Was it? I don’t get that impression.
It’s basically fairy tales.
We’ll sooner get confirmation An’she is a real being than any Alliance race being allowed a permanent “dark story”.
Don’t change the subject! Create a horror story about the children of the Alliance!
Arguably things can be ret-conned still. IMO there is a degree of “infallibility” in what the players see. Not the texts somebody wrote, or what other characters say, but what we directly see.
Most obvious examples I could think of would be:
- Siege of Silvermoon. We saw in Warcraft 3 the events. But then suddenly nope, it was just the betrayal that played the crucial role. Which both devalues Arthas, horror of incoming scourge, and makes some alterations to Sylvanas in the process.
- Somewhere on the border there are “side” materials. For example, about Jaina.
a. I did a part of the BfA alliance story, and what we were “shown” in Reunion is not how the motivations for the players going to Kul Tiras was presented.
b. both things “shown”, are videos of what supposedly happens at the same time: both are available after Siege of Boralus. But this is not possible. By that time Jaina and Katherine already said that “you could not save him from himself” in the game, so there could be no “I’m listening now, father”.
So, I wonder how those situations should be viewed by the community 
For the reference:
mutually exclusive stories
Seemingly the current take on lore.
“And yes, we do find ourselves fettered by something that was a small piece of a campaign in an RTS game when no one ever imagined for a moment this was going to be taken and built into a world of this scale – and it gets in the way of telling the story we need to tell.” When that happens, things are “flexible.”
© https://www.gameinformer.com/2018/08/14/a-look-inside-how-blizzard-maintains-world-of-warcrafts-lore
What does “we need” mean? There is somebody threatening to fire them, or something? Sounds unlikely. So where is this “need” even coming from, as if it’s not their choice to do what is done.
There are 9 “planets” in Karazhan observatory and on arcane sanctums of blood (high) elves.
Looks like a common trend in blizz lately. Market one thing, sell whatever, try to guard via “it’s their story to tell” / “they do not owe you anything” crowd.
I mean, depends on the way to evaluate, sure.
The story of the tree™ was sold on a premise of the aftermath of the event, and seeking justice. So, what was given:
- orc cinematics
- Reckoning one has the description
The faction war reaches its inevitable climax at the gates of Orgrimmar
what the events of in there had to do with the sold story, elves, and justice?
(not to mention that in BfA the entirety of W3 horde ideas, plus the alliance were dragged through trash just to justify turning the horde into “new” horde, the correct™ one)
I mean, if the “advertisement” would be clear, and the players would be informed by what are they getting into, it’s one thing. But taking the W3 horde and turning it into this is kind of… I mean I am far from being the example of morality and all of that, but it feels like “backstab” of the community by the devs who they (players) originally trusted to.
(not that I think that replacing the Metzen vision of the alliance by the current “Anduin & co.” is any better or less problematic, but it’s another flavour of damaging the origins of the franchise)
by the way, something crossed my mind. So, there is this “wonderful” interview by Bellular, confirming the “new vision” of the cosmology forces. And it say:
These forces… don’t care about morality, they are just driven to do what their nature is.
So, doesn’t it utterly contradicts the existence of Revendreth and they way it, as a part of “pantheon of Death” (by proxi from Denathrius), functions?
- you can’t kill hope
- can’t I?
© some unknown elves
gl hf
1 Like
IMO I’m listening now = Jaina giving into her father’s self destructive tendencies like he wanted, while couldn’t save him from himself = Jaina’s mom affirming her in rejecting them/him.
Story is subject to gameplay, in a lot of ways.
Curious
Doesn’t help Afrasiabi left.
During pre-BFA interviews, he was affirming that the Alliance would be the aggressors during later content, especially against the Tauren and Trolls.
And now Afrasiabi is gone, and during the time that the BFA content was pivoting/abandoned, he “revealed” Sylvanas planned the Wrathgate.
It feels like Danuser is pro-Alliance while Afrasiabi was the last pro-Horde story dev, and he just took a shot at Sylvanas because it’s Danuser’s favorite.
Blizzard genuinely has no idea what they’re talking about when the terms “ethics” and “morality” are involved.
1 Like
Its a cultural trait that is easily explained by their 3000 years as a slave race, and the fact that unlike the NEs … they were forced to develop in an unbelievably cruel and ruthless world. And while that of course does not invalidate individual actions, a Gob like Wix of course deserves whatever afterlife he gets … but to be culturally condemned? You might as well say “If you’re not born special and chosen you’re damned. How dare you not be the Trust-Fund kids of Demigods and have them teach you the right way of doing things?”
And the Kaldorei species were given at least a buffer of a few thousand years of making mistakes as they drifted away from their Wild God patrons. Apparently, ALL Goblins (except for a few good ones here and there) aren’t even allowed 150? They’re just expected to “GET IT” right out the gate from being property themselves.
And still. You can’t judge a thief from a family of thieves, although the reason to steal has disappeared? Right, Droite?
I get that you think of the NEs as the most Mary Sue race ever to exist. But its MORE like what you’re saying is “If you want to be a good person, just have rich parents. Or allow yourself to be the pet of those that do”. Because trust me, those Furbolgs that have to get cleansed of corruption every few years are no more equal to the Kaldorei than any other animal in their woods.
4 Likes
I mean, that IMO at the same time she can’t both condemn and abandon his views, and giving into them.
She did not have those ideas, or intentions in the upcoming events. Seemingly it’s Genn who killed Rastakhan (for some reason, I guess the inclusion of Zandalar needed a justification), and the whole “let them mourne” during the war (and unnecessary part of it on top IMO).
Well, true, but the “gameplay” idea as Ion presents is that the factions are “the core” and talks about it like something that is good to preserve. And this is not the story we’re getting, with the “heroes” being those who goes agains the faction division, and the factions being a source of problems at every corner.
As someone who currently plays more alliance characters… I would rather not have this “pro alliance”.
gl hf
1 Like
We already have one. Or did people forget the Caer Derrow questline?
You’re very quick to imply inherently a thief or a family of thieves.
Scholo feels like it’s so forever ago compared to the nonsense arguments on this board
Because apparently developing advanced economics AND advanced technology from NOTHING in a little over a century is “being a thief”. And conquering like all of the Troll Empires territories outside of their capitals they were allowed to keep (because Azshara saw no value in them) … doesn’t. And remember, all the Human kingdoms? They totally developed all those territories as eco-conscious as they currently are. And it didn’t take like 3000 years of development to get where they are in EK (much of which was previously Troll land).
2 Likes
Who is Caer Darrow?
I have no other criminal analogies. Murders don’t work.
iirc the lore goes Old elvish sanctuary desecrated by Gul’dan and the Twilight Hammers in wc2, given to the Barov family post second war, they build a castle named Scholomance, and did evil things there. It’s a spooky dungeon in Arathi.
At the end of the day it’s a choice. Blizzard can come out and say that all Goblins go to Revendreth because they’re inherently bad. Or they can, ya’ know, not do that.
Stop trying to justify it, it sucks if Goblins are inherently bad.
It also appears to only be OP’s interpretation, so don’t get too excited.
3 Likes
so this wasnt part of the book?
My mistake, it is actually battle for Darrowshire, in my defense it has been years:
1 Like
I get it but I’m dizzy.
2 Likes
How does a specific individual having religious doubts invalidate faith in Elune?
I’m not going to say I’m a big fan of some (most even, fallen wardens are too cliche at this point) aspects of this development but not everyone has to be a perfect racial stereotype.
Confess your sins! Goblins are greedy, unprincipled and ruthless businessmen.
“Theft” - lack of principle, ruthlessness, greed.
Perhaps this method was justified a hundred years ago (not sure), but now there are reasons for “stealing”. They continue to be the same goblins they were a hundred years ago. No changes.
And still. Should a thief, whose ancestors survived by stealing and had no access to other sources of life, avoid punishment for theft if another way of obtaining a livelihood was available?
Theft is an analogy. The main part is punishment.
Russian
Признайте свои грехи! Гоблины жадные, беспринципные и безжалостные дельцы.
“Воровство” - беспренципность, безжалостность, жадность.
Возможно, этот способ был оправдан сто лет назад (не уверен), но сейчас причины для “воровства”. Они продолжают быть все теми же гоблинами, что и сто лет назад. Никаких изменений.
И все таки. Должен ли вор, предки которого выживали благодаря воровству и не имели доступа к другим источникам жизни, избежать наказания за воровство, если другой способ получения средств к существованию оказался доступен?
Воровство - аналогия. Главная часть - наказание.