What do you think the future of the Forsaken will be under Calia Menethil? [Spoilers]

[Ersula]

I'm talking about the definition of the word treason. Considering citizens of the horde & alliance swear fealty to a head of state, and a head of state can't commit treason against itself, therefor Lorethemar cannot commit treason. When Garrosh was overthrown it was for other crimes, not "treason."

As for example I did use Alleria's brain melting technique as a form of "advanced interrogation." Capital punishment used by Alleria, justified against someone suspected of a crime. Beyond that I can simply give the example that a member of the Alliance killing a Blood elf is not a crime, in the eyes of the Alliance. Logically, there's no real rule why a nation couldn't be in both the horde & alliance, but as soon as Silvermoon joined the Horde they were considered fair game.

The Alliance is not morally superior here.

[mickybrighteyes]

Well why should they consider all that when it never stopped them from fucking up other races before?

What makes forsaken so special that their cultural heritage, lore and themes shouldnt be butchered and torn apart, spread between several factions and carted off to Alliance partially when other races suffered even worse bastardisation?

Because we shouldn't be advocating for destroying lore for the sake of some hamfisted story in the first place? Don't use the poor handling of OTHER story arcs as justification for bad storyline decisions elsewhere maybe?

[VladlTutushkin]

Because we shouldn't be advocating for destroying lore for the sake of some hamfisted story in the first place? Don't use the poor handling of OTHER story arcs as justification for bad storyline decisions elsewhere maybe?

Only if they get to fixing the arcs they fucked up first. Without it its just playing favorites when you were fine with fucking things up until it bit you in the ass.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm talking about the definition of the word treason. Considering citizens of the horde & alliance swear fealty to a head of state, and a head of state can't commit treason against itself, therefor Lorethemar cannot commit treason. When Garrosh was overthrown it was for other crimes, not "treason."

As for example I did use Alleria's brain melting technique as a form of "advanced interrogation." Capital punishment used by Alleria, justified against someone suspected of a crime. Beyond that I can simply give the example that a member of the Alliance killing a Blood elf is not a crime, in the eyes of the Alliance. Logically, there's no real rule why a nation couldn't be in both the horde & alliance, but as soon as Silvermoon joined the Horde they were considered fair game.

The Alliance is not morally superior here.

Alliance is very much morally superior anywhere on Azeroth. From Blizz mouth to your ears, bless.

If thats ALL we have i am going to use it.

[Magical Mudcrab]

Or when the novel literally stated that Sylvanas committed genocide at Teldrassil, you just say "Ohhh but it's a fantasy world, Geneva Conventions don't exist, she did nothing unusual or wrong".

I used to be an Alliance player (now a Horde player for the community being larger), and I've literally gone on multi-page arguments with people stating that the war was unjustified by the time of BfA. I've argued with people who lay the blame solely at Sylvanas' feet and I've argued with people who have argued that the leaders of the various factions were unaware of the crimes being committed. Hell, I've even argued with people who have gone back to Warcraft 3 and Vanilla WoW quests to try and justify a war that would occur 20 years later. I've argued with so many degrees of stupid that it would be hard to actually convey how bad some of the justifications are, but I have never had someone argue that the Burning of Teldrassil wasn't wrong.

[Varodoc]

I used to be an Alliance player (now a Horde player for the community being larger), and I've literally gone on multi-page arguments with people stating that the war was unjustified by the time of BfA. I've argued with people who lay the blame solely at Sylvanas' feet and I've argued with people who have argued that the leaders of the various factions were unaware of the crimes being committed. Hell, I've even argued with people who have gone back to Warcraft 3 and Vanilla WoW quests to try and justify a war that would occur 20 years later. I've argued with so many degrees of stupid that it would be hard to actually convey how bad some of the justifications are, but I have never had someone argue that the Burning of Teldrassil wasn't wrong.

Plenty of Horde fanboys here were arguing that Sylvanas did nothing wrong because Teldrassil was corrupted by the Emerald Nightmare and so she was just "getting rid of Old God corruption". Maybe you don't remember it, but I do.

I understand though, it's hard to remember specific arguments, buried under all those juvenile memes about the burning tree

[Super Dickmann]

It's funny how you Horde players have no problem relying on irl laws, when it suits you. But then, when it comes to Golden listing all of Garrosh's crimes, including genocide, you just roll your eyes, because "Azeroth is a fantasy world", "it shouldn't have Geneva Convention", "Horde did nothing wrong", "Crimes should be allowed on Azeroth"...

Or when the novel literally stated that Sylvanas committed genocide at Teldrassil, you just say "Ohhh but it's a fantasy world, Geneva Conventions don't exist, she did nothing unusual or wrong".

I guess referencing irl laws works only when it justifies the Horde, huh?

On the contrary, international criminal law is a complete meme and victor's justice, no one who ever won a war ever got judged for war crimes. I give exactly the same respect to international war crime laws that they're due, i.e zilch, while giving domestic law, which is routinely applied, its full respect. This is not withstanding that Garrosh's trial was rigged, with a predetermined conclusion of him going off.

[Unholyground]

It's guaranteed she's going to take over but I have a feeling they're going to release a neutral undead race.

[Feanoro]

The things that some Horde players here say are legit scary, disturbing, and terrifying tbh.

Don't forget hypocritical. After all, that reasoning also fully excuses Greymane in Stormheim. Oh, but he's not Horde? Never mind, different set of rules. Too bad for him, all he'd have to do is mumble "sorry", pinky promise not to do it again, and be completely scot free.

@Magical Mudcrab If you never argued with Hordies about Teldrassil being wrong, I can only assume you took a vacation from this and every other WoW discussion area for most of 8.0, because we had enough "justifications" being written to fill a bookshelf.

[Magical Mudcrab]

@Magical Mudcrab If you never argued with Hordies about Teldrassil being wrong, I can only assume you took a vacation from this and every other WoW discussion area for most of 8.0, because we had enough "justifications" being written to fill a bookshelf.

This is a drastic moving of the goalposts. People use things like Genn's attack on Sylvanas in Stormheim because it's an example considered by Saurfang in the short story A Good War. At the time, the attack was common knowledge and it was only a rumor that it was against Anduin's orders. At the very least, they knew that Genn had not been punished for the attack.

That was a concern, Saurfang had to concede. In the thick of the fighting against the Burning Legion, Greymane had launched a mission to kill Sylvanas. It had gotten some of Stormwind’s few remaining airships destroyed.

There were whispers that Greymane had ordered the attack without Anduin’s permission, but as far as Saurfang knew, Greymane had not been punished. The implications of that were troubling, and every possible explanation led to same conclusion: the old worgen would always drive the Alliance toward war against the Horde.

However, I've never seen this as a justification for the Burning of Teldrassil. Is it an example used to justify the war? Sure, but that's not even remotely the same thing as using it as a justification for what would happen later. You can argue the war was justified without also justifying the actions taken during the war.

[Feanoro]

This is a drastic moving of the goalposts.

Sorry, by whom? I'm simply commenting on other posters who argued Teldrassil was justified.


Daily reminder Anduin has no authority to punish Genn or any other Alliance head of state.

[Magical Mudcrab]

Sorry, by whom? I'm simply commenting on other posters who argued Teldrassil was justified.

It has been used to justify the War of Thorns, but has never seriously been used to justify the Burning of Teldrassil. One event may follow the other, but supporting one does not imply supporting the other.

Daily reminder Anduin has no authority to punish Genn or any other Alliance head of state.

The position of High King in the Alliance is the military counterpart of the position of Warchief in the Horde, conferring complete control over the Alliance's military to the High King. You're free to think that the High King cannot punish member states, but this is your personal headcanon. A Good War implies that Anduin can punish Genn for taking unapproved military actions. Whether it is in a vein similar to how Sylvanas punished Baine or through a form of sanction is irrelevant, the fact is that in-lore sources appear to believe punishment is possible.

[Feanoro]

The position of High King in the Alliance is the military counterpart of the position of Warchief in the Horde, conferring complete control over the Alliance's military to the High King. You're free to think that the High King cannot punish member states, but this is your personal headcanon. A Good War implies that Anduin can punish Genn for taking unapproved military actions. Whether it is in a vein similar to how Sylvanas punished Baine or through a form of sanction is irrelevant, the fact is that in-lore sources appear to believe punishment is possible.

This is not headcanon, this is how Metzen defined the position. He made clear it wasn't supposed to be the Blue Warchief, only an elected supreme commander of the military forces that member states supplied to the Alliance. No authority over the states themselves. If they now state Anduin somehow can punish member states, that's yet another "we don't give a shit enough to be consistent" retcon.

As to Teldrassil, I'm beginning to think we're having two different conversations. All I've said is there have been Hordies who tried to come up with all kinds of excuses and justifications. Varodoc mentioned a popular one, the idea that there was Old God corruption and the Lich Queen was "heroically" stopping its spread.

[Ardenaso]

For one, Lor'themar is a head of state, nothing he does can be considered treason.

Baine? 10 characters

[VladlTutushkin]

On the contrary, international criminal law is a complete meme and victor's justice, no one who ever won a war ever got judged for war crimes. I give exactly the same respect to international war crime laws that they're due, i.e zilch, while giving domestic law, which is routinely applied, its full respect. This is not withstanding that Garrosh's trial was rigged, with a predetermined conclusion of him going off.

Interestingly how when Horde character is utterly defeated (Sylvanas) she is treated with downright Genevan leniency and consideration though. VERY WEIRD AM I RIGHT?

[Ardenaso]

Alliance is very much morally superior anywhere on Azeroth. From Blizz mouth to your ears, bless.

look I know the Horde can be as bad or worse, but the Alliance isn't clean of crimes

from the Tyr's Hand peasant massacre to Garithos sending Kael'thas and his blood elves on a suicide mission to Stormwind corruption and repression and Stonemason betrayal to Stonespire genocide to Ghostlands sabotage to Frostmane genocide to Taurajo massacre to Purge of Dalaran to Goblin civilian miner massacre in Silithus to biological terrorism in Zul'dazar and then sending the Zandalari and the ambassadors to void portals

the moral standard for me is the Argent Dawn/Crusade

[Magical Mudcrab]

This is not headcanon, this is how Metzen defined the position. He made clear it wasn't supposed to be the Blue Warchief, only an elected supreme commander of the military forces that member states supplied to the Alliance. No authority over the states themselves. If they now state Anduin somehow can punish member states, that's yet another "we don't give a shit enough to be consistent" retcon.

I've not seen the Metzen quote, but given the current team's proclivity to change things and act like they haven't changed anything (i.e.: gaslight us on the story), it's entirely possible.

[VladlTutushkin]

look I know the Horde can be as bad or worse, but the Alliance isn't clean of crimes

from the Tyr's Hand peasant massacre to Garithos sending Kael'thas and his blood elves on a suicide mission to Stormwind corruption and repression and Stonemason betrayal to Stonespire genocide to Ghostlands sabotage to Frostmane genocide to Taurajo massacre to Purge of Dalaran to Goblin civilian miner massacre in Silithus to biological terrorism in Zul'dazar and then sending the Zandalari and the ambassadors to void portals

the moral standard for me is the Argent Dawn/Crusade

You had to go all the way to Warcraft 1 to gather enough war crimes to amount for the sum of Horde war crimes in one expansion or less.

Also if you dont want to blame current Horde for Old Horde then Alliance of Lordaeron actions do not apply to Alliance of Stormwind.

And devs said that - Alliance is morally superior faction, they are the “pure” one between the two.

[Ardenaso]

that's WC2 actually

[Combatbutler]

the moral standard for me is the Argent Dawn/Crusade

And devs said that - Alliance is morally superior faction, they are the “pure” one between the two.

I will never understand the utterly pointless fascination with morality in a setting such as warcraft.

[VladlTutushkin]

that's WC2 actually

Eh, i only read the lore of both so they are basically same game to me.

I started playing with Warcraft 3.

But the rest stands anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

I will never understand the utterly pointless fascination with morality in a setting such as warcraft.

Because its literally what we DONT have IRL? I live in Russia for fucks sake, can you imagine how little chivalry, honor, tolerance, nobility and all that we have here on daily basis?

Also, i wouldnt obsess over Alliance morality if it wasnt ONLY thing left that Alliance beats Horde at according to Blizz. Alliance are the “heroes” of the setting, and if thats all they left us with i will use it to the fullest extent.