Honestly it should have been Saurfang, keeping Sylvanas’s Horde at least kind of on the honorable side of war. It’s hinted at when she asks him to be the one to lead the War of Thorns because she knows he’ll do the war “right” where’s she would go too far in a really great moment of self awareness. If we had that dynamic the Horde would be way more interesting.
7 Likes
That’s right. I remember that. But it felt like the “co-op” was killed before it started.
I was running ICC tonight and realized - at least for me I think during the gunship battle - having the horde/alliance aggression relegated to a fight or two in a raid seemed to work better amidst the backdrop of the Warcraft universe: when fighting Illidan, Arthas, Legion, etc. If the factions go all out on each other, what else is there to do? The horde/alliance hatred was that framework, not necessarily the main course.
Consider that if our main Focus is fighting the Legion, but that we’re still not on good terms with the other half of the planet, there’s a lot of tension there. But when we’re actively fighting that other half…where do we go when it ends?
As has been discussed ad infinitum here: it will either terminate in an awkward stalemate or, perhaps even more obtuse, it will get brushed aside due to the next big invasion.
I’m hoping those are half-cogent thoughts…in my deliciously fatigued state.
I get what you mean, and it’s something I’ve always felt and have saida few times around different threads. AvH should never be the sole focus of an expac, or in this case a big focus of the not old god based ending expac,it’s not sustainable and Blizz are incapable of writing without a villain in their story, and of course it will be the Horde because no ones going to make the Alliance the actual expac bad guys. People don’t mind playing the bad guys sometime, but being the villain, as in the narrative treating you like a piece of trash for actions you had no control over, isn’t fun.
2 Likes
Agreed. I also think it would have been so much more interesting if the intro To the conflict was written such that the alliance was written as the instigator or if the horde started making miltary postures without going for the coup de grace (teldrassil) within the first instances of the expansion. But I guess that’s the expansion hook now.
This seemed to start with wod (freeing nerzhul/teron’gor) and realizing that the iron horde had changed the course of their legion involvement - right off the bat - and in legion, with the failed broken shore event. (Maybe mop, too, with the first footfalls into the continent being a failure)
But previous expansions (BC and Wrath) seemed to start with a slower burn and progressed to a rocking end. There didn’t appear to be an almost sinewave- like roller coaster of tension. It felt a bit more linear.
Perhaps my bias is showing though? Or, more likely, ignorance.
Trying to go shock value right off the bat instead of subtlety building a narrative isn’t my forte. But that doesn’t mean it can’t work…
This whole set up could have been a million times better by the simple change of having the Alliance attack first and Anduin instead of apparently saying bad boy to genn after the stormheim stuff, agrees with him and decides Sylvanas has to go or the future is screwed. Alliance attack UC, exact same battle sept maybe no Saurfang imprisonment, and having Sylvanas predict it and give minimal resistance lets her swing the horde military around and attack Teld while the alliance are burned out from being the attackers on a siege.
Shock writing will never be even in the same league as a well crafted narrative with a logical and enjoyable ending, predictable or not. I think LotR is the best work of fiction ever made, and we all know how that was ending after the Council of Elrond.
4 Likes
Also agreed. One could also see it being written that the conflict actually does start in Silithus in a conventional, front warfare and then spills over to hitting targets of opportunity. And the warfronts would be an extension of the RTS roots of the game as the story unfolds across the continents - like they did in the RTS.
But, I’m getting verbose again. I agree with you. That setup would have made more sense: attack Sylvanas off the basis of stormheim.
But instead we get an emotionally troubling bonfire. I honestly think that’s the worst part of BfA, not even that it’s bad, and I do genuinely think it’s worse then WoD so far, but that it COULD have been so so much better. A real faction war, with no “bad guys” where both sides have real reasons to hate each other would have been fantastic.
4 Likes
It’s been confirmed by blizzard.
Undead characters will be deleted.
1 Like
But the writers can’t make alliance look bad.
Red Bad
Blue Good
Purple lady Bad
Yellow ladyboy Good
I pray for an expac one day where the Alliance goees full Lawful good overdrive, like welcoming the Lightbound over from AU draenor and joining them. I know it would be awful, I know it would suck for Alliance players and I don’t legit want to force this travesty that Horde have on them, but I just want to see the carnage.
2 Likes
My dream is still Anduin giving the Horde two options. Join the Alliance and bring real peace to the world, or face the wrath of the Night Warrior.
It’ll never happen because it would require the Alliance as a whole to do something interesting but yeah. Dreams.
As for the Forsaken, I’m just gonna believe nothing really of note will happen to them and they just go back to being the amusing dark humor side characters again.
I would adore, just adore, at the end of this if the tempo and atmosphere was all like “Yay Sylvanas is dead we’re friends.” Then Anduin basically repeats his fathers speech, but decides that this will just happen again and commits to total war.
I think it needs to be another forsaken to counter Sylvannas, because blizzard makes the members of each faction individual and specifically by race (and im ok with this, for the less developed faction members atleast).
and while i dont believe Sylvannas is going to die at the end of this expac (nor should she) the individual nations of each faction should be able to stand on there own less we run into the Sen’Jin troll issue we currently have, the nation was never built up to begin with so they need to keep spirit vol’jin around until rokhan can be developed, this is what would also happen to the Tauren if Baine died. Orcs, Humans and Night Elves do not have this issue there are many members who can stand in if Malfurion, Thrall and Anduin were to perish (most evident with the Orcs).
This is what makes Zellings death that more tragic and what makes nathanos exposition about his loyalties to Sylvannas that much better. the Forsaken, Tauren, Trolls and Gnomes need a Zelling and if they cant get that need a Nathanos.
1 Like
Rally around Nathanos who decides to cut out the “kill all humans” plan while helping to preserve Forsaken society by focusing on keeping those who are already Forsaken in top condition and attempting to bring back some small part of Lordaeron’s identity pre-Scourge.
I have always felt (since Wrath) the horde had the more interesting narrative but both sides have there weaknesses.
The horde have much better political drama and more indentity to there various factions BUT they lack an outside antagonist (alliance dont make good enemies and horde are always “second” fiddle when it comes to fighting world threats minus C’thun.
The alliance however almost have no political drama/in fighting but are consistently given a good antagonist in the Horde and also get to be the “leaders” of tackling world threats, again odd the faction that has a dictator (horde) seem to be more democratic while the faction that should be an alliance meaning a collection of equals is far more dictatorial.
1 Like
I can verify this. They’ve already deleted my avatar. I only exist now as some sort of virtual poltergeist.
13 Likes
Since Blizzard is going to give them no choice at all if they want to betray their race/leader or not, many of them probably will be deleted if they haven’t already.
2 Likes
The thing is, Blizzard is not slick. They don’t do big twists or reveals well, and don’t typically try it anyway. If you see something coming a mile away… it’s coming.
The novel sets up Calia to be the Forsaken’s alternative to Sylvanas even when Calia is still alive, simply because she’s the technical heir of Lorderan and is sympathetic to the Forsaken. The only hindrance is that she’s Human. And lo, at the end of the novel, she’s miraculously become Undead. They invented a new way in the narrative to make Undead that doesn’t really make sense, simply so Calia specifically could become Undead without Sylvanas’ influence.
Regardless of whether will be a good and coherent story, you can almost 100% guarantee Calia will be the new Forsaken leader, simply because Blizzard has already put the idea there.
This is honestly why I can’t stand her, and don’t like what she represents for the Forsaken:
Forsaken can’t lead their own faction.
1 Like
1 Like