Sylvanas's Secret Plan... we're all on the same page, right?

[Steampunkette]

It was killing Malfurion. That was her secret plan, all along. It wasn't "A war against Life" or something similar. She was hunting his ass down in order to inflict "A wound that would never heal".

She didn't tell Saurfang her plan to kill Malfurion during the planning stages of the War of Thorns. Only that they had to inflict that terrible wound. Saurfang thought that taking the tree would create that wound, but it was only after the tree burned that he understood that keeping the tree was just a bonus for the Horde War Plan, and that Malfurion's Death was the real goal. Because only his death would push Tyrande into trying to reclaim Darnassus while Anduin and Genn did their best to hold her back because they didn't have the navy to support it. That the Alliance would tear itself apart over their separate interests.

But that would only work if Kalimdor were "secure", and Malfurion was dead.

She doesn't have some far-reaching hidden agenda that we don't know about, yet. She laid it all out for Saurfang: The conquest of the Alliance.

And it's also why she burned the tree... with Malfurion alive, she needed a new "Wound That Would Never Heal". And Teldrassil and it's civilians were it. She didn't kill them out of hatred, or spite, or sadistic cruelty that warmed her frozen heart. She did it because it was the only way to get the Alliance to attack Lordaeron, to get them to fall into the trap and decimate their military forces so that the defacto Peace of Distance could hold.

Aside from Saurfang brooding in a cell in Stormwind, and Jaina saving Anduin, the plan has gone like it's supposed to.

And that's fucking terrifying.

[Aucald]

I would say Sylvanas was straightforward in her rationale for war with Saurfang - her lie is one of omission, the selfsame stratagem she discusses with Nathanos in the opening chapters of "Before the Storm": the conversion of Stormwind's dead into Forsaken, consuming the lion's share of Humanity to empower her bulkwark against what awaits her if she experiences true death once more. This, I would think, is paramount in her mind because it concerns her well-being and continued existence directly - above and beyond what is good for the Horde or its (living) peoples. I think if pressed, she would justify this by saying that her goals and the needs of the Horde are essentially aligned, but her omission of this important detail as part of her case of war is telling by its very nature. She knows other leaders would never agree with that given their spiritual, ethical, and natural concerns - and she knows that adding it to the case would only distract and divide the consensus of the Horde.

[Brocksley]

I have only gone through everything once, but I thought she was upfront about killing Malfurion from the get go. Also, I didn't think it was unclear that this was all her plan. Saurfang should be held somewhat responsible for the burning of the tree, as if he'd killed Malfurion it probably wouldn't have needed to get burned down. I think her plan to wipe out the Alliance is exactly as you say, and she would have succeeded in it all if it weren't for Jaina coming back.

I don't think it's terrifying though. I think it's exciting. I am equally excited to see how Anduin reacts. I think it will make for some fun story progression this expansion as the war progresses.

[Super Dickmann]

I'm not entirely convinced. She mentions more than Elune would oppose her true motives and if all it was was conquering the Alliance or dealing such a wound that would no longer matter since she torches the tree would be no issue.

[Deleted]

It was killing Malfurion. That was her secret plan, all along. It wasn't "A war against Life" or something similar. She was hunting his ass down in order to inflict "A wound that would never heal".

She didn't tell Saurfang her plan to kill Malfurion during the planning stages of the War of Thorns. Only that they had to inflict that terrible wound. Saurfang thought that taking the tree would create that wound, but it was only after the tree burned that he understood that keeping the tree was just a bonus for the Horde War Plan, and that Malfurion's Death was the real goal. Because only his death would push Tyrande into trying to reclaim Darnassus while Anduin and Genn did their best to hold her back because they didn't have the navy to support it. That the Alliance would tear itself apart over their separate interests.

But that would only work if Kalimdor were "secure", and Malfurion was dead.

She doesn't have some far-reaching hidden agenda that we don't know about, yet. She laid it all out for Saurfang: The conquest of the Alliance.

And it's also why she burned the tree... with Malfurion alive, she needed a new "Wound That Would Never Heal". And Teldrassil and it's civilians were it. She didn't kill them out of hatred, or spite, or sadistic cruelty that warmed her frozen heart. She did it because it was the only way to get the Alliance to attack Lordaeron, to get them to fall into the trap and decimate their military forces so that the defacto Peace of Distance could hold.

Aside from Saurfang brooding in a cell in Stormwind, and Jaina saving Anduin, the plan has gone like it's supposed to.

And that's fucking terrifying.

This is all that I have been saying in a nutshell 1000x over until I'm blue in the face to the anti-Sylvanas brigade, but no matter how simply you lay it out and with all the evidence in front of them, it will seem many people who do not like will almost purposely not understand it, for whatever reason. The optimist in me says that if we keep making posts like this and keeping a consistent approach in providing the facts as they actually transpired, that people may gradually change their mind and see events a little more objectively, or at the very least accurately - in that, they may still not like her (and of course it is totally cool to despise her too, that's everyone's right), but at least they are basing that opinion on the facts we have available to us. This is all in a perfect world of course and I hope that laying it out like this once again will be a step closer...but the realist in me is not getting too hopeful just yet lol

[Selinde]

And it's also why she burned the tree... with Malfurion alive, she needed a new "Wound That Would Never Heal". And Teldrassil and it's civilians were it. She didn't kill them out of hatred, or spite, or sadistic cruelty that warmed her frozen heart. She did it because it was the only way to get the Alliance to attack Lordaeron, to get them to fall into the trap and decimate their military forces so that the defacto Peace of Distance could hold.

Aside from Saurfang brooding in a cell in Stormwind, and Jaina saving Anduin, the plan has gone like it's supposed to.

And that's fucking terrifying.

I think her plan was to make the Alliance unable to strike back by holding civilians hostage and getting the upper hand over Azerite by taking away the main Alliance harbor in Kalimdor, so that they couldn’t get Azerite back to Stormwind. She wanted to create a rift between the Alliance faction leaders over which city they should get back first, Darnassus or Gilneas. This part of her plan clearly backfired hard, not only her actions just brought the Alliance races closer and united them against a common enemy, but it is actually the Horde itself that now has internal tension over her choices.

[Steampunkette]

I would say Sylvanas was straightforward in her rationale for war with Saurfang - her lie is one of omission, the selfsame stratagem she discusses with Nathanos in the opening chapters of "Before the Storm": the conversion of Stormwind's dead into Forsaken, consuming the lion's share of Humanity to empower her bulkwark against what awaits her if she experiences true death once more. This, I would think, is paramount in her mind because it concerns her well-being and continued existence directly - above and beyond what is good for the Horde or its (living) peoples. I think if pressed, she would justify this by saying that her goals and the needs of the Horde are essentially aligned, but her omission of this important detail as part of her case of war is telling by its very nature. She knows other leaders would never agree with that given their spiritual, ethical, and natural concerns - and she knows that adding it to the case would only distract and divide the consensus of the Horde.

She doesn't discuss that with Nathanos in the opening chapters of Before the Storm. She states that there's a battle to come: Stormwind.

In A Good War she makes it clear to Saurfang that Stormwind is her goal, just not in a direct assault. Instead she wants to break pieces off of the Alliance and conquer them one by one. Because that's the only way there can be true peace. (Which the Devs have stated is her ultimate goal)

In the beginning chapters of Before the Storm she -THINKS- about raising all the humans who die defending it. She rationalizes it. She mulls it over. But it's presented even in her internal monologue as a bonus. A perk. An extra. "And in the bargain she would increase the population of the Forsaken"

The whole "Bulwark against Death" thing was Garrosh's interpretation of the look he saw in her eyes. Not her actual statements or thoughts as presented by the author.

... honestly, the more I read other characters' reactions to her actions the more morally grey things are actually becoming...

[Doffen]

To kill Malfurion wasn't a secret though, it was written in the first appearance in Undercity before you go to Orgrimmar.

We must inflict a blow that will show them what is at stake. They need to lose something... someone... in whom they have absolute trust and faith. A symbol of hope.
<The Dark Lady narrows her eyes.>
Malfurion Stormrage must die.

[Ulfric Trumpcloak]

The whole thing was bad writing. She burns down a world tree full of innocent people, but has a chance to easily dispatch her most powerful? opponent and decides to leave the scene and leave it to someone else. Who writes this stuff?

[Steampunkette]

To kill Malfurion wasn't a secret though, it was written in the first appearance in Undercity before you go to Orgrimmar.

We must inflict a blow that will show them what is at stake. They need to lose something... someone... in whom they have absolute trust and faith. A symbol of hope.
<The Dark Lady narrows her eyes.>
Malfurion Stormrage must die.

Oh, sure. I meant from Saurfang.

When Nathanos mentions that she's going to get a chance to hunt Malfurion, Saurfang is all "What's she up to?" because he thinks it's some secret plan of hers. But yeah. It was just killing him to drive a wedge between Sylvanas, Genn, and the rest of the Alliance.

[Deleted]

To kill Malfurion wasn't a secret though, it was written in the first appearance in Undercity before you go to Orgrimmar.

We must inflict a blow that will show them what is at stake. They need to lose something... someone... in whom they have absolute trust and faith. A symbol of hope.
<The Dark Lady narrows her eyes.>
Malfurion Stormrage must die.

I think by “secret” the OP is referring to the fact that you get a summons to UC to do discuss a matter in secrecy because of the spies around Orgrimmar. Ergo, you are the only person (other than Saurfang and Nathanos) I assume who is informed of the plan. The circle is kept very small because of the hugely sensitive nature of the plan, therefore treating it as a secret.

[Steampunkette]

The whole thing was bad writing. She burns down a world tree full of innocent people, but has a chance to easily dispatch her most powerful? opponent and decides to leave the scene and leave it to someone else. Who writes this stuff?

She has the chance to do so yup! But. She leaves it to Saurfang because it was a dishonorable blow. She needed him to be the one to kill Malf in order to ensure that he understood that Honor was less important than Survival. When Malfurion escaped, Sylvanas had to do something HORRIBLE in order to get the Alliance to attack Undercity, as she'd planned with Saurfang weeks before. A wound that would never heal.

She could've waited for the evacuation to finish... but Alliance Reinforcements might've stopped her, by then. And NOT destroying Teldrassil wasn't an option since it is the major port of the Alliance on Kalimdor and the source of the Alliance's Azerite. She couldn't occupy it, because with Malfurion alive there'd be no way that she could hold it. So she burned a tree full of civilians to slice into the heart of the Alliance to force them to attack her at Lordaeron.

It's disgusting, it's deplorable... and combined with everything else she's doing, it makes the whole mess morally grey.

[Hyral]

Pretty sure her plans have been revealed to the player/reader/viewer multiple times already. To have all serve her in death. She's pretty much said it multiple times, the most recent being the Three Sisters comic.

No idea why her worshipers keep ignoring that.

[viridian-716]

The whole thing was bad writing. She burns down a world tree full of innocent people, but has a chance to easily dispatch her most powerful? opponent and decides to leave the scene and leave it to someone else. Who writes this stuff?

Actually could be great writing if you intend to depict a person as irrational. It's clear blizz intends to paint her in a bad light and bad leaders aren't thorough. If she REALLY wanted him dead and if she was a good leader, she would have done it herself.

[Doffen]

Oh, sure. I meant from Saurfang.

When Nathanos mentions that she's going to get a chance to hunt Malfurion, Saurfang is all "What's she up to?" because he thinks it's some secret plan of hers. But yeah. It was just killing him to drive a wedge between Sylvanas, Genn, and the rest of the Alliance.

Which is odd, because Saurfang had no issues trying to kill Malfurion, just the way it was made for him. 1vs1 it would be honorful, and with a purpose. Why would she hide that from him in the first place.

Saurfang doesn't have problem with war, only the ways they are fought, well now at least :P

Ah well, that Saurfang line in the OP got lost into translation for me, we are on the same page.

- - - Updated - - -

I think by “secret” the OP is referring to the fact that you get a summons to UC to do discuss a matter in secrecy because of the spies around Orgrimmar. Ergo, you are the only person (other than Saurfang and Nathanos) I assume who is informed of the plan. The circle is kept very small because of the hugely sensitive nature of the plan, therefore treating it as a secret.

Yes sir! Players view vs Characters view, not always the same

[Tabrotar]

It was killing Malfurion. That was her secret plan, all along. It wasn't "A war against Life" or something similar. She was hunting his ass down in order to inflict "A wound that would never heal".

She didn't tell Saurfang her plan to kill Malfurion during the planning stages of the War of Thorns. Only that they had to inflict that terrible wound. Saurfang thought that taking the tree would create that wound, but it was only after the tree burned that he understood that keeping the tree was just a bonus for the Horde War Plan, and that Malfurion's Death was the real goal. Because only his death would push Tyrande into trying to reclaim Darnassus while Anduin and Genn did their best to hold her back because they didn't have the navy to support it. That the Alliance would tear itself apart over their separate interests.

But that would only work if Kalimdor were "secure", and Malfurion was dead.

She doesn't have some far-reaching hidden agenda that we don't know about, yet. She laid it all out for Saurfang: The conquest of the Alliance.

And it's also why she burned the tree... with Malfurion alive, she needed a new "Wound That Would Never Heal". And Teldrassil and it's civilians were it. She didn't kill them out of hatred, or spite, or sadistic cruelty that warmed her frozen heart. She did it because it was the only way to get the Alliance to attack Lordaeron, to get them to fall into the trap and decimate their military forces so that the defacto Peace of Distance could hold.

Aside from Saurfang brooding in a cell in Stormwind, and Jaina saving Anduin, the plan has gone like it's supposed to.

And that's fucking terrifying.

Hm remember how we had this discussion before that you always (and i mean really always) do the same thing aka "Oh look but she doesn´t did that, she didn´t wanted to do that she was forced" and so on in regards of Sylvanas.

And here you´re again doing the same shit and you even said to me that´s not what you´re doing...

Seems totally legit to me

[Aucald]

She doesn't discuss that with Nathanos in the opening chapters of Before the Storm. She states that there's a battle to come: Stormwind.

"Soon enough, they would thirst for blood, and she would offer the the red life-fluid of the Stormwind's humans, the older enemies of the Horde, to slake that thirst. And in the bargain she would increase the population of the Forsaken. For all the humans who fell with city would be reborn to serve her." - "Before the Storm", pg. 24-25

Omniscient third-party narration, a window into Sylvanas' inner monologue.

In A Good War she makes it clear to Saurfang that Stormwind is her goal, just not in a direct assault. Instead she wants to break pieces off of the Alliance and conquer them one by one. Because that's the only way there can be true peace. (Which the Devs have stated is her ultimate goal)

She does, and she relies on Saurfang to put 2 and 2 together in the manner that works best for her. The Kaldorei are only a tool - a machination, if you will. Stormwind is the true target in her mind.

In the beginning chapters of Before the Storm she -THINKS- about raising all the humans who die defending it. She rationalizes it. She mulls it over. But it's presented even in her internal monologue as a bonus. A perk. An extra. "And in the bargain she would increase the population of the Forsaken"

That above excerpt does not agree with your summation here. The rationalization is her view that such an act would be so bad for them, for they would be with the Forsaken of Lordaeron once more, and free from mortal concerns such as sleep, or "the daggers of passion." This is all just whatever faint glimmer of essential humanity that is left in her trying in vain to put a positive spin on monstrosity.

The whole "Bulwark against Death" thing was Garrosh's interpretation of the look he saw in her eyes. Not her actual statements or thoughts as presented by the author.

... honestly, the more I read other characters' reactions to her actions the more morally grey things are actually becoming...

That passage from "Edge of Night" is neither Garrosh's interpretation, his inner monologue, nor passive narration - it is a window into Sylvanas' inner thoughts:

"The army of undead that surrounded and protected the Dark Lady was still hers, body and soul. But they were no longer arrows in her quiver, not anymore. They were a bulwark against the infinite. They were to be used wisely, and no fool orc would squander them while she still walked the world of the living."

Garrosh's interpretation isn't going to include him thinking of himself as a "fool orc," after all. No, that is Sylvanas' thoughts shown to us directly.

[Stormdash]

It sounds good except for a fatal logic flaw. If her plan was to kill Malfurion... she would have killed Malfurion or certainly personally seen him dead. No way she just delegates blindly the central pillar of her plan.

Instead, what we saw in the War of Thorns was a classic example of the organizational leadership pitfall of "mission creep". In A Good War the plan upon invading, as Sylvanas unspools it, is to capture and hold Teldrassil, use it as both hostage and resource, to increase their hold over Kalimdor and to drive a wedge between the loyalties of the Alliance races* so that the Horde can build back from the war against the Legion faster than the Alliance and be the first to effectively extend their campaign global. To that end, Malfurion and Tyrande were literally only obstacles, challenges to be negotiated to obtain the main goal of capturing and occupying Teldrassil.

Somewhere in the midst of all that, the creep set in and suddenly this mishigas about a "bleeding wound" drew focus, and at that point, rather than killing or neutralizing Malfurion be a means to the end of capturing Teldrassil, it became an end unto itself -- for him to be that wound. And it was only when she is denied that by her own omission that she thwarts her own original goal, and burns Teldrassil instead. By the time she was standing on the beach triumphant, have successfully accomplished her original goal was something she viewed as insufficient, or even failure, because she had shifted her goal off target during the implementation. Mission creep.

*In some ways it's moot, though, whether she burnt Teldrassil or captured it. She underestimated that the Alliance would still just do whatever Anduin thought was right, whether reclaiming Teldrassil or Gilneas were competing goals or not. The first attack may well have fallen on Lordaeron all the same, and in that scenario she probably wouldn't have expected it.

[Steampunkette]

"Soon enough, they would thirst for blood, and she would offer the the red life-fluid of the Stormwind's humans, the older enemies of the Horde, to slake that thirst. And in the bargain she would increase the population of the Forsaken. For all the humans who fell with city would be reborn to serve her." - "Before the Storm", pg. 24-25

Omniscient third-party narration, a window into Sylvanas' inner monologue.

That above excerpt does not agree with your summation here. The rationalization is her view that such an act would be so bad for them, for they would be with the Forsaken of Lordaeron once more, and free from mortal concerns such as sleep, or "the daggers of passion." This is all just whatever faint glimmer of essential humanity that is left in her trying in vain to put a positive spin on monstrosity.

Yes. The thing you're copying is Third Party Narration, not a discussion she had with Nathanos. Which was your claim, and I disputed it. That she only states her intention to have a battle at/over/with Stormwind. On the second half...

Key phrase: AND IN THE BARGAIN.

into (or in) the bargain
phrase of bargain
1.
in addition to what was expected; moreover.
"an upstate yokel and a raving paranoiac into the bargain"

Her goal isn't "To wipe out humanity to increase her undead bulwark against the Darkness of death" it's "To conquer Stormwind" and as the prize in the Cracker Jack Box she can raise them as Forsaken.

That's her rationalizing it. You can claim it's the lest vestiges of humanity trying to put a positive spin on it, but she was also never human.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Sylvanas lies to EVERYONE. including herself.

That passage from "Edge of Night" is neither Garrosh's interpretation, his inner monologue, nor passive narration - it is a window into Sylvanas' inner thoughts:

"The army of undead that surrounded and protected the Dark Lady was still hers, body and soul. But they were no longer arrows in her quiver, not anymore. They were a bulwark against the infinite. They were to be used wisely, and no fool orc would squander them while she still walked the world of the living."

Garrosh's interpretation isn't going to include him thinking of himself as a "fool orc," after all. No, that is Sylvanas' thoughts shown to us directly.

I get that's what you think but you're dropping context a LOT, there. The first part is this:

Sylvanas did not move or shy away. "I was once like you, Garrosh," she answered, her voice quiet and steady, loud enough only for the warchief to hear. "Those who served me were tools. Arrows in my quiver." She reached up and slowly brought down her hood, then directed her dark gaze at him. Her eyes were alive, their oversized jet-black pupils livid with rage, red embers glowing deep within.

Here we establish that Garrosh now knows that she USED to think of her people as arrows in her quiver. Then he looks into her eyes and...

What he saw was a great black void, an infinite darkness. There was fear in those eyes, but also something else. Something that terrified even the great warchief. His wolf began to edge away instinctively.

"Garrosh Hellscream. I've walked the realms of the dead. I have seen the infinite dark. Nothing you say. Or do. Could possibly frighten me."

The army of undead that surrounded and protected the Dark Lady was still hers, body and soul. But they were no longer arrows in her quiver, not anymore. They were a bulwark against the infinite. They were to be used wisely, and no fool orc would squander them while she still walked the world of the living.

That could be interpreted your way. As Garrosh's reaction, Sylvanas's statement, and then Sylvanas's thoughts. But that narrative structure belies the fact that she left him hanging on what she thinks of her people as -now-. Her statements become "Those who served me were tools. Arrows in my Quiver." followed immediately by "Garrosh Hellscream. I've walked the realms of the dead" yadda yadda. They don't fit together and neither of them addresses what has been said. It's two completely unrelated nonsequitors that don't even relate to each other, back to back, broken only by her pulling down her hood to look at him.

But. If the narrative structure is Garrosh's reaction, Sylvanas's statement, and then what Garrosh interpreted in her eyes... then it makes sense because he's reacting to the interpretation (Bulwark) and then she's making her other "You can't scare me" statement. Because she didn't SAY they were the Bulwark against the Darkness, but he's aware that's what she feels when he looks into her eyes (Or at least he -feels- that's what she meant).

The narrative structure only makes sense one way. Otherwise Sylvanas had a stroke in the middle of a conversation and started talking about something completely different and Garrosh capitulates to her only on account of her looking at him all scary-like.

And trust me, adding "You fool" to your gaze is -not- difficult.

[Aucald]

Yes. The thing you're copying is Third Party Narration, not a discussion she had with Nathanos. Which was your claim, and I disputed it. That she only states her intention to have a battle at/over/with Stormwind. On the second half...

Third-party narration that exposes her inner thoughts, yes. Her thoughts *about* the discussion she just had with Nathanos and the ramifications thereof.

Key phrase: AND IN THE BARGAIN.

into (or in) the bargain
phrase of bargain
1.
in addition to what was expected; moreover.
"an upstate yokel and a raving paranoiac into the bargain"

Her goal isn't "To wipe out humanity to increase her undead bulwark against the Darkness of death" it's "To conquer Stormwind" and as the prize in the Cracker Jack Box she can raise them as Forsaken.

Logical construction, really. We know Sylvanas' desire to increase the ranks of the the Forsaken and/or to provide permanence for their unlives because of the events of "Edge of Night." That was the very reason she was in Stormheim, searching for legendary beings with power over death itself (e.g. Helya, Eyir, etc.) Sylvanas has no pre-existing beef with Stormwind, no overriding emotion that would impel her to hate the Humans above all. The fact that they become Forsaken when raised into undeath is her motivation, and she betrays it in the excerpt above.

Raising the dead of Stormwind isn't a secondary prize of the war in Sylvanas' eyes - it is *the* prize, as her own continued existence is the paramount concern (to her). Unless you truly believe Sylvanas is a through-and-through patriot of the Horde and all it stands for, with "blood and honor" as her standard and "Lok'tar Ogar" as her creed.

That's her rationalizing it. You can claim it's the lest vestiges of humanity trying to put a positive spin on it, but she was also never human.

I said "essential humanity," by which I mean her memories of being a living High Elf and caring for her people, her land, and the ideals therein. Not implying she was of the Human race in the Warcraft universe. For future reference, I tend to capitalize the "H" in "Human" when I'm referring to the fictional Warcraft race, and I leave it the lowercase "human" when I'm comparing a character to the real-life concept of humanity or human beings such as ourselves. It feels weird to refer to "essential elfishness" in my head - so that's how I do it.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Sylvanas lies to EVERYONE. including herself.

No disagreement there, but when you're looking at an external window into a character's thoughts and feelings, the tendency is to take the presented info at face value. If the novel or short story were written by an outright unreliable narrator it would be a different story, but I don't think that's the case here.

I get that's what you think but you're dropping context a LOT, there. The first part is this:

Here we establish that Garrosh now knows that she USED to think of her people as arrows in her quiver. Then he looks into her eyes and...

That could be interpreted your way. As Garrosh's reaction, Sylvanas's statement, and then Sylvanas's thoughts. But that narrative structure belies the fact that she left him hanging on what she thinks of her people as -now-. Her statements become "Those who served me were tools. Arrows in my Quiver." followed immediately by "Garrosh Hellscream. I've walked the realms of the dead" yadda yadda. They don't fit together and neither of them addresses what has been said. It's two completely unrelated nonsequitors that don't even relate to each other, back to back, broken only by her pulling down her hood to look at him.

I think you're inferring a contextual link that isn't present, personally. Nothing about that structure implies Garrosh's perspective, such as it is, goes beyond Sylvanas' reply to his previous statement.

But. If the narrative structure is Garrosh's reaction, Sylvanas's statement, and then what Garrosh interpreted in her eyes... then it makes sense because he's reacting to the interpretation (Bulwark) and then she's making her other "You can't scare me" statement. Because she didn't SAY they were the Bulwark against the Darkness, but he's aware that's what she feels when he looks into her eyes (Or at least he -feels- that's what she meant).

The narrative structure only makes sense one way. Otherwise Sylvanas had a stroke in the middle of a conversation and started talking about something completely different and Garrosh capitulates to her only on account of her looking at him all scary-like.

I see the paragraph following Sylvanas' reply to Garrosh as a description of her resolve - the meaning behind what she said, and of course further perspective on how she views the matter of Garrosh's use of the Forsaken herself. Garrosh is rankling that Sylvanas would dare check his authority and dictate to him how "his" armies were to be deployed - Sylvanas replies by giving her bona fides and cementing her own authority in this particular context, to which Garrosh wisely acquiesces. The paragraph the follows details why Sylvanas spoke, and how she views her Forsaken now (contrasting and book-ending how she did so previously). But to be honest who's perspective it might be is a secondary concern - this excerpt goes to motive as it ties into Sylvanas' rationale for war at the beginning of the post, showing why her desire for Stormwind's end has nothing to do with whatever is best for the Horde. This is still all about what is best for *her*.

And trust me, adding "You fool" to your gaze is -not- difficult.

Eyes can sometimes say things that words could never even hope to aspire to.