That’s… Actually a variation of the black and white argument in a nutshell. It pretends there’s no alternative to enslaving someone and extinction. We know that isn’t the case because Sylvannas already had access to val’kyr willing to help her. There is literally no immediate “either/or” condition at play here. The forsaken were not whatsoever in a situation where they were going to go extinct without someone forced to create more val’kyr.
I mean, a completely viable third option is pretty simple and takes little thought; stop deploying val’kyr in dangerous situations where they might be destroyed. No slavery required.
You are making up the notion that the Alliance broke the rules by allowing Calia to attend.
You need to reread BtS, or perhaps just the parts that I quoted and bolded.
The names of the living relatives and friends were provided by the Forsaken.
Those human loved ones were then to be contacted and interviewed by the King and and a priest selected by the Archbishop to ensure none of them meant harm.
That stipulation was provided by Sylvanas.
A priest approved by Archbishop Faol. Not a priest selected and approved by her, or even Anduin.
Archbishop Faol.
Who was the priest selected by the Archbishop?
Calia Menethil.
Calia was not a guest.
She was the priest from the conclave selected by Faol and Anduin to assist.
There is zero evidence in the novel to indicate he was obligated to inform her of that priests identity…
Not a single line.
You’re making up your own rules for the gathering.
You are then accusing the Alliance of breaking those rules.
You are then using the “fact” that the Alliance broke the rules to argue that Sylvanas’s willingness to work with the alliance towards a common goal after Stormheim doesn’t count.
So let me get this straight, in the world according to Curse, if Sylvanas trusts someone’s word and that trust is misplaced it’s not her fault.
If Anduin trust’s someone’s word and that faith is misplaced it’s entirely his fault and the Alliance’s fault?
I know what I wrote and I know what you have written in this thread and others.
You are placing the blame for the gathering’s failure entirely on the Alliance, despite your admission here that they made the same mistake she did – trusting the Archbishop’s word.
Anduin as the High King had the ultimate say of bringing Calia. That was not the same mistake as Sylvanas… as she did not bring Calia.
Sylvanas trusted Faol. Faol trusted Anduin. Anduin trusted Calia. The trust was broken at the sector of Anduin and Calia. Even Genn considered her actions out of place and lamented her death.
To say both sides made the same mistake is false.
As I said, Sylvanas’s mistake was trusting Faol’s judgement. Faol’s mistake was trusting Anduin. Anduin’s mistake was trusting Calia. Different mistakes.
Anduin had the ultimate say about bringing Calia, not the Archbishop. Calia then tried to instigate an insurrection.
You chop up quotes and selectively bold words. I simply can show you how your biased bolding of words to change the meaning is nonsense.
Sylvanas’s mistake was trusting Faol. I said that.
Anduin trusted Calia to behave. You said it yourself (or someone did) - Anduin never thought she would do what she did. He misjudged her and his trust in her was a mistake.
Not the same mistake Sylvanas made.
I am sure if one asked Sylvanas about Calia attending the Gathering, she would have had a different reaction than Anduin.
We see that by how she reacts when she sees Calia there.
Yup. And I do tend to recognize others’ viewpoints as valid, that’s fine. Issue is when they attempt to make those views objective for the narrative, they aren’t. No presented viewpoint in the Warcraft narrative ever comes off as objective, not now, not in the past (save the already-retconned WC1/WC2 RTS games). The most objective you can get is that “the players will always win”, which makes sense because that’s the MMO meta Blizzard is designing around. But when Blizzard decides to pit players against each other (ala faction war) that’s where objectivity falls apart. Forsaken players have their valid viewpoints just as night elf players just as orc players just as human players, etc. And due to such a scenario, players will naturally align themselves with whatever racial/faction narrative they create their characters on, and that’s perfectly fine.
But how do we know this isn’t one of Cursewords’ characters and your post isn’t just his way of guiding the conversation the way a serial killer sends notes egging the police on?!
cackles maniacally But no, I dont know, I think our typing style is different but I know that’s not a lot. I called him wrong, which his other posters wouldnt…shrugs in Panda
The Blood Elves were once a Light Leaning race, so the idea of the Light is by no means foreign to them. They could’ve communed with M’uru instead of torturing the light out of him.
![:scream:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/scream.png?v=6" ":scream:")