This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Could You Forgive Arthas?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Monday
Knuckles, every single one of those good things was canceled by turning those same people into Scourge a short time later.
(Note, however, that I will forgive anyone. I might not like them or even want to see them again, but I feel that nobody deserves eternal torment.)
Post by
Skreeran
I feel that nobody deserves eternal torment.While my penchant for forgiveness does not run as far as yours, I think we can agree on the above.
Just doesn't seem right for a person to receive infinite punishment for a finite crime.
Of course, we don't know who is in charge of Warcraft's afterlife. They might not care about the morality of it.
Post by
Rankkor
I feel that nobody deserves eternal torment.While my penchant for forgiveness does not run as far as yours, I think we can agree on the above.
Just doesn't seem right for a person to receive infinite punishment for a finite crime.
Of course, we don't know who is in charge of Warcraft's afterlife. They might not care about the morality of it.
I could think of a few exceptions.
Gul'dan and Blackmoore deserve every bit of suffering they can get. Infinite and beyond.
Post by
H3Knuckles
Knuckles, every single one of those good things was canceled by turning those same people into Scourge a short time later.
Oh for sure. I wasn't listing them as reasons he should be forgiven, just pointing out that when he was still Prince Arthas he was a competent do-gooder in War3. I just felt that Adams' last post was going a bit far.
I
preferred
Arthas as the hero turned villain, who may have been manipulated into choosing the darkness, but
chose
it himself, and reveled in it. The sarcastic, dry-witted, vengeful warlord who taunted the Lightbringer himself and set Sylvanas' start of darkness in motion. I just feel like it wasn't until the books and WotLK that they turned his living persona from a brash but competent hero into an embarrassment and his undeath into a generically villainous, growling-bass voiced benchwarmer, and therefor like to point out the difference between the two production eras.
No, I think Arthas was beyond redemption. I don't want to start witnessing or anything, but I believe that there is no crime that cannot eventually be atoned for (if not in this life than in the next) as long as your heart is in the right place, but that some people make choices that lead them to lose that capacity for good-will and penitence not because of what they did, but who they become. I think Arthas had more than enough free will all along to retain that, but he didn't. He cut it out of himself. He may have held back the Scourge waiting for others to kill him but I don't believe he could have reformed in this life or the next.
Post by
Monday
Ah, I see what you mean, and I fully agree.
Post by
Lordplatypus
Arthas, by no means was a total monster.
The only true unforgivable beings without any real remorse in their hearts were madmen like illidan or just heartless cold monsters like slyvannas.
Just about every other character in warcraft has their redeeming traits. Illidan only has his love for tyrande, which borders on stalker vibes and slyvannas, she's unforgivable plain and simple.
Grom fought for what he believed, he didn't even surender against a god.
Garrosh still wants the best for his people.
Deathwing only wanted relief from his eternal torment, before his fall, he was even a hero.
Hell, even Kael Jaedan was probably a better person before his corruption.''
Sargeras fought the chaos for far longer than any other hero before falling.
Everyone has their redeeming traits other than those two.
Post by
Adamsm
Not to me; there is nothing worth redeeming in Arthas.
Post by
Aimsyr
Arthas, by no means was a total monster.
The only true unforgivable beings without any real remorse in their hearts were madmen like illidan or just heartless cold monsters like slyvannas.
Just about every other character in warcraft has their redeeming traits. Illidan only has his love for tyrande, which borders on stalker vibes and slyvannas, she's unforgivable plain and simple.
Grom fought for what he believed, he didn't even surender against a god.
Garrosh still wants the best for his people.
Deathwing only wanted relief from his eternal torment, before his fall, he was even a hero.
Hell, even Kael Jaedan was probably a better person before his corruption.''
Sargeras fought the chaos for far longer than any other hero before falling.
Everyone has their redeeming traits other than those two.
From this post I'd sooner be inclined to feel sorry for any other villain you listed than Arthas, whom you listed zero
redeeming traits
for.
Seeing as you brought up Sylvanas, I fail to see how Arthas is any better than her. Sure, villains may have their redeeming features, but those features count for nothing when they go on to butcher thousands of innocents
of their own free will.
Sylvanas fought Arthas every step of the way to defend her people, in life, before being tortured and eventually killed by him. Then he turned her into a banshee, to make her suffer even further. Arthas did all this willingly, for while he lacked a soul, he still had his free will and clearly enjoyed every aspect of her destruction.
Sure Sylvanas has in essence become a 'lich queen,' but like Arthas she started off defending her people. Does that excuse her for the crimes she committed in undeath, of her own free will? Of course not! Just like how the good things Arthas did before he turned evil, like fighting to save his own people, were undone by him coming back, butchering them and raising them as undead.
As for some of the others you listed, namely Kil'Jaeden and Sargeras, assuming the former was a good person before his corruption does not excuse his own crimes - such as being responsible for the creation of the Lich King - and Sargeras? Really? He created the
Burning Legion.
You know, the same Legion that goes about the galaxy burning and consuming entire worlds? It'd take a hell of a lot of
redeeming traits
to compensate for that
slight
issue.
Post by
Lordplatypus
What i'm saying is, there's no such thing as a total monster (Excluding the two i pointed out).
Arthas was always doing what he thought was best for his kingdom. He sees the scourge as his "People" now, instead of the people or lordaeron, when he got taken over, and even so, he cared for his troops, feeling regret when he had to release some that were damaged in quel thalas and being notably shocked when he couldn't find his "subjects" Anub'arak and the other nerubians were seperated from under the ancient city.
Slyvannas on the other hand, had always treated people she was in command of no better than tools. either arrows or a wall.
Post by
Skreeran
What i'm saying is, there's no such thing as a total monster (Excluding the two i pointed out).
Arthas was always doing what he thought was best for his kingdom. He sees the scourge as his "People" now, instead of the people or lordaeron, when he got taken over, and even so, he cared for his troops, feeling regret when he had to release some that were damaged in quel thalas and being notably shocked when he couldn't find his "subjects" Anub'arak and the other nerubians were seperated from under the ancient city.
Slyvannas on the other hand, had always treated people she was in command of no better than tools. either arrows or a wall. Umm. No.
Just.
No.
Post by
Rankkor
Arthas, by no means was a total monster.
The only true unforgivable beings without any real remorse in their hearts were madmen like illidan or just heartless cold monsters like slyvannas.
Dude, how many times do we have to repeat this?
HE KILLED PEOPLE, ON PURPOSE, WITHOUT MIND-CONTROL.
It doesn't matter if he did what he "believed to be the best" it was not the best. He butchered his entire kingdom, murdered his father, screwed over his own men for revenge, and led a purge against every single civilian in Lordaeron.
Not even Sylvannas has gone that far.
Just about every other character in warcraft has their redeeming traits. Illidan only has his love for tyrande, which borders on stalker vibes and slyvannas, she's unforgivable plain and simple.
Right, because Sylvannas keeping her word and allowing the alliance forces besieging her land in Silverpine to walk away unharmed was in no way at all a redeeming trait. Not at all.
Grom fought for what he believed, he didn't even surender against a god.
What he believed was wrong. He willingly allowed himself and his clan to be slaves to Satan and butchered more draenei than any other orc alive. The main reason he gets some redemption is because he actually showed remorse and regret for his actions, and later atoned for his crimes against his people by freeing them of the blood curse. This still doesn't redeems him for what he did against the draenei.
Garrosh still wants the best for his people.
This is no longer the case, as enforcing conscription on every civilian, enforcing a police state, establishing Thought Police to kidnap and disappear any dissidents, and treating every single non-orc as worse than dirt, means he's the absolute most worst leader ever to have been placed in command of the horde since the second war.
Deathwing only wanted relief from his eternal torment, before his fall, he was even a hero.
Hell, even Kael Jaedan was probably a better person before his corruption.''
No he was not, first off its Kil'Jaeden, please learn to spell it right, and second of all, Sargeras offered him power in exchange of selling out his people, and Kil'jaeden gladly accepted, he's since then led uncountable purges against billions of worlds, killing what has to be trillions of innocent lives in the service of the equivalent of Satan in this universe.
Sargeras fought the chaos for far longer than any other hero before falling.
He then proceeded to piss all over what he did and what the pantheon did, and has done more damage, and more evil than anyone else in the setting except the Old Gods.
Everyone has their redeeming traits other than those two.
If you seriously see redeeming traits in KIL'JAEDEN but not Sylvannas you have a problem. Sylvannas has shown mercy (silverpine storyline) and also wants what is best for her people (an excuse that, says you, works for arthas, and even grom, but not her, for some reason)
What i'm saying is, there's no such thing as a total monster (Excluding the two i pointed out).
So, says you, people like Blackmoore and Gul'dan are better than Sylvannas and Illidan? WTF?
One was a rapist, drunkard, wife-beater, traitor to his own kingdom, slaver, treating living things are animals, secretly plotting to murder his king, and trying to bring doom to the people who served under his command.
The other one was a mass-murderer, who used black magic to turn children into brainwashed soldiers devoid of free will, who then proceeded to commit genocide, infanticide, regicide, mind-control, brainwashing, human sacrifices, tore down his own planet to raise a mountain and name it after himself, betrayed his own people not once not twice but TRICE in a row, and did all of the above willingly, with a big effing smile from ear to ear. Not once did he showed regret for anything, not once did he showed mercy to anyone, not once did he did ANYTHING WHATSOEVER that could be considered selfless or heroic, or just not evil.
And for some reason you think these 2 are better than Illidan and Sylvannas.
There's something wrong with your line of thought.
Arthas was always doing what he thought was best for his kingdom.
So did Sylvannas, twice, first for quel'thalas, then for her adopted people. Apparently this doesn't counts for her, but it counts for him.
He sees the scourge as his "People" now, instead of the people or lordaeron
So does Sylvannas, who now sees the forsaken as her people rather than the elves of silvermoon. Apparently this counts for him but not her.
when he got taken over
He wasnt. He never was brainwashed, all his actions were of his own doing. It was sylvannas who was taken over, but apparently this doesn't count for her, just him.
and even so, he cared for his troops
This is why he led them to a cold barren wasteland to die just to sate his own need of revenge right? he has a weird way of showing affection.
feeling regret when he had to release some that were damaged in quel thalas
now you're making things up, Arthas has never ever shown regret for anything in his life. Not even when he beheaded his own dad.
and being notably shocked when he couldn't find his "subjects" Anub'arak and the other nerubians were seperated from under the ancient city.
He was scared pissless to have to face Illidan alone. Apparently this counts for him but not for Sylvannas.
Slyvannas on the other hand, had always treated people she was in command of no better than tools. either arrows or a wall.
So has arthas, and many others, but apparently, this only counts for her, not him.
Post by
Adamsm
Arthas was always doing what he thought was best for his kingdom. He sees the scourge as his "People" now, instead of the people or lordaeron, when he got taken over, and even so, he cared for his troops, feeling regret when he had to release some that were damaged in quel thalas and being notably shocked when he couldn't find his "subjects" Anub'arak and the other nerubians were seperated from under the ancient city.Uh huh....right up till Wrath, when he was completely fine sending the Scourge forces to be shattered by the combined might of the Alliance and Horde, laughing at the games the Shadow Vault was playing with his champions, setting everyone's favorite troll up to fail in Zul'Drak, and watching as the Scourge broke against the power of the Avatar of Freya....oh yeah, he truly cared about his people.
Post by
Rankkor
Arthas was always doing what he thought was best for his kingdom. He sees the scourge as his "People" now, instead of the people or lordaeron, when he got taken over, and even so, he cared for his troops, feeling regret when he had to release some that were damaged in quel thalas and being notably shocked when he couldn't find his "subjects" Anub'arak and the other nerubians were seperated from under the ancient city.Uh huh....right up till Wrath, when he was completely fine sending the Scourge forces to be shattered by the combined might of the Alliance and Horde, laughing at the games the Shadow Vault was playing with his champions, setting everyone's favorite troll up to fail in Zul'Drak, and watching as the Scourge broke against the power of the Avatar of Freya....oh yeah, he truly cared about his people.
Not to mention willingly sacrifice every single one of his forces defending ICC just to have 10/25 new generals.
Post by
Adamsm
That too.
Post by
Lordplatypus
we all know you completely hate arthas.
Post by
Adamsm
And yet, you completely ignore the fact that the Lich King Arthas did the same things you hate Sylvanas for: Make up your frelling mind already. You can't say one is good while the other is bad when they are just copying each other.
Post by
Rankkor
we all know you completely hate arthas.
And we all know you completely hate Sylvannas, to the point that you accuse her of the same crimes Arthas commited, and say EVERY SINGLE OTHER Character in the game is not as bad as her. Even though people like Gul'dan, Blackmoore, the entirety of the Burning Legion, the entirety of the Twilight Hammer, the entirety of the scarlet crusade, the entirety of the old gods, the entirety of the shadow council, Queen Azshara, ect are far far worse.
Its one thing to hate a character, and another to let your own hatred go into overdrive. As much as I hate Varian (and now Jaina) you will not see me making the same bold accusations you do for Sylvannas and specially Illidan. Illidan in particular is laughably bad at being......... well..... bad.
He's a jerk, no doubt about it, but his actual list of villainous acts is pretty damned short compared to most actual bad guys that we've killed before. Heck, there's a rather long list of major 5man bad guys that are far worse than Illidan. Not that I felt bad about killing him, he was a big jerk, just saying your attitude of calling him a complete and unredeemable monster and that everyone else is a saint compared to him, are highly HIGHLY exaggerated.
Adamsm hates Illidan like you would not believe, yet not even him goes on the same tangent as you do when it comes to pointing the finger and accusing someone of being a monster. At worst Illidan is just a crappy character.
Post by
morginar
At worst Illidan is just a crappy character.
More like asum anti-hero in WarCraft 3 turned into !@#$y villian in WoW.
Post by
Monday
At worst Illidan is just a crappy character.
More like asum anti-hero in WarCraft 3 turned into !@#$y villian in WoW.
This ^
Same with Kael'thas.
Post by
Lordplatypus
How is kael thas an anti-hero?
I see a narcissistic magic-addicted idiot who'd sell out his own race for one drop of mana. He's shown that if he can't beat something by slinging magic and soldiers at it, he thinks it's impossible (It was fully possible to beat the undead without naga aid), just more difficult. He always took the easy path.
Illidan was willing to do anything for his beloved magic, just plain and simple. the guy sold himself out and nearly ripped azeroth apart to appease his latest source of magic.
Slyvannas outright views her people as possessions and use them, Arthas at the very least, has a bond with his followers, the greatest blows we you deal to him, other than bringing him down, was the death of Kel'Thuzad his Majordomo and really, he was a good person.
Then he got turned into a pure evul failure because WoTLk can't have morally ambiguousness when the villain we're fighting (Arthas) was probably a better person than our ally (Garrosh) who was so goddamn bloodthirsty his mindset was Kill Alliance>Kill rest of none-horde>Maybe save world if we have time.
Personally, My view is WC3>Books&Other Supplementary>Game.
The difference between Arthas and Slyvannas can be best described as between say............Lex Luthor and Norman Osborn.
Luthor actually acted well towards his underlings, treated them the best he could. But oh well, he's still a villain. He'll sacrifice them, but only if he cannot avoid it. Oh and his characterization goes from humanist who just happens to have a vendetta on superman and a ego problem to kicks puppies for the lolz
Osborn just randomly tosses them into a lab and uses them as test rats as much as he wants and barely even lets them live.
WC3 Made Slyvannas out to a selfish backstabbing $%^&*. Arthas to be a misguied hero who wants the best for his people. Illidan to be a Traitorous magic-addicted love-fuddled fool. Kaelthas to be a narcisstic magic-addict who can't understand crap. The only people who's characterization in the game weren't very good were Grom (Who had more redeeming traits than the idiot we saw in the games) and Garithos (The guy had his family murdered because he was of saving elves. ofcourse he's bitter).
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.