[Spoilers] Shadowlands: Afterlives Cinematic Discussion

[Frontenac]

a lot of your answers here are responses to statemenets never made. you said vashj and drakka have no difference as a counter argument when the argument was that Vashj WAS a warrior and a conqueror and a ruthless leader.

like, how do you ignore 90% of a sentence, and then actually use it to support your side. how can you do this and not feel anything? its outright scary.

I never said that Vashj and Draka had no differences. Where did I say that? Yes, Vashj was all that. So what? I never said her place was not in Maldraxxus. What I'm saying is that Draka, in her life, showed traits of character that ARE consistent with her being in Maldraxxus. Why did Blizzard chose her instead of Vashj or some other female character to present Maldraxxus in that short animation? I'll repeat myself: it's for a narrative reason. Thrall is in the Shadowlands. Something will happen between them. Therefore, since Draka has a purpose in the overarching narrative of the expansion, she cannot be a token female character. She's not there only because she's female.

[username993720]

I never said that Vashj and Draka had no differences. Where did I say that? Yes, Vashj was all that. So what? I never said her place was not in Maldraxxus. What I'm saying is that Draka, in her life, showed traits of character that ARE consistent with her being in Maldraxxus. Why did Blizzard chose her instead of Vashj or some other female character to present Maldraxxus in that short animation? I'll repeat myself: it's for a narrative reason. Thrall is in the Shadowlands. Something will happen between them. Therefore, since Draka has a purpose in the overarching narrative of the expansion, she cannot be a token female character. She's not there only because she's female.

But, they already kind of did it in Warlords of Draenor.

Again, seeing him meet his parents? Zzzz...

[Frontenac]

But, they already kind of did it in Warlords of Draenor.

Again, seeing him meet his parents? Zzzz...

Kinda is the right word. They were not truly his parents. They even never had Thrall. They had a girl, Geya'rah. And if I remember right, Thrall never told them who he was. The relation between Thrall and MU Draka would be much different and probably more meaningful than the one we got in WoD. That will depend on the writers, of course...

[username993720]

Kinda is the right word. They were not truly his parents. They even never had Thrall. They had a girl, Geya'rah. And if I remember right, Thrall never told them who he was. The relation between Thrall and MU Draka would be much different and probably more meaningful than the one we got in WoD. That will depend on the writers, of course...

Jeez...there are other characters with parents.
That's what i would call favouritism.

[Popokolara]

The Orcish clans were all strict meritocracies, and while the Frostwolves were perhaps the most benevolent of clans, they still had a highly regimented society that reflected that core ethos: which was the reason Draka and her family were exiled by Garad to begin with. That meritocracy also surrounded the function of both men and women in the society - there was no strict social demarcation there, both sexes treated equally according to their worth in said society. Draka goes from frail exile to the mate of the chieftain, a pretty meteoric rise for any individual in her culture. As the chieftain's mate she also distinguished herself and her clan in the Frostwolves' battles and eventual conquest of Bladespire Hold.

The description of Maldraxxus, to me, seems like a place that could circumscribe nearly any Orc - Durotan could be there, Ga'nar most certainly, Orgrim, and Grom all could conceivably be found there. Why Draka specifically was chosen for it we cannot know, perhaps something about her journey from weak exile to chieftain's mate caught the eye of the Necrolords who saw in her the willfulness and determination to aid the armies of the Shadowlands. Perhaps the circumstances of her death left her with a sense of discontentment that made Maldraxxus the choice destination, a means to prove herself once more. Perhaps there was even a darkness in Draka that was never explored previously, but something we'll see more of in the Necrolord Covenant story going forward.

you describe the clans as strict meritocracies which does not really align with contentiousness, ambition or even: might is right.

- - - Updated - - -

And I fail also to see how Draka is the token woman but Vashj, whom you seem to approve, would not.

You equate the two as a specific reply to a claim about how different they are.

[Aucald]

you describe the clans as strict meritocracies which does not really align with contentiousness, ambition or even: might is right.

Internal conflict and ambition are definitely part of any meritocratic society - competition, both friendly and otherwise, is a method by which one tends to establish their own merit compared to others. Orcish clans had a lot of infighting, and rituals like Mak'Rogahn and Mak'gora certainly underscore a "might is right" philosophy when it comes to both resolving disputes (the purpose of Mak'Rogahn) and even deciding who is to lead (Mak'gora).

[Frontenac]

you describe the clans as strict meritocracies which does not really align with contentiousness, ambition or even: might is right.

- - - Updated - - -



You equate the two as a specific reply to a claim about how different they are.

Tokenism means that they would have chosen Draka because they wanted a woman for diversity's sake. If it were true, it wouldn't make a difference if it were Draka, Vashj or any other female character, as long as the character was female. Therefore, complaining that Draka has been chosen as a token female while approving Vashj is just contradictory. You believe that Draka is a bad choice, that Vashj would have been a better fit? That is debatable. I don't agree, but that's an argument that can be made. But don't bring the sorry argument that they took Draka only because they needed a woman, while to your own admission another female character would have been better. Either both of them are tokens, or none of them are.

[Popokolara]

Tokenism means that they would have chosen Draka because they wanted a woman for diversity's sake. If it were true, it wouldn't make a difference if it were Draka, Vashj or any other female character, as long as the character was female. Therefore, complaining that Draka has been chosen as a token female while approving Vashj is just contradictory. You believe that Draka is a bad choice, that Vashj would have been a better fit? That is debatable. I don't agree, but that's an argument that can be made. But don't bring the sorry argument that they took Draka only because they needed a woman, while to your own admission another female character would have been better. Either both of them are tokens, or none of them are.

Ok this is ridiculous at this point.
If Vashj was chosen for her compatability it would have been a meritocratic choice.
The argument was never that they do tokenism therefore women characters wrong while vashj is right.
It was they might be doing tokenism since they choose drakka who is incompatible rather then vashj who is meritocraticly the proper choice.
in other words so you might understand
tokenism: Drakka just cause woman
non tokenism vashj cause she HAS the lore prescribed virtues.

What is so hard to understand?

Btw i am not 100% sure about drakka's compatability. i am criticising the way you spin the sentences missing the obvious point. and you write whole paragraphs where 2 sentences are enough. So i dont think its a lack of understanding you are just dancing with words to win the argument in your own mind's stage.

- - - Updated - - -

Internal conflict and ambition are definitely part of any meritocratic society - competition, both friendly and otherwise, is a method by which one tends to establish their own merit compared to others. Orcish clans had a lot of infighting, and rituals like Mak'Rogahn and Mak'gora certainly underscore a "might is right" philosophy when it comes to both resolving disputes (the purpose of Mak'Rogahn) and even deciding who is to lead (Mak'gora).

welp then i guess most societies who havent eclipsed are compatible with maldraxxus, not just those that greatly focus on the traits.

[Frontenac]

Ok this is ridiculous at this point.
If Vashj was chosen for her compatability it would have been a meritocratic choice.
The argument was never that they do tokenism therefore women characters wrong while vashj is right.
It was they might be doing tokenism since they choose drakka who is incompatible rather then vashj who is meritocraticly the proper choice.
in other words so you might understand
tokenism: Drakka just cause woman
non tokenism vashj cause she HAS the lore prescribed virtues.

What is so hard to understand?

Btw i am not 100% sure about drakka's compatability. i am criticising the way you spin the sentences missing the obvious point. and you write whole paragraphs where 2 sentences are enough. So i dont think its a lack of understanding you are just dancing with words to win the argument in your own mind's stage.

English is not my first language so it might take me longer to explain myself. But I refuse your argument. I'm sorry, but bringing the argument "Draka was chosen because she's a woman" is precisely denouncing Blizzard of tokenism. And the word itself has been used often in that thread and others.

And really I don't get that "Vashj is meritocraticaly the proper choice." Maldraxxus is all about meritocracy, but Blizzard's choices to tell their story is not. They did not choose to tell Draka's story because she was the best representative of the Necrolords, but because they have a story to tell with her. That's all.

you are just dancing with words to win the argument in your own mind's stage.

Right back at you! You're ignoring what other say to you.

Other posters and me have demonstrated that Draka's backstory shows that she fits into Maldraxxus. I won't repeat them, just read the thread. She also serves a narrative purpose due to her links with Thrall. Therefore she cannot be a token character!

[Aucald]

welp then i guess most societies who havent eclipsed are compatible with maldraxxus, not just those that greatly focus on the traits.

Who haven't eclipsed? Not sure I take your meaning there. The Necrolords value not just physical strength, though; but also self-determination and willfulness. This is why the House of Rituals (Liches and other spellcasters) as well as the House of Plagues (individuals forwarding Necromantic and alchemical science) exist - two Houses that don't emphasize martial strength but do emphasize willfulness, resourcefulness, and obviously intellect.

[Popokolara]

English is not my first language so it might take me longer to explain myself. But I refuse your argument. I'm sorry, but bringing the argument "Draka was chosen because she's a woman" is precisely denouncing Blizzard of tokenism. And the word itself has been used often in that thread and others.

And really I don't get that "Vashj is meritocraticaly the proper choice." Maldraxxus is all about meritocracy, but Blizzard's choices to tell their story is not. They did not choose to tell Draka's story because she was the best representative of the Necrolords, but because they have a story to tell with her. That's all.




Right back at you! You're ignoring what other say to you.

Other posters and me have demonstrated that Draka's backstory shows that she fits into Maldraxxus. I won't repeat them, just read the thread. She also serves a narrative purpose due to her links with Thrall. Therefore she cannot be a token character!

1. your english is fine. You do not take long to explain. you make a lot of arguments against things not stated. It is very different.
2. I am not arguing wether drakka is or is not appropriate. as i said i have my reservations but i cant be sure. i am using the dissagreement to highlight your behavior.
I am talking about how you form your arguments.
you go back to arguing about draka. when i told you i have no definite opinion and use it as an example

????????????????????????????????????????????



"Draka was chosen because she's a woman" is precisely denouncing Blizzard of tokenism"
How would blizzard, if they did use drakka as a token and not for her merits, denounce blizzard of the very act they commit?

Your own words:

"Tokenism means that they would have chosen Draka because they wanted a woman for diversity's sake. If it were true, it wouldn't make a difference if it were Draka, Vashj or any other female character, as long as the character was female. Therefore, complaining that Draka has been chosen as a token female while approving Vashj is just contradictory."

You literally say that aproving of vashj - who certainly has merits - is contradicting to complaining about drakka if she does not have merits.
What the actual £$%^ my man?

and here i will stop this pointless discussion.
I mean look. if you believe you have trouble with english and then get into paragraphs of arguing about the precision of lose....have fun. maybe try to ride a bycicle with no legs, i dont know.

[Frontenac]

1. your english is fine. You do not take long to explain. you make a lot of arguments against things not stated. It is very different.
2. I am not arguing wether drakka is or is not appropriate. as i said i have my reservations but i cant be sure. i am using the dissagreement to highlight your behavior.
I am talking about how you form your arguments.
you go back to arguing about draka. when i told you i have no definite opinion and use it as an example

????????????????????????????????????????????



"Draka was chosen because she's a woman" is precisely denouncing Blizzard of tokenism"
How would blizzard, if they did use drakka as a token and not for her merits, denounce blizzard of the very act they commit?

Blizzard denouncing Blizzard? What are you talking about?

Your own words:

"Tokenism means that they would have chosen Draka because they wanted a woman for diversity's sake. If it were true, it wouldn't make a difference if it were Draka, Vashj or any other female character, as long as the character was female. Therefore, complaining that Draka has been chosen as a token female while approving Vashj is just contradictory."

You literally say that aproving of vashj - who certainly has merits - is contradicting to complaining about drakka if she does not have merits.
What the actual £$%^ my man?

and here i will stop this pointless discussion.
I mean look. if you believe you have trouble with english and then get into paragraphs of arguing about the precision of lose....have fun. maybe try to ride a bycicle with no legs, i dont know.

If Blizzard had the intention of taking a woman just for the purpose of filling up a quota (tokenism), then it would have made no difference if they had chosen Draka, Vashj or any other female character. It would have been tokenism.

If Draka has no merit (no purpose in the story and no purpose in Maldraxxus), then it would have been a bad choice on their part. Not tokenism. Again, "they chose Draka because she's a woman" makes no sense at all.

And that's the last I will say about that, because I'm also sick of it.

[Overlordd]

We didn't see Draka grow in the fight.
We didn't see how she accepted the role.
We didn't see the reason why she was recruited.

She was shown to be a skilled assassin from the start.
Then she became a one man army.
Her getting blasted by that undead was just a weak attempt at showing she's not powerful, but still not overdo it because she is a strong women after all.

She didn't earn jack shit.

This is the same level of growth Rey from Star Wars had, she just was gifted instanty at everything.

Draka was cutting dummies and before you know it she was taking out entire forces.

I don't care if I sound like a "muh SJWs!!!!" But damn if I guesses it right that ofcourse Christie Golden wrote it.

Now I don't care that it was Draka, but her path in Maldraxxus didn't explain JACK SHIT.
She just accepted her role, boom no explanation why, then began her training and before you know it she was a master assassin and the plotpoint of the entire covenant.

I would've liked to see more of her path, her way of dealing with her husband's death and her mourning of her child possibly been killed or having thoughts on wether he was alive or not.

But alas, Christie Golden didn't want to link it to that, because her way of thought was to "make a stronk female character thzt isn't influenced by her love or family in her goals, a real careerwoman".

Pathetic that she's still allowed to write.

[Radaney]

Why did you expect any of that?

You must be in a constant state of disappointment.

[einaschern]

I think we're supposed to tie together her sacrificing her life for the Thrallbaby with her being willing to sacrifice again in Maldraxxus.
It was an awful connection.
I am sad that this is how Draka was used.
We don't need another merciless killer woman.

Give us some depth.

[Powerogue]

I'm not sure how much character growth you were expecting in a few minutes of motion comic.

I get that standards were high after the Uther one but what exactly were you expecting? Maldraxxus's thing is being militaristic, so they introduced Draka as being adaptable and pragmatic.

"But what will she do when she finds out her son is alive?" Good question, we're almost certainly going to find out. They have to leave some things for in-game. Uther's story certainly isn't done yet.

The purpose of these is introducing a covenant through the eyes of one of its members. For example, Uther showcasing how the Kyrians are bound by tradition but some are breaking away from the group. All the stuff about the various houses at war with each other from what I understand is what the Maldraxxus quests will be about, and so on.

[ro9ue]

They went from something extremely well done = the Bastion short... to this. I really hope it wasn't the 2nd best of the 4 lol.

[Keyblader]

We know that female orcs are trained to fight, just the same as the men. We are showed her training, in the allotted time, of a short, they conveyed her training, and becoming more skilled. Given that she was a trained orc in her mortal life, we can assume, she was able to use those abilities, and climb. Obviously she proved herself. None of it was "given to her" this wasn't a mary sue situation. It was just rushed. They did at least attempt to show her training, the issue I have, is I don't really get what the short was trying to show us, besides "Draka is the one you'll be dealing with in the Shadowlands." Which this cinematic didn't really need to show.

[shadowmatrix]

what, a trailer for a story didn't give you the full story? Somebody get my agent on the phone, heads will rolll!

[Drench]

It was a 3/10 compared to the 9/10 first one