Why not? (/10 char)
Maybe it’s just me but if redemption is just getting the Alliance to think we’re honorable and good I don’t really give a crap about that. The PC has done some crappy things all throughout the game’s history and we’ve never needed “redemption” before because we all just get treated like virtuous superheroes anyway.
8 Likes
I don’t think the OP was talking about the Alliance’s opinion.
If it’s not the Alliance, then how are we, the PC, irredeemable? We had nothing to do with the act of burning Teldrassil. If their plan is to basically pin everything on Sylvanas and then have Saurfang pat us on the back after his rebellion then we’re definitely not irredeemable in the narrative. I guess, I can’t tell if people mean irredeemable within the narrative or to the actual players.
They’ve basically already started the redemption for the Horde with all the “it’s just Sylvanas, everyone else in the Horde is gooooood! Kill her and we have peace until the end of time!!!”
1 Like
While The Horde Players have no moral responsibility, their character does.
Blizz has written themselves into a place where all the Horde PCs should be executed. Great writing!
4 Likes
But the story paints us as not really caring about it either–certainly not enough to say or do anything. And we are still assumed to have participated in the entire War of Thorns up to that point–a war that has a dubious basis at best.
But instead of speculating, maybe we should ask the OP. Carma, when you say …
… whose viewpoint are you talking about being redeemed in?
Not particurlarly well. Tyrande is considerably less gracious to Lady Liadrin than the reverse. The two camps stand apart with a pretty wide space between them, there is no suggestion of any informal communication between the two or any interplay at all.
Here’s a question I have that we don’t need to wait for OP to answer. Are we talking about “redemption” for the Horde player if it wasn’t an attack on a playable race? We wholesale slaughter pretty much every non-playable race in the game for flimsy reasons. Have we ever needed to be redeemed for that? No, we’re treated like heroes for culling populations because we view them as the enemy and in WoT the Alliance is viewed as an enemy that we need to stop before they overpower us. So, it seems to me the only reason we need to be redeemed now is because our “business as usual” was directed at the Alliance and thus we need to be redeemed because they think we’re evil and not because of the actual actions we took in War of the Thorns. I am ignoring the burning of the tree because it’s obvious that will not be pinned on the PC. Everything else? Business as usual for the PC. Brutal indifference for shiny rewards.
11 Likes
If you go and talk to Tyrande in her camp as a Horde PC she sort of scoffs at the idea that these Mana Addicts are on the footstep of HER home. If you go talk to Liadrin and Rommath as an Alliance PC … they sort of just make the same criticism about how the type of forces Tyrande brought with her will be invaluable for scouting; but aren’t really built for effectively laying siege to a city.
Its an interesting dichotomy.
2 Likes
You’re not wrong. Your statement also doesn’t change the end point that Sylvanas tried to assassinate Genn first and started all of this.
Using your own structure, refer back to Chronicle again that reinforces that Sylvanas took advantage of a greater threat to the world for military advantage. Sounds like a good reason to believe she’d do it again.
You do realize you’re talking about Legion, right? The same expansion that we have the meta-knowledge from that the Horde was not narratively necessary to defeating the Legion and their lack of presence did not stop Velen, Magni, and Illidan from ultimately defeating the Legion without the need of the full strength of either the Alliance or the Horde.
Though this discussion doesn’t change what I said, which you quoted, but I say here again, once again, moving away from the meta-perspective, during the time Genn tried to assassinate Sylvanas the Alliance was acting on the assumption that the Horde had broken the peace first.
Already done, but I’ll do it again, since you asked:
- Varian Wrynn: If your Horde fails to uphold honor, as Garrosh did...
Varian Wrynn: We will end you.
Now, to the work of winning the peace. I would like to station a garrison near Theramore. We need to investigate cleansing the plague from Gilnean lands so they can rebuild. We must contain Sylvanas.
From here on forward, the Alliance will be proactive. Never again can there be another the likes of Hellscream.
You can tirelessly repeat this as many times you want, it doesn’t change that there is indication and suggestion, which is right above you. You can do your best to ignore it all you want, but it is still lore we were given.
Thalyssra disagrees with you, and in fact she suggests we do it again:
- Lor'themar: Proudmoore and Shaw risked their lives to rescue Baine? Unexpected.
Thalyssra: That animosity only benefits Azshara. Her power is considerable. Divided, we are no match for her--or the master she serves.
Lor'themar: Cooperation between our sides has been the exception, not the rule. More often, we are at each other's throats.
Thalyssra: Is it? Not long ago, Alliance and Horde fought together to liberate Suramar from the Legion.
Lor'themar: Sylvanas has the loyalty of the people. So long as she is warchief, this war will rage within their hearts. We cannot stop it.
Thalyssra: Perhaps we do not need to. It might be enough to direct our attacks against Azshara rather than the Alliance.
Lor'themar: That plan would infuriate Blightcaller... which makes me like it all the more. Hmm... "It stops when you turn from one another and walk away..."
Thalyssra: Yes. We also have a history of setting differences aside to fight greater foes.
Lor'themar: A lesson once taught to Jaina Proudmoore and me. Your counsel is wise, Thalyssra. Our focus must be on ending Azshara's reign.
Thalyssra: A truce then? We fight Azshara here, not one another.
Yes, yes, each faction has grudges against the other.
The fact that the grudges have their bases in things that happen does not magically mean that when one shows a willingness to act on those grudges despite the consequences, they aren’t an active threat to the other. And since a good bit of where Sylvanas is talking about needing to act because the Alliance is a threat comes before WoT, at that time we weren’t at the time where Teldrassil was a good reason for anything the Alliance would want to do.
And not taking the meta perspective the Horde was acting under the knowledge that they did not betray the peace, they were still concentrating on defeating the legion, and yet the Alliance still attacked them without caring to find out why things happened like they did. (And if the Horde had knowledge of the Rogue campaign: Why after it was found out that everyone was led into a trap by the Legion does the Alliance still behave like this. If the Shaw was returned to them and did not clear that up, is that Shaw or is Stormwind still under the influence of a Dreadlord?)
Just because the Alliance jumped to conclusions does not change the fact that they were the ones who broke the peace in fact.
And again no.
You do not get to make up an excuse for Alliance misdeeds out of thin air, throw a couple quotes that don’t apply (as of Genn attacking at Stormheim, Sylvanas had behaved honorably) and then act like you’re quoting actual Lore.
6 Likes
Sylvanas puts as much blame on the Horde in A Good War for the willingness to act on grudged and be a threat to the Alliance. In fact, Sylvanas puts very minimal effort into bringing up Stormheim to convince Saurfang, and only offhand mentions it after failing to convince Saurfang by all her other excuses.
This information wouldn’t have changed the Horde leaving the Alliance for dead. “Alliance didn’t see what the Horde did” and “the Horde had to save itself” does not change that the Horde left the Alliance for dead, and Sylvanas even reflects upon this in Before the Storm.
Meta-knowledge not relevant to character motivation at the time. The Horde likewise made no effort to clear anything up, so the Horde actively let the Alliance continue to misunderstand the situation even well into Before the Storm.
You do know you can say “no” as many times as you want but it doesn’t actually make a point for you, right?
Come now, don’t misrepresent me to try to pivot the conversation again. I’m here to point out the Horde’s wrongdoings, not to excuse the Alliance’s. Eye for an eye is wrong. But taking a person’s eye first is also wrong to begin with.
In what way is supposedly having someone’s back and turning tail acting honorably? “Alliance didn’t see what the Horde did.” But the Horde did see what the Alliance was facing, and left them there.
Nothing meta about that. The Horde knew what they had done.
Have you ever heard of Russell’s Teapot?
He wrote that if he were to assert, without offering proof, that a teapot, too small to be seen by telescopes, orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, he could not expect anyone to believe him solely because his assertion could not be proven wrong.
We’ve got Amadis’ clause now.
4 Likes
That’s the difference between Thrall and Vol-jinn. Or maybe Saurfang and Sylvannas. (Where was Saurfang anyway?) Either of those orcs might have insisted on staying to the bitter end and as a result the Horde leadership and it’s army would have been annihlated. Vol-jinn however chose survival over a fruitless gesture of honor. Honor means very little to the dead.
3 Likes
After all, no one to sing songs about your glorious death if EVERYTHING dies.
3 Likes
From the point of view of a player, who can see the whole situation, the Horde as a whole really doesn’t have a moral leg to stand on, I’m afraid. Our PC is written as being fully complicit in all of that, except when we’re not. The narrative is trying to absolve us, but doing such a bad job that it is worse than unconvincing–it actually pushes us in the opposite direction.
“Leaving them there” would have been retreating without sounding the horn to announce what they were doing.
I think the problem, from your viewpoint, is that you don’t see the Horde as having the authority to make decisions in this situation. You think the Alliance are the only ones who had the right to say when it was time to retreat.
6 Likes
So then most people are talking about from the players’ pov? Eh, I don’t really care about that either. Killing Nelves in Ashenvale and Darkshore isn’t even like top 5 worst things we’re supposed to have done this expansion. From my pov WotT (minus the tree burning) was justified because of the assassination attempt on our Warchief. Really a shame they didn’t play that up more but I guess it goes against making the Alliance the poooooor lil victims of “unprovoked” aggression.
4 Likes
I don’t know about “most people.” Maybe others who are reading along will weigh in on this.
But anyway, it’s not specifically Alliance players that I care about looking justified for, except in the sense that it is the Alliance players who are going to be finger-pointing and screaming “EVIL!” forever, and I’d rather not have to deal with that. I want to feel justified in my own eyes.
Well, then I’m genuinely happy for you if it’s not bothering you. But it’s interfering with my ability to enjoy playing my Horde toons this expac. I’m not getting the experience that pulled me to the game in the first place.
I should clarify, I don’t personally care about all the shame they’re trying to saddle us with but I do recognize that it’s affecting other’s enjoyment of the game and I certainly sympathize with that. No one should have to feel like an awful person for playing a video game they love.
3 Likes
I absolutely disagree. But this goes back to Dotzy’s point: redemption in the eyes of who, exactly?
I am fine with it. I play my Horde toons with much enjoyment. I love fighting Alliance NPCs even if we are losing and failing every time we are sent on a mission.
However, I feel I may be truly disgusted playing Horde at the end of BfA, if Lorthemar, Liadrin, Garona, and Geyarah bow before Anduin and Auntie Jaina.
If Carm meant redemption in the story - well, all the writers need to do is make it so.
I really agree with this though. I would “half-like” your post if I could.
People seem to forget that Voljin was Warchief. He commanded Sylvanas “dont let the Horde die dis day.” And she obeyed. And she blew a loud horn.
The Alliance heard it and they knew what the horn meant. They even talk about it.
7 Likes