9.0 General Discussion

[Sondrelk]

Just popping in to remind people Illidan has still killed more innocent people than Sylvanas & they still portrayed him as a Christ-like figure in Legion. And that was not a redemption story: Illidan decided 10,000 years ago he was going to join the legion in order to destroy it. And he did that.

You might feel differently about Sylvanas & Illidan than the developers but that still happened.

- - - Updated - - -

Sylvanas dies. Jailer sends someone to resurrect her. Sylvanas dies. Jailer sends someone to resurrect her. Sylvanas dies. Jailer sends someone resurrect her.

That's not a choice.

It's the myth of Sisyphus. Sisyphus can't choose to ignore the boulder.

Legion didnt happen the expansion after TBC. And even with that, Sylvanas' acts were framed as far, far more horrible than what Illidan did. Sylvanas burning down Teldrassil is essentially framed as the quintessential evil of Azeroth. It isnt exactly the kind of act that can simply be pushed under the rug because the writers want her to be the hero now. Pretty much the entirety of BfA was a long list of reasons why Sylvanas is the ultimate evil, now only eclipsed by pledging herself to a primordial being that wants to commit omnicide.

[Ersula]

I dunno, why use that term when talkin about the Jailer's plans for Sylvanas then? I wonder if maybe the Helm was originally made for the Jailer, or at least for his plans, before being taken by the Legion.

Considering everything we know about the Dreadlords now, perhaps they were never really working for the Legion. It seems like the Jailer had to go to Sylvanas after Uther yeeted Arthas into the Maw, otherwise he would still be in the position Sylvanas is now.

You say Sylvanas could have simply chosen the maw, but for one, its hard to imagine anyone having the strength of character to choose that, and secondly, that doesn't solve the problem. The cycle of doom would just continue forever. Illidan & Azshara & Sylvanas were all in a similar existential crisis.

- - - Updated - - -

Legion didnt happen the expansion after TBC. And even with that, Sylvanas' acts were framed as far, far more horrible than what Illidan did. Sylvanas burning down Teldrassil is essentially framed as the quintessential evil of Azeroth. It isnt exactly the kind of act that can simply be pushed under the rug because the writers want her to be the hero now. Pretty much the entirety of BfA was a long list of reasons why Sylvanas is the ultimate evil, now only eclipsed by pledging herself to a primordial being that wants to commit omnicide.

And who was Sargeras when Illidan pledged his life to him? When writing a twist the story as it is framed is meant to deceive you.

[Toybox]

9.0 has done the impossible - made my guild hyped for Nyalotha again Genuinely looking forward to it. Feels like an age has past since we've last raided.

[Grimbold21]

Listening to Preach's latest video on Systemlands and I'm feeling like I don't care one of cent about Soulbinds/conduits etc. He looks like he's trying to explain something that is so convoluted that his explanation ends up being as confusing as the nature of the monster itself

[Vakir]

Just popping in to remind people Illidan has still killed more innocent people than Sylvanas & they still portrayed him as a Christ-like figure in Legion. And that was not a redemption story: Illidan decided 10,000 years ago he was going to join the legion in order to destroy it. And he did that.

The context and framing were totally different, though? Context matters. Illidan never really delighted in carnage and never was actively sadistic unless it was at the direction of someone he had deliberate enmity towards (like trying to bury Maiev, which still served a tactical purpose).

The Illidan of TBC was far, far more cartoonishly evil, but it is unanimously agreed to be a horrible misstep with a character that was more of a complicated anti-hero/anti-villain hybrid. While he did choose to destroy the Legion from the beginning, he also had selfish reasons to do what he did. It was not a black or white portrayal by any means, other than when Xe'ra tried to talk him up as some kind of savior, and that was quickly kiboshed both due to community reaction and because it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the character's appeal.

I don't see the Christ-like figure aspect at all, no matter how many times you bring it up. Every character and their mom has had a heroic sacrifice in WoW at this point. Having Velen make sad eyes like Illidan is Shane doesn't change that the following questline has two characters we're supposed to like and agree with (Tyrande and Malfurion) taking a massive shit all over him and talking about how uncomfortable they are with his existence, which is kind of fair. Illidan ruined a lot of people's lives. He caused the world a lot of misery. He did a lot of great shit ultimately, but he did so by causing chaos and disorder, and he did so without even entertaining for a second that he made a mistake. That's going to mean someone goes down in the history books as a complicated figure.

Sylvanas is presented, whether viewed as a derailment of her character or not, as actively malicious. She makes a point of forcing Delaryn to watch after she exhibits some amount of empathy for her personal situation and her nihilistic view of her former role as a protector of the weak and innocent - "a fool." She is actively slighted and makes a gut decision to cause more suffering because she is projecting her own situation of helplessness at the hands of a harmful figure in her life. Old Soldier very deliberately contrasts her glee at Teldrassil burning with the suffering and misery of the people surrounding it. Her flipping out during and after the Mak'gora is pretty clearly supposed to be an unstable and misanthropic individual criticizing the hell out of two factions and a world that she considers either expendable or contemptable. She delights and personally oversees Anduin's treatment in Torghast because she wants to see him fall. We're missing a cutscene, but Steve Danuser, love him or hate him, said distinctly that her motivations and true self will be clarified and unable to be ignored from "early on," which is implied to be the very same cutscene with him. He also said her Maw model is a reflection of her true self and coming into her power.

The only way it really feels like an awkward double standard based on cold conceptions of body counts is if you completely ignore literally all the storytelling that both have gone through over the last decade or so. I can understand and even completely back the argument that Sylvanas was heavily moved away from her Cataclysm characterization, that her motivations are strongly at odds with the sympathy she showed the Forsaken following Edge of Night...all of that I can get behind. It is bad. But it is also true.

What I can't get behind is, is the dishonesty of looking at the story's factual basis and information we are given, and say that one thing is simply something it isn't.

You've, prior to this, really pushed a hardcore narrative that is well recognized that the Jailer is actually a misunderstood figure that might be the rightful owner of the Shadowlands. In this version of the narrative, you backed the idea that Sylvanas was working with him for a positive end. This was discredited by the presence of Doylist text that outright confirms the Jailer is a banished ancient evil and that the Primus, Bolvar, etc. perspective on him is absolutely supported. Now the goalposts are moved to the fact that it's 12D chess and she wants all of this, but there are so many narrative things that discredit this. The entire epilogue of Shadows Rising flat out has her stating "the Jailer, too, knew what needed to be done" in regards to the unmaking of the cosmos. And we know it isn't intended as a wholly unjust cosmos...because Doylist materials still support the disrupted order of the Shadowlands as being considered "balance" in the Afterlife, certain improvements that the PLAYERS make aside. You can disagree, but it is still the intended reading and conclusion the writers are driving players towards.

Why is it so hard to believe that Sylvanas, someone who fell and was twisted through horrible circumstance, became a nihilistic omnicidal person? I will wholly agree it is a lame, bland, uninteresting direction, but I would by no means call it illogical in its direction with the new information we've been given. It would be wonderful if they course-corrected Sylvanas in 10 years, but the story they presently wrote just can't fucking do it without also raking her through plenty of her own karmic muck without alienating a large section of the player base and discrediting 95% of what we do in 9.0 alone.

And that's where I feel like your view is and always has been intellectually dishonest. It says way, way more about either your enjoyment of Sylvanas as a character or your discomfort with a perceived double standard with Illidan than anything actually reflected in the new lore. Or it's just flat out bad-faith acting. I dunno, you tell me.

[Zexaniro]

Listening to Preach's latest video on Systemlands and I'm feeling like I don't care one of cent about Soulbinds/conduits etc. He looks like he's trying to explain something that is so convoluted that his explanation ends up being as confusing as the nature of the monster itself

'systemlands' rip

I think people who complained about the convoluted BFA systems and are unfoundly praising shadowlands for moving away from that formula are in for a huge shock.

I personally don't care about all of the systems and grind, but it seems like a bunch of people are returning to the game because they think it's going to be on WOD levels of chill, very strange.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Doesn't look too complicated to me unless you like theorycrafting.

[Toybox]

'systemlands' rip

I think people who complained about the convoluted BFA systems and are unfoundly praising shadowlands for moving away from that formula are in for a huge shock.

I personally don't care about all of the systems and grind, but it seems like a bunch of people are returning to the game because they think it's going to be on WOD levels of chill, very strange.

I mean in terms of content required in order to keep your character as powerful as it can be, Shadowlands is very chill compared to Legion/BfA. With the cap on Renown & a limited amount of Soul Ash earned per week for Torghast, Shadowlands will inevitably be a lot more relaxed than an expansion with a limitless AP grind (& in the case of Legion, a seemingly endless RNG legendary grind).

I don't really care about the systems either, but I really like that very little playtime is required to cap your player power.

[Syegfryed]

Just to try and explain it as succintly as I can.
There are 3 tints of the Warfront armor, further there are 3 ranks for each. There is one tint from the Warfronts, one is the Gladiator and Elite Gladiator set, and the last one is the Aspirant set.
All the ranks are available from the Warfront tint, only 2 from the Gladiator sets and only 1 from the Aspirant version.

The armor we get in the pre-patch is the final version of the Gladiator set.

without pics is hard to get

[Gorsameth]

Just popping in to remind people Illidan has still killed more innocent people than Sylvanas & they still portrayed him as a Christ-like figure in Legion. And that was not a redemption story: Illidan decided 10,000 years ago he was going to join the legion in order to destroy it. And he did that.

You might feel differently about Sylvanas & Illidan than the developers but that still happened.

- - - Updated - - -

Sylvanas dies. Jailer sends someone to resurrect her. Sylvanas dies. Jailer sends someone to resurrect her. Sylvanas dies. Jailer sends someone resurrect her.

That's not a choice.

It's the myth of Sisyphus. Sisyphus can't choose to ignore the boulder.

How does that factor into Valkyr having to sacrifice themselves to resurrect her if she dies and her deal with Helya for the lantern that she wanted to use to bind Eyir and get more Valkyr.

If Valkyr are what the Jailer uses to forcefully resurrect Sylvanas then why did she need to get more of them in Stormheim?

[therumblings]

How does that factor into Valkyr having to sacrifice themselves to resurrect her if she dies and her deal with Helya for the lantern that she wanted to use to bind Eyir and get more Valkyr.

If Valkyr are what the Jailer uses to forcefully resurrect Sylvanas then why did she need to get more of them in Stormheim?

You are thinking this through more than Blizzard did lol

[formerShandalay]

How does that factor into Valkyr having to sacrifice themselves to resurrect her if she dies and her deal with Helya for the lantern that she wanted to use to bind Eyir and get more Valkyr.

If Valkyr are what the Jailer uses to forcefully resurrect Sylvanas then why did she need to get more of them in Stormheim?

Maybe it wasn't about her getting more Val'kyr at all. Maybe it's the same thing that she wants Nathanos to do in 'Shadows Rising': everyone who has any say in where souls go after dying has to be eliminated, so the Jailer can have them all. That means if she subjugates Eyir, those Val'kyr that were formerly in her domain go to the Jailer. If Nathanos succeeds in eliminating Bwonsamdi, all of his domain's souls go to the Jailer and once Sylvanas dethrones the (Bolvar-) Lich King, the undead are free to be taken by the Jailer too (because other than it was the case with Arthas and Ner'zhul, Bolvar actually keeps the Scourge undead from him, thus the 'usurper' remark from Sylvanas).

[Nyel]

Listening to Preach's latest video on Systemlands and I'm feeling like I don't care one of cent about Soulbinds/conduits etc. He looks like he's trying to explain something that is so convoluted that his explanation ends up being as confusing as the nature of the monster itself

The first iteration several months ago wasn’t convoluted. But then they started to add smaller systems to the big system, then they started adding restrictions and now we have this mess. The entire Covenant system is absolutely convoluted and they just make it worse, this week alone they introduced two new systems to deal with problems they fabricated themselves.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Maybe it wasn't about her getting more Val'kyr at all. Maybe it's the same thing that she wants Nathanos to do in 'Shadows Rising': everyone who has any say in where souls go after dying has to be eliminated, so the Jailer can have them all. That means if she subjugates Eyir, those Val'kyr that were formerly in her domain go to the Jailer. If Nathanos succeeds in eliminating Bwonsamdi, all of his domain's souls go to the Jailer and once Sylvanas dethrones the (Bolvar-) Lich King, the undead are free to be taken by the Jailer too (because other than it was the case with Arthas and Ner'zhul, Bolvar actually keeps the Scourge undead from him, thus the 'usurper' remark from Sylvanas).

Its essentially having a monopoly on souls. Guess the jailer is taking in all that anima.

[Nyel]

Doesn't look too complicated to me unless you like theorycrafting.

You tried and played it in beta?

People that haven’t really tried it don’t understand how convoluted it really is in game (and how horrible the UI is for these systems on top of that).

That’s why I’m asking.

[formerShandalay]

Its essentially having a monopoly on souls. Guess the jailer is taking in all that anima.

Exactly. We were at the time thinking Sylvanas was still operating under the same 'rules' that applied to her in Cataclysm (she needs the Val'kyr for resurrection and her Forsaken as her bulwark), but from what we now know that has not really been the case anymore since the start of Legion.

[Slowpoke is a Gamer]

Doesn't look too complicated to me unless you like theorycrafting.

The lack f any real preview doesn't help. Can't explain what we don't understand without beta access.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

We’ll be reverting this change in next week’s update. It’s something we were on the fence about internally, and seeing the range of reactions has been helpful in making it clear that it wasn’t the right move.

We explored adding this restriction partly for world-fantasy reasons (I mean, it’s a bit weird seeing someone’s summoned swolekin just hanging out in the Orgrimmar AH), but mainly as an exploration of how to make expansion-specific systems feel more grounded in their expansion from the outset. Covenants are the centerpiece of Shadowlands, but when the following expansion comes out (yes, there will be one), we know we’ll need to ensure that a returning player doesn’t need to go back and do the full covenant progression in order to be complete and competitive. And when that time comes, it won’t feel great to lose something that will have come to feel like a part of your character.

That led us to this experiment of just establishing these powers as inherently tied to the Shadowlands, so that nothing would technically change when the time comes for players to move on to the next chapter in their journey. But reducing that feeling of loss a couple of years from now isn’t worth the expense of a weaker sense of connection to your covenants in the meantime, along with feeling like a part of your character is missing when you’re running legacy content. The feedback around this change makes that clear.

Blizzard on not using covanent abilities outside Shadowlands.

[Toybox]

Holy shit, I didn't see this until now!

"Max level is now required to access the Black Market Auction House."

That's a damn good change.

[Greyfang]

Well, seems they're going back on the change regarding covenant abilities outside shadowlands. It was pretty clear the reactions were mostly negative.

https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wo...ands/668623/59