between Diablo 2 and Warcraft 3: should corrupted creatures be killed?

[Steve Lai]

This thread contains spoilers to the plots of Diablo 2 and Warcraft 3. Not that I expect anyone who manages to come across this thread to be unfamiliar with the storylines of these 2 games though.

That said...

Many of the Arreat Summit's biographies for the Diablo 2 monsters follows the "this monster, who had once been harmless to humans, had been corrupted by the powers of Hell to destroy humans" formula. Some examples:

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biography for Wendigo

Sadly, the Gargantuan Beast, Brute, and Yeti (Wendigo subspecies) were previously known to coexist peacefully with humans, avoiding contact whenever possible. Chaos' ill effects have changed them, as they are now quick to anger and attack with huge, sweeping blows of their massive claws.

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biographies for the Corrupt Rogue, Corrupt Rogue Archer, and Corrupt Rogue Spearwoman

Many of the corrupted ones have forgotten their skills with ranged weapons, or are so driven by Hell's rage, that they blindly melee with whatever weapon is at hand.
...
The least corrupted of these now evil Sisters maintain enough of their wits to use their years of training with the bow to ill effect against any who oppose the will of their new master.
...
The corruption of the Sisterhood has also turned many who were skilled in the use of spears and javelins to the cause of evil.

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biography for Giant Spider

Even in their largest forms, the giant arachnids had never been much of a problem for the inhabitants of the tropical forests. The Prime Evils have changed them, however, as large numbers of the spiders now actively seek meals of the human variety.

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biography for Bat Demon

Bats are natural inhabitants of caves and other such dank places, so it is no surprise that they would also congregate near the gateways to Hell. Their exposure to the vile powers that emanate from the demons that frequent these dark places has tainted these bats with arcane powers.

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biography for Baboon Demon

Twisted by the vile powers of Mephisto, these once docile tree dwellers have become rampaging monstrosities that prey on the weak and unwary.

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biography for Mummy

Under Mephisto's manipulation, these honored dead have been summoned and bound with the spirits of malicious demons to fill the ranks of his undead army.

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biography for Greater Mummy

Just as he did with the mummified bodies that slept beneath the sands of Lut Gholein, Mephisto bound the spirits of his most powerful demonic minions to the corpses of the greatest warriors and mages of Aranoch. Natural leaders in life, they continue their positions of dominance within the ranks of the undead, rallying hordes of mummies about them as they seek the flesh of the living.

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biography for Thorned Hulk

Composed mostly of wood, Thorned Hulks are the ancestral protectors of the jungle lands. Despite their strength and immense bramble and thorn-covered arms, even they have been twisted by the Prime Evils.

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biography for Council Member

The leaders of the Zakarum have been irrevocably turned to serve Mephisto, the Lord of Hatred. Once faithful and generous leaders of their people, the ruling members of the High Council have been twisted in form and spirit and now take their followers down a darker path.

Okay those are a lot of examples. I hope that validates my observation.

So now, according to Diablo 2 logic, your PC is responsible for exterminating Hell-corrupted creatures and indigenous minions of Hell alike. If we apply this mentality to Warcraft 3, we get some problems, precisely when we see Arthas chasing Mal Ganis in the human campaign, the following happens:

-- Arthas (in typical Diablo 2 hero style): This town has been corrupted by Mal Ganis and must be purged.
-- Uther Lightbringer: There must be another way!
-- Jaina Proudmoore: Sorry Arthas. I can't watch you do this.

And in the end Arthas turns eeeeeeeeee-villlllllll because of his raging wrath to get even with Mal Ganis.

Hence, we have a controversy: two stories written by the same company (Blizzard) have very literally opposite takes on the meaning of "evil". Killing formerly innocent creatures who were corrupted by demonic forces is heroism in Diablo 2 and moral felony in Warcraft 3.

Now, why is this?

I have all kinds of conspiracy theories about this phenomenon. But enough about me; I want to hear what other people think about this issue. So please, for those of you interested, feel free to share your opinions on this matter.

[Nephilim]

In Diablo 2 sentient creatures are corrupted because they are somehow weak. If this wasn't the case, then all the Rogues would've been corrupted, all the Paladins would've been corrupted, etc. There is some loss of will or despair that accompanies their corruption. This is fundamentally different in Warcraft. We have seen frequently creatures become corrupted not of their own free will. The process is simply different. I don't see how they're contradicting themselves if they're two completely different universes.

[BaNiSeR]

i agree, two different games have two different types of "monsters"...making it rather hard to compare.

apples and oranges is my first thought.

[Steve Lai]

Originally Posted by Nephilim

There is some loss of will or despair that accompanies their corruption.

And this is supposedly different from the DESPAIR felt by a certain Dark Ranger in Warcraft 3 whom Arthas forcefully recruited to the service of the Lich King?

Originally Posted by Nephilim

This is fundamentally different in Warcraft. We have seen frequently creatures become corrupted not of their own free will.

... Which does not seem to apply to the Mal Ganis-corrupted villagers that Arthas intended to eradicate in the example i cited in my first post in this thread. I certainly was not aware of any exhibited evidence of "unwillingness" from those villagers, who did seem very wholly possessed.

Oh and that also reminds me...

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biography for Griswold

While many of the townsfolk were merely slain, some were forced into cursed servitude.

The stout blacksmith Griswold was one of those who were bound past death to attend the desires of The Three.

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biography for Izual

Despite his valor and strength, his form was twisted by the perverse powers of the Prime Evils. They forced him to betray his own kind and give up Heaven’s most guarded secrets.

Originally Posted by the Arreat Summit's biography for Thorned Hulk

Their now glassy, lifeless eyes hint at a deep sorrow beneath a glowing Hell-induced hatred.

If, for some reason, the above excerpts do not hint at unwilling servitude, I will require nitpicky semantic explanations. Assuming that those excerpts do mean unwilling servitude, it's apparently our PC's job to wipe out those unwilling creatures like weed on a lawn too. Fancy that!

Originally Posted by Nephilim

I don't see how they're contradicting themselves if they're two completely different universes.

Originally Posted by BaNiSeR

i agree, two different games have two different types of "monsters"...making it rather hard to compare.

apples and oranges is my first thought.

...

[Ikeren]

I have all kinds of conspiracy theories about this phenomenon.

:lol:

Thanks for the laugh dude...this is pretty funny. ( I hope you meant this thread as some sort of joke, but if not...oops, sorry).

I think it's because in Diablo 2 all the characters are really just merciless slaughtermongers of truly innocent and misjudged demons and "Corrupted" fauna (at least, corrupted is what the propoganda proposors would like you to think!) , where as in Warcraft 3, everyone's heart is occupied by a dying carebear.

[Nephilim]

Originally Posted by Steve Lai

... Which does not seem to apply to the Mal Ganis-corrupted villagers that Arthas intended to eradicate in the example i cited in my first post in this thread. I certainly was not aware of any exhibited evidence of "unwillingness" from those villagers, who did seem very wholly possessed.

That's exactly my point. Read what I said again. The victims who become the enemy become so not of their own free will. This is different with the Diablo monsters, who lacked resistance or some inner strength.

Sylvanas - She despaired AFTER being forced back into undead servitude. She could do nothing to prevent what Arthas did to her, so yes, it IS different than the Diablo monsters. Those who resist the corruption are saved.

Izual - He was tortured into giving up information. If he was a stronger person, he would've died before he let that happen.

Thorned Hulks - I don't know enough about how Hulks were before to respond to that, and frankly, neither do you.

There's also something to keep in mind about the general situation. In the Warcraft scenario, the kingdom is still holding and general power structure is still in place. The situation grows desperate but it has yet to look completely hopeless. This is very different in Diablo. The good guys are heavily outnumbered by former good guys, and if not stopped, those corrupted people, unwilling or no, will wipe out more innocent lives than they already have.

When the game specifically says certain monsters are unwilling slaves, they also add that killing them is more an act of pity than retribution.

[Steve Lai]

Originally Posted by Ikeren

:lol:

Thanks for the laugh dude...this is pretty funny. ( I hope you meant this thread as some sort of joke, but if not...oops, sorry).

I don't think it takes an infallible intention-behind-the-word detector to know that you wouldn't really feel sorry even if it turns out that i didn't mean this as a joke. So thanks for the hollow and superficial disclaimer. (And by the way, I don't think it would be hard for you to figure out that I didn't really mean to "thank" you when I used the word "thanks" right? right.)

Originally Posted by Nephilim

That's exactly my point. Read what I said again. The victims who become the enemy become so not of their own free will.

If you meant to say that the Mal Ganis-corrupted villagers were justifiably killed because they didn't put up a "mental" fight again Mal, then I have a question: why was Arthas seen by Uther and Jaina as a sinful killer who didn't kill the "right" people?

Originally Posted by Nephilim

Sylvanas - She despaired AFTER being forced back into undead servitude. She could do nothing to prevent what Arthas did to her, so yes, it IS different than the Diablo monsters. Those who resist the corruption are saved.

Er what? How is Arthas's "corruption magic" any more irresistable compared to the Diablo trio's own "corruption magic"?

If you can't make a distinction, then going by your logic, Sylvanas was powerless to stop her corruption, and in turn, ever monster corrupted by the Diablo trio was in the same position too.

Originally Posted by Nephilim

Izual - He was tortured into giving up information. If he was a stronger person, he would've died before he let that happen.

So everyone who confessed to being a "witch" or "heathen" under extreme torture during the Spanish Inquisition and the Salem witch hunts had it coming didn't they? And all the American under-cover spies who infiltrated the Soviet Union with fake identities during the Cold War and were later caught and tortured into confessing their real identities were weak people who didn't deserve help too right? Wow . Just, wow.

Originally Posted by Nephilim

Thorned Hulks - I don't know enough about how Hulks were before to respond to that, and frankly, neither do you.

You can say that about every single Diablo 2 or Warcraft 3 character we've talked about. After all, we haven't seen Sylvanas's or Griswold's corruption first-hand, how do we know whether they put up a mental fight or not?

But that would be nitpicky now wouldn't it? Do you really need first-hand experience to know what "hint of deep sorrow" means? Likewise, do you really need to have witnessed 9/11 first-hand to be convinced that it really happened?

Originally Posted by Nephilim

There's also something to keep in mind about the general situation. In the Warcraft scenario, the kingdom is still holding and general power structure is still in place. The situation grows desperate but it has yet to look completely hopeless. This is very different in Diablo. The good guys are heavily outnumbered by former good guys, and if not stopped, those corrupted people, unwilling or no, will wipe out more innocent lives than they already have.

I require reliable statistical figures that proves that the Burning Legion did not outnumber the Orcs, Humans, and Night Elves!

No actually I don't need such things. But do you remember tha last mission in the Night Elf campaign before the Frozen Throne? Man I could've sworn Archimonde could pop his goons out of nowhere faster than Thrall, Jaina, and my combat-stressed Night Elves could fart. I certainly had no impressions of any "numerical" advantage or equality against Archimonde.

Originally Posted by Nephilim

When the game specifically says certain monsters are unwilling slaves, they also add that killing them is more an act of pity than retribution.

Arthas's "pity" for the Mal Ganis-corrupted villagers was not appreciated well by any of the "good" people, in my impression.

[Ikeren]

I don't think it takes an infallible intention-behind-the-word detector to know that you wouldn't really feel sorry even if it turns out that i didn't mean this as a joke. So thanks for the hollow and superficial disclaimer. (And by the way, I don't think it would be hard for you to figure out that I didn't really mean to "thank" you when I used the word "thanks" right? right.)

Ooops, I am sorry. I didn't think you were this serious about the topic. Your orriginal posts had a couple things that were rather amusing (particularily the conspiracy theories part...)
Sorry I took your post in the wrong way and offended you.

[Nephilim]

Originally Posted by Steve Lai

If you meant to say that the Mal Ganis-corrupted villagers were justifiably killed because they didn't put up a "mental" fight again Mal, then I have a question: why was Arthas seen by Uther and Jaina as a sinful killer who didn't kill the "right" people?

Once again, you're using arguments from the two different universes. Actually READ what I say. My point was that even if they HAD put up a mental fight, it wouldn't matter because they all get corrupted anyway.

Er what? How is Arthas's "corruption magic" any more irresistable compared to the Diablo trio's own "corruption magic"?

These two methods do not exist in the same universe. You can't apply the physics of one world to the other. We know, FOR A FACT, that magic works differently in the two universes and comes from very different sources.

If you can't make a distinction, then going by your logic, Sylvanas was powerless to stop her corruption, and in turn, ever monster corrupted by the Diablo trio was in the same position too.

No. Every corrupted monster by the Prime Evils & co CAN resist, but they fail. In Warcraft zombies, you can resist all you want, it doesn't matter. The strong-willed are corrupted along with the weak, so absolutely no fault can be placed upon the victims.

So everyone who confessed to being a "witch" or "heathen" under extreme torture during the Spanish Inquisition and the Salem witch hunts had it coming didn't they? And all the American under-cover spies who infiltrated the Soviet Union with fake identities during the Cold War and were later caught and tortured into confessing their real identities were weak people who didn't deserve help too right? Wow . Just, wow.

All right, let's just pick that apart for a second. You ARE helping Izual by killing him and freeing his spirit. He's living in Hell in the husk of some demon/angel hybrid. I never said that he was a bad person because he confessed, but he was corrupted from the guilt and despair of betraying his kinsmen.

And I just love that you felt the need to specify that these were American agents we were talking about. I didn't say he was weak, but if he HAD been stronger, he wouldn't have told them everything. The same goes for unvercover agents who crack under torture. It doesn't make them useless or bad people.

You can say that about every single Diablo 2 or Warcraft 3 character we've talked about. After all, we haven't seen Sylvanas's or Griswold's corruption first-hand, how do we know whether they put up a mental fight or not?

Not the point. I don't know how sentient Thorned Hulks were. Is there even much of a mind to corrupt. In the case of Sylvanas or Griswold, we met them and knew them before they were turned, so we can legitimately say that they had some capacity for will. I don't know if the same goes for Thorned Hulks.

Likewise, do you really need to have witnessed 9/11 first-hand to be convinced that it really happened?

That has absolutely nothing to do with anything. It doesn't even help the point you were trying to make. NOWHERE does it mention the mental capacity of a thorned hulk. And if "they look kinda sad" is all the proof you're going to bring up, I'd advise looking for more.

I require reliable statistical figures that proves that the Burning Legion did not outnumber the Orcs, Humans, and Night Elves!

You were talking about the destruction of Stratholme. That's what I was talking about, and that's what I was responding to. Please, TRY to keep your argument straight. In the scnario you outlined, you're battling malevolent demons who thrive on carnage and want nothing more than the destruction of all. So now you're going to say that THEY don't merit killing?

[Steve Lai]

Originally Posted by Nephilim

Once again, you're using arguments from the two different universes. Actually READ what I say. My point was that even if they HAD put up a mental fight, it wouldn't matter because they all get corrupted anyway.
These two methods do not exist in the same universe. You can't apply the physics of one world to the other. We know, FOR A FACT, that magic works differently in the two universes and comes from very different sources.
No. Every corrupted monster by the Prime Evils & co CAN resist, but they fail. In Warcraft zombies, you can resist all you want, it doesn't matter. The strong-willed are corrupted along with the weak, so absolutely no fault can be placed upon the victims.

"FOR A FACT"? Where does this "fact" come from? Can you quote them from a reliable source?

Speaking for myself, I know for a fact that:

A) In both Warcraft 3 and Diablo 2 certain creatures are "corrupted".
B) I know of no specifications in any official links of manuals on how these corruption processes are different.
Therefore -
C) Proof please.

Originally Posted by Nephilim

Not the point. I don't know how sentient Thorned Hulks were. Is there even much of a mind to corrupt. In the case of Sylvanas or Griswold, we met them and knew them before they were turned, so we can legitimately say that they had some capacity for will. I don't know if the same goes for Thorned Hulks.
That has absolutely nothing to do with anything. It doesn't even help the point you were trying to make. NOWHERE does it mention the mental capacity of a thorned hulk. And if "they look kinda sad" is all the proof you're going to bring up, I'd advise looking for more.

To be fair, if you're not going to assume any of what you perceive as unproven claims about the Thorned Hulks, your generalizations of the way that magic works in the two universes fall flat as well, if you wish to maintain consistency. Until you find proof, your claim about the difference in magic between the two universes is even more unfounded than mine.

Now then, before I get further, I'll put a halt on this issue until you explain the difference in the degrees of irresistability between the Prime Evils's corruption magic and that of the Burning Legions and the Scourge.

Originally Posted by Nephilim

You ARE helping Izual by killing him and freeing his spirit. He's living in Hell in the husk of some demon/angel hybrid. I never said that he was a bad person because he confessed, but he was corrupted from the guilt and despair of betraying his kinsmen.

You denounced his lack of moral competence. What opinion of you would you think I would be holding if I said "Gee if Neph was a stronger person he might have done this this and that with regards to this situation"?

Originally Posted by Nephilim

And I just love that you felt the need to specify that these were American agents we were talking about. I didn't say he was weak, but if he HAD been stronger, he wouldn't have told them everything.

If you had been less nitpicky on all this semantic crap between "weak" and "if he had been stronger" you may have noticed "weak" and "stronger" are highly subjective words. It would be difficult if you want to force your standard definition of the word "weak" on me.

By the way, did you notice that I actually did NOT accuse you of being nitpicky? I simply said if you HAD been less nitpicky. But how did my clause of "if you had been less nitpicky then blah blah blah" make you feel? Something to the effect of... I have just accused you of pedantry didn't I? But according to you I can simply go "no no no I simply said if you had been LESS nitpicky you see? Heh heh heh!" Do you really want that from me now? Geez.

Originally Posted by Nephilim

The same goes for unvercover agents who crack under torture. It doesn't make them useless or bad people.

What difference does it make when you do to the victims of corruption the same thing you do to enemies? Because the magic of the worlds are different?

Originally Posted by Nephilim

You were talking about the destruction of Stratholme. That's what I was talking about, and that's what I was responding to. Please, TRY to keep your argument straight. In the scnario you outlined, you're battling malevolent demons who thrive on carnage and want nothing more than the destruction of all.

It certainly didn't occur to me like you were only arguing for an isolated incident. To say in the very least, you were generalizing about the supposedly obvious helplessness of the Diablo 2 worlds. Wasn't Lut Gholein kept safe by Greiz and a magic ward and hence maintained a sense of order, like many places under siege in Warcraft 3? Wasn't the Kurast Docks protected by Hratli's magic ward (which he says is slowly eroding, but hey there are protective mechanisms for various cities Warcraft 3 that slowly eroded too), and hence maintaining a temporary sense of safety and order?

Originally Posted by Nephilim

So now you're going to say that THEY don't merit killing?

Well me being used to getting strawmanned in debates all the time, this doesn't surprise me.

You know as well as I do that your claims on differences of corruption magic notwithstanding, you were arguing that:

-- If enemies "vastly" outnumber you you're justified to kill corrupted victims because you're more desperate, whereas if enemies don't "vastly" outnumber you you can afford to leave corrupted victims alone.

I say: no sale. Should we be allowed to kill corrupted creatures just because we're desperate?