Shadowlands Sylvanas and Anduin cinematic.

[Nerovar]

We bust Jaina out of the Maw this week, presumably we bust Thrall out the one after that, but we don't get Anduin out since he gets an actual cutscene. He has something to do here, the others feel like the devs really want to feature them but also have no idea what to do with them.

It is funny because the way Blizzard treats the character somehow mirrors my own feelings in regards to the story. At this point, I don't really care about any character in the game except Anduin. I don't even like the character that much it's just that everyone else is so fundamentally uninteresting and does whatever the plot demands them to do whereas Anduin seems like he possesses at least some degree of agency. Strangely enough, he's one of the few characters that still manage to capture some of the old Warcraft magic.

[Cherry123]

I wonder where this cinematic is played.

[Raisei]

The dirty secret behind the Taelia/Bolvar thing is that once Bolvar is no longer the Lich King and his culpability in doing Lich King things is offloaded to the Jailer he isn't that interesting. He doesn't actually have much to do in Shadowlands thus far and his ability to track Sylvanas is as arbitrary as it is easily substituted by say, a Broker putting a tracker there or some such. Ditto, the Torghast quests seem to exist only to repeat reasons to get us into this feature. But even if it wasn't wrong strong enough to stand on its own, the main consequence of it is that with the exception of Anduin and Sylvanas, the other three also have nothing to do.

I assume it was the idea of making us care. While they might not be important for the future of this expansion, Jaina and Thrall are incredibly important and beloved characters of the franchise for over 2 decades now, arguabley they are the most recognizable faces of the two factions. So saving them is our motivation even if afterwards they need 2 years of therapy and cannot help anymore. Or to put it better: It is our initial motivation.
Now where we are seeing this realm of death and are introduced to (logically if maybe not emotionally) more pressing issues, their fate becomes less of a priority. We know they can take care of themselves for a while, they are not red shirts that will die immediatedly. Jaina did after all wipe the floor with several Maw creatures for days before we even arrived.
The cold truth is, if Sylvanas destroys reality it matters very little where Jaina and Anduin are. They will die with us and all the rest. Bolvar knows these kinds of cold logical decisions very well, he made several of those during the Legion campaign, where he risked that many of the Ebon Blade and the Silver Hand would fall just so he could build up Morgraine (retroactively probably because even then he knew Sylvanas was coming for the Helm and needed Morgraine and the other Horsemen to kill her or him).
I do not think Bolvar's role is over though.
If that were the case he could have stayed on Azeroth for some reason and Jaina might or might not be integral if we come across Arthas, which I yet refuse to believe isn't happening. One way or another the Shadowlands will be turned upside down in the course of this expansion and I very much believe that the Maw will not exist anymore at the end.
Thrall could also have a role to play if we meet Garrosh who must be somewhere under Castle Nathria, him meeting Draka would be interesting, but pointless, they don't know each other, their only connection is genetic.

[Soon-TM]

Anduin seems like he possesses at least some degree of agency. Strangely enough, he's one of the few characters that still manage to capture some of the old Warcraft magic.

Which is no surprise, given how 1) he's perhaps the ONLY consistently written character, 2) he has a strong "good Arthas" vibe about him (i.e. having all of Arthas' qualities but none of his flaws), and especially 3) they've thrown everyone else under the bus in order to make him shine (even literally) - aka warping the world around him, in true Sue style.

[bagina]

I wonder where this cinematic is played.

Same. We haven't seen this shot in any cinematic yet, have we. He's most likely talking to Sylvanas, I think.

[Nerovar]

I wonder where this cinematic is played.

Why does it look like this guy is blushing?

[Super Dickmann]

It is funny because the way Blizzard treats the character somehow mirrors my own feelings in regards to the story. At this point, I don't really care about any character in the game except Anduin. I don't even like the character that much it's just that everyone else is so fundamentally uninteresting and does whatever the plot demands them to do whereas Anduin seems like he possesses at least some degree of agency. Strangely enough, he's one of the few characters that still manage to capture some of the old Warcraft magic.

I mean, they did pretty much throw every single character under the bus for his sake and turned the entire surviving positive cast into his orbiters. While it'd be appropriate if this were some Shakespearian shit where all their efforts were ultimately in vain and them giving up everything for Anduin fucked him up as well he is actually the only character from Azeroth who came with us who's fate I'm interested in.

@Raisei mentions that Jaina and Thrall have been in the franchise for twenty years and he's right, but while say Sylvanas is running straight off a cliff, they at least give the impression that they finally have a destination for her. Anduin is essentially the main character and everything in the universe revolves around him, so he as well. But Jaina and Thrall don't seem to have any point there and while I expect Bolvar to do things I'm at a loss of what they are. They already handicapped themselves by having being the Lich King have no lasting effect on his personality or worldview. There's nothing new in any of their scenes. Thrall gaining back his powers, much like Jaina reverting to WC3 Jaina in BFA doesn't constitute development of his character but regression and opens no new stories to speak of.

My main worry for the expansion going forward is that Blizzard's best story decision by far up to this point with this expansion, namely stuffing virtually everything remotely connected to BFA in the locker and telling stories about zombies, vampires and angels instead will have to be overturned and they'll pivot back to characters who're effective dead ends. Jaina is WC3 Jaina now, but what of it? Where does she go? What story can you feasibly tell when the Horde and Alliance are effectively the same organisation? She can meet Arthas and Kael in hell, that's nice and all. Thrall can meet his mom. But how will that further their characters and the narrative in general? How is Jaina remotely different before and after she went into the Maw and if this entire story process were cut out, would anything change?

The expansion is already out, so it's too late to put the entire non-Anduin faction leader cast that followed us into Shadowlands out to pasture. But there is still a chance for their role to be minimized as much as possible.

[Kallisto]

Well just because there's no higher instance to judge the actions of leaders/factions it does not mean that there's no bad/morally wrong actions.

Golden doesn't make these big lore decisions. Even if she wrote war crimes it was under the direction of those in charge of WoW story. Which has not and is not Golden.

[Nerovar]

My main worry for the expansion going forward is that Blizzard's best story decision by far up to this point with this expansion, namely stuffing virtually everything remotely connected to BFA in the locker and telling stories about zombies, vampires and angels instead will have to be overturned and they'll pivot back to characters who're effective dead ends. Jaina is WC3 Jaina now, but what of it? Where does she go? What story can you feasibly tell when the Horde and Alliance are effectively the same organisation? She can meet Arthas and Kael in hell, that's nice and all. Thrall can meet his mom. But how will that further their characters and the narrative in general? How is Jaina remotely different before and after she went into the Maw and if this entire story process were cut out, would anything change?

The expansion is already out, so it's too late to put the entire non-Anduin faction leader cast that followed us into Shadowlands out to pasture. But there is still a chance for their role to be minimized as much as possible.

I think seeing Jaina and Kael or Thrall and his mum exchange some dialogue is perfectly enough for the average WoW fan. I mean, just look at how people reacted to Darion's and Alexandros' reunion even though it was placed in the most atrocious context you could possibly imagine (pretty sure this wasn't what Darion had in mind when he sacrificed his own life to free his father from the Scourge). It doesn't constitute any meaningful storytelling or character development but it works as fan service which is the only reason why we see these characters in the first place.

On the other hand, there are fates worse than being relegated to mere fan service. Take Bluether for example. No one in their right mind thought that Uther would require some contrived vengeance + redemption arc back in WotLK because his arc had closure and he found his peace after the death of Arthas. But they gave him one regardless of whether it makes sense for the character just because they needed some familiar character through which they could explore the whole Forsworn story, completely changing his character in the process.

[Arrashi]

Why does it look like this guy is blushing?

"Kyaaaa i finally gathered courage to flash senpai my super sexy man-nipple!"

[Super Dickmann]

I think seeing Jaina and Kael or Thrall and his mum exchange some dialogue is perfectly enough for the average WoW fan. I mean, just look at how people reacted to Darion's and Alexandros' reunion even though it was placed in the most atrocious context you could possibly imagine (pretty sure this wasn't what Darion had in mind when he sacrificed his own life to free his father from the Scourge). It doesn't constitute any meaningful storytelling or character development but it works as fan service which is the only reason why we see these characters in the first place.

On the other hand, there are fates worse than being relegated to mere fan service. Take Bluether for example. No one in their right mind thought that Uther would require some contrived vengeance + redemption arc back in WotLK because his arc had closure and he found his peace after the death of Arthas. But they gave him one regardless of whether it makes sense for the character just because they needed some familiar character through which they could explore the whole Forsworn story, completely changing his character in the process.

If you put enough production value in there'll be a ton of people who fight to the death about it being a worthwhile story. Jaina in BFA is the standout example in its illogic and being a void of drama that does nothing for its principal character but regress her to her state from twenty years ago, taking the actually fairly decent internal logic of the kingdom finding her to be a bad person and thinking fondly of Daelin with it. Draka is still the standout example in being the storytelling void of this expansion who you could replace with Mankrik's wife and have exactly the same dramatic heft (namely none).

With Bluether I disagree. To get it out of the way, it's a transparent retcon of what we saw in TBC and Wrath in terms of his ghost, so's everything to do with Shadowlands and the afterlife. On the other hand, his story there was hot garbage in the first place, so nothing of value was lost. Frostmourne was already devalued by not only having him be able to chat with some random dickhead elf at his tomb despite having his soul being robbed by the sword, but having Mal'ganis still be alive, a plot beat that went nowhere and only served to further caricaturize the Scarlet Crusade by having them have Death Knights and shadow priest in defiance of the whole gist of their story because 'lol zealots'. His only other function was as a shitty expository tool for there always being a Lich King. Not only a bad plot point in and of itself, being internally contradictory since Arthas ditching his heart and conscience and being entirely in control was a major plot beat in that very same expansion, not just contradicting the book, itself worse in characterizing Arthas than WC3 but at least stressing his culpability and action in his own story, but giving us the first example of 'Oh, he was only pretending to be retarded' as a reason for why a baddie is ineffective in connection to Arthas' plan to raise the heroes after acting like a Scooby Doo villain for the entire expansion. His final dialogue in the Shadowmourne quest is decent, as are bits of his conversation with Jaina, but it's exactly the kind of thing you call out earlier in being empty once you scratch past the surface.

The Bluether story does serve to introduce the Forsworn, but it also uses its fanservice correctly since while you could replace him with say Gavinrad the Dire or one of the other fodder paladins Arthas betrayed and avoid a retcon, Uther is the more dramatic choice who has more personal ties with him. It also actually develops the character since Uther lecturing Arthas on vengeance but then needing to live up to that himself after Arthas destroys everything he cared about ties in with his characterization in a more meaningful way than 'lol, fem orcs are cool' or 'lol, i used to hit scourge now i look like scourge but I'm a good guy '. It's not some masterpiece and the Forsworn story massively suffers by making them agents of the Jailer, but like with Kael, it builds on them on the basis of their personality traits and aspects that were there previously but not too explored. Bluether makes for a better continuation than Uther as an expository ghost since his role couldn't be replaced with Terenas to zero difference and both already fuck with WC3 by being simultaneously in and outside of Frostmourne.

[Malira]

@Raisei mentions that Jaina and Thrall have been in the franchise for twenty years and he's right, but while say Sylvanas is running straight off a cliff, they at least give the impression that they finally have a destination for her. Anduin is essentially the main character and everything in the universe revolves around him, so he as well. But Jaina and Thrall don't seem to have any point there and while I expect Bolvar to do things I'm at a loss of what they are. They already handicapped themselves by having being the Lich King have no lasting effect on his personality or worldview. There's nothing new in any of their scenes. Thrall gaining back his powers, much like Jaina reverting to WC3 Jaina in BFA doesn't constitute development of his character but regression and opens no new stories to speak of.

I'm still surprised they brought Jaina this expansion. BFA felt like a good "endpoint" for her character, they finally settled on what kind of character she was, had that excellent cutscene where she puts her demons to rest and makes up with her mother, she makes up with Thrall, and she gets made Grand Admiral, so I kind of assumed she'd basically be "retired" as a character to Kul Tiras where we could just assume she's doing Admiral-y things.

Thrall is a bit different in that he's retired and unretired like three times since Cataclysm so he doesn't feel like he's "ended" as a character, although that's more of a symptom of Blizz failing at writing new orc characters and not immediately villain batting them (seriously has there been an orc introduced since Cata that hasn't turned evil?), and trying to solve their self-inflicted assassination of horde pride by bringing back the OG to make everything better again. But yeah, Thrall is an old character that really needs to be put to bed properly, especially since he basically hasn't developed as a character in a decade.

Anduin and Baine are both "new-gen" characters in that they were introduced in WoW and only became actual characters in Cata, which is about the turning point from WoW being a WC3 sequel to it's own thing. However, while Anduin has a long term developed story arc that's obviously planned into the future, Baine just... hasn't started his story arc, really. He's shown signs of being interesting but mostly just acts as the "good hordie" and a foil to Anduin.

Honestly I've thought of this for several expansions but Blizz needs to put most of their WC3 cast to bed AND develop a new cast. Right now we have the problem of the WC3 characters feeling played out and uninteresting but there's not really replacements for a lot of them.

...there would be if Blizz didn't keep killing them off.

[Nerovar]

His final dialogue in the Shadowmourne quest is decent, as are bits of his conversation with Jaina, but it's exactly the kind of thing you call out earlier in being empty once you scratch past the surface.

I disagree. It's just dialogue but that's where the similarities end. The ICC Shadowmourne dialogue is pivotal because it shows Uther's development from wishing Arthas eternal damation for wiping out his kingdom in WC3 to accepting Arthas' fate and the role he played in his fall, thus allowing himself to move on from grief, regaining his connection to the Light and allowing his soul to find peace in the process.

The Bluether story does serve to introduce the Forsworn, but it also uses its fanservice correctly since while you could replace him with say Gavinrad the Dire or one of the other fodder paladins Arthas betrayed and avoid a retcon, Uther is the more dramatic choice who has more personal ties with him. It also actually develops the character since Uther lecturing Arthas on vengeance but then needing to live up to that himself after Arthas destroys everything he cared about ties in with his characterization in a more meaningful way than 'lol, fem orcs are cool' or 'lol, i used to hit scourge now i look like scourge but I'm a good guy '. It's not some masterpiece and the Forsworn story massively suffers by making them agents of the Jailer, but like with Kael, it builds on them on the basis of their personality traits and aspects that were there previously but not too explored. Bluether makes for a better continuation than Uther as an expository ghost since his role couldn't be replaced with Terenas to zero difference and both already fuck with WC3 by being simultaneously in and outside of Frostmourne.

The Bluether story is based on the premise that Uther's soul is split into two parts (which isn't problematic in and of itself) but then only incorporates the experiences and character development of one part into the actual story, effectively erasing everything that happened to him between WC3 and Shadowlands.
Uther throwing Arthas into the Maw also hardly constitutes character development since it's basically just what Uther would have done in WC3 if he had the power to do so. So, in a way this is the same "factory reset" you criticize when it comes to characters like Jaina. It's doesn't build character - it's regression. I also disagree with the notion that Uther's ghost could have been just as easily replaced by Terenas without having any impact at all. While Terenas was his father, we hardly see his relationship with Arthas portrayed in the original WC3 story whereas Uther is his mentor and functions as an actual father figure. The real conflict and emotional impact when it comes to Arthas' betrayal always stemmed from his relationship with Uther. Terenas didn't even live to see Lordaeron destroyed whereas Uther was pretty much there the entire time before ultimately dying to his pupil. So, no it wouldn't have been the same thing.

And this isn't even taking into account that they completely purged the whole 'Light' part from Uther the Lightbringer which is boring and lazy at best and cynical and nihilistic at worst.

PS: in regards to the whole inside and outside Frostmourne at the same time thing, I've always just interpreted it as the Light allowing those souls to temporarily reach out to characters or objects they had a strong connection with in life while ultimately still being rooted inside Frostmourne.

[Super Dickmann]

I disagree. It's just dialogue but that's where the similarities end. The ICC Shadowmourne dialogue is pivotal because it shows Uther's development from wishing Arthas eternal damation for wiping out his kingdom in WC3 to accepting Arthas' fate and the role he played in his fall, thus allowing himself to move on from grief, regaining his connection to the Light and allowing his soul to find peace in the process.

There is no development. He doesn't reach this conclusion as a result of any interaction. He dies wishing Arthas burns in hell after having their last previous conversation be violently breaking with him over the Culling. The last thing he does is see the kingdom he protected be destroyed and his pupil rob his father's urn to use it to raise a necromancer from the dead while Arthas taunts him about living forever. Yet when next we see him in TBC, not only is he not in Frostmourne, without even the figleaf of the Light saving that bit of his soul we have in Shadowlands but he's dispensing bland wisdom to some random blood elf about love and peace or telling a draenei fanboy that he's grateful that the draenei donated to his OnlyFans. When next we see him in Wrath, he's already talking about how there's some good in Arthas. Him getting the clasp doesn't change his mind, that's already how he thinks and the reason he thinks this way isn't based on anything we get to experience on-screen, it's based on a retcon of Arthas' personality and motivation based on Uther being in a quantum state of both in and out of Frostmourne.

Wrath Uther is written like Obi-Wan - a mentor archetype who lost his student to evil and blames himself over what happened to him, but has already forgiven him and wishes him the best. But Uther 'If it's green, take out its spleen' Lightbringer was never that kind of character, went out blaming Arthas and having everything he loved get wrecked and his route to becoming that character is never shown.

The Bluether story is based on the premise that Uther's soul is split into two parts (which isn't problematic in and of itself since we had the same thing with Alexandros' soul shard) but then only incorporates the experiences and character development of one part into the actual story, effectively erasing everything that happened to him between WC3 and Shadowlands.
Uther throwing Arthas into the Maw also hardly constitutes character development since it's basically just what Uther would have done in WC3 if he had the power to do so. So, in a way this is the same "factory reset" you criticize when it comes to characters like Jaina. It's doesn't build character - it's regression. I also disagree with the notion that Uther's ghost could have been just as easily replaced by Terenas without having any impact at all. While Terenas was his father, we hardly see his relationship with Arthas portrayed in the original WC3 story whereas Uther is his mentor and functions as an actual father figure. The real conflict and emotional impact when it comes to Arthas' betrayal always stemmed from his relationship with Uther. Terenas didn't even live to see Lordaeron destroyed whereas Uther was pretty much there the entire time before ultimately dying to his pupil. So, no it wouldn't have been the same thing.

And this isn't even taking into account that they completely purged the whole 'Light' part from Uther the Lightbringer which is boring and lazy at best and cynical and nihilistic at worst.

Uther's soul being split is contrived and I don't like it in any version, but already a problem of his story given his TBC/Wrath appearance. Taken on its own though, I don't see the problem with the piece of Uther's soul that went to the Shadowlands at his death not being aware of what the piece of his soul we saw in Wrath (and also at his tomb?) did. That's kind of the point of the split - Bluether starts off where WC3 Uther left off. It's only Bluether who acts like the Uther of WC3 would have acted given the chance. Blizzard actually skip out on the most obvious bit of fanservice they could've done by cutitng out the line with Uther wishing there was a special place in hell for Arthas and juxtaposing that with throwing him into hell and instead letting the audience draw the obvious parallel instead. WC3 Uther, given how he died and if he figured there was a chance Arthas would get away with what he did, would dunk him in hell. In terms of doing a story about vengeance and justice, Uther, who told Arthas about it in one of their first conversations, died hating him then taking his chance at revenge but then, unlike Arthas, actually reaffirming his beliefs later on is an actual story, and a positive one. Him never acknowledging the means of his death or his grievances isn't a story and it doesn't build on what his interactions with Arthas actually were. That's why I said you can switch him with Terenas and it'd work the same, if not better:

Terenas is in the Wrath expansion cinematic, the ICC trailer cinematic and Arthas's death cinematic, so he's been an element of the expansion from the start. He was also killed by Frostmourne, so his soul'd be in the sword, like he is in the raid trailer while talking to Arthas. Unlike Uther, that wouldn't mean he'd be at two places at once for no reason. Terenas also knows about there always being the Lich King and is even the guy to tell Tirion while Uther is nowhere to be seen, so he'd work better as also being the exposition ghost in the ICC dungeons. On top of that, while Uther died mad, Terenas died confused but would have a father's unconditional love for his son and if he's the one talking, you could a lot more easily chalk the talk of Arthas still being good and keeping the Scourge at bay as being a fancy of someone who wants to think the best of their kid and not an objective fact in contradiction to what we saw before that makes one of the best antagonists in the game worse. True, Terenas hasn't talked with Jaina before, but Uther only talked with her once, and both loved Arthas so the scene would still work. Plus him trading barbs with Sylvanas would be funny if it was the current and former rulers of Lordaeron vs it being Uther with whom she has nothing to do with. It also doesn't throw how Uther died out and reduce a character who's complicated for what screen time he has into a generic mentor figure as Terenas is already just an archetype.

On the Light part, while the previous soul split was unexplained, the one in Shadowlands explicitly has the Light intervene to rescue Bluether's soul and the very first thing he does when meeting the Kyrian is to tell them that he serves the Light.

[Nerovar]

There is no development. He doesn't reach this conclusion as a result of any interaction. He dies wishing Arthas burns in hell after having their last previous conversation be violently breaking with him over the Culling. The last thing he does is see the kingdom he protected be destroyed and his pupil rob his father's urn to use it to raise a necromancer from the dead while Arthas taunts him about living forever. Yet when next we see him in TBC, not only is he not in Frostmourne, without even the figleaf of the Light saving that bit of his soul we have in Shadowlands but he's dispensing bland wisdom to some random blood elf about love and peace. When next we see him in Wrath, he's already talking about how there's some good in Arthas. Him getting the clasp doesn't change his mind, that's already how he thinks and the reason he thinks this way isn't based on anything we get to experience on-screen, it's based on a retcon of Arthas' personality and motivation based on Uther being in a quantum state of both in and out of Frostmourne.

I think you misunderstand Uther's view on Arthas' soul as it is portrayed in WotLK. We are told in WC3 that Arthas' soul was the first soul claimed by Frostmourne so logically, Uther would see that Arthas still exists in some capacity but that this part is ultimately powerless. But unlike Jaina who believes that he can somehow be saved, Uther sees destroying him as the only option. Nothing indicates that Uther has somehow forgiven Arthas for the things he did by the time we see him in the Halls of Reflection. He's deliberately put there to contrast Jaina's naive character after all. The lines about "some good part of Arthas" remaining within the Lich King's mind are only there to set up the nonsensical "there must always be a Lich King" plot point but they don't reflect some kind of benevolence towards Arthas on Uther's side.

Wrath Uther is written like Obi-Wan - a mentor archetype who lost his student to evil and blames himself over what happened to him, but has already forgiven him and wishes him the best. But Uther 'If it's green, take out its spleen' Lightbringer was never that kind of character, went out blaming Arthas and having everything he loved get wrecked and his route to becoming that character is never shown.

I don't think the comparison fully works. Obi-Wan tells Luke that Vader killed his father Anakin Skywalker. While he reminisces about their past friendship, he still very clearly opposes the person Anakin has become and views him as an irredeemably evil character who must ultimately be destroyed. Obi-Wan had given up on Anakin and it was only through his son that he could be redeemed. With Uther we don't even see him being sentimental about his past pupil up until we bring him Arthas' Badge of the Silver Hand and only then after the Light's justice has been served and Arthas was destroyed, he reaches the conclusion Obi-Wan has at the start of Star Wars.

Uther's soul being split is contrived and I don't like it in any version, but already a problem of his story given his TBC/Wrath appearance. Taken on its own though, I don't see the problem with the piece of Uther's soul that went to the Shadowlands at his death not being aware of what the piece of his soul we saw in Wrath (and also at his tomb?) did. That's kind of the point of the split - Bluether starts off where WC3 Uther left off. It's only Bluether who acts like the Uther of WC3 would have acted given the chance. Blizzard actually skip out on the most obvious bit of fanservice they could've done by cutitng out the line with Uther wishing there was a special place in hell for Arthas and juxtaposing that with throwing him into hell and instead letting the audience draw the obvious parallel instead. WC3 Uther, given how he died and if he figured there was a chance Arthas would get away with what he did, would dunk him in hell. In terms of doing a story about vengeance and justice, Uther, who told Arthas about it in one of their first conversations, died hating him then taking his chance at revenge but then, unlike Arthas, actually reaffirming his beliefs later on is an actual story, and a positive one. Him never acknowledging the means of his death or his grievances isn't a story and it doesn't build on what his interactions with Arthas actually were. That's why I said you can switch him with Terenas and it'd work the same, if not better:

The split is contrived but it's an inseparable part of Bluether. Without it, this character arc could not exist while there could be numerous explanations for his ghostly appearances in TBC/Wrath and none of them would be as ridiculous as Uther flying over our heads seconds after his other soul-half got released from Frostmourne (maybe he even /waved at himself). My point about him being unaware of what his other soul-half experienced wasn't made to demonstrate some kind of logical flaw with the story but rather my distaste for the fact that it effectively overwrites his past appearances which, to me, is very disrespectful and just a fancy way of retconning his old character. You can't have your Uther-cake and eat it too. Though, there's also the obvious plot hole of what happened to the other part of his soul after he was freed from Frostmourne.
When evaluating Uther's character development prior to Shadowlands, you have to keep mind that while it might be rough, the writers were still confined to writing a story for a character that isn't really an actor in his own story (because he's dead). Sure, you can write a better story with an Uther who takes a more active role and actually does things but in the case of Uther this would have only been possible by raising him into undeath (which would have been terrible) or by completely changing the rules of the afterlife, devaluing and demystifying the concept of death in the process (which is what they did). So, under a microscope it might be a more interesting story but I think it's nonsensical to evaluate the story without taking into account the problems that this rewriting creates for the setting.

Terenas is in the Wrath expansion cinematic, the ICC trailer cinematic and Arthas's death cinematic, so he's been an element of the expansion from the start. He was also killed by Frostmourne, so his soul'd be in the sword, like he is in the raid trailer while talking to Arthas. Unlike Uther, that wouldn't mean he'd be at two places at once for no reason. Terenas also knows about there always being the Lich King and is even the guy to tell Tirion while Uther is nowhere to be seen, so he'd work better as also being the exposition ghost in the ICC dungeons. On top of that, while Uther died mad, Terenas died confused but would have a father's unconditional love for his son and if he's the one talking, you could a lot more easily chalk the talk of Arthas still being good and keeping the Scourge at bay as being a fancy of someone who wants to think the best of their kid and not an objective fact in contradiction to what we saw before that makes one of the best antagonists in the game worse. True, Terenas hasn't talked with Jaina before, but Uther only talked with her once, and both loved Arthas so the scene would still work. Plus him trading barbs with Sylvanas would be funny if it was the current and former rulers of Lordaeron vs it being Uther with whom she has nothing to do with. It also doesn't throw how Uther died out and reduce a character who's complicated for what screen time he has into a generic mentor figure as Terenas is already just an archetype.

Well, I just disagree. Terenas plays absolutely no role in Arthas original story apart from being his father and getting killed by him therefor it would probably feel very hollow. However, I agree with the fact that it would have been more reasonable to display the "Arthas is holding the Scourge back" thing as a father hoping that some part of his son remains rather than being rooted in facts. Then again, this hasn't got anything to do with Uther's character per se but is merely rooted in your (understandable) distaste for the "there must always be a Lich King" plot point.

On the Light part, while the previous soul split was unexplained, the one in Shadowlands explicitly has the Light intervene to rescue Bluether's soul and the very first thing he does when meeting the Kyrian is to tell them that he serves the Light.

I mean, this is very weak. He mentions the Light once the very first moment he gets into Bastion and even then it's presented in a way that makes his belief in the Light intrinsically tied to his desire for vengeance i.e. a burden that he'll ultimately have to shed. Afterwards, it's simply never mentioned again. Also why the Light would send someone to a place where they'll forsake the Light in favour of becoming a Kyrian is also beyond me.

[Super Dickmann]

I think you misunderstand Uther's view on Arthas' soul as it is portrayed in WotLK. We are told in WC3 that Arthas' soul was the first soul claimed by Frostmourne so logically, Uther would see that Arthas still exists in some capacity but that this part is ultimately powerless. But unlike Jaina who believes that he can somehow be saved, Uther sees destroying him as the only option. Nothing indicates that Uther has somehow forgiven Arthas for the things he did by the time we see him in the Halls of Reflection. He's deliberately put there to contrast Jaina's naive character after all. The lines about "some good part of Arthas" remaining within the Lich King's mind are only there to set up the nonsensical "there must always be a Lich King" plot point but they don't reflect some kind of benevolence towards Arthas on Uther's side.

Uther's view on Arthas's soul is convoluted nonsense in contradiction with all prior appearances and out of character besides. In WC3, Arthas is the architect of his own actions and Uther ascribes them to him when he dies before he ever puts on the helm. In the Arthas book, we factually know that Arthas is the dominant will there and that he kills Ner'zhul to take over. In the Icecrown leveling quest with Mathias Lehner, they disregard the above two, but you still destroy the last fragment of Arthas' humanity which he voluntarily cast out after becoming the Lich King. But in the ICC dungeons, it then pivots to there still being a bit of Arthas in the helm, but not the bit of Arthas that wanted to rule in who's perspective we were in the book, but the good part of Arthas that is keeping the Scourge back, this being a functionally identical but separate good part of Arthas from the part of Arthas that he chopped out.

How does Uther know this? Is it from being in the sword? How did he go from attributing Arthas' actions without the helm to Arthas himself and hating him for it to considering the Lich King a separate entity? You say it's not forgiving Arthas in some way, but this just isn't true. Uther only ever says the Lich King is to be destroyed and Arthas is an acceptable casualty therein, but still the architect of all that is good in that entity. When you do bring him something attributable to Arthas, he likes it. But he never contends with Arthas' culpability for his own actions or how Uther feels about those things. There is no narrative arc or progression. The development you talk about him having has occurred entirely off-screen and in a way that's left to conjecture. It's a similar problem I have with your argument in general.

I don't think the comparison fully works. Obi-Wan tells Luke that Vader killed his father Anakin Skywalker. While he reminisces about their past friendship, he still very clearly opposes the person Anakin has become and views him as an irredeemably evil character who must ultimately be destroyed. Obi-Wan had given up on Anakin and it was only through his son that he could be redeemed. With Uther we don't even see him being sentimental about his past pupil up until we bring him Arthas' Badge of the Silver Hand and only then after the Light's justice has been served and Arthas was destroyed, he reaches the conclusion Obi-Wan has at the start of Star Wars.

He acts like Obi-Wan in the sense that when Anakin went dark, Obi-Wan blames himself for it, but has already written Anakin off. When Vader kills him, Obi-Wan is at peace in doing so, knowing he'll do more good then and having hope in his son. Uther dies blaming Arthas, having lost everything dear to him. He doesn't go gently into the good night, but dies livid. Yet when we first see him he already considers Arthas and the Lich King distinct and when you bring him something that's entirely of Arthas, he treats it warmly. Sure, you could say this is the moment of reconciliation, but it's weak if his thinking before and since is the same and the actual major attitude change occurs entirely off-screen on the basis of information we don't know how he received and that doesn't jive with anything else we're told. The reason this story beat works in Star Wars is both because Obi-Wan acted without malice and because in the end we see Vader's redemptive moment. But this never happens in this situation and the attempt to pigeonhole Uther in a simplistic good mentor role cuts out the nuances of his character.

The split is contrived but it's an inseparable part of Bluether. Without it, this character arc could not exist while there could be numerous explanations for his ghostly appearances in TBC/Wrath and none of them would be as ridiculous as Uther flying over our heads seconds after his other soul-half got released from Frostmourne (maybe he even /waved at himself). My point about him being unaware of what his other soul-half experienced wasn't made to demonstrate some kind of logical flaw with the story but rather my distaste for the fact that it effectively overwrites his past appearances which, to me, is very disrespectful and just a fancy way of retconning his old character. You can't have your Uther-cake and eat it too. Though, there's also the obvious plot hole of what happened to the other part of his soul after he was freed from Frostmourne.

We can't see shit going on in the spirit realms from the normal realm even if they're effectively in the same location in the 'real world' in any other case, so I really don't see the issue you find with the believability of Uther nabbing the soul in the Shadowlands without us physically seeing it. More than that, while I get where you're coming from narratively, the whole premise takes for granted that Bluether is Uther as he was in WC3 and so never experienced what our main Uther did. If you're attached to his appearances from before I can see that getting on one's tits, but my main argument is that those appearances were already very weak storytelling that used the character as a stereotypical prop in a role that could easily be filled by someone else and devalued prior stories. And yeah, the two Uthers not reuniting after the sword broke is another reason why the soul split irks me by default.

When evaluating Uther's character development prior to Shadowlands, you have to keep mind that while it might be rough, the writers were still confined to writing a story for a character that isn't really an actor in his own story (because he's dead). Sure, you can write a better story with an Uther who takes a more active role and actually does things but in the case of Uther this would have only been possible by raising him into undeath (which would have been terrible) or by completely changing the rules of the afterlife, devaluing and demystifying the concept of death in the process (which is what they did). So, under a microscope it might be a more interesting story but I think it's nonsensical to evaluate the story without taking into account the problems that this rewriting creates for the setting.

I mean, this is very weak. He mentions the Light once the very first moment he gets into Bastion and even then it's presented in a way that makes his belief in the Light intrinsically tied to his desire for vengeance i.e. a burden that he'll ultimately have to shed. Afterwards, it's simply never mentioned again. Also why the Light would send someone to a place where they'll forsake the Light in favour of becoming a Kyrian is also beyond me.

Putting these two together and the bit about Terenas separately because they all come down to our main point of difference. My position isn't that the development presented is rough, it's that it's nonexistent. The Uther we see in TBC and Wrath has the backstory of WC3 Uther and is representing the same person, but he doesn't act based on what Uther did and his appearance in TBC while it can be handwaved with the Light allowing him inexplicable bilocation is nevertheless off in characterization, since he's supposed to be trapped in torment in Frostmourne but is instead dispensing fortune cookie wisdom. You can headcanon in reasons why he was in both places at once. You can headcanon in how he learned about Arthas's state in the way the writers envisioned it in that particular patch and never before or since. You can also headcanon in his thought process while receiving the token of Arthas' living self and see it as him only drawing that distinction later and being at peace with his student. You'd be doing this on the basis of bland expository dialogue where an explicit separation is drawn between Arthas and the Lich King, with one being good and the other being the evil dominant power. We can do all that, but what do we get out of it?

I get into this at the end more, but Uther's appearance in that one patch of Wrath is inextricably tied with the 'there must always be a Lich King' plot and with the removal of agency from Arthas and onto an evil sword and a piece of headware who's sentience were already ditched so that Uther can think fondly of his pupil and go off into the Light peacefully. Every aspect of this was different in his game of origin. In WC3, there didn't always have to be a Lich King, he was an invasion tool made by demons and the Scourge could be contested miltarily. Uther didn't think fondly of his pupil, he hated him in his last moments and he did so because Arthas wasn't a meat puppet, but the agent in his own story who's downfall was the result of his own actions. Frostmourne also wasn't just a generally powerful sword, but actually did rob the souls of its victims and people like Mal'ganis, Muradin and so forth were dead. The Helm, in as much as it had its own will, was that of Ner'zhul and Arthas chose to put it on and become the Lich King while being bombarded by voices from his past, all of which he disregarded to take up his crown in obvious symbolism regarding his agency. Every single aspect of this is thrown out in Wrath.

Shadowlands might be worse for the setting than Wrath by demistifying death, I totally agree on that front. But the reason I went down that checklist is that in order to accept Uther's story role in Wrath I already had to ditch basically everything in WC3, then everything they told me in Wrath up to that point, and what I'd get for making these concessions and engaging in the kind of headcanon you have is a retread of Star Wars with two characters who had the appearance and names of those in WC3, but acted nothing like them. Arthas as the Lich King acted nothing like paladin Arthas and nothing like Death Knight Arthas. Wrath Uther acted nothing like WC3 Uther. On the other hand, if I pretend that it totally makes sense that Uther's soul is split, with the game actually giving me a figleaf this time with the Light rescuing that bit of his soul and I also accept the basics of Bastion existing, I can fully believe that WC3 Uther would act like Bluether does. In the mental state he was left off then would still hate Arthas, take the opportunity to damn him if he had the chance and would also be unable to let go of his past life, with the narrative repeatedly presenting the Kyrian as borderline retarded for their positions and paving the way for a narrative arc we actually see with drama that fits him. One gives me more bang for my buck when ignoring flagrant retcons and completely fucking up Arthas is what I'm saying.

Well, I just disagree. Terenas plays absolutely no role in Arthas original story apart from being his father and getting killed by him therefor it would probably feel very hollow. However, I agree with the fact that it would have been more reasonable to display the "Arthas is holding the Scourge back" thing as a father hoping that some part of his son remains rather than being rooted in facts. Then again, this hasn't got anything to do with Uther's character per se but is merely rooted in your (understandable) distaste for the "there must always be a Lich King" plot point.

Mostly as a PS, but my point is that the narrative didn't tackle those parts with Uther anyway except obliquely off-screen as backstory. Terenas fits better in the Uther role in Wrath than Uther does, precisely because he doesn't have the extant baggage and is just Arthas's caring dad. A lot of this is tied into my dislike for the 'there must always be a Lich King' plot, but that's part of the point. That particular plot point and the overarching rewrite of Arthas and the Lich King in general, the ditching of Ner'zhul as well as Uther/Terenas in Wrath are inextricably tied and enjoyment of one is contingent on acceptance of the other. In the same way that enjoying Bluether requires accepting the Shadowlands' version of the afterlife and its associated retcons. Where we differ is which of these trade-offs is worth it and how bad they are.

[Nerovar]

Uther's view on Arthas's soul is convoluted nonsense in contradiction with all prior appearances and out of character besides. In WC3, Arthas is the architect of his own actions and Uther ascribes them to him when he dies before he ever puts on the helm. In the Arthas book, we factually know that Arthas is the dominant will there and that he kills Ner'zhul to take over. In the Icecrown leveling quest with Mathias Lehner, they disregard the above two, but you still destroy the last fragment of Arthas' humanity which he voluntarily cast out after becoming the Lich King. But in the ICC dungeons, it then pivots to there still being a bit of Arthas in the helm, but not the bit of Arthas that wanted to rule in who's perspective we were in the book, but the good part of Arthas that is keeping the Scourge back, this being a functionally identical but separate good part of Arthas from the part of Arthas that he chopped out.

How does Uther know this? Is it from being in the sword? How did he go from attributing Arthas' actions without the helm to Arthas himself and hating him for it to considering the Lich King a separate entity? You say it's not forgiving Arthas in some way, but this just isn't true. Uther only ever says the Lich King is to be destroyed and Arthas is an acceptable casualty therein, but still the architect of all that is good in that entity. When you do bring him something attributable to Arthas, he likes it. But he never contends with Arthas' culpability for his own actions or how Uther feels about those things. There is no narrative arc or progression. The development you talk about him having has occurred entirely off-screen and in a way that's left to conjecture. It's a similar problem I have with your argument in general.

Even if I accept your take on all of it being off-screen leaving aside all the Matthias Lehner stuff etc., it's still irrelevant to my initial contention. We still have a starting point and a destination for the character that constitutes a meaningful change and this gets completely deleted by Shadowlands' take on the character and changes him into something else entirely. I mean, I probably agree with most of your points in regards to how the story was handled but I can look past that because the story still works without breaking anything and Uther's ultimate position is in line with the kind of virtues that are promoted by the Light. I think it ultimately comes down to whether you can conceive of a plausible explanation for why Uther changes his mind since Blizzard doesn't really throw us a bone in that regard. I don't have a problem with this since much of Warcraft operated in a similar "fill out the blanks" fashion in earlier days. In this case I prefer vagueness + headcanon over shitty retcons.

He acts like Obi-Wan in the sense that when Anakin went dark, Obi-Wan blames himself for it, but has already written Anakin off. When Vader kills him, Obi-Wan is at peace in doing so, knowing he'll do more good then and having hope in his son. Uther dies blaming Arthas, having lost everything dear to him. He doesn't go gently into the good night, but dies livid. Yet when we first see him he already considers Arthas and the Lich King distinct and when you bring him something that's entirely of Arthas, he treats it warmly. Sure, you could say this is the moment of reconciliation, but it's weak if his thinking before and since is the same and the actual major attitude change occurs entirely off-screen on the basis of information we don't know how he received and that doesn't jive with anything else we're told. The reason this story beat works in Star Wars is both because Obi-Wan acted without malice and because in the end we see Vader's redemptive moment. But this never happens in this situation and the attempt to pigeonhole Uther in a simplistic good mentor role cuts out the nuances of his character.

Making a distinction between Arthas and the Lich King is not necessarily the same thing as thinking of Arthas as a character who got corrupted but is still a good boi at the end of the day. Uther's dialogue with Jaina in the Halls of Reflection doesn't conclusively present Arthas in a positive light or hint at reconciliation in my opinion.

We can't see shit going on in the spirit realms from the normal realm even if they're effectively in the same location in the 'real world' in any other case, so I really don't see the issue you find with the believability of Uther nabbing the soul in the Shadowlands without us physically seeing it. More than that, while I get where you're coming from narratively, the whole premise takes for granted that Bluether is Uther as he was in WC3 and so never experienced what our main Uther did. If you're attached to his appearances from before I can see that getting on one's tits, but my main argument is that those appearances were already very weak storytelling that used the character as a stereotypical prop in a role that could easily be filled by someone else and devalued prior stories. And yeah, the two Uthers not reuniting after the sword broke is another reason why the soul split irks me by default.

I wasn't making a point about us being unable to see Bluether. I was jokingly pointing out that Bluether should probably have seen the other half of his soul leak out of Frostmourne when he came to pick up Arthas since that is where Frostmourne got shattered just a moment ago. But there's probably some contrived Shadowlands™ explanation for why they were only able to see Arthas' soul.

Putting these two together and the bit about Terenas separately because they all come down to our main point of difference. My position isn't that the development presented is rough, it's that it's nonexistent. The Uther we see in TBC and Wrath has the backstory of WC3 Uther and is representing the same person, but he doesn't act based on what Uther did and his appearance in TBC while it can be handwaved with the Light allowing him inexplicable bilocation is nevertheless off in characterization, since he's supposed to be trapped in torment in Frostmourne but is instead dispensing fortune cookie wisdom. You can headcanon in reasons why he was in both places at once. You can headcanon in how he learned about Arthas's state in the way the writers envisioned it in that particular patch and never before or since. You can also headcanon in his thought process while receiving the token of Arthas' living self and see it as him only drawing that distinction later and being at peace with his student. You'd be doing this on the basis of bland expository dialogue where an explicit separation is drawn between Arthas and the Lich King, with one being good and the other being the evil dominant power. We can do all that, but what do we get out of it?

I mean, I already agreed with the point about the character development being flimsy in terms of presentation but you have to keep in mind that Uther is just a very tiny side character in the story of WotLK. His arc was basically over in WC3 and all that was left was to give his character some closure after his spirit was released from Frostmourne. Him "forgiving" Arthas or whatever you want to call it is effectively the same thing as Obi-Wan popping up as ghost next to Anakin in SW Episode 6. It's just there to show us that Uther is able to move on. Whether this is hollow or not is a matter of taste, I suppose. Personally, I think the Darion and Alexandros dialogue was much more gratifying.

I get into this at the end more, but Uther's appearance in that one patch of Wrath is inextricably tied with the 'there must always be a Lich King' plot and with the removal of agency from Arthas and onto an evil sword and a piece of headware who's sentience were already ditched so that Uther can think fondly of his pupil and go off into the Light peacefully. Every aspect of this was different in his game of origin. In WC3, there didn't always have to be a Lich King, he was an invasion tool made by demons and the Scourge could be contested miltarily. Uther didn't think fondly of his pupil, he hated him in his last moments and he did so because Arthas wasn't a meat puppet, but the agent in his own story who's downfall was the result of his own actions. Frostmourne also wasn't just a generally powerful sword, but actually did rob the souls of its victims and people like Mal'ganis, Muradin and so forth were dead. The Helm, in as much as it had its own will, was that of Ner'zhul and Arthas chose to put it on and become the Lich King while being bombarded by voices from his past, all of which he disregarded to take up his crown in obvious symbolism regarding his agency. Every single aspect of this is thrown out in Wrath.

Again, I mostly agree with you on the silly Wrath story beats and reframing of Arthas. Then again, Uther's dialogue in ICC would still work if they hadn't changed any of that. At the end of the day, Arthas broke with Uther long before he even took up Frostmourne. Him moving on from the wrongs Arthas has caused and choosing to remember the good boi Arthas he once was works irrespective of what ultimately went on inside Arthas head after his path to damnation. This is the same attitude Obi-Wan has in Episode 4. He realizes that his pupil's soul is lost and that it is beyond his power to redeem him so he chooses to at least embrace his positive memories and leaves his redemption to a higher power. I think this is very much in line with how the philosophy of the Light is presented in Warcraft.

Shadowlands might be worse for the setting than Wrath by demistifying death, I totally agree on that front. But the reason I went down that checklist is that in order to accept Uther's story role in Wrath I already had to ditch basically everything in WC3, then everything they told me in Wrath up to that point, and what I'd get for making these concessions and engaging in the kind of headcanon you have is a retread of Star Wars with two characters who had the appearance and names of those in WC3, but acted nothing like them. Arthas as the Lich King acted nothing like paladin Arthas and nothing like Death Knight Arthas. Wrath Uther acted nothing like WC3 Uther. On the other hand, if I pretend that it totally makes sense that Uther's soul is split, with the game actually giving me a figleaf this time with the Light rescuing that bit of his soul and I also accept the basics of Bastion existing, I can fully believe that WC3 Uther would act like Bluether does. In the mental state he was left off then would still hate Arthas, take the opportunity to damn him if he had the chance and would also be unable to let go of his past life, with the narrative repeatedly presenting the Kyrian as borderline retarded for their positions and paving the way for a narrative arc we actually see with drama that fits him. One gives me more bang for my buck when ignoring flagrant retcons and completely fucking up Arthas is what I'm saying.

I can understand where you're coming from. At the end of the day, it comes down to what is personally important to you in that story - I just can't look past the blatant retcons because they're so inredibly 'in your face' if you get what I'm saying. One of my biggest problems with Bluether (and Alexandros) will always be that they diminished the importance of the Light in their respective character stories simply because it is inconvenient for the story they wanted to tell. It just doesn't work. These characters are supposed to basically be fanatics who devoted their entire lives to a higher power... only to completely abandon it the moment they died. Shadowlands takes selective character traits like name, appearance, a few phrases and a rough outline of their personality and throws everything that is undesired for the story they want to tell right into the garbage can.


PS: Bluether also doesn't fix the question in regards to Uther's ghost appearing at his Tomb. Maybe they should have shown his soul split into three parts.

[Super Dickmann]

Even if I accept your take on all of it being off-screen leaving aside all the Matthias Lehner stuff etc., it's still irrelevant to my initial contention. We still have a starting point and a destination for the character that constitutes a meaningful change and this gets completely deleted by Shadowlands' take on the character and changes him into something else entirely. I mean, I probably agree with most of your points in regards to how the story was handled but I can look past that because the story still works without breaking anything and Uther's ultimate position is in line with the kind of virtues that are promoted by the Light. I think it ultimately comes down to whether you can conceive of a plausible explanation for why Uther changes his mind since Blizzard doesn't really throw us a bone in that regard. I don't have a problem with this since much of Warcraft operated in a similar "fill out the blanks" fashion in earlier days. In this case I prefer vagueness + headcanon over shitty retcons.

We have a starting point and a destination with no process. And in terms of it avoiding retcons, the reason I went on that tangent is that the status of Arthas' soul, who was actually in charge and what the Lich King was was drastically changed between WC3 and Rise of the Lich King. Then within Wrath the explanation Uther gives directly contradicts what we did earlier in that expansion when it came to Matthias Lehner and his take on Arthas' culpability and role directly contradicts what we know from Arthas' own perspective in Rise of the Lich King. I think our main point of difference is in what aspect we have to ignore to make it. I can understand that in terms of Uther as a paladin, that endpoint, even if all the steps to it basically need to be put together from whole cloth is worth it or is less harmful. But what I enjoyed about Uther in general is that on top of being a heroic paladin, he also strayed from the mileau, both with Tirion and Arthas and making him more like an archetype like Tirion, especially if the means to do it meant really gutting Arthas as a character and was paved with contradictions wasn't really worth it.

Making a distinction between Arthas and the Lich King is not necessarily the same thing as thinking of Arthas as a character who got corrupted but is still a good boi at the end of the day. Uther's dialogue with Jaina in the Halls of Reflection doesn't conclusively present Arthas in a positive light or hint at reconciliation in my opinion.

He says directly that if Arthas is still in the Lich King, who's someone else, then that small bit of him is what's keeping the Scourge from destroying the world. It's the opposite conclusion both to how he felt when Arthas still didn't have the helm, but destroyed Lordaeron and killed him and what Tirion found out earlier. So it's naff both as character writing and in terms of continuity. Reconciliation is maybe a strong word, but he's at ease with Arthas and differentiates it from the thing currently running around in his body. That's why I can't really buy the notion that the Shadowmourne hand-in quest constitutes a character shift of any kind so much as an epitaph to the character's time in the story. As that it's fine.

I wasn't making a point about us being unable to see Bluether. I was jokingly pointing out that Bluether should probably have seen the other half of his soul leak out of Frostmourne when he came to pick up Arthas since that is where Frostmourne got shattered just a moment ago. But there's probably some contrived Shadowlands™ explanation for why they were only able to see Arthas' soul.

PS: Bluether also doesn't fix the question in regards to Uther's ghost appearing at his Tomb. Maybe they should have shown his soul split into three parts.

The more you think about that the more your head will hurt. In practice the second the sword broke a ton of other souls should have come out of there and needed picking up. Combined with Kyrian manually picking up souls and the two fragments having to reunite it's a mess and they'd have been better off just retconning all of Uther's appearances in Wrath to Terenas, ignoring TBC and calling it a day since the soul split is just a contrivance that exists to pick up with Uther from where he was at when he died in WC3.

I mean, I already agreed with the point about the character development being flimsy in terms of presentation but you have to keep in mind that Uther is just a very tiny side character in the story of WotLK. His arc was basically over in WC3 and all that was left was to give his character some closure after his spirit was released from Frostmourne. Him "forgiving" Arthas or whatever you want to call it is effectively the same thing as Obi-Wan popping up as ghost next to Anakin in SW Episode 6. It's just there to show us that Uther is able to move on. Whether this is hollow or not is a matter of taste, I suppose. Personally, I think the Darion and Alexandros dialogue was much more gratifying.

I agree entirely that Uther's story didn't need a continuation and that as far as Wrath goes he didn't do much except serve as an expository device, even more so in TBC. It's what I was getting at from the start - those appearances weren't all that interesting character-wise, could easily have been switched out with someone else who did the same thing, hence the spiel about Terenas and were largely a plot device to tie in with the conclusion regarding the helm. You didn't need to carry on with him, but the way I see it, if you were to feature him, Shadowlands does a better job of doing something with the character you couldn't do as well with any other vs. Wrath's more pandering approach that caricaturizes him and mostly serves to push bad plot and character turns.

No argument that the Wrath Darion scene was much better and it's one of the reasons I really dislike how cheap their interaction is in this expansion. Nothing needed to be done with them.

Again, I mostly agree with you on the silly Wrath story beats and reframing of Arthas. Then again, Uther's dialogue in ICC would still work if they hadn't changed any of that. At the end of the day, Arthas broke with Uther long before he even took up Frostmourne. Him moving on from the wrongs Arthas has caused and choosing to remember the good boi Arthas he once was works irrespective of what ultimately went on inside Arthas head after his path to damnation. This is the same attitude Obi-Wan has in Episode 4. He realizes that his pupil's soul is lost and that it is beyond his power to redeem him so he chooses to at least embrace his positive memories and leaves his redemption to a higher power. I think this is very much in line with how the philosophy of the Light is presented in Warcraft.

As said, what makes it work in Star Wars and fails it here is that we saw Vader's moment of pathos and how his love for his son made him do the right thing at the last moment so when Obi-Wan shows up with his ghost in Episode 6 it pans out. On top of that, Obi-Wan went on his own terms at the time he wanted. With Arthas his goodness is a weird informed trait, his break with Uther, like you say happened way before he died and his means of death were brutal. A big part of the Light is retribution, which is why one bit I liked is that Tirion doesn't let the whole Matthias Lehner heart thing stop him but sticks to his guns. Ditto, while Uther offloads Arthas' responsibility, his ghost talks more about himself than he talks about Arthas. A good thing about that quest hand in dialogue is that he doesn't mention Arthas himself, but how choosing to think of him that way makes him feel better. And it's as I finished writing that bit that I realized we actually agree there, just differ on the implications and overall worth of that as a plot turn. Meh, keeping it anyway.

I can understand where you're coming from. At the end of the day, it comes down to what is personally important to you in that story - I just can't look past the blatant retcons because they're so inredibly 'in your face' if you get what I'm saying. One of my biggest problems with Bluether (and Alexandros) will always be that they diminished the importance of the Light in their respective character stories simply because it is inconvenient for the story they wanted to tell. It just doesn't work. These characters are supposed to basically be fanatics who devoted their entire lives to a higher power... only to completely abandon it the moment they died. Shadowlands takes selective character traits like name, appearance, a few phrases and a rough outline of their personality and throws everything that is undesired for the story they want to tell right into the garbage can.

I agree with you on Alexandros. While I've enjoyed Mald more than most the forum, the weakest part of it by far is the " 'member Alexandros, 'member Draka, 'member Kel'thuzad" fare that's all really token. Bluether and Kael on the other hand actually work with big parts of the characters that weren't used before, such as the actual trauma Uther went through and the way things ended up with Arthas in WC3 and Kael having any interaction at all with the Scourge who're the reason he was even punished into his position in the first place. Specifically in Bluether's case, the fact that he exists because of divine intervention, can't let go of his past and that this isn't cast as a bad thing, plus things like Denathrius' means of disposal and Anduin sticking to his guns in his faith in the Light make me think that this will be something that'll be getting focus later. Whether it'll be good is another story, but in general I think the character dynamic of him and the Forsworn work better than did their Wrath equivalent given the groundwork of both of Arthas as a patsy to an inanimate object/Blue Satan more than a major villain in his own right. It all really comes down to what a mess was made of their best villain on anything but the most base level of presentation and VA, which were outstanding.