Saurfang is an SI:7/Alliance asset

[Syegfryed]

https://i.imgur.com/xef1S0e.png

this is the future of the horde. fucking elves. they and forsaken should NEVER have joined the horde. they ruined everything

And people say im wrong with my hate towards elves

elves literally ruin everything if they are not in check, fantasie, stories, game, fuck it

i knew posts like this would come, they are never satisfied, new leader model, new customization, first heritage armor, and they want be the face of the horde

[Arrashi]

https://i.imgur.com/xef1S0e.png

this is the future of the horde. fucking elves. they and forsaken should NEVER have joined the horde. they ruined everything

Nope. It was blizzard with their idiotic idea for MoP that ruined everything. You can't blame belf/forsaken players for coming to obvious conclusions.

[Flarelaine]

the warcry is when you are in a fight, that you cannot run you either win or die

you do not beg, you do not surrender, you do not act in shameless or cowardly.

and this is mostly individual, when you are in a war, with actual armies, you need to manage then, you can't throw then at the window, cause it would be death or death

Human wave tactics work sometimes, when the defender is simply not as committed or has fewer reserves. But for the most part, you are right.

[Dimmak]

Well that's his character destroyed. Where the honour in working for your worst enemy? Or is treason honourable now?

Shame Zappiboi has attached himself with this tratior.

But isn't Sylvannis the Horde's worst enemy? She just wants to raise them all as undead and make them her worshippers. I've got a feeling they let him go because Anduin says he finally sees through her BS and they they are just using the orcs like the legion used the orcs. Shock troops to die at her feet and raise up as skeletons and zombies to die again.

[Aucald]

I've brought this up before and I'll repeat it here. If they're unscrupulous enough to kill Saurfang, who was actually somebody in the Horde and were able to track him up to this point, then killing Memeboi as well and feeding him to the crocodiles too wouldn't be beyond their power. Even more so because he was the one who revealed himself, not the PC. It's highly unlikely that he'd sit idly by while they torch Saurfang's hut and shoot him in the head, in the PC's absence. But say he did. These veteran trackers would obviously be able to follow a rookie troll shaman's passage through terrain he has no familiarity with and kill him too. Your argument is predicated on them leaving Zekhan alive inexplicably, which they have no motive to do or someone of his complete lack of skill escaping multiple trained assassins. Even in the release version that they'll kill him as well as Saurfang and the PC is implicit once the battle begins. If we accept that it's an assassination, it's even more obvious they'd kill any witnesses as well.

Your argument presumes that if the mission were taken as a secret one to assassinate Saurfang it would happen exactly the same it does as when the Champion tags along. It's the presence of the Champion that clues Zekhan in, after all, and you're the one he confronts and allies with. If Lyana were there alone she would likely pursue the investigation surreptitiously and in secret - and probably avoid allowing anyone to see her (including Zekhan) to throw off suspicion. That means Zekhan would likely never encounter her, and be waiting at Three Corners (as he is when he encounters Lyana and the Champion) and be otherwise unaware that Saurfang is being fought and possibly killed by Lyana and her Deathguard. Needless to say, without the need for the Champion to be present, events would have been quite different in a variety of ways.

Yes, but there's no evidence to speak of except Baine, who's been a traitor and an Alliance proxy in the Horde since Tides of War and a meme reference. For you to posit a theory on the mindset of the Horde you have to actually provide evidence of that being their mindset, but you've provided none. The burden of proof isn't on me to show you that something isn't the case, it's on you to prove that it's the case and provide supporting arguments, just as I've provided constant backing for the role and the approval the Horde shows as regards the war. To equivocate when it comes to the burden of proof is disingenuous. My claim is backed by the complete absence of mention of Saurfang and by every notable NPC going "For the Horde" and being pro-war as well as the PC. Your claim is backed by a known Alliance sympathizer, a meme and a possible future course of events.

A high likely future course of events now that we know the details of 8.1, as you've already admitted. I've already given a few examples of discontent or at least questioning of Sylvanas's regime in pre-8.1 content - you dismissed them as unimportant, but that doesn't make them irrelevant or non-existent, either. You've also provided no positive evidence that Sylvanas enjoys overwhelming popularity, either - you've only said "well no one has grumbled about it, so obviously everyone fully supports it." I disagree with this, and the events of the 8.1 quests also don't support it. Saurfang goes unmentioned in the 8.0 content because he's not important to it, really; but your claim that (in-universe) no one in the Horde is talking about the war, the events with the War of Thorns and the Battle of Lordaeron, seems pretty far-fetched. It doesn't jive with the way people (real or imaginary) deal with hugely important events that lead to a devastating global conflict.

If and when Blizzard decides that Saurfang is actually beloved and popular that won't make it retroactively present in the earlier cases that show no such thing. That's why I compared it to the identical scenario in Mists, where we were seeded with much more definitive proof of widespread discontent and racial groups forming Vol'jin's rebel constituency. Saurfang has no group at all following him as of 8.1 and no group has shown disapproval as regards Sylvanas. A future hypothetical doesn't change this.

When Saurfang becomes plot relevant (which he is beginning to be in 8.1) we will see just how much support he has among the Horde. As I said above, he's not been relevant during 8.0, which is why he's not really been mentioned (the game doesn't tend to dwell on irrelevant content, after all, and isn't big on aside material at the best of times).

See above. Kill Memeboi, put him in the oven with Saurfang. There's no way these veteran hunters and trackers won't be able to find a novice who would likely put himself in harm's way deliberately to try and save Saurfang anyway. There's zero reason why Shaw and SI:7's version, propagated by the Alliance or hidden channels would find more support among the Horde population than the version favoured by the Warchief of the Horde, in the middle of a worldwide war with the Alliance and given that as you yourself point out, Sylvanas has let Saurfang do whatever up to this point despite his myriad treacherous actions.

I think I covered this above - there's no reason for the same events to occur if Lyana was conducting the investigation herself, and presumably under the cover of secrecy.

It would have this impact on the Horde only if we accept the asinine position that the Horde would be more open to accepting a version of events where Saurfang is killed by the Horde for being an Alliance stooge than the version where he breaks out and is killed by SI:7 after his heroic escaped, turning his death into a propaganda point for Sylvanas or where he just disappears and is never heard from again. I would have an easier time believing Saurfang has some kind of support structure in place if there was any proof of it to speak of, but again, you yourself admit it's a hypothetical contingent on Blizzard doing the exact opposite of what they'd been doing up until now. Except it's too late, because from this point on any rebellion he will build after the fact would be the product of Shaw's plan to foment rebellion in the Horde, giving even more reason for him to be killed to keep the Horde stable.

The fact that Shaw wants a rebellion within the Horde doesn't discount or otherwise tarnish Saurfang's reasoning for such a rebellion. This seems like a far-fetched conflation of events.

The Horde don't have access to the script. They didn't see Saurfang's capture. They know he chose to stay in Alliance custody and later the PC and the Dark Ranger knows he changed his mind for whatever reason and his escape was facilitated by the Alliance. To believe his skillset was at the Alliance's disposal during that time period is a reasonable conclusion to come to given his track record up to this point and in any case isn't a risk worth taking. But since Sylvanas already took it by not killing him in prison to permit the plot to continue, killing him now before he presents a further danger to herself and the failing Horde war effort is reasonable.

They knew he was in Alliance custody, and they know he escaped. You can't assume it's common knowledge that Rokhan and co. tried to free him and he demurred, nor can you assume it's common knowledge that SI:7 aided in the escape. This means that anyone with respect for and a historic trust in Saurfang (e.g. a lot of the Horde's veterans and current soldiers) would see a prisoner of war escaping from Alliance detainment to probably return to the Horde for reasons of his own. I think you're allowing your own bias to color how you think the Horde would receive him.

Baine is against, as he quite obviously would be, but as you mention he lacks clout. Gallywix is on board, and from what we see regarding Sylvanas trusting Rokhan with the San'layn and him trusting her on that point and the rest have no stake in the proceedings. For what it's worth Lor'themar speaks well of her in the 8.1 heritage armor quest, but our positions on the leadership is purely conjecture. It behooves your narrative that they be closet-Saurfang supporters, but there's nothing evidentiary of their preference one way or another, except that they're evidently fine with the war.

Lor'themar says he'll always remember sacrifice as the Ranger-General of Silvermoon - which is proper that he should do so. But note that he refers to all this in the past tense and not the present; and we also know that he's had a number of serious disagreements with Sylvanas since then. This remembrance of her sacrifice in the Third War is nowhere close to a statement of full support in her regime. Gallywix's loyalty to Sylvanas is provisional on profits, and Gallywix is as fair-weather of a supporter as you could ever have as a ruler.

That doesn't get us anywhere, participating in Sylvanas' war without complaint implies at least a tacit support. This is even more so in the War Campaign, which is waged in a fashion Sylvanas prefers and especially Brennadam, where orcs and trolls engage in a massacre without complaint and happily. Every named NPC and their dog goes "For the Horde". For you to surmise that this means they secretly conspire against Sylvanas is without backing.

I disagree, as I said before. Brennadam is a relatively small scale conflict, and trying to say "this fight represents the mood and disposition of the entire Horde" seems like folly. I'm also not saying the entire Horde is conspiring against Sylvanas - I am saying that there is very likely an undercurrent of suspicion and mistrust in Sylvanas' regime that could, with the right catalyst, become a rebellion. You deny this, but simultaneously admit that Saurfang's escape from the Stockades is a danger to Sylvanas. If Sylvanas enjoys the widespread and total support that you claim, then Saurfang's escape is manifestly not dangerous to her - it wouldn't be an important plot-point if your view of the Horde's disposition is correct. The very fact that we've got this focus on Saurfang's escape illustrates that he's a threat to her, and the *only* way that he could be a threat to her is if he could foment division and strife within the Horde. The only way he could do that would be if he has a preexisting base to forward such division and strife.

The Warchief is the Horde. What the fuck are the greater values of the Horde? Every single thing Saurfang or his bum-buddy Baine complain with is done cheerily by the Horde. Let's entertain for a moment it's not for Sylvanas and it's because they just feel it's necessary. That makes no difference to speak of. They still torch the tree and ignore Saurfang, they still slaughter Brennadam, they still raise the dead and hose down people with plague. The Horde Saurfang views is a product of his imagination from what we see. I don't doubt that this will change, because Blizzard are hellbent on dragging us on this interminable narrative, where a faction war expansion's main plotline for the Horde consists of LARPing as what amounts to unwitting CIA assets in subverting our own side and electing a pawn, witting or otherwise to the Horde throne, but there's no plausible way for them to write themselves out of it. They can make Sylvanas a scapegoat and they no doubt will, but the Horde participated in her war without complaint up to that point. They did the atrocities, it wasn't Sylvanas doing them by herself, and when they are suddenly rewritten to be peaceniks who just want to put suitably Alliance-approved leaders in charge to enable the next expansion it'll be an even worse copout than it was with Garrosh. There's no rewrite that makes the Horde or the PC's conduct vanish.

If the Warchief were the Horde, then Garrosh would still be at the head of it. I think you confuse in-game events for the living, breathing world of the story itself, where individuals actually do have opinions, agency, and perhaps disagreements as to what they're fighting for. As I said above - the very fact that Saurfang is important enough to track down and kill, or for Shaw to allow to escape for his reasons, demonstrates that the story is not quite what you think it is.

For one thing dropping Taloc into the pit is implied to have prevented him from being deployed much earlier, but that's beside the point. The thing is, Sylvanas is the one who sent people to rescue Talanji, Sylvanas gave that task to Rokhan and Sylvanas sent the Gob Squad there, she's not singlehandedly responsible, obviously, but she was the one to pledge the Horde's resources to assisting Zandalar without which it would be gone. From the datamining we also know that it's Nathanos who rallies the Horde to prevent a total Alliance victory at Dazar'alor and we also know that while Baine tells Talanji that it's time for negotiations, Sylvanas reaffirms that the Horde will stand by them. It's pretty obvious who comes out looking better than this and it's not the guy who tells a grieving daughter and her damaged city that they should be writing up their surrender notice so the God-King can take mercy on their souls.

Sylvanas sends people to rescue Talanji because Talanji was en route to Sylvanas for her own reasons (e.g. the Blood Troll threat), and Sylvanas needs the Zandalari navy - there's no altruism on Sylvanas' part in that pursuit. Sylvanas also pledges the Horde's support to Zandalar for said navy, as many Zandalari NPC's grouse about in the opening quests. I would also expect Nathanos to lead the Horde against the Alliance at Dazar'alor because he's present there and he's a leader of the Horde forces in the area - this isn't really some kind of laurel in Sylvanas' cap, it's the expected reaction to an Alliance assault on their erstwhile allies (and the implied threat to Sylvanas' real interest in the Zandalari: that giant navy). I can't speak to Baine's blabber about negotiating (he really is kind of useless), but it's not really a contest either. I highly doubt Sylvanas or Nathanos feels any kind of sympathy for Talanji's loss or Rastakhan's death - rather, they're probably secretly happy to have a more tractable leader at the helm of Zandalar.

[Deleted]

Interesting how a bullet to the head killed her but a fall from a thousand feet is all fine and dandy, or was the bullet/gun somehow magically enhanced?

Again, pay attention to details or at least educate yourself, if you're even interested in the truth, which i doubt, because it doesn't really fit your preferred personal view of things. The person who shot the bullet used magic bullets. Lord Godfrey uses cursed bullets, thats one of his main abilities.

" Cursed Bullets Interruptible curse — Lord Godfrey picks a random player and shoots them with cursed bullets. This attack immediately deals 200 (50,000 heroic) Shadow damage to the target, and continues to deal severe and increasing Shadow damage every 3 seconds for 15 sec."

CURSED bullets. So no, she didn't die to a normal bullet. And Godfrey also isn't an idiot. If he wants to kill Sylvanas, he wouldn't use a normal bullet, if he can curse the bullet with shadow magic, to make it much more devastating and effective.

[Verdugo]

But isn't Sylvannis the Horde's worst enemy?

No, she is not.

[Leodric]

Again, pay attention to details or at least educate yourself, if you're even interested in the truth, which i doubt, because it doesn't really fit your preferred personal view of things. The person who shot the bullet used magic bullets. Lord Godfrey uses cursed bullets, thats one of his main abilities.

" Cursed Bullets Interruptible curse — Lord Godfrey picks a random player and shoots them with cursed bullets. This attack immediately deals 200 (50,000 heroic) Shadow damage to the target, and continues to deal severe and increasing Shadow damage every 3 seconds for 15 sec."

CURSED bullets. So no, she didn't die to a normal bullet. And Godfrey also isn't an idiot. If he wants to kill Sylvanas, he wouldn't use a normal bullet, if he can curse the bullet with shadow magic, to make it much more devastating and effective.

Sorry, but in-game skills aren't a conclusive lore evidence. Got anything else?

- - - Updated - - -

But isn't Sylvannis the Horde's worst enemy? She just wants to raise them all as undead and make them her worshippers. I've got a feeling they let him go because Anduin says he finally sees through her BS and they they are just using the orcs like the legion used the orcs. Shock troops to die at her feet and raise up as skeletons and zombies to die again.

Considering she drives the Horde currently into the shitters, yeah I would say so. Even Blizzard has to hide the army of the light to make it at least somewhat fair in Horde vs Alliance.

It also seems like that this will be the future plot in this expansion, either redemption story (most likely) or straight up raid boss.

- - - Updated - - -

Which part of "Victory or death" explains that? Are there footnotes? Is there a fine print?

It's just cool to shout man, brings the edginess out of ones character. death = cool

- - - Updated - - -

https://i.imgur.com/xef1S0e.png

this is the future of the horde. fucking elves. they and forsaken should NEVER have joined the horde. they ruined everything

Even though I mainly play Alliance nowdays, this hurts to read. BE and Forsaken should have become a third faction. Would make the game way more interesting as well I think

[Deleted]

@ Leodric

Of course in-game skills aren't a conclusive lore evidence for a character like Lord Godfrey, which only comes up in game and not in any book or comic. So if he is only present in the game, kills Sylvanas in the game, of course his abilities are those he has in the game.

But how convenient for you. You have no argument at all, you seem to be allergic to truth and you can't even come up with a counter argument that makes the slightest of sense. Nothing new or unexpected from you though.

[Mehrunes]

Sorry, but in-game skills aren't a conclusive lore evidence. Got anything else?

But do you have any actual counter-evidence that'd allow you to dismiss it? Or do you only have the power of nuh-huh?

Which part of "Victory or death" explains that? Are there footnotes? Is there a fine print?

The part of historical evidence of Horde's practicing it? Even very traditionalist Orcs like Garrosh or Grom? Do you have an actual argument or are you going to keep skimming over the examples I already provided to you because you're too busy constructing a weak-ass deflection out of thin air instead?

[Leodric]

@ Leodric

Of course in-game skills aren't a conclusive lore evidence for a character like Lord Godfrey, which only comes up in game and not in any book or comic. So if he is only present in the game, kills Sylvanas in the game, of course his abilities are those he has in the game.

But how convenient for you. You have no argument at all, you seem to be allergic to truth and you can't even come up with a counter argument that makes the slightest of sense. Nothing new or unexpected from you though.

So according to that logic (and the one stated in the novel by dropping 10k feet being nothing), Sylvanas is near immortal against physical weapon, thus could easily kill Saurfang/Baine without getting touched? It just doesn't add up in my opinion, that's why stating an in-game skill is not enough evidence in my opinion. Blizzard often retconns' stuff, wouldn't surprise me if it happens again here in Sylvanas case and her mortality.

Another thing is why I am not eager to discuss stuff with you is, that you seem to be very emotional invested into the lore/game thus coming with aggressive behaviour like

Again, pay attention to details or at least educate yourself, if you're even interested in the truth, which i doubt...

even though I genuinly asked if the bullet was enhanced, trying to actually "educate" myself. So you didn't even seem to read my post and just waited to shit on another persons head.

[Mehrunes]

A decade a half ago or not, it's still true today, unless you believe Sylvanas actually 'cares' about the Horde, unless denying them an honest death and bringing them back as mindless slaves is a good thing.

Sylvanas is still going against Horde wishes post Cata, by raising more dead to her side to fill the Forsaken numbers when she was specifically asked not to do.

She wasn't asked not to raise more dead. Garrosh was displeased with it, but didn't tell her not to do so. And he was displeased with it because he wanted Forsaken to die. And yes, Sylvanas cares about the Horde. She explicitly told Vereesa that she started her stun in the Horde as reluctant participant but grew to like it over the years.

Saurfang didn't willingly let himself get captured, he fought a handful of Alliance by himself before being beaten, asked to be delivered the final blow to be granted an honourable death, but Anduin denied him and took him prisoner instead. There was no willing about it. Although he did decide to remain in alliance captivity only because he saw the Horde as not the Horde he knew. Was that a betrayal, yes, I cannot deny that, even if you have a shit leader, unfortunately you still have to follow their orders, otherwise it's desertion, if you are a solider you either obey or die. And with Sylvanas death isnt an option when she can just raise you :P

Did Anduin mind control Saurfang to obey him? No. He just told him not only to surrender but that in that moment he gets to dictate to him what Orcish honor is. And Saurfang rolled with it, causing his ancestors to roll in their graves, even though it was entirely within his power to spit in his face and have his glorious last stand that he claimed to have wanted.

[Flarelaine]

The part of historical evidence of Horde's practicing it? Even very traditionalist Orcs like Garrosh or Grom? Do you have an actual argument or are you going to keep skimming over the examples I already provided to you because you're too busy constructing a weak-ass deflection out of thin air instead?

My argument is what I already have stated: it is hypocritical.

[GetCrunk]

A decade a half ago or not, it's still true today, unless you believe Sylvanas actually 'cares' about the Horde, unless denying them an honest death and bringing them back as mindless slaves is a good thing.

If you read Edge of Night you will see her motive change and if you play Battle for Lordaeron(Horde) she says to Saurfang "that she believes this Horde is worth saving". Her first motivation was to kill Arthas at all cost.

Sylvanas is still going against Horde wishes post Cata, by raising more dead to her side to fill the Forsaken numbers when she was specifically asked not to do.

If you referring at the quest in Silverpine Forest where Garrosh confront her for raising more forsaken he did not forbid.

[Super Dickmann]

Your argument presumes that if the mission were taken as a secret one to assassinate Saurfang it would happen exactly the same it does as when the Champion tags along. It's the presence of the Champion that clues Zekhan in, after all, and you're the one he confronts and allies with. If Lyana were there alone she would likely pursue the investigation surreptitiously and in secret - and probably avoid allowing anyone to see her (including Zekhan) to throw off suspicion. That means Zekhan would likely never encounter her, and be waiting at Three Corners (as he is when he encounters Lyana and the Champion) and be otherwise unaware that Saurfang is being fought and possibly killed by Lyana and her Deathguard. Needless to say, without the need for the Champion to be present, events would have been quite different in a variety of ways.

On this very page you argue that tracking Saurfang's remains after they have been disposed of would be accessible and easily done by what amounts to a novice shaman, as would signalling his spirit, which as has repeatedly been pointed out isn't easy. Yet now the crux of your argument is based around the fact that the most skilled trackers Sylvanas can muster, who literally spend hundreds of years learning these skills in life as rangers would be unable to figure out that Saurfang had someone else with him in a swamp or follow the movements of a guy who's been through one battle, has never seen this place before in his life and has no subtlety. And this is predicated on Zappy abandoning Saurfang, his idol, then somehow undertaking a journey back alone and undetected. I'm sorry, but this just doesn't gel. There's no way that they wouldn't able to find him and kill him given an overview of Shrek Saurfang's swamp.

A high likely future course of events now that we know the details of 8.1, as you've already admitted. I've already given a few examples of discontent or at least questioning of Sylvanas's regime in pre-8.1 content - you dismissed them as unimportant, but that doesn't make them irrelevant or non-existent, either. You've also provided no positive evidence that Sylvanas enjoys overwhelming popularity, either - you've only said "well no one has grumbled about it, so obviously everyone fully supports it." I disagree with this, and the events of the 8.1 quests also don't support it. Saurfang goes unmentioned in the 8.0 content because he's not important to it, really; but your claim that (in-universe) no one in the Horde is talking about the war, the events with the War of Thorns and the Battle of Lordaeron, seems pretty far-fetched. It doesn't jive with the way people (real or imaginary) deal with hugely important events that lead to a devastating global conflict.

What frustrates me is the disingenuous nature of your argument. You posit first a strawman of my position - i.e that everyone is 100% behind Sylvanas and then roundly handwave the multitudes of evidence I've provided that the Horde is at the very least overwhelmingly pro-war, including in these instances the War Campaign, the Warfronts, the dialogue of NPCs such as Rexxar, Cromush, Lilian and so on and events such as the decision for them to ignore Saurfang and burn the tree or take part in the Sacking of Brennadam. At the same time, you elevate the comparatively much, much more limited evidence of Saurfang-support being established as very high by overstating the value of comments from one meme character - the Kratos dude, Baine, who is as said, effectively an Alliance sympathizer and traitor since Tides of War who would be against any war by default and out of story ideas on what storyline were to follow.

Later on you accuse me of conflating out of game and in story events when your arguments cease to make sense without that conceit. You admitted earlier that the reason you think there's such a divide in-story among the Horde is because it exists in the playerbase, any evidence be damned and now that because Blizzard are likely to recycle the Mists story, it means that the story as presented now reflects this intent. Intent however isn't action. The reason I keep coming back to Vol'jin is because that was a situation where the story was built up, and even then not exceptionally well. In this case, the only reason I heavily suspect this is the route they're going is the utter incompetence of the writing staff and their love with characters the playerbase soundly despises, such as Baine and Anduin, it's not due to their ingenious foreshadowing in-game. Thus, you are forced to blow every evidence that supports your thesis that a majority of the Horde prefer Saurfang out of proportion to defend Blizzard's predetermined outcome, while dismissing the multitudes of evidence that the Horde in general is pro-war and pro-war with Sylvanas as Warchief to a lesser extent.

The fact that Shaw wants a rebellion within the Horde doesn't discount or otherwise tarnish Saurfang's reasoning for such a rebellion. This seems like a far-fetched conflation of events.

It tarnishes his reasoning because it makes him and us complicit in an Alliance plot to topple the Horde, something the player and Sylvanas is aware of. Aiding Saurfang is aiding the Alliance. This was not the case with Vol'jin, who's rebellion was an organic development that happened entirely within the Horde rather than a scheme by the enemy secret service. To assume that it would make no difference to the Horde that their glorious hero, who by the way chose to sit in the cell and chose to abandon them earlier was released as part of an Alliance plot, which would be highly likely for Sylvanas to publicize should it come to a rebellion, is comical.

This means that anyone with respect for and a historic trust in Saurfang (e.g. a lot of the Horde's veterans and current soldiers) would see a prisoner of war escaping from Alliance detainment to probably return to the Horde for reasons of his own. I think you're allowing your own bias to color how you think the Horde would receive him.

On the contrary, you are presenting a version of events that is not true to reality. There's no 24/7 camera showing the Horde that Saurfang broke out or that he broke out because he really wanted to bring muh honor back to a Horde that's well rid of it. The events surrounding Saurfang are of a strict secrecy. You have, for the past several pages, both with me and Mehrunes failed to bring up any argument when it comes to the publicizing of these events being so widespread or why the Horde would have a preference for the version of events that cast their leader in the worst possible light, a version that inexplicably excludes Saurfang's unknowning collaboration with humans and previous transgressions. You have taken it for granted because you're arguing from the conclusion. Your position is founded upon Blizzard's narrative having a set end goal and because that end goal is there, the components for it must be there as well. But they aren't, because the story is poorly set up and that's why you are put in a position where you must take huge leaps of reason that contradict what we have seen established in order to reach your predetermined conclusion.

The talk of the leaders we've already set aside as conjecture and ties into my point above about spinning things to suit a predetermined conclusion rather than looking over the materials presented and seeing why Blizzard's intent and the product they've produced do not align, to the benefit of arguments such as the ones I and others have proffered in this thread and to the detriment of their own desire to cram this shit down our throats a second time after Mists.

I disagree, as I said before. Brennadam is a relatively small scale conflict, and trying to say "this fight represents the mood and disposition of the entire Horde" seems like folly. I'm also not saying the entire Horde is conspiring against Sylvanas - I am saying that there is very likely an undercurrent of suspicion and mistrust in Sylvanas' regime that could, with the right catalyst, become a rebellion. You deny this, but simultaneously admit that Saurfang's escape from the Stockades is a danger to Sylvanas.

On the contrary, I've noted that there are elements, such as Baine, that could become rebellious if given a figurehead in Saurfang, to rally behind but that the majority of the Horde we've seen is pro-war and a significant portion is fine with the way Sylvanas wages the war. This is just what Blizzard have presented us. To treat Brennadam as unrepresentative, but Baine, by far the most pro-Alliance horde character, and Kratos, a meme, as representative is another exercise in your disingenuous form of argumentation.

If Sylvanas enjoys the widespread and total support that you claim, then Saurfang's escape is manifestly not dangerous to her - it wouldn't be an important plot-point if your view of the Horde's disposition is correct. The very fact that we've got this focus on Saurfang's escape illustrates that he's a threat to her, and the *only* way that he could be a threat to her is if he could foment division and strife within the Horde. The only way he could do that would be if he has a preexisting base to forward such division and strife.

Saurfang would both have a preexisting receptive audience in the form of Baine, and also be able to use his own botched assassination attempt in order to drive others into rebellion, banking on his previous reputation. Even a small division in the Horde, when they're already on the backfoot, would be a serious boon for the Alliance in their war. My position, unlike what you've claimed, is not that Sylvanas enjoys close to universal support, but that the war does and Sylvanas enjoys tangential support on that basis. Perhaps that was not Blizzard's intent, but that is the product they have made and that is the thing they have shown us. Unless we're arguing on the basis of future hypothetical content and then applying its findings retroactively to content that does not bear out this position, as you have been doing, then the claim that there is a developed subversive movement anywhere close to say, Vol'jin's base of support or even the Tides of War or Cata-era Anti-Garrosh movement is simply false. It's making excuses for poor storytelling and purposefully ignoring multiple sources of information to push one that aligns with a predetermined conclusion.

It'd be akin to arguing that Grom was on the way to redemption despite all his deeds and thus said redemption made sense at the end of Warlords, simply on the basis that this is the conclusion Blizzard have set up, so ipso facto the rest of the evidence must be aligned with this conclusion.

If the Warchief were the Horde, then Garrosh would still be at the head of it. I think you confuse in-game events for the living, breathing world of the story itself, where individuals actually do have opinions, agency, and perhaps disagreements as to what they're fighting for. As I said above - the very fact that Saurfang is important enough to track down and kill, or for Shaw to allow to escape for his reasons, demonstrates that the story is not quite what you think it is.

On the contrary, it is you who confuse the two. I am applying the reactions we see in-game, whereas by your own admission you project the opinions of the playerbase onto the content even in the absence of evidence. Then you caricutarize my position to further push that point. In the process, you dodge the core points I'm making regarding the faults of the narrative and the incompatibility of first Saurfang's ideals with how the Horde acts in the pre-patch and up to 8.1 and consequently, the 180 turn that has to take place to have Saurfang turn out to be right. There is a discrepancy between what Blizzard want to tell us and want us to believe and what they're actually showing. I'm defending the latter, you are defending the former and in the process you are defending the asinine writing presented.

Sylvanas sends people to rescue Talanji because Talanji was en route to Sylvanas for her own reasons (e.g. the Blood Troll threat), and Sylvanas needs the Zandalari navy - there's no altruism on Sylvanas' part in that pursuit. Sylvanas also pledges the Horde's support to Zandalar for said navy, as many Zandalari NPC's grouse about in the opening quests. I would also expect Nathanos to lead the Horde against the Alliance at Dazar'alor because he's present there and he's a leader of the Horde forces in the area - this isn't really some kind of laurel in Sylvanas' cap, it's the expected reaction to an Alliance assault on their erstwhile allies (and the implied threat to Sylvanas' real interest in the Zandalari: that giant navy). I can't speak to Baine's blabber about negotiating (he really is kind of useless), but it's not really a contest either. I highly doubt Sylvanas or Nathanos feels any kind of sympathy for Talanji's loss or Rastakhan's death - rather, they're probably secretly happy to have a more tractable leader at the helm of Zandalar.

I have never once argued Sylvanas' altruism on these forums, but rather I am arguing against the notion that Zandalar would be situated against Sylvanas by default. The Zandalari are not privy to her internal thoughts and machinations, if she even means anything duplicitous here which is dubious, given even the much lambasted invasion of Stormwind includes in her internal monologue mentions of what parts of the kingdom she'd dole out to her allies to keep them satisfied. Sylvanas is PR conscious and whatever her intent, without her intervention, without her and the Forsaken, Zandalar would have fallen twice over. These are the direct results of major policy decisions she has taken as regards Zandalar.

[Ramz]

without her intervention, without her and the Forsaken, Zandalar would have fallen twice over. These are the direct results of major policy decisions she has taken as regards Zandalar.

No forsaken was involved in the campaign to gain trust of Zandalari, that was all left to Rokhan. She sent gobsquad later, but that's it. Zandalari repelled all 3 invasions on their own, there was no Horde involvement other than Rokhan (and arguably Darkspears) and PC.


The only time Horde is actually seen supporting them on bigger scale is during Alliance Invasion.

Also it was more Talanji's intervention as Nathanos wanted to return to Orgrimmar, it was Talanji that decided to "go home".

[Super Dickmann]

No forsaken was involved in the campaign to gain trust of Zandalari, that was all left to Rokhan. She sent gobsquad later, but that's it. Zandalari repelled all 3 invasions on their own, there was no Horde involvement other than Rokhan (and arguably Darkspears) and PC.

The only time Horde is actually seen supporting them on bigger scale is during Alliance Invasion.

There are actually those dudes at Talanji's Rebuke and in Nazmir to help out, as well as the Forsaken (and Baine) helping during Zul's first coup attempt but they're tangential. I'm mostly referencing Nathanos being mentioned as the one to rally the Horde forces and push back after Rastakhan gets offed.

[Ramz]

There are actually those dudes at Talanji's Rebuke and in Nazmir to help out, as well as the Forsaken (and Baine) helping during Zul's first coup attempt but they're tangential. I'm mostly referencing Nathanos being mentioned as the one to rally the Horde forces and push back after Rastakhan gets offed.

Yeah but those forsaken at the shore were not involved in main campaign, and they failed securing their part of the shore. And during Zandalar Forever they were useless. Nathanos is not the only figure that pushes them back, there is Gallywix and Rokhan too.

But if there is main figure to rally the forces then Rokhan would again make more sense as he was the main ambassador and link between Zandalari and the Horde, he had high authority as shadow hunter and someone who fought beside the King, and that Nathanos was supposed to be at Darkshore at that moment?
From what I know those events happen almost at the same time.

[Deleted]

But isn't Sylvannis the Horde's worst enemy? She just wants to raise them all as undead and make them her worshippers. I've got a feeling they let him go because Anduin says he finally sees through her BS and they they are just using the orcs like the legion used the orcs. Shock troops to die at her feet and raise up as skeletons and zombies to die again.

Yes she probably is in the long term but CURRENTLY she is not. Also her larger plans about an undead world aren't known about by anyone outside of her and the blight-caller probably. The only living members shes raised of the Horde are those killed in battle. Shes yet to start massacres of Horde races for undead. Based on current information held by the majority of the world is that she is only a threat to the Alliance and all of her transgression against other Horde races have been done to aid the numerically weaker Horde level the playing field with the allys. Them being awful methods used in an unneeded war aside they are defensible. Especially compared to what loosing this war will cost the Horde.

Remember even by Cataclysm Garrosh had killed a another races leader (lawful though it was), had made the trolls feel the need to relocate from org and was threatening other Horde leader directly. Slyvannas has not reached those levels of antagonism with other Horde races yet.

Also the point about Andiun is unneeded. no ones questing his tactics starting a civil war of your enemy is smart. Varok, willingly or not, being used as a puppet makes him look bad. He is just aiding the Alliance and not the Horde. Slyvnnas had made no moves against the Horde as Garrosh did. Varok potentially spilting the Horde will just weaken them and allow the allys to wash over the more then they are currently doing.

- - - Updated - - -

No forsaken was involved in the campaign to gain trust of Zandalari, that was all left to Rokhan. She sent gobsquad later, but that's it. Zandalari repelled all 3 invasions on their own, there was no Horde involvement other than Rokhan (and arguably Darkspears) and PC.


The only time Horde is actually seen supporting them on bigger scale is during Alliance Invasion.

Also it was more Talanji's intervention as Nathanos wanted to return to Orgrimmar, it was Talanji that decided to "go home".

(cough) https://www.wowhead.com/quest=49477/surprise-backup (cough)

[Super Dickmann]

Yeah but those forsaken at the shore were not involved in main campaign, and they failed securing their part of the shore. And during Zandalar Forever they were useless. Nathanos is not the only figure that pushes them back, there is Gallywix and Rokhan too.

But if there is main figure to rally the forces then Rokhan would again make more sense as he was the main ambassador and link between Zandalari and the Horde, he had high authority as shadow hunter and someone who fought beside the King, and that Nathanos was supposed to be at Darkshore at that moment?
From what I know those events happen almost at the same time.

I would also prefer Rokhan be given a larger role especially since he's the de-facto Darkspear leader and is finally given attention, but we work with what we're given. I would've preferred Rastakhan not die either, but you know. The recap mentions Nathanos rallying the forces and Nathanos is pretty Sylvanas #2 guy. Others were involved yes, but along with Sylvanas reaffirming her support for the Zandalari after the siege I'm dubious about the Zandalari beginning with some kind of animus for her specifically considering that she was the one to order the Horde to help them and they just had the Alliance sack their town. To then band against her Horde wouldn't make much sense.