Page 11 of 20 FirstFirst ...
9
10
11
12
13
... LastLast
  1. #201
    Immortal Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Warsong Gulch
    Posts
    7,213
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    It's fine. Sylvanas is the people's choice:
    its is expected, the population is easy manipulated and feed with lies, they prob think the tree burn by accident or by the alliance

  2. #202
    Quote Originally Posted by Overlordd View Post
    Those last lines of theron. SoO 2.

    - - - Updated - - -



    So really Horde becomes an Alliance. And the Alliance becomes the Horde. Rallying behind one leader. (High king)

    Gr8
    I personally think there are far more interesting differences between the factions to focus on than leadership, but that is obviously entirely subjective.

  3. #203
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    It's fine. Sylvanas is the people's choice:
    I don't get HOW

    Orcs are supposed to mistrust forsaken, forsaken just lost their home to SYLV blowing it up, Vol'jin and darkspear were always vocal about mistrusting Forsaken

    No one's liked them since Wrathgate/Blight


    HOW does she have their loyalty now?
    Twas brillig

  4. #204
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    19,037
    Quote Originally Posted by Rafoel View Post
    It was logically impossible to side with Garrosh as PC, because Garrosh acted against you. During Vol'jin scenario Kor'kron attack BOTH Vol'jin AND YOU - Vol'jin because he is a "traitor" and you, because you are a "witness", and not member of Kor'kron. Whole scenario was a test by Garrosh, who wanted to finally determine which side is Voljin supporting. He was supposed to die there with nobody ever knowing what happened (they probably wanted to spread the word that Saurok killed him). Now ,remember that was still a time when PC wasn't really significant in grand scheme of things.
    A slight retooling of the "Dagger in the Dark Scenario" could've easily facilitated player agency - they could've also gone hostile against Vol'jin and been defeated by a blast of Voodoo from the Shadow Hunter, or they could've been told to leave and report to Garrosh while Rak'gor carried on with the assassination mission (to the same conclusion). The design was there because there was never a notion that the PC would ultimately join Garrosh in his True Horde splinter-sect.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rafoel View Post
    Now, the problem is that there is no fucking in-game reason for everybody to suddenly support this "rebellion" thing. Sylvanas position is legitimate. Still not a single fucking person called her to give up the position of Warchief, instead they all act like she personally holds whole Horde hostage. There is not even a reason for this situation, its just to keep this retarded plot afloat - if a single character acted logically, the "battle for azeroth" would end 4 months ago.
    I think you're just completely wrong here. Sylvanas de-legitimized herself with her actions in Darkshore, as I see it - I do not know nor would I ever countenance near-genocide of a people, even one with whom I had a preexisting disagreement or a history of conflict. Sylvanas being the Warchief neither enshrines nor hallows her actions, and I can fully see part of the Horde turning against her on that score alone. Since Teldrassil she's done a number of other things which I can see people looking askance at.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rafoel View Post
    First, Saurfang. Mad because Sylvanas tried to assasinate him. Everybody should be mad too appearently. And what did Saurfang do? Abandon Horde during Siege of Undercity, attempting to day in combat in only possible place and time that Horde doesn't benefit from it at all, and then CONSPIRE with Alliance king, in the middle of war with Alliance, in order to "dethrone" the Warchief. Saurfang probably doesn't care what will happen to Sylvanas, but he surely knows that Alliance wants her dead! And he is fine with it. He is completely fine that the Horde's Warchief gets killed by Alliance as long as he gets "his" Horde back. Like Horde ever belonged to him. And then we should get mad Sylvanas tries to eliminate the threat he poses! Laughable! From his actions its obvious he isnt interested in law or order, he just declared himself enemy of Sylvanas, and wannabe leader of "True Horde" (see what I did here?) with sole goal of destroying her. I wonder how fan favourite Thrall, when he was still Warchief, would react if he got informed Sylvanas was conspiring to kill him and rule the Horde herself...
    Sylvanas de-legitimized herself in Saurfang's eyes, and so her pursued a tactic to ensure that she was dethroned and could not go on to corrupt the Horde with her warmongering. You can certainly disagree with Saurfang's reasons and actions, but they make sense and are consistent with his character. Saurfang was willing to execute an "honorable" war against the Alliance having been convinced peace was not an option - but Sylvanas changed the war into a horror at Teldrassil, directly invoking the history of trauma Saurfang already carried.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rafoel View Post
    Then of course we have Zekhan blindly following Saurfang because he literally worships him. Okay. But why does he suddenly assume we, PC, want to join him in killing the Horde Troops sent to intercept Saurfang? We, who might be Forsaken, Blood Elf, Nightborne... people with at best vague idea of who the hell Saurfang is. But sure, lets literally betray your faction in order to support this guy who actually also DID BETRAY IT BY CONSPIRING WITH ALLIANCE. WTF. How the hell does Zekhan quest make sense from in-game perspective? Just how?
    The implication here being that hero-worship is what? Unrealistic? Completely fantastical? Zekhan effectively believes what Saurfang believes, probably even more fervently through the lens of his hero-worship. He sees his hero in danger and asks for aid, naively thinking that you too would be on the side of the legendary Horde hero and general of the Third War. He's right, too; at least in some cases - since the PC could be either loyal to Sylvanas or a rebel themselves. To Zekhan, his loyalty is more personal than factional, and that's also a very real state that people can have. For some the idea of a faction is more a distant claiming and more direct connections (family, loved ones, friends, etc.) are more important. As for conspiring with the Alliance, well, that's a bit muddled and subjective in and of itself. A case can be made, and the case can be argued against just as easy - I would not say this is an ironclad fact of objective reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rafoel View Post
    Hey, so we have war now, and Horde Members are literally dying. There comes the idea to send the corpse of kul tiran prince mindwashed into assasin. In order to, you know... win the fucking war? Save Horde lives? NO. The cowburger won't stand it, he personally KILLS tens of forsaken to return enemy their precious leader (who is dead, btw). Because, appearently, mindwashing a single forsaken if somehow fricking worse then killing 20 of them. EVEN WORSE, each of these 20 forsaken would have defended you with their "lives" a week ago on the battlefield, and that single "forsaken" would want to kill all of you if he were still alive. Honestly, no matter if Sylvanas actually expected Baine to free him, killing these loyal forsaken sailors for the first time made me feel morally sick.

    Okay you fucking idiot, you killed Horde soldiers, you sabotaged our plan of ending the war, you aided the enemy, and it is probable you are trying to conspire with Saurfang and Alliance to eliminate the Warchief too... off to the prison you go. What??? And outrage!! How can this be! Sylvanas should kneel and repent before Baine and his best pal's Anduin's absolute moral superiority! At least that's what almost all Horde leaders (except Geyarah) seem to think... killing Horde Soldiers is our fricking moral/human right okay??? You Forsaken will either follow your own unwritten rules or we will fricking end you okay??? We the enlightened Orcs and Tauren and Trolls, the "True Horde", would have had peace with Alliance long time ago if not for these meddling Forsaken!
    Only if you think using Derek Proudmoore as a Manchurian candidate type of assassin would "win the war." Likely it would not, it would just be more murder that would in turn incense the Alliance and make the war that much worse. Baine's goal, as stupid as it might be, was to show Jaina that the Horde were not without honor and thus hopefully reduce the war fervor and/or possibly create an avenue for potential peace. With the events of 8.2 we're actually shown that it might've even worked, though not quite in the manner Baine originally planned. As for Horde soldiers dying, well that's pretty much a constant now. Baine having to kill a few in order to save even more lives, by his calculus at least, was a more or less justifiable expense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rafoel View Post
    So now we have to free Baine because its literally new Holocaust letting him to be executed, the absolute moral evil of this is so enormous that Alliance and Horde join together to oppose this absolute evil that is Sylvanas that dared to imprison a murderer of Horde Soldiers - in every war that ever happened such act was punishable by death, but whatever.
    If you believe Baine and think his course of action was just, then imprisoning and torturing him for that is decidedly unjust. Do you feel that injustice should be permitted to stand? The Alliance agents and Horde rebels don't, and thus they were impelled to act.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rafoel View Post
    Oh wait, that's not really right. Alliance doesn't give a fuck about morality of this, they at least have a logical reason for aiding the rebellious individuals, that makes the Horde destroy itself and then Alliance can win the war without fighting. I will repeat this again and again, this is the worst lore that was EVER introduced to WoW, its so disgusting that it made me lose any interest in what will happen further. I'm just mad I lost so much time following it hoping that Blizzard can actually tell a good story.
    Jaina herself says she's there because she owes Baine for what he did i.e. Derek, so yes, I'd say she's there on ethical grounds. We don't really know what Shaw's rationale is, but knowing Shaw I'd wager you are more correct in that it's strategic for him. I think it is more likely you simply don't like this story, and that's fine - everyone has their own tastes. But I think it's both internally and externally logical and constructed well enough, at least on a mechanical level.
    "We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see." - The Player, "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead"

  5. #205
    Quote Originally Posted by Skytotem View Post
    I don't get HOW

    Orcs are supposed to mistrust forsaken, forsaken just lost their home to SYLV blowing it up, Vol'jin and darkspear were always vocal about mistrusting Forsaken

    No one's liked them since Wrathgate/Blight


    HOW does she have their loyalty now?
    Orcs love war and they don't mind personal sacrifice. Sylvanas should if anything be more popular with them than with the Forsaken, especially given that she's niether Lordaeronian nor orcish. The orcs have been after Ashenvale for ten years now and their resource issues were never solved after Cataclysm. They also don't like the Alliance. Sylvanas in the span of a week basically expelled the night elves from their territories and the only land that's still being competed on is not being fought over by orcs but Forsaken. Ashenvale, who's resources they were after for their prosperity is all theirs. And given the chances of Blizzard addressing this later, Sylvanas will have solved this problem for them for all time.

    In general though, you underestimate how warlike most of the Horde races are. The Forsaken blame the Alliance who invaded their home not Sylvanas, as they should. Sylvanas blowing up their home to defeat the enemy rather than ceding it to the living that they've hated for fifteen years is not ground to hate her and for the other races, that Sylvanas has opted to sacrifice her own home for them is good PR. Likewise, it's said in BTS that Sylvanas constantly panders to the Horde traditions by allowing them to do whatever provided they assist her war effort.

    As a final note, Sylvanas is an absolute dictator and likely controls the flow of information, so most of the shit she does that they wouldn't like would be swept under the rag. It's already stated how she spun the Gathering in her favor as a foreign coup attempt.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  6. #206
    If Thrall or Lorthemar (eventhough I'd like to see an Orc back in the seat) become warchief, I'm going back horde.

  7. #207
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    A slight retooling of the "Dagger in the Dark Scenario" could've easily facilitated player agency - they could've also gone hostile against Vol'jin and been defeated by a blast of Voodoo from the Shadow Hunter, or they could've been told to leave and report to Garrosh while Rak'gor carried on with the assassination mission (to the same conclusion). The design was there because there was never a notion that the PC would ultimately join Garrosh in his True Horde splinter-sect.



    I think you're just completely wrong here. Sylvanas de-legitimized herself with her actions in Darkshore, as I see it - I do not know nor would I ever countenance near-genocide of a people, even one with whom I had a preexisting disagreement or a history of conflict. Sylvanas being the Warchief neither enshrines nor hallows her actions, and I can fully see part of the Horde turning against her on that score alone. Since Teldrassil she's done a number of other things which I can see people looking askance at.



    Sylvanas de-legitimized herself in Saurfang's eyes, and so her pursued a tactic to ensure that she was dethroned and could not go on to corrupt the Horde with her warmongering. You can certainly disagree with Saurfang's reasons and actions, but they make sense and are consistent with his character. Saurfang was willing to execute an "honorable" war against the Alliance having been convinced peace was not an option - but Sylvanas changed the war into a horror at Teldrassil, directly invoking the history of trauma Saurfang already carried.



    The implication here being that hero-worship is what? Unrealistic? Completely fantastical? Zekhan effectively believes what Saurfang believes, probably even more fervently through the lens of his hero-worship. He sees his hero in danger and asks for aid, naively thinking that you too would be on the side of the legendary Horde hero and general of the Third War. He's right, too; at least in some cases - since the PC could be either loyal to Sylvanas or a rebel themselves. To Zekhan, his loyalty is more personal than factional, and that's also a very real state that people can have. For some the idea of a faction is more a distant claiming and more direct connections (family, loved ones, friends, etc.) are more important. As for conspiring with the Alliance, well, that's a bit muddled and subjective in and of itself. A case can be made, and the case can be argued against just as easy - I would not say this is an ironclad fact of objective reality.
    but you're missing the point. First of all if Saurfang had any problem with current leadership of Horde, he should have stayed with horde after battle of undercity. But instead of he decided that getting arrest by alliance was better idea. If Baine and Saurfang had any spine they could have gone against Sylvanas in front of all Horde's leader. At the end Sylvanas is not blackmailing or holding hostages. So we would not suffer by bad lore.

  8. #208
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    Orcs love war and they don't mind personal sacrifice. Sylvanas should if anything be more popular with them than with the Forsaken, especially given that she's niether Lordaeronian nor orcish. The orcs have been after Ashenvale for ten years now and their resource issues were never solved after Cataclysm. They also don't like the Alliance. Sylvanas in the span of a week basically expelled the night elves from their territories and the only land that's still being competed on is not being fought over by orcs but Forsaken. Ashenvale, who's resources they were after for their prosperity is all theirs. And given the chances of Blizzard addressing this later, Sylvanas will have solved this problem for them for all time.

    In general though, you underestimate how warlike most of the Horde races are. The Forsaken blame the Alliance who invaded their home not Sylvanas, as they should. Sylvanas blowing up their home to defeat the enemy rather than ceding it to the living that they've hated for fifteen years is not ground to hate her and for the other races, that Sylvanas has opted to sacrifice her own home for them is good PR. Likewise, it's said in BTS that Sylvanas constantly panders to the Horde traditions by allowing them to do whatever provided they assist her war effort.

    As a final note, Sylvanas is an absolute dictator and likely controls the flow of information, so most of the shit she does that they wouldn't like would be swept under the rag. It's already stated how she spun the Gathering in her favor as a foreign coup attempt.
    1. The resource issues were solved after MoP because the nelfs agreed to stop attacking the orcs harvesting in Azshara.

    Judging by Darkshore it's possible a lot of the land is poisoned too.

    2. I think even with how warlike most forces in the Horde are they'd have issues with how blatant Sylv is being.

    I know they're a God Of War Reference but the 'Traveling Orc' warrior and his kid are more what I'd expect to see.
    Twas brillig

  9. #209
    Quote Originally Posted by Ralqadar View Post
    People also like to forget that in MoP we were neck deep into 5.3 at this point and the Horde civil war was in full swing.

    Compared to 7.3 where Sylvanas has leaders working against her, but a far cry from defending Sen'jin from the Kor'kron, or assaulting Razor Hill, and disrupting military operations across the barrens.

    I feel people are getting far too lost in the intentional similarities, which are there to make you think this is Garrosh 2.0.



    Been calling it for a long time, the big reveal will be all six major cosmic forces are bad if left unchecked. So we will be getting heros who fit each sphere of power and they will bring balance to the cosmos.

    Illidan brought balance to the Fel.

    Alleria is clearly the chosen of Void and will bring stability to shadow.

    Anduin is probably the chosen of Light.

    Khadgar of arcane.

    Sylvanas of Death.

    Then probably malfurion or Tyranda with life.

    Time will tell, I could be wrong but it is seeming more and more likely.
    Not quite I think. 8.2 is more like 5.2 when we went to the thunder isles. Dissent was building but hadn't blown over yet. 5.3 was pretty much just a mini patch to lead into 5.4. 5.2 was the second full raid tier which is what 8.2 has. In terms of expansion progression we're at about the same point as 5.2 not 5.3. 8.2 with us working togeher to some degree or another against Azshara is similar to the thunder king where both sides agreed to stop fighting at the end of the faction involvement in that story. Which is what we see in 8.2 not peace but a temporary cooperation.

    Now I'm sure 8.3 isn't going to be us sieging Orgrimmar or Sylvanas as the final villain, but ending aside the similarities intentional or hot have been too much IMO. If they really wanted to do another faction war expac they should have made it different not deliberately reminiscent of MOP so closely.

  10. #210
    Quote Originally Posted by Skytotem View Post
    1. The resource issues were solved after MoP because the nelfs agreed to stop attacking the orcs harvesting in Azshara.

    Judging by Darkshore it's possible a lot of the land is poisoned too.
    The orcs had already taken Azshara uncontested early on, so I doubt that would have really been enough. Besides, the night elves have been fighting them for ages and were behind most of the skirmishes. They'er a traditional orc enemy and Sylvanas dealt them the heaviest blow possible. We know Darkshore is being used for mining and lumber-harvesting, but scorched earth is only applied once the night elves try to take it back. Ashenvale is uncontested and so open for perusal.

    2. I think even with how warlike most forces in the Horde are they'd have issues with how blatant Sylv is being.
    The thing is, while Sylvanas is being more evil, the only acts she hasn't done before were Teldrassil and very arguably the bit with Derek. And those are the only ones she's involved in. Teldrassil was done with conventional weaponry and only Sylvanas knew it was just civilians, as well as being part of a Horde victory over most of northern Kalimdor at the time. Derek was a private affair that would be heavily propagandized.

    The only part where this really should have had far more uproar is the necromancy at Lordaeron.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  11. #211
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    The only part where this really should have had far more uproar is the necromancy at Lordaeron.
    What about the massive amounts of imported murderous psychopaths/refugees? Shouldn't people be bitching about them? Seriously, people's kids have probably gone missing and stitched into abominations. Someone's probably been murdered in a back alley and eaten.

  12. #212
    Quote Originally Posted by KrakHed View Post
    What about the massive amounts of imported murderous psychopaths/refugees? Shouldn't people be bitching about them? Seriously, people's kids have probably gone missing and stitched into abominations. Someone's probably been murdered in a back alley and eaten.
    I like to think that Sylvanas had the wherewithal to stick the Apothecaries in the Underhold where they can freely stitch babies into biological weapons or whatever it is in their free time. Then again, BFA Sylvanas is legally retarded, so I can't discount the risks of some orphans going missing.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  13. #213
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    The orcs had already taken Azshara uncontested early on, so I doubt that would have really been enough. Besides, the night elves have been fighting them for ages and were behind most of the skirmishes. They'er a traditional orc enemy and Sylvanas dealt them the heaviest blow possible. We know Darkshore is being used for mining and lumber-harvesting, but scorched earth is only applied once the night elves try to take it back. Ashenvale is uncontested and so open for perusal.



    The thing is, while Sylvanas is being more evil, the only acts she hasn't done before were Teldrassil and very arguably the bit with Derek. And those are the only ones she's involved in. Teldrassil was done with conventional weaponry and only Sylvanas knew it was just civilians, as well as being part of a Horde victory over most of northern Kalimdor at the time. Derek was a private affair that would be heavily propagandized.

    The only part where this really should have had far more uproar is the necromancy at Lordaeron.
    1. It wasn't enough to sustain DURING the war because the nelfs were still attacking and sabotaging it. It was canonically enough things at the end of SoO

    2. Because she's basically not doing anything herself this expansion, another aspect of Blizz's bad writing.
    Twas brillig

  14. #214
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    19,037
    Quote Originally Posted by Onvious View Post
    but you're missing the point. First of all if Saurfang had any problem with current leadership of Horde, he should have stayed with horde after battle of undercity. But instead of he decided that getting arrest by alliance was better idea. If Baine and Saurfang had any spine they could have gone against Sylvanas in front of all Horde's leader. At the end Sylvanas is not blackmailing or holding hostages. So we would not suffer by bad lore.
    Does Sylvanas strike you as the kind of Warchief that would tolerate recalcitrant generals or racial leaders? Do you think either Saurfang or Baine could challenge Sylvanas and not be on the short list to have a Black Arrow embedded in their heart via the back shortly into their futures? Which would be worse lore - both of these leaders pursuing subversive resistance of some sort or standing up to Sylvanas and her just sort of rolling over when challenged?
    "We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see." - The Player, "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead"

  15. #215
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    Does Sylvanas strike you as the kind of Warchief that would tolerate recalcitrant generals or racial leaders? Do you think either Saurfang or Baine could challenge Sylvanas and not be on the short list to have a Black Arrow embedded in their heart via the back shortly into their futures? Which would be worse lore - both of these leaders pursuing subversive resistance of some sort or standing up to Sylvanas and her just sort of rolling over when challenged?
    For example look at when Baine arrested. All Horde leaders were there. What would Sylvanas do if all leader opposite her during the meeting? Will she try to murder everyone? I dont think so.

  16. #216
    Quote Originally Posted by Onvious View Post
    but you're missing the point. First of all if Saurfang had any problem with current leadership of Horde, he should have stayed with horde after battle of undercity. But instead of he decided that getting arrest by alliance was better idea. If Baine and Saurfang had any spine they could have gone against Sylvanas in front of all Horde's leader. At the end Sylvanas is not blackmailing or holding hostages. So we would not suffer by bad lore.
    Saurfang just gave up. He is a confused old man who has finally after all these years come to the realization that there is no honor in war, and for someone who has let war define him, that would break them. I honestly think he just wanted to be left alone and if not for Zekhan and for Sylvanas going after him, he may well have just become a hermit in the Swamp of Sorrows.

  17. #217
    Quote Originally Posted by Onvious View Post
    For example look at when Baine arrested. All Horde leaders were there. What would Sylvanas do if all leader opposite her during the meeting? Will she try to murder everyone? I dont think so.
    You said it. Will she try to murder? No. Did she try to murder Baine? No. She arrested him, if she tries to murder him she will lose that tauren and more factions.

    I think Sylvanas wanted to used Baine as bait and check the loyalties. She lied to the spies and Shaw once, however the part of the Spiritwalker, i cannot explain it.

  18. #218
    Quote Originally Posted by Onvious View Post
    For example look at when Baine arrested. All Horde leaders were there. What would Sylvanas do if all leader opposite her during the meeting? Will she try to murder everyone? I dont think so.
    And beyond the leaders, many of their troops were there. What would the Horde leaders do if they tried to move against Sylvanas and find that their troops oppose them?

  19. #219
    Quote Originally Posted by Qualia View Post
    The Nightborn were Kaldorei before WoTA, obviously Thalyssra would know about an ancient Kaldorei ritual.
    @Hellspawn, they were fully kaldorei up to several thousand years under the shield.

    I wouldnt be surprised if they consider themselves a unique caste of kaldorei. They co aiders the,selves the heirs and holders of the kaldorei legacy.

    What is disappointing is that we see no shen'dralar or Farondis highborne.

  20. #220
    this all sounds so great, i cant wait to see how it plays out

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •