Nathanos is proof players only want to be idolized in the story

[Aucald]

That's because humans didn't commit mass genocide on another intelligent race.

That's not actually true, though. The Gnoll War, fought some 75 years before WC1, would qualify as a quasi-genocide of the indigenous gnolls of the region that would become known as the Kingdom of Stormwind. As the human presence in the land grew beyond the point it could sustain multiple intelligent races vying for dominance of the local resources, the invasive humans went to war with and ultimately decimated the gnolls, forcibly pushing them out of Stormwind/Elywnn and all the way into the more hardscrabble Redridge Mountains. Additionally, the human kingdom of Strom was also complicit in another genocide, that of the Amani during the Troll Wars. The invasive High Elves in what became known as Quel'Thalas enlisted Strom's aid to break the power of the Amani Empire, including leveraging what would be Azeroth's first realized WMD - the use of collective magic by elven-trained human sorcerers to firebomb the troll army, leading to mass death, and ultimately sealing the Amani trolls into their last decaying fortress of Zul'Aman.

[Le Conceptuel]

That's not actually true, though. The Gnoll War, fought some 75 years before WC1, would qualify as a quasi-genocide of the indigenous gnolls of the region that would become known as the Kingdom of Stormwind. As the human presence in the land grew beyond the point it could sustain multiple intelligent races vying for dominance of the local resources, the invasive humans went to war with and ultimately decimated the gnolls, forcibly pushing them out of Stormwind/Elywnn and all the way into the more hardscrabble Redridge Mountains. Additionally, the human kingdom of Strom was also complicit in another genocide, that of the Amani during the Troll Wars. The invasive High Elves in what became known as Quel'Thalas enlisted Strom's aid to break the power of the Amani Empire, including leveraging what would be Azeroth's first realized WMD - the use of collective magic by elven-trained human sorcerers to firebomb the troll army, leading to mass death, and ultimately sealing the Amani trolls into their last decaying fortress of Zul'Aman.

To be wholly fair, this is pretty typical wartime behavior for an imperial force. I'd figure the Gnolls were the aggressors, too, given the general character they have with the whole "using human faces for building materials" bit and the fact that (IIRC) they did start off raiding them in varying capacities. Similarly, their actions against the Amani (who were the victims in their war with the Elves but the aggressors in their war with the Humans) seem to have originated in a place of desperation and they only really seem to have targeted combatants. At least as far as we know, given that the Humans effectively lured their military into the range of the spell, the only people killed were combatants.

[Aucald]

To be wholly fair, this is pretty typical wartime behavior for an imperial force. I'd figure the Gnolls were the aggressors, too, given the general character they have with the whole "using human faces for building materials" bit and the fact that (IIRC) they did start off raiding them in varying capacities. Similarly, their actions against the Amani (who were the victims in their war with the Elves but the aggressors in their war with the Humans) seem to have originated in a place of desperation and they only really seem to have targeted combatants. At least as far as we know, given that the Humans effectively lured their military into the range of the spell, the only people killed were combatants.

Typical behavior, but still deserving of the term "genocide." The gnolls wouldn't have needed to be aggressors if they weren't crowded out by an expansionist human kingdom in what was originally their land, in which they appeared to live in peace beforehand. Gnolls are quite intelligent and not typically inclined to violence for its own sake, though we'll never really know what truly incited the first conflicts between humans and gnolls in the Elwynn region. Either way, the humans met the benchmarks for utterly decimating the gnolls and force-relocating them to another, less prosperous region so that they could claim their lands entirely. Similarly, the Quel'dorei were the patent aggressors when it comes to the Amani - taking a sacred site on which to build their city, and fighting bitterly with the native trolls over land that didn't originally belong to them. The humans' role in the Troll Wars was as a proxy force used when the High Elves couldn't defeat the Amani alone, and with High Elven aid, the humans not only leveraged a horrific weapon of mass destruction against the Amani, they also helped drive them into a single small city and helped to keep them contained until, presumably, they would die out completely.

Mitigating circumstances may or may not exist, but the history of the human presence in the Eastern Kingdoms is far from bloodless.

[Feanoro]

@Jinnobi
Well, professor, then you ought to know about logical fallacies. You spend all your effort attempting to discredit me, rather than addressing my arguments. You're seemingly desperate to paint me as some frothing zealot, because I enjoy the good guys in a video game that actively encourages picking a side. WoW pays lip service to "morally gray" to the point of it being a community joke, while clearly presenting the Horde as villains more often than not.

I see from your other posts that you, like every other Horde poster that shrieks "You're biased!", go straight to "the internment camps were evil" while completely ignoring their full context. Best part, in doing so, you're actively doing exactly what you accuse me and others of doing. Excuse me then, professor, if I don't take your self congratulating essays on bias terribly seriously.

Astonishingly, this isn't a formal or academic environment. "Whataboutism" is perfectly appropriate here, as you may not have realized that you yourself defended. You used it, trying to dismiss the orcs' actions by "yeah, but what about the humans' actions". I replied in kind, and you clearly have no answer or argument, so again, you went for attacking me and my writing style. Seems there's nothing to discuss then.

Since you decided to go for trying to discredit and dismiss me, thank you for telling me not to waste further time with you. Saves me the annoyance of another "Look how objective I am" Horde defender, trying desperately to equate prisoners of war with multiple, repeated, deliberate genocides.

[Jinnobi]

@Jinnobi
Well, professor, then you ought to know about logical fallacies. You spend all your effort attempting to discredit me, rather than addressing my arguments. You're seemingly desperate to paint me as some frothing zealot, because I enjoy the good guys in a video game that actively encourages picking a side. WoW pays lip service to "morally gray" to the point of it being a community joke, while clearly presenting the Horde as villains more often than not.

I see from your other posts that you, like every other Horde poster that shrieks "You're biased!", go straight to "the internment camps were evil" while completely ignoring their full context. Best part, in doing so, you're actively doing exactly what you accuse me and others of doing. Excuse me then, professor, if I don't take your self congratulating essays on bias terribly seriously.

Astonishingly, this isn't a formal or academic environment. "Whataboutism" is perfectly appropriate here, as you may not have realized that you yourself defended. You used it, trying to dismiss the orcs' actions by "yeah, but what about the humans' actions". I replied in kind, and you clearly have no answer or argument, so again, you went for attacking me and my writing style. Seems there's nothing to discuss then.

Since you decided to go for trying to discredit and dismiss me, thank you for telling me not to waste further time with you. Saves me the annoyance of another "Look how objective I am" Horde defender, trying desperately to equate prisoners of war with multiple, repeated, deliberate genocides.

The reason I don't want to debate with you in-depth is because I can sense you're already firmly biased; and no matter what I say, you're not going to change your mind. From your forum signature to your posts, you've made it abundantly clear that you hate Orcs - and by extention, the Horde - and are not willing to even entertain the idea that you may be wrong about certain things. Why should I "cast my pearls before swine" (not calling you a pig, mind) when all it's going to do is waste my energy and time?

I'm more than willing to debate @Varodoc because he has shown himself to be open to multiple interpretations and is willing to admit when proven wrong. I don't get that from you - what I do get is an underlying mockery, a reliance upon logical fallacies that you half understand, a penchant for rhetoric ("desperate, shrieking, community joke," etc).

If you asked me a question in good faith and genuinely wanted my view of a certain aspect of WoW Lore, I'd answer to the best of my ability. What you've given me is a list of Old Horde atrocities, and want me to "tell you when humans did this" when of course they didn't. They did other things.

You can mock my real life background, but I don't claim to be something special. I'm just another poster on a forum. I give you the right to judge me, and you are entitled to your own opinions (which include what you think of me). But you may be wrong about me, just like you're not entirely correct about the Horde or the Alliance.

- - - Updated - - -

An extraordinary sequence of events, to be sure. Must be quite an excellent student to be given that kind of responsibility. Which topic were you teaching?

I appreciate your kindness. I wasn't an excellent student, but I did have a natural interest in philosophy, which was my saving grace -- well, that along with professors who treated me far better than I deserved.

I was teaching Existentialism. Since I have been drawn to Kierkegaard since I first discovered him, my professor thought the class would be a good fit for my particular, focused interest in philosophy. If the class was about another topic, I'm sure he would've had someone else teach it - or, rather, teach it himself.

However, I am grateful to this day that he let me have that opportunity. After the class, he even let me edit one of his books! Like I said, he was the father I needed.

My condolences for that. I do hope you'll get back to it soon. I've always figured it's a prestigious profession and it seems like tenure and the security you get after securing a spot (though the process of getting there is difficult, I hear, because of the high competition in the field) are worth it, at least insofar as my professors are concerned.

It's a tough field to get into -- especially since the wage-to-stress ratio of being a professor is wonderful. You have quality of life AND make bank. But getting into that coveted position is the hard part.

Mr. House from Fallout: New Vegas. There's something about a withered husk of a man living in a tower, never going outside, and only ever speaking from behind a screen that I deeply identify with.

Me too, my friend.

[Feanoro]

The reason I don't want to debate with you in-depth is because I can sense you're already firmly biased; and no matter what I say, you're not going to change your mind. From your forum signature to your posts, you've made it abundantly clear that you hate Orcs - and by extention, the Horde - and are not willing to even entertain the idea that you may be wrong about certain things. Why should I "cast my pearls before swine" (not calling you a pig, mind) when all it's going to do is waste my energy and time?

So you make assumption after assumption and attack me on those assumptions. I don't hate fictional green men or the fictional faction they belong to. That's absurd. The reason I don't want to debate you is your approach is to attempt to discredit me, rather than address my arguments, based on your GUESSES of my motivations. If you provide logical proof, I'm open to listening. Logical proof does not start with statements that amount to "How can anyone take you seriously, bigot?", statements that certainly do not meet the standard for "pearls".

what I do get is an underlying mockery, a reliance upon logical fallacies that you half understand, a penchant for rhetoric ("desperate, shrieking, community joke," etc).

What I get from you is arrogance, self-congratulation, and expectations of academic papers in a casual internet forum. Why shouldn't I laugh when you dare to presume to tell me what I think?

If you asked me a question in good faith and genuinely wanted my view of a certain aspect of WoW Lore, I'd answer to the best of my ability.

Except this exchange began with you attacking me. You certainly didn't ask "a question in good faith" or genuinely want my view, you went straight to making accusations based on what you GUESS I think. Hypocrite.

What you've given me is a list of Old Horde atrocities

Wrong. Only the first three items were Old Horde, the rest took place in WoW. Might want to get your lore straight before you make your pronouncements about it.

and want me to "tell you when humans did this" when of course they didn't. They did other things.

So we can add "pedantry" to the growing list, not surprising for an academic. No shit they didn't commit the same acts. You tried to excuse the orcs by "what about the humans?". The challenge then and now was for you to provide events that compare to the list I gave. Since you clearly do not know the majority of that list takes place during the lifetime of WoW, I'll help you. You cannot find equivalent events for even half of that list. What a pitiful defense, semantics and word games. "The humans didn't commit the exact same acts as the orcs!", how laughable.

You can mock my real life background, but I don't claim to be something special. I'm just another poster on a forum.

You tried to use your credentials to bolster your accusations of me. On an anonymous forum, your credentials mean zip, and even if they didn't, your accusations are assumptions. Try going to any anonymous discussion and attempting to use real world credentials without proof. If you think being called "professor" is mockery, you'll be torn to shreds anywhere else. Further, teaching philosophy hardly places you in a position to claim you know how I think.

I give you the right to judge me

I have that right whether you grant it or not, but will assume this is meant as a courtesy.

and you are entitled to your own opinions (which include what you think of me). But you may be wrong about me, just like you're not entirely correct about the Horde or the Alliance.

Allow me to repeat this back to you with a bit of advice. Know the lore before you presume to lecture on it. You've demonstrated you do not know it nearly as well as you think.

Now, in the interests of not derailing this further, unless you care to study up on the lore and stick to debating it rather than playing internet psychologist, we're done here.

[anon5123]

BFA Nathanos was hated because he was pushed front and center as a major character and agitated the fans because he was a simp for a tyrant and his powerlevel bullcrap.

Not to mention being a horribly blatant self-insert by the guy who wrote him. BFA Nathanos was essentially the guy's self-insert wish fulfillment character. Which just makes it that much more annoying when the aforementioned self-insert wish fulfillment character is pushed as a main character in the story and you constantly have to see and hear him.

[Feanoro]

Not to mention being a horribly blatant self-insert by the guy who wrote him. BFA Nathanos was essentially the guy's self-insert wish fulfillment character. Which just makes it that much more annoying when the aforementioned self-insert wish fulfillment character is pushed as a main character in the story and you constantly have to see and hear him.

When you know about that self-insert, it makes the constant sneers and "you'll never be good enough for the Dark Lady" commentary take on an entirely different character.

[Jinnobi]

So you make assumption after assumption and attack me on those assumptions.

I don't need to make assumptions. You've written what you think countless times across this forum - not to mention this very thread. Taking your opinion seriously - an opinion that you are not shy to put on blast, see signature - isn't "making an assumption." It's believing what you say and what you've said countless times before.

I don't hate fictional green men or the fictional faction they belong to. That's absurd.

Why is hating something fictional absurd? People say they "hate" fictional movies all the time; I doubt every time you see someone say that, you tell them they're being absurd. Hiding behind bizarre claims isn't effective. It just makes you look desperate.

The reason I don't want to debate you is your approach is to attempt to discredit me, rather than address my arguments, based on your GUESSES of my motivations. If you provide logical proof, I'm open to listening.

You've mistaken pointing out facts with attacking you, or "discrediting" you. There is a huge difference between basing an argument's premise upon a supposed flaw in your opponent, and pointing out how you've reached conclusions via being biased and hypocritical while refuting your arugment using logic, reason, likelihood, loremaster/storyboard statements, canon in-game events and stories, etc. One is a refutation via ad hominem. The other is a refutation via legitimate means while also casting light upon the mistaken assumptions being made and why they were made. There is a difference.

What I get from you is arrogance, self-congratulation, and expectations of academic papers in a casual internet forum. Why shouldn't I laugh when you dare to presume to tell me what I think?

You can infer whatever you wish. I don't think many people are going to agree with you: not once did I congratulate myself or expect "academic papers" from anyone. The arrogance you see in me is more likely a reflection of you own desire to discredit me; more along the lines of projection rather than reality.

Except this exchange began with you attacking me.

You really should get over the victim mentality. Pointing out that your dislike (probably hatred) of the Horde is so intense that you molded your entire profile around it, is not "attacking" you. It's pointing out a fact. This knee-jerk "you're attacking me by pointing out that my intense negative opinions about the Horde may not make me the most unbiased poster here" is nonsense. You had plenty of opportunities to present a powerful argument.

The problem is that there are no powerful argument that exist for demonizing the Horde at this stage in their existence -- and that's done on purpose. Blizzard is trying to make the Horde and Alliance both good and bad, guilty and innocent, home to heroes and villains.

If you had an argument that showed how Blizzard failed in their attempt to do that, you probably would have mentioned it. Instead, you attack the Old Horde (which has nothing to do with modern lore) and tried to bring up an incredibly one-sided view of MoP and BfA. If you genuinely wanted to know why some people believe the Horde isn't evil, you'd ask - without mockery, sarcasm, an bad faith attached. I've yet to see you do that in ANY of your comments, not only in this thread but in all threads. For years. Which prompted the comment about pearls and swine.

You tried to use your credentials to bolster your accusations of me.

This is exactly the kind of behavior you accuse me of, yet do yourself. I wasn't even talking to you. I was answering a question. It had nothing to do with you. Yet you somehow took a comment that wasn't meant for you, that wasn't asked for your sake - in short, a discussion that had nothing to do with Warcraft lore - and are now accusing me of "using my credentials to bolster your accusations of me." Which isn't just wildly inaccurate, but an outright lie. That is an ad hominem: wrapped in layers of assumption, discrediting, and bad faith - based on nothing but fantasy and reading a comment not directed at you in any way.

This is the perfect example of how deeply you've deceived yourself: after railing against a list of imagined slights against you, somehow you managed to wrap them all up and throw them back at me without even realizing it. (Or maybe you did, which is arguably worse.) In either case, it's an excellent example of why giving you further time and attention will never end well. Even if I managed to show you step-by-step how certain assumptions you made are illogical or unlikely, you'd just accuse me of attacking you while making wild accusations about me. Which is why I try to limit my discussions regarding people who disagree with me to those who are honest and therefore have an honest opinion.

[Feanoro]

The arrogance you see in me is

someone trying to tell me what I think. You, short of telepathy or godhood, are not the authority on my thoughts. If you lack the self-awareness to see why attempting to tell me what I think is arrogant, I can't help you. As to your playing victim about the academic credentials, you criticized my terminology based on academic grounds. Don't act surprised on getting called on it. Restricting further replies to lore alone, because as I already said your internet psychologist routine is not worth my time and wildly off topic.

The problem is that there are no powerful argument that exist for demonizing the Horde at this stage in their existence -- and that's done on purpose.

There are, you ignore them, but here's a short version of one. The Horde willingly participated in a war of extermination, after a genocidal act at Teldrassil. Trying to blame everything on Sylvanas is incredibly lazy writing (aside from being a device that has been used to the point of cliche by Blizzard) and ridiculous. Did we all imagine the armies she led? Did she carry out everything completely by herself? Obviously not, and "I was just following orders" is not a valid defense. Beyond that, why would I put in the effort writing an essay for you when you have already demonstrated blatant bias with your example of the internment camps, devoid of context, as somehow equal to a war of extermination?

If you had an argument that showed how Blizzard failed in their attempt to do that, you probably would have mentioned it.

I'm not required to repeat posts for your benefit. You claim to have read so extensively here, then you ought to know the arguments I and others have presented. The fact that you do not appear to be aware of them shows either 1) your claim of such study is a lie, or 2) you dismissed those arguments and are lying about not having read them.

Instead, you attack the Old Horde (which has nothing to do with modern lore) and tried to bring up an incredibly one-sided view of MoP and BfA.

The old Horde was brought up due to the straw clutching about pre-Alliance human acts, as well as how the modern regards them as heroes. Interesting how now you include MoP and BfA, while pretending you haven't previously lumped my entire list under the Old Horde. I included vanilla through present day, so you still have more reading to do. By all means, defend the actions I listed. I've been waiting for you to do so. After all, I must not be considering the nuances of genocides, right? Yes, you get sarcasm when you make ridiculous statements. I'm also still waiting for you to present comparable events for my list. Not holding my breath, because if you could present such defenses or events, you would have done so instead of playing internet shrink.

If you genuinely wanted to know why some people believe the Horde isn't evil, you'd ask

So despite your claiming to have read me for years, you're also unaware of me discussing just that with the few Horde posters who can view the story from a Doylist perspective. Might want to keep your lies straight, especially with your preaching at me about honesty.

[Aucald]

Let's take the interpersonal rancor to PMs, or preferably drop them entirely, and return to the actual topics at hand.

[Kalisandra]

However, in BfA we had Nathanos treating us like nobodies. He constantly treated us as common soilders. Not some world saving heroes. But people hated him.

No, he didn't treat our characters like common soldiers. At least not it he was supposed to be a good leader. He was rude and condescending. It's the same reason the Arch Druid was hated back in the day.

These NPCs acted like pricks, so like pricks in real life, everyone hated them.

- - - Updated - - -

He was just annoying. Constant quest dialog windows with him, battlefield comments from him ... the dude was just everywhere.
Just happens when you overuse an NPC.

This, too.

[Thundering]

Who is Nathanos?
Someone i killed on a farm two times, pretty weird you think once should be enough.

[Jinnobi]

Let's take the interpersonal rancor to PMs, or preferably drop them entirely, and return to the actual topics at hand.

Thank you for stepping in. I apologize for stooping to the level which I did. One of my flaws is taking bait when I should just keep my mouth shut; and with fishing being one of my hobbies, you'd think I'd know better!

In any case, I completely forgot about the Knoll Wars. Didn't humans also participate in some manner of war against Trolls in the Arathi Highlands? I'm not sure if I'd count that as a "genocide" -- I don't know much about the Trollbanes -- but it seems they took things very personally regarding the Trolls living there.

On the other hand, the Trolls living there may have been cowardly murderers and cutthroats. Perhaps the "war" was justified?

- - - Updated - - -

Who is Nathanos?
Someone i killed on a farm two times, pretty weird you think once should be enough.

I'm close to certain that Nathanos was given a new body by Sylvanas (his own nephew's body, IIRC) because his old one was worn and close to falling to pieces after being resurrected several times.

[Aucald]

In any case, I completely forgot about the Knoll Wars. Didn't humans also participate in some manner of war against Trolls in the Arathi Highlands? I'm not sure if I'd count that as a "genocide" -- I don't know much about the Trollbanes -- but it seems they took things very personally regarding the Trolls living there.

On the other hand, the Trolls living there may have been cowardly murderers and cutthroats. Perhaps the "war" was justified?

There was back-and-forth conflict between Strom and the Witherbark trolls in the Arathi region, yes. I don't know if any of those conflicts ever approached the appellation of "war," per se; it seems like they were just minor conflicts that shaped a relative animosity between humans and trolls. The Trollbanes and Trol'kalar got their names from the Troll Wars specifically, which was a much larger conflict between the trolls of the Amani Empire and the elves and humans of Quel'Thalas and Strom. Lord Ignaeus of Strom made his family's name in the Troll Wars, and the Troll Wars were started due to the High Elves arriving in the already-settled lands of what would become Quel'Thelas and establishing Silvermoon on a site sacred to the Amani. This initiated an intense conflict between the Amani trolls and the elves, and it got so bad that the elves eventually made peace with Strom in order to ring them into the conflict to finally deal with the Amani conclusively.

[Jinnobi]

No, he didn't treat our characters like common soldiers. At least not it he was supposed to be a good leader. He was rude and condescending. It's the same reason the Arch Druid was hated back in the day.

These NPCs acted like pricks, so like pricks in real life, everyone hated them.

- - - Updated - - -



This, too.

I didn't dislike Nathanos because after some time, you could manage to see under the semi-facade.

I say "could" because it's entirely possible to miss the opportunities; I say "semi-facade" because part of his act was his real personality.

Nathanos was a complex character that got on some people's nerves, but others (like myself and my brother) could compartmentalize the part of him which was speaking from insecurity and hurt, and the part of him which was genuinely concerned about the prolonged safety of the Horde. Unlike Sylvanas, I don't think he was completely uncaring about the Horde as a faction; in fact, he even hesitated to give the order to burn down Teldrassil under Sylvanas practically screamed at him to fire; having to repeat her orders is not something she is used to, especially with Nathanos (her most loyal retainer). He does have some conscience left. I think he cares (cared?) about the Horde to a degree, and he even cares about wholesale slaughter being wrong to a degree.

Besides, it's hard not to be moved by Nathanos' legitimate complaints about being discarded from human society merely for being undead. If the humans at large had accepted their loved ones with open arms instead of driving them away like abominations - based on their looks, not their actions - then they would have had the advantage of the entire undead force supporting the Alliance.

The smashing success of the meeting between human and undead relatives in Arathi was a testament to this: not only was the reunion between human and undead families incredibly emotionally fulfilling, but many of the Forsaken were instantly willing to rejoin the Alliance and even rallied around Calia Menethil within hours as their new queen.

And given the relationships between Anduin, Calia, and Archbishop Alonsus Faol (the creator of Paladins and the Silver Hand), the Forsaken can and would defect to the Alliance en masse. Which is why Sylvanas ruined the day by murdering her own people, attempted to murder Anduin, killed Calia (who was then resurrected by the Holy Light into a Light-infused Undead) and stormed off in a buttmad huff.

- - - Updated - - -

There was back-and-forth conflict between Strom and the Witherbark trolls in the Arathi region, yes. I don't know if any of those conflicts ever approached the appellation of "war," per se; it seems like they were just minor conflicts that shaped a relative animosity between humans and trolls. The Trollbanes and Trol'kalar got their names from the Troll Wars specifically, which was a much larger conflict between the trolls of the Amani Empire and the elves and humans of Quel'Thalas and Strom. Lord Ignaeus of Strom made his family's name in the Troll Wars, and the Troll Wars were started due to the High Elves arriving in the already-settled lands of what would become Quel'Thelas and establishing Silvermoon on a site sacred to the Amani. This initiated an intense conflict between the Amani trolls and the elves, and it got so bad that the elves eventually made peace with Strom in order to ring them into the conflict to finally deal with the Amani conclusively.

Listen man, I have no interest in kissing the ass of moderators and administrators -- but holy shit. That is walking-encyclopedia-tier knowledge you have.

So not as a resident-to-mod, but as fan-to-fan I want to say that you, sir, really know your stuff regarding WoW Lore. Thanks for answering my question far more thoroughly than I expected.

[Aucald]

Listen man, I have no interest in kissing the ass of moderators and administrators -- but holy shit. That is walking-encyclopedia-tier knowledge you have.

So not as a resident-to-mod, but as fan-to-fan I want to say that you, sir, really know your stuff regarding WoW Lore. Thanks for answering my question far more thoroughly than I expected.

Eh, wouldn't say I really deserve any accolades - mostly it's trivia I happen to know verified and expanded with info from WoWPedia and sometimes the Chronicle series. Glad to be of service insofar as the info goes, though.

[SoundOfGuns]

I think Nathanos was a great character.

People always say "In WoW we used to be adventurers not these main characters that saved the world multiple times. It felt more realistic.".

However, in BfA we had Nathanos treating us like nobodies. He constantly treated us as common soilders. Not some world saving heroes. But people hated him.

Then they (blizz devs) just killed him without any lore thought at all as a pre-expansion event to Shadowlands. Vanished like he never existed.

Now we get these "Dragonflight Legacies" videos where yet again, this Drakthyr that is YOU, THE GREAT HERO AND SAVIOR OF AZEROTH, again being the main focus of all the 3 videos so far.

Enjoy being called a god amongst men for the entire expansion. Fun story telling. Hero of Azeroth. Planeswalker. What else can we call you? "Savior of the Dragon Isles"?

Personally I don't like this kind of storytelling, but please don't be surprised that this is the way the game will keep pushing for the forseeable future, Planeswalker.

No. This thread is proof that many people just blindly defend every shit without actually knowing the context. Nathanos Blightcaller was an awesome character, but i will go out of my way and assume that was before you actually knew him.

Blightcaller used to be a Boss-Level NPC in the eastern Plaguelands that was friendly to Horde and had to be raided by 40 people to be defeated. He did not give any loot if i remember correctly. He was pretty awesome and a grumpy guy back then and later, when he became teacher for forsaken hunters later on. He did not hold the Players in high regards even then, but he wasnt an asshole all of the time. He was just grumpy and sarcastic to everyone.

His random hate for the player is from the time of his remodeling. And it is outright hate for no reason. The great Hero of Azeroth... is unfortunately what we are. Because Blizzard cant write worth shit, but thats not the point. Besides that we are actually... not ever called that besides "Hero" most of the time (and not remotely as often as Nathanos-Fanboys claim when they defend this shitty dude), he has no reason to be this much of a dick. He is not just not treating us as a hero, he, who sits in the city 24/7, is treating us like less than footsoldiers which is a bit weird.

Now... why is that?

Its because Steve Danauser, head writer of World of Warcraft, is a clown who does not like players very much. This little living failure who gives story writers a bad reputation is the reason that WoWs lore is utter garbage and... Nathanos remodelling and repersonalisation is a shameless self-insert by a guy who is infamously in love with his blue women in every thing he wrote for, beeing weirdly creepy with his obsession to boot and being unable to take criticism...

He turned Nathanos which we all liked into a Simp... for Sylvanas... Ya know, the blue skinned undead Elf that then went on a rampage, was the focus of attention and the story for near 3 expansions and has gotten away with it too, in spite of us damn kids.

No, Nathanos is not hated for not holding us high. He is hated for being a poorly written self-insert-simp for Sylvanas Windrunner and BECAUSE he is not how he used to be originally.

[Jinnobi]

No. This thread is proof that many people just blindly defend every shit without actually knowing the context. Nathanos Blightcaller was an awesome character, but i will go out of my way and assume that was before you actually knew him.

Blightcaller used to be a Boss-Level NPC in the eastern Plaguelands that was friendly to Horde and had to be raided by 40 people to be defeated. He did not give any loot if i remember correctly. He was pretty awesome and a grumpy guy back then and later, when he became teacher for forsaken hunters later on. He did not hold the Players in high regards even then, but he wasnt an asshole all of the time. He was just grumpy and sarcastic to everyone.

His random hate for the player is from the time of his remodeling. And it is outright hate for no reason. The great Hero of Azeroth... is unfortunately what we are. Because Blizzard cant write worth shit, but thats not the point. Besides that we are actually... not ever called that besides "Hero" most of the time (and not remotely as often as Nathanos-Fanboys claim when they defend this shitty dude), he has no reason to be this much of a dick. He is not just not treating us as a hero, he, who sits in the city 24/7, is treating us like less than footsoldiers which is a bit weird.

Now... why is that?

Its because Steve Danauser, head writer of World of Warcraft, is a clown who does not like players very much. This little living failure who gives story writers a bad reputation is the reason that WoWs lore is utter garbage and... Nathanos remodelling and repersonalisation is a shameless self-insert by a guy who is infamously in love with his blue women in every thing he wrote for, beeing weirdly creepy with his obsession to boot and being unable to take criticism...

He turned Nathanos which we all liked into a Simp... for Sylvanas... Ya know, the blue skinned undead Elf that then went on a rampage, was the focus of attention and the story for near 3 expansions and has gotten away with it too, in spite of us damn kids.

No, Nathanos is not hated for not holding us high. He is hated for being a poorly written self-insert-simp for Sylvanas Windrunner and BECAUSE he is not how he used to be originally.

I think saying Nathanos "hates" the PC is too strong of a word. His acrid sarcasm belies a wounded individual - bitter at the world that rejected him because of how he looked, not who he was.

Saying he is a "simp" for Sylvanas is also taking his relationship with her a step too far. Yes, he loves her; and their relationship goes back before the fall of Silvermoon when rumor has it they were having sleepover sex in his ranger cabin. I don't think missing Sylvanas Windrunner bent over your bed necessarily makes him a simp, but to each his own.

All this said, he rubbed a lot of people the wrong way: not only is he an auto-hate for anyone who is firmly in the Alliance camp, but he also managed to piss off a lot of Horde fans, too. But you can begin to understand where he's coming from when overhearing him talk, and his view of you taking his place at Sylvanas' side is a natural fear that most of us could understand if we tried.

So the King named you Speaker for the Horde? Good. My diplomacy skills mostly involve arrows.
----
This war is long overdue.

The Alliance cloaks itself in righteousness and piety. Rubbish! They spurn and revile anyone who does not fit into their narrow world-view.
-----
Gossip <Stay awhile and listen.>
Garona Halforcen walks over to Nathanos Blightcaller.

Garona Halforcen says: The zeal with which you attack the Alliance seems borne of more than deference to your queen, Blightcaller.
Nathanos Blightcaller says: I once fought for their cause. The Alliance's insufferable arrogance has increased tenfold since they turned their backs on us.
Garona Halforcen says: Turned their backs?
Nathanos Blightcaller says: When the Lich King's hold over us was broken, Sylvanas sought allies. Instead of embracing their fallen kin of Lordaeron, the humans spurned us. Hunted us. So I vowed to hunt them.
Garona Halforcen says: Ah, vengeance fuels you. I can appreciate that.
Nathanos Blightcaller says: Vengeance. Contempt. Call it what you will.
Nathanos Blightcaller says: When the last of his subjects has been slain and raised Forsaken, the boy-king will kneel before the Dark Lady. And at long last, there will be but one queen to rule them all.
Garona Halforcen walks back to her post.

[Feanoro]

No. This thread is proof that many people just blindly defend every shit without actually knowing the context. Nathanos Blightcaller was an awesome character, but i will go out of my way and assume that was before you actually knew him.

Blightcaller used to be a Boss-Level NPC in the eastern Plaguelands that was friendly to Horde and had to be raided by 40 people to be defeated. He did not give any loot if i remember correctly. He was pretty awesome and a grumpy guy back then and later, when he became teacher for forsaken hunters later on. He did not hold the Players in high regards even then, but he wasnt an asshole all of the time. He was just grumpy and sarcastic to everyone.

His random hate for the player is from the time of his remodeling. And it is outright hate for no reason. The great Hero of Azeroth... is unfortunately what we are. Because Blizzard cant write worth shit, but thats not the point. Besides that we are actually... not ever called that besides "Hero" most of the time (and not remotely as often as Nathanos-Fanboys claim when they defend this shitty dude), he has no reason to be this much of a dick. He is not just not treating us as a hero, he, who sits in the city 24/7, is treating us like less than footsoldiers which is a bit weird.

Now... why is that?

Its because Steve Danauser, head writer of World of Warcraft, is a clown who does not like players very much. This little living failure who gives story writers a bad reputation is the reason that WoWs lore is utter garbage and... Nathanos remodelling and repersonalisation is a shameless self-insert by a guy who is infamously in love with his blue women in every thing he wrote for, beeing weirdly creepy with his obsession to boot and being unable to take criticism...

He turned Nathanos which we all liked into a Simp... for Sylvanas... Ya know, the blue skinned undead Elf that then went on a rampage, was the focus of attention and the story for near 3 expansions and has gotten away with it too, in spite of us damn kids.

No, Nathanos is not hated for not holding us high. He is hated for being a poorly written self-insert-simp for Sylvanas Windrunner and BECAUSE he is not how he used to be originally.

Exactly this. A character that was interesting was ruined by changing him into Simp Cringecaller, by a loser who despises the playerbase and the old lore.