Can we stop this high king nonsense now?

General Discussion
Prev 1 2 3 4 26 Next
08/15/2016 12:08 PMPosted by Asthas
Having so many different cultures come together and agree on a commander under 100% objective merit based criteria wouldn't be plausible.


There is no one person who would ever be the best choice to command every mission.

When the plans call for two or more Alliance races to work together on the same battlefield, each of their forces will have a commander regardless of any other factors. Simply decide which of the commanders is in charge in that particular combined force and give them the authority for the duration of the mission.

Which of the races are you asserting is above politics, by the way, to make an unbiased recommendation?


None. I think the idea that joint forces require one of the faction leaders to be in direct authority over the others for military matters is utterly idiotic to begin with.

It would require the High King to be present in every situation where a joint force is being used.

The concept of the High King is like seeing American, Canadian, French and British troops operating nearby each other in a large war, seeing the need for one person to orchestrate all the forces, and then deciding to have the Heads of State of each of those four countries elect one of themselves to be in direct command of every joint military operation where two or more countries' forces need to work together.

It's... absurd!
And a lot of hate and conflict came from him as well. He purposely fueled the war between the horde and the alliance. I am sure he started to change there toward the end for whatever lore purposes but lore speaking- he did exactly that as well. He threw fuel whenever he could and called for war.
Now that he is dead, does that mean we can now have peace?
08/15/2016 12:41 PMPosted by Ornyx
Just for some lore notes on the title itself...

The title "High King" is more akin to the title "Supreme Commander" that was held by Anduin Lothar, being the commander of the Grand Alliance's armed forces. It doesn't serve to denote "rule", "legal authority", or any kind of faction-wide political control over the civilians of the races that make up the Alliance itself (outside of the case where Varian was the High King of the Alliance, and the King of Stormwind, making him the leader of the humans of Stormwind, obviously).

We've discussed this a lot in the past, but the title and position of "High King" fits thematically with the Alliance - being an alliance formed originally around allegiances to human kingdoms.

Much like the Warchief of the Horde serving a military role, the High King acts to try to coordinate the forces that he is given leave to command (races of the Alliance can refuse to commit forces to the High King). This does not necessarily mean that the entire group agrees with the High King at all times, but they do recognize and understand the need for organized military intervention.

You say that, but we haven't really been shown this. In practice, when the high king says jump the alliance jumps.
08/15/2016 12:41 PMPosted by Ornyx
Just for some lore notes on the title itself...

The title "High King" is more akin to the title "Supreme Commander" that was held by Anduin Lothar, being the commander of the Grand Alliance's armed forces. It doesn't serve to denote "rule", "legal authority", or any kind of faction-wide political control over the civilians of the races that make up the Alliance itself (outside of the case where Varian was the High King of the Alliance, and the King of Stormwind, making him the leader of the humans of Stormwind, obviously).

We've discussed this a lot in the past, but the title and position of "High King" fits thematically with the Alliance - being an alliance formed originally around allegiances to human kingdoms.

Much like the Warchief of the Horde serving a military role, the High King acts to try to coordinate the forces that he is given leave to command (races of the Alliance can refuse to commit forces to the High King). This does not necessarily mean that the entire group agrees with the High King at all times, but they do recognize and understand the need for organized military intervention.

You may suggest that the humans should not have the title of High King, but as said above, there is a historical anchor within the Human Kingdoms for commanding the militaries of the Alliance, and they do believe they are better served by these Kingdoms than they would be by a Republic or Democracy.


So we've seen a Troll and an Undead as Warchief....will we ever see a non-human as High King?
08/15/2016 12:41 PMPosted by Ornyx
Just for some lore notes on the title itself...

The title "High King" is more akin to the title "Supreme Commander" that was held by Anduin Lothar, being the commander of the Grand Alliance's armed forces. It doesn't serve to denote "rule", "legal authority", or any kind of faction-wide political control over the civilians of the races that make up the Alliance itself (outside of the case where Varian was the High King of the Alliance, and the King of Stormwind, making him the leader of the humans of Stormwind, obviously).

We've discussed this a lot in the past, but the title and position of "High King" fits thematically with the Alliance - being an alliance formed originally around allegiances to human kingdoms.

Much like the Warchief of the Horde serving a military role, the High King acts to try to coordinate the forces that he is given leave to command (races of the Alliance can refuse to commit forces to the High King). This does not necessarily mean that the entire group agrees with the High King at all times, but they do recognize and understand the need for organized military intervention.

While this is exactly the same line of thinking I have tried to explain to people, I must admit that the counter of "then why is it handed down from father to son" is a pretty good question (yes Adelphie I am admitting you are right :p).

Seems to me they would pick the next High King the same way they picked the first one - by having the racial leaders vote on it.

The best answer I can come up with is that Stormwind has the majority of the Alliance's military might, so it makes sense to keep the leader of Stormwind as the leader of the Alliance's military.
08/15/2016 12:48 PMPosted by Phlynch
08/15/2016 12:41 PMPosted by Ornyx
Just for some lore notes on the title itself...

The title "High King" is more akin to the title "Supreme Commander" that was held by Anduin Lothar, being the commander of the Grand Alliance's armed forces. It doesn't serve to denote "rule", "legal authority", or any kind of faction-wide political control over the civilians of the races that make up the Alliance itself (outside of the case where Varian was the High King of the Alliance, and the King of Stormwind, making him the leader of the humans of Stormwind, obviously).

We've discussed this a lot in the past, but the title and position of "High King" fits thematically with the Alliance - being an alliance formed originally around allegiances to human kingdoms.

Much like the Warchief of the Horde serving a military role, the High King acts to try to coordinate the forces that he is given leave to command (races of the Alliance can refuse to commit forces to the High King). This does not necessarily mean that the entire group agrees with the High King at all times, but they do recognize and understand the need for organized military intervention.

You say that, but we haven't really been shown this. In practice, when the high king says jump the alliance jumps.


Because generally the high king is right.
08/15/2016 12:41 PMPosted by Ornyx
Just for some lore notes on the title itself...

The title "High King" is more akin to the title "Supreme Commander" that was held by Anduin Lothar, being the commander of the Grand Alliance's armed forces. It doesn't serve to denote "rule", "legal authority", or any kind of faction-wide political control over the civilians of the races that make up the Alliance itself (outside of the case where Varian was the High King of the Alliance, and the King of Stormwind, making him the leader of the humans of Stormwind, obviously).

We've discussed this a lot in the past, but the title and position of "High King" fits thematically with the Alliance - being an alliance formed originally around allegiances to human kingdoms.

Much like the Warchief of the Horde serving a military role, the High King acts to try to coordinate the forces that he is given leave to command (races of the Alliance can refuse to commit forces to the High King). This does not necessarily mean that the entire group agrees with the High King at all times, but they do recognize and understand the need for organized military intervention.

You may suggest that the humans should not have the title of High King, but as said above, there is a historical anchor within the Human Kingdoms for commanding the militaries of the Alliance, and they do believe they are better served by these Kingdoms than they would be by a Republic or Democracy.


So why the hell does Anduin become the high king? He has the least military experience and least experience in general of all the alliance faction leaders.

It would be like if Dwight D Eisenhower son became supreme commander instead of Arthur Tedder if Dwight D died halfway through world war 2.

It is either a hereditary title OR it is a position based on merit. Blizzard can't have it both ways.
08/15/2016 12:41 PMPosted by Ornyx
Just for some lore notes on the title itself...

The title "High King" is more akin to the title "Supreme Commander" that was held by Anduin Lothar, being the commander of the Grand Alliance's armed forces. It doesn't serve to denote "rule", "legal authority", or any kind of faction-wide political control over the civilians of the races that make up the Alliance itself (outside of the case where Varian was the High King of the Alliance, and the King of Stormwind, making him the leader of the humans of Stormwind, obviously).

We've discussed this a lot in the past, but the title and position of "High King" fits thematically with the Alliance - being an alliance formed originally around allegiances to human kingdoms.

Much like the Warchief of the Horde serving a military role, the High King acts to try to coordinate the forces that he is given leave to command (races of the Alliance can refuse to commit forces to the High King). This does not necessarily mean that the entire group agrees with the High King at all times, but they do recognize and understand the need for organized military intervention.


A note on the name back to you. You guys decided to call it the "High King," in an Alliance of races where only two of the seven factions have a monarchy, while completely disregarding the much more descriptive and accurate term "Supreme Commander." And then you had the Human King get the title. The message is pretty clear.

Also, that original alliance of human kingdoms was 30 years ago, and are generally obsolete. Stromgarde's been destroyed entirely. Lordaeron is a Horde kingdom. Kul Tiras has been MIA since Warcraft 3 (outside of Jaina) and their navies haven't lifted a finger to help with anything. Gilneas is currently in a state of ruin and its inhabitants have moved in with Stormwind. Since then the faction has added a variety of distinct races who have their own traditions that are being overruled in favor of the one human kingdom from the original Alliance that still exists - Stormwind.

The Alliance of Human Kingdoms is irrelevant at this point. The other Human Kingdoms have either ceased to exist or are no longer aiding the Alliance. Move on and realize that the current Alliance only has one human kingdom left and it's long past time to stop revolving everything Alliance around the humans.
The ONLY reason there is a human king, is because the makers of the game are humans. Personally I'd prefer a different race to be the "big wig", but I play an orc so...meh.

For the Horde!
I can see the point of a high king when put into light that's it's basically just the alliance's military leader that makes sense. but with that being said

08/15/2016 12:41 PMPosted by Ornyx
You may suggest that the humans should not have the title of High King, but as said above, there is a historical anchor within the Human Kingdoms for commanding the militaries of the Alliance, and they do believe they are better served by these Kingdoms than they would be by a Republic or Democracy.


Agreed and the title warchief was historical anchored to orcs but you guys managed to figure out that was boring and brought in new races to the title, humans are getting pretty old leading the alliance like i said it's making the other races come off as incompetent. We've had a troll now undead as warchief i really want to see a gnome or night elf take up the mantel of high king now.
This proves players will whine about anything.../facepalm.
08/15/2016 12:53 PMPosted by Pouncey
08/15/2016 12:41 PMPosted by Ornyx
Just for some lore notes on the title itself...

The title "High King" is more akin to the title "Supreme Commander" that was held by Anduin Lothar, being the commander of the Grand Alliance's armed forces. It doesn't serve to denote "rule", "legal authority", or any kind of faction-wide political control over the civilians of the races that make up the Alliance itself (outside of the case where Varian was the High King of the Alliance, and the King of Stormwind, making him the leader of the humans of Stormwind, obviously).

We've discussed this a lot in the past, but the title and position of "High King" fits thematically with the Alliance - being an alliance formed originally around allegiances to human kingdoms.

Much like the Warchief of the Horde serving a military role, the High King acts to try to coordinate the forces that he is given leave to command (races of the Alliance can refuse to commit forces to the High King). This does not necessarily mean that the entire group agrees with the High King at all times, but they do recognize and understand the need for organized military intervention.


A note on the name back to you. You guys decided to call it the "High King," in an Alliance of races where only two of the seven factions have a monarchy, while completely disregarding the much more descriptive and accurate term "Supreme Commander." And then you had the Human King get the title. The message is pretty clear.


I don't personally think there is anything stopping the Alliance from choosing a member of another race as their commander, but it seems to me that, thematically, High King has been fitting of the title for some time. As said, the Alliance was founded as a collection of Human Kingdom, and there is historical weight there for the title of "King". Nothing stops titles from being changed, though.

It is also important to note that the human's relative military strength compared to other members of the Alliance is much larger - especially that of Stormwind - which does give them some precedence in being appointed leader of the larger Alliance military.

Let see what we find out about the "Why Anduin?" question. :)
08/15/2016 09:40 AMPosted by Jaerys
Velen for Peace Chief.
Hoping he sacrifices himself again.. Well that or that Gul'Dan turns him into a night light.
08/15/2016 12:41 PMPosted by Ornyx
Just for some lore notes on the title itself...

The title "High King" is more akin to the title "Supreme Commander" that was held by Anduin Lothar, being the commander of the Grand Alliance's armed forces. It doesn't serve to denote "rule", "legal authority", or any kind of faction-wide political control over the civilians of the races that make up the Alliance itself (outside of the case where Varian was the High King of the Alliance, and the King of Stormwind, making him the leader of the humans of Stormwind, obviously).

We've discussed this a lot in the past, but the title and position of "High King" fits thematically with the Alliance - being an alliance formed originally around allegiances to human kingdoms.

Much like the Warchief of the Horde serving a military role, the High King acts to try to coordinate the forces that he is given leave to command (races of the Alliance can refuse to commit forces to the High King). This does not necessarily mean that the entire group agrees with the High King at all times, but they do recognize and understand the need for organized military intervention.

You may suggest that the humans should not have the title of High King, but as said above, there is a historical anchor within the Human Kingdoms for commanding the militaries of the Alliance, and they do believe they are better served by these Kingdoms than they would be by a Republic or Democracy.


A fine idea, but it's not demonstrated in-game.

Anduin earns the title of "High King" because he's the prince. Why? If anything the leaders of the Alliance should decide who the new High King should be based on the available parties, Anduin technically included.

This would be pretty interesting storywise, now that I think about it. You have Greymane and Jaina, "kill the traitorous Horde" militarist types. You have Malfurion and Tyrande, who want to focus on defeating the Legion with the existing Alliance. You have Bronzebeard and Moira, a father-daughter duo who have learned the value of accepting former enemies' assistance. And then you have Mekkatorque, the correct choice.

Seeing each group argue over who should replace Varian would be way more interesting than "Anduin is High King now because he's a good boy."
08/15/2016 01:11 PMPosted by Mirson
08/15/2016 12:41 PMPosted by Ornyx
Just for some lore notes on the title itself...

The title "High King" is more akin to the title "Supreme Commander" that was held by Anduin Lothar, being the commander of the Grand Alliance's armed forces. It doesn't serve to denote "rule", "legal authority", or any kind of faction-wide political control over the civilians of the races that make up the Alliance itself (outside of the case where Varian was the High King of the Alliance, and the King of Stormwind, making him the leader of the humans of Stormwind, obviously).

We've discussed this a lot in the past, but the title and position of "High King" fits thematically with the Alliance - being an alliance formed originally around allegiances to human kingdoms.

Much like the Warchief of the Horde serving a military role, the High King acts to try to coordinate the forces that he is given leave to command (races of the Alliance can refuse to commit forces to the High King). This does not necessarily mean that the entire group agrees with the High King at all times, but they do recognize and understand the need for organized military intervention.

You may suggest that the humans should not have the title of High King, but as said above, there is a historical anchor within the Human Kingdoms for commanding the militaries of the Alliance, and they do believe they are better served by these Kingdoms than they would be by a Republic or Democracy.


A fine idea, but it's not demonstrated in-game.

Anduin earns the title of "High King" because he's the prince. Why? If anything the leaders of the Alliance should decide who the new High King should be based on the available parties, Anduin technically included.

This would be pretty interesting storywise, now that I think about it. You have Greymane and Jaina, "kill the traitorous Horde" militarist types. You have Malfurion and Tyrande, who want to focus on defeating the Legion with the existing Alliance. You have Bronzebeard and Moira, a father-daughter duo who have learned the value of accepting former enemies' assistance. And then you have Mekkatorque, the correct choice.

Seeing each group argue over who should replace Varian would be way more interesting than "Anduin is High King now because he's a good boy."

Velen is sad that you forgot about him. :(
08/15/2016 01:13 PMPosted by Ornyx
08/15/2016 01:11 PMPosted by Mirson
...

A fine idea, but it's not demonstrated in-game.

Anduin earns the title of "High King" because he's the prince. Why? If anything the leaders of the Alliance should decide who the new High King should be based on the available parties, Anduin technically included.

This would be pretty interesting storywise, now that I think about it. You have Greymane and Jaina, "kill the traitorous Horde" militarist types. You have Malfurion and Tyrande, who want to focus on defeating the Legion with the existing Alliance. You have Bronzebeard and Moira, a father-daughter duo who have learned the value of accepting former enemies' assistance. And then you have Mekkatorque, the correct choice.

Seeing each group argue over who should replace Varian would be way more interesting than "Anduin is High King now because he's a good boy."

Velen is sad that you forgot about him. :(


Velen died on the way back to his home planet.
08/15/2016 10:59 AMPosted by Averyx
They fought the old horde, the legion, the trolls, the scourge, the night elves, other humans, the naga, the elves and all of that before WoW begun.

Night elves lived in a bubble without challenges because they were so dominant, they didn't advance with the world, humans did however, they had constant threats, constant movement. Their military theory-crafting should be far superior to a race that hasn't advanced.

Uh, the Night Elves have the largest standing Army on Azeroth. The Sentinels at Feathermoon Stronghold under General Shandris Feathermoon are a massive body of 'the perfect warriors' (as stated by Grommash Hellscream).

We are fighting the Legion and none of the leaders have the experience fighting the Legion like Tyrande Whisperwind. The Night Elves have either on their own or with the other races, repelled the Legion twice.

In the end, the entire discussion here is pointless as I'm sure that the story is pretty much set in stone already.
I remember Jaina being disappointed with Anduin after the Broken Shore and referring to him as "King of Stormwind," which seemed like a subtle poke by her to remind everyone that he is ONLY the King of Stormwind and not the High King his father was.

I don't remember anyone referring to Anduin as High King in the present (future vision of him being a high king as an old man is a different matter). Did I miss it?
As far as the term King goes, only 2 of the 6 races/subfactions within the Alliance don't have Kings (or haven't in the past) - Night Elves and Draenei. So yea for the Alliance as a whole/on average, High King works.
08/15/2016 12:41 PMPosted by Ornyx
The title "High King" is more akin to the title "Supreme Commander" that was held by Anduin Lothar,


Then why not just keep using that title?

Seems silly to come up with a new one for no real reason.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum