It was a mistake to give single characters that much power to begin with especially so one sided.
1 Like
I personally don’t care, just combine the factions already. What even is the point of the faction war when we always fight together anyway… 
1 Like
What frustrates me is you’re basically insisting that the only way to write the Alliance Pantheon accurately is to write them as infallible, omniscient, and all-powerful. You’re saying there’s no way any of them could be backed into a corner, outwitted, distracted, manipulated, or just plain mistaken about a threat to the status quo.
I said “introduce a new character”—I didn’t say “pop up overnight fully formed with an implied backstory stretching back over multiple expansions.” You’re the one who put in that part. In my world, I’d have a new character start making a splash in a small way next expansion, rapidly gaining power to the point of becoming a major player by the end of that expansion or maybe the following one; obviously, it would depend on what makes sense for the story, but I’d want to get the new character onboard as fast as logically possible.
But I have a feeling you’re going to say that it wouldn’t be realistic for the Alliance Pantheon to allow this person to ever challenge them because “of course” they would see the threat and squash it before it became a problem.
7 Likes
Of course alliance players want that. That was always their goal. They can’t imagine the game without controlling and dominating the narrative to their favors.
1 Like
I think the problem with the “Well, all these Alliance heroes would stop the new guy” argument is that it misses the Alliance’s inherent weakness. As described, the Alliance is a rule of law kind of place. So why couldn’t our new Alliance war monger be very good at using those rules to his/her advantage? i.e. Malfurion or Jaina is powerful enough to stop Duke Forkbeard, but the Duke is very carefully staying within the laws of the Alliance as far as anyone knows.
11 Likes
Congratulations, you’re now full on Cata era Alliance poster. The circle is complete.
1 Like
It is what it is. They never made it a secret they they want the classic setup back. Alliance controls everything. Horde only has Barrens.
1 Like
The, ‘Alliance Pantheon,’ is comprised of characters with thousands of years of experience. To be blunt, some newly risen character out of nowhere out-smarting people with that sort of experience screams, “Mary-Sue.”
Remember, the story has to be written as much for Alliance players as for your goal. This has to be a character Alliance players would want to support as much as, ‘the masses,’ lorewise would purportedly support them.
It would be unrealistic for the, ‘Alliance Pantheon,’ to ignore dangerous rhetoric that would damage diplomatic relations with the Horde as peace finally becomes a strong possibility, yes. This Lywin Tannister character would become an outlaw faster than blinking, and we’d end up with a repeat of the Defias storyline.
In Game of Thrones just because you are old and a protagonist doesn’t mean you shall have plot armor. Anyone can died by any moment and that is great. A single arrow to chest and neck can kill a lord easily.
It wouldn’t really be that unrealistic though. We are talking about a position that is probably not super rare. You think Malfurion and Tyrande go and wag their finger at any night elf who still talks about wanting vengeance on the Horde? Do you think Jaina reprimands people in Kultiras that are still angry about the Horde? And plus, even if they DID do that that might backfire because “Why are they so set on silencing us? You know that guy over here has a good point. Our leaders don’t care about the losses we had…Screw them!”
6 Likes
That wasn’t peace. That was strongarming and blackmail. The Horde was pacified and betrayed by its own leaders due to ceding Silverpine and Hillsbrad. Don’t preetnd like there was a common agreement on equal terms.
To this date only one leader punished his own people for daring to be angry for being massacred by the enemy. There is a good reason why no one likes Baine.
2 Likes
This would be awesome… though it also tends to play into the old pro “strong man”/tyranny arguments that basically boil down to “See? Laws written by the weak nearly ruined our once great people.”
3 Likes
Depends. Is that Night Elf just venting, or are they amassing the sort of numbers that could go and start another war, and end up getting the rest of the race killed for their own vengeance?
That’s something else pretty often forgotten. For all the losses that are a result of the war, while people may want vengeance, you’ll also have people who just want it to stop.
The girl who’s father died in the Second War wanted vengeance. That woman, fully grown, lost her husband to the Horde in the Fourth War. You think she wants to lose her Grandson in the Fifth War?
For as many people wanting vengeance and war, you’ve got those who want it to end.
So in other words, it IS your position that they are infallible, omniscient, all-powerful, and just generally impossible to beat?
Why would a new character with those capabilities be a Mary Sue but Jaina Proudmoore isn’t? She’s been a major player on the world stage ever since she was still a student in Dalaran.
Or to put it another way, why could the writing techniques that turned Jaina into a beloved and powerful character never be used again to elevate someone else?
Actually, no, this doesn’t have to be a character that Alliance players would want to support. I’m 100% fine with (some) Alliance players hating this character and believing the character to be in the wrong. The character’s purpose is simply to create story by stirring up trouble.
“Ignoring a threat” isn’t the only way it could happen. But if you truly believe the Alliance Pantheon are infallible, then I accept that I can’t convince you otherwise. However, I hope that I might have convinced others that this is a viable possibility.
12 Likes
Given how a lot of these groups go, membership of them seems to pop up fast. So while they might be concerned it might not be really actionable. Especially since Night Elf society is already pretty militarized. At best they might want to keep an eye on them but it could be very well too late before they do intervene.
And yes, of course there are people who would feel the opposite. My point is more that wanting revenge is probably fairly common to the point that it’s plausible that the powerful leaders could lose control of the situation. I do think that if this kind of thing ever were in game it wouldn’t lead to the 5th War but a “30 seconds to Midnight but was saved from disaster at the last second” kind of thing.
4 Likes
I guess that I regard that as a feature and not a bug. It allows for some internal conflict in the Alliance. e.g. Team Turalyon - “Duke Forkbeard nearly toppled the Alliance because of our lax laws. We must ensure that this never happens again “ v. Team Anduin “Does the Alliance even exist anymore if we abandon our ideals in the face of difficulties?”
7 Likes
Kindly do not put words in my mouth. As I stated, it is pretty lame when some new character out of nowhere just stands up characters that have existed for longer, and have the experience to stop them.
Jaina Proudmoore was a Mary-Sue. Beautiful, preternaturally gifted with magic, apprenticed to the head of the Kirin Tor, the love interest of at least two princes (Arthas and Kael’thas), later mentored by the penultimate Guardian, beloved of the new Aspect of Magic for a while, etc…
She’s no longer a Mary-Sue as she is no longer universally loved in the setting, has made mistakes that she’s suffered and atoned for, etc… Don’t get me wrong, she’s still borderline Mary-Sue by all accounts, but she’s fallen off of the definition of it.
Why Jaina worked boils down to the fact that although she was a Mary-Sue, the story never focused on her heavily. In WC3, she didn’t even have her own campaign. The minute Jaina actually became the focus of the story, people started disliking her character.
Because you’re suggesting telling a story with this antagonistic character front and center. Jaina proved a Mary-Sue can exist in a narrative so long as they play a peripheral role.
Then you’re not writing a story for the Alliance playerbase, you’re just using them to create a story for the Horde playerbase.
No thank you.
If you want a Horde story, use Horde characters to tell it.
You’re not going to convince me of this idea of a new character showing up, winning the hearts and minds of the Alliance in the time frame of an expansion or two, and then get the greenlight to genocide the tauren or whoever in the Horde. It’s poor writing, it ignores the established lore, and it requires severe damage to a significant number of existing characters. The whole idea isn’t even presented in a way to appeal to Alliance players. Why create a story with Alliance characters, if its not for Alliance players?
hypothetical Alliance character who creates internal conflict within the Alliance would very much be an Alliance story, built up Alliance side for years before spilling out to be a problem for the Horde. Much like Garrosh was only really visible to Horde players at first.
Anyway, here’s my throwing-stuff-out-there idea. I think this imaginary noble character should be a warlock, we’ve never really had a big human warlock villain (unless you squint at Medivh and count him). With the leaders of the Burning Legion all being dead, or imprisoned, a politically minded warlock type could easily fit into the power-broker archetype. He’d be the kind of guy who’s so good at politics that he’s got the populace and a bunch of demons on his side. I think it could work.
10 Likes
The Horde deal with the external threat of an unknown Alliance figure targeting them while the Alliance deal with trying to prove who it is, and to what degree he’s actually wrong/doing things for the wrong reason. My idea is that he only gets so far and doesn’t actually do any major damage- maybe he even has help from a particularly bloodthirsty Horde faction who are stupidly insistent on War Forever, and he ended up backstabbing them before they can do that same to him, then spins it in his favor (“See? There WAS a group of stupidly bloodthirsty Horde about to attack again, and I stopped it. We can NEVER trust them; anyone who does so is a fool at best and a traitor at worst. What? Insinuations that I was in cahoots with them? Preposterous- you’d better have strong evidence to even dare accurse someone of my position!”)
6 Likes