Sylvanas Is Evil, Just Admit It

[Varodoc]

Source please.



Or, follow me here:

She's saying that because she doesn't want to admit that she doesn't want to kill her sisters. She's not saying this to herself - She is directly asked, by a creature whom apparently knew what her plan was, why she didn't go through with it. She will say whatever is necessary, not necessarily the truth.

Because, and follow me further:

What she said makes no fucking sense. If she's trying to break the death machine or feed the Jailer souls or whatever, "They'll die eventually" doesn't accomplish this goal. If they aren't dead now, they aren't feeding the Jailer, she isn't doing her job. So why, again, knowing she's going against what she's supposed to, would she leave them alive?



Actually, this WOULD be in character for her in WC3 when she was alive - But you'd think maybe she would have learned her lesson by now. Between Arthas and Godfrey alone she's literally been killed twice doing exactly that.

And more to the point - Illidan was pure evil, until Blizzard wrote it such that he wasn't. Sylvanas is pure evil right now - But yes, just like Arthas, just like Illidan, they can then just write whatever the hell they want and twist their own story in ways it was never meant to twist. Including but not limited to a redemption arc for Sylvanas.

The Shadowlands has been suffering for a while, and the Jailer has more allies beyond Sylvanas.

https://www.wowhead.com/news=311970/...taliesin-evite

Sylvanas is an ally and partner of the Jailer, not his minion. If you think Sylvanas is his servant, you didn't understand her character at all. Sylvanas is someone who values her freedom above anything else. Shackling herself to a new master is the last thing she'd do. We saw that in WC3, when she refused to serve the Dreadlords. We see that now with the Jailer, as she refuses to be a mere minion of his.

You do realize that Sylvanas later on tried to kill Alleria at the Battle of Lordaeron, yes? Then sought to start a massacre at the Siege of Orgrimmar 2.0, which could've led to the deaths of both Alleria and Vereesa. Even if that had not been enough, she always intended to unleash both N'Zoth and the Scourge upon Azeroth. Therefore, it's easy to see why she'd think her sisters would die anyway in the coming wars she'd start.

I am referring to when she fired that poison arrow at Arthas. At that point she was already undead. She could've killed Arthas in an instant (Arthas himself even acknowledges this), yet she refused to do so. She took her sweet time monologuing and then told Arthas she'd be slowly torturing him. This is who Sylvanas is. She likes to play with her food, instead of just eating it right away. This is the same thing she did with her sisters. She could've killed them right on the spot. But since she knew they likely wouldn't have survived the coming conflicts (indeed, Alleria would've died at the Battle of Lordaeron if it wasn't for Jaina), why bother doing that?

Which is, you know, exactly what she tells her dark ranger. That she'll let them cling to life for a little while longer, because eventually they, along with the rest of the world, will serve Death. This is further reinforced later on in 8.2.5, when she repeats twice the iconic line "Nothing lasts", as well as Saurfang remembering her last words to Vol'jin "In the end, Death claims us all".

As I said, there's nothing deeper here.

[huth]

So

She destroyed an enemy stronghold during a war
Every army is cannon fodder but she is very resourceful and nothing goes to waste
She's basically Jesus - she can raise the dead
She's very wise
She's added a whole new expansion to explore

There's no evil

What enemy stronghold? She didn't even attack one, much less destroy. She destroyed a city of civilians out of spite, nothing else.
If you want to lose, sure. And she pretty much wasted her army on a lost battle there while ultimately achieving nothing.
I don't think you quite understood Jesus' mindset. What she did was most definitely not comparable.
See above. She provably isn't, and whether that Jailer deal works out for her remains to be seen. I expect it to bite her in the ass within the next two years.
No, that was Blizzard. It also doesn't make her any less evil.

[Elim Garak]

According to you, the outright murder of a city full of civilians (as only one of her many crimes) is completely okay then. Gotcha.

Nope. In times of war - that's acceptable. Allies didn't leave a structure unbombed in Germany during WW2. And Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still touted as the event that was necessary. Was Truman evil or just a president?

It's all a matter of perspective. Just notice the language you are using to describe it. Trying to appeal to emotions about NPCs. See what language I am using? Completely dehumanizing NPCs.

Evil is in the eye of the accuser.

Not sure how you manage to twist your perception that this is only evil because Anduin says so. Pretty much any reasonable human being would condemn such actions.

What about reasonable orcs, undead and the rest? I don't know the half of it so who am I to condemn such actions? Time will tell. But you seem to have jumped the bandwagon jumping bangwagon.

[DemonHunter18]

bruh, what am I reading here xd

[Varodoc]

You're reading grown ass adults acting like genocide is not evil. Where did our education fail? Because clearly something went wrong.

[Fetus Rex]

There clearly is hidden plan. I don't find her evil. Most of her actions justified.

[Fetus Rex]

They really aren't and any redemption would be an asspull.

This is in spite of my own post above because honestly, if they go the redemption route they're really fucking themselves.

They are. She didn't anything extraordinary that would arrant her being called 'evil'.

[Varodoc]

You do realize she was left with only one other option, right? Eternity in the Maw?

And given that, you do realize her denying the Jailer souls would in fact be her own way of rebelling against him, ensuring he doesn't win and that she can continue with what she wanted unabated?

There's literally no contradiction. Left with literally no other choice, Sylvanas accepts whatever deal the Jailer gave her to escape the Maw. Since, she has been sowing discord at his request - But at particular moments, seems to just drop the facade of sewing discord and just ruins her own plans. (See: Teldrassil, The Three Sisters - Both major junctions, with wildly differing results, that did "not go according to plan" per all involved. Both times where Sylvanas' emotions overpower her necessary bargain with the Jailer.) She's not his puppet, she has free will to act as she pleases - But she is his pawn, because her alternative is eternity in the Maw.



She was also very convinced that N'zoth would be stopped and turned to Death's side. Instead he's been reoriginated out of false-future existance or whatever.

She's wrong a lot, as it turns out.



There is absolutely nothing about her somber, darkened expression at the end of The Three Sisters that says "Oh boy I can't wait to watch my sisters suffer."

You're relying heavily on this fact that Sylvanas likes to toy with her prey - But he hasn't since Varimathras betrayed her at the Undercity. Even Godfrey wasn't that - She planned to use his hatred of Gilneas against the Gilneans, it just bit her in the ass as all of her plans tend to do.

Delaryn, she was toying with. You could see it in her face.
Arthas, she was toying with. She tells them straight out while smiling.
Saurfang, she was toying with. She literally danced around him repeatedly stabbing him when she could just kill him.

Her sisters? There was no joy there. She's not toying with them.



It's not even that deep to begin with. You're just not looking at the right context clues.

This is Danuser himself saying they are allies. The Jailer is her ally, not her master. It's different. Also, Sylvanas very clearly does not seek to deprive the Jailer of a single soul. She even laments how the war ended prematurely and fewer souls were fed to the hungering darkness than anticipated. As I said, the idea that Sylvanas is secretly working against the Jailer is baseless assumptions, nothing more.

Your argument doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Sylvanas is not in the Maw anymore. If she wanted to abandon the Jailer's plan, she could easily do it. She physically isn't in his grasps anymore, she's on Azeroth. Yet she chooses to continue following their plan of consuming as many souls as possible.

She was also very convinced that N'zoth would be stopped and turned to Death's side. Instead he's been reoriginated out of false-future existance or whatever.

She's wrong a lot, as it turns out.

That's not what she meant by "N'Zoth will serve Death". She meant that N'Zoth will indirectly serve Death by, and I quote "lining their streets with corpses". The mass murder N'Zoth's invasions caused sent countless souls to the Maw, and thus N'Zoth indirectly acted as an agent of Death. She was not wrong, as N'Zoth caused the deaths of many defenders of Uldum and Pandaria.

There is absolutely nothing about her somber, darkened expression at the end of The Three Sisters that says "Oh boy I can't wait to watch my sisters suffer."

She literally says that Death will claim them all, and even shits on their lives, calling them "sorrow-filled".

First you say she hasn't toyed with her preys since Varimathras, then you give two examples from BfA of her toying with her prey? And she doesn't have to feel joy to be toying with her prey. As I explained multiple times, and as is presented in the actual story, she knew they were going to die anyway, like everyone else. That's why she "let them cling to their sorrow-filled existences for a little longer", and this is me directly quoting her.

I am the only person in this thread who actually provided quotes from the source material. Everyone who defends her, including you, keeps grasping to some abstract motivation that, simply put, completely contradicts the canon story.

You can keep believing that Sylvanas is secretly following some hidden good (despite Blizzard literally saying in Shadowlands' website that her actions at Icecrown were DESTRUCTIVE), but it doesn't change the fact it completely goes against the story Blizzard is presenting. Sylvanas is evil and an enemy of Azeroth. There's nothing left to say.

[huth]

Nope. In times of war - that's acceptable. Allies didn't leave a structure unbombed in Germany during WW2. And Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still touted as the event that was necessary. Was Truman evil or just a president?

Yes, they did. Many parts of Germany weren't bombed at all. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are at the very least questionable, and are not of comparative scale to what Sylvanas did. That would have been nuking the entire greater Tokyo area.

And anybody who tries to dehumanise these things is also evil, quite possibly one of the worst kinds.

[Elim Garak]

You're reading grown ass adults acting like genocide is not evil. Where did our education fail? Because clearly something went wrong.

Destroying a city during war is not genocide. War is disgusting. Yeah, hi, I think you didn't know that. But all parties participate in the war. Not just Sylvanas. All are evil then. I hold Alliance responsible for the victims of the Battle for Lordaeron. That was evil. To knowingly send your people to die in a meaningless battle.

[Zuben]

At the very least Sylv is callous to others' suffering, but there's still a whole expansion's worth of room for her to pull an Illidan. In case she saw something no one else saw and felt it required drastic action no Horde or Alliance council would agree to. That's not to say you can't hate her and the writing that led her to that path. Many people certainly don't like what Legion did with Illidan.

[Elim Garak]

Yes, they did. Many parts of Germany weren't bombed at all.

Not every world tree got burned either

Hiroshima and Nagasaki are at the very least questionable, and are not of comparative scale to what Sylvanas did. That would have been nuking the entire greater Tokyo area.

You are justifying one act over another simply by comparing the number of victims, while it's the intent that's in question here, not the results.

And anybody who tries to dehumanise these things is also evil, quite possibly one of the worst kinds.

You just did exactly that by comparing the statistical numbers rather than acts themselves. Nothing wrong with dehumanizing. Emotions are bad for clear thinking.

[Varodoc]

Destroying a city during war is not genocide. War is disgusting. Yeah, hi, I think you didn't know that. But all parties participate in the war. Not just Sylvanas. All are evil then. I hold Alliance responsible for the victims of the Battle for Lordaeron. That was evil. To knowingly send your people to die in a meaningless battle.

Destroying an entire kingdom full of INNOCENT PEOPLE (Delaryn even tells her she has no reason to attack Teldrassil because it holds no military value) during a war she started.

Funny how you would bring up the Battle of Lordaeron, where Sylvanas probably killed as many Horde soldiers as the Alliance, between the people she nuked at the gates and the massive nuke at the end.

[huth]

Not every world tree got burned either

None of the others were inhabited by Night Elves, either, so i fail to see the relevance. Sylvanas wiped out the largest Night Elf population center.

You are justifying one act over another simply by comparing the number of victims, while it's the intent that's in question here, not the results.

No, i'm not. I didn't claim either was justified, and i'm not talking about victims, either. Nuking greater Tokyo would have had a different intent, not just results. The US were trying to get Japan to stop fighting, not wipe them out.

You just did exactly that by comparing the statistical numbers rather than acts themselves. Nothing wrong with dehumanizing. Emotions are bad for clear thinking.

Ignoring emotions is bad for relating to humans and understanding the full impact of your actions. Also mistaken about what i did. You shouldn't let your emotions alone guide your actions, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't have them.

[Life-Binder]

if she was really evil - she would have killed Bolvar

counter that xD

[Raisei]

Nope. In times of war - that's acceptable. Allies didn't leave a structure unbombed in Germany during WW2. And Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still touted as the event that was necessary. Was Truman evil or just a president?

No it is not acceptable, the targeted elimination of a civilian population is called a war crime for a reason. There is a court for just that purpose. Collateral damage is one thing, that happens in war, but Teldrassil does not fall under that roof, it was targeted murder, nothing else.
The mods do not like mixing real history into arguments, so I will not consider the rest. Safe to say though, that the jury is still out on the second one and the land of the brave is not exactly quick on working up it's own history.

It's all a matter of perspective. Just notice the language you are using to describe it. Trying to appeal to emotions about NPCs. See what language I am using? Completely dehumanizing NPCs.

Sure, if everything is just a matter of perspective I guess we should let psychopathic murderers roam around freely. From their perspective they are not evil either, I am sure. They just want to express themselbes by collecting the tongues of babies for a necklace. We are so judgemental.

Suffice to say, we do not, because the reasonable majority agreed on a consensus of rules for living together and called that "law". this "law" is made specifically so that people do not run around and murder each other because by their own logic that is totally okay.

Also, not sure how proudly dehumanizing the victims helps your point. Murdering civilians is a dispicable act, that you dehumanize them and declare that that makes it okay only makes your viewpoint even more depraved. History is full of examples of people being dehumanized so that their murderes could feel better about killing them, that does not make it any less dispicable.

What about reasonable orcs, undead and the rest? I don't know the half of it so who am I to condemn such actions? Time will tell. But you seem to have jumped the bandwagon jumping bangwagon.

I have indeed jumped the bandwagon of "genocide and mass murder are wrong" and I am quite comfortable with that. Time cannot tell me anything I do not know yet. It is amazing that such a straight forward idea should in your mind be opposed, but oh well.

[Wylyth1992]

Destroying an entire kingdom full of INNOCENT PEOPLE (Delaryn even tells her she has no reason to attack Teldrassil because it holds no military value) during a war she started.

Funny how you would bring up the Battle of Lordaeron, where Sylvanas probably killed as many Horde soldiers as the Alliance, between the people she nuked at the gates and the massive nuke at the end.

Plus the reason I said she was irredeemably evil is not the burning of the tree and the killing of countless civilians (though that is messed up and wrong), but because she damned all those people (plus combatants on both sides) to a horrifying afterlife in The Maw.

[Akka]

I was saying that back when the "fans" were trying to flame everyone who dared to say it. But, anyone without bias could've seen it coming since the Wrathgate.

Wrathgate ? "back then" ?
She was already torturing and experimenting on captives to attempt genocidal warfare in Vanilla. The last time she wasn't overtly evil was in Warcraft 3. You're two expansions late to the party, mate !

[DemonHunter18]

I am the only person in this thread who actually provided quotes from the source material. Everyone who defends her, including you, keeps grasping to some abstract motivation that, simply put, completely contradicts the canon story.

the only one.

however, you still haven't posted a source where Sylvanas was send to the Maw when she died before she even nuked Teldrassil xd

and Maw is a place where the most vilest and irredeemable scum are sent.

if that doesn't convince them then it's better to just give up.

- - - Updated - - -

Plus the reason I said she was irredeemably evil is not the burning of the tree and the killing of countless civilians (though that is messed up and wrong), but because she damned all those people (plus combatants on both sides) to a horrifying afterlife in The Maw.

she is setting them free!!!

everyone asked for that

[Elim Garak]

None of the others were inhabited by Night Elves, either, so i fail to see the relevance. Sylvanas wiped out the largest Night Elf population center.

Plenty of elves in Hijal, I've been there today.

No, i'm not. I didn't claim either was justified, and i'm not talking about victims, either. Nuking greater Tokyo would have had a different intent, not just results. The US were trying to get Japan to stop fighting, not wipe them out.

Nuking Tokyo couldn't wipe Japan, either. You are just talking size, not the intent. Are there any elves in Azeroth left? Does Sylvanas methodically seek them out to kill? Exclusively elves! That's important.

Ignoring emotions is bad for relating to humans and understanding the full impact of your actions. Also mistaken about what i did. You shouldn't let your emotions alone guide your actions, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't have them.

Emotions are subjective. First, we objectively establish that Sylvanas is not evil - then you can mourne the dead.

- - - Updated - - -

Plus the reason I said she was irredeemably evil is not the burning of the tree and the killing of countless civilians (though that is messed up and wrong), but because she damned all those people (plus combatants on both sides) to a horrifying afterlife in The Maw.

How come? Maw is for the evilest and despicable! Were they evil and despicable? Thanks, Sylvanas!