WoW Petopia Community

What I mean is, whether you like it or not, you have to deal with it.

Oh yeah, I knew that already. *Laughs* It's not going to change, and I don't even really think it needs to. If that's the direction they want to push Sylvanas in, into some one who doesn't care about the ramifications of her actions, and who doesn't care what she does or who it hurts, then go for it.

That's who Sylvanas is though. I can't see her not being the type to stop and consider any principles before making a choice. She does what she has to do, no qualms or strings attached.

Vephriel wrote:That's who Sylvanas is though. I can't see her not being the type to stop and consider any principles before making a choice. She does what she has to do, no qualms or strings attached.

^
This.

It's very true to character.

And it means that players can still roll as undead. Win-win.

Vephriel wrote:That's who Sylvanas is though. I can't see her not being the type to stop and consider any principles before making a choice. She does what she has to do, no qualms or strings attached.

^ This.

She'll do what she has to, to make sure her people survive.

Sylvanas is a very cunning leader though. She isn't stupid. She know's, first hand, what happens when you try to bind some one against their will. Which is why I am pretty sure she is just raising ghouls, and not forsaken. She still get's her army, but she doesn't have to worry about it coming back to bite her.

Palladiamorsdeus wrote:Sylvanas is a very cunning leader though. She isn't stupid. She know's, first hand, what happens when you try to bind some one against their will. Which is why I am pretty sure she is just raising ghouls, and not forsaken. She still get's her army, but she doesn't have to worry about it coming back to bite her.

Again I find it strange that you equate procreation with the creation of an army. Sylvanas is using the power of a Val'kyr to create new Forsaken because her people cannot have children. Any DK can create ghouls, that's nothing special and Garrosh would not be horrified by the simple raising of the dead. He's horrified, presumably, because she is raising sentient undead.

Of course part of her concern will be military matters, the Forsaken do need soldiers, but the Forsaken do not employ Scourge as rank and file troops.

Lady Sylvanas Windrunner: "Warchief, without these new Forsaken my people would die out...Our hold upon Gilneas and northern Lordaeron would crumble"

It isn't ABOUT procreation. It's about them being able to hold onto the territory they've gained now that they are actively at war. There was no war before, or rather there was no war on their doorstep, so they weren't in a ton of danger. Now they are, and now in order to hold what they have, and to further the war front, they HAVE to make new undead. And unfortunately upon reread, she IS raising new forsaken , sinking it to an even deeper low.

So I am having a hard time understanding how you DON'T see how it isn't related to war. If they weren't dying due to the war, they wouldn't HAVE to create new Forsaken. It isn't like they die of old age or disease.

Would a undead person who was affected by the worgen curse in life still be affected in unlife?

cowmuflage wrote:Would a undead person who was affected by the worgen curse in life still be affected in unlife?

Probably, unless the two conditions clash. Undead Worgen would be great!

>.>

/rolls undead worgen

That is freaking awesome.

As Veph said way back at the start of this thread, I'll follow Sylvanas to the gates of hell and back. She's always been my favorite and given the choice between her and Garrosh, she wins hands down. Now, as I said before, the scenario being played out does indeed look like a civil war brewing within the alliance ranks. And this makes for possibly the most epic storyline Blizz has ever thought of and I am convinced it will end with the triumphant return of Thrall. Man o man, I am sooooo glad to be Horde. Hell, if I could I'd go help Sylvanas raise more dead into the fold. Guess I can only do my part by MAKING more people dead for her.

^ Agrees with Vespias, Sylvanus all the way...

Hmm.. while I appreciate what they are doing with the story, my Alliance blood boils at the thought of what she is doing.. Lich Lady indeed.

Methinks my troll might be headed for a gnomish accident...

I love the discussion, and would like to add my two cents.

Morality is a construct of society, and we must not forget a couple of things...

1. That this is a fantasy world with very different morality than the ones we are used to (or claim to follow, but our actions speak otherwise.)
I mean seriously Warlocks draining souls? How is this ok or even tolerated? Why isn't the Argent Dawn hunting them down instead of giving them a great honor by being a part of the Coliseum Battles?

2. Since it is a social construct, the Forsaken would have a very different moral compass than that of the orcs, humans, etc
(Take a look at the different nations around the world with their very different ethical codes)
We might not agree with some of the morality or ethics that other countries around the world hold, but it is still their beliefs... Does it make theirs wrong on any given disagreement of morality or ethics? Maybe yes, maybe no.


Now, as for the reason that the Orcs would disagree with the morality of the Undead that is obvious. They have a natural process of birth and death. Any interference with this process, (i.e. being raised as an undead) would be thought of as an abomination of the natural order. As such it could create a variety of reactions with differing levels of tolerance or intolerance.

As for the reasons behind the Undead, they see it (the raising of the dead) as a natural process, they were created in the same way. (maybe a bit different, plague vs. crazy spell) And in the same way they would fight any interference with this as the orcs would.

Now the question I have is: Which one is right?

From the answers so far, many people would say that the undead are wrong and the Orcs are right.

I would however state this: There is not enough information to come to any conclusion.

I would want a few questions answered to come to a reasonable conclusion.
Do these undead retain their minds and personality?
Are they being controlled or manipulated at all?
Did they accept the transformation like one accepts a resurrection?

And regardless of the answers to these questions, I have to say one thing, the first casualty of War is the Truth.
One will do horrible things, despicable things in the name of some ideal, to win a battle or a war, and even deluding their citizens into believing what they are doing is right. (So they set their own morality and ethics aside and believe what their leader says)
Just look at history: WWI, WWII, Vietnam, the Korean War, Desert Storm, the Iraq War..... etc, etc.
(use of civilian transports to transport weapons without their knowledge, firebombing civilians, use of a nuclear weapon on civilians, attacking hostage taking combatants with overwhelming firepower killing everyone involved, for just a few examples)

In a true conflict, especially one based on the survival of one or more of the people in the conflict, it soon becomes victory "by any and all means" and morality and ethics goes out the window.

I would love to hear what you guys have to say, thanks for reading.

(edited with another thought instead of double posting)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ VERY GOOD POINT.

But I have one more question about the situation (note that I am not against the raising, I think it's best for the fate of the Forsaken population) but... Couldn't she just re-raise the fallen Forsaken?

Ya know, I always wondered that myself.....

I think that's because their bodies are too damaged. I mean, Arthas re-raised Anub'Arak, even after we "freed" him in AN.