This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
New Warchief?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Behelich
Actually the death of Cairne was a way to promote Baine; after what he does to get back Thunderbluff, on top of his leading the Horde forces in the Nightmare War, it's a nice addition to the son of the Tauren.
They honestly could have done it without killing Cairne, though. From Vanilla on, it's been commented on that Cairne was raising Baine up to replace him, so he could leave behind the mantle of high chieftain. He didn't really need to die for that.
Rule of Drama
:
If the potential for conflict is visible, then it will never be passed over.
Post by
Adamsm
Actually the death of Cairne was a way to promote Baine; after what he does to get back Thunderbluff, on top of his leading the Horde forces in the Nightmare War, it's a nice addition to the son of the Tauren.
They honestly could have done it without killing Cairne, though. From Vanilla on, it's been commented on that Cairne was raising Baine up to replace him, so he could leave behind the mantle of high chieftain. He didn't really need to die for that.
Rule of Drama
:
If the potential for conflict is visible, then it will never be passed over.
There's that, but they also 'needed' a reason for the Crone to finally pull off the 'grand moves' shes been making since getting the Forsaken into the Horde, and pull off the 'redemption' for a portion of the Grimtotem clan.....and you know, for Baine to look bad ass, same as Golden did with Thrall in Lord of the Clans when he invaded Durnholde.
Post by
306612
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
4dehorde
For those of you who think Varok Saurfang could not be Warchief because of his age or dead son, I believe a prime example of a great leader who has lost his son and is old and still a powerful leader is Tirion Fordring. He is a veteran of numerous wars and battles, and lost his son Taelen to Isillien. He is also in his elder years. Yet, despite all this, he formed the Argent Crusade and later along with Darion Mograine the Ashen Verdict, and personally spearheaded the war against the Lich King which ultimately ended in a final victory over the Scourge. Age and tragedy can be destabilizing factors, but in the end they do not determine someone's ability. A man determines his own abilities.
Post by
Rankkor
For those of you who think Varok Saurfang could not be Warchief because of his age or dead son, I believe a prime example of a great leader who has lost his son and is old and still a powerful leader is Tirion Fordring. He is a veteran of numerous wars and battles, and lost his son Taelen to Isillien. He is also in his elder years. Yet, despite all this, he formed the Argent Crusade and later along with Darion Mograine the Ashen Verdict, and personally spearheaded the war against the Lich King which ultimately ended in a final victory over the Scourge. Age and tragedy can be destabilizing factors, but in the end they do not determine someone's ability, only that individual can.
leading a military faction, with no civilian government and no formal cities, states, countries or kingdoms is NOT the same as being a warchief.
That's like comparing being a General to being a President. 2 completely different occupations. Tirion has proved to be a good military leader, but at his age, I dunno if he could be leader of a kingdom, much less a coalition of kingdoms
Post by
Adamsm
And Blizzard and Golden already rejected Varok as the replacement Warchief while Thrall was away.
Post by
BrintoSFJ
Hmm... i think garrosh shud be in charge for a bit longer and i also think they shud portray him as a ruthless leader with sense of honor..i am alliance but i still think he shud be horde leader. thrall is awesome as a person but the honest answer is his personality doesn't match the brutal horde style. thrall shud rather be a great shaman than the leader of a bloodthirsty lot who will kill anyone just to prove their supremacy.
Post by
Adamsm
Hmm... i think garrosh shud be in charge for a bit longer and i also think they shud portray him as a ruthless leader with sense of honor..i am alliance but i still think he shud be horde leader. thrall is awesome as a person but the honest answer is his personality doesn't match the brutal horde style. thrall shud rather be a great shaman than the leader of a bloodthirsty lot who will kill anyone just to prove their supremacy.
......Yeah.....other then the Undead, that's not the Horde....
Post by
4dehorde
For those of you who think Varok Saurfang could not be Warchief because of his age or dead son, I believe a prime example of a great leader who has lost his son and is old and still a powerful leader is Tirion Fordring. He is a veteran of numerous wars and battles, and lost his son Taelen to Isillien. He is also in his elder years. Yet, despite all this, he formed the Argent Crusade and later along with Darion Mograine the Ashen Verdict, and personally spearheaded the war against the Lich King which ultimately ended in a final victory over the Scourge. Age and tragedy can be destabilizing factors, but in the end they do not determine someone's ability, only that individual can.
leading a military faction, with no civilian government and no formal cities, states, countries or kingdoms is NOT the same as being a warchief.
That's like comparing being a General to being a President. 2 completely different occupations. Tirion has proved to be a good military leader, but at his age, I dunno if he could be leader of a kingdom, much less a coalition of kingdoms
It does not matter what position the leader holds, the same principles apply. Again, age does NOT determine one's ability to lead, not even politically. Both Cairne Bloodhoof and Terenas Menethil II were old men when they died, and had been very effective leaders of their people. I remind you Cairne was the high chieftain and Terenas was king, political leaders.
Post by
4dehorde
And Blizzard and Golden already rejected Varok as the replacement Warchief while Thrall was away.
Source? Irrelevant anyway, this is about opinions, not official decisions.
Post by
Adamsm
And one more time, from the Shattering which is Blizzard's official view: The Shattering: Prelude to Cataclysm
* "High Overlord," Cairne rumbled, bowing. "As a father myself, I grieve for what you have had to endure. But know that your son died a hero, and what you have wrought here honors his memory. Anything else is borne away on the winds."
Saurfang grunted acknowledgment. "It is good to see you again, High Chieftain Cairne Bloodhoof. And... I know what you say is true. I am not ashamed to say, though, that I am glad this campaign has finally come to an end. We have lost too much."
* "I leave a skeleton crew with Saurfang." "It is my belief that my former advisor will sit and watch spiders spin cobwebs and fully enjoy the peace he so obviously craves."
"We have both done our duties. We serve the Horde. If I serve by watching little spiders instead of fighting large ones, then I am well content."
Thrall again, considered Saurfang as a choice, but then decided against it because he didn't want to put any more stress on Varok, and was more then willing to leave him in Northrend, where he can retire to a semi-peaceful life....as one more time, the death of Draenosh hit Saurfang hard. Yes, we see a lot of older members of the Horde in positions of high ranks....but as Drek'thar shows, even age catches up with you eventually, and as anyone who's ever seen a father lose a son, knows that weakens you even more.
And Blizzard and Golden already rejected Varok as the replacement Warchief while Thrall was away.
Source? Irrelevant anyway, this is about opinions, not official decisions.
The Shattering? Go read the book for the sake of the Horde; as official decisions will always trump someone's personal opinions....because you know, that's the actual Blizzard information.
Edit:
Hell if you won't read the book, at least read Skreeran's review of it.
Post by
oneforthemoney
For those of you who think Varok Saurfang could not be Warchief because of his age or dead son, I believe a prime example of a great leader who has lost his son and is old and still a powerful leader is Tirion Fordring. He is a veteran of numerous wars and battles, and lost his son Taelen to Isillien. He is also in his elder years. Yet, despite all this, he formed the Argent Crusade and later along with Darion Mograine the Ashen Verdict, and personally spearheaded the war against the Lich King which ultimately ended in a final victory over the Scourge. Age and tragedy can be destabilizing factors, but in the end they do not determine someone's ability, only that individual can.
leading a military faction, with no civilian government and no formal cities, states, countries or kingdoms is NOT the same as being a warchief.
That's like comparing being a General to being a President. 2 completely different occupations. Tirion has proved to be a good military leader, but at his age, I dunno if he could be leader of a kingdom, much less a coalition of kingdoms
It does not matter what position the leader holds, the same principles apply. Again, age does NOT determine one's ability to lead, not even politically. Both Cairne Bloodhoof and Terenas Menethil II were old men when they died, and had been very effective leaders of their people. I remind you Cairne was the high chieftain and Terenas was king, political leaders.
The levels to which you are wrong in this matter are simply baffling, it's the equivalent of saying someone who is a doctor is capable of performing surgery, even if they are in fact a psychiatrist.
Post by
306612
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
BrintoSFJ
......Yeah.....other then the Undead, that's not the Horde....
and those others of the horde watching them do such things but not protesting, what can u say abt them? what can u say abt garrosh's sudden bloodthirsty attack to wipe out the whole night elf race? lots of troll, tauren, goblin and a few bllod elf were with orc forces too. horde were always like what garrosh mentions it to be : "bloodthirsty mongrels".
offtopic: the word 'horde' primarily defined in dictionary as a coalition of large packs of animals. since when do the blood elves consider themselves animals?
Post by
Adamsm
......Yeah.....other then the Undead, that's not the Horde....
and those others of the horde watching them do such things but not protesting, what can u say abt them? what can u say abt garrosh's sudden bloodthirsty attack to wipe out the whole night elf race? lots of troll, tauren, goblin and a few bllod elf were with orc forces too. horde were always like what garrosh mentions it to be : "bloodthirsty mongrels".Old(Demon) Horde was sure, Thrall Horde wasn't for the most part. And Garrosh's 'sudden bloodthirsty' assault to 'wipe out the Night Elves' is motivated by the same thing that had the Warsong Clan in Ashenvale for years: Lots of Lumber and Minerals to mine to help with the fact that the Barrens and Durotar doesn't have those.
And as said all through out the thread: Baine and the Tauren see Garrosh as a necessary evil but he still allows Tauren to join up with the war effort. Vol'jin and the Trolls are watching Garrosh to see if he'll change but they are still loyal to the Horde at large so they'll join the war effort as well. Goblins can be insane and are fairly straight forward types, so to their eyes what Garrosh is doing in Ashenvale is the right move and they are more then willing to join in.
As for the Blood Elves: The Night Elves turned their backs on their ancestors and cast out the Highborne, and then, when Tyrande and Malfurion came through the Eastern Kingdoms, they didn't do much to help Kael'thas and his problems with Garithos; it was Illidan who did that for the most part with sending Vashj to assist. After that, the Blood Elves watched as the Night Elves attempted an invasion of their lands during BC so they don't really have an issue with fighting against the Alliance. Lots of bad blood there for the way they were treated during the Third War and afterward.
offtopic: the word 'horde' primarily defined in dictionary as a coalition of large packs of animals. since when do the blood elves consider themselves animals?
A Horde is a gathering of any aggressive forces: Such as a Mongol Horde. That's where the name more then likely comes from.
Post by
BrintoSFJ
Old(Demon) Horde was sure, Thrall Horde wasn't for the most part. And Garrosh's 'sudden bloodthirsty' assault to 'wipe out the Night Elves' is motivated by the same thing that had the Warsong Clan in Ashenvale for years: Lots of Lumber and Minerals to mine to help with the fact that the Barrens and Durotar doesn't have those.
And as said all through out the thread: Baine and the Tauren see Garrosh as a necessary evil but he still allows Tauren to join up with the war effort. Vol'jin and the Trolls are watching Garrosh to see if he'll change but they are still loyal to the Horde at large so they'll join the war effort as well. Goblins can be insane and are fairly straight forward types, so to their eyes what Garrosh is doing in Ashenvale is the right move and they are more then willing to join in.
As for the Blood Elves: The Night Elves turned their backs on their ancestors and cast out the Highborne, and then, when Tyrande and Malfurion came through the Eastern Kingdoms, they didn't do much to help Kael'thas and his problems with Garithos; it was Illidan who did that for the most part with sending Vashj to assist. After that, the Blood Elves watched as the Night Elves attempted an invasion of their lands during BC so they don't really have an issue with fighting against the Alliance. Lots of bad blood there for the way they were treated during the Third War and afterward.
and none of them thought of any alternative to all these aggression. doesn't it prove my point 'bloodthirsty mongrel'?
A Horde is a gathering of any aggressive forces: Such as a Mongol Horde. That's where the name more then likely comes from.
precisely, any bloodthirsty lot, my question is since when did blood elves started to count themselves as such?
Post by
oneforthemoney
and none of them thought of any alternative to all these aggression. doesn't it prove my point 'bloodthirsty mongrel'?
Attempts at alternatives were made but they were frequently derailed by third parties.
Post by
Adamsm
and none of them thought of any alternative to all these aggression. doesn't it prove my point 'bloodthirsty mongrel'?Not in the least; the Night Elves were just as blood thirsty as the Horde when the Orcs and Humans showed up on Kalimdor during the Third War and attacked them without finding out what was going on. Pretty much every single race on Azeroth can be considered bloodthirsty depending on what they are up against:
Humans against the Orcs, Horde members, Undead.
Dwarves against the original Dark Irons, the Horde, the Blacks.
Gnomes against the Leper Gnomes and Thermaplugg.
Night Elves against the Legion, the Scourge, the Undead, the Orcs, the Trolls.
Draenei against the Legion, the Blood Elves of Kael'thas, the Fel Horde.
Worgen against the Undead.
Orcs against the Fel Horde, Humans, Night Elves.
Trolls against pretty much everyone else if they aren't part of the Darkspear who have their bloodthirst against the Alliance forces.
Tauren against the Centaur, the Grimtotem.
Undead against everyone.
Blood Elves against the Night Elves, the Legion, Kael's forces, the Scourge.
Goblins against the Alliance for what they tried to do on the Lost Isles.
A Horde is a gathering of any aggressive forces: Such as a Mongol Horde. That's where the name more then likely comes from.
precisely, any bloodthirsty lot, my question is since when did blood elves started to count themselves as such?Since the new Horde isn't bloodthirsty, they don't?
Post by
367020
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
BrintoSFJ
Like oneforthemoney said, third parties tend to derail those talks. When the night elves stop allowing the orcs to retrieve valuable resources they need, is it any surprise when the orcs go on the offensive?
and why the hell night elves wud allow them to desecrate a sacred forest? if i entered a church and demanded to hand me over all the tables and chairs there wud u let me take them?
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.