No, you really don’t have to. We were told everything we needed to know about the why for Yrel and her people in the scenario, and the connection to events in Legion were obvious.
A new naaru (AU Xe’ra by implication) came 'round and told the draenei it was a good idea. The draenei have a long history of doing what the naaru say is a good idea, and 99.9% of the time it is! This time it isn’t, but they don’t see it because they have blind faith in the naaru. Legion showed us that blind faith is bad (“your faith has blinded you!”).
That’s the other side. We saw that. It was spelled out so heavy-handedly that you can’t miss it even if you want to.
So again, why do we need a “both sides” here?
Is the scenario good? ROFL no. It’s freaking terrible in its heavy-handedness. There are so many flaws with it, I could make a whole thread about it. But needing to see more of the zealots’ side isn’t really one of them. Just like I don’t need to see things from the Scarlet Crusade’s perspective, or from the Cult of the Damned’s perspective.
So if the connection is obvious, how are my arguments citing those characters and groups “irrelevant” to a Light Crusade expansion?
There was a lot of relevant information left out of that scenario. Blizzard suddenly tried to apply shades of grey to the Burning Legion, the Old Gods and the Jailer, so why suddenly make Light-antagonists one-sided bad guys? That is why we need a “both sides” here.
What Illidunce knew about the Light wouldn’t fill a thimble (he didn’t even know it existed until an unnamed “Elder Naaru” - possibly Xe’ra - tried to tell him the “Champion of the Light” deal and saved him from Kil’jaeden), so his edgelord one liners aren’t arguments.
With this quote, I think, for a moment, you started to see part of the reason why I oppose it. And we do get backstory for why people joined the Scarlet Crusade.
What’s the point you think I’m avoiding? In one comment you say the points I raised are irrelevant and might not make into the game. Then in another comment you say the connections to events involving some of those characters is obvious.
The villains are still evil, but that’s being diluted in places;
Blizzard changed Sargeras’ motivation from “good is futile because evil exists, so I’ll choose evil” to “Better I destroy the universe than let the Void claim it”.
While also trying to give the Light a bad side, they’ve tried to whitewash the Void a bit, such as with Xal’atath and plot contrivances to put all this foreshadowing in the mouths of Il’gynoth.
The Jailer is wrong to try and reforge all reality to serve him, so why is Sylvanas getting whitewashed for helping him?
Given that Illidan was a magic junkie who’d done a lot of harm to get his fix (remaking the Well of Eternity and killing people who tried to stop him, for one), and had to have his backstory retconned twice to even look heroic… his Lightforging reminded me of intervention and rehab for an addict.
He didn’t even know it existed until an unnamed “Elder Naaru” - MU Xe’ra by implication - tried to tell him the “Champion of the Light” deal and saved him from Kil’jaeden (she saved him and he edgelord-ed her to death, how’s that for gratitude?)
Apart from that, even if he shouldn’t have been Lightforged by force, if he was strong enough to break free, he didn’t need to kill her; also, killing an allied army’s commander while surrounded by mutual enemies is a horrible idea.
It’s worrying you’ve missed all that.
The fact that you even brought up idea of a the “Christians and the Bible” joke in this situation undermines your claim of niceness and looks like a veiled personal attack. Otherwise, why bring it up at all?
Dude. That you could come out as the takeaway only serves to highlight the point you missed.
Why do we need “both sides” when we already had both sides? Why is that your big hang-up with the scenario?
I already stated that. You missed it.
Not diluting; explaining. Destroying the universe is objectively evil.
Crazy ancient evils speaking in riddles is not whitewashing; it’s fulfilling the trope the old gods were literally founded on. Xal’atath betrayed us to N’zoth in the end, in case you forgot. Hardly a whitewashing.
Sylvanas isn’t the Jailer. You said the Jailer was being made less “black” and more “grey”.
Sylvanas has always been a grey character, leaning more heavily into the black. Right now, we don’t know that’s changed (though admittedly it likely has).
I’m gonna stop you right there. Because as someone who works with addicts every day, what you’re about to say is plain wrong.
Illidan has never been portrayed as a morally good person, so your not making any point here.
Illidan has never been one to make wise choices, so your also not making a point here.
It’s worrying that you think any of that means blind faith is perfectly fine, and forced conversion is acceptable.
Once more you’re assuming I said something I not once said.
Find a single time I claimed to be nice. Ever. Anywhere.
We don’t have a full picture of both sides, just lots of the picture of one side and barely anything for the other. So I didn’t miss the point.
So why’d the writers change Sargeras’ motives when it doesn’t justify his actions?
While you’re right about the Old Gods and Xal’atath being the “crazy ancient evils speaking in riddles”, why were our characters railroaded into trusting her in BfA with that dagger quest chain?
The Jailer himself, the story was trying to play up the “he was betrayed” angle. He whined about betrayal more than Illidan did.
How can Sylvanas be a grey character when she’s helping someone literally trying to rewrite reality? How did she not notice the deluge of red flags around the Jailer?
I’m going to keep going. I do know that not all addicts are the same, some are better than others and some are worse than others. While I’m glad you can see that Illidan isn’t portrayed as morally good and someone who makes wise choices, you can’t see the problem with him giving Xe’ra that jobber death.
Illidan would’ve presented a better case if he made actual arguments instead of edgelord one liners and didn’t kill Xe’ra. Funnily, Illidan and Xe’ra had a few things in common.
When you claim I was advocating blind faith and forced conversion, I think you’re assuming I said something I not once said.
You claimed you were being nice here by not making the joke.
Spare the personal attacks and passive-aggressiveness, please.
We have enough for the AR scenario, just like we have enough for every other AR scenario. You’re only upset about this one because of religion.
What are you even talking about? It does. In his twisted world view.
Because that’s how quests work, that’s how the in-game story is told, and none of this is in any way new at all.
You’re not making a point at all.
Because that’s how she hasd been written.
Fine, I’ll ask the question; what is it about Illidan saying no to having the Light forced on him makes you think of addiction at all? Isn’t this more a case of him just saying no to drugs?
I don’t see how that impacts anything we’ve discussed at all, because it doesn’t impact anything we’ve discussed at all.
That you think someone should present an argument for why they shouldn’t have someone transform them against their will says a lot about you.
It’s literally the crux of your Illidan argument; he should have let Xe’ra force convert him if he didn’t have a better argument.
In the end he did have a better argument: Only we can save ourselves. He was proven right in the end. We did save ourselves.
And I did not make the joke. That isn’t a claim to being a nice person or having a plethora of niceness.
I haven’t attacked you personally. Stop conflating yourself with the entire Christian Faith. It’s kinda ugly.
Maybe he’s the Pope and he is the entire Christian faith, Pope Thadeus has a nice ring to it.
Anyway, you are right, at this point he doesn’t have an identity outside of being Christian and that’s incredibly unhealthy and detrimental to forum discussion. He cannot divest the fictional Light from his own irl faith.
Playing devil’s advocate for conversion therapy is absolutely tactless. The more he speaks the more we can assume he advocates irl atrocities commited by the church, do mostly to this “both sides” mentality of justifying evil.
I’ve explained numerous reasons I disapprove of this story arc; you claiming it’s only about religion is Ad Hominen and a strawman.
You didn’t answer my question about why bother changing Sargeras’ motives or explain how the Jailer’s “betrayal” angle is irrelevant.
If Xe’ra was written as being in the right, would you have accepted that? Illidan jobbing Xe’ra and us blinding trusting Xal’atath in BfA are two examples of the game’s poor writing.
Illidan chose to keep his fel fix and killed someone who came between him and his fix; like if a crack addict killed the people staging an intervention for them. Seriously, Edgydan could’ve broke free and used his words instead of going full fedora-tipper.
Ironically, Xe’ra was partially right about Illidan in a way; Illidan used fel magic – at that time in the lore a by-prodcut of “Light and Shadow” and helped defeat the Burning Legion, helped us take away the demons’ key to immortality and helped the Titans imprison Sargeras “…ending the age of demons”. Just like in Xe’ra’s prophecy to/about Illidan.
If Illidan had let Xe’ra do it, that’s not forced. Your claim “It’s literally the crux of your Illidan argument; he should have let Xe’ra force convert him if he didn’t have a better argument.” was self-refuting.
Credit where credit is due, thank you for the niceness, scant as it was… yet you’ve attacked me indirectly, such as even bringing that kind of joke up; don’t spit in my ear and tell me it’s raining.
Renautus, you claim you see me as a friend…
…then lie about me and attack me out the other side of your mouth (I never said anything about conversion therapy or endorsing). There’s a difference between people roasting each other, and one person lying about the other. And you wonder why I don’t trust you, Renautus, lol
If Kyle was left-wing, and his attackers right-wing, would you still have opposed Kyle’s actions, Micah? If that was the case, I’d still be fine with his acquittal. And I wonder how much of a payout he’s going to get if he sues all those companies and news outlets that defamed him during the trial.
Why do you ALWAYS think in political terms? Murder is wrong. Period. Full stop. End of discussion. His political affiliation is irrelevant to the conversation
No, I highly doubt I’d accept a story that said “forced conversion is perfectly fine”, just like I wouldn’t accept a story that said SA was fine.
That’s also not what happened.
Here’s a hypothetical question for you; if someone came around and started forcing their belief system on you through forced psychic conversion, deciding for you that what you were was not only wrong, but only they could make you right and they would rebuild you in the glorious name of Satan, would you think this is perfectly fine because a stranger decided it for you?
Prolly not.
Not really. You’re reaching and you know it.
“If she let me do it, it’s not SA! She should have just let me do it!”
Not really. I’ve disagreed with you, pointed out flaws in your argument, and shown you how your defensiveness might lead people to have a certain opinion.
You decided disagreement was an attack. That doesn’t mean it actually is tho.
You pretty much are when you’re defending Xe’ra’s “rightness” to convert Illidan against his will, because her beliefs are more valid than his.
What did you think the Illidan - Xe’ra encounter was coded as?
So on to the political derail, why is it that Conservatives think murder is okay, as long as your political beliefs fall into a proper political camp.
That’s what your argument here boils down to; murder is fine, as long as the politics match up. Nobody on the Left is mad he killed a bunch of lefties; they’re mad because he killed people. His political beliefs are meaningless. The closest you can get is the gun control arguments, that nobody needs an AR-15 for personal defense.
You can certainly argue against the gun control arguments, and all you’d have to do there is point out he was facing people with firearms and numbers on their side to boot. Boom, solid argument.
But trying to turn his murder into some wierd “bet you’d be fine if he killed Righties” thing just highlights your own sickness, where you’re the only one entertaining thoughts of acceptable political murder.
You can call this post a personal attack, even thought I’m still only attacking your argument.
Yrel supposedly made her peace about that by the end of WOD.
It’s time to throw away once and for all the notion that the Light is inherently good. You’ve seen after all an uncorruptted version of the Scourge in Maldraxxus.
Making someone the antagonist isn’t automatically making them evil. Seeing how the Naaru operate in Legion, Y’rel may be a figure that’s been manipulated and robbed of her own agency. Perhaps we’ll find out that the true force behind the dessication and extinction of AU Draenor are some pig-headedly narrow focused Naaru in service to the Light.
This comment is such a strawman, it should be put in a field where crops are growing to scare birds away from them.
Your denialism towards my arguments in your previous comment does you no credit.
Your analogy about Illidan’s attempted Lightforging falls flat because Xe’ra just tried to change his power from Fel to Light, not change his mind or allegiances. The problems were her forcefulness and Illidan’s murderousness.
The Illidan - Xe’ra cinematic was such edgelord cringe (and Game of Thrones Season 8-level subversiveness for the sake of subversiveness), all Illidan was missing was a fedora and a katana.
Except in a lot of those cases, you claim I did not respond to something, when I clearly did.
She was forcing a change on him against his will and without consent or even conversation. When he protested, she gave not a single care.
I gotta ask at this point if you just don’t think consent is important or relevant at all.
Yes it was.
You’re still glorifying the victimizer and insulting the victim because of your own personal beliefs. You’re giving full approval of Xe’ra forcing her will on Illidan, just because “Light good, choice and free will bad”.
These are not the witty and wise aguments you think they are. They are the opposite entirely.
