Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ...
7
8
9
10
LastLast
  1. #161
    Scarab Lord Soon-TM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Netherstorm
    Posts
    4,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    No, I am asking what is their up to recently current Identity.
    Just in the remote chance you aren't actually trolling, have this, from the Forsaken intro in Vanilla/Classic:

    Convinced that the primitive races of the Horde can help them achieve victory over their enemies, the Forsaken have entered an alliance of convenience. Harboring no true loyalty for their new allies, they go to any lengths to ensure their dark plans come to fruition. As one of the Forsaken, you must massacre any who pose a threat to the new order, Human, Undead, or otherwise.

    They certainly do not look like the poor, oppressed goody-goody sadsacks who only need a motherly figure to show them the true path, as portrayed by Golden in that abomination of a book that is BtS.

    Forsaken had to join the Horde because their former associates in the Alliance... Well, forsook them. But now, all of a sudden, they accept Anduin's BFF Calia and her newly found BF as their rulers, because Sylvanas was a meanie who told them bad things after 15 years at the helm.
    "The heart of the Horde" = Alliance-approved Horde

  2. #162
    Quote Originally Posted by Mehrunes View Post
    I just love how you demanded examples from Arrashi in a tone indicating there aren't any only to shoot yourself in the foot five seconds later. And then beat it to death. And that's even with you making things up in point #2 and #3 for the Forsaken. Truly sublime.
    My point was to prove that the differences between the Scourge and the Forsaken makes the latter worse and more dangerous and thus even less believable to be left alive in a society of people that want to continue living. Hence just like we kill demons and void thingies on a regular basis, if the Forsaken identity is build on their wish to destroy live, we would have to kill them. But I guess I was too subtle. My apologies.

    Point 2 is wrong? Huh. Could have fooled me with developing mass-murdering plagues (with innoent human test subjects) and murdering both Alliance and Horde troops at the Wrathgate. "Death to the Living" and so on. Must have been the Tusker that did that then.

    Yeah, yeah, that was Putress, but all Forsaken I ever met would have happily joined him. Like that guy in the Darkshore questline: "Don't bother me, I have a forest to blight." Basically a race that uses B and C weapons against civilian populations on a regular basis (Gilneas, Drustvar and more) and that uses the corpses of those they murdered as food or to damn more souls to their own cursed existence is objectively trying to destroy life.

    If you still deny that Sylvanas manipulated and used the Forsaken for her own personal gain and literally murdered people that even remotely threatened her power over them then I think you have made up your head canon and nothing I say will reach you. Seems like a going trend with the Banshee loyalists.

  3. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by Raisei View Post
    Yeah, yeah, that was Putress, but all Forsaken I ever met would have happily joined him. Like that guy in the Darkshore questline: "Don't bother me, I have a forest to blight." Basically a race that uses B and C weapons against civilian populations on a regular basis (Gilneas, Drustvar and more) and that uses the corpses of those they murdered as food or to damn more souls to their own cursed existence is objectively trying to destroy life.

    If you still deny that Sylvanas manipulated and used the Forsaken for her own personal gain and literally murdered people that even remotely threatened her power over them then I think you have made up your head canon and nothing I say will reach you. Seems like a going trend with the Banshee loyalists.
    The Forsaken were so committed to destroying life that they had to be made to attack Gilneas before recent retcons, ditto, their plan of expansion consisted of securing their hold on Lordaeron, the land to which they have an actual claim, and then vegetating because Sylvanas didn't want people coming over to kick her shit in. BFA and BTS had to retcon both of these things in order to position them, or rather Sylvanas exclusively, as a world-spanning baddie. Re: Sylvanas conning the Forsaken, you contradict your own post, but then you know this already - the notion that this was purely a one-sided abusive relationship rather than a co-dependent one on both ends is an invention of BTS, ergo, of little consequence to the viability of the Forsaken's prior identity. You know this because you acknowledge the Forsaken were already doing this shit prior, without Sylvanas anywhere in sight and that Putress even took it one step further from "Beware the living" to "Death to the living".
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  4. #164
    The Forsaken are far less destructive to life when it comes to nature itself compared to the Scourge for example, just to name the other big undead faction(Legion and Old Gods also corrupt nature way more compared to Forsaken). Just compare the Eastern Plague Lands with Hilsbrad or Silverpine Forest or the lands around Undercity.

    In none of these regions the Forsaken destroy life itself for the luls or corrupt it with death and necromantic magic to grow giant mushrooms. So no, the Forsaken don't destroy life itself.

    Warzones like Darkshore and Gilneas are different matter. Not arguing that Forsaken are holy in any way, shape or form, but claiming that they destroy all life is down right wrong based on what we see in their own regions and in other places, where they're not at war with the living.

    Of course Blizzard can change this in the future, but under Calia's leadership its unlikely. And Sylvanas is no longer part of the Forsaken. But even Sylvanas wouldn't down right retarded to eradicate all life. What is death without life. Ironically, nothing..

    But i guess Sylvanas is so badly written these days, that such details don't matter anyway.

  5. #165
    Quote Originally Posted by Soon-TM View Post
    Just in the remote chance you aren't actually trolling, have this, from the Forsaken intro in Vanilla/Classic:

    Convinced that the primitive races of the Horde can help them achieve victory over their enemies, the Forsaken have entered an alliance of convenience. Harboring no true loyalty for their new allies, they go to any lengths to ensure their dark plans come to fruition. As one of the Forsaken, you must massacre any who pose a threat to the new order, Human, Undead, or otherwise.

    They certainly do not look like the poor, oppressed goody-goody sadsacks who only need a motherly figure to show them the true path, as portrayed by Golden in that abomination of a book that is BtS.

    Forsaken had to join the Horde because their former associates in the Alliance... Well, forsook them. But now, all of a sudden, they accept Anduin's BFF Calia and her newly found BF as their rulers, because Sylvanas was a meanie who told them bad things after 15 years at the helm.
    I am not in fact trolling.

    I am asking because I get the feeling that many people equate the Forsaken's identity and motives to that of Sylvanas, and rightfully so, because she tirelessly worked to off anyone who would have a different view than her, and there is some (not proven but quite possible) evidence that undead under her control or ones raised by her are affected by a sort of mind control. In fact though, the Forsaken's motives and Identity are actually not Sylvanas'.

    While indeed true that during vanilla, most forsaken were mostly with the sole thought of revenge in mind, (Revenge against Arthas and also against the living) after Arthas was disposed, with also the help of the Alliance as well, some just wanted to live the rest of their un-lives in peace, and come naturally (as much as possible) to the end of their existence. (e.g. Desolate Council, now disposed of for opposing Sylvanas' views)

    So now that we have set the fact that there actually are people within the forsaken who do not think as Sylvanas does, lets turn to the Forsaken people's reaction to Sylvanas herself, well, FORSAKING them. Needless to say the Forsaken do not like to be well, forsaken, especially so by their leader. Even loyal Forsaken soldiers fighting under Sylvanas are now seen doubting her aswell as the reason for their existance, imagine what the others think.

    All in all, the forsaken have lost their home Undercity, and also their leader. Their only home left is the Horde which they never liked in the first place, and they are starting to think their existence may indeed be pointless after all. Is it not then natural for them to start searching for reason to, well, exist? For meaning? Especially if they may or may not know that their afterlife is bound to be eternal hell?

    People in such situations are naturally going to turn to religion/Light or anything of the sort that can help them redeem themselves. Calia is the anchor to their Past, being a Menethil, but they indeed would have never accepted a living queen. Now that she is a light-sustained undead, she also represents a possible tangible future they can work towards.

    The notion that all Forsaken=Evil plaguing zombies killing for fun and hating on everyone is very much not true.

  6. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    No, I am asking what is their up to recently current Identity.
    It's not my job to educate you on the basics of a given faction in a thread dedicated to it. Especially since your ignorance on the topic smells of you feigning it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Raisei View Post
    My point was to prove that the differences between the Scourge and the Forsaken makes the latter worse and more dangerous and thus even less believable to be left alive in a society of people that want to continue living. Hence just like we kill demons and void thingies on a regular basis, if the Forsaken identity is build on their wish to destroy live, we would have to kill them. But I guess I was too subtle. My apologies.

    Point 2 is wrong? Huh. Could have fooled me with developing mass-murdering plagues (with innoent human test subjects) and murdering both Alliance and Horde troops at the Wrathgate. "Death to the Living" and so on. Must have been the Tusker that did that then.

    Yeah, yeah, that was Putress, but all Forsaken I ever met would have happily joined him. Like that guy in the Darkshore questline: "Don't bother me, I have a forest to blight." Basically a race that uses B and C weapons against civilian populations on a regular basis (Gilneas, Drustvar and more) and that uses the corpses of those they murdered as food or to damn more souls to their own cursed existence is objectively trying to destroy life.

    If you still deny that Sylvanas manipulated and used the Forsaken for her own personal gain and literally murdered people that even remotely threatened her power over them then I think you have made up your head canon and nothing I say will reach you. Seems like a going trend with the Banshee loyalists.
    Given how your post opened with you challenging @Arrashi to even name those differences, that's a rather peculiar way to phrase that point. And last time I checked I already pointed out how your points #2 and #3 in regards to Forsaken are a fabrication on your part. Which, lo and behold, included the entire bit about them wishing to destroy all life in the same manner as the Scourge. The Forsaken are ruthless, cruel and merciless to their enemies, but their wish to destroy life (or unlife in the case of the Scourge) is limited to their enemies. And even then, only in the capacity that makes them a threat.

    Vide their fight against the Alliance that ended in 4.0. Was Alliance still an enemy of them after 4.0? Most certainly, given how at the very least it was at war with the Horde, the faction that Forsaken joined. Yet after Forsaken secured their borders and felt secure in their kingdom (even with a few Alliance outposts remaining right on their doorstep like the Aerie Peak) they sat out the reminder of that faction war, with Sylvanas only sending a token force to Theramore and Krasarang and only because in those cases Garrosh demanded that (because at least in case of Theramore she was against that campaign).

    Forsaken are inherently an isolationist force. Precisely because of what led them to take the name of Forsaken. They don't like the living, the living don't like them, as such they prefer to be separate in their own corner of the world or, to some degree, mingle with the Horde that isn't antagonistic to them. And as long as the Alliance or any other unfriendly living force doesn't bother them, they don't really give a shit about them.

    And your defense of your second point is just sad. Oh noes, the Forsaken developed a weapon. Wait, would you look at that, the Alliance developed nukes. Those Gnomes must be an enemy of all life and as such should have been purged. Stellar logic right here And what innocent test subjects? The test subjects we know of were captured Scarlet Crusaders, some Dwarves from Dun'garok garrison, soome militia members of Hillsbrad and Forsaken's own criminals to test its capacity against the undead. And if you know your Wrathgate example is bad, why even bother making it?

    And your last paragraph is a pile of bullshit that has nothing to do with this thread to begin with, that you made up only to pretend you have shit to fling in my direction in order to besmirch me and dismiss me, because having actual arguments is too hard. Which in turn is the trend with people that conjure a pillar of salt whenever Sylvanas is mentioned.

    But to address what you said there specifically, the claim that Sylvanas murdered people that even remotely threatened her power over the Forsaken is a falsehood on your part. Which makes your flimsy remarks about headcanon rather ironic. Because Sylvanas only ever killed people that betrayed her, i.e. the folks that stole her bloodstones and defected to the Kirin Tor, Varimathras, Stillwater and the Desolate Council members that shat the bed at the Gathering. And from outside people, Calia, who was openly encouraging the aforementioned Desolate Council members to defect. And given how she is the highest authority of the Forsaken society, her punishing traitors does not constitute murder, because words mean things. And in regards to her conning the Forsaken, it was already addressed in detail by @Super Dickmann.


    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    I am not in fact trolling.

    I am asking because I get the feeling that many people equate the Forsaken's identity and motives to that of Sylvanas, and rightfully so, because she tirelessly worked to off anyone who would have a different view than her, and there is some (not proven but quite possible) evidence that undead under her control or ones raised by her are affected by a sort of mind control. In fact though, the Forsaken's motives and Identity are actually not Sylvanas'.

    While indeed true that during vanilla, most forsaken were mostly with the sole thought of revenge in mind, (Revenge against Arthas and also against the living) after Arthas was disposed, with also the help of the Alliance as well, some just wanted to live the rest of their un-lives in peace, and come naturally (as much as possible) to the end of their existence. (e.g. Desolate Council, now disposed of for opposing Sylvanas' views)
    The people that try to pin all of Forsaken's behavior on Sylvanas are outright admitting they have no clue about the race. The Forsaken act the way they act because they are undead and their very state of being gives them a rather limited emotional range. They needed no Sylvanas to do plenty of fucked up shit with her nowhere in sight. For god's sake, half of the traitor forces Sylvanas had to deal with were people that didn't think Sylvanas went far enough, with Putress allying with the Legion to make sure everyone he hated died and Stillwater decided that Sylvanas' limitations on necromantic practices were not in Forsaken's interests.

    And Sylvanas didn't off anyone who would have a different view from her. The Forsaken that left to the Argent Dawn/Crusade were left alone even when they were openly critical of her. Same applies to plenty other undead who went their way. Let alone the undead resurrected by them that refused to join, vide Voss or Robrain before they teamed up with the intent of attacking the Forsaken. Sylvanas only punished people that actively betrayed her, be it by stealing from her, defecting to her enemies, making secret pacts with her enemies or breaking her laws. Magically enough the Desolate Council members wasn't entirely destroyed and the people that didn't, you know, try to defect to the Alliance or violate her orders about the retreat survived just fine regardless of whether they agreed with her on the Eyir thing or not.


    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    People in such situations are naturally going to turn to religion/Light or anything of the sort that can help them redeem themselves. Calia is the anchor to their Past, being a Menethil, but they indeed would have never accepted a living queen. Now that she is a light-sustained undead, she also represents a possible tangible future they can work towards.
    Oh, yes, because the Forsaken just love the light. It's not like the Light actively hurts them which made them feel even more forsaken when they were trying to find their place in the world anew.


    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    The Forsaken were so committed to destroying life that they had to be made to attack Gilneas before recent retcons
    Eh, the retcon didn't go that far. It only said Sylvanas wasn't against the overall prospect. But in the end Garrosh still began the invasion on his own while Sylvanas was still on her Icecrown suicide trip. And given its intended purpose, it's not like she initially intended to be a part of the invasion on Gilneas.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    Does the CIA pay you for your bullshit or are you just bootlicking in your free time?
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    Slant is an extremist, willing to sacrifice the lives of everyone to keep his wet dream of the EU alive.
    You shouldn't support people like him, it's like supporting ISIS.

  7. #167
    Also, The people that try to pin all of Forsaken's behavior and atrocities on "deadened emotions" are outright admitting they have no clue about the race. In the Pre-BFA book Sylvanas had to outright BAN people from Undercity going to the upper side of Lordaeron because they still have some attachment to their past lives, this implies some emotional range. Look it up.

    Sylvanas let differently minded individuals live. Sure, some joined other factions, but the ones that thought differently (or had the POTENTIAL to think differently) WITHIN HER OWN FACTION were disposed of and quick. It is explained in the same pre BFA book. Look it up: Desolate Council being broken up completely, and all present at the undead/live human meeting being outright killed. (even the ones that did not like their human relatives, despite remaining loyal to Sylvanas, were also killed)

    ALSO, No, Putress and Varimathras WERE under direct orders of Sylvanas and did not in fact betray her and that's canon, look it up.

    And no, Forsaken believing in the light and redemption and acting as they want to redeem themselves with the help of Calia does not in fact hurt them. Using the light such as being a priest might, but the majority of common people do not in fact know magic. Not to mention that turning to the light isnt imperative, and just b
    Last edited by Yuugumo; 2019-10-23 at 12:05 PM.

  8. #168
    The Unstoppable Force Arrashi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Land of human potential (and non-toxic masculinity)
    Posts
    22,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    Also, The people that try to pin all of Forsaken's behavior and atrocities on "deadened emotions" are outright admitting they have no clue about the race. In the Pre-BFA book Sylvanas had to outright BAN people from Undercity going to the upper side of Lordaeron because they still have some attachment to their past lives, this implies some emotional range. Look it up.

    Sylvanas let differently minded individuals live. Sure, some joined other factions, but the ones that thought differently WITHIN HER OWN FACTION were disposed of and quick. It is explained in the same pre BFA book. Look it up: Desolate Council, and all present at the undead/live human meeting. (even the ones that did not like their human relatives)

    ALSO, No, Putress and Varimathras WERE under direct orders of Sylvanas and did not in fact betray her and that's canon, look it up.

    And no, Forsaken believing in the light and redemption and acting as they want to redeem themselves with the help of Calia does not in fact hurt them. Using the light such as being a priest might, but the majority of common people do not in fact know magic. Not to mention that turning to the light isnt imperative, and just b
    You are aware that almost all of that is very recent retcons (delivered to you by master writer christie golden).

    Now play vanilla or cataclysm forsaken quests and notice how massive the contrast is.

  9. #169
    Quote Originally Posted by Arrashi View Post
    You are aware that almost all of that is very recent retcons (delivered to you by master writer christie golden).

    Now play vanilla or cataclysm forsaken quests and notice how massive the contrast is.
    I am aware that most of that is very recent ret-cons, yes.

    True, those ret-cons and in general the "new" storytelling fashion of Golden ("the GRAND plot", the "Human Potential", and "Everyone suddenly shipping eachother") are not to my liking, and are in fact a hot pile of garbage, but in this plot's context, disagreeing that Calia makes sense as a ruler/spiritual leader to the Forsaken is just wrong. Also in this plot's context, all of the Forsaken's previous evilness is also pinned on it being under Sylvanas' orders.

    I am currently Playing classic with a very happy 54 level Troll Shaman. To add, if Calia showed up in Vanilla storyline, i'd imagine her being cannibalized by the forsaken.

  10. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    Also, The people that try to pin all of Forsaken's behavior and atrocities on "deadened emotions" are outright admitting they have no clue about the race. In the Pre-BFA book Sylvanas had to outright BAN people from Undercity going to the upper side of Lordaeron because they still have some attachment to their past lives, this implies some emotional range. Look it up.

    Sylvanas let differently minded individuals live. Sure, some joined other factions, but the ones that thought differently (or had the POTENTIAL to think differently) WITHIN HER OWN FACTION were disposed of and quick. It is explained in the same pre BFA book. Look it up: Desolate Council being broken up completely, and all present at the undead/live human meeting being outright killed. (even the ones that did not like their human relatives, despite remaining loyal to Sylvanas, were also killed)

    ALSO, No, Putress and Varimathras WERE under direct orders of Sylvanas and did not in fact betray her and that's canon, look it up.

    And no, Forsaken believing in the light and redemption and acting as they want to redeem themselves with the help of Calia does not in fact hurt them. Using the light such as being a priest might, but the majority of common people do not in fact know magic. Not to mention that turning to the light isnt imperative, and just b
    Some of this is in the new book, which contradicts virtually every aspect of the Cataclysm and Vanilla questing experiences. But don't take my word for it, play through it, it still holds up pretty well. Other elements are just wrong regardless of when you talk about.

    In order of your wrong claims - Sylvanas gave everyone who got the option to join the Forsaken or fuck off and released even elite agents like that kid's book Deathstalker to be on his way. She didn't assassinate Judkins or Voss even though one left specifically to oppose her and another had it as her goal to kill necromancers, which is what Sylvanas was at the time. She killed people who stole from her - like the Bloodstone thieves in Vanilla, and people who made uprisings against her like Putress. Even in that literary abortion BTS, the Desolate Council who got rejected just go home, that being half of the total of 24 people in attendance. Of the other twelve, eleven are described by Calia as being 'everyone' and leaving to join the Alliance, and Elsie was talking with Calia while Calia was screeching about people joining her and the Alliance because she's queen and was shot because the Dark Rangers had no magic hearing powers.

    Putress and Varimathras were not under orders to overthrow Sylvanas, that's preposterous and per Cataclysm lore, neither did she do the Wrathgate, she's explicitly described in the very first thing you hear when you roll undead that she and the Forsaken were falsely accused of the Wrathgate. What she did do was order the Blight, which the Horde in Northrend knew and based their strategy around their 'secret weapon'.

    The Light as a whole conflicts with their bodies because their souls and forms are incompletely tied together. The Light brings those two as one so they can feel themselves rotting, the maggots going through their body, etc. It's all in the CDev interview on this topic. The Light used to do great pain to the Forsaken, though it could still mend them. This got thrown out of the window in BTS much like all the above elements, mind.

    Edit: Aaaand I just read your most recent comment and see you know all that already. Nevermind, then. Keeping this post up for posterity. The main thing isn't that it runs counter to BTS, but that BTS and the broader BFA plot in general runs counter to what came before when it comes to the Forsaken as a whole and Sylvanas in particular. Hell, BTS Sylvanas manages to both contradict her earlier portrayals and contradict her BFA portrayal since they don't align in motives, knowledge or attitude.
    Last edited by Super Dickmann; 2019-10-23 at 12:19 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.

  11. #171
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    Some of this is in the new book, which contradicts virtually every aspect of the Cataclysm and Vanilla questing experiences. But don't take my word for it, play through it, it still holds up pretty well. Other elements are just wrong regardless of when you talk about.

    In order of your wrong claims - Sylvanas gave everyone who got the option to join the Forsaken or fuck off and released even elite agents like that kid's book Deathstalker to be on his way. She didn't assassinate Judkins or Voss even though one left specifically to oppose her and another had it as her goal to kill necromancers, which is what Sylvanas was at the time. She killed people who stole from her - like the Bloodstone thieves in Vanilla, and people who made uprisings against her like Putress. Even in that literary abortion BTS, the Desolate Council who got rejected just go home, that being half of the total of 24 people in attendance. Of the other twelve, eleven are described by Calia as being 'everyone' and leaving to join the Alliance, and Elsie was talking with Calia while Calia was screeching about people joining her and the Alliance because she's queen and was shot because the Dark Rangers had no magic hearing powers.

    Putress and Varimathras were not under orders to overthrow Sylvanas, that's preposterous and per Cataclysm lore, neither did she do the Wrathgate, she's explicitly described in the very first thing you hear when you roll undead that she and the Forsaken were falsely accused of the Wrathgate. What she did do was order the Blight, which the Horde in Northrend knew and based their strategy around their 'secret weapon'.

    The Light as a whole conflicts with their bodies because their souls and forms are incompletely tied together. The Light brings those two as one so they can feel themselves rotting, the maggots going through their body, etc. It's all in the CDev interview on this topic. The Light used to do great pain to the Forsaken, though it could still mend them. This got thrown out of the window in BTS much like all the above elements, mind.

    Edit: Aaaand I just read your most recent comment and see you know all that already. Nevermind, then. Keeping this post up for posterity. The main thing isn't that it runs counter to BTS, but that BTS and the broader BFA plot in general runs counter to what came before when it comes to the Forsaken as a whole and Sylvanas in particular. Hell, BTS Sylvanas manages to both contradict her earlier portrayals and contradict her BFA portrayal since they don't align in motives, knowledge or attitude.
    Afrasiabi confirmed in an interview that Sylvanas ordered the Wrathgate massacre then threw Putress and Varim under the buss.

    Link of Interview: https://www.eurogamer.net/amp/2018-1...n-for-sylvanas

  12. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    Afrasiabi confirmed in an interview that Sylvanas ordered the Wrathgate massacre then threw Putress and Varim under the buss.

    Link of Interview: https://www.eurogamer.net/amp/2018-1...n-for-sylvanas
    You misunderstand me. I know the interview. It's a retcon. The Forsaken intro directly tells you she and the regular Forsaken didn't do it. But that's not what I'm getting at - Sylvanas wasn't playing 5D underwater chess with Putress and Varimathras - they really did attempt to overthrow her even under the new canon. They just also weren't violating her orders yet at the Wrathgate but only later when they coup'd Undercity with the help of demons and their followers.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  13. #173
    The Unstoppable Force Arrashi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Land of human potential (and non-toxic masculinity)
    Posts
    22,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    Afrasiabi confirmed in an interview that Sylvanas ordered the Wrathgate massacre then threw Putress and Varim under the buss.

    Link of Interview: https://www.eurogamer.net/amp/2018-1...n-for-sylvanas
    Which objectively doesn't make any sense.

  14. #174
    The Unstoppable Force Friendlyimmolation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Dreadfort, or Korriban. You never know.
    Posts
    20,348
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    Afrasiabi confirmed in an interview that Sylvanas ordered the Wrathgate massacre then threw Putress and Varim under the buss.

    Link of Interview: https://www.eurogamer.net/amp/2018-1...n-for-sylvanas
    Which was then retconned /corrected again by Danesur. Afrasbi is as good at keeping his thoughts coherent in interviews as he is at writing.
    Quote Originally Posted by WoWKnight65 View Post
    That's same excuse from you and so many others on this website and your right some of threads do bully high elf fans to a point where they might end up losing their minds to a point of a mass shooting.
    Holy shit lol

  15. #175
    The Unstoppable Force Arrashi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Land of human potential (and non-toxic masculinity)
    Posts
    22,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Friendlyimmolation View Post
    Which was then retconned /corrected again by Danesur. Afrasbi is as good at keeping his thoughts coherent in interviews as he is at writing.
    Writing is like a surgery - hard to do it when you are sober.

  16. #176
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    You misunderstand me. I know the interview. It's a retcon. The Forsaken intro directly tells you she and the regular Forsaken didn't do it. But that's not what I'm getting at - Sylvanas wasn't playing 5D underwater chess with Putress and Varimathras - they really did attempt to overthrow her even under the new canon. They just also weren't violating her orders yet at the Wrathgate but only later when they coup'd Undercity with the help of demons and their followers.
    Retcons are part of the canon. She ordered that Massacre and the taking of her own city in order to have plausible deniability and to be able to say "oops it wasnt me it was rebels from my faction"

    Back to my original point, Under new canon after all those retcons, whether you like it or not, the Forsaken are now normal people with regrets, emotions, (a bit deadpan but still emotions) some morals, and definitely people who can possibly accept Calia as a leader after Sylvanas abandoned them. And that will actually make sense. (a rare thing for something under the new lore management)

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Friendlyimmolation View Post
    Which was then retconned /corrected again by Danesur. Afrasbi is as good at keeping his thoughts coherent in interviews as he is at writing.
    Ok fair enough, I got a few questions, First, Who is Danesur and where does he rank within the people who make decisions about Lore, as far as I was aware Alex was the lead lore guy and I mean the top dude.

    Second, where is the link to that, because try as I might I did not find it.

    EDIT: I was able to find it. The answers in this interview was "she may have done it, she may not have, we dont want u to know"
    Last edited by Yuugumo; 2019-10-23 at 12:35 PM.

  17. #177
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    Also, The people that try to pin all of Forsaken's behavior and atrocities on "deadened emotions" are outright admitting they have no clue about the race. In the Pre-BFA book Sylvanas had to outright BAN people from Undercity going to the upper side of Lordaeron because they still have some attachment to their past lives, this implies some emotional range. Look it up.
    What an awful attempt at a gotcha. Them having lowered affect isn't equal with them having none. So nothing you said here contradicts the post you thought you were writing a brilliant retort to. Nor have I said anything about all of their atrocities being caused by it. So you nice combo of a counterargument that doesn't actually counter anything with an outright straw-man. You should win some prize for that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    Sylvanas let differently minded individuals live. Sure, some joined other factions, but the ones that thought differently (or had the POTENTIAL to think differently) WITHIN HER OWN FACTION were disposed of and quick. It is explained in the same pre BFA book. Look it up: Desolate Council being broken up completely, and all present at the undead/live human meeting being outright killed. (even the ones that did not like their human relatives, despite remaining loyal to Sylvanas, were also killed).
    First of all, you've already moved your previous goalposts. Secondly, still wrong. Nothing in BtS talks about Sylvanas deposing people within her own faction that had the POTENTIAL to thing differently. Newsflash, Forsaken have free will, as such each and every one of them has the POTENTIAL to think differently. Again, she killed the members she suspected (accurately) of defecting to the Alliance, and only after she learned of Calia's involvement in her own deal. The members of the Desolate Council that did no such thing lived, regardless of whether they agreed with her or not. Nor has anything been said about the reminder of it being broken up completely.


    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    ALSO, No, Putress and Varimathras WERE under direct orders of Sylvanas and did not in fact betray her and that's canon, look it up.
    Yeah, I'm sure Sylvanas ordered them to perform a coup in Undercity. Oh, wait, no she didn't. Because the interview you are referring to only mentioned the Wrathgate. So you look it up, because it's rather sad. Never mind that Danuser later contradicted Afrasiabi in a later interview, making Afrasiabi's comments not canon. But hey, you already established yourself to be utterly ignorant about the topic so it's nothing but par for the course at this point.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    Does the CIA pay you for your bullshit or are you just bootlicking in your free time?
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    Slant is an extremist, willing to sacrifice the lives of everyone to keep his wet dream of the EU alive.
    You shouldn't support people like him, it's like supporting ISIS.

  18. #178
    The Unstoppable Force Friendlyimmolation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Dreadfort, or Korriban. You never know.
    Posts
    20,348
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    Retcons are part of the canon. She ordered that Massacre and the taking of her own city in order to have plausible deniability and to be able to say "oops it wasnt me it was rebels from my faction"

    Back to my original point, Under new canon after all those retcons, whether you like it or not, the Forsaken are now normal people with regrets, emotions, (a bit deadpan but still emotions) some morals, and definitely people who can possibly accept Calia as a leader after Sylvanas abandoned them. And that will actually make sense. (a rare thing for something under the new lore management)

    - - - Updated - - -



    Ok fair enough, I got a few questions, First, Who is Danesur and where does he rank within the people who make decisions about Lore, as far as I was aware Alex was the lead lore guy and I mean the top dude.

    Second, where is the link to that, because try as I might I did not find it.

    EDIT: I was able to find it. The answers in this interview was "she may have done it, she may not have, we dont want u to know"
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pol...-sylvanas-lore



    As it says in the article Dan is the lead / head narrative guy. He says we aren’t going to say either way rather than Afrasbi’s giddy “admission” so to speak.
    Quote Originally Posted by WoWKnight65 View Post
    That's same excuse from you and so many others on this website and your right some of threads do bully high elf fans to a point where they might end up losing their minds to a point of a mass shooting.
    Holy shit lol

  19. #179
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    Retcons are part of the canon. She ordered that Massacre and the taking of her own city in order to have plausible deniability and to be able to say "oops it wasnt me it was rebels from my faction"
    You're wrong. Chronicle Vol 3. explicitly tells you the coup attempt was still real. Sylvanas isn't operating a coup attempt against herself to kill people who were still on her payroll, especially people who were summoning Sargeras at the time. It was just good timing for her. And as already said, that's one thing that she hasn't yet been retconned to have done conclusively due to Danuser's interview.

    Back to my original point, Under new canon after all those retcons, whether you like it or not, the Forsaken are now normal people with regrets, emotions, (a bit deadpan but still emotions) some morals, and definitely people who can possibly accept Calia as a leader after Sylvanas abandoned them. And that will actually make sense. (a rare thing for something under the new lore management)
    That's true, but of no particular relevance. No one rolled Forsaken under the impression that that's what they would be playing. It has informed none of their content, not even in BFA, which stridently ignores BTS' take on the Forsaken both in mentality (Sylvanas and Paxton openly talking about Lordaeron, all of Darkshore) and physically (Paxton not falling apart from clapping but still being alive as a disembodied torso). What it did do was essentially disintegrate the entire prior Forsaken cast.

    It doesn't help that the resulting race is beyond pathetic, responding to the betrayal by their cult figure by their only remaining character, Voss, seeking out a new cult figure to worship because without outside direction they're just lost lambs who will passively waste away. A direction in line with the retcon and marginally less awful would be for the Forsaken to reform a new Desolate Council out of existing NPCs and renounce all aspects of the personality cult in favor of individualism. Going from "Dark Lady watch over you" to "Bright Lady watch over you" without even having the latter sustained by a comical police state makes the Forsaken be exactly as much a bunch of pitiable pansies as the villain claims they are.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  20. #180
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuugumo View Post
    Ok fair enough, I got a few questions, First, Who is Danesur and where does he rank within the people who make decisions about Lore, as far as I was aware Alex was the lead lore guy and I mean the top dude.
    Danuser is the lead narrative designer, making him the top dude in regards to lore.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    Does the CIA pay you for your bullshit or are you just bootlicking in your free time?
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    Slant is an extremist, willing to sacrifice the lives of everyone to keep his wet dream of the EU alive.
    You shouldn't support people like him, it's like supporting ISIS.

Posting Permissions

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