Blue Tracker

Why Garrosh?

#0 - Oct. 1, 2009, 6:51 p.m.

Blizzard Post

Garrosh Hellscream was itroduced in Burning Crusade as the leader of the Mag'har. He was depressed greatly, he knew not of his fathers deeds to the orcs. He was deppresed because the Greathmother was dieing. He was going to let his people die.

Fast foward after Thrall tells Garrosh of his fathers deeds and we enter Wrath.

Garrosh Hellscream has taken a new persona. We see him first at the pre-wrath event. Challenging Thrall due to that Garrosh, the very orc who was going to let his people die, thinks he could lead better than Thrall.

Fast Foward.

Warsong hold, he is shown to not have the temper for battle, Saurfang is attempting to guide him.

Fast Foward to Dalaran.

Causes the Spark at Dalaran when the Alliance and Horde are called upon for Yogg.

Fast Foward to Cata.

Garrosh is the new Warchief!

Uhhhhhhhhhh....... How did this happen? Better question. Will Carine be killed by Garrosh or just by his age. If not by old age, then the Tauren are literally out of the Horde for the most part. They would be atleast due to he was the one who united all the tribes under the banner of the Horde. And the Horde executes him? Hah. Tauren are gone.

Garrosh is not wise one bit, unless they do another attitude adjustment with no reason behind it. Perhapse he will finally decide even though countless times he has said no and not listened and perhapse he will listen finally to Thrall! Sounds like how Garrosh is turning out to be.

My point. Blizzard from day one of making him, seems to not know where he is going. First he was emo, then a moron, and now Warchief as Thrall is away? Uhhhh....

Also, I take it with unless they are changing how the Goblins got into the Alliance, that has to be it, due to that Thrall would have to be a big player in the Horde still if he would be putting them in it.

/endrant

2nd post probably will be "THIS IS NEW!"

#4 - Oct. 1, 2009, 7:25 p.m.

Blizzard Post

Garrosh is a character with a lot to prove. I realize there's a great deal of consternation out there concerning the tales of what's to come, but I want to reassure you that we understand that concern. We know where you're coming from.

Why are we still going this route? With all respect, you haven't seen the entirety of who Garrosh is. You've seen a great deal of his faults, certainly, but people grow over time, and you may find, come Cataclysm, that he is not quite the disaster you portend. :)

(Mind you, that doesn't mean he's Thrall, either.)

#22 - Oct. 1, 2009, 8:03 p.m.

Blizzard Post

Q u o t e:

If Garrosh is going to mature into a character worthy of leading the Horde in Cataclysm, then something rather dramatic will need to happen to him during the Arthas raid.

You're assuming that nothing will happen between Icecrown Citadel's release and Cataclysm's launch. That's interesting. :)

#76 - Oct. 1, 2009, 10:44 p.m.

Blizzard Post

I am seeing a lot of confusion regarding timeline, and I think it stems from the trailer starting thusly:

"As the terrible war against the Lich King continues, the proud defenders of Azeroth fight to secure a lasting peace... but there can be no peace when the world itself is devoured by rage..."

Am I correct?

I want to stress something: at no point in the trailer or on the website is it mentioned or even alluded to that the fight against the Lich King will happen the same time as the cataclysm. I can definitely see where one might get that impression, but the actual storyline is not going to be quite that compact.

#79 - Oct. 1, 2009, 10:56 p.m.

Blizzard Post

I'm not going to tell you the story of how things come to be, I'm afraid. You're going to have to wait for them to happen. :)

#89 - Oct. 1, 2009, 11:42 p.m.

Blizzard Post

Q u o t e:

Yeah, would you like to clarify whether you really intend to splinter the Horde with racism?

One thing I should mention right off the bat: there are no current plans to exclude players from Orgrimmar by any criteria to my knowledge.

As for the rest of what's been floating around, I will say that there is reason behind every choice. As I said earlier, I'm not going to explain the story before it happens, but I will emphasize that there is a story, and these aren't aribtrary decisions.

EDIT: NazgÃ»l, have you read any reviews of the Goblin starting area we showed at Blizzcon, by chance? :)

http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/cataclysm/features/lore.html

#94 - Oct. 1, 2009, 11:49 p.m.

Blizzard Post

Q u o t e:

Ah, damn, missed that. As for the lore page, it's a summary of his CURRENT situation... not necessarily his future situation.

The description is, yes, but the header states "Below is a list of some of the most important non-player characters in World of Warcraft: Cataclysm."

#100 - Oct. 2, 2009, 12:01 a.m.

Blizzard Post

Q u o t e:

Well that's what I'm worried about, that there is a story and that story is to drum up prejudices between the Horde races weakening their unity.

Couple that with potentially marginalizing/"ruining" Thrall it's hard to be patient as these are my two favorite things(the Horde and Thrall).

Why precisely would we do that?

As for Thrall, I sincerely doubt you could call what happens "ruining" him, but neither is he a perfect leader. He's made mistakes of his own, and not all of them have to do with what people consider the biggest threats to the Horde.

I realize it's hard to be patient, but patience is what I must counsel. The story will come soon enough.

#107 - Oct. 2, 2009, 12:11 a.m.

Blizzard Post

Q u o t e:

Exactly, yet we have a report about Garrosh seemingly going down that path by "kicking out" non-orcs and tauren.

If I pose that sort of question, I probably don't mean to take it at face value. ;)

To elaborate a little: I know the story. I understand what's going to happen and how things will work out. I don't see a fractured Horde at the end of it. My question to you was not necessarily seeking a literal answer, but asking why you believe we would fracture one of the core concepts of the Warcraft world at this point when it's quite clear we understand how core it is. It's not that we don't understand what we're doing, but that the playerbase doesn't understand how things will work out just yet.

You're working on very limited information, and I cannot fix that problem at this point. What I can do is counsel patience and ask you to trust that we do take these concerns into account.

#122 - Oct. 2, 2009, 12:47 a.m.

Blizzard Post

I'm not here to explain the storyline of the coming months, and I'm not particularly fond of fielding loaded questions. ;) I'd like the discussion to remain on topic, in any case, and the topic is Garrosh and the concerns surrounding him -- not the Alliance.

#125 - Oct. 2, 2009, 12:53 a.m.

Blizzard Post

Q u o t e:

Apologies.

All I really wanted to know is if the other (Horde) faction leaders are going to be involved? Or if they are going to take the spectator seat like the Alliance leaders have.

I will say in all honesty that we'll see activity from some leaders who haven't done a whole lot openly in the past. Will that suffice? :)

#127 - Oct. 2, 2009, 12:54 a.m.

Blizzard Post

Q u o t e:

Sure. . . how about the Alliance side? :P

I don't see the word "Horde" in my above statement, do you?

#266 - Oct. 5, 2009, 7:46 p.m.

Blizzard Post

Q u o t e:
so to be frank, blue, with your "clear understandin" of how the story plays out and my expressed concerns, can you now say that there is no need to worry about how the story would unfold with Garrosh as Warchief? or will the rumors prove true, and all Honor be removed for the Horde by the lorewriters?

I am not going to give hints on what will happen, but I will say this: we have no intention of removing all honor from the Horde and making them out to be a faction of pure evil. Thrall's honor, however, is not the only definition.

I will also say that while I have read a large number of rumors and speculation concerning what's to come, I haven't seen a single one that has the progresson of events or the reasons behind them correct. ;)

Edit for clarity.

#357 - Oct. 6, 2009, 6:26 p.m.

Blizzard Post

Let me put it this way: if things were going to turn out as badly as most of you are predicting, I wouldn't be here saying it won't.

I completely understand where you're coming from, as you're working with the information you have, most of which is what you've seen thus far in the game. I understand the concern based on that information.

However, my information is more complete. The common belief that the Horde will be under the Garrosh you dislike so much and take on his qualities is not going to come to pass.

I realize it's difficult, but relax. As I said before, we're not going to destroy the core of what makes the Horde interesting and compelling.

#359 - Oct. 6, 2009, 6:35 p.m.

Blizzard Post

Q u o t e:

So Garrosh isn't going to be leading the Horde?

I didn't say that. :)

#363 - Oct. 6, 2009, 6:40 p.m.

Blizzard Post

Instead of going from response to response, read through all my posts in this thread. It should give you a decent enough idea. If not, well, you'll have to wait and see.

At the end of the day, we know more about Garrosh as a character and where he's going than you do, and trust in where we're taking this will have to come into play at some point. We know all about your concerns. We're not ignoring them when we say we're not changing the direction of where we're heading. That's all I'm going to say on the matter.