The "stay of execution scenario" makes no sense for loyalists

#1

This scenario is not very sensible if you play it as “team Sylvanas”. I can barely accept having to kill lots of guards to get to Baine so that things look plausible. But once one gets there, and the “traitors” are surrounded and unable to get out, I have to kill the various forces, the battle mages, destroy the dampening crystals, and kill the Sunreaver instead of turning on Thrall, Jaina, Saurfang, and Shaw? What exactly is gained from looking “believable” in this situation? If the goal is to let them escape, don’t send additional forces. If the goal is to lead them into a trap, don’t force me to help them.

#2

Sylvanas told you to do that, and as a loyalist you trust her to know what she is doing. Goddess Sylvanas moves in mysterious ways.

(Malaficus) #3

Real answer:
Because blizzard just makes those loyalist quests to shut the sylvanas fans up.

Headcannon: Sylvanas is trying to gather the horde traitors and alliance into one place so she can blight/burn/slaughter/etc them all.
And you her loyal pawn are being used to ensure they all gather in one place.
Your sacrifice for the cause will be forgotten.
You will be cursed by her true loyalist as traitor.
You know this and you still fight for her.
Because you serve the dark lady.
Nothing else mathers.

(Elyssarain) #4

It is all part of Sylvanas’ plan ™ and of course Baine/rebels and the Alliance will fall for it. Cos…the latter is really stupid.

#5

This, probably.
Alliance or Horde, loyalists or rebels, we’re all just pawns in her game at this point. And will be none the wiser until she makes her final move.

#6

I certainly agree, when I did this on my main I was a bit disappointed that we once again had to fight alongside Thrall and the Alliance.

It would have made more sense and a whole lot more interesting if the story diverted after notifying the Dark Ranger that the traitors have sneaked past her. Make it believable that Baines rescue is a part of her plan, that we for example let Thrall & Co meet the Alliance and while they rescue him.
Let us rally Hathorel and convince him to take care of the rescue squad while we the Sylvanas loyalists together with Sylvanas herself, her dark rangers and Nathanos brutally ambush and later reanimate reinforcement consisting of Alliance & Saurfang loyalists.
I honestly wouldn’t mind if we fought another named character like Mathias Shaw, Magister Umbric or Valeera Sanguinar who later escape and informs Anduin who the Sylvanas loyalist is and Anduin in turn would notify Saurfangs rebellion.

Not only would this be a prefered way of driving the loyalist narrative forward for both sides and I think it would also make the story a bit more engaging as it tells Sylvanas side of this story leading up to the same conclusion while giving more side characters more screentime. It also would stop Blizzard from creating the “follow along”-quests we get from Nathanos as we are now known supporters of the current Horde.

Also, make Sylvanas the one who order us around and not Nathanos. That would also make it a whole lot more believable that everything is a part of her plan. Right now, it kinda feels like Nathanos is tricking us and selfishly taking credit for our work by outing the actual traitors.
It wouldn’t surprise me if he make us work together with the traitors and later reveal to Sylvanas that we are traitors as well, so he can get Sylvanas recognition.

#7

I’ll also stress that we weren’t part of the Crossroads Cinematic. That’s one of the problems here: This isn’t our story. We just get to play through it. Jaina, Shaw, Garrosh and Thrall broke Baine out. We’ll probably not even have been there, when the story is mentioned in a novel or something.

#8

If this was true, if Nathanos was acting on his own account and Baine’s rescue was never part of Sylvanas plan, it means he would deliberately undermine her war efforts. Only to pass us off as traitors in the end, to get her recognition ( which he already has ) ? Seems like a bit much tbh

#9

Well it is a bit of a stretch, because in the last paragraph I explained what it feels like as a Sylvanas supporter when Nathanos is our only link the her since she has so little screen time. The last sentence however was actually meant to be a sarcastic take on how the story might develop. When I read my post a second time, I can see that I wasn’t to clear with that; my bad.

#10

Just prepare for the big final conflict resolution:

Sylvanas: I was always on the right side! I made you act against me because of reasons that…
Loyalist: BUT I WAS WITH YOU ALL THE TIME!
Sylvanas: … that are above your understanding!
Loyalist: BUT I DID ALL IN YOUR FAVOR!
Sylvanas: Only with the whole world united against me, with my strongest champions hating me, I was able…
Loyalist: I give up… for Saurfang, for Honour…

#11

The argument is that Sylvanas is playing 5D-chess and is already ten moves ahead of the opposition. Until we see what her ‘End Game’ is and what this has all been leading up to… It’s hard to judge whether she’s an idiot or a mastermind, because we just don’t have all the pieces of the puzzle. Sylvanas loyalists are but tools, arrows in her quiver, and she values you certainly. But no more than any hunter values his best arrow - you’ll be loosed and disposed of if it suits.

So sit back, enjoy the ride, and see where the plot takes us. I’ve heard a theory that Sylvanas’ opening lines in the cinematic “We’ve forgotten what makes us strong…” tie to her ultimate plot to unite the Alliance and Horde. According to this theory, she’s gone full “Dr. Manhattan” and basically set herself up as the ultimate villain to unite the warring Alliance and Horde against a common enemy (her) so that they will become stronger through unity - in time to face the ultimate threat. Is this true? No idea. But it’s certainly not impossible.

#12

Well I suppose what you write, is her destination. The problem with it is, It is only true, if the both (united) factions would be stronger only if they had time to recover losses… But they don’t. Sylvanas weakened both factions just before the storm begins.

The only thing, that would give her actions some reasons is that Teldrassil had to be burned to prevent N’zoth from ultimate win. Because nether Horde, nor Alliance would burn the tree without resistance…

… But I see only 2 reasons how burned Teldrassil could affect war against N’zoth.

  1. Night warrior is the only one who can kill him, so Sylvanas “forced” Thyrande to become one by burning her home.
  2. N’zoth is imprisoned in or under Theldrassil and when he becomes free, he will enter the scorched ground.

… but I do not believe it will happen.

#13

I have done the Loyalist route on 3 different characters now. And each time I am forced to let them escape instead of using my heavy PC plot armor to be the victor, I have to bang my head against desk. It pains to know you can’t do nuffin about it, just watching. :expressionless:

#14

All BFA scenario makes little sense for now. We can only hope for better ending of addon.

(Ivydoom) #15

I’m simply not doing that chain at all. Also I never got rid of that 3rd eye.

(Elyssarain) #16

Fixed it for you.

#17

knowing sylvanas and her ways of doing things, she most likely sent the sunreavers there to be killed, and she most likely knew who would be there to rescure Baine anyways.

#18

Get off my case ebon blade filth. :wink:

(Elyssarain) #19

The Zandalari shall not escape our grasp!

#20

at this rate, when the time comes to topple the warchief, she’ll still ask you to follow them.