The number of people who’ve played this game far exceeds sales of WC3 by at least an order or two of magnitude.
1 Like
Because he’s presented as having been wrongly driven by his own hatred in the original Warcraft III, a position that was reinforced in WoW during the BFA Kul Tiras storyline. Which was mentioned at the very start of my post.
Same.
/10char
It’s all in the emphasis. The way you describe him makes him sound like a tragic hero–which is not what most people got from WC3.
1 Like
You really can’t possibly, logically and ideally, expect the Horde fanbase to not get upset over something they have no agency to stop. The narrative that they play through took ‘just’ enough abuse to come back from in MOP and had a relatively good feeling going into Legion. Doubly so, because they didn’t do anything atrocious in Legion after trying to fix a dilemma caused by a character who could’ve been interesting, if not beaten with the villain bat in that expansion.
It is a story without any player’s say so and a story that does not pay heed to its own limits. Sylvanas shouldn’t had been able to do any of this in the first place, because no-one in their right mind would obey it. Even if they did, the weight of the other leaders is immense and if Sylvanas said “BuRn iT!!!”, no-one would have done it because Saurfang has as much agency as she does in waging war, if not more, given that he’s a venerated war hero.
And you want this fanbase to feel bad because they chose one side during its initial concept and followed it all the way through the game’s history, only for the writing team to ignore everything established with the faction (again), made the leader do something atrocious (again), then turn around to the fanbase to say “you should feel ashamed for your actions, you’ve done something you can never come back from even though it wasn’t your decision to do any of this!!!” (again)?
Furthermore, you blame them for not wanting a second civil war arc to play through? Because of how disastrous it is for their own faction, on top of it being a story they’ve already experienced and decided they don’t like?
Get real.
If any of this happened on the other side, the Alliance community would be shouting the same things the Horde community is, because of how horridly it destroys all established story in the Alliance. It is an atrocious story that serves no-one and was wanted by very few, if not anyone at all.
30 Likes
Yeah, but Daelin Proudmoore’s character isn’t solely from what was shown in Warcraft III. That’s like saying Jaina is only her character from Warcraft III, or that Thrall is only his character as shown in Warcraft III. The character’s being includes all material they’ve been shown in.
Obviously, he’s an antagonist to the Horde, especially in Warcraft III. That was never in question, nor should it be. But your freedom fighters are my terrorists, and vice versa. Daelin Proudmoore, with the context given from all other materials, is a tragic villain, because we have other content that shows how he was outside of his feud with the Horde. Also, had the Horde he waged war with been any Horde other than Thrall’s Horde, he may very well have been right in his actions. What made him wrong in this scenario was how Thrall’s Horde sought redemption for what they did while under the Legion’s control, had turned away from the old Horde’s ways and in fact stood side-by-side with Jaina’s Alliance expedition against the Burning Legion to save the world, yet Daelin wouldn’t hear any of it because of his own flaws.
For an adequate comparison, look at Arthas and Garithos, two other Alliance-originating antagonists. Arthas was a tragic antagonist. Garithos was not.
Arthas was driven by his desire to save his people, avenge the fallen, protect his land at all costs. He loved his family, he loved his father, he loved Jaina, he loved his people and even as a kid played with the common folk and talked with the guards. Outside of his campaign to save Lordaeron, he was shown to be a good man. Then the Culling happened. Let’s be honest here, it was the only real option. But it still resulted in countless civilian deaths. And up until he picked up Frostmourne, one could say that it was still well-intentioned, if very extreme solution that could’ve potentially succeeded. Because it was all to save Lordaeron. He was doomed by his own feelings, by his own desire for vengeance and his own patriotism. Even after picking up the sword, there’s still a tragedy to it since he became his own antithesis and committed actions that went against everything he stood for even seconds before picking up Frostmourne, all against his will with his soul stored in the runeblade. He was a tragic villain.
Garithos was driven by racism. The most redeemable thing about him comes from one of his hero quotes, “In memory of Terenas!”, which implies a lasting loyalty to Lordaeron, the Menethil line and King Terenas in particular. Out of game material explains that the reason for his extreme racism towards elves in particular is because he felt they diverted Alliance resources when his home, family and people were destroyed while he was stationed in Quel’Thalas, which is something that may very well have happened anyways had he been there. Nothing points to him having been a pleasant person before death, and no one will ever look back and see him as a heroic figure of any sort. He was not a tragic villain.
Because of the lore behind Warcraft II and Warcraft III, one can see Daelin as a heroic figure during the battle with the old Horde, and Arthas as a heroic figure during the battle with the remnants of the old Horde and later on the Scourge. Even their feelings as they commit the atrocities they did can be relatable to many, because it doesn’t stem merely from “well they’re different so I hate them”, but from their own past interactions with the elements they’re fighting that shaped their views on the matter. That makes it tragic when they become antagonists precisely because of those feelings.
In contrast, with the lore behind Garithos there is nothing remotely heroic about him other than being the leader of the Alliance forces against the Scourge in Lordaeron, which could be considered a noble goal at least. But that doesn’t equate to the man himself. He had no reason to hate Kael’thas other than him not being human. There’s no tragic depth to how he became a racist other than him blaming the elves for his home burning down.
But despite that, Daelin’s actions are never painted as being justified and right at the time he committed them. The dialogue chosen to be remade in BFA for the Drust visions are all filled with his extreme anger, Jaina trying to convince her father not to do it, and lamenting about him not letting go while cradling his dead body - all lines that originate from Warcraft III that, in context, show him as having been wrong about Thrall’s Horde and how his hatred got him killed.
Chances are, had Daelin attempted the same thing against Garrosh’s Horde or Sylvanas’ Horde, he’d be painted as being more of a hero standing up against them than a villain. But against Thrall’s Horde, he has been and always will be the antagonist by default. But that doesn’t make him any less tragic, story-wise. And if the new Warcraft III changes that, then they’re missing the point.
7 Likes
You make a lot of good points, but I want to boil my response down to just this; Blizzard have already shown that they are very well ‘missing the point’ in the Horde story and, with their actions to date, seemingly care not which lore they have to trample and retcon and twist to serve the current narrative. Horde players already have precious few, if any, antagonists on the other side - they are constantly given justification, sympathetic portrayal, righteousness. We have no antagonists we can just be against without being bombarded with half a dozen reasons why we might be wrong.
The Horde story (and players) cry out for clear antagonists, antagonists which Blizzard constantly sees fit to deny. Daelin is one of the few examples of a clear-cut antagonist we had, and with the renewed emphasis on him and extreme villainization of the Horde narrative, many Horde players fear that his deeds will become retroactively justified or his previously antagonistic portrayal softened and smoothed out. Not every character should make us feel conflicted about fighting them.
Please don’t take away one of the only antagonists we have left.
18 Likes
No worries, I understand the concern. But I still think that in the remade Warcraft III he would still be a clear-cut antagonist who is in the wrong, because of the dialogue choices made for BFA.
Plus, I think they’re using the original voice lines, since they’re just remastering it (at least that’s the impression I got from the trailers). Don’t really see how they can change the story if they keep the dialogue.
Well, maybe I’m just naively trying to hope for the best.
3 Likes
While I’m hoping they don’t change him in WCIII, I think the way Daelin is being handled in BfA isn’t necessarily the wrong way, considering where we are.
Remember, we’re in Kul’Tiras now, his homeland. He was beloved and revered by his people, he was their hero. He defended them through the Second War from the Horde. He boldly led his troops to Theramore to rescue is daughter from what the nation of Kul’Tiras perceived to be that same Horde, and was murdered in a great betrayal. He’s supposed to be a hero to the Alliance, or to the Kul’Tirans at the very least.
Compare him to Grom Hellscream. Revered as great a leader, warrior and hero to his people. Not so much in the opposite factions eyes. To the Alliance, Grom is just another blood thirsting Orc doing Orc things. Most could care less that he died fighting Mannoroth and were just happy he was finally dead. That doesn’t discredit the good he did for the Horde (and Azeroth) in his final moments.
I don’t know. For me it seems like this new “light” on Daelin is supposed to be more for the Alliance, and specifically Jaina as she begins to question herself and her choices. The cut-scene where Katherine witnesses the event opens her eyes to the fact that Daelin was on a murderous rampage that couldn’t be stopped, and she basically tells Jaina “No, you were right and he was wrong.”
2 Likes
Okay, but I didn’t say I was worried about Daelin being a tragic antagonist. I’m worried that they’ll make him a tragic hero, at least to Alliance players.
With regard to Arthas and Garithos, the difference is that while we may pity and even to some extent understand Arthas, virtually no one, Alliance or Horde, thinks he was right. But there’s always been an undercurrent of sympathy for Garithos, because he is seen as a victim of Sylvanas’s treachery. Daelin used to be in the Arthas “bucket,” but he could very easily be transferred to the Garithos bucket.
It didn’t use to be that way. He used to be someone whom virtually everyone agreed was wrong, and that Jaina did the right (although extremely painful) thing in standing against him. But since BfA started, we’re seeing a groundswell of opinion from Alliance players that Daelin was in fact right to do what he did. This is because of the events the writers are putting into the game. With the current dev team, I’m not convinced they won’t put the same viewpoint into WC3, presumably because they like seeing players tear each other apart.
I thought I heard they were re-recording at least the lines from characters who have new voice actors–i.e., Arthas and Jaina. That could mean a lot of changes.
5 Likes
Why is that a bad thing? There are Horde fans who believe Garrosh was a hero to this day.
1 Like
If you have to ask that in a thread titled “Horde PC Shame Tally,” I don’t know what else to say.
(Speaking of which, we’re kind of derailing this discussion, so maybe we should start a new thread about it if people want to go into more depth.)
5 Likes
I don’t think that’s true. I think you could always find a fair number of people that thought Daelin was in the right.
Well, if damage was ever done, it was already there from Warlords of Draenor, Mists of Pandaria, and Cataclysm. It isn’t so much because of presentation of Daelin as it is presentation of the Orcs. So I don’t think they’ll retcon Thrall as being secretly more evil.
4 Likes
I like that he started some fires. We should have dropped off a little blight near the fire lines to make it more inconvenient .
Everything we’ve seen so far in the expansion is just beating us over the head with, “Daelin was right. The Horde can’t be trusted. Even if they have a peaceful leader now (Thrall), it just takes a different leader (Garrosh, Sylvanas) to change them back into ravening beasts.” Until Saurfang makes his return to say “#NotAllHorde”, nothing is disproving this for Alliance characters.
Doubly-so for the Kul Tirans. They’ve only ever known the Horde as monsters. They never fought alongside them against the Burning Legion or the Lich King. They’ve only ever seen the Horde as pawns of evil. To them, Daelin is absolutely a tragic hero. The only negative a Kul Tiran could take away is that, in his desire for justice and retribution, he would have gotten Theramore destroyed under the weight of this new Horde and its allies, and it was a pragmatic choice on Jaina’s part to play nice with the monsters so not everyone in Theramore got killed.
1 Like
Yep, that’s exactly why I’m afraid Daelin will be a tragic hero in nuWC3. He was not one in old WC3.
6 Likes
To the Orcs maybe. But if I remember correctly, the bulk of the personnel at the beach catapults were Forsaken.
Considering every Alliances settlement that the Horde has either Blighted, Blown Up and/or Burned BEFORE the events of BfA, I can’t say I’m necessarily surprised.
And after the events of BfA? I don’t think they’ll need to change a thing. The history of WoW has given Alliance players enough reasons to side with his line of thinking.
And like I said before, he’s not supposed to be a hero to the Horde, he never was. Think of him as a counterpart to Grom.
1 Like
From the point of view of the Drust witches, they were defending or retaking their home from colonizing invaders. We understand what it’s like to be oppressed and abused by humans, so they have my sympathy.
1 Like
The witches themselves aren’t retaking their home from colonizing invaders. The witches are Kul Tirans. You could argue they’re being used to take revenge by one Drust dude, but it’s not quite the same.
(Won’t lie, though, once I learned the Kul Tirans showed up to colonize a place where there were already people who did not want them there, I was kinda rooting for that dude.)
4 Likes