You think you did not butcher civilians in DazarAlor?
You forgot you stole gold as well?
Why im even talking with you?
I know no matter what you justify your factions crime and keep crying for “genocide” and rest silly excuses because your EGO was shattered.
Its world of WARcraft.
If you didnt want war, you should let azerite to us.
You didnt let it? Our actions are justified, as simple as that.
What ? I never implied Sylvanas was a frustrated girl with a unfortunate fate, I implied she was a good character with an unfortunate writing. She perfectly could have went full evil for all I care, I would have been down with that, as long as it made sense.
he’s not braying. he’s pointing out that Sylvanas’ fate was utterly inevitable.
that’s the difference.
the “theme” is she’s a villain. find her appealing if you like, but don’t complain when her villainous story arc reaches its inevitable conclusion - i.e. she is killed by the heroes for all the crimes she did.
start by actually reading what i said.
it’s development. yet MORE development for them. someone at Blizzard obviously likes them so much that they keep writing storylines around them incessantly to the detriment of everyone else.
the fact you dislike the direction this development is taking is neither here nor there.
you’re not waiting. you’re already lambasting other people’s story opinions. the difference is you’re not doing it because you have a point to make about the trajectory of the narrative, but because you’re bitter that the boring Forsaken and their tiresome leader are finally being shoved out of the way so some other races can get a bit of screen time.
Hey, it was you that tagged it as such.
You were the one that said that anyone that speaks against people that express exasperation with how Blizzard treats characters, or factions, (basically what OP did in this thread), is in fact braying. 
No, it’s is not.
I know that this is a futile effort at explaining the basics, but the theme wasn’t only about being somewhat villainous from time to time.
Doubling down on said iteration, trashes the rest of factors that made the character whole, and an appealing part of the faction.
Turning playable aspects of the game into raiding material, rejected and discarded on a narrative level, isn’t development.
Specially if it’s followed by a void in plot relevance.
Really? Quote me when I did such.
But yeah, I’m waiting. And I’m certainly noting the postures thrown around in regards to this particular story angle.
It may be petty, but I’ve noted that the same people that defend this sort of story treatment, are then the same ones that complain and wail at the mere innuendo about having it on their favoured picks.
Stuff like calling the systemic removal of everything Sylvanas stood for in the Forsaken narrative, the usage of their iconic characters as villain fodder, and the open reject on a narrative level of several of their core aspects, as “development” is the sort of Gold, I’ll certainly bring up the next time certain people bring up how awfully treated the Night elves are if they turn Tyrande into a villain to be sacrificed, or how butchered the human story is, if they make Turalyon a bad guy in an upcoming Evil Light themed expansion.
I know that certain people like you may end up grasping at the tiniest of differences in order to mask the obvious hypocrisy, but still, it will be so apparent that I’ll keep on pointing it out regardless.
And this isn’t “lambasting” anyone’s story choice. I wasn’t the one that felt like entering this thread just to add stuff like:
While addressing but a player that expresses his/her malcontents with the fact that they are dumping the aspects of the playable race that presented certain degree of appeal for him/her.
no it wasn’t
no i didn’t
“somewhat villainous from time to time”? she has never been anything other than a villain.
just because the current writing team like her and have been trying to layer in backstory for her for the last few years doesn’t change what she is. a villain with a past full of woobie sadness is still a villain, and there’s a clear unbroken narrative thread between her role in TFT (NB: not warcraft 3, where she was a recoloured Night Elf Archer intended to be a throwaway character for Arthas to kill to establish his evilness, hence her resurrection as a generic banshee - hardly “iconic”) and her current situation as a future raid boss. the only strange thing here is that it took them so long to get around to this.
where’s the hypocrisy here?
the night elves are treated awfully. they’ve done nothing but lose since the start of WoW - they were the first race to have a leader become a raid boss, the first race to lose their capital city, and are so far the only race that has lost zones their people canonically controlled prior to the start of WoW’s story.
“but the forsaken lost UC/ tirisfal!” - they didn’t “lose” these; sylvanas destroyed them. she hatched a plot to kill the Alliance leadership which involved the destruction of UC and tirisfal. the fact she was destroying her people’s homeland wasn’t even a concern to her, because she is a villain. a villain whom the writers are so precious about that even when she has to lose for development reasons, they ensure she does so on her own terms.
even when the writers are browbeaten into giving the Night Elves a win they can’t do the race or their lore justice, and we end up with Tyrande being used as a clumsy Aesop about the perils of seeking revenge (for the genocide of her race, directed solely against the woman who gave the order rather than the hundreds of Horde soldiers who actually carried it out) and some off-screen crap about Nordrassil being their new home despite the fact that’s not represented in the game.
In the fact that most that wail at the mere insinuation that the there might be certain lines crossed, are the same ones that applaud, or rationalise ad nauseam, when Blizzard decides to randomly double on said traits with the likes of Sylvanas and Garrosh.
As I said, when/if Blizzard ends up going the way they hint at, I’ll be there to point at the hypocrisy of those that cheered and fostered said treatment for certain characters.
If you think that the sort of treatment Orcs and Forsaken had with their themes and leaders, is to be considered logical, and applauded at, good for you. I’ll be there to remind the same when it goes down on Turalyon and Tyrande, Anduin or Velen.
I can already spot several familiar and firm advocates for the thorough villain batting of Sylvanas and Garrosh in threads such as these:
https://eu.forums.blizzard.com/en/wow/t/dont-turn-turalyon-into-a-villain/
Or the countless ones that ensued after Blizzard hinted at Tyrande going down a dark path.
only good sylvanas loyalist is a dead one
there’s a difference between explaining why someone is wrong and just telling them to get over a story direction they dislike.
it is logical. you’ve tried to argue it isn’t and it always comes back to the fact that you personally don’t like it, or that it’s a pivot away from what drew people to the race/ faction/ character in the first place.
that’s not how narrative critique works.
i’m glad people bring up Tyrande in threads like these, because she’s an interesting example to consider.
Blizz hinted Tyrande was becoming consumed by her desire for revenge, which is a logical progression for her considering she’s a headstrong and self righteous character.
the problem is Tyrande has only ever called for revenge against Sylvanas. she’s not demanding the Horde hand over the hundreds of ordinary soldiers who actually carried out the killing, and while she’s content to direct attacks against the Horde in Darkshore she never goes further than that. hardly seems like someone who’s “consumed by revenge” to me.
It required retcons all over the narrative board. Ranging from discarding the importance Sylvanas and the Forsaken gave Lordaeron, her feelings regarding how she felt about becoming Warchief, and who and why did such.
It introduced a newfound Death God, completely changed/retconned the development given late Wrath (Valkyr introduction), and radically changed the faction/character views on serving certain characters.
All to try and artificially give sense to a the current iteration some writer wanted for the character.
You can make everything “work” after retconning context, background, and overall scenario. But changing the entire setting to make it fit doesn’t make it logical development.
You grasp at it being “logical” because it now fits with the deep animosity people like you feel towards the character.
Basically, your bias wants you to excuse bad storytelling because it suits what you favour.
And again, I’ll wait for when Blizzard applies this sort of reasoning to other characters. The hypocrisy of some people will shadow the entire forum.
Yeah. I’m sure that people will take it gladly upon being notified that she was indeed acting villainous when taking onto herself the Night Warrior powers and killing “innocent”people.
Or when Yrel comes knocking on our door and Blizzard dumps Turalyon under the train of irrational zealots that need to be put down for the sake of the planet.
not to lend support to either side in this odd argument, aside from this one.
idk chief, if the Horde having two rebellions caused by two maniacs on the seat with the same schlock as ‘what is the horde???’ is considered logical storytelling, then we may as well wait for the third rebellion.
im sure the alliance too wont be exhausted of this hypermind turntabling once again.
there won’t be a third rebellion.
remember the cutscene with Blanduin and Whinefang prior to the makgora at the end of BfA? in it, Saurfang lays out the reason the Horde keeps putting bloodthirsty idiots in charge - because it’s still fundamentally Blackhand’s Horde, i.e. the rampaging barbarian mob that ruined Draenor, then came through the Dark Portal and tried to do the same thing to Azeroth. Saurfang dying in the makgora was a symbolic severing of the last link between Blackhand’s Horde and the new improved Good Guy Horde.
for years Horde players have complained that they get the short straw when it comes to stories because they’re the “bad guy faction”. they thought the Alliance, with their unity and good guy-itis, had things easier.
y’all gon’ learn.
you’ve removed 90% of the comment. very dishonest of you.
what retcons? the Forsaken have always placed a lot of importance on Lordaeron, but i don’t think Sylvanas has ever really cared about it that much other than the fact it belonged to her.
the Forsaken have also always been fanatically loyal to Sylvanas. it’s a central aspect of their lore. if the Dark Lady tells them Lordaeron needs to be blighted, would it make sense for them to object? especially considering they have form for throwing blight all over everything given half the chance?
introducing new stuff is not a retcon.
what? no it didn’t.
Sylvanas and the Forsaken have been “serving” the Horde for their own ends for nearly 20 years.
all of WoW’s storytelling is bad. thing is, just because a plotline is poor doesn’t mean it’s illogical. Sylvanas’ impending loot pinata-dom makes sense in universe. the en-good-ening of the Horde makes sense in universe, as does the new Good Guy Horde shaking off the last of the “bad guy” fleas.
so you’re intending to troll people by making up your own story that’s not supported by the text? have fun, i guess.
The intent of basically telling someone to deal with, or, as you put it “get over it”, doesn’t change with the number of words used to do so.
And you tagged it as braying. There is no other way around it.
I could go on an extensive list that includes for example Sylvanas inner thoughts, the basic premise that founded the playable race, how it was tackled in recent iterations that were presented for the sake of forcing the current story, and a long etc.
Wrong. Go do Cataclysm quests. Go read War Crimes.
Go read even Before the Storm.
You have outer and inner monologues that prove how the above is blatantly false regarding Sylvanas.
The first interaction with the Jailer apparently happened here.
It also supposedly presented the first deal ever made with said entity, and the point that had Sylvanas bargaining a deal with him in exchange for the Valkyr.
Do point at me at the piece that displayed either of the above.
I’ll wait.
After vowing to never serve any Master ever again (talking here near WC3 dialogues), the current iteration has her serving Death Satan.
Great “logical” progression amirite?
The word “logic” implies that the series of events have a natural causality behind them that leads towards a specific outcome.
In order to have the current outcome for the character, Blizzard had to retroactively change the story previously written, in order to explain how the current set of events are taking place.
That alone, showcases just how illogical the current scenario is.
If it were “logical”, no changes would’ve been needed.
And i’m sure people will love it when the impeding Turalyon loot pinata makes about the same “sense”.
Or Tyrande’s.
No.
I’m intending on holding them to the same storytelling standard they supported when the writers abused the narrative they didn’t care about (or disliked).
When/if the Sylvanas treatment is applied to Tyrande, Turalyon, or Anduin, i’ll certainly remind certain people of the time they so enthusiastically approved of said sort of “storytelling”.
he gave trenchant reasons why OP should’ve seen this coming. that’s what you removed.
dishonest, like i said.
that the story where she tries to trick her sister into becoming undead? just like a non-villainous character would do!
which part of War Crimes suggests she gives even half a flip for Lordaeron?
first, you tell me where anyone said the deal happens during Edge of Night.
… as opposed to the previous iteration which had her explicitly taking orders from the Horde on several occasions and kow-towing to Garrosh at least once.
i know, i know - “she was just putting it on”, right? just playing the Horde in order to serve her own ends? right - so what’s to say she’s not doing the same thing with the Jailer?
that’s speculation, but it fits the logic of the character
and here you have a character who has never been anything but a conniving, self-pitying villain who’s prepared to play any-one and any-thing in order to serve her own ends.
you also have a universe where characters like this end up dead nine times out of ten.
logical.
if it’s logical then it doesn’t matter whether people like it or not. that’s my point.
you mean when Tyrande is constantly being pushed to the fore of every single major event, constantly starring in short stories and cutscenes that are entirely centred on her personal narrative, constantly being allowed to act in ways that wouldn’t be tolerated in other lore characters, and having the faction she leads become distinct and individual in a sea of blandness?
i think even the cringiest of Night Elf fans would sacrifice Tyrande for a spoonful of that, particularly if her death makes as much sense to her as Sylvanas’ does.
Reasons that ranged from menial or token acts of evil that fell under a wider scope that gave nuance beyond radical villainy…mixed with the ones that fell under the caricaturesque villainy given to her in BfA/Shadowlands.
Yeah, expanding on a ton of bull, and lacing it with a “Deal with it”, falls under the definition you gave for “braying against those that express their malcontent with story directions”.
I mean:
(???)
And…
When these are the sort of reasons someone grasps at in order to excuse how a somewhat shady character with several layers, is to be thrown down the villain drain, then…well.
I’m sure that one time Tyrande beheaded an orc, or talked back at Anduin,…SHOULD OF COURSE TURN HER TO THE IRREDEEMABLE VILLAIN ROLE.
After all, these are the standards you operate with, aren’t they? 
The story where she literally states that she would wan’t nothing but to be with her people (The forsaken), and rejects any measure that could threaten them or their kingdom?
Yeah, that one.
Kinda amusing to read this blatant willigness to tailor a biased narrative that discards any/all aspects that go against what people favour.
That’s the sort of reasoning we can use to spin that time Anduin mind-controlled a dwarf in order to excuse how he can become the next Lich King. Great logic yeah.
Oh, and I’ll be there to remind people like you of this stance if/when Blizzard uses this same approach with the other characters.
We’ve also learned that Sylvanas started her partnership with the Jailer in the short story “Edge of Night,”
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/The_Jailer
Sylvanas Windrunner allied with the Jailer after her suicide (Edge_of_Night) at Icecrown Citadel.
He sent a group of Val’kyr to make a pact with her and allow her to return to the world of the living, so that she could ultimately claim the Helm of Domination from the “false king” Bolvar.
Bolded bits are both sourced in Wowpedia.
You can go on now. Do explain this whole “No Retcons” to me.
I already linked the short story. Point me at the page were any of the above took place
Is that why she went directly against his orders Silverpine? Why he was forced to send Cromush to overlook her war effort?
See, with each new bit, you just keep showing that you don’t know and don’t care about the character or the story surrounding it. You are simply part of the same hate mob that felt “wronged” by her presence in the story, and would condone outright bad storytelling for as long as she is artificially punished in the narrative.
Again i’ll point out, that i’ll be there to remind how willing people like you were to accept and cheer for this sort of treatment, when writers turn said praxis towards the races that you favour.
You asked were the hyporcisy was? Well, i’d say that all those wails and whinging regarding a potential similar fate for the likes of Turalyon and Tyrande, are explanatory enough.
Sure sure.
We may find out soon enough.
I’m sure that when Blizzard spins that one time event that had Turalyon torturing an innocent, into a fully fledged arch that excuses some genocide-accepting radicalisation, people will OF COURSE accept it as logical…
Of course, of course…
Isn’t this already happening? Isn’t she playing a major role in one of the principal covenant campaigns, had her own personal arch in Legion and BfA, and now will have a dominant role in the upcoming events that lead into the next raid?..
Anyway…
You mean like having their own narrative arch that ends with an unique new customisation option, exclusive and available for them?
Or maybe like having several zones implemented specifically under the theme they dominate in 3 expansions in a row?
Or maybe having their leaders be at the head, front, and back of almost every major plot since Wc3?
Besides this whole approach that goes along the lines “The Forsaken players had it going for them pretty good on a narrative level…having it ruined is something they’d deserve”, isn’t exactly what i’d call a healthy approach.
But, don’t worry, i’ll quote you on that one next time another particular race gets said sort of “attention” from writers. 
Yeah, i’m sure the NEFPAs will wet their pants at the prospect of having Tyrande villain batted and killed while dragging the main theme of her race down with her.
Hey, who knows, we may yet experience that come the end of SL!!! One can hope, right? Night elf fans sure will enjoy that one…
great, ill quote you on this.
pretty sure you can look back at the hundreds of threads of alliance players bashing the horde and its playerbase about how said complaints are actually pretty warranted. i can link you some, if you like!
we’ll take your good guy-itis, and you can take our bad guy-itis. we’ll just be changing the flagposts and go back to abusing each other and calling it ‘discussion’.
Cooperating with the agent of the Burning Crusade IS an evil act.
Resurrecting the dead against their own will and using them as soldiers against their own people IS an evil act.
Using chemical weapons against unarmed people IS an evil act.
This is only a little part of what she did, but these things alone would be enough to face the fate of every villain in warcarft universe: killed by heroes.
+1 Disobey the clear order of the warchief is an act of treason, what should be punished by the horde long ago. Disobeying orders during war is punished with death even in liberal societies.
The logical end for her is permanent death, doesn’t matter how you try to compare war crimes, multiple treasons, attempting to murder her own family, going against the world’s every single written and moral rules to talking back to Anduin.
If we are to take the sample list you wrote, we’d probably have to label a ton more characters as villains to be deposed.
Hey, we still might.
Specially interesting to read stuff like:
After Legion, the Demon Hunters, Warlocks, or guys like:
Or stuff like:
Like, woah. The likes of Turalyon, Tyrande and Genn certainly seem to have all tickets to become the next villains, right? 
That is a weird take really. Demons are not inherently evil, they’re just species from another “universe”. The Burning Crusade is inherently evil. But Sylvanas thought she had Varimathras break his ties with the BC - and I mean, Demons leaving the side of Sargeras isn’t unheard of
Agreed, but honest demons dont exist either. (Well, maybe Lothraxxion might be an exception).
So forcing a demon, of a kind that is known to be manipulative, into your service and then act all surprised pikachu when he turns on you is… well, it either shows you knew but didn’t care or you’d have to be the dumbest tactician in the history of Azeroth to not expect it. And that bar is set really, really low knowing warcraft tacticians.
Hmm, we have proof that it’s not systematic. Individuals such as the mo’arg Sal’salabim and the Shivarra (among other Shivarra) Matron Mother Malevolence willingly chose to turn against Sargeras, seemingly with no intervention of the Light or whatever external force. And what’s possible on an individual scale can most likely extend to the whole race
Sylvanas endorsing Varimathras was naive, or, at worse, risky and dangerous. Evil though ???