The alliance need to be better antagonists.

Story Forum
1 2 3 7 Next
If we swapped out Sylvanas for any other horde character but had similar events but perhaps using different methods based on the character I still think the horde would come off as evilish.

The problem is that the alliance doesn't seem like proper antagonists to this faction war expansion while we make excellent antagonists.

I personally would have the alliance be more aggressive to the lead up point to the battle for azeroth and have the battle for lordaeron happen before teldrassil.

The alliance needs to step up.
No. The Alliance doesn't start wars(usually) but it definitely finishes them.
The problem is that the Alliance has characters who would be great antagonists.

But they are shown as justified even for the Horde. Like how Jaina's city attacked the Horde multiple times during the years and is still shown as good.
But we’re not antagonists, we’re the good guys.
04/15/2018 09:24 PMPosted by Zerde
The Alliance doesn't start wars

Why not?
04/15/2018 09:29 PMPosted by Rokugan
04/15/2018 09:24 PMPosted by Zerde
The Alliance doesn't start wars

Why not?


Honestly, I wish we’d struck first with the Battle for Lordaeron, then the burning of Teldrassil happened. It would’ve made sense, Genn and Jaina both wanting revenge for different reasons, and Anduin wanting to prove himself as a military leader, along with the obvious fact that they want to retake Lordaeron for the Alliance, which has been a long time coming. Would’ve made things a lot more interesting, but oh well.
04/15/2018 09:00 PMPosted by Yagarr
The writers need to realize the Alliance doesn't feel like an existential threat to the Horde, but the Horde does to the Alliance.

Let's take a look at the setting for BFA from each faction's perspective. There will be some SPOILERS.

Alliance: The Horde races, in one incarnation or another, have led a continent-wide genocide against the Draenei, raised Stormwind and surrounding territories to the ground, forcebred Alexstraza and enslaved her children, tried to conquer all of the Eastern Kingdoms, betrayed the last standing Alliance army in Lordaeron during the height of the Scourge, pushed the remaining Humans out of Lordaeron, blighted Southshore, systemically burnt areas of Ashenvale, mana-bombed Theramore, nuked Teldrassil, blighted both Horde and Alliance forces in Battle for the Undercity (which raises everyone involved into undeath), and in BFA will attack a Kul Tiran trade hub lacking a military force. The Horde will have killed civilians, enslaved other races, conducted human experimentation, forcefully raised the dead, and deployed weapons of mass destruction. The Alliance should absolutely see the Horde as an existential threat.

Horde: The Alliance races, in one incarnation or another, have put the Orcs internment camps, tried to imprison the Sunreavers, killed a tribe of Tauren to establish Bael'dun digsite, attacked Taurajo (but left a path for civilians to escape), attacked the Forsaken fleet in Stormheim during a ceasefire, and killed some miners in Silithus. This is not comparable to what the Horde's done.
04/15/2018 09:29 PMPosted by Rokugan
04/15/2018 09:24 PMPosted by Zerde
The Alliance doesn't start wars

Why not?


Because while both factions were created with the intent of protecting their own only the Alliance had stable lands and kingdoms with decades to millenia of stable existence to back them up. There's no growing pains or political disfunction or real problems accessing vital resources; they got over those issues well before even WC1 started (or at least long since developed ways to handle those issues smoothly). And aside from some very specific concerns (Lordaeron, Quel'thalas, the Forsaken etc...) most Alliance members don't really want to own more of the world either. They already got theirs.

Which is... yeah kind of an issue compared to the Horde doctrine of "we must conquer everything we can see in order to thrive". At least if you're trying to portray both factions as somehow morally equivalent.
It wouldnt happen because it would kill the fantasy of being pure good, while albeit being pure stupid.
04/15/2018 09:33 PMPosted by Jacksouth
04/15/2018 09:29 PMPosted by Rokugan
...
Why not?


Honestly, I wish we’d struck first with the Battle for Lordaeron, then the burning of Teldrassil happened. It would’ve made sense, Genn and Jaina both wanting revenge for different reasons, and Anduin wanting to prove himself as a military leader, along with the obvious fact that it’s their land. Would’ve made things a lot more interesting, but oh well.

But it’s just not their land.
04/15/2018 09:45 PMPosted by Liuv
They already got theirs.

Wars don't need to happen over resources or territory. The Crusades were motivated entirely by boredom and religious zeal.

There's nothing wrong (From a narrative standpoint) with the Alliance starting a war for vengeance, righteousness, or a perceived superiority to Horde races. It would be antagonistic, but that's what we're looking for here, and such motivations can also lead to that coveted 'internal conflict' that the Alliance doesn't have and Alliance players want to have.
04/15/2018 09:55 PMPosted by Rokugan
Wars don't need to happen over resources or territory. The Crusades were motivated entirely by boredom and religious zeal.


And the Alliance lacks this angle. The closest we ever got to it was the Scarlet Crusade and outside of that one guy who hung out in the Church back in Vanilla the two groups remained wholly separate. Nelves could've made that angle work but they got neutered, draenei could've but it never arrived (maybe the lightforged can change that but we haven't seen it yet) etc... etc...

04/15/2018 09:55 PMPosted by Rokugan
There's nothing wrong (From a narrative standpoint) with the Alliance starting a war for vengeance, righteousness, or a perceived superiority to Horde races.


Except for the fact that this is what's happening right now in BfA. The Alliance is attacking out of vengeance and the Horde (or at least the OP) aren't satisfied with that as a reason to fight back. "Oh no, they're coming to attack us because we attacked them first/harder!" isn't a great rallying cry.
04/15/2018 09:29 PMPosted by Rokugan
Why not?


That wont happen if for no other than reason that because of the people who currently lead the Alliance. Anduin was hardly inclined to go to War. Even Varian was less interested to retake Undercity so much as to contain Sylvanas by SoO end.

The only one who this might apply to, Genn, had plenty of justifiable reason to want to attack the Horde.
And the Alliance lacks this angle.

Sooo... write it in?

This is a narrative. An angle can be written in. Worgen wanting revenge for Gilneas, zealous Lightforged wanting to purge Orcs for what they did to their friends and family, Dwarves who seek to dig in Horde lands, there's all kinds of possibilities that can be written in.

04/15/2018 10:04 PMPosted by Liuv
Except for the fact that this is what's happening right now in BfA.

Not exactly. The Horde is starting the war, not the Alliance. Secondly, the main reason Hordies aren't satisfied with this is because we've been through this before. The Horde has done the 'starts a war for resources' angle and we saw it end in SoO, so do you understand why we wouldn't want to see that for ourselves again?

Meanwhile, I can't think of a conflict the Alliance started in this fashion in all of WoW's history. My mind goes to Varian's threat to Thrall in the Battle for Undercity during Wrath, but that didn't go anywhere.

04/15/2018 10:13 PMPosted by Zerde
That wont happen if for no other than reason that because of the people who currently lead the Alliance.

The Alliance is made of independent kingdoms. If Genn wants to start a war with Gilnean forces, or Tyrande with Kaldorei forces, etc, it's not up to Anduin to stop them. Anduin can say he won't help, but they aren't beholden to him (Or shouldn't be).
04/15/2018 10:20 PMPosted by Rokugan
The Alliance is made of independent kingdoms. If Genn wants to start a war with Gilnean forces, or Tyrande with Kaldorei forces, etc, it's not up to Anduin to stop them. Anduin can say he won't help, but they aren't beholden to him (Or shouldn't be).


Tyrande wasn't particular interested in war. Genn, would loss the support of Stormwind, you know the guys trying to help rebuild his city. If he simply started a war. And even if he did he wouldn't have the forces to go against the whole Horde without support from the rest of the Alliance.
04/15/2018 10:20 PMPosted by Rokugan
Anduin can say he won't help, but they aren't beholden to him (Or shouldn't be).
they aren't, but they kinda need stormwinds support, since both the night elves and gilneans are now governments in exile
04/15/2018 10:20 PMPosted by Rokugan
Sooo... write it in?


With who?

Anduin is the leader, the big Light-worshiping priest king, and even he isn't that kind of zealot. Genn isn't, Jaina isn't, Alleria isn't, Rogers isn't etc... Virtually no one on either side of the faction divide is. Warcraft has a whole tends to skirt around motivations like that (or racist driven motivations as well) outside of their villains and frankly that's probably for the best. Better to write murderous, full scale war about 'grudges' and magic rocks then risk wading into that swamp.

Meanwhile, I can't think of a conflict the Alliance started in this fashion in all of WoW's history. My mind goes to Varian's threat to Thrall in the Battle for Undercity during Wrath, but that didn't go anywhere.


Exactly. That's the 'problem' that the OP is talking about. The Alliance just isn't built for the kind of stories that Blizzard wants from the faction war. And trying to make it into that sort of a faction, this late into the story, isn't going to work. Maybe the Horde shouldn't be the only faction getting bent out of shape for the sake of the plot but that's hardly an exciting or interesting idea.
04/15/2018 10:20 PMPosted by Rokugan
This is a narrative. An angle can be written in. Worgen wanting revenge for Gilneas, zealous Lightforged wanting to purge Orcs for what they did to their friends and family, Dwarves who seek to dig in Horde lands, there's all kinds of possibilities that can be written in.


Anything can be written in. That's how we got Warlords, and trashcan.

Sure the Worgen want revenge, but they shouldn't be more obsessed with that than reclaiming Gilneas. It'd be like the Gnomes trying to wipe out all Troggs.

The Draenei have had years, and several expansions to want revenge. Most don't, and a sudden group of them pushing for it would be too jarring.

Dwarves could want to, but why be willing to go to war for it?

I'm all for the Alliance fighting for revenge, or stop being nice about war, but you can't just force reasons on them. It's why Horde players are so miserable.
04/15/2018 10:22 PMPosted by Zerde
Tyrande wasn't particular interested in war. Genn, would loss the support of Stormwind, you know the guys trying to help rebuild his city. If he simply started a war. And even if he did he wouldn't have the forces to go against the whole Horde without support from the rest of the Alliance.

04/15/2018 10:36 PMPosted by Liuv
With who?

Therein lies the conflict. Let's assume Genn wants to begin a conflict, out of vengeful zeal. He attacks the Forsaken during peacetime and assumes the rest of the Alliance will back him up. This leads to an internal conflict where Genn's dragged the rest of the Alliance into a war.

Some support him wholeheartedly; Tyrande, for example, out of slights against Ashenvale and the Kaldorei, as well as bitter resentment towards the Nightborne, who she thinks are no different from Azshara and the Highborne.

Some support him through pure opportunism. Moira and the Dwarves probably don't harbor any particular resentment for the Horde races, but are more than happy to pillage and pilfer, and seek places they can do what Dwarves to best, like they once tried in the Barrens and Mulgore.

Some do so begrudgingly, voicing their disapproval at every turn; Anduin could fall in here. Genn is like a second father to him, filling a void that Varian no longer can. And while he'll stand beside his new, surrogate-father, and the human kingdom that Stormwind is aligned with, he'd make it clear that he doesn't approve of what Genn started, but just seeks to finish it.

And some refuse to grant aid, thus making rifts of distrust between the Alliance kingdoms. Velen and the Draenei could fall here; Velen recalls any forces he lent to Stormwind, and his opinion of the other kingdoms changes as a result of how they're reacting to Genn. He wouldn't become completely uninvolved, and likely would repeatedly voice his disapproval. At best, he might provide Clerics for medical aid, with the caveat that they remain far from the battlefields. He could pressure Anduin and the other kingdoms that if they don't end the war swiftly, they might not be able to rely on the Draenei anymore.

There is potential for conflict to be written everywhere, and little things and domino into big, drastic events and changes. Not everything needs to be so cut and dry.

04/15/2018 10:42 PMPosted by Arlifrex
That's how we got Warlords

Warlords wasn't an inherently bad concept, and was fairly decent at launch. It was just abandoned halfway through and it ended up ruining the whole thing.
Therein lies the conflict. Let's assume Genn wants to begin a conflict, out of vengeful zeal.


Okay but... none of that is the issue. At least not the issue that the OP raised.

The Alliance having more internal conflict would be fine but it does nothing to improve the Alliance as an antagonistic force for the Horde. Same as how the Horde facing down another potential civil war between Sylvanas and Saurfang does nothing to make me any happier about fighting it. And even if Blizzard used that suggestion, making Genn the focal point and warmonger? The Horde took his nation and his son. He would be (and frankly is) utterly validated both in and out of universe in taking the fight to the Horde, at least until he crosses a line somewhere.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum