Teldrassil Knowledge

[Lorgar Aurelian]

The difference being that the people of the Horde had a rebellion against a genocidal Warchief literally 2 years prior to the Fourth War.

Keep in mind the horde didn’t dislike or rebel against either for wanting or actually partaking in genocide in both cases they only turned on there Warchief when they started acting against members of the horde, the horde loves when both acted against they alliance no matter how extreme said actions were.

[MikeBogina]

Those two things aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, though I think the evidence cleaves more toward Sylvanas being in the "mastermind" mold, especially as A Good War itself intimates she has a greater plan in mind.

And that was almost certainly true, wasn’t it? Elune had intervened. Perhaps she had even stayed Saurfang’s killing blow. And she wouldn’t be the only force beyond the Alliance to oppose Sylvanas’s true objective.

Sylvanas’s anger grew cold.

She had known this would happen. It had simply come sooner than expected. That was all. (Source)

this is one of those things that I dislike with Blizzard's writing, especially when a scene or moment like this is written by numerous different people.

Did Sylvanas get triggered by Delaryn, did she plan to do this the entire time, did Malfurion's survival really lead to this. We may never know the truth and the truth later on might be canonized by someone being asked who doesn't know either, but says something that makes it canon.

I'd like to think that with Elune saving Malfurion, she was more willing to burn the tree, because they needed to hit the Alliance and Elves hard. If this is true, Elune in a way, playing favorites got all those elves killed.

Doing this because of Delaryn doesn't look good, cause no one is witnessing this conversation but us, no one knows that Delaryn basically told her that they'll never give up, etc...

[Villager720]

I mean it's pretty clear only Sylvanas and potentially Nathanos with some loyalists knew, but the other Horde representatives and people were oblivious that would occur.

It’s easy to see how people can have incorrect perceptions on the event as you clearly demonstrate.

In no media, dialogue, or quest text has it even stated that Sylvanas planned to burn Teldrassil.
Much like her outburst in front of the gates or Ogrimmar, Sylvanas clearly made an emotional snap-judgement because Delaryn told her she was pitiable and burned the tree.

[InfiniteCharger]

She burned the tree because Blizzard needed her to in order to frame the faction war for the expansion.
The problem was Blizzard shoehorned it in during a few weeks of questing at the end of legion.
Which means no in depth story telling or decent narrative or even decent game play could be created for such a short piece of content.
If they really wanted to make this an epic battle with a climactic finale they would have had it unfold during BFA proper.
But they didn't because it was simpler and cheaper to just throw it in at the end of legion and say thats that, all done, and start BFA.

And of course when BFA starts we immediately go on a side mission off to some island and Teldrassil is no longer important.
None of that is about motivation of characters or writing but Blizzard just making new theme park scenarios and jamming them together in random fashion. Wanna see Teldrassil get burnt down? Check. Queue for the Teldrassil theme ride. Wanna see Lordaeron get attacked? Check. Queue for that. Any narrative or storytelling that went along with it was purely filler and not to be taken too seriously.

[NorthernDragon]

It’s easy to see how people can have incorrect perceptions on the event as you clearly demonstrate.

In no media, dialogue, or quest text has it even stated that Sylvanas planned to burn Teldrassil.
Much like her outburst in front of the gates or Ogrimmar, Sylvanas clearly made an emotional snap-judgement because Delaryn told her she was pitiable and burned the tree.

It’s easy to see how people can have incorrect perceptions on the event as you clearly demonstrate.

In no media, dialogue, or quest text has it even stated that Sylvanas planned to burn Teldrassil.
Much like her outburst in front of the gates or Ogrimmar, Sylvanas clearly made an emotional snap-judgement because Delaryn told her she was pitiable and burned the tree.

I mean it's ambiguous at best if she planned it. Prior to this Sylvanas was shown as a cold calculating tactician, always doing something with purpose. I concede I forgot about Nathanos reaction and the purpose of the seige engines. We're still left with two reasons; she either threw a tantrum over some random or she wanted a pointless war for some conveluted reason. Both are silly

[Aucald]

this is one of those things that I dislike with Blizzard's writing, especially when a scene or moment like this is written by numerous different people.

Did Sylvanas get triggered by Delaryn, did she plan to do this the entire time, did Malfurion's survival really lead to this. We may never know the truth and the truth later on might be canonized by someone being asked who doesn't know either, but says something that makes it canon.

I'd like to think that with Elune saving Malfurion, she was more willing to burn the tree, because they needed to hit the Alliance and Elves hard. If this is true, Elune in a way, playing favorites got all those elves killed.

Doing this because of Delaryn doesn't look good, cause no one is witnessing this conversation but us, no one knows that Delaryn basically told her that they'll never give up, etc...

I think, as with almost all writing in fiction, there's a degree to which it's left up to you to decide what informed which actions, and which actions are those of Elune (if any). Personally speaking, I don't think Elune herself actually intervened here at all, just Elune has to our knowledge never intervened in the case where war ravages across Azeroth. Elune's interventions tend to be small-scale, such as her putting a shield around Tyrande in the War of the Ancients - actions that are generally personal, but can have a huge cumulative effect all the same. Elune was never going to swoop down and save Teldrassil, per se; but she may have softened Saurfang's heart somewhat, or may have allowed Malfurion to survive his wounds.

The responsibility for burning Teldrassil, however, lies entirely with Sylvanas. Even if Delayrn's dying declaration somehow inspired Sylvanas' later action, Delaryn deserves no blame for that - nor could she rightly have even conceived of what Sylvanas might do to try to prove Delaryn wrong about hope and the Night Elves' commitment to continue the fight. In that sense, the conversation with Delaryn is kind of immaterial - and burning Teldrassil is an idea Sylvanas could've had without the conversation between the two.

[MikeBogina]

The responsibility for burning Teldrassil, however, lies entirely with Sylvanas. Even if Delayrn's dying declaration somehow inspired Sylvanas' later action, Delaryn deserves no blame for that - nor could she rightly have even conceived of what Sylvanas might do to try to prove Delaryn wrong about hope and the Night Elves' commitment to continue the fight. In that sense, the conversation with Delaryn is kind of immaterial - and burning Teldrassil is an idea Sylvanas could've had without the conversation between the two.

I dont blame Delaryn, everyone should fight to the bitter end and be defiant in the face of their enemy. But the way that scene is done, it's like it's to prove Delaryn wrong. Which is to prove to a soon to be dead woman who has no witnesses of you crushing her "hope" so it makes you just look like you were going to burn the tree no matter what from the start from the Alliance PoV, but that's basically cannonized to be the truth. It's these moments that are made to be genuine, like Voljin making Sylvanas Warchief to me and many others who have any common sense, is a very genuine scene, but for those "never-sylvanas" people are rewarded with the cannonizing of it not being genuine.

Basically reminds me of how the truth of Garrosh was that he actually didn't start the fighting in Ashenvale, despite what Alliance believed, to actually being that they're right and he did start it. Which leads me to believe that Warcraft's biggest problem is that there's too many people writing the lore. That a scene or moment has a misconception and also a truth, yet the next writer only uses the misconception as truth.

[Aucald]

I dont blame Delaryn, everyone should fight to the bitter end and be defiant in the face of their enemy. But the way that scene is done, it's like it's to prove Delaryn wrong. Which is to prove to a soon to be dead woman who has no witnesses of you crushing her "hope" so it makes you just look like you were going to burn the tree no matter what from the start from the Alliance PoV, but that's basically cannonized to be the truth. It's these moments that are made to be genuine, like Voljin making Sylvanas Warchief to me and many others who have any common sense, is a very genuine scene, but for those "never-sylvanas" people are rewarded with the cannonizing of it not being genuine.

I'm not sure what you're referring to i.e. the Alliance PoV? Beyond the essential principle that in order to understand WoW lore fully you need to know both perspectives, I don't recall the Alliance PoV of the War of Thorns being fundamentally different from the Horde one. It's left a bit open in both cases whether Sylvanas always had the plan to torch Teldrassil or it only occurred to her during her conversation with Delaryn, but even in A Good War Sylvanas intimates an intent above and beyond what she'd related to Saurfang or Nathanos. Perhaps this was originally just a massacre of Night Elven non-combatants in the planned siege of Teldrassil (buoyed by Nathanos' itinerary for "people he wished to visit" in the lead-up to the invasion), and Sylvanas only changed tacks following Saurfang's decision to spare Malfurion and then the conversation with Delaryn. Ultimately, though, it doesn't matter - whether planned or unplanned, Teldrassil was still the end-result of the War of Thorns.

Basically reminds me of how the truth of Garrosh was that he actually didn't start the fighting in Ashenvale, despite what Alliance believed, to actually being that they're right and he did start it. Which leads me to believe that Warcraft's biggest problem is that there's too many people writing the lore. That a scene or moment has a misconception and also a truth, yet the next writer only uses the misconception as truth.

I assume you're referring to the Twilight Hammer's slaughter of the Druid meeting in which Hamuul was nearly killed? If so, Garrosh kind of agreed with the Twilight Hammer's actions there, saying he would've done it himself and been glad of it if he had known it was happening. In that sense, despite Garrosh not being the active agent of conflict, he all but demonstrates his willingness to start the conflict anyways.

[Soon-TM]

I remember in TBC not liking Garrosh and still disliked him in WotLK, like why is this character getting more spotlight. Then going into Cata, they revealed he was going to be the Warchief and people didn't like this and I think it was Alex who said that Garrosh was going to get some development behind the scenes and surprise us. Then Cata happens we see some of these moments and then it just stops and it's like... WTF?!

The same feeling happened with Sylvanas, you have her and Varian interacting and it's nice, genuine and you have Voljin tell her to save the Horde and she's wrongfully blamed for it by the Alliance. Then you have Voljin who admits he doesn't like her, but in their hour of need she saved them and he's been given clarity and many will not understand but she needs to step out of the shadow and lead and she's genuinely taken back by this. It was a very genuine moment, but again like Garrosh, it feels like they decided to change the story at some point and she was used as a plot tool to get us to the next 2 expansions, kinda like Garrosh was used to get us to MoP and WoD.

It's called Subverting Expectations™ in Danuser-speak. The same Danuser who thinks that GoT S8 was "brilliant"

[mickybrighteyes]

I'm not sure what you're referring to i.e. the Alliance PoV? Beyond the essential principle that in order to understand WoW lore fully you need to know both perspectives, I don't recall the Alliance PoV of the War of Thorns being fundamentally different from the Horde one. It's left a bit open in both cases whether Sylvanas always had the plan to torch Teldrassil or it only occurred to her during her conversation with Delaryn, but even in A Good War Sylvanas intimates an intent above and beyond what she'd related to Saurfang or Nathanos. Perhaps this was originally just a massacre of Night Elven non-combatants in the planned siege of Teldrassil (buoyed by Nathanos' itinerary for "people he wished to visit" in the lead-up to the invasion), and Sylvanas only changed tacks following Saurfang's decision to spare Malfurion and then the conversation with Delaryn. Ultimately, though, it doesn't matter - whether planned or unplanned, Teldrassil was still the end-result of the War of Thorns.

I don't quite agree on the "open ended" bit. The plan as shown and implied through the events we see and A Good War seems to have it that the Main plan was what we saw most of the way with the exception being when Saurfang diverted and spared Malfurion. That was the point where we got the little bit of monologuing and that moment with Summermoon and then even Nathanos was caught off guard with the "Burn it" command.

Now while I do agree that with respect to the overall events it doesn't matter about why or how the tree burned... The intent behind the actions and any at deception would drastically change some interactions along the way. Like if we're all being lied to the entire time and even Saurfang's planning was just to distract him and Nathanos (her main confidante) is even in the dark as well? Yeah that does change some things.

[TickTickTick]

Realistically Sylvanas would get overthrown right after the War of Thorns. Saurfang, Rokhan, Baine, Lor'themar and Ji, all were witness to Garrosh's rampage, all agreed it was wrong and should have known better. All it took was "just do it". The Horde's loyalty to Sylvanas wasn't that strong at that point and she wouldn't stand a chance with her undead and minority of other races who already forgot what fate befell them a few years ago.

After the Battle for Lordaeron, not a chance. Suddenly the Alliance became aggressors (no matter if for good reasons or not) and we all now humans in our world would react like the Horde races, let alone the actual Horde races in fantasy settings.

The reason why she wasn't overthrown is because Blizzard wanted so. Sadly the quality of writing came to the point where you just can't excuse certain things. They wanted to push for the Shadowlands story, even if it hurt the Warcraft realism and story continuity.

The story of BfA war is a lorefuck and should be treated as such. The writers sacrificed the realism of the Warcraft universe (by which I mean how characters should behave and act, not muh dragons and fireball are not real lmao) because they wanted the "Sylvanas is such a strong waifu even cosmic beings are making deals with her" plot point to exist.

[Aucald]

I don't quite agree on the "open ended" bit. The plan as shown and implied through the events we see and A Good War seems to have it that the Main plan was what we saw most of the way with the exception being when Saurfang diverted and spared Malfurion. That was the point where we got the little bit of monologuing and that moment with Summermoon and then even Nathanos was caught off guard with the "Burn it" command.

Now while I do agree that with respect to the overall events it doesn't matter about why or how the tree burned... The intent behind the actions and any at deception would drastically change some interactions along the way. Like if we're all being lied to the entire time and even Saurfang's planning was just to distract him and Nathanos (her main confidante) is even in the dark as well? Yeah that does change some things.

A Good War still strongly implies that Sylvanas had other plans (which aren't elaborated on at that time), which in turn implies that what she told Saurfang (and presumably Nathanos) wasn't the full picture of her true plans. The "open ended" part refers to whether or not her burning Teldrassil down was always part of her intimated true plan, or if it was a measure she arrived at due to Delaryn's inadvertent goading. Perhaps she only meant for Malfurion's death to be the capstone on a massacre at Teldrassil, a more mundane killing that what we actually saw as it were. That lacking the symbol of Malfurion's death she needed to make a similar statement and decided to do this by killing the Night Elves in an act of unmitigated atrocity.

We know she was keeping Saurfang in the dark on many things, and the introductory pages of A Good War are all about her trying to sell unilateral and preemptive war on the Alliance to Saurfang. But we know from Sylvanas' own internal thoughts that her "true plan" was severe enough that she knew Elune would get involved at some point, something Elune has never done prior when cities are destroyed or lands despoiled by war. She was up to *something*, we just don't know if that something involved the burning of Teldrassil beforehand or if that was thought up more or less on the spot.

[mickybrighteyes]

Realistically Sylvanas would get overthrown right after the War of Thorns. Saurfang, Rokhan, Baine, Lor'themar and Ji, all were witness to Garrosh's rampage, all agreed it was wrong and should have known better. All it took was "just do it". The Horde's loyalty to Sylvanas wasn't that strong at that point and she wouldn't stand a chance with her undead and minority of other races who already forgot what fate befell them a few years ago.

You might be right.... but you might also forget that the alliance, stormwind specifically, wasn't playing nice in the recent lore. SI:7 fucking with goblins on the grounds of "can't trust them"... Anduin setting up a botched meeting that turned into a coup for Lordaeron (failed but still attempted)... 7th Legion forces overtly assaulting horde forces. You might be right that those figures all saw Garrosh at his worst, but keep in mind they also saw the alliance when they (the horde groups) were at their weakest.

After the Battle for Lordaeron, not a chance. Suddenly the Alliance became aggressors (no matter if for good reasons or not) and we all now humans in our world would react like the Horde races, let alone the actual Horde races in fantasy settings.

I'd say the alliance were aggressors after Broken Shore, rather than Lordaeron but the lore bent over backwards to make Sylvanas call for a new "unprovoked war" (i think an assassination attempt and a botched coup MORE than count as provocation but that's me)

[MikeBogina]

It's called Subverting Expectations™ in Danuser-speak. The same Danuser who thinks that GoT S8 was "brilliant"

Did he really say that? S8 hurts me so much in so many ways. Visually it was a cool looking season, so if you're almost braindead i can see someone enjoying it, or a child, but anyone who uses braincells can't enjoy S8.

Subverting expectations is fine, but that's not what's done here. So there's group A and group B. Group A without knowing both sides of the story hates Garrosh/Sylvanas without giving them a chance, either because of a bias or lack of information. Group B pays attention more or doesn't have a bias and gives the character a chance... and in the end group A was right, not because they paid more attention to detail, but Blizzard can follow through with a decent story, without going "Bahahaha Horde actually is evil, gotcha" and then we get a faction expansion like MoP(everything that wasn't faction related was great btw) and BFA(again, non-faction related stuff was great)

Maybe they should subvert the Alliance's expectations for once, because it seems like that's all that ever matters.

[tommyhil622]

The problem is that Sylvanas STILL had popular support after the Burning of Teldrassil. So the people of the Horde knew that Sylvanas just committed genocide, and they still supported her. Only a few years after the terrible civil war against Garrosh.

Sure there were some dissidents in Orgrimmar, but the overwhelming majority were still somehow loyal to Sylvanas. That is why the wretched Horde deserves to be wiped out from the face of Azeroth.

I don't know if the majority was loyal to Slyvannas and more so the idea of the horde. I don't think we should fault them so harshly. Besides there's a huge difference to being present when the burning of Teldrassil was happening vs hearing about it off hand. There's some nuance there that it's not so clearly defined. Omission/Inaction does not equate to approval.