This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
Why do I defend Thrall so much? this is why
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Rankkor
Well, I apologise then.
apology accepted =] no harm done.
It's simply that some of your phrasing makes it seem as though you are.
yhea........ that's because english isn't my main language, spanish is, and sometimes my flawed english makes my phrases sound or have a diferent meaning than what I really wanna say. it's a common misunderstanding (it's even worst on vent U_U)
but it seems like you and Tauren think that your opinion is the "right" one, and that everyone who disagrees with you because of various different reasons are "wrong".
erm, that can't apply here, because it depends on the context, when I debate about some event that happened in the lore I do my research, and using such evidence like quotes, quests, or something else, I post my opinions on the subject.
but here it's diferent, because here we're not discussing something that happened, or something that will happen, it's a simple discussion about wheter or not it was a wise move by blizzard to replace thrall with garrosh.
as such, this is all tied to personal opinion, and nobody is "right" or "wrong" here.
some believe it was a great move by blizz to put someone else in gromash hold in that chair, whereas others believe it was the biggest piece of crap to have happened since the draenei lolore retcon or the inclution of night-elven mages.
all we can do here is not define who's right or who's wrong, but rather (if so inclined) post why you hate/love this desition, and explain why.
nothing more, nothing less.
in a nutshell, I despise this change because it was uncalled for, our lead was doing a great job before the writers nerfed him into a passive fool, and if they wanted to bring change upon the horde there could had been several other ways to do so.
plus the last part of my previous post:
Garrosh's order of expeling the "weaker races" from the center of orgrimmar is but a taste (and a bitter one BTW) of how is rule will be like.
it's kinda hard to picture a happy (or at least acceptable) outcome when someone like that sits in the warchief chair.
why? because the horde is not the alliance, in the alliance, a king or queen can only boss arround their only people..... so if tyrande suddenly get's all crazy, her crap only affects the elves, not the dwarves or the gnomes........
in the horde however, the warchief is the big-kahuna, the godfather, "El jefe de jefes". so, even if the rest of the horde disaproves, when the warchief orders something, it's his way or the high-way.
that's a double-edged sword, because if a great, benevolent and wise leader sits in a position so strong, he has the power to enforce positive changes.
put a rage-aholic in that chair, and well.............
Post by
Patty
all we can do here is not define who's right or who's wrong, but rather (if so inclined) post why you hate/love this desition, and explain why.
Agreed, very little is set in stone as of now.
I both dislike and like the change. I dislike it because I like Thrall, but I like it because it will certainly add some interest into the Horde in Cataclysm. I'll make a more decisive judgement when I have more information.
Post by
Adamsm
Garrosh's order of expeling the "weaker races" from the center of orgrimmar is but a taste (and a bitter one BTW) of how is rule will be like.Except it goes with the original Orc mindset(and again, not Dark Horde) heh.
Post by
306612
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
taurenmoo812
all we can do here is not define who's right or who's wrong, but rather (if so inclined) post why you hate/love this desition, and explain why.
Agreed, very little is set in stone as of now.
I both dislike and like the change. I dislike it because I like Thrall, but I like it because it will certainly add some interest into the Horde in Cataclysm. I'll make a more decisive judgement when I have more information.
I personally like the change because it will give some small measure of lore to Garrosh other than "I'm the son of that other guy. WAR WAR WAR."
You know considering how Rank put it, warcrafts recent writers have done nothing for Thrall in terms of lore, and so its because of them that people are looking at him differently now. So if that same set of writers were to work on Garrosh, you can be sure he wouldn't developed beyond his 'Me son of Grom, WAR WAR WAR' persona.
In other words, they need a better writing team.
Post by
Skreeran
You keep forgetting what Kirisani's had to say on this matter, Tauren.
Post by
Adamsm
You keep forgetting what Kirisani's had to say on this matter, Tauren.
Selective memory heh.
Post by
Patty
You know considering how Rank put it, warcrafts recent writers have done nothing for Thrall in terms of lore, and so its because of them that people are looking at him differently now. So if that same set of writers were to work on Garrosh, you can be sure he wouldn't developed beyond his 'Me son of Grom, WAR WAR WAR' persona.
In other words, they need a better writing team.
Would you rather him become Rhonin the second? Because quite frankly; characters need flaws. If said character is leader of an organisation -
their flaws are going to effect that organisation
. For example, Varian is unwilling to let go of the past - Which we have discussed and which
I will only mention in passing
. Jaina is desperate to avoid a 4th war, and is still distraught over Arthas' fate. Therefore - she has lost popularity with some people, who agree more with Varian.
Similarly, Thrall was weaknesses which will effect how he leads. He is
not
omnipresent, and is trusting enough to allow his allies and subordinates to do what they wish to for the good of the Horde. People can easily manipulate this, and word travels slowly across oceans. I really don't see why you are complaining about Blizzard giving him a flaw, because most characters are better developed because of these flaws.
Post by
451455
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Skreeran
You keep forgetting what Kirisani's had to say on this matter, Tauren.
Who is Kirisani?
World Event Designer
See
this thread.
Post by
Rankkor
You keep forgetting what Kirisani's had to say on this matter, Tauren.
while I generally trust what blizzard says, lately they have been unafraid of lying to us, (or at least saying something today, and changing their mind tomorrow)
these are the same folk who said each expac would have a hero class (only to find cata will have none)
these are the same folk who said the lich king would be the last raid in the game "The pinnacle of content in this expantion" and yet now we have the ruby sanctum........
so... maybe kirasani said that the honor of the horde wouldn't be compromised, and that the core values and creed of the horde wound't be reversed back to what the dark horde was in the second war but............
if they could lie (or change their mind) once...............
Post by
Adamsm
these are the same folk who said the lich king would be the last raid in the game "The pinnacle of content in this expantion" and yet now we have the ruby sanctum........It is; Ruby Sanctum is the sister instance to ICC, providing belt, bracer and boots to go with the T10 gear, but ICC is still the 'pinnacle' of the Expansion.
Post by
Skreeran
1. Hero class: This is arguably true, but this is nowhere near as specific as what Kirisani said, and was said roughly two years before Cataclysm was even announced.
2. They didn't lie about Ruby Sanctum. Firstly, they said that 3.3 would be the last
major content patch
of the expansion, not the last raid. Second, they've said repeatedly before (starting with Blizzcon, I believe), that they may have one or two small raids after ICC to bring it Cataclysm.
Post by
306612
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Skreeran
Well, they're already starting that in Wrath of the Lich King.
Sylvanas and Jaina are playing parts that the didn't have in Vanilla or TBC. Lor'themar got his part in the QD quest chain, even if it was forced. Vol'jin and Mekkatorque are getting new armor and helping reclaim their cities. Stuff is apparently happening with Baine and Cairne. I wouldn't be surprised if Tyrande did something in Cata after her appearance in Stormrage.
Post by
306612
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
chaosis
To be fair to both sides of the argument, I'll try to promote both Thrall and Garrosh here.
Tauren, you've been saying that by having Thrall replaced by Garrosh, the Horde changes its fundamental values and traditions that you hold such as stake in. But now, let's look at this from another perspective. The closest person that resembles Garrosh in the Alliance is Varian Wyrnn (btw, my main is an ally toon, although I've always played orcs since warcraft 1, 2, reign of chaos, etc., so they hold a special place in my heart as well). Personally, as an Alliance player, I've never more proud of the leadership of the Alliance. Varian is aggressive, passionate, and hot-blooded. In other words, he's the Garrosh of the Alliance.
If Garrosh does replace thrall in Cata, I say you give him a chance.
I guess the only thing I can compare to Horde players is the Lich King. Since we Alliance players have not had a leader be replaced yet, the death of Arthas and replacement by Bolvar is the closest thing I can relate to. To me, something like that just felt stupid and cliche by Blizz, I personally would've liked to see a much more deep and interesting ending to the WOTLK saga.
However, to be fair to Thrall, I definitely agree with you on the fact that he is an extrodinairy and unique character. Blizzard would be idiots if they discarded Thrall, or even lessened his influence on the happenings of Azeroth. IMO, I'd love to see Thrall elevated to an even higher position than Warchief of a warring faction against another (possibly a guardian of Trisfal, but that's just a hopeful wish). To sum it up, Thrall and Garrosh are absolutely fantastic characters. If I was to put this in literary terms, Thrall would be the dynamic protagonist, and Garrosh as the foil or the contrast.
Thrall is a pivotal character in the future of Azeroth, but there is absolutely no way that Thrall will have a lessened position or influence in Cataclysm
Post by
Adamsm
IMO, I'd love to see Thrall elevated to an even higher position than Warchief of a warring faction against another (possibly a guardian of Trisfal, but that's just a hopeful wish).Never going to happen.
Post by
taurenmoo812
Tauren, you've been saying that by having Thrall replaced by Garrosh, the Horde changes its fundamental values and traditions that you hold such as stake in. But now, let's look at this from another perspective. The closest person that resembles Garrosh in the Alliance is Varian Wyrnn (btw, my main is an ally toon, although I've always played orcs since warcraft 1, 2, reign of chaos, etc., so they hold a special place in my heart as well). Personally, as an Alliance player, I've never more proud of the leadership of the Alliance. Varian is aggressive, passionate, and hot-blooded. In other words, he's the Garrosh of the Alliance.
I'm sorry to break your balance argument here, but in this case, your quite wrong in thinking Garrosh would be like the horde version of Varian.
For all my dislike of Varian, I can just as well say, he does at least hold up the values of what the alliance have to themselves, and in that gives reason for that faction to survive.
Garrosh doesn't.
He represents the old horde, the savage, brutal, unthinking horde that wanted to conquer all of azeroth, and wipe out all things in there path. Given, this is what Varian is wanting to do the to the horde too, but Garrosh has no warrent to be this way with the alliance, and he would so clearly sink the horde back down into what it once was in the past to achieve what he wants, a corrupted horde no less if he was offered it.
Garrosh is the kind of leader who would be easily manipulated by power, and so it would weaken the horde. Thats what the old horde was like, well Blackhand was the orcs warchief, he was a puppet to Gul'dan. And Garrosh would be no different and just as easy to manipulate.
The horde needs someone extraordinary to lead them to keep them from falling back into there dark past, something Garrosh can not do.
Post by
Morec0
... And Garrosh would be no different and just as easy to manipulate.
How do you figure that? I've seen nothing that states he is.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.