Headcanon 2: Electric Boogaloo

Well how do you measure that anyway?

It’s not like Arthas and Uther went to the gym to test out who can objectively lift more.

There’s too many variables, and too few definitions you use for you to make that judgement- Or anybody else, for that matter.

Doesn’t matter, he lost. - Even while being just a fresh Death knight, far from his prime.

A more accurate example would’ve been Cairne vs Garrosh- In this case, Cairne was definitely past his prime, while Garrosh was absolutely in his prime. Even still, Cairne basically ragdolled and humiliated him throughout the fight up until Garrosh got one strike at him which shattered his runespear, and made a tiny, baby cut (enough to poison him). Garrosh was spent at that point and had the poison not been there, he’d lost.

In this case, we do not know as clearly if this’d been the case. Unlike the previously mentioned duel, Arthas was able to continuously match Uther, and only one slip caused him to -almost- lose, after which he recovered and won. They’re hardly similar or comparable events- With the Garrosh & Cairne example being far more easier to decipher and compare than this one.

It’s worth noting that the Light has a very strong tendency to preserve you into old age. Even the headless horseman (before he became the terror of hallow’s end) was well past his middle-age, but was able to cleave and cut and chop his way through unimaginable odds, thanks to the light.

At what point is it raw, brute strength, and at what moment it is light infused power? Much like unholy strength, this stamina doesn’t always show flashily, but is more built into the champion itself.

I think the question on which class is “the strongest” is not only a nonsensical question to ask because you have to first what measurement will you use, are the measurements same for the both examples and if so, are they biased, and if they are different, how do you equilevant them, do you have case examples to point your case to and whatnot.

It’s not an easy thing to do, from an objective point of view.

Regarding this debate about which classes are generally more stronger than others, I think along the lines that the spectrum of warriors is something like this:

I--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ilvl120

Whereas, say, a Death knight’s or a Demon hunters power spectrum is something like this:

                                                                                        I------------------------------------Ilvl120

This is supported by gameplay too btw; as the average warrior starts at level 1, while the average DK starts at level 55, and DH at…A few levels off hundred, yeah? (I’ve not ever made a DH, so I wouldn’t know).

Now, warriors/hunters/rogues, once they reach a certain level, can and do match against these hero classes, beat them too, once they enter a certain treshold. The gameplay certainly suggests that the level isn’t that high as people make it out- DK’s and DH’s are strong and dangerous, but so are the other classes, once they reach a certain level.

The book clearly states Uther is stronger, and is written from Arthas’ PoV.

It matters a lot. Uther was the superior fighter.

Guesswork at best. He shattered Cairne’s spear to a third of its length. You try fighting with a spear that’s 2 feet long against a giant axe.

You mean when Ner’zhul moved the sword closer to him?

Those classes start higher because they’re expansion features.

There is no reason to think a DK or a Demon Hunter is above a Paladin, when the Paladin was a Hero unit equal to the former 2 in Warcraft 3.

One word: Monks.

Monks are the least played class. I wonder why. Oh, because they start at lvl 1.

Which… kinda proves my point, they made those classes close to the content they were introduced for, to make them more popular.

What? I am not talking about which class is more played. I am just disproving the notion that a class’ starting level is determined by whether it is an expansion feature or not, because the existence of monks objectively proves that wrong.

4 Likes

Is there an exact quote on that? To me, as far as I recall from the Chronicles 3, Uther was the more experienced and skilled fighter (not to mention he had the light with him), and Arthas had already fought against other paladins shortly before engaging with him.

PoV’s are also really bad because someone can have whatever view they want about the subject and it might be or might not be wrong. Garrosh for one enters the combat with Varian sure of his own victory, but gets disarmed easily enough in Wolfheart by Varian, and has to retreat.

Clearly not, he lost.

Except that the book specifically mentions he was spent, wounded and Cairne was completely prepared for another engagement- Whether it was with the but of the spear or whatever remained of it.

This isn’t btw from either of their PoV, this is from narrator point of view, unlike in your case.

If you’re going to choose a “Gameplay purist” approach to an argument, you got to follow through it to the full, and not pick parts you like and dismiss the ones you dislike.

Initial DK’s are defacto more powerful than initial warriors. The evidence on this is crystal clear.

Why didn’t Light make a barrier to shield him from the blow, then?

This argument goes both ways. Arthas won because the narrative dictated so. In that spatial moment he was better of the two, no matter the analysis in hindsight.

1 Like

Yes, in Rise of the Lich King.

Arthas himself admits in his head Uther is stronger.

???

I don’t even?

He lost because Arthas had help and a haxxed weapon, it had nothing to do with Arthas being a better fighter, which he was not.

I’d bet on a tired orc with an axe over a tauren with a stick.

No, I don’t, because the world isn’t black or white and we have grays and logic.

Because the Light isn’t a sentient force that interferes with random fights, whereas Ner’zhul was there to act.

No, he was not. Not anymore than if I pulled out a gun while fighting McGregor and shot him in the chest. Doesn’t make me a better UFC fighter.

Burden of proof lies with the one making the claim btw. You better cite page and paragraph.

2 Likes

Only if we’re doing some sort of official debate, which we’re not. I told you where you can find the piece of information, I’m not going to try and find a pdf and search through a few hundred pages to please you.

Baine ripped Garrosh in two with only his hands. Think Cairne had this in the bag, broken weapon or not.

2 Likes

At this point I feel like there is some personal bias at play here. I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt until now despite you talking up warriors a lot while posting on one, but now it starts getting a bit suspicious if you think the orc had the advantage there. Garrosh was cool but honestly Cairne was steamrolling him until he got poisoned.

Then YSK that people can just dismiss it out of hand.

1 Like

When was that?

Ask any person with combat training how easy it is to fight barehanded against a dude with a weapon. Skilled or not.

Cairne’s spear got shattered in 3, what he was left with was a pointy stick.

Warcrimes novel.

"During Hellscream’s escape, Baine battled a version of himself from an alternate timeway. This alternate Baine slew Hellscream after Cairne’s death by tearing him apart with his hands, taking the mantle of Warchief for himself. "

Can’t link because of retarded forum rules but check out Baine’s wowpedia for the source.

2 Likes

Of course they can, but they’d be wrong. If they want to stay ignorant that’s their call.

1 Like

Yeah, and in a parallel universe Garrosh was the Ashbringer. Those things aren’t canon to our world. Maybe that Alternate Garrosh was a soyboy.

Except he wasn’t.

2 Likes

What is claimed without providing evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

1 Like

We get it, Ghortag, you dont like death knights

3 Likes

If only that was our Baine…/sigh

Blizz really need to step up their game and make Baine rip Sylvanas to shreds. This is the Baine we need.

(Sorry for going off topic.)

4 Likes