Did Garrosh do anything wrong?

[Aleksej89]

Usually when a character is considered the nazi/hitler of a franchise you can be sure he did a lot of wrong.

[Deleted]

Usually when a character is considered the nazi/hitler of a franchise you can be sure he did a lot of wrong.

In this age where SJW's call Trump a nazi makes the word meaningless.
These days you are called a nazi for the smallest things.

[Super Dickmann]

Usually when a character is considered the nazi/hitler of a franchise you can be sure he did a lot of wrong.

Everyone is Hitler these days, it's lost a lot of the appeal. The only group that Garrosh put to death by virtue of status were orcish warlocks. That puts him below the Purge Squad on the ethnic cleansing-o-meter.

[Hyral]

Did Garrosh do anything wrong?

Literally nothing.

Also, Wildberry is the only person speaking sense in this thread.

Garrosh will forever be the one true Warchief.

[Stormdash]

Translation: "I lost on every front again, and had to fall back on making ridiculous comments not relevant to the discussion in the first place because there's nothing to support the points I was previously making earlier."

Hey, I'll see you next thread, Stormdash, because we all know that you're just going to pretend this thread didn't happen and your headcanon didn't get debunked. Here's a helpful hint, don't set the goalposts so far out, you had to move them pretty early on.

And I'll look forward to you labelling references to hard text of canon as "headcanon" because that word works the same as "hadouken" for you or something, it's a magic spell that means you win. I arguably overstated the scale of his defeat in the final battle of "Tides of War", whereas you ignore completely that his plan was uniquely responsible for Mega Jaina being who she is and that only her deciding not to kept him and all of Orgrimmar from being destroyed. I misremembered the order of the near-disaster of the Twilight Highlands invasion and discovering the mole. Apart from that, my facts were pristine throughout.

Sorry that your main dude in lore is a complete trash character who failed at almost everything he touched. "Did Garrosh do anything right" would be a more compelling deep dive thread topic.

- - - Updated - - -

Literally nothing.

Also, Wildberry is the only person speaking sense in this thread.

Garrosh will forever be the one true Warchief.

If being a "true" Warchief is defined as "failing continuously", I suppose. And maybe one could make that argument if they go to Blackhand, etc? I dunno. Maybe it's your thing; I feel better about a Warchief that doesn't constantly lose.

[Super Dickmann]

And I'll look forward to you labelling references to hard text of canon as "headcanon" because that word works the same as "hadouken" for you or something, it's a magic spell that means you win. I arguably overstated the scale of his defeat in the final battle of "Tides of War", whereas you ignore completely that his plan was uniquely responsible for Mega Jaina being who she is and that only her deciding not to kept him and all of Orgrimmar from being destroyed. I misremembered the order of the near-disaster of the Twilight Highlands invasion and discovering the mole. Apart from that, my facts were pristine throughout.

That's a level of denial I haven't been able to manage yet. Refer to last page. It wasn't Garrosh who resulted in Jaina surviving to go mental, it's Aethas voting for Rhonin to go support them. Garrosh took every step in his power to send people to retrieve the Iris. That Garrosh still achieved his objective despite being repeatedly sabotaged by his own subordinates speaks well of him. He inflicted more casualties than he took when it comes to the fleet battle and the very next thing we see is Nazgrim reporting "Decisive victories off the shores of Tanaris and Tol Barad" representing Garrosh capitalizing on the damage he dealt to the Alliance fleet and pushing it to his advantage.

The Horde was at its greatest territorial extent in early Mists under Garrosh. The only reason he lost, by the admission of Wrathion, is because the Horde fell apart. In terms of positioning and military leadership, Garrosh was consistently successful. The way things were positioned after Tides of War, the Horde were the ones who had taken the advantage. He failed because of his abysmal PR with the other races and inability to work well with any of the Horde leaders, not helped by them repeatedly stabbing him in the back for retarded reasons.

[Wildberry]

But he did little to rebuild the relations with the other races.

That's not his responsibility to do. He was the Warchief. Like you said (for some reason totally irrelevant to my arguments here):

all the members took the Blood Oath. They're all Horde now.

And what exactly does the Blood Oath say?

Lok'tar ogar! Victory or death - it is these words that bind me to the Horde. For they are the most sacred and fundamental of truths to any warrior of the Horde.
I give my flesh and blood freely to the Warchief. I am the instrument of my Warchief's desire. I am a weapon of my Warchief's command.
From this moment until the end of days I live and die - For the Horde!

--"Blood Oath of the Horde"

Now tell me if any of the following sounds like "giving ones flesh and blood freely to the Warchief, being an instrument of the Warchief's desire and a weapon of the Warchief's Command:"
-Holding numerous subversive meetings in which Garrosh is openly criticized and participants fantasize about overthrowing him
-Insulting, denying the legitimacy of the Warchief and threatening to assassinate the Warchief
-Warning an enemy, during a time of war, of an upcoming assault, allowing them time to reinforce. With the intention of having the Horde attack repulsed
-Issuing an order to countermand Garrosh's if necessary
-Leveraging loyalty to the Horde in an attempt to force policy change
-Leveraging support to assume command of a military operation
-Openly engaging in negotiations to leave the Horde and join the Alliance
-Disobeying direct orders, in some cases numerous times.

See, maybe I'm wrong, because like you said "there's no point in talking to me," I must be completely deranged and off-base, right? But none of that sounds like it really meshes with the Blood Oath very well. In fact, all of those things sound like pretty clear violations. And even you think the Blood Oath is important, so surely you'll recognize that Garrosh has no fault here and that it was his treasonous underlings that should take the blame.

He imprisoned trolls on their home island.

He imposed martial law. There's a big difference between that and imprisoning them. More importantly, rebellious sentiment was already kicking up, judging by the aptly named "Rebellious Darkspear" NPCs.

Sends others races on a suicide missions since he wants to avoid Orcish casualties.

What exactly are you referring to here, because there are two possible events, and you'd be wrong for different reasons considering which one you're talking about.

If you're referring to the Invasion of Gilneas, you'll have to prove intent to avoid Orcish casualties. Garrosh specifically makes reference to the fact that they're "nearly impossible to kill" in "Edge of Night." Furthermore, The forces that Garrosh would have sent in behind the heavily armored Forsaken vanguard didn't consist of Orcs alone. Tauren, as well as "Orgrimmar's finest" (Which again, is not just limited to Orcs), were there as well.

If you're referring to Lor'themar's Blood Elves in Pandaria, that wasn't a suicide mission. Lor'themar simply opted not to bring guards for a mission in unknown, potentially hostile territory, and felt Garrosh should have explicitly told him so.

Starts messing in dark magics that are offense to many members of the Horde.

What offends them isn't of concern. That's entirely irrelevant. Do you remember the "Blood Oath" you were harping on about earlier? This is where it comes into play again.

More importantly, there's really not much to suggest this is worse than Fel Magic or direct Void Magic which those other races seem to have tolerated quite well.

He also attempts to assassin Vol'jin.

And Vol'jin, by that point, deserved it. This is inarguable. Baine even points this out as Garrosh's defense in "War Crimes." He's uncomfortable about this fact, but it's brought up nonetheless. By the time Garrosh ordered Vol'jin's assassination, Vol'jin had:
-Threatened to assassinate Garrosh
-Established himself as a noted critic of Garrosh
-Participated in two secret, subversive meetings in which participants openly criticized Garrosh and fantasized about his ousting
-Sailed halfway across the world to Pandaria, and appointed himself a check of Garrosh and the Pandaria campaign.

The assassination order was justified, and it's worth pointing out that despite all of the above, Garrosh still gave Vol'jin an out. During "War Crimes" we see the dialogue between Garrosh and Rak'gor Bloodrazer. He's to be killed if he disagrees. And of course, Vol'jin couldn't keep his mouth shut and had to complain about it. Garrosh was exceedingly merciful when it came to Vol'jin, and he had grounds to bump him off far earlier.

What Garrosh did wrong was to try to use tyranny to attempt to solve the deunifitcation within the Horde.

You mean Garrosh enacted punishments aimed at those who violated the Blood Oath of the Horde? Really weird.

Regardless of his 'right' to do the measures he took all they did was push the majority of the Horde away and have him killed.

The result doesn't matter when we're discussing "right or wrong." These actions were legitimate, and well within Garrosh's power.

Also i don't really care what you consider to be the 'true' Horde races. all the members took the Blood Oath. They're all Horde now.

As I've stated above, this is irrelevant to the thread. I have no idea why you shoehorned it in here aside from being really triggered about my stance on another subject.

Given that you brought it up, though, let me ask outright: If the Blood Oath is so important that you consider anyone and everyone who swears it to be a true member of the Horde, why is it unreasonable to expect that they follow the Blood Oath of the Horde?

And I'll look forward to you labelling references to hard text of canon as "headcanon" because that word works the same as "hadouken" for you or something, it's a magic spell that means you win.

The reason I referred to your statements on the subject as such was because you were holding up an arbitrary double standard as to when "Voice of the character" and "Voice of the author" applies. Perhaps if you stayed consistent I wouldn't have opportunities like that.

I arguably overstated the scale of his defeat in the final battle of "Tides of War",

No, stop it. The only reason you're even trying to make this fake "concession" is because the reality of what happened is worse for you.

You didn't "arguably overstate the scale of his defeat," you took it in the complete opposite direction of what was intended to be shown. You assumed his "Fleet" got rolled, when in reality he fielded 4 ships, and you conveniently ignored that it was the Alliance fleet that sustained extreme damage with the few survivors breaking for retreat.

whereas you ignore completely that his plan was uniquely responsible for Mega Jaina being who she is and that only her deciding not to kept him and all of Orgrimmar from being destroyed.

So you're back to arguing maybes again?

I misremembered the order of the near-disaster of the Twilight Highlands invasion and discovering the mole.

And that impacted the credibility of your argument.

Apart from that, my facts were pristine throughout.

Really? What about "Theramore pushed the Kirin Tor into the Alliance" and "Garrosh was a failure in Northrend." Both of which you stopped arguing fairly early on. Real weird, why'd you drop both subjects if your facts were so pristine?

Sorry that your main dude in lore is a complete trash character who failed at almost everything he touched. "Did Garrosh do anything right" would be a more compelling deep dive thread topic.

Look at this absolute level of salt. It's not my fault you can argue your way out of a paper bag. Acquaint yourself with reality better next time and you might fare well.

[Hyral]

If being a "true" Warchief is defined as "failing continuously", I suppose. And maybe one could make that argument if they go to Blackhand, etc? I dunno. Maybe it's your thing; I feel better about a Warchief that doesn't constantly lose.

True as in the embodiment of the Horde. If you consider dying or losing being a failure of a Warchief then you should revise your history, sounds like the only Warchief for you until now is Thrall then, the green human.

[Deleted]

Garrosh did alot of thing wrong, for this reason he lost the war and died.

[Varitok]

I am an Alliance player and I liked Garrosh before Mists. He was very war focused but honour came first and foremost, No matter what. He seemed to slowly be learning the fighting side and even the diplomatic side of being a leader. Then it all went to crap to make him a villain.

[Jastall]

Already treated Horde leaders like shit.

Already practiced heavy favoritism towards his Kor'kron lickspittles over anyone else.

Lost an airfleet because of his mongo tactics leaving it exposed in the intro to Twilight Highlands and the PC had to pick up the slack.

Nearly got himself killed a few times and had to be saved, like in Ashenvale and Mulgore (to Quilboars no less).

Escalated the war against the Alliance with the nuke, then sent the Kor'kron to round up the fleeing civilians afterwards.

Don't get me wrong, at the end of Cata his character was still very much salvageable and Blizzard could easily have done a story arc where he finally learns from his mistakes and is closer to his Stonetalon self, or instead becomes calmer without losing the spirit that makes people like him.

But ignoring the Mists arc is like saying "did Arthas do anything wrong before drawing Frostmourne?". You can make the argument that he did or didn't, but the subsequent event are just way too important and legacy-defining to handwave away.

[Deleted]

-snip-

No i'm not triggered by any of your opinions.

So in summary you feel an oath taken in a completely different time period under different circumstances should mean the oath taker should submit to the actions of someone who doesn't have their best interests at heart, with his end goal is to wipe them out. Seen from the Blank Scroll story.

I don't. Revolution is a valid option in such circumstances. A revolution Garrosh brought no himself because of his mismanagement from of the Horde. His not the orcish warchief his the Horde Warchief he failed the other races within his horde.

[Powerogue]

Besides the main thing he did wrong, did he do anything wrong? :O

MOP was an entire expansion's story arc, and he was a monster through pretty much all of it, even before getting his hands on the old god heart. He wanted only horde members that fit his specific ideas and did whatever he said without question, only to rapidly find that he had sheared off so much of the horde in doing that there was hardly anyone left to stand with him. "We'll see who has the Warchief's back when it counts..."

Cataclysm was really an extension of WotLK with him being big, brutish, and non-political. He solved his problems by punching them, and only Saurfang ever managed to punch through that massive ego and get him to listen. He was a pretty terrible leader, held in check by people who actually knew what they were doing, operating the important things like supply lines while Garrosh was at the forefront of the action screaming "LET'S TAKE ASHENVALE, WOOO!!!"

WOD seemed to dial him back from the cartoon villainy, but he was still being as stupid as he was in MOP with his "orcish master race" stuff, it's just now he was on a planet of tons of orcs who agreed with him. If he had recruited the draenei and other races instead of stomping over them, they would have easily obliterated the Legion's forces on the planet, and would have been greeted by us shaking his hand instead of killing him.

[Syegfryed]

He loved the horde too much, it was his great mistake

[Stormdash]

True as in the embodiment of the Horde. If you consider dying or losing being a failure of a Warchief then you should revise your history, sounds like the only Warchief for you until now is Thrall then, the green human.

This is where you can tell the ones that are only in it for an edgelord fix. Thrall was a "green human" in WC3? I didn't like Thrall nearly as much after he ditched his armor to become the most hippie version of a shaman we ever met in the lore, but yeah, he was a better Warchief than Garrosh. At least if anyone is interested in measuring 'better' in terms like 'didn't fail constantly to achieve his goals'.

I will give Garrosh this, of the most effective, successful in the job of Warchief since WC3, Garrosh is definitely in the Top 4.

[Kallisto]

Considering the bad blood between him and other races started over their leaders' inability to submit to his authority, their treason and consistent undermining of said authority, it's a highly relevant factor.

His bad blood with the Forsaken started with HIM putting them in a suicide mission with the intent of wiping them out. He didn't want them to be disloyal don't try to make them extinct for your own glory.

With the blood elves it was simply put he started going full Garithos on them. Before that point Lor'themar was 100% loyal, but the moment you do what Garithos did don't expect people to be all happy about it and stay by your side. That was when Lor'themar started talks with Varian. Not before.

[Krobane]

#hitlerdidnothingwrong

[Stormdash]

One could almost wonder if there is some fundamental link between loyalty and effective leadership habits and positive results. A Warchief who loses a helluva lot more than he wins, whose master plans always fall apart without final success had a continuing struggle with fostering enthusiastic trust and loyalty, you say? 'tis a headscratcher.

[Wildberry]

So in summary you feel an oath taken in a completely different time period under different circumstances should mean the oath taker should submit to the actions of someone who doesn't have their best interests at heart, with his end goal is to wipe them out. Seen from the Blank Scroll story.

The Blood Oath of the Horde binds them to the Horde and its Warchief. Not specifically the Warchief that they swore the Oath to, nor the type of Horde he led. This is inarguable.

With regard to whether or not Garrosh had their best interests at heart, he did say:

I will stop at nothing - NOTHING - to ensure a proud and glorious future for the orcs and anyone with the courage to stand with us.

--Garrosh Hellscream "Domination Point"

Something he later reiterated in "War Crimes" with full sincerity.

You're trying to take the "Blank Scroll" story in a completely different direction. By the time the story takes place, the seeds of the Darkspear Rebellion had already been sewn. The story features Garrosh attacking the Goblins, because Gallywix blatantly disobeyed orders to retrieve artifacts and kept the Scroll hidden from Garrosh.

The "Blank Scroll" doesn't show what would have happened if Garrosh won. It shows what would have happened if Garrosh won starting from that specific period in time. Considering Garrosh had already been betrayed. More importantly, here's what the short story actually says:

The rumors rippled across the world: Gallywix had found a powerful weapon in Pandaria and kept it for himself.

In the mind of Garrosh Hellscream, warchief of the Horde, there could be only one explanation for such treachery: rebellion. Garrosh led the fractured Horde against Bilgewater Harbor.

The tauren and trolls, appalled by the devastation, had fled across the Great Sea, hoping that Garrosh would be content with his victories.

He was not.

--"The Blank Scroll," p5

So essentially, a story that starts from a point where rebellion was already beginning to stir, where Garrosh had already been disobeyed and betrayed outright multiple times presents a future where Gallywix disobeys orders and faces consequences and Trolls and Tauren leave the Horde and face consequences.

The story doesn't support the claim you're making, and the reality of the situation doesn't absolve the Horde's members of their obligation to obey the Warchief.

His not the orcish warchief his the Horde Warchief he failed the other races within his horde.

You're right, he is the Horde Warchief, and thus, they should have obeyed him. Like the Blood Oath demands. Please point out the obligations that the Blood Oath outlines the Warchief having toward his people.

We know they would have benefitted had the simply just followed orders, we have Garrosh on record stating that.

[Super Dickmann]

This is where you can tell the ones that are only in it for an edgelord fix. Thrall was a "green human" in WC3? I didn't like Thrall nearly as much after he ditched his armor to become the most hippie version of a shaman we ever met in the lore, but yeah, he was a better Warchief than Garrosh. At least if anyone is interested in measuring 'better' in terms like 'didn't fail constantly to achieve his goals'.

Thrall failed entirely once he actually went to Durotar though. He settled his people in a barren desert and became reliant entirely on imports from an enemy he allowed a part of his army to wage a guerilla war with for sustenance, accepted the Forsaken then exercised zero oversight on them, ensuring that the peace he wanted to achieve wouldn't happen and ended his tenure rebuffed in terms of his beliefs and appointing his ideological opposite to lead the Horde because he better represented what the Horde wanted than him.