Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
... LastLast
  1. #41
    The Insane Syegfryed's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    19,268
    Quote Originally Posted by LarryFromHumanResources View Post
    Eh, "Hunter" is a vague term in WoW, Rexxar is a Hunter and a champion of the Horde. Does Blizzard when they say "Village where Hunters were trained" literally mean Hunters that "Hunt game to feed their village" or do they mean Hunters that "Fight with bows and arrows and pets against enemies of the Horde".
    it it means hunt to feed their village and defend against the quilboars, not "against the enemies of the horde"

    if it was not by wrong intel they would never attack that place, because it was not a threat

    Quote Originally Posted by Raisei View Post
    Too bad you are not the tauren chieftain that gets to decide that. The real one said it was okay.
    the real one words are meaningless as he is, so are not considered

    We agree on something. Theramore was by far worse.
    when you say worse, you are trying to say better, because theramore was actually threat that actively attacked the horde, unlike taurujo who didn't raise a finger to the alliance?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Thage View Post
    Sort of. It was a valid target since the Horde did use it as an infantry training camp
    a peaceful camp in the tauren own lands, that the alliance was invading and usurping, who didn't raise a single finger to harm the alliance ever, who most hunt to feed their own and trained others to defend against the quilboars isn't rly a valid target, no matter how you twist things

    it could be, if the horde fores seized the place and made that a military camp or base, and it wasn't, it was a civil camp of hunters that were brutalized

    If we are going to say anything is valid just because there is some class trainer, shit is going to the fan rly quickly.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by sam86 View Post
    isn't that topic over 10 years old now?
    It will be in December, and WC3 is 18 years old and yet people would still dig up dialogue from that of random tauren berserkers than address where the story is now, where the faction war they're bickering about a specific minor incident of is over

    THANKS. TO. BAINE.

    Mod Edit: Don't use giant fonts in this fashion
    Last edited by Aucald; 2020-07-02 at 12:27 PM. Reason: Received Infraction
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    Having the authority to do a thing doesn't make it just, moral, or even correct.

  3. #43
    The Insane Syegfryed's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    19,268
    Quote Originally Posted by Powerogue View Post
    where the faction war they're bickering about a specific minor incident of is over
    for now

    THANKS. TO. BAINE.
    you are telling the war is over thanks to baine? 4Head

  4. #44
    The Unstoppable Force Super Kami Dende's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    The Lookout
    Posts
    20,979
    You think when they firebombed Taurens, the place smelt like a Steak BBQ?

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    you are telling the war is over thanks to baine? 4Head
    Uniting the factions is on Baine, confronting Sylvanas is on Saurfang.

    He put his life on the line to save the forsaken Derek from Sylvanas's brainwashing, earning the trust of Jaina. Confronted by Sylvanas, he defended Zelling and took full responsibility, stirring the hearts of everyone present against Sylvanas's tyranny. Faced with something to unite over, Horde and Alliance forces put aside their differences to rescue Baine and confront Sylvanas at Orgrimmar.

    Without Baine, Sylvanas would have successfully gotten the factions to consume each other, eradicate hope, and end the world as we know it. Saurfang's rebellion would have ended with him.
    Last edited by Powerogue; 2020-07-02 at 04:59 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    Having the authority to do a thing doesn't make it just, moral, or even correct.

  6. #46
    The Insane Syegfryed's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    19,268
    Quote Originally Posted by Powerogue View Post
    Uniting the factions is on Baine, confronting Sylvanas is on Saurfang.

    He put his life on the line to save the forsaken Derek from Sylvanas's brainwashing, earning the trust of Jaina. Confronted by Sylvanas, he defended Zelling and took full responsibility, stirring the hearts of everyone present against Sylvanas's tyranny. Faced with something to unite over, Horde and Alliance forces put aside their differences to rescue Baine and confront Sylvanas at Orgrimmar.
    you can twist things enough to say the war end thanks to sylvanas

    lets not put one guy with the credit of things, especially someone like Baine, who never had the balls to challenge sylvanas and end the war like the horde leader

  7. #47
    @Powerogue

    There's no such thing as Tauren berserkers, those are regular tauren so ordinary they are simply called Tauren. Cairne was just as battle hungry and eagerly jumped into battle with humans as you see in the video below.

    https://youtu.be/WZeE9jU1KDA?t=70

    The whole point is Tauren and orcs have similar cultures. But your posts suggest you don't want Baine to be a tauren, but simply an Alliance patsy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    you can twist things enough to say the war end thanks to sylvanas

    lets not put one guy with the credit of things, especially someone like Baine, who never had the balls to challenge sylvanas and end the war like the horde leader
    Earlier in this thread, Powerogue claimed Baine joining his friends in Vendetta point in defending against the invading Alliance soldiers who had teamed up with his old enemies in Bael'dun would be "stupidly bloodthirsty", "like Garrosh" and "not like a tauren."

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    you can twist things enough to say the war end thanks to sylvanas

    lets not put one guy with the credit of things, especially someone like Baine, who never had the balls to challenge sylvanas and end the war like the horde leader
    Well, it is stupid to challenge someone more powerful than you head to head. Live to fight another day ? Stop spouting nonsense.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Specialka View Post
    Well, it is stupid to challenge someone more powerful than you head to head.
    Baine never even tries unless the Alliance is at stake.

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    the real one words are meaningless as he is, so are not considered
    No, that is where you are wrong. Your words are meaningless. Baine IS and REMAINS chief of the Tauren, what he says goes. You can make your headcanon where everything that ever happened in Baine's fault, where he did not help save the Horde from the Psycho Banshee you were following, but that is just your fantasy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    when you say worse, you are trying to say better, because theramore was actually threat that actively attacked the horde, unlike taurujo who didn't raise a finger to the alliance?
    I am not in the habit of using the exact opposite words of what I want to say, unless I am sarcastic. Which I was not. The fact that you cannot see how nuking a city is worse then destroying a camp consisting of three (!!!) buildings only helps to question your judgement.

    You have been trying to spin this tale for quite some time. The reality is that Taurajo was a justified military target as admitted by the relevant authority. Again you may believe in your headcannon, where Baine's word does not count for the Tauren, but you will find it hard to convince people that your fantasy supercedes the canon lore.

  11. #51
    Legendary! Ihavewaffles's Avatar
    5+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    The spice must flow!
    Posts
    6,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Minikin View Post
    Blizzard through Baine pretty much confirmed that hunters and such were trained there so I dont really see how it is a war crime

    Garrosh was constantly applying pressure on alliance, calling Varian a dog in the Ulduar cinematic. His troops bombed Theramore. Sylvanas slimed Southshore and blighted Gilneas. His troops also bombed a school in Stonetalon but they probably had it coming since I think because they were hippies high on a mountain, never good that combination. Astrannar was firebombed too. Finally the alliance went and set fire and made some bbq happen. <innocents died>. Innocents dont matter in wow. I dont care how many nice hd cinematics they make, I am not going to listen to that honor stuff. There is a world quest where you punch Deathwing in the face, its seen as funny and hilarious.

    And I am not asking for a pissing contest about how much worse the alliance has done, because frankly I dont care about your counter point and wont listen to it! I am asking why Taurajo is seen in a bad light and not a legitimate military target *sneeze*.
    You didn't give one reason why Taurajo was okay target, it wasn't, speaking as Alliance, don't see why massmurder on fluffeh moo cows is ok..

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Powerogue View Post
    Uniting the factions is on Baine, confronting Sylvanas is on Saurfang.

    He put his life on the line to save the forsaken Derek from Sylvanas's brainwashing, earning the trust of Jaina. Confronted by Sylvanas, he defended Zelling and took full responsibility, stirring the hearts of everyone present against Sylvanas's tyranny. Faced with something to unite over, Horde and Alliance forces put aside their differences to rescue Baine and confront Sylvanas at Orgrimmar.

    Without Baine, Sylvanas would have successfully gotten the factions to consume each other, eradicate hope, and end the world as we know it. Saurfang's rebellion would have ended with him.
    Well said, but pointless.

    The Horde posters here will never admit Baine's role in all this. He could have single-handedly saved us by slamming Sylvanas over the head with his totems and they would still call him a coward. Sylvanas on the other hand is their goddess and we are all fools for not allowing her to succeed and murder us all. Everyone that went against her is a coward, a traitor or an Alliance sycophant.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Specialka View Post
    Well, it is stupid to challenge someone more powerful than you head to head. Live to fight another day ? Stop spouting nonsense.
    This argument has been tried against @Syegfryed in another threat. It doesn't work. When confronted with arguments that counter his nonesense he just ignores them and keep going "lalalalala Baine is a coward lalalalala". He is one of those that you cannot convince with logic, his reality is very different from ours.

  13. #53
    If you did the quests there OP as Alliance you wouldn't have looked so foolish...

  14. #54
    @Raisei

    Please, don't embarass yourself, we all know you don't actually believe that Baine saying something in-story constitutes that being objective reality out of story because the same strand of logic would lead you to accept that Sylvanas alone was responsible for everything in the Fourth War or that Daelin and Arthas were morally equivalent to what the Horde has done, since those are the positions of the Alliance sovereign. Get back to admitting you're pushing Baine solely out of contrarianism because he's loathed by virtually all Horde players interested in the story and because of his pro-Alliance positions - that's defensible territory. No one who hasn't taken a hit on the head would ever endorse Baine's positions were they to be transposed on another party, and we know this because of how the people defending him rightly view his Alliance equivalents.

    Infracted.
    Last edited by Aucald; 2020-07-02 at 12:29 PM. Reason: Received Infraction
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

    Tinkers will be the next Class confirmed.

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Gann Stonespire View Post
    Baine never even tries unless the Alliance is at stake.
    No, he just tries to stop the Horde when it goes too far. He could not stop the burning of Teldrassil, he could at least save a single person in the form of Derek.

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    @Raisei

    Please, don't embarass yourself, we all know you don't actually believe that Baine saying something in-story constitutes that being objective reality out of story because the same strand of logic would lead you to accept that Sylvanas alone was responsible for everything in the Fourth War or that Daelin and Arthas were morally equivalent to what the Horde has done, since those are the positions of the Alliance sovereign.
    It is somewhat hard to argue against people that do not believe in and dismiss logic, so I need to adjust the arguments.

    However - and I am pretty sure you won't agree - I am not sure these situations are completely equal. Baine's decision and order as chieftain has a different weight then Anduin blabbering to Saurfang in a more or less private setting. But also Anduin needed Saurfang, he had to get that old Orc out of his funk to beat the Banshee. Since we have no internal monolouge for that scene we can't know, but Anduin might have just said what was needed, not what he believed.
    In fact I hope so, because otherwise... if his tutors have told him that Arthas's crimes are on the Alliance then I will personally fire them... or set them on fire.

    My favourite theory is that Anduin has delibaretly manipulated Saurfang both when he let him out of the cage and when he talked to him before SoO 2.0, so his words were just functional and not truthful. Unlikely as it is, that would be quite a twist.

  17. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Raisei View Post
    However - and I am pretty sure you won't agree - I am not sure these situations are completely equal. Baine's decision and order as chieftain has a different weight then Anduin blabbering to Saurfang in a more or less private setting. But also Anduin needed Saurfang, he had to get that old Orc out of his funk to beat the Banshee. Since we have no internal monolouge for that scene we can't know, but Anduin might have just said what was needed, not what he believed.
    In fact I hope so, because otherwise... if his tutors have told him that Arthas's crimes are on the Alliance then I will personally fire them... or set them on fire.

    My favourite theory is that Anduin has delibaretly manipulated Saurfang both when he let him out of the cage and when he talked to him before SoO 2.0, so his words were just functional and not truthful. Unlikely as it is, that would be quite a twist.
    We know that it's Anduin's objective policy from Day 1 that Sylvanas is solely culpable and that her removal is the war goal. He's acting in his capacity as leader when doing this. Ditto Baine is acting as leader when he exiles the tauren involved on the basis of Taurajo being a valid target. They are acting as in-story heads of state. The 'War Crimes' based argument collapses even further given its conclusion as we've talked about earlier.

    As to your latter point, there's something to be said that Shaw saw releasing Saurfang from the position of subverting the Horde with division at a time where it couldn't afford it. While we have seen Anduin being subversive before - like with mind controlling those dudes to escape, he's never been malicious or disingenuous and I don't view it in his character. It's genuinely a shame that this didn't get brought up in story because there is actually a good practical ground for loosing Saurfang in order to destabilize the Horde, but the purely moralistic lens the narrative takes robs the Alliance of conflict and of different motivations for the same action. You could have Halford and Shaw discuss it, calling back to their chat on their different views of war.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

    Tinkers will be the next Class confirmed.

  18. #58
    Well, he never said that Arthas's crimes were on the Alliance. He said that the ghost of the past haunted them as well. Quite a nuance.

  19. #59
    @Specialka

    He brings it up as a point of equivalence when Saurfang brings up the Horde's origins. I'd tell you why that's wrong, but I think any Alliance poster here would do a much more committed job and/or already has.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

    Tinkers will be the next Class confirmed.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Specialka View Post
    Well, he never said that Arthas's crimes were on the Alliance. He said that the ghost of the past haunted them as well. Quite a nuance.
    Exactly. But people are too small-brained to understand the difference.

    I dont blame them though. Right now, Horde fanboys need all the ammunition they can against the Alliance. It's almost like charity.

    Infracted.
    Last edited by Aucald; 2020-07-02 at 12:52 PM. Reason: Received Infraction
    Expansion Storylines ranking:

    Legion > Cataclysm > MoP > BfA up to 8.2.5 > Wrath > TBC > WoD > Dragonflight > BfA 8.3 > Shadowlands

Posting Permissions

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