Does the Horde deserve self-governance?

100 Night Elf Rogue
10320


The deal is this:

*Hands Shaithiss the brochure detailing the twelve-step program*

I'll be back next month to monitor your progress.


Alright guys in a month we need to hide the crystals!


I didn't say -when- next month.

:)
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Warrior
14765
In a bizarre alternate universe where Blizzard allows the Alliance to be triumphant in Orgrimmar, that wouldn't even be the end of the war. The war cannot end as long as the Forsaken are in Gilneas and Sylvanas lives.
Reply Quote
100 Human Warrior
16460
Well. I'll echo what other people have said - the Orcs do not deserve self-governance because they're currently a bunch of entitled green children. The rest of the Horde (barring Forsaken) should not suffer for the orc's crimes in particular.

As much as I'd love for the Alliance to place the Horde's new leader, that would make too many Horde fans angry (God knows we can't let Horde players be displeased) so we have to come up with a compromise.

I'm sure one of the other Horde's races, maybe a Tauren, will lead the Horde. Orcs are the current military backbone, however after the siege of Orgrimmar they might take a hit that destabilizes their current established power structure and allows for another race in the Horde to make a bid for power.

Normally under such circumstances this means the Horde would probably implode upon itself due to power struggles, but there's a strong possibility that Horde will select its new leader and follow them unfalteringly.
Reply Quote
85 Goblin Rogue
8070
In a bizarre alternate universe where Blizzard allows the Alliance to be triumphant in Orgrimmar, that wouldn't even be the end of the war. The war cannot end as long as the Forsaken are in Gilneas and Sylvanas lives.


Oh? So... Gilneas joined the Alliance again before the Forsaken invaded? I thought the Night Elves and Alliance for that matter used it as a chance of opportunity.

No, Gilneas really wasn't Alliance land. In fact, Gilneas was Gilneas land. The Gilnean's lost it before they even joined the Alliance, which makes me kinda laugh that the Alliance use it as a reason to further the advance on the Forsaken. "YEAH! WE WANT GILNEAS BACK.... Until we get something better, then it can sit for all we care."

Honestly, acting as if Sylvanas is the problem is kinda false there. The real problem is that her people are dying, it's been said that Forsaken will need new parts. They're a doomed race. Welcome to the cruel, sad truth of the Forsaken. It's literally survival of the fittest for them. But, on the other side of the hand, I completely understand what you're saying because it's really a perspective from factions.
Reply Quote
90 Goblin Mage
8380
I would say that the orcs can govern themselves with the right orc in charge. Thrall or Saurfang come to mind. This Warchief business, one person being in charge of the whole enchilada? That's probably got to end. Even if you have guys like Thrall in charge there's simply too much of it to keep in line all at once for just one guy. All the nasty stuff happening in UC while he was running things across the sea was evident of that.
Reply Quote
100 Human Warrior
16460
This Warchief business, one person being in charge of the whole enchilada? That's probably got to end.


That's why a lot of posters, myself included, are suggesting/speculating a senate that holds the real power while the Warchief is relegated to simply being the Orcish cultural leader or simply a figurehead - something for the Horde to rally around.
Reply Quote
100 Troll Shaman
5695
10/09/2012 08:24 AMPosted by Kyalin
The Night Elves sort of overthrew that government ten-thousand years ago. It's hard to keep up with the news, I know, but it did happen. There's a new government now, and they are and have always been firmly against fel magic.

The same new Night Elf government who just took in the very Highborne closest to Azshara and responsible for summoning Sargeras? The ones who not a few years ago were actively draining demons to keep themselves immortal?

The government may very well be anti-demon, but few peoples have dabbled in fel magics more than the Night Elves even to this day.

Dabbling in fel magic is a pretty bad reason to ban an entire race from being allowed to govern itself.

10/09/2012 09:12 AMPosted by Mordstreich
That's why a lot of posters, myself included, are suggesting/speculating a senate that holds the real power while the Warchief is relegated to simply being the Orcish cultural leader or simply a figurehead - something for the Horde to rally around.

The Horde could very much be made to live without the position of Warchief.
Edited by Kellick on 10/9/2012 9:18 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Warrior
14765
10/09/2012 09:00 AMPosted by Zizz
In a bizarre alternate universe where Blizzard allows the Alliance to be triumphant in Orgrimmar, that wouldn't even be the end of the war. The war cannot end as long as the Forsaken are in Gilneas and Sylvanas lives.


Oh? So... Gilneas joined the Alliance again before the Forsaken invaded? I thought the Night Elves and Alliance for that matter used it as a chance of opportunity.

No, Gilneas really wasn't Alliance land. In fact, Gilneas was Gilneas land. The Gilnean's lost it before they even joined the Alliance, which makes me kinda laugh that the Alliance use it as a reason to further the advance on the Forsaken. "YEAH! WE WANT GILNEAS BACK.... Until we get something better, then it can sit for all we care."


The worgen, as members of the Alliance, would like their homeland back, thank you very much.

10/09/2012 09:00 AMPosted by Zizz
Honestly, acting as if Sylvanas is the problem is kinda false there. The real problem is that her people are dying, it's been said that Forsaken will need new parts. They're a doomed race. Welcome to the cruel, sad truth of the Forsaken. It's literally survival of the fittest for them. But, on the other side of the hand, I completely understand what you're saying because it's really a perspective from factions.


When your method of reproduction involves murder, it's really hard to feel any sympathy for you.
Reply Quote
100 Tauren Druid
9890
10/09/2012 10:02 AMPosted by Quard
When your method of reproduction involves murder


I'm not really sure whether to counter by pointing out that "involves" does not mean "requires" or by pointing out that instances in which murder has been used to increase the Forsaken numbers is few and far between.

Either way your statement is superficially true in that in some specific instances their method of reproduction has involved murder, but any deeper implication fails.
Reply Quote
100 Blood Elf Rogue
10985
10/09/2012 10:02 AMPosted by Quard
The worgen, as members of the Alliance, would like their homeland back, thank you very much.


I think what he was getting at was that the attack on Gilneas was not an attack on the Alliance, but an attack on a neutral third party that the joined the Alliance. Doesn't change the Alliance's goal of liberating Gilneas though.

10/09/2012 10:02 AMPosted by Quard
When your method of reproduction involves murder, it's really hard to feel any sympathy for you.


There has been some speculation about whether Forsaken "reproduction" needs to involve murder. As organizations like the Cult of the Damned and individual stories like the old Scholo Ras Frostwhisper quest line showed us, there are some humans that are so scared of death that they would accpet undeath instead.

Edit: Bull beat me to it.

It is possible that an accord could be reached where some humans volunteer to either be raised or have their body parts used (after a natural death, or at least not murder by the Forsaken) to shore up existing Forsaken. The only question is would enough people volunteer for something like that.
Edited by Telonis on 10/9/2012 10:39 AM PDT
Reply Quote
100 Blood Elf Paladin
12075
10/09/2012 10:02 AMPosted by Quard
When your method of reproduction involves murder, it's really hard to feel any sympathy for you.

When you are killing that which is corrupted by an old god, it's really hard to call it murder. =T

The worgen, as members of the Alliance, would like their homeland back, thank you very much.

Then they get to leave it because all land is Troll land.

I kid.
Kinda ^_^

Seriously, if the orcs are such a power that the combined might of the rest of the Horde cannot contain it then there is no real way for the Alliance to do so without their support. The other races would most likely agree with this and may help bring about some peace.
Especially since all Horde aggression is by Garrosh's orders.
Gilneas was Garry wanting a port within striking distance from SW, and wanting the Forsaken to prove themselves.

I'm not going to get into Ashenvale because that quickly devolves into, who shot first Han or Greedo.
The Orcs should be restricted in their political power of the Horde and each racial leader should assemble into a council where each has equal say.
Edited by Fayt on 10/9/2012 10:47 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Hunter
5360
10/09/2012 10:37 AMPosted by Telonis
There has been some speculation about whether Forsaken "reproduction" needs to involve murder. As organizations like the Cult of the Damned and individual stories like the old Scholo Ras Frostwhisper quest line showed us, there are some humans that are so scared of death that they would accpet undeath instead.


Off hand, I would say the surviving humans would refuse to let the Forsaken use their dead and raise them into undeath (seriously, after the Scourge, the Forsaken and gods knows what else, WHY isn't cremation now the standard for humanity in dealing with their dead?) Someone dies? Cremate the body so no one can raise it into undeath. It's an obvious solution and should have been implemented -years- ago in the game. Instead they are still sticking the corpse in the ground intact..
Edited by Kynrind on 10/9/2012 3:21 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Hunter
5360
10/09/2012 10:30 AMPosted by Bullcowsby
I'm not really sure whether to counter by pointing out that "involves" does not mean "requires" or by pointing out that instances in which murder has been used to increase the Forsaken numbers is few and far between.


Battlefield raising. This is shown in the Silverpine questing. The Forsaken raise numerous people they just killed to bolster the Forsaken ranks.
Reply Quote
100 Orc Hunter
17585
As much as I'd love for the Alliance to place the Horde's new leader, that would make too many Horde fans angry (God knows we can't let Horde players be displeased) so we have to come up with a compromise.


This annoyed me far more than it should have. Why would you 'love' for it to happen when you have made it abundantly clear you do not play nor care for the Horde? Do you want it to happen so you have something to lord over the Horde players? Is it an ego thing?

As I said, probably far more than it should have.

Battlefield raising. This is shown in the Silverpine questing. The Forsaken raise numerous people they just killed to bolster the Forsaken ranks.


Death in war isn't murder. If it was then every single race is full of mass-murdering serial killers. Now, there is probably an argument for a morale quandry regarding the ethics behind raising a new Forsaken immediately following the death of enemy combatants, of which you are probably right, but the moment that human life expires the Forsaken view them as a potential recruit. Tasteless? Sure, absolutely. But practical.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Hunter
5360
10/09/2012 03:32 PMPosted by Korall
Death in war isn't murder. If it was then every single race is full of mass-murdering serial killers. Now, there is probably an argument for a morale quandry regarding the ethics behind raising a new Forsaken immediately following the death of enemy combatants, of which you are probably right, but the moment that human life expires the Forsaken view them as a potential recruit. Tasteless? Sure, absolutely. But practical.


It still involves the death of the Alliance human soldier. That's still technically murder. ALL soldiers are murderers. It's just sanctioned when it's done on a battlefield in the attack/defense of a place/person/nation. That doesn't excuse what the Forsaken are doing to the dead though. They went from hating being undead, to being the Scourge-lite.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Hunter
5360
10/09/2012 03:32 PMPosted by Korall
This annoyed me far more than it should have. Why would you 'love' for it to happen when you have made it abundantly clear you do not play nor care for the Horde? Do you want it to happen so you have something to lord over the Horde players? Is it an ego thing?


It seems to be an ego thing for many Horde players. They get to kick Alliance rear, stomp all over the world, killing, murdering and destroying as much as they can, and the Alliance and Alliance players are told to suck it up and deal with it. By those Horde players. And worse yet, in game we can't even defend the Alliance because Blizzard isn't letting the Alliance DO defense or be effective. All the while, a lot of Horde players (I'm not meaning some here, there are a fair number of Horde players here that are decent and clearly do not like the one sided stomp fest the Horde has had in Cata and MoP) are talking down the Alliance, telling us players we suck and should just !@#$ and take the hits they give us.

It gets frustrating and more than a little aggravating. Especially when we know the Horde isn't going to pay for it's actions except to have Garrosh removed. We want realistic payback and Blizzard isn't going to let us players have it because 'the Horde is needed'.
Edited by Kynrind on 10/9/2012 3:47 PM PDT
Reply Quote
100 Orc Hunter
17585
It still involves the death of the Alliance human soldier. That's still technically murder. ALL soldiers are murderers. It's just sanctioned when it's done on a battlefield in the attack/defense of a place/person/nation. That doesn't excuse what the Forsaken are doing to the dead though. They went from hating being undead, to being the Scourge-lite.


You get in to a sticky morale quandry when you call battelfield deaths murder. Casualties is a much better word, because let's face it, both combatants are trying to kill the other. Still, it's just a word so probably not worth arguing over.

I dislike the references to the Scourge. Yes, they are raising others into Undeath. Tasteless, to be sure. But they still do offer a choice. Serve the Dark Lady or be returned to death. The Scourge had no-such quandries about forcing someone to serve.

I don't even know if you could claim they are offering a "Serve or Die" option because technically it's like waking someone up then putting them back to sleep if they offer... It probably is though, I would wager I am being a bit more forgiving because I tend to try and not view the Warcraft world with my Real Life morales.
Reply Quote
100 Orc Hunter
17585

It seems to be an ego thing for many Horde players. They get to kick Alliance rear, stomp all over the world, killing, murdering and destroying as much as they can, and the Alliance and Alliance players are told to suck it up and deal with it. By those Horde players. And worse yet, in game we can't even defend the Alliance because Blizzard isn't letting the Alliance DO defense or be effective. All the while, a lot of Horde players (I'm not meaning some here, there are a fair number of Horde players here that are decent and clearly do not like the one sided stomp fest the Horde has had in Cata and MoP) are talking down the Alliance, telling us players we suck and should just !@#$ and take the hits they give us.

It gets frustrating and more than a little aggravating. Especially when we know the Horde isn't going to pay for it's actions except to have Garrosh removed. We want realistic payback and Blizzard isn't going to let us players have it because 'the Horde is needed'.


See, this annoys the tar out of me as well. You are basically asking for people who play one side of the game to be punished because of the way the writers have written the story. I don't pay to play Alliance in this game - the Alliance is boring and self-righteous to me. I could pick up any other fantasy game out there and play a basic carbon-copy of the Alliance (Sadly, the way the Horde is written, they're becoming textbook villains, but that's besides the point)

Yes, the Alliance have taken some blows. I would argue that so has the Horde, but the Alliance -HAD- to lose more to attain parity because the Alliance had more to lose in the first place. I want the Alliance to have some victories, but I do not want to have -MY- side of the story run by the Alliance because I don't like the Alliance. If I wanted to serve Humans or Night Elves as my faction leaders I would play Alliance. It's not because the Horde is 'needed' it's because people who choose to play the Horde and take part in the story don't want to play the Alliance and vice-versa.

Horde leadership needs to change. But it should never be under the direction of the Alliance.
Reply Quote
100 Night Elf Rogue
10320
The same new Night Elf government who just took in the very Highborne closest to Azshara and responsible for summoning Sargeras? The ones who not a few years ago were actively draining demons to keep themselves immortal?

The government may very well be anti-demon, but few peoples have dabbled in fel magics more than the Night Elves even to this day.

Dabbling in fel magic is a pretty bad reason to ban an entire race from being allowed to govern itself.


We don't know the precise breakdown of how many came from Shen'drelar, and how many came out of hiding from elsewhere. Everyone sort of presumed Shen'drelar, but that's never really been proven. The other issue is that we never got a breakdown as to how many supported the prince, and how many we could consider refugees.

It has been a while, but I was under the impression during Dire Maul that not a lot of the Highborne were permitted to leave.

Finally, we didn't let them keep that demon, and we didn't let them practice fel magic, so that's out too.

So, I'm going to need a better explanation than this to say that taking in the Highborne is an acceptance of fel magic.
Reply Quote
100 Human Warrior
16460
I really think you should look up the word "self-righteous" before using it to describe the Alliance Korall, then look at the Horde. It's hard to get any more self-righteous than to believe that you are entitled to the WORLD simply because you exist. The Horde has multiple times claimed Azeroth as "theirs" by merit of existing.

Meanwhile the Alliance not only fights in defense of its homes and its people, but has demonstrated that it also fights so that there may one day be peace between the two factions and to minimize casualties.

Boring, sure, that might be your opinion of the Alliance. But self-righteous? Please.

It's one thing to believe you are morally superior to someone and another thing to actually be morally superior to someone.
Edited by Mordstreich on 10/9/2012 4:26 PM PDT
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)

Reported!

[Close]