The Horde needs Thrall, and this is why..

Сообщение от Monday

Oh! Oh! I pick C!

Сообщение от HiVolt

When it came time to free the orcs, he invaded all the camps in unfair ways when the guards had little chance to fight back, but when he dies from a cowards blow, honor is suddenly a big deal.

I'm sorry, but this point is moot. When trying to free prisoners, you don't announce to the guards that you intend to do it. Honor does not dictate logic in this case.

And it seems to me that you just don't like the idea of any orc being treated like a hero... that's just begging for bad story.

Сообщение от 159454

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от Monday

HiVolt, post in Makorr!

And I believe Thrall is a great leader, just so I'm partially on topic.

Partially is better than almost all these other posts. It is now why the Horde is onorable, not why the Horde needs Thrall.

Сообщение от 451455

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от Morec0

I don't remember any other souce that states otherwise then current Lore, so I'm afraid I don't.

Сообщение от Monday

Сообщение от Adamsm

And it seems to me that you just don't like the idea of any orc being treated like a hero... that's just begging for bad story.

Thats not the case at all, I have nothing against orcs being heros, or even redeemed heros. Its retconed heros that I don't like.

You see, I have looked at several chats with you and other people about the differences between Thrall, Doomhammer, and Grom.

What makes Doomhammer and Grom different to me is that Doomhammer was changed from a coward to a sage, yet with Grom they just went with who he was.

You guys don't get what I am trying to say.

A coward? I still don't get that: Doomhammer was part of the Blackrock Clan, serving as second to Blackhand, and he was one of the few of that clan who didn't take the Blood(that's not a retcon by the way). He took down Blackhand and the Council once he figured out about the Shadow Council(and killing his best friends), accepting that doing so would brand him with a mark he wouldn't be able to get out from under in his entire life. He didn't kill Gul'dan and Cho'gall, which was a mistake, but he did the best he could with what he had; gaining the assistance of the Forest Trolls to help him in his war.

Yes, it's all retconned for the final fight against Lothar... but here's the thing; without the 'retcon' Turaylon wouldn't be what he is today after all; the original thing just had the Alliance and Horde army fighting each other, the Alliance eventually winning; not Turaylon picks up the broken blade of Lothar and beats Doomhammer down. Even at the end; Doomhammer escaped the camp with few casualities, he didn't go out of his way to kill people, he just wanted out.

He then spent 20 odd years wandering Azeroth before he ran into Thrall and Grom again.... and nothing he did was 'cowardly', he helped the son of his best friend and one of those he respected to free their people from a slavery worse then pretty much everything... I mean, the orcs were living in mud and filth, which is something no leader wants to see for their people. And while he took a blow to the back.. he was fighting against about 8 mounted Knights when he died, so not a cowards death either.

Сообщение от HiVolt

Thats not the case at all, I have nothing against orcs being heros, or even redeemed heros. Its retconed heros that I don't like.

Well, retcons are bound to happen. I know it's tough to accept them, but if it makes the story more interesting, it's worth it.

I mean, without Doomhammer being a hero, we might not even have Thrall. We might still be at the old Horde = Bad, Alliance = Good scenario, which is extremely boring.

But, we're drastically off topic here.

Сообщение от Skreeran

And what exactly do you think will happen after they run out of humans, dwarfs, and elves to kill? Go back to killing themselves. There was no way to an end in either senerio you showed. Infact, we don't even know if Doomhammer would consider peace.Well, with a big enough space, they wouldn't have to fight, especially not with the resources that Azeroth had and Draenor lacked, he hoped that there wouldn't be need for them to fight.

And then there's the fact that the bloodlust wore off after a number of years.

Doomhammer.Blackhand. Let's go over our timeline again:

Medivh was killed the day before the siege. Gul'dan went into a coma because he was prying into Medivh's mind when the Guardian was killed. Without Gul'dan, Orgrim killed Blackhand. Which was at the very least the day before Stormwind was destroyed. Even if Orgrim led the actual siege, he still didn't lead the campaign. It was too late to turn back.

And where are you getting the idea that it was Blackhand? It could have been anyone.It definitely wasn't Orgrim. The Alliance never sent ambassadors in the Second War.

You're asuming that. The orcs would more likely just do whatever he says. Thats how it always went. They didnt care that he killed thier original Warchief.The were in the throes of bloodlust. They never would have accepted peace. They would have rebelled.

Сообщение от 451455

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от 229054

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от Adamsm

Yes, it's all retconned for the final fight against Lothar... but here's the thing; without the 'retcon' Turaylon wouldn't be what he is today after all; the original thing just had the Alliance and Horde army fighting each other, the Alliance eventually winning; not Turaylon picks up the broken blade of Lothar and beats Doomhammer down.

I liked the original version better where Turalyon was the only surviving knight. It made the "Lothar's death was my fault" more climative. Some sources say the fight lasted for hours, so I think him not being able to make it to Lothar in time is a little silly. meh.

Other then that, you made some good points in the last paragragh. He was more down to earth in Lord of the Clans (Which as you said earlier, yes, I have not read it yet, I just skimmed through it. I plan to read it soon, but don't have the time right now.)

But I still hate him.

Fine, hate him, but don't call him names without actual things to back it up. I don't expect anyone to agree with me when I rant about Sylvanas after all, just as you would prefer if we don't insult you for liking Varian(which no one has done lately). Merely consider things before you post them is all.

Сообщение от taurenmoo812

Ok, this thread derailed from a Thrall thread into an Orgrim thread. And one thing I've picked up on, is how all those talking about Doomhammer seem to revere the idea of him as leader more then anything I listed off as what Thrall did for his people, and what he still trys to do and sustain today.

I now realise most here would just think of Thrall as a passing phase and those would be just as happy yo see any new character taking the mantle of warchief, just because its something new.

Сообщение от Skreeran

Сообщение от taurenmoo812

I now realise most here would just think of Thrall as a passing phase and those would be just as happy yo see any new character taking the mantle of warchief, just because its something new.That's not entirely true.

The thing is, Thrall is definitely a hero and a good Warchief. But he wouldn't be where he is now without Orgrim Doomhammer. Who is/was the better Warchief is hard to determine, because they both did the best with what they had, and both saved the Horde from destruction.

and that just makes ppl regard Thrall as the middle man and easily replaced. If that wasn't the fact this thread wouldn't have gone from talking about thrall to talking about doomhammer.

Сообщение от Adamsm

I now realise most here would just think of Thrall as a passing phase and those would be just as happy yo see any new character taking the mantle of warchief, just because its something new.That's not entirely true.

The thing is, Thrall is definitely a hero and a good Warchief. But he wouldn't be where he is now without Orgrim Doomhammer. Who is/was the better Warchief is hard to determine, because they both did the best with what they had, and both saved the Horde from destruction.

Aye, no one here is saying Thrall isn't a good warchief(minus a few flaws), he's just not the most important member of the Horde, which is going to fall apart if he's not there.

Сообщение от Orranis

I now realise most here would just think of Thrall as a passing phase and those would be just as happy yo see any new character taking the mantle of warchief, just because its something new.That's not entirely true.

The thing is, Thrall is definitely a hero and a good Warchief. But he wouldn't be where he is now without Orgrim Doomhammer. Who is/was the better Warchief is hard to determine, because they both did the best with what they had, and both saved the Horde from destruction.

Aye, no one here is saying Thrall isn't a good warchief(minus a few flaws), he's just not the most important member of the Horde, which is going to fall apart if he's not there.

He probably is the most important member, but the second point holds.

Сообщение от Morec0

I'll like to see what happens to Garrosh with him as Warcheif.

Back on topic: Thrall hall! (or whatever).

Сообщение от taurenmoo812

Fact is, your just saying that despite all he's done for his people, and it being more then even Orgrim did I'd say, in whatever way your trying to say it Thrall and what he's done/doing for the horde is being passed off as something it doesn't need anymore.

And no I'm not passing off Orgrim in the same way, I'm just stating a fact. Thrall healed the horde and made it powerful, but only with the sustained wisdom it has from him. And I have to say, its kinda nieve to believe the horde would keep as it is now if Thrall was gone for good. Because of anyone that follows garrosh's ways.. well, its gonna be the old horde all over again.

The Horde needs Thrall, and this is why..

Ответить