This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.

Sylvanas being 'evil'

Return to board index

Post by Adamsm

In the Warcraft universe, since the retcons and all the rest, there is only two 'true' evil beings/races/groups:

The Dreadlords, who, since the Draenei/Eredar retcon, are considered to be solely responsible for Sargeras fall.
This dark race of vampiric demons (also known as Dreadlords) conquered a number of populated worlds by possessing their inhabitants and turning them to the shadow. The nefarious, scheming Dreadlords turned whole nations against one another by manipulating them into unthinking hatred and mistrust. Sargeras defeated the Nathrezim easily, but their corruption affected him deeply.

The Old Gods..... which, I don't consider pure evil, but most do; those giant tentacled monsters who enjoy playing games and want to reduce the world back to nothing but chaos and destruction.

Post by HiVolt

Sylvanas is indeed very evil. And so are the Forsaken as well.

I'll admit I was skimming through the page again to see if there was anything else I could touch on before finishing this post, and I think this one is absolute bull#$%^.

Sylvanas being evil, that I can deal with; after all, she's had a pretty f***ed-up life and unlife up until this point, so I think that a lot of her bitterness towards the living is at least a little justified.

At the same time, if it could be concluded, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that she was 100% evil, how is it at all logical to think that, by extension, the entirety of her race (the Forsaken) are all evil as well? Could you honestly say that all of the Tauren are evil simply because of the Grimtotem Tribe?

Oh yeah, then the Humans are 100% evil for having, to name a couple, Kel'Thazud and Arthas. And let's not forget the Night Elves; they're all unforgivably evil because of Illidan. Or the Draenei for the Eredar.

See? Doesn't make much sense, does it?

Well, people often use the leaders of a faction as an example for the perfect representation of the individuals in that faction. That being said, to some people it would be Sylvanas = evil, therefore Forsaken = evil.

Take Thrall as another example. Thrall = Good, therefore Orcs = Good, or Horde = Good.

For the people who are able to see past a faction leader's qualities in relation to their faction, they most often take other examples, which differ from the faction leader, in the form of a high-ranking individual. This is where the lines of morality blur. Some people choose to ignore this, or they choose not to. But all in all, it's still a matter of opinion, because it's referring to something that is not concrete and equal for everyone (morality).

Post by 229054

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by 469682

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by HiVolt

Well, people often use the leaders of a faction as an example for the perfect representation of the individuals in that faction. That being said, to some people it would be Sylvanas = evil, therefore Forsaken = evil.
Don't you find it a little close minded?

Well naturally; people will look at it like that and, thus, refuse to believe that anything beyond it is false.
Exactly. I never said it wasn't closed-minded of people to do so, just that it is how many people make their judgments. On the other side of the argument, a person arguing against the evil or good of a faction might only take a single individual from the faction as an example, and claim that the faction as a whole is more like them.

Take Thrall and Garrosh for example. Anyone could say that the whole of the Horde or the Orcs are more like Thrall, while still, anyone could say that all of them are more like Garrosh, and neither of them would be wrong, but neither of them would be right either.

Generalization based upon appearance/demeanor/motive/etc. of a single individual within a given group is very common when weighing the overall morality of that group as a whole.

What WoW really does right is the shades of gray on the morality scale for both sides of the Alliance/Horde conflict. On topic, you could look at the Banshee Queen and debate all you want, but in essence, she's really not truly evil. That's how Blizzard has set things up.

This is one of the things that makes me love Warcraft. Nothing is ever as it seems in terms of being "good" or "evil". It's a very good representation of actual morality.

Post by 451455

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by Adamsm

Its not like the Forsaken have ever done anything good.

Not now, not ever.Killing the Dreadlord controlled forces of Lordaeron wasn't a good thing?

Post by 451455

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by Adamsm

Its not like the Forsaken have ever done anything good.

Not now, not ever.Killing the Dreadlord controlled forces of Lordaeron wasn't a good thing?

No, they did that alongside the humans (Which they betrayed and slaughtered).

Quite frankly, that event was like trading one evil for another.

But, had they left the Dreadlords in control of Lordaeron forces, wouldn't that have just made it so that the Scarlet Crusade which was starting up, Lordaeron, and a few other areas under the control of vampire demons.... that's not a good thing after all. And let's be honest, the humans wanted to kill the Forsaken as well.

Post by 229054

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by HiVolt

Its not like the Forsaken have ever done anything good.

Not now, not ever.

Disregarding the idea that a people can change is disregarding all of the historical evidence that confirms it will inevitably happen.

Post by 229054

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by HiVolt

Just wondering, anyone would like to add anything to my "Forsaken Analysis" above?

It's very good. I would love to see it in blog article format :D

Post by 451455

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by 229054

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by HiVolt

Really? No idea how I could do that though.

But its really my opinion, not sure if its fit for a blog.

All it would take is a little fleshing out, I think. Maybe go more into the nature of what the Forsaken have done since they've become what they are, to reinforce the main points.

Also, I was referring to it being a blog article on The Lore Center, if you were wondering.

Post by 229054

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by taurenmoo812

You know I've got to say this, since its I've thought it so often before:

The reason why so many in the alliance hate the forsaken is because there bear a reflection of themselves. A forsaken is basicly a human who has had his morality striped away by undeath, and his mind twisted by it. But at his core he is still human, and so the things they do bear the same relavence to humans in Azeroth.
And if you deny this, taking one look at the scarlet crusade proves otherwise.

Post by 229054

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by taurenmoo812

I don't think so. Its more like "faction pride", you'd feel better if your faction is right in some way, right? The same way the "end of the true horde" annoys a horde "addict" such as you taurenmoo.

If you have to "attack" someone on the horde, then the Forsaken are the obvious choice. After all, Orcs, Trolls and Tauren are Orcs, Trolls and Tauren and Sunwell Plateau happened.

Hey I'm kinda in agreeance with Adam on the forsaken for most of it, I don't like the image they make for the horde. I'm simply adding, in a lore based term, what I think many humans might think when they think of the forsaken, because they are basicly them, without any morality, or pulse.

Post Reply