Scrolls of Lore Forums  

Go Back   Scrolls of Lore Forums > WarCraft Discussion > WarCraft Lore Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old 09-09-2013, 09:59 AM
Valtheria Valtheria is offline

Priestess of the Moon
Valtheria's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 507
BattleTag: Frostbane#1378

Undead Icon (War3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nazja View Post
The number of Val'kyr continues dwindling and Sylvanas is forced to open her own Scholomance. The purpose is two-fold:
  1. Training necromancers to keep the population stable.
  2. Attempting to recreate the more powerful undead, despite lacking the LK's power. (Whether they are successful is something I leave to others to decide.)

The Forsaken withdraw from the Plaguelands, which become a neutral zone under the protection of the AC and EB. The ER and CC help them heal the land.

The Forsaken withdraw from Gilneas, but the Alliance allows them to keep the lands outside of the wall. Greymane gave them up, so he forsook his claim.

The Forsaken allow the Alliance to reclaim Southshore and Dun Garok, in the Hillsbrad Foothills, out of spite. The Alliance, contrary to the expectations of the Forsaken, manage to make them inhabitable.

The Forsaken move out of Arathi.

The Forsaken stop raising recently deceased Alliance soldiers, to appease the Alliance. Instead, they resort to grave robbing. As a result, some of their new recruits are often nothing more than animated skeletons and not intelligent undead like the true Forsaken.
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Oh god, her own Scholomance? There's no way anyone in the Alliance or the Horde would allow that to happen. Whoever the Warchief after Garrosh is would threaten to dump her immediately after hearing about that. It's one thing to have a small number of creatures capable of rudimentary necromancy, it's another thing to train a full-fledged Cult of the Damned.

Yes.

Already out of Gilneas. I agree with the second part, of course.

Southshore is useless to them. It will not be inhabitable - the Forsaken would know the effects of the Blight better than anyone else, so it breaks suspension of disbelief that the Alliance could do better in a short amount of time.

Yes.

That last point doesn't work. Again, there are limits on what can and cannot be raised that apply to time and the power of the person being raised versus the power used to raise them. This is why Terenas' urn was necessary to carry Kel'Thuzad's remains and why they required the Sunwell to resurrect a necromancer of his caliber.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-09-2013, 10:16 AM
Nazja Nazja is offline

Trade Baroness - Moderator
Nazja's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: All the lands of Wonder.
Posts: 40,927

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valtheria View Post
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Oh god, her own Scholomance? There's no way anyone in the Alliance or the Horde would allow that to happen. Whoever the Warchief after Garrosh is would threaten to dump her immediately after hearing about that. It's one thing to have a small number of creatures capable of rudimentary necromancy, it's another thing to train a full-fledged Cult of the Damned.
It's a secret.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valtheria View Post
Southshore is useless to them. It will not be inhabitable - the Forsaken would know the effects of the Blight better than anyone else, so it breaks suspension of disbelief that the Alliance could do better in a short amount of time.
The Gnomes, who have experience with slimes and are geniuses, and the Light could give the Alliance an edge. At least, that's how I'd explained it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valtheria View Post
That last point doesn't work. Again, there are limits on what can and cannot be raised that apply to time and the power of the person being raised versus the power used to raise them. This is why Terenas' urn was necessary to carry Kel'Thuzad's remains and why they required the Sunwell to resurrect a necromancer of his caliber.
That's why most (the oldest) are failures. Sometimes the Forsaken get lucky and find a fresh corpse. Of course, the grave robbing is done in secret so as to not anger the Alliance. Some unscrupulous humans could even be trafficking corpses.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-09-2013, 10:20 AM
GenyaArikado GenyaArikado is offline

Banished
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 13,294

Default

Am I the only one who sees the Alliance capable of eternally locking Sylvanas in a coffin if they knew her fate?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-09-2013, 10:30 AM
Valtheria Valtheria is offline

Priestess of the Moon
Valtheria's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 507
BattleTag: Frostbane#1378

Undead Icon (War3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kynrind View Post
The wall problem can be fixed easily enough. But I do agree that the Alliance should have Durnhold and Dun Garok. I think the Alliance should get Caer Darrow too. It's not as vulnerable as you seem to think it is TB. It's would be extremely easy to refortify it and as a fort, it would have stores against a siege. It would also be invulnerable from poisoned water (it's in a huge lake...) and it's not like the pass to the Hinterlands would be unfortified by the Wildhammer. Only a military idiot would not reinforce that.

I also think that the Alliance would be loath to let Uther's tomb and the graveyard there be held by the forsaken, who show a disturbing tendency to violate every graveyard they find.




That's a large part of the problem with the forsaken and Sylvanas. They keep desecrating the dead. THAT is what should be sticking in the craw of a lot of people. The forsaken are literally pulling people back from their deserved afterlife, cursing them with undead and ensuring that the new undead will almost never ever experience -anything- positive again.

It's like shooting someone up with a powerful drug that removes all inhibitions. The person fought to avoid it, but they were captured and shot up with the drug, then asked if they wanted it. Asking someone if they want something as horrifying as that AFTER you give it to them is wrong. The fact they were fighting to stop those who were injecting should be enough proof that they do not want it. Just like those who are killed fighting the forsaken. It's damned clear they do NOT want it. Yet too many forsaken fanboys see nothing wrong with the forsaken raising the dead of those they just killed (which is annoying as hell. 'the forsaken raising the dead, nothing wrong with that. Not evil...). Blizzard has screwed up the presentation of the forsaken very badly. There's too many inconsistencies after the starting area for how the dead are raised.

How would you like it if you were pulled back from a good afterlife to be stuffed back into your body, which is either damaged from battle and/or literally rotting to pieces. Then to find out you can't feel anything good or positive and the negative emotions are much easier to embrace. Does that sound like you could make a rational and reasoned decision? Would you not be mad as hell as the people who raised you?


Realistically though, the forsaken should be wiped out by both the Alliance, Horde, Argents and Cenarion Circle. The forsaken as they are and have been and by the actions they have willingly committed, are nothing but a 25 ton anchor around the Horde's neck.
Necromancy has a time limit. Any corpses they desecrate are recently deceased. They are not "violating every graveyard they find", because that would be pointless.

Note, I'm never saying that necromancy is correct. I find it wrong, but it's also necessary from a story perspective. The Forsaken have fought Alliance, Scarlets, Scourge, Syndicate, and Wolfcult in Lordaeron, a war against the Lich King, and lost hundreds in Varimathras's coup d'etat. Their initial numbers weren't that great to begin with and were only bolstered by the plagued undead who had yet to be activated (Vanilla Deathknell).

Still, the morality of necromancy hinges entirely upon the point-of-view of the person. Morality is not an immutable set of ethics, it varies from place to place. This is why orcish culture appears brutal to a human and human culture looks weak to an orc - they have different values much like any real-world culture might.

The Forsaken's values are extremely alien, however, I will admit that, but they are an amoral group. The question of "right or wrong" usually doesn't apply and, when it does, it still takes a back seat to "is this beneficial or not". It's the same kind of system goblins use, but goblins are generally less cruel about it and do pay attention to morality in certain cases (rather, pragmatism IS their morality, as friendship and business doesn't seem to have a large divide in Kezanian culture as it does in human culture).

Also, I'd like to be resurrected very much if it happened to me, given that my outlook on things would probably change post-resurrection. It's only a problem when it hasn't already happened. If I didn't accept undeath, then I'd kill myself or leave like the dozens of newly-raised Forsaken who choose to do just that. But there's always a choice; the Forsaken don't force anyone to join them after being resurrected, it's a conscious decision made by the person and they are free to leave at any time. If you don't want to serve the Forsaken, then they don't want you to and they are generally helpful to any undead that isn't trying to kill them (Redpath).

The Horde has no justifiable reason to hurt their major foothold in the Eastern Kingdoms and an ally that has aided them for half a decade now (though Garrosh was certainly willing to do it, likely to claim it for the orcs). In the wake of Hellscream, doing something like this would be an especially large issue, as it's essentially what he's done to the Darkspear - alienate, subjugate, and attempt genocide upon them.

The Argent Crusade is open and accepting of all races and I cannot imagine that they want to genocide any group of sentient beings because of it. It would be very, very out of character and not "realistic" at all. The same can be said to a lesser extent for the Alliance, who would have to give up manpower to assault the Forsaken and wouldn't condone genocide any more than the Argent Crusade would.

The Cenarion Circle is a group of druids. Unless it's changing the land in a manner similar to an Old God or the Legion, they probably don't care and won't involve themselves in a factional dispute regardless. This is probably why Malfurion appears to not care about the war - the Circle is primarily affiliated with Azeroth.

The other problem with genocide as an option is its effect on the world's understanding of the faction. The Alliance "simply" opting for genocide sends a lot of bad messages world-round.

From the Horde's perspective, the Alliance would have demolished every single man and woman of a faction allied with them. They may not care about the Forsaken on a personal level (side note: I find it funny how no one else cares about the Forsaken, but Sylvanas has to care to lead them...), but they will see that the Alliance will not hesitate to hold every person in a faction, whether they be complicit in the actions taken by their government and military or not, will be held equally accountable.

Even if they believe the Forsaken deserved it, it sends the message that, if the Alliance ever finds another race to be inconvenient to them, they will wipe them off of the face of Azeroth without so much as a second thought. That's scary and fear, as we've all seen, leads to war as much as the hatred and anger to commit that sort of violence upon a population does.

It's a recipe for more war.

Taken to it's extreme, it implies that the Alliance now sees itself as the ultimate moral standard of Azeroth and that those who go outside the confines of that moral standard will be eradicated. That's the kind of thinking only the Brotherhood of Light and D.E.T.H.A. might agree with among the neutral factions - but the main body of the Argent Crusade and the Cenarion Circle could never condone this.

As for the Ebon Blade, implied conflict with Sylvanas aside, they now have to face an army willing to kill any who use necromancy (and the Ebon Blade doesn't "do" free will when they use necromancy on their enemies) on the grounds that those practices are inherently evil. Even if the Alliance doesn't attack them, they'd be fools NOT to be on edge.

Again, genocide is not a viable "solution". It's not as simple as "we killed them all and everything was good". That's a naive way of viewing it. It's not to big a step from "kill them all, they're the bad guys who hurt us and we want vengeance" to "kill them all, they're the bad guys" because that sort of thinking is TOO SIMPLE to be realistic and lacks the basic understanding that, no matter the group and no matter the society, free-willed, sentient beings do not all think and feel and act the same.

Last edited by Valtheria; 09-09-2013 at 10:35 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-09-2013, 10:32 AM
C9H20 C9H20 is offline

Elune
C9H20's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,208

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kynrind View Post
That's a large part of the problem with the forsaken and Sylvanas. They keep desecrating the dead. THAT is what should be sticking in the craw of a lot of people. The forsaken are literally pulling people back from their deserved afterlife, cursing them with undead and ensuring that the new undead will almost never ever experience -anything- positive again.

It's like shooting someone up with a powerful drug that removes all inhibitions. The person fought to avoid it, but they were captured and shot up with the drug, then asked if they wanted it. Asking someone if they want something as horrifying as that AFTER you give it to them is wrong. The fact they were fighting to stop those who were injecting should be enough proof that they do not want it. Just like those who are killed fighting the forsaken. It's damned clear they do NOT want it. Yet too many forsaken fanboys see nothing wrong with the forsaken raising the dead of those they just killed (which is annoying as hell. 'the forsaken raising the dead, nothing wrong with that. Not evil...). Blizzard has screwed up the presentation of the forsaken very badly. There's too many inconsistencies after the starting area for how the dead are raised.

How would you like it if you were pulled back from a good afterlife to be stuffed back into your body, which is either damaged from battle and/or literally rotting to pieces. Then to find out you can't feel anything good or positive and the negative emotions are much easier to embrace. Does that sound like you could make a rational and reasoned decision? Would you not be mad as hell as the people who raised you?


Realistically though, the forsaken should be wiped out by both the Alliance, Horde, Argents and Cenarion Circle. The forsaken as they are and have been and by the actions they have willingly committed, are nothing but a 25 ton anchor around the Horde's neck.
Two things.

One, that the undead are unable to feel positive emotions is Fojar fanon.

Two, how can you know how ancient dead feel about raising? Maybe they are suffering in hell and would jump out the grave for a chance of "living" again.
Ultimately what is important is that no one is killed, weather or not a spell is devised to ask permission of those ancient dead about to be raised is just another layer of complexity to the story.

Though I'll also add that the immense moralizing you do is both stupid and unnecessary. I do not give a flying fuck about the fate of fictional humans, being all outraged over it is ridiculous. Raising ancient dead may be questionable from an in-game moral standpoint, but Azeroth is a world with many horrible dangers and convoluted politics. Long story short, it isn't a perfect world and you can't right every wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 09-09-2013, 10:37 AM
Kir the Wizard Kir the Wizard is offline

The Sun King
Kir the Wizard's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Donetsk, Occupied Ukraine
Posts: 11,115

Crossed Swords

"What should be done with the Forsaken?" is kind of a broad question and most of all requires an identification of the 'judges' who are deciding what must be done.

Any scenario that involves the undead state being allowed to keep the territories they conquered and corrupted with no repercussions will only be a temporary ceasefire for the Alliance, until a new wave of strife and anger at the -unfair treaty- rises high and a new conflict starts. Of course, had I been Sylvanas, I'd argue exactly for this kind of scenario - keeping everything, signing a treaty and branding the Alliance as aggressors when the new war inevitably starts.

Had I been an Alliance politician, I'd made the Lordaeronian Question our main priority, making it clear to the Horde that I'd let some other issues slide if the Forsaken state finally gets comeuppance for their policies and the people of the Alliance return their age-long rightful lands. Absolute hegemony over the Eastern Kingdoms, even at the cost of lost colonies on Kalimdor, is the Alliance's key to survival further down the line. The Argent and Syndicate states are to be dominated sooner or later, and a northern elven periphery won't do much trouble if unprovoked.

And if I'm an orcish Warchief, I'll probably try to use a third side to balance the power while looking less aggressive. Support Argent Lordaeron as the true continuation of the kingdom and have it claim Tirisfal, Darrowmere and all of Plaguelands, on the conditions that they would treat the undead denizens well (after all, we can't trust the Alliance with this!). If the Alliance really insists on getting some piece from the pie, give them back the Southern Lordaeron, perhaps even including Alterac and Silverpine, - that is, on the conditions that Dalaran returns here and becomes neutral again, the forest trolls retain their lands in the Hinterlands and the Alliance abandons any and all non-nightelven colonies they had on Kalimdor. As for Sylvanas Windrunner, she'd get diplomatic protection and cover in her homeland of Quel'Thalas. Mayhaps even move some (elven?) undead there, to Deathholme and the Ghostlands.

Whatever the character is, they'd try to wrestle the best treaty for their side.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-09-2013, 10:40 AM
Valtheria Valtheria is offline

Priestess of the Moon
Valtheria's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 507
BattleTag: Frostbane#1378

Undead Icon (War3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by C9H20 View Post
Two things.

One, that the undead are unable to feel positive emotions is Fojar fanon.

Two, how can you know how ancient dead feel about raising? Maybe they are suffering in hell and would jump out the grave for a chance of "living" again.
Ultimately what is important is that no one is killed, weather or not a spell is devised to ask permission of those ancient dead about to be raised is just another layer of complexity to the story.

Though I'll also add that the immense moralizing you do is both stupid and unnecessary. I do not give a flying fuck about the fate of fictional humans, being all outraged over it is ridiculous. Raising ancient dead may be questionable from an in-game moral standpoint, but Azeroth is a world with many horrible dangers and convoluted politics. Long story short, it isn't a perfect world and you can't right every wrong.
I like this post. I agree; I don't think every single wrong needs to be righted to its fullest extent - or can be. Should the Forsaken be mass murdered? Debatable, at best (I still say "NO"), but it's not like Azeroth has ever has a karmic need to right every wrong in full.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-09-2013, 11:01 AM
Kir the Wizard Kir the Wizard is offline

The Sun King
Kir the Wizard's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Donetsk, Occupied Ukraine
Posts: 11,115

Default

"The universe doesn't need to be karmic" isn't really a needed argument here, when both idealistic and realpolitik interests of the Alliance lie in the region.

The personalities of the characters that are supposed to be "doing" something with the Forsaken give out whatever questions you want to hear. Everything else is the matter of fan-specific bias and interest in the topic.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-09-2013, 11:08 AM
Valtheria Valtheria is offline

Priestess of the Moon
Valtheria's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 507
BattleTag: Frostbane#1378

Undead Icon (War3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kir the Wizard View Post
"The universe doesn't need to be karmic" isn't really a needed argument here, when both idealistic and realpolitik interests of the Alliance lie in the region.

The personalities of the characters that are supposed to be "doing" something with the Forsaken give out whatever questions you want to hear. Everything else is the matter of fan-specific bias and interest in the topic.
True as this is, I'm still genuinely enjoying the discussion. Hearing every person's ideas about the Forsaken gives me a bit of perspective on what the world might actually think.

A good number of people on Azeroth might think they should be stripped down and made to pay, others want them kicked out, and some just want to kill the lot of them and claim vengeance for the crimes they've committed.

But, then, I guess that proves my point - even within a culture (Warcraft fandom) and independent of the politics and actions of the government and leadership (Blizzard's actual stance), you'll find a ton of people who think differently.

I mean, I'm Captain Obvious for pointing out that different people think differently, but I feel it's a parallel that needs to be made in the context of the fandom's views on orcs, Forsaken, the war, and the faction politics.

Edit: Additonally, I'm just glad this hasn't turned into something worthy of the "Halls of Lordaeron" forum (please don't let me be wrong). Really, thank you all for being polite and respectful to one another's opinions.

Last edited by Valtheria; 09-09-2013 at 11:14 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-09-2013, 11:19 AM
Lord Grimtale Lord Grimtale is offline

Elune
Lord Grimtale's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Slaughtered Lamb
Posts: 22,046
BattleTag: Grimtale67#1407

Default

Not sure how to respond to this thread without bogging it down, but I'll try to be as light as possible.

Forsaken being repaid for their atrocities doesn't necessarily need to be a 'good vs. evil' sort of thing. It could be more like a 'gray vs. darker gray' kind of scene, like a vigilante punishing a criminal rather than the lawful good police officers.

I think the way they've handled the Worgen vs. Forsaken war has been kind of a drag, it just abruptly ends and Forsaken get more perspective out of it while the Worgen go off to be Night Elf sidekicks.

But honestly, I think Forsaken shouldn't be the only race that's allowed to be delightfully assholish. It's obvious that Blizzard sees it that way, but I don't think that's how it should be, which just leads to me resenting the race as a whole.

I know this will be impossible to see happen, but I would like the Forsaken to get a taste of their own medicine, to go through the same atrocities they inflict on others. I don't want them to face extinction, but they should certainly be forced to look in the mirror once in a while.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-09-2013, 11:30 AM
Noitora Noitora is offline

Elune
Noitora's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,690
BattleTag: Chillman#1339

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Grimtale View Post
Not sure how to respond to this thread without bogging it down, but I'll try to be as light as possible.

Forsaken being repaid for their atrocities doesn't necessarily need to be a 'good vs. evil' sort of thing. It could be more like a 'gray vs. darker gray' kind of scene, like a vigilante punishing a criminal rather than the lawful good police officers.

I think the way they've handled the Worgen vs. Forsaken war has been kind of a drag, it just abruptly ends and Forsaken get more perspective out of it while the Worgen go off to be Night Elf sidekicks.

But honestly, I think Forsaken shouldn't be the only race that's allowed to be delightfully assholish. It's obvious that Blizzard sees it that way, but I don't think that's how it should be, which just leads to me resenting the race as a whole.

I know this will be impossible to see happen, but I would like the Forsaken to get a taste of their own medicine, to go through the same atrocities they inflict on others. I don't want them to face extinction, but they should certainly be forced to look in the mirror once in a while.
I keep seeing you use the phrase grey vs grey. What do you find grey about fighting the Forsaken compared to let's say, Retribution via pissed off warriors or avenging the fallen via paladins?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fojar View Post
Yeah but where would this forum be if not for people speculating endlessly about things Blizzard doesn't give a shit about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leviathon View Post
SoL: 20 something know it alls telling other 20 something know it alls they know everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kobebyarlant View Post
All this faction bitching and people arguing with each other and it's Fojar of all people that comes in with reasonable positivity.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-09-2013, 11:40 AM
Lord Grimtale Lord Grimtale is offline

Elune
Lord Grimtale's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Slaughtered Lamb
Posts: 22,046
BattleTag: Grimtale67#1407

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noitora View Post
I keep seeing you use the phrase grey vs grey. What do you find grey about fighting the Forsaken compared to let's say, Retribution via pissed off warriors or avenging the fallen via paladins?
That depends on what you will accept as grey compared to morally stark white.

I think if it was Paladins vs. Forsaken, who are all about justice but also understand mercy and fighting Forsaken to the extent of their morality would be incredibly stark white and wouldn't really catch my interest.

But if it were savage werewolves vs. Forsaken, who are incredibly brutal, use shady guerilla tactics, and maybe even a lot of torture with a lack of any moral compunctions, that would be much more grey I think.

It would also be more interesting than man vs. monster, because instead it would be monster vs. monster.

Granted, it seems more like Blizzard prefers to use humans in the Alliance for dubious story developments, so you got me there.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-09-2013, 11:45 AM
Noitora Noitora is offline

Elune
Noitora's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,690
BattleTag: Chillman#1339

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Grimtale View Post
That depends on what you will accept as grey compared to morally stark white.

I think if it was Paladins vs. Forsaken, who are all about justice but also understand mercy and fighting Forsaken to the extent of their morality would be incredibly stark white and wouldn't really catch my interest.

But if it were savage werewolves vs. Forsaken, who are incredibly brutal, use shady guerilla tactics, and maybe even a lot of torture with a lack of any moral compunctions, that would be much more grey I think.

It would also be more interesting than man vs. monster, because instead it would be monster vs. monster.

Granted, it seems more like Blizzard prefers to use humans in the Alliance for dubious story developments, so you got me there.
See, we had Turalyon torture an Orc after spending a part of the story worrying whether or not it was justified. I don't even consider that grey, so why would torturing a Forsaken be considered edgy? Define shady guerilla tactics? The Alliance has snipers and assassins and I don't consider that grey.

Like, why is it that the tactics we players use against pve threats where we torture and imprison are accepted/tolerated, but if someone even thinks on doing it to the Forsaken all of a sudden it's edgy?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fojar View Post
Yeah but where would this forum be if not for people speculating endlessly about things Blizzard doesn't give a shit about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leviathon View Post
SoL: 20 something know it alls telling other 20 something know it alls they know everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kobebyarlant View Post
All this faction bitching and people arguing with each other and it's Fojar of all people that comes in with reasonable positivity.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-09-2013, 11:48 AM
Lord Grimtale Lord Grimtale is offline

Elune
Lord Grimtale's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Slaughtered Lamb
Posts: 22,046
BattleTag: Grimtale67#1407

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noitora View Post
See, we had Turalyon torture an Orc after spending a part of the story worrying whether or not it was justified. I don't even consider that grey, so why would torturing a Forsaken be considered edgy? Define shady guerilla tactics? The Alliance has snipers and assassins and I don't consider that grey.

Like, why is it that the tactics we players use against pve threats where we torture and imprison are accepted/tolerated, but if someone even thinks on doing it to the Forsaken all of a sudden it's edgy?
Well that goes back to my question, what would YOU accept as morally grey actions for the Worgen to do to the Forsaken?

Really I don't care, as long as it doesn't make them borderline evil.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-09-2013, 11:50 AM
Noitora Noitora is offline

Elune
Noitora's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,690
BattleTag: Chillman#1339

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Grimtale View Post
Well that goes back to my question, what would YOU accept as morally grey actions for the Worgen to do to the Forsaken?

Really I don't care, as long as it doesn't make them borderline evil.
Idk. Using warlocks and shadow priests? Burying them alive, leading them to a trap, killing a village of them, even the undead kids. Did you do Silverpine as a Forsaken? It was a back and forth brutal battle between them. I just don't consider vicious grey tbh unless the Forsaken start crying and begging for mercy.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fojar View Post
Yeah but where would this forum be if not for people speculating endlessly about things Blizzard doesn't give a shit about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leviathon View Post
SoL: 20 something know it alls telling other 20 something know it alls they know everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kobebyarlant View Post
All this faction bitching and people arguing with each other and it's Fojar of all people that comes in with reasonable positivity.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 09-09-2013, 11:51 AM
Valtheria Valtheria is offline

Priestess of the Moon
Valtheria's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 507
BattleTag: Frostbane#1378

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Grimtale View Post
That depends on what you will accept as grey compared to morally stark white.

I think if it was Paladins vs. Forsaken, who are all about justice but also understand mercy and fighting Forsaken to the extent of their morality would be incredibly stark white and wouldn't really catch my interest.

But if it were savage werewolves vs. Forsaken, who are incredibly brutal, use shady guerilla tactics, and maybe even a lot of torture with a lack of any moral compunctions, that would be much more grey I think.

It would also be more interesting than man vs. monster, because instead it would be monster vs. monster.

Granted, it seems more like Blizzard prefers to use humans in the Alliance for dubious story developments, so you got me there.
This is what Gilneas should have been. I wish that, rather than Ivar Bloodfang being introduced as a new character, Crowley had killed him, taken command of the Silverpine packs, and that character gradually developed to have traits that Ivar has in current lore. That way, when Sylvanas holds Lorna ransom, it's a moment where we see Crowley's human side return.

The worgen curse as a whole needed to be as bad as undeath. Should have some influence on the way you think, making you angrier, more brutal by default regardless of being feral. The more times you go worgen, the less you should want to go back to being human. It should be a condition that affects the mind. Genn could be the worgen who desperately wants to stay human while fighting what he's becoming and the desire to give into it. Struggle with the desire to kill living animals and other humanoids and eat their flesh, even though he can control it.

...Frankly, there's a lot to the Gilneas vs. Forsaken plot that could've been improved upon by making our werewolves act like damned werewolves.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-09-2013, 11:57 AM
Kynrind Kynrind is offline

Arch-Druid
Kynrind's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,980

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C9H20 View Post
Two things.

One, that the undead are unable to feel positive emotions is Fojar fanon.

Two, how can you know how ancient dead feel about raising? Maybe they are suffering in hell and would jump out the grave for a chance of "living" again.
Ultimately what is important is that no one is killed, weather or not a spell is devised to ask permission of those ancient dead about to be raised is just another layer of complexity to the story.

Though I'll also add that the immense moralizing you do is both stupid and unnecessary. I do not give a flying fuck about the fate of fictional humans, being all outraged over it is ridiculous. Raising ancient dead may be questionable from an in-game moral standpoint, but Azeroth is a world with many horrible dangers and convoluted politics. Long story short, it isn't a perfect world and you can't right every wrong.
If you'd read what I wrote you would have seen that I said 'new undead will almost never ever experience -anything- positive again.' Will almost never. That is backed up by the CDev statement. It is exceedingly rare for undead to feel positive/good feelings because the curse of undeath effectively severs those feelings from the undead being. This doesn't mean they can't, just that it is very rare for them to do so.

I am guessing that many of the dead would have gone onto a decent afterlife. They'd be damned resentful at being pulled away from that and stuck back in a rotting body to have a -second chance- at 'life'. If so it's a heavily stacked deck with fully half of their emotions more or less cut off. Even so, what gives the forsaken the right to raise the dead anyways? What makes it right? They they need to procreate? Why? What is so important that the forsaken have to spread what they KNOW is a curse to others?

Quote:
The Horde has no justifiable reason to hurt their major foothold in the Eastern Kingdoms and an ally that has aided them for half a decade now (though Garrosh was certainly willing to do it, likely to claim it for the orcs). In the wake of Hellscream, doing something like this would be an especially large issue, as it's essentially what he's done to the Darkspear - alienate, subjugate, and attempt genocide upon them.

The Argent Crusade is open and accepting of all races and I cannot imagine that they want to genocide any group of sentient beings because of it. It would be very, very out of character and not "realistic" at all. The same can be said to a lesser extent for the Alliance, who would have to give up manpower to assault the Forsaken and wouldn't condone genocide any more than the Argent Crusade would.

The Cenarion Circle is a group of druids. Unless it's changing the land in a manner similar to an Old God or the Legion, they probably don't care and won't involve themselves in a factional dispute regardless. This is probably why Malfurion appears to not care about the war - the Circle is primarily affiliated with Azeroth.

The other problem with genocide as an option is its effect on the world's understanding of the faction. The Alliance "simply" opting for genocide sends a lot of bad messages world-round.

From the Horde's perspective, the Alliance would have demolished every single man and woman of a faction allied with them. They may not care about the Forsaken on a personal level (side note: I find it funny how no one else cares about the Forsaken, but Sylvanas has to care to lead them...), but they will see that the Alliance will not hesitate to hold every person in a faction, whether they be complicit in the actions taken by their government and military or not, will be held equally accountable.

Even if they believe the Forsaken deserved it, it sends the message that, if the Alliance ever finds another race to be inconvenient to them, they will wipe them off of the face of Azeroth without so much as a second thought. That's scary and fear, as we've all seen, leads to war as much as the hatred and anger to commit that sort of violence upon a population does.

It's a recipe for more war.
If the forsaken's actions become more of a problem than they are worth, then you can bet the Horde would cut the forsaken loose in an instant. There comes a time when an ally's actions step over the line and become too much to tolerate. Right now, the only reason the forsaken are still with the Horde is because of game play. Real politics aside, Vol'jin would bitch slap Sylvanas hard enough her jaw lands in the Barrens when he finds out she wants to raise Alliance corpses. If the Horde wants real peace, it needs to STOP FUCKING WITH THE ALLIANCE BY DESECRATING THEIR DEAD! This is one of the biggest points. ALL Azerothian cultures find necromancy to be evil Even the trolls do. Alliance, Horde, neutral, it doesn't make any difference. They all find the practice abhorrent. Game play reasons make them alal more or less ignore it.


The Argents, Cenarion Circle, and the Horde have no problem about killing an enemy faction down to the last person. That's what they and we do as players to the NPC factions all the time. The Cult of the Damned, Twilight Cult, fel orcs, fel Horde, Burning Legion forces and so on, are -all- slaughtered to the last man and woman (rarely do you see a child with them). Why? Because leaving any alive is asking for more attacks. It is a regular practice to exterminate enemy groups because that is the sanest and smartest thing to do. Also because those groups are nothing more than a cancer on Azeroth and need to be lanced. The forsaken have pretty much reached that point by now.

Since classic WoW, the forsaken have been the one that has been unrelentingly hostile to the Alliance. It's been the forsaken that have been attacking Southshore and Hillsbrad. Those two settlements have been just trying to survive and have not been doing much if anything to attack the forsaken. If you look at the quests in Hillsbrad in classic, there might be 2 Alliance quests that have to attacking the forsaken and those were one forsaken guard at the western edge of the zone, and to reclaim a stolen crate at the broken tower between Southshore and Tarren Mills. While the forsaken gave out numerous quests that had the players killing dozens to hundreds of Alliance citizens.

I guarantee though, that if the forsaken continue, they will continue to be allowed to attack the Alliance with little if any retaliation. The forsaken need a slap down badly.

As for the Blight, it's not an 'I Win' button either. By now the Alliance should be developing countermeasures. They know about it and can plan for it. And widespread use of it would be guaranteed to get the Argents and CC coming down on the forsaken.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:11 PM
Lord Grimtale Lord Grimtale is offline

Elune
Lord Grimtale's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Slaughtered Lamb
Posts: 22,046
BattleTag: Grimtale67#1407

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noitora View Post
Idk. Using warlocks and shadow priests? Burying them alive, leading them to a trap, killing a village of them, even the undead kids. Did you do Silverpine as a Forsaken? It was a back and forth brutal battle between them. I just don't consider vicious grey tbh unless the Forsaken start crying and begging for mercy.
Warcraft is a very morally loose setting, I'll admit. A lot of things seem to be viewed as 'okay' given the circumstances.

That doesn't mean there isn't room for one race to stand out from another one in terms of how they do things though.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:11 PM
C9H20 C9H20 is offline

Elune
C9H20's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,208

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valtheria View Post
This is what Gilneas should have been. I wish that, rather than Ivar Bloodfang being introduced as a new character, Crowley had killed him, taken command of the Silverpine packs, and that character gradually developed to have traits that Ivar has in current lore. That way, when Sylvanas holds Lorna ransom, it's a moment where we see Crowley's human side return.

The worgen curse as a whole needed to be as bad as undeath. Should have some influence on the way you think, making you angrier, more brutal by default regardless of being feral. The more times you go worgen, the less you should want to go back to being human. It should be a condition that affects the mind. Genn could be the worgen who desperately wants to stay human while fighting what he's becoming and the desire to give into it. Struggle with the desire to kill living animals and other humanoids and eat their flesh, even though he can control it.

...Frankly, there's a lot to the Gilneas vs. Forsaken plot that could've been improved upon by making our werewolves act like damned werewolves.
I had a similar idea, wherein the worgen who left with Genn struggle to maintain their humanity at all costs while the ones who stay in Lordaeron lose themselves more and more in their feral natures. I am talking cannibalistic massacres, forceful blood feeding, unhinged bloodlust rampages possibly fueled by liquor. Total war, unscrupulous total war against the Forsaken.
To the point where the remaining humans of Lordaeron don't know what to fear more, monsters with red flags or monsters with blue flags.

Ultimately it is a duality, the fallen worgen of Lordaeron (be they ultimately villains or if they recover and become dark anti-heroes) and the struggling expatriot worgen who cling to the straight and narrow.
It shows and highlights the achievement of the moral worgen by comparing them to their failed brethren.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:25 PM
Valtheria Valtheria is offline

Priestess of the Moon
Valtheria's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 507
BattleTag: Frostbane#1378

Undead Icon (War3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kynrind View Post
If you'd read what I wrote you would have seen that I said 'new undead will almost never ever experience -anything- positive again.' Will almost never. That is backed up by the CDev statement. It is exceedingly rare for undead to feel positive/good feelings because the curse of undeath effectively severs those feelings from the undead being. This doesn't mean they can't, just that it is very rare for them to do so.

I am guessing that many of the dead would have gone onto a decent afterlife. They'd be damned resentful at being pulled away from that and stuck back in a rotting body to have a -second chance- at 'life'. If so it's a heavily stacked deck with fully half of their emotions more or less cut off. Even so, what gives the forsaken the right to raise the dead anyways? What makes it right? They they need to procreate? Why? What is so important that the forsaken have to spread what they KNOW is a curse to others?



If the forsaken's actions become more of a problem than they are worth, then you can bet the Horde would cut the forsaken loose in an instant. There comes a time when an ally's actions step over the line and become too much to tolerate. Right now, the only reason the forsaken are still with the Horde is because of game play. Real politics aside, Vol'jin would bitch slap Sylvanas hard enough her jaw lands in the Barrens when he finds out she wants to raise Alliance corpses. If the Horde wants real peace, it needs to STOP FUCKING WITH THE ALLIANCE BY DESECRATING THEIR DEAD! This is one of the biggest points. ALL Azerothian cultures find necromancy to be evil Even the trolls do. Alliance, Horde, neutral, it doesn't make any difference. They all find the practice abhorrent. Game play reasons make them alal more or less ignore it.


The Argents, Cenarion Circle, and the Horde have no problem about killing an enemy faction down to the last person. That's what they and we do as players to the NPC factions all the time. The Cult of the Damned, Twilight Cult, fel orcs, fel Horde, Burning Legion forces and so on, are -all- slaughtered to the last man and woman (rarely do you see a child with them). Why? Because leaving any alive is asking for more attacks. It is a regular practice to exterminate enemy groups because that is the sanest and smartest thing to do. Also because those groups are nothing more than a cancer on Azeroth and need to be lanced. The forsaken have pretty much reached that point by now.

Since classic WoW, the forsaken have been the one that has been unrelentingly hostile to the Alliance. It's been the forsaken that have been attacking Southshore and Hillsbrad. Those two settlements have been just trying to survive and have not been doing much if anything to attack the forsaken. If you look at the quests in Hillsbrad in classic, there might be 2 Alliance quests that have to attacking the forsaken and those were one forsaken guard at the western edge of the zone, and to reclaim a stolen crate at the broken tower between Southshore and Tarren Mills. While the forsaken gave out numerous quests that had the players killing dozens to hundreds of Alliance citizens.

I guarantee though, that if the forsaken continue, they will continue to be allowed to attack the Alliance with little if any retaliation. The forsaken need a slap down badly.

As for the Blight, it's not an 'I Win' button either. By now the Alliance should be developing countermeasures. They know about it and can plan for it. And widespread use of it would be guaranteed to get the Argents and CC coming down on the forsaken.
Well, that's the thing, Southshore is the only overtly damning action I can think of, and even that was an end to a long confrontation in a contested warzone. They barely do anything in Hinterlands and Arathi worth mentioning, so Hillsbrad is the worst of it.

In Cataclysm, the Forsaken didn't honestly go into Gilneas willingly, though Hellscream was able to rally them when he arrived on the scene after the initial invasion... for use as cannon-fodder. But, before then, the odds were ridiculously stacked against them.

Garrosh commanded the Forsaken - who had come off a war and were recovering from a coup - to invade Gilneas. Gilneas was, at the time, a human nation so fortified and powerful that even the Scourge could not tear down its wall. What chance had the Forsaken, who were bleeding numbers at the time with no way of replenishing them? An invasion from sea was impossible - Gilnean reefs prevented the Forsaken's ships from even nearing the coast. The rest of the peninsula was and is surrounded by tall mountains.

This was so ridiculous a task, I am convinced that Garrosh chose Gilneas specifically because he wanted to kill the Forsaken. There is no way he could have forseen victory in this scenario. They didn't have the numbers or the resources to fight a war with Gilneas.

In fact, the only reason they got as far as they did was Sylvanas's cunning and the pure luck of the invasion coinciding with Deathwing's return, neither of which were things Garrosh could forsee. I doubt Garrosh even considered the possibility of the Forsaken gaining allies in the Wolfcult to attack and spread the worgen curse throughout Gilneas City and take out Stormglen.

Even if he could forsee that, there's no way in hell that he could anticipate the cataclysm putting everything in place for the Forsaken. Earthquakes destroyed the reefs, then the shattering of the land took out a major Gilnean settlement - Duskshire.

I don't know where the Forsaken got the Scythe, but losing it was the worst thing that could possibly happen to them in this situation. I see why they wanted it - control over the now-leaderless worgen's minds to finish the invasion - but without it, the worgen regained their senses.

So now we come to the final act of the invasion - the resistance. Sylvanas was now faced with the full might of the Gilnean nation, many of whom were now large, angry wolf-beasts out for her blood. The resistence cut off her immediate supply line at Emberstone and retook 3/4 of the city in a matter of hours.

It's no wonder that she wanted to use the Blight. I imagine Hellscream expected her to be dead by the time he arrived, which might be why he sends a man to remind her not to use the Blight, but she violated those orders anyway.

And of course Sylvanas violated those orders when the alternative was the destruction of her army, the loss of Gilneas, and the possibility (eventuality, really) of a Gilnean counter-invasion. With no way to create reinforcements, they would be at the mercy of the orcs... and we all know how kindly Garrosh looks upon allies who he doesn't see as having the strength to protect themselves.

So the Blight worked. It was the best solution at the time, it's not like she could go "I surrender, sorry for killing your kid, friends now?" or "let's just hope our dwindling army is enough to take on what is possibly the most powerful human nation on Azeroth in their new, furry forms". It made the Gilneans fall back to Keel Harbor and evacuate the nation (after dealing with Garrosh's pathetic resistance and big, stupid airship).

Of course, shortly after that, Sylvanas threw up her arms and said "fuck it, I quit, screw you guys, I'm out" and headed to Northrend to kill herself. But this is why I call the val'kyr a "positive". They've given Sylvanas a reason to care about keeping the Forsaken around, whether she needs to use the val'kyr's powers to do it or not.

When she came back to Garrosh's idiotic squandering of already limited manpower (which seems to have allowed the Gilneas Liberation Front to progress all the way to Forsaken High Command), she was now on the defensive.

Note that it doesn't justify every action she has made or makes from there on; Theron put it best when he said "the actions I take in necessity are nonetheless indefensible". That's true for Sylvanas as well, even though how defensible her actions are means nothing to her.

Silverpine's odds are almost as bad as the initial invasion's when you think about it. The Forsaken with gimped Blight and some drunken orcs vs. the Gilnean Liberation Front, Bloodfang pack, Hillsbrad worgen, and the 7th Legion. That they survived at all (thanks, Godfrey) is nothing short of astonishing but makes sense when you play the quests.

Oh, and Andorhal. If it was Garrosh in that position, I am certain Koltira would be dead. As it stands, he wasted time and Forsaken lives with his truce. I don't think the punishment should've been so severe as (possibly) removing his free will, but execution would definitely be a viable option when he took unauthorized actions while in command of Sylvanas' army.

And, no, Sylvanas disobeying Garrosh with the Blight isn't the same as Koltira's truce violating her wishes. Koltira Deathweaver is not the leader of a nation, he is far more disposable than Sylvanas for a number of reasons.

...Or, you know, maybe she's just the Lich King with boobs. That totally-not-sexist-at-all statement seems a popular summation as well.
__________________
Have fun.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:29 PM
Shaman Shaman is offline

Site Staff - Admin
Shaman's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The Barrens
Posts: 12,447

Warlock

I think Sylvanas is a war-criminal and one of the biggest threats to Azeroth. Disloyal, dictatorial, morally-bankrupt, indiscriminate use of weapons of mass destruction that even Garrosh Hellscream forbade, death camps, the cultivation and alliances with dangerous figures like Warden Stillwater and Varimathras, the destruction of independent neighboring nations and the forced-resurrection and indoctrination of dissenters. She's one of the worst characters in Azeroth right now and the just and honorable thing to do is for her regime to meet the world's reckoning. The Knights of the Ebon Blade, Argent Crusade, Alliance and I would argue even the Horde have a moral responsibility to deal with her and her followers.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:31 PM
Kir the Wizard Kir the Wizard is offline

The Sun King
Kir the Wizard's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Donetsk, Occupied Ukraine
Posts: 11,115

Default



And here I thought we lacked opinionated Hordelings nowadays.

You seem like a dangerous man (woman?), Valtheria.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:44 PM
Lord Grimtale Lord Grimtale is offline

Elune
Lord Grimtale's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Slaughtered Lamb
Posts: 22,046
BattleTag: Grimtale67#1407

Default

I wouldn't consider Southshore the only moment where they're abhorrently monstrous.

What they did in Gilneas was pretty shitty if you ask me, far worse than what Gilneas did to Lordaeron in fact. (Which was simply just not helping them.)

I don't care whether they wanted to invade it or not, they still took it up and did it.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:45 PM
Valtheria Valtheria is offline

Priestess of the Moon
Valtheria's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 507
BattleTag: Frostbane#1378

Undead Icon (War3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarahmoo View Post
I think Sylvanas is a war-criminal and one of the biggest threats to Azeroth. Disloyal, dictatorial, morally-bankrupt, indiscriminate use of weapons of mass destruction that even Garrosh Hellscream forbade, death camps, the cultivation and alliances with dangerous figures like Warden Stillwater and Varimathras, the destruction of independent neighboring nations and the forced-resurrection and indoctrination of dissenters. She's one of the worst characters in Azeroth right now and the just and honorable thing to do is for her regime to meet the world's reckoning. The Knights of the Ebon Blade, Argent Crusade, Alliance and I would argue even the Horde have a moral responsibility to deal with her and her followers.
There's no such thing as a war-crime on Azeroth.

Disloyal, yes. Dictatorial, sure, not that being a dictator is automatically a bad thing - most leaders in Warcraft are/have been dictators with notable exceptions of gnomish leaders and the goblin trade princes (though they are dictators of their cartels). Morally-bankrupt is common to undead in general, Forsaken and death knights.

She DOES discriminate with use of the Blight. She didn't use it until the last minute in Gilneas and used a gimped version in Silverpine. The only instance where she has actually used the full strain is Southshore, since she didn't cause the Wrathgate.

Both Varimathras and Stillwater were executed (though the former is a dreadlord, so I doubt it'll stick) because they were criminals by Forsaken standards. One launched a coup d'etat that killed hundreds of Forsaken citizens and took control of the Undercity, the other performed illegal experiments upon captured humans and even his fellow Forsaken.

Southshore was not an "independent neighbouring nation", it was an Alliance town from Vanilla to its destruction and the site of many battles between Alliance and Horde armies.

While she does force resurrection, she has, with one exception, never indoctrinated anyone. The undead choose to join and are free to leave or kill themselves. Some choose to fight Sylvanas, like Redpath, which leads to retaliation.

Given that it took the destruction of Gilneas and Theramore, corruption of the Vale of Eternal Blossoms, theft of an Old God's heart, and multiple, smaller crimes for Azeroth's reckoning to come to Garrosh's doorstep, no, they will not be doing the same to Sylvanas unless they absolutely have to (like she gains some kind of Mega-Blight and threatens to Blight the Eastern Kingdoms if she doesn't get 300 sandwiches by Friday).

The Argent Crusade will not intervene so long as she is not actively destroying their territory. Factional conflict has never interested them. The Ebon Blade is arguably no better than the Forsaken, they just aren't large enough to show it and they aren't a nation.

The Alliance would gain very little in the long run by wiping the Forsaken off the face of the planet, I've gone into detail on that earlier. And the Horde has no responsibility to do anything beyond keeping her in check with the Blight. Sylvanas also keeps herself in check, contrary to popular belief, since she has no desire to die again anytime soon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Grimtale View Post
I wouldn't consider Southshore the only moment where they're abhorrently monstrous.

What they did in Gilneas was pretty shitty if you ask me, far worse than what Gilneas did to Lordaeron in fact. (Which was simply just not helping them.)

I don't care whether they wanted to invade it or not, they still took it up and did it.
No arguments here. I'm simply pointing out that Southshore was the only truly unnecessary one, especially since it offered no benefit to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kir the Wizard View Post


And here I thought we lacked opinionated Hordelings nowadays.

You seem like a dangerous man (woman?), Valtheria.
Aw, shucks. <3
__________________
Have fun.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:48 PM
Noitora Noitora is offline

Elune
Noitora's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,690
BattleTag: Chillman#1339

Default

How is there no such thing as a war crime? It's not just "I'm Alliance and you Horde can't do this to me!" It's also stuff like necromancy, which is why the Ebon Blade and the Argents are "watching" Sylvanas. We got Tirion bitching at Arthas to pay for his crimes too. All the PvE threats we take on as both factions and neutrals aren't considered war criminals?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fojar View Post
Yeah but where would this forum be if not for people speculating endlessly about things Blizzard doesn't give a shit about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leviathon View Post
SoL: 20 something know it alls telling other 20 something know it alls they know everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kobebyarlant View Post
All this faction bitching and people arguing with each other and it's Fojar of all people that comes in with reasonable positivity.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
factions, fanwank, forsaken, genocide is fun, lordaeron, stromgarde n shit, sylvanas fetishism, sylvanas rox, wololo

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.