Do you prefer Sylvanas or Garrosh? Who is more popular, and can they be redeemed?

[OwenBurton]

Sylvanas and Garrosh are two of the most controversial characters in the World of Warcraft -- both have certain parallels in their stories and character developments. Both were once extremely popular heroes and proud warriors who fought against the Scourge to defend their factions, and later to protect their respective peoples, the Forsaken and the orcs, from the Alliance. Both eventually fell prey to the weaker parts of their nature -- apparently becoming corrupted or otherwise turned against their former loyalties, although some kind of redemption seems possible for them, at least in the realms of death if not in those of life.

Which is generally more popular among the player base, and why? Which was better developed, and which had greater potential? If Sylvanas is more popular -- why is she better received than Garrosh, given his compelling backstory and his similar initial sense of honor? Can they be redeemed at this point? Or are they truly beyond any kind of redemption whatsoever?

[MikeBogina]

I think I prefer Garrosh to Sylvanas and yes they can be redeemed. It's been stated in Canon that Garrosh can be redeemed by the August Celestials and the Arbiter sending him to Revendreth. It's also kinda easy to debate that Garrosh was on the path to being a great leader, but other's bias towards him and their entitlement ruined his character.

Sylvanas can have similar arguments made in her favor, but the biggest is that she was tricked and manipulated by the Jailer into thinking she was destined to the Maw and that it's possible that those turned into undead against their will, with the corrupting powers of the maw will only be judged by their time being alive.

I think Sylvanas is more well received by Horde players and hated more by Alliance players than Garrosh was. It could be faction bias, it could be that people are being more vocal now than ever before. It could the passion that people have in real life with real life issues is seeping into the wow community. But I honestly think it comes down to Horde are tired of being the baddies and if we're going to be the baddies, then stop forcing rebellion plotlines on us. Not that people actually like Sylvanas more.

[Feanoro]

I prefer good writing.

Failing that, I prefer entertaining characters, particularly if I'm supposed to view them as enemies or villains.

Garrosh was a trainwreck, lurching from idea to idea as different writers fought over him. Sylvie wore out her welcome in early Cata, where she shifted from "Slaves to this torment" to Lich Queen of the NuScourge.

[Dead Moose Fandango]

Garrosh was a warrior. So he was superior. Also, an awsome axe.

[Itisamuh]

I liked both, and neither needed redeemed in my eyes. I want the Horde to be a darker faction, otherwise there is no reason to even have two.

[Shedaar]

Garrosh - he embodied the primal traits of the savage and brutal Horde.
I liked the "War-orientedness" that guided his decision-making.
Creating fortifications, gaining new land and resources, figuring out new technology to defeat your enemies...

Now we are killing ghosts in afterlife...
Now that I think about it... I liked the Azeroth-WoW more :P

[Varodoc]

Garrosh: The fool who thought he could control the powers of the enigmatic Old Gods.

Sylvanas: The fool who thinks she can control the powers of Death.

They are both pathetic idiots who toyed with powers beyond their comprehension. Like spoiled brats, they thought they were in control. But they did not defy anything.

[Lastgope]

I prefer Sylvanas as a character but for the role of "Warchief that went bad", Garrosh filled that role so much better.

[Soon-TM]

Garrosh all the way. Daddy issues aside, Garry's dilemma was quite clear, i.e. the remarkable differences between his highly idealised Old Horde, composed almost exclusively by Orcs and two or three token Ogres; and the New Horde he took command of, where Orcs weren't but a minority, influential as it may have been.

As it often happens to these "make America the Horde great again" types, he found that reality wasn't going to change just because he wanted to, and soon he found himself being everyone's antagonist - at least among non-Orcs. His lack of internal discipline or political sense did the rest, and thus he ended up in chains.

Compared to Garry, Suevanas is like a poor copy made by a 9 years old, and not a particularly talented one.

[VladlTutushkin]

Easily Garrosh. And its not about “preference”. Garrosh was a warmongering fool and got almost “owned” by an Old God sludge in the end but his motives were clear-cut. Some Blietzkrieg, some Final Solution, some Libensraum. Usual stuff every orc or Austrian Painter gets to when they think how to improve their country and expand its influence and power. Very *vomits a bit* grounded goals.

Sylvanas though? Wants to destroy afterlife because she thinks its unfair. Sends souls to the Maw.

Its entirely another level, Garrosh indeed an amateur in comparison.

- - - Updated - - -

I liked both, and neither needed redeemed in my eyes. I want the Horde to be a darker faction, otherwise there is no reason to even have two.

Horde cant be a darker faction. NOW it cant. Or rather... If they really committed during Garrosh’s time then maybe. Probably yes. But now that plot point is dead and beaten to a pulp and pretty much impossible because of how they wrote both factions.

- - - Updated - - -

No, you are not “bad”. Horde’s “common folk” are not “bad”. They are just ridiculously stupid thats it. So stupid that it makes them worse then just “bad”. Weird contradiction but thats how it goes.

[RasAlhage]

Sylvanas is much more charismatic and interesting as a character, but both are victims of bad writing and both deserve redemption in that sense.

[Danuel]

I prefer Thrall - decent guy with honour.

[loras]

Sylvanas and Garrosh are two of the most controversial characters in the World of Warcraft -- both have certain parallels in their stories and character developments. Both were once extremely popular heroes and proud warriors who fought against the Scourge to defend their factions, and later to protect their respective peoples, the Forsaken and the orcs, from the Alliance. Both eventually fell prey to the weaker parts of their nature -- apparently becoming corrupted or otherwise turned against their former loyalties, although some kind of redemption seems possible for them, at least in the realms of death if not in those of life.

Which is generally more popular among the player base, and why? Which was better developed, and which had greater potential? If Sylvanas is more popular -- why is she better received than Garrosh, given his compelling backstory and his similar initial sense of honor? Can they be redeemed at this point? Or are they truly beyond any kind of redemption whatsoever?

I like Garrosh, in the afterlife redemption might be possible but his death was necessary.

Sylvanas i find a lot less excusable, but perhaps it's just that she seems so poorly done next to Garrosh's story of corruption.
Garrosh was believable and flawed throughout, Sylvanas was a very different character and though her corruption did not come out of the left field it was handled poorly imo.

[OwenBurton]

I like Garrosh, in the afterlife redemption might be possible but his death was necessary.

Sylvanas i find a lot less excusable, but perhaps it's just that she seems so poorly done next to Garrosh's story of corruption.
Garrosh was believable and flawed throughout, Sylvanas was a very different character and though her corruption did not come out of the left field it was handled poorly imo.

I think Garrosh was at least more honest -- he never tried to really deceive his Horde or his followers the way Sylvanas did. He was extremely brutal and anti-Alliance, perhaps -- but he was at least forthright.

[Syegfryed]

Even as forced villain and butchered character Garrosh was better.

Still best warchief from cata to middle MOP

[loras]

I think Garrosh was at least more honest -- he never tried to really deceive his Horde or his followers the way Sylvanas did. He was extremely brutal and anti-Alliance, perhaps -- but he was at least forthright.

Very true as well, though admittedly underdogs like Sylvanas tend not to survive long on honesty.

[VladlTutushkin]

Very true as well, though admittedly underdogs like Sylvanas tend not to survive long on honesty.

“Underdogs”? She and her forsaken were downright world-beaters since Cata. Unstoppable, plot armored and invincible.

[Arewn]

Garrosh: The fool who thought he could control the powers of the enigmatic Old Gods.

Sylvanas: The fool who thinks she can control the powers of Death.

They are both pathetic idiots who toyed with powers beyond their comprehension. Like spoiled brats, they thought they were in control. But they did not defy anything.

Next on the docket;
Alleria: The fool who thinks she can control the powers of Void.

Another pathetic idiot who toys with powers beyond her comprehension. Like a spoiled brat, she thinks she is in control. But she is not defying anything.

[VladlTutushkin]

Next on the docket;
Alleria: The fool who thinks she can control the powers of Void.

Another pathetic idiot who toys with powers beyond her comprehension. Like a spoiled brat, she thinks she is in control. But she is not defying anything.

Call me when Alleria does the half of what Garrosh and Sylvanas did. And yes, that includes blowing up a whole city AND committing a genocide or just warmongering all over Azeroth.

[Soon-TM]

Next on the docket;
Alleria: The fool who thinks she can control the powers of Void.

Another pathetic idiot who toys with powers beyond her comprehension. Like a spoiled brat, she thinks she is in control. But she is not defying anything.

Ouch man, that was stingy. Wish I could upvote this post, but something tells me that Blizz will never allow Alleria gurl to go off the deep end, Kael or Garrosh style. She's Alliance after all, and we all know that Alliance can do no wrong (and even if they do, it doesn’t matter because the narrative simply shrugs it off).