9.0 General Discussion

[Vakir]

She didn't really care too much at the Horde and Alliance dying, the Plague that was developed to kill the Scourge AND the living(Who she has allies that are alive at the time). That shows how shady she is and the fact she was ok with the Plague sorta already shows what most of us know. She can't be trusted, she's ruthless.

I don't disagree she didn't care that much. I don't think anyone is that deluded, except maybe a couple of posts up. But it is indeed an outright change that she was behind it vs. the idea that it just aligned with her goal and had collateral damage from another set of intentions. It being a retcon is a fact.

Probably because pushing her into the spotlight is not what she wanted and as she's said herself, she prefers to stay in the shadows. Jailor or somebody whispered to Vol'jin for Warchief position gives her more to deal out death. We also don't know the details of why she aligned herself with the Jailer. Sylvanas is not a servant type of character and we will learn more in Shadowlands so we can't say for certain there is retcons.

No, you don't seem to understand. It is a retcon. Right here: Steve Danuser said "There was a long term strategy where Sylvanas would put herself into a position where she could take up the mantle of Warchief and she couldn't do that if she was aggro and everyone was against her, so she had to bide her time, and now we're seeing the fruition of that in Shadowlands."

So immediately after Vol'jin dies, and Sylvanas says "Grrr, curses, I wanna be in the shadows, booo," this internal monologue runs contrary to what the devs have now expressed was a distinct intention of hers.

So no, the story changed. It's a retcon. It's OK to admit it.

I don't see this as an issue, people wanted to believe Sylvanas was just at the wrong place at the wrong time and some third party started it but no, she did it on her own. Its not so crazy to believe she would do that or that her character is inconsistent. Unstable and emotionally driven(When she loses her shit).

It's not, on its own. It's the two different ways the stories were told that contradict one another. Not the content of the story itself.

Because with no army she can't kill more people and she can't keep herself alive either. Sylvans cares more about preventing her final death, far more then the Forsaken's fate. That has never changed, she was willing to kill some of her own Forsaken when some were gaining hope to see their familes in before the Storm(Again more little nods to hope which....was mentioned more then once).

That's about the only thing you can explain it away with - is that she can kill more people with an army of Forsaken. But then you have the whole "she gave them free will" wrinkle, which obviously later was no longer the case. So did she not intend to do all of that until Legion? Then why did she raise Forsaken after Legion that did have their own wills, like the Dark Rangers that openly denounce her after 8.2.5?

The Lantern and what it's purpose was is unknown and you can scoff at it and find it bullshit all you want but if you noticed, she was able to use the Horde for her own ends in whatever plan she has going on.

Nobody's scoffing at that. You seem to misunderstand as if I'm defending her and anything outside of that is a "retcon." I agree the malice has always been there. But there's direct contradictions in the delivery method that make the character both inconsistent and frustrating in her sheer omnipotence mixed with incompetence that doesn't carry any REAL long-term consequences.

[formerShandalay]

While I agree that her inner thoughts in BtS were seemingly that she didn't know that she'd have to become warchief at some point, this is not actually the case. She said she didn't want it, not really and wishes she could have stayed in the shadow. If you apply what we know now, you could read it as she knew she'd have to be warchief at one point, but wasn't really comfortable with it in any way, shape or form. In BtS and in A Good War there were several parts where her inner thoughts were somehow ambiguous or even completely left out when she otherwise thought about something or something was written from her perspective. I think we already talked about several of those things long before the new information was revealed. Like when she talks to the Tauren and someone reminds them that abusing the elements might cause another Cataclysm and she looks around and thinks that from their faces she can tell that they don't want another Cataclysm. It leaves out what she thinks about it completely, even though it is written from her perspective. Or in a Good War, when she points out to Nathanos that bringing Blight to Teldrassil would be an empty threat, because no one would believe she'd actually kill so many innocents/civilians. It doesn't say if she would or wants to, however. Just that she thinks it doesn't work as a *threat*.

[derpkitteh]

eh, idk. it was always implied in wotlk that sylvanas knew more about the wrathgate than she let on.

i had always assumed she told them to bomb the wrathgate, and hoped it would be enough to kill arthas. but i figured she didn't see putress and varimathras turning on her.

like, that's why thrall put kor'kron in undercity, and why garrosh kept them there. thrall knew she knew more than she let on, he just didn't have evidence to show she did. so he put the kor'kron there to watch for more traitors, including sylvanas.

[Sondrelk]

eh, idk. it was always implied in wotlk that sylvanas knew more about the wrathgate than she let on.

i had always assumed she told them to bomb the wrathgate, and hoped it would be enough to kill arthas. but i figured she didn't see putress and varimathras turning on her.

like, that's why thrall put kor'kron in undercity, and why garrosh kept them there. thrall knew she knew more than she let on, he just didn't have evidence to show she did. so he put the kor'kron there to watch for more traitors, including sylvanas.

It isnt a jard retcon, the facts we knew then and now have not really changed, but it is a soft retcon.
Sylvanas ordering the Wrathgatr attack does make sense with her character back then, but i dont think it was Blizzards intention back then to seed her as a villain by having her play 5D chess with Sargeras' conmection to Varimathras.

I just hope that Sylvanas finally bites it by the end of the expansion, though i fear the discussion might pivot to the Sylvanas fanboys becoming the new Garrosj fanboys, only with an added layer of delusion.

[derpkitteh]

It isnt a jard retcon, the facts we knew then and now have not really changed, but it is a soft retcon.
Sylvanas ordering the Wrathgatr attack does make sense with her character back then, but i dont think it was Blizzards intention back then to seed her as a villain by having her play 5D chess with Sargeras' conmection to Varimathras.

I just hope that Sylvanas finally bites it by the end of the expansion, though i fear the discussion might pivot to the Sylvanas fanboys becoming the new Garrosj fanboys, only with an added layer of delusion.

i hope she dies as well. all of this shit with her is just annoying.

i don't care if she's got some end goal to make everyone live in peace in the afterlife or whatever. it's just annoying at this point, and i want her gone.

also, it's so much worse than garrosh fanboys. because these fanboys got control of the narrative.

[Sondrelk]

i hope she dies as well. all of this shit with her is just annoying.

i don't care if she's got some end goal to make everyone live in peace in the afterlife or whatever. it's just annoying at this point, and i want her gone.

also, it's so much worse than garrosh fanboys. because these fanboys got control of the narrative.

At least Garrosh fanbpys could make legitimate points regarding his initial motives.
With Sylvanas it is just a neverending parade of trying to justify evil acts.

Syovanas was totally in the right to enslave an ally for selfish gains, if only Genn hadnt stopped her.
Sylvanas would never burn down Teldrassil, which turned into how she was justified in killing thousands.
Sylvanas blighting and ressurecting her own troops.
And now Sylvanas sending everyone to superhell and releasing the Scourge.

Hopefully it will be over soon.

[Yarathir]

At least Garrosh fanbpys could make legitimate points regarding his initial motives.
With Sylvanas it is just a neverending parade of trying to justify evil acts.

Syovanas was totally in the right to enslave an ally for selfish gains, if only Genn hadnt stopped her.
Sylvanas would never burn down Teldrassil, which turned into how she was justified in killing thousands.
Sylvanas blighting and ressurecting her own troops.
And now Sylvanas sending everyone to superhell and releasing the Scourge.

Hopefully it will be over soon.

You're not the only one getting sick of the constant circus of mental gymnastics to justify and whitewash poor, misunderstood Kween Windrunner's acts and sacrifices.

[formerShandalay]

It isnt a jard retcon, the facts we knew then and now have not really changed, but it is a soft retcon.
Sylvanas ordering the Wrathgatr attack does make sense with her character back then, but i dont think it was Blizzards intention back then to seed her as a villain by having her play 5D chess with Sargeras' conmection to Varimathras.

I just hope that Sylvanas finally bites it by the end of the expansion, though i fear the discussion might pivot to the Sylvanas fanboys becoming the new Garrosj fanboys, only with an added layer of delusion.

I don't think it is a soft retcon that Sylvanas was behind Wrathgate. All of the storylines from Borean Tundra and Howling Fjord, of which there are 4 (one Alliance and one Horde from both directions) all through Dragonblight tell you, that Wrathgate is where it's at. That is where all of the efforts from both sides are set to come together right from the start.
The Hand of Vengeance questline tells you, that the strain they brought from back home (which they created through all of Vanilla) is to be used at the Wrathgate and has to be ready by then. You try to refine it so it works against undead properly, but it already works against the living when you get to Halgrind (as the questgiver points out explicitly), just not as effective against Vrykul. They don't disintegrate properly.... ^^
Everybody knew that there would be two armies converging at the Wrathgate to attack Arthas there, one Alliance and one Horde army. The Forsaken even waited until it was clear that Arthas probably wouldn't fall at the hands of the normal army until they deployed their Blight (Saurfang was already dead at that point). If you just see the events in the Forsaken story from Vanilla to Wrathgate (including the story of Rise of the Lich King), you see no hint whatsoever that this wasn't Sylvanas's plan. Only a few hints that there is more to the New Plague itself which maybe is Varimathras's own little scheme, not the assault at Wrathgate itself.
The only thing anyone had ever going for the version of 'It was Varimathras's scheme all along' was Sylvanas saying it. But really, the only surprise that Varimathras had was his coup in Undercity. Everything else always was done under the scrutiny and the orders of Sylvanas herself.

[Directionalk9]

One, I doubt Sylvanas is going to be killed off in SL. My theory is the Jailer and the Arbiter are connected entities that need to function in this “machine of death” and by the end Sylvanas and Bolvar replace them. Ostensibly removing them from the story, with a return clause in their contract, same thing Illidan has in his.

Two, I’ve never understood this recent constant bitching about Sylvanas. She’s always been presented as, the “bad mother-fucker on our team, that will eventually betray us.” I’ve been waiting 15 years for this to happen, it’s finally here.

[Vakir]

Two, I’ve never understood this recent constant bitching about Sylvanas. She’s always been presented as, the “bad mother-fucker on our team, that will eventually betray us.” I’ve been waiting 15 years for this to happen, it’s finally here.

No problems with the betrayal at all. I love villains as do most. It's the complete warping of all logic and reasoning to allow for it at the expense of hijacking every last moment in the narrative and making every single individual look like a complete buffoon even by the usual standards. It's a Creator's Pet issue. It extends to Nathanos. He's at Darkshore and Dazar'alor simultaneously for max screentime despite us establishing both are concurrent events by the lack of aide given to Tyrande at the same time. This is because he's a self insert for Danuser. And then he is omnipresent in basically every other chapter of the war campaign AND is the voice of 90% of your WQ turn-ins.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

No problems with the betrayal at all. I love villains as do most. It's the complete warping of all logic and reasoning to allow for it at the expense of hijacking every last moment in the narrative and making every single individual look like a complete buffoon even by the usual standards. It's a Creator's Pet issue. It extends to Nathanos. He's at Darkshore and Dazar'alor simultaneously for max screentime despite us establishing both are concurrent events by the lack of aide given to Tyrande at the same time. This is because he's a self insert for Danuser. And then he is omnipresent in basically every other chapter of the war campaign AND is the voice of 90% of your WQ turn-ins.

I would disagree on Nathanos's overuse if he actually shown more clear signs of being shocked at how low Sylvanas is going and since he 90% of the time on board. Thats a separate tangent. I don't think he's a self insert...unless he likes being treated like shit but thats not my problem >.>

[huth]

No problems with the betrayal at all. I love villains as do most. It's the complete warping of all logic and reasoning to allow for it at the expense of hijacking every last moment in the narrative and making every single individual look like a complete buffoon even by the usual standards. It's a Creator's Pet issue. It extends to Nathanos. He's at Darkshore and Dazar'alor simultaneously for max screentime despite us establishing both are concurrent events by the lack of aide given to Tyrande at the same time. This is because he's a self insert for Danuser. And then he is omnipresent in basically every other chapter of the war campaign AND is the voice of 90% of your WQ turn-ins.

Armies move on a timescale of weeks. Individuals in positions of power can cut that down to seconds if a mage is available or they are one themself.

Most of the supposed lore issues tend to come down to people not actually knowing the lore and working of incorrect premises, often including mistaking their own headcanon as actual lore. Like "Sylvanas is morally grey", which Blizzard never actually claimed.

[Vakir]

Armies move on a timescale of weeks. Individuals in positions of power can cut that down to seconds if a mage is available or they are one themself.

Most of the supposed lore issues tend to come down to people not actually knowing the lore and working of incorrect premises, often including mistaking their own headcanon as actual lore. Like "Sylvanas is morally grey", which Blizzard never actually claimed.

Then give me an explanation for the discrepancies I detailed in earlier pages rather than weasel-wording by saying "most of." Even people who LIKE Sylvanas and this story have acknowledged that there's massive discrepancies.

Otherwise you're basically opposing air, not even a strawman.

As far as Nathanos, yes, magic and whatnot exist in this universe and there's even other explanations - but the point is that Nathanos is a spotlight stealer irrespective of that compared to other characters in the same faction plus his rough equivalents on the opposing faction. He's the most present and most intrusive character by far. His very aggro personality and his complete lack of respect towards basically-anything never gets even the faintest opposition. Add in what we already know about Steve Danuser and it becomes very clear.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Then give me an explanation for the discrepancies I detailed in earlier pages rather than weasel-wording by saying "most of." Even people who LIKE Sylvanas and this story have acknowledged that there's massive discrepancies.

Otherwise you're basically opposing air, not even a strawman.

As far as Nathanos, yes, magic and whatnot exist in this universe and there's even other explanations - but the point is that Nathanos is a spotlight stealer irrespective of that compared to other characters in the same faction plus his rough equivalents on the opposing faction. He's the most present and most intrusive character by far. His very aggro personality and his complete lack of respect towards basically-anything never gets even the faintest opposition. Add in what we already know about Steve Danuser and it becomes very clear.

...So more "GOD DAMN YOU DANUSER" I don't like Nathanos either but I think people are trying to desperately look for a scape goat for somethin WoW that annoys them.

[Vakir]

...So more "GOD DAMN YOU DANUSER" I don't like Nathanos either but I think people are trying to desperately look for a scape goat for somethin WoW that annoys them.

That's making a lot of assumptions about me. I can't speak for others, but Nathanos and the frustrations surrounding him existed long before his self-insert status confirmed my suspicions. Instead of pointing out other people and assuming things about their intentions, maybe address the actual base arguments being put forward. Like everything I actually said rather than what you believed.

[huth]

Then give me an explanation for the discrepancies I detailed in earlier pages rather than weasel-wording by saying "most of." Even people who LIKE Sylvanas and this story have acknowledged that there's massive discrepancies.

Because it is a general statement, not one directed at any particular discrepancy. Half of what's being "discussed" in the lore forum is people disagreeing about their headcanons. I'm not obligated to fix your issues for you.

[Vakir]

Because it is a general statement, not one directed at any particular discrepancy. Half of what's being "discussed" in the lore forum is people disagreeing about their headcanons. I'm not obligated to fix your issues for you.

You're not obligated, no. It's just disingenuous to whine about in reference to a post that makes genuine points about discrepancies. Especially when you say "half" (debatable) but don't address, you know, the other half.

What you really mean is "I don't care, so I'm going to be smug about it towards people who do."

[huth]

You're not obligated, no. It's just disingenuous to whine about in reference to a post that makes genuine points about discrepancies. Especially when you say "half" (debatable) but don't address, you know, the other half.

What you really mean is "I don't care, so I'm going to be smug about it towards people who do."

Almost as much as declaring anything not agreeing with you as "whining" and presupposing the posters attitude towards you.

And again, it is a general statement. It is not in reference to your crap, genuine or not. Not every line in a post that contains a quote of your post needs to be about you.

[Vakir]

...then why even quote it? Why make a general statement that comes off as passive aggressive? I, what.

[huth]

...then why even quote it? Why make a general statement that comes off as passive aggressive? I, what.

Not every line in a post that contains a quote of your post needs to be about you.

Part of the post was in response to you. Part of it wasn't. You assumed all of it was.