The representative enthusiast share alot of the same distrust in the old ways of governance like the anti-monarchist do, but with one step further. History has had too many failed rulers to continue to trust in one soul to lead.
Those who take this stance might be more inclined to see a revival of something similar to the Desolate Council. Perhaps they might agree to a single ruler in times of war, but a position that is held temporarily and in trust of a republic body.
Would this be better for the Forsaken? Would this create inefficient bureaucracy? What is your take?
Given how tense IRL politics makes everyone, I’d rather not have elections in game. 
More serious answer - Sarestha would oppose a pure democracy as things have been unstable for a while and she believes the Forsaken need direction and stability right now. Not individuals seeking approval for election.
She would however accept a Constitutional Monarchy where Calia Menethil is crowned Queen, but her power is checked by a Desolate Council and certain constitutional restrictions. That way no Forsaken leader ever ends up QUITE as powerful as Sylvanas, or quite as able to destroy what they’ve built.
1 Like
Yeah, you might be right that having a Forsaken council rule would be inefficient.
I would be happy to see a new desolate council be the representatives of the little Forsaken folk. A voice on behalf of the people to inform Calia more efficiently than if she listened to supplicants.
Doubtful Blizzard will do this, but that might not be as bad either. Because maybe the players could make their own civilian Forsaken council for RP.