The Horde: A Different Type of Heroism

[Ariël-drakkari (Ariël)]

100% agree with OP, a shame the people actually in-charge of writting this meme of a narrative haven´t figured out by now.

@Ainhin-thorium-brotherhood

There is no New Alliance. It’s just the Alliance. It’s still even technically called “The Alliance of Lordaeron” as confirmed by Metzen himself in MoP but I forgive you for not knowing this because Blizzard sure doesn’t tell anyone about it.

The Alliance had members leave after the Second War but as of Warcraft 3 it still consisted of Lordaeron, Stormwind, Dalaran, Kul’Tiras, Ironforge, Gnomeregan, and Aerie Peak.

Wrong, Aerie Peak and Gnomegaran literally didn´t exist as kingdoms as per WC2 (at the most they are just affiliated with Ironforge and would be have to be counted as such). Oh, and Kul´Tiras left by WC3 times, so that leaves Stormwind, Ironforge and the ruins of Dalaran as per WC3 (no Dalaran proper either dude, the existence of the city in Vanilla was yet another retcon of WC3).

SOOOOO… 2 out of 7? But sure, “most” of the kingdoms".

@Ainhin-thorium-brotherhood

I’m so tired of constantly needing to point out Lordaeron’s survivors and legacy and its presence culturally, in the timeline, and how the Horde themselves constantly tacitly admit that the Alliance is mostly from Lordaeron when they use the “Alliance rejected the Forsaken because they were traumatized by the Scourge” line of reasoning.

As a matter of fact, you are wrong again. When you take into account a good portion of the nobility from Stormwind traveled up to act as refugees back in the First War, you realize the “Kingdom” of Lordaeron had a healthy population of NOT citizens of the kingdom. Then when the whole Arthas fiasco happened, casually some “citizens” travel all the way back south into Stormwind… I wonder who had both the money AND the connections to easily do so, maybe the ones that originally traveled from Stormwind the first time around?

That´s the issue man… the “cultural presence and legacy” of Lordaeron proper has been explored and established in-game by two groups: the Forsaken and the Scarlet Crusade (who fought over the territory until the end)… the “survivors” that left the country to hide in Stormwind represent exactly that: the people with the means AND the will to abandon their past and look for newer (or maybe no even newer but older) pastures somewhere else, no regrets involved.

@Ainhin-thorium-brotherhood

So we get a situation where the Horde is permitted to hold up Warcraft 3 as a sacred model of the Horde’s roots that all of its narratives flow from but when I do the same with the Alliance I get “lol they’re all dead get over it”

Well man, you can complain towards WC3 writers, cause unless you want to RP a Scarlet Crusader I´m afraid that´s the only other venue available in the story . The legacy of WC3 Alliance side was an ode to incompetency and pride, and unless the writting team changes their tune you people on the Blue side will never get any actual narrative roots into your story (I mean when the story of the Alliance in WC3 is about all the failures and defects they had BUT the story of the current Alliance is about how they are the gift of God from the High Heavens and more perfect than any biblical angel then one can see why this is never going to happen… these are two opposite narrative paths / portrayals after all).

@Ainhin-thorium-brotherhood

I’m the one saying that Humans and Forsaken can share Lordaeron and co-exist in peace actually. I’ve never seen any Horde posters propose anything even close.

And you will never see, cause story suggestions like this one HAVE gameplay ramifications… and unfortunately for you, none of the Alliance races can mirror this “idea” (ergo the Horde loses one capital / territory while you guys continue holding your exclusive toys for the lols).

Or can you replicate this with any of the Alliance races (make them lose their territory and “share” ownership with the Horde without stepping in a billion toes while at it? Cause I´m pretty sure you can´t.

[Baalsamael-turalyon (Baalsamael)]

@Ainhin-thorium-brotherhood

And as much as this forum doesn’t like to hear it, the human experience is always going to be central to any narrative because that’s who we are, and we can’t be anyone else.

?? No.

My heritage and culture is actually mostly represented in-game by Tauren and Trolls, to a lesser extent Blood Elves.

I have literally zero in common with any of the Human Kingdoms except like, gothic cathedrals and witch folklore.

This is 100% false and says more about how you personally view the game and its meta-implications than anything else lmao

@Droité-black-dragonflight

I really wish Alliance posters would stop with the “Northrend Horde reservations” shtick. It is really creepy.

They won’t because they’re motivated by IRL ideology and know what they’re doing, as we’ve seen with both Ainhin’s claims and Zerde’s takes, likewise the likes of Ikaar (aka Mr. Slavery Is Good Actually) and others.

[Ainhin-thorium-brotherhood (Ainhin)]

@Baalsamael-turalyon

My heritage and culture is actually mostly represented in-game by Tauren and Trolls, to a lesser extent Blood Elves.

Yes, your human culture. I’m not talking about humans as in WoW humans, I’m talking about human humans IRL. Everything in our fiction is ultimately derived from that.

[Ariël-drakkari (Ariël)]

@Ainhin-thorium-brotherhood

Yes, your human culture. I’m not talking about humans as in WoW humans, I’m talking about human humans IRL. Everything in our fiction is ultimately derived from that.

Which mind you, as latin americans (me and Baal share heritage), we especially NEVER GOT from WC2 Lordaeron nor by ANY of the Alliance races.

So no, stop with the “muh WC2 Lurdaeron heritage” BS. It doesn´t represent anything Stormwind doesn´t already represent.

[Baalsamael-turalyon (Baalsamael)]

@Ainhin-thorium-brotherhood

I’m talking about human humans IRL.

In your example your frame of reference is that the Human characters matter more than the non-Human ones.

I am telling you that in WoW, this does not hold; the in-game Humans and their experiences is not at all paramount to “Human Experience” from an IRL perspective the way you (attempt) to do with Star Trek. The in-game Humans have zero to do with my history and heritage and experiences therein.

Hell, it doesn’t hold with Star Trek either, there’s a lot of literature on Spock as Jewish, Klingons as Black, etc.

[Ariël-drakkari (Ariël)]

@Baalsamael-turalyon

In your example your frame of reference is that the Human characters matter more than the non-Human ones.

Man when we take into account who lordaeron references IRL the connotations are both creepy AND problematic.

The message is… YUCK!!!

[Waygs-bleeding-hollow]

@Smallioz-kromcrush

I don’t think anyone can possibly take the SI7 spying caused the burning seriously. Lack of proportionality of response doesn’t make the Alliance look back, its more the other way around.

I mean… you absolutely could.

If you look at the situation without knowing of the Burning (because literally nobody, not even Nathanos knew that was in the cards), the spying is one piece of evidence of many, that the Alliance is planning hostilities and the Horde should be proactive.

Sure, the spying alone didn’t cause the War of Thorns, but the spying, the massacre of goblins in Silithus, Anduin bringing Calia to a forsaken/human relations event who immediately started calling for a coup, and oh yeah, the Backstabbing of the Horde during the burning legion’s invasion of Azeroth, all came together to make even the more peace minded members of the horde extremely wary of the Alliance.

With all that in mind, Saurfang’s initial goal of capturing the main Alliance capitol on Azeroth to force the Alliance to actually come to the table to argue for structuring a lasting peace in good faith is far more reasonable.

Is holding a major city hostage morally “good”? Hell no. But it’s also a lot more reasonable when you realize that not a single planner but one of the WoT but one had any plans on actually harming any civillians more than they had to.

[Shernish-nazjatar]

Let’s say everything went according to Saurfang’s scenario. The Horde takes Teldrassil hostage, the Alliance and the Horde sit down at the negotiating table, poison-poison … How long will this peace last, given that the night elves will clearly not want to stick to it? Or was the Horde planning to hold Teldrassil hostage forever?

[Kyalin-cenarion-circle (Kyalin)]

It’s notable that given the way the attack was designed - something that would “end the Night Elves as a people” - and that was the manifest purpose well before Sylvanas ordered the burning - it is something that meets the UN definition of a genocide.

Absolutely none of us are required to take moral lessons from a person who would defend or advocate for that. The civilized world recognized such acts as crimes, even in war, a long time ago. The debate ended before any of us were even born.

[Waygs-bleeding-hollow]

I am not saying the plan would have worked out. It probably would not have given how powerful the Hawks are were in the alliance, and the relative difficulty of holding a city like Teldrassil without hurting civillians if the alliance chose to use guerilla tactics. I also have no idea how much trust the Horde could have reasonably had in the Alliance committing to agreements after Stormheim and Calia’s failed little coup attempt.

But IIRC the plan was that that if an actual tenable long term agreement came to pass (god only knows what the specifics would be), then the horde would have receded back to the Barrens/Azshara and left the Night elves to their own lands. I do not believe Saurfang wanted actual land conquest, just security.

[Kyalin-cenarion-circle (Kyalin)]

@Waygs-bleeding-hollow

I do not believe Saurfang wanted actual land conquest, just security.

Saurfang again, agreed to a plan that would have, as pitched, ended the Night Elves as a people through the imposition of a wound that would never heal, and he did so on the basis of being offered a racially paranoid delusion that if he didn’t, then in up to a hundred years, the Night Elves eventually would.

There is a certain parallel in history to that, which is why I thought it was apt that another Horde poster described Sylvanas’s appeal as the Azerothian equivalent to the fourteen words.

[Smallioz-kromcrush]

@Waygs-bleeding-hollow

I mean… you absolutely could.

Nope. You cannot.

[Waygs-bleeding-hollow]

@Kyalin-cenarion-circle

and he did so on the basis of being offered a racially paranoid delusion that if he didn’t, then in up to a hundred years, the Night Elves eventually would.

What paranoia? The alliance tried to headshot the Horde leadership during a Demonic invasion of Azeroth. Genn was beloved by everyone but Anduin for it, despite it being a mindbogglingly stupid waste of men and resources on both sides that could have been used against the Legion.

The Alliance was insanely hostile during and after Legion.

@Smallioz-kromcrush

Nope. You cannot.

[Shernish-nazjatar]

To the demon Stormheim and Kaliy (the first is never mentioned, the second only concerns the Forsaken, who already do not trust anyone, and in general I am biased).

Uh-huh. The horde would have retreated. Pha! And then Saurfang is sold the idea that the Alliance won’t stick to peace because it was forced. Therefore, Saurfang must declare WAAGH again! The natural question “Why did we attack Teldrassil, if there will be no peace anyway?” the answer will be “To secure an advantage for ourselves and continue to bring peace and prosperity to ourselves.” And so on until only the Horde remains in the world.

[Kyalin-cenarion-circle (Kyalin)]

Which was part of the argumentation, but not the end of it. It would have been one thing to raise certain political matters and demand a resolution - to prepare in the long term for future hostilities, or to work to split the Alliance up. There was actually a broad kaleidoscope of actions that Sylvanas’s argumentation tossed out because of the time horizon that she offered.

Accusing Genn Greymane of being unstable is a temporary, geopolitical issue that could invite an immediate response.

Stating that a race of people will destroy your superior orcish race one day, possibly a hundred years from now is entirely different. That is the language of racial hatred and paranoia. It is not a political concern - no political remedy is possible. The only options under such an ideology are subjugation or extermination - with the former leading to the latter anyway once those in power feel that they can get away with it.

Does that mean that Saurfang would have one day set up death camps? Probably not - but the ideology that he subscribed to inevitably marches towards this regardless - and if Thrall’s concerns about Garrosh are correct, it’s that the Orcish people will replace a leader who they see as “weak”. Saurfang however did not raise objections to ending an entire race of people as a people - he explicitly understood that his actions would do such, even if the plan worked perfectly.

That is what you are supporting and defending.

[Waygs-bleeding-hollow]

If blizzard was trying to make the WOT entirely based on conquest and slaughter, using Saurok “Ask me why I don’t eat pork” Saurfang as the architect for it would be a huge misstep on blizzard’s part.

If you are arguing the Horde in general would chip away at the alliance over time, I have no real argument against that, as both sides are imperialist as hell at times.

But Saurfang’s very first real characterization that wasn’t just “big mean orc that kills insects in Silithus and Orgrimmar”, was him being a reasonable person who only wanted to fight for defense, and was trying to moderate Garrosh’s views.

[Kyalin-cenarion-circle (Kyalin)]

It WAS a huge misstep on their part, for far more reasons than just that.

[Waygs-bleeding-hollow]

I will certainly not argue against the entirety of BFA being dumb as hell and a massive mistake.

[Smallioz-kromcrush]

Are you really going to argue the act of spying warrants a wholesale civilian slaughter as a response? That is psychotic.

[Kyalin-cenarion-circle (Kyalin)]

@Waygs-bleeding-hollow

I will certainly not argue that the entirety of BFA was dumb as hell and a massive mistake.

I’m not sure if the text of this was what you were intending to argue - but I would. Cataclysm and MOP already proved that the concept that they were treading down was unsatisfying to everyone - and this time they dumped a lot more poison into the affair than before.

Edit: Only just saw your edit there! But - against, yeah. BFA was a disaster for all involved.

@Waygs-bleeding-hollow

But Saurfang’s very first real charictarization that wasn’t just “big mean orc that kills insects in Silithus and Orgrimmar”, was him being a reasonable person who only wanted to fight for defense, and was trying to moderate Garrosh’s views.

His first real characterization was fine - but again, having him sign on to the same arguments that the Third Reich used against their “racial” enemies was a shift in his character, one that was done to make the War of the Thorns work (among many, MANY things that were arbitrarily changed or ignored to make this happen).