Tyrande’s quest was NOT vengeance

Lore Story Forum
221

I mean, you seem to simply want to deny that the Night Elves should get anything on the basis of preserving and vindicating Sylvanas at all costs. So if you want to accuse me of motivated reasoning, I’m going to point out that you’re living in a glass house.

As for what justice is, I think that’s pretty clear - it would be a set of actions that would prevent something like Teldrassil from ever happening again. Given that a part of Sylvanas was doing that and has demonstrated that she has no issues with doing something as monstrous as knowingly sending children to WoW’s version of hell, for eternity, for something that she wants? That has to be factored into the conversation as to what ought to happen with her.

2 Likes
222

Em.
But Sylvanas didn’t suffer for Teldrassil. When was the last time she died? Suicide or Godfrey?
The suffering that preceded Teldrassil is not atonement. It was ordinary suffering. Sorry. No, you cannot cash them out by killing someone.

Or can the suffering be cashed out in the form of “senseless aggression”?

223

No one want’s innocents to die in war. Sylvanas specifically states in A Good War that wiping out the Alliance will save the Horde’s children and future children. The only way to stop that is to have on going peace or wipe the other faction out. Sylvanas thought peace was a fool’s bargain.

Yes, glass houses indeed. Your precious Tyrande refused to agree with a peace treaty with the Horde… stop throwing stones. Our faves are both trash foils of one another.

224

sylvanas told saurfang what he needet to hear to agree on her war…

225

Keep telling yourself that maybe one day it will be true.

227

No Kyalin. No.

Stop.

I will not let you turn this arguement into anti-semitism to paint your forum enemies as nationalists. You are wrong. This is bad form and you know it. Night Elves are not Jews. Teldrassil is not comparable to the Holocaust.

If you can’t win an arguement with out pointing at your oponent and calling them a N@zi, then we are done here. Stop exploilting anti-semitism to win arguements. It’s distasteful, and dishonorable.

1 Like
228

I’m sorry, but that’s literally what you are doing. It’s what the Third Reich did as well - they spun up paranoia among the German people that their alleged racial enemies were going to one day destroy them unless they acted against them, and that paranoia, paired with a belief that the strong must overcome and dominate the weak, is what led to the atrocities that prevent me from mentioning the name of that political party on this forum.

That is not how reasonable actors handle their problems. Even in war, there is an expectation that the people you are at war with you will one day NOT be at war with - you don’t ascribe temporal political issues to immutable racial “facts” about people that may be resolved only by subjugating or just killing them all.

And once again, do not try to hide behind other people or other commenters on the Horde side - the grand majority of them recognize this as an issue. YOU meanwhile continue to advance this rhetoric and continue to adopt it as your own. So long as YOU continue to do that, you can bet that I will point it out.

229

It is true, the wound who will never heal, sylvanas sentence, it was a wound who she used him, abused him to whound him, and the alliance, and he even understand it in the moment Teldrassil was burning.

She even accused her, and stayd there until the end.

Sylvanas was lying, and the horde will pay most likely a terrible price for it, in the future, peace? the option of peace was dead in the Moment Sylvanas burned Teldrassil.

230

Tyrande was literally moving her armies into Faralas, to engage the Horde in Silithus on false intel. The night elves were planning War themselves. You can’t play the victim…

Tyrande openly threatened the Horde through micro-aggressions, tried to put the Horde on trial in MoP. Stop downplaying the Night elves as not an active participant and an active military threat in Kalimdor.

The Horde and the Kaldori have been fighting each other over Kalimdor resources since the beginning of WoW. I’m sorry you thought you’d win this fight.

1 Like
231

War is not genocide - get that through your head. If you are at war with a state, there is an expectation that in some form, that state of war will end and you will in some manner resume relations with the civilian population. A state of war does not give you carte blanche to butcher civilians, or to engineer attacks that are intended to end a people as a people.

Stop defending war crimes. There is no defense or justification for genocide, PERIOD.

2 Likes
232

What? Okay, Genn is in Stormheim or a million spies in Orgrimmar, there is at least some kind of connection.
But then how?
The Horde itself began the war, sending an army to Silithus. Everyone understood that Azerite is a powerful resource. The Horde captures its largest field by military means.
…
Profit?

233

Hence why Sylvanas brought the catapults along the beach in range of Kaldori ships when the Horde was detained by the wisp wall. To scare innocents into evacuaring the tree so it can be held as collateral to ensure Undercity and Silvermoon were protected from retaliation. The plan was to only kill Malfurian…

That plan went south when Saurfang failed to kill Malfurian.

Sylvanas didn’t succeed in the War of Thorns. She failed. Because she put her trust in Saurfang and he failed her. Hence her seething line in the Reckoning cinematic “I trusted you!”

1 Like
234

…
…
…
Okay.
If the night elves drown Orgrimmar in acid, but the original plan was to kill all non-mage warriors (kill the culture of honor or something like that), then everything is all right?

STOP, WHAT?
What the hell is an evacuation compulsion? The plan was to take hostages!
Not Teldrassil, but its population, is it not?

235

No, because that would hurt the Horde. That’s the extent to which this thinking goes.

That’s the problem with unrestrained factionalism. Literally everything you do is justified because it’s your faction doing it. I think the comparison that Renautus made earlier to nationalism was surprisingly, if accidentally apt.

236

Did you make up this word yourself?

What are you even talking about?

237

So what about the Horde planning a terrorist attack on a grand scale?

@Renautus
On the seizure of the population of the city and the zone as hostages.
This is classified as terrorism, right?

238

There is the whole eternity ahead in the afterlife, so the casual irl idea of “killing” is not quite as functional anymore as before.

It’s all about the cultural context. Question of “justice” is to have a “scale” to measure the way of punishment.

It could be “universal-ish”, like all are in some work that needs to be done, or imprisonment. It could be different relative to the severity of the crime. Even irl, there are places where crime punishment, which is “justice” in local terms, could range from a fine, to a death sentence. With a bunch of options in-between.

Trying to evaluate them as “my kung-fu is better” is possible, but kind of futile. Ideally the option would just be “do not live in the place if you disagree” which is, of course is not always achievable, but still.

Isn’t that precisely something what would contribute to making a better faction based story, when there is a clear ideological divide among the 2?

People voice their opinions. For different people different aspects are more relevant.

For me, for example, the key point is that if the story is sold as a quest for justice, and then tries to derail the motive, that’s the creator’s decision.

Using misleading advertisement is fine and all, however, to me if a company does it, being out of business or having financial / reputation backlash are a perfectly valid outcomes of such decision.

So, if a story is sold with the premise of justice, either stick to it, or be mentally happy with other possible consequences.

It all depends on how far are you going to go. I mentioned in another thread a few things that could’ve kickstart a decent-ish redemption story should it start in BfA time frame, but that’s beside the point.

The main thing is that in lore there are reports that restoring the senses / emotions are doable for the undead. And it’s possible to avoid getting to the Shadowlands (like Bridenbrad) Yet she chose not to act on it. Which should be also considered in this case.

One should be dead to get there first, as the Shadowlands anima extracted from the deceased only.

1 more point to Griffindor, I mean, to make a now ignored option to kill Sylvanas a step to justice and rehabilitation.

Depends on who’s to judge.

If the genocide is the seriously considered option to continue one’s existence, perhaps there is no point to continue it.
:man_shrugging:

Nah. 1st of all, any outer threat in the post WotLK days is a reason in the eyes of the devs to stop the war.

2nd thing is that stuff does not exist in the vacuum. If the general selling point of the project is to have factions divided, what does that mean for the stories?

Is having peace a good thing, or is it something that would damage the project?

IMO that is a matter of delicate balance between the identity of the IP, and keeping the sense of rivalry, yet also why factions are the core (according to Ion, at least), and thus are good to keep around.

gl hf

1 Like
239

See, this logic was presented by Saurfang in his response to what the Horde would do if Orgrimmar was sieged by both sides and his answer was to charge out and die heroically in battle. Sylvanas didn’t agree with that and neither do I. Like she said, the Horde is worth saving… (even in it’s current miserable state.)

I don’t think this divide between Horde and Loyalists is as easily mended as just admitting Sylvanas lost or was wrong. On some level she was right and even Saurfang admitted to that.

That my friend, is the reason we keep being put through the wringer. One of the disappointments I had to deal with especially with the SoD ending is the fact that without Sylvanas being a catalyst for faction conflict… what is there left storywise? Who is going to be the next catalyst for conflict?

I personally felt challenged by the ethical and moral dilemma’s presented by Battle for Azeroth. I would hate for this game to dumb itself down because the playerbase can’t wrap it’s head around nuance.

240

the horde is nothing ©

Not doing the stuff that was done would’ve been precicely the step to it.

If you want to use irl-ish logic in it all, keep in mind, that till the 3rd war, for example, there were very few night elf children. But there were a lot more after it. Those were the children born from the cooperation with the horde.

People with grudges, like Genn, are not getting younger. And there was a path where the new generation would be alive precicely because of the assistence of the factions. Hence even if some conflicts would arise, there would always be some who would value this cooperation, that made their life possible, something worth to consider.

Problem that for the elves this generation might no longer exist. And the next one will know the price for trusting the horde. So, did Sylvanas’s logic ever had a point? Not sure.

And it would not work in the coherent story, because the Saurfang would not sign up for the action. But for the story it was necessary to have him memory problems. Or for the dranei to suddenly forget the earlier cooperation and who contributed, if not brought them into the alliance.

A lot. And there always were many unfinished story threads.

It might never end. It might be anything from old grudges, to provocations, 3rd parties, new lands / places, and so on. It’s a magical world with timelines and many dimensions / planes of existence.

It could be a fun experience people largely ok with. Like pre-Cata stuff, you know.

Good for you. I didn’t. Does not make one of us right or wrong IMO.

I’d argue that it’s more dumb now than it was in Classic, but that’s just me. Might be a stylistic preference of pre-Cata way of story-telling. It was flawed though, for sure.

gl hf

2 Likes
241

The example you stated is one of vengeance. I am talking of justice, where the person responsible is taken to task for their crimes.

This isn’t about your sheep . This is about you.

And I frankly don’t care about certain ideas of justice. I do not think there is any justice in letting a mass murderer- who willingly and knowingly took part in their crimes- walk free. Your example is so abstract and so meaningless.