Why was Arthas wrong?

[Florena]

You basically have two outcomes.

Stratholme is purged and you kill the people inside. The corpses can all later be raised into undeath. Violent and ugly and not a 'good' solution. But IMO preferable to the other option.

You let the undead take Stratholme. You now have an entire city full of undead who are an active threat to other people and cities RIGHT NOW, not theoretically in the future, and the people you refused to kill are now suffering in undeath so....that didn't really do them any favors.

And they did not have the time to go for a third option. The fact that Mal'ganis was playing Arthas doesn't really change the reality of the situation, nor could Arthas have known in the moment that the Lich King and Mal'ganis had special plans for corrupting him. Arthas had to make the call with what little information he had, not with our years of hindsight.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Yeah if a book written about 5 years after the game wants to flesh out his psyche by adding a layer of PTSD, that’s fine but it still doesn’t make his actions excusable. “I was really tired and at the end of my rope so I just went with the easy and efficient murder strategy” is still the wrong course of action. It also doesn’t change the core of the character. He’s still the guy that thought he was doing the right thing but made all the wrong moves and fell to corruption.

Either way, that still doesn’t change the fact that he was set up to fail. If Mal’Ganis wasn’t orchestrating the plot and Stratholme was just a plagued city, then any attempt to quarantine and help people (no matter how futile in the grand scheme) was still preferable. With Mal’Ganis as the architect of a larger plot targeting Arthas, the right move was NOT to purge, but to recall his forces, actually explain the situation to people like Uther and Jaina, and actually formulate a strategy. Yes, even if that leaves the city to the undead. Purging the city is still losing the city, and what he didn’t realize was that he was still leaving an army of dormant undead.

Uther and Jaina should have done more to stop Arthas, that’s for sure. He had neither the right, nor the maturity, nor the state of mind to make the decision he made.

I don't feel like explaining PTSD at the moment So I'm just gonna say "I was really tired and at the end of my rope" isn't how PTSD works, like at all, like not even in the same ball park, like not even on the same planet, like not even in the same solar system.

and ya he was set up to fail but Mal'ganis or no Mal'ganis purging the city is still a better option (if still not a good one) then letting it die any way and then spread further.

[Adamas102]

I don't feel like explaining PTSD at the moment So I'm just gonna say "I was really tired and at the end of my rope" isn't how PTSD works, like at all, like not even in the same ball park, like not even on the same planet, like not even in the same solar system.

and ya he was set up to fail but Mal'ganis or no Mal'ganis purging the city is still a better option (if still not a good one) then letting it die any way and then spread further.

Yeah, actual PTSD is more complicated and serious, but it still 100% is NO excuse for committing war crimes.

The purge is the wrong option in either circumstance, especially given that he had no idea whether it would work. It was the selfish choice, taking the easy route of killing civilians rather than undead. Viewing the people as little more than a resource to deny the Dreadlord. And of course the fallacy that he had the right to choose how someone else should die.

Arthas succumbed to the trap, played directly into Mal’Ganis’ hands, and his kingdom suffered, nullifying any good intentions he might have had.

If he had let the city fall and instead had taken the time to explain the things he had witnessed, sure the plague likely would have spread but it could have been met by a unified and informed resistance. Then maybe the kingdom of Lordaeron would still exist.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

The purge is the wrong option in either circumstance, especially given that he had no idea whether it would work. It was the selfish choice, taking the easy route of killing civilians rather than undead. Viewing the people as little more than a resource to deny the Dreadlord. And of course the fallacy that he had the right to choose how someone else should die.

ya you should really go read the book as that's not at all how he viewed the civilians and he didn't do the purge for any selfish reasons but instead to stop them from doing further harm to the people they put at risk when they were doomed either way.

[Adamas102]

ya you should really go read the book as that's not at all how he viewed the civilians and he didn't do the purge for any selfish reasons.

Those are the exact reasons he gives in game (as well as resources like wowpedia that draw from multiple lore sources), and the excuses that have been thrown around by people in this thread. If you want to make another argument that hasn’t been brought up yet then go for it.

Oh, and I'd forgotten he was literally told straight up by Medivh that his campaign against Mal'Ganis was having the opposite effect. Sure, some random mage on the road isn't the best of sources, but for someone who wasn't as impulsive, stubborn, and dismissive as Arthas it might have led to some much needed self reflection, especially when faced with the situation at Stratholme.

[Askyl]

Play Wc3 and you'll see why Arthas was wrong. Not that hard to understand.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Those are the exact reasons he gives in game, and the excuses that have been thrown around by people in this thread. If you want to make another argument that hasn’t been brought up yet then go for it.

He kills them to stop them form hurting other as undead, to try and save there souls as they think being undead damns them, and a few other reasons he lays out to Jiana before the purge and she even agrees with him that she'd rather have the clean death instead of being foruclly raised in undeath but she says she's still not strong enough to go through with it.

The whole of the purge was also at his own determent he start's it on the verge of weeping and as it goes on its implied that he does start to cry and if he didn't have his helm on it would break his men's spirit. He does become vindictive near the end when Mal'ganis shows up as he has some one to target all his hurt towards but it wasn't some prideful showing or vengeful march before that point.

[huth]

Killing off X number of peasants before they turn into Y number of undead would require far less man power then trying to stop X number of undead from leaving the city.

The peasants are weaker then the undead, will break in fear, will get tired, will try and hide, will in general be disorganized. None of this applies to the undead. Even with some of the peasants turning it would be far easier to deal with the ones that turned once the number was cut down then dealing with all of them as a unified undead front.

If each soldier can kill X amount of undead they can kill even more peasents then that as well as setting places to the torch.

It still takes time that Ielenia keeps insisting Arthas didn't have, unless he brought an army of thousands. But if he did that, Quarantine would have been feasible, at least based on what they knew at the time.

[Adamas102]

He kills them to stop them form hurting other as undead, to try and save there souls as they think being undead damns them, and a few other reasons he lays out to Jiana before the purge and she even agrees with him that she'd rather have the clean death instead of being foruclly raised in undeath but she says she's still not strong enough to go through with it.

A similar excuse that has been used in the real world to commit atrocities. Inquisitions and witch trials tried that, and no one is arguing that they were onto something. Even if the plague was a horrible death, it's still not his right to make that decision for other people. It doesn't matter than Jaina agrees because she doesn't have that right either.

What about all the people who would have rather stood their ground and fought? Or those who would have rather had a few more moments with their families rather than being hunted down and slaughtered by men they thought they could trust? All those people who would have preferred to go out on their own terms were denied that by a selfish man who robbed them of what agency they had left. I'm sure plenty might have welcomed his warhammer, but he made the decision unilaterally for everyone in the city. That's not the action of a good person.

The whole of the purge was also at his own determent he start's it on the verge of weeping and as it goes on its implied that he does start to cry and if he didn't have his helm on it would break his men's spirit. He does become vindictive near the end when Mal'ganis shows up as he has some one to target all his hurt towards but it wasn't some prideful showing or vengeful march before that point.

Yeah, that still doesn't not make him an anti-villain. A character like that can believe so strongly that what they're doing is right, but that doesn't change the fact that they're committing evil deeds. So the book fleshes out his mental state, but it still doesn't change the fact that he committed an evil and unforgivable deed. I think literary characters like that, who are written well, can be fascinating. Good anti-heroes and anti-villains can be so much more interesting than their more typical counterparts. But still, the anti-villain is still the villain.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

It still takes time that Ielenia keeps insisting Arthas didn't have, unless he brought an army of thousands. But if he did that, Quarantine would have been feasible, at least based on what they knew at the time.

It does still take time but instead of the number of enemy's growing in that time it decreases and the time needed to set up the quarantine could very well be the difference between being over whelmed by undead or being able to get them to manageable numbers.

[Ielenia]

It still takes time that Ielenia keeps insisting Arthas didn't have, unless he brought an army of thousands. But if he did that, Quarantine would have been feasible, at least based on what they knew at the time.

False. You're lying. I did not say he didn't have time to do anything. I said he didn't have time to do everything that would be required for the quarantine, and I've said that to you before:

Nope. That is demonstrably wrong. I'll repost what I wrote before:

• Time used analyzing the situation.
• Time used coming up with logistics and devising a strategy.
• Time used up to gather the manpower and resources.
• Time used up to prepare a location to house an ENTIRE CITY's worth of people.
• Time used up to escort small parts of the city at a time.

versus:

• Time used up to head in and mercifully kill everyone.

So if you're ignoring that, you're being openly dishonest.

- - - Updated - - -

A similar excuse that has been used in the real world to commit atrocities. Inquisitions and witch trials tried that, and no one is arguing that they were onto something.

Invalid comparison. Inquisition and witch trials were bollocks because they were done precisely to cause harm to others, with the idea of "hunting witches" and whatever other reasonings were just excuses for those to happen. Witches do not, and never existed.

But in Warcraft, zombies, ghouls and other undead are an actual thing.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

A similar excuse that has been used in the real world to commit atrocities. Inquisitions and witch trials tried that, and no one is arguing that they were onto something. Even if the plague was a horrible death, it's still not his right to make that decision for other people. It doesn't matter than Jaina agrees because she doesn't have that right either.

the real world doesn't have a tangible soul touching light or zombies, no comparison will ever work between the real world and wow's.

What about all the people who would have rather stood their ground and fought? Or those who would have rather had a few more moments with their families rather than being hunted down and slaughtered by men they thought they could trust? All those people who would have preferred to go out on their own terms were denied that by a selfish man who robbed them of what agency they had left. I'm sure plenty might have welcomed his warhammer, but he made the decision unilaterally for everyone in the city. That's not the action of a good person.

Ya it sucks for them but what they want to do doesn't only effect them self's it also effects those around them.

Arthas made a selfless choice not for his own pride vanity or power but to keep as many people safe as he could He gained nothing from his choice it didn't benefit him at all instead it actively cost him.

Yeah, that still doesn't not make him an anti-villain. A character like that can believe so strongly that what they're doing is right, but that doesn't change the fact that they're committing evil deeds. So the book fleshes out his mental state, but it still doesn't change the fact that he committed an evil and unforgivable deed. I think literary characters like that, who are written well, can be fascinating. Good anti-heroes and anti-villains can be so much more interesting than their more typical counterparts. But still, the anti-villain is still the villain.

trying to label him an anti-villain or anti-hero is pretty pointless. there is no lack of anti-hero's who do the same kill already doomed innocents to save more in media.

[Weeps]

Historically speaking, cities would quarantine lepers and outcasts. During plague fall, they’d sometimes burn the quarantined.

[Adamas102]

Invalid comparison. Inquisition and witch trials were bollocks because they were done precisely to cause harm to others, with the idea of "hunting witches" and whatever other reasonings were just excuses for those to happen. Witches do not, and never existed.

But in Warcraft, zombies, ghouls and other undead are an actual thing.

I was referencing the "saving their souls" angle that Daemos mentioned. Either way, it's still the same intent. The people who committed those real world atrocities also truly believed they were doing the right thing. Sure, we know now that they were wrong, just as we know now that Arthas was wrong as well. That doesn't excuse their actions at the time, though.

- - - Updated - - -

the real world doesn't have a tangible soul touching light or zombies, no comparison will ever work between the real world and wow's.

Ya it sucks for them but what they want to do doesn't only effect them self's it also effects those around them.

Arthas made a selfless choice not for his own pride vanity or power but to keep as many people safe as he could He gained nothing from his choice it didn't benefit him at all instead it actively cost him.

trying to label him an anti-villain or anti-hero is pretty pointless. there is no lack of anti-hero's who do the same kill already doomed innocents to save more in media.

It is truly scary that people could see mass, indiscriminate slaughter of civilians as "a selfless choice". Like, seriously messed up.

As for the real world comparison, it's irrelevant that we don't believe in souls the same way as Arthas does, or that they're actually real in that fantasy world. The question is on intent. Those people in our real world also truly and deeply believed they were doing the right thing. They truly believed that the soul existed and they could save it by purging evil through torture. We know it's wrong now, but that doesn't change what they believed at the time.

It's a recognition of the character he was written to be. And no, any literary character who massacres civilians for "the greater good" is not an anti-hero.

[Ielenia]

I was referencing the "saving their souls" angle that Daemos mentioned. Either way, it's still the same intent. The people who committed those real world atrocities also truly believed they were doing the right thing. Sure, we know now that they were wrong, just as we know now that Arthas was wrong as well. That doesn't excuse their actions at the time, though.

No. No, it's nowhere near the same intent. Again: witches and 'enemies of god' were things that never existed in the first place, and the crusades, especially were done with the actual intent of expanding the faith and enriching the church with the spoils of war.

Whereas in Warcraft, I'll repeat this again: zombies and other types of undead are an actual thing that exists.

[Adamas102]

No. No, it's nowhere near the same intent. Again: witches and 'enemies of god' were things that never existed in the first place, and the crusades, especially were done with the actual intent of expanding the faith and enriching the church with the spoils of war.

Whereas in Warcraft, I'll repeat this again: zombies and other types of undead are an actual thing that exists.

No. It doesn't matter because the morality for massacring civilians doesn't change. Warcraft isn't some in depth exploration of morality in a world where right and wrong don't resemble our own. The stakes might be exaggerated for a fantasy setting, but it's a story for an audience of gamers with modern day sensibilities. Massacring civilians is an evil act in ALL situations that only a villain would commit.

I mean, this is also a world where people can literally see the future, and Arthas was warned by such a person. His character as written, a stubborn, hothead, dismissed the warning entirely. Arthas was on his way to becoming the villain of the story before he even reached Strat. The purge was simply the pivotal character moment that solidified his place as the villain.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

It is truly scary that people could see mass, indiscriminate slaughter of civilians as "a selfless choice". Like, seriously messed up.

I mean that's what it is he scarifies his friend's and his own mental well being and even his own health to keep the people of his people safe with no gain to his self. it's not a good choice but its but definition selfless.

As for the real world comparison, it's irrelevant that we don't believe in souls the same way as Arthas does, or that they're actually real in that fantasy world. The question is on intent. Those people in our real world also truly and deeply believed they were doing the right thing. They truly believed that the soul existed and they could save it by purging evil through torture. We know it's wrong now, but that doesn't change what they believed at the time.

Intent changes a hell of alot when you have tangible magic, soul's, and soul touching magic , the two aren't comparable.

It's a recognition of the character he was written to be. And no, any literary character who massacres civilians for "the greater good" is not an anti-hero.

So you wouldn't say some one like wolverine was an Anti-hero? to go with one big name character.

[Ielenia]

No. It doesn't matter because the morality for massacring civilians doesn't change.

It does change. There is a Grand Canyon-wide difference between killing people for profit (the crusades) or because of lies used to protect your own power over the masses (witch hunts), to actually stopping the spread of actual zombies.

Warcraft isn't some in depth exploration of morality in a world where right and wrong don't resemble our own.

I never said Warcraft is anything close to a masterpiece of writing. But the Warcraft world does have big differences to our world like magic and actual zombie plagues.

[Adamas102]

I mean that's what it is he scarifies his friend's and his own mental well being and even his own health to keep the people of his people safe with no gain to his self. it's not a good choice but its but definition selfless.

Classic anti-villain. Still not excusable.

Intent changes a hell of alot when you have tangible magic, soul's, and soul touching magic , the two aren't comparable.

It doesn't when the people who commit the acts truly believe these things to be true. To an inquisitor, the divine soul was absolutely a reality. The intent is the same because both subjects are acting under the same beliefs.

So you wouldn't say some one like wolverine was an Anti-hero? to go with one big name character.

I don't know enough about all of Wolverine's actions throughout the decades of comics. I know all those characters have been written in various, very different iterations. While Wolverine is typically portrayed as an anti-hero, if there's a version of him written where he knowingly and purposefully massacres innocent men, women, and children, then I'd definitely argue that he's a villain in that story.

- - - Updated - - -

It does change. There is a Grand Canyon-wide difference between killing people for profit (the crusades) or because of lies used to protect your own power over the masses (witch hunts), to actually stopping the spread of actual zombies.

I never said Warcraft is anything close to a masterpiece of writing. But the Warcraft world does have big differences to our world like magic and actual zombie plagues.

If you can't understand how literary themes work then I don't know how any of this is going to sink in. It's doesn't matter that zombies don't exist in our world. They're simply a trope used to provide conflict. The characters in all of these zombie stories, from Warcraft to TWD, are still written to adhere to our system of morality. Most of these stories are about dealing with desperate circumstances, but right and wrong doesn't change. If a character knowingly and indiscriminately massacres civilians, it doesn't matter if the threat is zombies, aliens, disease, or any other real or fictional threat. That character is a villain.

Warcraft isn't even written to truly depict a real scenario. Was it you who shot down the idea of equating Arthas' purge with what an actual real life purge looks like? He SAID to make it quick and painless so that's how every civilian died when they were cut down with swords, axes, and warhammers? If you want to sterilize a chaotic slaughter of thousands of civilians, that's fair because the story isn't about the civilians, it's only about Arthas. We're not REALLY supposed to care for their individual suffering because they're just the vehicle for Arthas' character shift.

[huth]

It does still take time but instead of the number of enemy's growing in that time it decreases and the time needed to set up the quarantine could very well be the difference between being over whelmed by undead or being able to get them to manageable numbers.

Not at a rate that would actually matter. That's part of the problem. If he has enough forces to actually pull the purge off before getting overrun, he has enough forces for a quarantine.

False. You're lying. I did not say he didn't have time to do anything. I said he didn't have time to do everything that would be required for the quarantine, and I've said that to you before:

And i already pointed out that your list is vastly understating the time required for the purge and most of the steps would apply either way. Stop reposting it, it just shows your unwillingness to actually consider the situation. You're being excessively dishonest and falling to the exact same failures Arthas exhibited.

It also does not demonstrate that he didn't have enough time. It only demonstrates that you don't believe he had but aren't considering the time requirement for combing through the whole city.