I am aware that some people are not exactly Baine’s biggest fans, but seeing some people actually defending Baine over Sylvanas got me thinking on his character.
Part of the reason, if not all, he gets hate, is his apparent desire to avoid conflict at all costs, even if justifiably provoked (read Taurajo).
But why would the leader of a Horde race, more specifically, one of the three OG races, be like that? That does contradict a lot of what the Horde does. Not saying they are unnecessarily violent (even if the Burning of Teldrassil doesn’t help that case), but they won’t sit and avoid any sort of confrontation.
My guess is, and it is helped by the fact that we have not seen that much of Baine in previous expansions, it has to do with Cairne’s death. Cairne was killed due to internal conflict in the Horde, due to disagreements. I’d figure that’s probably a traumatic event, and if your mind makes the simple link of “conflict” and “pain” then you probably want to avoid it.
That being said, I do believe other actions of his stem more from desperately trying to conserve the Horde’s honor after seeing it be tainted by Sylvanas’ way of wagering a war, all while trying to not see it destroyed. And/or trying to not have everyone killed whilst keeping his moral compass as intact as possible.
Other actions mainly involve his dialogue after King Rastakhan was killed. To me, it didn’t scream Alliance sympathizer, as some claimed, but rather, like he didn’t want to take advantage of Talanji’s grief to win a war. He knew what Talanji was going through, and was probably trying to ensure she was going to be doing well and that she wouldn’t do anything too extreme while fueled by grief. As for the negotiations, it’s probably just he thought it was more reasonable to end a war in which his side seemed bound to lose before the Horde was absolutely defeated, even if it meant negotiating.
I know some people may not like characters like this, and feel like their behavior is spineless, cowardly, or even traitorous or untrue to Horde values. However, I do think it’s necessary to have some characters that advocate for peace, so they can act as a counterbalance to those who turn to violence too often, and viceversa.
All that being said, I do like seeing him start to realize that peace might not always be the solution, and that action must be taken sometimes. I hope his character can develop into a likeable Horde leader, because the Horde is in dire need of well-developed characters. Or just characters, given how often characters get killed off.
The Reason why Baine is recieving so much Hate is because he only acts to benefit the Alliance.
(Spoilers)
The biggest Hypocrisy being the case of Derek.
He is only acting because it is a Proudmoore.
You didn’t see him Flinch at the battle for Lordaeron, you heard nothing from him when other Heroes of Kul’tiras was risen and Used.
But the Moment something Connected to an Alliance Friendo is happening?
Not only does he Storm out to Confront the Warchief?
He then Risks everything.
I don’t think so. He didn’t free Derek because he is a Proudmoore. He freed Derek because Derek is supposed to be the first case of Forsaken denied free will. This is the moment when Sylvanas officially became the Lich Queen for Baine.
That is ridiculous. What Baine actually does is act as to benefit both factions. When it comes down to it, Baine always sides with the Horde, he is just the only Horde leader who does not have his head so far up his behind as to think the Horde never does anything wrong and has enough decency to try to repent. He fought with the Horde in the Barrens, against and after Theramore, after Teldrassil he fought at Lordaeron. All of that, even when the Horde has become as far removed from his values as they are now.
The difference being that Derek is being brainwashed and forced to remain Forsaken, which is what Baine objects to.
It’s a fair cop to throw shade at him with, but it might also be because of time management. If he acted there, then Blizzard might have had to progress things even faster than they are now.
I mean, would you be fine in that, to save the story, Sylvannas is shown as the weak and inactive counterpoint individual instead? This is a horrible corner of attempting to let them progress the story.
How can he confront without risking everything? I count my mercies that Baine did not resort to just sending a strongly-worded letter instead. But when he actually does something that does not involve a letter, he is bashed once again for risking everything?
Seriously?
I don’t like the dude until he grows a spine, but whipping him at every chance you can get without proper perspective is equally - if not more - dislikeable.
Probably because, unlike us, he isn’t all seeing and all knowing.
I mean it is not like Sylvanas and even Saurfang has attempted to keep him in the dark when they know he would not appr-…Oh wait, that’s exactly what they did.
Imagine a town-port is a distance away from your homeland. Despite it claiming neutrality it has been funneling soldiers and siege engines of your foe into your region, they even built a highway to do it with ease. The conflict had gotten to your borders and the threat was that high you had to build a wall and gates which have been under repeated attack.
Finally your Alliance pushes your foe back to this town, and they plan to siege and raze it. Removing the threat to your people. So you run away and tell your foe your allies are gunna attack it, enabling them to summon in more soldiers and people of note to defend the town.
This is how the Baine do.
Edit: Baine has the best intentions at heart, he’s an okay character but he’s hardly reliable from a Horde PoV tbh.
It was a tumultuous time for the Horde during that time. Between getting indebted to the Alliance because of the inability of the Horde at the time or, you know, being a stone throw away of complete defection to the Alliance and only being stopped last minute thanks to PMS mage.
Imagine that your father died to the Warchief after he challenged Garrosh to a duel to the death.
Then next the person and one of the tribes who you let into the Tauren people revolt and take over the entirety of Mulgore. If it wasn’t for the help of one of the Grimtotem who told you what was about to happen you would have been captured and most likely executed.
You are now in an awful position, powerless and the Grimtoten control most of Mulgore. Your allies won’t provide you with help and you are running out of time. You are left with only one choice. Jania and Theramore. Jaina provided you the support your own faction would not and if it wasn’t for her he wouldn’t have a homeland anymore. He would most likely being living in exile or worse, all the while the Horde embraces the new leadership change in the Tauren people, effectively kicking out Baine.
But none of this matter now, the Grimtotem are gone and despite the tension of the escalating faction war with warhawks on both sides trying to call for war Jania risked everything to save you and your people from a grim (no pun intended) occupation.
Garrosh is now marching towards Theramore, and while Theramore has been sending troops to support the war effort in Southern Barrens they are still neutral. Now Baine is left into a position whether to at the very minimum warn Jania about the impending attack, somewhat repaying the debt he owes her for saving him and his people or to let it happen.
Baine just sends a warning to Jania about the Horde’s slow approach to Theramore so she has time to evacuate. She does, but that was somewhat of a ploy as Garrosh wanted to get the best generals and troops of the Alliance military had in one place to nuke them, which worked.
This is what Baine is indeed, repaying his debt to the people who had every right not to help him. All the while his own allies wouldn’t. This is the only case of him purposely going behind the Hordes back to warn the Alliance.
To be honest, the Horde is right that Theramore was not neutral. It is an Alliance city. But the fact that something is legal does not mean that something is right. That’s the home of the woman which sacrificed her father for peace.
And the Horde attacked Northwatch first, which was Theramore controlled land unprovoked. So any aggression from Theramore there was defending their lands.
Northwatch was hardly neutral seeing as it was attacking high elves in vanilla/TBC (and the quest was maintained in cataclysm) under the belief they were blood elves. And even in Cataclysm Northwatch also acted as an Alliance strong-point to attack Honor’s Stand.
Assuming this is correct and isn’t being over-exaggerated then that quest happened in Vanilla, and it wasn’t against members of the Horde. Thus it was neutral against the Horde.
Military access isn’t a declaration of war. Otherwise the Streamwheedle Cartel wouldn’t be neutral as they also helped the Horde with gathering troops, especially at Ratchet.
Theramore was still neutral no matter what way you try to slice it. While certainly aligned with the Alliance they were still neutral.
There are plenty of times in our history where nations have sent troops, supplies, allowed military access (etc…) to help out other nations and not declaring war.
This is the quest in question, I can’t find the old Vanilla quest on Wowhead due to it going by a different name - identical to a newer quest (the Guns of Northwatch).
No, but if you open up one of your ports to one side of a conflict. Letting troops funnel into a heartland of a nation, you shouldn’t be naive to expect that the invaded territory will want to stop people from landing they.
But that doesn’t shield it from the repercussions of being the platform for an invasion, no? What should the Horde have done? Just camped out at the Barrens and just waited for more Alliance to funnel in? Costing more lives and resources etc, etc.
And there have been times where places have been attacked to deter that very same thing (Copenhagen being sacked by the Royal Navy is a good example, to deter them from joining the trade league against Britain/Prussia/Portugal et al and to stop their ships from joining France).
