Should Thrall Die?

[Khaza-R]

Do you know what kills a franchise? Its when you kill off familiar characters and try to replace them.

When they killed off optimus prime in transformers, the outcry was so overwhelming they brought him back.

When they kill of beloved comic book heroes, and try to replace them, they never live up to the previous heroes title.


If your someone who believes the only way to progress a story is to kill all popular characters and replace them with new ones, then your a bloody idiot. This is a piss poor excuse of developing plot, hey, lets kill off all long standing characters and replace then with new ones. Yeah, they worked great when they killed Cairne and replaced with his cut and paste clone son, hes sooooo much more popular.

I'm sorry, but this just pisses me off when people with such inexperience of understanding fantasy storylines thinks there only solution to just kill characters off. It degrades the story and leaves nothing good after. And your boorish excuse for killing them "I don't like them anymore" Well you obviously didn't like them to begin with and so would just sooner see the destroy degrade for it.

And yet I've never seen you say the same about Arthas. Who was a more influential character to WarCraft III fans than Thrall was.

[Trassk]

And yet I've never seen you say the same about Arthas. Who was a more influential character to WarCraft III fans than Thrall was.

Bad example. Arthas was a character who fell to corruption and gave into the his flaws easily. You can't even call him a heroic character for anything he did.

[Throren]

He just became a dad, sheesh, cut the orc some slack.

[Flaks]

Bad example. Arthas was a character who fell to corruption and gave into the his flaws easily. You can't even call him a heroic character for anything he did.

Because attempting to save his kingdom by purging a people already lost isn't heroic?

THAT'S the kind of situation Thrall has never been forced into. If he was he might become a little more interesting. All that happens with Thrall is that opportunity to be heroic comes knocking at the door with something blatantly good or evil. He, not being a dumbass, goes with the thing that's good.

If your answer to Thrall being put into such a situation is "he's Thrall, he'd figure out a way to wipe out the plague without sacrificing the people and saving his kingdom too" then what you've got is pretty much a Mary Sue.

[Trassk]

This whole subject isn't just about Thrall. If Malfurion was involved strongly in the story you'd all be saying the same about him. You all flamed Jaina's character for being an upright character who believed in peace before war before mists.

Every major character, unless they have major flaws, you people think the worst of such characters, who speaks more against your attitudes then anything said characters have done. So you like flawed characters, fine, but don't give some garbage about how just because a character isn't deeply flawed they should be killed off.

---------- Post added 2013-02-13 at 04:32 AM ----------

Because attempting to save his kingdom by purging a people already lost isn't heroic?

THAT'S the kind of situation Thrall has never been forced into. If he was he might become a little more interesting. All that happens with Thrall is that opportunity to be heroic comes knocking at the door with something blatantly good or evil. He, not being a dumbass, goes with the thing that's good.

So now were trying to justify bad guys in thee actions. well I expected it from you tbh, it seems you have a love for any character with issues.

[Khaza-R]

Bad example. Arthas was a character who fell to corruption and gave into the his flaws easily. You can't even call him a heroic character for anything he did.

So essentially in your eyes, if a character is not morally squeaky clean they can get the ax. But if they "do good" they deserve not to be killed off?

[Trassk]

He just became a dad, sheesh, cut the orc some slack.

they can't, there a group of narsassistic players who think messed up characters are heroes and good guys are bad guys. Sort of turned on there heads.

[LilSaihah]

quick PSA guys

don't get yourself bogged down in a land war about thrall with trassk

he's not gonna budge and just use muddying tactics to annoy you

[Trassk]

So essentially in your eyes, if a character is not morally squeaky clean they can get the ax. But if they "do good" they deserve not to be killed off?

A character like Thrall is morally good. A character like Wrathion is completely in a grey. A character like Arthas is messed up. This isn't a black and white argument.

---------- Post added 2013-02-13 at 04:38 AM ----------

quick PSA guys

don't get yourself bogged down in a land war about thrall with trassk

he's not gonna budge and just use muddying tactics to annoy you

Annoy them oh? Vapid opinions with translucent extension of ideals hardly makes for riveting conversation here.

[Khaza-R]

A character like Thrall is morally good. A character like Wrathion is completely in a grey. A character like Arthas is messed up. This isn't a black and white argument.

But in good story telling it shouldn't matter what their alignment is. They all should have an equal chance to be killed off. Anything else leads to an overly predictable story in which the good guy always wins.

[LilSaihah]

Annoy them oh? Vapid opinions with translucent extension of ideals hardly makes for riveting conversation here.

I say this because I've been down this road before with you and you annoyed me quite a bit too, whether as a conscious or unintended effect. If you're willing to have an adult conversation in which you don't paint everyone who disagrees with your opinion with the same brush, then I'd be happy to carry out that conversation with you, but judging from what's in this thread I really can't see you being able to do that.

But in good story telling it should matter what their alignment is. They all should have an equal chance to be killed off. Anything else leads to an overly predictable story in which the good guy always wins.

Good storytelling shouldn't really involve arbitrary alignments at all.

[Hughes]

It's Metzen's creation that he is completely high on. Whenever talking about Thrall the term 'badass' always comes up. He will never let Thrall die, the day Thrall actually dies is the day Metzen retires and we can all get shitfaced and spit on the town jackass.

[Trassk]

But in good story telling it should matter what their alignment is. They all should have an equal chance to be killed off. Anything else leads to an overly predictable story in which the good guy always wins.

how does that even make sense to you. They should have an equal chance to be killed off? NO, characters should not be built up just to be killed off, thats degrading logic and does nothing for the story but force the writers in invent replacements for those characters with poor extension. We've seen it already happen.

---------- Post added 2013-02-13 at 04:45 AM ----------

I say this because I've been down this road before with you and you annoyed me quite a bit too. If you're willing to have an adult conversation in which you don't paint everyone who disagrees with your opinion with the same brush, then I'd be happy to carry out that conversation with you, but judging from what's in this thread I really can't see you being able to do that.

Someone makes a thread about killing off Thrall, some posters come in with really piss poor reasoning why they think this, and you expect nobody to say anything about it.

there is no decent conversation here, its just the same argument 'I don't like what he did in cata so kill him off so I will find it amusing'. There is no decent conversation here, its just childish logic.

[Hughes]

how does that even make sense to you. They should have an equal chance to be killed off? NO, characters should not be built up just to be killed off, thats degrading logic and does nothing for the story but force the writers in invent replacements for those characters with poor extension. We've seen it already happen.

Or just not replace them at all. Right now Thrall is to the Horde what Jaina used to be to the Alliance. A mediator. Someone who seeks a peaceful resolution (which goes against the them 'World of WARcraft')

[Stir]

they can't, there a group of narsassistic players who think messed up characters are heroes and good guys are bad guys. Sort of turned on there heads.

No...
It doesn't work like that.

But you've already decided what other people think and why they do so, and it's evident that no amount of reasoning (at least, from my side) is going to change your mind.

So again: Superduperhero characters are ALWAYS bad for the story. I've already explained why they're bad for any story. You don't like it? I don't care.

[Khaza-R]

how does that even make sense to you. They should have an equal chance to be killed off? NO, characters should not be built up just to be killed off, thats degrading logic and does nothing for the story but force the writers in invent replacements for those characters with poor extension. We've seen it already happen.

As someone just said, you aren't killing off every main character at once. Some die, some live, some new ones emerge.

Assuming that the creative department cannot replace existing characters with better ones is what is questionable logic and ultimately insulting to ability of the storyteller.

[TaylorsaurusRex]

But in good story telling it shouldn't matter what their alignment is. They all should have an equal chance to be killed off. Anything else leads to an overly predictable story in which the good guy always wins.

This. One of the reasons A Song of Fire and Ice is such a great book series is the fact that anyone can die, regardless of how good, bad, or neutral they are. A story becomes much more compelling when none of the characters have plot armor.

[LilSaihah]

Someone makes a thread about killing off Thrall, some posters come in with really piss poor reasoning why they think this, and you expect nobody to say anything about it.

there is no decent conversation here, its just the same argument 'I don't like what he did in cata so kill him off so I will find it amusing'. There is no decent conversation here, its just childish logic.

If you don't think it's decent conversation, then don't involve yourself. You don't have to swoop in like Batman each and every time someone writes a thread that says "thrall sux lol!", and if you feel some kind of compulsion to do so, you should probably have a quick breather, chill out for a bit and meditate on why it bothers you so much. If you're going to let dumb people dictate your behavior then you're gonna have a bad time.

[Chickat]

I want Thrall to die off as quickly as possible. I'd love it to be dramatic, tear-drawing and tragic.

I like Thrall. Honestly, I do. But Thrall is simply too powerful. Thrall has become a deus ex character; most problems we could encounter at this point will have a simple solution: Toss a Thrall at it, and the problem goes away. That's the kind of level of power the character has gotten.
Now; Varian, being possessed by the Wolf Ancient, should pretty much reach that level as well. Here's a question: Why HASN'T Varian shown any of the powers of an Ancient? Why is he so weak (being pretty much effectively an Ancient)? Here's why: Because it would ruin the story. So basically: The entire Lo'gosh thing was a mistake. Never, EVER give a character that kind of power and keep the character. Either have them shine brightly for a short while and then die off, or don't have them shine brightly at all. There is no good explanation for Lo'gosh not to be as powerful as an ancient, other than artificial story-rigging.

So yes; Thrall has to die, or become otherwise... Removed and incapable of interfering. For the good of the story. Sometimes, characters we like must die off for the story to continue in any believable way.

Thrall is no more powerful then Malfurion, queen azshara pre demigod, and the lich king. Granted the Lk was killed off, but shouldnt Malfurion have to die too? Jaina is as powerful as thrall imo as well.

[Trassk]

Or just not replace them at all. Right now Thrall is to the Horde what Jaina used to be to the Alliance. A mediator. Someone who seeks a peaceful resolution (which goes against the them 'World of WARcraft')

The WARcraft argument is as worn out as saying mary sue because you think it sounds clever.

I'd say nobody has paid any attention to the story in mists of pandaria, how things like war and hatred and doubt lead to consequences and your actions being judged for such feelings. Yet, none of that matters when some 15 year old sounds out 'this is world of WARcraft! not Peacecraft!'.

Even when the game developers are telling you outright the theme of this expansion, how WAR is the enemy, you choose to ignore that.