Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ...
6
7
8
9
LastLast
  1. #141
    Quote Originally Posted by msmollymillions View Post
    we've been murdershitting our way through every storyline to date? you expect it to go any different? Have we ever had a quest where we could decided to take the non violent route?! "No I'm not going to kill these kobolds, but instead reason with them!"
    There's the Horde's Battle for Lordaeron stage where they can elect to fight people or save people. There are several quests (mostly world quests) where filling the % progress bar can be done by interacting with objects instead of fighting mobs. Numerous quests require no violence at all, but it's not in lieu of a non-violent route (gather these things, deliver this item, etc.). Ultimately of course the decisions don't change the outcome, because the state of the world doesn't generally differ player to player (aside from things like phasing where one person is simply behind progress compared to another).

  2. #142
    Quote Originally Posted by Wazooty View Post
    No sufficiently cool villain is ever responsible for their own actions in Blizzard lore. They were always influenced by a far more generic and final mission/raid boss friendly baddie.
    She does feel responsible for what she's done, and she decides to take up the burden of Xel'naga precisely to atone for her crimes, but at the same time it's important to remember that she wasn't really herself as the Queen of Blades. She was being influenced by her Zerg mutagen.

    The problem here is that some people think becoming Xel'naga was a reward for Kerrigan. It wasn't. It was the actual redemption arc. Kerrigan did NOT want that power, but she took it up anyway to atone for the trillions of people she murdered (even though she was being influenced).

  3. #143
    Quote Originally Posted by Mungho View Post
    But, doesn't that mean that neither Ner'zhul or Arthas were responsible for their actions? If so, then why did Arthas go to the Maw(no clue about Ner'zhul)? He shouldn't be held responsible for something someone else made him do.
    I think that's a big plot point. Uther damned Arthas to the Maw. The Arbiter never got to judge him.

  4. #144
    Immortal Soon-TM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Netherstorm
    Posts
    7,312
    Quote Originally Posted by HitRefresh View Post
    I think that's a big plot point. Uther damned Arthas to the Maw. The Arbiter never got to judge him.
    And possibly Uther and his BFF Devos (sp?) !@#$ed it up big time by doing so. But Uther has already the perfect alibi, i.e. his soul was torn in two so he wasn't really responsible for his actions
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    The Jailer's first ever appearance involved chucking him [Baine] off a cliff for being too shit to even qualify as a Maw trash mob.

  5. #145
    Given that the rules change with every new piece of SL lore, Uther won't be responsible one minute and will be the next.
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex86el View Post
    "Orc want, orc take." and "Orc dissagrees, orc kill you to win argument."
    Why no, people don't just like Sylvie for T&A: https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...ery-Cinematic/

  6. #146
    Quote Originally Posted by Mungho View Post
    But, doesn't that mean that neither Ner'zhul or Arthas were responsible for their actions? If so, then why did Arthas go to the Maw(no clue about Ner'zhul)? He shouldn't be held responsible for something someone else made him do.
    Because Arthas was always an asshole even before he was corrupted

  7. #147
    Legendary! The One Percent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    ( ° ͜ʖ͡°)╭∩╮
    Posts
    6,370
    Quote Originally Posted by Broken Fox View Post
    Because Arthas was always an asshole even before he was corrupted
    Revendreth is where you go for being an asshole. The Maw is for the irredeemable.
    You're getting exactly what you deserve.

  8. #148
    Quote Originally Posted by The One Percent View Post
    Revendreth is where you go for being an asshole. The Maw is for the irredeemable.
    Like those that destroy entire worlds for their own selfish reasons. Oh wait, its Revendreth for those too.

    Experimenting on humans though, thats a one way ticket to hell for attempting to mess with Golden perfection.

  9. #149
    Quote Originally Posted by Broken Fox View Post
    Because Arthas was always an asshole even before he was corrupted
    Arthas would probably fit into Revendreth. Garrosh, who was pretty much the same kind of prideful moron, filled with self-doubt landed there...
    the main difference is probably that Arthas might have pissed off the Arbitter by using maw-magic... which would have landed him in the maw, making no difference in the end.

    It was actually Uther and Devos who played judge, jury and executioner and threw him into the maw. (as seen in the video)

  10. #150
    Quote Originally Posted by Verdugo View Post
    Experimenting on humans though, thats a one way ticket to hell for attempting to mess with Golden perfection.
    Nah, if you go full ham and dismember thousands of people for science, you get to go to Revendreth too. Here's some testimony from a patient of his, really gets those redemptive juices flowing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eva Sarkhoff
    "The undead surrounded us, constantly tormenting us with horrifying acts of depravity. Finally, he came. He introduced himself as Doctor Theolen Krastinov. We came to know him as the butcher...We finally understood what the screams were from. The Butcher exposed us to pain that we did not know existed. He used us in countless experiments to devise a plague. The days turned to weeks. We would have died on that first day had it not been for that cruel bastard keeping us alive through magical means....We feel nothing. Our souls remain here, in limbo. We are unable to leave until our remains are found and spirits laid to rest."
    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. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    Nah, if you go full ham and dismember thousands of people for science, you get to go to Revendreth too. Here's some testimony from a patient of his, really gets those redemptive juices flowing.
    Really? I can understand someone like Sharth Voldoun ending up in Revendreth, but this guy is literally a monster.

  12. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by BaumanKing View Post
    Really? I can understand someone like Sharth Voldoun ending up in Revendreth, but this guy is literally a monster.
    Honestly, I wouldn't mind this kind of thing at all if it were clear that the Venthyr and the Arbiter were fallible and the moral discrepancy intentional. It's also why I really liked Sharth's original description emphasizing that he got a ticket out of the Maw because he manipulated the naaru, as while this isn't really a virtue, it makes sense that it's something the Light-fearing Venthyr would value. Ditto, a torturer not being much of a big deal for a society solely based around torture also works out. Under that view, them taking more issue with his motive than the act fits the Venthyr where it's reprehensible to us as the audience.

    Where it falls apart is that we're meant to view the Shadowlands uncritically. The Sharth change away from his manipulation of the naaru and towards his patriotism pushed that, as they removed that weirder, but more interesting motive for him to have a shot at Revendreth for something more conventionally heroic, but also less alien.
    Last edited by Super Dickmann; 2020-11-20 at 12:57 PM.
    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. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    Nah, if you go full ham and dismember thousands of people for science, you get to go to Revendreth too. Here's some testimony from a patient of his, really gets those redemptive juices flowing.
    ...I give up. This is just sewage. Raw, toxic, sewage.

    I am sure Aucald has an excuse for it, though.

  14. #154
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    33,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Verdugo View Post
    ...I give up. This is just sewage. Raw, toxic, sewage.

    I am sure Aucald has an excuse for it, though.
    If I recall correctly, you didn't want me to respond to you going forward - if that's still the case then I'd request you not do any indirect call-outs either.
    "HUMAN BEINGS MAKE LIFE SO INTERESTING. DO YOU KNOW, THAT IN A UNIVERSE SO FULL OF WONDERS, THEY HAVE MANAGED TO INVENT BOREDOM." - Death, Hogfather

  15. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by Zmagoslav View Post
    Arthas would probably fit into Revendreth. Garrosh, who was pretty much the same kind of prideful moron, filled with self-doubt landed there...
    the main difference is probably that Arthas might have pissed off the Arbitter by using maw-magic... which would have landed him in the maw, making no difference in the end.

    It was actually Uther and Devos who played judge, jury and executioner and threw him into the maw. (as seen in the video)
    Arthas is basically Anakin/Vader. Even if he was "corrupted" he still chose to go down that path so I guess that's taken into consideration. It's not like he was possessed by a demon or something Exorcist style.

  16. #156
    This whole thing is fixable if literally everyone can go to Revendreth, which is implied in the actual zone story. People unwilling for redemption or people who are unwilling to let go of their sins being put in the Maw. Otherwise it raises so very many questions.

  17. #157
    Quote Originally Posted by rowaasr13 View Post
    So deep. Guess we need to murdershit the hell out of all those progress impeding Draenei, Night Elves, remaining dragons and other ancient beings. For good and progress of Azeroth!
    I'm glad to see that you're fastidious in your incredible ignorance of the issue. The members of those societies live for a long time and for that reason their birth rate is low, so doing that would do more harm than good as it would actively remove ideas from it without replacing it with anything as there are too few young people to organically reshape it.

    That said, those societies are incredibly Conservative and have only really changed due to outside influences.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    You're making no argument here. You're commenting on the inevitability of change while I'm commenting that change can be negative, so wanting it for the sake of it is a waste of time. I'm not engaging in some pseudointellectual argument on the meaning of the word, but that change can easily be towards something worse that came before. And that your own stupid position requires you to support Sylvanas as she represents change over the extant status quo.
    Change is just change, it has no value and it's inevitable unless you use violence to keep it from happening. It's humans that assign a value to change, and you then attach a value to change and make a strawman of me in the same breath, that makes it change for the sake of change and that's bad. You then make another strawman where you state that the logic of the argument means we must assist Sylvanas because she wants change.

    Are you incapable of debating honestly and without making strawmen of your opponent's arguments? I've argued with you before and this is the first time you've gone mask off and veered full-throated into Conservatism as the "change for the sake of change and that's bad change" is a Conservative argument.

  18. #158
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaade View Post
    Change is just change, it has no value and it's inevitable unless you use violence to keep it from happening. It's humans that assign a value to change, and you then attach a value to change and make a strawman of me in the same breath, that makes it change for the sake of change and that's bad. You then make another strawman where you state that the logic of the argument means we must assist Sylvanas because she wants change.

    Are you incapable of debating honestly and without making strawmen of your opponent's arguments? I've argued with you before and this is the first time you've gone mask off and veered full-throated into Conservatism as the "change for the sake of change and that's bad change" is a Conservative argument.
    The former paragraph is meaningless sophistry, which to be fair is par for the course. Change does take place, but that change can be positive or negative. If your position is that change is inevitable and should not be opposed or as you say elsewhere, that it is good for things to die so that new things, which are inherently better, can take their place, then you should logically support Sylvanas because she is both younger and different from what came before while her opponents are ancient. You however oppose her, because you realize that while what she is doing is a stark break from the Arbiter and the extant afterlives, it's also worse and you are capable of making a value judgment on top of simply observing whether something is the same or not. Ergo, not even you genuinely have this position and neither does anyone else who wouldn't be better off in a mental institution.

    Capitalizing Conservative like you're casting a curse is funny, but anyone who's not fallen on their head as a child is aware that wanting to alter a status quo simply because it'll inevitably be altered anyway is a barking position, regardless of political alignment. To give just one example, the deindustrialization and neoliberalism that Thatcher heralded in the UK was a massive change from the post-war consensus, but it was vigorously opposed by the left. Any political movement will obviously oppose changes that they don't agree with, even if social currents are pushing in that direction, because they're stakeholders in an extant situation and would like to maintain it and not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
    Last edited by Super Dickmann; 2020-11-29 at 12:50 PM.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  19. #159
    Quote Originally Posted by Verdugo View Post
    ...I give up. This is just sewage. Raw, toxic, sewage.

    I am sure Aucald has an excuse for it, though.
    You are only supposed to go to the maw for fucking with the Shadowlands itself


    Why not just learn the lore instead of being facetious for no reason?

  20. #160
    Quote Originally Posted by Ersula View Post
    Which is I'm sure is how they are going to treat Sylvanas. Legion's story definitely portrays him as a Christ-figure, who did terrible things to achieve a auspicious goal. In other words, the people who hate sylvanas will be able to continue to hate her & the people who like her will feel vindicated.
    Well, if they redeem Sylvanas somehow, it's sort of liking Stalin because he helped kill Hitler. He's still Stalin and killed many on his own, despite that good thing he did.

Posting Permissions

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