"Everything is about honor when it comes to the Horde."

Argent Dawn
1 2 3 7 Next
In case you were hoping for something different than SoO 2.0, it seems you will be disappointed, as the latest Polygon interview all but confirms that Sylvanas will be going down.

https://www.polygon.com/platform/amp/interviews/2018/11/7/18069554/world-of-warcraft-battle-for-azeroth-interview-blizzcon-2018

“It’s challenging for sure,” said Cobo. “but I think that, ultimately, we have to look at what’s at the core of the faction [...] Everything is about honor when it comes to the Horde, and as the story unfolds and you start to learn about the motivations behind Saurfang, or the motivations behind Sylvanas and why she’s doing what she’s doing, it starts to create a perspective around, ‘Is that the kind of person that I want to follow?

How do you feel about Blizzard doubling-down on the concept of "honor"? Do you agree that the opposite of honorable is evil? How will forsaken roleplayers (and other "evil" indivuals) justify their characters being in a faction who solely revolves around honor?

I can't imagine anyone being happy with this story as it tries to streamline a faction consisting of different cultures and values, especially if it is to revolve around a vague belief like "honor".
07/11/2018 18:40Posted by Moburon
How do you feel about Blizzard doubling-down on the concept of "honor"?


Fine, although I would've preferred they took the story a different direction. The Horde's already gone down this road. On the face of it, this is a little too similar.

07/11/2018 18:40Posted by Moburon
Do you agree that the opposite of honorable is evil?


Nah. The opposite of honour, at least in the storytellers' eyes, seems to be ruthless pragmatism where the ends justify the means. Good characters, like people, aren't solidly one or the other, they're somewhere on a spectrum between the two.
I think maybe Americans just don't have a good grasp on traditional definitions of 'honour'.

Modern honour cultures tend to be Latin America and the Middle East, while East Asia and Europe have strong historical examples to draw on for what "honour" means, but for American creators it's probably hard to get a grasp on what exactly it should mean when your primary exposure is popculture interpretations of foreign culture and history. See: Klingons as "Space Vikings".

I guess my point is that the Horde isn't honourable because the writers (who are overwhelmingly Americans) don't know what they're doing with it.

As for SoO2, I'm shocked. Shocked that the thing I predicted over a year ago is still just as predictable.
I too remember the long proud tradition of honour among the blood elves.

thinkingemoji
I was meant to post this in another thread but i'll post it here instead.

The problem is there's no fluff. There's no development. It started with so much promise.

"Yo Saurfang, you know just as well as I that the Alliance will attack us eventually. We may as well get the first dig in and keep that momentum going!"

And this was somewhat supported, on one hand you have Genn/Rogers attacking the Forsaken in Legion and on the other you have Vareesa firmly under the belief blood elves need 'redemption'. You can -buy- the idea that the Alliance will inevitably begin to pester the Horde over past wounds. You could almost believe their line of "we're going to show you why each Horde race has a part in this fight."

Yet the entire thing !@#$ the bed and started sprouting the exact same problems as Garrosh's war: Blizzard's fascination with black and white morality, lawful stupidity pitted against dick-dastardly evil. Once again the Horde has become a foil for the Alliance to be just and overbearing, at the expense of another host of characters being killed off. From major figures (inc Sylvannas) to minor (the dark rangers who dished out quests in Vengeance landing back in wrath).

Once again you can take a step back, look at the bigger picture and think "the only reason these races are here and involved is because of Blizzard's arbitrary assertion of the two factions and/or 'honour'."

And the worst part is is Blizzard clearly disregard consistency, both with their writing and with what they're saying about their story. We've gone from "trust us and be patient, it's morally gray" to "Sylvannas is evil".

TL;DR - I'm not looking forwards to Siege of Orgrimmar 2.0, i'm pretty sick of the Horde and Horde characters becoming the filler-boss between the world ending threats.
Despite everything I agree with Blizz on one thing:

You wanna be the bad guy and follow Sylvanas? Get ready to pay the price in the end.

We know Sylvanas will fall and the Horde will go back to what it was. It's inevitable.

And despite Blizz being the ones that brought this mess to us, I'm glad they're gonna fix it up. I didn't chose this faction to be a bad guy and feel like crap.
Everything is about honor when it comes to the horde but also have to keep doing rebellions cause horde is dishonorable.

Saurfang or Thrall or someone (orc) should've been made warchief in Legion. Making Sylvanas warchief both removed what made her char good (shady qt goth druggie in sewers), and removes what made warchief concept good (powerful orcish mud bulls) sry almost off topic

In practise it seems to me alliance is more all about honor than horde

07/11/2018 19:21Posted by Uruk
You wanna be the bad guy and follow Sylvanas? Get ready to pay the price in the end.


No, I want to be the nuanced guy and follow a morally grey Sylvanas that we were promised and not have to betray my warchief again just cause blizzard is !@#$ at writing.

However between current stupid evil Sylvanas and the mindnumbingly boring coward Saurfang I'll still go with retard evil Sylvanas
07/11/2018 19:21Posted by Uruk
e know Sylvanas will fall and the Horde will go back to what it was. It's inevitable.


And this plays into the stagnation of the story. Every time the Horde takes a step out of its defined circle, in any direction it soon gets slapped back into that ring. Garrosh starts a war to stop poverty? Nah, he becomes a mad and sadistic supremacist. Sylvannas strives to lead with pragmatism over Thrall's concept of honour? Nah. You're dead. Back in your circle. Back in your time out corner.

It's stale. It's tired. It's inconsistent. There's no growth. The Horde doesn't learn from its faults. Hell, the 'honour' angle isn't even in the original spirit of what the original world of Warcraft Horde was sold as.

The only time we've seen the Horde show genuine growth was under Garrosh, we saw Orgrimmar fortified; we saw how much of an economic powerhouse it could become (albeit at the expanse of stripping the barrens). But it was all painted in a bad light. And then we get a war chief of 'good honour' in the form of Vol'jin and there was no development.

It very much feels like a Tom and Jerry episode. Jerry is actual progression and evolution, Tom is the Horde and the Alliance is the bulldog that Tom always regrets hitting with a frying pan.
We've gone from "trust us and be patient, it's morally gray" to "Sylvannas is evil".


It's sad, isn't it? I gave them the benefit of the doubt before, as the story was imho quite nuanced, with Saurfang and Sylvanas both agreeing war was necessary, but conflicting ideals making them clash: a conflict which could be placed in the greater philosophical struggle of of brutal pragmatism and survival at any cost vs honor and valuing the means above the ends.

But then you hear directly from Blizzard "yeah no she's just evil lol" and you're left thinking how the !@#$ you managed to be optimistic about Blizzard's writing and realize assuming the worst isn't pessimism in the case of Blizzard, it's realism.

07/11/2018 19:09Posted by Elenthas
I too remember the long proud tradition of honour among the blood elves.

thinkingemoji


Let's not forget the Nightborne, whose society of backstabbing aristocrats and power-hungry magi represents perhaps the most honourable among all the elves, or the ever-honourable goblins, whose endless quest for profit brings great pride to the hearts of the Horde.
07/11/2018 19:38Posted by Moburon
Let's not forget the Nightborne, whose society of backstabbing aristocrats and power-hungry magi represents perhaps the most honourable among all the elves, or the ever-honourable goblins, whose endless quest for profit brings great pride to the hearts of the Horde.


You're not wrong. In fact lets list it out.
Orcs: Sure, but it's never really tested and when it is they fail constantly (see that other thread)
Undead: Lolno.
Tauren: Sure, but mostly it seems to be standing around.
Troll: Cannibalistic voodoo hexers who have a penchant for ambush tactics and mass slaughter. I guess that's a certain amount of honour?
Blood Elves: Nope.
Goblins: Only if you pay top dollar.
Pandaren: Noting defined, they're just sort of nice. Huojin are defined by pragmatic action too, rather than the "noble ideals" of the Alliance that attracted the tushui.
Nightborne: Nope.
Highmountain: Sure.
Mag'har: I guess. But they also want to genocide the draenei so...

There's a significant chunk - over half, even - of the Horde who don't really give a !@#$ about honour. Certainly not a as a main facet of their culture.

07/11/2018 19:29Posted by Langsley
No, I want to be the nuanced guy and follow a morally grey Sylvanas that we were promised and not have to betray my warchief again just cause blizzard is !@#$ at writing.


We were sold a lie. RIP Horde.
I find the current iteration of honour very one note. With Saurfang as poster-boy, it comes across quite 'squeaky-clean,' where other orcs have given it more character.

To Korm Blackscar, ambushing Alliance forces fighting Scourge was glorious (especially when it got everyone killed.) To Nazgrim, honour was dying for a man he knew to be a tyrant. To Doomhammer, it was backstabbing his Warchief and usurping his Horde--at least until they changed it.

Saurfang's approach is much more straight-laced; fine and dandy, but without balancing perspectives it comes across a little one dimensional.

I suppose they're trying to achieve that with Sylvanas' "... For us, there can only be victory or death," and her desperation to ensure the Horde's survival, but I'm not sure that it's working.
There's a significant chunk - over half, even - of the Horde who don't really give a !@#$ about honour. Certainly not a as a main facet of their culture.


You forget... when you join the horde you immediately assimilate into orcish culture (looks at undead in grunt armor) and start to build mud huts wherever you can...
Kinda getting tired of hearing the buzzword "honor"
I just want my Jerry bros, even a whisker would be good at this point.
07/11/2018 19:33Posted by Aerilen
And this plays into the stagnation of the story. Every time the Horde takes a step out of its defined circle, in any direction it soon gets slapped back into that ring. Garrosh starts a war to stop poverty? Nah, he becomes a mad and sadistic supremacist. Sylvannas strives to lead with pragmatism over Thrall's concept of honour? Nah. You're dead. Back in your circle. Back in your time out corner.


Garrosh could have been good. His development was a mistake imo as it could have balanced and progressed the Horde well.

Sylvanas on the other hand is too different and too radical to lead the Horde. Having the living races of the Horde follow her always felt forced imo.

You want more evolving Horde? Fine but this isn't the way to do it. There are better choices for warchief than Sylvanas.
07/11/2018 19:49Posted by Moody
Kinda getting tired of hearing the buzzword "honor"


Is something the matter, Right Honourable Moody?

ps feeling like pure !@#$ just want metzen back
07/11/2018 19:43Posted by Elenthas
07/11/2018 19:38Posted by Moburon
Let's not forget the Nightborne, whose society of backstabbing aristocrats and power-hungry magi represents perhaps the most honourable among all the elves, or the ever-honourable goblins, whose endless quest for profit brings great pride to the hearts of the Horde.


You're not wrong. In fact lets list it out.
Orcs: Sure, but it's never really tested and when it is they fail constantly (see that other thread)
Undead: Lolno.
Tauren: Sure, but mostly it seems to be standing around.
Troll: Cannibalistic voodoo hexers who have a penchant for ambush tactics and mass slaughter. I guess that's a certain amount of honour?
Blood Elves: Nope.
Goblins: Only if you pay top dollar.
Pandaren: Noting defined, they're just sort of nice. Huojin are defined by pragmatic action too, rather than the "noble ideals" of the Alliance that attracted the tushui.
Nightborne: Nope.
Highmountain: Sure.
Mag'har: I guess. But they also want to genocide the draenei so...

There's a significant chunk - over half, even - of the Horde who don't really give a !@#$ about honour. Certainly not a as a main facet of their culture.

07/11/2018 19:29Posted by Langsley
No, I want to be the nuanced guy and follow a morally grey Sylvanas that we were promised and not have to betray my warchief again just cause blizzard is !@#$ at writing.


We were sold a lie. RIP Horde.


Oh, hey, we haven't even touched upon death knights and demon hunters.

I mean, I bet the group of superpowered zombie knight who teamed up with the Lich King and happily killed red dragons and paladins for the greater good REALLY care about honour, RIGHT?

Or what about the infamous demon hunters, who accepted Illidan as their leader, a man who holds honor in the highest regard? A man who would absolutely never do something like sacrificing anything that's necessary to defeat his enemies, an example that his demon-infested followers are all too eager to follow?

THEY ABSOLUTELY BELIEVE THAT HONOR IS IMPORTANT RIGHT?

THE HORDE MEMBERS OF THE EBON BLADE AND ILLIDARI ABSOLUTELY DON'T THINK VICTORY IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN BEING HONORABLE RIGHT??

AHAHA.... AHAHAHAHAHAHHA!! ILITH QI'UOTHK SHN'MA YEH'GLU SHATH'YAR! H'IWN IILTH!!
07/11/2018 19:33Posted by Aerilen

And this plays into the stagnation of the story. Every time the Horde takes a step out of its defined circle, in any direction it soon gets slapped back into that ring. Garrosh starts a war to stop poverty? Nah, he becomes a mad and sadistic supremacist. Sylvannas strives to lead with pragmatism over Thrall's concept of honour? Nah. You're dead. Back in your circle. Back in your time out corner.

It's stale. It's tired. It's inconsistent. There's no growth. The Horde doesn't learn from its faults. Hell, the 'honour' angle isn't even in the original spirit of what the original world of Warcraft Horde was sold as.

The only time we've seen the Horde show genuine growth was under Garrosh, we saw Orgrimmar fortified; we saw how much of an economic powerhouse it could become (albeit at the expanse of stripping the barrens). But it was all painted in a bad light. And then we get a war chief of 'good honour' in the form of Vol'jin and there was no development.

It very much feels like a Tom and Jerry episode. Jerry is actual progression and evolution, Tom is the Horde and the Alliance is the bulldog that Tom always regrets hitting with a frying pan.


Same with the Alliance, really. Wanna bet Tyrande gets slapped back into her corner by some random Human because she acted so very unlike an Alliance-member...?
When this trash expansion is finally over, can we just pretend it was one big filler episode and never acknowledge it ever again?
07/11/2018 20:12Posted by Rangoor
When this trash expansion is finally over, can we just pretend it was one big filler episode and never acknowledge it ever again?


That's not very honourable of you. A truly honourable person would learn from their mistakes and not forget the past.

Dishonour to you, soldier.

p.s. honour

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum