Justifiable?

Story Forum
11/14/2018 12:02 PMPosted by Darethy
11/14/2018 12:00 PMPosted by Withpuppys
they have gone on record before saying they wont show the politics like with the house of nobles in stormwind


Which is why we have dumb things like the Alliance and Horde refusing to actually contact each other after Broken Shore, worse it's obvious Blizzard doesn't WANT you to think about this.

HEY BLIZZCON ALLIANCE, ARE YOU HYPED FOR REPAYING THE HORDES TREACHERY AT THE BROKEN SHORE?

???
yeah its dumb, i personally would love to see more of the politics internally and externally.
Even if we got stuck with the garbage reasoning from Sylvanas and the War of Thorns ending in a huge defeat and slaughter for the Alliance... I just wish the blue faction had teeth. The War of Thorns was just one massive delaying action that ultimately failed as a large portion of the Night Elf population burned to ashes. There was no change of ground, no gains only losses. It adds insult to injury that the Draenei, the nearest ally, couldn’t manage to send one troop deployment to their neighbour incurring huge losses when they’re a days swim away. “Oh but this is a Night Elf story we’re telling” is poor justification for forgetting the impressive Draenei war machine (even depleted from Argus). That a HUGE plot point from days before hand (the Vindicaar) simply didn’t fit into their narrative is honestly pathetic. They neutered the Alliance to be a bunch of idiots and cowards all the while making the Horde either extremely gullible or 100% actually the moustache twirling genocidal maniacs they’ve been denying they are since Daelin tried to kill them in WC3.
11/14/2018 12:14 PMPosted by Deathisfinal
11/14/2018 11:51 AMPosted by Droité
she realized then and there that killing Malfurion would not have resulted in the wound she desired


Are you sure about that? This is what she said after she talked to Summermoon.

“This was your battle. Your strategy. And your failure. Darnassus was never the prize. It was a wedge that would split the Alliance apart. It was the weapon that would destroy hope. And you, my master strategist, gave that up to spare an enemy you defeated. I have taken it back. When they come for us, they will do so in pain, not in glory. That may be our only chance at victory now.”

Seems like she had every intention on invaded the tree until her chat with Summermoon, which prompted the above quote.


Right, but had she not had that chat with Summermoon she would have still invaded the tree, regardless of Malf's survival (and regardless of whether she knew or not that Saurfang hesitated long enough to result in his escape). So, ultimately, it was Summermoon's defiance and insistence that it didn't really matter if she killed them she would not break their hope (and we get a lovely scene of Teldrassil, their "hope", coming in to focus in the background while she says that).

Thus, it can be surmised that Sylvie realized the truth, that killing Malf and Tyrande would not have resulted in the wound she wished to inflict upon the Alliance; nor the despair that came with it. Yes, killing Malf would have helped, but it does seem like she's deflecting responsibility on Saurfang, despite it also being her fault that she insisted he kill Malf. "Sylvanas hefted his axe, considering it. Then she looked back at Saurfang. He could not read her expression, but he did not like it."

Sylvanas wasn't giving him the kill to be nice, she doesn't DO nice for the sake of it; and she certainly doesn't misunderstand Saurfang enough to think that forcing him to execute Malf was a nice thing (after all, she openly admitted that he would eventually become her enemy and she didn't know what he'd do if she denied him his honor or the Horde; or he would surprise her and see the world as "it is", becoming one of her greatest allies). By all metrics, it looks like she found an opportunity to see what would happen if she removed his honor; and it backfired when the choice she forced upon him ... was ultimately removed by outside interference.
You guys can get a lot done in an hour.

Also, OP, there's a thousand threads already debating this. I for one disagree with you, as her reasoning given in A Good War is, frankly, piss poor and unconvincing.
Any theoretical justification gets completely blown out of the water if Sylvanas had an ulterior motive for burning it. Which was hinted at during the quests and seems more likely after Blizzcon.
11/14/2018 01:10 PMPosted by Niingdorei
Any theoretical justification gets completely blown out of the water if Sylvanas had an ulterior motive for burning it. Which was hinted at during the quests and seems more likely after Blizzcon.


Yup. I also just went another round through Stormheim (this time on my first Ally alt) and I noticed while in Helheim she mocks you about escaping to see "the dawn of a new era". She doesn't mention ANYTHING like that with the Horde PC, no details about a secret plan to bring upon a great change to the world. If she's hiding her "true motives" from the Horde, then the chances of those motives being beneficial for the Horde are pretty minimal.
11/14/2018 12:48 PMPosted by Droité
Right, but had she not had that chat with Summermoon she would have still invaded the tree


I absolutely agree with this.

Edit: There is the possibility that she could have come to that conclusion in the future or on her own, because she had already jumped into - how to fix this mode.

11/14/2018 12:48 PMPosted by Droité
Thus, it can be surmised that Sylvie realized the truth, that killing Malf and Tyrande would not have resulted in the wound she wished to inflict upon the Alliance; nor the despair that came with it. Yes, killing Malf would have helped, but it does seem like she's deflecting responsibility on Saurfang, despite it also being her fault that she insisted he kill Malf. "Sylvanas hefted his axe, considering it. Then she looked back at Saurfang. He could not read her expression, but he did not like it."


Your point fringes on the assumption of what Sylvanas realized while talking to Summermoon. The beauty of that scene is you don't have to assume, because Sylvanas directly states the issue:

This was your battle. Your strategy. And your failure. Darnassus was never the prize. It was a wedge that would split the Alliance apart. It was the weapon that would destroy hope. And you, my master strategist, gave that up to spare an enemy you defeated. I have taken it back

I mean their are chunks of references that infer or out right stated the death of Malfurion was crucial to their ultimate victory:

This conquest of Darnassus would rattle the kaldorei people. They would grieve for their lost, fear for their imprisoned, and tremble at the thought of the Horde ransacking their homes. But they would not fall to despair. Not anymore. Malfurion’s impossible survival would give them hope. Their wound would heal.

Sylvanas didn't all of a sudden realize that Malfurion's death meant nothing, it was quite the opposite.

11/14/2018 12:48 PMPosted by Droité
Sylvanas wasn't giving him the kill to be nice, she doesn't DO nice for the sake of it; and she certainly doesn't misunderstand Saurfang enough to think that forcing him to execute Malf was a nice thing (after all, she openly admitted that he would eventually become her enemy and she didn't know what he'd do if she denied him his honor or the Horde; or he would surprise her and see the world as "it is", becoming one of her greatest allies). By all metrics, it looks like she found an opportunity to see what would happen if she removed his honor; and it backfired when the choice she forced upon him ... was ultimately removed by outside interference.


Don't get me started on Saurfang's honor, I have been unable to move pass "Dishonorable Blow". Apparently he denied himself honor.

Edit:

11/14/2018 01:10 PMPosted by Niingdorei
Any theoretical justification gets completely blown out of the water if Sylvanas had an ulterior motive for burning it. Which was hinted at during the quests and seems more likely after Blizzcon.


I don't think that's what the OP is getting at. It seems as though the OP is talking about the justification that Sylvanas and Saurfang agreed on.
Sylvanas didn't all of a sudden realize that Malfurion's death meant nothing, it was quite the opposite.
Sylvanas seems like the kind of person who's very good at making up a convincing lie on the spot.
Sylvanas' shady as heck ulterior motive aside, isn't this similar to the reasoning Jaina had in Tides of War that Horde players thoroughly berated her for? That the Horde was never going to stop churning out soldiers for their campaigns of murder and genocide, so it'd be in the future's best interest if Orgrimmar was converted to a waterpark?
11/14/2018 01:45 PMPosted by Grandblade
Sylvanas didn't all of a sudden realize that Malfurion's death meant nothing, it was quite the opposite.
Sylvanas seems like the kind of person who's very good at making up a convincing lie on the spot.


Seems she's even lying to herself lately, that list is getting longer by the day. Funny how it changes depending on if it support certain arguments, I mean its okay to believe her when it support your(not you) argument right?
Quite honestly, the truth is in the middle of DiF and Grandblade imo, maybe slightly in the favor of DiF because the Forsaken fanbase doesn't make any bones about the fact Windrunner is a consummate liar.

The motivations in part are logical, the lies to get there are her M.O, but the execution is botched.
11/14/2018 02:07 PMPosted by Darethy
Quite honestly, the truth is in the middle of DiF and Grandblade imo, maybe slightly in the favor of DiF because the Forsaken fanbase doesn't make any bones about the fact Windrunner is a consummate liar.

The motivations in part are logical, the lies to get there are her M.O, but the execution is botched.
This seems to be the most believable interpretation of it so far.
11/14/2018 01:55 PMPosted by Deathisfinal
Seems she's even lying to herself lately, that list is getting longer by the day. Funny how it changes depending on if it support certain arguments, I mean its okay to believe her when it support your(not you) argument right?
Put down the bottle, your family is scared for you.
11/14/2018 02:14 PMPosted by Grandblade
11/14/2018 02:07 PMPosted by Darethy
Quite honestly, the truth is in the middle of DiF and Grandblade imo, maybe slightly in the favor of DiF because the Forsaken fanbase doesn't make any bones about the fact Windrunner is a consummate liar.

The motivations in part are logical, the lies to get there are her M.O, but the execution is botched.
This seems to be the most believable interpretation of it so far.
11/14/2018 01:55 PMPosted by Deathisfinal
Seems she's even lying to herself lately, that list is getting longer by the day. Funny how it changes depending on if it support certain arguments, I mean its okay to believe her when it support your(not you) argument right?
Put down the bottle, your family is scared for you.


Cool story bro! Lol
We need these forums age restricted...
11/14/2018 02:14 PMPosted by Grandblade
11/14/2018 02:07 PMPosted by Darethy
Quite honestly, the truth is in the middle of DiF and Grandblade imo, maybe slightly in the favor of DiF because the Forsaken fanbase doesn't make any bones about the fact Windrunner is a consummate liar.

The motivations in part are logical, the lies to get there are her M.O, but the execution is botched.
This seems to be the most believable interpretation of it so far.
11/14/2018 01:55 PMPosted by Deathisfinal
Seems she's even lying to herself lately, that list is getting longer by the day. Funny how it changes depending on if it support certain arguments, I mean its okay to believe her when it support your(not you) argument right?
Put down the bottle, your family is scared for you.


It's the interpretation that Blizzard seems to want us to follow, strike the last part. I get the impression there are a lot of moral relativists in Blizzard, and the comparisons I keep making to Curtis Lemay aren't on accident. I get the impression that Darnassus is supposed to be our Hiroshima, an act that demoralizes our army as much as theirs but is viewable as a 'necessary evil.'

Here's the problem, I get where they are coming from. The idea is the Night Elves are basically a death cult, they will fight for their forests until their dying breath and any attempt to invade would lead us to occupying a country devoted to murdering the hell out of us. For bonus points we even set fire to an island land mass. If you think about it, on the most superficial level these two events are actually painfully obvious 1 to 1 comparisons.

And they also do not work AT ALL, because unlike the Japanese who had demonstrated a suicidal devotion to self defense. There are no night elves drugging themselves, strapping bombs to their bodies, and running their flying mounts into Forsaken ships, just never happened.

In that lens, BfA is just a really tortured WW2/Cold War analogy, and not a subtle one at that. Windrunners reasoning for burning Darnassus is the same reasoning we used to firebomb Tokyo, straight up, so for me it's not hard to see why it occurred because Blizzards spelling it out to me in big bright pink neon letters. But no amount of justifying her thought process will make up for the fact the Night Elves, or even the Alliance as a whole, has not been showcased to be aggressive enough to warrant it.
For one shining moment, Grandblade and DeathisFinal agreed on something...and then it was gone :-P

@Darethy, its also not really understanding the nuance of why Hiroshima and Nagaskai were decisive, or how targeting civilian population centers (both in Europe and in Japan) did not work out as well as Allied Leaders wanted.
I've talked this subject to death.

You do you, hombre. @OP

11/14/2018 04:41 PMPosted by Saiphas
For one shining moment, Grandblade and DeathisFinal agreed on something
I personally thought I was still asleep. 'This can't be right???'
11/14/2018 04:41 PMPosted by Saiphas
For one shining moment, Grandblade and DeathisFinal agreed on something...and then it was gone :-P

@Darethy, its also not really understanding the nuance of why Hiroshima and Nagaskai were decisive, or how targeting civilian population centers (both in Europe and in Japan) did not work out as well as Allied Leaders wanted.


In fact in certain cases it drove people into even more of a crazy suicidal frenzy, and you could say Sylvanas might not realize that but honestly after how many years of war she's been in. And for that matter, after she's fought battles against the kind of horror she has, and arguably leads a country whose entire ideology is inverting this trope...you'd think she might realize this was a bad idea.

Then again, BfA required several people to be magically dumber then they actually should be.

Edit: I forgot though, NEGATIVE EMOTION PERCEPTIONS, it's because she's undead. And that's not a jab at you, I think that's probably what Blizzard will actually go with.
11/14/2018 04:41 PMPosted by Saiphas
For one shining moment, Grandblade and DeathisFinal agreed on something...and then it was gone :-P

@Darethy, its also not really understanding the nuance of why Hiroshima and Nagaskai were decisive, or how targeting civilian population centers (both in Europe and in Japan) did not work out as well as Allied Leaders wanted.


In fact in certain cases it drove people into even more of a crazy suicidal frenzy, and you could say Sylvanas might not realize that but honestly after how many years of war she's been in. And for that matter, after she's fought battles against the kind of horror she has, and arguably leads a country whose entire ideology is inverting this trope...you'd think she might realize this was a bad idea.

Then again, BfA required several people to be magically dumber then they actually should be.

Edit: I forgot though, NEGATIVE EMOTION PERCEPTIONS, it's because she's undead. And that's not a jab at you, I think that's probably what Blizzard will actually go with.


Yep, I think so as well, it curdles the outlook if you will
Blizzard should of really hired a historian, not a lore historian, an actual historian before they tried this. But what can you do?

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum