Page 29 of 29 FirstFirst ...
19
27
28
29
  1. #561
    Quote Originally Posted by Mehrunes View Post
    Except they weren't mere civilians. They were the Forsaken administration in Sylvanas' absence.
    Politicians are civilians.

  2. #562
    Quote Originally Posted by The Stormbringer View Post
    Incorrect, only SOME of them were the Forsaken administration. There were just plain civilians that they had along with them to meet with their families. Even if we hand-wave the ones who were in places of governance, refugees fleeing for their safety and to their families were still unjustly murdered.
    Those present were the Desolate Council, no one else. All high-ranking Forsaken administrators. Twelve were rejected outright and went home safe and sound. Four defected for certain, one didn't defect for sure of the remaining twelve and the seven remaining were claimed to be defecting by Calia. If true that would mean Sylvanas has a very high rate of killing actual traitors.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  3. #563
    Give me WC3:R, Blizz! The Stormbringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ...location, location!
    Posts
    12,793
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    Those present were the Desolate Council, no one else. All high-ranking Forsaken administrators. Twelve were rejected outright and went home safe and sound. Four defected for certain, one didn't defect for sure of the remaining twelve and the seven remaining were claimed to be defecting by Calia. If true that would mean Sylvanas has a very high rate of killing actual traitors.
    If that's true, then I might have missed something. I've only read excerpts and don't have the book.

    That said, she still unjustly murdered civilians who were not part of a military organization. Oh, and the ones that were already coming back to the wall and clearly weren't defecting.

  4. #564
    Quote Originally Posted by The Stormbringer View Post
    If that's true, then I might have missed something. I've only read excerpts and don't have the book.

    That said, she still unjustly murdered civilians who were not part of a military organization. Oh, and the ones that were already coming back to the wall and clearly weren't defecting.
    The book isn't very good. Don't buy it.

    That aside, they are high-ranking officials managing the capital of the Forsaken and were doing so to a pretender to Sylvanas's throne. The whole bit about coming back to the wall is the main ambiguous part. Depending on how you interpret events, Sylvanas killed anywhere from eight to just one innocent, with the rest being defectors. We know for sure that one of them was legitimate and reaffirmed her trust in Sylvanas but was killed because Sylvanas wasn't privy to the conversation and saw her talking with Calia, assuming it to be defection, and that four others were confirmed defectors.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  5. #565
    Give me WC3:R, Blizz! The Stormbringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ...location, location!
    Posts
    12,793
    Eh, agree to disagree I guess. Though I'll agree with the bit about the book! I'm still of the mind that you don't go executing your officials on the spot because they're trying to flee. It also sets a pretty bad precedent.

  6. #566
    Quote Originally Posted by The Stormbringer View Post
    Eh, agree to disagree I guess. Though I'll agree with the bit about the book! I'm still of the mind that you don't go executing your officials on the spot because they're trying to flee. It also sets a pretty bad precedent.
    I won't say it's particularly nice, but it's definitely not the atrocity it's cast as. It's presented as being about leaving with their families, but from a political context they're still very high up and leaving to join the Alliance and someone with a claim to Sylvanas's throne. Were Sylvanas to let that go she'd be basically declaring herself illegitimate and passing not only valuable intel but a huge propaganda win to her foe. It's why modern states prosecute treason and leaks of information as well. It's about geopolitical standing more so than it is about morality in the standard sense, because the consequences of not doing this are very severe for the state that lets it slide.

    But seriously, don't buy the book. The few good character moments aren't worth 300~ pages where nothing happens.
    Last edited by Super Dickmann; 2019-04-26 at 10:36 PM.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  7. #567
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Politicians are civilians.
    First of all, the concept of politician doesn't really apply here as Azeroth is set in ~feudal times. They'd be considered ruling class for which the rules were different. Even if you want to operate on anachronistic terminology, they were the highest echelons of politicians, who'd be committing high treason by defecting to the enemy. They were people privy to the most confidential information of the Forsaken society. No country on earth would treat such people's defection with kid gloves on.


    Quote Originally Posted by The Stormbringer View Post
    Incorrect, only SOME of them were the Forsaken administration. There were just plain civilians that they had along with them to meet with their families. Even if we hand-wave the ones who were in places of governance, refugees fleeing for their safety and to their families were still unjustly murdered.
    Yeah, no. The only Forsaken present on the field were Desolate Council members. The only other Forsaken in the general vicinity were Dark Rangers, 25 priests monitoring the field, Nathanos and Sylvanas herself. There were only 22 Forsaken on the field itself. Before the Storm, chapter 22 (among others that corroborate it). And as per the graves in Arathi in game, 10 Forsaken survived. Those that disobeyed the rules on when and how fast they were supposed retreat in case of a signal from Sylvanas did not.


    Quote Originally Posted by The Stormbringer View Post
    If that's true, then I might have missed something. I've only read excerpts and don't have the book.

    That said, she still unjustly murdered civilians who were not part of a military organization. Oh, and the ones that were already coming back to the wall and clearly weren't defecting.
    Except they were all aware of the rules of the Gathering. One of them being that they should retreat immediately in case of the retreat signal. They didn't. They only started retreating when Sylvanas already deployed the Dark Rangers from the wall. Elsie, the first one to react to Sylvanas' signal, was still talking with Calia when Anduin already left Stromgarde and was approaching the Gathering site, quite some time after the signal. At that point they were no longer trustworthy no matter where they were running to, as Sylvanas explained to Nathanos. Otherwise she'd be risking getting a fifth column back to Undercity just after she was faced with a coup attempt.


    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    The book isn't very good. Don't buy it.

    That aside, they are high-ranking officials managing the capital of the Forsaken and were doing so to a pretender to Sylvanas's throne. The whole bit about coming back to the wall is the main ambiguous part. Depending on how you interpret events, Sylvanas killed anywhere from eight to just one innocent, with the rest being defectors. We know for sure that one of them was legitimate and reaffirmed her trust in Sylvanas but was killed because Sylvanas wasn't privy to the conversation and saw her talking with Calia, assuming it to be defection, and that four others were confirmed defectors.
    Admittedly, the timeline seems a bit wonky. Elsie seems to react faster from her perspective than it happens from Sylvanas' or Anduin's. But given Anduin's holy bones, his perspective is probably the most valid.
    Last edited by Mehrunes; 2019-04-26 at 10:41 PM.

  8. #568
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    I won't say it's particularly nice, but it's definitely not the atrocity it's cast as. It's presented as being about leaving with their families, but from a political context they're still very high up and leaving to join the Alliance and someone with a claim to Sylvanas's throne. Were Sylvanas to let that go she'd be basically declaring herself illegitimate and passing not only valuable intel but a huge propaganda win to her foe. It's why modern states prosecute treason and leaks of information as well. It's about geopolitical standing more so than it is about morality in the standard sense, because the consequences of not doing this are very severe for the state that lets it slide.

    But seriously, don't buy the book. The few good character moments aren't worth 300~ pages where nothing happens.
    What's this blasphemy? Each description of how Anduin's holy bones work is worth all the wealth in the universe.

    @Stelio Kontos Did you already delete your mountain of fallacies? Not proud of your own posts?
    Last edited by Mehrunes; 2019-04-26 at 10:56 PM.

  9. #569
    Quote Originally Posted by Mehrunes View Post
    What's this blasphemy? Each description of how Anduin's holy bones work is worth all the wealth in the universe.

    @Stelio Kontos Did you already delete your mountain of fallacies? Not proud of your own posts?
    Wrong topic, and I knew that post would trigger the Edgekins like you.
    No ideology has been more murderous or detrimental to human dignity than Communism
    Quote Originally Posted by kidkilla View Post
    The Ottomans brought civilization to Greece.
    Oh my...

  10. #570
    Quote Originally Posted by Stelio Kontos View Post
    Wrong topic, and I knew that post would trigger the Edgekins like you.
    How totally not edgy of you What other totally not edgy invective are you going to throw in my direction for my terrible crime of liking a character that you don't? And given what you wrote there, it seemed like you posted in the correct topic.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Honestly the issue with Sylvanas was not her actions but rather her intent. It's not that she was wrong to kill defectors, it's that she killed everyone present so no one could know that there are humans out there who are willing to accept Forsaken relatives back.
    As I've said, if I was Shaw within hours everyone in Undercity would have heard exactly what happened in Arathi.
    But there were ten remaining Desolate Council members, 25 priests and an unspecified amount of Dark Rangers left as witnesses. Plus Nathanos. Sylvanas outright told her reasoning to Nathanos. It didn't contain stifling the very knowledge that there are humans that are willing to accept Forsaken relatives. Her reasoning was that:
    1. she couldn't trust those that retreated with delay because they could have been returning simply out of fear at that time, while in their heart they were as much of subvertives as Felstones and Parqual.
    2. she wanted the Forsaken to be bitter as she considered that to be better for them and a more trustworthy state for them to have from her perspective.

  11. #571
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    Who cares what kind of arrows she killed traitors with? Modern states extradite people and a large part of their population urge the death penalty just for giving information, let alone actual desertion. If we take Calia's word for it, everyone on the field short of Elsie was a traitor in the process of defection and Sylvanas had no means of gleaming her allegiance at the time.
    Disregarding Sylvanas murdering innocents, the point I was trying to get at is paranoia =/= evidence of treason. You can't just go lighting people on fire or shooting them for maybe-possibly-discussing-dissenting-opinions-that-might-in-the-longrun-lead-to-treason.

    At the end of the day I mostly agree with the OP that Baine's a big ol' softy that places his principles above pragmatism, often to the detriment of those around him, a very strong counterpoint to Sylvanas, who we have seen throw away literally every principle she's ever held in reckless pursuit of victory. Two extremes. I don't know which is better at this point, as Blizzard seems intent on making us pick one.

    I mainly distinguish that I don't think it's out of some obsession with the Alliance over his own faction. If Sylvanas had resurrected say, Draenosh instead of Derek, and sent him off to kill Saurfang, Baine would've had the same problem with it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mehrunes View Post
    Now have fun finding anything whatsoever that would indicate the Blight has anything to do with anything black-flighted. Alternatively you could just admit you're wrong instead of digging your hole ever deeper. Because I have the book right next to me too and it just so happens I just reread the last few chapters for the sake of another thread. You made the blighted arrows up.
    I edited the post, what more do you want? I didn't "admit I was wrong" because I was still right that they use blighted arrows, just from other sources rather than the book that I got blurred together.

    Pedantic as heck. I wanted to just leave it be since that whole tangent had nothing to do with Baine.
    Last edited by Powerogue; 2019-04-27 at 12:03 AM.

  12. #572
    Quote Originally Posted by Powerogue View Post
    I edited the post, what more do you want?
    How can I know you edited your post? You made no mention of that in your subsequent reply and as such, in conjunction with you making zero mention that you're correcting yourself in said subsequent reply, it looked like you were delving further into trying to prove yourself right by quoting the book. Which you could have easily avoided by, you know, saying that you're correcting yourself.


    Quote Originally Posted by Powerogue View Post
    I didn't "admit I was wrong" because I was still right that they use blighted arrows, just from other sources rather than the book that I got blurred together.

    Pedantic as heck. I wanted to just leave it be since that whole tangent had nothing to do with Baine.
    Except you said the Dark Rangers used blighted arrow at the Gathering and Sylvanas and Nathanos using those at one point in Legion doesn't mean the Dark Rangers also used them at the Gathering. So one step forward, two step backwards.

  13. #573
    Quote Originally Posted by Powerogue View Post
    Disregarding Sylvanas murdering innocents, the point I was trying to get at is paranoia =/= evidence of treason. You can't just go lighting people on fire or shooting them for maybe-possibly-discussing-dissenting-opinions-that-might-in-the-longrun-lead-to-treason.
    We are the omniscient witnesses of what goes on. We know that at least a third of those and as many as 11 out of 12 depending on whether Calia was being truthful to Elsie or not were traitors. A high-ranking official defecting to a pretender to the throne of the one they're defecting from isn't going to be lead there. In this case, they were actively defecting already, not discussing their defection.

    As for Sylvanas, she's actually engaged in some Baine-like behavior in this patch by offing her own side to help Baine escape, so even those who stand against Baine will eventually become Baine. One who fights cows should know that she herself not become a cow?

    On the last point, that's simply wrong and we have proof of it. Scores of Baine's soldiers were raised as skellies to defend Lordaeron and he gave so little of a fuck despite being witness to it that he was calmly chatting away with Nathanos and the only issue he took was that Sylvanas left Saurfang to die, which didn't even happen as Saurfang himself chose to stay there.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

Posting Permissions

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