This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Why so much hate towards the Dark Lady?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
551048
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
367590
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
229054
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
306612
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
457614
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
355559
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
457614
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
So.....does that mean any places ruled by a king are a dictatorship? Even if the king is kind and just? I call Sylvanas a dictator, because that's what she acts like; all of the other kings/queens/high priestess/leaders have a council assisting them, offering opinions and the like; Sylvanas...not so much. She is the final word of everything that has to do with the Forsaken; if she orders them to walk into fire, most of them will do so, even if it means their end.
Post by
Skreeran
Likewise with any other monarchy. Henry VIII had two of his wives beheaded.
Post by
457614
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
306612
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
229054
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
306612
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
694287
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Braevia
So.....does that mean any places ruled by a king are a dictatorship? Even if the king is kind and just?
Well...yeah. Dictatorship is a form of government, not (necessarily) a value judgement.
I call Sylvanas a dictator, because that's what she acts like; all of the other kings/queens/high priestess/leaders have a council assisting them, offering opinions and the like; Sylvanas...not so much. She is the final word of everything that has to do with the Forsaken; if she orders them to walk into fire, most of them will do so, even if it means their end.
That's not true. She has a bureaucracy in place that takes care of the day to day needs of her people. Magistrates and Deathguards seem to keep the wheels running, while Apothecaries apparently act outside of direct control, and have free reign to do whatever they want for their experiments. There are suggestions (in quest text) that they are under tighter controls now, though it is definitely still true that the Forsaken are a haven for unethical medical experiments.
To be fair, the Apothecaries are responsible for the vast majority of the "evil stuff" done by the Forsaken. The Deathguards are mostly concerned with wiping out the remnants of the Scarlet Crusade, defending their lands, and waging a conventional war on Gilneas (again, the bio-weapons are designed and operated by the Apothecaries). Even so, the extreme measures taken are understandable (though not condonable by a modern audience) by the fragility of their situation: they are small in number and beset by enemies who will never accept them.
Post by
229054
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Braevia
Well...yeah. Dictatorship is a form of government, not (necessarily) a value judgement.
To nitpick a bit, I think its that Monarchies and Dictatorships are both Authoritarian regimes, but still somewhat different.
Regardless, it's still not a value judgement. Monarchy and Dictatorship are not separated simply by the relative "niceness" of the person in charge. A monarch derives their right to rule from their lineage, and that right will pass to their children. Their relatives gain similar rights. A dictator derives their right to rule from their military might. Sylvanas is *called* "The Dark Lady" or "The Banshee Queen", but she has no children, never will, and has no hereditary claim to Lordaeron. She leads a cult of personality and a large military force, and thus rules the Forsaken. Her people, in turn, hold a legitimate claim to the land they ruled prior to contracting the Plague.
To be fair, the Apothecaries are responsible for the vast majority of the "evil stuff" done by the Forsaken. The Deathguards are mostly concerned with wiping out the remnants of the Scarlet Crusade, defending their lands, and waging a conventional war on Gilneas (again, the bio-weapons are designed and operated by the Apothecaries). Even so, the extreme measures taken are understandable (though not condonable by a modern audience) by the fragility of their situation: they are small in number and beset by enemies who will never accept them.
I disagree. Its a general characteristic of the undead to have a disregard for somethings that we, living people that didn't undergo the incredibly traumatic trials that the Forsaken have, have as sacred. Like life itself and ''human rights''.
Sure, the Apothecaries are quite unethical. But you can't blame many things a small parcel of the population does, society either agrees or is completely indifferent to such deeds.
As an example, the Apothecaries may build the Forsaken Blight, as well as the many poisons and toxins created in the way, but it is Sylvanas who orders its use, and the Forsaken who wield such things in battle/everyday life.
Absolutely, every Forsaken who participates in spreading the blight deserves some responsibility for the effects thereof. Sylvanas too, must be hold accountable for what her Apothecaries do. The question here is how much of the Apothecaries' atrocities are done with her knowledge and/or under her orders.
Speaking as one of her "most trusted soldiers" (a status afforded to anyone who completes the Silverpine/Gilneas questline), Sylvanas appears thoroughly uninterested in casual cruelty, or in turning people undead for the sake of doing so. She was ordered to invade a walled city full of werewolves with a depleted army, and found a couple of shortcuts (biological warfare and Val'Kyr zombification) that could make the campaign winnable. She's not a "good" person by any measure, but she's not quite "raid boss" evil yet. If you can cheer for Jack Bauer, you can probably cheer for Sylvanas.
Post by
229054
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Braevia
Elective monarchy? I think you mean a Constitutional Monarchy, where the monarch's role is merely ceremonial, and leadership is elected. Even in that case, the monarchs inherit their role from their parents.
I won't comment on anything in Rise of the Lich King, but I will say that I would be mindful of applying "extended canon"; the writers may be in communication, but there are bound to be minor incompatibilities.
Post by
Adamsm
I won't comment on anything in Rise of the Lich King, but I will say that I would be mindful of applying "extended canon"; the writers may be in communication, but there are bound to be minor incompatibilities.
Ah, but it was Golden who penned that. And honestly, all things considered, the way Sylvanas runs her kingdom, that the idea that the RAS and Vari somehow built the Blight without her knowledge....yeah...right....
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.