This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Investigation Into the Blight and Its Testing
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
451455
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Rankkor
Med'an is like 15 years younger
yup,. that's true, it was orukai who said that thrall and med'an are of the same age
Post by
Adamsm
I doubt med'an as the same age as thrall, he looks a lot younger, but I do admit 100% that he's by no definiton a child, no way no how....
Med'an is like 15 years younger
Actually, he's not: Garona was pregger's with him at the end of 1st War, which would mean Thrall is only older then him by a year at most. He's 'younger' due to the Draenei blood and the magic within him; Agewynn was over 800 years old when she finally died, and she only looked a few years older then Jaina... and we should stop the off topic here.
Post by
451455
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Rankkor
I doubt med'an as the same age as thrall, he looks a lot younger, but I do admit 100% that he's by no definiton a child, no way no how....
Med'an is like 15 years younger
Actually, he's not: Garona was pregger's with him at the end of 1st War, which would mean Thrall is only older then him by a year at most. He's 'younger' due to the Draenei blood and the magic within him; Agewynn was over 800 years old when she finally died, and she only looked a few years older then Jaina... and we should stop the off topic here.
I belive there is some mistake by Blizzard here, as if Med'an and Thrall were to be close to the same age, Med'an would be nearly as old as Garona.
i got an answer to this riddle, but I'll post it on the general lore thread.
let's stop the offtopic.
I'll continue this on general section.....
Post by
Adamsm
I doubt med'an as the same age as thrall, he looks a lot younger, but I do admit 100% that he's by no definiton a child, no way no how....
Med'an is like 15 years younger
Actually, he's not: Garona was pregger's with him at the end of 1st War, which would mean Thrall is only older then him by a year at most. He's 'younger' due to the Draenei blood and the magic within him; Agewynn was over 800 years old when she finally died, and she only looked a few years older then Jaina... and we should stop the off topic here.
I belive there is some mistake by Blizzard here, as if Med'an and Thrall were to be close to the same age, Med'an would be nearly as old as Garona.
Med'an's father is Medivh, and the Guardian and Garona hooked up before the fall of Stormwind while she was serving as emissary there..... how is it a mistake, and how can he be as old as his mother, who's only roughly 20-25 at the most during the time of the Last Guardian, even with the new information about her being aged prematurely like all other orc young? Garona would now be 45-50 at the most, with her son the same age or so as Thrall.
Post by
451455
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Rankkor
let's not go more offtopic, I've posted my opinion on this matter on the general section, pls let's continue there.
pretty.-please.-
Post by
Adamsm
Well, she was the same age as Khadgar, and he was seventeen, so...
I am just saying. Thrall is like 31, and Garona is 37 (Going by how she is the same age as Khadgar). So Med'an would only be a few years younger then his mother.
I agree that she is 45-50 if you count the years she was aged prematurly, but her real age should be 37.
Your math is wrong dark.. if she had Med'an at 17, he would always be 17 years younger then her....... Also, according to that, as it's only 25-32 years total to Wrath... she was 8 when she met Medivh?
Post by
283679
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Rankkor
This is coming from the guy who spells everything wrong all the time?
english is not my language, I can write and talk spanish perfectly.
making mistakes on a foreing language is one thing, but screwing up your own language......?
Post by
451455
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Rankkor
making mistakes on a foreing language is one thing, but screwing up your own language......?
Your saying I am screwing up my own language because you can't understand the defenition of a language foreign to you.
nope I'm saying you're messing up your own language when u say that someone who's been called a "woman" can still be a child..
even when the words man and woman are not the same as male and female.
male and female denote the sex of the individual being refered to....
while man and woman are used to describe people that have (or have began to develop) marks of manhood and womanhood (such as erection, ejaculation, pubic hair and testosterone on the men, and menstruation, breasts, pubic hair and hormones on the women)
ROTLK clearly described the human victim as a Woman, and later on called her a girl.
just by using the word Woman, all connotations of being a child go out of the window, as woman and man are NEVER used to describe children.
much less pre-pubecent kids.
at best you can hear the terms "Young man"; or "young woman" but when man and woman are used ALONE, it's a clear indicator that the person being refered to, has already shown all marks of physical and mental maturity.......
Post by
278900
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Rankkor
on northrend this goes even further, as they litterealy have wintergarde and new heartglenn at their doorsteps, and while wintergarde is smaller, and weaker (the base is heavily besieged by scourge and 3/4 of the whole town is burned downm thus the defense on the outer perimeter would be minimun) they chose to go at new heartlenn (wich if u look at it you have to admit is the largest town in dragonblight, even larger than agmar's hammer, it's heavily defended not only by crusader but also by siege weapons and ballistae)
my only contradiction to this is that Wintergarde is manned by the 7th legion, who are probably the most BA soldiers in the alliance. If i had to choose between abducting some crazy zealots, or heavily trained shock troopers, i'd choose the fanatics.
exept that you missed the part of "perimeter breached".......
I did quests for wintergarde, there are several humans trapped on the burned section of the town,. cut off from reinforcements, and away from any sort of defence,
that section of the town lacks any form of protection or even a defensive perimeter, so abducting the people trapped in these abandoned sections would had been easier than going after the fanatics who have a heavily fortified base defended with calvary, infantry, and even ballistae, stuff that wintergarde simply doesn't have.......
Post by
278900
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Orranis
Another was possibly a Forsaken criminal.
The theme is that he is likely an innocent man, but they don't care.
Not saying he is innocent, but it just seems that way.
It seems to me he was actually willing. Perhaps he had been a criminal, and wanted to repent, or perhaps he just wanted to serve a cause.
Alright, so first of all, it makes no direct mention of the female's age, but called her both "woman" and "girl." That alone should be enough to refute claims that she was a child.
You can be 6 and defined as 'women' as well.
And vice-versa, though the you call a 30 year old girl a lot more than you call a 6 year old woman. (Aegwyyn called Jaina a girl, Uther called Arthas a boy, etc.). If you're going to use that logic you cannot use it as proof for one side or the other, else it is flawed logic. You bend facts to your own purposes. It's like arguing with a creationist (Besides you Hyper, if you're reading this. While I think you bend some logic to suit you in some cases, your generally all right).
And lastly, we have the Scarlet Crusade, who are living on the Forsaken’s doorstep in Tirisfal. In addition, the Forsaken have a particular hatred towards the Crusade, which hunts them fervently and frequently tortures them. It thus makes sense that captured Crusaders have the highest priority as human test subjects.
By this point in time, all those outposts where in ruins, likely.
Likely. Then it's arguable, not to mention you have made no arguments for this case. Just stating a "probable" situation that would suit your own ends. Why wouldn't they use the Scarlet Crusade? They hate them. You just say they wouldn't because then they wouldn't be as evil as you say they are. It's like saying they would kill an innocent instead of the Scourge. Not to mention any other humans would have betrayed them by not opening them back into the Alliance, so even then it might not be right, but it's justified in their eyes, and thus they cannot be evil.
Besides, we have already come to agreement children were likely killed in The Battle of Hillsbrad, doesnt
have
to be with experiments.
As it is stated, the Blight has to be adapted for each individual race. The Forsaken want it to work on dwarves, so they have to test it on Dwarves. Interestingly enough, this could also mean that it was made to function on orcs, trolls, tauren, and elves, considering that it killed everyone at the Wrathgate. This does not necessarily imply that those races were made prisoners, after all, they were able to adapt it to Vrykul with a mere blood sample, but it’s food for thought. It’s also possible that when they “perfected” the Blight, they were able to make it function on all life without necessarily testing it on every species on Azeroth.
Wow, I never thought about that. Great theroy.
In closing, let me just say that, despite the evil that the RAS and Sylvanas have done, not all Forsaken are evil. One only needs to look at Leonid Barthalomew and Trevor the Priest to see that. If they are good people, who’s to say that they are the only ones?
Make no mistake, I love those guys a ton, but they both left the Forsaken government.
How about the poor Defias who worked their ass off to rebuild Stormwind, and then got kicked out for it? That sounds like a pretty bad Government to me.
Post by
Orranis
the reason varian got trashed for his action towards med'an was because med'an didn't do anything to him and yet he was willing to kill him only for being garona's son.
No, Med'an
attacked
Varian. That knid of got on Varian's nerves
I doubt med'an as the same age as thrall, he looks a lot younger, but I do admit 100% that he's by no definiton a child, no way no how....
Med'an is like 15 years younger
so, my 4 year old daugther can be called a woman? even when she shows no signs of womanhood? (no menstruation, no hormones, no breasts, no pubic hair, and all the marks that clearly make the diference from FEMALE to WOMAN)
No, she is a female. That is why.
People do that all the time, like how when you kid could hit 10, you might start calling them 'A young women', 'your becoming a young women now', etc.
More flawed logic. It never said she was becoming a woman, was a young woman, or was becoming a young woman. It said she was a woman. I'm going to become a lawyer or a physicist, does that make me a lawyer or a physicist? No.
Post by
Orranis
My on topic point is the people in this thread are using some of the same arguments to defend Sylavanas and the Forsaken that were used to condemn Varian Wyrnn. The only difference is the Faction. Would this thread have even been written if Varian was the one creating the Blight, or would most of you assume Varian was grabbing baby Orcs to experiment on simply because they refered to one as a boy and another as a girl.
Win.
...So you admit defeat?
Post by
283679
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.