As far as I can tell Sylvanas just wanted Delaryn raised to prove that she could kill hope.
And that still didn’t kill hope for the Night Elves at large.
Nathanos was still on Darkshore gloating about the burning.
This is the Forsaken under Nathanos’ leadership:
Catapults.
It’s almost as if the people she trusts most are the people with whom she has a long history of, uh, trust with as their commander in both life and death. What’s she supposed to do, let every random corpse raised in a cemetery hear every last detail of everything that goes into leading the Forsaken/the Horde and put in their own commentary on it? No leader of a nation does that.
If we had canon facts that Thrall’s inner circle when he was leading the Horde was all Orcs and just Vol’jin and no one else from any other race, you’d be as silent a grave about it, all because it wasn’t Sylvanas doing it.
Basically every leader in WoW, besides those of the least developed races like Velen, the Dwarf Council, Gelbin, etc. has an inner circle made of select people they trust that either act as official advisors or as friends and family to rely on. Sylvanas trusting her Dark Rangers who served her in life to act as her inner circle is no worse than Anduin being partial to Jaina and heeding her words when she weighs in on a decision because he sees her as an Aunt.
Yeah, its super weird the Forsaken NE thing. There is just so much weird about that entire scenario, its SUPER forced on several levels. I really am starting to hate the fact that Sylvie’s motives are so darned opaque all the time.
As for Belmont? You expect him NOT to be an edgy psychopath? He has always been that way, and I’m honestly shocked that somehow HE managed to survive his run in with Tyrande in Darkshore (Nathanos I can kind of get … but Belmont)?
Yeah but … the Dwarves are the leaders of the Dwarves. Gelbin is the leader of Gnomes. Sylvanas is the leader of the Forsaken, where the majority population are SUPER underrepresented within her circle of trust (human undead). It really does sort of just reinforce the idea that she ONLY sees them as valuable tools for use in her personal objectives (not as a group meant to be represented)…
Nathanos’ motives are not opaque.
He is fine with burning countless people, and fine with defiling the land and the dead afterwards.
Even the quest name is telling.
What exactly about that is negative towards Nathanos? He’s following orders to pick up a specific corpse; he also sasses Tyrande a little bit in a later quest (but he sasses everyone, he even sasses the Horde PC for being SO amazing to find an immobile corpse). Also, yeah, turns out the DEAD race (who ONLY reproduce through the resurrection of the dead) don’t have quite the same level of hesitance on resurrecting the dead. That is what they do. Why is this surprising? In the list of things you could complain about, him going grocery shopping for Sylvanas hardly seems like a highlight.
Why do you keep avoiding discussion that Nathanos was followed through on the orders to burn Teldrassil?
You didn’t bring up Teldrassil in that post. You brought up him reviving Summermoon, which yeah … is not that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. The Forsaken revive people into undeath … it is a thing they do (it is not something considered culturally inappropriate for them to do from their perspective). As for Teldrassil, he DID follow orders to burn Teldrassil … you are right, I cannot deny that. Can you think of a personal motivation that he should have turned on her at that moment?
I did:
He wouldn’t, because he’s shown no issue with having burned Teldrassil.
He was confused at her first order to burn it because that wasn’t Sylvanas’ plan that he had so fully committed to, not because he had any hesitation to kill everyone still on Teldrassil.
They didn’t hit a reset button on Teldrassil and UC. And the events were very different. UC will eventually be forgotten about while Blizz will never live down Teldrassil.
Yes you can equate them. Rastakhan had the same impact on the Alliance side as the Spell Blade or Star Augurer did. He was just a raid boss as Zul’s enabler. Now he was more important to the Horde, that I did acknowledge. That’s the problem, they set out so deliver payback for Teldrassil by having the Alliance raid people who were not involved with Teldrassil, defeat a character that was only around to die for another character’s development, and had no impact on the Alliance story (he had impact on the Horde’s story, but they weren’t trying to address an issue with the Horde Story with the raid).
So it is or isn’t the same deal? You accomplished something and a reset button promptly gets hit so you accomplished nothing.
Also check back through my post history. I have long criticized Blizz for their policy on putting Alliance Characters on the Horde story, Horde characters on the Alliance story, taking Alliance stuff to make neutral for the Horde to have as opposed to building something equivalent for the Horde.
And my question is WHY should he have issues with the Burning? Because your premise seems to be that he should taken a moral stand against the Queen he owes everything to; solely for the benefit of an enemy? Saurfang’s objections make sense due to his trauma induced backstory with these sort of acts; as well as his strong conception of the Horde being challenged with Sylvie’s orders. However, what motives would a FORSAKEN have to turn on Sylvie at that moment; in the middle of a warzone; without Sylvie’s context of WHO exactly remained in the tree (innocents sure, but ONLY Sylvie knew it was ONLY non-combatants thanks to Summermoon)?
I’m not saying he should have issues with the burning.
I’m saying his not having issues with the burning and having carried it out should disqualify him from being Forsaken leadership when that will just keep the dishonor on the Forsaken and the Horde same as it is with Sylvanas in charge.
But … none (or very few) of the Forsaken are bound to have an issue with the burning? They, like Nathanos, have not been given a proper motivation to question their queen right now; there is no personal investiture to turning on her yet (and yes, PERSONAL motives ARE important to justify actions … why do you think SO MANY people have issues with the Forsaken NEs)?
I don’t expect the Forsaken to be honorable; nor do I wish to destroy their racial fantasy to such an extent that I expect them to be diluted into the Honor Horde caste (no more than I wish for the NEs to simply “fall in line” with the EK Alliance). What I want from them is simply them finding a way to live more compatibility with the rest of the Horde races (and IMO, one of the MAJOR facets preventing that is them not having a leader that is unambiguously invested in their future).
Will Nathanos be that person? No friggen clue, but the potential is there. I could be VERY wrong about him … and I’ll freely admit that. However, with how present he is in this story, I DO expect something BIG from him by BfA’s conclusion (just as I expect the same from Shaw … due to his overwhelming presence as well).
And there was no real proper motivation for Orcs to have stood against Garrosh at the coming of the Siege of Orgrimmar, yet here the Orcs are still in the Horde that turned against him.
There are Forsaken NPCs that have sided with Lor’themar and Jaina in Nazjatar right now.
Do I think Sylvanas should do something to the Forsaken to make them turn against her? Absolutely, if anything just because I don’t like the Forsaken and would be happy to see them hoisted by their own petard that is Sylvanas.
But I would be leery of thinking it is necessary to the way Blizzard moves stories forward.
Unless they completely separate the stories with no interaction between the sides we will be right back where we started from except there are members of each race on both sides.
It would be a short termed fix that ignores the long standing problems.
(scratches head) that is a bit of a double standard. The dark iron dwarves were given orders NOT to attack civilians in BoD, and they disregarded that and attacked them anyways for the lulz.
Nathanos is just a stooge for sylvanus, he even stated if she died he would kill himself.
Had that conversation once:
Actually, the conclusion of SSO bolsters the argument.
Varian says something like: “If you fail to uphold honor again - we will end you.”
The High King of the Alliance says that directly to the new Warchief (Voljin), in front of a deposed Warchief (Garrosh), and a previous Warchief (Thrall), in the center of the Horde’s capitol.
An utter castration of the Horde.
Now that Teldrassil burned, and the Horde has shown Honor means nothing to a corpse… the Alliance promise of ending the Horde is due. The Horde can either roll over and be ended or continue the fight to exist.
While more enlightened and knowledgeable characters like Baine, Thrall, and Lorthemar have first hand experience with Alliance cooperation and compassion, the general Horde populace is not so experienced.
So, the fact that they see this as an existential war comes from Varian’s words.
I do not think this is a fair assessment. Sylvanas seems egalitarian as far as racial cooperation - so long as they do her bidding.
She championed the idea of a Human Ranger Lord when the High Elves refused.
She worked with Dreadlords and Garithos to claim Lordaeron.
She worked with Putress (a regular Forsaken) and Varimathras (a Dreadlord) - though they betrayed her for their own ends. They may have been her closest collaborators at the time.
She works with Ashvane, the Fogsail Freebooters, Helya, and lord knows who else.
And in the Horde intro to Stormheim, she makes a point of showing us the next generation of Dark Rangers - regular ole Forsaken.
Sure. It is a short term solution. But the thread is about positive endings for the current plot lines. Short term. An expac or two.
What comes after, long term, depends on what actually happens in the short term.
But Varian said that line to Horde leaders you mentioned.
Not the average Horde citizen.
What is more its the leaders that decide where they ultimately lead their nation.
I just wish Alliance was as ruthless as people imagine it. I crave for such an alliance.
In that cinematic, there were more than just the leaders present. There were soldiers of various races present as well. From both Factions. As well as Pandaren.
And unlike the current leader of the US, I do not think the Horde leadership has its people sign confidentiality agreements.
Lorthemar is a racial leader. The Regent Lord of Quelthalas. He was present for that moment. And even he is not sure his people will follow him.
Being a racial leader does not equate to universal agreement within the race they represent.
That is an issue I can agree with you on.
Some of the worst things the Alliance did stem from “rogue agents” and “misunderstandings”. Like Genn disobeying Anduin at Stormheim. Or Camp Taurajo. Or the Vulpera Caravans (the Alliance leader on the field, Sandwalker Vakaara, says the Vulpera are not their enemy and to merely scare them away - but her soldiers disobey and burn it all), and the Dark Iron Dwarves who burn civilians in Dazar’alor.
It does not make the crimes any less grievous, in my mind, but it does make their leadership seem spotless. It takes a lot of recollection and lore info to back up such claims of Alliance cruelty.
Meanwhile, the Horde’s greatest atrocities are commanded directly by the Warchief. In flashy cinematics. Like the Destruction of the Vale and the Burning of Teldrassil.