"But...but Muh Honor.. But muh Glory"

General Discussion
Prev 1 3 4 5 9 Next
08/09/2018 12:55 PMPosted by Shudder
08/09/2018 12:54 PMPosted by Jinjinks
Think they are talking about the comic, When she says ''all will serve death, all will serve me'' maybe?


But surely if they meant that they would specify that instead of conjuring up events that never happened out of thin air right?

Right?


OH NO I GET IT NOW!
They racist, Sylvanas is dead... Putress is dead... Must be the same character right?

Right?

Death to the Scourge! And death to the living!
08/09/2018 12:58 PMPosted by Zumas
These threads are just copying each other over and over.


Look buddy, if you're not here to call somebody names you can geeeeeet out!
I don't care about honor or glory. I just see a genocidal banshee problem that needs to be ghostbusted.
08/09/2018 12:48 PMPosted by Shudder
<span class="truncated">...</span>

in the short that came out last week she said something like that, i can't rewatch the video, but she very much siding with death


Oh you mean the warbringer short where she said no such thing?

So, yes, it's your headcanon.

"life is pain, hope fails, now you underatand, do not grieve you'll join your loved ones soon."

"i grieve for you, you made life your enemy, and that is a wae you cannot win, you can kill us, but you cannot kill hope."

"can't I?"

"BURN IT."

*proceeds to burn tree of life*

nope, no way that can be tied to siding with death, i will concede she doesn't say death to the living, but i already gave that.

no way someone saying life is terrible and pain filled and death is good then burning the tree life while wanting to kill hope after practicing spreading disease and death as zombies and being known for it

total baseless headcannon

those claws you have out are totally justified.
08/09/2018 01:00 PMPosted by Jinjinks
They racist


Yes. Racists every one of them.

We should burn down all their trees.
08/09/2018 12:55 PMPosted by Lilithyra
08/09/2018 12:51 PMPosted by Volmere
you left out the part of Genocide meaning 'attempt to kill ALL of a species or ethnic group'


Where is that in that definition? Did I link hidden text somewhere?

08/09/2018 12:51 PMPosted by Volmere
and yes, the player can make the choice because that's game play... but who organized everything? Sylvanas and she sent out the gas masks etc to make them available for those that don't wan to to die.


Mechanically yes, but canonically? I wonder about that.

08/09/2018 12:51 PMPosted by Volmere
And yes, war is slaughter... We slaughter things in this game all the time... boars, harpies, murlocs,

you name it we slaughter it...


War is not necessarily slaughter. You can take prisoners, you can impose your will on conquered people. Again, you're missing my main point.

She wants to exterminate all life. There is plenty of in-game canon evidence for this. You cannot deny as much.


you're just arguing semantics at this point... my point still stands

If my choices we're to be blighted by Sylvanas or Anduin order a demolisher blow my limbs off so I can bleed out slowly and drown in mine and other's blood as it slowly get's higher around me.... I can't say that either one sound better or worse...

In fact I might choose the blight

If you really think blight is so much worse than other things done by members of the Horde/Alliance then there is nothing to debate with you in the first place
...

Oh you mean the warbringer short where she said no such thing?

So, yes, it's your headcanon.

"life is pain, hope fails, now you underatand, do not grieve you'll join your loved ones soon."

"i grieve for you, you made life your enemy, and that is a wae you cannot win, you can kill us, but you cannot kill hope."

"can't I?"

"BURN IT."

*proceeds to burn tree of life*

nope, no way that can be tied to siding with death, i will concede she doesn't say death to the living, but i already gave that.

no way someone saying life is terrible and pain filled and death is good then burning the tree life while wanting to kill hope after practicing spreading disease and death as zombies and being known for it

total baseless headcannon

those claws you have out are totally justified.


so a night elf said that "she has made life her enemy" and that = Sylvanas screaming "death to the living!"????

sounds like headcanon to me
And this is why Blizz writes the horde that way. Horde fanbois just want to "kill and destroy" like 2000's edgelords who never grew up. They think just because the faction deploys an ex machina and "kills people" is "cool" and "great".

08/09/2018 01:03 PMPosted by Volmere
you're just arguing semantics at this point... my point still stands


The funniest thing I've read. You are literally arguing semantics and criticize her for doing that. What?
08/09/2018 01:03 PMPosted by Volmere
If my choices we're to be blighted by Sylvanas or Anduin order a demolisher blow my limbs off so I can bleed out slowly and drown in mine and other's blood as it slowly get's higher around me.... I can't say that either one sound better or worse...

In fact I might choose the blight

If you really think blight is so much worse than other things done by members of the Horde/Alliance then there is nothing to debate with you in the first place


Where did I argue that the Blight is bad? My point is her desire to end all life. You can do that with fire, with ice, with shadow, with light, with steel, with plague, who cares? The point is that she wants literally anything with a pulse to stop having that pulse.

:eyeroll:
...

Oh you mean the warbringer short where she said no such thing?

So, yes, it's your headcanon.

"life is pain, hope fails, now you underatand, do not grieve you'll join your loved ones soon."

"i grieve for you, you made life your enemy, and that is a wae you cannot win, you can kill us, but you cannot kill hope."

"can't I?"

"BURN IT."

*proceeds to burn tree of life*

nope, no way that can be tied to siding with death, i will concede she doesn't say death to the living, but i already gave that.

no way someone saying life is terrible and pain filled and death is good then burning the tree life while wanting to kill hope after practicing spreading disease and death as zombies and being known for it

total baseless headcannon

those claws you have out are totally justified.


But that isn't what you said or are the words you use when you post just not meant to be taken as the words you use?

Did you mean to use "wouldn't" instead of "would"?
08/09/2018 12:40 PMPosted by Reshyk
08/09/2018 12:31 PMPosted by Volmere
Not even the Gilneans or Nelves can be considered true genocide.
Is that why the Elegy novella says verbatim, “Sylvanas has committed genocide”?

I’m still trying to understand why she burned the tree. The original plan called for holding Teldrassil as a bargaining chip to force the Alliance into inaction. Instead she galvanized the entire Alliance to move against her. She basically took out all the awkwardness the Alliance would need to sift through to declare total war. From a strategic standpoint, it was a poor decision. The fact that it’s genocide is extra salt on the wound. (Approx. one Dead Sea’s worth but not touching that.)

I get that she wanted to send a powerful message to the Night Elves by destroying one of their greatest symbols, but I don’t see how this is an effective replacement for killing Malfurion. Instead of being broken the Night Elves resolve is more hardened than ever and Sylvanas knew this would be the result before she gave the order.

I simply can’t come up with why she’d commit one of the greatest war crimes we’ve ever seen.

I’ve followed Sylvanas’ brand of logic for all of her decisions so far and I can see a certain sense to them. It’s just burning Teldrassil I can’t fathom.


I'm missing the logic leap as well. "Saurfang failed to kill Malfurion, so the Night Elves still have hope. We need to burn their tree now, along with all the civilians in it".

If you wanted to kill Night Elf morale, you should go for Tyrande anyway, not Malfurion. She embodies their deity, and she led her people while her husband slept through most of the last 10,000 years. He's important, she's essential.

Remember it was 900+ in the quest in Darnassus. That's just Darnassus. There is still Astranaar, the starting area, the Furbolg village, etc...There are more areas in Teldrassil than just Darnassus.
Using chemical/biological weapons is a war crime IRL for reason. Even though effectiveness is important, there are lines the civilized do not cross. Nukes too, they've only ever been used in one conflict ever and people have been too afraid to use them again.

The blight is chemical warfare, and it isn't too much of a stretch to assume that the honourable orcs/tauren are going to have a beef (heh) with using things that even IRL we consider to be heinous, and we don't even have cultures built up on extreme levels of honour anymore.
You're absolutely right, of course. Hitler didn't commit genocide against the Jews because he didn't try to kill ALL of them. /kappa

The fact that Sylvanus didn't try to kill all of the nightelves didn't make it any less genocidal. It was deliberate and systematic. She was trying to take out a whole group of them at once. That what made it a genocide.
08/09/2018 12:25 PMPosted by Shudder
I have yet to hear a sound argument against the blight as to why it is so much worse than the myriad of other ways the warcraft universe gives us to cause suffering in our victims before killing them.


Because the characters in the game world think that it is. You're applying real world logic to a fantasy world in which we can raise the dead and fling destructive magic from our fingertips and summon demons to do our bidding. To us (the humans behind the keyboard), those things make use of the Blight seem trivial. But within the game world, the lore has established that use of the Blight is considered an atrocity by characters on both sides of the faction divide. Therefore the story (and the characters within it) must stay true to that belief.

Once again I must ask why y'all feel it's necessary to continue these daily mental gymnastics to justify Sylvie's actions. She's evil and what she did at Teldrassil was wrong, even in the context of war. That's not to say that I as a real world observer of this story don't like her as a character. I do. She's one of my favorites. Every story needs a good antagonist. But again, the characters themselves have ample reason to dislike her (even some that are currently pledged to her) and that's okay too.
08/09/2018 01:01 PMPosted by Shudder
08/09/2018 12:58 PMPosted by Zumas
These threads are just copying each other over and over.


Look buddy, if you're not here to call somebody names you can geeeeeet out!


lmao
Buddy, morality matters.

Saurfang is one guy who puts his principles before blind loyalty to his nation or race.
08/09/2018 01:11 PMPosted by Evylline
You're absolutely right, of course. Hitler didn't commit genocide against the Jews because he didn't try to kill ALL of them. /kappa

The fact that Sylvanus didn't try to kill all of the nightelves didn't make it any less genocidal. It was deliberate and systematic. She was trying to take out a whole group of them at once. That what made it a genocide.


Nope, she was trying to burn the tree.... Whether it had been full or empty of Night Elves wouldnlt have changed her mind one bit.

she wanted Teldrassil and/or to break Alliance spirits... How many of them were killed, if any, had no impact to her.

In fact she specifically says herself that Malfurion is the only one she had any real desire to kill
08/09/2018 01:05 PMPosted by Afkdots
Using chemical/biological weapons is a war crime IRL for reason. Even though effectiveness is important, there are lines the civilized do not cross. Nukes too, they've only ever been used in one conflict ever and people have been too afraid to use them again.

The blight is chemical warfare, and it isn't too much of a stretch to assume that the honourable orcs/tauren are going to have a beef (heh) with using things that even IRL we consider to be heinous, and we don't even have cultures built up on extreme levels of honour anymore.


don't compare a game to real life please.... You play a class that drains the life out of their victims and or tortures/desecrates their bodies just as bad as the blight.

You have no moral ground to stand on
08/09/2018 01:12 PMPosted by Firemane
Because the characters in the game world think that it is


But why do they think it is?

Surely these characters have in game reasoning as to why. If they do not then that is just shallow writing.

08/09/2018 01:12 PMPosted by Firemane
You're applying real world logic to a fantasy world in which we can raise the dead and fling destructive magic from our fingertips and summon demons to do our bidding.


Not even. In fact, the only side that is basing their reasoning on real life logic is the side saying that the blight is wrong.

08/09/2018 01:12 PMPosted by Firemane
the lore has established that use of the Blight is considered an atrocity by characters on both sides of the faction divide. Therefore the story (and the characters within it) must stay true to that belief.


What a load. If no reasonable justification exists in universe in the lore aside from "it is bad because we say so" then there is no justification to accept that as truth for any character.
08/09/2018 12:23 PMPosted by Onoswun
FOR THE HORDE!!


You misspelled Scourge ...

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum