Faction Loyalty

[Zarao-colinas-pardas (Zarao)]

Who was the Warchief in charge, when Camp Taraujo happened ?

How is that relevant regarding the protection of his people? The Tauren of Vendetta Point didn’t need Garrosh seal of approval to fight back the looters of Taurajo. And Baine punished them.
And as much as Garrosh was a warmonger, he did send troops to defend the Barrens, that are Tauren land, when Baine decided he would rather wall himself inside Mulgore and kick out anyone that said otherwise.
To the point he ended up needing the ones he left out to break the siege of said wall.

It seems having bad Evil Warchiefs that make the Alliance military, go berserk mode, doesn’t help his situation either.

So, he rather side with them? Some Forsaken traitor screws it in Northrend, and the Alliance decides that the appropriate payback is to raid unrelated Tauren land, and Baine should agree with them?
What kind of relation is he setting up there?

I wonder what would happen if Camp Taraujo had happened while Thrall was the Warchief, or Vol’Jin was nominated instead of Garrosh ?

See, this is a problem. The second the argument spins into “The Horde should save the Tauren from their incompetent leader”, this already throws some negative light on him.

The Horde is obliged to assist and help the Tauren. Not save them from a passive leader that sits like some damsel in distress waiting for someone to help her.
Baine should’ve reacted to the invasion, he should’ve fought back instead of making up excuses for it. He should also demand help from the rest.

And regarding this last point…he DID receive help from the Horde. Even if he DIDNT want/like it.
The Horde assists those that defend the Barrens, the ones Baine kicked out.
The Horde puts an end to the siege of Mulgore. Without Baines permission or help by the way.

The problem with the Barren invasion wasn’t an evil/passive Warchief. The problem was that the ruler of said land decided not to do a thing.
And I’m sorry, but there is no way you can spin this into something to blame the rest of the Horde for.
If Baine is incapable or unwilling to defend his piece of land and defend his people, then he isn’t fit to rule said territory.

Desperate attitude for a desperate time under another evil Warchief rule sadly …

Loktar Ogar. Those are the Old Horde values.
Victory or death.

And if you don’t like said war (Baine or anyone), duel to death with the leader and YOU get to decide how to continue going forth.

[Lukas-argent-dawn-8166 (Lukas)]

• What Faction do you play/favor?
• Why do you play/favor that faction?
• Do you dislike/hate the opposite faction?
• If yes: Why?

What Faction do you play/favor?

While a large part of me has always enjoyed the Horde, the idea of it struggling with what it means to be the Horde has always been an interesting idea (well done in MoP), the recent expansions have had me be firmly planted in the Alliance.

Why do you play/favor that faction?

I am favouring the Alliance because unlike the current Horde iteration they have consistency and a sense of principles they do not compromise on as a whole. Unlike the Sylvanas Horde - which does as it does for the whims of a tyrannical genocidal despot, not the faction itself.

Do you dislike/hate the opposite faction?

I think the idea of faction pride is absolute nonsense really, but I refuse to be railroaded into a story that I have no actual meaningful decision making over. If Blizzard wants the Horde to be the villainous faction - look to how Bioware writes the Sith Empire in SWTOR. What bothers me most is the self-righteousness the writers put into the Horde attempting to look the “good guys” when at this stage you might as well start putting the “Are we the baddies?” gif in EVERY quest that involved Sylvanas or Nathanos.

Get on with it and either blight the entire planet, or chop off both their putrid heads and put an Orc back in charge.

[Amazoner-kul-tiras]

How is that relevant regarding the protection of his people?

Very relevant.
You see War only happens during mad Warchiefs rule.

• Follow them and you are a war criminal.
• Disobey them and you are a traitor.
  That’s your beloved war narrative for the Horde right there.

Without war you don’t need to question anything.

Baine punished them.

He was trying to avoid conflict.
In fact if we are arguing about the right actions he should had taken here is two actions for you:

1. Leave the Horde and Garrosh Hellscream rule.
   Not allowed because the Tauren are a playable race.
   QUALITY writting right here for you.
   Here is a few examples:
   "Baine had willingly chosen not to pursue vengeance against Garrosh for the death of Cairne Bloodhoof in favor of a united Horde leadership. "
   “the young chieftain is frustrated to learn of Garrosh’s increasingly numerous demands from the mighty tauren people.”
   "Several of the tauren begin to express dissatisfaction with Baine’s compromising attitude with Garrosh. Viewing his willingness to bow down to every demand made of him as an affront to their peoples’ interests, they consider walking away from the Horde. "

There you are a proper Baine with balls would had walked away from the Horde.
Now you can’t play the Tauren race because they left the Horde during Cataclysm.

2. Negotiate a cease fire with the Alliance.
   Much more efficient and another advantage, no Tauren is harmed during BfA because they don’t participate in it.

Some Forsaken traitor screws it in Northrend, and the Alliance decides that the appropriate payback is to raid unrelated Tauren land, and Baine should agree with them?

Some Alliance humans screws it in Stormheim, and the Horde decides that the appropriate payback is to raid unrelated Night Elf land.

Does that sounds familiar ?
It’s the Horde in BfA.

What kind of relation is he setting up there?

One that will allow him to negotiate a cease fire.

See, this is a problem. The second the argument spins into “The Horde should save the Tauren from their incompetent leader”, this already throws some negative light on him.

I would take his incompetence over :

• Garrosh Hellscream
• Sylvanas Windrunner

The Horde is obliged to assist and help the Tauren. Not save them from a passive leader that sits like some damsel in distress waiting for someone to help her.

Yes. Because he is a veteran war leaser of 54 years like Saurfang.

but there is no way you can spin this into something to blame the rest of the Horde for.

Yes there is.
The Horde and the Warchief are responsable for their entire race.
Explain to me now how Thrall and Vol’Jin NEVER had any ttroubles with Baine but:
Garrosh Hellscream and Sylvanas Windrunner HAD !

If Baine is incapable or unwilling to defend his piece of land and defend his people, then he isn’t fit to rule said territory.

OR the Tauren should leave the Horde.

See ?
No more alliance problems.

Loktar Ogar. Those are the Old Horde values.
Victory or death.

Yeah look at Sylvanas Windrunner “bravely” leading us on “Loktar Ogar”.

And if you don’t like said war (Baine or anyone), duel to death with the leader and YOU get to decide how to continue going forth.

Wonderfull.
Look at this brilliant piece of narrative:
WoWgamepedia:
“Prior to the sacking of Stormwind, Kilrogg had killed three of his sons and two grandsons already who thought they could rule the clan better.”

BfA narrative according to this logic

• Saurfang didn’t agree with Sylvanas plan so he challenged her for Mak’Gora and died.
• Baine didn’t agree with Sylvanas plan so he challenged her for Mak’Gora and died.
• Lor’themar didn’t agree with Sylvanas plan so he challenged her for Mak’Gora and died.
  And we can continue like this until only Nathanos is left.

Now the Horde has no more characters left.
The end.

Cheers.

[Keydiam-die-aldor (Keydiam)]

And that’s why I hate his character as a character.

I actually liked Anduin especially however in Legion, where he was actually struggling with the sudden burdens of becoming king, with the loss of his father and with the fact that even his own people had their doubts about him. It was an interesting angle, and had great potential for character development and growth.

Yet, this was all thrown out of the window with “Before the Storm” and BfA itself. Now he’s Mister Perfect who cannot do any wrong, and everyone around him always agrees with him. Frankly this problem exists for several characters. Jaina is such a candidate as well.

[Wimbert-die-aldor]

I actually liked Anduin especially however in Legion, where he was actually struggling with the sudden burdens of becoming king, with the loss of his father and with the fact that even his own people had their doubts about him.

I think he was just as bad in MoP as he is now, but I will agree that in Legion they were finally going in the right direction… until they didn’t.

The BtS-change in him that really annoyed me the most was them making him an adequate fighter and quasi-paladin. That was just so symbolic for taking away his weaknesses offscreen… Now the only real option to bring him down a bit that is left is posession through magic bones…

Jaina is such a candidate as well.

They just can’t keep Jaina’s character straight and keep making her regress and learn the same lesson again and again.

[Zarao-colinas-pardas (Zarao)]

You see War only happens during mad Warchiefs rule.

• Follow them and you are a war criminal.
• Disobey them and you are a traitor.
  That’s your beloved war narrative for the Horde right there.

You don’t need to have an official posture regarding the Warchief in order to defend your land. You shouldn’t need his or her approval/consent in order to do so.

Whatever Garrosh thought, or did, is irrelevant.

Baine was faced with a choice about defending his people. He decided to make excuses for those that attacked them.
And it was the Horde, and its Warchief, the ones that ended up defending the Tauren. When the only thing their Chieftain did, was to denounce and expel the ones that tried to do so on their own.

Having Thrall, Vol’jin, Garrosh, or Sylvanas, is irrelevant regarding said decision. It wasn’t contingent to the one currently sitting the Warchief chair.

It shouldn’t be ANY kind of problem for Baine to discern on his own that regardless of the build-up towards said situation, he should ALWAYS side with his people. And he DIDN’T.

He was trying to avoid conflict.

What conflict? The one that had already happened? The one that continued to do so, with ballistae and catapults knocking at Mulgore’s gate?
What conflict was he exactly avoiding? The one that offers the Alliance ANY sort of resistance instead of just rolling with it and dying?

There you are a proper Baine with balls would had walked away from the Horde.
Now you can’t play the Tauren race because they left the Horde during Cataclysm.

If the alternative is their current depiction, i rather have that.
I respect what they did with Lorthemar because at least he was shown willing to take that step to protect his people.

And just like him, there are narrative ways to not lose the Tauren as a playable race for the Horde.

Some Alliance humans screws it in Stormheim, and the Horde decides that the appropriate payback is to raid unrelated Night Elf land.

Good. That was the Warchief they attacked, there should be consequences. Just as i expect consequences for the Wrathgate.
Inaction, upon suffering from those consequences, is what doesn’t make sense.

And going with your own example, if Tyrande had done as Baine had, she would be punishing those that fought in Darkshore and Ashenvale.

One that will allow him to negotiate a cease fire.

Given that the follow up of Baine establishing good terms with Theramore and Stormwind is having both invade Durotar and the Barrens, i rather he didn’t have any of those “brilliant” ideas.
Apparently, the “deal” in said situation is about as one-sided as it can get.

I would take his incompetence over :

I rather not.
Rather take a warmonger willing to do whats necessary to preserve the race he leads, than a peacemonger that would rather sacrifice his own people to keep himself in good terms with the enemy.

Yes there is.

No, there isn’t.

You can’t blame the Horde if the Tauren leader decides its a good idea to NOT defend the land he is in charge of. To NOT defend the people he is leading.

The Horde isn’t there to save Baine from his own ineptitude. And the tauren people shouldn’t be forced to put up with it either.

BfA narrative according to this logic

• Saurfang didn’t agree with Sylvanas plan so he challenged her for Mak’Gora and died.
• Baine didn’t agree with Sylvanas plan so he challenged her for Mak’Gora and died.
• Lor’themar didn’t agree with Sylvanas plan so he challenged her for Mak’Gora and died.

Good. The ones that die remain true to their principles and will be hailed as heroes.
And Blizzard can work on ways to make any of them succeed if necessary.

[Amazoner-kul-tiras]

Having Thrall, Vol’jin, Garrosh, or Sylvanas, is irrelevant regarding said decision. It wasn’t contingent to the one currently sitting the Warchief chair.

Wrong.
It is relevant.
And the narrative proves proves it.

You do realise Zarao if you were near correct, Baine would had been left in the prison, because neither Thrall or Saurfang would lift a finger to help a “traitor Alliance scum”.

And it was the Horde, and its Warchief, the ones that ended up defending the Tauren.

They did their duty.
It’s because of said Horde that the Tauren were on this mess to start with.

It shouldn’t be ANY kind of problem for Baine to discern on his own that regardless of the build-up towards said situation, he should ALWAYS side with his people. And he DIDN’T .

Yes.
Look at Sylvanas and her beloved Forsaken.
How she cares for them.
Right.

The one that offers the Alliance ANY sort of resistance instead of just rolling with it and dying?

By your logic, Vol’Jin should had not rebelled, why would the Horde help the alliance and commit treason on the Warchief of the Horde ?

Disagree all you like Zarao.
All i see is:

• Garrosh is dead killed by Thrall himself.
• Baine is still here and so the Tauren.
  Time prove his actions were right.

If the alternative is their current depiction, i rather have that.

NOT ALLOWED, GAME PLAY.

This is where the narrative is to be blamed, when it starts to show her inconsistencies due to the fact that Tauren are a playable race and losing them would cause massive outrage on the player base.

Good. That was the Warchief they attacked, there should be consequences. Just as i expect consequences for the Wrathgate.
Inaction, upon suffering from those consequences, is what doesn’t make sense.

Glad you said that.

Have fun when the bill for Sylvanas actions, comes in future expansions.

What Gen did at stormhein is kids play, when we compare to what Tyrande is planning to do.

And going with your own example, if Tyrande had done as Baine had, she would be punishing those that fought in Darkshore and Ashenvale.

The Alliance didn’t burned Thunder Bluff, you really want to go that way ?

Given that the follow up of Baine establishing good terms with Theramore and Stormwind is having both invade Durotar and the Barrens, i rather he didn’t have any of those “brilliant” ideas.
Apparently, the “deal” in said situation is about as one-sided as it can get.

It was better than the deal Garrosh and his Kor’kron guard had.

I rather not.
Rather take a warmonger willing to do whats necessary to preserve the race he leads, than a peacemonger that would rather sacrifice his own people to keep himself in good terms with the enemy.

Look at that Warmonger, turned everybody against him including his allies and the guy who chose him.

No, there isn’t.

You can’t blame the Horde if the Tauren leader decides its a good idea to NOT defend the land he is in charge of. To NOT defend the people he is leading.

The Horde isn’t there to save Baine from his own ineptitude. And the tauren people shouldn’t be forced to put up with it either.

Neither the Tauren leader and the Tauren should suffer because the Horde has a Warmomger as a Warchief, that sets them as a valid target, because they are part of the Horde.

Good. The ones that die remain true to their principles and will be hailed as heroes.
And Blizzard can work on ways to make any of them succeed if necessary.

Nope.
Seeing their ineptitude to replace Horde characters, as they die, I doubt it.
Who is the racial leader of the Darkspear Trolls ?
Who is the racial leader of the Orcs ?
Has Cairne been replaced yet ?

Cheers.

[Zarao-colinas-pardas (Zarao)]

Disagree all you like Zarao.
All i see is:

• Garrosh is dead killed by Thrall himself.
• Baine is still here and so the Tauren.
  Time prove his actions were right.

Being saved by bad writing and turning into one of the least liked Horde leaders of the few remaining ones, to the point people rather have Sylvanas over him, is something I wouldn’t call a success or a right thing.

If the best the Tauren can offer is a leader whose response to aggression is turning in his people to die, and his land to be invaded, then I pity the Tauren lore in general. I truly do.

The current state of affairs is the Alliance invading most of Tauren land except Mulgore, the siege of the frontier of said land, and the deaths at Taurajo that far from being unanswered, got excused and validated by the chieftain that supposedly represented them.

To the point their leader needs to be saved, again, by the ones that ordered the above.

If inaction or passiveness regarding the above, is something you find good writing and a sensible response, fine. I don’t.

Also, I wouldn’t really want to use or support the logic about blaming the Horde for an Alliance aggression that came out of the blue for people that had no say in the actions they were punished for. It comes short of excusing the same warmongering attitude that Sylvanas is being called for in the current conflict.

The Alliance is to blame for the invasion of Night elf lands because their “warlike” ally of Gilneas felt like poking at the Horde in Stormheim?
Forget the Teldrassil incident if you wish, we can concede that’s Sylvanas alone going for the overkill.
But that still leaves us with the invasion and destruction of Darkshore and Ashenvale. The Alliance is to blame for that, much like the Horde is supposedly to blame for the Alliance randomly attacking the Barrens?

[Amazoner-kul-tiras]

If the best the Tauren can offer is a leader whose response to aggression is turning in his people to die, and his land to be invaded, then I pity the Tauren lore in general. I truly do.

Will see what Sylvanas actions will lead the Forsaken to, by the end of this expansion.
So far the Forsaken lost Undercity and they are homeless in Ogrimar as the Night elves in Stormwind.

• Baine, the Tauren and Thunder Bluff:
• Sylvans the forsaken and Undercity:

Will see who gets the short stick.

The current state of affairs is the Alliance invading most of Tauren land except Mulgore, the siege of the frontier of said land, and the deaths at Taurajo that far from being unanswered, got excused and validated by the chieftain that supposedly represented them.

How many issues have remained unanswered ?

• Theramore
• Gilneas;
• Teldrassil;
• Dazar’alor;

Just to set a few examples.

If that’s what you find good writing and a sensible response, good for you. I don’t.

Zarao, do you honestly, want me to post the amount of posts, I made on the story forum complaining about BfA, since this the start ?
Look for:

• Valainistima Blood Elf hunter lv 100 Draenor
• Aster Blood Elf Paladin lv120 Kul-Tyras

Araphant is my main witness here, since he has been reading my posts since the start.

I hated this narrative since day one, exactly the very first minute:

What I thought:
“War again ?”
“WTF ?”
“We just got out of Legion !”
“Surely the Alliance is the one starting hostilities in this expansion ?”
“Nope. Evil Warchief again …”
“FFS …”

But at the end of the day it’s Activision Blizzard story and I have to accept what is written, while trying to find some sense on it.
Even through head cannons.

Brigante stated better than me:

Exactly. In Chess you have the very simple differentiation between the two sides, in War, you don’t. You have ‘Good’ people on the ‘Bad side’ and ‘Bad’ people on the ‘Good side’, Which in fairness has always been the case. That’s what makes it interesting, How far is your character willing to go, before ‘loyalty’ is replaced with ‘morality’, How far is a war when you fight back against oppression, a change from being a Freedom Fighter, to a Terrorist.

Its the complexity that makes it fun, and that we can explore it through our characters in a relatively ‘safe’ environment, by Safe I mean very few countries are actually -in a War- at the moment, and by extension nor are we as WoW Players.

I am happy for:

• Jaina is back to herself as I know her from Warcraft 3;
• Saurfang brought Thrall is back;
• Baine was rescued and his friendship with Anduin proved useful;
• The Zandalari brought Talanji with them and a marvellous city to explore with them.
• Rockhan is back.

Also, I wouldn’t really want to use or support the logic about blaming the Horde for an Alliance aggression that came out of the blue for people that had no say in the actions they were punished for. It comes short of excusing the same warmongering attitude that Sylvanas is being called for in the current conflict.

The Alliance is to blame for the invasion of Night elf lands because their “warlike” ally of Gilneas felt like poking at the Horde in Stormheim?
Forget the Teldrassil incident if you wish, we can concede that’s Sylvanas alone going for the overkill.
But that still leaves us with the invasion and destruction of Darkshore and Ashenvale. The Alliance is to blame for that, much like the Horde is supposedly to blame for the Alliance randomly attacking the Barrens?

That’s why I hate war narratives.
There is never justice in them, for both sides.

By the end of BfA Activision Blizzard will consider everything “repayed”.
But I studied this narrative long enough, thanks to the story community in this months, to know that’s a lie.

The wounds, from BfA, will be there for a future war expansion.
They always are.

Cheers.

[Daelinna-argent-dawn]

Jaina is back to herself as I know her from Warcraft 3;

Jaina in Warcraft III wasn’t a useless pansy who needed Thrall to put some sense into her crazy brain. If her character were consistent, Jaina would kill Thrall, f*ck him. He put a warmonger on the throne and then bailed out when he decided to nuke her city. Then he has the guts to lecture Jaina about what is right and what is wrong. Jaina is too good. She would grow a spine and drive an icicle between Thrall’s eyes.

[Amazoner-kul-tiras]

Jaina should honestly kill Thrall, f*ck him. He put a warmonger on the throne and then bailed out when he decided to nuke her city. Then he has the guts to lecture Jaina about what is right and what is wrong. Jaina is too good. She should grow a spine and drive an icicle between Thrall’s eyes.

SHOULD.

Here is a idea for the story community.
Make a topic about what each player think in his head what SHOULD happen and let us see how many different opinions we would have.

Cheers.

[Daelinna-argent-dawn]

Thank you for highlighting my mistake. I should have used the word “would”, not “should”. Based on her previous characterization from the critically-acclaimed cinematic “Warbringers: Jaina”, Jaina would have driven an icicle between Thrall’s eyes.

[Amazoner-kul-tiras]

Thank you for highlighting my mistake.

You are welcome.

I should have used the word “would”, not “should”.

No problems.

Based on her previous characterization from the critically-acclaimed cinematic “Warbringers: Jaina”, Jaina would have driven an icicle between Thrall’s eyes.

Fair enough.

• Based on his previous characterisation, Thrall would had chosen Cairne, Vol’Jin or Saurfang as Warchief.
• Based on his previous characterisation, Varian would had let Thrall kill Garrosh and listened to Jaina.
• Based on his previous characterisation, Anduin would had listened to Genn instead of ordering him around.
• Based on their previous characterisation the Tauren would had left the Horde during Cataclysm.

And so on.

Cheers.

[Keydiam-die-aldor (Keydiam)]

And so on.

Clears throat Continuity exists to enhance a story not to tie the hands of creators!

[Erevien-die-aldor (Erevien)]

The current state of affairs is the Alliance invading most of Tauren land except Mulgore, the siege of the frontier of said land, and the deaths at Taurajo that far from being unanswered, got excused and validated by the chieftain that supposedly represented them.

True. Any attempts to downplay it worries me. But again, blizzard is so alliance biased they might retcon the entire thing at one point.

If inaction or passiveness regarding the above, is something you find good writing and a sensible response, fine. I don’t.

In all objectivity, if Baine ever ascends as Warchief, it will be because any other viable candidate is already dead. Not because the has any competence on the job. Blizzard can’t fool us.

If the best the Tauren can offer is a leader whose response to aggression is turning in his people to die, and his land to be invaded, then I pity the Tauren lore in general. I truly do.

Don’t pity them too much. If they would disagree they would have rebelled by now. But they didn’t. The collective masochism of that race is troubling. Even Draenei or Pandaren have a breaking point.

Neither the Tauren leader and the Tauren should suffer because the Horde has a Warmomger as a Warchief, that sets them as a valid target, because they are part of the Horde.

This post was ghostwritten by Christie Golden.

The Alliance didn’t burned Thunder Bluff, you really want to go that way ?

No they wouldn’t. That’s my job to do. gets BBQ brazier

Baine is still here and so the Tauren.
Time prove his actions were right.

No.

Garrosh is dead killed by Thrall himself.

Killsteal my achievement. That’s all the green human is capable of.

Look at Sylvanas and her beloved Forsaken.
How she cares for them.
Right.

Those who are loyal gets rewarded. Those who start joining alliance after Calia shouts at them to defect from the “Usurper queen” gets shot down. There was legally nothing wrong with that punishment.

because neither Thrall or Saurfang would lift a finger to help a “traitor Alliance scum”.

No. Because neither Saurfang nor Thrall currently stand in for anything horde related. Just some ominous concept of honor and themselves. Thrall is neutral. Saurfang a deserter. None of those 3 faces we are supposed to root for represent the horde.

[Amazoner-kul-tiras]

No.

Yes.
People are entitled to their opinion.
And Activision Blizzard is entitled to write their story as they want.

Killsteal my achievement. That’s all the green human is capable of.

He is the founder of the Horde.
You knew that when you joined.

• Not Sylvanas.
• Not the Blood Elves.

Those who are loyal gets rewarded. Those who start joining alliance after Calia shouts at them to defect from the “Usurper queen” gets shot down. There was legally nothing wrong with that punishment.

What is right or wrong is ultimately for Activision Blizzard to decide, not the player base.

Here is a fact: Garrosh was always meant to be a villain that was stated by one of the developers.
People can write entire essays why he didn’t nothing wrong.
In the end who gets punished, who gets redeemed is decided by them, not us.

The same thing will happen to Sylvanas.

No. Because neither Saurfang nor Thrall currently stand in for anything horde related.

Yes they do.

• Thrall is the founder of the Horde;
• Saurfang is the only one who can say:
  “I have sacrificed everything, what have you given ?”

They represent the Honourable Horde.
You may not like them, I don’t like Sylvanas Horde, too scourge look alike.

Chaos has no place in Azeroth, that’s why Garrosh was removed, that’s why Sylvanas will be removed.

Arthas was killed, Illidan was redeemed.

People may disagree, but that’s not up to them to decide.

None of those 3 faces we are supposed to root for represent the horde.

Your opinion.
Not mine.

We disagree and that’s fine.

Let Activision Blizzard decide which one of us is right and who is wrong by the end of this expansion.

Cheers.

[Janzì-argent-dawn]

If the best the Tauren can offer is a leader whose response to aggression is turning in his people to die, and his land to be invaded, then I pity the Tauren lore in general. I truly do.

you’ve only started pitying tauren lore now?

tauren lore has been pitiful even before bfa. either by no content or just lil’ magatha doing her thang before disappearing in a cloud of mystery.

[Blunderhoof-nordrassil (Blunderhoof)]

So if they had just killed off Magatha it would’ve been beter?
Seriously doubt it, at this point She and the Grimtotem Are the more interresting parts of Tauren lore(my opinion).

Everything else is just…Muh Baine this, muh Baine that.
As a Tauren player I’m personally glad she and her tribe are still out there, that alone gives me some hope something exciting may yet happen.
And with Thunder Bluff supposedly “burning” on the Horizon…‘some’ hope is all I have.

[Janzì-argent-dawn]

i didn’t say anything of the sort and you know that. neither did i imply anything of the of the like that magatha should die.

where did you get that?

what i’m saying is that the tauren are no stranger to pity when it comes to their lore. that’s all.

[Beshird-draenor]

Grimtotem are pretty much a token evil tribe of a mostly morally good people.
Bloodtotem are discount Grimtotem.