Saving the Horde's Narrative

Is this ‘gaping plot hole’ not equally true of monarchy the Humans and Worgen live under? Yet Blizzard has made it clear that political reform in this manner isn’t important to them.

I would be ok with sylvanas staying warchief and just changing her attitude a bit. Redefine horde honor and allow for the forsaken to fit in with the horde better, but also maybe chill out on the violently murdering puppies.

10 Likes

The difference is that the Horde story has been primarily about evil dictators rising to power and plunging the world into chaos with their unchecked power until a bloody civil war forces them out of office.

It’s an annoying double standard, but it is what Blizzard has written.

But the gaping plot hole exists on both sides. Both sides have governmental systems that can and have been abused. Blizzard said they don’t care about a story involving political reform.

It is a plot hole on the Horde’s end because it is a flaw in our narrative. The Alliance are getting a completely different story that has nothing to do with their political instability so they aren’t obligated to reform.

The warchief position would be fine if Blizzard hadn’t repeatedly shown why it doesn’t work in practice. But they have, and that should be acknowledged by the people in the story or they all look like fools.

The Horde has always been a nation that has civil war though, Blizzard can’t write them in any single way, it’s the only way the Alliance actually “wins” against the Horde.

It goes all the way back with Guldan and Doomhammer. The one time Blizzard did something different, we lost the most iconic Horde character and he went neutral and also got neutered. When it comes to Horde development, Blizzard drops the ball. This is why they never write novels about them. It’s why their characters rarely get any actual good character development.

A council won’t change anything. Blizzard can easily write some dark power controls one and that one character is able to control the rest.

1 Like

Except the system of bloodline inheritance shows that same problem and has also had the same issues.

Garithos was in power because he was a noble son, abused his power.
Kael’thas sided with the Legion, his people had to work to overthrow him.
Genn walled off his kingdom, there was a revolution, they still let him be in power.
Daelin led his army in a war of aggression the Alliance did agree with, still have the Lord Admiral position that can be gift at a whim (as seen with Jaina).
The nobles of Stormwind were manipulated to cause the Defias issue exacerbated by Varians kidnapping. People in Westfall were starving. Still have King Anduin.

Not to mention, if the Horde changes there system, it makes it even more glaring how awkward a bloodline monarchy is when all the humans are dumb peasants that can’t get reform for a democracy.

I wouldn’t call what happened with Thrall in Cata a Horde story.

Ohh don’t get me wrong, I don’t think so either, but the question at hand is does Blizzard think like that? And to me I think Blizzard thinks anytime a character of x race of y faction has some type of development, it’s a y story.

Calia comes to mind when I think about this.

Arazlok! This is directed at you. My quote disappeared for some reason.

That is true, but there isn’t anything that can be said that will change that.

For the story we have now to end with the Horde continuing to ignore their own flaws would make it far weaker. Even if we get villain batted later we can at least say the Horde tried.

Most of what you’ve shown are small footnotes in the lore compared to the Horde’s frequent world spanning wars of aggression and civil wars. Only the Defias plot was a major plot for Stormwind and that showed the nobility to be evil, not the royal family.

And it is still irrelevant to what the Horde story needs. You keep using a whataboutism, but the Alliance story is not about political stability. The Horde’s story is. The Alliance story is about surviving our political instability and deciding if we deserve to live after all this is over. Again.

1 Like

I am slightly confused, are you saying you think blizzard think calia is an alliance or horde story? Because she claimed to be working with neither, yet also claimed to be the rightful ruler of lordaeron.

But you realize the logic conclusion of ‘the Horde system is flawed’ is ‘the Alliance system is flawed’. If you’re saying it must be the system, you’re saying the Alliance is necessarily as bad in theory.

It isn’t whataboutism. The problem is you’re saying the reason why the Horde system must change is because the system is clearly a problem. My retort is that the Alliance system is clearly a problem as well, especially if the Horde goes to fix their own. But Blizzard has made clear they don’t want to tell a story of political reform.

I’m not saying the Alliance system makes the Horde one good. I’m saying they’re both clearly bad and that Blizzard said they don’t care.

I am saying the Horde system must be changed because it has been repeatedly shown to fail us. We’ve seen the ramifications of what our system brings and it is war and blood and failure. Our characters will look stupid if they just elect another warchief without doing anything else.

The Alliance system has flaws too, their story just isn’t demonstrating them. So they get to live in ignorance and not have their government structure questioned. Why fix what isn’t broken? For them it isn’t. For us it demonstrably is.

It is fair to point out Blizzard doesn’t care to write a political reform. I just consider it another bit of bad writing on their part to bring up clear political drama and then not resolve it in a realistic way.

1 Like

in my mind and how the narrative is going, Calia is going to become a Horde character potentially to replace Sylvanas. She sees the Forsaken, a Horde faction, as her people. Sure they could go the route of making them an Alliance allied race which I really hope they do, but until than I think Blizzard thinks this is a Horde story about the Forsaken becoming more in touch with their feelings.

Because both systems share the same flaws. A leader is just chosen, heredity being even less about qualification, and open for abuse. I mean, I don’t think the Horde will look any worse going from Sylvanas to someone else. Not anymore than going from Garrosh to Vol’jin was fine. Just make not a blatantly horrible choice like trusting a dying man’s ghost buds.

I don’t entirely disagree. I just find the storyline unnecessary at this point, all things considered.

Well, not entirely the same flaws. Like you said, we elected a new ruler based on the fever dream of a dying man that was later revealed to be some evil force. That won’t typically happen with heredity unless we get a doppleganger situation.

I do kind of hope Anduin dies without an heir, though. That would be the Alliance’s equivalent to what we’re going through story-wise.

Fair enough. To me it is a lot more important because this is the second time it has happened. When Garrosh was replaced with Vol’jin you could reasonably chalk it up to misfortune. But now that it has happened twice in a decade I feel it is irresponsible of the Horde to not at least consider a check to the warchief’s power.

I’d be content if the Warchief position was merely elected by the racial leaders rather than arbitrarily chosen by the last warchief. At least then it would be harder for a super ghost to usurp our line of succession.

As a Sylvanas fan, I can’t think of a worse possible outcome than throwing Calia into her role, on top of everything they’ve already put the character and her fans through.

10 Likes

It seems bizzar to me to put a character so close to the alliance king and think it’ll be believable when they join the horde. I mean even as an undead there’s little reason to see her as a horde character. I certainly would not call her forsaken either. I think you miight be right though, I could see blizzard somehow not seeing it that way.

I don’t even see how calia could exist among the forsaken we have now. The RAS and deathstalkers would have to be disbanded right?

If I am restricted to your heavily biased options, this is it. Purely because I do not see any real, compelling reason for a what has since Vanilla been a completely valid and real facet of the Horde that I have played and loved since Vanilla, as others have done for the Honor side of things, to be thoroughly ruined, destroyed, and demolished just to make players who it wasn’t written or made for feel better.

8 Likes

Come on Yagarr, the narrative of the Horde is insurmountable now… no matter what, the terribad writting happened and nothing short of the devs coming out and telling us: “lul, we screwed up, pretend the narrative of this expac never happened” can fix things now…

All your options have issues, personally I´ll go with Sam´s option and vouch for Nzoth-sama´s victory hoping he destroys everything and make things go back to the very beginning.

Irrelevant, as long as the same cretins continue writting for Blizzard the type of government the Horde has is pointless; at the end they can (and WILL) corrupt it to make their “lul, Hurde is lululul EVUULL AGAIN!!” rehashed plot of always…

7 Likes