Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ...
3
4
5
  1. #81
    The Lightbringer Steampunkette's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    I come from the land of Ice and Snow.
    Posts
    3,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Sephakay View Post
    If I come of this way I am sorry. English is not my native tongue.
    And I dont think we completely dissagree. I do agree that Calia was the trigger, but my point was simply that Sylvanas even killing those Forsaken who showed their loyalty is a sign that Sylvanas is, like Anduin said, lost.
    To me it seems she cannot understand the difference between the forsaken and her, not comprehend that not all Forsaken necessarily think exactly like her, and that the thought of the notion that bonds with humans is possible sickens her and "threatens" her because she, herself, is not capable of doing that.

    I hope this comment makes more sense. I am sorry if I came of as trying to misunderstand on purpose.
    That's okay I understand now.

    Sylvanas loves her sisters. It's the reason she didn't kill them at the end of the comic that she, Alleria, and Vereesa starred in. She is capable of caring and is heartbroken that her sisters do not love her enough to reach across the divide and embrace her. That is not the difference between her and the Forsaken.

    The thing is even The Forsaken who ran back to the wall may not have been showing loyalty. They might have just been scared of dying. Sylvanas knows this and isn't scared of them telling people about how they were loved, or love others. She's scared that they may have returned out of fear rather than loyalty. If they still held hope of defection or betraying her then they were a risk to her and she couldn't allow that risk.
    When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like injustice.

  2. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    ...Sylvanas killed all but the ones who returned early (with hearts considered hardened against the living) because she felt she couldn't trust them - in her view if she allowed the fear (or the hope) to fester, it would only breed further weakness and division in the Forsaken people...
    This echoes my own understanding of the events that played out. We have no way of knowing who among the Desolate Council would have turned traitor and who would have stayed loyal. We only saw the intentions of a couple of them. This did not matter one iota to Sylvanas and she killed them all except for the handful who were spurned by their loved ones and returned to Thoradin's Wall early. They, Sylvanas claimed, are now "truly Desolate...". It's about making sure that the Forsaken believes what she believes: the living do not care for them. If anything, the living resent and despise them and their existence.

    Allowing loyal Desolate Council members to return to the Undercity who had seen differently was a threat to what Sylvanas believed to be true and what she wanted the Forsaken to believe to be true. Whether they were loyal to the Horde was irrelevant to her. Whether or not they were traitors to the Horde, they were traitors to Sylvanas' ideals the moment they met with the living and had a positive interaction with them. At least this is what I took away from these events.

  3. #83
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    14,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Steampunkette View Post
    I didn't try to imply that there is significant time to cogitate or reflect. Though you have clearly inferred it. Only that she has already committed the act when she realizes the truth of the matter.

    So in my mental timeline it goes:
    1 Sylvanas blows the horn to see if people are loyal
    2 Sylvanas learns of Calia and gets upset
    3 Sylvanas thinks that Anduin is behind it
    4 Sylvanas orders the Dark Rangers to go kill all the Forsaken on the field
    5 The Dark Rangers depart and engage
    6 Sylvanas realizes that it wasn't Anduin's idea (evaporated in the time it took to give an order and have the Dark Rangers leave)
    7 Nathanos questions Sylvanas and she responds with the coldness to hide her emotions
    8 Sylvanas goes after Calia


    I also disagree with the idea that Sylvanas would give the Dark Rangers a list. Or that they would specifically Target whoever is at the top of a list and then work their way down in rank. It makes more sense if the Dark Rangers each attacked whichever Target was closest. Anduin after all mentions their uncanny accuracy, so it's not as if they have to be super duper careful in picking their targets to avoid hitting humans.
    That's a plausible construction of events.

    I don't think Sylvanas gave the Dark Rangers a list, either; but they're well trained and probably intuited the substance of her desires without having to be told directly. They were aware the genesis of the consternation started with Elsie and the revealed Calia, but their command was specifically to target only Forsaken and not kill any Humans (thus keeping with the agreement struck between Anduin and Sylvanas in their accord leading up to the Gathering). Assuming all the Dark Rangers were parked on or near Thoradin's Wall, held in reserve should they be needed, then it is equally likely they all took the field at roughly the same time - making Elsie's death seem like a very pointed statement on Sylvanas' or the Dark Rangers' part. She wouldn't be the closest target (assuming the field was more or less people milling about chaotically), but she would still be the target most familiar to the Dark Rangers.

    Actually, thinking further on it, it wouldn't surprise me in the least that Nathanos gave the Dark Rangers instruction on exactly what to do if they were called to do their duty, after all; he would've wanted them prepared for the eventuality and likely would've supplied them with intelligence on every Council member. Not to mention that Elsie was already under suspicion before the Gathering itself even began, as Anduin had wrote her personally to inform her of Wyll Benton's death and giving her his direct condolences (which is why they acknowledge one-another later on at the Gathering). Elsie would definitely be the most visible target, figuratively and literally.
    Last edited by Aucald; 2018-07-13 at 08:09 PM.
    "This is what I am called. I'm called Glad-of-War, Grim, Raider, and Third. I am One-Eyed. I am also called Highest, and True-Guesser. I am Grimnir, and the Hooded One. I am All-Father, Gondlir Wand-Bearer. I have as many names as there are winds, as many titles as there are ways to die. My ravens are Huginn and Muninn: Thought and Memory. My wolves are Freki and Geri. My horse is the gallows."

  4. #84
    The Lightbringer Steampunkette's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    I come from the land of Ice and Snow.
    Posts
    3,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    That's a plausible construction of events.

    I don't think Sylvanas gave the Dark Rangers a list, either; but they're well trained and probably intuited the substance of her desires without having to be told directly. They were aware the genesis of the consternation started with Elsie and the revealed Calia, but their command was specifically to target only Forsaken and not kill any Humans (thus keeping with the agreement struck between Anduin and Sylvanas in their accord leading up to the Gathering). Assuming all the Dark Rangers were parked on or near Thoradin's Wall, held in reserve should they be needed, then it is equally likely they all took the field at roughly the same time - making Elsie's death seem like a very pointed statement on Sylvanas' or the Dark Rangers' part. She wouldn't be the closest target (assuming the field was more or less people milling about chaotically), but she would still be the target most familiar to the Dark Rangers.

    Actually, thinking further on it, it wouldn't surprise me in the least that Nathanos gave the Dark Rangers instruction on exactly what to do if they were called to do their duty, after all; he would've wanted them prepared for the eventuality and likely would've supplied them with intelligence on every Council member. Not to mention that Elsie was already under suspicion before the Gathering itself even began, as Anduin had wrote her personally to inform her of Wyll Benton's death and giving her his direct condolences (which is why they acknowledge one-another later on at the Gathering). Elsie would definitely be the most visible target, figuratively and literally.
    I don't disagree that she would be the most visible target both figuratively and literally. But is it again plausible that she was just the closest? Maybe it was just pareidolia paranoia that led Sylvanas to think they were defecting, but what if it wasn't?

    What if most of the Desolate Council was on the other side of Elsie Benton from Sylvanas's perspective and she intuited that they were defecting en masse, and was correct in her guess based on the admittedly loose evidence provided?

    If Elsie Benton was the only innocent person on the field, the only one who wasn't defecting, so caught up in talking to Calia that she didn't notice people moving around her, and Sylvanas recognized the truth that they were actually defecting but assumed the wrong motivation on the part of the Desolate Council, with all of that in mind:

    Does it change the morality of her actions?
    When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like injustice.

  5. #85
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    14,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Sills View Post
    This echoes my own understanding of the events that played out. We have no way of knowing who among the Desolate Council would have turned traitor and who would have stayed loyal. We only saw the intentions of a couple of them. This did not matter one iota to Sylvanas and she killed them all except for the handful who were spurned by their loved ones and returned to Thoradin's Wall early. They, Sylvanas claimed, are now "truly Desolate...". It's about making sure that the Forsaken believes what she believes: the living do not care for them. If anything, the living resent and despise them and their existence.

    Allowing loyal Desolate Council members to return to the Undercity who had seen differently was a threat to what Sylvanas believed to be true and what she wanted the Forsaken to believe to be true. Whether they were loyal to the Horde was irrelevant to her. Whether or not they were traitors to the Horde, they were traitors to Sylvanas' ideals the moment they met with the living and had a positive interaction with them. At least this is what I took away from these events.
    This is also dovetailed with the revelation in "Before the Storm" that the Forsaken are pressured (sometimes strongly) to break away from their pre-undead lives and assume entirely new identities as Forsaken to separate themselves from who they once were. This is taken as far as assuming entirely new names like Velcinda did in an attempt to be someone entirely else in undeath than they were in life. The Forsaken truly seem to operate as a cult of sorts, with Sylvanas at its head as the source of all direction and culture. Before "Before the Storm" I always considered the flow of power as deriving from the Forsaken and moving upward to Sylvanas, with Sylvanas at the center of a cult of personality more or less created by her followers (those she freed from the yoke of the Scourge). But more and more it seems that Sylvanas has deftly manipulated her original support she would've had in the early days of the Forsaken to create said cult of personality - engineering their society and culture to lionize herself, and slowly and surely eroding the Forsaken's self-sufficiency and making them dependent on her in every way.

    This is possibly a change in the society post-WotLK, stemming from the traumas she suffered and the change in her worldview following "Edge of Night." But this kind of social change seems like it would take longer to bring about than just that, all considered.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Steampunkette View Post
    I don't disagree that she would be the most visible target both figuratively and literally. But is it again plausible that she was just the closest? Maybe it was just pareidolia paranoia that led Sylvanas to think they were defecting, but what if it wasn't?

    What if most of the Desolate Council was on the other side of Elsie Benton from Sylvanas's perspective and she intuited that they were defecting en masse, and was correct in her guess based on the admittedly loose evidence provided?

    If Elsie Benton was the only innocent person on the field, the only one who wasn't defecting, so caught up in talking to Calia that she didn't notice people moving around her, and Sylvanas recognized the truth that they were actually defecting but assumed the wrong motivation on the part of the Desolate Council, with all of that in mind:

    Does it change the morality of her actions?
    The morality of her actions? No, probably not - she personally still doesn't know who is or isn't legitimately defecting (she says so in the text itself), meaning she was still acting on essential paranoia or the mere suspicion of treachery. Does it justify them? Well, perhaps more than otherwise, yes. If the Desolate Council at large were traitors and Elsie an unfortunate element of collateral damage then Sylvanas' actions aren't quite so beyond the pale from the objective standpoint - few leaders would permit figures high in the government of their coalition to freely defect to an enemy state without consequence. The fact that she doesn't know (or seemingly care) who is or isn't guilty before executing them is the moral quandary here, not the substance of those actions as concerns potential treason.
    "This is what I am called. I'm called Glad-of-War, Grim, Raider, and Third. I am One-Eyed. I am also called Highest, and True-Guesser. I am Grimnir, and the Hooded One. I am All-Father, Gondlir Wand-Bearer. I have as many names as there are winds, as many titles as there are ways to die. My ravens are Huginn and Muninn: Thought and Memory. My wolves are Freki and Geri. My horse is the gallows."

  6. #86
    The Lightbringer Steampunkette's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    I come from the land of Ice and Snow.
    Posts
    3,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    This is also dovetailed with the revelation in "Before the Storm" that the Forsaken are pressured (sometimes strongly) to break away from their pre-undead lives and assume entirely new identities as Forsaken to separate themselves from who they once were. This is taken as far as assuming entirely new names like Velcinda did in an attempt to be someone entirely else in undeath than they were in life. The Forsaken truly seem to operate as a cult of sorts, with Sylvanas at its head as the source of all direction and culture. Before "Before the Storm" I always considered the flow of power as deriving from the Forsaken and moving upward to Sylvanas, with Sylvanas at the center of a cult of personality more or less created by her followers (those she freed from the yoke of the Scourge). But more and more it seems that Sylvanas has deftly manipulated her original support she would've had in the early days of the Forsaken to create said cult of personality - engineering their society and culture to lionize herself, and slowly and surely eroding the Forsaken's self-sufficiency and making them dependent on her in every way.

    This is possibly a change in the society post-WotLK, stemming from the traumas she suffered and the change in her worldview following "Edge of Night." But this kind of social change seems like it would take longer to bring about than just that, all considered.

    - - - Updated - - -



    The morality of her actions? No, probably not - she personally still doesn't know who is or isn't legitimately defecting (she says so in the text itself), meaning she was still acting on essential paranoia or the mere suspicion of treachery. Does it justify them? Well, perhaps more than otherwise, yes. If the Desolate Council at large were traitors and Elsie an unfortunate element of collateral damage then Sylvanas' actions aren't quite so beyond the pale from the objective standpoint - few leaders would permit figures high in the government of their coalition to freely defect to an enemy state without consequence. The fact that she doesn't know (or seemingly care) who is or isn't guilty before executing them is the moral quandary here, not the substance of those actions as concerns potential treason.
    Yeah, that's close to the position I wind up in, too.

    The only way it really works is if she was right that they were all defecting, except Elsie, and her doubt over whether the ones running back were actually loyal rather than just scared came up, later. And only as a result of their running back, essentially being tricked into believing that maybe they were loyal.

    If that were the situation then Elsie would just be a casualty caught in a nasty-ass Crossfire. But I think the writers just screwed the pooch on trying to have any kind of moral grayness in this situation. Both Christie Golden in the writing of the novel, and whoever handed her the outline which included the Gathering as an importance lore event.
    When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like injustice.

  7. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by The World View Post
    I was quite sad that Elsie got killed. I can understand the killing of the defectors, but the one running back towards the wall? Can't grasp that..
    It’s their own fault. They should have zig zag’d.

  8. #88
    The Lightbringer Niwes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,117
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    I don't think anyone is saying that Sylvanas didn't murder a bunch of people based on her own fear or paranoia as concerned their loyalty - "Before the Storm" makes that pretty much indisputable, and we know that several of the Desolate Council members massacred at the Gathering were still loyal to Sylvanas (e.g. Velcinda/Elsie Benton and those who were retreating back to Galen's Fall with her). The question here is whether or not Sylvanas' actions were justified by the threat that the Council posed if it were defecting en masse, whether or not they were "innocent" as they were being cut down.

    As has been said previously, in the context the Warcraft universe we're all murderers - Sylvanas, Anduin, the PC's, pretty much anyone who plays a role in the events have impressive tallies of victims.
    yeah, ofc. sylvanas isnt much different to the rest of us. ofc. like garrosh was too. keep telling you that. lol.

    /sarcasm off

    result: i think i have a way another oppinion here than you (what is fine).
    There are only 10 types of people: those who understand binary, and those who don't.

  9. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by Niwes View Post
    yeah, ofc. sylvanas isnt much different to the rest of us. ofc. like garrosh was too. keep telling you that. lol.

    /sarcasm off

    result: i think i have a way another oppinion here than you (what is fine).
    Well considering we’re just killers for hire half the time and have done plenty of dirty work for BOTH of those people I’d say were just as bad, sure

    We’re this guy


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •