Ah, finally. A traitor emerges.
Welcome to the fold, you nightfallen cur.
Strange. I keep getting told that Baine is an Alliance loving traitor that would give up his own people for a night with Anduin.
Now he is a pro genocidal leader more than happy to slaughter all the Alliance? I donât know what to believe anymore.
2 Likes
The Story forums is a fickle beast. It changes its perceptions repeatedly, like a football fan changing support to remain on the winning side.
3 Likes
Itâs a wild ride that would put MMO Champion lore forums to shame sometimes, that is for sure.
2 Likes
Well, both are exaggerations. Anduin and he are friends, and both would clearly prefer peace.
But Baine has never done anything to actually stand against the aggressive wars his faction waged. And while it might have cost him and his people a lot, he could have. So he canât shrug off responsibility for the Taurenâs part in the wars.
He preaches peace and makes war. A number of Horde posters complain mostly about the peace-preaching, but the war-making is an equally valid criticism.
1 Like
Same way the Alliance canât shrug off their responsibility for their incursions into tauren lands then I guess.
The problem is trying to claim him to be pro genocide. There is a massive MASSIVE difference between a war to bring everyone under one banner and one where the goal is to murder everyone on the other side.
I seem to remember Garrosh quickly losing his support base when he started going more extreme as well.
1 Like
gelbin mekkatorque is a horde lover because he did not detonate the other half of the zandalari fleet !!1!one!
These were acts withn a war, not starting a war, but no, they canât shrug off responsibility for that.
Like I said, a great exaggeration. He just isnât as anti war in practice as he is in his words.
I wouldnât be surprised to see someone earnestly make this argument on this forumâŚ
1 Like
And acts before the war if you remember the Dwaves and their urge to diggy diggy holes in tauren lands, over their bodies if needed in vanilla. Also when it comes to starting wars, that is a can of worms considering a certain anime haired king proclaiming his desire for one during Wrath.
Both sides tend to have people wanting peace but eventually giving into war, this isnât just a tauren problem.
Well considering the Horde is basically a dictatorship, what exactly is he supposed to do? Itâs clear his fellow leaders have zero respect for him and his views to the point they send his attention off to Silithus to distract him from the fact they are going for Night Elves again.
I meanâŚNo spoilers but check out what happens to him when he finally tries to act next patch.
Simply put, Anduin is right. The Warchief is the problem here because the Warchief is the one that makes all the rules and the others -must- fall in line or else. The Alliance does not have this problem
1 Like
Yup.
One that Varian chose not to enforce and Thrall not to accept, so no, this one really doesnât matter.
Refuse to send his soldiers into a war he doesnât want to fight. Yes, that bears the risk of the risk of the Horde turning on him, but that part isnât his choice. If he takes part in a war he finds unjust, he is supporting it in practice, no matter what he says about it.
That is also making it too easy. Sylvanas doesnât have the power to enforce her standing as the Warchief. The Horde does. If the Horde wouldnât follow the Warchiefâs orders unconditionally, the title wouldnât hold the power it has. Of course changing that isnât easy either, but following Sylvanas certainly isnât inevitable.
But I would agree that getting rid of Sylvanas will solve the problem in the short term, and give both factions enough time to solve it for the long term. If they want to and accept the structural problems as problems.
Yes Iâd love to see the Alliance try to utterly destroy the Forsaken, Orcs and Trolls mainly. For story reason, naturally! The Forsaken of course for what they did at Gilneas, Darnassus, the Wrathgate (they got off way too easily for that in WOTLK, with the whole IMO rather unbelievable âsplinter factionâ thing), not to mention their rather rich history with experimenting on prisoners and destroying all life around them with their vile alchemy. Also in addition Iâd like to see some proper condemnation (either justified or not!) for just their existence, since undeath has always been anathema to the faith of the Holy Light. And since both variants of humans and draenei have that as their main religion (plus I believe that being religious should be considered the default, for people of those races), a righteous crusade is not too far fetched. Orcs have ravaged, razed and butchered their way across Azeroth ever since stepping through the Dark Portal, and at this time most Alliance races have suffered under them. Plus to again play into the religious theme, at least by humans they were considered to be unholy in the past (not sure how prevalent that still is). So it might not be too much of a stretch, that some still hold that belief. Also it would be nice if the Alliance learnt from their mistakes, as the âpeacefulâ solution in the past, was to place the orcs in internment camps, which clearly not made them docile as was their intent. And finally the Trolls, who fought bloody wars against practically every race throughout history. Of course succeeding in destroying those races wouldnât be likely, not to mention a little harsh for those who play them. But it would certainly be refreshing to see them try, and have some bite.
Though on a sidenote I donât think the word genocide is an appropriate term for WoW, itâs much too 21st century for my taste. I vastly prefer for WoW races and in-character reasonings to be as far from 21st century stuff as possible, and just be about dwarves wanting to kill all orcs, for example. The word genocide (at least to me) immediately brings modern associations with it, and modern morals and values are not always too compatible with a fantasy setting I think.
I mean, it would mean his people would be in grave danger from the Horde who are basically sharing the same lands as them but hey, at least he stood by his principles. No, not an option and I think you know this.
But that is just it, the Horde are not the Alliance. If dictatorships were that easy to disobey we would not still have them in the real world in 2019, same principle applies in universe.
1 Like
âŚwhy? I really donât see it. If the Horde actually turns on him for not wanting to fight an unjust war, he could even turn to the Alliance for help. And the Horde could just as well leave him alone. Mulgore isnât that easy to attack, especially lacking the forces the Tauren bring in.
Dictatorships rise and fall quite frequently. Keeping them up through multible changes in leadership isnât that easy, it certainly isnât a given. And even if they donât fall, they constantly meet internal resistance and have to look out for attempted coups. There are always people standing against them, so that is a choice everyone could make.
The bold part there answers your very own question as to why. The only faction capable of protecting from Horde aggression is the Alliance, to expect Garrosh to sit there and leave them be to run right into their arms is completely out of character for him.
Some things to consider here.
-
The Alliance leadership was different to what it is now. Is it guaranteed that they will come to aid and if so, what will they expect in return? Will they expect the tauren to aid them in combat against their once allies? Then they are back to square one and right smack into a war again, except this time they are spilling the blood of those they once considered friends and blood brothers.
-
Not every tauren is conveniently nested away behind Mulgore gates. They are spread over Kalimdor and a fair few live in Orgrimmar itself. So is the expectation that Baine ignores these tauren and throws them to the wolves, just so he can feel good about himself? Thatâs a very cold choice to make and, despite the meme that he doesnât care about his people, one that would be grossly out of character for him.
-
Even if, by some miracle, the Horde decide to leave the tauren be and the Alliance also do the same. The Tauren are now on their own with war ravaging through their lands. Trade is now cut off and the only âsafeâ place is Mulgore, which now has the entire population of the tauren in it. How long do you think they are going to last like that?
Long story short, beating the chest and defying your leaders sounds great on paper, until the moment you realise you are responsible for the lives of hundreds of peopleâŚThen suddenly the morality of your choice twists.
And yet many persist for long periods of time. The problem is, you are arguing from the viewpoints of someone that doesnât understand what living under a dictatorship is like. For every 1 person wanting to change, there will be about 10 wanting to maintain the status quo because they believe, either genuinely or by conditioning, that it is the best choice for them.
I mean North Korea has been going since whatâŚ1948? That is a hell of a long time to wait for change to just happen, donât you think?
2 Likes
And they only need protection, if the Horde shows aggression.
I would expect Garrosh to try to attack⌠and have the Horde break up there and then, actually. Volâjins trolls were already halfway out when Garrosh took over, the undead and belves certainly werenât Garrosh loyalists and a continent away, and we saw exactly how it would go if Garrosh had to rely on just his own people.
And weâre not only talking about Garrosh, Sylvanasâ war is the second chance.
They considered them friends and brothers before they tried to force them to act against their principles under threat of violence from them. I donât know about you, but that would kind of be a dealbreaker for my friendships.
SoâŚyes, I would find it quite a lot less morally problematic to stand against the guys who were my allies before, but try to kill me now than to stand with those guys to kill people I donât think deserve it.
And I do think the Alliance leadership would use Mulgore as the anvil to their hammer, no matter if they liked the Tauren or not, and treat with them afterwards, if not before.
He should probably do his best to minimize casualties by planning ahead, but yes, his job is to lead, and that includes risking the lives of others. If he isnât willing to do that his principles werenât as strong as he always claims they were, in which case it would be nice if he would stop preaching, or he is just a crappy leader and should step down.
Longer than the Horde under a leader at war with the world, actually.
No, I am saying he could do it, so if he doesnât, that reflects on his principles. If he actively takes part in the war, he canât be innocent of it.
OrâŚThey could see it Garroshâs way considering it was basically the tauren sticking the middle finger up at their allies and leaving them to deal with the Alliance on their own. Itâs a far different tale to sticking it out and rebelling when the support is there finally.
Betrayal is kind of a dealbreaker as well and that is what you are suggesting the tauren do here. That would make them completely in the wrong and they should expect retribution for that.
So you agree the Alliance would want to put them straight to work in the war effort. So much for that âwe want peace so we wonât get involvedâ thing.
And minimizing casualties is exactly what he did by waiting for the time to rebel rather than outright giving the likes of Garrosh bargaining chips to use against him. Your scenario is not the sign of a leader sticking by his principles, it is the sign of a moron more interested in being right than doing right.
Again, assuming everyone turns just because the tauren took a strop and betrayed them. Very unlikely.
He could do a lot of things sure, question is if he should. Also no one is innocent of war in this universe, thatâs a futile point to try and claim. However, if Baine is to get tarred with the bad boy brush for doing so then I expect the likes of Anduin and other fairweather âpeace loversâ to be held to the same standards.
From the morally questionable to outright evil actions I see the Alliance do in the War Campaign? Something that Anduin decided to go visit for himself? Seems he is absolutely fine with what is going on despite his principles.
2 Likes
So itâs a risk. Do you want to tell me that waging a war against the Alliance isnât?
They did it anyway. The Horde leaders didnât stick to Garrosh till the end, they stuck to him until they found his actions were too much to take. What Iâm suggesting is that the Tauren refuse orders. What you are suggesting is that Garroshâs reaction should be to order the whole might of the Horde against him and his people. I think it is debatable what the people who actually donât like Garrosh (so⌠all the leaders) would see as the betrayal.
No. But if the Horde is attacking Mulgore for refusing orders, there is already a front, and the Alliance can and would happily hit the sieging Hordeâs backside. If the Horde doesnât attack Mulgore, the Tauren wouldnât necessarily be part of the war. But if they are attacked, they donât have the choice of not taking part anyway. Since they would be⌠well, you know, under attack.
Thus taking responsibility for anything done to the Alliance while waiting for the âright timeâ, yes. You sacrificed your stance against dishonorable wars in favour of one that tries to minimize Tauren (not overall) casualties.
I would call what Baine actually did quite moronic and a waste of life and goodwill, so⌠No, I just donât agree with you, here.
Not even that. The Tauren are a good part of the Hordeâs fighting force. Suddenly losing them (and losing men fighting them in addition) would put them at a severe disadvantage against the Alliance.
No, my claim wasnât as broad as that. I didnât decide what Baine should have done. I said that he shows that he a) isnât keeping to the principles he preaches, when he fights a war that he thinks shouldnât be fought, and b) is at least in part responsible for anything he and his people supported through this war effort.
If we ever get into a comparable situation, sure. But Anduin hasnât taken part in the starting of a war yet, and everything he did within BfA was always done with the explicit goal of ending the war that was pressed upon him as soon and bloodless as possible. As stupid as the plans may have been.
You canât stop others from pushing a war upon you. But you can refuse to push a war upon others.
That said⌠I find Anduinâs oh-so-superior morality, up to and including his magic bones, utterly nauseating and would prefer a weak hypocrite like Baine. I donât like either of them.
We really have no idea what exactly he knows about the tactics of the Void Elves nor the Vulpera thing, and these are the only clearly evil tactics I can remember right now. But if he is supposed to be condoning this behaviour, then sure, that is hypocritical.
When you are backed up with one of the largest and strongest factions behind you, itâs far less of a risk.
Exactly, until his actions were too much for them to take. I mean, I find it kind of frustrating that the responsibllity of betrayal was on the one race that had tried making small steps for peace with the Alliance in various times.
Funny thing is, if a certain diplomat had said no to her superior and not let the Alliance come through to firebomb tauren homes, then we might have had a genuine opening for your scenario. Not sure what was stopping her though considering that, last I checked, The Alliance donât run under a Warchief. Woops I guess.
âDishonourableâ. Bit biased of you I think if you are trying to claim the Allliance are pure in Cataclysmâs war.
Thatâs odd. I thought sacrificing your own people for your own goals was just something evil that Sylvanas didâŚ
You can however try to have better control over your subordinates and not have them rip open void portals to throw people in, or attack purely civilian places like Gallywixâs palace (Those oh so terrifying golfers).
That is the big difference between Anduin and Baine. One is at the complete top of the totem pole, the other is a subordinate responsible for a single group.
Ah see and here we go. You are 100% right, we do not know how much he is being told in the same vain that we do not know how much the other main characters know and are told. Yet it seems some are still expected to know everything while others get a free pass. Itâs dishonest, really.
1 Like
I disagree.
Iâm not sure I understand how this relates to my point, sorry.
Dishonorable by his standards. What the other side does isnât really important for that.
Depends on the goals, and your motivations.
Who says he doesnât try as much as he can? What is he supposed to do? Magically watch every operation in progress? Invent body cams for every soldier?
Actually the point where I think Baine should have refused to follow Garrosh was after he killed his father with Grimmtotem help and didnât even try to fight the Grimmtotem after their coup in Thunder Bluff. We know he knows about that. He also witnessed Theramore and found that deeply dishonorable, but still followed Garrosh, missing the next big chance.
And with Sylvanas, he should have withdrawn his suppoert after Teldrassil, if he knew about it by the fight at Lordaeron, and after Lordaeron if he didnât.
Weâre not talking about some guys using some questionable methods far from home, we are talking about monumental events everyone knows about. There is nothing dishonest about seeing different epistemic obligations in these cases. Especially when he personally witnessed some of these events.
Nice Trolling, but you know exactly what I mean. Then canât just keep blaming the Warchief for something the enitre Horde leadership share responsibility for.
Wimbertâs post explains it better then I can.
I never said we shouldnât shrug of the Alliance responsibility for the incusion into the Barrens, did I?
I know heâs not pro-genocide, I am just saying that he is just as responsible for allowing it to happen and not lifting a finger twice. And you cannot put the blame on the Warchief for a second time when the Warchiefs commanders are the ones joining in on it twice now.
Yes, when he started going to more extremeâs against his own underlings. Not when he went more extreme against the Alliance.