Azshara killing Sylvanas

Lore Story Forum
87

Think the same goes for many of the faction leaders.

All I’ll say is that they built her up too much for all this voidy stuff to just up and scrap her. Think the most satisfying thing for the Horde would be have her and Saurfang to make amends and lead the Horde better. That would show the Horde moving past Garrosh, since the writers seem so insistent on that. She becomes a better warcheif, deals with voidy crap with death powers, then we can finally keep the faction leaders in the background.

Killing off another warchief and/or shelving off Sylvanas just to become some villian later down the line will just cement to alot of people that the writers can’t write the Horde, and probably lead people to quit. I know I would.

88

Not if the whole point of her doing this stuff is to lead to the next step. Take a look at Gul’dan. They built him up a lot only to have him die in raid, and not even the last raid. He was a tool to introduce/set up the next step.

There is also the fact that it may just be part of the story and not intended for a higher point. Look at Varian. They built him up as the chosen of the wolf demigod. They spent a lot of time developing his story away from the rage and towards balance. Did not stop his death.

Ultimately, being a big part of the story now does not mean she is not going to go down.

From what I have seen from most Horde posters…no. The Sylvanas fans usually want Saurfang killed as a traitor. The Saurfang fans want Sylvanas dead. And most of the rest seem to want them both dead.

And lets really be honest here, that would be terrible story telling. It is way outside the believable actions of either character. The only way I could see Sylvanas choosing to let Saurfang live is if she believed he was 100% subjugated to her. And that is not even factoring in the rest of the world. The war has to end. And there is no way the Alliance would be okay with her still running the Horde in any capacity. Even with her dead, it is going to be a stretch at the minimum for the Alliance to believably make peace with the Horde. With her still leading it, no way it works.

Well, that is unfortunate. Honestly, there will probably be some people that are upset enough to quit however it ends. I think it is extremely unlikely she survives. The real question I think is how she goes out. Hopefully Blizzard will do it in a way that most can accept. If you are one that cannot regardless of the how, then do what you need to. If the story makes you that upset or takes away your fun, then you should quit. It is only a game after all.

2 Likes
89

yeah i mean there’s people who say they gonna quit if she dies and there is just as many if not more people saying they ll quit if she stays alive lol

2 Likes
90

Sylvanas has been set up for the Alliance to yearn for revenge upon her and her actions causing fragmentation within the Horde. Sylvanas is raising the dead and even disobeying the rules of Forsaken. She also doesn’t merely use an “All of the Above approach to warfare”. Killing everything in sight isn’t the only approach to warfare. There is absolutely no reason to absolve Sylvanas from any consequence in the story other than the writers doing it to appease a minority over the majority who play this game. I don’t care if it humiliates her loyal fans. They should take an L and be punished for supporting genocide and other immoral actions. Then Blizzard could for once give us a Warchief who isn’t a psychopath and fix the Horde.

2 Likes
91

This role is meant for Azshara, not a faction leader.

Varian’s own rise played a big role when it came to his own story, as well as the Alliance as a faction, but never outside of that. Against anybody but Garrosh, what enemy could you say Varian had a stake in fighting? While I believe there could have been more stories to tell with Varian, it’s undeniable story ended at it’s peak, very bittersweet, as oppose to Vol’Jin. Vol’jin was a massive waste of a character to kill off since he never got the chance to shine as a warcheif. But then this is implying that Varian’s story as High-King was even good either, since large portions of his developments were found outside of the game.

Now Sylvanas already had her own peak after the death of Arthas. (A bit crapply since she wasn’t present for it but eh) but now she’s been introduced to a new plot were more potential for her character has been teased inregards to the void plot.

I believe wholly that the majority of players would rather not see the Horde divided at the end of this expansion. Said it a million times before, proving one side right or wrong will lead to players leaving. From the looks of either side, it seems like people don’t enjoy having the Alliance play a role in the affairs of the Horde, so uniting both sides against by SOME means would probably help, so long as it end the civil war peacefully, not perpetuate it.

As they currently stand, yes, I would agree. Which is why they need character growth, they need to change for the better. Neither side seems like they want to lead the Horde astray, but both are very keen on leading the Horde on their own pathes without taking the other into account. It was both sides that decided a war with the Alliance was necessary. Both can still find a way to work together to complete their goal on winning the war.

The Alliance shouldn’t get a say on whether of not who get’s to lead the Horde just like the Horde doesn’t get to have a say on who gets to lead the Alliance. The war isn’t going to end because we all know PVP is still going to be a thing. The only people Sylvanas/Saurfang need to be redeemed to is the Horde, not the Alliance. With both characters being put in a favorable position for the Horde, the Alliance will feel justified in continuing their efforts in trying to defeat the Horde, while the Horde will feel justified in defending their redeemed leaders. The Faction war doesn’t have to escalate any further than that.

With Blizz admittingly messing up Garrosh as a warchief by sticking to making him a villian, along with the utter waste of a good warchief that could have been Vol’Jin, they can’t afford to do it all over again. Showing another civil war was yet another bad call, and all I’m suggesting is an ending where it is invalidated, that the Horde doesn’t need to off another Warcheif or any other leader to be whole again. Going through another route like that again will be an even bigger drop in players, imo.

“Fool me once, shame on you” and all that.

It’s more a message to the company though, not trying to seem a bit aggressive with you or anything man. Just real disappointed on how the way things seem to be going is all.

2 Likes
92

There was plenty of fans of Arthas and Garrosh and they killed them.

Look, stories end. It does not matter how long her story has been running. Long history does not mean it can’t end.

Sure–and they can kill Sylvanas. But just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should.

I’m about to make the case that she has more to offer the story alive than dead. But maybe her time is up–that’s fine. But if she’s going to go, she should go in a way that pushes the plot forward while giving her long arc a fitting conclusion, similar to the way Varian’s death finished his arc as a self-sacrificing warrior king. Tossing her away for shock value on a mid-patch boss is a bad joke.

Ask any given WoW player to describe Sylvanas’s personality, and you’ll get a consistent list of strong, memorable traits. Some hate her, some love her, but we know exactly what she’s about, and a lot of us are invested. Why?

A big part of it is just the sheer amount of story she’s been through and that we watched her go through in game. Sure, the executive summary of her backstory isn’t anything new, but story experienced counts for a lot more than story exposited. We watched Sylvanas become who she is in WC3, in FT, and in WoW, and that means a lot of us have more buy-in than we would for some brand new character with an identical backstory and aesthetic.

Also, because of how long she’s been kicking around, Sylvanas has relationships that can add depth to a scene. For example: Sylvanas needles Anduin about the blood on Varian’s blade. Basic villain dialogue. But, when the villain waxing sadistic is also the warchief who ordered the retreat that killed Varian, there’s another layer of meaning that both adds emotion to the scene and adds complexity to both characters situations.

History with the players adds potential to characters, and that’s not something to be squandered because you cannot replace it even with brilliant writing.

She becomes a better warcheif, deals with voidy crap with death powers, then we can finally keep the faction leaders in the background.

The story’s fixation on the warchief position is getting real old, I agree. And you know, I don’t really know what I want until good writing surprises me with it, so who knows, maybe you’re right.

But I don’t see it. Her precarious in-game position aside, just on a meta level she alienates too many players from the Horde. After Teldrassil, after Derek, after Undercity, a lot of players refuse to identify with whatever group she leads, and if that group is The Horde, that’s a big problem.

Given that she can’t stay warchief, the choices are to either eliminate her completely or to give her a different role in the story.

Your next problem is that she is not really the kind of character to walk away.

True. Sylvanas will probably have to suffer a serious defeat or undergo a major transformation to get in a position where the main plot can ignore her for a while.

It does not follow that we have to kill her to get her out of the plot. It follows that she has to suffer a major defeat or undergo a major transformation.

Ending Sylvanas story preferably her having to suffer consequences for her actions, not only fixes the Horde with this dumb story they wrote for her as the Warchief but it offers the much deserved closure for Night Elf players.

No, it won’t. Barring some brilliant swan song story for Sylvanas, her death will give the Horde and the NE’s exactly 3 seconds of catharsis. Then they have to deal with the weak story again. A strong story is the only solution, and you can’t build a strong narrative on dead characters and schaddenfreude.

3 Likes
93

Are we telling a story or a morality play? If were telling a story, then a character doing bad things doesn’t mean karmic balance is required, and can tell a better story with more depth.

We already tried the path your suggesting, it ended with the Warchief dying pathetically to put somebody else in the seat. I don’t want to be doing this all over in 2 expansions when Warchief Geyrah decides to blow up the Exodar.

9 Likes
94

That was old Blizzard. The new writers for Blizzard only know how to write Morality Plays.

The easiest way to see it, is to see how Tyrande acts for the rest of the expansion.

War-hawks don’t get good endings. They always end up dying in futile battles, promoting hopeless causes, or just becoming shunned by all other “reasonable” personalities.

The writers want the Alliance to be like Anduin: Merciful, Compassionate, Soft-spoken, Cautious, and see conflict as a waste.

Flip a coin.

Heads, Tyrande and the Night Elves stand down after Sylvanas is gone, and are rewarded with development or a promise of a new beginning.

Tails, Tyrande and the Night Elves become obsessed with vengeance, and make no real progress against the post-Sylvanas Horde. Later, Tyrande is shamed for refusing to accept the end of the War, possibly becoming a villain, even if it is a minor chance.

2 Likes
95

This rings true for me. It’s exactly how I felt about the change in writing between Brood War and Starcraft II. But, you know, I’m an optimist. Maybe new Blizzard will become old Blizzard soon.

1 Like
96

She attempts to run away from Azshara by power slide but is stab in the back.

Her last death with reference her first.

After we will get an achievement,

[Not Garrosh, we told you!!!]

Afterwords blizzard will laugh, you tubers will laugh, and the horde players will die a little inside,

4 Likes
97

Y’all should take the L for insisting a portion of the playerbase to suffer. Two L’s for not able to separate a video game fantasy from real life morality. Three L’s for insisting we repeat a stupid plot point we already had in Cata/MoP. Four L’s for playing sheep to Blizzard’s narrative instead of focusing your efforts towards the writers.

9 Likes
98

And an extra L at you for thinking they care about some people on the story forums

1 Like
99

Are you sure? What if the next step they are setting up is a complete change to the way the Horde operates? What if part of what she is meant to set up the removal of the Warchief position? Also, Blizzard never said faction leaders could not play a major role in setting up large events. You might not like it, but that does not mean Blizzard is not doing it. The point I was making was that just because of the void connection and her chasing the knife is happening does not mean she can’t die, which was the claim that was made.

I would argue that her story is rounding out. It is showing that without Arthas himself to hate, she is becoming him. The parallels between her path and Arthas’ path are really blatant. And to me, it looks like her story is going to end with her becoming that which she hated. Honestly it feels more like the void plot is just her going after her own “frostmourne” weapon. So, I think she will be rounding out her story.

But, that said, I think you miss the point. Varian had a lot of potential in his story when he died. Even if I believed there was a lot of potential in Sylvanas going forward, it does not prevent her death.

Sylvanas death does not divide the Horde. The Horde is arguably more divided with her present than with her dead.

Who says the Alliance will play a part in the Horde after her death? This whole thread is about a third party removing her. No rebellion, no civil war, and no Alliance defeating the Horde.

I think you are confusing growth with characters doing a 180. Sylvanas has gone so far down one path that coming back would really not make any sense. There is not really any kind of scenario that makes sense where she decides Saurfang is right (even partially) and she flips to working with him. I think even a really skilled author writing this story in a book would have a hard time working her around to that in a reasonable time frame. In the media of the game, it is not possible to have her flip like that and not be completely jarring and out of character.

In this case, yes it most certainly does. Not directly mind you. But in a larger story. You have to keep in mind that the stories are not disconnected. This is a larger world. There has to be a way to end the full out war. And with Sylvanas in charge the larger story would demand the Alliance continue it efforts to remove that threat from them.

Not really. PvP justifications have been sketchy in the past. Pretty much all the BGs happen in the past (from a lore perspective). Arenas are a thing that does not involve factions. And even after the full war ends, there is some justification for skirmishes. The full war has to end or every expac from here on out would be BfA style conflict. That is really not a viable option going forward. It has to be resolved.

What do you mean by “escalate any further?” It is already at the point of full, all out war. War that includes a genocidal attack. It really can’t escalate further.

I don’t think that is accurate. They admitted they messed up in Stonetalon making him seem less villainous. They admitted that the story arc ended up being shorter than they planned. But from everything I have seen them say, he was always intended to be a villain. It just did not go down quite the way it should have.

Which is again the whole point of this thread. If Sylvanas dies to a third party (or even the Alliance) before a civil war happens the Horde can right its ship so to speak without the need for a civil war.

I don’t think the real issue is about karmic balance. The problem is where the story goes. The story has to have a logic about why said character doing bad things is not eliminated by those threatened by said character. In this case mostly the Alliance and even some Horde.

So, lets look at story reasons that a bad character can stick around.

  1. Said character is to powerful. Nobody can stop them and they do whatever they want. Well, this might work in a book or outside single story that players do not participate in. But you can not have the entire Alliance player base (and a % of the Horde players) held hostage and abused by her in perpetuity. That is not a reasonable choice. So, that option is out.

  2. Said character’s bad deeds are not well known. This is a situation where either nobody knows what is happening or they do not know who is behind it. Problem is, Sylvanas is front and center with it. Burning a city is not something that goes unnoticed. And everyone knows she is behind it. So, that is out.

  3. The actions taken are a relatively small threat. If the other characters see the person as a minor threat that cost more to deal with then to leave than they would leave that person. Perhaps simply taking a containment approach. Dealing with what is thrown out and staying on guard. But, the cost of leaving her is everything gets destroyed. So, that is really not an option. The expectation is that those fighting her are literally fighting for their lives. That does not just stop.

During vanilla Sylvanas was kind of #2 & #3. Most did not know what all she was doing. And the bad that was known seemed minor. That is not true today. The expectation for the story with Sylvanas is not that she dies for karmic balance. But, rather that she dies because she is a literal threat to the world that must be dealt with. There is no, ‘she burned a city full of civilian, oh that is just Sylvanas being Sylvanas just let her be.’ Most of the world has reason to want her gone at this point. There is really only one reasonable way this can go.

3 Likes
100

Just off the top of my head, how about:

“Her enemies believe her to be dead, but in fact she’s just moved into hiding or a dormant state (in a dagger, perhaps). This is compounded by the distraction that an Old God invasion creates.”

“Her enemies can’t access her because she’s been sucked into some inaccessible plane of existence with the Old Gods or deep in the crypts of ICC.”

“Her enemies can’t kill her because she serves some essential cosmic purpose, like Bolvar as the Lich King.”

I mean, I think she’s probably going to die, too. They’re making a huge deal the way she’s losing Val’kyr, so that’s almost certainly going to continue to be a plot thread headed somewhere.

But it’s too strong to say the writers have no other options at all. If anything, it’s an opportunity for a plot twist.

1 Like
101

ya it’d be framed in some ways as a blessing in disguise that saved the horde from another civil war

this too. just cause players are divided if sylvanas dies doesn’t mean the horde will be in the story

1 Like
102

These are either option one (to powerful) or really just effectively dead. If she has any power to act, she is the to powerful. And this is really bad from the player base. Because again you have a character essentially holding a large mass of the player base hostage. Not a good solution. If she has no power to act, then she is not sticking around.

This is just wrong. Bolvar is not a massively bad guy doing terrible things that we can’t kill. He is specifically there because he is not a threat. When the Lich king started causing problems, we killed him. And what Arthas did to the world that got everyone rushing to Northrend was arguable less than Sylvanas has done.

And if you want some other deus ex machina save for her that gives her plot armor you are asking for the to powerful to kill scenario. And again, that is back to her character essentially holding a significant portion of the player base hostage. Not a good solution.

There are always options. There are not always good options. Everything I have seen suggesting a ‘way to save’ her boils down to giving her some stupid level of plot armor or completely reversing her characterization. Either way, it is not good for the story as a whole.

103

. Nukvgcbzzw2222

104

If Sylvanas suffers some crushing defeat that puts her in a position where she is no longer perceived as a threat, but she continues to be available for future storylines three or four expansions hence, I don’t see how that would count as “holding the player base hostage.”

I mean, same, but then I also find most suggestions for how Sylvanas should be killed unsatisfying. Still, I’m sure there is a way to do it effectively–and it would probably involve surprising me with a story I haven’t thought of ahead of time.

IMO, whether players find catharsis in Sylvanas’ defeat will depend much less on whether she’s dead or merely disempowered, and a lot more on whether the details of her defeat are surprising, coherent, and resonant with the larger emotions of the story. Plot points on an executive summary matter much less than how those plot points are presented and developed in the details.

I really am prepared to be happy either way Blizzard goes with this. However, I still dislike dogmatic “Sylvanas must die” griping because if you decide ahead of time that the only possible acceptable outcome is Sylvanas’ head on a pike, then you’ve primed yourself to dislike any other story, even if the presentation is top-notch.

In Burning Crusade you “kill” Illidan. When the writers decided they wanted to bring him back for Legion, they had to write around his “death” in a really clunky way that invalidated previous player experience. The distinction between actual death and “no longer a powerful or relevant part of the current expansion’s world” is worth making because death should be permanent and everything else open-ended.

3 Likes
105

To be fair, people had been theorizing on whether Illidan could come back long before Legion was announced. Their reasoning was that Illidan’s demonic nature made it impossible to permanently kill him outside the Twisting Nether.

1 Like
106

You know that your faction has to thank Jaina on bended knee because she literally killed her father to allow the Horde to begin building up right?

Yeah killing her own race to help other races is racism. Nice logic there.

3 Likes