So... the Alliance of Lordaeron = Grand Alliance ?

[Ardenaso]

A never ending question that came from another thread and I decided to just put a separate thread to avoid derailing it further. I still have some more confusions to the topic.

Here's some arguments regarding them:

(+) The Alliance of Lordaeron was centralized on Lordaeron, and the Grand Alliance is centralized on Stormwind; approximately 20-40% are Horde now (Lordaeronians and Blood Elves) and another 5-10% are neutral now (Argent Dawn/Crusade, Brotherhood of the Light, and Kirin Tor [and even Ravenholdt if we consider them Alteraci])
(-)With Garithos being a defacto leader of the New Alliance Remnants/Alliance of Lordaeron, but with little notoriety of him in WoW, I think it's safe to say that Daelin, Rhonin/Ansirem, Varian don't recognize him as a leader.

(+) The Alliance splintered and most members abandoned it after its failure during and shortly after the third war, only very few nations stuck out with it. Over time some gradually rejoined. Prime example would be Gilneas with Genn petitioning to rejoin during Wolfheart and Varian initially vetoing it.

(+) As said by Metzen, it's the same Alliance
(+) Anduin himself recognizes Daelin and Arthas (but not Garithos nor Blackmoore)

(-) "Meanwhile, dwarves, gnomes and the ancient night elves pledged their loyalties to a reinvigorated Alliance, guided by the human kingdom of Stormwind."
(-) The Wildhammer Dwarves took until Catalcysm to formally and officially pledge themselves to the Grand Alliance
(-) That means it was formed after the Third War and why would anyone pledge again to a union
(-) That means the Grand Alliance should have no legible claim whatsoever in the northern Eastern Kingdoms like Lordaeron - Stratholme, Caer Darrow, Eastweald, Tyr's Hand and Hearthglen will either be Horde or Argent Dawn and should stay at is
(+) But then again reinvigorating also means to further repeat the pledge to it, like the Sacrament of Confirmation and the Renewing of Vows; you can't pledge "again" to something new.
(+) That means the Grand Alliance is a continuation of the Alliance of Lordaeron

Metzen and the WoW website seem contradictory to me; but whatever the actual canon decision - I think it can be a verdict towards the fact that if the Grand Alliance should be guilty of Garithos and Daelin's actions. (Now if only we see some opinions of the Silver Covenant and the Kirin Tor NPCs about Garithos, especially Vereesa herself)

[Florena]

It's the same organization, but the leadership transferred to Stormwind after WC 3.

Member nations join and leave etc, so you could make a ship of Theseus argument if you want that its makeup has changed a lot since the RTS games. But it's the same organization, it was never disbanded or destroyed outright, just lost its old leadership.

[Aucald]

The modern Alliance and the Alliance of Lordaeron are the same organization with essentially the same member-states as before, albeit with a few exceptions and new members. Following the Third War and a brief interregnum (in which the organization had no High King or leader figure due to Terenas Menethil's death) the Alliance was restored and its member-states pledged to a new charter based in the capitol of Stormwind. Garithos was never specifically a leader of the Alliance of Lordaeron, he was essentially a warlord operating in the ravaged territory of Lordaeron. Given that the chain of command had completely broken down by that point, and Lordaeron had no recognized military or government left, Othmar couldn't really be recognized nor was subject to any kind of oversight. Given his actions and personality, it's small wonder that the modern Alliance doesn't want to claim him - though an argument could be made he is indeed in the chain of leaders, albeit unofficially.

Ultimately I think it comes down to a political standpoint: if you want to smear the modern Alliance then you claim him as an inheritor of the Alliance of Lordaeron, if you want to disavow him then you call him an illegitimate warlord.

[Varodoc]

There is no way you can justify Arthas and Daelin being Alliance-affiliated. Anduin is stupid and should read some history books.

Also Calia Menethil is Alliance-affiliated, so they have a big claim on Lordaeron, especially now that the crazy ghost is gone.

[Malikath]

No, the grand alliance is far older, it was the alliance of the 7 human kingdoms and quel'thalas under Arathor against the declining zandalari empire.
Then you have the alliance of azeroth(which was the original name of the kingdom that stormwind is capital of) which was largely just the 7 human kingdoms and the dwarves it fell apart with the death of king Llane.
Then the alliance of lordaeron formed with the 5 remaining human kingdoms with the high elves, and the dwarves, it fell to the scourge after the death of king terenas.

[Aucald]

There is no way you can justify Arthas and Daelin being Alliance-affiliated. Anduin is stupid and should read some history books.

Also Calia Menethil is Alliance-affiliated, so they have a big claim on Lordaeron, especially now that the crazy ghost is gone.

Arthas was the crown-prince of Lordaeron and direct successor to King Terenas Menethil II, and Daelin Proudmoore was the Grand Admiral of the Alliance forces in both the Second and Third Wars. Both figures loom pretty large in Alliance history despite their ultimate failings.

[Varodoc]

Arthas was the crown-prince of Lordaeron and direct successor to King Terenas Menethil II, and Daelin Proudmoore was the Grand Admiral of the Alliance forces in both the Second and Third Wars. Both figures loom pretty large in Alliance history despite their ultimate failings.

I mean when they committed their crimes. The Alliance abandoned Arthas the moment he decided to purge Stratholme and the Alliance also refused to come to Daelin's aid. That's why Kul Tiras was neutral until BfA.

[Malikath]

Arthas was the crown-prince of Lordaeron and direct successor to King Terenas Menethil II, and Daelin Proudmoore was the Grand Admiral of the Alliance forces in both the Second and Third Wars. Both figures loom pretty large in Alliance history despite their ultimate failings.

That's tantamount to calling Gul'dan and Ner'zhul horde-affiliated.
Trite and asinine.

[Aucald]

I mean when they committed their crimes. The Alliance abandoned Arthas the moment he decided to purge Stratholme and the Alliance also refused to come to Daelin's aid. That's why Kul Tiras was neutral until BfA.

Not really as Terenas sent emissaries to bring Arthas back to Lordaeron - who followed him all the way to Northrend to do so, which forced Arthas to burn his own ships in response. As for Daelin he maintained his rank and charge well into the Third War, and it was only when his actions in Kalimdor came to light that the Alliance officially disavowed him (as they were in no position to support him post-Third War even if they were inclined to). That disavowal and the accepted of his death (or murder as they would see it) led to the Kul Tiran suspending their Alliance membership.

- - - Updated - - -

That's tantamount to calling Gul'dan and Ner'zhul horde-affiliated.
Trite and asinine.

Gul'dan and Ner'zhul were pretty involved in the day-to-day running of the Horde in their turns - they go well beyond "Horde-affiliated."

[Razion]

Some of the error may come from humans considering the Alliances the same, even if they're not, and that any and all land that has ever been owned by humans would still be considered human land. If the humans not having any claim to lands like Lordaeron actually mattered much in the setting, the Horde wouldn't have felt any pressure in trying to settle there after the Horde adopted the Forsaken into their ranks. As it stands, the humans - more specifically even, the Scarlet Crusade, still view these as their ancestral homes and will fight to break the Horde out of these lands if anything out of spite and hatred. What's worth noting is that there are still living humans who still hail from Lordaeron who are still alive, and to them, they would probably feel like they have a very real claim to the land even if it hasn't been theirs for a very long time. And as these citizens are under the protection of Stormwind now, people like Anduin as king probably views it as his duty to retake their homes for them. Case in point, I think some Forsaken would view Calia Menethil as leader, even though she has technically died and by normal standards this would mean any right she would have to the throne should be null and void in death. The human element of emotions plays a large part in why these lands are still considered human lands. The humans believe they own them, so they will fight for them and will appoint whoever they believe is worthy of rule, and will even illegitimate people like Garithos who - let's say, if he were raised into undeath, would probably have some claim to something significant, but would be run into the ground by many almost immediately due to his history.

[Varodoc]

Not really as Terenas sent emissaries to bring Arthas back to Lordaeron - who followed him all the way to Northrend to do so, which forced Arthas to burn his own ships in response. As for Daelin he maintained his rank and charge well into the Third War, and it was only when his actions in Kalimdor came to light that the Alliance officially disavowed him (as they were in no position to support him post-Third War even if they were inclined to). That disavowal and the accepted of his death (or murder as they would see it) led to the Kul Tiran suspending their Alliance membership.

- - - Updated - - -



Gul'dan and Ner'zhul were pretty involved in the day-to-day running of the Horde in their turns - they go well beyond "Horde-affiliated."

Yes, and why did he send that emissary to Arthas? Because he wanted the army to come back to Lordaeron because he wasn't having any of Arthas' BS, so again the Alliance was never on board with Arthas' plan and actually tried to stop him.

The Alliance did not support Daelin's war, thus you can't blame them for Daelin's actions. Simple. I don't think there's anything particularly nuanced here.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Even if you want to say they are the same organization it’s a meaningless point as no one in the current alliance Supported Or took part in any of the bad things the old alliance did.

- - - Updated - - -

Also Calia Menethil is Alliance-affiliated, so they have a big claim on Lordaeron, especially now that the crazy ghost is gone.

Calia isn’t alliance Anduin sylvanas and calia her self all say so. As far as the lorderon goes the alliance has no claim other then a few civilians.

[Aucald]

Yes, and why did he send that emissary to Arthas? Because he wanted the army to come back to Lordaeron because he wasn't having any of Arthas' BS, so again the Alliance was never on board with Arthas' plan and actually tried to stop him.

The Alliance did not support Daelin's war, thus you can't blame them for Daelin's actions. Simple. I don't think there's anything particularly nuanced here.

And because Terenas was worried about the mental health of his son, and wanted him to return home - which is why when he did so there was a pretty warm greeting all around (as depicted in the cinematic where Arthas murders him). Not sure there's really a question of them being "on board" with any plan, Arthas as regent-prince had a fair deal of authority to move unilaterally, which he did i.e. Stratholme and the journey to Northrend. Terenas recalled him, sure; but he also never rebuffed him - right up until the moment that Arthas killed him in his own throne room.

As an empowered Grand Admiral of the Alliance fleet Daelin's actions bear their own essence of responsibility - the same as any leader before or after him. If the Alliance truly wanted to show a firm denial of support they could've recalled him, or even stripped him of rank, but those actions were never taken. In that context it's not easy to disavow Daelin.

[Varodoc]

And because Terenas was worried about the mental health of his son, and wanted him to return home - which is why when he did so there was a pretty warm greeting all around (as depicted in the cinematic where Arthas murders him). Not sure there's really a question of them being "on board" with any plan, Arthas as regent-prince had a fair deal of authority to move unilaterally, which he did i.e. Stratholme and the journey to Northrend. Terenas recalled him, sure; but he also never rebuffed him - right up until the moment that Arthas killed him in his own throne room.

As an empowered Grand Admiral of the Alliance fleet Daelin's actions bear their own essence of responsibility - the same as any leader before or after him. If the Alliance truly wanted to show a firm denial of support they could've recalled him, or even stripped him of rank, but those actions were never taken. In that context it's not easy to disavow Daelin.

Arthas was Uther's subordinate, he did not have the authority to go against his orders. The moment he purged Stratholme, he stopped being affiliated with the Alliance and went rogue. The fact he returned home a hero doesn't change that, if anything it adds tragedy to the story because it shows just how oblivious his people were. You're making this more complex than it needs to be.

The Alliance couldnt' do that. Allied leaders can't be ordered around. Blizzard even said that High King, i.e. the highest authority in the Alliance, cannot control allied armies. The best Varian and co. could've done was trying to dissuade Daelin, but they did not have the authority to recall him from Kalimdor.

[Aucald]

Arthas was Uther's subordinate, he did not have the authority to go against his orders. The moment he purged Stratholme, he stopped being affiliated with the Alliance and went rogue. The fact he returned home a hero doesn't change that, if anything it adds tragedy to the story because it shows just how oblivious his people were. You're making this more complex than it needs to be.

Arthas was Uther's subordinate as a Paladin, but not in terms of his place in the governmental or military hierarchy of Lordaeron (or the greater Alliance). Which is why Arthas could disband the Silver Hand and send Uther packing, an order to which Uther acceded as he returned to Lordaeron to dispute the matter with Arthas' superior (King Terenas). Neither Terenas nor anyone else in the Alliance leadership ever stripped Arthas of his position, upbraided him for his actions, or otherwise barred him from pursuing further means; at least up until the point that the emissary caught up to and ordered Arthas home from Northrend. That happened well after the purging of Stratholme, as well. You're inferring an event that didn't actually happen - Arthas was a legitimate leader right up until he disobeyed orders at Northrend, and even then he wasn't held to account in any way for disobeying his father's commands (although it was much too late to matter at that point). That's not a matter of complexity, it's the arc of events as they occurred.

The Alliance couldnt' do that. Allied leaders can't be ordered around. Blizzard even said that High King, i.e. the highest authority in the Alliance, cannot control allied armies. The best Varian and co. could've done was trying to dissuade Daelin, but they did not have the authority to recall him from Kalimdor.

Alliance command couldn't force Daelin not to act, sure; but they could strip him of his title of Grand Admiral of the Alliance and disavow him publicly and completely. They however did neither of those things until well after the fact, and after Daelin's death.

[Varodoc]

Arthas was Uther's subordinate as a Paladin, but not in terms of his place in the governmental or military hierarchy of Lordaeron (or the greater Alliance). Which is why Arthas could disband the Silver Hand and send Uther packing, an order to which Uther acceded as he returned to Lordaeron to dispute the matter with Arthas' superior (King Terenas). Neither Terenas nor anyone else in the Alliance leadership ever stripped Arthas of his position, upbraided him for his actions, or otherwise barred him from pursuing further means; at least up until the point that the emissary caught up to and ordered Arthas home from Northrend. That happened well after the purging of Stratholme, as well. You're inferring an event that didn't actually happen - Arthas was a legitimate leader right up until he disobeyed orders at Northrend, and even then he wasn't held to account in any way for disobeying his father's commands (although it was much too late to matter at that point). That's not a matter of complexity, it's the arc of events as they occurred.



Alliance command couldn't force Daelin not to act, sure; but they could strip him of his title of Grand Admiral of the Alliance and disavow him publicly and completely. They however did neither of those things until well after the fact, and after Daelin's death.

Okay then, so you would blame the Alliance for Arthas' actions when the Alliance literally tried to stop Arthas at every turn after he went crazy and actually got slaughtered by Arthas after he turned evil.

Does anyone actually care that he retained the title of Grand Admiral of the Alliance? Seems like nitpicking at its finest and absolutely nothing would've changed. The Alliance's reputation wasn't even hurt when they decided not to do that, so it wasn't a big deal.

[Aucald]

Okay then, so you would blame the Alliance for Arthas' actions when the Alliance literally tried to stop Arthas at every turn after he went crazy and actually got slaughtered by Arthas after he turned evil.

Does anyone actually care that he retained the title of Grand Admiral of the Alliance? Seems like nitpicking at its finest and absolutely nothing would've changed. The Alliance's reputation wasn't even hurt when they decided not to do that, so it wasn't a big deal.

I would blame them for not acting sooner to stop his pre-Death Knight excesses, yes; I would say the Alliance is partially culpable for Stratholme, but not entirely. After Arthas was corrupted, killed his own father, and ground Lordaeron down into dust I would say that responsibility pretty clearly ended. It's not an all or nothing thing - blame can be apportioned, after all.

Anduin seems to care, as he mentions Daelin when discussing the Alliance's own failings as an entity. I don't find it nitpicking in the slightest to hold a government accountable for its failings or misdeeds, nor do I think the Alliance is perfect or otherwise entirely free from wrongdoing.

[Varodoc]

I would blame them for not acting sooner to stop his pre-Death Knight excesses, yes; I would say the Alliance is partially culpable for Stratholme, but not entirely. After Arthas was corrupted, killed his own father, and ground Lordaeron down into dust I would say that responsibility pretty clearly ended. It's not an all or nothing thing - blame can be apportioned, after all.

Anduin seems to care, as he mentions Daelin when discussing the Alliance's own failings as an entity. I don't find it nitpicking in the slightest to hold a government accountable for its failings or misdeeds, nor do I think the Alliance is perfect or otherwise entirely free from wrongdoing.

But again they clearly tried to do something, they ordered all troops to return home and they actually persuaded Arthas' troops from abandoning their posts. No one could've foreseen that Arthas would hire mercenaries to burn the ships. To say that the Alliance did not do enough to stop Arthas is disingenuous.

Also I don't see what they could've done to stop the Culling, since it all happened very fast and geographically Stratholme is far from the Alliance's seat of power in Lordaeron.

Daelin would've waged war on the orcs regardless of his title as Grand Admiral. Stripping him of his rank wouldn't have changed anything, that's why it doesn't matter.

[Aucald]

But again they clearly tried to do something, they ordered all troops to return home and they actually persuaded Arthas' troops from abandoning their posts. No one could've foreseen that Arthas would hire mercenaries to burn the ships. To say that the Alliance did not do enough to stop Arthas is disingenuous.

Also I don't see what they could've done to stop the Culling, since it all happened very fast and geographically Stratholme is far from the Alliance's seat of power in Lordaeron.

Daelin would've waged war on the orcs regardless of his title as Grand Admiral. Stripping him of his rank wouldn't have changed anything, that's why it doesn't matter.

Like I said previously, they acted once he reached Northrend, yes. But Arthas couldn't have reached Northrend without support, the time to stop him was before he left Lordaeron. He also shouldn't have been invested with the authority he had, as he was clearly unready for it (as shown by his actions) - I hold Terenas accountable for that, and thus I consider it a failing of the Alliance. Just like I hold Ner'zhul accountable for his role in the creation of the Old Horde and Gul'dan's ascendancy to power. Does the Alliance bear *all* the blame for that? No, but they do bear some in my view.

As for Daelin, you're right that he would've gone ahead regardless. But in one scenario he did so as Grand Admiral of the Alliance in good standing, and in the other he would do so as an errant warlord acting on his own. That's a significant difference in terms of history even if the outcome of his actions wouldn't have changed.

[Varodoc]

Like I said previously, they acted once he reached Northrend, yes. But Arthas couldn't have reached Northrend without support, the time to stop him was before he left Lordaeron. He also shouldn't have been invested with the authority he had, as he was clearly unready for it (as shown by his actions) - I hold Terenas accountable for that, and thus I consider it a failing of the Alliance. Just like I hold Ner'zhul accountable for his role in the creation of the Old Horde and Gul'dan's ascendancy to power. Does the Alliance bear *all* the blame for that? No, but they do bear some in my view.

As for Daelin, you're right that he would've gone ahead regardless. But in one scenario he did so as Grand Admiral of the Alliance in good standing, and in the other he would do so as an errant warlord acting on his own. That's a significant difference in terms of history even if the outcome of his actions wouldn't have changed.

Arthas took the fleet to Northrend as soon as he was done with the Culling, and he did so quickly because Stratholme had an harbor with ships. Realistically there was no way for word of the Culling to reach Lordaeron, for the High Command to decide how to deal with Arthas, and to carry out said action before Arthas took the ships to Northrend. I also disagree that Terenas made a bad call by putting Arthas in power. First of all he did not know things would get so bad, initially he sent Arthas to deal with a band of orcs that got defeated in two quests, no one knew the Scourge existed at that point (they knew there was a plague but not that there was an undead army). Also he was aware that Arthas had flaws, that's why he wanted Uther to teach him some lessons and make him wiser for the day he'd become king.

Many races on Azeroth have their own versions of history anyway. Stripping Daelin of his ranks would have hardly safeguarded the Alliance's reputation. The Horde would still hate them, the night elves, dwarves, and gnomes wouldn't give a shit, and Kul Tiras would still refuse to remain in the Alliance.