View Poll Results: Would you like Baine as Warchief?

Voters
290. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    88 30.34%
  • No

    202 69.66%

Thread: Warchief Baine

Page 12 of 17 FirstFirst ...
2
10
11
12
13
14
... LastLast
  1. #221
    Quote Originally Posted by matrix123mko View Post
    At least Baine is honest with his allegiances.

    Horde is basically Alliance puppet state now.

  2. #222
    Quote Originally Posted by Jshadowhunter View Post
    Horde is basically Alliance puppet state now.
    But Alliance players are still asking for their dreamed genocide.
    https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...lopment-thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Nevcairiel View Post
    If you are suggesting to take my Night Elfs Shadowmeld away, then please find some pike to run yourself through, tyvm.

  3. #223
    Quote Originally Posted by Soon-TM View Post
    What is the overarching theme of the Horde today, may I ask?


    or



    You can pick one, but can't have the other.
    Last edited by WanderingWarrior; 2019-12-26 at 02:45 PM.
    "You will become my force of retribution. Where you tread, doom will follow. Go now, and claim your destiny, Death Knight."

  4. #224
    I am Murloc! Soon-TM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Netherstorm
    Posts
    5,068
    Quote Originally Posted by WanderingWarrior View Post
    <snip>
    Why not? ^^
    Last edited by Soon-TM; 2019-12-26 at 02:52 PM.
    "This world is a prison!"

  5. #225
    Quote Originally Posted by Soon-TM View Post
    Second pic is awesome, but I can't open the first one
    Fixed it now.
    "You will become my force of retribution. Where you tread, doom will follow. Go now, and claim your destiny, Death Knight."

  6. #226
    Quote Originally Posted by HighlordJohnstone View Post
    Dear god no. He's the opposite of Nathanos. Too righteous, whiny, and obnoxious. Two bad extremes = Two bad Warchief's! Garrosh was the best Warchief prior to MoP fucking up his character!
    Gotta disagree with you there. Had no problem attacking Alliance all around Northrend simply to take what they had that he wanted (trade routes, locations, supplies). Only had a problem with one of his generals backstabbing an Alliance force engaged with Scourge because it made him look back. Completely destroyed any chance of Horde/Alliance cooperation against Yogg Saron. Would have destroyed the cooperation between the Horde and Alliance against Arthas if Thrall and Tirion hadn't been right there to shut him up.

    And the worst thing is we don't even see HOW he ended up with such an Alliance hate boner in the first place. One moment he's moping around Garadar the next he's commanding in Northrend. I know there's the books, but even they don't describe this. The nearest I can come to for a motivation is "People who are not orcs have things orcs would like to have, therefore they need to give it up or die so we can have it anyway."
    -- Remember, never look over the long term story and try to piece together what Blizzard planned, only take singular moments out of context and blow them way out of proportion. We can argue better that way. Every time I try to look at the story as Blizzard are presenting it I'm either called a shill or a fanfiction writer. - Powerogue 2019

  7. #227
    Quote Originally Posted by Soon-TM View Post
    Why not? ^^
    Because when that happens Horde falls to pieces, devouring itself like an ouroboros. Happened like two times now... No, three (Orgrim Motherfucking Doomhammer betraying Blackhand) ... or four (Gul'dan betraying Orgrim).

    If there is a overarching theme, it's one of those art pictures, although devs and the playerbase is lost on which one they would prefer.
    Last edited by WanderingWarrior; 2019-12-26 at 03:29 PM.
    "You will become my force of retribution. Where you tread, doom will follow. Go now, and claim your destiny, Death Knight."

  8. #228
    Quote Originally Posted by WanderingWarrior View Post
    Because when that happens Horde falls to pieces, devouring itself like an ouroboros. Happened like two times now... No, three (Orgrim Motherfucking Doomhammer betraying Blackhand) ... or four (Gul'dan betraying Orgrim).

    If there is a overarching theme, it's one of those art pictures, although devs and the playerbase is lost on which one they would prefer.
    One of those pictures represents what actualy happened.

  9. #229
    some posts here sounds like a warchief must always be a complete douchebag like Baine or an insane warmonger like Garrosh or Sylvanas.

    Why ?

    Early Thrall also had a great mid ground. Hard fighter, good morals. Its not THAT complex to design a warchief that is not just either a douchebag or a warmonger. Dont get that.

  10. #230
    Quote Originally Posted by Niwes View Post
    some posts here sounds like a warchief must always be a complete douchebag like Baine or an insane warmonger like Garrosh or Sylvanas.

    Why ?

    Early Thrall also had a great mid ground. Hard fighter, good morals. Its not THAT complex to design a warchief that is not just either a douchebag or a warmonger. Dont get that.
    Garrosh was fine but all the whiners in Cata hated him because Thrall was gone and wanted him replaced. (I know because I was one of them)
    So the devs hit him with a "not-see stick".

  11. #231
    Quote Originally Posted by Jshadowhunter View Post
    Garrosh was fine but all the whiners in Cata hated him because Thrall was gone and wanted him replaced. (I know because I was one of them)
    So the devs hit him with a "not-see stick".
    you know what parts of a „millions player base“ thought, because you was „one of them“. ok.

    i personally was not fine with garrosh. disliked him from day 1 and was sure he will become a villain. but, yeah, i am not „one of them“.

  12. #232
    Quote Originally Posted by Niwes View Post
    I disliked him from day 1 and was sure he will become a villain. but, yeah, i am not „one of them“.
    Sure, whatever makes you sleep easy at night.

  13. #233
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    • It's not the same thing. The Kor'kron were sent to aid in security with the bulk of the Forsaken army in Northrend. After the Wrathgate event, they remained to keep the peace within Undercity after the use of abominations (the apothecaries' constructs) were deemed not trustworthy. Notice how Sylvanas still remained in power, and no edict changing the way the Forsaken ruled itself was done, even after the Wrathgate.
    • Thrall did not "put" Gallywix as the leader. He already was the Bilgewater Cartel leader. (On top of that, Thrall wasn't even leader of the Horde anymore, at that time) Likewise, Thrall did not "put" Gazlowe as the new leader of the goblins. Gallywix escaped, and Thrall asked Gazlowe to step up and lead the currently leaderless goblins.
    • Banning the use of weapons of war, such as the Blight, is within the Warchief's purview as it is not "internal affairs". Especially when said bomb brings heavy risks to the Horde's own members.
    • Then why didn't she?
    • In the Horde, not in the nations under its banner. He is the ultimate authority for any and everything regarding the Horde, but he cannot do anything else regarding their internal affairs.
    • ... Really? Garrosh and Sylvanas? "Political considerations"?
    The Warchief has power restrained only by Mak'gora. Everyone in the Horde is his subject, not only can he dismiss and appoint leaders should he want to, but he can also kill them if they oppose his policy and work against him and is fully in his rights to do so, as attested by Baine himself when he talks about how Garrosh offing Vol'jin for threatening him with death is entirely in line with the Blood Oath. You impose limits on the Warchief's purview that the game never entertains and it's why your arguments fail. To go over your arguments piece by piece.

    1. That Sylvanas remained in charge doesn't meant that the Warchief didnt' run her troops, tell her to attack shit or have her city under military occupation. The ban on the Blight is also a limitation on Forsaken war effort and the invasion of Gilneas itself is part of Garrosh ordering the broader powers. Ditto, the holding of her city is done by Thrall in contravention to their sovereignty, because the Horde component races only have sovereignty in so far as they don't interfere with the Warchief's will, due to the Blood Oath making them instruments thereof. The Horde is not a confederation, it's a dictatorship.
    2. Thrall did appoint Gallywix as a leader. He shows up the second Gallywix is set to be overthrown and marks him out as being the one in charge, despite the player having just kicked him out. This is despite the existence of other options and the will of other people - the Horde chose the Bilgewater leader, as the Horde, being an extension of the Warchief and now the meme Council, designated Gazlowe to be in charge despite him being from a different cartel.
    3. The Warchief is an executive in all fields. Garrosh could have his Kor'kron maintain his desired policy regardless of the individual desires of the component races and did so. Sylvanas could send Horde leaders to prison freely. The reason they didn't ditch leaders entirely isn't a lack of capacity but their individual leadership style. Garrosh wanted the others to align with him, rather than booting them outright, the only one he outried to kill had already turned against him. Sylvanas did not require a leadership switch to rule, they were already largely behind her, her leadership was based on a veneer of maintaining their existing cultures and traditions while barreling them towards a goal of her choosing.

    There is no separation of internal and external affairs. The Blood Oath is total - there is no clause to "I am an instrument of my Warchief's desire" that reads "except when I'm among others who happen to look like me but have also made the blood oath". All lenience and free reign is just what the Warchief allows to be exercised out of convenience.
    Last edited by Super Dickmann; 2019-12-26 at 07:49 PM.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  14. #234
    Over 9000! Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    9,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    No, the warchief cannot. The warchief simply does not have the power to interfere with the internal affairs of any of the other groups within its banner.
    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!
    The Warchief of the Horde stands as the undisputed leader. The warchief holds dominion over the entire Horde. The warchief maintains the Horde, has the power to declare war for the entire Horde, take any precaution to ensure the stability and security of the Horde's member states, and has the final say in the induction of new Horde members.

    It's something heavily evidenced by the fact that we never saw the warchief never telling any of the other leaders how to rule their own people, even in times of crisis.
    just because he never did, don't mean he cannot, absence of evidence don't mean its evidence of absence,"

    Also, Garrosh put the Trolls in martial law, thus, proving he himself mnaged the trolls with vol'jin absence

    Vol'jin also ruled over the orcs since there was no orc leader
    And this "he won't do it for the sake of stability within the faction" is bollocks. The Horde's stability was already in shambles during Garrosh's reign and a revolt happened, and during Sylvanas' reign, in which another revolt happened
    just because was bad don't mean it could not be worse

  15. #235
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    The Warchief has power restrained only by Mak'gora. Everyone in the Horde is his subject, not only can he dismiss and appoint leaders should he want to, but he can also kill them if they oppose his policy and work against him and is fully in his rights to do so, as attested by Baine himself when he talks about how Garrosh offing Vol'jin for threatening him with death is entirely in line with the Blood Oath.
    What you wrote there is at odds with itself. If it is the Warchief's purview to kill off and/or replace leaders of the groups within its banner, why did Vol'jin's assassination have to happen in such secrecy, away from the public's eye? Why didn't Garrosh simply replace Vol'jin, or better yet, make a public execution out of him to show the rest of the Horde what it means to defy "their warchief"?

    You impose limits on the Warchief's purview that the game never entertains and it's why your arguments fail.
    The game does support my arguments, and I've shown that. At no point any of the warchiefs exercise their supposed rights you claim they have. Vol'jin was assassinated in secret, instead of making an example out of him. Garrosh never even publicly admits that he had Vol'jin killed until the troll reveals himself.

    1. That Sylvanas remained in charge doesn't meant that the Warchief didnt' run her troops, tell her to attack shit or have her city under military occupation. The ban on the Blight is also a limitation on Forsaken war effort and the invasion of Gilneas itself is part of Garrosh ordering the broader powers. Ditto, the holding of her city is done by Thrall in contravention to their sovereignty, because the Horde component races only have sovereignty in so far as they don't interfere with the Warchief's will, due to the Blood Oath making them instruments thereof. The Horde is not a confederation, it's a dictatorship.
    None of that counters my argument that the Warchief has no say in the internal affairs of the nations within its banner.

    2. Thrall did appoint Gallywix as a leader. He shows up the second Gallywix is set to be overthrown and marks him out as being the one in charge, despite the player having just kicked him out. This is despite the existence of other options and the will of other people - the Horde chose the Bilgewater leader, as the Horde, being an extension of the Warchief and now the meme Council, designated Gazlowe to be in charge despite him being from a different cartel.
    Thrall was not the warchief of the Horde anymore at that point. And the council did not "designate" Gazlowe as the next leader of the Bilgewater Cartel. Thrall asked him to step up, and step up he did. Big difference.

    3. The Warchief is an executive in all fields. Garrosh could have his Kor'kron maintain his desired policy regardless of the individual desires of the component races and did so. Sylvanas could send Horde leaders to prison freely. The reason they didn't ditch leaders entirely isn't a lack of capacity but their individual leadership style. Garrosh wanted the others to align with him, rather than booting them outright, the only one he outried to kill had already turned against him. Sylvanas did not require a leadership switch to rule, they were already largely behind her, her leadership was based on a veneer of maintaining their existing cultures and traditions while barreling them towards a goal of her choosing.
    Garrosh cared little about diplomacy, even within the Horde. He did not care about 'appeasing' the leaders. If it was within the purview of the warchief to do whatever he wanted with the races under his banner, he would've removed Baine and Vol'jin from their leadership positions from the get-go, and not resort to honorless sneak-attack assassionation attempts.

    There is no separation of internal and external affairs. The Blood Oath is total - there is no clause to "I am an instrument of my Warchief's desire" that reads "except when I'm among others who happen to look like me but have also made the blood oath". All lenience and free reign is just what the Warchief allows to be exercised out of convenience.
    Oh, please. "The warchief allows out of convenience". Garrosh cared nothing about the non-orcs' convenience. They were just tools to him, if not less so. And that goes just as true for Sylvanas, if not more so. If power over the other races' internal affairs was within the Horde's warchief purview, we would have seen that right being exercised already, and we had plenty of opportunities for that.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    just because he never did, don't mean he cannot, absence of evidence don't mean its evidence of absence,"
    Normally, you'd be right, but in this case, absence of evidence is evidence of absence, because the situations with Garrosh and Sylvanas would've been situations that would have gone much better for them if they simply openly removed and replaced the leaders of the race that were giving them trouble.

    But it never happened. Garrosh and Sylvanas did nothing to the internal affairs of the races of the Horde. Creating a trap and ordering Vol'jin's assassionation in secret is also heavy evidence that the Warchief does not possess power over the races' internal affairs. Because, again, if it was, this would've happened publicly instead, with 'honor'.

    Also, Garrosh put the Trolls in martial law, thus, proving he himself mnaged the trolls with vol'jin absence
    He did not "manage" the trolls. He just held them hostage.

    Vol'jin also ruled over the orcs since there was no orc leader
    Did he? When?
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    Update 08/17: I changed how the Bone spec's golem mechanic works, as well as some other minor changes.
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!
    Update 09/02: Apparently the mods decided to merge my class concept thread with an existing one.

  16. #236
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    What you wrote there is at odds with itself. If it is the Warchief's purview to kill off and/or replace leaders of the groups within its banner, why did Vol'jin's assassination have to happen in such secrecy, away from the public's eye? Why didn't Garrosh simply replace Vol'jin, or better yet, make a public execution out of him to show the rest of the Horde what it means to defy "their warchief"?
    He didn't need to do it, as Baine himself argues in War Crimes and as Vol'jin confirms. Garrosh acted fully within his rights to have him killed by whatever means Garrosh saw fit. He chose to do it in this fashion out of convenience, because shivving a guy in a cave is easier than braining him in public, and also because he was giving Vol'jin a final chance to prove himself - he could either accept the use of anima and mogu life magic or get killed. It served the double purpose of an execution and a test. Garrosh wanted the Horde to live up to his standards, which they failed to do repeatedly.

    Thrall was not the warchief of the Horde anymore at that point. And the council did not "designate" Gazlowe as the next leader of the Bilgewater Cartel. Thrall asked him to step up, and step up he did. Big difference.
    He acted from a position of command and forwarded you to a loyalist of his, doing so despite Gallywix being unseated seconds before and without any outer input. Garrosh was only acting Warchief at that point and subject to Thrall's suggestion. Gazlowe was selected by Thrall as the next Bilgewater leader, despite being Steamwheedle and without any outer input. Thrall was in his capacity as an executive of the Council, which is the Warchief stand-in.

    Garrosh cared little about diplomacy, even within the Horde. He did not care about 'appeasing' the leaders. If it was within the purview of the warchief to do whatever he wanted with the races under his banner, he would've removed Baine and Vol'jin from their leadership positions from the get-go, and not resort to honorless sneak-attack assassionation attempts.
    Garrosh didn't care about appeasing the leaders. He wanted them to do and act as he wished them to and as the Blood Oath and orcish values required of them. There is no dishonor in executing a seditious subordinate, he was only extending Vol'jin a final lifeline. As @Syegfryed pointed out, he put the Darkspear under martial law and had them executed for sedition and also ordered Lor'themar and his elves freely, as he did the Forsaken, whom he put under oversight and who he also limited the military options of. This is all preceded by Garrosh deciding who gets to stay in his city or not and evicting Vol'jin for talking shit, all things that mess with the 'internal affairs' that you claim he has no capacity to act within. You have yet to counter the point that the Blood Oath is total in nature - that everyone sworn to be an instrument of the Warchief's will does so indefinitely, not only in specific cases and that the fact that the Warchief only chose to exercise that power occasionally rather than at all times doesn't mean he lacks it.

    Oh, please. "The warchief allows out of convenience". Garrosh cared nothing about the non-orcs' convenience. They were just tools to him, if not less so. And that goes just as true for Sylvanas, if not more so. If power over the other races' internal affairs was within the Horde's warchief purview, we would have seen that right being exercised already, and we had plenty of opportunities for that.
    Garrosh was deeply interested in the Horde leading up to a set standard. "I will stop at nothing to make a world for the orcs and all strong enough to stand with us". Sylvanas by contrast didn't give a flying shit who was in charge, what they believed and why. What she cared about is that they do and die, and they did. She only acted in so far as was required to achieve that aim. Rocking the boat and imposing any ideology past simple convenience would've contradicted her goal of mass death and utility.
    Last edited by Super Dickmann; 2019-12-26 at 09:38 PM.
    Dickmann's Law: As a discussion on the Lore forums becomes longer, the probability of the topic derailing to become about Sylvanas approaches 1.

  17. #237
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    The Warchief simply cannot tell how the groups within its banner how to rule its own members. Otherwise it'd be a simple thing for Garrosh to order Vol'jin to step down from his position of leadership of the trolls, and pick another troll who's more in line with Garrosh's leadership. Sylvanas could've done the same to the tauren, ordering Baine to step down from his position of leadership and putting in... I don't know, Magatha or someone else from the Grimtotem that better align with Sylvanas' desires.

    After all, per your logic, that should be within the Warchief's purview.
    Yeah, no, this has nothing to do with "my logic" nor with what has actually been said in the post you replied to. Try again, this time with less straw-men and less logical leaps. Because the Warchief having no right to order racial leaders to step down is neither here nor there in regards to what was being discussed, i.e. that the Blood Oath of the Horde gives all members of the Horde the right to vengeance, not all member races in general, under the personal purview of just their leaders. If you thought this post was supposed to vindicate your blatant misrepresentation of the Blood Oath - and basic English for that matter - do rethink that notion.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    No, the warchief cannot. The warchief simply does not have the power to interfere with the internal affairs of any of the other groups within its banner. It's something heavily evidenced by the fact that we never saw the warchief never telling any of the other leaders how to rule their own people, even in times of crisis.

    And this "he won't do it for the sake of stability within the faction" is bollocks. The Horde's stability was already in shambles during Garrosh's reign and a revolt happened, and during Sylvanas' reign, in which another revolt happened.
    Do actually give the Blood Oath a read. The Warchief has pretty much absolute power. Which is corroborated by your statements here being blatantly wrong. Thrall imposing Kor'kron martial law upon Undercity. Garrosh ordering Vol'jin and his ilk to move out of Orgrimmar. Garrosh imposing Kor'kron martial law upon Sen'jin Isles. Garrosh forbidding Sylvanas from using the Plague in Gilneas. Garrosh allowing Sylvanas to use only accepted strains of Blight in Silverpine and other areas. "We never saw the Warchief telling any of the other leaders how to rule their own people".


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    "I'm saying Baine broke the blood oath multiple times, so I'll just say he did so multiple times."
    This is beyond dishonest. The entire rest of @MatthiasVonTzeskagrad's post you replied to here is them giving examples. You trying to present their argument as just "I'm saying Baine broke the blood oath multiple times, so I'll just say he did so multiple times." is somewhere between silly and sad.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    The Horde is not a nation. It's an alliance of nations. The warchief of the Horde cannot interfere in the internal affairs of the other nations' within its banner. It's been demonstrated in the game several times when the warchief did not simply remove the dissenting leaders and appointed new leaders, more in line with their way of thinking.
    You're conflating the Horde with the Alliance right now.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    According to the "blood oath" that you all seem to hold in high regard, all Horde members are "tools of the warchief", so why are you criticizing Baine for "doing his job as a Horde member" and protecting his "warchief"?
    You putting the "Warchief" in quotation marks by your own volition is you making it crystal clear on how this cute little gotcha here is a complete flop. Garrosh wasn't the Warchief anymore at that point. And what's wrong with holding the Blood Oath in high regard exactly?


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Sylvanas, for one. On the other hand, I cannot think of any leader more interested in the spirit of the Horde than Baine, though.
    What's this "spirit of the Horde", exactly? And how is Sylvanas less interested in laws of the Horde than Baine?


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    • It's not the same thing. The Kor'kron were sent to aid in security with the bulk of the Forsaken army in Northrend. After the Wrathgate event, they remained to keep the peace within Undercity after the use of abominations (the apothecaries' constructs) were deemed not trustworthy. Notice how Sylvanas still remained in power, and no edict changing the way the Forsaken ruled itself was done, even after the Wrathgate.
    They weren't sent to aid the security. They were sent to replace it. And gee, who was it who deemed the use of Abominations not trustworthy again? Because it wasn't Sylvanas. The moment the Kor'kron in Undercity were killed she brought them back. Could it have been Thrall? :O


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    • Banning the use of weapons of war, such as the Blight, is within the Warchief's purview as it is not "internal affairs". Especially when said bomb brings heavy risks to the Horde's own members.
    How is Sylvanas' waging her own campaigns on her own turf not internal affair? Besides, Garrosh banned even production of unaccepted strains of it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    • Then why didn't she?
    Because she decided against it? This question is a non-argument.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    • In the Horde, not in the nations under its banner. He is the ultimate authority for any and everything regarding the Horde, but he cannot do anything else regarding their internal affairs.
    Except both the racial leaders and the individual race members are sworn to the Warchief, with the wording of the Blood Oath being so severe it outright calls them tools. The notion that there are limits on how the Warchief gets to entertain it has little to stand on.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    • ... Really? Garrosh and Sylvanas? "Political considerations"?
    Try to actually make an argument? Garrosh was politically cunning, vide how he played the Divine Bell incident. Sylvanas is even more so.


    Quote Originally Posted by cparle87 View Post
    Gotta disagree with you there. Had no problem attacking Alliance all around Northrend simply to take what they had that he wanted (trade routes, locations, supplies). Only had a problem with one of his generals backstabbing an Alliance force engaged with Scourge because it made him look back. Completely destroyed any chance of Horde/Alliance cooperation against Yogg Saron. Would have destroyed the cooperation between the Horde and Alliance against Arthas if Thrall and Tirion hadn't been right there to shut him up.
    Kinda hard for Garrosh to have destroyed any chance of Horde/Alliance cooperation against Yogg-Saron long after Alliance declared war against the Horde. Likewise, it's kinda hard for the Horde team in Icecrown to have backstabbed someone they were at war with. And they didn't make Garrosh look back as he was not there, nor ordered it. He was against that attack because he considered it to be cowardly.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    What you wrote there is at odds with itself. If it is the Warchief's purview to kill off and/or replace leaders of the groups within its banner, why did Vol'jin's assassination have to happen in such secrecy, away from the public's eye? Why didn't Garrosh simply replace Vol'jin, or better yet, make a public execution out of him to show the rest of the Horde what it means to defy "their warchief"?
    Nice for you to deliberately ignore the part of @Super Dickmann's post about Baine himself successfully arguing during Garrosh's trial that Garrosh had all the right in the world to kill Vol'jin. It neatly showcases how your argument has no basis whatsoever, which forces you to resort to blatant cherry-picking to mask that fact. But reality is a harsh mistress and the reality is that as per Baine himself, Garrosh could have killed Vol'jin publicly or in a Saurok cave. That was his decision to make. Never mind that the entire scenario with Vol'jin was one last test to figure out Vol'jin's attitudes.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    The game does support my arguments, and I've shown that. At no point any of the warchiefs exercise their supposed rights you claim they have. Vol'jin was assassinated in secret, instead of making an example out of him. Garrosh never even publicly admits that he had Vol'jin killed until the troll reveals himself.
    No, you haven't shown anything. What you've done is constructing an amalgam of fallacies. Like your special pleading about the manner in which Garrosh decided to off Vol'jin. As per a racial leader of the Horde Garrosh had full authority to do that. You offered nothing whatsoever to counter that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    None of that counters my argument that the Warchief has no say in the internal affairs of the nations within its banner.
    Yes, Thrall replacing Undercity guards with Kor'kron because he decided to do so totally does not counter your argument that the Warchief has no right to intervene in the internal affairs of subject races.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Garrosh cared little about diplomacy, even within the Horde. He did not care about 'appeasing' the leaders. If it was within the purview of the warchief to do whatever he wanted with the races under his banner, he would've removed Baine and Vol'jin from their leadership positions from the get-go, and not resort to honorless sneak-attack assassionation attempts.
    Yet another statement about Garrosh from you, yet another something that's completely wrong. Garrosh cared about appeasing the leaders of the Horde quite a bit. It's why he lost his shit more and more with each consequent failure to do so. Garrosh's problem with racial leaders is that he completely misread the crowd because he didn't experience the failures of the Old Horde personally so the moment he learned about his father's redemption he developed a huge Old Horde boner. Case in point Garrosh thinking racial leaders would be in awe after he nuked Theramore.

    And looping back to Baine's statement, you're once again wrong about Vol'jin. Because the thing that Vol'jin did that according to Baine gave Garrosh the right to kill Vol'jin happened before Cata even started. So he most certainly could have removed Vol'jin pretty much from the get go. Him deciding otherwise isn't proof that your claims are correct because as @Syegfreyd already pointed out to you (futilely it appears), absence of evidence does not equal the evidence of absence.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Oh, please. "The warchief allows out of convenience". Garrosh cared nothing about the non-orcs' convenience. They were just tools to him, if not less so. And that goes just as true for Sylvanas, if not more so. If power over the other races' internal affairs was within the Horde's warchief purview, we would have seen that right being exercised already, and we had plenty of opportunities for that.
    Sylvanas made it clear in Before the Storm that she wants to maintain appearances to keep the Horde loyal.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Normally, you'd be right, but in this case, absence of evidence is evidence of absence, because the situations with Garrosh and Sylvanas would've been situations that would have gone much better for them if they simply openly removed and replaced the leaders of the race that were giving them trouble.
    Literally not how this works. Again, Baine himself outright contradicts your claims here in regards to Garrosh and Vol'jin. And as above, Sylvanas wanted to maintain appearances. And, later on, didn't give a fuck about Saurfang's little rebellion as she was aware of his plans and considered them to play into her own. Besides, by that point Saurfang already abandoned the Horde. And Baine was, you know, outright imprisoned and sentenced to death by her. Would you look at that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    But it never happened. Garrosh and Sylvanas did nothing to the internal affairs of the races of the Horde. Creating a trap and ordering Vol'jin's assassionation in secret is also heavy evidence that the Warchief does not possess power over the races' internal affairs. Because, again, if it was, this would've happened publicly instead, with 'honor'.
    Except you're still deliberately ignoring the part where Baine said that the Warchief most certainly has that power. And so did Vol'jin when questioned by him for that matter. Then there's Sylvanas imprisoning Baine. Publicly, which is in line with your special pleading here. Yet you haven't mentioned that one. How totally unexpected.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    He did not "manage" the trolls. He just held them hostage.
    They were under martial law, not hostage. I wonder what implications the "law" part of "martial law" has in regards to this discussion. 'Tis a mystery to be sure.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    Does the CIA pay you for your bullshit or are you just bootlicking in your free time?
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    Slant is an extremist, willing to sacrifice the lives of everyone to keep his wet dream of the EU alive.
    You shouldn't support people like him, it's like supporting ISIS.

  18. #238
    Quote Originally Posted by Mehrunes View Post
    Kinda hard for Garrosh to have destroyed any chance of Horde/Alliance cooperation against Yogg-Saron long after Alliance declared war against the Horde. Likewise, it's kinda hard for the Horde team in Icecrown to have backstabbed someone they were at war with. And they didn't make Garrosh look back as he was not there, nor ordered it. He was against that attack because he considered it to be cowardly.
    I'd suggest reviewing the Patch 3.1 trailer again. The actually neutral at the time Kirin Tor invite leaders from both factions to a meet, apparently hoping to enlist their aid against Yogg Saron. Though it looks like they (the Kirin Tor) didn't want either faction to know they had contacted the opposing faction for help. Make it a "both factions are helping the Kirin Tor not knowing the other also is" kinda thing. It looks like things are going well, Rhonin has Varian hooked and is trying to land him when Thrall and Garrosh show up. Cue Garrosh attacking Varian in a neutral setting. The cat is out of the bag. Varian now knows the Kirin Tor wants the Horde's help and tells Rhonin that Yogg Saron can have "his (Rhonin's pet) Horde."
    -- Remember, never look over the long term story and try to piece together what Blizzard planned, only take singular moments out of context and blow them way out of proportion. We can argue better that way. Every time I try to look at the story as Blizzard are presenting it I'm either called a shill or a fanfiction writer. - Powerogue 2019

  19. #239
    Quote Originally Posted by cparle87 View Post
    I'd suggest reviewing the Patch 3.1 trailer again. The actually neutral at the time Kirin Tor invite leaders from both factions to a meet, apparently hoping to enlist their aid against Yogg Saron. Though it looks like they (the Kirin Tor) didn't want either faction to know they had contacted the opposing faction for help. Make it a "both factions are helping the Kirin Tor not knowing the other also is" kinda thing. It looks like things are going well, Rhonin has Varian hooked and is trying to land him when Thrall and Garrosh show up. Cue Garrosh attacking Varian in a neutral setting. The cat is out of the bag. Varian now knows the Kirin Tor wants the Horde's help and tells Rhonin that Yogg Saron can have "his (Rhonin's pet) Horde."
    I'd suggest re-reading Chronicle v3. Because Varian declared war after Wrathgate and that war ended only at the end of MoP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    Does the CIA pay you for your bullshit or are you just bootlicking in your free time?
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    Slant is an extremist, willing to sacrifice the lives of everyone to keep his wet dream of the EU alive.
    You shouldn't support people like him, it's like supporting ISIS.

  20. #240
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dickmann View Post
    He didn't need to do it, as Baine himself argues in War Crimes and as Vol'jin confirms. Garrosh acted fully within his rights to have him killed by whatever means Garrosh saw fit.
    Can I have a quote of that passage, please?

    He acted from a position of command and forwarded you to a loyalist of his, doing so despite Gallywix being unseated seconds before and without any outer input. Garrosh was only acting Warchief at that point and subject to Thrall's suggestion. Gazlowe was selected by Thrall as the next Bilgewater leader, despite being Steamwheedle and without any outer input. Thrall was in his capacity as an executive of the Council, which is the Warchief stand-in.
    "Acting warchief". There is no such thing as that. Garrosh was made full-fledged warchief.

    Garrosh didn't care about appeasing the leaders. He wanted them to do and act as he wished them to and as the Blood Oath and orcish values required of them. There is no dishonor in executing a seditious subordinate, he was only extending Vol'jin a final lifeline. As @Syegfryed pointed out, he put the Darkspear under martial law and had them executed for sedition and also ordered Lor'themar and his elves freely, as he did the Forsaken, whom he put under oversight and who he also limited the military options of. This is all preceded by Garrosh deciding who gets to stay in his city or not and evicting Vol'jin for talking shit, all things that mess with the 'internal affairs' that you claim he has no capacity to act within. You have yet to counter the point that the Blood Oath is total in nature - that everyone sworn to be an instrument of the Warchief's will does so indefinitely, not only in specific cases and that the fact that the Warchief only chose to exercise that power occasionally rather than at all times doesn't mean he lacks it.
    None of what you said even comes close to "messing with internal affairs". Because at no point Garrosh tells Sylvanas or Lor'themar how they should lead their people, their laws, customs, their leaders, etc... none of that is ever changed with an edict from the warchief.

    Garrosh was deeply interested in the Horde leading up to a set standard. "I will stop at nothing to make a world for the orcs and all strong enough to stand with us". Sylvanas by contrast didn't give a flying shit who was in charge, what they believed and why. What she cared about is that they do and die, and they did. She only acted in so far as was required to achieve that aim. Rocking the boat and imposing any ideology past simple convenience would've contradicted her goal of mass death and utility.
    And, again, if the warchief really had any power over the internal affairs of the other races, Garrosh and Sylvanas would've exercised that right to remove nuisances that threatened their master plan.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    Update 08/17: I changed how the Bone spec's golem mechanic works, as well as some other minor changes.
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!
    Update 09/02: Apparently the mods decided to merge my class concept thread with an existing one.

Posting Permissions

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