Various Vol'jin and Thrall Cataclysm Dialogs

[Anansi]

He can no longer indulge in that way of thinking? Really Veph? The horde and the alliance came together to defeat Arthas. They worked for the common good of everyone for a lot of this last expansion. And who, may I remind you, screwed that up? Garrosh. Giving the order to take potshots at the alliance airship in Icecrown, as WELL as the order to 'honorably' ambush the alliance WHILE THEY FOUGHT THE SCOURGE.

And THIS is the guy that Thrall is going to leave in command? Really? The guy who went out of his way to antagonize Varian Wrynn? The guy who has done his BEST to undermine the horde/alliance relations at every turn? The guy SAURFANG hates? This is SO wedged in it isn't even funny. Thrall would never, EVER have allowed Garrosh to lead the horde under ANY circumstances. This is a characterscrew in all it's glory.

I disagree with all of this.
The Horde and the Alliance did not come together to work for the common good of everyone, they did it because it was advantageous to both sides to see the Lich King destroyed because the Lich King was an equal threat to both, the Scourge didn't play favourites. Now that the Lich King is defeated, old rivalries that have been temporarily put on hold resurface.

Thrall knows full well that Wrynn is going to turn the eye of the Alliance war machine towards the Horde, and he believes Garrosh is the one return that gaze. In some respects, Thrall is kind of passing the buck here, he doesn't want to be responsible for leading the Horde to war and believes he can achieve better things elsewhere. War is a certainty, and Garrosh Hellscream is the very sort of Orc to lead the Horde in war. I don't like Garrosh very much, but at the same time I do understand from where his perspective is coming. You have to look at the broader picture, which Thrall alludes to when he says the Horde needs a hero. The Hellscream name carries immense weight with the Horde and they look up to the legacy of Hellscream as both a cautionary tale and a tale of great heroic redemption and salvation. If the Horde are going to war, having a Hellscream as Warchief is huge.

The Horde don't care about politics really (nor do the Alliance - they're all just people and pay as much attention to backroom politics as your average real world citizen, which is to say not very much at all to utterly none). All your comments are hedged in political events which are essentially unknown to the populace. We all have past and present leaders whom are dreadful people, and most of their worse flaws and actions are unknown to their people. The same applies here with Garrosh. He's definitely flawed, is overbearing and all too keen to see war, but he's also a Hellscream and that, to the Horde in general, is far more important than whether he pissed of Wrynn (for whom no one in the Horde really has any love). Vol'jin hates Garrosh and Garrosh has treated Vol'jin very disrespectfully but as Vol'jin says, the Horde is more than it's leaders and understands Thrall's reasons for putting Garrosh in command, that Garrosh will be a strong figure to lead the Horde in a time of war.

Yes, Garrosh is an arse, but that's what makes him great. He's also a Hellscream, which is going to make for some fantastic storytelling throughout the events in Cataclysm. But what you and I may see Garrosh as, that is not what he is to the Horde, and what he is to the Horde is the son of the greatest figure in Horde history, which makes him a very strong and compelling Warchief.

[Vephriel]

Excellently said Anansi, I wholeheartedly agree with your post.

[Palladiamorsdeus]

Where do I even start with this? The Horde and the Alliance did not come together to work for the common good of everyone, they did it because it was advantageous to both sides to see the Lich King destroyed because the Lich King was an equal threat to both, the Scourge didn't play favourites." Then your idea of a common good and mine are vastly, vastly different. They came together to defeat something that would have eaten them all. This isn't common good how.....? Nearly everyone remained calm and collected throughout this, EXCEPT Garrosh and his people. They? Spent the entire time more interested in trying to kill the Alliance. It was so bad that an underling had to kill one of Garrosh's people so that they didn't spark an all out war. Would YOU trust people like this? People who ambush you while you are supposedly under truce?

"Thrall knows full well that Wrynn is going to turn the eye of the Alliance war machine towards the Horde, and he believes Garrosh is the one return that gaze." This is so built on Varian hate that it is amusing. Varian late in Wrath has shown a remarkable amount of restraint where the horde, particularly the orcs are involved. Or have you forgotten that a certain 'warmonger' not only allowed Saurfang to mourn his son, but expressly forbid anyone from interupting his moment of grief? Saurfang. An ORC. A race Varian HATES. Varian is completely capable of seeing the light if given enough time. From Garroshs actions, can you really claim the same of him?

"All your comments are hedged in political events which are essentially unknown to the populace." Really. Your reasoning is "The people didn't know, so that's okay!" ? Not only that, but you are COMPLETELY wrong. You keep using the 'horde' to encompass the Blood elves, Undead, trolls, and tauren as well as the orcs. The ORCS are the only one's who care ANYTHING about Garrosh, and that's because such a large portion of the orcish horde are still fairly warlike. They admire their old heroes, whether those guy's were completely evil or not. Garrosh is the sun of Grom. The standard orc'd look up to him even he spat on them.

Thrall's reasons for putting Garrosh in command are completely stupid, and there is no excuse for them. Zero. The way Thrall has been built up since Warcraft 3 just got crapped upon royally. Having a leader like Garrosh in command would ONLY make the situation a lot worse then what it already is.

And that's all I've got to say about it. We are very clearly not going to agree on it, so I'm dropping it.

[Kalliope]

Heh, your opinion is extremely biased toward the alliance. Wrynn may have shown some maturity in regards to Saurfang the Younger, but between ToC and ICC, there was nothing shown to us that accounted for some deep change in him or his beliefs. The one isolated incident isn't enough to convince me personally that he's going to pull a complete 180 in the long run.

It makes sense to me that Thrall would want to rally the Horde around Garrosh instead of himself; he knows this needs to be done and that Garrosh is more likely to get blood boiling than himself. Even if the other races don't have the same loyalty to Garrosh that the orcs do, they will certainly be spurred into action, even if it's because they don't approve.

Anansi's point that the general populace doesn't have access to the same information that the players do is a strong one. I mean really, the entire world of players knows what happened to Bolvar, even though the NPC populace doesn't. Their perception of what really happened with Arthas is completely different than ours.

[Anansi]

I'm not going to discuss something with someone who's only debate technique is condescension.

[Saturo]

I'm not going to discuss something with someone who's only debate technique is condescension.

Have you tried backing your argumement with something other than personal opinion? Because Palladia's point isn't what WE think about this, it's about what the PEOPLE IN-GAME think of it. The only ones that really like Garrosh is the more warlike orcs and the Hellscream clan. That's the way he was written. Vol'jin and Saurfang both want him dead, Sylvanas is mocking him, and the Tauren apparently want nothing to do with the horde anymore. And this is supposed to be a great leader? Pssh!

[Vephriel]

Actually I find Anansi always backs his posts up with a variety of examples and facts to help illustrate his personal opinion. This is all based on our opinions, of course there's no avoiding that. I just think it's more conducive to discussion to bring in a well supported statement rather than just "This is stupid."

[Saturo]

I didn't see any facts or examples in that post.

[Gimlion]

I blame the no war part on Jaina. She's the wall between Varian and his goals of destroying the horde.

And I don't think he wants to destroy the horde to be an ass. He's seen the underbelly of their society. If you payed attention at the VERY end of the Wrathgate quest when you're about to fight Thrall, he mentions how he was thrown from arena to arena. no one cared what happened to him as long as they saw a good fight.

He isn't an ass towards the Horde for no reason. He has very strong reasons, which I can support. It's not his fault he didn't get to see the nicer part of the horde. And he has managed to not go into full out war with them, despite what he wants, because he understands Jaina and what she is trying to do.

I am going to put this here on behalf of Varrian.

[Anansi]

Have you tried backing your argumement with something other than personal opinion? Because Palladia's point isn't what WE think about this, it's about what the PEOPLE IN-GAME think of it. The only ones that really like Garrosh is the more warlike orcs and the Hellscream clan. That's the way he was written. Vol'jin and Saurfang both want him dead, Sylvanas is mocking him, and the Tauren apparently want nothing to do with the horde anymore. And this is supposed to be a great leader? Pssh!

The Horde is much more than just a few old stubborn leaders and a handful of heroes from Northrend.

Vol'jin recognizes and acknowledges Thrall's stance that the Horde will rally under Garrosh due to his father's legacy. Yes, he is an Orc hero, but where the Orcs go so goes the Horde and with the understanding that it is best for them as a collective people. He also recognizes the wisdom of Thrall's decision which is seated in an approach to the Horde itself, not what the players know or what a few select leaders and their circle know.

The Horde is not a political body in the same way as the Alliance, it is a collective of tribes and disparate peoples. Now, the son of a great Orc icon is placed as Warchief by Thrall himself, a leader the Horde respects and admires. These two things add together to put Garrosh as a great figure to lead the Horde in the eyes of the tribes. As I said before, Garrosh is the son of a great cautionary tale and a tale of heroic redemption, and it will be through Garrosh as a figurehead of Horde history and ancestry that they will regain a true Horde identity, which again is something Thrall alludes to, after the more unified events in Northrend. Thrall appears to fear that the Horde are losing a sense of identity following a long period of more or less peace and diplomacy. Not that the Horde only identify with war, but the way of the Horde peoples has always been one of an uphill struggle against the odds in the face of many adversities so much so that it is part of their mental cultural being. Remove that and minds wander, factions sway, the Horde could dissolve under the false assumption that a unified front is not necessary. Thrall knows better and believes that through Garrosh, the tribes of the Horde will retain their sense of identity, even if it means war and many lives lost.
It is not coincidence that Thrall sees the bigger picture which spans generations into the future right at the time he is about to take on the mantle of the Guardian of Tirisfal, a very storied and prestigious position that demands of it's bearer to have a great vision and perspective. Thrall is a Shaman, one who speaks with the spirits and sees the world and events yet to unfold in a different way. He refers to putting a great deal of thought into Garrosh's succession, and the Horde will trust both in Thrall and Garrosh, that the decision is correct and that the Horde are in capable hands, respectively.

Story wise it's brilliant as anything can happen. Will the Horde entertain notions of civil war? Will Garrosh go through a fantastic story arc in the same way his father did, starting with a fall and completed by heroic redemption? What narratives will Horde players get to experience as they quest and internal conflicts, beliefs and perspectives get into motion?

I do find it a bit odd, Saturo, that you accuse me of speaking only from personal opinion when Palladia refuses to even entertain and discuss alternate viewpoints to his own.

[Saturo]

What I was getting at wasn't that, it was that you didn't put it in an opinionated way, you put it as true facts.

Also, Thrall doesn't justify war. That's his character. They're changing it now. That's not a good choice.

[Anansi]

I don't see how his character is changing at all. If anything, he is reluctantly accepting that war is inevitable and is removing himself from the responsibility of leading the Horde in war and is instead pursuing change via other more hopefully positive means (I forget his exact words in the audio files) as the Guardian of Tirisfal.

The rational being that if war is inevitable, there are better choices for military leadership than Thrall, that better choice being Garrosh for reasons I already covered. Thrall does not like war, he believes other options are better, a belief he has clearly pursued in his time as Warchief. But now it appears that war is upon the Horde and Alliance regardless of his efforts (and those of his parallel Jaina) and it is wisdom which acknowledges and accepts this, and thus Thrall has made a choice he feels is better suited to the Horde in a time of war.

This all seems very much in character and even develops that character more.

I don't mean to give any impression of what I say as being "true facts" I just try to be collected and direct in my posts, so if my tone comes across as "this is the way it is only", that is not how I am thinking, as I enjoy the discussion element and putting up a wall is not exactly helpful to that goal.

[Kalliope]

This all seems very much in character and even develops that character more.

That's the beauty of character development over a long period of time. A character can eventually change their mind about things, based completely on the experiences we've seen them have. It justifies their new position.

[Anansi]

Exactly, Kalliope.

I was thinking about this the other day, how for a game based in a very static state of running the same content repeatedly, killing the same lore figures repeatedly, how very rich, diverse and developing the Lore of WoW is.
They really spend a great deal of time and effort on the small details of personalities, places and history so that the balance of an MMO is maintained with that of a rich RPG (I still don't quite know how people RP in WoW but that's a whole other topic!). Thrall has really had a lot of effort devoted to him and it's nice to see his development as the game has progressed. I wonder if we'll see the same in Garrosh? It would be interesting to see how he changes given the very vocal assortment of critics and fans the character has gathered. The reward at the end could be well worth the trip.