Belkar is evil.

[EmeraldPhoenix]

God, why do I even have to start this thread? I'm going to lay out the facts for all the people who flat-out refuse to believe what the rest of us have seen as glaringly obvious:

Belkar is not effected by holy blight, as proven here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0011.html).

Belkar killed this gnome (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0539.html) for no reason.

Belkar killed the Orac- ok, so the Oracale had it coming to him.

Belkar wouldn't let Miko detect evil in t (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0202.html)h (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0208.html)e (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0228.html)s (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0253.html)e (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0281.html) strips. A good person would have let her with nothing to fear.

On this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0261.html) occasion, he killed a paladin.

In these (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0244.html) strips (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0249.html), Belkar pretty much harrasses Roy, mentally and constantly, and admits to it.

In this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0230.html), Belkar claims to be chaotic, then attempts to attack a lawyer with a knife. Does that seem like chaotic good to you?

Roy has a conversation here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0488.html) and here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0489.html) with an angel who is measuring the amount of Belkar's evil.

In the fourth pannel of the second half of this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0610.html), Belkar comes right out and says "I'm Chaotic Evil!" (Props to Lira for finding that)

And lets not forget the most recent strip, here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0645.html), where Belkar says to V "Welcome to the deep end of the alignment pool." in reference to V turning evil. "Welcome" implies that Belkar is there already, and is welcoming V to evil.

So, as you can see, Belkar is evil. Now can we please all agree on that?
Now, see if you can find the link that has nothing to do with Belkar!

[kpenguin]

Belkar is evil.

Well, duh.

[Logalmier]

God, why do I even have to start this thread?

You don't. Nobody asked you to point out this, in fact, Belkars alignment has already been confirmed by numerous sources, including Rich Burlew. Anyone who still thinks he's good thinks it because they want to, and your starting a thread on it isn't going to change their minds.

[Studoku]

An unfortunate side effect of having forums of this size is that every conceivable theory will be posted, regardless of likelyhood, plausibility or common sense, including every character is every alignment.

[Lira]

I can't believe you forgot 610 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0610.html), Belkar says, "I'm Chaotic Evil!" in it. :smallwink:

[Kid Dynamo]

Belkar wouldn't let Miko detect evil in t (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0202.html)h (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0208.html)e (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0228.html)s (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0253.html)e (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0281.html) strips. A good person would have let her with nothing to fear. Minor nitpick, wanting personal privacy isn't a good or evil trait. You probably don't consider yourself evil, and I bet you wouldn't submit to random polygraph tests just because a police officer wanted to.

All in all, good post. I really don't understand how anyone can consider Belkar anything but evil.

[SinisterPenguin]

There are actually people who don't think Belkar is evil? :smallconfused:

[kpenguin]

There are actually people who don't think Belkar is evil? :smallconfused:

Well, there are people who think that a chainsaw-wielding randomly-killing arcane incarnation is Lawful Good.

You know who I'm talking about.

[SinisterPenguin]

Well, there are people who think that a chainsaw-wielding randomly-killing arcane incarnation is Lawful Good.

You know who I'm talking about.

Nah, I think there's only one person who thinks that. :smalltongue:

[NerfTW]

God, why do I even have to start this thread? I'm going to lay out the facts for all the people who flat-out refuse to believe what the rest of us have seen as glaringly obvious:


Do these people actually exist, or did you just make them up so you could rant? I didn't know anyone was still claiming the "Belkar is neutral" position, since it's now been stated several times in the strip.

So I think we all really do want an answer to the question "Why did you have to start this thread, instead of just responding to whichever one person on the planet is still clinging to the 'Belkar isn't evil' theory?"

[EmeraldPhoenix]

There are actually people who don't think Belkar is evil? :smallconfused:





And this is the first time "the voices" are actually "fond of" someone :) also confirmation of Belkar's "un-confirmed but obvious" evillnes :)Unconfirmed? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0011.html) Unconfirmed? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0202.html) Unconfirmed? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0489.html)

The only less subtle way Rich could have told us that Belkar is evil would have been if the URL for this site was "belkarisevil.com".
So, he should have gone for the "ironic URL" approach, by signifying that a CLEARLY Lawful Good character is "evil"?

case in point.

[Aaron]

Yeah. Belkar is EVIL!!!:smallfurious: Pure Chaotic EVIL!!! There is an overwhelming amount of proof of this. Belkar has even said he is CE! His new act of "faking sincerity" will only be acting a little less annoying around the party, then he'll go into a back alley or somewhere on his own and do so mass killing.
The people who keep on saying that Belkar isn't evil either:
A) Don't read all of the comics
B) Are just joking around:smallbiggrin:
C) Just think Belkar is way too awesome to be evil
D) Need a better Intelligence score
E) All of the above
F) Some other reason

Face it, Belkar is EVIL!!!:smallfurious: Mr. Rich Burlew (whom I hopefully don't need to remind anybody is the creator of the OOTS world and writes ALL of the comics) has even personally said on the forums that Belkar is EVIL!!! Belkar is EVIL, end of subject.

[Dogmantra]

OP, Belkar is OBVIOUSLY good, and I don't see how you could think otherwise.


Belkar is not effected by holy blight, as proven here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0011.html).

That's because Belkar obviously has a homebrewed item that protects him from Evil spells.


Belkar killed this gnome (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0539.html) for no reason.

Belkar justified his actions: that's one Gnome fewer for the resistance to fight.


Belkar killed the Orac- ok, so the Oracale had it coming to him.

Exactly! The Oracle is definitely evil, or at least chaotic, and a Lawful Good adventurer kills chaotic and evil monsters. That doesn't make them evil!


Belkar wouldn't let Miko detect evil in t (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0202.html)h (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0208.html)e (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0228.html)s (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0253.html)e (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0281.html) strips. A good person would have let her with nothing to fear.

That's because, being Lawful, he respects privacy, and in turn, expects the same courtesies. He's not afraid.


On this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0261.html) occasion, he killed a paladin.

Pre-emptive self defence. The Paladins (wrongly) think he's evil because of his desire for privacy, and would have attacked him.


In these (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0244.html) strips (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0249.html), Belkar pretty much harrasses Roy, mentally and constantly, and admits to it.

Roy's Chaotic Evil, and being Lawful Good, Belkar sees it fit to attempt to make Roy leave, to stop him from negatively influencing the party.


In this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0230.html), Belkar claims to be chaotic, then attempts to attack a lawyer with a knife. Does that seem like chaotic good to you?

The lawer was wearing black. He was evil. Also, Belkar saying he was chaotic was just to protect his privacy more.


Roy has a conversation here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0488.html) and here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0489.html) with an angel who is measuring the amount of Belkar's evil.

As you'll see in those strips, Belkar's evil rating is so far down, that it's around 1/4 of a KiloNazi. That's hardly very evil, when most people are compared to Cruella DeVille and Sauron.


In the fourth pannel of the second half of this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0610.html), Belkar comes right out and says "I'm Chaotic Evil!" (Props to Lira for finding that)

He's just protecting his privacy again, he did think he was speaking to the leader of the Sapphire Guard.


And lets not forget the most recent strip, here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0645.html), where Belkar says to V "Welcome to the deep end of the alignment pool." in reference to V turning evil. "Welcome" implies that Belkar is there already, and is welcoming V to evil.]

Swimming in the deep end of the swimming pool is harder, yes? Therefore, being in the deep end of the alignment pool must be harder too. Being good is much harder than being evil, since you have to be nice to others. Therefore, all this proves is that V is also Lawful Good.


So, as you can see, Belkar is evil. Now can we please all agree on that?

Certainly not. He's obviously Lawful Good.
Yes, I'm being facetious, and probably not doing that great a job...

[Logalmier]

OP, Belkar is OBVIOUSLY good, and I don't see how you could think otherwise.

I realize this is just a joke on your part (or I hope), but I am curious how you will respond... Mr. Burlew himself has said that Belkar is chaotic evil. How do you get out of that one, eh?:smalltongue:

[NerfTW]

I realize this is just a joke on your part (or I hope), but I am curious how you will respond... Mr. Burlew himself has said that Belkar is chaotic evil. How do you get out of that one, eh?:smalltongue:

More serious posters have simply stated that he's lying to them. Literally. In the very thread he said "Belkar is evil", he was accused of lying. I believe that thread was purged.


Anyways, I still don't see why one person who was obviously joking (Lawful Good? you honestly believe someone thinks Belkar is Lawful Good?) deserved an entirely new thread directed at them instead of just posting it in the original discussion.

[Spiryt]

Santa Claus doesn't exist

I think you should put such huge spoilers like this thread... well in spoilers too.

[Dogmantra]

I realize this is just a joke on your part (or I hope), but I am curious how you will respond... Mr. Burlew himself has said that Belkar is chaotic evil. How do you get out of that one, eh?:smalltongue:
Someone hacked his account on the forums and posted that! One of the "Belkar is evil" people.

In the comics, when Belkar says it, it's just to protect his privacy!


one person who was obviously joking
Who?
I'm completely serious
:smalltongue:

[EmeraldPhoenix]

More serious posters have simply stated that he's lying to them. Literally. In the very thread he said "Belkar is evil", he was accused of lying. I believe that thread was purged.


Anyways, I still don't see why one person who was obviously joking (Lawful Good? you honestly believe someone thinks Belkar is Lawful Good?) deserved an entirely new thread directed at them instead of just posting it in the original discussion.

I have several reasons, which I will now name for you:

I am an extremely long winded person.
I've found that where there is one person claiming a position, there are often many more people who agree and just haven't made open claims yet.
Belkar is my favorite member of the Order, and his being accused of doing good hurts me deeply.
I get very bored.
There is a message in white beneath my original post. :smallbiggrin:

[EmeraldPhoenix]

Santa Claus doesn't exist

I think you should put such huge spoilers like this thread... well in spoilers too.

Well, duh. He's secretly just the easter bunny and the tooth fairy getting together to keep kids from pestering their parents on birthdays more than they already do.

[Saint Nil]

Found it.:smallwink:

[Spiryt]

The lawer was wearing black. He was evil. Also, Belkar saying he was chaotic was just to protect his privacy more.


The lawyer was also a lawyer. And had a freaking parting. I don't know who should have doubts about his character considering those facts.

[Cúchulainn]

Belkar is lawful neutral with evil tendencies, trust me.

[Silverraptor]

s (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0253.html)

Found it too.

[Logalmier]

Belkar is my favorite member of the Order,


Really? No!:smallamused:

Oh, and I found the link. Correction: Belkar Bitterleaf has everything to do with Larry Gardener, he's obviously Voldemorts little helper. You think Voldemort has any ranks in train animal? He needs Belkar to keep his pet satisfied. And we know Belkar could get promoted to head executioner if he wanted to. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0520.html)

[Saint Nil]

Also, add this to the evidence please.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0206.html

If Miko associates with Belkar, she losses her powers.

This only happens with evil characters.

[The Dark Fiddler]

You all fail to see the truth:

Belkar is a homebrew alignment, along with V being a homebrew gender. And that also explains any other argument on any subject anywhere.

[John Campbell]

Minor nitpick, wanting personal privacy isn't a good or evil trait. You probably don't consider yourself evil, and I bet you wouldn't submit to random polygraph tests just because a police officer wanted to.

I realized last night that the Paladin's detect evil is a spell-like ability, which means it provokes attacks of opportunity if not "cast" defensively and can be disrupted by damage taken during use.

I also realized that my rogue - my very independent-minded and disrespectful of authority rogue - has Mage Slayer, which means that no one can cast defensively when I threaten them, and Improved Unarmed Strike, which means that I threaten all the squares around me even when not wielding a weapon.

I think I'm going to start punching the party paladin every time he tries to violate someone's privacy with his spy magic when I'm near him.


And, yeah, Belkar is totally evil. He may also be the only reason I'm still reading this strip.

[The Blackbird]

Why did we have to start a thread like this.

THE GIANT SAID HE WAS EVIL,
Word of God (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WordOfGod) trumps.

Also: He says he is evil.
Here is a good system for alingment

75% actions
25%choice (What you think your alingment is)
5% Speech



Santa Claus doesn't exist

I think you should put such huge spoilers like this thread... well in spoilers too.

What?!NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! !!!1111!!!!



:smalltongue:

[Zevox]

Minor nitpick, wanting personal privacy isn't a good or evil trait. You probably don't consider yourself evil, and I bet you wouldn't submit to random polygraph tests just because a police officer wanted to.
True, but that's because polygraph tests take time and would inconvenience me. Detect Evil takes all of 6 seconds and has no effect on the subject at all. I might not want some police officer randomly asking me to take a polygraph test, but I sure wouldn't be bothered by a Paladin casting Detect Evil on me.

Unless, of course, I were actually evil.

Zevox

[Querzis]

I dont think anyone ever said Belkar was good seriously. Its just a joke. Some people do seems to believe he is neutral though but some people also seems to believe dragon genocide is good so meh. Its kinda useless to argue with them so instead just hope you never meet them in real life or that they never get to position of power.

[lio45]

Also, add this to the evidence please.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0206.html

If Miko associates with Belkar, she losses her powers.

This only happens with evil characters.

Some more evidence,

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0515.html

"First of all, watch where you're swinging that Smite Evil..."

(not that further evidence is needed in the least!)

[tcrudisi]

Well, there are people who think that a chainsaw-wielding randomly-killing arcane incarnation is Lawful Good.

You know who I'm talking about.

Change Lawful to Chaotic and I'd be one of those people.

Belkar? Eeevvvvviiiiillllll. At least we can (almost?) all agree on that.

[Logalmier]

True, but that's because polygraph tests take time and would inconvenience me. Detect Evil takes all of 6 seconds and has no effect on the subject at all.

3 seconds actually. And I imagine you wouldn't mind because you live in a world were we don't know our alignments. Good and evil are relative terms. This is not so in OotS world, Belkar knows he's chaotic evil, and that he can be smited by a paladin. Hence the lead screen.

[Zevox]

And I imagine you wouldn't mind because you live in a world were we don't know our alignments. Good and evil are relative terms. This is not so in OotS world, Belkar knows he's chaotic evil, and that he can be smited by a paladin. Hence the lead screen.
I'm well aware of all that. Hence the "Unless, of course, I were actually evil" part.

(And whenever I reference alignments like that, I am assuming that whatever I'm describing is taking place in a world where good and evil are something resembling absolutes, the way they try to make them in D&D, rather than a world like ours, where the terms merely denote behavior we view as desirable or undesirable, positive or negative, etc. It would just be insanely tedious to mention that every time I mention alignments.)

Zevox

[Aaron]

Someone hacked his account on the forums and posted that! One of the "Belkar is evil" people.

In the comics, when Belkar says it, it's just to protect his privacy!


Who?
I'm completely serious
:smalltongue:

*sigh* O.K., show me proof, SOILD PROOF, that the account of Rich Burlew, who made and runs this website, was hacked several times over the coarse of many years. The answer: You can't, cause Rich would find out right away and be like, "Hey, I didn't post this..." Or one of the Moderators would be like, "hey boss, did you post this?" He'd delete that post . Rich has said in many posts that Belkar is evil. Also, hacking his account would cause a total crash of the website, cause Rich runs the site.
You're not fooling us. Belkar is EVIL!!! You just like him too much to believe it.

[Aquillion]

*sigh* O.K., show me proof, SOILD PROOF, that the account of Rich Burlew, who made and runs this website, was hacked several times over the coarse of many years. The answer: You can't, cause Rich would find out right away and be like, "Hey, I didn't post this..." Or one of the Moderators would be like, "hey boss, did you post this?" He'd delete that post . Rich has said in many posts that Belkar is evil. Also, hacking his account would cause a total crash of the website, cause Rich runs the site.
You're not fooling us. Belkar is EVIL!!! You just like him too much to believe it.Maybe Rich was brainwashed or possessed by a space-parasite that forced him to make those posts.

[derfenrirwolv]

On this occasion, he killed a paladin.

1) I don't think the guard is a paladin, just a guard. He refers to the samurai, not my fellow samurai, or fellow paladin.

2) Many alignments besides chaotic evil would kill the guard to escape.
The better alignments would probably try to subdue instead, but its not a requirement.
Chaotic and neutral characters would have every reason to not comply with azure cities oppressive laws. Even a lawful good character could legitimately cry bull at shojo's legalese giving himself the ability to act extraterritoriality and feel free to resist arrest by any means at their disposal. Only another paladin would be required to await their own execution because another paladin seized them in neutral territory and dragged them back to their jurisdiction.

However... only a chaotic evil character would go so far as to get themselves killed to cause miko to fall from grace by using the guards blood to scribble on the walls and then mocking the paladin to the breaking point.

[Aaron]

Maybe Rich was brainwashed or possessed by a space-parasite that forced him to make those posts.

*sigh*:smallsigh: (again). You've got to be kidding me...:smallsigh: Space-parasites don't exist. Brainwashing is only in movies and other fictional stories.:smallsigh:

[Aquillion]

*sigh*:smallsigh: (again). You've got to be kidding me...:smallsigh: Space-parasites don't exist. Brainwashing is only in movies and other fictional stories.:smallsigh:That sounds exactly like what someone brainwashed by a space-parasite would say!

[Ancalagon]

Btw:
Evil. Is. Not. Awesome.

Evil sucks.

[Rhydeble]

Actually Ancalagon, the very existence of evil is awesome, for without evil, there is nothing for the good guys to fight.
If there was no evil, good guys would fight each other, which makes them evil, and, because they're the good guys, awesome.

[lord_khaine]

I realized last night that the Paladin's detect evil is a spell-like ability, which means it provokes attacks of opportunity if not "cast" defensively and can be disrupted by damage taken during use.

I also realized that my rogue - my very independent-minded and disrespectful of authority rogue - has Mage Slayer, which means that no one can cast defensively when I threaten them, and Improved Unarmed Strike, which means that I threaten all the squares around me even when not wielding a weapon.

I think I'm going to start punching the party paladin every time he tries to violate someone's privacy with his spy magic when I'm near him.


then i guess it must suck that detect evil has a range of 60 feet, while standard unarmed attacks only has a range of 5.


Originally Posted by Aaron
*sigh* (again). You've got to be kidding me... Space-parasites don't exist. Brainwashing is only in movies and other fictional stories.

That sounds exactly like what someone brainwashed by a space-parasite would say!

arrrrg! we cant trust anyone anymore!!!

[X2]

In this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0230.html), Belkar claims to be chaotic, then attempts to attack a lawyer with a knife. Does that seem like chaotic good to you?


Chaotic anything would dislike Lawyers... its common sense.

Belkar? Evil? Hell yes... I can't believe this is even a topic.

[Raging Gene Ray]

Btw:
Evil. Is. Not. Awesome.

Evil sucks.

I appreciate your succinctness.

[Dogmantra]

*sigh* O.K., show me proof, SOILD PROOF, that the account of Rich Burlew, who made and runs this website, was hacked several times over the coarse of many years. The answer: You can't, cause Rich would find out right away and be like, "Hey, I didn't post this..." Or one of the Moderators would be like, "hey boss, did you post this?" He'd delete that post . Rich has said in many posts that Belkar is evil. Also, hacking his account would cause a total crash of the website, cause Rich runs the site.
You're not fooling us. Belkar is EVIL!!! You just like him too much to believe it.

That's because Rich was actually kidnapped three years ago, and forced to work and make the comics, while a robot imposter was put in his place to post those things.
Also: prove that he wasn't hacked.
You do know I'm joking, right?

[John Campbell]

then i guess it must suck that detect evil has a range of 60 feet, while standard unarmed attacks only has a range of 5.

Um, maybe, I guess?

It's entirely possible, and in fact pretty common, for me to be closer to the party paladin than he is to whoever he's spying on.


I dont think anyone ever said Belkar was good seriously. Its just a joke. Some people do seems to believe he is neutral though but some people also seems to believe dragon genocide is good so meh. Its kinda useless to argue with them so instead just hope you never meet them in real life or that they never get to position of power.

Black dragons are Evil. Not just "not very nice", or "occasionally grumpy". Not "except for the Chaotic Good emo rebels". Always. Invariably. EVIL.

It says in the book.

So, either ridding the world of them is a tremendously Good act, or the alignment system is a meaningless load of crap that stifles actual role-playing and in-character moral thought.

I know which side I'm on!

[The Blackbird]

Btw:
Evil. Is. Not. Awesome.

Evil sucks.

But Belkar is awesome, but Belkar is also evil. So Belkar can't be evil because he's awesome...wait no.... that certainly can't be right.... evil.... good... choas...awesomeness...AHHHHHHH (Head explodes)

[Selene]

Anyways, I still don't see why one person who was obviously joking (Lawful Good? you honestly believe someone thinks Belkar is Lawful Good?) deserved an entirely new thread directed at them instead of just posting it in the original discussion.

Did you miss that the original person she quoted, rangermania, called Belkar's evil "unconfirmed?" IIRC, there are a couple other, similar posts in the current strip's thread. Such as:


Ahh!
So that proves it, Belkar is definitely still evil. I mean "I wonder if we can get the scene of us rescuing Roy's corpse added as bonus content to the next book"

Eviiiiiiiil. :smalltongue:

Saying he's still evil is kind of like saying he's still a halfling. Why on earth wouldn't he be?

[The Blackbird]

Saying he's still evil is kind of like saying he's still a halfling. Why on earth wouldn't he be?

Maybe he's a gnome in disguise. But yeah he's still blatantly evil.

Oh wait I forgot, my head just exploded. Nevermind (X's appear in eyes)

[Silverraptor]

Maybe he's a gnome in disguise. But yeah he's still blatantly evil.

Oh wait I forgot, my head just exploded. Nevermind (X's appear in eyes)

I'll make a new one for you. I got excellent contacts with Clerics with regeneration.

Oh ya. This is my 4th post ever on this forum so I'll put it in here:
Belkar is my favorite character so let me tell you what he thinks.

First, he kills a bunch of people in a tavern and the guard of his jail cell. He joins up with Roy to get out of town quickly, or in his words "get out of town with a heavily armed escort". He was planning on leaving or killing them after they got far enough away.

However, he learned that they were going into a dungeon so he wanted to tag along to kill whatever was in there. After they were in that small town and he was on the verge of killing everything in sight, for example Elan because he wanted a bit more XP.

Then Roy tricked him onto going onto the side quest by claiming there were Ogres guarding the starmetal. As Belkar says later, "Ogres make a very satisfing *Thump* as they hit the ground. He was in it only for the kills. Shortly afterwords he meets up with Miko. Now he wanted the challenge of getting away with stuff under a paladins nose, and the challenge of making her lose her paladinship. So again, he was in on the ride of killing.

Soon afterwords, he got a Mark of Justice on him. So he had to tag along with Roy because he didn't want to be moving Roy's corpse everywhere he went. before he was free of the Mark, Shinjo warned him to pretend to not enjoying killing or people would kill him. So he took advice and is now Pretending to be better.

Belkar is Chaotic Evil. Period. There is no deep down. He enjoys the pleasure in the pain of others and spares only when it would lead him to more killing in the future. Now does this stop this silly debate?:smallyuk:

[Dixieboy]

1) I don't think the guard is a paladin, just a guard. He refers to the samurai, not my fellow samurai, or fellow paladin.

2) Many alignments besides chaotic evil would kill the guard to escape.
The better alignments would probably try to subdue instead, but its not a requirement.
Chaotic and neutral characters would have every reason to not comply with azure cities oppressive laws. Even a lawful good character could legitimately cry bull at shojo's legalese giving himself the ability to act extraterritoriality and feel free to resist arrest by any means at their disposal. Including murder of innocents?

[Godskook]

Actually, I've been developing an argument to support Belkar being Chaotic Good for a while, as a goofy hobby. Scary thing is, I'm starting to convince myself. I'll post my reasoning later, but I can answer every accusation hurled at :belkar: in the first post.

[BlueWizard]

There are actually people who don't think Belkar is evil? :smallconfused:

Who are they? Step over here. And the BlueWizard will turn them all into toads.

[Mephit]

The Dogmantra-Aaron-Aquillion discussion made me giggle. :smallamused:

Anyway, I support the 'Belkar is Lawful Good' theory (we should start a club! :smalltongue:) on account of the 3.5e Alignment system being kinda botched.

[NamonakiRei]

I'll make a new one for you. I got excellent contacts with Clerics with regeneration.

Oh ya. This is my 4th post ever on this forum so I'll put it in here:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverraptor View Post
Belkar is my favorite character so let me tell you what he thinks.

First, he kills a bunch of people in a tavern and the guard of his jail cell. He joins up with Roy to get out of town quickly, or in his words "get out of town with a heavily armed escort". He was planning on leaving or killing them after they got far enough away.

However, he learned that they were going into a dungeon so he wanted to tag along to kill whatever was in there. After they were in that small town and he was on the verge of killing everything in sight, for example Elan because he wanted a bit more XP.

Then Roy tricked him onto going onto the side quest by claiming there were Ogres guarding the starmetal. As Belkar says later, "Ogres make a very satisfing *Thump* as they hit the ground. He was in it only for the kills. Shortly afterwords he meets up with Miko. Now he wanted the challenge of getting away with stuff under a paladins nose, and the challenge of making her lose her paladinship. So again, he was in on the ride of killing.

Soon afterwords, he got a Mark of Justice on him. So he had to tag along with Roy because he didn't want to be moving Roy's corpse everywhere he went. before he was free of the Mark, Shinjo warned him to pretend to not enjoying killing or people would kill him. So he took advice and is now Pretending to be better.

Belkar is Chaotic Evil. Period. There is no deep down. He enjoys the pleasure in the pain of others and spares only when it would lead him to more killing in the future. Now does this stop this silly debate?

Ohh, yeah, I remember that post. I agre at a 100% with it. Belkar has never shown condescendence for any other living being, nor affection, except for when V used Crushing Despair. He hasn't expressed interest on helping other beings unless it reports him some benefit. He hasn´t expressed interest in other's freedom. He's NOT CG. He has done mainly CE acts, and if you remember, he was disgusted that he had been forced to do a quasi good act.

Belkar is Evil, and I find it amazing that there's people who claim he's good... I've seen them. Just because someone acts less randomly Evil, and becomes more focused Evil, it does NOT mean that he's Neutral or Good now. I mean, I know the alignment system is a bit... uhm... failed, but, seriously, how can someone claim Belkar is of his EXACT OPPOSITE ALIGNMENT with such ceirtanty??? :smallconfused:
Give me one single proof he's LG. Or even neutral. ONE proof. I don't thnk you'll find one convincing enough for anyone.

[Mephit]

Give me one single proof he's LG. Or even neutral. ONE proof. I don't thnk you'll find one convincing enough for anyone.

He saved Hinjo. Not saying that cancels all other evidence against him, but it is proof.

He did it for selfish reasons, sure, but had Belkar not interfered, many more inhabitants of Azure City would've died. That counts as good.

[Aaron]

That's because Rich was actually kidnapped three years ago, and forced to work and make the comics, while a robot imposter was put in his place to post those things.
Also: prove that he wasn't hacked.
You do know I'm joking, right?

Impossible!!! If Rich Burlew was kidnapped, it would be found out eventually (if not right away). Also, if Mr. Burlew was hacked, he'd tell us and delete the posts that the hacker made. Yet, you can't hack his account, so it's never happened.:smallsmile:
Please stop spreading lies!!!:smallmad: Belkar is EVIL:smallfurious:, and Mr. Burlew has not been kidnapped. You haven't got any ranks in Bluff, while most of us have several ranks in Sense Motive. Stop lying!!!:smallfurious: Please!!!

[NamonakiRei]

Yeah, sorta. I mean, it was a quasi good act. Belkar himself said it. "THAT is for forcing me preform a quasi-Good act!" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0435.html)
Let's stop there for a while. Why is it Quasi-Good and not Good? Because of the intention. Belkar did it so he could get to kill people without worrying if he was or not on a city(AKA so hinjo would remove the MoJ later). That is a selfish motivation, and thus, a Neutral act from Belkar's point of view. If he had known that he was saving so many lives with it, and that it was closer to a good act than he thought, I doubt he would have done it. But still, was it a good act, Belkar's acts are still Evil for the most, and it does not put him even on the Neutral category. It was minor compared to all the Evil Belkar has done, and probably will still do. At least the way I see it.
We cannot take off the fact that this is subjective, but it still has many objective facts that some people fail to consider, so important is to them their own opinion they fail to accept others opinion (Even if it's Word of God, as I hear has happened), and even if the facts are laid out in front of them, they fail to see them. (Mind you, I'm not talking about anyone inparticular. I've heard of these people, but I am yet to see them. Read them. Whatever)

[Falgorn]

He did it for selfish reasons, sure, but had Belkar not interfered, many more inhabitants of Azure City would've died. That counts as good.

Doing something good for a bad cause does not make the deed good. It just makes it helpful by coincidence. Say there was a fugitive that escaped. His only crime was stealing, and he only stole 2 lbs of bread because he needed the food for the family. Does capturing him for the bounty make you a hero? No, far from it.

[Roderick_BR]

There are actually people who don't think Belkar is evil? :smallconfused:
Yes, but they often just have a twisted view on what good/evil is (killing people that simply annoys you is being smart, being a paladin is being a dictator, therefore evil), or just like to troll an see the reactions.

[Dogmantra]

Also, if Mr. Burlew was hacked, he'd tell us and delete the posts that the hacker made.
How do you know what Rich would do if he was hacked?
Perhaps you found that out during your questioning, after you'd kidnapped him!

[Godskook]

Step 1 in my defense of :belkar: is to answer the accusations against him.


Belkar is not effected by holy blight, as proven here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0011.html).

Not proven. Elan speculates, but there is no proof. My client could have made a successful save. Since none of the party is visually damaged from the spell, there is no evidence to the contrary.


Belkar killed this gnome (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0539.html) for no reason.

This is a valid discussion, but one I won't touch on at this moment. I will admit that this act reflects negatively on my client. However, in and of itself, it is not enough to prove him evil.

See step 2, when I post it.


Belkar killed the Orac- ok, so the Oracale had it coming to him.

Despite your willingness to ignore my client's actions here, even I am not, however, this is part of the same time period as the above instance, and both will be handled in step 2 of my defense.


Belkar wouldn't let Miko detect evil in t (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0202.html)h (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0208.html)e (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0228.html)s (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0253.html)e (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0281.html) strips. A good person would have let her with nothing to fear.

Your willingness to judge a halfling based on his cultural background and desire for privacy are revolting, sir. Neither has anything to do with D&D alignment policies, and my client should not be the receiver of your prejudices.


On this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0261.html) occasion, he killed a paladin.

Belkar was illegally arrested by a figure who didn't have the authority or the evidence to arrest him. This figure demonstrates a blind, almost judge Dredd, style of justice, giving my client every reason to believe that he would be judged mercilessly for actions he didn't commit by a system to which he never submitted. Violent escape is arguably his only option.


In these (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0244.html) strips (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0249.html), Belkar pretty much harrasses Roy, mentally and constantly, and admits to it.

So does Elan, on other occasions, supporting the argument that they share the CG alignment.


In this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0230.html), Belkar claims to be chaotic, then attempts to attack a lawyer with a knife. Does that seem like chaotic good to you?

I submit to you this priest's opinion:

OK, There is this man, who always runs over lawyers with his car and one day, he picks up a priest who was hitch-hiking. So they were driving down the street and this lawyer was J-walking. The man sweerrvved to miss him and didn't know if he hit or not. Then he said to the priest,
"Wow Father, I almost hit that lawyer." and to that the priest responded,
"Oh, don't worry, I got him with the car door."


Roy has a conversation here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0488.html) and here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0489.html) with an angel who is measuring the amount of Belkar's evil.

This is also part of step 2 of my arguments.


In the fourth pannel of the second half of this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0610.html), Belkar comes right out and says "I'm Chaotic Evil!" (Props to Lira for finding that)

Self identity does not define one's alignment. See Miko for the proof-text.


And lets not forget the most recent strip, here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0645.html), where Belkar says to V "Welcome to the deep end of the alignment pool." in reference to V turning evil. "Welcome" implies that Belkar is there already, and is welcoming V to evil.

No. When they were previously together, both acted stereotypically, and allowed they're self-identity to run them. During their time apart, both had serious character development that forced them to reconsider themselves, and to gain depth. Essentially, both were originally operating with an understanding of the alignment system that was 2d in nature. Now they both have 'depth'.

[JJ48]

For the record, I WAS joking when I said that Belkar was Lawful Good. However, seeing as how I'm from the "Nigh Impossible Occurrences Happening with Alarming Frequency" school of storytelling, I feel compelled to try to actually defend the "Belkar is Lawful Good" statement.

<ahem>

The key, of course, is Comic 645 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0645.html), where Belkar tells V, "Welcome to the deep end of the alignment pool, pal." Now, we all know that depth is of the third dimension, and yet there are only two axes, Law-Chaos and Good-Evil. How can this be? Clearly, there must be a third axis. This axis, previously unknown to the world, is the axis of Dedicated-Undedicated. As an example, let me take three separate Lawful Good people from the comic:

Miko is Dedicated Lawful Good. She will stick to the letter of the alignment no matter what. All of her actions will, to the best of her knowledge, be 100% Lawful, and 100% Good. (Note that though she DID perform non-lawful, non-good acts, SHE believed them to be so, and was thus acting according to the Dedicated Lawful Good code.)

Roy is Neutral Lawful Good. He will do his best to be Lawful Good, but tends to look at the "big picture". If doing something slightly chaotic or slightly evil is necessary for the greater good in the long run, he's willing to do so.

Belkar is Undedicated Lawful Good. He's Lawful Good, but won't even bother trying to do anything Lawful or Good, unless he has to. He can lie, pillage, steal, kill, and what does he care? It's not like he's DEDICATED to being Lawful Good.

(Note that this could explain how some Paladins are able to slaughter innocent monsters without affecting their Paladin status: they're simply Neutral Lawful Good or Undedicated Lawful Good!)

As for Belkar's actions and words, he's obviously lying, because he wants people to THINK that he's not Lawful Good. And as for Rich's statements, I can only assume that, until recently (possibly even up to Comic 645,) even HE didn't know about the Dedicated-Undedicated axis, and so even he thought Belkar was Chaotic Evil. A TRULY good author's characters are so well defined that they can pretty much act on their own, and even the author will be surprised at times which direction things go in.

(Closing Note concerning the third axis. The alignment along the third access should precede the alignment along the Law-Chaos axis. Thus, "Dedicated True Neutral" or "Neutral Chaotic Evil". The only exception is what WOULD be "Neutral True Neutral", which becomes "Absolutely, Positively True Neutral...We MEAN It This Time!")

[EmeraldPhoenix]

Yeah, sorta. I mean, it was a quasi good act. Belkar himself said it. "THAT is for forcing me preform a quasi-Good act!" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0435.html)
Let's stop there for a while. Why is it Quasi-Good and not Good? Because of the intention. Belkar did it so he could get to kill people without worrying if he was or not on a city. That is a selfish motivation, and thus, a Neutral act from Belkar's point of view. If he had known that he was saving so many lives with it, and that it was closer to a good act than he thought, I doubt he would have done it. But still, was it a good act, Belkar's acts are still Evil for the most, and it does not put him even on the Neutral category. It was minor compared to all the Evil Belkar has done, and probably will still do. At least the way I see it.
We cannot take off the fact that this is subjective, but it still has many objective facts that some people fail to consider, so important is to them their own opinion they fail to accept others opinion (Even if it's Word of God, as I hear has happened), and even if the facts are laid out in front of them, they fail to see them. (Mind you, I'm not talking about anyone inparticular. I've heard of these people, but I am yet to see them. Read them. Whatever)

Wait...what? I mean, I'm glad you're on my side about this, but I think you have the facts wrong.

If you'll look closely, Belkar did not kill the man with the poison just so that he could jump over the wall, (where did you get that logic?) he could have jumped at any point. He killed the man to save Hinjo, so that later Hinjo could remove his mark. So to clear it all up, Belkar saved Hinjo. That might be fodder for the Belkar-is-not-evil folks, but here is my reasoning:

The man was going to kill Hinjo.
Belkar killed the man to keep him from killing Hinjo.
He did it so that Hinjo could remove his mark of justice.
Hinjo removing Belkar's mark of justice would let Belkar kill people.
Killing innocent people is an evil act.
So, following this train of thought, Belkar killed one man to help his chances of killing many more people in the future.
And so, I'm honestly asking here when I say this, not to you, but to the "belkar=good" people of the forum: That would make Belkar good...how?

I mean, Belkar proclaimed himself that he disapproved of the fact it was a "quasi-good act".

Please, explain your reasoning to me.

[JJ48]

If he's Undedicated, then he doesn't HAVE to approve of good acts, or disapprove evil ones.

[NamonakiRei]

Oh, no, yeah, I didn't mean he killed the man to get out the wall! I meant he killed the man to have the mark removed later by Hinjo! My bad! I'll edit my post and make it clearer! :smalleek: thanks! :smallsmile:

[Sgeo]

Impossible!!! If Rich Burlew was kidnapped, it would be found out eventually (if not right away). Also, if Mr. Burlew was hacked, he'd tell us and delete the posts that the hacker made. Yet, you can't hack his account, so it's never happened.:smallsmile:
Please stop spreading lies!!!:smallmad: Belkar is EVIL:smallfurious:, and Mr. Burlew has not been kidnapped. You haven't got any ranks in Bluff, while most of us have several ranks in Sense Motive. Stop lying!!!:smallfurious: Please!!!

The person you were responding to was joking... although I guess your reply could be pretending to not realize that..

[Godskook]

The man was going to kill Hinjo.
Belkar killed the man to keep him from killing Hinjo.
He did it so that Hinjo could remove his mark of justice.
Hinjo removing Belkar's mark of justice would let Belkar kill people.
Killing innocent people is an evil act.
So, following this train of thought, Belkar killed one man to help his chances of killing many more people in the future.
And so, I'm honestly asking here when I say this, not to you, but to the "belkar=good" people of the forum: That would make Belkar good...how?

You're making a jump in your logic. Belkar *does* like killing people. However, that doesn't mean he needs to kill innocent people. Belkar's already had troubles performing his duties as a member of the OotS because of the mark. The mark had already prevented him from doing good, by preventing him from killing. Wanting it removed does nothing to demonstrate his alignment, except maybe along the law/chaos axis.


I mean, Belkar proclaimed himself that he disapproved of the fact it was a "quasi-good act".

No, he complained about being forced to do a quasi-good act. His complaint can just as easily be understood as being against the compulsion aspect, since he is clearly against such things. On the other hand, he has never complained about helping Roy do good things. Actually, it makes more sense that his complaint is about the compulsion and not the goodness of the act, given Belkar's own actions up to that point.

[Aaron]

The person you were responding to was joking... although I guess your reply could be pretending to not realize that..

Yah... But he said that he was joking in white text format that compleatly blends in with the background.:smallmad: Saying that Rich Burlew was kidnapped and threatened is not funny:smallannoyed: and very serious!!!:smallfurious:

[Silverraptor]

Doing something good for a bad cause does not make the deed good. It just makes it helpful by coincidence. Say there was a fugitive that escaped. His only crime was stealing, and he only stole 2 lbs of bread because he needed the food for the family. Does capturing him for the bounty make you a hero? No, far from it.
This supports your theory, kinda.


http://archive.lfgcomic.com/lfg0154.gif

[derfenrirwolv]

Well, the whole point with Richard is that there's a threat coming that's so massive that the only way to counter it was to sell his soul and turn himself into the ultimate, amoral killing machine. The elemental "cup" that was possessing people said there was another something inside Richard.. that something is the original soul, which is guiding Richards rampage in order to avert the coming catastrophe.

Belkar doesn't think in such longterm goals. He in fact required one of his devils (the one thats apparently belkars devil of fake character growth) in order to convince him it was in his longterm evil interests to kill "guy let out of prison" to save hinjo

[Silverraptor]

Well, the whole point with Richard is that there's a threat coming that's so massive that the only way to counter it was to sell his soul and turn himself into the ultimate, amoral killing machine. The elemental "cup" that was possessing people said there was another something inside Richard.. that something is the original soul, which is guiding Richards rampage in order to avert the coming catastrophe.

Belkar doesn't think in such longterm goals. He in fact required one of his devils (the one thats apparently belkars devil of fake character growth) in order to convince him it was in his longterm evil interests to kill "guy let out of prison" to save hinjo

What are you talking about?:smallconfused: Also, Richard slaughtered that village for fun, just like Belkar.

[derfenrirwolv]

What are you talking about? Also, Richard slaughtered that village for fun, just like Belkar.

Well, as the talking stomach chickenman said, if Richard hadn't whiped out that village it would have made the evil empire last a thousand years longer. he killed a few hundred to save a million.

[DrakebloodIV]

In this strip (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0230.html), Belkar claims to be chaotic, then attempts to attack a lawyer with a knife. Does that seem like chaotic good to you?

Well, Ive met some pretty horrible lawyers.

[JJ48]

Well, as the talking stomach chickenman said, if Richard hadn't whiped out that village it would have made the evil empire last a thousand years longer. he killed a few hundred to save a million.

I don't believe he killed them TO save a million, I think he killed a few hundered DESPITE the fact that it saved a million.

[Dagren]

I don't believe he killed them TO save a million, I think he killed a few hundered DESPITE the fact that it saved a million.I think he killed a few hundred not having the slightest clue it would save a million. That's what Chaotic Evil is about.

[King of Nowhere]

Wait, I'm so confused...
Was there even the need for this thread?

[Comet]

No, there was not.
And yet it has gone on for three pages now.
Seriously, what? :smalleek:

[Selene]

Yeah, sorta. I mean, it was a quasi good act. Belkar himself said it. "THAT is for forcing me preform a quasi-Good act!" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0435.html)
Let's stop there for a while. Why is it Quasi-Good and not Good? Because of the intention. Belkar did it so he could get to kill people without worrying if he was or not on a city(AKA so hinjo would remove the MoJ later). That is a selfish motivation, and thus, a Neutral act from Belkar's point of view. If he had known that he was saving so many lives with it, and that it was closer to a good act than he thought, I doubt he would have done it.

I think Belkar would have put on the T-shirt and marched in the Lawful Good parade if he'd thought it would get the MoJ off him. And then gone on with his evilness afterward, of course.

[EmeraldPhoenix]

I feel compelled to try to actually defend the "Belkar is Lawful Good" statement.

<ahem>

The key, of course, is Comic 645 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0645.html), where Belkar tells V, "Welcome to the deep end of the alignment pool, pal." Now, we all know that depth is of the third dimension, and yet there are only two axes, Law-Chaos and Good-Evil. How can this be? Clearly, there must be a third axis. This axis, previously unknown to the world, is the axis of Dedicated-Undedicated. As an example, let me take three separate Lawful Good people from the comic:

Miko is Dedicated Lawful Good. She will stick to the letter of the alignment no matter what. All of her actions will, to the best of her knowledge, be 100% Lawful, and 100% Good. (Note that though she DID perform non-lawful, non-good acts, SHE believed them to be so, and was thus acting according to the Dedicated Lawful Good code.)

Roy is Neutral Lawful Good. He will do his best to be Lawful Good, but tends to look at the "big picture". If doing something slightly chaotic or slightly evil is necessary for the greater good in the long run, he's willing to do so.

Belkar is Undedicated Lawful Good. He's Lawful Good, but won't even bother trying to do anything Lawful or Good, unless he has to. He can lie, pillage, steal, kill, and what does he care? It's not like he's DEDICATED to being Lawful Good.

(Note that this could explain how some Paladins are able to slaughter innocent monsters without affecting their Paladin status: they're simply Neutral Lawful Good or Undedicated Lawful Good!)

As for Belkar's actions and words, he's obviously lying, because he wants people to THINK that he's not Lawful Good. And as for Rich's statements, I can only assume that, until recently (possibly even up to Comic 645,) even HE didn't know about the Dedicated-Undedicated axis, and so even he thought Belkar was Chaotic Evil. A TRULY good author's characters are so well defined that they can pretty much act on their own, and even the author will be surprised at times which direction things go in.

(Closing Note concerning the third axis. The alignment along the third access should precede the alignment along the Law-Chaos axis. Thus, "Dedicated True Neutral" or "Neutral Chaotic Evil". The only exception is what WOULD be "Neutral True Neutral", which becomes "Absolutely, Positively True Neutral...We MEAN It This Time!")

Wow...I can't believe this. You actually had to change the rules of the game just to make you point. In D&D, there isn't any such thing as the "third axis". Your game sounds like a lot of fun...but it's not the game that OOTS was based on.

You haven't essentially proven anything. You said that you would prove that Belkar was Lawful Good, but ended up saying that he was "undedicated Lawful Good", which is completely different apparently. What was it you said? Oh yeah-


"He's Lawful Good, but won't even bother trying to do anything Lawful or Good, unless he has to."

That's not Lawful Good. That's not even True Neutral. What you have right there? Somebody who doesn't want to be Lawful or Good? You've just described Chaotic Evil.

[JJ48]

Wow...I can't believe this. You actually had to change the rules of the game just to make you point. In D&D, there isn't any such thing as the "third axis". Your game sounds like a lot of fun...but it's not the game that OOTS was based on.

By the same argument, V can not have killed the Black Dragon, because there is no such thing as a triple Soul Splice in D&D.


That's not Lawful Good. That's not even True Neutral. What you have right there? Somebody who doesn't want to be Lawful or Good? You've just described Chaotic Evil.

Only if we are assuming that he is Dedicated.

[ABB]

As a cat lover, I must say that I think belkar is good for taking care of mr. scruffy so well.

As to belkar attacking lawyers, that's what good aligned people should do, on sight, with the deadliest weapons possible.

BTW, speaking of evil, ok the B man killed that travelling peddler, but as I recall roy killed a couple goblins in their sleep after V bored them to unconsciousness. isn't killing someone in their sleep kinda...not so good?

[Aaron]

By the same argument, V can not have killed the Black Dragon, because there is no such thing as a triple Soul Splice in D&D.

Wait, what??? How did V get into this discussion?


Only if we are assuming that he is Dedicated.

Dedicated? The only thing Belkar is really dedicated to is killing innocent people.

[dps]

I dont think anyone ever said Belkar was good seriously. Its just a joke.

You have a lot more faith in the intelligence of your fellow man than I do. I'm quite sure that some people do think that Belkar is good--some people are just ****ing morons.

And as for those who think it's funny--well, they're stupid too, 'cause it quit being funny after about the first hundred times.

[JJ48]

Wait, what??? How did V get into this discussion?



Dedicated? The only thing Belkar is really dedicated to is killing innocent people.

These were in response to post #80, which was in turn a response to my previous post #63.

[Greep]

For the record, I WAS joking when I said that Belkar was Lawful Good. However, seeing as how I'm from the "Nigh Impossible Occurrences Happening with Alarming Frequency" school of storytelling, I feel compelled to try to actually defend the "Belkar is Lawful Good" statement.

<ahem>

The key, of course, is Comic 645 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0645.html), where Belkar tells V, "Welcome to the deep end of the alignment pool, pal." Now, we all know that depth is of the third dimension, and yet there are only two axes, Law-Chaos and Good-Evil. How can this be? Clearly, there must be a third axis. This axis, previously unknown to the world, is the axis of Dedicated-Undedicated. As an example, let me take three separate Lawful Good people from the comic:

Miko is Dedicated Lawful Good. She will stick to the letter of the alignment no matter what. All of her actions will, to the best of her knowledge, be 100% Lawful, and 100% Good. (Note that though she DID perform non-lawful, non-good acts, SHE believed them to be so, and was thus acting according to the Dedicated Lawful Good code.)

Roy is Neutral Lawful Good. He will do his best to be Lawful Good, but tends to look at the "big picture". If doing something slightly chaotic or slightly evil is necessary for the greater good in the long run, he's willing to do so.

Belkar is Undedicated Lawful Good. He's Lawful Good, but won't even bother trying to do anything Lawful or Good, unless he has to. He can lie, pillage, steal, kill, and what does he care? It's not like he's DEDICATED to being Lawful Good.

(Note that this could explain how some Paladins are able to slaughter innocent monsters without affecting their Paladin status: they're simply Neutral Lawful Good or Undedicated Lawful Good!)

As for Belkar's actions and words, he's obviously lying, because he wants people to THINK that he's not Lawful Good. And as for Rich's statements, I can only assume that, until recently (possibly even up to Comic 645,) even HE didn't know about the Dedicated-Undedicated axis, and so even he thought Belkar was Chaotic Evil. A TRULY good author's characters are so well defined that they can pretty much act on their own, and even the author will be surprised at times which direction things go in.

(Closing Note concerning the third axis. The alignment along the third access should precede the alignment along the Law-Chaos axis. Thus, "Dedicated True Neutral" or "Neutral Chaotic Evil". The only exception is what WOULD be "Neutral True Neutral", which becomes "Absolutely, Positively True Neutral...We MEAN It This Time!")

Yeah but you're also forgetting the FOURTH dimensional alignment, wherein it turns out anyone can randomly be the opposite alignment for no apparent reason, and since Belkar belongs to this he must be opposite(undedicated(Lawful(Good))) i.e. chaotic evil.

[Volkov]

Belkar cannot be lawful good, he has levels in barbarian. You can't take levels in barbarian with a non-chaotic alignment.

[Zevox]

Belkar cannot be lawful good, he has levels in barbarian. You can't take levels in barbarian with a non-chaotic alignment.
Correction: you can't take levels in Barbarian with a Lawful alignment. Neutral is perfectly allowed. (Although Belkar in particular is certainly Chaotic.)

Zevox

[Volkov]

Correction: you can't take levels in Barbarian with a Lawful alignment. Neutral is perfectly allowed. (Although Belkar in particular is certainly Chaotic.)

Zevox
I thought that those were bards?

[Dagren]

I thought that those were bards?Yep. Both Bard and Barbarian have "Any nonlawful" for their listed alignment.

[EmeraldPhoenix]

Belkar is Undedicated Lawful Good. He's Lawful Good, but won't even bother trying to do anything Lawful or Good, unless he has to. He can lie, pillage, steal, kill, and what does he care? It's not like he's DEDICATED to being Lawful Good.

As for Belkar's actions and words, he's obviously lying, because he wants people to THINK that he's not Lawful Good. And as for Rich's statements, I can only assume that, until recently (possibly even up to Comic 645,) even HE didn't know about the Dedicated-Undedicated axis, and so even he thought Belkar was Chaotic Evil. A TRULY good author's characters are so well defined that they can pretty much act on their own, and even the author will be surprised at times which direction things go in.

(Closing Note concerning the third axis. The alignment along the third access should precede the alignment along the Law-Chaos axis. Thus, "Dedicated True Neutral" or "Neutral Chaotic Evil". The only exception is what WOULD be "Neutral True Neutral", which becomes "Absolutely, Positively True Neutral...We MEAN It This Time!")

I won't listen to your arcane new rules of D&D, and I'll tell you why:

Under this reasoning, anyone could be a good guy.

What would happen to the story if Nale was a good guy? An "undedicated" lawful good, who went out of his way not to do anything lawful or good?

What about Xycon? He murdered lots of palidins, but technically, he just isn't "dedicated" to being lawful? How evil would you have to be to actually count as evil? I'm really asking, 'cause right now I think I could use your rules to come up with a pretty strong case for Hitler being good, let alone Belkar. The game needs evil characters. Something needs to balence the good people, and the bad ones are doing it nicely.

[The Glyphstone]

What's this nonsense about Dedicated and Undedicated? It's already been conclusively proven that the "third axis' of alignment is clearly Square versus Funky. Belkar, by welcoming V to the deep end of the alignment pool, is celebrating V's conversion from Square (which he clearly was) to Funky, like Belkar always has been.

Also, this thread has apparently been Godwinned, so it can't last too much longer.

[Aaron]

Yep. Both Bard and Barbarian have "Any nonlawful" for their listed alignment.

Yup. So thus, Belkar CAN'T BE LAWFUL!!! Belkar has levels in Barbarian. Barbarians CAN'T be lawful. This puts the current score of Belkar's alignment at Evil: 10,301 to Good: 0.:smallbiggrin: HA!!!

[Aquillion]

Yup. So thus, Belkar CAN'T BE LAWFUL!!! Belkar has levels in Barbarian. Barbarians CAN'T be lawful. This puts the current score of Belkar's alignment at Evil: 10,301 to Good: 0.:smallbiggrin: HA!!!
Technically speaking, you only need to be non-lawful in order to take levels in Barbarian. If you become lawful later on, you lose the ability to rage (for as long as you remain lawful) and can't gain any more barbarian levels until you change back, but you don't lose any other abilities.

Have we specifically seen Belkar rage? Probably on one or two pages. But he could easily become non-lawful on those specific pages, then go back to being lawful at all other times.

[MickJay]

Also, this thread has apparently been Godwinned, so it can't last too much longer.

Not really, the example is appropriate and wasn't used in an offensive manner, Godwin's law is much more specific than "someone says Hitler, thread goes out the window" :smalltongue:

[Aaron]

Technically speaking, you only need to be non-lawful in order to take levels in Barbarian. If you become lawful later on, you lose the ability to rage (for as long as you remain lawful) and can't gain any more barbarian levels until you change back, but you don't lose any other abilities.

Have we specifically seen Belkar rage? Probably on one or two pages. But he could easily become non-lawful on those specific pages, then go back to being lawful at all other times.

:smallsigh:Not possible. Belkar talks about putting another level in barbarian here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0515.html). Also, a lawful good person would have somewhat cared about Azure City in comic 516 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0516.html).
Also, you can't keep on switching your alignment back and forth like you suggested.
And yes, we have seen Belkar rage many times. Such as in epic comic 439 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0439.html).

[Aquillion]

:smallsigh:Not possible. Belkar talks about putting another level in barbarian here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0515.html). Also, a lawful good person would have somewhat cared about Azure City in comic 516 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0516.html).
Also, you can't keep on switching your alignment back and forth like you suggested.
And yes, we have seen Belkar rage many times. Such as in epic comic 439 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0439.html).Well... he could use a helm of opposite alignment. Or, technically, a whole stack of helms of opposite alignment, since they only function once. Alternatively, he could pay a level 17+ wizard to Mindrape him. Or he could find a cleric to cast Atonement for him, if he honestly repents his old alignment each time.

Another option: Identical twins. There are actually two Belkars who occasionally switch places. One of them is, naturally, the evil twin, which means that the other is the good twin. (However, I would say that the evil twin is actually the lawful one, because the good twin would probably be chaotic so they can be a barbarian and, therefore, let out their vicious anger at having to be the Good one.)

[JJ48]

I won't listen to your arcane new rules of D&D, and I'll tell you why:

Under this reasoning, anyone could be a good guy.

What would happen to the story if Nale was a good guy? An "undedicated" lawful good, who went out of his way not to do anything lawful or good?

What about Xycon? He murdered lots of palidins, but technically, he just isn't "dedicated" to being lawful? How evil would you have to be to actually count as evil? I'm really asking, 'cause right now I think I could use your rules to come up with a pretty strong case for Hitler being good, let alone Belkar. The game needs evil characters. Something needs to balence the good people, and the bad ones are doing it nicely.

That was rather the entire point. For any who didn't pick up on it initially, I was JOKING. The whole POINT of the post was, "Hey, there IS a way to make Belkar's actions good, without directly breaking the current rules! All we have to do is completely destroy the barriers between good and evil, by adding NEW rules!" The whole thing was supposed to be pointing out that we CAN say Belkar is Lawful Good...if at the same time we make it so titles such as "Lawful Good" and "Chaotic Evil" mean absolutely nothing.

Oh, and just to run it into the ground some more, under this system, the class requirements for Bard and Barbarian are "Any non-Lawful OR any non-Dedicated."

[EmeraldPhoenix]

For any who didn't pick up on it initially, I was JOKING.

Yeah, I kinda figured. But arguing is so much fun, and I don't get many chances to argue anymore, ever since the CIA put me on house arrest for trying to kidnapp Rich Burlew (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=109744) :smallbiggrin:

[Cracklord]

I don't think Belkar is evil. I think he's a stupid, boring character who has simply never learned that hitting people beyond the point where they loose consciousness is bad.
I mean, the Tarrasque is not considered evil. It is true Neutral. It kills a lot of people, but not out of any true maliciousness. It is simply to hungry to care. This is much like Belkar, much as the Tarrasque classifies everything as You see Food = You eat, and classifies everything as landscape/food, Belkar lives by You see someone = You stab them, and classifies everyone as hate/lust.
To be evil, you have to have vision. Belkar is just a small scale force of nature, who's one joke is OK for a oneshot but gets really old after nearly 650 strips.
Now, let's get back to anticipating/dreading his death.

[Mitth'raw'nuruo]

Everyone is forgetting one strip.

When V raised the great Belkar's Wisdom so he could cast ranger spells, his world opened up, and he renounced all violence. This leads me to believe that he is not truly evil, most likely chaotic neutral, leaning evil because all those around him are good.


Granted that was before his vision quest, (which I assume might have granted enlightenment and increased his wisdom score by several points). Now he might be evil. Or it could be a trick do make him start sliding up the good chain.

[Cracklord]

Everyone is forgetting one strip.

When V raised the great Belkar's Wisdom so he could cast ranger spells, his world opened up, and he renounced all violence. This leads me to believe that he is not truly evil, most likely chaotic neutral, leaning evil because all those around him are good.


Granted that was before his vision quest, (which I assume might have granted enlightenment and increased his wisdom score by several points). Now he might be evil. Or it could be a trick do make him start sliding up the good chain.

I think my answer explained that...

[Silverraptor]

Everyone is forgetting one strip.

When V raised the great Belkar's Wisdom so he could cast ranger spells, his world opened up, and he renounced all violence. This leads me to believe that he is not truly evil, most likely chaotic neutral, leaning evil because all those around him are good.


Granted that was before his vision quest, (which I assume might have granted enlightenment and increased his wisdom score by several points). Now he might be evil. Or it could be a trick do make him start sliding up the good chain.

I think that was a joke from Rich saying that lack of wisdom makes you have evil tendencies.

[JJ48]

I think that was a joke from Rich saying that lack of wisdom makes you have evil tendencies.

Or, at least, that Belkar's evil tendencies are due to lack of Wisdom, seeing as how the MitD also seems to have pretty low Wisdom, but doesn't really have evil tendencies.

[Silverraptor]

Or, at least, that Belkar's evil tendencies are due to lack of Wisdom, seeing as how the MitD also seems to have pretty low Wisdom, but doesn't really have evil tendencies.

That's true.

[Elan man]

belkar is awsome

[Silverraptor]

belkar is awsome

Ya, I think we pretty much established that by now.

[The Blackbird]

I don't think Belkar is evil. I think he's a stupid, boring character who has simply never learned that hitting people beyond the point where they loose consciousness is bad.
I mean, the Tarrasque is not considered evil. It is true Neutral. It kills a lot of people, but not out of any true maliciousness. It is simply to hungry to care. This is much like Belkar, much as the Tarrasque classifies everything as You see Food = You eat, and classifies everything as landscape/food, Belkar lives by You see someone = You stab them, and classifies everyone as hate/lust.
To be evil, you have to have vision. Belkar is just a small scale force of nature, who's one joke is OK for a oneshot but gets really old after nearly 650 strips.
Now, let's get back to anticipating/dreading his death.

The Tarrasque needs to eat though, Belkar does not need to kill. Also Belkar is not stupid, he is unwise. Or at least not as dumb as Elan. He has not dropped to Thog intellegence, he is also faking character growth that does not seem like a stupid act to me, the reason he is doing that is to avoid being so open with his stabbing.



And as a personal opinion he is not (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0610.html) boring. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0611.html)