So is Anduin evil now or a bad guy...

[pewpmeiser]

Littering is bad. White supremacy is evil.

No. They are synonymous. Bad, Evil, Immoral. It's all the same.

[cirdanx]

Turalyon is already Regent Lord of the Alliance, Alleria rules at his side as the Chief Advisor to the High King Regent.

Wait..what..that is now the state really?

[Adamas102]

Yes, it happened because they realised that Varian was too "flawed" and too old for the kind of low effort shonen they wanted to pull off. Now compare it to the virtual assassination of Sylv as a character, and the actual assassination of her two predecessors as Warchief.

A single swallow doesn't make a spring, as the saying goes.

Was Varian a human Alliance leader? Yes. Was he killed off? Yes. Maybe there was a better way of framing what you meant to say that didn't involve you contradicting one statement with the sentence that immediately followed it.

I just don't think an MMO like WoW can have a good story or compelling character arcs.

- - - Updated - - -

No. They are synonymous. Bad, Evil, Immoral. It's all the same.

The CAN be interchangeable depending on context, but they're not the same in all (or even most) instances.

"Evil" requires intent. An erupting volcano can be really bad, but it's not evil. It doesn't decide to be harmful or destructive. Anduin can't be evil because he has no will or agency. He's just a tool. He's a powerful tool that opposes the main characters which is certainly bad, but still not evil.

[Belloc]

No. They are synonymous. Bad, Evil, Immoral. It's all the same.

They are absolutely not:

"I did bad on my test" vs "I did evil on my test". The post above mine has other examples.

[Le Conceptuel]

Wait..what..that is now the state really?

Chief Advisor is Varodoc fanfiction, but yes. Turalyon is running the Alliance now.

[huth]

No. They are synonymous. Bad, Evil, Immoral. It's all the same.

So a poorly made, i.e. bad, hammer is evil?

No, they're not the same. Bad means that there is some unspecified negative quality. Evil and Immoral are specific negative qualities. An evil person is bad, but a bad person isn't necessarily evil.

[lockybalboa]

Not rly.

• Mannoroth wasn't killed by Thrall, but by Grom.
• Archie wasn't beaten by Thrall, but by nelfs, Thrall only played a secondary part.
• Thrall didn't triumph over the Alliance. As a matter of fact, he spent all of his tenure as Warchief trying to appease it, and failed miserably, so he threw the hot potato to Garrosh and ran away.
• Thrall did kill DW, in what probably was one of the most egregious Mary Sue shows in the entire franchise, even if Sue's have never been in short supply.
• Thrall didn't beat Garrosh in MoP; Varian, Jaina and Vol'jin did. As a matter of fact, his role during MoP was so lacklustre (for a self insert, anyway), that Metzen couldn't help giving his self insert the KB on Garrosh - even if the circumstances leading to the duel made no sense whatsoever, besides sheer author favouritism.
• Thrall's only appearance in battle during Legion shows him getting his ass handed to him, after which he bestows Doomhammer onto the shaman PC because he is a broken man, and once again he runs away to Outland.
• In BfA, Thrall triumphed over neither the Alliance nor Sylvanas. He helped the former and would have likely died against the latter, if the dArK lAdY hadn't gone 100% retarded screeching mode during SoO 2.0
• As of SL, he still hasn't triumphed over anyone so far. Indeed, we have had to drag his useless ass out of the Janitor's playground.

So there goes your "destroyed every major baddie he encountered and hardly ever lost a battle" Thrall. The only times he won was due to sheer author favouritism (muh world shaman). When the focus shifted to other characters, he was invariably useless or was just along for the ride.

Thrall turned Super Saiyan and defeated Deathwing and Garrosh (even though he achieved the latter through sneaky means), while Anduin is only good at kowtowing and compromising to the Hordies , sobbing about love and peace everytime. He even got kidnapped by a random NPC ffs. He is an absolute disgrace.

[Varodoc]

Wait..what..that is now the state really?

Yes. If you go to Stormwind Keep in-game, you see Turalyon on the throne and Alleria in the adjacent room (the War room).

[Rngmonster The God]

Nah, he's just "Sylvanas Evil". Not more, not less.

[mickybrighteyes]

That he ends up gaining things after the setback doesn't stop it being a setback.

Don't forget he doesn't change his belief or ideas from the event and it turns into the excuse to give him weird super powers they barely bother explaining or utilizing in more storylines. Crippled king showing literally no ailments as he leads the charge on the frontlines at Lordaeron.

- - - Updated - - -

when was the lich king plan retconned?

moreover, retconning that would make the story make less sense not more. him recruiting sylvanas as plan B after bolvar becomes an even more difficult to control LK makes sense.

The wrathgate event hasn't been discussed in any official lore that I'm aware of beyond major characters having concerns and inner monologue over suspicions. However one of the authors came out and said Sylvanas planned it without elaborating on the extent of their meaning. But so far as I'm aware, the master behind the demon hordes Varimathras was summoning is still Sargeras and Putress was still the only player behind the whole death on everything at THAT point in the story.

Cause this all is before Sylvanas willingly offed herself after Arthas' death in ICC where she was then canonically linked to the Jailer and shifted to serve him... which is basically a retcon of her motivation and actions for Cataclysm in not following Garrosh's orders for how to conduct the Gilnean Invasion...

Though they might actually outright retcon it anyways since they're basically destroying everything for whatever story they have planned.

[Elestia]

No.

He's just been set up as a parallel to Sylvannas. However a big difference is that he's being controlled and has to be controlled to do evil.

Sylvannas was evil all on her own in full knowledge she was missing part of her soul.
Being restored actually doesn't mean anything. The presence of free will in her case is actually a liability which she ironically claimed not to have or didn't exist. /ezclap

[huth]

Don't forget he doesn't change his belief or ideas from the event and it turns into the excuse to give him weird super powers they barely bother explaining or utilizing in more storylines. Crippled king showing literally no ailments as he leads the charge on the frontlines at Lordaeron.

It kept him from doing much of anything for months afterwards. BfA happened years later. While resurrection is not nearly as common in lore as in gameplay, healing magic is very much a real thing.

Seems you're just ignoring the outcome to fit your story here.

[mickybrighteyes]

It kept him from doing much of anything for months afterwards. BfA happened years later. While resurrection is not nearly as common in lore as in gameplay, healing magic is very much a real thing.

Seems you're just ignoring the outcome to fit your story here.

Alright let me put it this way. The only setback Anduin had was that he got a time out in the storyline. The life threatening damage is totally undone shortly afterward via magic and the departure from the main story. Does his personality change? not really. He's right back out there on the frontlines of the demon invasion running off alone with no guard EXACTLY LIKE HE DID in MoP (and this is Legion not BFA). So what changed in Anduin? Oh right... magical malice detecting bones that ache when someone does thinks poorly. A setback in my book has to have some sort of impact that actually extends into the story... a short break from the story to comeback even better somehow isn't really a setback.