Unofficial Sethrak Discussion Thread 🐍

10/04/2018 11:55 PMPosted by Bretherezen
10/04/2018 11:47 PMPosted by DĂ nnar
You're not really helping your "Horde is beastial" argument by being a blood elf.

And no, that helmet doesn't make you slightly more beast like.


I didn't say the Horde was beastial, I implied that beastial races fit with the Horde schematic that Blizzard Entertainment has laid out for the Horde. They tend to be nomadic, parse, vengeful, lost or otherwise in dire need of help that the "good" Alliance won't ever provide in their life. The Horde takes those races under their wing. Since the basic vanilla game, the only races that have joined the Alliance, or otherwise "people" that have joined the Alliance, have been those that were directly in some way involved with the Horde. And no true beastial race was added directly to the Alliance either, ergo, beastial races do NOT fit the Alliance scheme here; And no, Worgen are NOT beastial, they are cursed Humans who merely take on a beastial form of nature. That is NOT the same thing, no matter how much you attempt to argue that it is, it is NOT. So stop saying it is.

The Pandaren similarly are faction NEUTRAL. I'll say it again: FACTION. N-E-U-T-R-A-L. They aren't exclusive to the Alliance and never will be. They're for both factions, playing both angles. They're also, once again, the biggest joke Warcraft has ever seen, so take their meaningless existence with even less than a single grain of salt.

And I don't care if you badmouth my transmogrification. It's an awesome one and one I personally like. If you even knew me, or knew Bretherezen, you'd know he started off as a Tauren character and will ALWAYS be a Tauren at heart in my eyes. The fact he is a Blood Elf right now boils down purely to aesthetic reasons, and Raiding reasons; I grew tired of seeing the idle Tauren animations, and I got tired of hearing the Tauren snorting like a wild animal. Not to mention, it was hard to make a Tauren "look cool" in any sort of armor whatsoever in my personal point of view. So I race changed him to a Blood Elf for aesthetic reasons. The second reason was for a second silence during raiding; His racial ability. Not to mention other racials.

But I needn't actually have explained that to you. Not that you care one bit.


If I cook you up, do you taste like steak?
10/04/2018 10:37 PMPosted by Grayphus
And frankly, many of those who do not want to sethrak just want this, to see the disappointment of the alliance.


I'm not saying i'm not down for a playable Sethrak.

But you're missing a lot of key points:

1) Do not, absolutely do not, fit in to the Alliance. Even on the Alliance design scheme, they do not.

2) Their motives are not in line with the Alliance whatsoever.
2B) They team up with some of the Horde and the Alliance to save a few of their own people and to depose some traitors. So what? You think that gives you the right to beg and claw for them to be added to your Faction? It doesn't work that way.

3) There's zero links between the Sethrak and the Alliance beyond a random act of kindness, and a Sethrak needing your help for the sake of his people. There's no goal that can link the Sethrak and the Alliance together. It won't happen.

4) The Sethrak are a beastial race. I think i've beaten this to death already, and you're still not getting it.
4B)


1- "they don't look the part" again.

2- motives are something that can be written into the story that we've yet to see between now and when they would presumably be released.
ideas/examples:
-they don't like what Sylvanas is doing
-they didn't like that the Zandalari elevated their loa above Sethrallis, and Alliance slew the Zandalari King.
-War is coming to their shores and they need to ally with someone or get caught in the crossfire, and after witnessing/hearing about the Alliance's siege, they decide it would be pragmatic to join with what they assume would be the winning side.
-literally any sort of rational storytelling blizzard dreams up

3- see #2

4- see #1

and this catches us up, as the second half of that post was your first response to me.
10/04/2018 11:53 PMPosted by Seije
this is literally "they don't look the part."


This is literally you not reading underlying tone, or pairing what I said in the beginning to the later explanations. Again, stop nitpicking details to fit your weak argument. It's insulting.

Not sure which neutral factions you're talking about, but quite a few neutral factions seem to lean more alliance than horde. Cenarion Circle. Argen Dawn. Even the Nightborne approached the Alliance (nelves) first before going horde instead. Highmountain joined the horde in much the same way the Lightforged joined the alliance, because of close ties with their kin, but both sides were friendly with each other throughout all of Legion. Would you provide examples of neutral factions that are 'shaky' with the alliance? Though, to be honest, i don't know how this has anything to do with the Sethrak. It's not like the Sneks are going to be sending letters around to all the factions of Azeroth to get their opinions.


The only Neutral Faction that is actually playable that is Allied to the Alliance and accessible to be played by players: The Pandaren.

Oh, I am sorry, are we including ALL neutral factions in a debate now for PLAYABLE CHARACTERS? Because, as far as I recall, NPCs of a neutral faction that are still inherently and almost completely neutral story wise, of which the player is never a direct part of nor tied to, isn't a matter of discussion nor point of any actual interest for this topic. Kirin Tor? Are we going to bring them in to the debate too?

The Sethrak have no interest in Alliance politics. The Alliance may be "free religion", but the Sethrak have literally no place of belonging, and zero actual ties to the Alliance whatsoever. The theme of the Loa being the Sethrak's central point similarly doesn't jive with the Alliance whatsoever. Again, you're leaning a lot more Horde, and on that last part alone.

The Sethrak, and i'll re-state it in this newer manner this time: As things currently stand, have NO PLACE in the Alliance. Aesthetically, canonically, lore-wise, whatever which way you look at it, it WON'T HAPPEN.

Begging for it changes nothing.

My argument has, and always was, from the beginning, more than "it doesn't fit". But you already knew that. Still, I had to reiterate it all just for you to read it, maybe, this time. So please, put them big boy reading glasses on and get to reading! Or are you just going to nitpick my words again and choose to ignore what is convenient for you?
It's okay, mate, the Horde is going to get their beastial race with the Vulpera.

Enjoy your alpacas damnit!
Get Hekk'd m8, Draenei are goats, worgen are wolves, the Alliance can do with some less boring races out there. Yes, I'm saying this AS a fabulous elf, but the whole 'nope because too ugly/bestial' argument actual goes heavily against exactly what the devs said. So... https://www.wowhead.com/achievement=12482/get-hekd
1 Like
10/05/2018 12:11 AMPosted by Fallynn
Get Hekk'd m8, Draenei are goats, worgen are wolves, the Alliance can do with some less boring races out there. Yes, I'm saying this AS a fabulous elf, but the whole 'nope because too ugly/bestial' argument actual goes heavily against exactly what the devs said. So... https://www.wowhead.com/achievement=12482/get-hekd

Sethrak arent ugly. They're precious.
I already have 3 characters ready for a race change.
And they have the most perfect names to go with their race.

This better be happening.
10/05/2018 12:12 AMPosted by Alaeis
10/05/2018 12:11 AMPosted by Fallynn
Get Hekk'd m8, Draenei are goats, worgen are wolves, the Alliance can do with some less boring races out there. Yes, I'm saying this AS a fabulous elf, but the whole 'nope because too ugly/bestial' argument actual goes heavily against exactly what the devs said. So... https://www.wowhead.com/achievement=12482/get-hekd

Sethrak arent ugly. They're precious.

I said ugly/BESTIAL, Sethrak are a gem and should 100% be added in, mark my words. I wouldn't play a race that isn't fabulous, would I? Have you seen my glasses? Therefore, I declare Sethrak fabulous and I will roll one should they be added of course. (dark scales options plz Blizz)
1 Like
10/05/2018 12:02 AMPosted by Bretherezen
10/04/2018 11:53 PMPosted by Seije
this is literally "they don't look the part."


This is literally you not reading underlying tone, or pairing what I said in the beginning to the later explanations. Again, stop nitpicking details to fit your weak argument. It's insulting.


your argument, as i understand it: alliance will never have a 'true' bestial race; one that's ruthless and savage. Worgen don't count because they aren't savage, pandas don't count because they're neither ruthless nor savage. And which beast races on the horde are? The Tauren are not ruthless, and even 'savage' is debatable, and we've already established that pandas aren't either. Orcs and trolls, while ruhless and savage, aren't 'beast' races, they're humanoid races.

So then it just comes down to aesthetics; i.e. "they don't look the part." If i'm still missing something, please, enlighten me. Maybe i'm just not getting it. feel free to talk down to me and use small words if you want. treat me like an idiot. But i don't feel you're conveying your thoughts as well as you think you are.

Not sure which neutral factions you're talking about, but quite a few neutral factions seem to lean more alliance than horde. Cenarion Circle. Argen Dawn. Even the Nightborne approached the Alliance (nelves) first before going horde instead. Highmountain joined the horde in much the same way the Lightforged joined the alliance, because of close ties with their kin, but both sides were friendly with each other throughout all of Legion. Would you provide examples of neutral factions that are 'shaky' with the alliance? Though, to be honest, i don't know how this has anything to do with the Sethrak. It's not like the Sneks are going to be sending letters around to all the factions of Azeroth to get their opinions.


The only Neutral Faction that is actually playable that is Allied to the Alliance and accessible to be played by players: The Pandaren.

Oh, I am sorry, are we including ALL neutral factions in a debate now for PLAYABLE CHARACTERS? Because, as far as I recall, NPCs of a neutral faction that are still inherently and almost completely neutral story wise, of which the player is never a direct part of nor tied to, isn't a matter of discussion nor point of any actual interest for this topic. Kirin Tor? Are we going to bring them in to the debate too?


I quoted exactly what you wrote, and saw no earlier mentions of neutral factions. Apologies if i missed this, but can you blame me for being confused? you said neutral faction'S', as in, more than one. how was i supposed to know that when you said neutral factions, what you really meant was one specific split faction that has denizens on both sides? And you're calling it shaky? I mean, Moreso than the Horde's relationship? Because our Panda leader wasn't nearly killed by our own faction-leader-gone-mad, and as far as i can tell, the only dissent we've seen from our panda leader is he criticism that Anduin is a 'weaker sparring partner' than his father was.

10/05/2018 12:02 AMPosted by Bretherezen
The Sethrak have no interest in Alliance politics. The Alliance may be "free religion", but the Sethrak have literally no place of belonging, and zero actual ties to the Alliance whatsoever. The theme of the Loa being the Sethrak's central point similarly doesn't jive with the Alliance whatsoever. Again, you're leaning a lot more Horde, and on that last part alone.


Which is why the story is so important. Again, there are a number of reasons that a faction would pick a side. Hell, in Legion, I would never have guessed that the nightborne would have picked a side after having both factions liberate them from the Legion, but blizzard wrote the story to make it happen. Why is this suddenly not feasible? And again, just because, "it doesn't fit" now doesnt mean it can't make sense in the context of the story.

The Sethrak, and i'll re-state it in this newer manner this time: As things currently stand, have NO PLACE in the Alliance. Aesthetically, canonically, lore-wise, whatever which way you look at it, it WON'T HAPPEN.


And that's where we have the break-down in communication. We are speculating on would could be, and you are saying what 'is,' at least, in your opinion.

10/05/2018 12:02 AMPosted by Bretherezen
Begging for it changes nothing.


Expressing an interest is different from begging. there may be some people 'begging' in this thread, but most are providing feedback, speculation, and wishful thinking about what a Sethrak AR could be. Oh, and to say "begging changes nothing;"

Do you enjoy seeing these discussions?

Oh yeah, definitely, it’s actually a lot of fun. There are even cases of people speculating about something they’ve seen in Hearthstone and being positive it’ll pop up in WoW. But you know, sometimes the chatter influences us itself. The decision to put in Dark Iron Dwarves was very much based on players saying for years that they’ve wanted to play that particular look of dwarf, and have been very disappointed that we never gave it to them.


again, taken from that interview (they go on to say Mag'har was a similar situation). Players expressing interest can, in fact, 'change something.'

10/05/2018 12:02 AMPosted by Bretherezen
My argument has, and always was, from the beginning, more than "it doesn't fit". But you already knew that. Still, I had to reiterate it all just for you to read it, maybe, this time. So please, put them big boy reading glasses on and get to reading! Or are you just going to nitpick my words again and choose to ignore what is convenient for you?


I feel i've been pretty fair with you. I made one call-out with sarcastic misspelling and caps. and you know what? I'll apologize for that. I'm sorry, it's not condusive to a civil discussion, and it obviously put you on edge. So again, if there's something i missed, i'd love to have a fair and civil discussion about this.
1 Like
I somehow missed this post, and i wanted to respond to it as well;

10/04/2018 11:55 PMPosted by Bretherezen
I didn't say the Horde was beastial, I implied that beastial races fit with the Horde schematic that Blizzard Entertainment has laid out for the Horde. They tend to be nomadic, parse, vengeful, lost or otherwise in dire need of help that the "good" Alliance won't ever provide in their life.


The sethrak are not nomadic.
They don't seem to be sparse (assuming this is what you meant. no criticism, i've been making typos all night too), or maybe you meant parse as in divided, which they admittedly are, but that's not exactly a horde-exclusive trait; pretty much every race has factions that have broken off, or broken in half.
They don't seem vengeful considering Vorrik still wants to reunite his people.
And the Alliance has already provided them aid, and Wyrmbane expressed interest in working with them in the future. That's not to say he has any interest in their plight, but it does prove that he isn't just chalking them up as some savage locals we bumped into and have no interest in ever seeing again.

10/04/2018 11:55 PMPosted by Bretherezen
The Horde takes those races under their wing. Since the basic vanilla game, the only races that have joined the Alliance, or otherwise "people" that have joined the Alliance, have been those that were directly in some way involved with the Horde. And no true beastial race was added directly to the Alliance either, ergo, beastial races do NOT fit the Alliance scheme here; And no, Worgen are NOT beastial, they are cursed Humans who merely take on a beastial form of nature. That is NOT the same thing, no matter how much you attempt to argue that it is, it is NOT. So stop saying it is.


10/04/2018 11:55 PMPosted by Bretherezen
I didn't say the Horde was beastial, I implied that beastial races fit with the Horde schematic that Blizzard Entertainment has laid out for the Horde. They tend to be nomadic, parse, vengeful, lost or otherwise in dire need of help that the "good" Alliance won't ever provide in their life.


The Worgen have lost thier home city twice. They may not be nomadic, but they certainly fit the 'lost' idea. they're also pretty vengeful, as any sylvanas fanboy will eagerly point out before explaining why Genn deserves to die. and as for parse/sparse, well, the gilneans were rather splintered when they joined the alliance, between Crowley's rebellion, Genn's loyal Gilneans, and the three lords that ended up as undead (and their underlings), that refused to bow to 'worgen mongrels.' And lorewise there aren't supposed to be a tremendous amount of actual worgen.

just an interesting observation.
Worgen are bestial: change my mind. Its a little bit stupid to argue over opinion isn't it fellas? Worgen have racials named viciousness and aberration for a reason though. You may have noticed worgen npcs have anger issues as well. Constantly growling and attacking unprovoked.
10/05/2018 01:34 AMPosted by Släm
Worgen are bestial: change my mind. Its a little bit stupid to argue over opinion isn't it fellas? Worgen have racials named viciousness and aberration for a reason though. You may have noticed worgen npcs have anger issues as well. Constantly growling and attacking unprovoked.


Viciousness is a trait that any humanoid can possess... Being cursed to lean towards acts of aggression doesn't make them a beast... And an aberration is just a fancy way of saying you're a freak of nature that shouldn't exist in the first place, and people actually despise your existence and try to stay away from you, less they catch your disease and turn as well.
10/05/2018 01:53 AMPosted by Bretherezen
10/05/2018 01:34 AMPosted by Släm
Worgen are bestial: change my mind. Its a little bit stupid to argue over opinion isn't it fellas? Worgen have racials named viciousness and aberration for a reason though. You may have noticed worgen npcs have anger issues as well. Constantly growling and attacking unprovoked.


Viciousness is a trait that any humanoid can possess... Being cursed to lean towards acts of aggression doesn't make them a beast... And an aberration is just a fancy way of saying you're a freak of nature that shouldn't exist in the first place, and people actually despise your existence and try to stay away from you, less they catch your disease and turn as well.
Ok lets take the dictionary definition of bestial then since we can't accept others opinions, lets make this objective.

BESTIAL: of, relating to, or having the form of a beast:
Or without reason or intelligence; brutal; inhuman:
Or beastlike in gratifying one's sensual desires; carnal; debased.

Which race has the form of a beast? Which race lacks reason or intelligence in their un cured state?

Honestly bestial by its dictionary definition most accurately describes worgen. Their are horde races that can meet one definition, but not more then one. Worgen are the beastial race confirmed. You can use whatever made up definition you think beastial means, but the big word book says I am right.
I'd like to point out that under the worgen's official description on the official website they are described as beasts. But I'm sure this guy knows more than blizzard too.

Its a silly argument. Worgen are clearly designed after wolves whom are animals whom are beasts. The worgen dont even call themselves human anymore because they know they arent. When you look at my armory you see a wolf creature, not a human. They're worgen. Not human. Alliance is already used to having an animal like race on the alliance with both worgen and pandaren. And yes they do count.

Sethrak would be very unique but so would vulpera on the horde. Sethrak culture and morals also closely align with the alliance where as vulpera's flexibility and underdog story goes with the horde better. The alliance's war campaign involves the sethrak and will likely expand in the future, hopefully in 8.1 so all we can do is wait and see.
Worgen are, beyond doubt, a 'bestial' subrace of Human.

But back to Sethrak.

Sethrak are exactly the sort of race the Alliance needs. Right now the Alliance, with the exception of Worgen, is rather dull. We need an edgy race to shake things up a bit and create some interest on the Alliance side.

The last thing the Alliance needs is another 'Elf' or other vanilla retread.
10/05/2018 01:51 AMPosted by Bretherezen
your argument, as i understand it: alliance will never have a 'true' bestial race; one that's ruthless and savage. Worgen don't count because they aren't savage, pandas don't count because they're neither ruthless nor savage. And which beast races on the horde are? The Tauren are not ruthless, and even 'savage' is debatable, and we've already established that pandas aren't either. Orcs and trolls, while ruhless and savage, aren't 'beast' races, they're humanoid races.

So then it just comes down to aesthetics; i.e. "they don't look the part." If i'm still missing something, please, enlighten me. Maybe i'm just not getting it. feel free to talk down to me and use small words if you want. treat me like an idiot. But i don't feel you're conveying your thoughts as well as you think you are.


Tauren can be, and have been. The main branch of the Tauren Tribes that is chiefly linked to the Horde, however, are not primarily savages. However, it is interred that the other tribes are also linked to the Horde to some degree, if not fully. Tauren are nomadic and heavily spiritual, they seek the guidance of the Spirits and the Elements as their religion. They are also a very brawny bipedal bovine. When the going gets tough, they're quite savage. Who else do you know of that uses totems as baseball bats, hm?

Ruthless, however, the Tauren for all but maybe one Tribe, may not be.


using "brawny bipedal bovine" as a reason to consider them a beast race is focusing on the physical, which goes back to the idea of "looking the part." And as for "when the going gets tough," the same 'savagery' could be said for the worgen. Which, moving on to the next point;

10/05/2018 01:51 AMPosted by Bretherezen
And no, to restate it once freaking more: Worgen do not count because they are CURSED HUMANS. The Worgen are not a race of their own evolution or otherwise. They are freaking. Cursed. Humans. Of which, because of how things work in Warcraft, that curse is entirely remove-able. The option doesn't exist for pretty obvious reasons to players who want to play a Worgen.


"Behind the formidable Greymane Wall, a terrible curse has spread throughout the isolated human nation of Gilneas, transforming many of its stalwart citizens into nightmarish beasts known as worgen. The origins of this curse have been fiercely debated, but only recently has the startling truth come to light." Taken from the Worgen intro. You may not consider them beasts, but it seems that Blizzard does.

Also, the worgen curse is something that they haven't found a cure for, like the undead plague. I don't recall any instance of anyone being cured from Worgenism, but if you can find an example i'd love to see it. the lore reason for being forced into worgen form in combat also had to do with worgen being unable to concentrate on supressing the curse when angry. Worgen are meant to be savage and brutal, and yet they are still on the Alliance.

Pandaren don't count because they are a NEUTRAL FACTION.... (snip)


i mentioned them only because there are no other beast races on the horde. Saying 'beast races fit better with the horde' doesn't mean much when there's only one example, and the argument itself becomes flimsy when you consider that blizzard has described worgen as 'beasts, ' meaning there's the same number of beast races on each side. And, if vulpera and sethrak were to be added, the balance would again remain the same.

10/05/2018 01:51 AMPosted by Bretherezen
The sethrak are not nomadic.
They don't seem to be sparse (assuming this is what you meant. no criticism, i've been making typos all night too), or maybe you meant parse as in divided, which they admittedly are, but that's not exactly a horde-exclusive trait; pretty much every race has factions that have broken off, or broken in half.
They don't seem vengeful considering Vorrik still wants to reunite his people.
And the Alliance has already provided them aid, and Wyrmbane expressed interest in working with them in the future. That's not to say he has any interest in their plight, but it does prove that he isn't just chalking them up as some savage locals we bumped into and have no interest in ever seeing again.


No, the Sethrak are not Nomadic. Another good reason why they have zero incentive to join up with anybody.


the Nightborne weren't nomadic but they still joined. In fact, the war on their home soil had already been won by the time they became part of the horde. The Sethrak, however, are about to have two armies clashing in their front yard. It seems to me that it would be wise for them to pick a side or else risk losing everything. Or, what if they're dragged into the war by someone trying to claim their temple as a base of operations to assault the opposing force? Again, there are a number of ways the Sethrak could be forced to pick a side.

10/05/2018 01:51 AMPosted by Bretherezen
They are sparse. Their entire species seems to be secluded to a single small area of a continent, and even then, if we're thinking in terms of population, there's a freakishly small amount of them, all things considered, and neither are they confined in total to their major Temple (I personally think sparse fits because of population. There cannot honestly be that many Sethrak around...). Parse does work as well to define them though, as they are actually a divided people with seemingly two goals in mind: Continued servitude for their beloved Loa, or to rise over their Loa.


IAnd sparse isn't necessarily a horde trait, nor does it exclude them as a possibility of being an AR; the void elves are supposed to be a very small group, and yet they're an AR. and as for division in the ranks, i've already mentioned that pretty much every race has groups that are unafiliated, or even hostile to the faction of their race. Until recently, Dark-Iron were one of them.

10/05/2018 01:51 AMPosted by Bretherezen
And you don't think they don't seem vengeful? That entire story arc was about vengeance... He outright sought it out, with your aid--vengeance against his friend for turning away from their beliefs and doing the things he did, and undermining Sethraliss, their Loa, and their entire way of life up to that point.

Not sure if that entire story arc can be seen as anything but vengeance... The dude was pretty brutal in his execution of his friend, and the Sethrak that followed him. I quite remember that awesome display he made turning you in to an Avatar envoked with his power, and running around zapping down droves of Sethrak. And if I remember correctly, but I could be wrong, but he blows up his ex-friend, doesn't he? Could be wrong on that part... Kind of blinded by how awesome being an Avatar was.


Vorrik's words mention nothing of vengeance or justice in their final encounter. in fact, as Korthek is about to die, Vorrik says "No, old friend. Our people are dead. Because of you. And now you may join them. Sethrallis forgive you." And he refers to Korthek in the completion text again as "Old Friend." One seeking vengeance would likely not use those words. Everything about Vorrik's lines feels more like remorse at what must be done, rather than vengeance for what has transpired. Even the voice-acted lines seem sincere (no sarcasm) when he calls him a friend.

10/05/2018 01:51 AMPosted by Bretherezen
And yes, interest was showed after the fact, as the Alliance did seem to prove useful to him, but that could evolve in to absolutely nothing. Yes, yes, there is plenty more story to go along with in BFA. I still don't think that anything will come of it. The Alliance can offer nothing at all to the Sethrak to gain their allegiance, but the Alliance would be benefiting from the Sethrak's aid. The Sethrak are getting the very short-end of the stick in any alliance that forms there.


Yes, I admited that Wyrmbane could easily be looking to use the sethrak without having any real concern for them, but this is a point on which we'll just have to agree to disagree; you don't think anything can come of it, whereas i do. Ultimately we'll just have to wait and see.

10/05/2018 01:51 AMPosted by Bretherezen
I'm also not sure if the Horde could benefit the Sethrak either, but at least they have Loa experience, and Loa worshippers. Any aid as well the Alliance provided, had the Horde been there, the Horde could have easily provided as well. So you see when I say there's very little to no room here as things stand for the Alliance to gain Sethrak? It goes beyond that of just beastial races, but that is still a design goal for how things stand and the Alliance. The beastial races just naturally gravitate to the Horde. "Be lucky you have Worgen". I said that ._. They're not a 'true' beastial race, in the sense they're just cursed Humans, but they're better than nothing.


again, there is currently one 'full' bestial race in the tauren. you could argue highmountain as a second, but they're really the same race, in the same way that KT and humans are the same race. And an argument can easily be made that blizzard feels the worgen are another beast race, as per their own intro for the worgen starting area.

as far as having little to gain, well 'not dying' would be a pretty big reason to join. The example i used earlier for example; what if the horde want to use the Sethrak temple to mount an assault on the Alliance port? If they refuse, how would Sylvanas take that news? Maybe it's not having something to gain so much as preventing loss. And whose to say the entirety of the Sethrak join up? It could be a case like the Mag'har, where the soon-to-be player characters and a few NPCs feel a debt of gratitude to the Alliance for aiding them in a time of need, and offer to join up.

10/05/2018 01:51 AMPosted by Bretherezen
And yes, they are with the Alliance, they are a lost people; they are parse and sparse; they are, at this point, probably nomadic (not by choice), and because of past atrocious grievances, are very vengeful. But what Human isn't? Need I point out Jaina Proudmoore and her constant need to PMS whenever the Horde is involved in... Anything? Her skin color turns from pale to red. She might as well be half Eredar.


So are we starting to agree that certain dispositions are found on both sides of the aisle, and that saying "x type of race definitely belongs over here" is flawed? ;)

10/05/2018 01:51 AMPosted by Bretherezen
If there wasn't the fact that Sylvanas invaded Gilneas with the express intent of wiping them out with the Plague, and by some other design plot, the Gilneans were attacked by some savage beasts or something and Sylvanas happened to be in the area with a helping hand before the Alliance arrived, the Horde would've probably gained Worgen instead, and the Alliance alternatively could've been the ones to get Goblins somehow, idk. It was design intent that allowed all of that to happen (although, we already had contact with Goblins in the Horde, so we already had a tie that linked us together. The Alliance just followed the Horde to Gilneas and recruited them. Actually kind of underhandedly, using their need for vengeance like that. Putting it that way, it is sort of out of the Alliance's character to have recruited them while at the same time, not so much out of character. *Shrug.*) Things played out how they did by design.


And they could just as easily design any race to go wherever they wanted, sethrak included.

Look, lorewise, blizzard could make a case for anything, which is part of the reason there's so much speculation around -how- it would work. But one thing i like to focus on is the -why-.

As mentioned above, giving the horde vulpera and alliance sethrak fits with the interview i posted. it keeps the beast race tally balanced. it gives both the horde and the alliance a brand new race, even if the skeletons are based on preexisting models, and those skeletons are from goblins and worgen, horde and alliance, and fit with where things seem to be pointing.

I could be wrong about all of it. But i really feel that if Blizzard plans to release vulpera, they NEED to have a race that checks off the list of what horde are getting as well;

-a race that has a vastly different silhouette to the normal races of that faction
-a beast race
-a race introduced in 8.0 with a decent amount of backstory and character
-something that might cause people to roll the opposite faction

Sethrak are the only race that do this and have signs of being worked on for possible player models.
And now we're arguing pure semantics, okay. Good bye. Not even a debate anymore. Sethrak won't happen. Keep begging all you like.

Saberon weren't added. Sethrak won't happen. Zero basis; Zero motivation; Zero intent; No design point of view for Sethrak in the ALLIANCE (as opposed to the Horde especially) to be of any use or significance to anything; There's no real benefit to their involvement; And just because YOU want it, doesn't mean it'll happen and it likely won't.

Go on and argue your semantics, and keep nitpicking my posts. I'm done. When BFA is done and Sethrak aren't added, i'll find the latest of this string of threads and blatantly flat-out tell you: I told you so.
10/05/2018 03:24 AMPosted by Bretherezen
And now we're arguing pure semantics, okay. Good bye. Not even a debate anymore. Sethrak won't happen. Keep begging all you like.

Saberon weren't added. Sethrak won't happen. Zero basis; Zero motivation; Zero intent; No design point of view for Sethrak in the ALLIANCE (as opposed to the Horde especially) to be of any use or significance to anything; There's no real benefit to their involvement; And just because YOU want it, doesn't mean it'll happen and it likely won't.

Go on and argue your semantics, and keep nitpicking my posts. I'm done. When BFA is done and Sethrak aren't added, i'll find the latest of this string of threads and blatantly flat-out tell you: I told you so.


and here i thought we'd both calmed down. I tried to provide evidence backed up in-game, or by actual quotes taken from blizzard employees. And I was willing to admit where speculation took place. You say i nit-pick, but i feel my concerns are fundamental flaws in your argument.

oh well. t'was fun. I enjoy a good debate.
10/05/2018 03:34 AMPosted by Seije
10/05/2018 03:24 AMPosted by Bretherezen
And now we're arguing pure semantics, okay. Good bye. Not even a debate anymore. Sethrak won't happen. Keep begging all you like.

Saberon weren't added. Sethrak won't happen. Zero basis; Zero motivation; Zero intent; No design point of view for Sethrak in the ALLIANCE (as opposed to the Horde especially) to be of any use or significance to anything; There's no real benefit to their involvement; And just because YOU want it, doesn't mean it'll happen and it likely won't.

Go on and argue your semantics, and keep nitpicking my posts. I'm done. When BFA is done and Sethrak aren't added, i'll find the latest of this string of threads and blatantly flat-out tell you: I told you so.


and here i thought we'd both calmed down. I tried to provide evidence backed up in-game, or by actual quotes taken from blizzard employees. And I was willing to admit where speculation took place. You say i nit-pick, but i feel my concerns are fundamental flaws in your argument.

oh well. t'was fun. I enjoy a good debate.
Seiji ABSOLUTELY DESTROYS SETHRAK DENIER WITH PURE LOGIC AND REASON IN A TOTALL BLOODBATH!
I like how that guy's whole premise was, the Horde get the bestial races (double lol, that is was a BE saying it). Where Blizzard is on the record, just a few months back, saying they want to flip precisely that exact stereotype on it's head with future allied race(s). I guess he knows more than Blizzard does about behind the scenes development.