Nazgrim

[RohanV]

I think it's a fitting end for Nazgrim. Just because he's likable, that doesn't mean he's perfect. His death will be true to his character.

Nazgrim's greatest strength is that he is loyal. Nazgrim's greatest weakness is that he is loyal.

[Zulkhan]

The sad thing is, well I expect fictional characters like nazgrim or Zaela or the rest, to be characters only living within there small world and only knowing what they know, the fact that the players actually adopt the same mentality as these fictional characters, when we have the ability to see the story in its entirety, it boggles the mind how people are so close minded to seeing the faults of those characters, like as if they want to be the asshole warchief, because it makes them feel good being that way.
Thats just sad.

The problem is that people don't care about this, since this is a game, nothing real and so who cares. I like to belive that people stick with such characters because they like them in the game contenst, for their own reasons (because being "evil" in that particular universe is "cool" while being bad persons in real life is just "bad" and stop) but i cannot confirm that my belief is 100% a certainty for everyone. Personally, i liked the Horde much more as it was in WC3, so for me everything that Garrosh represent is shit. But other people liked the "bad" version of it for their own fictional reasons i suppose (and hope), and so they see the whole Garrosh's Horde walking a similar path, and for this they like it and sustain it, regardless of anything else.

[Daeaye]

It's the simple fact that he's loyal to the Warchief. Just like people who served monarchs in the old days, just because a new King was on the throne didn't mean they could just stop following them or fighting for them.
Nazgrim was a pretty cool character, but I agree with this move. He was never a particularly important character, he was just an unlucky quest giver, he wasn't really a leader.
I do think it's a shame, yes, and I do think that, because Garrosh has gone too far with what he's been trying to do since he came to power, he should realise that his leader isn't a leader he should follow anymore, but that's just not how these kinds of things go. He is obligated to serve him, and that's that, whether he agrees with him or not. And it's not cowardice: it's doing his job.

[Kalcheus]

Are you kidding me? We are killing trolls for how many years now?

This is our land!
You want to stay?
You stay here forever!
We going to bury you here

[Octavius]

I think it's a fitting end for Nazgrim. Just because he's likable, that doesn't mean he's perfect. His death will be true to his character.

Nazgrim's greatest strength is that he is loyal. Nazgrim's greatest weakness is that he is loyal.

Nazgrim=Good people pledged to bad causes. Cit. Varys (from westeros with love)

[Kalcheus]

Nazgrim=Good people pledged to bad causes. Cit. Varys (from westeros with love)

Hmmm ... as of season 3, or as of book 5?

[Legion]

I'm glad they're letting him go down with dignity at least.

Sorry for the offtopic, but your avatar both confuses and annoys me.

[Trassk]

The problem is that people don't care about this, since this is a game, nothing real and so who cares. I like to belive that people stick with such characters because they like them in the game contenst, for their own reasons (because being "evil" in that particular universe is "cool" while being bad persons in real life is just "bad" and stop) but i cannot confirm that my belief is 100% a certainty for everyone. Personally, i liked the Horde much more as it was in WC3, so for me everything that Garrosh represent is shit. But other people liked the "bad" version of it for their own fictional reasons i suppose (and hope), and so they see the whole Garrosh's Horde walking a similar path, and for this they like it and sustain it, regardless of anything else.

yeah. Well I've always thought having something that is morally grey can be interesting at times, infact some of my fav fictional characters in the past have been morally grey, there comes a point when if that character crosses a line, they are no longer representing that moral middle.
With characters like Thrall, you know where you stand, he's a moral hero and does whats right, where as someone like Sylvanas you never know where you stand with her, and always stepping over glass.
But Garrosh, his progression has been seen before in so many other characters, its beyond belief people didn't see this coming, since ones like Illidan, Kael'thas and Arthas went down the same road.
As for only being drawn to bad guys, thats fine and dandy, but when the story begins to conflict and blur moral lines between such characters, and more so, when people seem to lose any sense of awareness of the characters faults and what they are doing, and just pass it off as okay (because they like the character), then the line is crossed by the player as much as the character.

Since this is a subject on Nazgrim, he is a character who, frankly, is just a disappointment. He could have shown a kind of conflicting intrest, given his position as Garrosh's first hand man, but one who saw what Garrosh was doing to the horde. He could have been someone who questioned his own loyalty, such as the difference between his king or his country. He choose to side with his king, and abandon his country. That unfortunately crossed the line.

And f**k me.. so many orcs becoming the bad guys in wow right now, its hard to play them anymore without feeling like there the bad guys. I'm been more into playing skyrim just to play an orc that feels like a hero instead of a foil.

[Octavius]

Hmmm ... as of season 3, or as of book 5?

Book 5 if I remember correct. Talking about (do not kill me please) kevan.

[Xalzel]

My guess is at the start he will say something along the lines of "I'm sorry, I wish it hadn't come to this. After all we've been through... But I am honor bound to my Warchief, please, do not dishonor me with restraint. I wish you the best of luck heroes, now, lets do this!"

[billielecter]

This occurs very oddly to me that every time I need to fight some hero, he or she is always corrupted.

[Kalcheus]

Book 5 if I remember correct.

I understand. (Go ahead and edit)

---------- Post added 2013-06-13 at 02:07 PM ----------

This occurs very strangely to me that every time I need to fight some hero, he or she is always corrupted.

Why would you fight an uncorrupted hero?

[Verdugo]

This is our land!
You want to stay?
You stay here forever!
We going to bury you here

They sure did.

Why would you fight an uncorrupted hero?

For same reasons you fight anyone.

Conflict of interests.

[Kalcheus]

For same reasons you fight anyone.
Conflict of interests.

So ... Gunship Battle!

You're welcome

(Also, maybe the Paragons)

[Dybia]

This occurs very oddly to me that every time I need to fight some hero, he or she is always corrupted.

Who says Nazgrim is corrupted? He's just stupidly loyal.

[Zulkhan]

As for only being drawn to bad guys, thats fine and dandy, but when the story begins to conflict and blur moral lines between such characters, and more so, when people seem to lose any sense of awareness of the characters faults and what they are doing, and just pass it off as okay (because they like the character), then the line is crossed by the player as much as the character.

Some people have serious problems in understanding and judging characters, but more importantly pretend that the story goes in the direction they want. Liking a character or a faction is a thing, pretending that a storyline like the Warcraft one follows a complete and constant dark theme is another, and is ridicolous. I mean, like if they didn't know how this saga works, in the RTS won always the "good" side aswell in the end, even if you were able to play any faction during the various campaigns (WC1 actually not, but that was merely a setback, since what happened in the sequel, and the fact that the human campaign had a non-canon alternative ending). Dark and violent universes, like the Warhammer one, are cool and fascinating, but the Warcraft saga doesn't work in the same way, and never did; pretending this now it's simply stupid.

Since this is a subject on Nazgrim, he is a character who, frankly, is just a disappointment. He could have shown a kind of conflicting intrest, given his position as Garrosh's first hand man, but one who saw what Garrosh was doing to the horde. He could have been someone who questioned his own loyalty, such as the difference between his king or his country. He choose to side with his king, and abandon his country. That unfortunately crossed the line.

If they truly want to kill him off, the only way for make it worth it's doing so that Nazgrim don't feel like "another bad orc slain", but as something tragic, especially if he is showed mostly as flawed, having strong doubts about his Warchief but with no strength for make the right decision, unable to spit to what is now a hollow blood oath. The fight could even work with Nazgrim, at 1%, asking to be finished for grant him a honorable death, but then occuring some script-event where some lore character says to him that don't deserve to die in such a way for who, despite how much he tries stubbornly to deny it, is not anymore his "Warchief".

But maybe i'm deluding myself, at this point i don't know what to think anymore.

[Maxilian]

And f**k me.. so many orcs becoming the bad guys in wow right now, its hard to play them anymore without feeling like there the bad guys. I'm been more into playing skyrim just to play an orc that feels like a hero instead of a foil.

Sadly, that's true, that's why, sometimes, i think that's killing Thrall is a good idea, cause right now is like "Thrall is the only good orc than want peace", and if he die another orc may take his example and become another light for the orcs...

[Austilias]

A shame about Nazgrim; an Orc who was far more interesting than the ever boring Thrall, yet the one we may well be killing. Truth be told he was the only compelling Orcish character i've encountered for a while; save for Garrosh himself who achieved his intended effect as a character, however bad he himself is as a character.

[Mukor]

just because you defeat someone or something doesn't mean they have to die.

[Agoonga]

Hopefully Garrosh will get the Sha beaten out of him before Nazgrim has to pay the ultimate price for being a loyal soldier.