Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ...
8
9
10
11
12
LastLast
  1. #181
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Nikotin View Post
    Well, good point. I guess it'll be so in Stonetalon, while it's heavy-Garrosh'd location. But, for example, in Ashevale we must go to Orgrimmar with report to warchief Garrosh. This quest will rather be removed (see reporting about mag'har to Thrall) or just Garrosh replaced with other warchief (see DK's starting chain).
    Most likely we will simply report to the new Warchief. That particular quest isn't all that relevant to Garrosh anyway, since the reason you're reporting is that you know that you and the quest giver did wrong by resorting to fel magic which is forbidden (with some possible exceptions).

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-04 at 02:40 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    A level 1 character is only stuck in the past from the perspective of a level 90 character. Just like when TBC came out, a level 1 character was stuck in the past from the view of a level 70 character.
    Indeed. Which is what I meant with that the level one character is sort of in its own dimension of the timeline, it's stuck in the past. Because the real present is the latest added content, right now 5.2, the forces of the Horde and Alliance are currently fighting the Mogu and their Thunder king, whilst the Sha has mostly been dealt with. Soon we will move on back to Azeroth and focus on how Pandaria has affected the old world (5.3).

  2. #182
    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    A level 1 character is only stuck in the past from the perspective of a level 90 character. Just like when TBC came out, a level 1 character was stuck in the past from the view of a level 70 character.
    Perspective doesn't matter, that character's in the past until they reach current content.

    If you'd like, you can cite reasoning from the game as to why your idea works, like I have for why the common opinion is so common.

  3. #183
    Elemental Lord Nindoriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8,843
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Nikotin View Post
    Well.. Vol'jihn's Horde war, Baine's Horde war, Rexxar's Horde war, Wrathion's Horde war, Anduin's Horde war, Gamon's Horde war... Choose what you wish.
    Still not following you.

  4. #184
    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    What if we don't actually kill him. In fact, when I think about it, it would be a bit weird for the game to have a different warchief at some point. They would either have to use phases to make it work, or it will feel weird to have a certain warchief greeting you in Orgrimmar at level 1, and then having so much story about Garrosh in the zones, even up to Pandaria. Sure, technically that is in the past, but will they then only make you see the new warchief in Orgrimmar when you're 90? Or 91-95? What will happen when patch 5.4 releases, will Garrosh still stand around in Orgrimmar?

    Replacing leaders in the game is difficult.

    And because of that, very often when characters die, it is not reflected in the game, like with Jaina and Rhonin, or Korialstrasz. The only time they really changed around the leadership of a lot of races was when Cataclysm launched. Cairne died and was replaced by Baine, Magni was turned into diamond and was replaced by the council, Thrall left and was replaced by Garrosh. And that was really only possible because they've redone the world. They've also replaced Anduin/Bolvar with Varian before Cata, but there weren't so many problems with that lorewise. There wasn't so much tied to the Stormwind leadership. It's a bit different with Garrosh. The Cataclysm and MoP storyline seems to be heavily focussed on Garrosh.

    Can this change in leadership be done without feeling strange?
    Ha ha seriously?..We killed Illidan and Arthas ..the two main villans that had PLENTY of story behind them..it would be a piece of cake to end this.

  5. #185
    The Patient Sir Nikotin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Internetz
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Chaozu View Post
    Most likely we will simply report to the new Warchief. That particular quest isn't all that relevant to Garrosh anyway, since the reason you're reporting is that you know that you and the quest giver did wrong by resorting to fel magic which is forbidden (with some possible exceptions).
    That's generally what I've said.
    LF something funny to place here.

    English isn't my native, sorry for possible mistakes

  6. #186
    Elemental Lord Nindoriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8,843
    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    Perspective doesn't matter, that character's in the past until they reach current content.

    If you'd like, you can cite reasoning from the game as to why your idea works, like I have for why the common opinion is so common.
    Perspeective is exactly what matters. That's why it's called perspective. It means that it's different for one and different for another.

  7. #187
    So the question here; What if we don't kill Garrosh, and he'll remain Warchief?
    Well the only sad thing is that we do not know Garrosh condition at the patch he is going to die.. Not really sure if he is corrupted, under some influence or just a moron essentially.. But if we dont do anything about it, I think the horde will scatter slowly.. The Troll rebellion will get away by boat, and the Undead and Blood elves will get together to survice or the elves join the Alliance.. Tauren is pretty much going to keep for themselves, but ey, thats what I think will happen.
    Taking by the fact that Garrosh proberly will try and claim everything, even his own allies.


  8. #188
    Elemental Lord Nindoriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8,843
    Quote Originally Posted by Emisary View Post
    Ha ha seriously?..We killed Illidan and Arthas ..the two main villans that had PLENTY of story behind them..it would be a piece of cake to end this.
    Illidan and Arthas have not been killed and replaced in the game. You don't have a secret Scourge or Legion base where players can go to, where those 2 stand around. It's like replacing Arthas with Bolvar in the DK starting area.

  9. #189
    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    Perspeective is exactly what matters. That's why it's called perspective. It means that it's different for one and different for another.
    No, it doesn't matter, because the perspective of the character is irrelevant to the established timeline. Only the chronological order in which story is introduced matters.

    Seriously, you're arguing that going backwards in time means you're in the present. I don't have that paradox.

  10. #190
    Elemental Lord Nindoriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8,843
    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    No, it doesn't matter, because the perspective of the character is irrelevant to the established timeline. Only the chronological order in which story is introduced matters.

    Seriously, you're arguing that going backwards in time means you're in the present. I don't have that paradox.
    You're not going backwards in time when you start a level 1 character. That is your starting point. It's the beginning of your story. You go backwards in time when you hit Outland.

  11. #191
    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    You're not going backwards in time when you start a level 1 character. That is your starting point. It's the beginning of your story. You go backwards in time when you hit Outland.
    Yeah, that's exactly it though. You're suggesting that the content you're in is your present, yet you can go back in time and still be in the present.

    That's illogical and debunks your entire thesis. I don't have that problem.

  12. #192
    Elemental Lord Nindoriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8,843
    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    Yeah, that's exactly it though. You're suggesting that the content you're in is your present, yet you can go back in time and still be in the present.

    That's illogical and debunks your entire thesis. I don't have that problem.
    You're talking nonsense.

    A level 1 character plays in the time around Cataclysm, then goes back in time when he goes to Outland because the stuff in Outland happened before Cataclysm.

  13. #193
    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    You're talking nonsense.

    A level 1 character plays in the time around Cataclysm, then goes back in time when he goes to Outland because the stuff in Outland happened before Cataclysm.
    So then your character isn't always in the present, which means your theory is debunked because it isn't consistent. What makes something in the past or present then? Why is Cata content present when TBC stuff isn't and when we have Mists available? Why isn't Mists content the present? It's the most recent. That's what the present is, really. The most recent moment of time.
    Last edited by The Mister Madgod; 2013-04-04 at 01:08 PM.

  14. #194
    The Patient Sir Nikotin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Internetz
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    Still not following you.
    Well, I mean we just can call low-level Azeroth war "Enter_your_warchief_name_here's war" and that's it. Much like how Outland expansion is now for Garrosh, and Garrosh is just one of commanders of his own Horde army in Northrend now (if we try to keep timeline normal).

    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    You're not going backwards in time when you start a level 1 character. That is your starting point. It's the beginning of your story. You go backwards in time when you hit Outland.
    So, where is the difference generally?

    Also, for less misunderstanding: I don't think that doing timelines even more messed up due to changing warchief is good in any terms. But it happened to WoW earlier, and it was very rough. So expecting Blizz not doing so and, even more, building up some theories like "Garrosh will not be killed because it's bad for timelines" is not a good idea.
    Last edited by Sir Nikotin; 2013-04-04 at 01:00 PM.
    LF something funny to place here.

    English isn't my native, sorry for possible mistakes

  15. #195
    Quote Originally Posted by Lakrin View Post
    Only if you haven't been paying attention to Wrathion. I'm going to guess you haven't?
    Some vague remarks by Wrathion really aren't enough storybuilding to suddenly spawn a burning legion invasion on top of Orgrimmar

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-04 at 03:21 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    No it's not, because the Legend of Zelda games have a different sense of time.

    How can I explain this?

    The present in WoW is not based off of your character's point in the story. It is based off of the highest point of content in the game, I.E., the current patch. Viewing it in this way actually removes the timeline inconsistencies you find if you view the timeline and the present as the content you are currently experiencing on one character, as all of the leveling process is in the past. Doesn't matter what the chronological order you experience it is. The timeline is based off of the release of content. Ask anyone and they will tell you exactly that.

    This is further supported by revised quests to reflect the present. In Wrath, Thrall was still warchief and if one keeps to "content I'm playing is the present" you find that you're sent to Garrosh, despite the events of the DK starting chain happening slightly before Wrath. Again, an annoying paradox, unless you understand what cognitive dissonance means.

    You will also find that you cannot participate in the Battle of the Undercity now, despite you being in Northrend. If that was the present, then why can't you participate in it? Because it already happened. All of that is in the past.

    Again the problem is WoW's leveling isn't supposed to be a chronologically-correct narrative. Leveling in WoW is basically you playing story catch-up with the people at end-game. It allows you to see (almost) all the story you missed and allows you to get back up to the rest of us in the present.
    You see, this stuff is why Nozdormu went insane.

  16. #196
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragon2K View Post
    You see, this stuff is why Nozdormu went insane.
    Pff. I understand it just fine.

  17. #197
    Elemental Lord Nindoriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8,843
    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    So then your character isn't always in the present, which means your theory is debunked because it isn't consistent. What makes something in the past or present then? Why is Cata content present when TBC stuff isn't and when we have Mists available? Why isn't Mists content the present? It's the most recent. That's what the present is, really. The most recent moment of time.
    No he isn't always in the present, that wasn't my "theory". But if you start a level 1 character, that is the present for your character. It only becomes weird when you travel back to Outland and Northrend.

  18. #198
    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    Pff. I understand it just fine.
    All right, you explain how Pandarens and monks are fighting the Burning Legion in Outland.

  19. #199
    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    No he isn't always in the present, that wasn't my "theory". But if you start a level 1 character, that is the present for your character. It only becomes weird when you travel back to Outland and Northrend.
    So what makes cata the present and not mists? We have access to mists content starting at level 1 in the form of the pandaren.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragon2K View Post
    All right, you explain how Pandarens and monks are fighting the Burning Legion in Outland.
    They never did.

    Leveling content, when it is no longer the primary expansion, is simply catch-up work.

    As far as the overarching lore is concerned, if your character is not at endgame with the most recent parts of the most recent story arc, you are experiencing the past, but not being truly part of the past.
    Last edited by The Mister Madgod; 2013-04-04 at 01:39 PM.

  20. #200
    Elemental Lord Nindoriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8,843
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Nikotin View Post
    Well, I mean we just can call low-level Azeroth war "Enter_your_warchief_name_here's war" and that's it. Much like how Outland expansion is now for Garrosh, and Garrosh is just one of commanders of his own Horde army in Northrend now (if we try to keep timeline normal).


    So, where is the difference generally?

    Also, for less misunderstanding: I don't think that doing timelines even more messed up due to changing warchief is good in any terms. But it happened to WoW earlier, and it was very rough. So expecting Blizz not doing so and, even more, building up some theories like "Garrosh will not be killed because it's bad for timelines" is not a good idea.
    But the war in "low level Azeroth" is Garrosh's war. A lot of stuff in the Horde questing is around Garrosh. You can't just call it "the new warchief's war" when you still have Garrosh showing up everywhere in Silverpine, Stonetalon etc.

    The thing with Garrosh is not even a timeline problem. The problem is having a warchief standing in Orgrimmar that has nothing to do with the story in the zones, and having a story in the zones that talks about a warchief that isn't there anymore.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •