Damaged the lore, not sure. Kul Tiran Drust Druidry is good, G’huun was cool but badly managed (the notion that Raden had no idea MOTHER existed, nor Uldir), Tidemother was absolutely amazing (Human religion other than The Church of Light).
Damaged the narrative yes. Wrote themselves into multiple problematic corners ranging from the redeeming human rights abuses (e.g. genocide) to narrative racism (killing more trolls, repeatedly).
Create a retcon via an expansion of retcons? Absolutely not, terrible idea, why would you trust them with that.
I think see that being added in a potential future Chronicle volume. I also see them using the Chronicle as a way to try and make the BfA flow neater.
As to the OP… One thing that must be remembered is that redemption is subjective. For example in Angel, his friends are all for Angel getting his happy ending but when Holtz returned, all he saw was the monster Angelus that murdered his family and nothing could stop him from wanting his vengeance.
With that said I think we need to see the Horde rebuilding, showing them being defenders of Azeroth over conquerors, and show that internal conflict with the Alliance over it. Have some express hope for a more peaceful future, have others disagree. It can help show case that while the Horde is turning over a new leaf, the Alliance is divided over it, since it would be realistic.
They actually didn’t know who the spirit was. Bwonsamdi and Vol’jin just learned Mueh’zala tossed an ancient spirit in there and decided to rescue said spirit from that fate. Bwonsamdi also called it a type of payback against Mueh’zala and the Jailer manipulating Vol’jin, with Vol’jin viewing it as fixing an injustice.
I’m honestly a bit surprised that there wasn’t a quest chain or short story focused on explaining that. Until states otherwise I’m figuring Voss got the position as a result of a the Forsaken understanding the rest of the Horde leadership could be wary against the old guard, as it were, and seeing the newcomer as a sign of them picking a new future without Sylvanas. Furthermore I think her working with Rexxar, however brief, had an impact because Rexxar does have history with Thrall, Rokhan, Gazlowe, and he could have easily mentioned the deal with Zelling, Voss warning about the possible fallout, and then her ensuring that his family was well taken care of. Thus showing that Voss honors her oaths.
That is true, good point. Mueh’zala didn’t name drop while Bwonsamdi was trying to get the information out of him, and Vol’jin and the player didn’t know who it was until they caught up to Ashamane.
Ok, the narrative, but ill assume you agree with the rest.
For the record i dont trust them, im not saying what i propose doesnt have its own problems but we have an unsolvable problem here so whatever they do has to be a bit radical imo.
I don’t think outright racism should be the key to muddying the alliance, though I think a few mustache twirling bigot nobles might be a good inclusion, since I can’t think of any positive depictions of non-Wrynn stormwind nobility. I do think the colonialist/imperialist bent of some previously positively portrayed Alliance groups should absolutely be investigated though.
I think a bigger/better divide would be tensions between the explicitly light worshipping side of the Alliance and those who are more agnostic/void/nature attuned. The Alliance of OG wow was happy to break bread with fanatics like the Scarlets until they started killing too many innocents, and the glowy Draenei probably disdain the void/fel/death users in the alliance even if they’re not gonna go full AU Draenei.
Night elves don’t have reason to be particularly happy with the EK based alliance either, so I think there’d be realistic tension to explore.
I agree with most that this will take two parts: both allowing the Horde to come across as “better” than they currently are portrayed, and also reducing some of the “perfection” of the Alliance.
I think many people have pointed out that part of the issue is a lack of development among Alliance characters - they come across as immune to corruption, invulnerable to danger, and always on the moral high ground. Not just that they believe they have it, but it’s portrayed in such a way as to provide that as fact, making them the “good” faction.
The Horde has been portrayed as a rag-tag group, prone to aggression and violence, and sometimes blindly following leaders into doing unspeakable acts. They have been portrayed as the “bad” faction - even having their cities raided (twice). This has even led to splintering of the Horde, where some of the Horde have worked with the “good” faction to remove the “bad” faction leaders.
I will probably be alone in saying this, but I feel that (perhaps unintentionally) some of the necessary steps are already under way to alleviate these narrative issues.
The armistice following BfA created a division within the Alliance with the Night Elves unwilling to support it, creating dissent within the faction that has generally been shown to be unified. It could lead to the Night Elves becoming overzealous in killing the Horde in retaliation for Teldrassil. Already Tyrande has been portrayed as consumed by vengeance.
The Night Elves will likely want a new home established and most likely expect the resources of the Alliance to support that creation. The Worgen, staunch allies of the Night Elves, have been waiting a decade for their home to be rebuilt (or a new home).
Turalyon is a former/current (I don’t know his status) member of the Army of the Light. As shown in the Mag’har Allied Race campaign, Yrel and the Army of the Light are shown - in essence - exterminating the Mag’har that refuse to join their cause. While Humans and Draenei have predominantly worshipped the “Light” other races have pursued different forms of spirituality. When Velen presented the similarities of Elune and the Naaru, Tyrande requested he refrain from making such outlandish claims in Darnassus or in the presence of Elune’s priesthood. That’s not even questioning their potential treatment of the Horde members with different beliefs.
Similarly, Anduin has been shown to utilize Void magic (as has Alleria - Turalyon’s wife). The Void and Light have been at war for eons and even though the small contingent of Void Elves have been allowed into the Alliance, if the battle between the Light and Void spilled over into a larger scale on Azeroth (not just via the Old Gods as a proxy), then there could be tensions between who should lead the Alliance and whether certain races should be allowed to stay.
Also, along the same lines, Humans have dominated the Alliance leadership, but Anduin is currently in the middle of a storyline that could throw the leadership of the Alliance into jeopardy. If Anduin is transformed into a Death Knight, will the Humans of the Alliance accept his return to the throne? Predominantly Humans have seen the Forsaken (and Undead in general) as abominations.
While these themes do suggest a level of bigotry (racial, spiritual, etc) I think they are somewhat more nuanced than simply “Green skin? KILL IT WITH FIRE!”
I also think there is room for the Horde to take on a more “noble” approach that they had, but then lost when the writers found they needed a new purple dispenser. Unfortunately they’ve still not done much to elevate the stature of the Horde.
Loa’jin potentially offers a rebuttal to the narrative of the Humans (and Night Elves) as having the “closer” relationship with true divine powers (the Light and Elune respectively). Even the Loa are of a lesser stature. The Orc’s Shamanism focuses on the elements - which were soundly beaten by the Pantheon, which is associated with Dwarves and Gnomes. Elevating the powers represented by the spirituality of the Orcs, Taurens, Trolls, etc would help to create a more “level” playing field. If the “powerful” deities/cosmological forces/whatever are on the side of the Alliance, they seem to be siding with “good” and always able to call on a stronger “power.”
Stop consistently splintering the leadership of the Horde for the sake of adding drama and allow the Horde to return to focusing on their original motivations. They formed to provide unified defenses against the threats of extermination from xenophobic groups. They formed to try to survive in a desolate land that was directly hostile to themselves.
While I don’t think “political structures” itself is an interesting narrative, I would like to see a bit of different organizational layouts play a role in how each side is able to handle conflicts - where both sides represent a set of pros and cons. Neither side is truly fleshed out in terms of where more power resides (as far as I know) but in essence the differences could boil down to a centralized power structure (not a tyranny, but one where the central government holds most of the power) compared to a decentralized power structure (where regional groups hold most of the power). The most basic way is that regional powers can often be more responsive to threats locally but end up with disparities in policies and power, whereas a centralized power unifies power and policies within regions, but often is slower to respond regionally to threats; an Azeroth-wide invasion might be easier to be slowed down regionally by one group, but harder to organize a group effort (and vice versa for the other side).
The underlying theme of the Orcs and the formation of the Horde under Thrall was freedom. Embrace that. Compare freedom and the associated risks against more restrictions with more safety.
These types of narratives portray the Horde less as embodying the “evil” aspects and needing to be “put down” regularly and more as a different set of goals that have their own benefits and positives. Conflicts may and will ensue but instead of the Horde constantly being shown as savages, they’ll just be shown as different, which could be the root of these conflicts.
The first part is true. The Horde does have to become better. But the goodness or badness of the Alliance is irrelevant to that. That is nothing more than trying to give fodder for the ‘what-about-ism’ arguments. The Horde wont be ‘redeemed’ by the Alliance being bad. It has to be the Horde changing.
So, let’s talk about what redemption actually requires.
The fundamental problem is that the Horde’s “redemption” after Grom killed Mannorath was ‘we are not bad anymore.’ Their “redemption” after Garrosh was ‘we are not bad anymore.’ Their “redemption” after Sylvanas has been ‘we are not bad anymore.’ Everytime the Horde has gone bad at the end they just say it is over and they are good now. But they never actually seek redemption.
To actually redeem the Horde you need to have the Horde actively trying to correct the wrongs. They need to be trying to repair what they broke. This is not happening. One of my biggest frustrations with the latest ‘redeemed Horde’ is that the only Horde character showing any effort or even desire to atone for their crimes is the one Horde character that was not involved. The Horde’s “redemption” after being a part of Sylvanas war is: ‘We are a council now, so we are not bad anymore.’ This just doesn’t work because it is just empty promises. We need to see action.
Thrall’s actions after the war actually make the Horde look worse by comparison. He seeks a meeting to with Tyrande to find out what he can do. His first response in finding out Tyrande is in the Maw is to try and find her to help her. Thrall is showing actual guilt over what the Horde has done. Guilt that is motivating action.And he was not part of the war. The rest of the Horde as either taken no action or even comment that would indicate guilt over their part. It is all back to the same old ‘we are blameless for what we did because Warchief.’ Thrall is proving that their claim to being different is false.
If the Horde is to be redeemed we must see them actively trying to make amends for their part. We need to see them trying to fix what they broke. This could be things like:
*Sending supplies and aid to Night Elf territories.
*Sending help to the Shadowlands to try and save as many Night Elf souls as possible.
*Withdrawing from territories contested with Night Elves and purging any Horde that attempt to stay.
*Etc, etc.
In short, we need to see them spending resources and effort to try and repair whatever they can from the damage they did. Redemption will only be a thing when we see action to fix that damage.
My gut guess is that the meta reason why Thrall and Baine are even involved at all is because they’re probably the least-objectionable options to use as horde reps in a neutral expansion coming off of horde aggression.
Like, take the complaints people have about rescuing Jaina from the Maw, and if you tried to make that Saurfang or Gallywix instead? Whew; I’m pretty sure alliance fans would be rightfully ticked over that.
Edit: I could easily imagine Nathanos criticizing how long it took you to come break him out, once he realizes the player’s actually saving him and composes himself.
Blizzard hires a WC3/Vanilla era horde fan, and they sit in on writing/dev team meetings armed with a pool noodle. If a writer starts talking about killing off/corrupting more horde leaders, the offending dev get pummelled with the pool noodle until they relent.
In a 2-faction game the 2 factions are always going to be compared to one another.
At this point, it doesn’t matter how much “better” the Horde becomes because they will always and ever be less than the Alliance. The Alliance level of moral absolutism isn’t something that is attainable for Horde because it has flaws, unlike the Alliance.
Without the Alliance moving down in the standings they will always be above the Horde. It’ll become a matter of
“Oh! You rescued souls from the Maw. But didn’t you send them there in the first place?”
“Gee, thanks for the supplies. Would that you hadn’t invaded our territory and destroyed our infrastructure in the first place.”
“Yeah, you helped save Azeroth. But remember that time you burned a tree?”
No. As long as the Alliance remains narrativelly unblemished the Horde can never better itself to the point of equality.
No matter what you do to help “redeem/rebuild” the Horde, as long as the Alliance - the only counterpoint to the Horde - is constantly depicted as having the “moral high ground,” worshipping the “correct/powerful” cosmological powers, and always justified/correct then the Horde will always be the “bad guys.”
If you set the Alliance up, in perpetuity, as the great bastion of “goodness” then the Horde by default is the faction of “bad.” You can improve the Horde, but they will always be worse than the Alliance because they’re simply unblemished perfection. Until you make it so that one faction is not the epitome of “good,” the other faction will never be able to be anything but “worse” than them and in a two choice system that makes one good and one bad.
I suppose there’s an exception requiring you to make them both the bastions of perfection, but good luck with that. Then there’s no factional differences and we might as well just be one faction.
And any story that begins with the Horde trying to buy forgiveness is destined to end badly. It emphasizes placing the Horde faction subservient to the Alliance, relegating another chunk of story to how the Horde is evil and paying for their misdeeds.
And for the record, real life history suggests this type of process ends poorly. After WWI Germany was hit hard by sanctions with the goal of aiding in rebuilding and repaying the countries they had fought. The struggles of the German people helped due to this burden (among other causes) aided in the rise of Hitler.
No, the Alliance goodness or badness irrelevant to the Horde’s goodness or badness. Even if the Alliance went full evil, destroy them all, it would have no effect on if the Horde was good or bad. That would just make two bad factions. For the Horde to be redeemed it only matters what the Horde does. Every other factions actions are completely separate from that.
The “greyness level” of the world is a completely different discussion. You can argue whether or not the Alliance needs internal conflict. You can argue whether or not the Alliance should do questionable things. But all of that is completely separate from the conversation about the Horde being redeemed or not.
I understand where you are going. But I still maintain the redemption of the Horde is irrelevant to the relative moral standing with the Alliance.
See, the thing about redemption is that it is not instant. Sure, they are the reason things need done. But that is the whole point of them doing them. It is about trying to fix their wrongs.
Think of it like this. If you run into your neighbors fence you have damaged their property. So, you seek to fix it. Maybe you pay to have a new section of fence put in. You don’t get credit for being charitable, because you caused the issue to start with. But you do get credit for trying to fix it.
The situation is the same for the Horde. Yes, they caused the issues to start with. Yes, the help would not have been needed had they not done it. So, there is not credit for charity. But, if you see them working and sacrificing to fix or mitigate the damage they did, you give them credit for that. And that is how redemption comes. By simply ignoring the damage done you indicate there is no change and they are just as bad as before. Redemption requires a turning around and action in the opposite direction, not just a white wash of the past.
Equality has nothing to do with redemption.
That is not how it works.
Again, that is not how redemption works. Redemption does not require you to be equal or better than everyone else. A murder can be redeemed even if he never matches the good that someone who spent their whole life dedicated to making the world better. The Horde’s redemption is completely separate from anything the Alliance may or may not do.
To suggest that the Alliance needs to be dirtied to ‘redeem’ the Horde is really only trying to excuse the Horde’s conduct by giving them a ‘what-about’ argument. And that is just not a good solution.
NOTE: I am not arguing either for or against the Alliance being made more grey. I am contending that is completely separate from the discussion about the Horde’s redemption. The Alliance good/bad state is irrelevant to the Horde’s good/bad state.
The short answer: It cannot be done. The current writing team have demonstrated almost zero capacity for moral nuance more complicated than Pure Good and Pure Evil. And what they’ve already written has so completely poisoned the well that the only two viable paths going forward are the Horde remains stupid pointlessly evil to the extant that the faction should just be re-named ‘The Stupid N@+!$’; or they just become blandly good, superglue their lips to Anduin’s butt, and just join the Alliance, after which every bad thing they ever did will be quietly ignored, just like every bad thing the rest of the Alliance has even done is quietly ignored.
