Do I really need to spell out what kind of a person he is? Lying to protect his reputation as a storyteller (such as it is) would be the least of his sins.
1 Like
She is quite frankly even less redeemable than Garrosh by now.
Garrosh despite being hit by the villain bat, still had certain convictions and character that he stuck with to the very end.
Sylvanas in BFA and after was just clinically stupid yet portrayed as a genius.
She really should have been killed of in the cinematic against TyrandeâŚ
2 Likes
The quote is from 2014.
What he has done is irrelevant to the question of whether he is telling the truth here.
Lying at this point makes no sense, because it is of no use. So why should he do it?
Source?
1 Like
Yeah doubt that statement since Thrall for most of the expansion was vibing in Outland with the Earthern Ring before the Firelands patch.
1 Like
Getting things done isnât a good sign if it isnât good things that get done.
1 Like
I believe what Brewa is trying to say is itâs their opinion that Afrasiabi was lying in that interview and with the way we know he acted, believing heâs a liar isnât such a stretch.
And I think Brewa has a good point.
I think that story being written for Thrall or the other Kalimdor racial leaders like Baine or Voljâin actually makes more sense because Garrosh has never shown compassion, especially when it comes to the Alliance. The Garrosh we met in Wrath is the same meat head we meet in Twilight Highlands.
Because someone with no ethics views lying the same way they view breathing.
3 Likes
He almost wiped out the Horde, completely screwed up an entire continent and any and all allies from it, and repeatedly chose to permit war crimes after war crimes. The only time he ever punished someone for engaging in war crimes was when it was done on his behalf and targeted the druids of Stonetalon Peaks.
All of this because he had daddy issues and wanted to live in a fantasy land of racist orcs.
Thatâs your definition of âgetting things doneââŚ?
Yes, which ultimately led to her downfall as she became blinded towards her own plans forgetting that people who fought for and with her did so because they wanted to side with the Horde as a warring faction.
They messed up her character but then course corrected it as best as possible which, hilariously, folks didnât get when Sylvanas soul was made whole (even if scarred) again. Garrosh never took responsibility for his actions even to the very end beyond death when he chose to let his rage destroy his soul when freed. Just to enact vengeance.
Sylvanas on the other hand stopped running for once and was finally willing to face the consequences of her actions, the totality of her actions. Comparing the two of them as leaders only makes sense when put like this:
Garrosh was a racist orc who wanted to destroy Azeroth in order to appease his fantasies relating to his daddy issues. Sylvanas chose, like Garrosh, the most vile and horrific strategies in order to win ⌠which ultimately always backfired because plans of total destruction never ever survive even when they are successful (which, they werenât even successful).
Garrosh ran away screaming like a petulant child, upset that actions have consequences. Sylvanas did the same but then chose to stop. As leaders, they were both childish and self-serving but for different goals - which made neither one of them good leaders.
2 Likes
It fits in with his personal understanding of orcish honour, like in silverpine. They apparently wanted to give Garrosh a few âgoodâ sides.
Thrall makes no sense. He wasnât involved in the war during stonetalon.
Baine and Volâjin have no authority over the orcs.
Objection, your honor. Character Evidence.
1 Like
Garrosh, say what you will about him stuck to his guns.
My guy was fueling the Venthyr on pure rage.
1 Like
Sometimes I wonder if Garrosh should have stayed Warchief. People would certainly get their eternal conflict between Horde and Alliance.
Sylvanas was a fantastic leader.
Just a shame her end goal was to kill everyone.
But if you ignore that part⌠yeah she was pretty stellar.
1 Like
No.
No they were not.
Garrosh no not at all Sylvanas however yes at first through legion and then Before the Storm however that all went down hill when to the shock of everyone she burnt down Teldrassil and became the second coming of Garrosh out of legit nowhere.
Like Sylvanas as Warchief started like this with one of my favourite WoW cinematics.
And then ended with thisâŚ
Problem is, she was barely around in Legion. Because Legion was 99% about the Important Alliance Characters.
Sheâs there at the first Broken Shore scenario with everyone else. And then you catch a couple fleeting glimpses of her in the leveling quests in Stormheim.
Thatâs it.
Sheâs M.I.A. the rest of the expansion.
1 Like
Well of course Legion was about the Alliance. We were trying to save Azeroth from the Legion. Not destroy it like the Horde would have done.
The thing is that it didnât come out of nowhere. Watch the Cinematic again and consider this question:
âWhy did Volâjin make Sylvanas the Warchief despite never having trusted her?â
He did so because he trusted his connection to the Loa. Not because of Sylvanas.
During the Wrathgate, why did people immediately assume Sylvanas was in lieu with Putress? After all, he had tried to overthrow Sylvanas and with who ⌠? One of Sylvanas oldest allies, not a reliable ally by any means but nevertheless, Varimathras had been an ally of Sylvanas since she âsparedâ him during Warcraft III.
Again and again, not at any point has Sylvanas been treated as a character who can be trusted or someone who can rely on others.
So⌠what does she do?
Her foe is literal death itself, so she allies with death itself in an attempt to overthrow life itself. After all, undeath on Azeroth on the scale that that created the Forsaken, The Scourge, Sylvanas - everything she was forced to become, is excellently portrayed in her fight with Bolvar:
âYou are unfit to wear this crown ⌠to wield so much power.â
âThat power⌠will be your prison.â
âThis world is a prison.â
Sylvanasâ goal has always been one to achieve freedom from any and all shackles. Simply, sheâs been lonely, abused, and betrayed endlessly both in life and in undeath because of Arthas and consequently the power that raised her from death. Her solution? Make everyone bound by eternal life rather than temporary life. To bring everyone into undeath and if everyone, according to her philosophy, is bound and shackled when living ⌠what cost is there to pay but the most natural one? Why would one or a hundred thousand lives matter? All are supposed to be freed in undeath.
And this is why she took such great issue with the Forsaken who were happy with their current existence and saw no reason to live forever. This is why she was so hurt when Vereesa said she couldnât join Sylvanas in the Undercity with her children. This is why Nathanos became such an important character to Sylvanas because it was the one and only character who she confided her desire for everyoneâs immortality.
This is why when her soul was reforged, scarred as Frostmourne had caused to it, she was willing for the first time to see her actions in the totality of it. When folks complain about âoh so sheâs fine now?â they miss the point of it all completely. Because thatâs the first time that Sylvanas was willing to accept that folks werenât against her, but what she had done, and the things that she had caused.
All of this is what Sylvanasâ character is, regardless of whether one liked that this is the direction they decided to take her ⌠they have, and none of Sylvanas actions were really âout of nowhere.â Her character was definitely not planned to be this but thatâs because her character is an allegory for a topic that one canât really talk about on these forums or anywhere else. Because it is ⌠wellâŚ
It is quite horrific how Arthas forced himself on her, and how Syvlanasâ life turned out afterwards.
So⌠yahâ. Sylvanasâ character is one that is one of the most difficult types of character to write correctly and sometimes it is genuinely just best to let them fade into the background. Because trying to stick to that allegory would be ⌠probably not that well received.
Blizzard got both factionsâ leadership totally backwards with the stupid repeated Horde civil war plots, and their inability to write a character/faction as brutal and warlike without being Literally Hitler. Garrosh definitely should have stayed Warchief. The Horde should be the aggressive/expansionist empire ruled by the iron will of a Genghis Khan-like warlord, and it should have been the Alliance as a coalition of - well - Allies ruled by a council of the various nationsâ kings/queens from the get-go. All of the High King/Anduin-centric Alliance storytelling would have worked much better if that had been character development of a conqueror-not-monster Horde Warchief instead.
1 Like
Idk if they were good leaders, but they were far more entertaining than w/e the fel the Horde has now.
Under Garrosh, the Horde won more land than they lost (and really⌠only Baine lost ground).
2 Likes
This wasnât because he cared about the Alliance, itâs because Garrosh is old fashion. He doesnât like warlocks or anything to do with undeath.
Apparently they do if theyâre both eligible to lead the Horde.
Well, it wasnât like he was fired from Blizzard for sexual harassment.
Oh wait, he was. 
1 Like