Wikia

WoWWiki

Talk:Sylvanas Windrunner

100,548pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Revision as of 06:53, September 8, 2010 by Makuta of Oz (Talk | contribs)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sylvanas Windrunner article.

Be polite
Assume good faith
Be welcoming

Archived discussions: Talk:Sylvanas Windrunner/Archive1, Talk:Sylvanas Windrunner/Archive2

Race/Creature

She is a Forsaken (Humanoid). The creature part does not seem to show up so I guess you have to write both Race type and Creature type in the Race section when you edit for some reason, unless I am missing something with this template. If you put "formerly" High elf then you will have to put "formerly", and then the race, of every Forsaken and Undead that exists in lore. Unless she turns back back into a High Elf, I think Forsaken fits as her "race" pretty well. Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 09:33, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Forsaken is a faction. Undead is a condition. High elf is her race. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 09:45, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Incorrect. Forsaken is a faction and a race. Undead is a creature type. High elf is a race type of which she is no longer. Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 09:51, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Rolandius, before you start an edit war, I strongly recommend you consult the admins about this. This is a discussion we have had before. Forsaken is a faction, not a race. She is still a high elf, albeit an undead one. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 10:00, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
I thought it was agreed by everyone that Forsaken was a faction while forsaken was a race? Ok, I am not reverting your stuff on purpose and I will not edit this page any longer until someone sorts it out. I was just following WoWWiki which lists forsaken as a race unless I am missing something. If you just look at any page of a character who is found in those lands of the Forsaken the article lists their race as Forsaken and not Human or High Elf. This would mean we have to change every NPC from Forsaken to whatever their previous race status was and that will be about 100 pages maybe, I am not sure. Also, WoWHead lists her new model as a Humanoid unless they are wrong. Vereesa Windrunner would be an example of a High Elf not Sylvanas.Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr)
For the purposes of infobox information, "Undead" is listed as a condition. It can also be creature type, but that's mostly for game mechanics. Sylvanas's status should therefore be "undead", instead of "acitve." The "active" status is reserved for gods (or god-like beings), demigods, and powerful demons.
As for Race versus creature type, Race is lore, creature type is in-game. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 20:23, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Last I heard Sylvanas was in-game also. This would make her a Humanoid like most of her followers and her classification on WoWHead. Does this mean we have to change all the Forsaken (Humanoid) on WoWWiki to something else now? If her status is Undead then the Undead part in her race infobox is just redundant either way. As I said before, most of the forsaken are Undead high elves or Undead humans but we don't put that in their infobox. Sylvanas seems to be the only article on here not following procedure. Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 01:33, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Last I checked, this was WoWWiki, not WoWHead. As for race versus lore, "Forsaken (Humanoid)" isn't her "race", it's the convention that has (apparently, as I've never seen a discussion on it) sprung up to deal with actual race versus some form or another of in-game classification. You'll note that most NPCs are classed this way, though it makes little sense to me.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 04:35, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I thought that was how people figured out, for example, if a satyr was a Demon or for some reason Blizzard made it a Humanoid, or Mechanical, etc. was by checking WoWHead. Unless you went looking for every single NPC in the game and clicked on them, but WoWHead seems faster and easier.
I didn't say her race was Forsaken (Humanoid). I said her race status was Forsaken and creature status was Humanoid as per template. In the infobox, it would read Forsaken (Humanoid). Just look at any NPC aligned with her and it says race=Forsaken and creature=Humanoid usually. In the infobox, it reads as Forsaken (Humanoid). Isn't that what the template is there for? Or is this a different template for Sylvanus? Now her sister Veressa would be a High elf (Humanoid). This infobox makes it seem like Veressa is just like Sylvanas but they aren't. If you put too much info like Undead/former High elf/Humanoid/Forsaken/Banshee/Ghost it gets a little convuleted. If we followed the other 98% of the NPCs on WoWWiki her status should say Forsaken (Humanoid). Her "Undead" info is already in the Status area of the infobox and the information that she was a former Night elf and Banshee would be in her main page. Whatever you think it should be like I will go with it, but I am just wondering why her page isn't following all the other NPC pages. Unless this template is different and does not show "Creature type" but instead shows "Race type" and "Former Race type"? If so, then you were right from the beginning and I just got mixed up between different templates.Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 04:59, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
She's got the same template, but it doesn't seem to be showing creature type as a separate field for some reason... Creature type is an in-game thing, while race is what her actual race is. All the main groups are relegated to humanoid, all dragon-related beings are relegated to Dragonkin. They should be separate fields, so "<race> (<creature>oid)" isn't the way I want to go. As for the undead high elf, it's a clarifier, there's no separate field for that.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 05:08, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I tried awhile ago to put Creature type but it wouldn't show up in the page and I don't know why since the other NPCs work. Okay, so we use clarifiers for NPCs that are found both in lore and in-game? I will have to remember that. Why do we have the "Status" part of the infobox though if we are already saying she is Undead in the "clarifier" part of the infobox? I thought the "Status" would be Active like The Lich King's article on WoWWiki. It says Status=Active. Like WoWHead, the Creature status for him is Undead and the Race is Human/Orc. If we use the Sylvanas page as an example, then The Lich King's page should say something like Scourge (former Human/Orc Undead) Status=Undead. It seems like his page makes more sense than Sylvanas' page though as an example for the template and her page should look like his does now. I am confused. Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 05:37, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
The clarifier is more due to her undead status- Anub'arak, for example could be listed as "undead Nerubian". "former high elf" could be a better way to put it, I suppose, if you want to avoid redundancy. Also Sylvanas, unlike most forsaken, used to be a high elf, while most of them were humans. The Lich King is a god or demigod-like entity, hence, he uses the "Active" status.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:39, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I thought I read somewhere in the RPG where it said many Forsaken are, besides former Humans, also former High elves due to the Scourge going through Quall'thalas and all those High elf lands and converting many of them into Undead. Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 04:40, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Just to adress the issue, Sylvanas was called the only leader to not be her race. But what about Velen? BobNamataki 23:38, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

There is no need to be an edit war here. The Forsaken are both a Faction and a Race, Forsaken being conscious undead. Their state is undead, and they have abandoned their living race in acceptance of their undeath. However, Lady Sylvanas is a High Elf in the state of Undeath. She is not Forsaken, she is an Undead Elf. The Forsaken following her are more accurately characterized as Forsaken Undead, and as I said before the Forsaken are simply conscious Undead with a solid will and control over their own minds. --Vaelkyrix

Something notable maybe?

As of now, Sylvanas' new model is the only one in the game that shows her hair while wearing hood like that, think we should like make a note of that or not? I know it's stupid...but I notice the tiniest details sometimes--Saphiredragon89 (talk) 04:55, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

It's a custom part of her model itself, not a separate piece of equipment, so I'd say no, not really. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 07:29, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Why can't we keep the picture?

Sylvanas model comparition

Well that, I have some reasons why to keep it:

  • It is an official model.
  • This was discussed on blizzcast.
    • It is an official picture taken from Blizzcast.
  • Other articles have their beta models: Deathwing, Garona, Valeera Sanguinar.
  • So that people who didn't knew about the beta model have the oportunity to see it.
  • There are fanarts in the article, why an official picture has to be removed?

Now tell me why it should left out of the article. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 04:05, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

For one thing, the original and current models are already in the article. If this is just you wanting the beta picture, I believe an individual one was already uploaded and should probably be placed in the gallery. We are not, as you seem to be impling attempting to supress any knowledge of beta models. As to it being on BlizzCast, it isn't our job to document or post everything official coming out of Blizzard. The article has more than enough pictures anyway. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 04:27, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I believe the old model pictures should be removed individually and this one placed as an "Evolution of Sylvanas"--Gurluas (talk) 22:21, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

What does she consider herself as?

I'm just wondering, if she died when Blood Elves were High Evles, does she still consider herself a High Elf, or a Blood Elf? ~~Battm7~~

She considers herself a Forsaken. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 06:27, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Did she gave the forsaken their name? BobNamataki (talk) 23:19, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
Yes, in TFT she declared herself, Varimathras and their loyal troops as the Forsaken. She says: "The capital city is ours, but we are no longer part of the Scourge. From here on out, we shall be known as the Forsaken." in A New Power in Lordaeron Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 01:27, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
Also, she was a High Elf but now considers herself a Forsaken. Even though the Blood Elves split, there are still High Elves. However due to her being the Ranger-General of Silvermoon, she would probably join the blood elves? BobNamataki 23:40, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Speculation

I have heard the speculation on more than one occasion that Sylvanas was romantically involved with Nathanos at one point. At first I wrote it off, but the more I thought about it, the more sense it made. For one thing, they are both two almost inherently negative people who speak of each other in a very positive light. Furthermore, they seem to have an unswerving devotion to each other even in undeath. He even seems to worry about what she thinks about him in two separate quest texts. Now that I think about it, both of her sisters were romantically involved with human men at some point. Lckyluke372 (talk) 22:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I've had the same suspicions for the same reasons, though i came to it from the opposite starting point. I noticed Alleria's and Veressa's hook ups and started to wonder about Sylvanas when the one and only human ranger-lord (later champion of the forsaken) popped into my head. Kinda a special privallage ;). After looking at the quest texts i suspect the same.Warthok Talk Contribs 01:45, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Faith?

What is Sylvanas' attitude towards belief? Is she an advocate of the Cult of Forgotten Shadow or does she maintain a vestige of ranger druidism? May be worth mentioning in the article proper. Strength and Honour Horderoyale (talk) 07:38, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

She is, by all accounts, non religious. She is noted as not subscribing to the Cult herself, but not taking any stance against it.Tweak the Whacked (talk) 07:32, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Heartbreaker

Is it me, or does the song "Heartbreaker" by Pat Benatar fit Sylvanas a lot? Lyrics here. Your love is like a tidal wave, spinning over my head Arthas' love for his army, and his creations Drownin me in your promises, better left unsaid Would she not have preferred to not hear the promises Arthas made- that they would win and kill all that she loved? Drownin me in your promises, better left unsaid I'm ignoring this line... The invincible winner, and you know that you were born to be Arthas: Too high on his horse, right?

A: This is not a forum B: No Horderoyale (talk) 02:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Changed succession boxes a bit.

Hey, I just put down another succesion box here and one on Varimathras' page to show that he usurped her and she later retook the Undercity. Feel free to remove and/or edit. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 22:10, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

What's her purpose?

I know she's the leader of the Forsaken and has helped free the minds of many undead. But in the bigger picture, won't she just become another villain? Her goal, other than killing the Lich King, is to do what he's attempting now. She's using the Horde's trust to further her goals, and leading up to the events of WotLK, convinced Thrall that the plague she was actually having her Royal Apothecary Society make was a 'cure' for their undeath. Unless having her eyes opened that she's still a fragile, little, naive, arrogant elf and had a change of heart from UC being taken by her most trusted companions and being proven weak... she'll just become the next Lich King, only less than half as powerful. What's gonna happen AFTER Wrath is done? Is she actually gonna try to make the Forsaken a cure? Or go back to trying to wipe out all life and dominate but just get slaughtered in the process? Thrall will continue making a place for the Orcs in the world of Azeroth. Cairne still has Magatha Grimtotem to worry about and leading his people. Vol'jin has yet to claim the Echo Isles back as the troll city. (Given that in-game, it's landmass would need to be increased to sustain one) --Mykael Mourningsun

I was about to post this here. I agree with you, Sylvanas is a potencial future enemy for the Horde, she IS, indeed, a really dangerous creature, and like you said, I also believe she will be the "next" Lich Queen.
The new Epilogue in the hardcover Ashbringer comic makes it pretty clear Sylvanas did not know a thing about the plague Putress was making. There really were just 2 factions within the Forsaken which were the ones actually loyal to Sylvanas and those loyal to Varimathras and the Burning Legion. We really do not know whether she actually wants to kill all life or if all the early quests even in vanilla WoW were actually just using her name for Varimthras' plan. Course a conversation like this doesn't really belong on a talk page. Leviathon (talk) 02:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Yet in Rise of the Lich King, she personally oversees Faranell testing the plague on both a human and a Forsaken criminal (easier to obtain than actual Scourge), and thinks, "At last, Arthas, you will pay for what you have done. The humans who spawned such as you shall be slaughtered." -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 03:21, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Take the epilogue, and the Arthas novel, with a grain of salt each. Both seem contradict each other. Just be happy she's gracing Undercity with her presence.--TheUltimate (talk) 03:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't think Sylvanas will be the next Lich King,but her goals are different from the Horde...Malygos Helper (talk) 10:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

What about this? Black Iron Golem. Pudim17 (talk - contr) 12:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Take it to the forums, please.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 13:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Rise of the Lich King information

Ok, Rise of the lich king shows how dark Sylvanas is...she kills children, openly expresses her desire to kill everything alive, and shows her love for the devasting effect of the New Plague *which kills everything of coarse*. and she shows her affiliation with the Royal Apothecary Society by overseeing creation of the New Plague alongside them.

This information shows great detail into her character, motives and connection with the RAS and new plague and should be in this article. I would add it but I have no idea where to add it and I rather not move things around. So perheps someone with more experience and has read the novels would know what to do.

On a personal level, I just want to say I hope these Rise of the Lich King things can be put on because. I'm tired of people saying "Sylvanas is Good". Blue Ranger (talk) 22:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure she wants to kill ALL the living. And remember, she did lament what would happen if it fell into the wrong hands, so she clearly recognized that there were more sinister possibilities. What happened at the Wrathgate, for instance, was probably not what she was intending. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 03:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I just feel we should show more of the connection between Sylvanas, New Plague and the RAS *Or at least show what she does and thinks in the novel*.

Currently a person could read these articles and think 'Sylvanas had nothing to do with the New Plague really" but in reality she ordered it to be made and formed the RAS herself and even oversees experiments on races with them *which isn't in the articles from what I can tell*. And though she may not wanna use it on EVERYTHING, we should stress she wants to kill the Scourge and the Humans at least. Blue Ranger (talk) 06:10, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

All i'm going to say is proceed with caution (whoever does it, i'm going to pass). I think it's a loaded subject and very easy to get over passionate about and have the truth be presented n a less than neutral light. Just be sure that such information goes in her biography section. Keep it seperate from the Battle of the Undercity piece in the WoW section. Relation between the two at this point is still speculative, regardless of peoples personal opinions on the matter.Warthok Talk Contribs 09:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Sylvanas isn't bad,nor she is good:she never knew what Putress did until the betrayal.And,remember,that she hates demons,so she will never fight at the same side of the Burning Legion,that entered in Undercity.It is right that she is making a new plague,but it doesn't proof that she wants to be such evil as the Lich King.Her goals are always said by her and by the Forsaken:She wants to have her veangance upon the Lich King,and,once it is done,give a place in the world to the Forsaken.That she likes to kill every creature is normal as she is now an undead.Malygos Helper (talk) 11:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Nipping this in the bud. This isn't the place for this discussion, this is for discussing changes to the article. Take it to the forums.Warthok Talk Contribs 13:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Warthok, with respect. this IS about changing and adding new information to the article. I'm just not sure where or how to add this properly from the novel. Perheps it should be added below Wrath of the Lich King but before Battles for Undercity. My point of this section is: Rise of the Lich King novel went into good detail into her character and story connection with the Forsaken and RAS. And should somehow be written into this article or at least have it's own section in the article. I KNOW I shouldn't write or add anything about Sylvanas, because I am a bit biased towards her. But someone else who can keep it neutrel can. Blue Ranger (talk) 17:36, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Blue...that was in response to Malygos helper. Your post was about editing the article, that's great. Malygos was getting into the subject itself. That's why it was indented after his post. See WoWWiki:Talk_page_guidelines#Formatting Use : to indent your responses. I fixed yours accordingly.Warthok Talk Contribs 23:51, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Character traits aside, there are some interesting discrepancies that the novel presents about her form. On pages 233-234, Arthas kills her and raises her much the same as in Warcraft III (No altar), and her body is loaded/flung onto a meat wagon (But not fired from it). Later, on pages 273-274, it is revealed Arthas locked her body in an iron coffin to torment her, and she did not get it back until right before the "Sylvanas' Farewell" interlude (How she gets it is not stated). Her body is oddly (The novel uses that word) said to have no wounds (and possibly little-to-no rot).--SWM2448 22:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

From what I remember (I've forgotten parts of the novel already?) that part was pretty ambiguous. Remember that she did "black out", and Golden might have deliberately excluded descriptions of where Sylvanas came back because she knows we like talking about stuff like that. --Super Bhaal (talk) 03:30, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

New Voice Actor?

It seems Sylvanas has even been given a new Voice actor or at had her lines re-recoreded. I stopped by her room and clicked on her, and I was surprised to find a diffrent voice then normal. Lego3400 (talk) 06:30, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Is Sylvanas still voiced by Piera Coppola even after the Patch 3.2.0? TherasTaneel (talk) 11:57, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I doubt it, since this voice actor was of a much lower quality.--WoWWiki-Odolwa (talk) 16:32, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Its definately different, and I totally agree that the new voice actor has nothing on Piera Coppola. I also thought Varimathras sounded different. Did anyone else notice? Scarletsorcerer (talk) 16:41, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Varimathras have sounded different ever since they've changed his model. But Anyway, so all agree it is not Piera Coppola any more, then who is it? TherasTaneel (talk) 18:57, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Hallow's end

The Dark Lady minimum HP=2,8M? Her minimum HP is 730k, as Hallow's end uses her old model at the wickerman, she there also has old stats, i'm going to put this in the article if you don't mind (you're free to delete it)Malygos Helper (talk) 10:47, October 5, 2009 (UTC)

Battle for the Undercity quotes

Could an enterprising soul please add the things she says during the Battle for the Undercity to her quotes list? I'd do it myself but I'm unsure where to find them and after hearing them once can't remember them exactly. IMO she says some very cool stuff during her fights/conversations. Metalmunki (talk) 00:29, November 7, 2009 (UTC)


Why was my removal of something removed?

The reason I removed those 1 and a half paragraphs was because apon reading it, it seamed like a load of rubbish with the mention of "Uther's Ghost". I don't care if it was a quest chain or something, people should really take concideration on what they ad.--The last Alterac (talk) 02:06, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

So you're basically saying that you don't care if you removed official information because it sounds like bullshit to you? That's seriously not the right way to go about doing things. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 02:09, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

It didn't sound official at all, in fact; it sounded superficial.--The last Alterac (talk) 02:24, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

As the guy who wrote said "bullshit", I must ask where you've been the last two months. What was written was essentially what happened. Sylvanas encounters Uther's ghost. Uther warns her the Lich King's on his way, that he can only be destroyed at the Frozen Throne, so on and so forth. Basically a mirror of what he said to Jaina - it's the same event, the same general story (the Lich King is coming, you can't beat him here, you gotta kill him at the Frozen Throne), just a different listener.
And before you decide to insult me, as you have with others in the past, know this: I make sure to check my sources before writing such things. My source, in this case, is playing as a Horde character in the Halls of Reflection on several different occasions, both live and in the PTR. The information I added here was based on the actual dialogue between Uther and Sylvanas. Check Quest:Frostmourne (Horde) - as in most cases with in-game dialogue events linked to quests, a full transcript of the dialogue is there. I added this quest and dialogue, based on screenshots I took in the PTR, back in November, and (having reliably checked - with two different Horde characters) it has not changed since then.
Just because you can't be bothered to read it does not disprove it. --Joshmaul (talk) 03:15, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
Alterac wasn't that you who said he would never edit again and then asked to be banned? Yea that was good, you should have stuck with that. What are you trying to say with "I don't care if it was a quest chain or something, people should really take concideration on what they ad."??? What alternative universe are you living in that you think official information wouldn't or shouldn't be added?Warthok Talk Contribs 04:30, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

Okay, lets go ahead and end this conversation before it gets out of hand. User:Coobra/Sig4 06:15, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, it was Zeratuel's arguament that persuaded me the most. The rest of you guys were merely redundant. My only defence is; Suspencion of disbelief has failed me, but now for me to rant: How would you guys like it if I edited Muradin's article so it no longer says he died because we never heard "Our hero has fallen", huh huh? You would of all called me blinking mad.--The last Alterac (talk) 06:51, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

As for Warthok's comment: this is a wiki, and one of the things wikis must do is preform NPOV. Now this wiki is clearly biased in that only works liscensed by Blizzard are considered canon. --The last Alterac (talk) 06:57, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

I'd counter that, but i don't think anyone can make a better case against yourself than that last comment you just made did. Do you honestly not understand how fundamentaly wrong and misguided your thinking is, npov or not?Warthok Talk Contribs 07:00, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

That. Is. Enough. It's pretty obvious that we're keeping the passage, so if you two want to continue this, do it on usertalk. Or if you'd like to discuss WoWWiki's functions, the forums. The matter of changes to this article is closed.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:05, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Ragestorm, about the obviousability of the keeping of the paragraphs. And no I do understand how fundermently wrong and misguided my view is, and can't you take a joke, seriously? As that's what my comment of the NPOV is clearly is.--The last Alterac (talk) 12:00, January 2, 2010 (UTC)

Post-Death of the Lich King

Frostmourne contained the souls of those it killed, and Sylvanas was raised as a Banshee by the Lich King, her soul contained within Frostmourne. The Lich King has been killed and Frostmourne has been destroyed. What happens to her soul, and, more importantly, what happens to her, now that her soul has been freed? ÐashGod is dead[Home][talk] 06:07, February 4, 2010 (UTC)


Consdiering being a Banshee requires your soul (As they are a type of ghost) she was never trapped in Frostmorne Lego3400 (talk) 16:50, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Sylvanas & the Dark Lady

OK so i have seen it stated that Sylvanas is also known as the Dark Lady however in the Forge of Souls, after Sylvanas finishes her speech she says "Dark Lady watch over you." It seems strange for her to say that if she truly is the Dark Lady but could the Dark lady actually be more of a deity rather than her own title or does anybody know? Kupo! (talk) 14:54, March 25, 2010 (UTC)

In TFT, it's pretty obvious they're referring to Sylvanas herself. The majority of Warcraft's dark characters are male, and I doubt she was referring to Azshara. It's probably an error on the part of whoever wrote that particular text. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 15:16, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
"Dark Lady watches over your" seems to be a common farewell sentence among the Forsaken, obviously refering Sylvanas. As to why does she speak of herself on the third person I have no idea...
IconSmall Hamuul Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 15:25, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
Maybe she is suffering from megalomania :P Aedror42 (talk) 15:50, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
That wouldn't be entirely surprising given the circumstances (although that makes her even more like Kerrigan), though they haven't set it up. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 15:59, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

Potential Death?

After reading the conversation between her and Garrosh about the Forsaken gaining Val'kyr, Garrosh stated :"Remember, Sylvanas, eventually we all have to stand before our maker and face judgment. Your day may come sooner than others..." AFTER stationing High Warlord Cromush to "guard" her. Pretty sure this is going to mean that Garrosh will take Sylvanas out if she tries anything, and since she's still using the New Plaugue even after Garrosh told her not to( not sure if Garrosh knows, but he'll find out eventually), I think we are going to see a new Forsaken leader. And with so many Kor'kron already stationed there, an overthrow wouldn't be to hard.

Eh, I wouldn't be so sure about that. The Forsaken aren't like other races, their leader can't just be replaced. Sylvanas is the reason most of them are no longer Scourge. Just look at the Horde in general. From what we've seen, Thrall voluntarily makes Garrosh warchief, and that in itself incites chaos - **SPOILER** the death of Cairne Bloodhoof (true, he's being poisoned and probably would have died anyway, but had he not felt the need to challenge for the seat of Warchief, he may have discovered his poisoner) and the expulsion of the Trolls from Orgrimmar (and damn near their withdrawl from the Horde). With the strength of the Plague, the Val'kyr, and all the Forsaken adventurers across the world, it would be much easier for Sylvanas to overthrow the Kor'kron within the Undercity. As to Garrosh actually killing her? Not only would that incite chaos within the Undercity (remember, she means a lot to the Forsaken), but it would cost Garrosh 1/5 of the Horde. I think he's just vocalizing what most people think - there's not much love for the Forsaken among the living races - to many they're creepy, sneaky, and disturbing, and I'm sure lots of people would be thrilled if they went away, but they are an important asset to the Horde. Garrosh doesn't have the forces to maintain control in Kalimdor and Lordaeron. If Garrosh "removed" her, the Forsaken would most likely rebel against the Horde, and then there would be war on three fronts. Garrosh, while hot-headed, is smart, and would not want that. Vund223 (talk) 20:19, July 9, 2010 (UTC)
Garrosh actually does have the forces to take Kalimdor and Lordaeron. After Cairne's death, he retakes Thunder Bluff and help Cairne's son become chieftain, thus gaining the Tauren support again. And with the addition of the Goblins, he also has enough firepower to arm all the ships and seige engines that he's been making with all the timber he's taking out of Ashenvale. As for the Trolls.....there is almost no way they could survive being a rouge nation so close to Horde territory. Though you did bring up a good point, I believe I underestimated the power of the Forsaken, however, they are going to take a terrible hurting from Varian and isn't going to get much support from Garrosh. Gorlack2231 (talk) 20:43, July 9, 2010 (UTC)
You are correct about the Trolls - they couldn't survive, which I'm sure is why Vol'Jinn doesn't actually leave the Horde, but comes close. I was including the Tauren in my count. My point was, with the Alliance moving in on Horde lands, and with the campaign in Ashenvale and northern Kalimdor accelerating, and with the chaos Deathwing is causing, losing the hold the Forsaken have would be rough - and I'm including the Blood Elves. They owe their acceptance into the Horde to Sylvanas, and with the Sunwell cleansed, they do have the power to stand on their own. Losing the Undercity and Silvermoon would hurt the Horde. I do believe you, though, that Garrosh will most likely just stop supporting Sylvanas's campaigns, but she can handle herself against Varian, who himself will be busy dealing with the problems in Ironforge, as well as his new campaigns in Kalimdor. With everything going on with the Cataclysm, inner-faction politcs will be nothing but a burden to the leaders. Vund223 (talk) 20:57, July 9, 2010 (UTC)
So........Just agree that Cata will be awesome regardless of political standings? What do you say? Truce between us? Gorlack2231 (talk) 07:07, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
Truce it is. And I'll agree that Cataclysm will be awesome, regardless of what happens. Vund223 (talk) 07:27, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Warcraft III Stats

How come there isn't a page on Sylvanas Windrunner's Warcraft III stats as a high elven Ranger? Numerous times I've needed to find info on it, such as whether or not she ever uses Starfall in battle in the Undead campaign of Reign of Chaos. --Makuta of Oz (talk) 06:53, September 8, 2010 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki