I often wonder if the writers ever visit the forums, read some of these threads and just think “wow we didn’t intend for this character or act to be viewed this way”.
For Saurfang it really feels like they’re trying to portray him as a honorable orc who wants to go back to the old ways, but when I look at him all I can see him as is the traitor that intentionally didn’t kill the leader of the Alliance in hopes that the Alliance would kill/remove Sylvanas and win the war.
For Baine they’re portraying him as a someone who cares for all life (sylvanas loyalists excluded) and perhaps a bridge to peaceful dealings with the Alliance, but all I can see is a character that has actively and openly worked against the Horde to the benefit of the Alliance on numerous occasions.
By every definition of the word, Baine and Saurfang are traitors, and it just makes me wonder how their heads are still atop their shoulders. Is it intended for me to feel this way, or is it the writer’s plan for everyone to fall in line between the “honor duo”?
Why is that so bad? Sylvanas could deathmist Saurfang in a second. It’s not like Mak’gora is practical. Even if he somehow won, he’d have to deal with a Forsaken rebellion and Nathanos trying to murder him for the rest of his life. However, if Sylvanas dies in the Battle for the Undercity, Saurfang could assume control of the Horde afterward.
Let’s also understand, Saurfang made an impulsive decision. It’s not like this was his grand strategy. He made a split-second decision. He was clearly emotionally compromised after watching Sylvanas burn Teldrassil and realizing he just helped her throw the world into the global conflict he’d wanted to avoid.
Baine spared the lives of Sylvanas’ loyalists, even though they’d compromise his mission. Clearly he cares about them.
“Numerous?” You mean encouraging Jaina to evacuate Theramore after she helped fund his own war effort to recapture his capital and leadership over the Tauren? Jaina and the people of Theramore have personally done more for Baine than anyone in the Horde since WC3. The reason he has a nation at all right now is thanks to Jaina. It sucks to acknowledge that, but that’s the reality.
And let’s be honest. No sane person wants Sylvanas to win this war. Sylvanas is evil, she doesn’t care about the living, and she’s liable to turn on the Horde once the Alliance is defeated. There’re whole paragraphs in Before the Storm dedicated to expressing her lack of solidarity or outright dislike of the other Horde races. Sylvanas is more of a threat to the Horde than choirboy Anduin and Jaina “We can’t win because that’d be mean” Sadmoore. Anduin isn’t going to murder the Horde and raise them into undeath if the Alliance wins this war, but you can’t put it past Sylvanas - because she doesn’t value the Horde as anything other than a weapon.
So is Sylvanas for betraying Garrosh, who was the legal authority of the Horde.
We’re all traitors. It’s ok to betray evil, dysfunctional leadership.
Sylv was a bit late to the “Screw Garrosh” party, so by the time she “betrayed” him officially, he’d already declared his “True Horde” was seceded from the Horde.
He didn’t kick Sylvanas out of the Horde. Garrosh was willing to work with people willing to submit themselves to his authority. She chose to support the rebellion.
She also disobeyed his orders in Silverpine, before the civil war even began, and betrayed her agreement with Garithos’ army.
Yeah, Garrosh murdered the Forsaken ambassador to Orgrimmar, and Sylv still didn’t officially turn against him until he left the Horde 2 patches later.
Before we go off on this tangent, let’s just acknowledge that Sylvanas betrayed Garrosh.
Ok, as to your tangent. Nah. Warchief is an iconic position in the Warcraft franchise. We just need a good Warchief that knows how to respect the opinions of other people, like Thrall.
Apologies in advance, cutting responses on mobile is tedious so I’ll just make a simple response.
Saurfang and Baine may both have good reasons for why they did what they did, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t bare the title “Traitor”. Whatever Saurfang’s reasons, spur of the moment or not, he actively chose to let the leader of the sworn enemy of the Horde live in hopes that said enemy would kill the Horde leader and win the war. Saurfang had zero assurance from the Alliance that they would stop after Sylvanas. They could very easily keep going and wipe the Horde out. This applies to Baine as well. He may feel that he owes a debt to Jaina that needs to be repaid, but repaying that debt in the way he did, namely that it was to the detriment of the Horde war effort, is clearly a act of treason.
Regarding the stuff rebellion bit in MoP, ya pretty much everyone was a traitor.
Personally, I think a lot of this is really a symptom of what I saw mentioned in another thread (sorry, can’t remember the original poster). The execution of both these character’s arcs is very poor, even if thematically there is something too them.
Saurfang has a very “Uncle Iroh” vibe to him this expansion, with him regretting his decisions in War, but not moving against Sylvanas directly (due to sharing responsibility for the conflict he hates her for). Baine in contrast comes off someone just doing what he believes is right; but because Baine is so often used to be the “Token Good Horde”, it comes off more like he’s just sacrificing the well-being of his own people for the Alliance.
The biggest issue with these stories is generally lack of investment and time on Blizz’s part. Talanji is the one who got the character arc in the Zandalari campaign, while its Saurfang and Baine who end up getting short quests attached to the War Campaign (then there’s Vol’jin bouncing around on the side). Compare that to Jaina’s arc, where it comprises nearly ALL of the Alliance Kul Tiras campaign (and she’s been front and center for much of the War Campaign).
Long story short, Saurfang and Baine’s narratives are supposed to be focusing more on the internal struggle between loyalty and personal ideals; but very little time is spent devoted to them within game. It makes their stories feel disjointed and sparatic, rather than giving us that complex turmoil that both are apparently having right now. So, instead, we get Traitor Saurfang (rather than a Saurfang that found himself at a loss for what to do for a while, and finally found a destination again); and Alliance Baine (because his intent and ideals that cause an action are so often glossed over for the sake of brevity).
My memory of MOP is a bit hazy here, when/where did Garrosh ‘secede’ from the horde again?
Also not to undersell Jaina’s importance, but she did take a long ‘nap’ during the KT story. She’s important in the battle for Lordaeron and then getting us to Kul’tiras, then she’s arrested.
We then don’t see her for almost the entirety of 8.0, and she isn’t regularly mentioned either. She’s absent from the 8.0 war campaign and only brought back into the story in final Kul’tiras story arc after you’ve done the major quests in all three zones, where the story becomes about saving her.
Once she’s saved, she’s back in main character status, calling the fleet back, saving Boralus and being active again. But Jaina actually wasn’t around for all that much of 8.0, she just bookended it.
Depends on who wins. Lots of examples in history of people being heroes because they won, but who would have been labeled traitors had they failed. History is written by the victor, so they get to label things. Same reason the ‘rebels’ against Garrosh are not called traitors. To him, they clearly were. But, he lost, so they are not called that.
Assurances, not really. But he had every reason to believe they would not wipe out the Horde. The Alliance past actions do give an indication of future actions.
I would also like to point out, killing Anduin would not have ended the Alliance. Would it have been a hit? Sure. But not one that would have ended the war. And, Anduin’s love of peace and general good will is more likely going to reduce the cost to the Horde should the Alliance straight up win. His character is one that would be less likely to burn. Had the Horde killed him and then still lost, the calls for revenge would have been much more severe.
Depends on who wins. Lots of examples in history of people being heroes because they won, but who would have been labeled traitors had they failed. History is written by the victor, so they get to label things. Same reason the ‘rebels’ against Garrosh are not called traitors. To him, they clearly were. But, he lost, so they are not called that.
True, but we’re looking at this as it unfolds, not down the road when a winner has been declared. At the moment I see two characters that have openly betrayed the warchief and the war effort. I view them as traitors until some evidence proves otherwise.
Assurances, not really. But he had every reason to believe they would not wipe out the Horde. The Alliance past actions do give an indication of future actions.
Did he? I’m pretty sure “A Good War” showed that Saurfang did in fact believe that down the road, peace would not last and it’s what spurred on his plan to attack Teldrassil in the first place. Adding to that, do you really think Saurfang still believed that the Alliance wouldn’t wipe out the Horde after genociding the night elves? I have a hard time believing that.