Shadows Rising: Sylvanas Motivation Revealed? *HUGE SPOILERS*

[Kyphael]

So what about the "this world is a prison and i will set us all free" thing?

Killing us is setting us free in her sick mind.

[Lupinemancer]

https://i.imgur.com/sGRrI5E.png

Basically what a lot of people expected: she's sick of her lot in life and wants to destroy everything because she's butthurt.

Is anyone actually surprised or thought she would have a heroic reason?

The question is, was anyone actually surprised that was her motivation?

[Mehrunes]

The people were astonished at her doctrine.

Beautiful summary. Though a comparison to He-Man is unfair to He-Man. That show had the levels of depth WoW can only dream of.

[omeomorfismo]

Sorry, if you want to play the genocidal bad guy Swtor is waiting for you. WoW is not and never was that kind of game.

FOR AZEROTH!

[Mehrunes]

Pretty easily - people can hold multiple and sometimes contradictory emotions at a single time. Like I can be proud of being promoted, but I can also express anxiousness about it - worrying that the responsibility might be too much, or the time commitment too onerous, etc. etc. These are only mutually exclusive if you believe people (even fictional people) are two-dimensional and cannot feel a multitude of emotions. Sylvanas could well be proud to be the first female Warchief, but also prefer to stick with her old position for the relative freedoms it offered - that's not a reach by any means.

How much Sylvanas was complicit in the events surrounding her own rise to Warchief is an open question that isn't yet concluded. If she was in the know the entire way, then I would conclude that Before the Storm got hit with the retcon stick, as would anyone else I assume. If she wasn't then the narrative is pretty much intact and not all that difficult to follow. That we now know that it was actually Mueh'zala who whispered into Vol'jin's ear actually makes it less likely Sylvanas was informed of what was going down in the Shadowlands, at least at the time we're given access to her thoughts in Before the Storm. We also have no idea how much she and the Jailer can communicate, or if they even do communicate. All of these remain unexplored elements of the ongoing story.

It's not an issue of whether she was in the know about the specific machinations of the Jailer. In Before the Storm Sylvanas was flat out cursing Vol'jin for putting her in a position she detested and outright said she never wanted it. In Blizzcon's grand reveal we learned that she was actively working towards becoming the Warchief and that's why she cooperated with Varian (because that somehow has some logical link to becoming a Warchief, but not really).

You could twist yourself into a knot that would make the Gordian knot look like a complete amateur in the knot world and you wouldn't be able to reconcile the two. And her being aware of specific details like the Jailer whispering sweet nothings to Vol'jin's Fel-poisoned ear is immaterial here.

[Malix Farwin]

I always just assumed the most laziest of writing would occur. was not disappointed.

[Mehrunes]

I still hold that Sylvanas' arc is only "bad writing" if you had some kind of misplaced notion that Sylvanas was ever good to begin with. If you said "Sylvanas has lost a lot of narrative complexity" then I'd agree with you, she has - but that's generally what happens when an anti-hero makes the plunge into complete villain territory, which is what Sylvanas has been doing since Cata.

Is her narrative arc a masterpiece of writing? No, it's not - none of WoW's writing is likely to be heralded in the ages to come. But relative to what it is? It's fine, pretty much.

Trying to defend Sylvanas' current scattershot of a direction where she wants and thinks mutually exclusive things by creating a false equivalence between this and a time where she made sense, as if there were no varying levels of bad (if one agreed with the premise she was already bad back then to begin with), isn't a particularly convincing defense. No, a mess of a story where something as basic as character's inner thoughts means absolutely fucking nothing because the writers are such inept amoebas they can't even pretend they comprehend what consistency is isn't fine "relative to what it is". It's not fine relative to anything. Twilight fanfiction makes for better writing than that.

Then again it's still better than your initial "lol, she cray cray".

[Aucald]

It's not an issue of whether she was in the know about the specific machinations of the Jailer. In Before the Storm Sylvanas was flat out cursing Vol'jin for putting her in a position she detested and outright said she never wanted it. In Blizzcon's grand reveal we learned that she was actively working towards becoming the Warchief and that's why she cooperated with Varian (because that somehow has some logical link to becoming a Warchief, but not really).

You could twist yourself into a knot that would make the Gordian knot look like a complete amateur in the knot world and you wouldn't be able to reconcile the two. And her being aware of specific details like the Jailer whispering sweet nothings to Vol'jin's Fel-poisoned ear is immaterial here.

If you're referring to what Danuser said, I don't think he was literally talking about Sylvanas' specific motivations on a personal level and more her involvement with the overall plot in broader strokes. He phrases things pretty weirdly - and given what we know now, it seems more and more obvious that Danuser isn't speaking about Sylvanas' own goals and more the goals the Jailer and/or Mueh'zala intended for her.

- - - Updated - - -

Trying to defend Sylvanas' current scattershot of a direction where she wants and thinks mutually exclusive things by creating a false equivalence between this and a time where she made sense, as if there were no varying levels of bad (if one agreed with the premise she was already bad back then to begin with), isn't a particularly convincing defense. No, a mess of a story where something as basic as character's inner thoughts means absolutely fucking nothing because the writers are such inept amoebas they can't even pretend they comprehend what consistency is isn't fine "relative to what it is". It's not fine relative to anything. Twilight fanfiction makes for better writing than that.

Then again it's still better than your initial "lol, she cray cray".

Unless your initial assertion is incorrect.

And yeah, Sylvanas is crazy. That much should be more or less a given.

[Mehrunes]

Sylvanas' insanity is understandable, and it's also been something that's been brewing over time. She suffered perhaps the most violent and troubling violation I can imagine - her very soul perverted into undeath against her will by Arthas, converted into a being sustained by hatred and rage (the basic description of what a Banshee is in WoW). But the clues were always there as to what kind of person Sylvanas was, and little was obscured as to the nature of her essential character. Let's look at some highlights of her pre-BfA career:
[*]She viewed her people (the Forsaken) with disgust, thinking of them as "arrows in her quiver" to be aimed at Arthas. This already presupposes an essentially sociopathic view of a people she knew loved her for her role in freeing them from the yoke of the Scourge.

Even putting aside how this outlook changed more and more over time, using this as evidence of how Sylvanas turned into an insane psycopathic monster because of what she suffered at Arthas' hands makes no sense because she viewed her soldiers as arrows in her quiver even when she was alive.

[*]She betrayed the Sin'dorei at their lowest point, frog-marching them into war in Northrend via threats and blackmail for her own purposes as part of her designs on ending the Lich King.

Sylvanas informing the Blood Elves of the natural consequences of their impending betrayal of their obligations to the Horde that Lor'themar loudly pondered shitting on right in front of Sylvanas, just after she conveyed the Warchief's call to arms to him still doesn't constitute her betraying them no matter how many times you repeat that. Like Sylvanas told Rommath after his outburst, the Blood Elves weren't obligated to accept the help they were given. That was their choice and by doing so they also accepted the obligations that came with it.

[*]She concocted bioweapons alongside the Royal Apothecary Society, fully knowing and not caring that they would be just as deleterious to her erstwhile living allies.

You mean like all weapons are?

[*]She *may* have been fully complicit in the Wrathgate incident.

Given how Danuser back tracked out of that, the latest actual source of information we have on the issue is still Forsaken's post-Cata intro where the omniscient narrator flat out says the Forsaken were wrongly accused for Wrathgate.

[*]She organized her society into a cult of personality with her at its center, limiting freedom and stifling any kind of growth in the name of her own preservation.

Only after Golden retconned things to be that way because she's too lazy to play through a single Forsaken quest while writing a book where they play a large part.

[*]She killed the Desolate Council on the merest hint of perceived disloyalty, including those demonstrably loyal to her cause, to preserve her own power.

Except they weren't "demonstrably loyal to her cause". The people Nathanos protested over started retreating only after Dark Rangers have already been deployed. That created a doubt in whether they were returning out of loyalty or out of fear. Which is why Nathanos accepted that explanation. And it just so happened that disloyalty wasn't just perceived. It was real, making the claim of them being "demonstrably loyal" to anything all the more wrong. As per Calia, everyone aside from Elsie was already defecting even prior to Sylvanas sounding the horn to retreat, let alone before she deployed the Dark Rangers after learning about Calia.

So yes, she's pretty conclusively a monster. As for insanity, you need only look at her various justifications and confabulations she employs to protect herself. She has a long history of trying to refactor defeats as "playing into her hands," or simply denying reality outright if she can't fold it into her personal narrative.

What "long history"? Sylvanas has only been saying that about in BfA's war campaign in the loyalist missions pertaining to the traitors. Because the loyalist path was a lie to silence people complaining about BfA being a retread of MoP. Even though it's precisely what it is, as per Blizzard's own later admission. And even that aside she's right anyway. Because Saurfang got just a handful of people, but he led a joint Alliance-traitor army to the gates of Orgrimmar where they would have died had the plot made sense.

And even with Sylvanas noping out of the plot, she still succeeded. Because as some Alliance character speculated, her simply abandoning the Horde meant she simply could have achieved her goals on her own at that point. Which as the intro to Shadowlands showed, is true.

[bagina]

Gotta love people ignoring your posts and circlejerking over their hateboner for Sylvanas instead.

[Mehrunes]

I don't think any of the writers for WoW have aspirations toward being remembered as classics or some such, mostly I think they just want to write fun and engaging stories that compliment the game world and keep people interested in returning to said world, a task at which they largely succeed.

Except they actually expected that players will consider BfA to be a great story once it ends. Although they did say something about lighting the funeral pyres in the same sentence, so maybe that means they will set this garbage on fire before Shadowlands releases.

[Aucald]

Even putting aside how this outlook changed more and more over time, using this as evidence of how Sylvanas turned into an insane psycopathic monster because of what she suffered at Arthas' hands makes no sense because she viewed her soldiers as arrows in her quiver even when she was alive.

I don't think she was a bastion of heroism in life, either; but better than she is now in undeath. She also views the Forsaken with disgust, which is something she didn't do with her Ranger peers in life.

Sylvanas informing the Blood Elves of the natural consequences of their impending betrayal of their obligations to the Horde that Lor'themar loudly pondered shitting on right in front of Sylvanas, just after she conveyed the Warchief's call to arms to him still doesn't constitute her betraying them no matter how many times you repeat that. Like Sylvanas told Rommath after his outburst, the Blood Elves weren't obligated to accept the help they were given. That was their choice and by doing so they also accepted the obligations that came with it.

And that doesn't stop being blackmail no matter how many times you attempt to rationalize or excuse Sylvanas. That's like coming into a destitute country to deliver outreach and aid, and then taking 70% of their GDP as recompense for your "charity."

You mean like all weapons are?

Only if you assume all weapons are equally destructive, which they aren't. Especially when you don't care who you're flinging them at, and more, consider all life to be your enemy.

Given how Danuser back tracked out of that, the latest actual source of information we have on the issue is still Forsaken's post-Cata intro where the omniscient narrator flat out says the Forsaken were wrongly accused for Wrathgate.

Hence the emphasis on "may."

Only after Golden retconned things to be that way because she's too lazy to play through a single Forsaken quest while writing a book where they play a large part.

Sylvanas was at the center of a cult of personality long before Golden expounded on her characterization. She banked on it all the way back in WC3: TFT to secure her power, and it only changed in tenor following the events of Edge of Night.

Except they weren't "demonstrably loyal to her cause". The people Nathanos protested over started retreating only after Dark Rangers have already been deployed. That created a doubt in whether they were returning out of loyalty or out of fear. Which is why Nathanos accepted that explanation. And it just so happened that disloyalty wasn't just perceived. It was real, making the claim of them being "demonstrably loyal" to anything all the more wrong. As per Calia, everyone aside from Elsie was already defecting even prior to Sylvanas sounding the horn to retreat, let alone before she deployed the Dark Rangers after learning about Calia.

Nathanos would accept any rationalization Sylvanas gave, he's not really one to gainsay her for any extended period. Vellcinda/Elsie we know was loyal as she pointedly declares her loyalty in Before the Storm, but she still dies ignominiously and pointlessly during the Gathering. Calia also didn't and couldn't know what the other Forsaken were thinking or doing, aside from Parqual himself (who was pointedly defecting) - the Felstones were just getting their living relative to safety and we've no idea if they were defecting or just acting out of terror, not that it ultimately mattered to Sylvanas. That's what happens when execution without evidence or trial in your go-to response.

What "long history"? Sylvanas has only been saying that about in BfA's war campaign in the loyalist missions pertaining to the traitors. Because the loyalist path was a lie to silence people complaining about BfA being a retread of MoP. Even though it's precisely what it is, as per Blizzard's own later admission. And even that aside she's right anyway. Because Saurfang got just a handful of people, but he led a joint Alliance-traitor army to the gates of Orgrimmar where they would have died had the plot made sense.

And even with Sylvanas noping out of the plot, she still succeeded. Because as some Alliance character speculated, her simply abandoning the Horde meant she simply could have achieved her goals on her own at that point. Which as the intro to Shadowlands showed, is true.

You think Sylvanas outing herself to the Horde was some kind of calculated move, then? Or losing the Soulcage to Genn's interference? Or being betrayed by Varimathras and Putress? Sylvanas didn't "win" in 8.2.5, she noped out and fled - going into hiding to avoid both the Horde and Alliance who were searching for her. She does eventually achieve her aims, sure; but only well after that point - the entirety of the events of Shadows Rising and the Shadowlands pre-release event lie between her failure at Orgrimmar and her success in Icecrown.

- - - Updated - - -

Except they actually expected that players will consider BfA to be a great story once it ends. Although they did say something about lighting the funeral pyres in the same sentence, so maybe that means they will set this garbage on fire before Shadowlands releases.

Some people do like BfA, it seems. I'm not one of them, myself; but apparently they do exist. I'm personally glad to see Shadowlands close the curtains on BfA for the most part.

[scelero]

She's breaking the cycle in her life. It's a common theme in most people's lives.

It's not a butthurt thing. Most of us just accept it and go on in life. But imagine if we had her powers. I would imagine some of you would take action into your own hands, just like she did.

And fighting your shadow is also a common theme as well, with people choosing one choice or the other.

Maybe simple, but humans in nature are very simple.

[Felfaadaern Darkterror]

How is the book? Just as a story for reading? I am not playing the game anymore, but thinking about reading it for escapism. Thought I might find some informed opinions here. Thanks!

[Powerogue]

Doesn't tell us much that wasn't already clear from the Shadowlands trailer. She's deluded that dismantling the system of death in this fashion will help us (the same person who thinks murdering her own people running to her for safety is helping them)

The only new information here I see is that she is absolutely not a pawn of the Jailer, nor particularly seeing him as the other way around, but on fairly equal grounds that understand each other, which goddamn I don't actually think I've seen in WoW before. o_O

- - - Updated - - -

How is the book? Just as a story for reading? I am not playing the game anymore, but thinking about reading it for escapism. Thought I might find some informed opinions here. Thanks!

Everything I've seen of the early snippets was positive, Madeleine Roux is good at keeping characters in character and exploring their nuances. I plan on buying it. I liked Christie Golden's BFA book as well overall because of great world building and making it feel like I could walk through those same environments in-game, but find her character writing more ham-fisted, particularly Calia, who has yet to win me over on being a good effectively-new character.

Madeleine Roux also wrote A Moment In Verse, which might give you a taste of her writing style: https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/st...oment-in-verse

[Grazrug]

She's right about this one. I hope she succeeds and kill all her haters with it. Sylvanas for life.

[Houle]

lmao at all the edgy emo kids here spouting how right she is and how this makes her a hero who just wants to defeat the "unjust cosmos and life"

Infracted.

[Feanoro]

lmao at all the edgy emo kids here spouting how right she is and how this makes her a hero who just wants to defeat the "unjust cosmos and life"

Hot Topic is closed for the pandemic, they have to go somewhere.

[Varodoc]

It's funny because it isn't even an original or complex motivation. In fact, "I want to destroy the current world and replace it with my ideal utopia" is a very generic motivation for a villain.

[Maljinwo]

It's funny because it isn't even an original or complex motivation. In fact, "I want to destroy the current world and replace it with my ideal utopia" is a very generic motivation for a villain.

Sylvanas was a member of Team Galactic