Thread: To Be Forsaken

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ...
3
4
5
  1. #81
    I don't know, keeping a pet dreadlord around it felt like just a matter of time IMO until Varmatharas pulled something like that. They didn't need to involve the Legion to make it dual faction, having Putress attacking both factions at the Wrathgate could have done that on its own. The legion invasion was a consequence of Sylvanas falsely believing she'd cowed Varmatharas and not keeping a close enough eye on him.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    Troll shamans and orc catapult operators were more involved in torching the tree than any Forsaken and every Proudmoore is a threat to everyone else's screentime inshallah.
    I wouldn't say they were more involved than the forsaken who ordered the deed done. Though I suppose she was acting as warchief of the entire horde at that point not just as a forsaken.
    Last edited by Florena; 2022-06-13 at 08:13 PM.

  2. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Ardenaso View Post
    which is weird as they never did any shit to the Argent Dawn who took a piece of Lordaeron land (Light's hope chapel) then the next day they already own the entire Eastweald
    That's because Sylvanas practiced realpolitik and didn't antagonize them. The Forsaken weren't stupid evil until BFA and even then the staggeringly inept writing kept it localized to Sylvanas.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ersula View Post
    ALL FACTIONS KILL SAPIENT RACES ENCROACHING ON THEIR LANDS IN THEIR NEWBIE ZONE.

    Those lines are no different from any other major horde or alliance faction; just with more fearsome semantics. It's a scary aesthetic twist.

    Those are farmers pledged to the Scarlet crusade; an extremist faction that was disavowed by Lordaeron's government even before it fell: How is killing them different from newbie Human players killing Defias farmers in their starting zones? You try to use aesthetics to expose a hypocrisy but your conclusion is backwards.
    I don't know what you're on about, I don't give two shits about the Scarlet-protected farmers and wasn't referring to them anyway. For all it matters they can (and did) get liquidated by the nascent Forsaken state. I mean Garithos's troops that Sylvanas offed and she was right to do so given that the alternative was to be wiped out themselves. My point is that the living-dead opposition was the founding act of the Forsaken and is intrinsic to their existence and premise as a faction. They and the humans of Lordaeron couldn't co-habit long-term because their interests are mutually exclusive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Florena View Post
    I wouldn't say they were more involved than the forsaken who ordered the deed done.
    Sylvanas ordered the tree burned in her capacity as Warchief of the Horde. The people she ordered were trolls and orcs and the idea of using Forsaken-preferred methods and war tactics like necromancy and Blight were explicitly ruled out. The Forsaken role in the War of Thorns is negligible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Varodoc View Post
    Since you're always so sarcastic and humorous, I'm sure that's not what the Celestials really said.

    But I do seem to recall quite clearly the Celestials listing out all of Garrosh's war crimes (hence the name of the novel ), amongst which was genocide, and I don't remember Baine (Garrosh's lawyer) ever justifying Garrosh by saying that he technically didn't do those things himself...
    They specifically say that the outcome was rigged and Garrosh was going to get away no matter what and that everyone else was on trial. The trial is a circus, as Garrosh himself says and the War Crimes are ex post facto nonsense pushed by the winning party that the Celestials, in their divine wisdom, see through and move the burden of change on the witnesses and lawyers in the trial. As regards Baine, he's a better lawyer than he is a racial leader, but he still too was among those judged. Frying Garrosh was an act morally equivalent to wiping out the draenei in terms of getting a shaman out of touch with the elements as we can see from Thrall.

    Neither of them cared about the Forsaken and only used them as pawns, then threw them under the bus when they were no longer useful.

    They don't get to decide what the Forsaken stand for, because they never cared about the Forsaken in the first place.

    Otherwise, the Horde stands for genocide and destruction because that's what the Legion dictated back in WC1.

    Which, by the way, I don't disagree with.
    Sylvanas founded the state and ran the Forsaken the entire time they were a functional entity. She ipso facto defines what they are much like the Horde is in fact defined by its entire history and not Thrall's blip of it, given that he maintained the exact leadership structure, kept his legitimacy through his appointment by Doomhammer, kept his armor and weapon as symbols, named the capital after him, named other places after Kargath, Kilrogg and Grom etc. etc. The Forsaken are inseparable in their origins and their entire identity up to BTS from Sylvanas and even if we for the sake of argument accept that Calia is actually the one who most represents them because we've suffered severe head trauma or are in the Blizzard writing staff (but I repeat myself) the points made by @Darth-Piekus refer to their founding, done by Sylvanas, and their time in Vanilla.
    Last edited by Super Dickmann; 2022-06-13 at 08:21 PM.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

    Tinkers will be the next Class confirmed.

  3. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by Varodoc View Post
    Whether it was mentioned in the cutscene or not is irrelevant, the two events (Wrathgate and Battle of Undercity) take place literally in the same patch and so, when Blizzard wrote the dialogue of Putress, they also knew he was going to betray the Forsaken and turn Undercity over to the Legion.

    So it's just funny to me how the "quintessential" Forsaken quote was spoken by someone who actually betrayed the Forsaken and willingly gave their capital to the Legion in a coup d'état.

    You cannot say that it was an "asspull", because it was planned from the start. Putress was always supposed to be a traitor.

    It should also be noted that Sylvanas basically told Putress to unleash the blight on Arthas if the opportunity presented itself. She would not have been explicitly against the Wrathgate. And so, many of Putress' followers at the Wrathgate could have remained loyal to Sylvanas. Which means, that Putress' pretty speech about "Forsaken vengeance" was probably just a ruse to trick the other apothecaries into thinking he was still loyal to Sylvanas. He never cared about any "Forsaken vengeance".
    Never did the Battle for Undercity stuff, I just was all about Forsaken Vengeance and at that point in time the whole Blight everyone was amazing and I loved the DGAF attitude we are undead just blight everyone "Death to the Living and Death to the Forsaken"

  4. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by Varodoc View Post

    In the end, the Forsaken were never supposed to be evil. The Forsaken were supposed to be a refuge for all the victims of the Scourge and they were meant to be more honorable and respectable than the Scourge. But in Cataclysm they mass-raised Alliance farmers to use them as cannon fodder and in BfA they mind-controlled the innocent Derek Proudmoore. This is not what the Forsaken stood for. People who think Forsaken were meant to be the "evil option" never understood them.

    ...

    The Sylvanas who tried to kill Anduin with the blight is gone from existence.
    I'd disagree on both counts. The Forsaken have always had members "just trying to carve out a place in the world" and members who were outright evil, and as long as both groups obeyed Sylvanas, she didn't do anything to stop them.

    Even with overhauling of leadership and two coups now counting Putress so we have more of the former and much less of the latter, we can still expect the occasional blighting of baby bunnies because dang it the plague must be tested on live subjects!

    And on the other note, Sylvanas has changed a lot, but you're disregarding that so has Anduin. From holy-boned perfect paragon of perfect perfectness whose very existence is a threat to Sylvanas's whole worldview (from Sylvanas's perspective), to someone who has experienced harrowing trauma that caused him to actually understand better than most what she went through, both on some level needing to "find themselves" again in the wake of the Jailer's machinations. Not friends, absolutely not friends, but mutually, someone who understands them, and that's enough.
    Quote Originally Posted by DatToffer View Post
    Sylvanas will just give her own head to Tyrande.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    And just like the thread before it, let's back away from sexualizing Azshara and return to the original topic at hand.

  5. #85
    Actually Powerogue let's be honest here. The whole Frostmourne that splits souls and the Jailer taking half of those souls to torment turning it's victims to a good and a bad part was a bad asspull just to justify not killing Sylvannas or wiping the Forsaken. Technically every Scourge that died from that sword had it's soul torn to shreds.

  6. #86
    Pandaren Monk Grazrug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    1,750
    Calia is nothing. She needs to go away full stop. She is basically an alliance plant meant to undermine the Horde's politics. Anduin sent her to damage our faction.

  7. #87
    Moderator Cloudmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Celestial Planetarium
    Posts
    1,833
    Quote Originally Posted by Grazrug View Post
    Calia is nothing. She needs to go away full stop. She is basically an alliance plant meant to undermine the Horde's politics. Anduin sent her to damage our faction.
    I see you are back my friend! All you have to do is breath and count to 10. Haha

    Just to comfort you Anduin stays in Shadowlands so I don’t think he will be the king of Stormwind at least for now.
    Behold my new creation!


  8. #88
    Pandaren Monk Grazrug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    1,750
    Quote Originally Posted by Cloudmaker View Post
    I see you are back my friend! All you have to do is breath and count to 10. Haha

    Just to comfort you Anduin stays in Shadowlands so I don’t think he will be the king of Stormwind at least for now.
    I will do my best but I can't be certain. My fight for the Horde continues. Every day.

  9. #89
    No leader felt they were ready to see themselves in charge of a race or faction.

    Voljin says he wasn't worthy to be warchief, but accepted anyway. Bain was passed on the burden of High Chieftain due to his heritage after Cairn's death to Garrosh. Lorthemar isn't royalty like the Sunstrider dynasty, but the title of Regent Lord fell upon him so suddenly. After Thrall stepped down as Warchief, he refused being reinstated twice, despite having prior experience from WC3 till Wrath. Andiun like Bain, slid into the role because of his heritage. And now here we are again, with Calia being convinced to lead the forsaken.

  10. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by onesBronson View Post
    No leader felt they were ready to see themselves in charge of a race or faction.
    A good leader did not seek to lead, they were made the leader by the people around them. The people that actively strive for power usually do so because of some character deficit that directly disqualifies them to be the leader. Sylvanas for example only made herself leader of the Forsaken to use them as pawns for her revenge on Arthas and when that was done for she couldn't care less what happened to them.

  11. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by guisadop View Post
    I'd rather have Calia ruling Tirisfal for humans and the alliance.
    Ok, but stay outta the Undercity!

    If you thought Tarren Mill and Southshore was a PVP festival, imagine Brill vs. The Undercity.

  12. #92
    No one actually knows what it is to be Forsaken tho.

    Is it to just be pragmatic, kill people who oppose them but seek alliances elsewhere? That's more a modus operandi than a racial identity TBH. And many, many Forskaen have shown to be far less than pragmatic.

    Is it to be a baby-eating mad scientist whose only goal is to blight everything that isn't currently blighted like Putress? Some will say hell yes, but then you run into the problem of why anyone, even their fellow Horde, would tolerate such levels of unpredictable sociopathy. We've looted raid bosses for lesser offences.

    Is it to be a bunch of sadsacks who regret their condition and wish they were anyone else? The Calia angle certainly pushes it but even Blizzard seems lukewarm about the whole thing.

    Is it to be like Sylvanas, who has flip-flopped between those three positions as the plot demands?

    IMO too much of the race's identity was tied into into emulating whatever Sylvanas was written to be at the time. Thus when she was villain batted and then put on the freezer, they're left a directionless mess of an identity and a bunch of side characters that about 10 people know and 5 people like, plus Calia. I don't have much faith that Blizz can put the pieces back together gracefully.

    Then again, one could argue the only races with a somewhat intact identity are those Blizzard doesn't focus on in the first place, but that is another conversation altogether.
    It is all that is left unsaid upon which tragedies are built -Kreia

    The internet: where to every action is opposed an unequal overreaction.

  13. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by Powerogue View Post
    I'd disagree on both counts. The Forsaken have always had members "just trying to carve out a place in the world" and members who were outright evil, and as long as both groups obeyed Sylvanas, she didn't do anything to stop them.

    Even with overhauling of leadership and two coups now counting Putress so we have more of the former and much less of the latter, we can still expect the occasional blighting of baby bunnies because dang it the plague must be tested on live subjects!

    And on the other note, Sylvanas has changed a lot, but you're disregarding that so has Anduin. From holy-boned perfect paragon of perfect perfectness whose very existence is a threat to Sylvanas's whole worldview (from Sylvanas's perspective), to someone who has experienced harrowing trauma that caused him to actually understand better than most what she went through, both on some level needing to "find themselves" again in the wake of the Jailer's machinations. Not friends, absolutely not friends, but mutually, someone who understands them, and that's enough.
    That they had evil members is irrelevant.

    So did the Night elves (Fandral and his followers), so did the Humans (Edwin VanCleef and his followers, Archbishop Benedictus and his followers), so did the orcs (Garrosh and his followers), etc.

    The Forsaken also had their evil members: Putress and his followers, Sylvanas and her followers. And those evil members have now been rooted out and expunged.

    but you're disregarding that so has Anduin
    Anduin is irrelevant to me, he's no longer in the Alliance. Now the Alliance belongs to Turalyon and Alleria. With this being said, Anduin can now do whatever he wants in his free time, his whereabouts are not my concern.

Posting Permissions

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