[Spoilers] Shadowlands: Afterlives Cinematic Discussion

[Rhlor]

THe cinematic, showed new souls being siphoned/re-conditioned.. and they were clearly night elven judging by the ears, or was it an optical illusions.

i see a troll

[Moonrage]

THe cinematic, showed new souls being siphoned/re-conditioned.. and they were clearly night elven judging by the ears, or was it an optical illusions.

It was a Troll, I couldn't make out what the other two were.

[Aucald]

What I was trying to say was that there would be a parallel with WoA-era Illidan if she is tricking the Jailer (and with the Winter Queen if her rationale is in part benevolent, which we don't know that it's not). Of course, people are or were already calling her Garrosh 2.0, Gul'dan 2.0, Kerrigan 2.0, Azshara 2.0, Arthas 2.0, etc. In some cases character connections exist, but in others they are either non-existent or irrelevant to the thematic parallels, so they need not be required.

An almighty big "if" in my view of things. But I think such a huge parallel would be in need of something to justify it, so to speak, some element or portion of Sylvanas' character that makes one feel it is a viable path should could take. I see precious little of that in Sylvanas as she's been since Cata, though; next to nothing in her characterization would make a sudden heel-face turn into opposing the Jailer seem like a continuous or viable possibility. It could happen, sure; but even if it did I would probably be among the first to agree that it would fall into the oft-cliched indictment of "terrible writing." I don't tend to call Sylvanas 2.0 of anything, myself; she is a unique character at the end of the day.

I tend to take inner monologues with a big pinch of salt because as far as I know they are already inconsistent with her current supposed motivations. Whether we're dealing with intentional deception on the part of of the writers, poor continuity management or a behind the scenes narrative course correction during Legion, the writers haven't exactly been consistent with Sylvanas, and I say this with all understanding towards the challenges of the medium.

This goes back to the whole thing about trying to second guess or one-up the writers, though; an exercise I feel is foolhardy at best or outright arrogant at worst. I won't argue that there have been consistencies, but in order for the story to function as a story you have to at least take the storyteller at their word - if you continually "ahem" or butt into the narrative every other sentence then the story is going to break down right swiftly. At that point, suspension of disbelief is well and truly voided and the entire exercise is basically for naught. When we're given insight into the innermost thoughts or drives of a character in a novel, there is a necessary presumption that what we're being told is the truth of the matter, at least at the time is unveiled.

Fixing the nonsensical story of BFA wasn't the only argument I gave, nor the strongest, though it is the freshest in our minds. Like I said, there are strong nostalgic echoes in Sylvanas actually opposing the Dreadlord team (whether that means that she will turn on the Jailer as the "Master" of the Nathrezim or that the Jailer himself is or was opposed to this Dreadlord conspiracy remains to be seen), as well as the Lich King team. Her new song from the last PTR update certainly hints to her Warcraft III themes.

I suppose we'll have to see - personally speaking, I'm not so sure the Dreadlord missive is actually going to be germane to the specific events of Shadowlands, but will probably have dividends in future storylines.

The loyalist narrative isn't poor because it's not satisfying to the players who made that choice, it is poor because it provides Sylvanas with that much more canonical information and opportunities to foil the rebels, and yet she does not capitalize on them. If she was a cocksure character like Garrosh, that would have been fine, but as a character whose primary strength is her cunning, it doesn't look good at all. Why would we fear her as a villain if that was the case? If it was her plan all along, on the other hand, that would be superb.

Sylvanas is exceedingly arrogant and prideful, traits she shares with Garrosh - the key difference between the two is that much of Garrosh's arrogance was wrapped up in bluster and bravado, whereas Sylvanas' is presented more a self-assured and quiet surety (except when she gets thwarted and lapses into histrionics). I can easily see Sylvanas cunningly and connivingly allowing Baine's plans to go on unhindered, thinking to herself and keeping a proverbial paper trail of the renegades' coming and going. Then she springs the trap almost successfully on Saurfang and Thrall, with Jaina's tacit assistance being the only "gotcha" that stopped her plan from working. It was a bold plan, and still deserving of respect, only failing due to a fair degree of luck on the renegades' parts. I don't really think the Loyalist arc was all that bad, outside the fact that as I said previously it was ultimately doomed to failure, as was (and is) Sylvanas.

What I meant to say was that, in my hypothetical scenario, Saurfang wasn't in on the plan to orchestrate a rebellion. If my scenario is correct, however, his fight with Nathanos in Orgrimmar would count as foreshadowing/a parallel to his later fight with Sylvanas, both of them being orchestrated in order to distract a third party so that Sylvanas would be able to go through with her plans.

That construction doesn't really pass Occam's Razor very well, in my view - it relies on too many moving parts and unlikely correlations to be a workable plan. It works fine for the scope it generally applies to, feeding Anduin's spies the needed misinformation, putting a secondary spin on it kind of beggars belief.

You really should get into the ASoIaF fandom, then such theorizing would feel more natural to you...

I'm not a big GRRM fan, myself, and was never very enamored of ASoIaF to begin with. I probably wouldn't be very welcome in the fandom as a critic of the franchise.

That argument focuses too much on what Sylvanas says and too little on the context.

If you run through the Nazjatar story, including the raid, you will see that Azshara has no intention whatsoever to kill us, but rather wants to test us and make us serve her, up to the very last moment. One could argue that Sylvanas wanting us dead was exactly what made Azhara think that we would make useful tools, and created an opportunity for us to get close. Otherwise, she would have had ample opportunities to kill us and take the Heart of Azeroth herself.

P.S. Since it came out before I managed to comment, I might as well say that I enjoyed the Revendreth clip. Short and sweet. Possibly my favourite, depending on how the Ardenweald one will relate to the story in the future.

I don't think one can really underscore the significance of what Sylvanas says here, especially since it was both being said in confidence and was more or less an outright command she delivered to Azshara. I'd agree Azshara didn't want us dead, or cared to kill us, since someone as overwhelmingly arrogant as Azshara would ever deign to follow the orders of an undead High Elf - she was probably offended Sylvanas would even dare order her to do anything. But the fact remains, Sylvanas *wanted* her to do it, literally demanded it of her. I also don't think she could take the Heart of Azeroth, either; it was bonded to us - and the ritual to use it only worked because we were also there with it, and it never left our possession. She just siphoned off a bit of its essence to power the release mechanism of N'Zoth's prison - she didn't have the means to literally take the Heart, which is why she cajoled and more or less rolled out the red carpet into the heart of her fiefdom to begin with.

I also enjoyed the Revendreth cinematic, and it made me once more second-guess my Covenant choice for Shadowlands. I think Sire Denathrius' VA should do some audiobooks in character.

[tommyhil622]

THe cinematic, showed new souls being siphoned/re-conditioned.. and they were clearly night elven judging by the ears, or was it an optical illusions.

I didn't see a single Nightelf in any part of the cinematic.

[Harbour]

So, yeah:
1) Lords of War 10/10 Perfection
2) Warbringers 10/10 Perfection
3) Harbringers 9/10 There are minor details that make me remove 1 point
4) The Burdens of Shao-Hao 8/10 It was the first attempt and its not as refined as first 2 series
5) Afterlifes:
a)Bastion 8/10
b)Revendreth 7/10
c)Ardenweald 6/10
d)Malddraxus 3/10


While i generally like Bastion one, i couldnt brush off the few details that were absolutely annoyingy written and directed:

1) The line "He was my student" is undertuned. Its almost as lacking emotion (the line itself, not the way actor spelled it), as the line "He was my cucumber". There should be something more personal and emotional. "He was my apprentice", "He was like my brother", "He was the son to me", "I loved him" etc.

2) "I can see only darkness before me" was badly edited with the hand reflecting in Arthas eyes. It should have been just Maw dark cloud reflection immediately. Almost every person i see joked about "No, not the darkness, but the hand of giant angel woman". Its director/editor mistake.

3) Second "Not Vengeance. Justice" was very badly timed after kyrian's argument. There should be few seconds longer pause before Uther spelled it.
It was like this:
U: He was my student...
K: He is bad guy. Do your vengeance.
U: Oh right, nevermind. Not vengeance, justice.
It felt like there was no weighty and hard decision and he just didnt care enough.

Instead it should have been like this:
U: He was my student...
K: He is bad guy. Do your vengeance.
Long pause. We see and feel the conflict of emotions and search for the right answer inside Uther.
Then he decided.
U: Not vengeance, justice.

Some may say its the nitpicking, but both Lords of War and Warbringers had every single shot timed, directed absolutely perfectly, hitting all right notes.
Bastion one timing and writing made the whole emotional side of Uther fake'ish. They failed to deliver the emotions they clearly wanted to deliver.

[Coconut]

An almighty big "if" in my view of things. But I think such a huge parallel would be in need of something to justify it, so to speak, some element or portion of Sylvanas' character that makes one feel it is a viable path should could take. I see precious little of that in Sylvanas as she's been since Cata, though; next to nothing in her characterization would make a sudden heel-face turn into opposing the Jailer seem like a continuous or viable possibility. It could happen, sure; but even if it did I would probably be among the first to agree that it would fall into the oft-cliched indictment of "terrible writing." I don't tend to call Sylvanas 2.0 of anything, myself; she is a unique character at the end of the day.

I don't see the point on insisting to call speculation speculation at every turn. Nobody is denying that it is.

People have been theorizing about a redemptive arc for Sylvanas ever since she was pushed into the spotlight in Legion, and those theories have ebbed and flowed and changed with new information constantly since then. Teldrassil threw a massive wrench in that scenario. Now, the Dreadlord Conspiracy and the Ardenweald clip provide narrative and thematic outs. This doesn't mean that the theory is true or that you should buy into it, but they provide a stronger context for it nonetheless. Your argument against that is circular: I say the potential parallel strengthens the theory, and you say we shouldn't take the potential parallel into account until the theory is confirmed, which is really just you expressing an anti-speculation stance.

Sylvanas's behavior since at the very least Legion can be put into question in light of the Dreadlord Conspiracy reveal. If she is indeed trying to play them, she would have to remain convincing. We shouldn't expect anything more than the faintest retroactive hints that she was playing a long con all along.

This goes back to the whole thing about trying to second guess or one-up the writers, though; an exercise I feel is foolhardy at best or outright arrogant at worst. I won't argue that there have been consistencies, but in order for the story to function as a story you have to at least take the storyteller at their word - if you continually "ahem" or butt into the narrative every other sentence then the story is going to break down right swiftly. At that point, suspension of disbelief is well and truly voided and the entire exercise is basically for naught. When we're given insight into the innermost thoughts or drives of a character in a novel, there is a necessary presumption that what we're being told is the truth of the matter, at least at the time is unveiled.

Again, I disagree that theorizing about a thematically and narratively supported twist is somehow an attack on the writers.

Other than that, I take the medium for what it is. I account for inconsistencies and retcons because they have been a staple in WoW lore ever since the beginning, and the latest expansions didn't exactly cut down on them. I don't get hung up on random lines of inner monologue because - like I said - they are already contradicting the current scenario, at least in the manner in which it has been framed so far.

As for me "butting into the narrative", I find it amusing that you would say that, considering you yourself have a well documented habit to answer criticism and fill in plot holes with lavish personal contextualization.

I suppose we'll have to see - personally speaking, I'm not so sure the Dreadlord missive is actually going to be germane to the specific events of Shadowlands, but will probably have dividends in future storylines.

We'll have to see indeed, but as far as I'm concerned I hope it will pay off sooner rather than later. They can't just lead us on forever. We already had a similar situation with N'zoth, where the hints were far more interesting than the pay off in 8.3, and to a degree with the war as well. And there is the fact that the book heavily implies the conspirators have a connection with Death. How do you deliver on that after Shadowlands? After revealing that the Dreadlords deceived the Legion about working for the Void and then about working for them, when they were in fact working for Death all along in a Cosmic-wide conspiracy, will Blizzard once again reveal that they betrayed Death off-screen and are now serving the Void for reals? Or hell, why not Life? Make them the real baddies!

Sylvanas is exceedingly arrogant and prideful, traits she shares with Garrosh - the key difference between the two is that much of Garrosh's arrogance was wrapped up in bluster and bravado, whereas Sylvanas' is presented more a self-assured and quiet surety (except when she gets thwarted and lapses into histrionics). I can easily see Sylvanas cunningly and connivingly allowing Baine's plans to go on unhindered, thinking to herself and keeping a proverbial paper trail of the renegades' coming and going. Then she springs the trap almost successfully on Saurfang and Thrall, with Jaina's tacit assistance being the only "gotcha" that stopped her plan from working. It was a bold plan, and still deserving of respect, only failing due to a fair degree of luck on the renegades' parts. I don't really think the Loyalist arc was all that bad, outside the fact that as I said previously it was ultimately doomed to failure, as was (and is) Sylvanas.

Speaking of personal contextualization... The plan would have worked just fine had she sent enough soldiers to take care of the intruders. And it's heavily implied that she was expecting Jaina, since she specifically sent a Sunreaver to deal with them, and had inhibitor crystals placed in the room to prevent teleportation.

And don't you think you are ruining suspension of disbelief when saying that Sylvanas was and is "doomed to failure"? How are we supposed to take villains seriously if even their lesser plans are supposed to fail?

That construction doesn't really pass Occam's Razor very well, in my view - it relies on too many moving parts and unlikely correlations to be a workable plan. It works fine for the scope it generally applies to, feeding Anduin's spies the needed misinformation, putting a secondary spin on it kind of beggars belief.

Err... it would only be foreshadowing/a narrative parallel, how is the use of foreshadowing "a secondary spin that beggars belief"?

I'm not a big GRRM fan, myself, and was never very enamored of ASoIaF to begin with. I probably wouldn't be very welcome in the fandom as a critic of the franchise.

To each their own, I suppose, though it's a bit peculiar that you are sophisticated enough to look down on GRRM but at the same time remain a staunch defender of Alex Afrasiabi, Steve Danuser and Christie Golden. I must confess I am a little curious what your general criticism would be.

I don't think one can really underscore the significance of what Sylvanas says here, especially since it was both being said in confidence and was more or less an outright command she delivered to Azshara. I'd agree Azshara didn't want us dead, or cared to kill us, since someone as overwhelmingly arrogant as Azshara would ever deign to follow the orders of an undead High Elf - she was probably offended Sylvanas would even dare order her to do anything. But the fact remains, Sylvanas *wanted* her to do it, literally demanded it of her. I also don't think she could take the Heart of Azeroth, either; it was bonded to us - and the ritual to use it only worked because we were also there with it, and it never left our possession. She just siphoned off a bit of its essence to power the release mechanism of N'Zoth's prison - she didn't have the means to literally take the Heart, which is why she cajoled and more or less rolled out the red carpet into the heart of her fiefdom to begin with.

The fact remains that she *told her* she wanted to do it. It's not like you take everything that comes out of Sylvanas's mouth at face value. She is manipulative and says what needs to be said in order to push others towards a desire result. You can't selectively ignore that when it suits your narrative to believe she is sincere.

I also enjoyed the Revendreth cinematic, and it made me once more second-guess my Covenant choice for Shadowlands. I think Sire Denathrius' VA should do some audiobooks in character.

The music was particularly good this time, and yes, I agree about the voice actor. I liked that they hinted at Garrosh (and possibly Zalazane? Zul? random troll?) without overselling it.

While i generally like Bastion one, i couldnt brush off the few details that were absolutely annoyingy written and directed

People liked the Bastion clip because it featured two iconic characters and two iconic moments from the history of Warcraft. It rode the fan service hard, but narratively speaking it was pretty poor.

The problem with it is that it couldn't decide whose story it wanted to tell, Uther's or Devos's. We are clearly more invested in Uther, but he was extremely passive in the clip. Everything he did, he did because Devos took him by the hand and told him to do it, up to the final decision to cast Arthas into the Maw. While it might seem like a big cathartic moment for Uther, it wasn't really earned.

Devos, on the other hand, was the driving agent of the story, but her motivations always seemed plot driven and artificial - we didn't know enough about her backstory to connect with them properly. Why was she so invested in Uther? Technically, because we were invested in him and she had to mirror audience feelings, but it didn't make sense within the narrative. And they almost explained that one with him having such a hard time ascending, but then they tripped over their own feet by saying that was normal. When she had a vision by touching his wound (which was a cheap plot device in itself), retroactively validating her interest, I couldn't help thinking that the narrative would have worked better if she'd seen the wound from the start (sans-vision).

Then her motivation suddenly becomes to do something about Arthas. That's why she defies the Archon and gives Uther his wings before wiping away his memories... but then they don't actually do anything meaningful? They just wait for Arthas to get killed naturally and they take him to the Maw. Was Devos expecting the Arbiter to do anything more? And why do that to begin with? Was there doubt that he would have been sent there? Would it have been such a big issue if he wasn't? I get that Uther would have been motivated to deliver justice himself, but why was Devos so invested?

Personally, I would have made them play a more active role in Arthas's defeat, such as revealing that it was them who freed Tirion from the ice block, or even that they were the ones who resurrected the players at the end - that would have been a retcon, but it never made much sense that Terenas's soul would have the ability to do that, whereas kyrians resurrect players all the time. Ironically, Terenas was sort of taken out of Arthas's death scene anyway.

I agree about his iconic last words, btw.

Arthas: "There is only darkness before me..."
Actually in front of him - a blue angel chick and Uther.

It felt like with his final breath he was trolling everyone about the afterlife.

The continuity with Terenas telling us how "There must always be a Lich King" also becomes a bit awkward, especially since a soul should have been able to see the two kyrians as they were taking Arthas away, and they should have seen Terenas and all the other souls floating around. Best not to think too much about that, I guess.

There is also the anti-Path angle, which I assume is Devos's whole thing in game (and would have really benefited from some backstory, had the clip focused more on her), but here it seemed to come from nowhere and didn't really follow logically from the situation. I mean, kyrians lose their memories as individuals, but new souls can still bring information to Bastion as a whole. What was stopping them from purging Uther's past identity while at the same time sending someone to deal with Arthas? Wouldn't kyrians know what's going on on mortal worlds anyway, since they go there to guide souls? And wouldn't the other covenants and the Arbiter know, since only the kyrians purge memories? Maybe something was being done, but it simply wasn't the kyrians' concern? I mean, I think the Path is pretty horrible myself, but Uther's obsession with Arthas isn't exactly an argument against it.

[LemonDemonGirl]

It was a Troll, I couldn't make out what the other two were.

Kind of weird that a troll go in that hellhole. Dosen't Bwonsamdi take most trolls into his Afterlife? Maybe this was a Sandfury troll, which he hates because Mueh'zala?

[Combatbutler]

Kind of weird that a troll go in that hellhole. Dosen't Bwonsamdi take most trolls into his Afterlife? Maybe this was a Sandfury troll, which he hates because Mueh'zala?

Trolls are still subjects of the Arbiter, if they haven't screwed up too much they will most likely end up on the other side. In the hierarchy of death bwonsamdi isn't really far up.

[username993720]

They teased Garrosh just to create hype. The episode is not about him

I hate it when they use manipulation like this. Like the Warcraft 3 Reforged Cinematics. They updated the first one to create hype at Blizzcon, but not the other cinematics (i know they, technically, said they wouldn't, but it's still a low marketing agenda).

So, yeah:
1) Lords of War 10/10 Perfection
2) Warbringers 10/10 Perfection
3) Harbringers 9/10 There are minor details that make me remove 1 point
4) The Burdens of Shao-Hao 8/10 It was the first attempt and its not as refined as first 2 series
5) Afterlifes:
a)Bastion 8/10
b)Revendreth 7/10
c)Ardenweald 6/10
d)Malddraxus 3/10

Warbringers is not a perfection, by any means.
I guess it's too feminine for me, and not epic enough like the masculine Lords of War.

I agree Lords of War is top-notch. The best they have ever done. That's why i'm disappointed everytime i see an Afterlives animation

Harbingers: Gul'dan is pretty good (like all Orcs animations, except Draka). But, compared to him, Khadgar was a bit boring. Illidan was solid.

Burdens of Shaohao Prelude and Sundering were pretty good ("This is the Emperor's gifts to us, and this is Pandaria!" accompanied by the musical score still gives me chills), the Burdens themselves were not so much (anger was emotionally good, tho).

Afterlives were the least emotionally touching of all (except for the Uther one). I literally felt nothing when watching them. They were so disappointing, and are such a stretch from the awesome Lords of War ones. I have to admit, though, the bear sounds in the Ardenweald one, along the orchestral music gave me chills, but that's about it. I literally checked the time left for the video while watching them (especially the Draka one), which i never did with the other ones.

I would rate them like this:
1. Lords of War
2. Burdens of Shaohao
3. Harbingers
4. Warbringers
5. Afterlives

Burdens of Shaohao is a close one with Harbingers. i guess it has to do with the amount of episodes, which dwindled down to 3 afterwards, which i do not appreciate them doing. They also ditched the voice-over storytelling, which is a downside for me.

[LemonDemonGirl]

Trolls are still subjects of the Arbiter, if they haven't screwed up too much they will most likely end up on the other side. In the hierarchy of death bwonsamdi isn't really far up.

I guess he ended up there and Bwonsamdi probably thought 'Oh shit I forgot one' Or something like that

[Combatbutler]

I guess he ended up there and Bwonsamdi probably thought 'Oh shit I forgot one' Or something like that

Bwonsamdi doesn't have dibs on all troll souls, he currently nabs them all, because his big boss is currently out of order.

[TheFirstOnes]

Here's how I rate em:

Burdens of Shaohao: 7/10. These shorts are innocent, and get the point across. They introduce us to the Sha, the Monkey King, and the August Celestials. And they make Shaohao's character that much more interesting. It also explains why Pandaria's been shrouded in mists. These shorts are good, though they are not amazing like with the Lords of War, or Harbingers. However, they get the point across, and they make you care for the characters, which is nice on its own.

Lords of War- 10/10. Gets the point of every Warlord across entirely, the banter between Varian and Maraad is practically brilliant, and the overall narrative makes the start of WoD feel that much more impactful. Oh, and did I forget to mention just how amazing Part 5 was?

Harbingers: 10/10. I'm sorry, but this is also a 10/10. Kor'vas and Illidan were cool asf, Khadgar outsmarting a damn Dreadlord tryna pose as Medivh was cool, and the Gul'dan short is probably one of the best things I've ever seen.

Warbringers: 8/10. The Sylvanas one kinda ruins it, cause her burning Teldrassil came outta nowhere and completely negates the "morally grey" thing Blizzard wanted to tell regarding the Horde. The Jaina one is my favorite out of ALL these shorts (This includes Lords of War and Harbingers), and the Azshara one was cool asf too.

Afterlives: 6/10. The Bastion one is probably my 2nd favorite short, tied with the Gul'dan short. However, after that, there's nothing really too interesting. Maldraxxus was just confusing and didn't get the point of the story across at all. Ardenweald's was alright, but I don't think it was as impactful as people think it was. Revendreth's was also really good, even if short. I'm sorry, but anything regarding Venthyr is just top tier for me. The music, the fact that Denathrius' speech was a letter, the fact that it expresses the issue of Revendreth to the point, it's all so fucking good. I also love how Remornia is just floating behind his back. That's cool asf. Oh, and did I forget to mention that Garrosh is just there with his Pride STILL intact (Even after all the torturing), and Denathrius just refers to him as "old reliable"?! LMAO

- - - Updated - - -

Overall, I like these shorts. I really hoped they'd do more with the Afterlives shorts tbh, but that's just me.

[Moonrage]

Trolls are still subjects of the Arbiter, if they haven't screwed up too much they will most likely end up on the other side. In the hierarchy of death bwonsamdi isn't really far up.

Seconded, even the Winter Queen doesn't think too highly of him.

[Aucald]

I don't see the point on insisting to call speculation speculation at every turn. Nobody is denying that it is.

People have been theorizing about a redemptive arc for Sylvanas ever since she was pushed into the spotlight in Legion, and those theories have ebbed and flowed and changed with new information constantly since then. Teldrassil threw a massive wrench in that scenario. Now, the Dreadlord Conspiracy and the Ardenweald clip provide narrative and thematic outs. This doesn't mean that the theory is true or that you should buy into it, but they provide a stronger context for it nonetheless. Your argument against that is circular: I say the potential parallel strengthens the theory, and you say we shouldn't take the potential parallel into account until the theory is confirmed, which is really just you expressing an anti-speculation stance.

Sylvanas's behavior since at the very least Legion can be put into question in light of the Dreadlord Conspiracy reveal. If she is indeed trying to play them, she would have to remain convincing. We shouldn't expect anything more than the faintest retroactive hints that she was playing a long con all along.

Only if you believe that all speculation is made equally, which I do not. Speculation is subject to effective degrees of separation - in this case, how distant you are from existing characterization and/or current outcomes. I never considered a redemptive arc for Sylvanas to be within what I deem the "safe zone" of speculation, that is 1-2 degrees of separation from existing characterization or probable outcome(s). Generally speaking, whenever I hear about people talking about a redemption for Sylvanas it's generally a sarcastic or tongue-in-cheek comparison to what happened with Kerrigan in Starcraft 2 with her redemption. This isn't at all an "anti-speculation" argument or anything of the sort, it's just me saying that this redemption conjecture in conjunction with the newly-discovered Nathrezim missive is pretty far removed from the safe zone for speculation - like 4-5 degrees removed. It makes it, in my view, exceedingly unlikely.

Not to mention that Sylvanas has already been gulled by the Nathrezim, when Varimathras betrayed her and almost took the Undercity from her during WotLK. It took both the Alliance and Horde working together to return her to city to her. This, in conjunction with all the rest, makes me really doubt Sylvanas is even capable of playing "5-D Chess" with the Nathrezim.

Again, I disagree that theorizing about a thematically and narratively supported twist is somehow an attack on the writers.

Other than that, I take the medium for what it is. I account for inconsistencies and retcons because they have been a staple in WoW lore ever since the beginning, and the latest expansions didn't exactly cut down on them. I don't get hung up on random lines of inner monologue because - like I said - they are already contradicting the current scenario, at least in the manner in which it has been framed so far.

As for me "butting into the narrative", I find it amusing that you would say that, considering you yourself have a well documented habit to answer criticism and fill in plot holes with lavish personal contextualization.

I would say it is when you're more or less gainsaying what the authors are literally conveying to the audience and then substituting it with your own theories, yes. And as I said previously, if you don't take the authors' words at face-value and instead interject or insert your own suppositions in place of them then the continuity of the story is already irrevocably broken for you. Basically like throwing up your hands and saying "well if they can't tell the story right then I'll just tell my own story."

I don't think I would call my speculation "lavish" by any means, but I'll accept the praise for what it is. As I said above, I prefer my avenues of speculation to be very close in terms of degree of separation - and I'll almost never buttress speculation by speaking of it as if it were objective fact. I will always prepend speculation with key phrases such as "it's likely," "most likely," or something along those lines. There's nothing wrong with well-reasoned speculation in the absence of confirmation or fact, I feel; but it does need to be well-reasoned and it does need to be explicitly pointed out for what it is.

We'll have to see indeed, but as far as I'm concerned I hope it will pay off sooner rather than later. They can't just lead us on forever. We already had a similar situation with N'zoth, where the hints were far more interesting than the pay off in 8.3, and to a degree with the war as well. And there is the fact that the book heavily implies the conspirators have a connection with Death. How do you deliver on that after Shadowlands? After revealing that the Dreadlords deceived the Legion about working for the Void and then about working for them, when they were in fact working for Death all along in a Cosmic-wide conspiracy, will Blizzard once again reveal that they betrayed Death off-screen and are now serving the Void for reals? Or hell, why not Life? Make them the real baddies!

Personally, I'm of the belief that Shadowlands is basically cracking the seal on expansions that will likely be exploring the realms beyond Azeroth and going deeper into the Warcraft metacosm. The possibility that the Dreadlords are being promoted to metacosmic baddies, so to speak, seems like a way to usher us into an even wider scope of effective worldbuilding while retaining a villain we're at least familiar with (thus avoiding the issue with characters like the Jailer, who arrived as a more or less out of context villain). We may be visiting the realms that constitute the greater Light, Void, Order, Life, and Disorder planes and contending with this sweeping plan to essentially bring ruin to the metacosm. I think the Brokers too will play a hand in this, given all the goings-on they allude to while you interact with them in Oribos and the Maw. The Nathrezim missive likely plays into this presumed exploration of the other planes and their denizens.

Speaking of personal contextualization... The plan would have worked just fine had she sent enough soldiers to take care of the intruders. And it's heavily implied that she was expecting Jaina, since she specifically sent a Sunreaver to deal with them, and had inhibitor crystals placed in the room to prevent teleportation.

She was expecting Jaina, but she didn't count on her circumvent both her inhibitors and evade Hathorel as well. As for sending enough soldiers, well, she probably didn't have enough that she could trust explicitly with the duty of guarding the popular Baine as well as possibly having to contend with Saurfang and Thrall, both of whom are storied heroes of the Horde. Full Banshee Loyalists were a minority in the Horde, after all; and there was a multi-continent war being waged across the face of Azeroth.

And don't you think you are ruining suspension of disbelief when saying that Sylvanas was and is "doomed to failure"? How are we supposed to take villains seriously if even their lesser plans are supposed to fail?

That's where the suspension of disbelief actually comes into play, really. But there's still a wide gulf in allowing the story to lull you into feeling anxiety and danger for the story's characters, and literally believing that a villain victory is possible at the end (especially when the conditions of said victory implies cessation of existence or some such). Suspension is not complete and utter removal, after all.

Err... it would only be foreshadowing/a narrative parallel, how is the use of foreshadowing "a secondary spin that beggars belief"?

When the foreshadowing requires you explore the nature of a shadow's shadow's shadow's shadow, where the third shadow may not even properly exist.

To each their own, I suppose, though it's a bit peculiar that you are sophisticated enough to look down on GRRM but at the same time remain a staunch defender of Alex Afrasiabi, Steve Danuser and Christie Golden. I must confess I am a little curious what your general criticism would be.

I think I related it a few pages back. It's not really an issue with "sophistication" or anything like that - like I don't think I'm a better writer or person than GRRM. I just found ASoIaF to be more grim-dark than I prefer in a story, kind of nihilistic and a bit depressing when you get down to it. The actual technical writing itself is superb, mind you; and I found both easy to read and captivating for as far as that goes. I like my fantasy to be more optimistic and heroic, I guess you could say I'm old fashioned in that regard. The quest may be difficult, and lives may be lost in the process, but in the end the heroes prevail and vanquish darkness at least for a time.

I also wouldn't call myself a staunch defender of Afrasiabi, Danuser, or Golden. There's a lot of stuff I like in the WoW story, and there's a lot of stuff I'm ambivalent to, and there's some stuff I detest or feel could be done better. What I find myself most opposed to is the sense that any given WoW writer is a totem for "everything that is wrong with WoW." I've seen Danuser and Golden, especially these days, basically serve as the Judas Goat for heaping scorn upon the franchise. I'm not a fan of that penchant in the fandom, that overriding need to burn specific people in effigy every time something happens in the story that doesn't work so well.

The fact remains that she *told her* she wanted to do it. It's not like you take everything that comes out of Sylvanas's mouth at face value. She is manipulative and says what needs to be said in order to push others towards a desire result. You can't selectively ignore that when it suits your narrative to believe she is sincere.

Do you *really* think she was lying or being insincere about the command? For what reason would she do this? This sounds like another of those "5-D Chess" type things, where you're implying that Sylvanas knew ahead of time if she told Azshara to do X then Azshara would actually do Y, and she banked on that like a Batman gambit. I don't really buy it, especially since that even though she may have conceivably predicted Azshara doing something incredibly dumb, I don't think she could guess N'Zoth would also leave the heroes alive when he was freed from his prison. This is the kind of thing I'm referring to when I talk about degrees of separation in terms of the probable/possible.

[Trollokdamus]

Is there a lore reason for anima to be red instead of blue in Revendreth? I get that they wanted it to resemble blood but curious how it's explained in-universe.

[scrappybristol]

Bastion: Good, very nostalgic.
Maldraxxus: mmm... look, it was basically how Draka rerolled from warrior to rogue.
Ardenweald: Sad.
Revendreth: Cheeky but boring.

[Aucald]

Is there a lore reason for anima to be red instead of blue in Revendreth? I get that they wanted it to resemble blood but curious how it's explained in-universe.

Anima always takes on a different color color depending on the realm in question. Anima in Bastion is blue/white, in Ardenweald it is white/purple, in Maldraxxus is is green/black, and in Revendreth it is a crimson/white. In the Maw it is black/gray, and in Oribos it very similar to Bastion's color. Unsure of why this is the case and it may just be a kind of labeling mechanism, or it could be down to the wavelength of anima that is unique to each realm and its method of harvesting anima.

[formerShandalay]

Kind of weird that a troll go in that hellhole. Dosen't Bwonsamdi take most trolls into his Afterlife? Maybe this was a Sandfury troll, which he hates because Mueh'zala?

Maybe it's Zul, I bet Bwonsamdi doesn't care about him. And because it's Revendreth, Denathrius might have gotten Zul's soul as a favour from the Jailer.
Or it's a reaaaally old troll from before Bwonsamdi even was around or had much say in things ^^

[LemonDemonGirl]

Maybe it's Zul, I bet Bwonsamdi doesn't care about him. And because it's Revendreth, Denathrius might have gotten Zul's soul as a favour from the Jailer.
Or it's a reaaaally old troll from before Bwonsamdi even was around or had much say in things ^^

It's not Zul, he has longer tusks/ no beard

I was thinking it could be Jakrazet (the Sandfury troll who seemed to really hate our characters), since he got stabbed and jumped into an Old God pit. That might've cut him off from Bwonsamdi. I guess it could be a dark troll too, since they're pretty much extinct now, and Bwon boi was probably a baby back then

[formerShandalay]

It's not Zul, he has longer tusks/ no beard

I was thinking it could be Jakrazet (the Sandfury troll who seemed to really hate our characters), since he got stabbed and jumped into an Old God pit. That might've cut him off from Bwonsamdi. I guess it could be a dark troll too, since they're pretty much extinct now, and Bwon boi was probably a baby back then

ooh, you're right, Jakrazet sounds really probable. And as he was in cahoots with the Old God stuff and Zul maybe Bwon didn't even care to try and take him.