This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Differences between Forsakens and DKs?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
146993
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
GVHB
Death Knights were allowed to rejoin the Alliance only because of Tirion's letter to Varian. And Death Knights are not as rotten as the Forsaken are.
Post by
Behelich
Basically, a Death Knight can be biologically still alive, though without a soul.
Post by
Morec0
Basically, a Death Knight can be biologically still alive, though without a soul.
Not really, eventually the necromantic magic they weild will kill them, but slowly. Thus was the case with Arthas.
However, death knights have the ability to use their power to preserve themselves - akin to a necromancers - so they appear to be alive, unlike the Forsaken, which look exactly like rotten, walking corpses.
Post by
229054
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Skreeran
Here are the differences in a nutshell:
Past lives:
In life, most of the Forsaken were just civilians or footmen. Death Knights, on the other hand, were great heroes. The Alliance remembers the names and heroic actions of their great heroes. The random farmers, not so much.
Leaders:
When the Forsaken gained their freedom, they flocked to the banner of Sylvanas. Sylvanas was an undead elf with a serious grudge against the humans. She didn't really want to join them, and they didn't really want her, as we can see with Garithos. On top of that, the Alliance, heavily entrenched in religious concepts like the Holy Light, didn't like the idea of the undead at all.
The Death Knights, on the other hand, were led by Darion Mograine, who was friends with Tirion Fordring. Were it not for Tirion, the Alliance would have booted the undead DKs out just as fast as the Forsaken. However, Tirion was a paladin. One of the first paladins, in fact, and if he said the Holy Light was cool with the Ebon Blade, no one could really challenge him.
Attitude:
While the Death Knights are generally repentant and sorry for their actions, the Forsaken generally want to kill the Alliance. This is partly due to Sylvanas (who, as I said, is pretty angry about the Alliance prince who killed her people), and partly due to the Alliance. Because there was no Tirion figure to help the Forsaken and the Alliance settle their differences way back when, the Alliance's method of approaching the Forsaken was simply to kill them (
Quest
,
Quest
,
Comic
,
Comic
.) After all, they were undead abominations in the human's eyes.
Meanwhile, Sylvanas was having humans like Garithos and his folks killed. Both sides believed the other side a threat to their survival.
Post by
Adamsm
I wouldn't call it racist; Varian was harsh to the returning Death Knights as well with good reason; the Scourge did recently attack Stormwind and other locations all across Azeroth(as the Death Knight start up shortly after the 2nd Scourge invasion). Yes he could have responded differently, and not threatened to kill the returning Alliance warriors... but that's not how he is, and he accepts Tirion's word from the letter that the Alliance Death Knights are not a threat.
It's probably the same on the other side; when the newly returned Horde Death Knights arrived in Orgrimmar, I'm sure Thrall and his Kor'kon guards kept their hands near their weapons until the Warchief read the letter from Tirion. Don't forget, the early Forsaken Ambassadors were slain as well, before the Horde realized they were not the Scourge.
As for the Forsaken themselves; like Skree said, there is old bad blood between the undeads and the Alliance; the Forsaken tried to return home but they were driven off by their ex-loved ones, and the Alliance humans saw what they did to Lordaeron and Capitol City... and then of course, the poisons and the rest of the stuff came out.
Though, out of all the races, the Forsaken Death Knights suffer more then most; they are beat down, recaptured, re-enslaved and forced to serve under the Scourge again till they are freed at Light's Hope Chapel, when they are allowed to return to their normal undead life.
Also, all Death Knights are already dead; the entire 3rd Generation are re-en-souled mortals, as in they had their souls ripped free of their bodies and put back in by Frostmourne and the Lich King.
Post by
Rankkor
I posted a topic about this, detailing everything, so I'll copy&paste it here. (although my post was about what was the diference between sylvannas and darion, but it's almost hte same topic as this)
Darion and Sylvannas have a similar background, both were good people a long time ago (sylvannas being a ranger, and darion a holy knight) both fought the scourge, and both died at the hands of the scourge (darion's death was a bit diferent but still it was caused by a battle against undead) and both were turned into dark versions of what they used to be (sylvannas into a dark ranger, and Darion into a Knight of darkness, a Death Knight)
after this, they served the enemy they hated and had sworn to fight, they undo what they had strived to do (sylvannas fought to save her people, but after she was "Scourged" she helped killing them, and destroying her kingdom, and Darion ended up killing both the Scarlet crusade and a huge number of Argent dawn soldiers who were his friends and he had fought with in the past)
after a similar reason (the lich king got weakened) both were released from his controll, and now lead a small fraction of the undead army, wich elected them as leaders (silvannas leads the forsaken, Darion leads the ebon knights)
so, having so many similar traits in common, your question, is why did their outcome was so very diferent? today sylvannas and darion despite having the same goal (killing the lich king) are in completely diferent positions, and had tottaly diferent reactions to what they did.
so let's start, the first diference is their headquarters, Sylvannas was freed, she saw a bunch of other undead get free too, she rallied them, and set out to find a suitable place that serves as their headquarters, she figured that since most of her forces were citizens of lordaeron, it was only fitting that they took it back from the scourge, and give it back to their rightfull owners, problem was that she's not the only one who wants that place.
the humans who left lordaeron and never looked back, and also never turned to help take it back, now want to reclaim it, with the help of humans who have no claims to it.
to put it in a more neutral point of view, to this day, lordaeron is not safe, many forces seek to take it by force, the alliance, the worgen, the scourge, the scarlet crusade, they are all forming a line to take the undercity for their own, this in turn made sylvannas seek aid on the horde, otherwise she and her forces would had been decimated, also defending her city, and her lands has kept her occupied, and has made her loose focus on what her true mission is, wich is revenge.
but she's too busy to have revenge when she has a land to protect, she has to take care of both atack and defense at the same time.
Darion has not this problem, after he and his forces were freed, they didn't had to look at a new sanctuary, they took a scourge fortress as their own, and not happy enough about that took a second one (shadow vault) to further entrench themselves.
these buildings are deemed unholy by the alliance, and unworthy by the horde, none wants anything to do with a necropolis, so darion has no worries about someone comming to the ebon hold looking for a fight (exept the scourge of course) even then, if someone came looking for a fight the ebon hold is a mobile base, that's a luxury sylvannas doesn't have, if darion needs to he can move the ebon hold to a new location, one that's inaccesible to normal forces.
also when sylvannas took lordaeron from the scourge she had to recruit and then betray an alliance officer, wich earned her the anger of the alliance, Darion didn't had to rely on outside help to take back acherus, why not?
because sylvannas was in controll of common undead, the riff-raff, the common zombies, the cannon-fodder, while darion got controll of the ebon knights, the elite among the elite, the best of the best that the scourge had trained and empowered, not only were they extremely well trained, well preserved in undeath, well powered by the dark sorcery of the runes, but also well geared with the finest saronite stock of weaponry and armor at their disposal.
it is for this reason that darion was able to take back acherus without needing to rely on outsiders, while sylvanas had to recruit an alliance regiment, a tribe of ogres, and a band of pirates to retake lordaeron. this made her depend on the horde, and by depending on the horde she had to dedicate time to defense, and also aid of their allies, while darion, having absolutely no debts to anyone, had plenty of time to focus on his revenge against arthas.
the last reason for their diference is that the ebon knigths have the endorsement of Tirion fordring and the argent crusade, tirion is greatly respected both in the horde and in the alliance, and his endorsement was enough to warrant a truce between the ebon knights and the alliance/horde.
sylvannas had no such luxury, no renowed hero to vouch for her, no shiny saviour to protect her from the prejudices of the outside world who judges forsaken for their undeath and not for what they used to be.
these are the reasons why they had such diferent outcomes.
Post by
Atik
Varian? Racist?
No, when had the king
ever
been racist?
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.