Breakfast Topic: Did Arthas do the right thing in Stratholme?
by Robin Torres 
Jan 29th 2010 at 8:00AM
Should they have tried quarantining them until a cure could be found, perhaps? (Even though there isn't one.) It's a bit like a recent Fringe episode. Was it evil to consider killing all of the people infected with an extremely intelligent, contagious and fast-spreading disease? How do you deal with deciding between compassion for a few versus the survival of a race?
Could the ruthlessness that Arthas showed there be a symptom of weak morals that perhaps led to his demise as a human? Or was his swift, decisive action an example of his excellent leadership qualities and why he makes such a successful Lich King? Perhaps doing the right thing in Stratholme weakened his soul, making him more susceptible to corruption.
How should Arthas have behaved in Stratholme? Did his actions help corrupt him or show him to be already corrupted? What would you have done in the same situation?
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Breakfast Topics, Lore
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 12)
BlackTiger™ Jan 29th 2010 8:05AM
Arthas was absolutely right!!!
Also Arthas was "corrupted" by ignorance and lack of understanding from Uther ans Jaina, not by Ner'Zul.
Guildenstern Jan 29th 2010 8:07AM
Oh great, is misogyny time? HAI GAIZ ITZ ALL JAINA'S FAULT STUPID GIRL LOL
Like Arthas gave an eff what Jaina thought about anything.
WoWie Zowie Jan 29th 2010 8:14AM
was arthas right when he said "glad i could get to you before the plague" and tried to kill those people in the town hall? sure they turned out to be the infinite dragonflight, but the intent was to kill them even though they weren't infected.
i think what we are meant to take from this is that at first he really did mean well, but he got consumed and blinded by his hatred and it turned into a slaughterfest of the innocent.
kv83 Jan 29th 2010 8:52AM
With his comment "before the plague" he actually meant that he kill them before the plague transforms them. All of stratholm was alrady infected and therfor either doomed to serve the (old) Lich King as slaves or be free'd with a swift clean Death.
Arthas did the only right thing anyone could do. It's sad that he was punished that hard for his love of his own people, but that's what he was all about. Even when he knew he would be cursed when taking frostmourn, he did it to save his people and im some strange way he actually did that. (Without the Scourge, Azeroth might have fallen to the Burning Legion eventually too)
Banic Rhys Jan 29th 2010 8:58AM
But everything is Jaina's fault. She is pure evil, it's all explained in this post
http://www.mmo-champion.com/general-discussions-22/jaina-proudmoore/
And yes, Arthas did the right thing.
Deadly. Off. Topic. Jan 29th 2010 9:34AM
Well, the right thing would have been to let them "Turn" first and then kill the city. Of course that would have been a lot harder to work with given his small band of followers at the time. But at least this way no one's morals (like Jaina's and Uther's) would have been offended and they have a legitimate reason to stick around and not leave.
Eyhk Jan 29th 2010 11:01AM
May be out of scope, but Arthas' mindset seems to be the standard mindset of all leaders that commit genocide, racial cleansing, etc.
Jorges Jan 29th 2010 11:59AM
He did the right thing. It's not clear if this state of undeath actually made people forget their human self, (remember that even Arthas had some traces of humanity on him that were hidden in his heart, under Icecrown Citadel); all the town was doomed to this fate, so it was better for them and the rest of azeroth to die with dignity by the hands of their prince, than die as puppets under the control of evil.
But with no doubt, this event weakened an already emotionally beaten-up Arthas, and made him easy pray for Ner'Zul.
gatorfan Jan 29th 2010 12:20PM
Oh the old "moral dilemma" problem presented with Arthas. Put into different terms I think of it like this. Is there a situation that makes murdering innocent people right? I will violently disagree that there is anything "right" in that decision. This is classic situational ethics 101. The circumstances don't justify the suspension of a moral right vs wrong.
At some point you have to stand on and for your core moral values recognizing that circumstances like Stratholme represent a lack of creativity to find an option that doesn't involve murdering people. Arthas in his arrogance took all the responsibility on his own, didn't want to listen to Uther, brushed off Jaina, didn't trust his own training as a Paladin in the Light, and felt it was his and ONLY HIS decision to murder innocents. That is why he became the Lich King because his thirst, what ever it was, could not be satisifed and was never put in check by a strong moral conviction of right and wrong.
Net result, when put face to face with pure, dag-nasty evil in the form of Frostmourne, the Frozen Throne, Ner'zhul and his helm he could no longer tell the difference. That my friends is a classic case of where compromise leads a person. A little here, a little there and before long you have no idea who you are and anything can take you.
Arbitor Jan 29th 2010 1:48PM
Sigh...
Why are so many people making silly mistakes these days?
Yes, slaughtering the innocent was a mistake, even if they were infected.
But there was only one bridge outta town.
Blow it up, have some pallys bless the moat with holy water.
Arthas just saved Lordaeron with some explosives, some pallys and got keep his GF.
You bet he's gonna get some from Jaina for finding a non-violent solution!
brian Jan 29th 2010 2:25PM
Really, all of the above is what happened, even though Arthas was right.
His decisive action was a sign of leadership, but the ruthlessness of it was a foreshadowing of his downfall. He spared them of the horror of undeath, but doing so went against his teachings as a paladin, weakening him to the corruption of Ner'zhul.
Ultimately, it was Arthas' brash and egotistical nature that caused his final corruption. If he was able to talk the situation over with Uther and Jaina (it would have only taken a few moments), he would not have had to disband Uther's paladins, and he likely wouldn't have ended up in Northrend. Be that as it may, Arthas was brash, and his egotism took the motto of "sacrifices for the greater good" to its ultimate extreme, "sacrifices for my greater good" as the Lich King.
arcai921 Jan 29th 2010 3:53PM
He was quarantining the population of creatures that are ruthless deadly and extremely persistent before they had a chance to come to fruition. If he didn't do this the undead would have eventually broken through any guard erected around the city and spread the plague all over his home country of Lodaeron.
The two mistakes he made where disbanding the only order who was willing, and able to effectively fight the Scourge, i.e. the Silver Hand, and pursuing Mal'ganis to Northrend.
Jekab Jan 29th 2010 7:11PM
As a paladin he did the wrong thing, as a solider he did what had to be done.
TR Jan 29th 2010 7:13PM
Totally ignoring Guildenstern's "oh great, is it misogyny time?" comment (um, you DID notice Uther's name before Jaina's in the OP's sentence, right) since I'm sure he or she probably feels that Lady Katrana Prestor a.k.a. Onyxia was setup. However, I'm not so secure about Lady Proudmoore myself, and the stuff in link given by Banic Rhys has been bouncing around in my mind for a couple years already.
Look at the guys she's been close to.
Father figures: Antonidas? Dead. Her father? Dead. Uther? Dead.
Possible love interests: Kael'thas Sunstrider? Obsessed with saving his people, turns into an evil guy. Arthas? 'Nuff said.
Thrall and Varian are the only ones left, and they're closer to brotherly types than those mentioned above, and yet somehow something always brings them close to war with each other. Wonder what that is?
I'm thinkin' Jaina's angling for Arthas' job, and I'm not worried about a "catfight" with Sylvanas over it either. After all... ever seen them in the same room together? Maybe that's why Jaina ported everyone out of Undercity.
I'm really just joking around here, but it IS kinda interesting.
jbcani Jan 29th 2010 7:47PM
I'm not sure if he did the right thing but I'd like to think it was a hard thing for him to do even though he doesn't show it.
I'd like to think that anyways...
KronosIII Jan 30th 2010 12:05AM
I will end this whole blog right here
PALLYS POWER ONLY WORKS IF THE USER THINKS WHAT HE/SHE HAS DONE IS RIGHT AND JUST
To put it more simple what Arthas did in his own mind was a holy act. He did no wrong. His first and only goal was to protect his people.
And to most people would you want to die attacking your loved brothers and sister or would you want to die before such an option was at your hand.
If anything Arthas did the right thing by a long shot. Killing people before they are turned into there cursed fate. And as we have seen this disease goes as far as inflecting the soul of the person as we see in the undead.
If anything Arthas did a double whammy of good by killing them before they disease got to them.
And no, this was not an act that showed he was going down a dark path. Because in his mind everything he was doing was just. If it was not just then his powers would not work. The moment he picked up Shadowmourne is when things started going dark.
He simply wants to ensure the defenseless are ensured a future.
Eisengel Jan 30th 2010 6:51PM
@KronosIII
Really? What about all those Belf Paladins that gained their power by siphoning it out of an imprisoned Naaru? They had to know that was wrong, the only reason the Naaru didn't come down and stomp them is that the capture and release of M'uru was foretold by Velen, and it was allowed to happen, since it would create a fresh army of holy warriors that would be utterly dependent on the Naaru.
@gatorfan
I entirely agree. I think you hit it just right. The question wasn't that the town would be turned, the question was what to do about it. Arthas jumped the chain of command; I recall him justifying himself by saying 'as your future king'... meaning he wasn't king. He didn't have the authority. Beyond that, I think it showed the fatal flaw in Arthas that caused him to be seduced by the power of the Lich King, he hated the Scourge more than he loved his people.
If he truly loved his people, he would have done anything, everything, other than slaughter them before they turned. He would have tried to cure some, any of them. He would have tried to contain them (nice idea with the bridge :^) ), even if it meant his own death. If he truly loved his people, he never would have killed them. The problem was... they would have become Scourge, and he wanted to kill Scourge, he hated them - he hated the Scourge more than he loved his people, so that he would rather kill his own people than let more Scourge be created. Then it was a slippery slope, kill the Scourge, kill the Scourge-infected people, then why not not kill healthy people so that they don't get infected by the Scourge?
I honestly place a healthy amount of blame with Uther and Jaina too though. They allowed Arthas to go right ahead with his plan. They were there and could have at least tried to stop him, but they just stood there. They allowed him to run off into the city, knowing what he was about to do. They are as guilty as him (accessories before the fact). It is a hard thing to turn a weapon on your own, but sometimes good people make bad decisions. Superior officers are only superior as long as they follow the rules of war, once they step outside certain boundaries, it's a soldier's responsibility to disarm and arrest them. When Arthas decided to liquidate non-hostiles, and could not be stopped by reason, orders, or formal charges, he was outside the boundaries. He was just as much a hostile combatant as any Scourge, and should have been arrested with the minimum force necessary. Uther and Jaina failed in their duty, allowing an entire city to be slaughtered and a mad Prince to descend further into insanity.
Guildenstern Jan 29th 2010 8:05AM
I think the results of the Culling of Stratholme speak to the rightness/wrongness of it.
It did nothing productive, did not help Lordaeron in the slightest and helped create one of the most evil beings on Azeroth. Hey, Arthas-- when the Burning freaking Legion and a hugely malevolent evil entity with a brain-melting sword are trying to goad you into killing an entire town, please stop for a minute and think about it first, OK?
EJ Jan 29th 2010 9:18AM
It did make a difference. When you talk to the bronze dragonflight in the instance, I believe they mention you have to help arthas because if history is changed, the plague spreads faster/further.
Raioul of Shadow Council Jan 29th 2010 9:53AM
I don't think Arthas could have, would have known how it would turn out any more than he could have foreseen himself becoming Lich King. He did what he thought it was best and this is in line with the old zombie question: Once somebody infected, do you wish kill the person and spare the others or do you let them become a zombie. While in zombie movies people often wait for the other person to become a zombie before doing them in right after the change, Arthas hardly had that chance or the ability in such a town.
I have played way too many zombie games to state point blank Arthas was wrong compared to the alternative. He wasn't completely in the right, if there was people not infected, that should have been taken into account with him. Killing people who didn't touch the grain just put more innocent blood on his hands, but he might have done what he thought was best as he could not judge who did and did not eat the grain.