Why aren't Tauren and Draenei just Neutral?

[Gann Stonespire]

Garrosh leads the Horde. Not the tauren. There is a difference. Anyone with the slightest bit of understanding can see that this line refers to groups within the Horde affecting each other, not within those groups. Baine leads the tauren, and his word is final for anything tauren. Garrosh, for example, has no power to tell the tauren to stop worshiping the Earthmother. He has no political power within the groups of the Horde, save for the orcs, since he leads the orcs as well.

Except retribution against attackers is normal for tauren just like worshipping the Earthmother is.

Baine abused his power to disrespect Tauren and Horde culture, whilst backstabbing his allies and punishing the defenders of his own people for doing the job he failed at.

Except, it doesn't. It shows him doing this out of duty and he fears for what could happen to his people.

Baine exiling Jorn Skyseer and the survivors of Taurajo for defending the Tauren shows he doesn't care about the Tauren, just himself and the Alliance.

Hatred for Anduin? What have you been smoking to think I have any sort of "hatred" toward Anduin?

Here you go.

Try to remember your own posts. Its hilarious someone can say Anduin is too peaceful, yet continually argue "I brush off the deaths of my own people and exile my own citizens for defending themselves" Baine is the best Horde leader possible.

There is no blame for Baine in this context, the active agent is still Sylvanas. Baine's inaction in the face of Sylvanas' atrocities doesn't somehow diminish Sylvanas' responsibility for her own actions.

Yet a lot of posts seem to say Sylvanas being a bad leader makes Baine not a traitor to the Tauren and the Horde who has continually disrespected their culture and put them in danger.

[Aucald]

Except that was Bain's personal thoughts that most tauren liked it AND, Bain's own ally who took care him of during Magatha's coup, disagreed with Baine and chose to help defend the Barrens, only to be backstabbed/exiled by Baine. Jorn's actions show the tauren were not united with Baine.

Taurajo was no mere incident. Plenty of civilians died in the camp including the wives, brothers, and children of the tauren, imagine telling Kirge Sternhorn its cool the Alliance killed his wife, but him defending against the Alliance massacring innocent tauren is worth him and his son being exiled from Thunderbluff.

LOL, the Alliance were still attacking the tauren, the dwarves were firebombing any tauren in the barrens from the air, had killed an entire mine of innocent people and were trying to break into Mulgore.

Whilst Baine was being betraying his own people and everything they stand for, it was Garrosh's orcs, sent by the man himself, who protected the tauren and repelled the invaders from the Gates of Mulgore.

And no, it wasn't Garrosh's fault, the Alliance, especially the Dwarves wiped out the Stonespire tribe BEFORE Garrosh even came to Azeroth. Those douches would never stop killing Tauren until their worthless existences were sent straight to Twisted Nether.

Unless you're claiming that Baine is indulging in some kind of fourth-wall breaking deceit with the reader of the novel, you pretty much have to take his internal narrative at face value. Jorn also disobeyed the edict of his High Chieftain and in so doing earned his exile knowingly. No one is saying the Taurajo incident wasn't tragic, either. The Stonespire incident has nothing at all to do with the conflict surrounding Taurajo, either; completely different incident that happened well before Baine was High Chieftain of the Tauren or Garrosh was Warchief of the Horde.

Then why are you trying to vilify the noble tauren protecting their homeland from invasion and whitewashing all of the Alliance atrocities of the Barrens by blaming it all on Garrosh.

The entire mention of Taurajo was to point out the implicit hypocrisy of Baine's rebellion against Sylvanas vs. the Taurajo exiles' rebellion against Baine. When it comes to Baine vs. Sylvanas, Baine is vilified and Sylvanas lionized because she is Warchief and her word is law - she brooks no dissent, and those who do disagree with her are branded traitors. But when it comes to Baine's edict about the Barrens conflict and Taurajo, suddenly it's the High Chieftain that is vilified as a "traitor" despite the fact that his people disobeyed him, continuing to escalate the conflict after being told to stand down. Whether you agree or disagree, this is still a pretty blatant hypocrisy. I have sympathy for the Taurajo exiles myself, but you can't deny that they violated the command of their chieftain, the same way Baine betrayed Sylvanas in BfA.

[Syegfryed]

Except Garrosh was well-known for doing exactly the opposite of that - it's the very thing his forces take issue with Theramore, him not telling anyone the full plan i.e. the empowered mana bomb and allowing pretty much everyone to believe the Horde had been defeated and pushed out of the city by the Alliance forces. Garrosh only told people what he wished them to know - if he didn't want it to be public knowledge, then it wouldn't be.

Just because he didn't tell about the manabomb don't say he would not tell the leaders about anything

He even said his goal with theramore was ashenvale and thus Darnasus, he shared yes, he was not leading everyone in the dark

All basically sums up to "Baine didn't act quickly or decisively enough," to which I've already agreed. No one is saying Baine is a paragon here, after all.

and he didn't act for the right reason, but for Jaina brother, thats the point too, and yes, people here are literally saying he was a paragon of the horde and the tauren race, 3 other posts who i was discussing were literally saying he was completely right in everything

There is no blame for Baine in this context, the active agent is still Sylvanas. Baine's inaction in the face of Sylvanas' atrocities doesn't somehow diminish Sylvanas' responsibility for her own actions.

And i never said it did, i was said sylvanas warchief would be stupid and would end like this this someway somehow, but again, Sylvanas bullshit don't diminish Baine responsibility by his own cowardice, 2 wrongs don't make one right

She wasn't called out after the fact, and no one we know of ever discusses Sylvanas dishonor of the Mak'gora - it has to be assumed that people were basically okay with it.

people called her out by using dark magic, and there is some texts about wih the citizens, who i don't recall, we cana ssume though, is things just don't matter anymore, and is pointless still keep digging that

I certainly can, and did. Magatha doesn't have Gul'dan's power thankfully, but if she did do you really think she'd be any different?

She coudl ahve his power, she could just have alligned with the Legion in Legion, instead of fighting then for the classhall.

do you honestly think gul'dan would do that?

You'll need to cite some canon source for this figure, as I didn't find anything even close to such a figure.

whati read previously read is how they were split in two main groups, why i said half, one horde the other alliance, apparently 1/4 is horde, still a great number imo, considering they would be loyal to their leader

I've distorted nothing - it's pretty plain and clear in the narrative. The Great Gate is Baine's answer to the conflict in the Barrens, and it has the majority support of his people. You might disagree with the methodology and have sympathy for the plight of the Taurajo exiles, but it is what it is.

i mean, like the other guy said, apparently it was his inner monologue about the "majority support", and is kinda hard to not receive support when you are exiling anyone who don't support it.

He had to do something - a leader who allows his people to disobey his decrees isn't long in power, after all. That's not hypocrisy - it's a tragic outcome of the burdens of leadership. And since Baine was ultimately imprisoned for his later actions in BfA, there's no hypocrisy there either. He didn't argue the point or even defend his actions, but instead accepted the responsibility for them and allowed himself to be arrested.

The hypocrisy here, is he, actually, giving the decree after all. Instead of fighting for his people, and fighting the alliance who were still attacking and besieging mulgore because a distort lust for peace.

He commit treason before and nothing happened to him, he need to do something against his people in their own right, because he is a peacemonger.

- - - Updated - - -

Here you go.

Try to remember your own posts. Its hilarious someone can say Anduin is too peaceful, yet continually argue "I brush off the deaths of my own people and exile my own citizens for defending themselves" Baine is the best Horde leader possible.

now everything makes sense

[Ielenia]

Because he did before and nothing happened to him, duh

Once again: why do you think Baine somehow knew questioning the Warchief wouldn't put him in trouble? If he was a coward, he would never question the warchief, even the first time around, because he would be afraid of the possible consequences.

i literally put the definition of coward, and by his previous acts, he pretty much fit right in

They don't. They really don't. A coward would not act against the Warchief. A coward would beg for his life.

By this logic we can just say Garrosh was a completely honorable warchief, because he, with his own hands killed horde who taint the horde honor, a dishonorable warchief would let him live, would never do that...

Still dishonorable because: one, it was his honor, not the Horde's honor; and two, saying nothing while in public, but killing or maiming dissenters away from the public's eye is basically the definition of "dishonorable".

sue man, of course Sylvanas would just imprison and torture him

That's what she did to him, and that's what she did to Koltiras, too.

- - - Updated - - -

Except retribution against attackers is normal for tauren just like worshipping the Earthmother is.

Is it? Where does it say that? Especially since the book mentions that most tauren were ok with what was going on, and those that wanted revenge were in the minority.

Baine abused his power to disrespect Tauren and Horde culture,

He did not "abuse" his power in any way, shape or form. You're not just "grasping at straws", you're outright making up lies.

whilst backstabbing his allies

Except he didn't backstab anyone. Do you know what "backstab" means?

and punishing the defenders of his own people for doing the job he failed at.

He wasn't punishing the defenders of the tauren, because they weren't defenders of the tauren. They were tauren out for revenge. Big difference.

Baine exiling Jorn Skyseer and the survivors of Taurajo for defending the Tauren shows he doesn't care about the Tauren, just himself and the Alliance.

They weren't "defending the Tauren", at all. They wanted revenge. That's a whole different ball park. Me killing the murderer of my brother, two days after my brother was killed, is not me "defending my brother". That's me getting revenge on my brother.

Here you go.

Try to remember your own posts.

I do remember my posts. And I knew you'd go to that one, exactly, because it's one of the only times I spoke of Anduin in a not so positive light. But here's the thing: unfortunately for you, I don't hate Anduin, nor that post of mine hints of any "hatred" toward him. I simply said that I would like a less pacifist leader for the Alliance, for once, that actually did something with their non-pacifist ways.

The "dead, captured, petrified, whatever" part was simply ideas to instigate conflict between the Alliance and the Horde from the Alliance side. That's all. At no point I ever said anything about "hating Anduin". But you just lack basic reading comprehension, apparently.

Its hilarious someone can say Anduin is too peaceful, yet continually argue "I brush off the deaths of my own people and exile my own citizens for defending themselves" Baine is the best Horde leader possible.

Weird, right? It's a good thing I'm not saying that. And Baine didn't exile anyone who wanted to defend the tauren or themselves. He only exiled those who wanted revenge against their High Chieftain's orders.

Funny how you're completely okay with tauren disrespecting their leader, but somehow Baine is in the wrong for disrespecting the warchief of the Horde.

[Gann Stonespire]

Unless you're claiming that Baine is indulging in some kind of fourth-wall breaking deceit with the reader of the novel, you pretty much have to take his internal narrative at face value. Jorn also disobeyed the edict of his High Chieftain and in so doing earned his exile knowingly.

I'm saying Baine can delude himself that his actions are for the tauren but the truth shows otherwise.

And you keep saying Jorn should've just stood by and let the people who destroyed his town and murdering his civilians, finish their fullblown siege on the Gates of Mulgore. I don't understand your argument.

No one is saying the Taurajo incident wasn't tragic, either.

Baine said it wasn't tragic in Tides of War, claiming everyone in it was a military target.

The Stonespire incident has nothing at all to do with the conflict surrounding Taurajo, either; completely different incident that happened well before Baine was High Chieftain of the Tauren or Garrosh was Warchief of the Horde.

The criminals behind the Stonespire massacre were involved in the Alliance push into the barrens and were still killing innocent people. Baine was basically telling their victims to just stand there and take it from their persecutors.

When it comes to Baine vs. Sylvanas, Baine is vilified and Sylvanas lionized because she is Warchief and her word is law - she brooks no dissent, and those who do disagree with her are branded traitors. But when it comes to Baine's edict about the Barrens conflict and Taurajo, suddenly it's the High Chieftain that is vilified as a "traitor" despite the fact that his people disobeyed him, continuing to escalate the conflict after being told to stand down. Whether you agree or disagree, this is still a pretty blatant hypocrisy. I have sympathy for the Taurajo exiles myself, but you can't deny that they violated the command of their chieftain, the same way Baine betrayed Sylvanas in BfA.

None of us talking here are defending Sylvanas. Sylvanas being a terrible leader who failed the Horde and her citizens doesn't stop Baine from being a terrible leader who failed the Horde and his citizens.

Is it? Where does it say that? Especially since the book mentions that most tauren were ok with what was going on, and those that wanted revenge were in the minority.

Emmisary Brighthoof says that when explaining the Blood oath of the Horde to Taunka. Again you keep implying that Brighthoof doesn't know his own race's culture. Plenty of Tauren requests involve striking back, even Baine himself did so before Golden ruined him.

Also Baine thinks that to himself that tauren agreed with him, but it also notes many tauren cheering at the destruction of Theramore. And again, note Jorn Skyseer was a notable leader among the tauren.

Its not as if you know anything about the tauren with all I've shown of your posts.

He did not "abuse" his power in any way, shape or form. You're not just "grasping at straws", you're outright making up lies.

Using his powers, which were given to him by the tauren people so he could protect them, to punish the tauren people's own defenders and breaking the blood oath of the Horde promising the people of the Horde retribution against their attackers is a massive abuse of his powers.

You are grasping at straws and many others in the past have pointed this out. You hate the Horde, yet insist you know everything about the Horde, even moreso then people who actually play it.

Except he didn't backstab anyone. Do you know what "backstab" means?

Except he did, which you'd realize if you'd been paying the slightest bit of attention. Jorn Skyseer saved Baine in the Shattering when Magatha exiled him and took over Thunderbluff, Baine repays this kindness by exiling Jorn for helping the tauren survive when Baine was sitting on his traitorous ass.

They weren't "defending the Tauren", at all. They wanted revenge. That's a whole different ball park. Me killing the murderer of my brother, two days after my brother was killed, is not me "defending my brother". That's me getting revenge on my brother.

Kodocrap and I believe you know it too.

Everyone at the camp Baine exiled was fighting the Alliance invaders and WarCriminals who were trying to breakdown the gates of Mulgore to invade Thunderbluff. They gave no attacks against civilian targets. Baine himself was meant to side with them.

The siege machinery outside the gates of Mulgore is like a spear aimed at our heart. I want you to go to the gates, south of here, and remove those siege vehicles from play. They were sieging the gates of Mulgore.

The Alliance scorches a trail of murder across the Barrens. We must stop them here or there is nothing left for us.
They were trying to conquer the barrens.


I want to see some dead goblins, <name>! Just west of here you'll find a whole warren of those little insects burrowing into the mountain.
The Alliance generals were criminals who'd never leave the Horde alone.

Note all of the Horde quests are from Vendetta point which in the lore was formed to protect Mulgore, and the tauren Baine exiled, which again, included Jorn Skyseer who helped Baine take back Thunderbluff from the Grimtotem.

These are all things that warrant retribution.

I do remember my posts. And I knew you'd go to that one, exactly, because it's one of the only times I spoke of Anduin in a not so positive light. But here's the thing: unfortunately for you, I don't hate Anduin, nor that post of mine hints of any "hatred" toward him. I simply said that I would like a less pacifist leader for the Alliance, for once, that actually did something with their non-pacifist ways.

The "dead, captured, petrified, whatever" part was simply ideas to instigate conflict between the Alliance and the Horde from the Alliance side. That's all. At no point I ever said anything about "hating Anduin". But you just lack basic reading comprehension, apparently.

You want the Alliance to have a non pacifist leader, but you want the Horde to have a leader who values the Alliance over the Horde...as others in that thread you basically want the Horde to be deleted from the game out of your Alliance bias.

Weird, right? It's a good thing I'm not saying that. And Baine didn't exile anyone who wanted to defend the tauren or themselves. He only exiled those who wanted revenge against their High Chieftain's orders.

Lying through your teeth again, huh? Everyone at Vendetta point only attacked the soldiers who were still threatening the tauren and retribution is indeed a basic right of the Horde.

Funny how you're completely okay with tauren disrespecting their leader, but somehow Baine is in the wrong for disrespecting the warchief of the Horde.

Baine disrespected the tauren by sitting back when their people were being killed, insulting the survivors of Taurajo and exiling the tauren defending their capital from Invasion, backstabbing his old ally and finally breaking his blood oath to the Horde promising the right to retribution to members of the Horde.

As everyone has said, you want Baine to lead out of hatred for the Horde. You literally label fleeing unarmed tauren civilians, "military targets" and call Horde quest text, "RP nonsense".

[Aucald]

Just because he didn't tell about the manabomb don't say he would not tell the leaders about anything

He even said his goal with theramore was ashenvale and thus Darnasus, he shared yes, he was not leading everyone in the dark

It's the establishment of precedent. He does much the same in "Wolfheart" as concerns the Ashenvale front and his use of enslaved beasts from Northrend, and the Divine Bell, and the use of Sha energies in the Vale, etc. etc. Garrosh is manifestly not forthcoming with details with his own people.

and he didn't act for the right reason, but for Jaina brother, thats the point too, and yes, people here are literally saying he was a paragon of the horde and the tauren race, 3 other posts who i was discussing were literally saying he was completely right in everything

As I said previously, the narrative is at pains to show he's not acting specifically because Derek is Jaina's brother. You're making a pointed and biased inference based on your own dislike, not one present in the canon.

And i never said it did, i was said sylvanas warchief would be stupid and would end like this this someway somehow, but again, Sylvanas bullshit don't diminish Baine responsibility by his own cowardice, 2 wrongs don't make one right

Except the wrongs are Sylvanas', not Baine's. It's not Baine's responsibility to redeem the soul of the Horde all on his own, either; just as it shouldn't have been Saurfang's. What you're doing here is basically a form of blaming the victim.

people called her out by using dark magic, and there is some texts about wih the citizens, who i don't recall, we cana ssume though, is things just don't matter anymore, and is pointless still keep digging that

Jaina, Lor'themar, and Thalyssra discuss the form of magic that Sylvanas used, but they don't call her out for dishonorable actions during the Mak'gora.

She coudl ahve his power, she could just have alligned with the Legion in Legion, instead of fighting then for the classhall.

Just like Gul'dan before her, Magatha wouldn't deign to be a slave.

do you honestly think gul'dan would do that?

Gul'dan would do whatever would give him power, and he would betray any previous benefactor as soon as it was feasibly possible to do so. And so would Magatha.

whati read previously read is how they were split in two main groups, why i said half, one horde the other alliance, apparently 1/4 is horde, still a great number imo, considering they would be loyal to their leader

Again, you'll need to cite a source for this.

i mean, like the other guy said, apparently it was his inner monologue about the "majority support", and is kinda hard to not receive support when you are exiling anyone who don't support it.

And I said to them, inner monologue doesn't really lie when it's first-person revealed to the reader in a narrative. The Taurajo exiles are just a handful of people, as well; a super minority of the Mulgore Tauren, perhaps no more than a score of people.

The hypocrisy here, is he, actually, giving the decree after all. Instead of fighting for his people, and fighting the alliance who were still attacking and besieging mulgore because a distort lust for peace.

That's not hypocrisy - it's just something you disagree with.

He commit treason before and nothing happened to him, he need to do something against his people in their own right, because he is a peacemonger.

You'll have a steep hill to climb if you're trying to make the argument that Baine is somehow the equal and opposite of either Garrosh or Sylvanas. I won't argue that Baine hasn't committed treason, but then when you consider who he committed treason against I can't really find it in myself to be all that concerned. Neither Garrosh nor Sylvanas ultimately deserved *any* loyalty, after all; both were monsters who themselves betrayed the Horde in the end.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm saying Baine can delude himself that his actions are for the tauren but the truth shows otherwise.

And you keep saying Jorn should've just stood by and let the people who destroyed his town and murdering his civilians, finish their fullblown siege on the Gates of Mulgore. I don't understand your argument.

Baine never put a proscription on defending the Great Gate, and it has braves positioned whose jobs are to defend it. Jorn and the rest of the Taurajo survivors could've easily retreated to Mulgore in safety, and peaceably protested Baine's inaction otherwise. They didn't and were punished for disobeying their chieftain.

Baine said it wasn't tragic in Tides of War, claiming everyone in it was a military target.

I was referring to myself and Syegfryed here. Baine also never denies it was tragic in "Tides of War," he simply points out that as a post that outfitted Horde warriors in the conflict it was a legitimate target as a belligerent in said conflict, which he's not wrong about either. I highly doubt Baine was overjoyed that Tauren lost their lives in the conflict.

The criminals behind the Stonespire massacre were involved in the Alliance push into the barrens and were still killing innocent people. Baine was basically telling their victims to just stand there and take it from their persecutors.

You mean Cairne? The Stonespire massacre happened in Classic, not Cata. Completely different conflict.

None of us talking here are defending Sylvanas. Sylvanas being a terrible leader who failed the Horde and her citizens doesn't stop Baine from being a terrible leader who failed the Horde and his citizens.

You jumped into the midst of an ongoing debate and don't have the full context for what is being discussed. No one here is saying that Baine is a great leader, either.

[Ragedaug]

In Lords of War Part 5 - Maraad

Maraad tells Varian of the atrocities of the Orcs he experienced first hand. The survivor's guilt, the vengeance of one who sees the loss of their friends, women, children, loved ones. If you're Maraad, every single corridor, every single hallway he goes through must be a persistent reminder of his mistake, his lack of virtue, and the loss. I've lost loved ones before, and the pain never goes away completely and Maraad had to live through a lot more of it so I can understand a little. The Orcs may not be culpable entirely, but for the Draenei who almost died, who lost people, who saw it first hand like Maraad and Yrel will carry the grudges the longest. Yrel currently speaks of converting the Orcs of Draenor, not killing them. Maraad's story and his lessons of faith may have inspired Yrel yet in ways that are destructive to anyone not willing to bend the knee to the Light - much like Sargeras.

The Orcs never did a fraction to the Draenei as their own people did, before the Orcs were even involved. The Draenei's own people already committed atrocities and attempted genocide before the Orcs were even involved, chasing the Draenei across the cosmos. And it was the Draenei's own people who employed the Orcs. The Orcs didn't do a thing to the Draenei that the Draenei's people didn't push the Orcs to do.

If you want to convince me the Draenei are idiots, then OK, fine, at least now I understand why they are mad at Orcs for doing the work of the Eredar. But nowhere in lore does it say, "the Draenei are idiots", so you will have to show me. Until then, it makes no sense.

Also, if the Draenei hate all Orcs for what the corrupted Orcs did, then the Draenei also have to hate all Draenei for the atrocities the Eredar did, in order to stay consistent. Again, unless you can show me where it says Draenei are idiots and can't figure this stuff out.

[Gann Stonespire]

I was referring to myself and Syegfryed here. Baine also never denies it was tragic in "Tides of War," he simply points out that as a post that outfitted Horde warriors in the conflict it was a legitimate target as a belligerent in said conflict, which he's not wrong about either. I highly doubt Baine was overjoyed that Tauren lost their lives in the conflict.

He claimed no civilians were harmed in the attack on Taurajo, insulting the memory of; Kirge Sternhorn's wife, Yonada, Krulmoo Fullmoon, Dranh, Omusa Thunderhorn, among others. He then exile the survivors such as the widower of Mrs. Sternhorn.

You mean Cairne? The Stonespire massacre happened in Classic, not Cata. Completely different conflict.

No, Bael'Dun was involved in the Alliance push through the Barrens with its General, Twinbraid, being a major leader among the Alliance's forces. They also massacred many tauren and goblin civilians during Cataclysm.

Baine never put a proscription on defending the Great Gate, and it has braves positioned whose jobs are to defend it. Jorn and the rest of the Taurajo survivors could've easily retreated to Mulgore in safety, and peaceably protested Baine's inaction otherwise. They didn't and were punished for disobeying their chieftain.

The Braves were involved in helping the Tauren of Vendetta point and got exiled.

You continually overlook that Jorn Skyseer is a big leader among the tauren and took part in important meetings among the tauren leaders in Shattering.

[Ragedaug]

I had to edit this, because you deliberately tried to make it sound absurd by not using the appropriate terms. Also, the draenei are, by definition, uncorrupted, meaning saying "corrupted Eredar" is plain redundant.

I stopped reading here because I have no idea why you are trying to start a fight with me over using a correct term because it somehow offends you for me to point out that Draenei are Eredar.

Also, it's not redundant, it's explanatory. It's just another way to say it. If I said "uncorrupted Draenei", that would be redundant. Because all Draenei are uncorrupted. When you put it in front of Eredar, it's not redundant, because some Eredar are corrupted, and some are not, so it explains which group you are talking about. That's how the word "redundant" works.

Also, most people seem to have no idea that Draenei are Eredar. That's why I spelled it out. That's why I don't just leave it. Don't assume everyone in your audience has as vast an understanding of lore as you have. When people say Eredar, they tend to leave out the fact that some are corrupted and some aren't. So if you want to differentiate them by saying, "corrupted Eredar" and "Draenei", that's fine. But if you just say "Eredar", that gives me no information on which group you are talking about, or if you are talking about both groups.

[Aucald]

He claimed no civilians were harmed in the attack on Taurajo, insulting the memory of; Kirge Sternhorn's wife, Yonada, Krulmoo Fullmoon, Dranh, Omusa Thunderhorn, among others. He then exile the survivors such as the widower of Mrs. Sternhorn.

Perhaps none of those individuals actually were civilians? If they were active in the war-effort, then they were belligerents.

No, Bael'Dun was involved in the Alliance push through the Barrens with its General, Twinbraid, being a major leader among the Alliance's forces. They also massacred many tauren and goblin civilians during Cataclysm.

That's not what the Stonespire massacre was, though - it was when the Dwarven prospectors settled in Stonespire lands searching for Titan relics, as part of Magni's "soveriegn imperative" back in Classic. Twinbraid did indeed participate in the Barrens conflict in Cata, yes; but that's still a different conflict than the one you were originally talking about. The Stonespire massacre happened on Cairne's watch, not Baine's.

The Braves were involved in helping the Tauren of Vendetta point and got exiled.

You continually overlook that Jorn Skyseer is a big leader among the tauren and took part in important meetings among the tauren leaders in Shattering.

Eh, I don't think Jorn's profile is really that big, to be honest. He's pretty low on the totem pole next to Baine, Hamuul, Magatha, or even Perith in terms of name recognition.

[Gann Stonespire]

Perhaps none of those individuals actually were civilians? If they were active in the war-effort, then they were belligerents.

We see talk to the the ghosts of the tauren killed in Taurajo in a quest
, they were all civilians, all were profession and other non combat jobs, most of them had no weapons at all, and even the one that did, just had a utility weapon(a skinning knife).

They were in no way belligerents and to say otherwise is insane.

That's not what the Stonespire massacre was, though - it was when the Dwarven prospectors settled in Stonespire lands searching for Titan relics, as part of Magni's "soveriegn imperative" back in Classic. Twinbraid did indeed participate in the Barrens conflict in Cata, yes; but that's still a different conflict than the one you were originally talking about. The Stonespire massacre happened on Cairne's watch, not Baine's.

I never said it did, but Twinbraid was still committing crimes; his spawn sends Alliance PCs to kill tauren civilians and later the man himself has the Alliance PC collapse a mine on a bunch of goblin civilians.

Basically everything showed they would never stop killing innocent people until they were sent to Hell.

Eh, I don't think Jorn's profile is really that big, to be honest. He's pretty low on the totem pole next to Baine, Hamuul, Magatha, or even Perith in terms of name recognition.

Then why did Baine meet with him and the other tauren leaders in the Shattering.

Also you're aware Winnona, another tauren Baine exiled, was a disciple of the Night Elf druid, Naralex? Again, you're going out of your way to whitewash the Alliance atrocities and doing all you can to frame the heroic tauren who looked out for their race as baddies.

[Alvito]

Yeah... surely those are the two most selfish races that "destroy everything around them to lamely protect themselves".
• Not the goblins who literally sold their own as slaves as they tried to escape certain death.
• Not the orcs who sold their souls for power and conquest.
• Not the blood elves who tortured and killed a Naaru to drain their power.
• Not the forsaken who love to experiment the plague on the the living to make more forsaken.

None of those... but the night elves, who sacrificed their World Tree to protect the world. The night elves who fought in the war of the Shifting Sands. And the draenei, who never waged a single war on their lives.

- - - Updated - - -


A "yes-man" would've continued to serve the Warchief, even then. And Baine was already questioning Sylvanas even before then.

The big difference is those other races aren't portrayed as noble selfless races. Even if that wasn't the case nobody dumped more suffering on Azeroth than the Draenei bring the burning legion here.

- - - Updated - - -

Quality victim blaming there.

They are the victims on the legion sure. They are the bringer of death to Azeroth

[Ielenia]

Emmisary Brighthoof says that when explaining the Blood oath of the Horde to Taunka. Again you keep implying that Brighthoof doesn't know his own race's culture. Plenty of Tauren requests involve striking back, even Baine himself did so before Golden ruined him.

You're misreading it. Emissary Brighthoof gives you (the player) the Blood Oath of the Horde. It has nothing to do with the Tauren's way of life. Once again: the book tells us that the majority of the tauren was at least content with their High Chieftain's decisions regarding the Great Gate.

Also Baine thinks that to himself that tauren agreed with him(1), but it also notes many tauren cheering at the destruction of Theramore.(2)

1) It's still an official source, and unless you want to claim that Baine was actually lying to himself regarding how many tauren were okay his decision-- which there was no reason to do so since no one was there to hear his thoughts-- you'll have to do better than "he's just thinking that to himself in the book".
2) Soldiers in a war cheering as their side pushes the enemy back. Never heard of that, before. Wow.

Its not as if you know anything about the tauren with all I've shown of your posts.

All you've shown is lack of reading comprehension, but do go on.

Using his powers, which were given to him by the tauren people so he could protect them(1), to punish the tauren people's own defenders(2) and breaking the blood oath of the Horde(3) promising the people of the Horde retribution against their attackers is a massive abuse of his powers.

1) And he did exactly that, by erecting the Great Gate.
2) No defenders were punished, only those seeking revenge against their High Chieftain's orders.
3) He broke no oath since he wasn't preventing any other group in the Horde from having revenge. He was just leading his people, which he has sovereignty in.

You are grasping at straws and many others in the past have pointed this out. You hate the Horde, yet insist you know everything about the Horde, even moreso then people who actually play it.

"Grasping at straws" here only denotes projection from you, as you link to someone else's post that completely misses the point in what I wrote, just like you are also always missing the point. Also: funny how you have that post from me from over a year ago bookmarked. It almost sounds like you have an obsession with me, and was waiting for the perfect moment to do a "gotcha!" with that post of mine.

Only to completely miss the mark.

Except he did, which you'd realize if you'd been paying the slightest bit of attention. Jorn Skyseer saved Baine in the Shattering when Magatha exiled him and took over Thunderbluff, Baine repays this kindness by exiling Jorn for helping the tauren survive when Baine was sitting on his traitorous ass.

That's not 'backstabbing'. Baine is Jorn's leader, and he issued an order. An order that Jorn disobeyed. And Jorn was not seeking to "protect" the tauren. He simply wanted revenge. Big difference. Look up the dictionary definitions for the words "protect" and "revenge", and you'll see they're not the same.

Kodocrap and I believe you know it too.

Everyone at the camp Baine exiled was fighting the Alliance invaders and WarCriminals who were trying to breakdown the gates of Mulgore to invade Thunderbluff. They gave no attacks against civilian targets. Baine himself was meant to side with them.

They wanted revenge, not to "protect the tauren". Baine build the Great Gate and assigned warriors to protect it. What the other tauren did, that caused their exile, was to go against their High Chieftain's orders and tried to seek revenge.

The siege machinery outside the gates of Mulgore is like a spear aimed at our heart. I want you to go to the gates, south of here, and remove those siege vehicles from play. They were sieging the gates of Mulgore.

And the Great Gates have their defenders. Again: Baine is a pacifist and he was protecting the tauren.

The Alliance scorches a trail of murder across the Barrens. We must stop them here or there is nothing left for us.
They were trying to conquer the barrens.[/quote]
Were they, really? I don't recall a single quest in the Alliance side even remotely talking about them wanting to "take over the Barrens".

I want to see some dead goblins, <name>! Just west of here you'll find a whole warren of those little insects burrowing into the mountain.
The Alliance generals were criminals who'd never leave the Horde alone.

Yeah... a pity you completely ignored the previous quests in which is shown that the goblins infiltrated Bael'dun and sabotaged the explosives, which is what caused the whole "kill goblins" thing. So, no. The Alliance wasn't the aggressor there.

These are all things that warrant retribution.

Which is, again, irrelevant. Because Baine issued an order: no escalation. No revenge. It was a simple order, that some tauren opted not to obey, and were exiled as punishment for their disobedience.

You want the Alliance to have a non pacifist leader, but you want the Horde to have a leader who values the Alliance over the Horde...as others in that thread you basically want the Horde to be deleted from the game out of your Alliance bias.

No. I don't. This is, as you put it, "Kodocrap and I believe you know it too." I never said I wanted "someone who values the Alliance over the Horde" as the Warchief of the Horde. I'm sorry if you lack basic reading skills, but, as I've mentioned many times over, I don't think Baine is anywhere near this "Alliance doormat" you think him to be.

Lying through your teeth again, huh? Everyone at Vendetta point only attacked the soldiers who were still threatening the tauren and retribution is indeed a basic right of the Horde.

I'm not lying. That is objectively what happened: Baine didn't exile anyone who wanted to "protect the tauren", he only exiled those who disobeyed his orders and wanted to seek revenge. And, once again, you misunderstand the Blood Oath. It's about the different groups in the Horde interfering in other groups' revenge. It forbids, for example, the orcs from denying the tauren their right of retribution. It is not about how a group leader should lead their groups. Baine is free to lead his people as he sees fit.

Baine disrespected the tauren by sitting back when their people were being killed(1), insulting the survivors of Taurajo and exiling the tauren defending their capital from Invasion(2), backstabbing his old ally(3) and finally breaking his blood oath to the Horde(4) promising the right to retribution to members of the Horde.

1) He didn't "disrespect" anyone. He built the Great Gate to protect the tauren.
2) He didn't exile anyone protecting the tauren. Those are still there. He exiled those who disobeyed his orders to not seek revenge.
3) He didn't "backstab" anyone. If anything, it was his old ally that "backstabbed" Baine by going against his orders.
4) He didn't break the Blood Oath since the oath is about the relationships among each group within the Horde, not within each group. Baine is free to lead his people as he sees fit.

As everyone has said, you want Baine to lead out of hatred for the Horde.

"Everyone" = 1 person? Not to mention that you call me a liar, and yet you lied, over and over in this post of yours. I don't "hate the Horde". I don't "hate Anduin". In my post that you linked, I simply want some variation, since both times the Horde has been the aggressor, with Garrosh and now Syvlanas. I just wanted something different, and have the Alliance be the aggressor, for one, in a big conflict.

You literally label fleeing unarmed tauren civilians, "military targets"(1) and call Horde quest text, "RP nonsense"(2).

1) I literally never did that.
2) I called your RP "nonsense".

Also, last but not least: link the quoted post properly. You're just copying the post address of the first guy you respond and change their name to mine. That's not how post quote linking works.

- - - Updated - - -

The Orcs never did a fraction to the Draenei as their own people did, before the Orcs were even involved. The Draenei's own people already committed atrocities and attempted genocide before the Orcs were even involved, chasing the Draenei across the cosmos. And it was the Draenei's own people who employed the Orcs. The Orcs didn't do a thing to the Draenei that the Draenei's people didn't push the Orcs to do.

There is some massive double-standards, here. From what I'm understanding, you're absolving the orcs from guilt because they were "employed" by the man'ari... but you're not absolving the man'ari for being "employed" by Sargeras, by putting the man'ari and the draenei together as one singular group.

You're talking as if the Draenei knowingly and intentionally brought the Legion to Draenor.

- - - Updated - - -

The big difference is those other races aren't portrayed as noble selfless races.

But they are noble and selfless. You're basically "blaming the victim" for the Legion's actions because they were hunting the draenei.

Even if that wasn't the case nobody dumped more suffering on Azeroth than the Draenei bring the burning legion here.

... You DO know that the Legion had turned its eye on Azeroth and set foot on the planet long before the Draenei arrived on Azeroth, right?

[Syegfryed]

It's the establishment of precedent. He does much the same in "Wolfheart" as concerns the Ashenvale front and his use of enslaved beasts from Northrend, and the Divine Bell, and the use of Sha energies in the Vale, etc. etc. Garrosh is manifestly not forthcoming with details with his own people.

its established that he don't share everything, especially if its based on his own plans, not that he don't share anything to anyone

There is a difference in here

As I said previously, the narrative is at pains to show he's not acting specifically because Derek is Jaina's brother. You're making a pointed and biased inference based on your own dislike, not one present in the canon.

If he didn't do a thing about she taking away the free will of the night elves in Darkshore and raising then as slaves, why he is now?

you are going to tell me he didn't know, but unlike other events, everyone knew she was raising the night elf to kill their own kin, i think even Baine can connect A with B

Except the wrongs are Sylvanas', not Baine's. It's not Baine's responsibility to redeem the soul of the Horde all on his own, either; just as it shouldn't have been Saurfang's. What you're doing here is basically a form of blaming the victim.

As a member of the horde he also have the duty to do something, he did nothing, not until Jaina brother was in game, and even then he did nothing, Saurfang did everything, like Vol'jin did before him, In both cases Baine did nothing and just wait something to be done for him, so he could join then.

As one of the oldest member os the horde im gonna say yes, he had more responsibility than the others, especially after what he saw

Jaina, Lor'themar, and Thalyssra discuss the form of magic that Sylvanas used, but they don't call her out for dishonorable actions during the Mak'gora.

So no one say Thrall also cheated in his duel, lets keep things under the rug.

Just like Gul'dan before her, Magatha wouldn't deign to be a slave.

but Gul'dan still allied witht he Legion, adn got much power, why Magahta didn't?

seems like she isn't gul'dan 2.0 after all if she is not ok in doing literally anything like you implied

Again, you'll need to cite a source for this.

its on the wiki 1/4 of the clan is horde

And I said to them, inner monologue doesn't really lie when it's first-person revealed to the reader in a narrative. The Taurajo exiles are just a handful of people, as well; a super minority of the Mulgore Tauren, perhaps no more than a score of people.

i doubt more of the tauren would b eok in exiling people for rightfully wanting vengeance or righfully defending their own people, and yes, Baine being the particular individual he is, he could very well think everyone is good with that, would explain also, he is disconnected with the tauren people and the reason why he exiled other tauren

That's not hypocrisy - it's just something you disagree with.

Sounds pretty hypocritical punish someone for treason while you do your own treason

You'll have a steep hill to climb if you're trying to make the argument that Baine is somehow the equal and opposite of either Garrosh or Sylvanas. I won't argue that Baine hasn't committed treason, but then when you consider who he committed treason against I can't really find it in myself to be all that concerned. Neither Garrosh nor Sylvanas ultimately deserved *any* loyalty, after all; both were monsters who themselves betrayed the Horde in the end.

Garrosh at that point deserved entirely loyalty, he haven't done anything to harm the horde, inf act, he was doing something good that everyone wanted.

Baine didn't just commit treason against his warchief, but against the horde, warning the enemy let then prepare themselves and more horde lives were lost for it.

- - - Updated - - -

Once again: why do you think Baine somehow knew questioning the Warchief wouldn't put him in trouble? If he was a coward, he would never question the warchief, even the first time around, because he would be afraid of the possible consequences.

i think we are entering in a strange loop of delusional

They don't. They really don't. A coward would not act against the Warchief. A coward would beg for his life.

A coward would not call a mak'gora, a coward would not challenge his warchief, a coward would act sooner when worse shit was happening, please your tentative are laughable.

Still dishonorable because: one, it was his honor, not the Horde's honor;

it is horde honor not attack civilains, but tis funny how you tried to nitpick that

and two, saying nothing while in public, but killing or maiming dissenters away from the public's eye is basically the definition of "dishonorable".

just like being a coward, to afraid to act against your warchief when she killed your own people with blight and raised then and let others to die by the alliance

That's what she did to him, and that's what she did to Koltiras, too.

that would imply Baine knew about Koltiras

the survivors of Taurajo were defending mulgore gates against Alliance incursions, and they were exiled anyway for fighting then and wanting to drive then out, completely retarded, even if it was just by revenge they were in totally right since civilians were killed

They weren't "defending the Tauren", at all. They wanted revenge. That's a whole different ball park. Me killing the murderer of my brother, two days after my brother was killed, is not me "defending my brother". That's me getting revenge on my brother.

the survivors of Taurajo were defending mulgore gates against Alliance incursions, and they were exiled anyway for fighting then and wanting to drive then out, completely retarded, even if it was just by revenge they were in totally right since civilians were killed

- - - Updated - - -

I was referring to myself and Syegfryed here. Baine also never denies it was tragic in "Tides of War," he simply points out that as a post that outfitted Horde warriors in the conflict it was a legitimate target as a belligerent in said conflict, which he's not wrong about either. I highly doubt Baine was overjoyed that Tauren lost their lives in the conflict.

He was wrong about it yeah, a village of hunters and civilians isn't a valid militar target, the alliance though it was by wrong intel, Baine said it was trying to remove the blame from the alliance, a horde leader literally whitewashing alliance actions who killed his own people

that already say everything we need to know about the character

[Ragedaug]

There is some massive double-standards, here. From what I'm understanding, you're absolving the orcs from guilt because they were "employed" by the man'ari... but you're not absolving the man'ari for being "employed" by Sargeras, by putting the man'ari and the draenei together as one singular group.

You're talking as if the Draenei knowingly and intentionally brought the Legion to Draenor.

I'm not sure where to start here. The Draenei are Eredar. The Eredar (also known as race of the Draenei) did worse to the Draenei than the Orcs did. The Eredar employed the Orcs. If you want to blame all Orcs for what the corrupted Orcs did, then you have to blame Velen for what Archimonde and Kil'jaeden did.

Are you absolving the Draenei for what the Eredar did?

The Eredar were corrupted by the Legion. The Eredar, a very advanced and sophisticated race. Then the Eredar corrupted the Orcs, a simple and savage race, and bid them to do what the Eredar were already doing, but you absolve the Eredar and blame the Orcs. That's like blaming an attack dog for doing what it's trainer taught him to do, meanwhile, you have no problem with the trainer.

----------------------
You are the one with the double standard. I don't blame the non-corrupted Orcs for what the corrupted Orcs did no more than I blame Velen for what the corrupted Eredar did. You on the other hand, give the non-corrupted Eredar a clean pass while forever condemning the non-corrupted Orcs. And if you have to wonder, who did worse, the Eredar or the Orcs, it was the Eredar, without whom the Orcs wouldn't have become corrupted in the first place. And even then, that's Velen's fault because he led the Eredar to the Orcs in the first place.

----------------------
The good news is that you aren't alone. The entire alliance hates all Orcs for what corrupted Orcs did, while having no problem with the Draenei even though the Eredar have done worse.

Corrupted Orcs: Tried to expand and conquered those in their way. Didn't make it far, were defeated, ended up settling in a wasteland. Then one destroyed an island, was defeated again, then tracked down and killed by an Orc. All Orcs bad!
Corrupted Eredar: Travel the cosmos enslaving entire planet after planet, attempted to destroy Azeroth (multiple times). Still going strong, regardless of the fact that they've been defeated. Eredar are good though.
Corrupted Human: Caused a blight over the entire northern tier of the continent. Went north and found another continent, caused a blight that covers much of it. The blight and the scourge remain to this day. Humans are good though.
Corrupted Night Elf: Actions led to the sundering, destroying nearly 80% of Azeroth's land mass. Night Elves are good though.
Corrupted High Elf: Constantly trying to genocide other races. Burnt down Teldrassil. Destroying everyone in her path, still at large. High Elves are good though.

So Eredar, Humans, Night Elves, High Elves, they are still cool. BUT WE FOREVER HATE THE ORCS! The group that got tricked by one of the groups you say is good, and caused the least amount of damage compared to what the others have done, but yeah, the non-corrupted Orcs - ones who did not commit those atrocities...they are the bad ones.

[Raisei]

The entire mention of Taurajo was to point out the implicit hypocrisy of Baine's rebellion against Sylvanas vs. the Taurajo exiles' rebellion against Baine. When it comes to Baine vs. Sylvanas, Baine is vilified and Sylvanas lionized because she is Warchief and her word is law - she brooks no dissent, and those who do disagree with her are branded traitors. But when it comes to Baine's edict about the Barrens conflict and Taurajo, suddenly it's the High Chieftain that is vilified as a "traitor" despite the fact that his people disobeyed him, continuing to escalate the conflict after being told to stand down. Whether you agree or disagree, this is still a pretty blatant hypocrisy. I have sympathy for the Taurajo exiles myself, but you can't deny that they violated the command of their chieftain, the same way Baine betrayed Sylvanas in BfA.

This perfectly summarizes the stance of the Sylvanas apologists. If Sylvanas does it, it's cool, if Baine does it, he is a traitor. Take her going directly against her Warchief's orders in Cata to blight Gilneas, making her a clear and visible traitor and a mass murderer on top, but no one minds. Then Baine goes behind a Warchief's back to safe lives and in general do the right thing and he gets called a traitor with no good hair left on him.
Did Sylavanas challenge Mak'gorah when she disagreed with Garrosh? Nope, she smiled and nodded and then went behind his back (and later tried to assassinate him with poison, the weapon of cowards), yet she is not called a coward, Baine does the same and he is the biggest coward in the history of cowards.

There is quite obviously favoritism at work here. Baine is called names because he is Baine and Sylvanas is exalted because she is Sylvanas, no matter how hard the apologists try to cloth this point in halve-truth.

I appreciate that you are trying hard to convince this fellow, Aucald, but I think it is just falling on deaf ears.

[Gann Stonespire]

You're misreading it. Emissary Brighthoof gives you (the player) the Blood Oath of the Horde. It has nothing to do with the Tauren's way of life. Once again: the book tells us that the majority of the tauren was at least content with their High Chieftain's decisions regarding the Great Gate.

Brighthoof is a tauren talking to a Taunka about the way of life for the Horde and the Tauren.

And no Baine thinks that in the book, it is not fact, stop pushing your fanon.

1) It's still an official source, and unless you want to claim that Baine was actually lying to himself regarding how many tauren were okay his decision-- which there was no reason to do so since no one was there to hear his thoughts-- you'll have to do better than "he's just thinking that to himself in the book".

An official source of Baine's thoughts and him exiling anyone who disagreed otherwise showed there was reason for tauren to go along with it out of fear of reprisal.

2) Soldiers in a war cheering as their side pushes the enemy back. Never heard of that, before. Wow.

Baine was angsting about it constantly and even sabotaged his own side by giving Theramore vital information. This shows Tauren don't unanimously think like Baine.

All you've shown is lack of reading comprehension, but do go on.

Thats funny coming from you.

1) And he did exactly that, by erecting the Great Gate.

Except it was being sieged by an entire army of Northwatch soldiers as I linked you.

2) No defenders were punished, only those seeking revenge against their High Chieftain's orders.

Baine exiled the tauren of Vendetta point, everyone who gave that quest was from Vendetta point...

3) He broke no oath since he wasn't preventing any other group in the Horde from having revenge. He was just leading his people, which he has sovereignty in.

Nothing from Emissary Brighthoof's words imply that a Horde leader can do that, in fact he implied it couldn't be taken away. You're lying again.

"Grasping at straws" here only denotes projection from you, as you link to someone else's post that completely misses the point in what I wrote, just like you are also always missing the point. Also: funny how you have that post from me from over a year ago bookmarked. It almost sounds like you have an obsession with me, and was waiting for the perfect moment to do a "gotcha!" with that post of mine.

I've continually stayed at the story forum and stuck to the Horde topics. I remembered you posting that as I was here at MMO-Champion back then and simply typed what I remembered in the search engine and viola.

But go ahead and delude yourself about everything revolving around you.

Only to completely miss the mark.

You think Anduin is too peaceful to lead the Alliance, yet want the even more peaceful Baine who has never willingly lifted a finger against the Alliance to lead the Horde. That implies bias as people have pointed out.

That's not 'backstabbing'. Baine is Jorn's leader, and he issued an order.

Baine is still the leader due to Jorn helping him in his hour of need. And Baine's order was a death sentence for the tauren in the barrens and even Mulgore. Jorn chose to do what was right even if it meant Traitorhoof backstabbing him.

An order that Jorn disobeyed. And Jorn was not seeking to "protect" the tauren. He simply wanted revenge.

Read the quest text again and stop treating your headcanon as actual canon.


Jorn was protecting the tauren.

And the Great Gates have their defenders. Again: Baine is a pacifist and he was protecting the tauren.

They did not, it was only due to the tauren and orcs of Vendetta point that the gate survived. Stop pushing these giant accusations with zero proof.

Were they, really? I don't recall a single quest in the Alliance side even remotely talking about them wanting to "take over the Barrens".

Hawthorne himself mentions his hope to drive the tauren from their lands right here.

Once again, Ielenia headcanons don't equal fact.

Yeah... a pity you completely ignored the previous quests in which is shown that the goblins infiltrated Bael'dun and sabotaged the explosives, which is what caused the whole "kill goblins" thing. So, no. The Alliance wasn't the aggressor there.

Twinbraid was a genocidal war criminal who wiped out the Stonespire tribe when the Horde and Alliance were at peace, his son literally gave out quests to kill Tauren and those were goblin civilians.

You are literally defending outright genocide!

No. I don't. This is, as you put it, "Kodocrap and I believe you know it too." I never said I wanted "someone who values the Alliance over the Horde" as the Warchief of the Horde. I'm sorry if you lack basic reading skills, but, as I've mentioned many times over, I don't think Baine is anywhere near this "Alliance doormat" you think him to be.

Even though he's taken more Horde lives then Alliance lives in his whole career and prevents his people from fighting back, and only rebelled against Sylvanas over an Alliance prisoner..

I'm not lying. That is objectively what happened: Baine didn't exile anyone who wanted to "protect the tauren", he only exiled those who disobeyed his orders and wanted to seek revenge. And, once again, you misunderstand the Blood Oath. It's about the different groups in the Horde interfering in other groups' revenge. It forbids, for example, the orcs from denying the tauren their right of retribution. It is not about how a group leader should lead their groups. Baine is free to lead his people as he sees fit.

The links prove you are lying as they show the tauren of vendetta point were noble and it was only due to them the invasion force breaking down the Gate of Mulgore were repelled.

"Everyone" = 1 person?

Nearly every poster has called out your anti Horde bias and zero people, let alone Horde posters, have ever agreed with your warped headcanons.

1) I literally never did that.

I just linked you calling quest text from honoring the dead, "Alliance - They've surrounded the camp! What are they doing here? Why are they attacking Taurajo? Get the children - run! RUN! "
as RP nonsense.

It really shows how desperate you are when you take someone's roleplay comment and treat it as canon. The tauren civilians were allowed to flee the confrontation, but it's obvious some decided to stay to protect their homes, and apparently that leatherworking supplier was one said tauren.

Your utter lack of knowledge and bias against the Horde is blatantly shown there and everyone who reads this post can see it.

You hate the Horde and have constantly insulted Horde posters here whilst saying murdering Horde civilians, even fleeing women and wholesale genocide is ok because the Alliance is doing it. You don't want the Alliance to be the aggressors, you want the Horde to be weak.

[Aucald]

We see talk to the the ghosts of the tauren killed in Taurajo in a quest
, they were all civilians, all were profession and other non combat jobs, most of them had no weapons at all, and even the one that did, just had a utility weapon(a skinning knife).

They were in no way belligerents and to say otherwise is insane.

You are creating an unnecessary appeal to sympathy - there is already plenty sympathy for the plight of the people of Taurajo, and it's a regrettable fact that civilians often die as collateral damage during war. No one likes that fact, but in the brutal calculus of warfare it is an accepted thing. Taurajo made itself a target by participating in the Barrens war-effort, it was attacked, and people died (civilians and combatants alike). The fact that civilians died doesn't change Taurajo's combative state. It's easy to understand why the survivors of the attack want revenge - but it's also immaterial to this argument.

I never said it did, but Twinbraid was still committing crimes; his spawn sends Alliance PCs to kill tauren civilians and later the man himself has the Alliance PC collapse a mine on a bunch of goblin civilians.

Basically everything showed they would never stop killing innocent people until they were sent to Hell.

As has been well established at this point, Azeroth has no laws concerning war and its execution. This has been used time and time again to excuse Sylvanas' excesses, and it must unfortunately also be true for the Taurajo massacre and Twinbraid's excesses. Creating different rules for obverse situations is what hypocrisy is.

Then why did Baine meet with him and the other tauren leaders in the Shattering.

Also you're aware Winnona, another tauren Baine exiled, was a disciple of the Night Elf druid, Naralex? Again, you're going out of your way to whitewash the Alliance atrocities and doing all you can to frame the heroic tauren who looked out for their race as baddies.

Because Jorn and his people were on the way to Mulgore, where he was heading to work to recapture it from Magatha's Grimtotem.

As I said above, the entire point isn't to villify the Taurajo survivors - it's to a point out the hypocrisy of villifying Baine for being a bad leader (which I agree he is in this context) while giving Sylvanas a pass. I personally think their exile was wrong as well, but that's still besides the point. The point is that they disobeyed their leader and got punished for it, which you and many others argue as a bad thing. But if Sylvanas gets disobeyed because she's a bad leader, the reverse becomes true and those who disobey get branded as traitors to the Warchief and the Horde.

[mickybrighteyes]

And I am saying that discussion is not a requirement - it does exist, we both acknowledge it's existence, and therefore it is a consideration that must be taken into account when reviewing the sequence of events. It's relevance is not enhanced or diminished by repetition as it is a true thing.

It's relevance is non-existent in the story and only acknowledged by a small number of people in the audience relative to those who point it out. The story proceeds in a manner that regards it as much as the story regards the events of Talanji's capture.

Genn's transition from mad dog warmonger to Anduin's Good Boy has more prevelence in the overall plot.

I am unsure how that is relevant to what we're discussing?

Oh it's just a slight error that is just blatantly out of order with what was shown in the novella's. Being that most people don't bother reading them it set a very different story in motion.

Novellas: [Duel] => [departure] => [Tyrande showing up] => [Malfurion's escape] => [report in] => [monolouge and burn the tree]
In game: [Duel] => [departure] => [Tyrande showing up] => [Malfurion's escape] => [monolouge and burn the tree] => [report in]

such a 'slight' error that really does alter a how things are viewed but yeah, I'm sure you're not going to change your position that the ONE line in the novella maybe only those of us who frequent this forum ever really dug into read is clearly too much acknowledgement of what was going on.

Tyrande shows up almost seconds after Sylvanas leaves the scene of Malfurion's near-fatal injury, that is the event I'm referring to. This occurs both in the novella and in the in-game cutscene, the only additional embellishment in the novella is that she actively incapacitates Saurfang (which is not depicted in the in-game version).

That isn't at all what the "slight" error I meant was.

edit:

Novella makes a barely touched bit about how Saurfang managed to ruin the major stated plan, by any accounts as we went INTO the war, and delighted in his failure when reporting. There is no further discussion about how his momentary inaction might have altered events despite the fact that he did fail to achieve his own goals.

Furthermore there is never any discussion about his other antics like leaving battlegrounds in ANY negative way. Zappyboi finding him running off to die? fine and dandy, he comes back to run off again within the day. Refusing aid when jailed? "oh well we can't spare time" or whatever and then he just shows up anyway with not even a "hey Saurfang... how'd you get out?" moment.

[Aucald]

its established that he don't share everything, especially if its based on his own plans, not that he don't share anything to anyone

There is a difference in here

A different that seems to amount to basically nothing. What one would call a decided non-factor.

If he didn't do a thing about she taking away the free will of the night elves in Darkshore and raising then as slaves, why he is now?

you are going to tell me he didn't know, but unlike other events, everyone knew she was raising the night elf to kill their own kin, i think even Baine can connect A with B

He wasn't there to do anything about in the first place, and given the pace at which it went from the war in Darkshore to the war in Lordaeron there was never really time to assay it, either. As I also said previously, Baine has been under censure since "Before the Storm" as well, as Sylvanas had already threatened him and his people for Baine's perceived treachery (e.g. attempting to conduct covert peace-talks with Anduin).

As a member of the horde he also have the duty to do something, he did nothing, not until Jaina brother was in game, and even then he did nothing, Saurfang did everything, like Vol'jin did before him, In both cases Baine did nothing and just wait something to be done for him, so he could join then.

As one of the oldest member os the horde im gonna say yes, he had more responsibility than the others, especially after what he saw

He saw the same thing as everyone else who basically did nothing, which is still putting an unnecessarily large onus on him. He also *did* act, albeit late in the game, and in so doing became the lightning rod that essentially lit the Horde rebellion in full.

but Gul'dan still allied witht he Legion, adn got much power, why Magahta didn't?

seems like she isn't gul'dan 2.0 after all if she is not ok in doing literally anything like you implied

I'm unsure if you're being willfully obtuse or just hung up on the specifics. When I call her "Gul'dan 2.0" I'm not literally saying she's the same person who must undergo the same evolution (e.g. joining the Legion), I'm saying that she shares many of Gul'dan's foremost traits: powerlust and apparent sociopathy. She has different values, though; and a different history that defines her actions. Gul'dan allied with Legion for his own purposes, and he betrayed them at the Tomb of Sargeras because he thought the power contained there would elevate him above Kil'jaeden and Archimonde and into veritable godhood.

its on the wiki 1/4 of the clan is horde

That's not a cited source.

i doubt more of the tauren would b eok in exiling people for rightfully wanting vengeance or righfully defending their own people, and yes, Baine being the particular individual he is, he could very well think everyone is good with that, would explain also, he is disconnected with the tauren people and the reason why he exiled other tauren

You're making a series of unproven assumptions here: how do you know Baine is disconnected with his people? How do you know the majority aren't fine with the decision? How is the Taurajo exiles' decision "rightful" if it directly disobeys the word of their High Chieftain? The Tauren seem pretty unified in wanting peace (understandable given their history of conflict), and there is zero evidence that Baine faces low approval at home - no protests against his leadership, no internal strife in Thunder Bluff that's ever been depicted, etc. etc. I think you're reaching for a justification for your own moral stance that isn't borne out by the facts of the narrative.

Sounds pretty hypocritical punish someone for treason while you do your own treason

Perhaps, but again, neither here nor there - Baine's internal rationale was never part and parcel of the discussion in the first place.

Garrosh at that point deserved entirely loyalty, he haven't done anything to harm the horde, inf act, he was doing something good that everyone wanted.

Baine didn't just commit treason against his warchief, but against the horde, warning the enemy let then prepare themselves and more horde lives were lost for it.

Garrosh was opposed well before his inception as Warchief - both of Thrall's most senior advisors (Cairne and Vol'jin) *knew* that Garrosh's reign would be disastrous for the Horde, which is exactly what it was. So no, Garrosh never deserved complete loyalty - even Garrosh himself knew his ascent was a mistake, and told Thrall so in "The Shattering," a warning which unfortunately fell on deaf ears. You trying to cast him as somehow the perfect target of unending loyalty is flatly a revision of history. He was a popular general, yes; but highly divisive among the Horde leadership at the time.

He was wrong about it yeah, a village of hunters and civilians isn't a valid militar target, the alliance though it was by wrong intel, Baine said it was trying to remove the blame from the alliance, a horde leader literally whitewashing alliance actions who killed his own people

that already say everything we need to know about the character

The "wrong intel" here was that the Horde was planning a renewed offensive, not the nature of Camp Taurajo as a belligerent in the existing conflict or its supplying of Horde warriors fighting against the Alliance in the greater Barrens. Your defense and resulting conclusion are both incorrect.

I think this will be my final post in this matter, as I feel we're basically circling around without a conclusion in sight - and these replies are growing in length and time commitment on my end. We'll let the audience decide for themselves what they want to believe.

- - - Updated - - -

It's relevance is non-existent in the story and only acknowledged by a small number of people in the audience relative to those who point it out. The story proceeds in a manner that regards it as much as the story regards the events of Talanji's capture.

Genn's transition from mad dog warmonger to Anduin's Good Boy has more prevelence in the overall plot.

The fact that we're discussing it here belies your point, and underscores its essential relevance. I'm unsure where the inclusion of Genn really factors, to be honest - it seems like an unnecessary aside. Genn is still a noteworthy warmonger even if he has mellowed a touch. Genn still acts against Anduin in BfA when he sides with Tyrande's offensive against Anduin's planning, citing the debt he owes the Night Elven people.

Oh it's just a slight error that is just blatantly out of order with what was shown in the novella's. Being that most people don't bother reading them it set a very different story in motion.

Novellas: [Duel] => [departure] => [Tyrande showing up] => [Malfurion's escape] => [report in] => [monolouge and burn the tree]
In game: [Duel] => [departure] => [Tyrande showing up] => [Malfurion's escape] => [monolouge and burn the tree] => [report in]

such a 'slight' error that really does alter a how things are viewed but yeah, I'm sure you're not going to change your position that the ONE line in the novella maybe only those of us who frequent this forum ever really dug into read is clearly too much acknowledgement of what was going on.

If you look at the above you'll notice that what you're talking about, and what I'm talking about, don't appear to be the same thing at all. The event I'm exploring is actually between [departure] and [Tyrande showing up] in your sequence breakdown, not at the end. A shift in the tail-end of the sequence doesn't really change anything of note, either.

That isn't at all what the "slight" error I meant was.

edit:

Novella makes a barely touched bit about how Saurfang managed to ruin the major stated plan, by any accounts as we went INTO the war, and delighted in his failure when reporting. There is no further discussion about how his momentary inaction might have altered events despite the fact that he did fail to achieve his own goals.

Furthermore there is never any discussion about his other antics like leaving battlegrounds in ANY negative way. Zappyboi finding him running off to die? fine and dandy, he comes back to run off again within the day. Refusing aid when jailed? "oh well we can't spare time" or whatever and then he just shows up anyway with not even a "hey Saurfang... how'd you get out?" moment.

You are wandering far afield from the parameters of the discussion, I assume in the need to muddy or otherwise confuse what's being discussed? Are you attempting to invalidate the whole of "A Good War" from canon to bolster your argument? I can't really follow what your ultimate goal here is, or why you bring up events for an entirely unrelated tableau, going from the War of Thorns to the Battle of Lordaeron. None of these events have any bearing on what we were previously discussing.