It will re-escalate into a World War again.
Which I have no issues with - especially if this is not the only conflict point. The only caveat that I push for is that I think these conflicts should be localized into fronts. Places like the Barrens Border, Arathi, the High Seas, etc. - you get a series of battlegrounds with little stories around them.
This is just a proposal for one of them. Arathi is next on my list if I can ever get to it.
This bolded bit here tells me you didn’t understand what I am saying.
You’re not trying to get orcs to engage with the story in a way they can have fun. You’re targeting players. And the players are telling you that if the night elves attacked Horde civilians they, perceiving the world from a Doyalist perspective as we tend to do when not actively roleplaying, would shrug their shoulders and feel like it was deserved.
I do appreciate that, but I also think that the posters I’m engaging with are coming at this with a pre-defined idea - that one being that they believe that the Horde can never be redeemed under any circumstances.
That’s a similar mindset to the one I used to have about Malfurion and Tyrande never being able to be taken seriously again - and one of the silver linings of BFA is that I have to admit to being partially wrong. I also think the position that no one would ever sympathize or want to protect innocent people is wrong - especially if you can do the character work to make people care about who they’re protecting.
Of course not. Because your entire Agenda here is to give you chance to act on YOUR unresolved Grievances and YOUR Motives. And both the Alliance and Horde are an accessory to that. To be made convenient for that story. Because honestly, if a rogue NE group was slaughtering their way through the Barrens civilian population … the majority of the Alliance would not come to their defense. Because its easier to either deal with them themselves, or just let the Horde hunt them down without risk of Alliance interference … then let these civilian killers drag their people and their populations into another War.
And like it or not, that will apply to the Draenei and the Gilneans. No matter how much NE players try to make them an accessory for their race and their stories because “they owe them”.
Can’t imagine why they’d think that…
The last ten years’ worth of expansions.
Think that might have to do with both those characters clearly being portrayed in an inarguably-heroic light?
Just putting that out there 
… and again, this is a purity test. I do not believe that my interests are subordinate to yours and vice versa. This is an attempt to resolve things for the both of us. Past that, I owe no debt of loyalty to you, nor do I owe you deference. I am treating you as a fellow player and negotiating partner. You do not occupy a superior position to me or me to you.
As for the larger world - there’s a thread entitled “Writing a PVP Narrative - Post Shadowlands” which is the larger picture in which this fits. Writing a PVP-Narrative, Post Shadowlands
Yes I know, more reading - but if you’re worried about the larger situation - with admittedly some areas that could use some updates to account for later suggestions - here you go.
Not putting a big bad clause redarding how absolutely NO ONE from the story dev team post Cata can get close to 15 ft from your scenario and how they are absolutely forbidden from making any type of change that retcons the narrative intention of it post implementation was your first mistake.
To put it simple you´re asking the Horde players bummed and distrustful of Blizzard´s writting team -thanks to the lack of competence and actual malice exercised by them in BfA- to give a chance to your story and it´s implementation as a “solution” to the Horde narrative problem, while you don´t take into account the crucial fact the clowns that ruined the Horde in BfA using an scenario disturbingly similar to your own proposed one would be the same ones implementing the story. And then you wonder why we don´t TRUST nor BELIEVE Blizzard WILL implement it with nuance and honesty!!!
To put it in perspective: it has already happened 2 TIMES Kyalin, and in BOTH the devs capriciously decided it was easier to muddle the Alliance aggresion and put the whole freaking blame on the Horde´s characters and the Horde faction with no coherence involved. We´re talking about actual experimental data here, woman, so if you think your word is "good2 nough to trump my actual freaking irl experience with the game, then you´re playing us like fools, refuse to read or lack self awareness.
Also, you´ll absolutely need an implementation that gives NO possible cause to remove the aggresion causals from the Alliance side of the story to retroactively justify them and put a Horde character in the spot as the actual “aggresor”… and if for this it is necessary to get Khadgar/rando Neutral NPC literally calling you guys up on your BS and PUTTING THE BLAME FOR STARTING THE AGGRESION UNQUESTIONABLY ON YOUR SIDE OF THE FENCE, then you damn well may implement that safety clause for us too. And if this means YOU GUYS HAVE TO KILL YOUR OWN ROGUE ELEMENTS AND GET CHASTENED BY HORDE FLAVORED NPCS, THEN YOU WILL HAVE TO STAND IT.
But then again, if the fight ends up being Bad Alliance vs. Rebel Alliance + Horde, is it an actual PvP scenario? Cause me thinks it isn´t.
This would be true if we were discussing real world innocent people, but we’re not. I personally don’t feel any strong sense of urgency to leap into the fray to defend digital pictures on my computer screen unless I am heavily engaged with the narrative already.
Which most Horde posters here simply are not. It was beaten out of them.
And trying to find a way to re-engage the narrative is a tall order as this 2.5K post thread can attest to.
Because this doesn’t sound even remotely insecure…
Ariel, these are not plotholes - and this is why I’m getting frustrated. I have asked repeatedly for criticism that I can take back and make edits with. You’re coming back to me with this fallacy that I also have to account for what Blizzard might do in the future, rather than making suggestions as to what I believe they should do - and I feel like you’re baking that into my intentions.
I get that you’re angry with the story, I am too - but I have to ask for better than this.
Tl;dr: Horde players that used to care for the story deffinitely DON´T trust Blizzard with any nuance that actually salvages the faction after thye narrative disaster of BfA.
Ergo why losing customer TRUST is such a big no-no regarding quality control policies… simply put it, most of us that followed the story don´t believe Blizzard has the will nor the means to fix the mess they pridefully created in the first place, regardless of how much we tried to give feedback in BfA.
You need to stop taking me disagreeing with your idea (like nearly every Horde poster here) as a personal insult or attack against you. Then pulling empty academic jargon out to butter up you being upset that we aren’t thrilled with the idea you are presenting here. Which is why my argument simply focused on the likely outcome from the Horde in its current post-BfA state to NE radicals killing Horde civilians. To preserve the Armistice, the Horde would put the burden of choice on the Alliance. They can either deal with these murderers themselves, or they can leave the Horde to do it without interference. If they choose to support the NE radicals, then the armistice is over and things escalate beyond a simple skirmish in the Barrens. Which … go figure … only benefits one race. The NEs.
So … supporting the NE radicals targeting civilians wouldn’t really be a rational choice for most of the Alliance Leadership to take. Since it would risk dragging their people and their resources into another World War, solely to benefit the NEs grudge (no matter how justified it would be). Thus, they would either choose to deal with the problem themselves … or remain hands off to the Horde dealing with them. Its a lot less risk and resource intensive than the alternative. Which … thus doesn’t support PvP. Because in the Alliance acting case, the Alliance are the ones hunting down the radicals. In the Alliance hands off case, the Alliance is not supporting the radicals. Which means that either the Horde or Alliance as Factions are not involved in one of those two scenarios. Its just the NE radicals vs the Alliance OR the Horde.
Again, the point that this is going to hinge on is the characterization. If you can make a character that’s likeable, and then threaten then, you can generate investment to protect them, I feel. Admittedly - this is the hardest part of this question - which is: how do you make the average citizenry of the Horde feel as though they are worth protecting?
And characterization is, admittedly, where I am weak.
Why the rest of the Alliance simply doesn´t run ASAP to stomp the Horde in defense of their allies when the historical record in-game related to this type of conflicts shows that any time that the Horde “fought back” it ended up with a big bad crater with an Alliance name and a huge amount of Alliance lost lives IS a plothole.
Simply put it: using COHERENT and DECENT writting, the moment the Horde raises a mere hand to “defend” themselves SHOULD raise the alarms of all and every Alliance military and political leader (after all the Horde lorewise speaking has NEVER been shown as a “fair fighter” and anytime they get into spats with the Alliance the blue team ends up losing massive amounts of life thanks to some weirdo weapon the Horde magically pulls from their behinds at the last minute).
And unless you actually WANT to avoid any type of justification for the Alliance murdering civilians in the narartive (ergo, the bit about naeutral organizatyions condemning the Alliance this time around), then I´m afraid the Alliance is kinda justificated into murdering those Orcs by default thanks to the historical behaviour of the Horde in the current lore.
Good luck trying to invest in “positive characterization for Horde Orcs” when we have a COMPLETE expac -WoD- retconning their fall from grace from “usually peaceful but then devil fooled and manipulated them” to “they act like warmongering jerks cause WoW´s “Titanic Gods” designed the Orcs as a-holes by starters”.
Your secodn plothole / hurdle: why would any on the Alliance / Neutral side of things care over murdered Orcs when those Orcs have been consistently shown as violent maniacs that never respected the Alliance races at any point in the story of the game?
Why the rest of the Alliance simply doesn´t run ASAP to stomp the Horde in defense of their allies when the historical record in-game related to this type of conflicts shows that any time that the Horde “fought back” it ended up with a big bad crater with an Alliance name and a huge amount of Alliance lost lives IS a plothole.
Two reasons.
Good look trying to invest in “positive characterization for Horde Orcs” when we have a COMPLETE expac -WoD- retconning their fall from grace from “usually peaceful but then devil fooled and manipulated them” to “they act like warmongering jerks cause WoW´s “Titanic Gods” designed the Orcs as a-holes by starters”.
I think that’s easy to do when you regard the Orcs as a concept - harder when you approach individual characters. I get the feeling that if we’re presented with likeable, fun people, people are naturally going to want to defend them. That’s a task the Barrens questing would have to accomplish.
Your secodn plothole / hurdle: why would any on the Alliance care over murdered Orcs when those Orcs have been consistently shown as violent maniacs that never respected the Alliance races at any point in the story of the game?
The Alliance aren’t supposed to care. The Horde player is supposed to care - rebuilding the investment is for them, not us.
That sort of emotional manipulation (in the context of story writing) can work, but it can also backfire pretty easily.
You could, say, add a new character who is a precious newborn babe with wide eyes and have Tyrande show up and literally eat it. Awful! Scandal! The sheer woe of it all!
That’ll get people to hate Tyrande. Sure. But that can also backfire and get people to just give up with the story entirely. It can make them hate the writers.
So. I think I’ll try to bridge the gap here with a simple comparison.
Kyalin, why are you not invested in the story enough to want to kill Sylvanas even after what she did to something you care about in the game?
Your answer is most likely pretty similar to how the Horde feel when you suggest they fight the night elves for killing this theoretical character.
I want to place less of the focus on loss and more of the focus on the threat. I don’t want to just kill a puppy on screen and say “don’t you feel bad? Go avenge this puppy”. I don’t think that worked out very well in the first place. Some of that is going to be needed, but I think the overall focus needs to be a) here are these fun people, b) oh no, these fun people are under threat unless you do something, and then c) your actions saved these fun people. It should be framed in a positive way, and should feel like a victory.
Are they? I mean the Horde torched their lands and killed their civilians with nothing but a pat on the hand as punishment. And the benefits from defending a race that has been consistently shown as violent when left alone are waaay less than the problems thye Alliance can get from losing their biggest supporters in Kalimdor.
Dear, the Horde and Alliance have been “portrayed” as being “in the last stages of resource availability” since TBC… and soldiers et al are still pulled from the factions´behinds -why? simple: because if Horde / Alliance are TRULY in ac actual shortage of military resources, then how can devs justify them beating the cosmic menace FOTM, hmmm?-
What I quoted WAS the actual conceptualization of the RACE. WoD wasn´t about “Grommash acting like an a-hole for the sake of being an Orc”! it was about THE WHOLE FREAKING ORC RACE ACTING LIKE A-HOLES FOR THE SAKE OF BEING ORCS.
Why would I care for rando Orc civilians or an Orc nobody I literally met 5 minutes ago when the race has been consistently depicted as violent morons that literally can´t have 5 minutes of peace without pissing off someone?
Are they? I mean the Horde torched their lands and killed their civilians with nothing but a pat on the hand as punishment. And the benefits from defending a race that has been consistently shown as violent when left alone are waaay less than the problems thye Alliance can get from losing their biggest supporters in Kalimdor.
Yes. We may not see eye to eye on this - but I don’t view slaughtering civilians as justified - and the Silverwing commander is certainly someone I want to paint as appearing to represent a darker, less justifiable figure - as well as her series of raids as evil acts.
Dear, the Horde and Alliance have been “portrayed” as being “in the last stages of resource availability” since TBC… and soldiers et al are still pulled from the factions´behinds -why? simple: because if Horde / Alliance are TRULY in ac actual shortage of military resources, then how can devs justify them beating the cosmic menace FOTM, hmmm?-
Sure, and they’ve also been portrayed as not being able to do various things due to resource constraints. Again, my suggestion does not have to incorporate what Blizzard writers may do in the future. I think you’re telling me to fear the monkey paw, and I’m saying that we can’t make suggestions when we live in fear of it. We have to suggest that they not do the ridiculous things they do.
What I quoted WAS the actual conceptualization of the RACE. WoD wasn´t about “Grommash acting like an a-hole for the sake of being an Orc”! it was about THE WHOLE FREAKING ORC RACE ACTING LIKE A-HOLES FOR THE SAKE OF BEING ORCS.
As you can read in my OP - I’m aware of that. Undoing that perception I feel will take some time, but I feel that presenting Orcs in a more sympathetic, relatable light is the first step in reversing that impression.
I feel like this is a hard question to answer, because (I could just be wildly biased about this) it feels like on average, alliance-leaning fans seem to attach to a broader range of minor characters than horde ones do. But, fair warning, I can’t separate my own view from that.
I spent loooaaads of time in the barrens. You kinda had to, with the pre-Cata leveling pacing. But for the life of me, I cannot tell you anything about any of the NPCs there, save for two; one of them ticked me off on a meta level because the game spoke for my character to give him a sexist smirk at a quest giver. The other is Mankrik because he is a joke.
So I was genuinely surprised when people were gushing over the named night elf lowbie NPCs that you can rescue from the maw during the Ardenweald covenant campaign. Which hey, more power to them if they like it. I wish I could have gotten that connected to the game. But as for civilians for me to care about? I’ve been sitting here for minutes trying to think, and at present I can tell you…Auctioneer Stampi, I suppose, because he’s the closer of the two Thunder Bluff auctioneers to the mailbox. And the grieving undead woman whose name I can’t remember, who sends you to the sepulcher to throw away her locket as a post-mortem divorce.
Other than that, I don’t think I’ve held much, if any, attachment for everyday NPCs. I feel like that requires a heavy dose of affectionate nostalgia, and for something like Warsong Gulch, which started out with the orcs clearly in the wrong and being bastards who just couldn’t help themselves, I never found myself sympathizing with them to begin with.
I feel like I’m rambling at this point and if I don’t sound stupid already, I probably will with this next comment: I wanted to avoid getting attached to Zelling and Rastakhan in BFA because I wasn’t expecting anything good to come out of a faction war. Couldn’t help it, kinda liked them despite trying not to. But I feel cagey about even the prospect of being interested in horde characters at this point, even ones that don’t exist yet.