One of the biggest questions I have with the story of the Horde in Battle for Azeroth is just how exactly Sylvanas' story is not going to mirror Garrosh's.
Very recently - only two expansions have passed through since - the Horde rose up against its own Warchief and toppled his regime. Garrosh had pushed war against the Alliance into overdrive, and he had transformed the Horde into an authoritarian regime in which certain races were privileged over others. On top of that, his pursuit of greater and greater power and weapons to use against his foes (external and internal) pushed the Horde into rebellion. Vol'jin, one of their most respected leaders, was nearly assassinated, but his survival allowed him to organize the other leaders against Garrosh, and between the Alliance and the Darkspear Rebellion, Garrosh could not hold onto his seat.
Yet in many ways, Garrosh was a more traditional Warchief. If you were willing to live the brutal, fascistic way that he idealized, that Horde was the one for you.
Sylvanas seems to be far less ideological, but she is even more ruthless than Garrosh was. While he lost it near the end, Garrosh did show some restraint, or at least try to. The story of Stonetalon Mountains shows that while he wanted global conquest, he was primarily interested in attacking military targets. Sylvanas seems not to consider anyone a civilian, or perhaps instead considers civilians to be targets for acts of terror and demoralization.
Burning Teldrassil was either a rash decision she made in the moment after Delaryn got under her skin, or it was a calculated attempt to use the deaths of thousands of innocent people to scare the Alliance into submission (or at least over-extension.)
While many Horde members seemed to feel like they were standing up to a domineering Alliance, it's clear that as this war has been waged, confidence in the Horde's honor has been faltering. First Saurfang refused to follow Sylvanas from Undercity, and now...
SPOILERS AHOY
Now Baine has acted in brazen defiance of her, bringing Derek Proudmoore to Jaina. Baine has been arrested, and Saurfang is on the run.
As a side note, I wish that we had a good dissenting Forsaken character. The way I see it is that, at least among old-school Forsaken who woke up with Sylvanas (I count my Rogue as one, roughly) from the dominance of the Scourge, free will is a crucial value to them as a race. They are, in fact, defined by their free will that had been robbed from them when they were under the influence of the Lich King.
Sure, you might use the blight as a weapon, and you might kill anyone who could pose a threat to you, but everyone has a right to decide how they want to live, even the undead. It's the core principle that makes them different from roving zombies and ghouls.
So when Sylvanas attempts to domineer Derek, or indeed anyone else, as she's been doing pretty much since Cataclysm, she is violating the very principle upon which the culture she created is built.
My Undead Rogue has a special dagger ready for her, when the time is right.
Anyway, the point is that the Horde is at the verge of fracturing, if it hasn't already. This, despite the fact that they should all be rallied around the Zandalari after the Alliance's attack on Dazar'alor.
Again, it seems that, by contrast, the Alliance is getting along just fine.
And of course, this frustrates me.
I get that the Horde has always existed in a more morally grey area than the Alliance, given the history of the Orcs, the Forsaken, and the very structure of the Horde in the first place. But while I think the individual pieces of this story are probably more interesting than the one we got in Mists of Pandaria (though I really hope Nathanos turns on Sylvanas at some point, because again I want a Forsaken character who cares about free will) the fact is that it's once again a bunch of intrigue and, well, stuff, while the Alliance is so conflict free that we don't really have to check in on anyone.
After having a whole Horde civil war in Mists, I don't understand why Blizzard wasn't eager to do some kind of internal conflict in the Alliance. Instead, it seems as if the edges have been smoothed - Genn seems to be more in control of himself than ever, Jaina has basically been vindicated.
Tyrande and Malfurion are, to be fair, defying Anduin in their battles in Darkshore, but one never gets the sense that Anduin has to fear for his own safety with them - what conflicts exist within the Alliance are fights among friends, not potentially lethal enemies.
Now, I've found Jaina's journey over the course of this expansion really compelling, and again I want to say that the various moving parts in this plot are ones I find more interesting than the Mists one. But if Blizzard isn't just repeating itself, I really don't see how they could possibly resolve this.
It seems obvious that at some point we're going to remove Sylvanas from power.
The only way I could see them getting around this is if they show that N'zoth has actually been influencing her all along. But that would feel like a cop-out.
I'm really interested in seeing where the story goes, but I have trouble believing that they're going to come up with something all that different from what we got at the end of Mists of Pandaria.
No comments:
Post a Comment