Warchief Sylvanas, everyone.

[Aucald]

The kind of story I imagine would have you picking several dialogue choices with Thalyssra to push her over to your side (all of them work, or if not, you can keep rechoosing until you pick the right one) and then a moment would show that in their time of need, Horde would be there where Alliance might not. It wouldn't need to be dramatic, and it could have some obligatory combat, but it could be better than 'lolol Alleria almost corrupted the sunwell in front of the Nightborne' and Tyrande literally throwing the diplomacy because she just doesn't care/is incredibly stupid to a degree that a basic campfire would have been a better diplomatic device.

I think what you're talking about actually happened in the Insurrection arc back in Suramar, not in any of the 7.3.5 content with Alleria and the Sunwell. The warm reception of the Blood Elves as compared to the taciturn one of the Night Elves was what sealed the deal. In 7.3.5 the alliance between the Nightborne and the Horde is all but a done deal - Alleria's interlude with the Sunwell isn't really a factor and it doesn't make or break Thalyssra's decision. Tyrande's reaction to the Nightborne, while not that stellar for the purposes of the Alliance, is a genuine reaction from a fallible individual. She holds some animus for the Nightborne because she was at the War of the Ancients when the denizens Suramar elected to hide as opposed to fighting with the rest of the Night Elves - Liadrin and Rommath weren't there, and know only of the myth of the War of the Ancients. For Tyrande it was real - people died and the world was shattered while the Nightborne hid themselves away like frightened children (from her perspective), her coldness might not have been diplomatic but it was certainly justified.

I don't like that Blizzard is depending on very heavily forced plot elements to tell a story that is frankly a bit cringey to read. They could have easily adjusted it so that it fit into time constraints without making it so the Nightborne join the Horde primarily because the Alliance act like incompetent idiots... again.

I don't think the Alliance are incompetent at all in the this scenario, and I think it's also telling that they also don't seek out the Nightborne for an alliance in the first place (at least not in 7.3.5). Insofar as we know it's not even brought up, so it's possible the Alliance considers the Nightborne not worth pursuing in the first place - possible because of Tyrande's view of them or possibly because they're aware the Horde already have an "in" given Thalyssra and Silgryn's rather o

I strongly disagree with the argument of "This was the best Blizzard could do", if that is what you are implying, because it's not even remotely true. Blizzard could have done any number of things to make it less ridiculous and more interesting without artificially complicating or extending the scenario significantly. Even just some small touches could have been done so that the Alliance makes mistakes but don't act like the most moronic diplomats on Azeroth -- which is supposed to be one of their greatest strengths, not their greatest weakness.

Well, better is always an option - but it's as much a matter of iteration as it is forethought and planning. What I mean is that the format of an MMORPG is already a limiting factor when it comes to storytelling, and you would get much more detail and flourish if the story were delivered in a book or in a movie. But the mistakes you're referring to are present already in the story - they're part of the Insurrection arc, primarily in the person of a biased diplomat like Tyrande and a rash partisan like Vereesa. I also don't think this is a matter of the Alliance leaders all convening and deciding as a group to elect Tyrande as diplomat - so the blame, if you want to assign it, probably doesn't sit on Anduin's shoulders. Tyrande was in the area of the Broken Shore because of Malfurion being kidnapped, and she no doubt inserted herself into the Suramar affair by virtue of proximity and connection to the land's historic significance (to her). The same is true of the Blood Elves and their presence - I doubt Sylvanas or Saurfang were involved with their insertion into the Nightfallen Insurrection, either - it was a unilateral move that luckily goes on to bear fruit for the Horde.

- - - Updated - - -

From a lore stand-point you are a member of a Horde race. If X racial leader wants to swear a loyalty pledge to Sylvanas, that's their business.

#NotmyWarchief

I don't think the Blood Oath of the Horde is to a specific individual, it's to the office of Warchief which is a mobile and inheritable position. It passed from Thrall to Garrosh, from Garrosh to Vol'jin, and now from Vol'jin to Sylvanas but it still binds those loyal to the Horde to their Warchief. You can certainly break the oath and turn from the Warchief but in doing so you would become an exile at best, or an enemy at worst.

[Arrashi]

snip

Here is the core problem - some stories really benefit from being open from interpretation. Others don't. I think that we will both agree that warcraft is on..."simpler" side of spectrum, and noone really will consider it to be thought provoking as some games are.

The issue with leaving such story (especially story that is still being told, and nowhere near completition) open to interpretation is that you can create a big rift betwen audience vision and writers vision.
Take nazgrim for example. The interpretation you put here is obviously a "right" one. This is what blizzard wanted us to think. But lets look it from diffrent perspective. What if nazgrim is just yes-man incapable of thinking for himself and just caving in to any figure of authority around him. In the end, if thrall menaged to kill garrosh before players got there, wouldnt nazgrim action be clear treason ?
His story once again suffer from simple mistakes that could be easily avoided and make story much better. Instead of what we had, a nazgrim who in the end wasnt fully loyal to anyone, and never made his own decision, push his act of good will after we fight him. Then, when he is mortally wounded, he could give us some vital info as part of mini-redemption while still being loyal to end.

As for all evil members of garrosh horde, just read the quotes they say in barrens and SoO. They are the most generic evil mooks fantasy can breed. They even have necklaces from troll ears and take tusks as trophies. Like, come on, you dont need to be that evil.

The issue with take garrosh story further back is that it still lacks that vital "point of no return". Arthas story made his downfal much more clear, because it split it in 3 main points:
Stratholme - hard decision that came a little to easily, but nothing irredemable
Betrayal of mercs/lying to his men - a shitty decision that once again came a little to easy but still wasnt point of no return, but pushing him further into dark side
"Sacrificing of murading" - a proper point of no return, that was very quickly followed with him becoming undead.
What made arthas story better is that it had much better pacing, conclusion came quickly, and you never seen any other path.

With garrosh we had completely diffrent story. Cata painted him as complex, and difficult to judge character. And thats what many people wanted. Orc character who won't be thrallful good. A character with flaws, aka something called room for growth. Actual one. The fact that diffrent situations painted him in diffrent light, made it much better, because you never knew what to expect.

And then MoP happens, and garrosh is just...evil. Like just evil. Not lawful, not chaotic, not neutral evil. Just evil. And all his followers are also...just evil.
I mean compare diary of alliance and horde commanders in 7.1 in kaarsang. Horde one is...just evil.
In whole expansion there isnt a single thing garrosh and his followers do that isnt..just evil. Like pure evil. As in, you are first time roleplaying and decided to be evil and your GM starts bitching that you aren't acting like evil character so you pick up all cats in village, and put them on a highest tree so they can't go down and their meowing for help really pisses everyone in said village (this really happened in one session).

There is also, another more meta reason and thats...his plan sucked. Like really garrosh plan really didnt made any sense. I mean, he clearly had to plan that we will reach him, otherwise he wouldnt make an anti-thrall room with his giant metal balls (this one part of enounter is so stupid i still cant get over it). So what, he planned to fight everyone who would came for him and then what ? Conquer azeroth on his own ? Like i get it, warcraft villains aren't the sharpest, but everything that garrosh did literally had no hands or legs. Its like he wanted to be defeated. And that makes him even worse villain.

And im gonna be honest, all things consider i still firmly believe that the point of SoO was...orgrimmar being sieged. And that it was pretty rushed decision all together. I just can't believe that this and its "glorious" follow up of WoD with equally "glorious" intermission of trial of pandaria is something they sat and actually planned with any dose of seriousness.

[Aucald]

Here is the core problem - some stories really benefit from being open from interpretation. Others don't. I think that we will both agree that warcraft is on..."simpler" side of spectrum, and noone really will consider it to be thought provoking as some games are.

The issue with leaving such story (especially story that is still being told, and nowhere near completition) open to interpretation is that you can create a big rift betwen audience vision and writers vision.

Everything in its context. The story of Warcraft is more piecemeal and bare-bones than the "Game of Thrones" novels or "The Dark Tower," but those are linear stories divorced from the multi-perspective and staggered format of your classic MMORPG. A single player game such as "Knights of the Old Republic" or "Legacy of Kain" follows a similar format - characters can freely grow and change without constraint because the story is a more or less linear map from A to B to C. But in the MMORPG context you've got a number of narrative handicaps to contend with - an inability to easily revisit previous settings (whose content must be locked so that leveling players can still experience them), portions of the world that must remain "frozen" in time, limitations on how the story can be delivered, and a hundred and one gameplay element concerns that limit what you can do with a given character, given class, or specialization.

Now this isn't to say there's not room for improvement, I would say that's almost always a given. Nor is it to say the story of Warcraft is perfect within its sphere of context - that's not true, either. But if you are going to compare it then it's best to do so against other things in its class, other MMO-based quantities. Comparing it to the workings of a written novel, an anime movie, or even another single-player linear game isn't quite fair to the subject at hand.

Take nazgrim for example. The interpretation you put here is obviously a "right" one. This is what blizzard wanted us to think. But lets look it from diffrent perspective. What if nazgrim is just yes-man incapable of thinking for himself and just caving in to any figure of authority around him. In the end, if thrall menaged to kill garrosh before players got there, wouldnt nazgrim action be clear treason ? His story once again suffer from simple mistakes that could be easily avoided and make story much better. Instead of what we had, a nazgrim who in the end wasnt fully loyal to anyone, and never made his own decision, push his act of good will after we fight him. Then, when he is mortally wounded, he could give us some vital info as part of mini-redemption while still being loyal to end.

I think "what if" type scenarios have value, but there's a limit to how far one can take them and a limit to their scope of application. Nazgrim was what he was - loyal soldier and general to Garrosh, but he understand the nature of Vol'jin's insurrection and intuited that he had through no fault of his own been bound to the wrong horse, so to speak. But he considered himself honorbound to his duty, and in the end he valued that above any moral higher calling. I don't think Thrall or Vol'jin would've considered him a traitor, though; he likely would've been exhonerated (as I doubt someone as honorable as Nazgrim would've involved himself in the petty cruelties of the Kor'kron) and maybe might've even kept his commission with a demotion to a lower rank to allow him to prove himself. But I think Nagrim was indeed fully loyal to the ideal of the Warchief, perhaps not Garrosh in his person but to the role of the commander of the Horde - someone whose loyalty isn't complete wouldn't die in the execution of their duties, after all. If Nazgrim were insufficiently loyal or as indecisive as your example above, he would've given up before the fight or during it as opposed to dying on principle and at peace with himself.

As for all evil members of garrosh horde, just read the quotes they say in barrens and SoO. They are the most generic evil mooks fantasy can breed. They even have necklaces from troll ears and take tusks as trophies. Like, come on, you dont need to be that evil.

They are the Kor'kron of the "True Horde" - less Garrosh's men and more Malkorok's, they are the reflection of Malkorok's evil. If you are in pursuit of a two-dimension character in the mold of a mustache-swirling be-monocled villain it would definitely be Malkorok.

The issue with take garrosh story further back is that it still lacks that vital "point of no return". Arthas story made his downfal much more clear, because it split it in 3 main points:
Stratholme - hard decision that came a little to easily, but nothing irredemable. Betrayal of mercs/lying to his men - a shitty decision that once again came a little to easy but still wasnt point of no return, but pushing him further into dark side. "Sacrificing of murading" - a proper point of no return, that was very quickly followed with him becoming undead. What made arthas story better is that it had much better pacing, conclusion came quickly, and you never seen any other path.

With garrosh we had completely diffrent story. Cata painted him as complex, and difficult to judge character. And thats what many people wanted. Orc character who won't be thrallful good. A character with flaws, aka something called room for growth. Actual one. The fact that diffrent situations painted him in diffrent light, made it much better, because you never knew what to expect.

Arthas' story benefits greatly from being told in WC3 - a linear and straightforward game not bound by the limitations and contrivances of the MMO format. But Garrosh's story echoes Arthas' in many ways, a fact not lost on a reminiscing Garrosh during his imprisonment in "War Crimes." Neither Arthas nor Garrosh were straightforward characters, they had moral complexities and ambiguities, they had inner conflict that expressed itself in a variety of ways. Arthas loved his people so much that, in the end, he made the terrible (in terms of difficulty, not of quality) decision that the few had to be sacrificed to save the many. Garrosh too made choices for what he felt was the good of the Horde that didn't turn out the way he wanted or expected. The difference was that Arthas' fall came more from the outside, in the person of the Lich King through the auspices of Frostmourne. Garrosh's came from within - from his compounded decisions to insulate himself from the criticism of his fellow leaders and placing himself in a position where his weakness (his lack of belief in himself and his overall worth) ate away at whatever was upstanding about him.

And then MoP happens, and garrosh is just...evil. Like just evil. Not lawful, not chaotic, not neutral evil. Just evil. And all his followers are also...just evil. I mean compare diary of alliance and horde commanders in 7.1 in kaarsang. Horde one is...just evil. In whole expansion there isnt a single thing garrosh and his followers do that isnt..just evil. Like pure evil. As in, you are first time roleplaying and decided to be evil and your GM starts bitching that you aren't acting like evil character so you pick up all cats in village, and put them on a highest tree so they can't go down and their meowing for help really pisses everyone in said village (this really happened in one session).

In MoP you are on the arc of descent for Garrosh, when he stands alone and without peer, unfettered and untempered by dissenting or critical voices. I don't think his lackeys are necessarily pure evil but they are definitely a reflection of the rot that is the "True Horde" of Garrosh's visions. Thematically speaking all of the Greater Sha of Pandaria also resonate with the chords that form the taspestry of Garrosh's song: Hatred for the Alliance. Fear of failing to follow in his father's footsteps. Doubt in himself and his purpose. Anger speaks for itself, as does Violence. Despair at the thought of being left alone with the burden of rulership. Pride driving him to greater and greater excesses to prove that his vision for the Horde was the right and only path. Of all the places in Azeroth for a person such as Garrosh to come Pandaria would be the absolute worst choice that could be made. And it's of special note that Garrosh never tested his mettle against the Sha the way he made Ishi and other Kor'kron guards do.

There is also, another more meta reason and thats...his plan sucked. Like really garrosh plan really didnt made any sense. I mean, he clearly had to plan that we will reach him, otherwise he wouldnt make an anti-thrall room with his giant metal balls (this one part of enounter is so stupid i still cant get over it). So what, he planned to fight everyone who would came for him and then what ? Conquer azeroth on his own ? Like i get it, warcraft villains aren't the sharpest, but everything that garrosh did literally had no hands or legs. Its like he wanted to be defeated. And that makes him even worse villain.

Perhaps somewhere deep down, buried under all those negative emotions and drives, there was a part of Garrosh that did want to be defeated and stopped. His final duel with Thrall in WoD felt like it spoke to that pretty strongly - his tirade toward his adopted father-figure carried with it tones of beseechment along with understandable anger and rage. If Garrosh had had the strength of his own convictions I think he might've even carried the day and defeated Thrall (who himself fought with the reticence born of his own guilt) - he was in the superior position until he decided to put distance between himself and Thrall. He practically invited Thrall's rally. This is only speculation on my part, of course, but it adds a layer of complexity as opposed to removing one.

I don't think Garrosh had a clear plan, though; not really. He thought that if he proved himself (and through him the Horde) as the superior force then somehow reality would reassert itself and all would be right. Like most tyrants he didn't think beyond the desires of the day, or of the short term. The question of "and then what?" would've been a distant conception to him if he thought of it at all. Garrosh was many things, but a philosopher-king was not among them.

And im gonna be honest, all things consider i still firmly believe that the point of SoO was...orgrimmar being sieged. And that it was pretty rushed decision all together. I just can't believe that this and its "glorious" follow up of WoD with equally "glorious" intermission of trial of pandaria is something they sat and actually planned with any dose of seriousness.

That is of course your prerogative and I won't fault you for it. My criticism of WoD is pretty well-known at this point, so we won't linger on that, and I've already related the flaws of "War Crimes" as concerns the non-ending that was the Trial of Garrosh. WoD and its lead-up were both unqualified debacles, but I think in the rush to condemn them you might be doing the story of MoP and SoO in specific a bit of disservice.

[Arrashi]

snip

Its in a bounds of writers job to understand the medium. And i agree that WoW, as MMO is far from perfect. But then, they should chose a story that can be easily told in bounds of said medium and not push against them, hoping for best. The story of MOP/SoO was bound to be controversial because it antagonised alot of players for no real reason in attempt to please another group. And it was handled poor enough to piss off orc fans while not really satisfying alliance fans (remember that fucking cat quest ? Thats what im talking about). If they don't think a story will work out well in games enviroment...scrap it. Do something else.

You are also ignoring one more problem that comes from malkorok and co. They cheapen the story once again. BLizzard once again chickened out, so in attempt to pat player orcs on their head saying "its not your fault" and put...generic evil mooks instead. It made the story even more pointless, because it avoided its logical core - horde actually fighting itself and facing its own demons. Instead, for a most part it just had..acceptable substitutes. And alliance couldnt tell the diffrence anyway, they were here only for hordebreaker and conqueror of orgrimmar tittles anyway. Its a weird story that from alliance POV is nothing But a fanservice (and i think you will agree, that noone on alliance particularly cared about hordes inner struggle), but from a horde POV it was supposed to be this deep, redefining themselves, realising what horde stands for...and fails miserably at it. All horde leaders stick together and go against something that could be as well a terrorist attack on orgrimmar committed by garry and his small group of followers. We are undeniably good guys, they are undeniably bad guys. No questions needed. Even player character switches side instantly the lol'jin gets shanked.

And i don't really see a point in rationalising garrosh story too much. In the end they needed a warchief for allies to kill so they just went with it. Saying things like "Maybe he wanted to be defeated:, just come on. We know that he was one dimensional villain, like all other warcraft villains, yelling and doing evil stuff. Its just that like all others he was set up for defeat (and one can argue said defeat was only reason why he was made villain) and he didnt need plan. Like all others we was content with...evil. For a story that would benefit from showing inner struggle, and emotional conflict...we got nothing of that. Garrosh is just evil and his response to anything is just "well, kill them all right ?" It really lacks drama, and quite frankly makes us more annoyed at members of horde who messed up as much as its possible to even let that happen.

And celestials pulling off their BS at the end, combined with "travels to another dimensions past to get help from dad" plot makes it even harder to not treat this as some setup for a joke that never came. Well, no, the joke did came, its just that there wasnt anything to laugh at.

[Aucald]

Its in a bounds of writers job to understand the medium. And i agree that WoW, as MMO is far from perfect. But then, they should chose a story that can be easily told in bounds of said medium and not push against them, hoping for best. The story of MOP/SoO was bound to be controversial because it antagonised alot of players for no real reason in attempt to please another group. And it was handled poor enough to piss off orc fans while not really satisfying alliance fans (remember that fucking cat quest ? Thats what im talking about). If they don't think a story will work out well in games enviroment...scrap it. Do something else.

Satisfying both of the major factions is itself a limitation and stumbling block when it comes to the story. The very nature of having factions as gameplay elements requires you cultivate a rough balance between the two - you can't have one faction become dominant over the other either in terms of game balance or story, which is why for the history of WoW there has always been a give and take tug-of-war when it comes to Horde and Alliance victories and losses. Add to this the tendency of people in general to accentuate the negative and you will often reach a state of "compromise" where both sides feel equally shafted. That is kind of what SoO felt like for some because while it focused on Orgrimmar falling, it didn't actually concern the Horde as a faction (as they participated in the siege and were one of the victors at its resolution).

I'm guessing the "cat quest" was part of the Alliance part of the Darkspear Rebellion event in 5.3? I didn't actually run an Alliance character through it so I didn't really experience it.

You are also ignoring one more problem that comes from malkorok and co. They cheapen the story once again. BLizzard once again chickened out, so in attempt to pat player orcs on their head saying "its not your fault" and put...generic evil mooks instead. It made the story even more pointless, because it avoided its logical core - horde actually fighting itself and facing its own demons. Instead, for a most part it just had..acceptable substitutes. And alliance couldnt tell the diffrence anyway, they were here only for hordebreaker and conqueror of orgrimmar tittles anyway. Its a weird story that from alliance POV is nothing But a fanservice (and i think you will agree, that noone on alliance particularly cared about hordes inner struggle), but from a horde POV it was supposed to be this deep, redefining themselves, realising what horde stands for...and fails miserably at it. All horde leaders stick together and go against something that could be as well a terrorist attack on orgrimmar committed by garry and his small group of followers. We are undeniably good guys, they are undeniably bad guys. No questions needed. Even player character switches side instantly the lol'jin gets shanked.

I will agree that making Garrosh a "third party" or external type of evil by separating him entirely from the existing Horde does dilute or diffuse the impact of the story for Horde players - but it also goes into what I stated above, it's an unfortunate side-effect of the limitations of the format. The Horde *can't* simply disappear or undergo a universal level redefinition without the same occurring to the Alliance. That is an unfortunate status quo that can't be changed without modifying elemental aspects of what the game actually is. The "True Horde" and by extension the evils of Garrosh's henchman is a reflection of that - it splinters off a third and external antagonistic force that both the Alliance and the Horde can contend with in their own ways. The real failing of MoP, as I see it, is that the Alliance didn't get their own "what you are in the dark" type of storyline to go along with the Horde one, and that's really the only aspect of MoP that I would call Horde-centric. Sure, it ultimately ends up with the Horde and Alliance in teeth-clenched teamwork against an external aggressor, but there was a chance for the Alliance to get their own textured story (which I think they aspired to in the Jade Forest and Krasarang quests but ultimately failed to realize) about the "lesson of Pandaria" and what they are fighting for and against.

And i don't really see a point in rationalising garrosh story too much. In the end they needed a warchief for allies to kill so they just went with it. Saying things like "Maybe he wanted to be defeated:, just come on. We know that he was one dimensional villain, like all other warcraft villains, yelling and doing evil stuff. Its just that like all others he was set up for defeat (and one can argue said defeat was only reason why he was made villain) and he didnt need plan. Like all others we was content with...evil. For a story that would benefit from showing inner struggle, and emotional conflict...we got nothing of that. Garrosh is just evil and his response to anything is just "well, kill them all right ?" It really lacks drama, and quite frankly makes us more annoyed at members of horde who messed up as much as its possible to even let that happen.

I don't think we do know that to be quite honest, and it's not the immediate sense I got from the characterization of Garroth either. Garrosh actually stands apart from the roster of WoW villains in that he didn't begin as an external evil or wasn't corrupted by an external evil directly - he's a product of his own narrative cycle that brought from troubled hero to tyrannical despot over the course of no less than 4 expansions of story. The same can't be said of Ragnaros (a pre-existing external evil), Arthas (corrupted by an external evil), Deathwing (ditto), the Old Gods (pre-existing), or the Legion (ditto) - it was an attempt to create a villain we knew of old, an attempt to do within the context of WoW what was done with the Lich King, the Legion, and all the other recurring threats from the RTS games.

Did it ultimately work? Well, YMMV I suppose - you obviously think it didn't, and I'm a bit more on the fence. I think that in the rush to be critical you're throwing out the proverbial baby with the bath water, and you likely think I am being naive or perhaps overly effusive in my praise. I think many people like and dislike Garrosh for the wrong reasons, either agreeing with his ideology (which I frankly find terrifying) or relegating him to one-dimensional villain status when I don't think that really in evidence.

And celestials pulling off their BS at the end, combined with "travels to another dimensions past to get help from dad" plot makes it even harder to not treat this as some setup for a joke that never came. Well, no, the joke did came, its just that there wasnt anything to laugh at.

Well, that's more or less WoD territory, and I'm not going to sit here and try to defend *that*. Both the Celestials' words at the end of the Trial and the entire lead-in to WoD were terrible, sloppy, and absurd flights of fancy when it comes to WoW's greater story-arc. I try to think of WoD as a mescaline induced fever dream we all jointly experienced before the game and story got back on track in Legion. I'd rather have the Legion find and beam in an AU version of Gul'dan apropos of nothing as opposed to the nightmare we collectively endured.

[Grythletubs]

Jaina tried numerous times to work for peace with the horde.

She was betrayed every time.

I feel like she should hate the horde.

Also the worst of Jaina's actions are nothing compared to any of the horde's most mundane wrongdoings. It would have been interesting if she actually drowned orgrimmar considering Blizzard seems to have no problem bombing ally cities and burning down their civilizations.

She's all mouth right now, I hope she actually does something like Genn did such as stopping Sylvannas from enslaving the Valkyr.

[The Penguin]

I don't think the Blood Oath of the Horde is to a specific individual, it's to the office of Warchief which is a mobile and inheritable position. It passed from Thrall to Garrosh, from Garrosh to Vol'jin, and now from Vol'jin to Sylvanas but it still binds those loyal to the Horde to their Warchief. You can certainly break the oath and turn from the Warchief but in doing so you would become an exile at best, or an enemy at worst.

Yeah, I get that but really barring some serious handwaving I've yet to hear why any member of the Horde would follow Sylvanas. Wrathgate was sort of a thing, and her actions in Gilneas speak a lot. IMHO wouldn't be surprised if Vol'jin was possessed by Aelthyste (spelling) and already dead when he passed leadership to Sylvanas. Regardless, anytime content is gated behind crap like a loyalty pledge I tend to disregard it if it's something my character wouldn't do. The Horde wasn't exactly active in Legion. Order Halls were.

[TheVaryag]

"The Horde's selfless leadership in the war against the Legion has left our ranks depleted. Our enemies slaver at the thought of stealing what is ours. We will not let them."

ok, she has either:
clearly lost it,
or
she has become a great propagandist.

i lean more towards the second.
since she even dared to shout "for the horde" at the trailer.
you're not fooling anyone dear. especially the horde.

I never understood that line, the Horde and Alliance did bugger all In Legion. And now we're menth to believe our Order Halls are either splitting up or having more than half of It's membership leave and join their respective factions In factional warfare after they became close friends, possibly had children and families together during Legion.

I say she lost It, when she got the title of Warchief her face told me "I can do anything I want to make the Forsaken great again..." and weeks later took a fleet to Stormheim to make a deal with Helya (On which we still have no resolution), leave the Horde Champion (us) down In Helheim after meeting us literally saying "Oh hey Champion, I'm going so you can die here If you like, bye" what a Warchief, right?

And then we meet her In the village In Stormheim and she goes "Oh hey champion, help me kill these Shieldmaidens and then watch me do an awesome thing from the doorway" and then cutscene time with the Lantern and that Val'kyr chick.

Not to mention when we stood at one side of the door, the other side had an Alliance Champion watching the same thing most likely.

She cares little to not at all for the Horde, only sees It as grunts and fodder for her goal of making a new Scourge on Azeroth with her at the helm. Not to mention most of the reason she's a Warchief Is her popularity among fan not that she's a good character choice for the role, Saurfang makes more sense, hell even Baine does. I just hope they fix this In the Battle for Azeroth and have Saurfang declare Mak'gora on her butt and take over. Because at least I know Saurfang won't leave me to die In the realm of the dead If we happened to see me there and then say nothing about It afterwards.

[Mehrunes]

Jaina tried numerous times to work for peace with the horde.

She was betrayed every time.

Poor misunderstood Jaina. So peaceful when her Northwatch troops broke the truce after WotLK by attacking Barrens and capturing a Horde outpost there. Or when her forces spread across Southern Barrens, Northern Barrens, Azshara, Stonetalon and even Durotar to fight the Horde. Or when they also tried to invade Mulgore. Dat betrayal when Horde retaliated for her hostile, errr... "peaceful" actions.

Also the worst of Jaina's actions are nothing compared to any of the horde's most mundane wrongdoings. It would have been interesting if she actually drowned orgrimmar considering Blizzard seems to have no problem bombing ally cities and burning down their civilizations.

She's all mouth right now, I hope she actually does something like Genn did such as stopping Sylvannas from enslaving the Valkyr.

Yup, ethno-political cleansing in Dalaran and attempted genocide at Orgrimmar are nothing

Yeah, I get that but really barring some serious handwaving I've yet to hear why any member of the Horde would follow Sylvanas. Wrathgate was sort of a thing, and her actions in Gilneas speak a lot. IMHO wouldn't be surprised if Vol'jin was possessed by Aelthyste (spelling) and already dead when he passed leadership to Sylvanas. Regardless, anytime content is gated behind crap like a loyalty pledge I tend to disregard it if it's something my character wouldn't do. The Horde wasn't exactly active in Legion. Order Halls were.

She's their Warchief, she's a good military leader, she saved the Horde at Broken Shore risking her Val'kyr in the process, the previous Warchief appointed her, she was active in the uprising against Garrosh, she secured Blood Elves' admission to the Horde, the Horde had enough civil strife lately to last for a decade. Plenty of reasons. Also, Wrathgate was an action of the rebels and her behavior in Gilneas consisted of what, planning to deploy the shittiest strain of Blight ever, one that barely slowed the Worgen down?

And you don't get to roleplay a Horde member who does not swear the Blood Oath. First of all, the game puts constrains on you. You are either Alliance or you are Horde. You don't get to play a Defias human either. Secondly, that roleplay would go against lore. Blood Oath is the most fundamental law of the Horde. You swear it or you're not in the Horde. Where you once again run into the issue of game constraints.

[Qualia]

I never understood that line, the Horde and Alliance did bugger all In Legion. And now we're menth to believe our Order Halls are either splitting up or having more than half of It's membership leave and join their respective factions In factional warfare after they became close friends, possibly had children and families together during Legion.

To be fair, though - Legion events probably happened within a month (or months at most). We might have bonded well as comrades, but I don't think the class orders members would have gone far enough to make families in middle of a war, after knowing each other for mere months. We don't know if the Orders split either, or just a few members (including the player character) who are loyalists to their faction left. Khadgar, for example, flat out said that he didn't want to take part in our conflict (for now).

Moreover, we usually assume our characters' personalities are as we thought, but in fact, they don't. In a way, we are just re-enacting Blizzard's story. Our characters are as Blizzard envisioned them - maybe the player character's loyalty to their faction is actually extremely high, or perhaps we are fanboys of Anduin / Sylvanas - who knows? There have been many people in real life who put their loyalties towards their leaders / countries over their bonds with friends / families, so it isn't too far off if that's the case for the PC.

[Mehrunes]

I say she lost It, when she got the title of Warchief her face told me "I can do anything I want to make the Forsaken great again..." and weeks later took a fleet to Stormheim to make a deal with Helya (On which we still have no resolution), leave the Horde Champion (us) down In Helheim after meeting us literally saying "Oh hey Champion, I'm going so you can die here If you like, bye" what a Warchief, right?

Yeah, no. First of all, Forsaken are already in a good spot. She did what she did for long-term future. Also, she explicitly does not exhibit "I can do anything I want". That's what pretty much the entire snippet of the incoming book was about. She could do that when she was operating in the shadows, but now is in the spotlight of the entire Horde and needs to act accordingly to the wishes and needs of all Horde races. She even wondered if this wasn't the whole purpose. And what she literally said in Helheim was that she expected to meet us back outside. Damn, a Warchief holding expectations for their champion, particularly that they can handle tings on their own. Totally misplaced ones too. Pure evil right here.

And then we meet her In the village In Stormheim and she goes "Oh hey champion, help me kill these Shieldmaidens and then watch me do an awesome thing from the doorway" and then cutscene time with the Lantern and that Val'kyr chick.

Not to mention when we stood at one side of the door, the other side had an Alliance Champion watching the same thing most likely.

That's Blizzard's fuckup. There was something for the player to do before the cinematic in the beta, but they scrapped it for no reason and then instead of replacing it they just lazied out.

She cares little to not at all for the Horde, only sees It as grunts and fodder for her goal of making a new Scourge on Azeroth with her at the helm. Not to mention most of the reason she's a Warchief Is her popularity among fan not that she's a good character choice for the role, Saurfang makes more sense, hell even Baine does. I just hope they fix this In the Battle for Azeroth and have Saurfang declare Mak'gora on her butt and take over. Because at least I know Saurfang won't leave me to die In the realm of the dead If we happened to see me there and then say nothing about It afterwards.

Most of this is a repeat of the nonsense from the first paragraph so I'll not repeat myself there. But the idea that she wants to make a new Scourge is also idiotic. Forsaken are free-willed and she does not want to kill all living just so she could be a queen of a dead wasteland. And judging by his behavior at the start of the Warrior campaign, if Saurfang was Vol'jin's second-in-command at the Broken Shore, he'd have ordered a suicidal last stand charge instead of a retreat, dooming the Horde.

[Grythletubs]

Yup, ethno-political cleansing in Dalaran and attempted genocide at Orgrimmar are nothing

Notice how pretty much everything you post of alliance "wrong-doings" are in response to horde razing their cities and terrorizing their people?

My point stands, the alliance attacks on the horde are childsplay compared to anything the horde has done. I'm not complaining, I mean what is there to expect from a warmongering faction that can't keep a leader for more than 6 months, and proceeds to choose genocidal impulsive maniacs as their leaders...twice.

At least make an attempt to hide your obnoxious "FUR THA HURD" irrational fanboism.

I really don't care about the ally/horde conflict, but it's obvious that Blizzard have been writing the lore with the intention to make the horde seem like bloodthirsty warmongers. I mean just listen to the shit their npcs say lmao.

[Trassk]

Jaina tried numerous times to work for peace with the horde.

She was betrayed every time.

I feel like she should hate the horde.

Also the worst of Jaina's actions are nothing compared to any of the horde's most mundane wrongdoings. It would have been interesting if she actually drowned orgrimmar considering Blizzard seems to have no problem bombing ally cities and burning down their civilizations.

She's all mouth right now, I hope she actually does something like Genn did such as stopping Sylvannas from enslaving the Valkyr.

The ones who betrayed Jaina's trust ended up pretty much being traitors to the horde who we end up killing in a boss fight, or those yet to go that way.

[Arrashi]

snip.

The issue here is that its ok to satisfy one faction, as long as you don't poop all over other one.
And boy, that goddamn cat quest is prime example of that. If you don't recall in 5.3 horde got that whole rebelion thing with vol'jin thrall and co. Alliance got...a single quest where you control mechanical cat to spy. Thats it. Then you met vol'jin. And the blizzard once again caves and tries to please alliance and gives some more lines to his dialogue...that make him look like a bitch to mighty alliance hero.

You see, coming back to my original point of this story being pointless, i see 3 main "failures" that make it so.

Failure number one is taking estabilished characters and story and trying to use them to achieve...something. And whatever said something was, i think that we will agree, it wasn't really achieved. That failure however, is more of a price, that is made into failure but 2 other failures.

Second failure is that the story they decided, really wasn't that good. As we said, its heavily watered down by limited horde involvement, usage of standard issue evil mooks, and dance of both chickening out of interesting and dark twists, and trying to please two opposing sides.

But even there, the story in its sorry state could be salvaged to at least some degree, if follow up and consequences were interesting and impactful. And once again blizzard failed. They were too lazy to reflect this event in ogrimmar itself (save for bothering to look for a single doodad, and putting it on wall with 2 lines of text), the orc leadership and culture was literally untouched, they told us that saurfang is leader in tweet, and didnt even bother to reflect that in game till legion. The garrosh vs thrall duel in nagrand...well it wasnt ending of metal gear solid 4, thats for sure.
And of course, the "logical" followup in form of WoD, was so logical, it didn't even need any setup. It was so random that it could as well come out of nowhere.
In many ways, garrosh story left massive, gushing wound, and all blizzard did was apply "happy sunshine" brand bandaid and ignore bone poking out, blood loss and ongoing infection it left.

There is also, one other, more meta thing. I think that you will agree with me that warcraft has...rather limited area for storytelling. As if there isn't that much story being added to game over short amounts of time and we generally need to wait alot of time for something new. And to paraphase gabe newell, i don't think story of SoO was "worth the wait". I think that what was almost 2 years of storytelling space could be used by much better stories.

In the end, was SoO the worst story in warcraft mythos ? Nope, WoD easily tops that. But it certainly wasn't among best either.

[Whatever Dude]

The WoW fanbase is not emotionally mature enough to look at Sylvanas from an unbiased perspective. She inspires total hatred from the Alliance and total blind and hypocritical devotion from the Horde.

She's poison to the story and has got to go. I really hope Blizzard is intelligent enough to see this and finally rid themselves of her after BfA is said and done.

[Friendlyimmolation]

The WoW fanbase is not emotionally mature enough to look at Sylvanas from an unbiased perspective. She inspires total hatred from the Alliance and total blind and hypocritical devotion from the Horde.

She's poison to the story and has got to go. I really hope Blizzard is intelligent enough to see this and finally rid themselves of her after BfA is said and done.

Poison to the story how in your so called unbiased opinion? Because she isn't a lawful good Paladin?

[ello]

The WoW fanbase is not emotionally mature enough to look at Sylvanas from an unbiased perspective. She inspires total hatred from the Alliance and total blind and hypocritical devotion from the Horde.

She's poison to the story and has got to go. I really hope Blizzard is intelligent enough to see this and finally rid themselves of her after BfA is said and done.

Wait, what?

The Warchief of the Horde is loved by the Horde and hated by the Alliance... and you think this is a bad thing?

No, working as Intended.

[Maljinwo]

The WoW fanbase is not emotionally mature enough to look at Sylvanas from an unbiased perspective. She inspires total hatred from the Alliance and total blind and hypocritical devotion from the Horde.

I'm Horde and I despise her.
Does that make me Pandaren?

[Aucald]

The WoW fanbase is not emotionally mature enough to look at Sylvanas from an unbiased perspective. She inspires total hatred from the Alliance and total blind and hypocritical devotion from the Horde.

She's poison to the story and has got to go. I really hope Blizzard is intelligent enough to see this and finally rid themselves of her after BfA is said and done.

I have no problems whatsoever looking at Sylvanas from an unbiased perspective - I am primarily Horde and I am wary of her and her intentions, but within the framework of the game I acknowledge her as Warchief until she breaks the contract that binds me to her role as leader.

I also think that the renewed faction conflict also brings about a resurgence of people not thinking critically or semi-objectively. Having a controversial character with base-breaking tendencies is not "poison to the story." The fact that Sylvanas' role and intentions are so often debated seems to me to be proof of the authenticity she actually brings to the story as a whole.

[Aliven]

The WoW fanbase is not emotionally mature enough to look at Sylvanas from an unbiased perspective. She inspires total hatred from the Alliance and total blind and hypocritical devotion from the Horde.

She's poison to the story and has got to go. I really hope Blizzard is intelligent enough to see this and finally rid themselves of her after BfA is said and done.

Nope. I loved Sylvanas as a character both in Warcraft 3 and in early days of WoW. Point is Blizzard is adopting "she can do no wrong" attitude in game for her. No racial leader give a shit, no npc call out of her bullshit, hell, she even got a personal fanboy in Nathanos. Its the same as Grom from WoD - Draenor is free, dont mind i fucked you all in the ass before, we coll kkthxbb.

What im saying - i hate her because blizzard fucked her up.