That was originally the plan of Centaurs. They just replaced them with Theramore troops and copied and pasted the same quests in Cata.
1 Like
What now, Horde players? Are you going to keep yapping about Brennadam and qUiLbOaRs?
The concentration camp at Hillsbrad? The plaguing of Southshore? The decimation of and the near extinction of the living population in Silverpine at Pyrewood and Ambermill? How many died there? We call that genocidal intent and ethnic cleansing. You go out of your way to wipe out everyone. What would you call it?
…Durnholde?
1 Like
Were the people at Durnholde being raised into undeath buried up to their necks in fecal waste and then have geists rip off their heads? Then the heroes of the Horde bash their heads in with a shovel if they so wish? Being used in experiments as well as spider farms at Azurelode where they are wrapped in spider webs to have eggs be put inside their bodies so while alive they explode with new spiderlings after gestation?
I mean the stuff that was done to the survivors of Lordaeron i.e. Fenris Isle, Pyrewood, Hillsbrad, Southshore, and Ambermill not to mention the plaguing of Gilneas. Do you truly think that was just okay in your book? The Alliance has done bad things, but before Teldrassil and the genocides of the Draenei and humans. These are reasons to look at the Horde as definitely corrupt especially the Forsaken.
Why play dumb? You know they are talking about Sludge Fields. What do you gain from this? It can’t possibly be fun.
Also, don’t you people constantly say either that the Forsaken are Lordaeron, or that Loraeron is dismantled? So why the Alliance is responsible for a Lordaeron-made internment camp? The people who built and ran that camp are literally in the Horde.
1 Like
Those things are bad, yea. But I don’t pretend otherwise like you all do with the Alliance when they go all Leopold the II on the “inferior species”.
At least the most heinous war criminals of the Horde are dead.
3 Likes
I see it as it is. I don’t excuse the crimes of the Alliance and I don’t care to have a long winded debate on the morals of genocide or ethnic cleansing. I look at the facts and the story presented. Alliance has racist elements, but that’s definitely died off in Vanilla WoW. The Night Elves were very isolationist and racists to non Kaldorei when led by Fendral Staghelm. Then they took that away. Humans were more ignorant than outright racists, but even that has gone away with Garithos.
The worse you can argue is that the Alliance is biased and overly suspicious of the Horde for crimes they may have committed within the last 20 years, but people are starting to forgive and move on. Same with the Horde races learning to move beyond the wrongs they feel done to them especially the orcs and tauren. The Tauren in fact are leading the way in showing peaceful shamanistic coexistence is the goal.
If Turalyon can forgive and move past. Why cant some Horde players accept what was done is severely wrong. The living humans who survived deserve a home too. The crimes done should be recognized and some reparations given. Only then shall we all know peace.
Am I missing something? Is there really a wave of horde players here who deny that the horde’s been written to do a lot of messed up stuff? The game loves to hammer that home.
I mean, there’s Erevien, but everyone knows he’s crazy after years of fruitless begging him to go away.
6 Likes
Clearly it hasn’t hammered it enough.
Doesn’t matter why there were Theromorans, the fact is there were. Story written and executed is what counts, even if it’s a Developer shift.
1 Like
Actually, all old quests are dubiously canon. A former dev named Eric Covington made tweets saying that Blizzard does not check the canon before writing quests. They seem to be deleted now, but tons of people have talked about them.
Quests can easily contradict what Blizzard actually wants to be canon. For example, the Red Shirt Guy was told that the quests in Silverpine where you kill Dalaran mages wasn’t canon.
https://x.com/TheRedShirtGuy/status/1734716711843070379?t=iALKUxbnDSOzIokmrtm0yQ&s=19
https://x.com/TheRedShirtGuy/status/1734716713256489314?t=zE4CxLe8U75nVYJwhHIsvQ&s=19
3 Likes
I’ve been sayin, if SMC goes neutral I will be killing and camping anyone and everyone I see in SMC. I have little shame in regressing into my doo doo head Cata/MoP Emerald Dream days.
4 Likes
I prefer to think of it as the devs know that GD won’t be able to handle certain questions without having a meltdown, but we’re more mature and can recognize a stupid bait thread when we see one!
For once, I agree with Varodoc on something. That particular word is becoming so overused that it’s starting to lose all meaning. It shouldn’t be invoked for wiping out a single town, even though that is still a horrible thing to do.
7 Likes
For me its what the word means legally. The intentional ethnic cleansing or targeting of a group of individuals based on their religion, ethnic background or nationality and seek to destroy them in whole or in part. In other words, when the Forsaken targeted and went on a extermination campaign in Silverpine Forest, Gilneas, and Hillsbrad/Southshore the intent was to wipe out the living remnants in whole or in part for the specific goal of cleansing the land of the living.
It’s why Drek’thar refused to help the Forsaken complete the job because as a Frostwolf orc and veteran of the wars and genocide of the Draenei. He saw no difference between the Forsaken and those bloodlust crazed orcs. The legal definition applies hence the action as recognized by Drek’thar gives weight to the idea and the obvious Sludge Fields being a 1:1 comparison to a concentration camp. That the Forsaken were trying to and effectively did commit a genocide on their families and friends for the fact they remained alive and continued their actions well into the future right through the Fourth War.
What else do you call the extermination of an entire population in whole or in part if not genocide? You may not like the term, but it is factually correct to use. Just like it was in Teldrassil.
It has to be a big part to qualify for the word “genocide.” One town, like Southshore, isn’t it. Terms like “ethnic cleansing” or “mass slaughter” would be more appropriate for that.
I repeat: wiping out a town is a terrible thing. But “genocide” should be reserved for bigger atrocities, or else we’ll have no way to describe those truly world-shaking crimes.
3 Likes
Actually it is. You don’t understand a genocide can be done to a town, a region, a community even if the community is a few thousand people. When you specifically target a town or province which again is Hillsbrad and seek to exterminate the population in whole or in part. That is genocide. Genocides don’t have to be entire nations razed to ashes, it can be regional or even 20 square miles filled with thousands of people. The fact is the intent of extermination and the stated goals with the result being a portion of said population being killed for a genocidal reason. Which the Forsaken have repeatedly stated as, “Death to the living!”
No, it can’t. That’s my point.
The destruction of one human town is not a genocide when (living) humans are the dominant species on the entire rest of the continent.
When you’re talking about a species that spreads across an entire continent, it is going to take something on that scale to qualify for the word “genocide.”
2 Likes
Then you are wrong. How are you seriously arguing against the UN definition and international law addresses this. It’s a community and a community can be a dozen or thousands or millions. The size isn’t the problem its the intent. Again, the intent to exterminate a group in WHOLE or in PART. A group can be large or small, but why are you seeking their extermination makes it genocide. Your using reasoning which would not be accepted by any legal body. Your feelings that a town is irrelevant and small, but to the people there that’s not true. Ask Admiral Rogers and the survivors. They were victims of a genocidal campaign to eliminate the presence of the surviving Lordaeronian population in Lordaeron in whole or in part by the Forsaken and Horde forces.
I’m not arguing against the UN definition. I believe you and others are putting too much weight on the “or in part” phrase in that definition, to the point where the word becomes completely meaningless because any destruction of people for their ethnicity is a destruction of the ethnicity “in part.”
What percentage of a people have to wiped out for an act to qualify as genocide, in your opinion? More than 50%? More than 25%? Is 5% enough? Is 1% enough? Where do you draw the line? That’s the question here.
In my view, genocide has to be destruction of a significant percentage of a population. If you don’t have that, it’s not genocide but some other horrific atrocity that should never happen.
“Irrelevant” is your wording, not mine. I have repeatedly said that wiping out a city is a terrible thing, and I don’t know how to make that any clearer. You’re also invoking the feelings of the people who live in that town as part of the definition, which simply isn’t a factor in whether the town’s destruction is genocide or not. The murder of a single person is going to have a huge impact on those who care about the person, but that doesn’t make it genocide.
2 Likes