OOTS #707 - The Discussion Thread

[The Giant]

New comic is up.

[PallElendro]

Sweet. I love it. No questions.

[JonestheSpy]

Brutal.

Saw the elf's line coming, but it still was a great bit.

Definitely does not forbode well for future normalizing of goblin/Azurite relations.

[zoltansonojo]

Here come the morality arguments.

[kladams707]

I saw it coming too. But, it's a classic that hardly gets old.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Dang... y'know, that didn't exactly endear me to the elves. Then again, I've always been of the mind elves need to be the ones pushed off high places :smallamused:

[Acero]

The commander is coolest elf I've seen. Granted, there isn't much competition, but still. That guy is awesome. Plus, he's not a wizard for once in history!

[Deth Muncher]

This is up there with the best non-plot-thick strips. Ever.

[JoseB]

Yiaiks! That's... Harsh. The previous comic ended in a rather ludicrous/absurdist note, and this one goes way into the serious/cynical end of the scale.

Although, of course, the elf commander has a point: They cannot risk the hobgobling being a plant... But there will be that nagging doubt: What if he wasn't?

Slightly depressing gray and gray morality. Which makes it more real, of course :smallfrown:

Oh well... Let's see what happens next!

It's interesting to see, by the way, how the "action scene" of eliminating all of the goblinoid guards is not shown.

[Starbuck_II]

Wow, that was merciless of that elf.

I mean, I know it is war, but ... still pretty non-good act.
I'm impressed that they took over that whole area.

[Querzis]

Yeah I dont think Thanh would like to know about that. Anyway, I saw it coming, I'm surprised the hobgobelin didnt really. And once again, this show that the gobelins at least take prisonners while the «good» guys dont.

[Acero]

Here come the morality arguments.

here, the only good morality argument is a dead one.

*Pushes the term 'morally justified' off cliff*

[Faleldir]

The only good goblin... *puts on sunglasses* ...is a dead goblin.
YEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH

[Chaelos]

And once again, this show that the gobelins at least take prisonners while the «good» guys dont.

Slaves ≠ prisoners.


here, the only good morality argument is a dead one.

*Pushes the term 'morally justified' off cliff*

+1

[Allan Surgite]

The elves are pretty morally clean, given their track record with both goblins and dragons.

[Penny67]

Awesome possum, Rich!

[Draxonicar]

Hey! I was here for an update!

Hehe, elves ARE awesome. *******s

Love the "A spatula may be helpful in that regard"

Also, I think that we need to trap the place with one of Grimtooths Ear traps, that'll show em.
In before "Was the elf morally justified" threads

(from Grimtooths wurst of traps..ahh...)

[Optimystik]

Here come the morality arguments.

If Rich didn't want us to consider deep moral issues, he'd be writing gag-a-day strips.

Anyway, I always knew elves were asshats, nothing new here.

[Eldariel]

Elves are awesome.

[Moff Chumley]

Don't really care about "morally justified", I still think Elves should be target practice. For dwarves, of course.

[Haven]

I actually didn't see the joke coming. I probably should have.

[Szilard]

The title is so true.

[Drolyt]

Well, there goes my theory that the Elves wouldn't be jerks like the Sapphire Guard. Good comic, but it would be nice if we met someone who didn't treat Goblins like monsters just because they look different. So far Roy, Durkon, and Elan are the only characters we know of that have ever treated an NPC race like a sentient being with actual worth.

[Mercenary Pen]

Of course, having read mostly manga of late, I tried to start reading this from right to left.

[Lord_Asmodeus]

Slaves ? prisoners

Uh, those guys WERE prisoners. They were in a prison and were even called prisoners.

[tassaron]

This comic makes me appreciate Thanh a lot more...

[Lamorak]

I could see that coming a mile away, but that does not in anyway diminish how awesome that was. I like that commander guy already, even Roy isn't that ruthless - but he should be!

Two thumbs way up!

[OldFart]

The commander is coolest elf I've seen.Oh, sure, the commander elf whacks a goblin prisoner, and he's all cool. But V takes out a few dozen black dragons, and s/he's evil.

[Zanaril]

Can we have a temporary lift of the 'morally justified' threads ban?

Because I think we need it.


However, I do think that was the wisest course of action, even if I don't agree with that elf's reasons.

[Morty]

Well, there goes my theory that the Elves wouldn't be jerks like the Sapphire Guard. Good comic, but it would be nice if we met someone who didn't treat Goblins like monsters just because they look different. So far Roy, Durkon, and Elan are the only characters we know of that have ever treated an NPC race like a sentient being with actual worth.

Of course it would be nice, but I don't think expecting elves to do it is such a good idea. :smalltongue:
Looks like OoTS elves continue the tradition of being pricks but getting away with it because they're so darn good lookin'.

[Yendor]

Elves are, as you say, awesome.

[Drolyt]

Can we have a temporary lift of the 'morally justified' threads ban?

Because I think we need it.


However, I do think that was the wisest course of action, even if I don't agree with that elf's reasons.

Morally justified threads ban? What's that?

[Ancalagon]

Nice comic.

As the kings in SoD.

[Covenantwgw]

Wow...that was simultaneously cold blooded, and totally awesome!

We need to give that Elven Lieutenant a name!

Edit: Oh and the commander of course. *facepalm on my own behalf*

[Solara]

I saw the joke coming and I know it was funny but I can't really laugh. I feel bad for the hobgoblin. :( I know, I know, it's 99& likely he was an evil little bastard that was helping to kill and enslave the Azurites and would have ratted them out the first chance he got, but I can't help it, it's just an instinctive reaction to watching a (scared, cooperative) person in a completely helpless position get killed. And it doesn't help at all that the commander guy made a joke about it...if it had to be done I would have preferred them to just be straight up stone cold efficient about it. STAB. "Sorry, can't take any chances, I'm sure you understand."

...but I have a feeling this is going to be just the first of many pages of alignment debate, (and I'm sure the Giant was aware of it when he made this comic too...he knows his audience) so I'm not going to carry on too much.

It is cool that this is the first real character development we've seen for Team Peregrine, I've been wanting to know more about them for awhile, and now if nothing else it's clear that they're not going to be squeaky clean good guys.

...also interesting that it's implied that Thanh still kind of is, they must know he wouldn't approve if they're going to make a point of not even mentioning it.

[Elfey]

Sigh, more of the pretty pinkish races keeping down the rest. Will this cycle never end?

[Draxonicar]

Alright, figured I'd be the first to pose the question:

For the sake of a cheap gag, the commander killed a possibly-innocent prisoner. They have freaking clerics, just divine whether or not he is telling the truth or not!


But noooo... They killed him on the OFF CHANCE he might be a spy.


[/rage]

[Ancalagon]

Wow...that was simultaneously cold blooded, and totally awesome!

No, it was simply evil. Something an antagonist would do.

[Moff Chumley]

Elves=kill it with fire.

Take that as you will.

[Zanaril]

Morally justified threads ban? What's that?
Once we started seeing things to the effect of "are 'morally justified' threads morally justified?", there was a general consensus not to create any more because they were just ending up as jokes. Here, however, there may be something worth discussing.

And while elves - in general - may be awesome, that elf is not.

[Drolyt]

No, it was simply evil. Something an antagonist would do.

Yeah, that was pretty damn sick. You don't kill a defenseless prisoner. At least now we see where V gets it from, honestly this is more evil than what V did, at least V had the excuse that he was under enormous stress and trying to protect his loved ones, what excuse did that Elven commander have?

[Gredival]

The hobgoblin says the reason he was imprisoned is that he doesn't like the greenskin goblins. He gives no indication he is good aligned or innocent. So even if he wasn't a spy, he is still a hobgoblin. He might have Redcloak higher on his "people I dislike" list than the resistance but he probably has no qualms about killing innocents and what not. There's no reason to spare him.

[Lamorak]

He probably has a biff with Goblins, if he's a ranger he likely has goblinoids as his "favored" prey. I'm guessing he's either clashed with them before in battle or they killed his loved ones ages ago.

Was he morally justified? Well lets see, he was likely hand picked for this mission by his superiors for his skills and willingness to do what was needed. They don't have the resources to take care of anyone that might be a liability, what he did was necessary.

[Drolyt]

Once we started seeing things to the effect of "are 'morally justified' threads morally justified?", there was a general consensus not to create any more because they were just ending up as jokes. Here, however, there may be something worth discussing.

And while elves - in general - may be awesome, that elf is not.

I see. While, what that Elf did was sure as hell not morally justified, but there are already people posting that he was awesome, I'm not sure what to say. This is the type of thing that could too easily turn into a flame, especially on one of the comic discussion threads where lots of people see it.

But yeah, I guess that while I can hope that the other Elves aren't bastards like that, I don't think The Giant would have made this strip if that was the case. I think he's probably trying to tell us "nope, the Elves aren't any nicer to goblins than the Azurites are".

[Mystic Muse]

No more morally justified threads unless it's something that actually makes sense to be arguing.

I think that most of us agree that that was just sick and wrong of the guy to do.

[Gundato]

Also, it has been long established that pretty much all goblinoids are fair game. Paladins don't fall from slaughtering women and children during raiding parties, so no reason that the leader of a strike force would worry about a potentially dissenting goblin.

[SPoD]

Well, there goes my theory that the Elves wouldn't be jerks like the Sapphire Guard. Good comic, but it would be nice if we met someone who didn't treat Goblins like monsters just because they look different. So far Roy, Durkon, and Elan are the only characters we know of that have ever treated an NPC race like a sentient being with actual worth.

I'm pretty sure this is the entire point of the goblin subplot. This IS how the goblins are treated because they look different. This is they way the world is. If the everyday people in the world treated the goblins with respect and dignity, there would be no plot, because Redcloak wouldn't need to do what he's doing in the first place. Roy and company are the heroes precisely because they think for themselves.

This comic reminds us of the backdrop against which all of the villains' actions are set. Without it, Redcloak's actions make no sense.

[GooeyChewie]

Probably not. And I doubt the elf cares.

[Zanaril]

Yeah, that was pretty damn sick. You don't kill a defenseless prisoner. At least now we see where V gets it from, honestly this is more evil than what V did, at least V had the excuse that he was under enormous stress and trying to protect his loved ones, what excuse did that Elven commander have?
It's not killing the golbin I have a problem with, it's that the reason - the explicitly stated reason - is that he's a goblin.

Not because he might turn on then. Not even because it's a waste of resources. And he obviously enjoyed killing him.

In my opinion, this is exactly as evil as V killing those dragons was; it's only the scale that differs.

[Jokasti]

Falcorvius and Eagluvius?

[Drolyt]

No more morally justified threads unless it's something that actually makes sense to be arguing.

I think that most of us agree that that was just sick and wrong of the guy to do.

Judging by comments to the effect that he was awesome, I'm not sure everyone does agree, although I wish we did.

[Covenantwgw]

No, it was simply evil. Something an antagonist would do.

Hmm...I can see why you would think so, but if you consider the story of OOTS as a cinematic adventure, I think I see the archetype the elven commander was portraying. In most "war" movies, you almost always see a battle-hardened no-nonsense veteran who is totally capable of acts of remorseless violence, while not in fact being villains or other antagonistic types.

I think perhaps that's what Rich was going for here, and personally I can sympathize with the commander. There is a possibility that the hobgoblin was in fact exactly what he seemed to be...albeit a very slim one. Goblins who rewrite history are not usually prone to locking up there own alongside the prisoners/slaves. At the very least he would have been kept in a different prison. However slim that chance might have been, had the elf made that decision he would have been putting the entire resistance, along with his allies and underlings lives at risk.

The cold-blooded nature of the killing aside, I think from a purely military point of view he made the right decision.

[Jokasti]

Also, it was for the git and shiggles. I mean, it was a joke. In a comic. Let's not get to caught up here, fellas.

[Zanaril]

Also, it was for the git and shiggles. I mean, it was a joke. In a comic. Let's not get to caught up here, fellas.

What gives you that idea?

[Astrella]

Another reason for me to root for the goblins.

[Drolyt]

In my opinion, this is exactly as evil as V killing those dragons was; it's only the scale that differs.

No, it was worse. V killed those Dragons out of revenge and a desire to protect his family. That Elven commander killed that Goblin simply because he was a Goblin. Yes V's act was on a greater scale, but that Elven commander didn't care about the Goblin's life at all; there is no indication that V feels the same way about Dragons.

[Mystic Muse]

Judging by comments to the effect that he was awesome, I'm not sure everyone does agree, although I wish we did.

thats why I said most and not all.:smalltongue:

[Jokasti]

What gives you that idea?
The idea that it was for an alignment joke? I'd have to go with observational evidence.

[Woodsman]

Elves? Awesome?

Eh, I disagree.

Anyone else think "17 types" referred to Pokemon at first? :smalltongue:

[Eldariel]

No, it was simply evil. Something an antagonist would do.

Oh c'mon, that's just standard military protocol: Spies are killed on sight, or tortured for info and then killed; he was merciful there. That was a wee bit too obvious an infiltration attempt to really do anything else.

[Drolyt]

Hmm...I can see why you would think so, but if you consider the story of OOTS as a cinematic adventure, I think I see the archetype the elven commander was portraying. In most "war" movies, you almost always see a battle-hardened no-nonsense veteran who is totally capable of acts of remorseless violence, while not in fact being villains or other antagonistic types.

I think perhaps that's what Rich was going for here, and personally I can sympathize with the commander. There is a possibility that the hobgoblin was in fact exactly what he seemed to be...albeit a very slim one. Goblins who rewrite history are not usually prone to locking up there own alongside the prisoners/slaves. At the very least he would have been kept in a different prison. However slim that chance might have been, had the elf made that decision he would have been putting the entire resistance, along with his allies and underlings lives at risk.

The cold-blooded nature of the killing aside, I think from a purely military point of view he made the right decision.

Even if he did it for pragmatic reasons it would be questionable at best, but admittedly understandable. But that wasn't the issue. By his own admission he did what he did out of prejudice towards the Goblins.

[Harr]

Gotta say I was pretty disgusted by it... those were not the actions of any good-aligned being. EVEN IF they can't take the chance that he's a spy/plant, a good-aligned person would have

A) Kept him in chains as a prisoner

or, option A being not feasible,

B) Given him a quick, honorable death.

Instead, he gives it false hope (akin to mental/emotional torture), he makes a joke out of it, he humiliates it, then gives it a death that is even more humiliating.

So yeah, you can jot me down in the "Team Peregrine can suck one and die" column for sure :smallsmile:

[Morty]

I'm pretty sure this is the entire point of the goblin subplot. This IS how the goblins are treated because they look different. This is they way the world is. If the everyday people in the world treated the goblins with respect and dignity, there would be no plot, because Redcloak wouldn't need to do what he's doing in the first place. Roy and company are the heroes precisely because they think for themselves.

This comic reminds us of the backdrop against which all of the villains' actions are set. Without it, Redcloak's actions make no sense.

Indeed. I suspect Giant might have written it to remind us about the real reason for Redcloak's conquest and everything else he's doing. Of course, he might not, but it wouldn't surprise me if he has.

[Dr.Gunsforhands]

Eh, we're not going to miss that particular hobgoblin very much. It was a nice touch to establish that he was the same sort of crazy racist that Redcloak used to be; this way, we can laugh at the spatula line without feeling too bad about it. Heh. Nice work.

I imagine that the commander is probably a ranger with goblinoids as his favored enemy. That would make hating them almost as much a class feature for him as it is for a paladin to hate, say, imps, even if they're all just minding their own business.

Well, okay, not quite that bad, but close. Hard habit to break and all that.

Overall, the only complaint I can come up with would be something along the lines of, "Whine, whine, I'm Roy and I want more plot points!"

[Deca]

A racist elf? Wow, that's a shock.

[Drolyt]

Oh c'mon, that's just standard military protocol: Spies are killed on sight, or tortured for info and then killed; he was merciful there. That was a wee bit too obvious an infiltration attempt to really do anything else.

And if he didn't make his little anti-Goblin speech I might agree with you. It was a very pragmatic military decision, but it was still wrong to kill a defenseless prisoner and the fact that his reasons were blatant racism doesn't exactly help.

[SPoD]

Probably not. And I doubt the elf cares.

This.

Discussions about whether a character is "morally justified" have no meaning when the character taking the action is not trying to justify their morality.

No one in the strip ever claimed all elves were good and pure. They are a team of skilled commandoes lending military aid to an ally, not heroes.


Gotta say I was pretty disgusted by it... those were not the actions of any good-aligned being.

Again, at what point were we lead to believe that Team Peregrine were good-aligned?

[Deca]

Elves are pricks generally anyway.

And, no it wasn't really justified. That's why they decided not to tell Thanh because he would disapprove of it.

[Shular]

Hmm, anyone seen Inglourious Bastards? Were the guys who were killing and scarring the nazis (Brad Pitt and Co.) evil? I see theirs as pretty equal to the elf's behaviour.

[Gredival]

Gotta say I was pretty disgusted by it... those were not the actions of any good-aligned being. EVEN IF they can't take the chance that he's a spy/plant, a good-aligned person would have

A) Kept him in chains as a prisoner

or, option A being not feasible,

B) Given him a quick, honorable death.

Instead, he gives it false hope (akin to mental/emotional torture), he makes a joke out of it, he humiliates it, then gives it a death that is even more humiliating.

So yeah, you can jot me down in the "Team Peregrine can suck one and die" column for sure :smallsmile:

Oh come off it, it wasn't like the elf stuck him in Abu Ghraib and whipped it naked. There were maybe ten seconds where the goblin thought it was spared. And I'm sure it died pretty damn fast. It wasn't as much a humiliation as a "Gotcha!"

[Haven]

Also, it has been long established that pretty much all goblinoids are fair game. Paladins don't fall from slaughtering women and children during raiding parties, so no reason that the leader of a strike force would worry about a potentially dissenting goblin.

The question Order of the Stick invites us to examine, though, is if the inherent morality of the world is "right". Because I think automatically assuming that it is, is somewhat tautological.

Anyway: if the elf was really just "doing what he had to do", he would have pretended to go along with the goblin, and then interrogated him for information.

[Jokasti]

Yes, he was.

[Lamorak]

Gotta say I was pretty disgusted by it...

...

So yeah, you can jot me down in the "Team Peregrine can suck one and die" column for sure :smallsmile:

Sometimes ruthlessness gets the job done. It was certaintly common practice among fighting forces back in the day to execute captured hostiles when outnumbered. Considering that in this case they are outnumbered 10 to 1, I think that concept applies. Team Peregrine was picked for the job and if they have anything to say about they will get it done, just dont expect them to play nice.

[Kish]

Hobgoblin prisoner: Evil racist bastard who openly states that he was locked up for "roughing up" a "greenskin." Probably sincere, possibly trustworthy to Team Peregrine, if not to any other goblinoid. Deserved what he got, but not for the reason he got it.

Elf commander: Evil racist bastard who openly states genocidal desires and even acknowledges that he doesn't expect Thanh to be okay with what he did. Completely uncool. Deserves what the hobgoblin got, and will hopefully get it at some point.

[Harr]

It wasn't as much a humiliation as a "Gotcha!"

A "Gotcha!" is, by definition, a humiliation.

What did you think it was? :smallconfused:


Sometimes ruthlessness gets the job done.

"Sorry I can't take that chance" *slice throat, done* ==> Ruthless.

What this elf did ==> Needlessly debasing and humiliating.

[Shular]

I imagine that the commander is probably a ranger with goblinoids as his favored enemy. That would make hating them almost as much a class feature for him as it is for a paladin to hate, say, imps, even if they're all just minding their own damned business.

I like that idea Dr. Don't rangers get a sense motive bonus against their favoured enemy? Perhaps he KNEW the hobgoblin was lying.

[Crusher99333]

Elves are awesome.


No further discussion required.

[Jokasti]

People are forgetting what the goblins did to the Azurites already. And the hobgoblin was definitely a spy, which is why the elf killed him.

[Optimystik]

If you really wanted to discuss this, wouldn't a less copycat thread title be in better faith?

[LuisDantas]

Oh come off it, it wasn't like the elf stuck him in Abu Ghraib and whipped it naked. There were maybe ten seconds where the goblin thought it was spared. And I'm sure it died pretty damn fast. It wasn't as much a humiliation as a "Gotcha!"

I don't think it was much better, myself.

I'm disappointed with OOtS-verse elves. So far there have been hints that they simply aren't up to their own reputation.

[Quild]

Hobgoblin prisoner: Evil racist bastard who openly states that he was locked up for "roughing up" a "greenskin." Probably sincere, possibly trustworthy to Team Peregrine, if not to any other goblinoid. Deserved what he got, but not for the reason he got it.

Elf commander: Evil racist bastard who openly states genocidal desires and even acknowledges that he doesn't expect Thanh to be okay with what he did. Completely uncool. Deserves what the hobgoblin got, and will hopefully get it at some point.

I totally agree with this.

[Covenantwgw]

Even if he did it for pragmatic reasons it would be questionable at best, but admittedly understandable. But that wasn't the issue. By his own admission he did what he did out of prejudice towards the Goblins.

Well that assumes that the dialog was the commanders motivation. I don't really see it that way. The lieutenant's responses were just a little too "prepared" for it to be a spontaneous thing. One alternative explanation would be that it was purely for morale reasons. Another explanation would be that it was an attempt to get the goblin out of the way, quickly and quietly. I also saw a hint of differing standards of protocol between the elven commander and Thanh, and this was merely an attempt to avoid a confrontation by eliminating the source of the potential issue.

I don't really think the moral or ethical reasoning is an issue though. Why would it matter why the commander did what he did from a practical standpoint. The goblin is still dead at the end, but he's literally a terrorist at this point, (the goblin nation being legally recognized now) so legalities and moral debates are more then a bit moot at this point.

At least that's the way I would see it.

[Trixie]

Dang... y'know, that didn't exactly endear me to the elves. Then again, I've always been of the mind elves need to be the ones pushed off high places :smallamused:

Yah, what he said. That commander was an idiot :smallannoyed:

I mean, being an arse might be forgivable, being a cretin who offs a potential ally and/or source of info before ascertaining its worth isn't.

Oh, yeah, he is going to escape band of guys three to five times his level! While shackled! They are all doomed! It's not like they can cast a few Truth spells on him or kill him if he turns out to be a spy later! :smallsigh:


And by the way, they officially committed War Crime now, joining the ever growing band of evil bastards who claim they're still "good", that nevertheless will still be indeed hailed as "good" by some. You know, love of killing from previous page was disgusting, this took them right into Inglorious Bastards knockoffs realm of 'being worse than 95% of the Nazis'. Seriously, was there even one elf in this comic, save for zero level NPCs, and Lirian, maybe, that didn't deserve Disintegration to the face? :smallannoyed:

[Raging Gene Ray]

Hobgoblin prisoner: Evil racist bastard who openly states that he was locked up for "roughing up" a "greenskin." Probably sincere, possibly trustworthy to Team Peregrine, if not to any other goblinoid. Deserved what he got, but not for the reason he got it.

Elf commander: Evil racist bastard who openly states genocidal desires and even acknowledges that he doesn't expect Thanh to be okay with what he did. Completely uncool. Deserves what the hobgoblin got, and will hopefully get it at some point.

How trustworthy do you think the hobgoblin would be now that Redcloak is gone and he has every reason to get behind the new leader, Jirix?

[Jayngfet]

Oh come off it, it wasn't like the elf stuck him in Abu Ghraib and whipped it naked. There were maybe ten seconds where the goblin thought it was spared. And I'm sure it died pretty damn fast. It wasn't as much a humiliation as a "Gotcha!"

As opposed to not wasting anyones time and just knifing him in the neck? Seriously, how can anyone think this action isn't evil unless they take the core books as the shallowest face value?

[Harr]

People are forgetting what the goblins did to the Azurites already.

If what you're getting at is that these particular Azurites/Peregrines are no better than the goblins themselves, then we are in agreement.


And the hobgoblin was definitely a spy, which is why the elf killed him.

Didn't need to do it like that.

[Drolyt]

Hmm, anyone seen Inglourious Bastards? Were the guys who were killing and scarring the nazis (Brad Pitt and Co.) evil? I see theirs as pretty equal to the elf's behaviour.

Uh, it's hard to quantify whether a person is "evil". Their actions were evil, yes. One point in their defense is that they were doing it for pragmatic reasons; the Elf killed that prisoner out of hate.


Hobgoblin prisoner: Evil racist bastard who openly states that he was locked up for "roughing up" a "greenskin." Probably sincere, possibly trustworthy to Team Peregrine, if not to any other goblinoid. Deserved what he got, but not for the reason he got it.

Elf commander: Evil racist bastard who openly states genocidal desires. Completely uncool. Deserves what the hobgoblin got, and will hopefully get it at some point.
No. Continuing the cycle of revenge is the cause of half the problems in the OotSverse. I don't get this mentality.

Elves are awesome.
No further discussion required.
Elves used to be awesome, back when Tolkien made Elves, and they were noble warriors fighting against evil alongside mortal men. Now apparently they are racist bastards who kill people that look different for fun.

[SPoD]

I don't think it was much better, myself.

I'm disappointed with OOtS-verse elves. So far there have been hints that they simply aren't up to their own reputation.

What reputation is that, exactly? The only things we know for sure about the elves of the OOTS-verse is that they are allied with the Azurites and many of them have indistinguishable genders. Any presumptions of purity and goodness are your own projections.

Team Peregrine was likely selected for this mission precisely BECAUSE their commander was a goblin-hating bastard. It doesn't really say anything about elves in general except that their leaders know the right tool for the job.

[Woodsman]

Seriously, was there even one elf in this comic, save for zero level NPCs, and Lirian, maybe, that didn't deserve Disintegration to the face? :smallannoyed:

V did at one point, but I think she/he's rather remorseful right now.

[SlyGuyMcFly]

I laughed, even if I saw the punchline coming a mile away.:smallbiggrin:


[...] Now apparently they are racist bastards who kill people that look different for fun.

Oh the irony! It burns!

[Harr]

To be fair, there's nothing that leads us to believe Elves are, as a race in general, Good-aligned in the OOTS world. They may simply be True Neutral (in general), in which case acting like this is less surprising.

A True Neutral race alignment would also be in concordance with Hinjo's "allies which are slow to act" statement about them.

[Jokasti]

Didn't need to do it like that.

It needed to happen, they were high up, and this is what required minimal effort. Elves seem to be Vulcans.

Besides, is stabbed in the face any better than push off a tower?

[Kish]

How trustworthy do you think the hobgoblin would be now that Redcloak is gone and he has every reason to get behind the new leader, Jirix?
This seems to hinge on one of two assumptions which I doubt both of. Either 1) Jirix is going to discriminate against goblins, or 2) the hobgoblin prisoner's views on goblins would suddenly change just because the one ordering him to get along with them had orange rather than green skin.

[Platinius]

What the elven commander did was wrong, the real world conventions of La Hay (the conventions of war) clearly forbid the excecution or even mistreating of prisoners of war. Always assuming the worst case (that he is an enemy combattant), it would have been simple to gag and bind him, than bring him away with other (possible) enemy survivers.

[SPoD]

the Elf killed that prisoner out of hate.

Not entirely; he killed the prisoner because he didn't want Thanh to bring the prisoner into the tunnels, thus exposing the Resistance to a security breach waiting to happen. The fact that he ALSO hates goblins is just icing on the cake.

[Woodsman]

What confuses me is the fact that the hobgoblin admits he hates the greenskins, yet hobgoblins are the major race in Gobbotopia.

What reason would he have to betray the majority of his people for his hatred of a simple minority?

[Raging Gene Ray]

I'm really more happy to see the happy Azurites walking out of the prison than anything.

[SlyGuyMcFly]

Justified? No way. Commander's a real jerkhole. A funny jerkhole but a jerkhole none the less.


Gotta say I was pretty disgusted by it... those were not the actions of any good-aligned being.

Yeah... I kinda think that's the point. The Commander isn't Good. The act of killing a helpless prisoner is... grey to say the least, but the way he went about it was rather sadistic. Probably Evil, but I'm sure that's debatable :smalltongue:



I'm disappointed with OOtS-verse elves. So far there have been hints that they simply aren't up to their own reputation.

What reputation do OOTS-verse Elves have, anyway?

[Gredival]

A "Gotcha!" is, by definition, a humiliation.

What did you think it was? :smallconfused:


You make it sound like he stripped the goblin naked and ripped him all his dignity. You say "akin to mental torture" and there's a vast difference in degrees between making a joke of the goblin and torture.



What this elf did ==> Needlessly debasing and humiliating.

Humor was the point, therefore it was not needless.

[SPoD]

What confuses me is the fact that the hobgoblin admits he hates the greenskins, yet hobgoblins are the major race in Gobbotopia.

What reason would he have to betray the majority of his people for his hatred of a simple minority?

The obvious answer to this is, "He would have little reason, which is why he can't be trusted."

[Mando Knight]

It took me a while to realize the title was talking about Elves.

Why? My mind skipped immediately to the 17 types of Pokémon. It might have something to do with the game I just got today. Maybe.

[warmachine]

If I was playing a Good aligned character in that world, I'd calling the Elf commander a murderer and demanding he not approach any hobgoblin prisoners ever again. If divination magic is not available, the risk that he's a spy is unacceptable, so uncuff and release him or stick him back in prison. He can't be blamed for the raid, so he's not doomed. A person should be judged by what he did and intended. That a person is a hobgoblin does not reveal any of that.

[Barlen]

I agree with the poster who pointed out that the commander was probably a ranger with goblinoid as their favored enemy. If I recall correctly their is already a fair amount of enmity between the two races. And yes they get a +2 bonus to sense motive against their favored enemies.


and getting put into the same prison as the slaves for "beating up a greenskin" seems like a weak excuse. It would be quite odd for the goblins not to try to plant a spy. I suspect Redcloak will probably come back with "it was worth a shot" when he learns of his spy's death.

[Woodsman]

The obvious answer to this is, "He would have little reason, which is why he can't be trusted."

And that's what makes me think the commander may have had more reason to do it than is openly presented.

Of course, the bias and prejudice shown by the commander is quite despicable, but there may have been a good reason for the actual killing.

[Dr.Gunsforhands]

Don't rangers get a sense motive bonus against their favored enemy? Perhaps he KNEW the hobgoblin was lying.

Maybe, but it doesn't really change how killing the poor guy is a bit out of proportion. I was just noting how that elf in particular might have a comical reason for thinking that way.

Alright. Dr.Gunsforhands: not necessarily a proponent of mindless killing.

[Harr]

Humor was the point, therefore it was not needless.

Well, yeah, from a meta point of view, a joke was needed for the strip, and a joke was delivered in the strip.

I think my personal conclusion to this whole thing is yeah, the guy isn't Good by any stretch of the imagination, but then again nobody said that he was or needed to be.

And obviously those two blue-colored humans aren't actually Paladins. So this is probably just what happens when Neutral and Evil collide.

[Kranden]

What the elven commander did was wrong, the real world conventions of La Hay (the conventions of war) clearly forbid the excecution or even mistreating of prisoners of war. Always assuming the worst case (that he is an enemy combattant), it would have been simple to gag and bind him, than bring him away with other (possible) enemy survivers.

Those conventions have little to zero meaning for anybody using guerrilla warfare.

[Woodsman]

I also get the feeling the whole "I hate the greenskins too" may have had something to do with it.

Why would he betray his country, made up of around 90-something percent hobgoblins because he hates a much smaller percentage?

[Gredival]

A person should be judged by what he did and intended. That a person is a hobgoblin does not reveal any of that.

The hobgoblin said he was thrown in prison because he beat an immigrant (presumably greenskin) that just came to the new city.

At the very least we can presume the hobgoblin is racist. Should we trust hobgoblins just because they hate other goblins?

We can still presume the hobgoblin is most likely evil. That is the whole purpose of races having alignments in D&D based worlds. Sure there are exceptions, but I doubt you'd find one in a racist hobgoblin that participated in the take-over of a Paladin city which was a beacon of good before its citizens were turned into slaves.

[Lord_Asmodeus]

You know, you're right, what I would think while pllummiting to my death from a very high place, moments after I have had my heart filled with false hope that I might actually live and being the butt of a cruel and sadistic joke is "Well, at least they didn't torture me to death, and I'm glad my death wasn't ENTIRELY pointless because they got a sickly humurous joke from me dying a horrible horrible death"

[pendell]

Alright, figured I'd be the first to pose the question:

For the sake of a cheap gag, the commander killed a possibly-innocent prisoner. They have freaking clerics, just divine whether or not he is telling the truth or not!


But noooo... They killed him on the OFF CHANCE he might be a spy.


[/rage]

He killed a helpless prisoner out of hand?

By the rules of D&D -- and by my own personal morality, which isn't really something we should talk about, since real-world stuff is verboten -- it was NO WAY a good act. There were plenty of other methods for restraining the prisoner than killing him. The idea that 'the only good goblin is a dead goblin' is reprehensible.

Roy himself -- in the prequel -- showed the *right* way to deal with this situation. Confronted by an orc tribe, he used diplomacy rather than kill 'em all. Durkon followed him because of this . I believe Roy was right, and the elves are in the wrong.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Gredival]

You know, you're right, what I would think while pllummiting to my death from a very high place, moments after I have had my heart filled with false hope that I might actually live and being the butt of a cruel and sadistic joke is "Well, at least they didn't torture me to death, and I'm glad my death wasn't ENTIRELY pointless because they got a sickly humurous joke from me dying a horrible horrible death"

No it's probably be more like "oh crap oh crap oh cra- SPLAT"

[Shular]

Why are people using (late) 20th century morality to judge medieval behaviour? Further, why are they assuming that some races are NOT inherantly evil. Has anyone here ever MET a hobgoblin?

Also note the nature of death in this universe. It's not like it's always permanent.

So the commander made a joke of it. So what? Heck, Elan cracks jokes when killing, in fact they even help him kill better. Does that disregard for his enemies' make the killings an evil act? C'mon people, get over it.

[warmachine]

Real, medieval societies were known to be this brutal.

[drengnikrafe]

Giving something hope shortly before it's death... is done all the time. Frequently it is done in a hope that it will create a positive impact.

On the other note (about the team leader being a jerk), if you had a character who, in his backstory, hated goblins with a burning passion, would it be very in-character to spare one because he said he hated goblins?

Consider a third possibility. The hobgoblin made a bluff check, against which the sense motive beat it. The Commander then desided to play the same game, and made a bluff check of his own, against which the goblin could not compete, so he was fooled until the moment of his death. Then it's payback.

The point here is that there are too many things we do not know for certain to make moral observations about actions.

[SPoD]

If I was playing a Good aligned character in that world, I'd calling the Elf commander a murderer and demanding he not approach any hobgoblin prisoners ever again. If divination magic is not available, the risk that he's a spy is unacceptable, so uncuff and release him or stick him back in prison. He can't be blamed for the raid, so he's not doomed. A person should be judged by what he did and intended. That a person is a hobgoblin does not reveal any of that.

The important thing to remember is that NO ONE is necessarily playing a Good character in this scene.* The only person we know for sure has a Good alignment in all of Azure City at this point is Thanh, and they made a point of mentioning how they weren't going to tell him.

So, it's not really a case of anyone failing to act the proper way for their alignment, so much as it is that the audience had a false expectation as to what their alignment might be.

* Of course, no one is "playing" anything in OOTS, and if they were, it would be Roy & Co. Who would almost CERTAINLY act close to the way you describe.

[Kish]

Why are people using (late) 20th century morality to judge medieval behaviour? Further, why are they assuming that some races are NOT inherantly evil. Has anyone here ever MET a hobgoblin?

Your argument is self-contradictory. It's not "medieval." They're hobgoblins.


Also note the nature of death in this universe. It's not like it's always permanent.

I wish people would quit waving around, "It's possible to resurrect!" as though it meant, "Death is nearly meaningless to everyone there, regardless of whether that individual is at all likely to be resurrected!"


So the commander made a joke of it. So what?

If you didn't know the answer to the question, you wouldn't ask the question. One of those paradox things...

C'mon people, get over it.
Are you seriously under the impression people will stop disagreeing with you because you tell them to? 'Cause if you are, uh...wow.

[Eldariel]

And if he didn't make his little anti-Goblin speech I might agree with you. It was a very pragmatic military decision, but it was still wrong to kill a defenseless prisoner and the fact that his reasons were blatant racism doesn't exactly help.

If the defenseless prisoner was a spy, this was the right thing to do; in such a case, it's unlike he actually was as defenseless as he appeared. If he was a spy, his shackles might be loose, he might have a weapon hidden god-knows-where and may be able to fire a signal of the escape or whatever once he realizes the opposition didn't fall for his story.

As such, what the Elvish commander did was merely a story to keep the Hobgoblin occupied thinking his story was bought and thus avoid him revealing the escape or escaping himself or any such. Prudent precaution.

[Solara]

and getting put into the same prison as the slaves for "beating up a greenskin" seems like a weak excuse. It would be quite odd for the goblins not to try to plant a spy. I suspect Redcloak will probably come back with "it was worth a shot" when he learns of his spy's death.

I don't know, 'hey let's chain a dude up in a cell for an indefinite amount of time on the off chance that there's a prison break and the Resistance is gullible enough to completely believe a hobgoblin' doesn't seem like a very practical plan, I'm thinking he was sincere about why he was in there. Redcloak was pretty racist again hobgoblins for awhile, I don't see why a hob couldn't feel the same way about a 'greenskin'.

So he was jerk, but still...he was already chained up, if they didn't trust him (and it would have been stupid too, I'm with the elves at least that far) how hard would it have been to put a gag on him and just leave him somewhere?

[Barlen]

Re-reading this it almost looks like the hobgoblin saw it coming but carried his bluff to the end.

[Trixie]

Well that assumes that the dialog was the commanders motivation. I don't really see it that way. The lieutenant's responses were just a little too "prepared" for it to be a spontaneous thing.

Or maybe, just maybe, he is evil monster who does this routinely. His sidekick's lack of surprise completely confirm that :smallannoyed:


One alternative explanation would be that it was purely for morale reasons. Another explanation would be that it was an attempt to get the goblin out of the way, quickly and quietly.

I fail to see how killing unarmed prisoner, which pretty much will bring the response in kind, besides being hideously evil will help morale of anyone but Belkar-type. And yes, pushing big orange object off the wall, giving him a chance to scream and being absolutely visible for everyone around instead of, you know, a quick stab, was both quick and quiet :smallsigh:


I also saw a hint of differing standards of protocol between the elven commander and Thanh, and this was merely an attempt to avoid a confrontation by eliminating the source of the potential issue.

You know who needs to hide their deeds from Paladins? Chaotic Evil bastards :smallsigh:


Not entirely; he killed the prisoner because he didn't want Thanh to bring the prisoner into the tunnels, thus exposing the Resistance to a security breach waiting to happen. The fact that he ALSO hates goblins is just icing on the cake.

Yeah, telling the escort to assign someone to watch him would take away resources from escorting the very same column! Wait, what? :smallconfused:

If he is a spy, you can kill him later, not behave like second Peiper or Raine without being branded as such :smallannoyed:

[Harr]

The important thing to remember is that NO ONE is necessarily playing a Good character in this scene.* The only person we know for sure has a Good alignment in all of Azure City at this point is Thanh, and they made a point of mentioning how they weren't going to tell him.


Yeah I think that's the real takeaway here. They specifically said that Thanh didn't need to know about this, which implies they know full well the twisted morality of what just transpired - they just don't happen to have a problem with it.

[Solara]

Or maybe, just maybe, he is evil monster who does this routinely. His sidekick's lack of surprise completely confirm that :smallannoyed:

Okay, you hate elves, we get it.

[waterpenguin43]

Part of me feels good watching the hobgoblin get thrown off, the other feels bad. But which is which?:smalleek::smalleek:

[TheBST]

Why are people using (late) 20th century morality to judge medieval behaviour?

Further, why are they assuming that some races are NOT inherantly evil.

So the commander made a joke of it. So what? Heck, Elan cracks jokes when killing, in fact they even help him kill better. Does that disregard for his enemies' make the killings an evil act? .

a) Because we live in a time when those morals are commonplace. So does the author.

b) Because that would be stupid.

c) Elan's never killed someone not only unarmed but with their hands bound.

[dspeyer]

I see we're maintaining the pattern that all drow are secretly evil. Nevertheless, they are integrated into elvish society. Perhaps a foreshadowing of how things could be for goblinkind.

[Alex Warlorn]

On the plus side, at least their PAINFULLY PREDICTABLE AND MISERABLY CLICHE NEW-AGE REVERSE PREJUDICE only resulted in the death of one racist bigot this time.... I'm worried about the goblins who really DON'T mean any harm and happy by these elves.

[Istari]

I'd say it a neutral action, its definitely not good, but considering he's their enemy and that looking him up or letting him go is too risky its justified enough to not be unnecessary and evil

[LuisDantas]

To be fair, there's nothing that leads us to believe Elves are, as a race in general, Good-aligned in the OOTS world. They may simply be True Neutral (in general), in which case acting like this is less surprising.

A True Neutral race alignment would also be in concordance with Hinjo's "allies which are slow to act" statement about them.

I just don't see it. Yes, it is true that from what little we have seen it would make sense for OOtS elves to generally revolve around some form of Neutral alignment. But still, Hinjo and Xykon both seem to expect them to stand for Azure City, which goes at odds with Neutral alignments.

True Neutral societies aren't expected to be slow in acting against Xykon, but to refuse to act at all, until and unless a good reason to presents itself.

I also strongly take issue with the idea that a bastard is "the right tool" for the job. That may be realistic in the sense that it is what happens in the real world, but that is also self-defeating in that it makes the victory hollow.

[Miklus]

This just shows that the elves are every bit as ruthless and murderous as the goblins. The Azurites are not much better, they actually go out of their way to murder women and children based only on speices. Or rather because they are labled "evil" by the flying petting zoo.

I actually like this story. The old good vs evil thing was getting old anyway.

[Gredival]

Your argument is self-contradictory. It's not "medieval." They're hobgoblins.

His point is that we're not dealing with robust moral ambiguities. We're dealing a species that is metaphysically defined as evil in the most explicit way possible.

The elf is acting under the moral rules of a different universe where you can pretty much take it for granted that goblins = fair game. He's not a cop shooting African-Americans on sight because there is a chance they could be gang-bangers. He is a soldier on a battlefield against an undoubtedly evil force confronted with an agent that has 99.99% chance of being evil and deserving of death.

What motivation does the elf have to spare him? What motivation does the elf have to show mercy to an evil race that murdered and enslaved dozens of innocent good Azurites?

[Dark Matter]

If I was playing a Good aligned character in that world, I'd calling the Elf commander a murderer and demanding he not approach any hobgoblin prisoners ever again. If divination magic is not available, the risk that he's a spy is unacceptable, so uncuff and release him or stick him back in prison. He can't be blamed for the raid, so he's not doomed. A person should be judged by what he did and intended. That a person is a hobgoblin does not reveal any of that.Ignore that the hobgoblin is in jail because he's evil (or at least chaotic) by goblin standards.

The resistance CAN NOT simply put him back in jail. He's seen that there's a team of high level characters helping the resistance. That's extremely important information, and that information getting out is the difference between Xykon leaving the city with the other high level characters and Xykon destroying the resistance for his own amusement.

They can't even take the hobgoblin with them without running serious risks of him getting lose and talking about the group... one "sending" by T would do it. The other goblins WILL look into this.

Good isn't stupid. This was a choice of evils, the elf took the lesser.

[Zanaril]

You know who needs to hide their deeds from Paladins? Chaotic Evil bastards :smallsigh:

Actually, that behaviour strikes me more as Lawful - in the bad way where people hide behind self-justifed rules to be a complete, self-righteous bastard. I wouldn't be nearly so annoyed otherwise.

I still think elves are awesome, just as long as they're Chaotic.

[shadowxknight]

Good to see the comic back.
Elves ARE awesome.

[Mystic Muse]

I'd say it a neutral action, its definitely not good, but considering he's their enemy and that looking him up or letting him go is too risky its justified enough to not be unnecessary and evil

It was the way he killed the goblin that makes the act evil.

if he'd said "I'm sorry I can't take any chances" that would have been a neutral action.

giving somebody false hope while you lead them off the cliff to their deaths is evil

[Woodsman]

I see we're maintaining the pattern that all drow are secretly evil. Nevertheless, they are integrated into elvish society. Perhaps a foreshadowing of how things could be for goblinkind.

But the commander isn't a Drow, he's just of a darker skin tone than the others.

[Kish]

I just don't see it. Yes, it is true that from what little we have seen it would make sense for OOtS elves to generally revolve around some form of Neutral alignment. But still, Hinjo and Xykon both seem to expect them to stand for Azure City, which goes at odds with Neutral alignments.

True Neutral societies aren't expected to be slow in acting against Xykon, but to refuse to act at all, until and unless a good reason to presents itself.

Why are you assuming a good reason didn't present itself? Ranging from "he'll attack us in the future" to, "our traditional enemy, Cliffport, just acknowledged them"?


I also strongly take issue with the idea that a bastard is "the right tool" for the job. That may be realistic in the sense that it is what happens in the real world, but that is also self-defeating in that it makes the victory hollow.
Indeed. Especially given that the human resistance already made a point of not being able to tell their leader what he just did.

The meme that being violently racist makes someone a better soldier always makes me scratch my head. The only thing he did better than a pragmatic-but-not-racist elf without "the only good goblin is a dead goblin" as a tagline, who would have killed the hobgoblin without playing games, is "polarize the forum."

[The Pilgrim]

After several strips of V softening up after the soulbind affair, it's good that we are reminded why elves are a loathsome race that only deserve to be socially ostracised. :smallbiggrin:

[Harr]

True Neutral societies aren't expected to be slow in acting against Xykon, but to refuse to act at all, until and unless a good reason to presents itself.


But they didn't act at all - until they knew that Xykon had irrevocably won. They know Xykon could very well be gunning for them next, only now he has that entire city as a resource, so it makes sense for them to act even when in Neutrality. Xykon's victory is a threat.

Also, they could have some kind of official signed alliance with Azure City, in which case Lawfulness (assuming in that case a Lawful Neutral alignment), not Goodness, would compel them to act.

[SensFan]

Further, why are they assuming that some races are NOT inherantly evil?
Because that would be stupid.
Except we all know that Hobgoblins are inherently evil.

To avoid using real-world analogies, I'll make one with Harry Potter.
Just because Volemort may have placed one or more Death Eaters under' house arrest' for screwing up a mission doesn't mean that the Order shouldn't just kill them because they're Death Eaters.

[Mystic Muse]

Good isn't stupid. This was a choice of evils, the elf took the lesser.

no, he took the greater. He could have simply said "I'm sorry but we can't take any chances" and simply stabbed him.

he gave him false hope that he would be allowed to live for the sake of a cruel joke while he pushed him off a building.

[SPoD]

You know who needs to hide their deeds from Paladins? Chaotic Evil bastards :smallsigh:

Also, anyone who isn't Lawful Good. The list of people who have hidden actions from a paladin in this comic includes Haley and Elan.


I see we're maintaining the pattern that all drow are secretly evil. Nevertheless, they are integrated into elvish society. Perhaps a foreshadowing of how things could be for goblinkind.

He's not a drow, he's a wood elf (or similar). For drow, look to Zz'dtri from the early comics; he has a dark grey, almost black tone.

[Kish]

His point is

He can't talk for himself now?

We're dealing a species that is metaphysically defined as evil in the most explicit way possible.

What are you talking about? Have you read Start of Darkness or On the Origins of PCs? 'Cause if you have, I'd say you missed the point of something quite thoroughly.

Except we all know that Hobgoblins are inherently evil.

:smallsigh: Same question about the prequel books, and do not presume to speak for "we all" when you're actually talking about a group which doesn't include the author of the webcomic.

[Mystic Muse]

Except we all know that Hobgoblins are inherently evil.

To avoid using real-world analogies, I'll make one with Harry Potter.
Just because Volemort may have placed one or more Death Eaters under' house arrest' for screwing up a mission doesn't mean that the Order shouldn't just kill them because they're Death Eaters.

Except the order of the Pheonix doesn't kill anyway.:smalltongue: (at least from what I remember.)

[Woodsman]

no, he took the greater. He could have simply said "I'm sorry but we can't take any chances" and simply stabbed him.

he gave him false hope that he would be allowed to live for the sake of a cruel joke while he pushed him off a building.

I believe that wasn't what he was referring to.

[Eldariel]

Also, anyone who isn't Lawful Good. The list of people who have hidden actions from a paladin in this comic includes Haley and Elan.

Roy too (him being Lawful Good). The whole "Belkar in disguise"-saga. Pretty much everyone not Lawful Exalted...

[TheSummoner]

Was he wrong to kill the Hobgoblin? Nope. Taking the Hobgoblin prisoner presents it's own risks. Leaving the Hobgoblin to rot in the cell gives anyone who finds him information about those who released the rest (even if he honestly wanted to join up with the elves, he'd probably be a bit spiteful if they left him after releasing the rest). Killing him was the smart thing to do.

But giving him false hope? That was sadistic. The commander did it because he got joy out of it... out of tricking the Hobgoblin into thinking he would have his freedom and then killing him.

Had the commander slit the Hobgoblin's throat and ended it quickly, perhaps explaining that it was a risk he could not take, then I would be defending his choice as the smart thing to do given the circumstances. However, taunting an unarmed prisoner before giving him a cruel death... that pushes it over the line.

[Gredival]

What are you talking about?

The metaphysics of a D&D universe indicate that the hobgoblin race is evil. As in the opposite of good. As they have a net negative effect on the world and their elimination would thus create a positive effect. As in it is morally permissible to kill them.

Yes in the era of Drizzt everyone wants to think about the exception. We want to believe in the possibility of someone to overcome their evil societies and be good people! But the point is that the commander isn't evil for neglecting to consider that possibility.

Especially when the hobgoblin pretty excludes himself from that special group of exceptions when he talks about roughing up immigrants

[Mystic Muse]

The metaphysics of a D&D universe indicate that the hobgoblin race is evil. As in the opposite of good. As they have a net negative effect on the world and their elimination would thus create a positive effect. As in it is morally permissible to kill them.

Yes in the era of Drizzt everyone wants to think about the exception. We want to believe in the possibility of someone to overcome their evil societies and be good people! But the point is that the commander isn't evil for neglecting to consider that possibility.

Especially when the hobgoblin pretty excludes himself from that special group of exceptions when he talks about roughing up immigrants

In D&D Hobgoblins are only usually evil. That means what, 60%? the only reason hobgoblins are evil in this world is because the gods deem it so and if you read Start of darkness you'll see what that has wrought.

[Istari]

There is also the fact that he did this in a humorous way because it this is a comic with humor it it and just killing him would have been boring to us as readers.

[Shular]

No, I haven't read the prequel books, and so my viewpoint does not take anything in them into consideration.

The answer to whether the commander was morally justified in killing the hobgoblin seems to be "yes he was". The real debate is over the manner in which he did it.

Without knowing the character's backstory, I just can't say. I do like the one suggestion how he made his sense motive check, then played along. Also, perhaps he wanted the hobgoblin killed away from the prisoners' escape route, and so walking him to the other side of the tower was the easiest way to get him there.

[SensFan]

:smallsigh: Same question about the prequel books, and do not presume to speak for "we all" when you're actually talking about a group which doesn't include the author of the webcomic.
I have indeed read both. And the fact that they are not always evil does not mean that its not an inherently evil organization.

[BarGamer]

What this comic needed to really head off the "moral justification" flamewar was some kind of back-and-forth opposed "Sense Motive" checks. A few for when the goblin was talking, and several for when the Commander was talking. Even if it was something like the SFX of dice rolling.

Then again, people will argue about anything. I don't really care. Elves ARE awesome. All 17 types of them.

[Kish]

But the point is that the commander isn't evil for neglecting to consider that possibility.
In the same way he wouldn't be wrong if he failed to consider the "possibility" that Vaarsuvius has an alignment other than Chaotic Good, or that Belkar has an alignment other than True Neutral.

Sorry, no. The phrase, "The only good [sapient race] is a dead [sapient race]" pushes anyone who believes it quite firmly southward, alignmentwise. Or "Good" is meaningless. Pick one, but you can't have neither.

I have indeed read both. And the fact that they are not always evil does not mean that its not an inherently evil organization.
...Organization? So being a hobgoblin is something you decide on? Do they have a secret handshake?

The fact that they're a race rather than an organization is what means they're not an inherently evil organization.

[Solara]

no, he took the greater. He could have simply said "I'm sorry but we can't take any chances" and simply stabbed him.

he gave him false hope that he would be allowed to live for the sake of a cruel joke while he pushed him off a building.

This is really the core of the issue for me. But of course, as it's already been stated, the characters themselves basically acknowledged that it would be difficult to try and 'morally justify' what happened to Thanh, so I don't know what there really is to argue about. (Not that that will stop any of us...)

e: This sums up my feelings exactly, and better than I could have ever said it:


Was he wrong to kill the Hobgoblin? Nope. Taking the Hobgoblin prisoner presents it's own risks. Leaving the Hobgoblin to rot in the cell gives anyone who finds him information about those who released the rest (even if he honestly wanted to join up with the elves, he'd probably be a bit spiteful if they left him after releasing the rest). Killing him was the smart thing to do.

But giving him false hope? That was sadistic. The commander did it because he got joy out of it... out of tricking the Hobgoblin into thinking he would have his freedom and then killing him.

Had the commander slit the Hobgoblin's throat and ended it quickly, perhaps explaining that it was a risk he could not take, then I would be defending his choice as the smart thing to do given the circumstances. However, taunting an unarmed prisoner before giving him a cruel death... that pushes it over the line.

[Ranger Mattos]

Roy too (him being Lawful Good). The whole "Belkar in disguise"-saga. Pretty much everyone not Lawful Exalted...

So everyone but a paladin.

I also agree that elves are awesome. All of them. Even drow.

[Sport351]

Great comic as always Mr. Burlew!

I love the paladin's reaction in the last panel.

[SPoD]

I also strongly take issue with the idea that a bastard is "the right tool" for the job. That may be realistic in the sense that it is what happens in the real world, but that is also self-defeating in that it makes the victory hollow.

"May make the victory hollow," is a rather subjective standard that I don't think really gets considered at Elven Command's military strategy meetings.

Just because you wouldn't do something because it would make a victory hollow doesn't mean that other people wouldn't do it and never worry about it. The elven leaders obviously don't mind releasing someone who will kill all goblins he meets into a situation where that's an asset. It is very clearly intended by the author to be Morally Shady (because of the reference to not tell Thanh), but that's what they did. Therefore, we can only conclude that the author is telling us that the elves are Morally Shady.

In other words, the elves lose no sleep over these actions because elves don't sleep.

[Vulkan]

:smallsigh: Technically no.
How ever amusing it was.


It was an evil act regardless how ever I'm sure many CG players would gladly disagree.

Let's play some role reverse and pretend that goblin was a female elf and the elves Orcs.

Notice how you now completely view that as evil.

[Kish]

What this comic needed to really head off the "moral justification" flamewar
I think there's something wrong with one of your premises.

Specifically, the one that states that "show the commander being ruthless and racist" isn't exactly what Rich was going for.

[The Pilgrim]

The hobbo was unarmed, and handcuffed. The Elf totally killed him in cold blood.

The Elf's action was Evil. The fact that the hobbo could be evil, or could be a spy, is pointless.

From a full practical point of view, the action is equally unjustified. A spy, even a double-agent, is always useful as long as you *know* he is a spy, no matter you are unsure about his true loyalties, if any. They could have kept him as prisoner, feed him crap and false info and then released him. Or they could have set him free on promise to be a spy for the Resistance, then feed him crap in the hope he is actually a double-agent.

It is true that in war there are some situations in wich you can't take prisoners. But this was not one of these, as in the first panel it is stated that the goblins have shown no reaction to the attack. The Resistance had plenty time to deal with the hobbo, no need to kill him outright.

Finally, note that the Elf commander is NOT the leader of the Resistance. The leader is Thanh, and the decission to kill a POW was his to take.

[Trixie]

No one in the strip ever claimed all elves were good and pure. They are a team of war criminals lending military aid to an ally, not heroes

Fix'd it for ya.


People are forgetting what the goblins did to the Azurites already.

Oh, yeah, they were taking prisoners, for one.

I guess if they killed all these prisoners, one by one, in humiliating ways, you'd give them your "AWESOME!" seal of approval you just give elves? :smallamused:


And the hobgoblin was definitely a spy, which is why the elf killed him.

Aaaaaand, inventing of white-washing stuff for which there is no proof whatsoever even in words or racist war criminal begins in 3... 2... 1... :smallamused:


Oh, and in other (not yours) posts of this thread, wholesome apologism of racism and idea that it was somehow wholly the victims fault is already taking roots. Good, give them +/- two days, and these guys will make the elves into saints, as always someone does when someone commits major evil deed in OotS :smallamused:


What reason would he have to betray the majority of his people for his hatred of a simple minority?

The Government. They are ruled by Goblin and two Humans, not Hobgoblins. That's all there's to it.

[Solara]

Great comic as always Mr. Burlew!

I love the paladin's reaction in the last panel.

I doubt that guy was a paladin. There are very few left in the city, and a paladin (such as Thanh) probably wouldn't have been too happy with the situation, which is why they won't be telling him.

[Gredival]

Sorry, no. The phrase, "The only good [sapient race] is a dead [sapient race]" pushes anyone who believes it quite firmly southward, alignmentwise. Or "Good" is meaningless. Pick one, but you can't have neither.

And you are taking a punchline way too literally. Do you really think the elf commander is too stupid to recognize there is a theoretical chance goblins can be good aligned? He probably made two rational decisions that a) this goblin wasn't good and b) we cannot spare prisoners in this sort of resistance war.


The fact that they're a race rather than an organization is what means they're not an inherently evil organization.

But the metaphysics of D&D says that is exactly possible. You can classify entire races as morally good or bad by their rating on the alignment system

[Woodsman]

The Government. They are ruled by Goblin and two Humans, not Hobgoblins. That's all there's to it.

Not anymore it's not (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0704.html)

[silvadel]

Karma Bites -- they will pay for than maneuver. Poor hobgoblin.

[Solara]

And you are taking a punchline way too literally. Do you really think the elf commander is too stupid to recognize there is a theoretical chance goblins can be good aligned? He probably made two rational decisions that a) this goblin wasn't good and b) we cannot spare prisoners in this sort of resistance war.


Except that his lieutenant was way too familiar with the whole routine and lead up to the 'joke', meaning this probably wasn't the first time.

[Mystic Muse]

But the metaphysics of D&D says that is exactly possible. You can classify entire races as morally good or bad by their rating on the alignment system

wrong. Even always evil races have at least 1% of them being deserters. I believe it's 5% but I'm not sure. so, since there is an infinite amount of fiends there is also an infinite amount of good aligned fiends.

yeah, not even fiends, the pure incarnation of chaotic evil are always evil.:smalltongue:

[SPoD]

Fix'd it for ya.

Wow, that was incredibly original and clever. Good job.

[Eldariel]

It was an evil act regardless how ever I'm sure many CG players would gladly disagree.

Let's play some role reverse and pretend that goblin was a female elf and the elves Orcs.

Notice how you now completely view that as evil.

It's no more or less evil to kill spies regardless of the race. The speech? It could just be a red herring to ensure the spy didn't realize his bluff failed until it was too late. Though it's worth noting that in a world where there are such things as "evil countries" (dunno about "good countries", politics is dirty enough that that's practically impossible), a spy acting against them would probably be "good" in the grand scheme of things while a spy acting on their behalf would be evil.

So not Orcs themselves, but if talking about an evil Orc-nation and a non-evil Elf-nation (roles supported by MM generic alignments), it would actually make a difference if the races were flipped.

[multilis]

"(such as Thanh) probably wouldn't have been too happy with the situation, which is why they won't be telling him."

Not clear that all elves would be happy with the situation, only seeing opinion of a few.

"Lawful good" goblins in past have betrayed later. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0100.html

[Kish]

And you are taking a punchline way too literally. Do you really think the elf commander is too stupid to recognize there is a theoretical chance goblins can be good aligned?

No, I think he's too evil to care. Or are you unaware that he's paraphrasing someone real who said "the only good Indian is a dead Indian"? If there weren't so many people not seeing horrible racism, I'd say Rich was heavy-handed about showing it, but as it stands, apparently he wasn't heavy-handed enough.


But the metaphysics of D&D says that is exactly possible. You can classify entire races as morally good or bad by their rating on the alignment system
From Rich Burlew, in the commentary on Don't Split the Party:

Vaarsuvius finds him/herself at the dragon's mercy because he/she never thinks to take precautions against her, despite knowing that the dragon he/she killed shared a home with another. Vaarsuvius then repeats and amplifies this misconception when he/she casts the custom-made familicide spell, essentially speaking for all players who say, "All monsters are evil and exist only for us to kill." But hopefully when the reader sees the scale on which Vaarsuvius carries out the devastation, the error of this thinking is more obvious. If it is wrong to kill a thousand dragons simply because they are dragons, then it is wrong to kill a single dragon for the same reasons.
Also, I'm not sure what it says about fantasy roleplaying that I felt the need to make the argument against genocide. Probably best that I not think about it too much.

[Harr]

He probably made two rational decisions that a) this goblin wasn't good and b) we cannot spare prisoners in this sort of resistance war.


This completely ignores the point that has been made, oh, about 47 times in the thread already, that it's not his killing of the hobgonlin but the way that he went about it that's reprehensible.


Do you really think the elf commander is too stupid to recognize there is a theoretical chance goblins can be good aligned?


You do realize that that makes it worse, not better, right?

[Gredival]

Except that his lieutenant was way too familiar with the whole routine, meaning this probably wasn't the first time.

And the fact he's made these same decisions repeatedly while leading a guerrilla resistance invalidates the rationality of the decision making how?

He's obviously at least decently intelligent and can comprehend the theoretical philosophical notion of sentience and its implications. He has simply decided (probably rightly) this is neither the time or the place to be sparing goblin prisoners until it can be determined if they deserve death or not.

[druid91]

Personally I don't get why everyone is surprised, almost every elf we have seen, V included, has been pretty violent I believe the only exception is V's partner.Besides I figure it was an even trade. The hobgoblin tried to trick his way into the resistance. The elf commander tricks him and throws him off a tower. Why is being thrown off a tower worse then getting your throat cut?

[Snake-Aes]

Elf guy listens to hob prisioner.
Elf Guy decides to kill said hob prisioner.

Whatever reasons he had, to both kill and use that method, are not within our grasp. There are far too many things for him to take into account, both pro and con having such prisioner. And no, "if he's a spy he can be killed later" is not appropriate. If the spy is out for a single second, that's more than enough to cause the resistance some major trouble.

If he was planted, and it seems a very unique bait, he might as well be under scry constantly. the Baddies do have the resources to pay for a scried spy if it'll drop the resistance.


Was it evil? Yeah, it was. No secondary reason will change that.
Do we give a damn? Mostly, we don't. That's why the plot exists in the first place.

[CWater]

It's not killing the golbin I have a problem with, it's that the reason - the explicitly stated reason - is that he's a goblin.

Not because he might turn on then. Not even because it's a waste of resources. And he obviously enjoyed killing him.


And it doesn't help at all that the commander guy made a joke about it...if it had to be done I would have preferred them to just be straight up stone cold efficient about it. STAB. "Sorry, can't take any chances, I'm sure you understand."

My thoughts exactly.

Even if I do think the goblin guy was a bastard, the way he used the word "greenskin" really made me angry, and that he was obviously lying about the helping thing, what the commander did was still wrong.:smallannoyed: I started to like the elf in the last comic, the fight-scene was pretty awesome, but now he seems all jerk to me. As for the lieutenant I can't really say yet.

But, but, good comic again!:smallsmile: I hope there will be more soon.

[Kish]

He's obviously at least decently intelligent
Oh dear god. He's the new Girard.

...Look, the one thing we know about him is that he chooses to present himself as genocidally racist, whether because he is or for some other reason. Whether we can estimate his alignment from that is apparently possible to debate. We certainly can't estimate his mental ability scores. He may be an (evil) genius or he may be the stupidest commander to ever command an elven strike team.

[Gredival]

You do realize that that makes it worse, not better, right?

I think it simply shows he's pragmatic enough to know that some niceties cannot be afforded in a war vs. an enemy that is metaphysically evil

[Harr]

He's obviously at least decently intelligent and can comprehend the theoretical philosophical notion of sentience and its implications. He has simply decided (probably rightly) this is neither the time or the place to be sparing goblin prisoners until it can be determined if they deserve death or not.

Once again completely ignoring the entire point of the thread. LOL, it's actually getting kinda funny to watch :smallbiggrin:

Once again for the Nth time: it's not his killing of the hobgoblin, but the way that he went about it, that's reprehensible.

Again? ok: It's not his killing of the hobgoblin, but the way that he went about it, that's reprehensible.

[Mystic Muse]

Why is being thrown off a tower worse then getting your throat cut?

nothing if he goes about it in the same way. if he gave the guy the same speech and stabbed him it'd be just as wrong as it is now. if he'd simply killed him and said "I'm sorry but we can't take any chances" or something along those lines the act would still be questionable but not blatantly sadistic and evil.

[The Pilgrim]

Originally Posted by Jokasti View Post
People are forgetting what the goblins did to the Azurites already.
Oh, yeah, they were taking prisoners, for one.

I guess if they killed all these prisoners, one by one, in humiliating ways, you'd give them your "AWESOME!" seal of approval you just give elves? :smallamused:

Maybe they could have dropped the azurites into the rift (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0545.html), instead.

[TheSummoner]

Personally I don't get why everyone is surprised, almost every elf we have seen, V included, has been pretty violent I believe the only exception is V's partner.Besides I figure it was an even trade. The hobgoblin tried to trick his way into the resistance. The elf commander tricks him and throws him off a tower. Why is being thrown off a tower worse then getting your throat cut?

How did he trick the elf? Can you prove he was lieing? He seemed pretty straight foreward about what he wanted to me...

Well, the throat slitting is faster, but you're right, a death is a death. The thing that makes it evil is the taunting and false hope.


Maybe they could have dropped the azurites into the rift (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0545.html), instead.

Keep in mind Redcloak never followed through on that threat and was only using it to gather information.

[Solara]

And the fact he's made these same decisions repeatedly while leading a guerrilla resistance invalidates the rationality of the decision making how?

He's obviously at least decently intelligent and can comprehend the theoretical philosophical notion of sentience and its implications. He has simply decided (probably rightly) this is neither the time or the place to be sparing goblin prisoners until it can be determined if they deserve death or not.

I meant, probably not the first time he made that exact joke, to a goblin, before killing that goblin. Notice that the Azurites look surprised, the lieutenant is almost bored.

[SPoD]

f there weren't so many people not seeing horrible racism, I'd say Rich was heavy-handed about showing it, but as it stands, apparently he wasn't heavy-handed enough.

I agree. Every time I read a new strip and think, "Rich really hit us over the head with that one," I come to the forum and realize that Rich is too subtle for his target audience.

At any rate, I would put forth the proposition that anyone who has changed their opinion about OOTS-verse elves due to the Commander's actions is, in fact, doing the exact same thing that he is: judging an entire race by the actions of a few. That the Commander is likely Neutral (with a creamy Evil filling) tells us nothing about the elves back home; they might not even know he does stuff like this.

[LuisDantas]

Why are you assuming a good reason didn't present itself? Ranging from "he'll attack us in the future" to, "our traditional enemy, Cliffport, just acknowledged them"?

For one, the last one isn't a good reason (and do we know that Cliffport has bad history with the Elves?)

But mainly, I assume that if there were a good reason it would either have convinced the other nations that Hinjo asked to help (at least one of which is probably better than True Neutral) or at least have been presented to us.

As it is, the best I can hope for is that Elves are just as xenophobic as the other races in OOtS, which is quite a letdown.


(...) The meme that being violently racist makes someone a better soldier always makes me scratch my head. The only thing he did better than a pragmatic-but-not-racist elf without "the only good goblin is a dead goblin" as a tagline, who would have killed the hobgoblin without playing games, is "polarize the forum."

The theory is apparently that a soldier must not nurture doubts about the validity or the fair cost of its cause. Doubt removes determination to fight.

Of course, such an idea, despite its modern popularity, is by definition a load of bull. Mediocre commanders may like obedient soldiers, but a good soldier is supposed to have a good reason to make his choices, not to go by rote and propaganda.

Those are rare, apparently, but still, that is how things are.


But they didn't act at all - until they knew that Xykon had irrevocably won. They know Xykon could very well be gunning for them next, only now he has that entire city as a resource, so it makes sense for them to act even when in Neutrality. Xykon's victory is a threat.

That makes sense. Trouble is, it makes even more sense for the other nations that don't happen to be so neutral. Or are we to assume that those are few and far between in OOtS-world? It's possible, I guess, if depressing.


Also, they could have some kind of official signed alliance with Azure City, in which case Lawfulness (assuming in that case a Lawful Neutral alignment), not Goodness, would compel them to act.

Which amounts to much the same, really: Azure City has no better than TN allies.


Except we all know that Hobgoblins are inherently evil.

We know nothing of the sort.


To avoid using real-world analogies, I'll make one with Harry Potter.
Just because Volemort may have placed one or more Death Eaters under' house arrest' for screwing up a mission doesn't mean that the Order shouldn't just kill them because they're Death Eaters.

Are Death Eaters a biological species? I thought it was a sort of ideology/criminal activity.


The metaphysics of a D&D universe indicate that the hobgoblin race is evil. As in the opposite of good. As they have a net negative effect on the world and their elimination would thus create a positive effect. As in it is morally permissible to kill them.

I'm afraid that you're missing the point. Morality is all about the exceptions and allowing them to bear fruit. There is a reason why you are talking about a net negative effect, you know.

That D&D often passes over such minutiae is a side effect of the nature of RPG constraints when it comes to time and the like. That is not, however, a desirable feature, and certainly not one that helps in making the game's morality better or more realistic. It is only simpler.



Yes in the era of Drizzt everyone wants to think about the exception. We want to believe in the possibility of someone to overcome their evil societies and be good people! But the point is that the commander isn't evil for neglecting to consider that possibility.

Uh, neglecting to consider that possibility damn right makes him evil. Or at the very least it makes his act evil.

That is sort of the whole point of evil, you know: disregarding the well-being of others out of simple convenience.


Especially when the hobgoblin pretty excludes himself from that special group of exceptions when he talks about roughing up immigrants

So it is ok to kill people, as long as they are not perfect? Really?

[silvadel]

Personally I would think that would be court martialable. And yes in a war zone like that the proper method of doing this would be to wait and bring up his cruelness, brutality, and murder of the helpless prisoner at a trial after the crisis is over.

[Phoenix Xul]

Can I end the morality arguments now? (The answer's no, of course.)

These elves probably aren't good. Elves in the OotS universe (And, indeed, most D&D) are Usually-True-Neutral. That was a VERY Neutral act in my book--There was CERTAINLY justification, and it might be a Chaotic-good act except for the fact that it was because of race.

In other words, noble intentions, evil actions, thus neutral act.

I hate morality discussions.

[Trixie]

Not anymore it's not (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0704.html)

You know, his knowledge about the event might be less than perfect, taking the whole sitting in cell time into account... :smallamused:


Wow, that was incredibly original and clever. Good job.

Some anvils need to be dropped :smallwink:

[Eldariel]

Don't forget how unreliable stabbing someone in D&D is; if he's not helpless, it's few points of damage (and if he's a spy, chances are he's not helpless in case he chooses to act). If he's a spy with anything at all on his person in case his cover is blown, that's gonna be major trouble. Tossing someone down many floors is far more reliable way of killing someone.

As OOTS tends to be rather genre-savvy and the characters are "aware" of the rules of the game, that wouldn't even surprise me as a reason. It seems to me this was the most reliable way of disposing of him without trouble.

[Ellen]

On the bright side, they guys are pretty sure Thanh wouldn't support what just happened. On the not so bright side . . . .

Sure, there are cases in war where, unfortunately, ugly decisions have to be made. Point granted and not in debate.

That said, they were perfectly free to leave the hobgoblin in a cell if they didn't want to take him with them.

If they decided to risk taking him with them, there are lowtech (or low spell level) things like blindfolds that limit a person's ability to retrace the same path.

The only information the hobgoblin could pass on at that point was a few names and the fact that elves were involved. I'm guessing Team Evil already has a general idea about who's in the resistance and how many, since there have been fights between the groups with survivors on the Team Evil side. I'm guessing they know elves are involved (based on what Redcloak said earlier about elves attacking rather than an elf, even if I were to make the leap that they have no other information sources or reasons to suspect Elves might help Azurites to keep a Goblin nation from being established).

And that's assuming they can't reconstruct general numbers of how many people attacked the prison and whether there would be evidence of Elvish involvement.

And even that is assuming this commando squad is going with the theory that they got all the possible witnesses - or that none of the humans in the group will be a double agent (a much more likely scenario if you're going to assume possible double agents among the prisoners).

Or that they think RC isn't going to raise at least one of the dead guards who could give him this information.

[Felius]

It was the way he killed the goblin that makes the act evil.

if he'd said "I'm sorry I can't take any chances" that would have been a neutral action.

giving somebody false hope while you lead them off the cliff to their deaths is evil

It's no more or less evil to kill spies regardless of the race. The speech? It could just be a red herring to ensure the spy didn't realize his bluff failed until it was too late. Though it's worth noting that in a world where there are such things as "evil countries" (dunno about "good countries", politics is dirty enough that that's practically impossible), a spy acting against them would probably be "good" in the grand scheme of things while a spy acting on their behalf would be evil.

So not Orcs themselves, but if talking about an evil Orc-nation and a non-evil Elf-nation (roles supported by MM generic alignments), it would actually make a difference if the races were flipped.

For all who were talking about how he should have merely stabbed the goblin, that was not really practical in the end. He would be killing the guy in the middle of the crowd, and if he didn't gave the goblin some false hope, he would have resisted and possibly endangered others. So he bluffs him to take him to a ledger where he can be given a less visible death.

So, indeed not a good act, but I wouldn't say that this just gave certainity that he irrevocably evil.

[Gift Jeraff]

Eh, I found this one kinda sickening. The strip itself is not bad, it's just that the Commander's act seems like something the Light Warriors (http://www.nuklearpower.com/2003/11/13/episode-353-last-one-i-swear/) would do. :smalleek:

[warmachine]

The hobgoblin said he was thrown in prison because he beat an immigrant (presumably greenskin) that just came to the new city.

At the very least we can presume the hobgoblin is racist. Should we trust hobgoblins just because they hate other goblins?

We can still presume the hobgoblin is most likely evil. That is the whole purpose of races having alignments in D&D based worlds. Sure there are exceptions, but I doubt you'd find one in a racist hobgoblin that participated in the take-over of a Paladin city which was a beacon of good before its citizens were turned into slaves.
As I doubt the elven commander is concerned with Gobbotopian welfare, as far as he's concerned the hobgoblin has committed no crime or betrayal. That he might is not sufficient as anyone might commit a crime. Judging based on assumptions, even for likely assumptions, without even trying to look for evidence of an actual crime eliminates any chance of peaceable behaviour by them as war is the only way to prevent automatic death sentence. Why put your knife away if the other guy will never, ever put his away in response? To me, deliberately eliminating any chance of peace, no matter how slim, is unjustified. There is a reason convicts aren't automatically executed in the real world.

Of course, the commander was justified as far as the majority of OotS gods were concerned but I don't regard creating a sentient race for the sole purpose of being killed as a justifiable act.

[LuisDantas]

Just because you wouldn't do something because it would make a victory hollow doesn't mean that other people wouldn't do it and never worry about it.

True enough. Then again, neither does it mean that they have some sort of moral justification, either.


The elven leaders obviously don't mind releasing someone who will kill all goblins he meets into a situation where that's an asset. It is very clearly intended by the author to be Morally Shady (because of the reference to not tell Thanh), but that's what they did. Therefore, we can only conclude that the author is telling us that the elves are Morally Shady.

It looks more like he's playing with our expectations and telling us that these specific Elves are in fact damaged goods. Maybe it will tie to Vaarsuvius' situation further along the line.

[Kish]

(and do we know that Cliffport has bad history with the Elves?)

Given that that hobgoblin said that Cliffport's reason for acknowledging Gobbotopia finally was their longstanding trade war with the elves?

It went like this:
1) "Elven insurgents," which is to say Vaarsuvius, attack the tower.
2) Cliffport acknowledges Gobbotopia and begins trading with them, because of Cliffport's trade war with the elves.
3) Actual elven insurgents show up in Gobbotopia.

...and I just noticed Gredival's sig. Oh, sh'yeah. Never mind. Formally disengaging from further exchanges with Gredival.

[Gredival]

...Look, the one thing we know about him is that he chooses to present himself as genocidally racist, whether because he is or for some other reason. Whether we can estimate his alignment from that is apparently possible to debate. We certainly can't estimate his mental ability scores. He may be an (evil) genius or he may be the stupidest commander to ever command an elven strike team.

a) Elves are generally pretty intelligent
b) His speech is generally articulate
c) He shows he is capable of weighing possible consequences and making a rational and pragmatic wartime decision in light of those possibilities (he explicitly considers, in front of the goblin, the multiple ways letting the goblin live could bite the resistance in the ass)

So I presume he is at least as intelligent as the average college student who should be able to understand the content of a basic ethics course.


Once again completely ignoring the entire point of the thread. LOL, it's actually getting kinda funny to watch

Once again for the Nth time: it's not his killing of the hobgoblin, but the way that he went about it, that's reprehensible.


Or maybe you presume that this is a valid point of contention.

Perhaps I am a consequentialist that cares naught for motives. Would that be surprising considering I think familicide was morally justifiable?

[SPoD]

For one, the last one isn't a good reason (and do we know that Cliffport has bad history with the Elves?)

Yes, we know exactly that.


But mainly, I assume that if there were a good reason it would either have convinced the other nations that Hinjo asked to help (at least one of which is probably better than True Neutral)

This is a huge assumption. One with no basis in the comic whatsoever. So, yeah, go ahead and assume it, but know that it's utterly specious.


As it is, the best I can hope for is that Elves are just as xenophobic as the other races in OOtS, which is quite a letdown.

And what does that make you all of us, for now assuming that all elves are like the Commander?

The real best that we can hope for is that all elves have their own alignments and any given individual may be Good or Evil.

[Dark Matter]

no, he took the greater. He could have simply said "I'm sorry but we can't take any chances" and simply stabbed him.

he gave him false hope that he would be allowed to live for the sake of a cruel joke while he pushed him off a building.Wait... giving him hope (and then a very quick death), is MORE evil than not giving him hope followed by a slower death?

[Woodsman]

You know, his knowledge about the event might be less than perfect, taking the whole sitting in cell time into account... :smallamused:

Yeah, true. But the fact the sky is dark leads me to believe it's currently night-time, so he might have gotten something from the guards.

[silvadel]

No, it was worse. V killed those Dragons out of revenge and a desire to protect his family. That Elven commander killed that Goblin simply because he was a Goblin. Yes V's act was on a greater scale, but that Elven commander didn't care about the Goblin's life at all; there is no indication that V feels the same way about Dragons.

And I have little doubt that the commander -- if he were put in the position where he could familicide goblins -- would do so without any undue hesitation.

[SPoD]

Yeah, true. But the fact the sky is dark leads me to believe it's currently night-time, so he might have gotten something from the guards.

The sky has been dark for over a year, ever since the rift exploded. It's only been a few minutes since Jirix's speech ended.

[TheBST]

Eh, I found this one kinda sickening. The strip itself is not bad, it's just that the Commander's act seems like something the Light Warriors (http://www.nuklearpower.com/2003/11/13/episode-353-last-one-i-swear/) would do. :smalleek:

8 Bit Theater already said it best: '[Elves] are a race of total bastards'.

[Woodsman]

The sky has been dark for over a year, ever since the rift exploded. It's only been a few minutes since Jirix's speech ended.

The guards might still have known, though.

Of course, this is all speculation.

[Snake-Aes]

That said, they were perfectly free to leave the hobgoblin in a cell if they didn't want to take him with them.
They weren't. Telling a single word about the resistance is potential trouble. And that goblin knew there were at least 4 high level people attacking.
If he was taken in, things would be even worse: if he was prepared as a plant, odds are a single round is all he needs to warn the city of *something*.
The deed was perfectly fine for a warlike circumstance. The methods aren't.

[LuisDantas]

Yes, we know exactly that.

Actually, no, we do not. We know of a commercial rivalry, which is another beast entirely. A far less compelling one.


This is a huge assumption. One with no basis in the comic whatsoever. So, yeah, go ahead and assume it, but know that it's utterly specious.

Why would it be?



And what does that make you all of us, for now assuming that all elves are like the Commander?

What I do assume is that he has the support of Elven authorities, as opposed to being a straight terrorist or a rogue of some sort. And that, in turn, would imply that Elven government Just Doesn't Know Better, when it in fact Ought To.


The real best that we can hope for is that all elves have their own alignments and any given individual may be Good or Evil.

That defeats the whole point of seeking help from governments, though.

[Dark Matter]

The Elf's action was Evil. The fact that the hobbo could be evil, or could be a spy, is pointless.

From a full practical point of view, the action is equally unjustified. A spy, even a double-agent, is always useful as long as you *know* he is a spy, no matter you are unsure about his true loyalties, if any. They could have kept him as prisoner, feed him crap and false info and then released him. Or they could have set him free on promise to be a spy for the Resistance, then feed him crap in the hope he is actually a double-agent.And how do you deal with the pretty serious issue that this spy has seen new high level characters in the resistance? Letting him live is an action which most likely ends with Xykon learning this, which in turn results in him destroying the resistance.

[Solara]

Wait... giving him hope (and then a very quick death), is MORE evil than not giving him hope followed by a slower death?

Sorry but, this is...a very weird interpretation of what we've all been talking about. I'm not quite sure how to respond to it.

Stringing along a helpless prisoner and then getting enjoyment out of killing him=evil, in most cases that I can think of. 'Efficient' would've have made me much less uncomfortable with the whole thing, even if the result was the same. Heck, I would've probably been defending the commander, in that case.

But I'm sure that, like with most of these comics, Rich was perfectly aware of what people's reactions were going to be. Which is why I'm with Kish here and just can't wrap my mind around the fact that when the author goes out of his way to present the elf as a racist and (arguably) cruel, people are still not getting that what he is doing in this scene is supposed to make you uncomfortable. Even after his comrades underline that fact by mentioning they'd better not tell the paladin. Maybe he should have quoted Hitler instead of Andrew Jackson?

[Ridureyu]

Told ya.

Goblins = Good

Azurites and Elves = Evil



In fact, let's be honest. Those aren't "slaves" or "refugees." Those imprisoned humans are horrible criminals who deserve whatever they get. Redcloak should've thrown them all into the rift a long time ago.

[Mystic Muse]

Wait... giving him hope (and then a very quick death), is MORE evil than not giving him hope followed by a slower death?

actually,given the comics history with that specific method of killing, (slashing) it's probably quicker than falling off the building was. especially if the guy had decided to go for the neck.

[Trixie]

Maybe they could have dropped the azurites into the rift (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0545.html), instead.

Yeah, they should have. They would be glorified today for it, it seems. Too bad they never followed on this, and you shot yourself in the foot here, proving the elf is far more evil than Redcloak can be.


Just because Volemort may have placed one or more Death Eaters under' house arrest' for screwing up a mission doesn't mean that the Order shouldn't just kill them because they're Death Eaters.

Except it is nonsense, as they did nothing of the sort, indeed, even invited many Death Eaters and their sympathizers (Sirius and Snape, for example, ring a bell?) into their ranks, hell, they allowed many of them to teach at Hogwarts.

That's why they were good guys, and not a band of murderous scum.


The answer to whether the commander was morally justified in killing the hobgoblin seems to be "yes he was". The real debate is over the manner in which he did it.

Nice try, but there is no such consensus. In fact, more sensible people found the kill to be stupid from the beginning :smallamused:


Without knowing the character's backstory, I just can't say. I do like the one suggestion how he made his sense motive check, then played along. Also, perhaps he wanted the hobgoblin killed away from the prisoners' escape route, and so walking him to the other side of the tower was the easiest way to get him there.

[yawn] I love how apologists invented the whole 'sense motive' nonsense and it already spread like fire in wain apology attempt, despite having no support whatsoever in the very words of that racist prick himself.

If he said something like 'nice try' or 'I was supposed to buy that?' it would be a different story, but he didn't even hinted at it, and for now, you're like the guys arguing Thog, Belkar, Nale, V or Haley aren't evil because they're cool :smallsigh:

[wowy319]

From a moral standpoint, not really. But from a logical standpoint? Absoultely. Saving one hobgoblin isn't worth putting every single freed prisoner and combatant at risk.

And this is in no way comparable to V and the dragons. V killed 1/4 of an entire intelligent race for the sake of showing off his power. Nameless Elf Commander killed a random mook for the sake of hundreds (maybe thousands) of people forced into slavery by a blatantly evil force. No comparison.

That's really all there is to an argument on this. He made a logically sound decision that more than likely saved hundreds of civilian lives.

[LuisDantas]

And how do you deal with the pretty serious issue that this spy has seen new high level characters in the resistance? Letting him live is an action which most likely ends with Xykon learning this, which in turn results in him destroying the resistance.

Letting him live would only make much of a difference if there were not other witnesses to tell much the same thing. Are we to assume that this is a team of butchers that intends to leave no witnesses at all?

I sure hope not.

[Solara]

Yeah, they should have. They would be glorified today for it, it seems. Too bad they never followed on this, and you shot yourself in the foot here, proving the elf is far more evil than Redcloak can be.



Except it is nonsense, as they did nothing of the sort, indeed, even invited many Death Eaters and their sympathizers (Sirius and Snape, for example, ring a bell?) into their ranks, hell, they allowed many of them to teach at Hogwarts.

That's why they were good guys, and not a band of murderous scum.



Nice try, but there is no such consensus. In fact, more sensible people found the kill to be stupid from the beginning :smallamused:



[yawn] I love how apologists invented the whole 'sense motive' nonsense and it already spread like fire in wain apology attempt, despite having no support whatsoever in the very words of that racist prick himself.

If he said something like 'nice try' or 'I was supposed to buy that?' it would be a different story, but he didn't even hinted at it, and for now, you're like the guys arguing Thog, Belkar, Nale, V or Haley aren't evil because they're cool :smallsigh:


Trixie, is it just me or have a lot of your posts so far been really emotional and borderline insulting? Please try and chill out a little, this kind of thing just makes discussions no fun.

...or maybe I'm just reading too much into all the italics...

[faith]

@ all the people who are saying that Comando enjoyed killing the goblin are wrong, if you look at his face while he's tossing the guy its a strait brow with down-turned talking face. which suggests that he views it as a necessity. Also, I believe that he killed the hobo because he was untrustworthy, and his *primary* reason for that was because he was a hob. as for the moral standards of killing a helpless prisoner (whether or no he's a spy) the only realistic options that i can see would be to kill him, let him go, or take his offer. and honestly if you are a rebellion group taking his offer would probably be to risky, and killing him has more reward than just letting him go.

[Mystic Muse]

@ all the people who are saying that Comando enjoyed killing the goblin are wrong, if you look at his face while he's tossing the guy its a strait brow with down-turned talking face. which suggests that he views it as a necessity. Also, I believe that he killed the hobo because he was untrustworthy, and his *primary* reason for that was because he was a hob. as for the moral standards of killing a helpless prisoner (whether or no he's a spy) the only realistic options that i can see would be to kill him, let him go, or take his offer. and honestly if you are a rebellion group taking his offer would probably be to risky, and killing him has more reward than just letting him go.

But the way he did it was completely unnecessary and sadistic. that's what we're arguing. If he had to kill the guy, no chance of letting him go whatsoever he could have done it in a much quicker and a much less Cruel way.

[xwing]

I still don't get why some of you root for a hobgoblin, part of an evil society of slavers, who admitted he was taken prisoner for being a racist against his own type and hate the elf because you think he killed said hobgoblin because he is a racist.

Moralising from the warmth of your house, behind the keyboard, anonymously on an internet forum is all nice, but if commandos acted on your "moralities", they would die or suffer psychic trauma pretty soon because of it. Also, somehow I don't think most of you would hold up to your "high" standards on an actual battlefield...
The elves didn't smile full of joy like Xykon or those goblinoids when torturing and killing enemies. Little perspective is in order...

Personally, I think they did it professionaly with a little small talk. It was a little colourful, because they just like black humour. It comes with the job.

[Felius]

Except it is nonsense, as they did nothing of the sort, indeed, even invited many Death Eaters and their sympathizers (Sirius and Snape, for example, ring a bell?) into their ranks, hell, they allowed many of them to teach at Hogwarts.


No, that's them being very idealist, and it works, because their world is far, far on the idealist end of the scale.

Also, generally speaking, one does not have time nor resources to properly deal with a potential hostile in a safe, humane, nice, and non-harming way in the middle of a covert operation, of which, the details are best not falling in the knowledge of the enemy.

[LuisDantas]

@ all the people who are saying that Comando enjoyed killing the goblin are wrong, if you look at his face while he's tossing the guy its a strait brow with down-turned talking face. which suggests that he views it as a necessity.

He is making a point of claiming to be a racist, you know... are you saying that he is lying?


Also, I believe that he killed the hobo because he was untrustworthy, and his *primary* reason for that was because he was a hob. as for the moral standards of killing a helpless prisoner (whether or no he's a spy) the only realistic options that i can see would be to kill him, let him go, or take his offer. and honestly if you are a rebellion group taking his offer would probably be to risky, and killing him has more reward than just letting him go.

Why not simply tie him up so that he will be powerless to hinder them until things are settled?

[Zevox]

...

You did this on purpose, didn't you Giant?

Well, I guess it's no mystery what sort of discussion is going to dominate these boards until the next comic comes...

Zevox

[wowy319]

Oh, and one more thing: not everyone has to follow the rules of good. This elf never claimed to be good-aligned, so why is everyone assuming he has to be? People can do good things without being good-aligned, and they can do evil things without being evil-aligned. True Neutral is defined as this by the PHB:


A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn’t feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil—after all, she would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, she’s not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way.

So he's neutral and thus doesn't have to be a paragon of virtue. You don't have to be LG to help LG people. And I'm also fairly certain he isn't a paladin, so good vs. evil is a moot point. This whole thing is pretty ridiculous if you think about it.

[SPoD]

Actually, no, we do not. We know of a commercial rivalry, which is another beast entirely. A far less compelling one.

A commercial rivalry so strong that Cliffport (a human nation) is willing to cut goblins some slack on the fact that they conquered and enslaved other humans. That says their beef with the elves is stronger than their loyalty to others of their own species.


Why would it be?

Because we have NO INFORMATION whatsoever on the nature of the other nations, other than one panel (without dialogue). Why would you assume that any of them were Good? There's no basis, other than, "I want the world to be like that."

There is as much textual support for there being even a single Good-aligned Southern nation (other than Azure City itself) as there is for there being a nation with a sizable minority population of giant anthropomorphic lollipops.


That defeats the whole point of seeking help from governments, though.

I don't understand this at all. They seek help from governments because governments are the ones who have the resources to help. Who else can provide them with military aid?

[Mystic Muse]

There is as much textual support for there being even a single Good-aligned Southern nation (other than Azure City itself) as there is for there being a nation with a minority population of giant anthropomorphic lollipops.

ah but there is! haven't you ever heard of the lollipop guild?:smallamused::smalltongue:

[LuisDantas]

I still don't get why some of you root for a hobgoblin, part of an evil society of slavers, who admitted he was taken prisoner for being a racist against his own type and hate the elf because you think he killed said hobgoblin because he is a racist.

Because gratuitous death is a bad thing. Isn't that enough reason?



Moralising from the warmth of your house, behind the keyboard, anonymously on an internet forum is all nice, but if commandos acted on your "moralities", they would die or suffer psychic trauma pretty soon because of it.

How so?


Also, somehow I don't think most of you would hold up to your "high" standards on an actual battlefield...

Maybe not. Shame on us, then. There is really no excuse for murder.


The elves didn't smile full of joy like Xykon or those goblinoids when torturing and killing enemies. Little perspective is in order...

So what is your take on that sentence about what makes a goblin good, then?


Personally, I think they did it professionaly with a little small talk. It was a little colourful, because they just like black humour. It comes with the job.

Indeed. It is a disgusting, immoral job. Point taken, thanks for playing.

[The Pilgrim]

Yeah, they should have. They would be glorified today for it, it seems. Too bad they never followed on this, and you shot yourself in the foot here, proving the elf is far more evil than Redcloak can be.

Actually, proving that the Elves are far more evil that Redcloak was my whole point. Thank you :smallbiggrin:

By the way, for those thinking that it's totally cool for the Elf to go around killing people, as long as it makes it more convenient for the Resistance... it's not as if knowing that they need to lie about it to the Paladin is a good indication that it may be the wrong idea (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0596.html).

[WoolenSocks]

Bwahaha! I feel so guilty for laughing at the last panel!:smallsmile:

[SPoD]

Letting him live would only make much of a difference if there were not other witnesses to tell much the same thing. Are we to assume that this is a team of butchers that intends to leave no witnesses at all?

Yes, I think that's pretty much implied. You don't see the guy who harmlessly summoned Dancing Knights tied up and left prisoner, do you?

[LuisDantas]

A commercial rivalry so strong that Cliffport (a human nation) is willing to cut goblins some slack on the fact that they conquered and enslaved other humans. That says their beef with the elves is stronger than their loyalty to others of their own species.

Sorry, SpoD, that is simply not something that we know, at least not yet. Cliffport probably HAS a commercial rivalry with the Elves (Redcloak has no reason to lie about that, although he may be simply mistaken or biased) but that does not necessarily, or even likely, translates into a significant aversion to the Elven communities.

All that we know is that Cliffport would rather keep commercial relations with Gobbotopia than challenge it. It does not at all mean that they won't rather have the place run by Humans and/or Elves. We MAY theorically learn better eventually, but that simply did not happen yet and IMO is unlikely to.



Because we have NO INFORMATION whatsoever on the nature of the other nations, other than one panel (without dialogue). Why would you assume that any of them were Good? There's no basis, other than, "I want the world to be like that."

Yes, I want OOtS-world to be "like that", as in "not a depressing collection of bastards". Guilty as charged, and I claimed as much myself.

[Beelzebub1111]

Huh, I thought that Elves had the racial hatred of ORCS not goblins... And Dwarves have the hatred of Goblinoids.

[wowy319]

Letting him live would only make much of a difference if there were not other witnesses to tell much the same thing. Are we to assume that this is a team of butchers that intends to leave no witnesses at all?

I sure hope not.

I'm not sure if you understand that the people at the tower were all soldiers. Soldiers knowingly put their lives at risk. To say that someone who has to fight and kill for a living has no reason to expect that someone else can and will try to kill them is asinine.

And no, there weren't any hobgoblins left in the area besides him. If there were any left, they would have been swarmed by wights already.

To sum up what happened: Soldiers were guarding enslaved civilians. A group of enemy soldiers attacked them and won this skirmish. In battle, the attacking soldiers killed all enemy combatants to prevent reinforcements from arriving. A likely neutral-aligned elven commander saw a potentially dangerous person that could lead to the extermination or enslavement of their entire group, with none spared. He took the logical course of action. He was neutral aligned and was not bound by any moral code. The morality of his actions was in accordance to his alignment. Nothing out of the ordinary happened, and the world moved on.

[Jayngfet]

I still don't get why some of you root for a hobgoblin, part of an evil society of slavers, who admitted he was taken prisoner for being a racist against his own type and hate the elf because you think he killed said hobgoblin because he is a racist.

Who said we have to root for one? These are horrible people doing horrible things to horrible people. Just because the other guy is evil doesn't mean I take the protagonists side.



Moralising from the warmth of your house, behind the keyboard, anonymously on an internet forum is all nice, but if commandos acted on your "moralities", they would die or suffer psychic trauma pretty soon because of it. Also, somehow I don't think most of you would hold up to your "high" standards on an actual battlefield...
The elves didn't smile full of joy like Xykon or those goblinoids when torturing and killing enemies. Little perspective is in order...


Except there was no battle, there wasn't a rush and there wasn't a right-this-second risk. They had time to think it over, they weren't panicked and knew fully well Thranh wouldn't approve



Personally, I think they did it professionaly with a little small talk. It was a little colourful, because they just like black humour. It comes with the job.

Black humor is called as such for a reason. It's generally not ok to crack dead baby jokes mid miscarrage, filling a man with hope for no reason other than to laugh when you kill him isn't good by any stretch of the imagination and I'd make anyone who did as such slide into evil territory from neutral.

[LuisDantas]

Yes, I think that's pretty much implied. You don't see the guy who harmlessly summoned Dancing Knights tied up and left prisoner, do you?

I did not see him harmlessly kept in prison to begin with, either. It is one thing to kill a sentinel before he calls for reinforcements. It is another entirely to kill a bound prisoner.

[SPoD]

Yes, I want OOtS-world to be "like that", as in "not a depressing collection of bastards". Guilty as charged, and I claimed as much myself.

Considering we know for a fact that the gods created social inequalities on purpose and encouraged their followers to slaughter those who weren't like them for XP, your viewpoint has little support.

[TheSummoner]

To sum up what happened: Soldiers were guarding enslaved civilians. A group of enemy soldiers attacked them and won this skirmish. In battle, the attacking soldiers killed all enemy combatants to prevent reinforcements from arriving. A likely neutral-aligned elven commander saw a potentially dangerous person that could lead to the extermination or enslavement of their entire group, with none spared. He took the logical course of action. He was neutral aligned and was not bound by any moral code. The morality of his actions was in accordance to his alignment. Nothing out of the ordinary happened, and the world moved on.

And if it were actually like that I would agree with you.

Rather than executing the potentially dangerous person on the spot for the safety of the group... as you put it, the logical course of action... he decided to taunt that individual and give him false hope first.

Killing the hobgoblin may have been for the good of the group... to eliminate a potential risk. That much I agree with. Taunting him and giving him false hope on the other hand... people don't do that sort of thing unless they get some sort of enjoyment out of it. There was nothing to be gained from it other than the pleasure he got out of it. It was sadistic and cruel. THAT is what was evil.

[KiwiImperator]

Pah says I to the malcontents! The elf's course of action made sense from every angle. They don't owe these goblins anything, not civility or decency or mercy, or much less the naivety to believe that there are any amongst their number who would betray their great leader to serve elves hell-bent on destroying their civilization. They owe them a short drop with a sudden stop, or a long fall to a cement trampoline.

[wowy319]

Yes, I want OOtS-world to be "like that", as in "not a depressing collection of bastards". Guilty as charged, and I claimed as much myself.

But that's incredibly unrealistic and makes for really lame storytelling. Black and white morality doesn't match the way people act at all, and it makes stories pretty uninteresting. Star Wars wouldn't have been anywhere near as great if the characters were all paragons of justice and virtue, and nor would Lord of the Rings. And you can't possibly tell me Hamlet would be a classic if the titular character was a goody-two-shoes.

[SPoD]

Also, I'd like to complain about whichever moderator merged the "morally justified" thread into the #707 discussion thread...doing so has only guaranteed that the discussion can be about nothing but moral justification.

[Mystic Muse]

Pah says I to the malcontents! The elf's course of action made sense from every angle. They don't owe these goblins anything, not civility or decency or mercy, or much less the naivety to believe that there are any amongst their number who would betray their great leader to serve elves hell-bent on destroying their civilization. They owe them a short drop with a sudden stop, or a long fall to a cement trampoline.

look one post above you.

if you still don't get the point read Start of Darkness to see why Hobgoblins are even considered evil.

[Math_Mage]

On the one hand, the elf made the brutally practical decision to kill the goblin and exercised his racial hatred in doing so. This is evil.

On the other hand, the elf is a/the leader of a strike force freeing slaves and prisoners from a conquering power with immoral authority. This is good.

Conclusion? Neutral, with a heavy flavoring of "Characters are more complex than their alignment." This is precisely the Giant's style, hence should be no surprise to anyone here.

[Mystic Muse]

Also, I'd like to complain about whichever moderator merged the "morally justified" thread into the #707 discussion thread...doing so has only guaranteed that the discussion can be about nothing but moral justification.

PM Roland. he's currently the official Mod in charge of complaints.

[Blaznak]

I would imagine there were probably some kind of standard orders to kill all the goblinoids. The leader just did it in a way that was expedient.

[Silver2195]

I'm very disturbed that people are defending the elf commander here. This is different from Familicide, which at least was used against an Always Evil race by someone who wasn't thinking clearly. The commander calmly and deliberately killed the hobgoblin (Usually Evil, meaning a sizable minority are not evil) just because he was a hobgoblin. If he'd given a reason like "I don't believe your story and we can't risk having witnesses", that would be one thing, but he gave no reason except racism for his action.

[FerhagoRosewood]

I thought it was funny.

And I'm liking the female NPC with the eyepatch. Hope she gets a name soon.

^-^

[TheSummoner]

I would imagine there were probably some kind of standard orders to kill all the goblinoids. The leader just did it in a way that was expedient.

Except he didn't.

He gave the Hobgoblin false hope first and led him to believe he would be freed.

It was unnecessary. It was sadistic. It was cruel. Thats what makes the act evil.

The killing in itself could be considered a necessity, but the taunting... not so much.

[wowy319]

he decided to taunt that individual and give him false hope first.

Killing the hobgoblin may have been for the good of the group... to eliminate a potential risk. That much I agree with. Taunting him and giving him false hope on the other hand... people don't do that sort of thing unless they get some sort of enjoyment out of it. There was nothing to be gained from it other than the pleasure he got out of it. It was sadistic and cruel. THAT is what was evil.

I never said it wasn't. I said it was in accordance with his likely alignment. And the way he did it was still logical; rather than waste time having the same discussion of morals with Thanh or anyone else who would have raised this same question, he tricked the guy into coming with him quietly. It was that or drag him kicking and screaming away from the group which would have caused the problem he was trying to avoid. Was it evil? Sure, that was a pretty crappy thing to do. But it was still logical to him and in what he felt was the best interest of his mission, which is what neutral is all about.

[LuisDantas]

I'm not sure if you understand that the people at the tower were all soldiers. Soldiers knowingly put their lives at risk. To say that someone who has to fight and kill for a living has no reason to expect that someone else can and will try to kill them is asinine.

Again: being a soldier is no excuse for being a butcher. The hobgoblin had his hands tied, for crying out loud.

You sure don't think much of the military, do you? Neither do I, as a matter of fact. But I usually don't assume them to be glorified, racist butchers.



And no, there weren't any hobgoblins left in the area besides him. If there were any left, they would have been swarmed by wights already.

That would require that those hypothetical hobgoblins were free and had enough lead time to call for succor. There were indeed none, and there was no significant risk of that one getting free in time to make a difference, either. His hand were tied, he could be kept out of action for long enough without being killed.

Sure, he would then tell Gobbotopia authorities about the escape and the presence of the Elven Teams. But what are the odds that such a large escape will pass unnoticed anyway?

It is not even reasonable to assume that killing him will keep Gobbotopia in the dark about who and how many people freed the captives. Even if there are no witnesses, there is scrying magic to consider.


To sum up what happened: Soldiers were guarding enslaved civilians. A group of enemy soldiers attacked them and won this skirmish. In battle, the attacking soldiers killed all enemy combatants to prevent reinforcements from arriving.

True enough so far.


A likely neutral-aligned elven commander saw a potentially dangerous person that could lead to the extermination or enslavement of their entire group, with none spared.

That would be true if the hobbo was free and about to escape. Not at all the case.


He took the logical course of action.

For an immoral racist, yes he did.


He was neutral aligned and was not bound by any moral code.

So it appears, although I have reason to suspect the "neutral" part.


The morality of his actions was in accordance to his alignment. Nothing out of the ordinary happened, and the world moved on.

And the world will keep moving, but that doesn't make his acts any less evil.

[wowy319]

I'm very disturbed that people are defending the elf commander here. This is different from Familicide, which at least was used against an Always Evil race by someone who wasn't thinking clearly. The commander calmly and deliberately killed the hobgoblin (Usually Evil, meaning a sizable minority are not evil) just because he was a hobgoblin. If he'd given a reason like "I don't believe your story and we can't risk having witnesses", that would be one thing, but he gave no reason except racism for his action.

That's pretty much the exact reason he gave. Didn't you see the point he brought up in panel four?

[LuisDantas]

Considering we know for a fact that the gods created social inequalities on purpose and encouraged their followers to slaughter those who weren't like them for XP, your viewpoint has little support.

We don't know that either, as the Giant himself clarified in another recent thread. Did you miss it?

[Kish]

That's pretty much the exact reason he gave. Didn't you see the point he brought up in panel four?
The exact reason that he gave was, "The only good goblin is a dead goblin." No need for "pretty much"s. It was a paraphrase of the real-world assertion, "The only good Indian is a dead Indian."

[Worira]

A question to those defending the elf commander: Do you actually think Rich intended the commanders actions to be viewed as positive? Or do you simply disagree with him as to whether they are?