I honestly see no reason as to why would any race settle with a status quo postbellum they feel as unfair or unjust.
Specially if they consider they have the means or motivation to change that.
Anduin doesn’t have to be true all the time. That’s one of the facts that Blizzard can highlight at any given time and instantly use as a reason to create divisions amongst the Alliance factions.
And there are gradients between being stupidly reckless, and a passive patsy. With both poles having the potential of being equally negative for any race or character.
If there is any upcoming Alliance division, my bet is on having certain races realising that Anduins stance is often making them act as the latter.
My evidence as to some night elves being tired of war and acrually wanting it to just settle as long as they get their lands horde free is the texts some Night warrior affected Kal’dorei have in Boralus.
Let’s agree to disagree on the other things then hehe!
I’ll also remind everyone that Roux only got the information she needed to know to write her book. That is, what Blizzard thought she needed to write her book. She explicitly says “I don’t have big picture information outside of this book”.
So there is a question about how much she can actually set up and foreshadow for the future. And if Blizzard will take up the character stuff that was within her own discression in future content at all.
This is not someone from the story team writing, but a contractor.
Oh, I get that and I feel the same about certain characters but that’s the thing. People have different taste and opinions and thus, striving for an unbiased and credible portrayal of all the characters you write is imo a good approach for an author.
They will play a role in Shadowlands. In fact they will go against Anduin, spread propaganda and call him out on Calia (I think even use the Arthati thing against him and lie about it).
Pretty much this.
Regardless of taste, I feel that characters deserve to grow beyond shallow templates (be them villainous or heroic).
And I do appreciate if some writer aims at reverting the damage inflicted by said shallow characterisation.
I see a big difference between a character that started out shallow, but showed promise as a character later on, and a character that started out mostly interesting, and became too shallow or contradictory to stomach. I really have no interest in seeing time wasted on the later category.
Aditu is right of course, tastes differ, and authors who are happy writing the flat characters they are given without improving upon them have no professional pride at all. So this isn’t exactly a criticism of the author, she didn’t choose the cast. But I can only speak for myself, and for my emotional investment there is such a thing as “too late to matter”, and quite a few WoW characters are beyond the point of salvagability for me, Sylvanas included.
Edit:
But it just came to me that we will probably mostly hear about Sylvanas from Nathanos’ perspective. That might actually be interesting to me, less as a new perspective on Sylvanas, but as a deeper dive into Nathanos.
If we are to talk specifically about Sylvanas, any attempt at explaining her motives will be seen as something positive in my book because of two reasons mainly.
First one, I would see it as some damage control that back-pedals a bit from the overly cartoonesque portrayal she recently had.
And secondly, because it will feed plenty other characters by proxy, and may represent the difference between her dragging a whole lot of themes and characters in her downfall, or managing to somehow salvage those that aren’t to far gone…yet (I.e. Nathanos).
Edit: And I agree again, that this is all personal taste.
Well, I can agree on that part, I guess, though not your first point. Partially at least. I’m not sure what the “whole lot of characters” beyond Nathanos would be. Helya? The Jailor? Mueh’zalah? The Valkyr? I mean, it isn’t like Sylvanas was happy to share her plans around, and most of the people who are in on it are cosmic entities anyways. And knowing her plans won’t help us change our opinions of the people who acted without knowing them.
By expanding on the views of those that followed Sylvanas, you take them out the Mindless Minion zone, and give them the tools for a potential change of mind.
Or at least enough free thinking to make them sympathetic enough for the story to not discard them as some used up killer drone.
You cease to treat them as Sylvanas extensions and start seeing them as characters.
Not talking about the cosmic forces. I’m referring to all those Forsaken characters that were featured as Sylvanas supporters throughout the entire war.
Characters whose status is still unknown and might yet go down with her as either raid fodder or boss material.
Characters that to this day had represented the Forsaken faction: Belmont, Faranell, Nathanos,…
If you have enough story about them, they’ll have a better chance at having sympathetic traits or development that saves them from going down as mere adds in some Sylvanas boss phase.
Sure, but I don’t see what that has to do with expanding on Sylvanas’ views, if they weren’t in on her plans? Nathanos was, of course, but the rest might just aw well have switched teams when she left, which would point toward them not being fully in the know.
Not saying that these characters are unsalvagable, but I don’t see how writing about Sylvanas’ plans would salvage them.
Edit:
I mean, if you assume that mutible important Forsaken characters left the Horde offscreen, then knowing Sylvanas’ motivation, might make them a bit less like one-dimensional minions, so that we might feel something, when they are thrown at us as raid fodder, since we still oppose them? Doesn’t exactly seem like that great of a scenario.
No. There has been datamine of Scarlet Crusade acting against Anduin and Calia since 8.1, and nothing came from it. There is no indication whatoever in the Shadowlands alpha (that is already at a very advanced stage) that the Scarlet Crusade will play a major role or are even present at all.