If they had taken her somewhere private the Horde wanderers would have just made up rumours of them doing other unnecessary stuff, like kicking her when she was down or something
Gotta question her infront of others cause they can’t be trusted not to lie or make up stuff.
They wouldn’t of had too if they home wasn’t being invaded. A place where plenty of mothers and fathers and children were living their lives peacefully.
Probably fewer after Sylvanas burned down Teldrassil. So, I guess you can thank her for making him look better.
Saurfang stopped at… Oh, with the Dreanei genocide, first and second war, and War of Thorns… Probably a few thousand.
I agree. It’s a shame that Tyrande and Malfurion didn’t hold Genn accountable for his warcrime in setting the Alliance at War with the Horde. That would’ve nipped this all in the bud.
Before the Tree burned, how many orphans were made in the War of Thorns?
I think the Warcrime of Sylvanas enslaving all Val’kyr was a but more on their mind at the time.
Blizzard has never, nor will ever, give us a casualty report of conflicts. But if your point if that “No number, therefore no orphans” We can say the same thing about casualties as a whole. Blizzard never gave us a number, therefore the entirety of war of thorns was fought without anyone actually dying.
I’m not ignoring the other aspects in-so-far as I don’t really disagree with any of it. And really that it is generally good when someone examines the idea of moral decision making. But I’m still not seeing what you mean by right and wrong if they are not things that should or should not be done.
You’ve outlined how people discern right and wrong. And that people should not rationalize certain things. I’m still trying to see what you mean by right and wrong actions.
I’m not strictly sure that much is true. But is a minor quibble as otherwise just a matter of necessity and precedent.
If the traitors all leave then it is a win win. You know who are traitors and you haven’t harmed the innocent citizens.
I mean, you’ve said a second time here that they were given a chance to leave. In which case the traitors could have done so anyway.
I disagree, it is relevant in assessing the risk at hand. Someone being a full blown Garrosh loyalist versus someone being blackmailed in the moment to save their people influences the likelihood their organization is compromised, which is the point in question.
But the enforcers of Dalaran do have that magic. That was the entire reason it is being discussed. You can’t say ‘people who have super magic to subdue people shouldn’t use it because people without it wouldn’t’, you realize why that’s a failing analogy, right?
Bad things did happen. A bunch of innocent people were abused and killed.
And shoddy evidence is bad if it works out because it sets a bad precedent. This is the precise reason we have things like warrants.
Not when it is based on slapdash evidence.
It was totally worth the risk, we know that for a fact. And even judging from her PoV, she should have weighed the lives of innocent Sunreavers over her paranoia.
Helping the entire world includes helping Japan to the detriment of China in this scenario.
Not if the Alliance wasn’t involved at all in the recovery and security. But that’s not what happened, of course.
Except you’re passing sentence on them by indefinite imprisonment without trial, killing them for fleeing, and seizing their assets. Literally no due process or let alone reasonable suspicion. Again, the idea that just being a member of a nation is sufficient grounds for an arrest (or anything else per the above) is wildly prejudiced and bad policing.
You literally go from his conversation and capture to cutting off escape routes. Again, there’s no option for these people. And one of the quests is literally killing someone trying to leave.
And if there was, you’d be cool with it. It isn’t a stretch to see a similar event. Heck, I’d be pretty surprised if there wasn’t an example out there somewhere.
And to the fascist, everyone is a potential traitor or criminal. Again, don’t care about rights. And you can have that opinion if you want.
I think the fact the quest says they ‘forfeited it’ is proof enough. The people killed certainly didn’t.
She didn’t do that until after Genn betrayed His King and the Alliance and attacked the Horde and the Warchief, regardless of Sylvanas’s later attempts at slavery.
You stated many orphans were made. Given the lack of abundance in nelf children models but large abundance of other children models, and night elves being immortal (and thus likely not reproducing often) ontop of nelves not having… any stories about having children of which i am aware, I am inclined to believe that Saurfang may have made a few children orphans, but not many.
Unless you know something that I do not.
Well, I just explained it to you. People who are mentally healthy have an innate ability to discern right from wrong. Usually is comes from a place of empathy, but that is innately flawed. As I think your definition is also flawed… Just because something is wrong doesn’t mean one shouldn’t do it… Sometimes, we have to do wrong things for the sake of something greater… and your definition can either stop that, or lead someone to believe that something wrong they are doing, is actually right. Both are dangerous.
She went to Stormheim strictly for that purpose, and the Alliance champion discovered this in Azuna.
Game mechanics is not lore.
When you invade someone’s home… Which, in this case, spans several large zones, everything you do is going to result in “many”
Maybe you are right though, maybe there are not many orphans… But it will be because the Horde killed them.
My point is, if you are drawing the line at one child being traumatized as evil, then you have to be consistent with War of Thorns, in its entirety, being immoral.
No they did not. I just did the quest a month or two ago. I took screenshots of the entire thing. Genn does not have any evidence on the skyship. He states. “We’d better (find some). I’m not in the habit of hunting prey and not killing it.”
That’s definitely not game mechanics. Children models are very plainly story representation.
That’d be true if the race was not immortal. They are immortal. Blizzard shows us the other races reproduce at regular intervals. They do not show us that is true for night elves. To the contrary, they show Tyrande is barren. Or Malfurion is. Or both. Either way, Tyrande had to adopt a fully grown woman.
The canonical order of questing on the Broken Isles is Azuna, Val’sharah, Highmountain, and Stormheim. That means the Champion finds evidence of Sylvanas’ plan before they go to Stormheim to stop her.
And Blizzard doesn’t want to make a child model for every single race. It is game mechanics, not lore. It means nothing.
Doesn’t matter… it is multiple geographical regions, populated by night elves. Multiple cities, multiple villages. The casualties of that war was mostly civilian before the burning.
No, it isn’t. You’re lying.
Brb grabbing screenshots, lmao.
You’ve explained how they decide if something is right or wrong, but not what you think right and wrong actually mean. Say I feel giving a child candy is right, what does right actually mean in this context if not something I should do or that would be beneficial?
To my system, the definition is meant to decide (or prescribe) what action should be taken (which is what I consider the point of morality, generally). A code of conduct. And this is why I’ve been asking what you mean by right and wrong, I understand the decision making process you present (intuition, empathy, etc), but not the terms right and wrong if they are devoid of action-ability.
The value in ascribing good or bad to an action (to me) is as to whether or not it should be done. So I wouldn’t use the phrase ‘doing wrong things for the sake of something greater’, I would just call it doing good.
But I can’t see the value (or linguistic point in general) in calling something good or bad without knowing the meaning you are ascribing them when it isn’t based around conduct.
Well, why are you compelled to give the child candy?
You can’t have an answer to “What does right and wrong mean” without understanding the means in which you decide when something is right and wrong.
Its the same thing.
Well, I know we disagree partly on whether or not Alleria did the right thing here. But for a moment, lets assume that her means was the only way to objectively see results.
I think it is vital to recognize the thanklessness and the ugliness of the deed. Even if it is ultimately a good thing to do, by your definition.
https://imgur.com/a/UmdX7lp
They are blithely unaware of any wrong doing.
In an interview, I think it was Ion, he explained why we have a fixed order this time, and referred to Legion and the decision why they didn’t handled it that way again because it caused lorewise problems.
Lorewise it would have gone from left Aszuna, to right Sturmheim, that was confirmed in the interview.
Just because it is not mentioned, doesn’t mean they are completely unaware.
He also acknowledges there is no canon order to Legion; he just wishes there had been because it tells a more completed story.
(Whether or not you or any other reader here agrees with him, I leave up to you.)
Yes it is. Their orders are specifically to interfere if Sylvanas is up to something. They acknowledge that they have nothing to go on but “will find something anyway.”
Yeah, i know, but he even said in that interview, IT WOULD Be from Aszuna to stormheim, Aszuna would be lorewise first.
Link video please. I’m 99% sure he states he would’ve preferred to tell a story in a specific order. I do not remotely remember him stating “ONLY THIS IS CANON.”
And she was up to something. So they interfered.
I never wrote that “only that is canon”, as you said yourself, there is no order, it would only have gone from Aszuna to Stormheim. That order didn’t catch on, and I don’t even remember in which streamer interview that passage was in, I just know that it came somewhere when he was talking about the order of SL.