Uhg. I wish that was the problem.
Because what it actually is, is initially Sylvie didn’t do the Wrathgate. Then Chron. 3 implied when did. Then Agrosalami said she did. And now, she didn’t (but is still partly responsible).
It’s not that they haven’t told us; it’s that they keep changing their answer.
It seems to me like one of the problems with this entire scenario is that we have no information whatsoever on the Alliance’s perspective at the time, what was motivating them, what was going through their heads, how rational or irrational they were behaving, what kind of tricks the Scourge/CotD might have tried on the Alliance during the fall of Lordaeron and its aftermath, etc.
The only Alliance perspective we have in TFT, all the way to Vanilla WoW, is freaking Garithos. A plot device to set up the Forsaken and Blood Elves in WoW.
Getting to the bottom of this requires more information from the Alliance on the matter. But I’d guess that a lot of what was going through the Alliance’s collective mind at this point has a lot to do with their social, political, and cultural affection and attachment to Lordaeron. Are you sure you’d be able to handle all that?
Zovaal showed Sylvanas an afterlife for lava eels and explained that an eel’s mate didn’t go to the same afterlife after being eaten by it, which is what convinced Sylvanas that the system was unfair.
Are lava eels like Seahorses?
ainhin, to be fair, no one cares about this 4 ambassador, and we all know, and can be pretty sure, the most likely never reach even one city of the alliance…it seems to me that either the scourge did their job again, or the alliance troops were a little bit too motivated…
this is the wrong conclusion from rens post here…this didn´t convince sylvanas at all…she was affected by it, sadened because of her own family…but she was not convinced.
Gosh you could’ve fooled me
The equivalent to the Garithos situation would be “They knew the Alliance killed them, but the emissaries were fine with it, and nobody cared”.
why? its true or not? This Discussion is truly about “who have more claims to lordaeron”, the 4 ambasador are only a WAY to try to convince others…but the pro horde/forsakenplayer will use them as shield to justify their holding and you will use them as weapon to try to claim it for yourself…in the end, no one cares about this 4 dudes…everyone in this discussion care about lordaeron.
Shaw may be alot of thing. But he has always been loyal to Stormwind crown. If anything I expect he told Anduin about being replaced by a dreadlord. And this particular information about Garithos would be pretty vital to knowing why thr Blood elves are part of the Horde. I doubt he would hide it.
Both living and dead humans have claim on lordearon.
The only question is who is capable to hold it militarily.
Now why would Alliance spend treasure and man power to hold a blighted ruin of a kingdom when their own territories are themselves devasted is the bigger question.
So you’re saying you don’t need someone to outright say that Shaw told them about the Dreadlord situation… but you need someone to outright say what happened to the Forsaken ambassadors?
It played a part in convincing her. That along with other afterlives Zovaal showed her. He showed her that fate is what put people into their afterlives and thus lead to familial separation. “This world is a prison” because everyone on Azeroth is a prisoner to fate. They can’t even choose who they spend their afterlife with (in Sylvanas’ words).
Who knows, they might change their answer to this too. If they wanted to blame the Alliance for the death of these emmisary they could have added a chapter or even just have Anduin mentioned the Alliance had them killed.
As it is, they left it vague enough to add their own answer later.
I did, because that was never relevant to the original conversation. You just suddenly started throwing it in there after this whole “Shaw knew” bit started showing it’s holes.
Yes, two characters learned about Garithos’s fate. At some point. It’s assumptions to take that and spin a whole yarn out of how this impacts the ambassadors.
It’s weird.
Right, actually the Eel situation was just a station between that led them there, one of many, it wasn’t even the only one described, it’s already very out of context and the outcry also seems partly provoked, Ren said she’s biased, so why are we arguing about it?
I am sure if someone neutral reads the book, much will be different, not better, but calmer.
I am saying, we can be reasonably certain Shaw doesnt hide anything from the Wrynn that would be vitally important.
The same cant be said of the ambassadors because there are plenty of other reasonable things that could have happened to them that doesnt involve being killed in the court of Stormwind.
why did we fight about a desert since houndred of years?
What exactly are you referencing?
the so called holy land