Do they have experiences from there? Sylvanas remembers a blissful existence after her first death, before Arthas dragged her back. After the second death, she had horror visions, of course, but I don’t even know if she shared that around. Apart from that, I don’t think it would be much of a problem if many Lordaeronians had hellish experiences. They didn’t live with a warrior’s honor after all, so this is to be expected. They probably deserved their fate.
Again:
Did they live as warriors? If not, then there isn’t a religious problem.
Is that even common knowledge? Players get to see quite a few exceptional things that don’t make the rounds in the game world.
No he didn’t. He had reveled in it because of the Demon Blood, it was when the blood curse was lifted he started to feel shame because of the unnecesary bloodshed.
I think its been stated somewhere that Sylvanas rather sees everyone raised as Forsaken, and she wants to see Stormwind serve her in Undeath. How can that ever be a honourable goal?
Yes you should, you know why? Because the Alliance has spared the Horde more times then I assume most Orcs can even count. They spared them after the slaughters of the First and Second War, they spared them after they escaped from the Internment Camps(With holding Dealin because the Alliance was non-existant back then) and they even worked together with them during the Northrend Campaign after they had assaulted an Alliance army in the back. Then they spared them again after Garrosh racist world-conquering campaign.
And still Saurfang fell for Sylvanas lies’. It has never been the Alliance that started a War and it has always been the Horde that was at the start of any war on Azeroth.
There is no evidence of a “selective” afterlife either, so why would being a warrior/honourable matter? I’m just saying that for most, the afterlife is too uncertain to lust for, and the little interaction most people have had with spirits from the afterlife has given them a bad impression of it, which results in most people wishing to stay alive (or undead) for as long as possible. Therefore,survival is key.
But there is evidence that Tauren and Orcs believe that they know what will happen with their souls after their death. That’s what we are talking about. It actually doesn’t matter in the least if they are right or not, if we are speaking about their motivations.
Or you could argue the other way around: By forsaking honor, you are daming yourself to eternal suffering, instrad of the peaceful communion a warrior deserves after his death. You traded a few years of earthly pleasures for an eternity of uncertainty and possibly suffering.
We’re talking about religion here. People believed this stuff in real live, where they didn’t have a shred of evidence. It’s really not hard to believe that they would believe it in a world where their local shaman can call up their grandmother and ask her how it is to be dead, and what kinds of people the ancesteors would reject.
And since you brought that up, what about Greymane’s unprovoked attack on the Horde fleet outside Stormheim during a time of relative peace and when the two factions were working together against a common foe? Spare me the “Alliance never does anything wrong”-speech, it is outdated and wrong.
Again, you are narrowing the Horde down to two-three races. Just because the Tauren and the Orcs might believe one thing and value honour before anything else does not mean the other races wants the same.
No, I am talking about what Saurfang and his culture believe. If he thinks this is true, it makes sense that he doesn’t lead his people farther away from honor for survival, doesn’t it?
“Unprovoked”. Sylvanas invaded his Kingdom, blighted his lands, forced his people to leave their home’s and killed his son.
Yes, very “unprovoked”. Just because she became Warchief does not absolve her from any crime she had commited before that. So, no, Genn had all the right reasons to never trust her and apparently it was for the better in this case.
And I never said the Alliance does no wrong, but I am saying that its never the Alliance that start a all out war based on paranoia.
And what about the fact that Sylvanas wanted to alienate Odin? What about the fact that if she suceeded then Odin would get a mood and not help us? Greymane prevented Sylvanas from dooming the world that day.
What about Sylvanas’ unprovoked attack on Gilneas? They were a neutral state and all of a sudden Sylvanas started throwing blight left and right (betraying her warchief who forbid her from doing that), committed a genocide and murdered Genn’s son?
But that’s just a weak argument. Does that mean that everyone is free to attack whoever they want based on what they’ve done in the past, despite whatever consequences it might lead to today (in this case, an all-out faction war in the middle of a Legion invasion).
I am not saying Sylvanas’ attack on Gilneas was justified, but just that an attack on her during the Legion invasion was unprovoked. Of course Greymane had his reasons to do so, but it was still the wrong time and would have launched a new war in the middle of it all. So yes, in that sense it was indeed “unprovoked”.
And Keepers have a bad habit of considering living races of Azeroth… Not exactly worthy.
If Sylvanas succeeded, she would alienate Odin and the Legion would wipe us out without his aid. This is my opinion on that. Sylvanas was incredibly shortsighted and didn’t consider OBVIOUS consequences.
I won’t be here to argue any further, but all the differing views in here proved my answer to the original post: we see and value things differently and have a different opinion of what might happen in the future. All in all, I really hope they don’t turn Sylvanas into Garrosh 2.0 and that they finally show her true motivation, and I also know that a civil war at this time would be one of the worst things that could happen to the Horde, so no matter how much you hate Sylvanas, having Saurfang rebel against her leadership is most likely not a good idea right now.
Any source for that statement? Or is it just your feelings? She was next to Saurfang when Malfurion was down. She could at least stay there to make sure he will kill Malfurion. And if he would say no, can’t do it, she could do it herself. Wouldn’t take more than 1 minute. And if you wanna spin it that this was a test for Saurfang’s loyalty (or more plainly put how much can he take of her mockery of his principles) she should have stayed there and see the results herself.
It was a very dumb move on her part not to finish the job. And also throwing a hissy fit and blazing a joint.
I hope we get to end her. Don’t care if it’s SoO 2.0. I want my orc warrior to hammer the final nail in her coffin. My level 2 Undead Rogue, probably would hate that idea.
You’re trying to defend poorly consistent lore in diferent medias.
For example, Saurfang gets angry at Sylvana because she burns Teldrassil, saying “this has no honor, now they’ll come for us, all of them!”. Yet in the books he agreed with the attack and made the plans. Did he expect the Alliance to just accept the Horde conquering Kalimdor without a retaliation? Makes no sense…
