Arthas has to be in the Shadowlands

[Temp1on2]

"Possession" is literally the entity entering your body, wearing your body, and controlling it as their own. Your mind is "kicked off the driver's seat", so to speak, as the entity takes full, direct control of your body.

And what does that entity do once its inside the host?

Oh that's right control the person's actions.

What you're doing is akin to blaming someone who was mind-controlled for the actions they were forced to take while under someone else's control.

In case you can't see what the key word here is:

akin to

Possession is akin to mind control. The result is the same (if anything mind control is more absolute than possession), the individual being mind controlled/possessed has no control over their actions therefore not being responsible for said actions. Which is the entire point of your post that I'm quoting - you can't talk about LK arthas' actions because he was under the control of something else - which he wasn't.

So for you to act like you:

don't know why this keeps being repeated against me despite me never making that argument.

Is either a lie, or ignorant of what you've already said. Both aren't becoming of someone saying other people are "crashing and burning".

"Mind control" is when the entity guides your thoughts and actions, telling you what to think and do. Your mind is still "in control" of your body, it still has "agency", but manipulated by an outside agent.

No. if you are mind controlled you have absolutely no agency whatsoever. Apart from the universally accepted meaning of mind control you need only look at the priest spell mind control.

The closest and simplest analogy I can think of to finally get you to understand simple concepts is this: "possession" is akin to a person wearing a costume, your body being the costume; and "mind-control" is akin to a puppeteer guiding a marionette, your body being the marionette.

Don't use analogies, you've already failed several times already.

If you can't understand simple concepts (or refuse to) and instead insist on throwing big words in an attempt to sound smart, this will be my last reply to you.

We're still waiting for you to explain:

• If Sargeras were to kill uninfected children to stop a disease - evil according to you.
• Arthas actually kills uninfected children to stop a disease - not evil according to you.

All these posts and not a single explanation. Can't be that simple otherwise you'd have done it by now.

[plz delete account]

How can you even consider that? There's got to be some other way!

Damnit WanderingWarrior! As your future admin of these forums, I order you to purge this thread!

[Dark Succ]

Damnit WanderingWarrior! As your future admin of these forums, I order you to purge this thread!

You are not my admin yet, boi. Nor would I obey that command if you were!

[plz delete account]

You are not my admin yet, boi. Nor would I obey that command if you were!

Then I must consider this to be an infraction for major trolling.

[Dark Succ]

Then I must consider this to be an infraction for major trolling.

Infraction? Have you lost your mind Lilithvia?

[Evangeliste]

Not to play Devil's advocate here.


But just because Arthas said "he wanted to save his people" doesn't mean it's the truth. He was in the presence of Muradin, someone who he still had some form of affinity with up until he held the Frostmourne. Also who, is "his people"? It's simply assumed that he's referring to all of his Kingdom but it could be a select few. And this behaviour isn't a first time, he totally murdered his own Kingdom's troops whom are still "his people". It's not just civilians who are...
I dunno about you, but that does not scream in it "for your people" when you start to be selective on who people live or die and forget that your Kingdom's people extends to everyone... Not just civilians. Which I think is the one people default to. Just the civilians. If he really was in it for "his people" that would include those soldiers that didn't belong in Northrend and would all return home. Alive...

Actions speak louder than words.



To better illustrate my point. I could say to everyone here I'm an author with a award-winning book, or I can say I have a long career in Illustration. Do you know which is true or false?
I do, you don't. My actions dictate one is my job, the other is simply words.

[plz delete account]

Infraction? Have you lost your mind Lilithvia?

Have I? By my right of OP of the WC3 megathread and future admin, I hereby relieve you from your posting privileges and suspend your ability to send private messages.

[Dark Succ]

Have I? By my right of OP of the WC3 megathread and future admin, I hereby relieve you from your posting privileges and suspend your ability to send private messages.

You just crossed a terrible threshold, Lilithvia.

[plz delete account]

We should get back onto topic here (and screenshot this convo) before we get infracted.

[Dark Succ]

Worth it though.

[Temp1on2]

Not to play Devil's advocate here.


But just because Arthas said "he wanted to save his people" doesn't mean it's the truth. He was in the presence of Muradin, someone who he still had some form of affinity with up until he held the Forstmourne. Also who, is "his people"? It's simply assumed that he's refering to all of his Kingdom but... Arthas doesn't seem very considerate of them all. Even as a Prince, it doesn't really seem in it "for his people" when he totally murdered his own Kingdom's troops.
I dunno about you, but that does not scream in it "for your people" when you start to be selective on who people live or die and forget that your Kingdom's people extends to everyone... Not just civilians. Which I think is the one people default to. Just the civilians. If he really was in it for "his people" that would include those soldiers that didn't belong in Northrend and would all return home. Alive...

Actions speak louder than words.



To better illustrate my point. I could say to everyone here I'm an author with a award-winning book, or I can say I have a long career in Illustration. Do you know which is true or false?
I do, you don't. My actions dictate one is my job, the other is simply words.

This is also a good point. But Ielenia doesn't agree with you, they already said this:

I think you would consider "evil" if your government decided to kill all babies and young toddlers in your country just so they wouldn't end up contracting measles.

Which is exactly what Arthas, as the representative of the government of stratholme (he's the Prince), did. Mysteriously Ielenia can't explain why this doesn't apply to arthas though

[Ielenia]

And what does that entity do once its inside the host?

Oh that's right control the person's actions.

They don't control the person's actions. It's the entity's own actions.

Is either a lie, or ignorant of what you've already said. Both aren't becoming of someone saying other people are "crashing and burning".

It's neither. It's the truth. I never made that claim.

Don't use analogies, you've already failed several times already.

Not my fault if you lack the brain cells or the desire to understand them.

We're still waiting for you to explain:

• If Sargeras were to kill uninfected children to stop a disease - evil according to you.
• Arthas actually kills uninfected children to stop a disease - not evil according to you.

All these posts and not a single explanation. Can't be that simple otherwise you'd have done it by now.

Perhaps if you read and used your brain a little you'd have realized the answer has been given many, many posts ago. More than once, too. I'll say this one more time, even though I know you'll ignore this and continue to claim your question that has been answered multiple times has not been answered:

Hospital A declares a spread of measles on the babies in their care.
• Arthas kills all the children in hospital A to stop the disease from spreading, sparing the children from other hospitals.
• Sargeras kills all the children in hospital A to stop the disease, as well as all children in hospital B, hospital C, hospital D... all the way to hospital ∞, even if the only hospital to ever show signs of measles was hospital A.

[Trassk]

Here's the thing. ALL dead mortal characters are in the shadowlands

However, blizzard in their forever disappointing and lackluster way will only show us a few well known characters in the shadowlands, including those in the maw.

The excuse why we don't see all dead characters, and their is a LOT of them, is because blizzard doesn't have the resources and time to show us them all, and will come out with a half arsed excuse later on saying "Yes so-and-so is in the shadowlands but they are situated in one of the infinite realms within the shadowlands you haven't been able to visit", because just like all other lore it's easier to half arse it and make excuses later.
Or better yet, have christie golden write a short story with them as cameos, oh yay

[kaelix1]

If Illidan was redeemable than I don't see any problems with Arthas, tho, I hope his story is over, I don't want him to get butcher, I fell his end was good for blizzard standards

[czarek]

Simply they now can ressurect any of old warcraft icons like Arthas or Archimonde and bring them back to world a the end of shadowlands. I bet shadowlands will be closed at the end of expansion and some good and bad souls will come back to real worlds :P

[Temp1on2]

They don't control the person's actions. It's the entity's own actions.

Here you go again with the semantics. You're literally splitting hairs in order to argue over something we both already agree on.

Clearly when I say "their actions" I meant the actions of their bodies. Bottom line they aren't responsible if they are mind controlled or possesed.

It's neither. It's the truth. I never made that claim.

Yes, you did. I've quoted it for you, but happy to do it again:

Your problem:

don't know why this keeps being repeated against me despite me never making that argument.

The reason:

What you're doing is akin to blaming someone who was mind-controlled for the actions they were forced to take while under someone else's control.

In case you can't see what the key word here is:

akin to

Possession is akin to mind control. The result is the same (if anything mind control is more absolute than possession), the individual being mind controlled/possessed has no control over their actions (of their body) therefore not being responsible for said actions. Which is the entire point of your post that I'm quoting - you can't talk about LK arthas' actions because he was under the control of something else - which he wasn't.

Not my fault if you lack the brain cells or the desire to understand them.

I wouldn't talk about someone else's brain cells when you can't even read your own words.

Hospital A declares a spread of measles on the babies in their care.
• Arthas kills all the children in hospital A to stop the disease from spreading, sparing the children from other hospitals.
• Sargeras kills all the children in hospital A to stop the disease, as well as all children in hospital B, hospital C, hospital D... all the way to hospital ∞

WOW!!! We have made some progress!

Great! So now answer what is the difference between example 1 and example 2? The answer is that only a single hospital is in example 1 and there are 4 hospitals in example 2. Therefore the difference between the two examples is the number of hospitals (3) - or to use a different term scale. Which is what I said originally was the difference between Sargeras and Arthas.

even if the only hospital to ever show signs of measles was hospital A.

That's not true though is it, the void has been found throughout the universe, not just on one planet - as far as sargeras is aware (and he's not wrong) the void has already infected the entire universe (certainly everywhere we've been).

[Ianus]

False. Mortal life isn't the 'hand'. It's the whole 'body', here.


snip--

Arthas is not bad because he was protecting mankind from being eradicated by a plague by killing a city that was wholly infected with said plague.
Sargeras is bad because he wanted to fight the void lords by eradicating all life in the cosmos.

Context matters.

he is 5 year old his brain cant understand context

[Evangeliste]

This is also a good point. But Ielenia doesn't agree with you, they already said this:



Which is exactly what Arthas, as the representative of the government of stratholme (he's the Prince), did. Mysteriously Ielenia can't explain why this doesn't apply to arthas though

All I can say is shrug. There is always this zoomed in focus of one event - the Culling of Stratholme as some person defining moment when it should be the entirety of their life. The other events are not irrelevant. A person isn't and should never be judged by one action alone, but several.

His journey was not of a hero. Or even as an anti-hero like Illidan.

He, much like Sylvanas followed the path into the deep, dark woods of villainy. With every step being with a choice to actually stop and not commit atrocity after atrocity. Illidan did similar actions and actually can be akin to individuals like Arthas and Sylvanas as he was part of the Burning Legion machine and does share his body with a Demon, at one point a Titan too but the biggest thing is he broke away.
If he was that power hungry he would have accepted Sargeras joining him in his body, it's a big upgrade from a Demon.

But the element of mind control, sharing a body are not some acceptable reasons for inexcusable actions of murdering innocents. Not within the context of the lore and franchise when you have clearly defined examples and changes to compare.
Sylvanas broke free from Arthas, Illidan shares his body with a Demon, two things that occurred and were originally beneficial things for the greater good.



What is sinister is their actual motive, both Arthas and Sylvanas share(d) the desire to eradicate all life for the sake of ending it all.
There is no grand gesture to save the world for the greater good like Illidan.

It was simply to destroy.

[Temp1on2]

he is 5 year old his brain cant understand context

What is this context you're talking about? Do explain. All the person you quoted has said is "arthas was trying to protect the rest of humanity", to which the reply is "Sargeras was trying to protect the universe"

- - - Updated - - -

All I can say is shrug. There is always this zoomed in focus of one event - the Culling of Stratholme as some person defining moment when it should be the entirety of their life. The other events are not irrelevant. A person isn't and should never be judged by one action alone, but several.

The point is:

You cannot say X action is objectively evil , but its not evil when Y person does it. That is logically inconsistent.

Furthermore, you cannot then give the example that exactly describes what Y person does, then not explain why that doesn't apply to person Y.

What is sinister is their actual motive, they both shared the desire to eradicate all life for the sake of ending it all.

But this isn't true. Sargeras didn't want to eradicate all life "for the sake of ending it all".

[Evangeliste]

What is this context you're talking about? Do explain. All the person you quoted has said is "arthas was trying to protect the rest of humanity", to which the reply is "Sargeras was trying to protect the universe"

- - - Updated - - -



The point is:

You cannot say X action is objectively evil , but its not evil when Y person does it. That is logically inconsistent.

Furthermore, you cannot then give the example that exactly describes what Y person does, then not explain why that doesn't apply to person Y.



But this isn't true. Sargeras didn't want to eradicate all life "for the sake of ending it all".

I didn't say Sargeras was part of that explanation though sweetheart - please read carefully as it says "both" not "all" which would include more individuals but I focused on Arthas, Sylvanas and Illidan and part of the sentence focused on both Arthas and Sylvanas. I also am not part of your intent on proving whose good and bad.
Sargeras is a baddie to me as much as Arthas. The intention is not honourable in the slightest just like Arthas. So don't put words into my posts.


The fact is, you have relevance in lore where things like breaking from mind control like Sylvanas from Arthas, or sharing your body like Illidan with a Demon are not reasons to excuse heinous actions because one such character didn't happen to follow suit.

All 3 individuals, Arthas, Sylvanas and Illidan are I would say on similar grounds of power and prowess not to mention overlap in features such as sharing a body, mind control, etc. Hence why I focused on them independently and not Sargeras, I identified Burning Legion as a unit, not specifics.

Besides that, Arthas killed his people as a living and supposedly sane person but that doesn't appear to be of sound mind when you are selective in who lives and dies, especially when it comes to people. He murdered his Kingdom's troops. The very people who are meant to directly serve him and died by his malice intention.
His people are not only civilians inside Stratholme, they are everyone.