What if we don't kill Garrosh, and he'll remain Warchief?

[Chrysia]

Best of a bad situation...especially if the sha are influencing his actions...if you think back to cata garrosh wasn't like that, he killed his commander for harming tauren and nelf druids...he stopped sylvanus from using the plague on the worgen...

Aaand he threw a subordinate off a cliff, pissed Vol'jinn off enough to get him to threaten his life, has repeatedly called the other races expendable, and only has the respect of the goblins because they're after money, first and foremost.

[Deleted]

The problem is that Garrosh was acting like this even before he set foot on Pandaria and encountered the Sha. Even if he is corrupted by some Sha, he can't blame it all on it. But what if Thrall will not be able to allow his friend's son to be killed.

[Deleted]

That's what I've been saying

I thought you were saying that it would be confusing and difficult to switch Warchief, when in fact it really isn't?...

[Deleted]

I thought you were saying that it would be confusing and difficult to switch Warchief, when in fact it really isn't?...

Are you playing mindgames with me? You just said

it would be more confusing if the new Warchief was added to the quest-lines that took place before Deathwing was defeated.

[Frozenbeef]

Aaand he threw a subordinate off a cliff, pissed Vol'jinn off enough to get him to threaten his life, has repeatedly called the other races expendable, and only has the respect of the goblins because they're after money, first and foremost.

yeah he's not perfect..but who else would take the throne?

[Deleted]

Best of a bad situation...especially if the sha are influencing his actions...if you think back to cata garrosh wasn't like that, he killed his commander for harming tauren and nelf druids...he stopped sylvanus from using the plague on the worgen...Do you really think the garrosh that we have now would stop sylvanus from using the plague or be unhappy about the death of nelfs? :S

Didn't Blizzard say that Garrosh wouldn't be influenced by the Sha? That what he did and will do, is because he actually, in his mind, believes he is in the right? I could swear I remember a blue post on this but I can't claim it to be true unless I find a link... Either way, in my opinion Garrosh needs to go. I don't care if he's killed, exiled or whatever, just get him out of my sight. I've hated him ever since I met him in Nagrand during BC.

---------- Post added 2013-04-04 at 02:05 PM ----------

Are you playing mindgames with me? You just said

Yes... Meaning it wouldn't make sense for Blizzard to go out of their way and edit the old quests from the old timeline, during Cataclysm, while Deathwing was still alive, and edit the Warchief seen during that particular quest. That was the Warchief in charge during that time, therefor that's the Warchief you see in that quest. That does in no way, shape or form mean that it would be at all confusing to have another Warchief in the present.

[Sir Nikotin]

I'm talking about the Cataclysm 1-60 zones and about Pandaria. Those quests will not be in the past for someone who is leveling up. For a level 20 character Ashenvale is not in the past, it's the present. The main problem here is not whether it's in the past or not, but that youre fighting a war for a warchief that you'll never see, should the warchief be changed for characters of all levels.

Well, how many times we actually see Garrosh while until 60? IIRC, 3. In the start of Silverpine quests, where he can easily be removed witout losing anything but some EPICNESS. We come to him while questing in Ashenvale to report about demons. Can easily be replaced with other warchief. And third place is Stonetalon Mountains. Well, it's a bit harder, but Garrosh still can be removed or replaced there. Or become one more timey-wimey thing.

I said, in the post you quoted, that it's in the past from the perspective of the level 90 player. Of course it's not in the past for a level 1 character.

That is like saying, if I'm playing Legend of Zelda, that the end boss is already dead because someone else finished the game.

There are no timeline issues for a new character starting to play the game until he reaches level 60.

And due to this logic Outland and Northrend questing is in the present for 60-80 players. Even if we come there from Cataclysmed Azeroth. Or 1-60 is something special? Well, no. Actualy, traveling to the past at low levels is happening with pandarens right now.

[Deleted]

Didn't Blizzard say that Garrosh wouldn't be influenced by the Sha? That what he did and will do, is because he actually, in his mind, believes he is in the right? I could swear I remember a blue post on this but I can't claim it to be true unless I find a link... Either way, in my opinion Garrosh needs to go. I don't care if he's killed, exiled or whatever, just get him out of my sight. I've hated him ever since I met him in Nagrand during BC.

---------- Post added 2013-04-04 at 02:05 PM ----------



Yes... Meaning it wouldn't make sense for Blizzard to go out of their way and edit the old quests from the old timeline, during Cataclysm, while Deathwing was still alive, and edit the Warchief seen during that particular quest. That was the Warchief in charge during that time, therefor that's the Warchief you see in that quest. That does in no way, shape or form mean that it would be at all confusing to have another Warchief in the present.

Now I know you just want to confuse me.

[The Madgod]

I said, in the post you quoted, that it's in the past from the perspective of the level 90 player. Of course it's not in the past for a level 1 character.

That is like saying, if I'm playing Legend of Zelda, that the end boss is already dead because someone else finished the game.

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.

[Deleted]

Well, how many times we actually see Garrosh while until 60? IIRC, 3. In the start of Silverpine quests, where he can easily be removed witout losing anything but some EPICNESS. We come to him while questing in Ashenvale to report about demons. Can easily be replaced with other warchief. And third place is Stonetalon Mountains. Well, it's a bit harder, but Garrosh still can be removed or replaced there. Or become one more timey-wimey thing.


And due to this logic Outland and Northrend questing is in the present for 60-80 players. Even if we come there from Cataclysmed Azeroth. Or 1-60 is something special? Well, no. Actualy, traveling to the past at low levels is happening with pandarens right now.

But the storyline still makes sense. Whether there's some jumping back and forth is irrelevant, that is not the issue here. But at least right now, level 1 characters experience the level 1-60 story as it's meant to be. It's about Garrosh's war. Replacing Garrosh with a new warchief, but still having that story in the zones be about Garrosh, would be like replacing Arthas with Bolvar. It doesn't matter whether the flow of the timeline makes sense, even if you isolate the expansion from the others, it's screwed up.

[Deleted]

Now I know you just want to confuse me.

What part of my post is confusing?...

---------- Post added 2013-04-04 at 02:16 PM ----------

Well, how many times we actually see Garrosh while until 60? IIRC, 3. In the start of Silverpine quests, where he can easily be removed witout losing anything but some EPICNESS. We come to him while questing in Ashenvale to report about demons. Can easily be replaced with other warchief. And third place is Stonetalon Mountains. Well, it's a bit harder, but Garrosh still can be removed or replaced there. Or become one more timey-wimey thing.


And due to this logic Outland and Northrend questing is in the present for 60-80 players. Even if we come there from Cataclysmed Azeroth. Or 1-60 is something special? Well, no. Actualy, traveling to the past at low levels is happening with pandarens right now.

He doesn't need to be removed from those quests, they represent the past of what happened during Cataclysm. Swapping him for the new Warchief wouldn't make sense at all, since the new Warchief wasn't Warchief during Cataclysm. Unless they update the entire timeline of all the Cataclysm zones, Garrosh should still be Warchief in those quests, even if we switch our current Warchief.

[The Madgod]

But the storyline still makes sense. Whether there's some jumping back and forth is irrelevant, that is not the issue here. But at least right now, level 1 characters experience the level 1-60 story as it's meant to be. It's about Garrosh's war. Replacing Garrosh with a new warchief, but still having that story in the zones be about Garrosh, would be like replacing Arthas with Bolvar. It doesn't matter whether the flow of the timeline makes sense, even if you isolate the expansion from the others, it's screwed up.

So... don't replace him in those quests.

It's cata content, so it's in the past anyway. Big deal.

[Deleted]

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 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.

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 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.

No it's not. Not unless the patch affects your level 1 character. Though I have to admit that having Pandaren running around in the Barrens does destroy that image a bit. But it still stands that a level 1 character is not playing through the past, until he hits Outland.

The thing with the battle for the undercity doesn't make sense. Why would that particular battle be part of the past, and all the rest of the questchain is not? Why would the battle against Putress happen before the Wrathgate incident?

[Sir Nikotin]

But the storyline still makes sense. Whether there's some jumping back and forth is irrelevant, that is not the issue here. But at least right now, level 1 characters experience the level 1-60 story as it's meant to be. It's about Garrosh's war. Replacing Garrosh with a new warchief, but still having that story in the zones be about Garrosh, would be like replacing Arthas with Bolvar. It doesn't matter whether the flow of the timeline makes sense, even if you isolate the expansion from the others, it's screwed up.

So, switching Thrall's wars to Garrosh's wars is okay for you? So, we'll just have... er... Warchief Basic Campfire's Horde war in low level Azeroth instead of Garrosh's, and that's it.

[Deleted]

So, switching Thrall's wars to Garrosh's wars is okay for you? So, we'll just have... er... Warchief Basic Campfire's Horde war in low level Azeroth instead of Garrosh's, and that's it.

What?

Warchief Basic Campfire what?

[The Madgod]

No it's not. Not unless the patch affects your level 1 character. Though I have to admit that having Pandaren running around in the Barrens does destroy that image a bit. But it still stands that a level 1 character is not playing through the past, until he hits Outland.

Well you're entitled to your opinion, but like I've shown pretty plainly, you're obviously in a minority in your thought and there's evidence on my side to suggest this is how Blizzard treats the timeline, so... I don't really know what to say.

Hell you even mention how Mists content is in Cata content, when Cata happens before Mists. It's all in the past until you hit the current patch content, merely in different degrees. Seriously, try this thinking out. You'll find a lot less holes and find it's a lot simpler than you think it is.

The thing with the battle for the undercity doesn't make sense. Why would that particular battle be part of the past, and all the rest of the questchain is not?

Because Undercity is in the present with Kor'kron guards instead of the old abominations, something that occurs after the battle (so in other words, that battle is in the past). However that quest chain is important in making sure Dragonblight stays okay to level through, so they keep it in. However since the one event already occurred, it's okay to leave the one quest out.

Why would the battle against Putress happen before the Wrathgate incident?

It doesn't. That's the point. That's why it's all in the past.

[Deleted]

No it's not. Not unless the patch affects your level 1 character. Though I have to admit that having Pandaren running around in the Barrens does destroy that image a bit. But it still stands that a level 1 character is not playing through the past, until he hits Outland.

The thing with the battle for the undercity doesn't make sense. Why would that particular battle be part of the past, and all the rest of the questchain is not? Why would the battle against Putress happen before the Wrathgate incident?

The Undercity quest part was removed because it was added to the old Undercity. The Undercity area was revamped completely in Cataclysm, and they didn't have the time to also update the quest for it. So they had to remove it completely.

A level 1 character is stuck in the past until he's leveled up and caught up with the rest. You could say that the character is living in its own dimension of the reality, one that is not current for the rest of the world (yet), but still is sort of current for that particular character.

[Sir Nikotin]

He doesn't need to be removed from those quests, they represent the past of what happened during Cataclysm. Swapping him for the new Warchief wouldn't make sense at all, since the new Warchief wasn't Warchief during Cataclysm. Unless they update the entire timeline of all the Cataclysm zones, Garrosh should still be Warchief in those quests, even if we switch our current Warchief.

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).

[Deleted]

The Undercity quest part was removed because it was added to the old Undercity. The Undercity area was revamped completely in Cataclysm, and they didn't have the time to also update the quest for it. So they had to remove it completely.

A level 1 character is stuck in the past until he's leveled up and caught up with the rest. You could say that the character is living in its own dimension of the reality, one that is not current for the rest of the world (yet), but still is sort of current for that particular character.

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.

[Sir Nikotin]

What?

Warchief Basic Campfire what?

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.