[Spoilers] Shadowlands: Afterlives Cinematic Discussion

[Combatbutler]

Such evil lady. The cinematic was all about the tough choices they have to do to keep the realms of death still running. And the lesser point is that Ara'lon got that choice to do for himself.

What she did is essentially the same as arthas in stratholme, with the difference being she kept a level head afterwards, or to boil it down further the end justifies the means.

I guess some people didn't see that she said she would honor the dude's wish even if he wanted to take care of that one soul, Ursoc.

Doesn't really matter though, another soul would have then died in ursol's place, just from another grove.



She is of course correct, doesn't make her choice any less evil though

[LemonDemonGirl]

It would be refreshing if everyone in the Shadowlands was evil. Jailor's faction and the Pantheon of Death faction. Screw 'em all.

Pro tip: Anyone you have to kneel and swear an oath to usually ends up being a less than savory person.

Even Bwonsamdi himself is all 'me queen' to her. It's nauseating

However, he was also like that to Rastakhan (less 'ya Majesty' and more 'hehe we got a deal') and look what happened. He dead now

[Doffen]

Sylvanas fanboys are really grasping at straws, aren't they?

Not sure what people are, but it's obvious some just have to see the negatives in everything, as in seeing the bad in characters. They are even too good, or there have to be some "evil" side to them. Blizzard is 99 of 100 times pretty straight forward with characters like this. One of the 100 is also in Shadowlands, but that also gets quickly known when playing the story there.

To me that cinematic was great because it had depth, and made choice being the center of it. It is pretty clear to me that the Winter Queen is good at heart and saving the realm is of necessity for all of Shadowlands.

She is of course correct, doesn't make her choice any less evil though

Yeah, I am not gonna bother with this.

[Combatbutler]

Even Bwonsamdi himself is all 'me queen' to her. It's nauseating

Because she could squash him like a bug and he knows it.

[Wyattbw09]

The cinematic literally shows a vision of the horrible future that awaits Ardenweald and its people if they don't end this crisis

No, it’s shows her vision of the future. These are not the same. Many terrible things have been done, even if you just stick to WOW, simply because someone with power believed something would happen. That vision shows nothing more then the Queens presumption of what would happen.

I might also point out, she was wrong. We are riding into Shadow Lands to fix everything. Her vision is simply one in which she was unable to envision the assistance of outsiders.

[bagina]

If there's one thing this forum excels at, it's victim-blaming.

Says #1 Sylvanas hater lmao. "She's always been evil". Practice what you preach.

[Coconut]

If the story contrives that Sylvanas is actually pulling a Snape on the Jailer, or that the Jailer is good and the rest of the Shadowlands evil, and one or both of them are actually trying by any means necessary to undo a conspiracy to unmake the Cosmos, @Varodoc will of course claim that the story is shit and the characters in question should still be considered villains because they both did things he personally can't forgive. But if others can't forgive the Winter Queen and the satyr guy's choice to cull Ursoc, they are obviously wrong and should just transfer the hatred to the characters @Varodoc hates.

After all, we shouldn't delve too deeply into the actual morality of their actions. The important thing is that Sylvanas & the Jailer are visually and narratively coded evil, while the Winter Queen is visually coded good, so we should totally accept anything she does.

[Varodoc]

Not sure what people are, but it's obvious some just have to see the negatives in everything, as in seeing the bad in characters. They are even too good, or there have to be some "evil" side to them. Blizzard is 99 of 100 times pretty straight forward with characters like this. One of the 100 is also in Shadowlands, but that also gets quickly known when playing the story there.

To me that cinematic was great because it had depth, and made choice being the center of it. It is pretty clear to me that the Winter Queen is good at heart and saving the realm is of necessity for all of Shadowlands.


Yeah, I am not gonna bother with this.

To me that cinematic was surprisingly touching because it showed that Winter Queen, despite being an ancient cosmic deity, cherished all life above everything else and felt no joy or pleasure in sacrificing an innocent soul. The ending is also very optimistic, with the night fae sticking with their Queen to fight the crisis, and I appreciate that. The ending of Bastion by comparison was very dark.

Says #1 Sylvanas hater lmao. "She's always been evil". Practice what you preach.

In WoW, yes, she has always been evil. Not my fault if you don't know the character.

[Katchii]

What she did is essentially the same as arthas in stratholme, with the difference being she kept a level head afterwards, or to boil it down further the end justifies the means.



Doesn't really matter though, another soul would have then died in ursol's place, just from another grove.



She is of course correct, doesn't make her choice any less evil though

Evil is not the accurate word to use here. She's not doing it out of malice, her intentions are not evil, she's not doing it because she wants to out of some sick sense of enjoyment or whatever.

Her choice is pragmatic given the situation, and the cinematic makes it apparent that she hated having to make the decision, and is teary eyed and distraught at having to make it.

I agree that's it's a tough and unsavory decision, but it's not evil. It would have been evil, or at least heartless, to just let things rot and the whole of Ardenweald to whither and die due to inaction and ambivalence.

[Combatbutler]

Yeah, I am not gonna bother with this.

Are you saying the sentiment the end justifies the means is not evil? Because this is literally what this is.

[Aucald]

Are you saying the sentiment the end justifies the means is not evil? Because this is literally what this is.

Consequentialism is not itself inherently evil - it is up to us to decide if said end is truly worth the means to bring it about. The same is true of virtue ethics. Much hinges on the question of whether or not preserving Ardenweald at the cost of some of its charges is a worthy or necessary goal.

[bagina]

In WoW, yes, she has always been evil. Not my fault if you don't know the character.

I've read your posts about how W3 Sylvanas was evil because she mind-controlled (enemy! hostile!) ogres and (sic) gnolls to survive.

[Combatbutler]

Evil is not the accurate word to use here. She's not doing it out of malice, her intentions are not evil, she's not doing it because she wants to out of some sick sense of enjoyment or whatever.

Her choice is pragmatic given the situation, and the cinematic makes it apparent that she hated having to make the decision, and is teary eyed and distraught at having to make it.

All of this is correct and it is still evil, due to the fact that thousands of innocents are being killed with no say in the matter. Sure she feels bad about but it, does not change the underlying moral theme, the end justifies the means.


Sure there are things that have to be done, but you can't just look away from what has been done.

- - - Updated - - -

Consequentialism is not itself inherently evil - it is up to us to decide if said end is truly worth the means to bring it about. The same is true of virtue ethics. Much hinges on the question of whether or not preserving Ardenweald at the cost of some of its charges is a worthy or necessary goal.

From a modern moral perspective it would be, it is the same as throwing 100 kids into a volcano to appease a deity that actually lives in there and demands it or it will destroy the land.


The moment you trample over innocent lives you do something evil.

But evil is sometimes necessary, plain and simple.

[Doffen]

Are you saying the sentiment the end justifies the means is not evil? Because this is literally what this is.

At best you could name it a necessary evil. What they did in Ardenweald is not evil. It's a tough choice which is not made lightly.

[Aucald]

From a modern moral perspective it would be, it is the same as throwing 100 kids into a volcano to appease a deity that actually lives in there and demands it or it will destroy the land.

The moment you trample over innocent lives you do something evil.

But evil is sometimes necessary, plain and simple.

Not necessarily, no - that would be a pretty surface take on some rather deep philosophical grounds that modern philosophers still wrestle with. If you refuse to act in your above scenario you would be just as evil, as innocent lives would still be lost when said angry deity destroys the land - and your choice would've directly facilitated the outcome. In a scenario where all outcomes could be said to contain evil, the "good" outcome is necessarily the one which minimizes evil. Whether "good" is defined as the complete absence of evil or the least evil action is something still up for debate.

[Combatbutler]

Not necessarily, no - that would be a pretty surface take on some rather deep philosophical grounds that modern philosophers still wrestle with. If you refuse to act in your above scenario you would be just as evil, as innocent lives would still be lost when said angry deity destroys the land - and your choice would've directly facilitated the outcome. In a scenario where all outcomes could be said to contain evil, the "good" outcome is necessarily the one which minimizes evil. Whether "good" is defined as the complete absence of evil or the least evil action is something still up for debate.

It just means there are good choices and it is literally the lesser evil, but evil nonetheless.

At best you could name it a necessary evil. What they did in Ardenweald is not evil. It's a tough choice which is not made lightly.

Such choices are never easy, doesn't make them any less despicable.

[Syegfryed]

tfw when a cinematic about the enhanced night elves is way better and more impactful than the boring one from maldraxxus

[Katchii]

All of this is correct and it is still evil, due to the fact that thousands of innocents are being killed with no say in the matter. Sure she feels bad about but it, does not change the underlying moral theme, the end justifies the means.


Sure there are things that have to be done, but you can't just look away from what has been done.

Again, Evil isn't the correct term to apply. Intention matters. Her intentions are not evil. Are doctors evil for advocating the removal of a limb to save the patient? Are health officials "evil" for quarantining the sick and diseased, basically forcing them to die in isolation, in order to prevent the spread of the disease and death of the larger population? The same logic applies here.

It's a clinical, cold and pragmatic decision she has to make to save the whole of Ardenweald but it's not "Evil."

- - - Updated - - -

It just means there are good choices and it is literally the lesser evil, but evil nonetheless.

Just because the idiom "the lesser of two evils" is an apt description, doesn't mean it's literally evil.

[bagina]

If you refuse to act in your above scenario you would be just as evil, as innocent lives would still be lost when said angry deity destroys the land - and your choice would've directly facilitated the outcome. In a scenario where all outcomes could be said to contain evil, the "good" outcome is necessarily the one which minimizes evil.

Incorrect, the only evil in this scenario is the deity.

[Aucald]

It just means there are good choices and it is literally the lesser evil, but evil nonetheless.

In a scenario where there is no unsullied act that could be construed as good, the lesser evil is the greater good.