were exact the same"


please save us from the victim card.

Yes, after they already slaughtered most of the Draenei on the planet.

due to the fel energies, again, i never aid they didn't kill draenei, you are fighting, furiously, arguments that i never made


please, stop appealing to pity bringing up "children and innocents" every single quote, we get it we all know that, you don't need to double down on that trying to make it look worse than what already is

You clearly made it sound like they were in an even war with each other where the Orcs ever were at risk of loosing, which is not the case.

i did a mistake on that part but i was right in why they did drank: to overcome shattrat, not because they wanted be bad guys and conquer worlds

How so? Kil'jaeden convinced the feeble minded Orcs to kill the Draenei,

Ah yes, they were deceived into, they didn't just wake up, and decided on their own to do so, like youare implying.

Also, I did not realize that pity for murdered children is a negative thing these days. You probably should tell that to your cronies here who ask for our pity for the poor poor Orcs that have unjustly been imprisoned by the evil Alliance. Seriously every time I read your aplogist comments I curse Blizzard for not wiping the Orcs out that time.
The amount of unreal nonesense I had to read from Horde posters over the years just because Blizzard did not snuff the Horde out then and there..

An appeal to pity (also called argumentum ad misericordiam, the sob story, or the Galileo argument) is a fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent's feelings of pity or guilt. It is a specific kind of appeal to emotion.

Probably you should try to understand the Trailer first. Grom says "We will never be slaves! But we will be conqueres." That is his message.

which goes against your nonsensical claim that "those are exact the same", they are completely different, with different scenarios and different knowledge

[Jastall]

It's scary how many seem to conflate video game morals with real life morals...

It really depends on how these morals are presented. When I play Total War: Warhammer, I tend to play evil factions with characters so lacking in morals that many make Sylvanas look good, but that game isn't being coy about it, hiding their motives and pretending that there's some super-secret 4D chess master plan that justifies it all. Malekith is a megalomaniacal slaving tyrant who would see the world burn rather than belong to someone else. Throt the Unclean is a mad scientist who performs utterly horrific genetic splicings and mutations on captured subjects, when he's not cannibalizing his own people that is. Settra is a self-aggrandizing warmongering douchebag with a few redeeming qualities. Sigvald is an utterly selfish, hedonistic serial rapist and cannibal. Vlad von Carstein's dream world is one where the population of an entire Empire either submits to him in life or slaves for him in undeath, so on and so forth. They're all assholes, but the game isn't shy about it and just goes, yeah they're assholes, you know it from the onset and it's fine like that.

Same shit in Fallout New Vegas. I'm perfectly capable of playing as the Legion, who are a bunch of slavers, rapists and mass murderers serving the whims of an hypocritical self-styled philosopher king with a god complex. The game gives reasons as to why one would like to play as them- for instance, they are so brutal their conquered territories tend to be quite safe if you don't piss them off- but also makes no bones about the fact that their favorite pastimes are nailing men to crosses and raping women until their body gives out. If you choose the Legion, you know what you're getting into from the onset.

The big issue with Warcraft is that instead of being composed of 16 disparate races with wide ranges of morality in between them, everyone is sandwiched in two factions, so you have the nice-if-haughty Blood Elves mixed in with the noblesavage Tauren and the baby-eating mad scientist Forsaken. So of course the people who rolled a Tauren to be nice cows or a BE to be pretty won't like it when their head honcho has to be a genocidal dead bitch, and likewise the people who rolled Orcs to Lok'tar all the Ogars or Forsaken to eat as many gnomes as possible aren't going to be fans of following a bunch of peacechiefs around. It all makes for some deeply unsatisfying morality bait-and-switches where the writers arbitrarily decide to ruin the fantasy you've created for yourself because of the story they want to tell. No wonder people are pissed at the characters who embody these morality swerves, such as Garrosh, Sylvans, Baine, and Anduin for the Alliance.

[Raisei]

you straight up said they were not mind-controled: they were, you lied

Maybe you should actually read what I wrote BEFORE making wrong accusations. My point was aimed at the time BEFORE they drank the demon blood. They had complete free will then. Which is clearly shown during the WoD timeline where Grom DECIDES not to drink. How is this so hard to understand?

You also said they were perfectly fine with the slaughter of innocents and war, they just didn't like being slaves: another lie, the third

So here you do not even bother refuting after I laid out a detailed reasoning why this is the case with sources.
You say I lie and people should believe you because ... ?

Man, this new style of having discussions is really productive! "I don't like your point, so you lie! I don't have arguments or evidence to prove you wrong but you lie!"

You also said MU and AU "were exact the same"

In regards to what the Orcs were trying to do, yes. The only difference is that they were not mind-controlled by demons and commited all their crimes out of their own free will and they ended up doing the exact same things that the Legion wanted them to do. Attack the Draenei and Invade Azeroth. The only reason the Draenei are not dead is because we managed to stop them this time.

please, stop appealing to pity bringing up "children and innocents" every single quote, we get it we all know that, you don't need to double down on that trying to make it look worse than what already is

It's very hard to make a planned and executed genocide, celebrated by building a friggin road out of the bones of the victims look worse then it is, really. I wouldn't know how to be honest.
If you can't stand being reminded of these facts then you probably should stop defending it and explaining it away. As long as there are Horde posters that blame the Draenei for being genocided by the Orcs I shall point out the facts.

Ah yes, they were deceived into, they didn't just wake up, and decided on their own to do so, like youare implying.

They DECIDED to believe Kil'jaeden, they had a choice, just like Kil'jaeden and Archimonde had a choice, when Sargeras visited their world. No one was pressuring them, no one was holding a gun to their heads, no one mind-controlled them. They made a choice and for this choice they are to be blamed.

which goes against your nonsensical claim that "those are exact the same", they are completely different, with different scenarios and different knowledge

I guess I have to spell this out because you are either not reading what I write or you are purposefully dense:

What is "the same" is the Orc people. Their character. They were offered to be conquerers by Gul'dan (as emissary of the Legion). The Dark Portal is literally already being build to INVADE another planet. Grom rejects the demon blood because he refuses to become a slave of the Legion ("We will never be slaves"), but he fully embraces the goals of the Legion for his people ("But we will be conqueres") and thus he continues all efforts to destroy the Draenei and invade Azeroth.

The story obviously unfolds differently from there, because Garrosh is around to help his dad and because we manage to get wind of their invasion much sooner then in the original time line so that we can stop them from coming to us and in turn go to Draenor. Of course this changes the story but it does not change the Orcs as a people.

[Kumorii]

It really depends on how these morals are presented. When I play Total War: Warhammer, I tend to play evil factions with characters so lacking in morals that many make Sylvanas look good, but that game isn't being coy about it, hiding their motives and pretending that there's some super-secret 4D chess master plan that justifies it all. Malekith is a megalomaniacal slaving tyrant who would see the world burn rather than belong to someone else. Throt the Unclean is a mad scientist who performs utterly horrific genetic splicings and mutations on captured subjects, when he's not cannibalizing his own people that is. Settra is a self-aggrandizing warmongering douchebag with a few redeeming qualities. Sigvald is an utterly selfish, hedonistic serial rapist and cannibal. Vlad von Carstein's dream world is one where the population of an entire Empire either submits to him in life or slaves for him in undeath, so on and so forth. They're all assholes, but the game isn't shy about it and just goes, yeah they're assholes, you know it from the onset and it's fine like that.

Same shit in Fallout New Vegas. I'm perfectly capable of playing as the Legion, who are a bunch of slavers, rapists and mass murderers serving the whims of an hypocritical self-styled philosopher king with a god complex. The game gives reasons as to why one would like to play as them- for instance, they are so brutal their conquered territories tend to be quite safe if you don't piss them off- but also makes no bones about the fact that their favorite pastimes are nailing men to crosses and raping women until their body gives out. If you choose the Legion, you know what you're getting into from the onset.

The big issue with Warcraft is that instead of being composed of 16 disparate races with wide ranges of morality in between them, everyone is sandwiched in two factions, so you have the nice-if-haughty Blood Elves mixed in with the noblesavage Tauren and the baby-eating mad scientist Forsaken. So of course the people who rolled a Tauren to be nice cows or a BE to be pretty won't like it when their head honcho has to be a genocidal dead bitch, and likewise the people who rolled Orcs to Lok'tar all the Ogars or Forsaken to eat as many gnomes as possible aren't going to be fans of following a bunch of peacechiefs around. It all makes for some deeply unsatisfying morality bait-and-switches where the writers arbitrarily decide to ruin the fantasy you've created for yourself because of the story they want to tell. No wonder people are pissed at the characters who embody these morality swerves, such as Garrosh, Sylvans, Baine, and Anduin for the Alliance.

You are arguing a point that wasn't made... People not liking what writers do with a character is perfectly fine and you can like and dislike direction all you want.
However, the guy who started the quote train literally said that he's not surprised some would follow Sylvanas because some would vote for Trump as if choices in a game would reflect your real life stance in politics.

As you said, you have no problems choosing to be evil but only a warped mind would think that you are for some reason supporting that in the real world due to your evil choice in a game... that's the absurd, and frankly, scary part of the entire thing.

[Lolites]

Aren't they the most aggressive and violent Orc clans today? So the one's in the camp certainly came out better.

is horde still divided into clans? kinda didnt notice that in wow... except for frostwolves i dont think we realy encounter clan, and they were never interned and are arguably least aggresive...
so that theory kinda fell on the nose...

[Stormwolf64]

You will (mostly) all support her when blizzard starts brainwashing you by having her do increasingly good deeds or have small reveals which makes us doubt her being evil until they give us the good old redemption story and people celebrate while frothing from their mouths. Blizzard don't want to kill of sylvanas, they're getting really short on iconic characters already.

[Powerogue]

I RPed a forsaken death knight sylv loyalist who had been ressed so many times his brain barely functioned. It was the point where she takes you aside, admits to all her crimes, then says she pitied the forsaken before abandoning you one last time that did it in for me.

Loot pinata time.

[Shedaar]

She tried to get Nathanos to kill Bwonsamdi, hell no

From the Horde perspective, as a "nation" - how is killing Bwonsamdi, a Death Loa that doesn't even care about Zandalari and uses them as pawns, a bad idea?
At best he is an unknown element, at worst he is just a nuclear bomb getting bigger and bigger with every troll death.
If you have no means of enslaving him and making him your bitch the safest bet is to kill him, or am I missing something?

[LordVargK]

is horde still divided into clans? kinda didnt notice that in wow... except for frostwolves i dont think we realy encounter clan, and they were never interned and are arguably least aggresive...
so that theory kinda fell on the nose...

Yeah, it's called warsong gulch because of the songs the lumberers sing there... Of course there are still clans within the Horde. And the Frostwolves kept/keep only somewhat peaceful because of thrall, who again values peace because he was raised by humans.

[Lolites]

Yeah, it's called warsong gulch because of the songs the lumberers sing there... Of course there are still clans within the Horde. And the Frostwolves kept/keep only somewhat peaceful because of thrall, who again values peace because he was raised by humans.

warsong gulch is the name bcs its where warsong harvest lumber and its a gulch, tells fuck all about bloodthirst...
frostwolf were peaceful even before Thrall found them...
yes there are clans, but do we ever encounter clan as entity? we meet orcs, but they dont all have clan in their name tag, so we know fuck all about what clan they are from...

btw, Saurfang must be terribly bloodthirsty right? bcs he was never interned...

[VladlTutushkin]

It's not"spooky" at all. Because it's a video game. A ridiculous videogame with time travel, magic and ghosts, immortal beings and every other clownery you can come up with at that. A video game where you can play as an undead. It's no surprise that an undead wouldn't care what happens to the world of living. I would absolutely support Sylvanas in game even if out of sheer curiosity and the novelty of it. WoW's story has run its course, there's nothing new for it to say, of fucking course I would support the reset.

Your own character killed more beings than all main characters combined. You have no problems with your character killing thousands upon thousands but can't deal when NPCs act similarly, appropriately to the setting? In a supposedly "role playing" game some people can't accept that people want to explore different, not completely tired paths.

Never before WoW have I seen such idiotic divide between a fanbase, that's been purposefully and artificially introduced by the creators themselves. Horde/Alliance divide is the worst thing about WoW, it ruins it.

It's like WoW players don't realize it's all fiction, it's like they live in WoW 24/7 and act like what happens in WoW affects their real life.

Because by design or by oversight everything in WoW (at least between Horde and Alliance) comes at a detriment of one another.

If horde players (part of them) want to be evil it has to “take” from non-evil horde players who want to enjoy the “monster races being heroic” thing which actually very few settings truly explore, aside from TES maybe but TES Orcs are not... monstrous imho. And also at the expense of Alliance.

Its not just some “misguided sense of morality” speaking but rather a very understandable desire NOT to be slam-dunked by villanized horde again in a nonsensical humiliation fiesta aka War of Thorns with tear-jerking narrative that was made to anger/sadden the Alliance players.

So people are not really against the plot ideas themselves but rather against the implementation of those since it ALWAYS comes at a cost. Cost detracted from another faction or part of your faction and it ALWAYS done in a very annoying and hurtful manner.

Horde gets villanized - Alliance gets victimized.
Horde gets “purified” - it loses some of its “uniqueness”.
Alliance wins... ah wait, that never really happened so idk what happens then.

And i dont know how the fuck that can be fixed but i sure as all hell know that i rather dance around with Anduin and Calia and any other peacemonger then face another crap show like War of Thorns or BfA in general and 8.1 specifically.

[Jastall]

You are arguing a point that wasn't made... People not liking what writers do with a character is perfectly fine and you can like and dislike direction all you want.
However, the guy who started the quote train literally said that he's not surprised some would follow Sylvanas because some would vote for Trump as if choices in a game would reflect your real life stance in politics.

As you said, you have no problems choosing to be evil but only a warped mind would think that you are for some reason supporting that in the real world due to your evil choice in a game... that's the absurd, and frankly, scary part of the entire thing.

I do think there's somewhat of a correlation, especially when the in-game choices are fairly relevant to real-life politics such as in New Vegas. Obviously trying to directly correlate Trump voters and Sylvanas fans is nonsense but I was speaking of a broader point.

[Aresk]

That doesn't mean that we will be able to do the same with every threat until the end of time, though. Just because it worked before doesn't mean it'll ALWAYS work. And there were plenty of times we pulled something off without sacrifice, while at other times, we did have to make some sacrifice. Does that mean it could have been done without any sacrifice, just because it worked like that once in some other scenario? Obviously not.

Think of an analogy using the Avengers movies: they managed to stop Thanos because Iron Man sacrificed himself. But WAIT! They stopped all prior threats without sacrificing a main hero! Doesn't that mean they could have stopped Thanos without sacrificing Iron Man? Did they just not try hard enough? Obviously not.

As I said, we don't know enough yet about what's behind the whole Sylvanas/Jailer thing. It's entirely conceivable there could have been other solutions; but it's also conceivable there couldn't have been. Once we do know more we can reevaluate.

The difference is that Stark chose to sacrifice himself to stop Thanos. Stark didn't choose to sacrifice a city and three villages in order to stop Thanos. Given that you have promoted different options for dealing with the orcs after the second war, it seems silly to assume that the way Sylvanas is doing things is the only feasible way. She is the one making all the choices and victimizing others to accomplish her goal, and regardless of whether that goal is good or not does not justify her actions. If the goal is something that the playerbase at large is supposed to accept as worthwhile, then there's no reason to assume that other people within the setting wouldn't also accept it. The fact that Sylvanas isn't willing to disclose her ultimate goal feels like evidence enough that it's insufficient to merit everything she's done to accomplish it.

[VladlTutushkin]

The difference is that Stark chose to sacrifice himself to stop Thanos. Stark didn't choose to sacrifice a city and three villages in order to stop Thanos. Given that you have promoted different options for dealing with the orcs after the second war, it seems silly to assume that the way Sylvanas is doing things is the only feasible way. She is the one making all the choices and victimizing others to accomplish her goal, and regardless of whether that goal is good or not does not justify her actions. If the goal is something that the playerbase at large is supposed to accept as worthwhile, then there's no reason to assume that other people within the setting wouldn't also accept it. The fact that Sylvanas isn't willing to disclose her ultimate goal feels like evidence enough that it's insufficient to merit everything she's done to accomplish it.

Huh. I just realised that as you pointed it out - he argues that Alliance should have gambled and invested a lot into “better” solution with the Horde which was frankly speaking a bunch of rampant beasts not so long ago... But he seems dead-set that Sylvanas insane schemes that involve a wipeout of entire planet (yes her original plan was to end All life on Azeroth, she just failed to reach that benchmark) is the ONLY way to stop... something? Something we dont even know exists and IF it exists because most likely she just mad about going to Hell and wants to crash entire system to avoid it.