[SPOILERS] Anduin's....

[Nerovar]

They can always redeem him and retcon the shit out of him, but the current characterization is kinda clear on Arthas. He was already evil before he grabbed Frostmourne, even Blizzard confirmed it. The Novel establishes that he always had remnants of his humanity with him and that he did everything he did with a free will. From a broader narrative standpoint, basically the entire world around Arthas tried to safe him. Everyone tried to lead him away from his descend into evil, he never listened. With Sylvanas on the other hand, her narrative is exactly the opposite of Arthas. The world seemed to have been hellbend to push her into that direction. She was already in the Jailers hands since her first death.

While I would never say Arthas didn't commit evil acts prior to becoming part of the Scourge, I don't think the narratives in the games but especially Rise of the Lich King support your exaggerated claims about him. Sure, Arthas was compelled by everyone around him to change his mind and abandon his quest but they were also displayed as incompetent and/or unwilling to take action so it's understandable that he pays little attention to their warnings.

I get that defending Arthas might seem like playing devil's advocate just for the sake of being edgy but if you actually look at the state of Lordaeron during the events of WC3, his actions become much more understandable. You have to consider a few factors here:

1. Arthas relatively young age paired with his responsibility that comes with him being the crown prince of Lordaeron
2. The incompetence of King Terenas (one Necromancer in Stratholme even describes him as senile) who didn't even want to order a quarantine when he was warned about the initial outbreaks of the plague
3. The fact that Kel'Thuzad deliberately told him to seek out Mal'Ganis in Straholme who then lured him to Northrend as part of a greater plan to fulfill Arthas' destiny as a vessel for the Lich King's will
4. The fact that he was abandoned by his lover and his teacher when he was at his lowest

Back in WC3 the culling of Stratholme was framed as a necessary evil. The people in that town were dead either way and had Arthas not purged the city, all of its citizens would have risen as Scourge which would have placed the entirety of Lordaeron in jeopardy. While I don't think that this makes his actions any less immoral, the game still tells you that it's a better outcome than letting Mal'Ganis slaughter everyone and raise them as undead. Hell, WoW even tells us that many people opted to kill themselves by jumping into fire rather than be raised as Scourge [1]. Medivh outright tells us that Arthas' culling of the city was pretty much successful when it comes to stopping the spread of the plague ("The dead in this land lie still for the time being"). Furthermore Medivh even describes Arthas' motivations as 'commendable' while at the same time prophesizing that they will ultimately be his undoing.

Arthas starts out doing what he thinks he has to do out of a sense of responsibility for the kingdom he will inherit. Did he fail in that regard? Yes. Was he motivated by a petty personal thirst for revenge? Sure. Does this make him a sociopath? Absolutely not. The entire character wouldn't work or be compelling if he was what you described him as. He's a flawed character who had to make tough decisions and ended up on the path to damnation. But Arthas was absolutely redeemable up until the point he took up Frostmourne (this is symbolized by the Light reaching out to him for one last time even after he apparently 'killed' his friend by shattering the block of ice containing Frostmourne).

In regards to him feeling "no remorse" this is explained early on during the Undead campaign. Arthas expresses his bewilderment about feeling nothing about his actions to Tichondrius who then tells him that it's due to Frostmourne claiming his soul when the took up the blade. So it's not some essential character trait but rather a side effect of him being cursed.

[Soon-TM]

So yeah, Arthas is plainly in his entire personhood more of a clear cut pure villain than Sylvanas, who shows shades of grey to her personality Arthas lacked ever since taking up Frostmourne.

According to several Alliance leaning posters, Arthas isn't as bad as Sylv (or even #ArthasDidNothingWrong ftw) simply because he didn't wipe an entire town or city belonging to playable Alliance. But with Arthas, everything's a-ok, even if he commited literal genocide against high/blood elves, not to mention laying waste to the very kingdom he was Crown Prince of.

[Diaphin]

While I would never say Arthas didn't commit evil acts prior to becoming part of the Scourge, I don't think the narratives in the games but especially Rise of the Lich King support your exaggerated claims about him. Sure, Arthas was compelled by everyone around him to change his mind and abandon his quest but they were also displayed as incompetent and/or unwilling to take action so it's understandable that he pays little attention to their warnings.

This doesn't changes the fact that Arthas was faced by plenty of well-meaning opposition to the way he does things and his actions. He never even considers being wrong and turning around. And I think viewing it as the narrative wanting for Arthas to change but him rejecting is kind of an appropriate way to look at it. He was on the cover of the game and the game certainly lead you into believing that Arthas will be the hero of Warcraft 3. And it is clear, everyone around him wanted him to have this role, but he rejected. Hell, Jaina is effectively just a replacement of Medivh for Arthas, she wasn't his first choice to be the hero to lead the rests of humanity to Kalimdor and face the burning Legion.

I get that defending Arthas might seem like playing devil's advocate just for the sake of being edgy but if you actually look at the state of Lordaeron during the events of WC3, his actions become much more understandable. You have to consider a few factors here:

1. Arthas relatively young age paired with his responsibility that comes with him being the crown prince of Lordaeron
2. The incompetence of King Terenas (one Necromancer in Stratholme even describes him as senile) who didn't even want to order a quarantine when he was warned about the initial outbreaks of the plague
3. The fact that Kel'Thuzad deliberately told him to seek out Mal'Ganis in Straholme who then lured him to Northrend as part of a greater plan to fulfill Arthas' destiny as a vessel for the Lich King's will
4. The fact that he was abandoned by his lover and his teacher when he was at his lowest

Back in WC3 the culling of Stratholme was framed as a necessary evil. The people in that town were dead either way and had Arthas not purged the city, all of its citizens would have risen as Scourge which would have placed the entirety of Lordaeron in jeopardy. While I don't think that this makes his actions any less immoral, the game still tells you that it's a better outcome than letting Mal'Ganis slaughter everyone and raise them as undead. Hell, WoW even tells us that many people opted to kill themselves by jumping into fire rather than be raised as Scourge [1]. Medivh outright tells us that Arthas' culling of the city was pretty much successful when it comes to stopping the spread of the plague ("The dead in this land lie still for the time being"). Furthermore Medivh even describes Arthas' motivations as 'commendable' while at the same time prophesizing that they will ultimately be his undoing.

It was not though? The culling of Stratholme is never described as a necessary evil or even a legitimate choice. Everything in the entire setting framed it as evil. His closest friends abandon him over the decission to slaughter countless innocents. That wasn't like a mild disagreement. He wanted to slaughter an entire urban center of his entire kingdom because he believed what a Demon told him, the game is absolutely clear on the matter that this is a moral no-go, that this is one of the worst things you could possible do in the context of this fantasy worlds sense of morality. In the Interlude we even see that there were survivors of the town and the framing in this scene as well as later on in World of Warcraft is, that most of the death in Stratholme was caused by Arthas himself. Play the friggin game, it is even the scene from where you have the Medivh references. Here I am unsure if you are deliberately trying to lie to me and if you are acting in bad faith or if you actually can't understand context. The dead in this land lie still for the time being means that it is only a momentary peace, not that Arthas had any success. And after Jaina says that Arthas is just doing what he believes is right, Medivh answers that this may commendable, his passions will be his undoing. He already fully sees how his Bloodthirst and desire for vengeance will turn him.

Arthas starts out doing what he thinks he has to do out of a sense of responsibility for the kingdom he will inherit. Did he fail in that regard? Yes. Was he motivated by a petty personal thirst for revenge? Sure. Does this make him a sociopath? Absolutely not. The entire character wouldn't work or be compelling if he was what you described him as. He's a flawed character who had to make tough decisions and ended up on the path to damnation. But Arthas was absolutely redeemable up until the point he took up Frostmourne (this is symbolized by the Light reaching out to him for one last time even after he apparently 'killed' his friend by shattering the block of ice containing Frostmourne).

In regards to him feeling "no remorse" this is explained early on during the Undead campaign. Arthas expresses his bewilderment about feeling nothing about his actions to Tichondrius who then tells him that it's due to Frostmourne claiming his soul when the took up the blade. So it's not some essential character trait but rather a side effect of him being cursed.

Arthas does tell himself that what he is doing for the greater good, but the narrative and how it is framed tells a different story. And I can't really believe I have to explain it to you, as I was able to perfectly tell what the narrative is trying to tell me back at age 13, when I played the game for the first time. The story is not about well intentioned being able to be exploited, it is explicitely about Arthas ill passions getting the better of him. You can't miss it, it is the first warning Uther issues out to him, directly at the beginning of the game. His story is about a young prince who is pushed into a situation where every pretense of him being the heroic noble princely archetype is stripped away and we see him being a cruel, violent and vengeful person underneath, somebody who will always take the most evil path which sates his bloodthirst. Warcraft 3 was basically all about Blizzard saying "Look, the Orcs can be heroes who redeem themselves while the pretty boy Paladin Prince can easily turn into true evil". And yeah, you get it. He was able to redeem himself at any point, up to Wrath of the Lichking himself, because so many actors in this narrative wanted to safe him despite everything he did. Medivh wanted to safe him from what awaits him. Uther tried to safe him from his path by having Terenas order him back. The Guardian of Frostmourne wanted to protect him from the blade. Muradin tried to warn him from what Frostmourne is and even the Light reached out to him at the final point of turning back to safe his friend, but Arthas rejected it all. Hell, even his humanity reached out to him when he put on the helm of domination to make him repent, and he stabbed the representation of everything still good inside of him. Tirion wanted to safe him in the Quest for Arthas heart, but in the end he had to admit that there was nothing but evil in Arthas and that he couldn't be saved. Hell, even Jaina tried again in the Hall of Relections and the end result was, that there is no redeeming him because what we learn at the final fight against him, that he held the Scourge back because he wanted to make us his champions first, before he fully unleashes it. Something most people plain didn't understand.

Even if you don't understand dialogues, you are capable of understanding that rejecting ever single opportunity for redemption, especially if given so many as Arthas had, is the definition of being irredeemable? That redeemable is that a person is willing to accept a chance at redemption, which Arthas was never interested in?

- - - Updated - - -

According to several Alliance leaning posters, Arthas isn't as bad as Sylv (or even #ArthasDidNothingWrong ftw) simply because he didn't wipe an entire town or city belonging to playable Alliance. But with Arthas, everything's a-ok, even if he commited literal genocide against high/blood elves, not to mention laying waste to the very kingdom he was Crown Prince of.

I mean, we can count Lordaeron as a genocide commited by him too I guess as well as what he did to the Drakkari and he continued the genocide against the nerubians. I think its also basically people unable to understand narratives or read characters. It seems to be a hugh intellectual failure of parts of the community, as very few people seem to even understand the Arthas Human Campaign and make it up to be something in their head which it is not.

[baskev]

Because lets be real here, people find every way to condemn Sylvanas here when they are hellbend to find any redeeming quality in Arthas Menethil.



They can always redeem him and retcon the shit out of him, but the current characterization is kinda clear on Arthas. He was already evil before he grabbed Frostmourne, even Blizzard confirmed it. The Novel establishes that he always had remnants of his humanity with him and that he did everything he did with a free will. From a broader narrative standpoint, basically the entire world around Arthas tried to safe him. Everyone tried to lead him away from his descend into evil, he never listened. With Sylvanas on the other hand, her narrative is exactly the opposite of Arthas. The world seemed to have been hellbend to push her into that direction. She was already in the Jailers hands since her first death.



There was no manipulation. He was provoked. Thats like saying somebody who stabs someone else in an argument is manipulated, because he was argitated. He went through all the steps into becoming corrupted himself. And even afterwards, he didn't lost his humanity, he rejected it. Actually, he stabbed his own humanity in the form of a helpless little boy with his sword. Then there is his actions and the actions he commanded which were on a by far greater scale than Sylvanas actions. Then there is the characterizations, while we see glimpses of humanity and struggle with her actions while the Jailer is depicted clearly as a manipulative abuser. With Arthas, we saw never any hints of remorse. Hell, he kept Sylvanas blood as well as Mograines soul together with his most intimate treasures. For this guy the memory of taking Sylvanas blood and ripping apart a mans soul in front of his son is the same as the memories of his beloved ones. He backstabbed Ner'zhul at the first opportunity and we know that Arthas didn't do whatever the Jailer wanted him to do, as the veil was intact at the moment of his death and the Jailer had to go through recruiting Sylvanas so that she can just rip apart the veil.



Shadowlands is pretty clear that she is fighting against the machine of death as it works now and that the Jailer promised her to be the one to fix it. Not to forget that we know that he holds part of her soul now. Not saying she is not evil, her role was always to occupy this thin line between villain and anti-hero. But she is nowhere near Arthas or even Garrosh, who is so full of himself that he serves as an unlimited battery for the Maw.

And dude, how could I come to the conclusion that people who hype Arthas and want his redemption while hating on Sylvanas are bigots, its not like the gaming community is so bigoted and misogynist that there was an outrage over a woman wearing a sports bra last year.



And thats why the narrative was pretty clear on Arthas being evil even when he was a Paladin?

- - - Updated - - -



Because I have the ability to read subtext, themes and analyze characters on a very basic level while being aware of what kinds of men are common in the gaming community? Like, come on. If Arthas was a chick, much fewer people would want to see his redemption.

I am not redeeming Arthas. I am just saying with all the new info he might not be as bad as she was/is. And with all the new info she might be worse then we thought before. Nothing to do with her being a women. And i am not people. i am a person.

Current situation with arthas: he was manipulated by dreadlords and liches. Mad bad choices on his own and he took up a curse blade and armor that we know now are made by primus for the jailor to control people like anduin.
Not saying he did not make bad choices or he is a good guy. And there was manipulation. Its even said ingame :S:S.
And again on the arthas stuff. He is still bad, but all the stuff around anduin and his new blade/armor makes a very good point that arthas might have been under the influence by the jailor for some of it.

He said he fix it. by using souls and killing them taking away any chance of a afterlive?
And she is less evil? she mass murder like the other 2. But she knew the souls would not go to the afterlive. Arthas was using a curse blade/armor. She was not. She was in control the whole time.

And again, i am not a bigot. You are putting your own frustrations on other subjects into this conversation. And i feel sorry for you.
But again i am not redeeming Arthas or Garrosh. Or hating extra on sylvanas. They are all evil. But with the current story info she looks to be more evil. And with the weapon/armor anduin has one. Sure looks a lot like a new LK.

And the only reason people give for him being evil as paladin was 2 situations: stratholm and the boats. And the boats was evil. i agree. Stratholm was a right call. So yes he is evil. But not AS evil as her.

[Nerovar]

It was not though? The culling of Stratholme is never described as a necessary evil or even a legitimate choice. Everything in the entire setting framed it as evil. His closest friends abandon him over the decission to slaughter countless innocents. That wasn't like a mild disagreement. He wanted to slaughter an entire urban center of his entire kingdom because he believed what a Demon told him, the game is absolutely clear on the matter that this is a moral no-go, that this is one of the worst things you could possible do in the context of this fantasy worlds sense of morality. In the Interlude we even see that there were survivors of the town and the framing in this scene as well as later on in World of Warcraft is, that most of the death in Stratholme was caused by Arthas himself. Play the friggin game, it is even the scene from where you have the Medivh references. Here I am unsure if you are deliberately trying to lie to me and if you are acting in bad faith or if you actually can't understand context. The dead in this land lie still for the time being means that it is only a momentary peace, not that Arthas had any success. And after Jaina says that Arthas is just doing what he believes is right, Medivh answers that this may commendable, his passions will be his undoing. He already fully sees how his Bloodthirst and desire for vengeance will turn him.

I'm really curious. What do you think would have been the outcome if Arthas had listened to Jaina and Uther and had stepped aside to watch the people of Stratholme turn into Scourge, a fate which many of the inhabitants of that city clearly viewed as worse than even an excruciatingly painful death?

The momentary peace created by the culling of Stratholme is a success.

Arthas does tell himself that what he is doing for the greater good, but the narrative and how it is framed tells a different story. And I can't really believe I have to explain it to you, as I was able to perfectly tell what the narrative is trying to tell me back at age 13, when I played the game for the first time. The story is not about well intentioned being able to be exploited, it is explicitely about Arthas ill passions getting the better of him. You can't miss it, it is the first warning Uther issues out to him, directly at the beginning of the game. His story is about a young prince who is pushed into a situation where every pretense of him being the heroic noble princely archetype is stripped away and we see him being a cruel, violent and vengeful person underneath, somebody who will always take the most evil path which sates his bloodthirst. Warcraft 3 was basically all about Blizzard saying "Look, the Orcs can be heroes who redeem themselves while the pretty boy Paladin Prince can easily turn into true evil". And yeah, you get it. He was able to redeem himself at any point, up to Wrath of the Lichking himself, because so many actors in this narrative wanted to safe him despite everything he did. Medivh wanted to safe him from what awaits him. Uther tried to safe him from his path by having Terenas order him back. The Guardian of Frostmourne wanted to protect him from the blade. Muradin tried to warn him from what Frostmourne is and even the Light reached out to him at the final point of turning back to safe his friend, but Arthas rejected it all. Hell, even his humanity reached out to him when he put on the helm of domination to make him repent, and he stabbed the representation of everything still good inside of him. Tirion wanted to safe him in the Quest for Arthas heart, but in the end he had to admit that there was nothing but evil in Arthas and that he couldn't be saved. Hell, even Jaina tried again in the Hall of Relections and the end result was, that there is no redeeming him because what we learn at the final fight against him, that he held the Scourge back because he wanted to make us his champions first, before he fully unleashes it. Something most people plain didn't understand.

I don't know what the point of this paragraph is. Him being well-intentioned and being exploited while also being led astray by his own passions aren't mutually exclusive things. You can't deny that there was a degree of manipulation. From the moment he meets Kel'Thuzad he is lead to believe that Mal'Ganis is the head of the snake and that he must kill him in order to stop the Scourge while also receiving literal visions from Ner'zhul later on that would heavily influence his decisions. All I'm saying is that (from his view) the character had very good reasons to reject the counsel of people who at that point where pretty much doing nothing except stand in his way while he was trying to save his Kingdom. Obviously that doesn't really negate his personal responsibility and the immorality of his actions.

Even if you don't understand dialogues, you are capable of understanding that rejecting ever single opportunity for redemption, especially if given so many as Arthas had, is the definition of being irredeemable? That redeemable is that a person is willing to accept a chance at redemption, which Arthas was never interested in?

I never said that Arthas as a whole is redeemable or that he should receive any form redemption arc like what has been hinted at in recent Shadowlands dialogues. Any possibility of redemption ended when he took up Frostmourne instead of embracing the Light to save his friend. I merely disagree with your framing that Arthas was some kind of sociopath and the only story revealed some kind of essentialist 'evil' trait that was within him all along. I don't think that's what the story is trying to convey.

[Rozz]

The misogyny accusations are out of place and muddying discussion. Stay civil.

[Diaphin]

I'm really curious. What do you think would have been the outcome if Arthas had listened to Jaina and Uther and had stepped aside to watch the people of Stratholme turn into Scourge, a fate which many of the inhabitants of that city clearly viewed as worse than even an excruciatingly painful death?

The momentary peace created by the culling of Stratholme is a success.

It wasn't though. The implication was that the Scourge just pulled out until they can strike right at the heart of Lordaeron with Arthas as their champion. And he could have issued a quarantine and tried to get as many uninfected people out of the city as he could. you know the Benediction quest? The one where you replay a priest trying to get out as many refugees as possible, who end up being slaughtering by the scourge because Arthas is too busy making things worse? Even in the interlude, we see survivors of Stratholme, so the city as a whole wasn't lost ever. All the time, Arthas culling is named as the core catastrophe which befell the city, with the fires he started literally burning even years afterwards. Stratholme is not a moral dilemma, it is just showing Arthas true colors: When he has the choice, he will always go with the most brutforce, straight forward solution he can, especially when somebody provokes him.

I don't know what the point of this paragraph is. Him being well-intentioned and being exploited while also being led astray by his own passions aren't mutually exclusive things. You can't deny that there was a degree of manipulation. From the moment he meets Kel'Thuzad he is lead to believe that Mal'Ganis is the head of the snake and that he must kill him in order to stop the Scourge while also receiving literal visions from Ner'zhul later on that would heavily influence his decisions. All I'm saying is that (from his view) the character had very good reasons to reject the counsel of people who at that point where pretty much doing nothing except stand in his way while he was trying to save his Kingdom. Obviously that doesn't really negate his personal responsibility and the immorality of his actions.

Nobody gives a fuck about your fanfictions. Blizzard is unambigious about him being evil even as a Paladin and him still having his free will and even his humanity intact but suppressed. In the friggin novelization of the events we even know that in the scene where he claims to not feel remorse anymore, he is lying, he knows deep in his heart he that this is a lie. He wilfully choses to follow the Lichking and ignore his own humanity. And again, it is not like he is manipulated like for example made believed that the fate that awaits him is literal hell and that for no reason at all the powers that are condemn him to the same torture as his greatest abuser, like a certain other character who is supposedly more evil, he is baited. He is provoked and he follows the bait at any point. And again, the people who try to counsel him are trying the best to solve the situation without becoming Monsters themselves. If you share Arthas point of view, the flaw is on you as a person. The entire scenario of Warcraft 3 is a test of personality, in which Arthas over and over again proves that he was a bad person from the beginning. All the good that was ever there was the expectations others placed on him, hell, he didn't even wanted to be a Paladin. The campaign shows that underneath every pretense, Arthas was a bad person. What Ner'zhul and Frostmourne did was to unleash the evil that was always there.

I never said that Arthas as a whole is redeemable or that he should receive any form redemption arc like what has been hinted at in recent Shadowlands dialogues. Any possibility of redemption ended when he took up Frostmourne instead of embracing the Light to save his friend. I merely disagree with your framing that Arthas was some kind of sociopath and the only story revealed some kind of essentialist 'evil' trait that was within him all along. I don't think that's what the story is trying to convey.

He was not inheritly evil, he was evil by his own choice. Arthas story is all about the choices he makes which lead him exactly to where he is. He always had this evil aspects inside of him, but he certainly also had good aspects inside of him, as seen in the fact that his humanity still existed inside of Arthas and wanted him to repent. It is the choices he makes, which prove him to be truly evil, because he had every opportunity to be good and made the choice against it at every step. I mean, hell, even the so called manipulations of Mal'ganis and Kel'thuzad are nothing more than Arthas rather listening to a creepy old man and a literal demon than the people who love him and care for him.

[TheFirstOnes]

Hopefully they don't trash the story even further by being like "AHA Anduin really was Arthas' son all this time".

Why would they ever do that? If anything, the plot is that Anduin is the King Arthas was SUPPOSED to be, but never became.

- - - Updated - - -

It wasn't though. The implication was that the Scourge just pulled out until they can strike right at the heart of Lordaeron with Arthas as their champion. And he could have issued a quarantine and tried to get as many uninfected people out of the city as he could. you know the Benediction quest? The one where you replay a priest trying to get out as many refugees as possible, who end up being slaughtering by the scourge because Arthas is too busy making things worse? Even in the interlude, we see survivors of Stratholme, so the city as a whole wasn't lost ever. All the time, Arthas culling is named as the core catastrophe which befell the city, with the fires he started literally burning even years afterwards. Stratholme is not a moral dilemma, it is just showing Arthas true colors: When he has the choice, he will always go with the most brutforce, straight forward solution he can, especially when somebody provokes him.



Nobody gives a fuck about your fanfictions. Blizzard is unambigious about him being evil even as a Paladin and him still having his free will and even his humanity intact but suppressed. In the friggin novelization of the events we even know that in the scene where he claims to not feel remorse anymore, he is lying, he knows deep in his heart he that this is a lie. He wilfully choses to follow the Lichking and ignore his own humanity. And again, it is not like he is manipulated like for example made believed that the fate that awaits him is literal hell and that for no reason at all the powers that are condemn him to the same torture as his greatest abuser, like a certain other character who is supposedly more evil, he is baited. He is provoked and he follows the bait at any point. And again, the people who try to counsel him are trying the best to solve the situation without becoming Monsters themselves. If you share Arthas point of view, the flaw is on you as a person. The entire scenario of Warcraft 3 is a test of personality, in which Arthas over and over again proves that he was a bad person from the beginning. All the good that was ever there was the expectations others placed on him, hell, he didn't even wanted to be a Paladin. The campaign shows that underneath every pretense, Arthas was a bad person. What Ner'zhul and Frostmourne did was to unleash the evil that was always there.



He was not inheritly evil, he was evil by his own choice. Arthas story is all about the choices he makes which lead him exactly to where he is. He always had this evil aspects inside of him, but he certainly also had good aspects inside of him, as seen in the fact that his humanity still existed inside of Arthas and wanted him to repent. It is the choices he makes, which prove him to be truly evil, because he had every opportunity to be good and made the choice against it at every step. I mean, hell, even the so called manipulations of Mal'ganis and Kel'thuzad are nothing more than Arthas rather listening to a creepy old man and a literal demon than the people who love him and care for him.

Though I kind of agree with you, refrain from being rude.

[Diaphin]

I am not redeeming Arthas. I am just saying with all the new info he might not be as bad as she was/is. And with all the new info she might be worse then we thought before. Nothing to do with her being a women. And i am not people. i am a person.

A person who can't read texts.

Current situation with arthas: he was manipulated by dreadlords and liches. Mad bad choices on his own and he took up a curse blade and armor that we know now are made by primus for the jailor to control people like anduin.
Not saying he did not make bad choices or he is a good guy. And there was manipulation. Its even said ingame :S:S.
And again on the arthas stuff. He is still bad, but all the stuff around anduin and his new blade/armor makes a very good point that arthas might have been under the influence by the jailor for some of it.

Where is he manipulated in the current narrative? He is provoked. He is baited. That is different than the manipulation Sylvanas faces. The Scourge baited Arthas into following his worst tendencies and he wilfully complied. And again, in Rise of the Lichking, where we learn Arthas unambigious inner thoughts during his entire journey, we learn that not only did he keep his free will, he even lied about not feeling anything anymore. He had his humanity still with him the entire time.

He said he fix it. by using souls and killing them taking away any chance of a afterlive?
And she is less evil? she mass murder like the other 2. But she knew the souls would not go to the afterlive. Arthas was using a curse blade/armor. She was not. She was in control the whole time.

Arthas stole literally thousands of souls himself, even having an entire soulforge of his own without any deeper reason than him wanting to power and creat an order befitting to him on Azeroth? Because these are the motivations we have for Arthas, he thought he is the guy to creat order. He wanted to rule, nothing else. Not to forget that Arthas literally never followed through on the plan of the Jailer, we learn that both Lichkings failed. And Sylvanas is a mass murderer who still feels remorse and thinks she is doing what is necessary to literaly liberate all of life from the shackles of a shit system put in place against their will. Arthas was a bigger mass murder who did everything he did because Arthas wanted it.

And again, i am not a bigot. You are putting your own frustrations on other subjects into this conversation. And i feel sorry for you.
But again i am not redeeming Arthas or Garrosh. Or hating extra on sylvanas. They are all evil. But with the current story info she looks to be more evil. And with the weapon/armor anduin has one. Sure looks a lot like a new LK.

Yeah, but Arthas was a person who chose to be evil despite tons of opportunities to turn away from his path, even when he became Lich King. And he did everything just for himself.

And the only reason people give for him being evil as paladin was 2 situations: stratholm and the boats. And the boats was evil. i agree. Stratholm was a right call. So yes he is evil. But not AS evil as her.

If you think Stratholme was the right call, then there is something wrong with your moral compass. Even the game itself at not point in time condoned it, it is the iconic first step into Arthas descent into evil. Sorry, normal people don't consider purging an entire city full of innocents morally justifiable. And it isn't even a matter of immersion, like for example things which would be screwed up in real world being more justifiable inside the game world, the game is very clear on stratholme being unambigiously evil. So it is a you thing.

[Orby]

man did this thread take the wrong turn at the preverbal fork in the road...

[Nerovar]

It wasn't though. The implication was that the Scourge just pulled out until they can strike right at the heart of Lordaeron with Arthas as their champion. And he could have issued a quarantine and tried to get as many uninfected people out of the city as he could. you know the Benediction quest? The one where you replay a priest trying to get out as many refugees as possible, who end up being slaughtering by the scourge because Arthas is too busy making things worse? Even in the interlude, we see survivors of Stratholme, so the city as a whole wasn't lost ever. All the time, Arthas culling is named as the core catastrophe which befell the city, with the fires he started literally burning even years afterwards. Stratholme is not a moral dilemma, it is just showing Arthas true colors: When he has the choice, he will always go with the most brutforce, straight forward solution he can, especially when somebody provokes him.

I don't know if you actually played WC3 but the implications there are quite clear. If you don't kill the plagued population, they are joining Mal'Ganis' ranks. Every infected citizen you don't kill turns into a zombie. Just because there were survivors after Arthas purged the city doesn't mean the city wouldn't have been lost if Arthas hadn't culled it of the diseased population.

Nobody gives a fuck about your fanfictions. Blizzard is unambigious about him being evil even as a Paladin and him still having his free will and even his humanity intact but suppressed. In the friggin novelization of the events we even know that in the scene where he claims to not feel remorse anymore, he is lying, he knows deep in his heart he that this is a lie. He wilfully choses to follow the Lichking and ignore his own humanity. And again, it is not like he is manipulated like for example made believed that the fate that awaits him is literal hell and that for no reason at all the powers that are condemn him to the same torture as his greatest abuser, like a certain other character who is supposedly more evil, he is baited. He is provoked and he follows the bait at any point. And again, the people who try to counsel him are trying the best to solve the situation without becoming Monsters themselves. If you share Arthas point of view, the flaw is on you as a person. The entire scenario of Warcraft 3 is a test of personality, in which Arthas over and over again proves that he was a bad person from the beginning. All the good that was ever there was the expectations others placed on him, hell, he didn't even wanted to be a Paladin. The campaign shows that underneath every pretense, Arthas was a bad person. What Ner'zhul and Frostmourne did was to unleash the evil that was always there.

Firstly, I never denied Arthas was a "bad person" so I don't really get who you're arguing with here. Secondly, I don't get why you're downplaying the degree to which he was manipulated. Ner'zhul planted literal dreams and visions in Arthas' mind that swayed him towards evil and directly influenced his actions and the Dreadlords revealed that Arthas was pretty much groomed to be become an agent of the Lich King. That's pretty much the definition of being manipulated. In regards to the remorse bit, it seems rather obvious that these feelings were weakened a point where they didn't really influence his decisions anymore. So yes, he still felt a modicum of remorse but it's not really enough to sway him. This is the case with most undead and one of the reasons why they are more likely to be evil aligned.

If you share Arthas point of view, the flaw is on you as a person.

I don't really get what you're trying to virtue signal here. I have repeatedly said that Arthas choices are immoral.

Your tangent about Sylvanas being extorted into committing genocide is also kinda out of place. Ironically, I think even though Arthas is probably the worse person of the two, he would have been less susceptible to this kind of manipulation as it heavily plays into Sylvanas (understandably) feeling wronged whereas Arthas was primarily manipulated due to his rashness and him genuinely caring about his people which is something that even persisted in a perverted form when he was a Death Knight ("He was the Lich King’s favored, and the Scourge was his to command, and in a strange, twisted way, he found that he cared for them."). Similarly, I don't think Sylvanas would have taken the bait Arthas fell for. Both were still manipulated and both committed evil acts out of their own volition.

He was not inheritly evil

The campaign shows that underneath every pretense, Arthas was a bad person. What Ner'zhul and Frostmourne did was to unleash the evil that was always there.

This is a contradiction. If the evil was always there, then he was inherently evil.

I mean, Arthas didn't want to cull Stratholme and he didn't want to betray the mercenaries in Northrend. He knew those were immoral acts. Arthas clearly had an intact moral center in that he could tell right from wrong. He merely chose against his own moral judgement because he felt like the circumstances left him no other choice (which is of course cope but that's why he's one of the bad guys). His fall to evil is primarily rooted in weakness i.e. a lack of fortitude, abandoning his own convictions whenever they were inconvenient. I'd guess that most people are like this and most people would have failed in a similar way if they were put in his shoes at a similar age. That doesn't mean that there is something evil within them that only needs to be teased out.

Arthas story is all about the choices he makes which lead him exactly to where he is

What else would it be about?

[Diaphin]

I don't know if you actually played WC3 but the implications there are quite clear. If you don't kill the plagued population, they are joining Mal'Ganis' ranks. Every infected citizen you don't kill turns into a zombie. Just because there were survivors after Arthas purged the city doesn't mean the city wouldn't have been lost if Arthas hadn't culled it of the diseased population.

The story is actually quite clear in the aftermath, that Arthas was wrong and that he could have done something to safe this city. You are aware that this is among other things what the interlude shows, right? We saw Arthas making a rash decission but afterwards, we see that Uther and Jaina were right and that even after the plague and his killing spree, there were still healthy survivors left in the city. Especially since the game itself differs in terms of the depiction to afterwards ones. In the game, due to gameplay reasons all the citizens immediately turn into undead when Arthas faces them. Depictions afterwards on the other hand show that he killed indecriminitely, no matter whether they might have been plagued or not.

Firstly, I never denied Arthas was a "bad person" so I don't really get who you're arguing with here. Secondly, I don't get why you're downplaying the degree to which he was manipulated. Ner'zhul planted literal dreams and visions in Arthas' mind that swayed him towards evil and directly influenced his actions and the Dreadlords revealed that Arthas was pretty much groomed to be become an agent of the Lich King. That's pretty much the definition of being manipulated. In regards to the remorse bit, it seems rather obvious that these feelings were weakened a point where they didn't really influence his decisions anymore. So yes, he still felt a modicum of remorse but it's not really enough to sway him. This is the case with most undead and one of the reasons why they are more likely to be evil aligned.

Yeah, he was always planned to become the Lich Kings champion, but it is not like for example Medivh was or even Sylvanas. He was put into a scenario in which he was baited to follow his worst tendencies, which he did every single time. He had every single moment the moment to turn back from this path by just acting like a Paladin or taking into consideration that his closest friends who he knew as good people wouldn't leave him without a reason, that he was wrong. And again, his conscience was weakened, but still intact. Arthas himself was the one who cast it out fully in the end, nobody else. Arthas always had alot of agency, I would argue he is probably one of the mortal villains who had the more agency in terms of their actions (Garrosh takes the No.1 spot here, considering that no higher power fucked with him, he just decided to be a plain fascist).

I don't really get what you're trying to virtue signal here. I have repeatedly said that Arthas choices are immoral.

Because his choice in Stratholme is unambigiously presented as an evil one, even in universe, even inside the same game. There is no ambigiouty here or any moral complexity, people ignore that Blizzard with the interlude indicated that Arthas choice was not justified. Hell, play the Benediction quest in classic. You know what could have safed these stratholme peasants? Arthas ordering his soldiers to protect refugees instead of slaughtering everyone.

Your tangent about Sylvanas being extorted into committing genocide is also kinda out of place. Ironically, I think even though Arthas is probably the worse person of the two, he would have been less susceptible to this kind of manipulation as it heavily plays into Sylvanas (understandably) feeling wronged whereas Arthas was primarily manipulated due to his rashness and him genuinely caring about his people which is something that even persisted in a perverted form when he was a Death Knight ("He was the Lich King’s favored, and the Scourge was his to command, and in a strange, twisted way, he found that he cared for them."). Similarly, I don't think Sylvanas would have taken the bait Arthas fell for. Both were still manipulated and both committed evil acts out of their own volition.

It is showing the difference between both characters and their situation. Again, with Arthas, it was nearly like the universe wanted him to do good on his potential. Even as far as Wrath of the Lich King, Tirion and Jaina hoped that Arthas was merely corrupted and not really himself, they tried to safe him. There just wasn't anything left to safe. With Sylvanas on the other hand, her narrative is basically pushing her to become more evil and miserable. Even her Sisters are kinda failing her alot. I mean, so far, the only person who tried to connect to Sylvanas like she was a person besides Vereesa was Anduin. With Arthas its kind of the opposite, besides the people he hurt the most, people tried to believe that there is still good in him. Hell, it turns even into a meta-text, considering how people try to see good in Arthas while dismissing Sylvanas, even before BFA.

This is a contradiction. If the evil was always there, then he was inherently evil.

This side of him, the bloodlust, this vengefulness, this cruelty was probably always here, but he always had the opportunities and the social network to learn to not follow through on them. Compare him to Varian, who also was in a place of vengefulness and bloodlust but decided to turn back from his tendencies because he wanted to do good for his son. Jaina was in a similar place like Arthas in BFA (lets ignore the back and forth in MoP and afterwards) but she managed to pull out of it for people she cares about, like her brother, Baine and Thrall. Arthas decided against listening to those he loves and against fighting this bad tendencies.

I mean, Arthas didn't want to cull Stratholme and he didn't want to betray the mercenaries in Northrend. He knew those were immoral acts. Arthas clearly had an intact moral center in that he could tell right from wrong. He merely chose against his own moral judgement because he felt like the circumstances left him no other choice (which is of course cope but that's why he's one of the bad guys). His fall to evil is primarily rooted in weakness i.e. a lack of fortitude, abandoning his own convictions whenever they were inconvenient. I'd guess that most people are like this and most people would have failed in a similar way if they were put in his shoes at a similar age. That doesn't mean that there is something evil within them that only needs to be teased out.

I would argue, somewhere its exactly what he wanted. Or at least, what sounded the best to him, which is already why he could fall so much from grace. His personality was relevead to be always one, that puts violent efficency and vengeance above moral integrity, otherwise he wouldn't have acted the way he did.

What else would it be about?

If you ask many of his fanboys it would be about him being a poor victim who got turned bad despite him only doing what was right to safe his people, because people can't understand simple themes.

[Nerovar]

If you ask many of his fanboys it would be about him being a poor victim who got turned bad despite him only doing what was right to safe his people, because people can't understand simple themes.

I mean, to some degree Arthas was at least in part a victim of the circumstances he found himself in. The grievances that motivated him have to be relatable otherwise he wouldn't really work as a character who we can on some level identify with. But that doesn't really take away from the moral dimension of his choices. He's not a puppet after all.

[Zyky]

Why would they ever do that? If anything, the plot is that Anduin is the King Arthas was SUPPOSED to be, but never became.

There has been a lot of speculation about Anduin being Arthas and Jaina's child using actual lore from various books and games. Including timelines of Anduin's birth/pregnancy coexisting with trips from Arthas to Stormwind.

[baskev]

A person who can't read texts.

Then go back and read them again. Cursed blade maurdian called it.
And again, you are talking about me calling arthas a good guy. Or he had valid reasons. Nope i think he did some horrible stuff and is a bad guy. But looking at the new info and LK anduin. + what warcraft 3 showed us ( liches and dreadlords working for the jailor all along). And arthas being manipulate by them. Makes his corruption and story a bit different.

Where is he manipulated in the current narrative? He is provoked. He is baited. That is different than the manipulation Sylvanas faces. The Scourge baited Arthas into following his worst tendencies and he wilfully complied. And again, in Rise of the Lichking, where we learn Arthas unambigious inner thoughts during his entire journey, we learn that not only did he keep his free will, he even lied about not feeling anything anymore. He had his humanity still with him the entire time.

Play warcraft 3. A certain dreadlord provokes him ( hint he is even in a cavern of times dungeon). Or kel thuzad. Who as lich pushed him in all kinds of directions.
And yes old lore said that about arthas. But a lot has been retcon this expansion. And everything points to more outside influence.
But lets say you are correct. Arthas killed everyone and trapped their souls in a blade. But they could released. And he was corrupted into service with the jailor. Sylvanas chose it out of free will.

Arthas stole literally thousands of souls himself, even having an entire soulforge of his own without any deeper reason than him wanting to power and creat an order befitting to him on Azeroth? Because these are the motivations we have for Arthas, he thought he is the guy to creat order. He wanted to rule, nothing else. Not to forget that Arthas literally never followed through on the plan of the Jailer, we learn that both Lichkings failed. And Sylvanas is a mass murderer who still feels remorse and thinks she is doing what is necessary to literaly liberate all of life from the shackles of a shit system put in place against their will. Arthas was a bigger mass murder who did everything he did because Arthas wanted it.

Again, you are talking to me like i think arthas is a good guy. I think he is less evil then sylvanas. And with all the new info, it shows the she was more horrible.

Yeah, but Arthas was a person who chose to be evil despite tons of opportunities to turn away from his path, even when he became Lich King. And he did everything just for himself.

Again learn current lore. And sylvanas is pretty much the same right now? using stuff to get power and get more out of the afterlive for herself?

If you think Stratholme was the right call, then there is something wrong with your moral compass. Even the game itself at not point in time condoned it, it is the iconic first step into Arthas descent into evil. Sorry, normal people don't consider purging an entire city full of innocents morally justifiable. And it isn't even a matter of immersion, like for example things which would be screwed up in real world being more justifiable inside the game world, the game is very clear on stratholme being unambigiously evil. So it is a you thing.

Have you even played warcraf 3 or WoW? in the cavern of times dungeon AND in warcraft 3. When arthas starts to attack stratholm its shown that people are turning into zombies. Hell halfway thruh the first part of the dungeon most people have turned already. really play the dungeon.

Almost the entirety of Stratholme's population was massacred by them, along with the undead.

What we know about zombies in WoW...it was a right call. otherwise they would have broken out. And the whole of the population was already infected.
And only a sick person would says its okay or good. I think its more of a grey area or the lesser of 2 evils.


But whe are derailing . You have called me a big and a socio already. that is really going far. And you keep hammering down that you think i feel like arthas was a good guy. And that all his actions where just. they where not.

So let me point it out 1 last time :
- arthas is BAD
- But old lore had him in control. But under manipulation by several agents of the jailor
- he made a grey/less of 2 evil callings with stratholm
- the boats in northrend was just evil.
- he picked up a curse bladed with a soul in it. Like the armor. And its shown ingame right now. That there is amount of infleunce on the wearer.
- Does not make arthas right or good in anyway.

But why is sylvanas worse:
- arthas started out to stop a plague and derailed in a massive way.
- after she got revenge on him. Instead of looking for a other way. She mad a deal with the guy who gave arthas his gear/sword. Who was arthas boss.
- she without curse objects/armor to control her started wars etc. Knowing what would happen.


she only does it for herself:

Meanwhile, her actions have set in a series of events that threaten to upset the cosmic balance between life and death.[113] Furthermore, she had no intention of saving the loyalists from what is to come

Sylvanas and the Jailer to both grow greater in strength

as for the new goal of her and her boss:

Sylvanas claimed that the Jailer will shatter the system of Death and forge it anew, with everyone truly having free will.[37] Devos of the Forsworn believed that the Eternal Ones' imprisonment of Zovaal was a "great injustice" and that he "seeks to free us from the prison we have built for ourselves

Who knows what is ment by that. But it sure looks like he wants to be boss. And seeing that kyrian already changed their ways to be more fair. I doubt zovaal has good intentions.

So in the end: she started out with a selfish goal. Arthas did not.
She did it without manipulation or cursed objects. Arthas have both happen.
While both are evil. 1 chose to be evil. The other one slipped into it. And was worked on by the forces of evil.

But i think i will never convince you. Since you called me 2 very horrible things. And try to take every out of context. Even not reading parts where i say arthas is evil. Yet you think i mean he is somehow good? So bye bye.

[Diaphin]

I mean, to some degree Arthas was at least in part a victim of the circumstances he found himself in. The grievances that motivated him have to be relatable otherwise he wouldn't really work as a character who we can on some level identify with. But that doesn't really take away from the moral dimension of his choices. He's not a puppet after all.

I think he is a great villain protagonist. And I think he works so well because Warcraft 3 did a lot of subverting expectations and play with known fantasy tropes in a unique way. Arthas was what would be expected to be the typical fantasy protagonist, a blonde pretty boy holy knight/prince who has some flaws but is ultimately set up to his personal heroes journey, defending his kingdom from a threat bigger than Orcs. In most fantasy storys, hell even in A Song of Fire, Arthas would grow as a person while fighting the Scourge that threatens his homeland, he would overcome the flaws which are hinted at at the beginning. WC3 does the exact opposite, the whole scenario is set up as a test of Arthas character and instead of growing to the challenge, like a typical hero would, he fails at every occation and becomes actually a worse person with every step, until he himself becomes the Champion of the Scourge. And afterwards, be actually play as him in the role and our missions are to actually destroy Lordaeron, slaughter Uther and destroy the rest of the Alliance to summon a Demon Lord. Thats unique and it was especially unique back when the game released. Think about it, its 2002. Its the hight of the Lord of the Rings hype, the genre conventions are still mostly unchallenged, Warcraft 2 still played by the books by having the elves, humans and dwarves be the good guys and the Orcs and trolls be the bad guys. And then Warcraft 3 came around and the pretty boy human prince on the cover turns out to be actually the villain. And the orcish Chieftain was actually a hero, who tried to redeem his people and who ended up fighting for Azeroth. Hell, even the way the game ends, with humans, orcs and elves uniting to protect the world was pretty unique. And then TFT comes around and Arthas story is actually a full on villains journey. He starts as a noble and shining Paladin and Prince and in the end he himself becomes the Lich King.

Thats what makes hin character iconic and interesting, his story is unique, especially for the time it was released in. The same year Aragon finally became King and lead the armies of middle earth against the evil orcish forces against Sauron, in Warcraft 3 Orcs were heroes and Arthas became the evil Lord of the Scourge himself. And just talking about it I feel shows how much Blizzard since then forgot what made Warcraft such an interesting genre. It was the total Anti-Lord of the Rings setting. Orcs were noble shamanistic warriors trying to redeem themselves from their pasts while the humans fell to evil or were actually antagonistic racists, which the good human character trying to make peace with the Orcs. The glorious human kingdom Lordaeron fell and became home to the Forsaken, freed Undead who tried to carve a place for themselves in the world. The classical tolkien-eque high elves renamed themselves Blood Elves and started to walk under a much darker path, forced into it by their human allies.

[TheFirstOnes]

There has been a lot of speculation about Anduin being Arthas and Jaina's child using actual lore from various books and games. Including timelines of Anduin's birth/pregnancy coexisting with trips from Arthas to Stormwind.

Or that’s not the point at all and Anduin’s written as the King Arthas was SUPPOSED to be?

His father is Varian. Stop. Everything he has is from his mother and father. His looks is of Varian’s, his hair is of Tiffins, and his personality is a mix of Tiffin’s naive yet passive nature, and his dads stern yet aggressive nature.

[Hekazi]

You guys do realize Anduin’s situation isn’t like Arthas’, yeah? Anduin is getting mind controlled. His “good side” is within that mind control. That’s it.

- - - Updated - - -



I’d agree, except...

TURALYON IS A FUCKIN ZEALOT WITH A DREADLORD RIGHT BY HIM!!!

Turalyon is evil, we'll realize that eventually, so is Alleria, they both will bring the void lords.

[Jastall]

The debate as to whenever Arthas was a better person than Sylvanas or not seems impossible to actually tackle to me given that one character was (by Blizzard standards anyway) consistent while another wasn't at all. Arthas's downfall was clearly a result of both his own moral failings and the manipulations of powerful interested parties and a supernatural curse- but his moral failing is part of it. Arthas isn't Arthas if he doesn't start taking the most expedient solution available to him from Stratholme onwards without ever considering alternatives or trying to explain himself to people that want to help him. Then the magical whatsisits like Frostmourne and the Helm get truly involved and things go downhill even faster. It's a clear, fairly concise and understandable narrative, and a straightforward but effective piece of character growth.

Sylvanas? Please. She yoyos between cackling maniac and muh misunderstood every other scene she's in (apart from BfA where she's locked in maniac mode and SL where she's in muh misunderstood mode), passing by Blizzard trying to make her a ruthless pragmatist that nonetheless hatches terrible plan after terrible plan and gets emotional every time something hits close to home. Nothing about the character makes sense and has a clear line that allows the player to appreciate how her character changes, why and at what point. They just turn on whatever aspect of her fragmented personality suits whatever they want to tell in whatever scene she appears. Arthas was a character, albeit he did get flanderized come Wrath. Sylvanas was, and still is, a plot device. They'll flip her morality on a dime if they want to, so any debate about it is rather pointless if you ask me.

Mind you, Arthas could still get the didndunuffin "he was manipulated lol" treatment because Heaven forbid that anyone but the Jailer himself ever does anything bad in Shadowlands. But we're talking about the characters so far.

[Ardenaso]

Turalyon is evil, we'll realize that eventually, so is Alleria, they both will bring the void lords.

the crown of light will bring only darkness?

the Light has struck a bargain with the enemy of all?